EPISCOPACY AND PRESBYTERY CONSIDERED, According to the several Respects, which may commend a Church-Government, and oblige good Christians to it.  If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God. 1. Cor. 11.16. God is not the author of confusion ( or of tumult and unquietness) but of Peace, as in all Churches of the Saints. 1. Cor. 14.33. 
OXFORD, Printed by LEONARD LICHFIELD, Printer to the University. 1644.   

Episcopacy and Presbytery considered, &c.  
IT is no new thing for men out of their desire of Novelty to affect and endeavour a change, but to do it violently and to the subversion of a Government, is a new way of Reformation found out in this later and worse Age.  
The forcing of such a change has been the misery of this Nation for some years past; and now the admitting of it, as the readiest way to Peace, is made the Question of these unhappy Times. There are some that( wisely as they think, consulting safety to themselves) do take it into deliberation, and can( as if they had learned new Principles of Prudence, Iustice, Religion) debate it thus: What are Bishops to us? what ist to us if all Ministers of the Church be made equal, and the Government of it turn Presbyterian? We shall be where we were, enjoy what is ours, and shall still( for they must seem to speak Conscience too) hold our Religion and the King our sovereign His crown and Dignity. Could they make all this good to the present contentment of themselves and their sovereign, yet would there be just cause to complain, as Tertullian did once to the shane of some Christians, O melior Nationum in suos fides! how much more constant and faithful were the Heathens to their Priests?  
But if the Persons be inconsiderable, the Government is not so for many respects: and however indifferent men are to any form of ecclesiastical Policy, yet surely there is something in the Government of the Church obligatory, and farther binding then they are ware of. Calvin thought good to bind his unsteady Citizens by Oath to the form agreed on, that if they cast out Him, yet should they not his Discipline, without banishing of Conscience also. We do not say, but many things in Church Government are alterable, as being accidental, and permitted to the prudence of a Church, not left in particular determined by apostolical precept or practise; yet cannot we but say, the Church was so far forth provided for in the point of Government, that, beside the general Rules, some particulars thereof were left more essential, and to continue in the Church unalterable, which( besides the strength and right they have from the ties of laws and customs of the kingdom) do bind in a more divine way.  
Be it wisdom then to buy Peace at any rate, yet let us not drive the bargain blindfold, least we do it to the less of a good Conscience, or( of that be of less moment with the worldly wife) to the forfeiture of our Reason and Iudgement; As they will surely do, that promote or accept the Exchange of episcopal government for the Presbyterian.  
The intent therefore and purpose of this discourse is to show, that it will be against Prudence, Justice Religion to make such a change: Episcopacy being( beside the advantage it hath of Institution and Antiquity) more convenient and effectual for obtaining the end of Church Government( the preservation of Truth and Peace, the suppression of heresy and schism) and also more agreeable with Monarchy, the Civill government of this kingdom.  
But, seeing it is plain that the averseness which some have to Episcopacy, and the careless indifference, which is in others to either Government, doth much proceed from the misunderstanding of the true condition of both; I shall first endeavour briefly & plainly to show what Episcopacy is, how it appeared in its original, how shown itself in the practise down from the Apostles to us; next, what Presbytery is, what the original and Constitution thereof; Then, upon the comparison of both, that which I proposed, will by easy and plain inferences be made to appear.  

Of Episcopacy.  
HE that takes things in gross( as most do) without due examination, and looks upon Bishops as Persons dignified with Titles of Honour, possessed of I an is and Revenues, having under them( as the late Covenant set them out attended) deans, Arch-deacons, chancellors, Commissaries, &c. for the exercise of jurisdiction, will peradventure think there can be nothing apostolical in Episcopacy, or that it cannot be other, then what he has imagined it to be, and so not greatly stick to part with such a Bishop. But he that with a discerning eye( as wisemen should) looks upon a Bishop, may in that Person and his Government easily see what is original and apostolic, what brought in after upon good and necessary considerations, and can sever what is accidental from what is essential; and will consider well, upon what terms he Parts with any thing, that concerns the Church of God or the Ministers thereof.  
E●iscopacy therefore in itself considered, is a Prelacy or superiority of One above all the Presbyters within such a precinct or D●ocesse; which One is appointed to have care of all the Churches within that compass, and furnished with power and Authority for Ordination and jurisdiction( that Authority being not Arbitrary, but bounded by laws, and administered or exercised with advice and assistance of certain choice Presbyters) to the intent that all Churches or Congregations under him may be provided of able Pastors, and that both these inferior Pastours and people may perform the duties required of them.  
That there is such a power of Ordination and jurisdiction left in the Church by our Saviour Christ, and to continue in it, for the Ordaining & sending forth of Ministers of the gospel, and for the ruling and governing of them and the Church, is a Truth confessed on all sides. That the Ministration of this power was not left indifferent to all Presbyters or Ministers of the gospel, but restrained to certain choice men( having thereby a Prelacy and superiority above others) for the more orderly Government of the Church, is a Truth also, currant for 1500 years in the catholic Church, however in this last Age opposed with all violence by Presbyterians. After many volumes written for the evidencing of this Truth, take it briefly thus: Our Saviour upon his departure, gave the Twelve their full Commission in these words, As my Father hath sent me, even so sand I you. Joh. 20.21. and thereby power to sand others for the same purpose they were sent themselves( that is, to Plant and Constitute Churches, and to appoint Pastors and Ministers in the same) and those to sand others, and so to the Worlds end; For this was an Ordinary power to continue in the Church after the Apostles, and to be entrusted with certain choice men for the same purpose of sending others, which was the settling of Episcopacy in the Church, for the more due and orderly government thereof. This is clear by the practise of the Apostles using this power, and by the continuance of that practise in those choice men, that did succeed them in this superiority. Such were Timothy in Ephesus, and Titus in Creet, as appears by the charge the Apostle gives them in his Epistles to them; Such were those Angels of the Churches, our Saviour sends to Rev. 2.3. as appears by what he lays to their charge: thereby approving the function and government, but reproving their neglects in the managing of it.  
It could not be expected that the episcopal power should show itself in any Persons distinct from the Apostles, till the Churches planted abroad were so enlarged by the access of new Converts, that there was need of many Presbyters to Minister in them, and so of a Bishop as chief Pastor to take care of the whole, and still to sand out new labourers as the harvest increased. For though the Churches abroad at their first planting were not without Order( such as they were capable of) being visited by the Apostles or their fellow labourers, as time and occasion gave leave, yet had they not at first such an order by Bishop and Presbyters settled among them, as they had when it seemed good to the Apostles so to provide for them; and that was done, as I said, when the increase of new Converts called for many labourers to be employed in and about the same City. When the Church of Ephesus, and that in Crees came to such a condition, we see Timothy is sent to have care of the one, and Titus of the other. But by that time as St John wrote his Revelations, there had been in the Churches of Jerusalem, and Alexandria, and Antioch, and in some of those Churches he wrote to, a succession of several Bishops; a most clear argument that this Apostle, nay that his and our Saviour the great Bishop of our souls, who wrote by him to those Angells or Bishops, did approve and own this Government of his Church.  
As this appears plainly enough in Holy Writ, so the practise and continuance of episcopal Government, is most evident in all the Ancient Fathers, all the Councells, all the Histories of the Church, so clear and obvious to any eye that looks into them, that it is no small wonder, any man of Learning and Knowledge should in this point be Papist or Puritan, either for a Pope or against a Bishop.  
Calvin himself acknowledgeth Instit. l. 4. c. 4. §. 2. in every City a Bishop anciently placed, and that according to Hierom( the only seeming friend the Presbyterians have among the Fathers) there had been at Alexandria, à Marco Evangelista, a succession of Bishops from Mark the Evangelist. So then we have an Evangelist engaged for Episcopacy, it cannot sure be far from apostolic; but how must this confessed antiquity be eluded? even by such shifts, as men interested, though otherwise judicious, are sometimes content with. I. That Bishops had not then a superiority of power, but the Presbyters, ita suberant Episcope, vt & ipse fratrum caetui subjiceretur. Calvin. ib. Were so under the Bishop, that he also was subject to the company: to the company of his fellow Bishops, if you will, not to the Assembly of the Presbyters, that were under him; for how could Episcopacy be available to suppress Heresies and schisms among Presbyters( the end for which that government, as Hiorom and Calvin aclowledge, was instituted) if Bishops have not a singularity of power? what power they had anciently, was intimated before; and our Bishops desire no other, then what the Ancient Bishops exercised, as received from the Apostles. II. That episcopal Government was introduced humano consensu: so Calvinibid. But what Consent could this be? such an one as is made by custom? that which began so soon as Saint marks time, could not by custom obtain to the over throw of a settled Presbyterian Government, if there had been any such established by the Apostles: or shall we think Saint mark guilty of introducing such a custom, as should be so contrary to the apostolical institution? Or can it be such a consent, as was at once agreed upon by the Church? How do we think they should so soon conspire to subvert the Government fixed by the Apostles? and to do it, some of them yet living in St marks time? nay to continue it without check during the life of St John the Apostle, which was almost forty yeares longer? and that none of the Angells or Bishops of the seven Churches should be charged by our Saviour for changing the government of his Church, if it had been formerly Presbyterian? These being Imagihations against all possibility of truth, it cannot be conceived, that the Church was left by the Apostles under any other government then episcopal.  
Now it follows we should say something of the Use and practise of Episcopacy, as it came down from the Apostles to us; which, because it may give satisfaction happily to exceptions taken at some particulars in and about that government, I shall endeavour briefly to unfold.  
Churches at their first planting began in Families, and so spread themselves over Cities and Villages about; The whole City with the places adjoining, which thence received the gospel, made a particular Church of one Denomination, as the Church of Ephesus, Laodicea, Smyrna, and as still we say, the Church of Lincoln, Winchester, &c. In each of these Churches by reason of its extent were many Presbyters to minister to the people in holy things, yet but one Bishop, who was properly the Pastor, and unto whom belonged the oversight and care of the whole; For which he had power, as aforesaid, of Ordination, still to sand out new Presbyters, as the number of Converts increased, or as the necessities of the Church required: and of Jurisdiction, to direct, reprove, censure, &c. All which he did in the presence and by the advice of his Presbyters, especially and most usually those of the City, who were always at hand; He having power therefore to call the Presbyters both of the City and Country together on all occasions, which in those firster Times was done more frequently, because then were fewer Canons to direct, what was to be done in every particular case. Answerable to those City Presbyters are the dean and Prebends resident in our Cathedrall Churches, and who sees not, they may be as useful in the Church, and as serviceable to the Bishop, as those Presbyters were?  
The Bishop had also Deacons continually attending on him who in succeeding Ages were called chief or Arch-Deacons, in relation to those other Deacons, that waited upon Presbyters in their charges; These the Bishop sent upon all occasions into every part of his diocese, that they might observe how all went abroad, and so upon their report matters might be prepared the better against the episcopal Visitation or Synod. But by degrees they were entrusted to judge and redress the smaller abuses, greater offences being reserved for the hearing and determination of the Bishop; And upon this trust not plain Deacons, as at first, but Presbyters of the best repute for Learning and gravity were employed, to supply the places of Arch-Deacens.  
And for the better and more orderly Government of every diocese, being grown large and of great extent, the Country Presbyters were reduced into several divisions or Deanryes, & in every of these one Presbyter was appointed chief, called therefore Arch-Presbyter or rural dean, in relation to the Cathedrall dean, who was chief of the Presbyters in the Mother City. These Arch Presbyters or rural deans did impart to the several Presbyters within their Precincts, any Order receive● from the Bishop, and had a kind of ●urisdiction permitted them, for the inquiring into Doctrine taught the people, and for redressing some matters of lighter moment. Answerably with us is every County, in relation to the affairs of the Church, divided into several Deanryes, and still some rural deans remaining, though generally the use of them is vanished, their Authority being lestened( as I take it) by the increasing power of Arch-Deacons.  
Lastly, where the diocese was of more then ordinary extent, there were also Choropiseopi, rural Bishops, one or more, which performed the episcopal office in places remote from the Mother City, when and where the Bishop himself could not personally be present. These by some are confounded with the Arch-Presbyters or rural deans: but we speak of such Chorepiscopi as had power of Ordination; These in England were Suffragan Bishops, some of them continuing in the first year of queen Elizabeth.  
If any quarrel at these ( deans, Arch. Deacons, Arch. Preshyters, Chorepiscopi) as at new Names and new employments. I suppose Wisemen will not greatly contend about Names; and yet the newest of them are as Ancient as jerome, as may be shown, were it a matter of moment. And for employments, that of dean and Chapter is, or should be the same with that of the City Presbyters of old, as was said before; and for the other, whose employment is in the Church abroad, we see the Apestles had their Helpers, whom they sent to the Churches, when and where they could not come themselves, as appears throughout St Pauls Epistles: And the Bishop, as he has need of Helpers, so may he employ such abroad in visiting the Church, and reforming somethings amiss, and set the rest in Order, when he comes himself,( as the Apostle, 1. Cor. 11.) not by giving out new Ordinances with apostolical authority, but by redressing every thing according to the Apostles general orders, and the particular constitutions of the Church agreeable to them.  
But there are other Persons we must give account of, employed by episcopal government in the exercise of jurisdiction, under the names of Chancellors, Commissaries, officials, &c. So it was, that when Kings and Emperours became Christian, they shewed great piety in endowing the Church with ample Revenues, & in honouring the Bishops thereof: to whose hearing and judgement they referred many Causes, otherwise Civill, as of Wills and Testaments, of Marriage, tithes, &c. By reason of these, and of other matters concerning Church Order and Government, the Constitutions of the Emperours, and the Canons Ecclosiasticall grew many and perplent: whereupon Bishops for their greater ease, and quicker dispatch of differences depending, took to themselves certain of their Clergy skilful ●n the 〈◇〉 constitutions, and the laws of the Church, to whom they committed the hearing of all matters of instance between party and party, and by whom they might be resolved in all Cases of doubt; But the Canon I awe growing to so vast a body, that it required a mans whole study to be thoroughly skilled in it, and the knowledge of it became a special profession, Canoaists were en ertained for assistance, and permitted some ex●●cise of I●●i●●tion.  
Now if that place of the Apostle, where he speaks of helps in Governments( 1 Cor. 12 28.) were appliable to lay Presbyt●●s, I such as they, I see no reason but the Presbyterians( who so interpret it) should think, that Learned Civilians might be as fitting helps in Governments, as their Lay Elders, especially seeing they do not, or should not assume to themselves so much, as is permitted to these.  
But to say the truth, they were entertained at first onely as Assessors, to suggest what was law in doubtful Cases; if they be advanced beyond their bounds, it is no service but injury done to episcopal Government. It were to be wished, that noble profession had better entertainment in the State, where the employment of it would be proper, and the service useful; but I cannot think, that men of ingenuity in that profession should conceive themselves ill dealt with in the way of the Church, if ●●ey be still retained judges in such causes, as have been by the grace of Emperours permitted to the sentence of the Church, though excluded wholly from that part of judicature, which wa, by Christs appointment left to them, to whom he committed the power of the keys: it being altogether reafonable, that they, when are charged with the cure of souls, should have the powet one care of censures, and they only the keeping of the keys, who are accountable for the treasure. Were it so, and anogether so. I must needs say( for now is a time to speak plainly) it would much alter the face of Church Goverement, and make it more pleasing, because more like itself.  
We have seen the persons employed in episcopal Government, and kow, and to what purpose employed; in all which, besides what is original and apostolic, there was nothing after introduced, which was not done upon good and necessary grounds, or may not easily be redressed.  
But if the titles of honour, and the Revenues of the Church do make this Government seem more guilty to the envious or covetons eye, let it red what the Apostle writeth, An Elder that ruleth well, is worthy of double honour; and such Elders are Bishops especially, and such honour had they always paid them in Reverence and due Maintenance, even when the Church was in her low estate: but when Emperours became Christian, then had they it in a more ample manner.  
Our Bishops in this kingdom through the favour of Princes have been honoured with the Titles of Lords, and their Seas by the piety of former times endowed with faire Revennes: the Statute of 24 of H 8. c. 12. speaks it, and the reason of it, For the due administering of what belongs to their places, and to keep them from cerrupt and sinister affections, the Kings most noble progenitors, and the Antecessours of the Nobles of this realm have sufficiently endowed this Church with honours and possessions.  
If any shall come in with that ignorant mistake, that this is to Lord it over Gods heritage, forbidden by S. Peeer, 2 Ep. 5. 3. they must know, that it is not the bearing of that Title, or the having of answerable Revenue, that is guilty of such usurpation, but the arrogating of a power over mens consciences, which the papal consistory doth; & whether the Presbyterian or episcopal Government be more apt to do it also, the wise may easily judge. If others shall pled, these Titles and Revenues are accidental to Episcopacy, time was when Bishops was without them: I would desire them to consider: First, that time was also, when Christians held nothing they possessed was their owns, but had all things common, Act. 4.32. and if the anabaptistical Spirit can still prevail, it shall be so again; but that was no example for after Ages. In the first and low estate of the Church, they and their Bishops, according to the exigency of the Times, lived as they could. Secondly, that by the Apostles argument, 1. Cor. 9. vers. 13, 14. the ministry of the gospel should be as well provided for, as the levitical Priesthood was; but all that the Church( Cathedrall or parochial) hath, falls short of the proportion, which God allotted to the Tribe of Levi. It is true indeed, that when the Apostle made that argument, the Christian Church was not soamply provided for: yet now, that by the piety of Christian Kings and People such a portion is applied to the Church, for the maintonance of the Ministers thereof, who can withdraw any of it without wilful sacrilege?  
Lastly, if they consider the security, that Magna Charia, the Kings Oath at his Coronation, and all the laws of the Land afford to those that are provided for by them, it will be no dis●aragement to any to say, that Bishops hold what they have, by as good title, as any other Subjects can show for their privileges and revenues; beside, that which is singular in the revenue of the Church, the right of Dedication, by which it is applied as a portion, set apart to maintain God's Ministry.  
This being spoken touching Episcopacy, we shall be better able to consider, and judge of that which follows   

Of the Presbyterian Government.  
FOr 1500 years continuance of Christianity we have no example of any Church so governed. When after that time Reformation of Religion was endeavoured, Luther, Melancton Bucer, and the rest, that admitted the Augustan Confession( among whom was Calvin also) declared, what respect they had to the Government of the Church by Bishops, and how willing they were to continue it, if the Bishops would admit of the Reformation: which also Calvin, for himself and them of Geneva, professeth in his answer to carded. Sadolet.  
In the Dominions of those German Princes, that reformed, though Bishops were deprived for adhering to the Pope, yet was the like Office and Authority ecclesiastical continued, under the Titles of Superintendents and general Superintendents, answerable to Bishops and Arch-Bishops: the change being of good old Greek names into worse Latin ones, rather then of any thing else; as Zanchy was wont to say of them. But in kingdoms, that received Reformation of Religion, both name and Office of Bishops was retamed.  
It is well known, where the Prosbyterian Government began; it was in that City where the Bishop with the Ecclesinsticall bower had the temporal also. They that cast him out, thought it no policy to re-establish any thing like a Bishop or superintendant, that is, any one Person with an ecclesiastical Superiority, least he should call to mind the Civill power lately joined with it, and endeavour to recover that also. Thus was Episcopacy declined, out of too much respect to outward Considerations, and some thing else of their own invention, by many windings brought in, and with much ado established. They call it the Presbyterian Government. And now to examing, what it is.  
For this we must not so much look into it, as it stands in that republic, where it received beginning, for there it is more famed and restrained, being framed in a compliance to the Civil Government, which is also Popular: but we must seek ●o● such a Presby●ery( if such can be found) as may well consist will. Monarchy, and where can we have a pattern for such? We find it ●eceived in no Kingdom, onely in Scotland we see how it has been forced upon Monarchy, and thence we must have it, if we can suffer ourselves to be persuaded into it. The knowledge therefore of it is to be drawn out of the Doctrines, and practices of those, that did erect it in Scotland, and of those that would have done it in England upon the same grounds. Thus it may briefly be described. It is such a form of Church government, as is administered by Preaching and Lay-Elders jointly, with equal voice and Power in the several judicatories, of their parochial Sessions, of their classical or greater Consistories, of their provincial Synods, and national Assemblies.  
But we shall discover it more fully, if we compare it( as was promised at the beginning) with Episcopacy, by taking a view of the Frame of each government, set Parallcil one to the other: of the Causes falling under the Cognizance and Indicature of each: and lastly of the Title, by which they claim in holding Courts, and Assemblies for the exercise of their jurisdictions. By this comparison will appear what the Presbyterian hath in imitation of Episcopacy, what singular, and of its own invention: and thereupon will also be manifest, what was at first proposed, that Episcopacy is every way more convenient; both in regard of the end of Church government, as being more chectuall to procure that, and in relation to the Government of the kingdoms as being more agreeable with that.  
It may be our new English Presbyterians will say, they intend not such a form, as is set down in the following parallel. Be it so: but then must they also say, they intend such a Church-Government, as never was, and condemn their own intention by its Novelty; for that, which we can learn touching the Presbytery from the Doctrines, Directories, and practices of the Masters of that Discipline, either English or Scottish, standeth in such sort, as the following parallel exhibires it.  
For the Frame then of that Government, it stands thus upon the Comparison 1. under episcopal Government, there is in every Parish a Preaching Minister with Church Wardens, and in some, Deacons also or Curates. By these Off●nders are noted, and admonished, and the Offences presented to the Feclesiasticall Courts or Consistories, where they may be heard and censured: the Minister having power, in some Cases of notorious scandal, to restrain from the Communion, till the offence may be heard and judged in the Court, and the party so offending by the Censures of the Church brought to give public satisfaction. under the Presbyterian Government, in every Parish a Minister with a competent number of Lay Elders and Deacons, according to the largeness of the Parish. These make the parochial Session, and have power to censure scandalous Livers, as Drunkards, Contentious, and the like, to enjoin public Pennance, and impose upon the Penitent, before he be received into the Church, a Fine to be employed on pious uses.  
II. under episcopal Government, in every diocese the●● are several Divisions, the lesser and the greater, those being called Denaries these Arch-Deaconries; in those the Arch-Presbyters, in these the Arch-Deacons have power to call the parochial Ministers together, to enguire of Doctrine and Manners, and see to to the redressing of smaller abuses. In the Mother City is the Bishop residing with his Presbyters, having the power of Ordination, of judging and determining all matters of Dostrine or scandal, referved to his hea●ing by his Arch Deacons, and of rejudging what was judged amisle by them; This he doth either in his Consistory, which he holds in the City assisted with his Presbyters: or in his Visitations, going through his diocese, and causing his Clergy personally to appear: or in his Diocesan Synod, which is made up of the City Presbyters( dean and Chapter) the Arch-Deacons, and other choice Presbyters under the Presedency of the Bishop. under the Presbyterian, in every County there are also several Divisions, or Classes containing such a number of parochial Ministers, who have their set meetings for conference; and in the City or more eminent town is the great presbyterial Consistory( commonly called the Presbytery) made up of all the parochial Ministers within its precincts, and of Lay Elders from each Parish one. In this is the power of Ordination, of Censu●ing Crimes and scandals of the higher strain with the greater excommunication, of heating appeals from the parochial Sessions, and rejudging what was there judged amiss.  
III. under episcopal Government are held provincial Synods, consisting of all the Bishops, deans, Arch-Deacons, and of certain choice Presbyters, from every Dioc●sie within the province. These have power to order all matters concerning the whole Province, to hear appeals from every diocese, to rejudge what is done amiss, and to deter nine Cases of Diffienlty, that could not be well determined in a Diocesan Synod.  
under the Presbyterian also are held provincial Synods, made up of Commissioners, that is, certain preaching and Lay Elders sent from every individual presbytery( or presbyterial Consistory) within the ●rovince. These Judge and determine matters pertaining to the whole prevince, also all difficult Cases, that could not well be determined within the Presbytery; They receive appeals also from the Presbyters, and examine what was there thought to be done amiss.  
IIII. under episcopal Government are also held national Councells, consisting of the like members as do the provincial. These are of greatest Authority; They examine and judge any thing done amiss in any Province, they consider and determine matters of Doctrine and Discipline, in order to the whole national Church. under the presbyterial likewise are held national Assemblies, consisting of Commissioners from all the Presbyteries in the kingdom, each of them sending two Preaching, and one Lay Elder; also from every Borough one, and he a Lay man; and from every university one, and for the most part a Lay man too. In these is the Supreme and final determination of all Complaints and Controversies, and unto the Decrees, that issue thence, all must obey under pain of Excommunication.  
So stands the Frame of each Government. By this parallel, as we do see what the Presbyterian hath retained in imitation of the episcopal, so may we discern, which of the two has the more effectual means to procure the End of Church Government,( the preservation of Truth and Peace, the suppression of heresy and schism) especially if we reflect upon these particulars.  
First, in the Ordaining and admitting of those, that are to publish that Truth, and teach it to the people, the Presbyterian permits unto Laymen the trial and approbation, and after that the Imposition of hands; which as it is without all warrant, so without probability of success. Whereas episcopal Government permits this onely to such, as by apostolic warrant, and catholic practise may do it, and for their learning and knowledge are more able to judge, and for their gravity and profession are more likely to use a Conscience, in approving and admitting of those, they have examined. Much ado has there been about inquiring of Scandalous Ministers, to expose a number to the view of the kingdom, that the Imputation might lie upon Episcopacy, as the Cause thereof. Were there nothing but true dealing in the business, yet can it not amount to a just charge upon the Government itself, but upon some Persons bearing the Authority; nor yet upon them soly and wholly: for what if there be some laws also in part accessary to miscarriages in the Church, and that not by enlarging but restraining of the episcopal power? laws there are, which under pain of a praemunire bind our Bishops to consecrate those Persons, that are nominated to them: which make a young unexpersenced Novice at 23. yeares of age capable of a Cure of souls: Which require very mean abilities of learning in them: which enable Patrons by a Quare impedit against the Bishop, though he has good cause of exception against their Clerkes in point of Learning and Manners. Were the episcopal power here left at more Liberty, and more restraint cast upon Patrons, and more age and experience, with better gifts and abilities required of such, as should be admitted to cure of souls, who sees not, that the entrance of the Church would be better secured against those, that are unfit to be placed in it, or may prove scandalous to it?  
Secondly, in the judging of heresy, the deciding of matters of Faith, and determining of points of Worship, the Presbyterian Government allows equal voice to Lay men; which cannot yield so good security for Truth, and soundness of Doctrine, as when the decision and determination is made, according to the ancient and constant usage of the Church, by Presbyters of Learning and gravity, under the presidency of their Bishop in a Diocesan Synod, or by many Bishops also, met together in a provincial or national council. Look we into the Records of Time, and they will tell us; That Bishops they were, by whom Heresies of old were refuted, and the true faith preserved: and Bishops they were, by whom Popery was cast out of this Land, and Truth again established by an happy Reformation; That the corruption of Doctrine in the Romish Church then broken forth, and enlarged itself, when that one Bishop drawing all to himself, had enslaved his fellow Bishops, to the overthrow of true episcopal Government: and this Inundation of Sects and Errors, which now overflows the Land, we find has prevailed through the restraint of episcopal power.  
Thirdly, in the passing of Beclesiasticall Censures, the Presbyterian puts the keys into the hands of such, as our Saviour never committed them to, Lay men I mean, and those in many Parishes ignorant and illiterate; which as it is against Christs ordinance, so without likelihood of success, for the correcting of Abuses, or preserving of Unity and Peace in the Church. For how will such as they, think you, handle the keys, when they come to use them? how shall the Tenant behave himself, when he sits judge upon his Landlord? or the peasant up●n the Noble? nay, how towards those of equal rank with them? for being either fearful to be requited by their Neighbour, when he comes to sit the next year in their place, they will not date to censure: or being malicious and wilful no● greatly care, what they do to the spitting of a Neighbour. So that indeed their parochial Sessions or Indicatories must needs be sand so Experience in Scotland has found them) very Nurseries of Strises and fiends; which are prevented under Episco●all Government, by reason the power of Censure there is not left parochial, but restrained to such Persons, as cannot lie so open to envy and emulation.  
Fourthly, the Presbyterian Parity or equality cannot be so effectual or convenient for preservation of Unity and Peace, by reason that in their consistories and Synods, as the Moderatorship is by choice every meeting, and not usually carried without strivings and envyings, so are there always some leading men, that will sway all, and not seldom to the perverting of judgement; whereas there is no place for such contentions, and emulations under the settled presidency of a Bishop, who hath an established superiority above the rest. King James did often, and not without cause complain of such leading men in the Presbytery, who could rule all, and would sufficiently trouble all, to the vexing even of King and Nobles, if they were not handsomely courted. This is Diotrephes his 〈◇〉, to affect rule, to be prime and chief men, when they have it not by place and office, as Bishops have it, and as S. John the Apostle, who reproved Diotrephe●, had it in the Church. To conclude this point, Cyprian having often occasion to speak of Unity and Peace of the Church, makes this a ground-work of it, In Una Ecclesia Unus Episcopus, because in every great Church, there is one Bishop with singularity of power. And Hierom( who useth to speak no more to the advantage of bishops, then ●●●ds must) acknowledgeth, If there be not 〈◇〉 chief th●re 〈◇〉 as many schisms as Presbyters, in a Church: advers● Lucifer And if you ask Calvin, or Beza, or the rest, why was episcopal Government at first instituted? they will tell you 〈◇〉 of Hierom, that it was for preventing of schisms, and preserving of Peace.  
It remaines, we now look into the Causes, 〈…〉 under the Cognizance or judicature of each Government, and the Title by which they claim; whereby it may appear, which of the two is more agrecably consistent with Monarchy.  
The Causes, that episcopal Government takes knowledge of, are Matters of Doctrine and Worship: also Scandals from corruption of manners and evil life, and what falls directly under the power of the keys, according to the penitential Canons: lastly, causes Testamentary, matrimonial, and the like( by the grace of Emperours and Kings, referred expressly to the judgement of the Church) according to the constitutions and Canons concerning them. The particulars indeed are many, and the extent large: but the bounds are fixed, and within them the episcopal jurisdiction precisely keeps itself, not daring to entrench upon any civill Court. In the Presbyterian Government, matters of Doctrine, Worship, heresy, Idolatry, scandal, corruption of manners are considered and judged: and in effect any civill matter belonging to the judicature of temporal Courts. For though they pretend to judge nothing of Actions, but what falls directly, sub ratione Scandali, or as Beza in his Epistle to the Chancellor of Scotland resolved it, in this consistory is heard and judged, Nihil nisi ad Conscientiam pertinens. Yet can they enlarge these restrictions so, as to bring within their power almost every thing, sub ratione Scandali, and in ordine ad Conscientiam, as the papal consistory doth all Temporals in ordine ad spiritualia. The Apostle said once according to the necessity of the times, Ye have iudgement of things pertaining to this life, 1. Cor. 6, 4. for then, there being no Christian Magistrate, it was a shane for them to pled their differences before Heathens; and as if he still spake it to the Presbyterian consistory, they will be judging the 〈◇〉, which properly belong to the cognizance and judgement of the Christian Magistrate. Indeed to persuade the compounding of any difference by arbitration, is a work worthy the Minister of the gospel of Peace: but to withhold any man by ecclesiastical coërcion, from using the benefit of the Law, for recovering of his right, as it is an apparent wrong to the party grieved, so a plain usurpation upon temporal Courts. How the presbyterial Consistory has dealt with men in this kind, they that have look't into the known stories of this last Age, cannot be ignorant.  
Now for the Title, that each Government claims by, inholding Courts and Assemblies for exercise of jurisdiction: It is true, that both episcopal and presbyterial Government claim to be of Divine institution, though in a different sense, which of them doth it to the prejudice of the crown, that's now to be cleared. It is confessed on both sides, that the power of Ordination and of judicature, so far forth as the Keys left by Christ in his Church do extend, is of divine institution; that this power must be exercised or administered in his Church by some, is also confessed to be of divine right. Now whether the exercise or ministration of that power be restrained to certain choice Men, succeeding the Apostles to that purpose, or in●ifferently left to all Presbyters, is a Controversy between Episcopacy and Presbytery, not a contestation of either of them against the crown.  
But here's the difference; Bishops, though by apostolical practise and perpetual use of the Church it appears, they are the persons, to whom the ministration of that power is left, do not assume to exercise it within any Princes Dominions, or to use it over his Subjects, but by permission and Authority from Him: and that according to just laws and Rules made by sovereign Authority, for the manner of the external ministration thereof; so that when this episcopal power comes to the Forum exterius, to the holding of Courts, and calling Assemblies, it wholly depends on the sovereign power. Accordingly it was declared by the Clergy with all submission,( 25 H. 8.19.) that without His Majesties assent, signified by his Writ, they could neither assemble for the making of Canons and Constitutions, nor publish, or put in ure any of them being made; And the Clergy( as now consisting of Arch-Bishops, Bishops &c.) are by Parliament declared, to be part of that body, which is aptly joined to the Head of the Monarchy, viz. the King 24. H. 8.12. What can more fully speak the conjunction, episcopal power hath with, and the dependence it hath upon the sovereign power? Vpon this Headship or supremacy of the King in C●uses ecclesiastical, both Papists and Presbyterians look awry. They with an eye to the Pope, These with respect to themselves and their own advantage; for though, when they deal with the People to raise a suspicion upon episcopal Government, they give it out, Bishops are not so under the King, but that they are still addicted to the Pope, and ready upon occasion to be joined to Him, as their Head: yet let them have to do with those that understand, they will rather affirm the contrary, that Bishops make the King a Pope in this Church, and derive their jurisdiction from him, as the Romish Bishops do from the Pope. If I may speak what I think and wish. I cannot but conceive, that the meaning of those Assertions ( the King is Head in all causes, and fountain of all Jurisdiction ecclesiastical) has been too much enlarged by some, who( being not in holy Orders) would thereby make themselves, and their Profession capable of exercising all ecclesiastical turisdiction; and I cannot but wish, the true and genuine sense of them were more carefully and plainly expressed. The brevity, I proposed to myself in this discourse, beside the want of ability, will not suffer me to say much: yet thus much in brief; for Causes referred by the grace of Kings to the judgement of the Church, there is no doubt, but the jurisdiction therein flows from the crown as wholly, as the jurisdiction of any temporal Court; and for causes falling directly under the power of the keys, though that power be left by Christ to them, he has made Ministers of it in his Church, yet when it comes to be administered in Foro exteriori, the jurisdiction is derived, and receives many Regulations from the regal Authority; in a word: Bishops in the exercise of their jurisdiction aclowledge such a dependence upon the sovereign power, as neither Papists nor Presbyterians will allow. For as it follows,  
Presbyterians claim a Title immediately from Christ, whereby they take upon them, to set up their Discipline in any Kingdom, maugre all opposition; indeed for external peace sake, they hold it fit to crave leave first, and beg the assistance of the Civill power: but if denied, to proceed without it. So where their Discipline is entertained, to Assemble Nationally without the assent of the Prince, if after Petition it be denied; and to make their own laws without regulations from the sovereign Power, for the manner and form of exercising their Discipline. They allow the Prince Potestatem cumulativam,( as they speak) a power to add more strength and vigour, not Privativam, to interpose or hinder their Assemblies or Decrees: from Him therefore is expected a confirming, and executing of what they have judged fit to be done, and in case he refuse, he may be forced to it. And for this the Presbyterian doth not only commend itself, as a Divine Institution and Order set in the Church, but will command obedience, as the sceptre, the Throne, the Kingdom of Christ, in opposition to sceptres, Thrones, and power of Kings, that shall withstand the erection, or the exercise of this Discipline.  
By this may it easily be discerned, which of the two Governments do entrench upon temporal Courts, which of them will better endure the Kings Supremacy, in Causes and over Persons ecclesiastical, or more agreeably consist with Monarchy. But to proceed a little farther upon the grounds of Reason and Experience; There are three forms of political or Civill Government: Monarchy, Aristocracy, Democracy; and there are three sorts of Church-Government now extant. 1. The papal, wherein there is one universal Bishop, which is also called the monarchical Government, and maintained in and by the Romish Church. 2. presbyterial, wherein none are afore or after other, called therefore democratical; 3. episcopal, wherein according to the number of the Mother Churches, are certain chief and chosen men, having a Prelacy or Superiority over other Presbyters, called therefore aristocratical; Now Reason tells us, there are two things chiefly which make the ecclesiastical Government agreeable, and peaceably consistent with the Civill: unity in itself, by which Factions and schisms are prevented, and dependence on the Civill Power, by which subjection to it is assured. The Roman monarchical Government, though it pretend more to unity in itself then the other, yet denying subjection to Kings and Princes, can be no more consistent with the temporal Monarchy, then two Suns in the same Firmament. The Presbyterian Government, as it cannot by reason of its democratical Parity have that unity and Peace, which it should, so doth it not yield that subjection to the Prince, which it ought. But episcopal Government, as it is most aptly framed to conserve unity and order within itself, so doth it most willingly aclowledge a dependence on, and subordination to the sovereign power of Majesty, as was above shown.  
Experience likewise testifies, how this ecclesiastical Government has in all ages through the universal Church agreed with the imperial and regal government, how it has from the beginning of Christianity been trained up to Obedience, how by this government Christians, while under Heathen persecuting Emperours, were restrained from rebelling, and so downward under Christian Kings; till that one Bishop of Rome passing beyond his bounds, encroached upon the regal power: and making the Bishops his vassals, extinguished the true episcopal Government, wheresoever he had to do.  
Long experience also doth witness for this kingdom in particular, how well the episcopal has agreed with the monarchical government of the kingdom: under which, from the first planting of Christianity in this Land, Episcopacy has grown up and flourished, yielding to the sovereign power on all occasions good and pious advice, and receiving from it honour and support. Indeed while Rome had an influence upon this Land, many storms and commotions were raised, and in them sometimes Bishops made active, but not onely they: Nobles also, and Gentry, and Commons by the same papal power were engaged against the Prince. But since the Reformation it is now again currant episcopal doctrine, as it was always apostolical, That Subjects ought not to resist, nor can be disobliged of their obedience to their sovereign, upon any pretence whatsoever; and we should have a more quiet World, if the Presbyterian Consistory, however it hates the papal, did not endeavour to raise, and uphold itself by practices and usurpations upon the regal power.  
Reason has  told us, that the Presbyterian Government cannot well consist with Monarchy; if we would know it by Experience too, we must not look upon those two democratical or popular States, where we see it entertained and practised; for there is some cause it should be more peaceable, because there it grew up with the Civill Government, being framed in a compliance to it, and must needs have less power upon the people, who have an interest in the State, and are concerned to maintain the Authority thereof, against all encroachments of the ecclesiastical Jurisdiction: but in a Monarchy it has more advantage to raise and engage the people against the regal power, of which they are easily induced to be suspicious, and to conceive they gain to themselves so much, as that loses. The Experience of this we have from the kingdom of Scotland, and onely from that; and how the Presbyterian discipline was there forecably brought in, and has accordingly agreed with the regal power, had we no other histories to assure us, then what Knox and Buchanan, with others of the same strain have left us, it were sufficient.  
There is indeed am●ng the English Promoters of that discipline, a talk now of a more mixed and prudential Presbytery, and one of their learned L●wyers in his 12 Questions put to the Ind●pendents, altogether speaks( as mindful of his own profession) of a Presbytery framed and ordered according to the laws and customs of this kingdom. How this pleases their best Friends, I say not. But it gives the Independents an advantage of using the same Weapons, for defence of their discipline, by which the Presbyterians at first made way for theirs, in this and the Neighbour kingdom; as, That our Saviour has left an exact form of Church Government, prescribing in every particular what is to be done, or else he had not been as faithful in Gods House, as Moses was: and, that theirs is that form, directly and in every point expressed in Gods word; the sceptre, the kingdom of Christ &c. This the very Language, Presbyterians spoken, these the Principles they taught, when at first they commended their Discipline to the People of these kingdoms, and now they are put to answer for them to the Independents, as we see by their books, written one against the other.  
Well, let the Presbyterian discipline desert its first pretence of being exactly Consonant to Gods word, and promise a compliance with the laws of this kingdom, to work itself in: yet will it at length return to its old bias and practices; we may be sure of it, if we consider who th●y are, that have left their own Country to force it upon this, what the doctrines are, that have been taught, and the violence that has been used to establish it here; for the old maxim will tell us, By what means a new Government receives beginning, ijsdem conservatur, it is maintained by the same. If it be turbulent in the entrance, it will be so in the continuance: if by force set up, by force it will be upheld.  
Let them cease to urge us then with a conformity to other Reformed Churches, and consider sadly, whose the fau●t is, that we are not alike in this point; For our parts, when we look upon the Presbyterian Discipline, either in relation to the Church, we cannot see any Church for 1500 years so governed, that may challenge us of inconformity: or in relation to the State, we find not one kingdom which has yet received their Discipline, that this kingdom may therein conform unto it; for as for that of Scotland, we know by what means, with what a shaking and commotion of the State it was there introduced: and as for that republic, where it first appeared, we know upon what politic considerations episcopal gevernment was declined there; and yet not left without a witness and allowance given to it, even from the most learned Divines ( Calvin and Beza not exceepted) of those Churches, where it was declined; whose acknowledgements of the Antiquity and conveniency of Episcopacy, are to be seen in their own Writings, especially their Epistles to the Bishops of our Church, and in a late Book entitled, Confessions of Protestant Divines of, &c.  
Now if that Discipline, which at first was devised, as most convenient for the State, where it began, shall still( as heretofore was endeavoured by the English and Scottish Promoters of it) be obtruded on us, as the sceptre and Kindgome of Christ, let them dispute it out with the Independents, who challenge these Titles, as due to their Discipline: and let both of them conclude, that either Christ wanted his sceptre, kingdom, Church, from the Apostles time till this last age, or else their Discipline is not so. We leave them to their Fancies, being assured that in holding to an episcopal Government, we are conformable to apostolical practise, continued in the Church by universal observance.  
But as the Lawyer said, master, thus saying thou reproachest us also: so may some reply, that in saying this, we reproach the reformed Churches, which have not retained that form of Government. We answer, that to speak the Truth is no reproach to any, but an admonition to conform unto it: for want whereof we do not disclaim them a● no Churches, but must say, they are deficient in something that was apostolical; and of their ordaining Ministers without Bishops, though we do not pronounce a nullity in the fact, yet cannot we but say, there is an inexcusable irregularity, and too wilful a transgression in doing it( where necessity doth not enforce it) against that order and rule, which apostolical practise has fixed, and the catholic obser vance of the Church has continued, in restraining the exercise and ministration of that power to certain choice Persons, for the more orderly Government of the Church.  
I would to God they head followed, or would yet, the example of the true Hussites in Bohemia, who desiting to preserve the purity of Doctrine,( from which the council of Basil had withdrawn many, by granting them the cup in the Sacrament, and some small matters beside) departed from the Communion of the Calixtine, or Pseudo-Hussites, Ann. 1457. And although they well knew, their Churches could not be continued without a succession of faithful ministers, and such could not be had from those, they had forsaken: yet did they not think, they were brought to a necessity of Ordaining at home, till they had tried all means abroad. They sand therefore to the Waldenses, lately driven out of France into Austria, and finding they had Bishops still, by an uninterrupted succession from the Apostles, cause three of their Ministers to be consecrated Bishops by them, and to receive the power of Ordination. After a long time, being driven out of Bohemia, they sate down in Polonia, Prusia and Moravia; where to this day they have many Churches, still observing the ancient form of episcopal Government, and ecclesiastical Diseipline; as appears by a Book, containing the platform and order thereof in every particular and by themselves published, An. 1633.   

ANd now to cast up our account according to the Considerations of Prudence, Iustice, Religion: the inferences will be easy from the Premises.  
That there can be no Prudence or wisdom. I. To exchange a Government of so ancient institution, so long continuance, for one sprung up yesterday, and not yet agreed on by the Contrivers, to reject the experience of 1500 yeares, with the universal approbation of the catholic Church, and please ourselves with our own inventions. Who are we, men of these last and worst times, that we should take so much upon us? II. To abrogate that Government, which is most convenient for preservation of unity and Peace in the Church, and receive that, which opens the way to schism and Faction; to cut off from the Head such a Body of the Clergy, as is fitly united, and duly subordinate to it,( Stat. 24. H. 8. c. 12.) and join unto it such a body of a Presbyterian ministry, as cannot agree with the Head, will not be directed by, or subjected duly unto it. III. For Nobles and the best of our Gentry to put themselves into the hands of such men, as the Presbytery( not Christs Ordinance) subjects them to, men of illiberal education, and easily tempted with corrupt and sinister affections: and to cast off the direction of episcopal Government, which is administered by such persons, as pass through a more liberal and ingenuous way of knowledge and learning, making many steps of experience, e're they attain to that superiority of jurisdiction and being at that height are sufficiently provided for with Honour and revenue, to keep them from corrupt and sinester affections,( Stat. 24. H. 8. c. 12.) and to hold them within their compass, are also bound up by certain and known Laws, which the Presbytery will not admit. IIII. To yield to the introduction of a parity in the Church, and so open a way to a parity in the State; for if that spirit, which has hitherto so violently moved for the one, get a little more tincture of the Anabaptist, it will scarce be denied the other, as not knowing any reason, why there should be such inequality among Subjects, as now Honours and Possessions make.  
But do we herein persuade men or God! do we seek to please in telling them, what is for their advantage and honour, without due respect had to God, in speaking what is for his glory, and what they in Conscience of Justice and Religion are bound to do?  
Secondly therefore, That it cannot be Just, I. To do that to others, which we would not have done to ourselves: for Nobles and those of the Gentry, whom it may concern, to yield up a considerable body( one of the three Estates of the kingdom) to be rent in sunder, and a number of such persons to be made a prey, who hold their privileges, Rights, and Possessions, by as good Title & claim, as any Subjects do. Should they make it their own case, and suppose they heard of such a motion made to take away their Honours, and dispose of the greater part of their Revenues and Lands to public uses, would they not be sensible of it, as of the greatest injustice? And yet in justice done to Church-men is so much greater, as sacrilege adds to Rebbery. II. To spoil the King of that power and authority he has in Causes ecclesiastical: to enforce or induce him to yield to that, he is sworn against, the spoiling of the Church, and the subversion of its government.  
Thirdly. That it is against Religion; which he cannot be said to hold, that consents to such a change and subversion of Church Government. For if we take Religion for the virtue and power thereof, he that holds not justice, but loses Conscience by doing unrighteously, cannot have any Religion indeed. If we take Religion for the Doctrine or profession thereof, he cannot be said to hold the s●me Religion, viz. That, which is professed and established in the Church of England. I. It is the Doctrine of this Church, that such an ali●nation and dissipating of the Churches portion, as must needs follow upon such a change, is sacrilege in an high degree, and that sacrilege is an high and presumptuous breach made upon R ligion; And so it is in the Apostles judgement too, Rom. 2.22. Thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege! He couples Idolatrous and Sacrilegious Persons together, to show that, what ever they pretend, they are both of them Enemies to true Religion and Worship. II. It is the Doctrine of the Church of England, and was al ways of the catholic Church, that episcopal Government is of apostolical institution and practise; which he must renounce, that admits the Presbytery. III. It is the doctrine of our Church, and was always of the catholic, that the Imposition of hands in Ordination, and the power of the Keys in Excommunication & Absolution, may not be permitted to Lay men; to which doctrine he must give the lie, that admits the Presbytery. IV. It is the doctrine of our Religion, to aclowledge the Kings Supremacy in Causes ecclesiastical so, as the Presbytery will by no means yield to. V. The Doctrine of our Religion teaches obedience, contrary to those seditious Do strines, which have been hitherto taught, to erect and uphold the Presbyterian Government; such as these: That the People may reform Religion by the advice of their Ministers, if the King and Nobles refuse; That the People are of greater Authority then the King; That they may upon just causes depose Him. These and many more like to these, were taught, and are still to be seen in the Writings of the prime promoters of the Discipline, Knox, Buchanan, Goodman, Cartwright, Parker, &c. If they, which now would advance that Government, disclaim such Principles of sedition, we would fain know by an answer from their Conscience, what Rules and Doctrines they are, that guide the practices of these daies? VI. The Doctrine and Truth of our Religion is comprised in the 39 Articles, and if they mean no change of Religion with the Government, why was there so much labour and time bestowed upon those Articles of Religion in the Presbyterian Assembly? and why did they, that used to cry, No Bishops, cry also Truth and Peace, if the Truth established in this Church( which they might have had with Peace) would have pleased them?  
Lastly, take we Religion for the form of Divine service or the public exercise of Religion in a Church, and in the first place, reflect upon one Religious Solemnity,( that has its part in the Service, and divine Offices of our Church) the Anniversary Remembrance of our Saviours Nativity, and thereupon put the question to the Fathers of the Ancient catholic Church: Wh●t Religion are they of, that will not endure the solemnity of that Remembrance, but instead of keeping the Day festival, begin the abrogation of it with a Fast? certainly the Answer would be, They are scarce good Christians. For shall the angel tell us, J bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all People, for unto you this DAY is born a Saviour, which is CHRIST the Lord. Luk 2.10. and suddenly a multitude of the heavenly Host praising God, and saying, Glory be to God, &c. Shall the Angells( I say) begin to us from heaven, and we not follow, not continue and hold on the joy, with Songs and praises? Scarce good Christians we, if we neglect( much more abolish) such occasions of our public and solemn meetings, for the expression of our joy and thanksgiving. Peradventure it will be said, the abrogating of the Day, did but abolish the Abuses of the Time, not the remembrance of the Nativity. unhappy Reformers are they, that having to do with Religion or Government of a Church, know no mean betwixt Reformation and Extirpation, with violent hands pulling up Root and Branch, where pruning and digging would have served the turn. Had they consulted with the ancient Father Nazianzen, in his O●ation or Sermon upon this Day, they might have heard him vehemently inveighing against the riot and excess of eating and drinking, the vanity and pride of apparel, and all the abuses of this festival,( the very same in a manner with the iniquities, & extravagances of these later Ages:) but withall adorning the Day with glorious Titles, drawn from the work of the Day, and persuading to a due observance of the Feast, not in a carnal way of licentious joy and mirth, but after a spiritual manner. And that is by a careful performance of the duties of Holinesse, and of Charity, according to the example and instruction of the Angells hymn on that Day, Glory be to God in the highest, on Earth Peace, good will towards Men.  
I have insinuated what opinion the Ancient Church would have had of their Religion, that should have so dealt with the Day, and Remembrance of our Saviours Nativity: and yet in that Religious Solemnity, there is only a part of the Liturgy of our Church concerned; but how they, that together with the Government, have cast out the whole Divine service, can be said still to hold the same Religion, I cannot see. Our Law accounts such for Recusants, that refuse to communicate in it, and the Ancient Church held them for schismatics. We stand already apart,( and lamentable it is to behold) as two Churches refusing to meet in the same public exercise of Religion; whose the fault is, and who must b●are the burden, it is no hard matter to judge. He sees little what belongs to a Church, that sees not who has made the schism: and he knows as little, what belongs to Religion, that thinks he can hold the same Religion, and yet entertain the Presbyterian Discipline.  
If any out of an impatient desire of Peace, shall against all the premises still hold his conclusion, that Peace must be entertained on any conditions: yet will no honest heart so far distrust the goodness of God, or limit his Providence, as if there were no way for it to restore our Peace, but by unjust means: or think it can be any other, then a tottering and unsettled Peace, which is raised upon such a foundation. Such a Peace, did King Asa purchase to himself, by giving the Silver and Gold out of the Treasures of the House of the Lord to the King of Syria: and heard from the Prophet for it, from henceforth thou shalt have Warres; he might have had a nearer and safer way to his rest and quietness by relying on the Lord, 2. Chr. 16. v. 2, 8, 9.  
And how much more safe, and honourable conditions of Peace might we have from God, would we agree it with him? What a ready way to our desired happiness, could we but set ourselves to enter upon it? did wo but really endeavour, what our Enemies so much make show of, to humble ourselves before the Lord, the King of Heaven, and reform our ways according to the prescript of his sovereign will: our Peace should not be purchased at the rate, they are pleased to set upon it, but only cost us the loss of our needless Vanities, and unruly Lusts. When Phinehas stood up to execute Iudgement; the Plague was stayed, and may that Authority( which has so long laboured, to uphold itself, against the violence of disloyalty) thoroughly engage itself, against 'vice and wickedness raging in our streets: and all that are in place, and expect obedience from others, be zealous of Gods glory and service, as they would have him tender of their honour and safety; Let the Priests also be clothed with righteousness, and those that are more specially concerned in the desolation of the Church, behave themselves answerable to their calling and profession, driven indeed from their Cures and Charges, but taking all occasions of doing good, as the exigency of the Times will afford them, and expecting a return with firm resolution of amending all former neglects; Finally, let every one, that names the name of Christ, depart from iniquity, and order his ways henceforward, as becometh Christians. Then should we see the People scattered, that will delight in war, and all those, that shall think they are on high, above the reasonable conditions of Peace, made like a wheel, and suddenly brought down in their Pride: but the Church as Mount Sion stand firm and unmoved; then should Authority, restored to its place, have no other work, but to employ its just power in reforming, what is amiss in the Government of Church and State, to the greatest advancement of Gods service, and the welfare of his People: and every loyal Subject restored to his own, have no other solicitude, but willingly to bear his burden according to the duty of his place, and faithfully to discharge his trust to the glory of God, that has wrought the deliverance. And may he( nay he shall) want the blessing and comfort of Peace, that desires it upon other terms, or expects it with other resolutions; but let every good heart so desiring, and so resolved pray, that God would restore unto this Church and kingdom that blessing of Peace, by such means and in such a way, as shall be most to his glory, and the advancement of his Service. And let all the People say, AMEN.    

Pag. 14. l. 30. for presbyters, red Presbyteries.  
FINIS.