PAX VOBIS OR GOSPEL AND LIBERTY AGAINST ANCIENT AND MODERN PAPISTS.  
BY E.G. PREACHER OF THE WORD.  
DEDICATED TO THE RIGHT HON BLE THE LORD HALYFAX.  Stand fast in the Liberty, wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage (Popery) Gal. c. 5. v. 1. 
Anno 1679.   

THE PREFACE TO THE CHILDREN OF THE REFORMATION.  
BE not concerned to know whose hand it is which holds the link, but follow the light it gives: reach your hand to receive this Treatise, which marks the shore, where the Ark of our Reformation, shattered by a deluge of troubles, may rest; which is a Holy liberty to all and each Person to believe or not believe; act or not act, as he pleases with a safe conscience according the Principles of our Reformation. We generally lament the convulsions which shake our Church and State, through the diversity of opinions, professed by our several Congregations; some remedies have been applied to bring us to Peace and conformity; but all have proved ineffectual: some of our Drs judge, nothing can cure our disease, but a General Council or supreme Authority, to whose sentence we should all submit; but this, besides that it is Popish, to grant any human Power for to oblige our consciences against our jugdments in matters of Religion; is but an imaginary remedy for a real Evil: for, it's not in the Reformation as in Popery; in this there is a supreme Authority for to convene the Pastors of divers Kingdoms to a general Council; in our Reformation there is none: Popery believes its Councils and Popes infallible; and therefore they cannot but acquiesce, because an infallible sentence leaves no doubt of the Truth; but in the Reformation, all Councils and human Authority are fallible; and consequently their Decisions may be doubted of, and we are never certain of the Truth.  
Others judge, the remedy of our disease can be no other, but Pills of persecution, penal laws, Acts of Parliament, Ordinances of Synods, forcing men to conformity; but this has proved not only destructive to the peace of the Church, but has shockt the very foundation of our Reformation: for if we must believe under severe penalties what the State and Ecclesiastical Authority will have us believe; then scripture must be no more our Rule of faith, but the state and Church, which tells me what I must believe; and we must be deprived of the right and power of interpreting Scripture and believing it in the sense we think it to be the true; and yet our whole Reformation is cemented and was first raised upon this Holy Liberty; That every one should read Scripture, interpret it, and believe whatever he thought was the true sense of it; without any compulsion or constraint for to believe either Church, State, University or Dr. if we did not judge by Scripture his Doctrine was true.  
If Prudence had as great a share in our Conduct, as Passion, we should regulat our future by the effects of our past actions; and if we will cast an eye back to the transactions of later years, we will find this compulsion of men's Consciences has produced but confusion in our Church, and fatal disturbances in our State; contrariwise, never did our Reformation enjoy more peace, shined with more lustre, and held its course with more happiness, than when none was molested for his Profession, but every one had liberty to believe and teach, what Doctrine and sense each one thought to be the most conformable to Scripture. Consider the infancy of the Reformation, when God raised Luther to repair the ruins of the Church; how of a sudden it spread itself in Germany, France, Holland, Poland, Scotland and England, and by what means? was it not by takeing away all constraint of men's Consciences (used then only in the Popish Church) our blessed Reformers takeing to themselves and giving to others, a Holy liberty for to teach and believe what ever they judged to be the Doctrine and true Sense of Scripture, though it should be against the received opinion of the Councils, Church, Universities and Drs.? look into the Reign of Edward the VI then, did our Reformation flourish in England; and was miraculously propagated by the Liberty of Martin Bucer, Cranmer, Ochinus, Peter Martyr and others in teaching Calvinism, Lutheranism, Zuinglianism by Scripture as every one understood it: Descend to the reing of Queen Marie; then, the light of the Gospel was eclipsed, because the flock was again popishly compelled to believe, not what they judged by Scripture to be true; but what the Pope and Church judged was such: Come down a step lower to Queen Elizabeth's time; then, the flock recovering that holy liberty for to believe what each one thought was the Doctrine of Scripture; the Reformation gained ground; our several Congregations lived peaceably; for though Protestancy was established the Religion of the Land; others were not oppressed, nor their liberty constrained by compulsions: step down a degree lower to king James his time; the Reformation held its course as prosperoussy as in Queen Elizabeth's time, because men's consciences were not oppressed; all Reformed Brethren had full liberty to believe as they pleased; though Protestancy was the Religion of the King: look down a step lower to king Charles the first's reign; his Maty carried with a godly zeal of restraining the diversity of opinions, begot by the liberty enjoyed in his Predecessors times, would by new Laws and Ordinances force the flock to an Uniformity of Doctrine, but our zealous Brethren the Presbyterians, impatient of any constraint in affairs of Religion, and pleading for the Evangelical Libetty of our Reformation, for to believe nothing, nor use any Rites or Ceremonies but as each one judged by Scripture to be convenient; they covenanted against his Majesty and Bishops; and the storm grew to that height, that both Church and state were drowned almost in the blood of our Reformed Brethren: lastly look upon our Realm as it is at present, the symptom● of disatisfactions which you may read and hear in the Coffie houses, in public and private conversations; the sparkle● of jealousies, which appear in our land▪ the Cabals against our government; the animosity of divided parties; the murmur and complaints of all; what's all this but the smoke of that hidden fire of zeal, wherewith Protestant's would force Presbytherians by penal Laws, to profess their Tenets, Presbyterians exclaim against Protestancy as against Popery; Quakers judge both to be limbs o● Satan; Anabaptists look on all three, as Children of Perdition; and no Congregation would give liberty for to profess any Tenets but its own; in so much that if you consider all well, each of our Congregations, are as severe Tyrants over our judgements and consciences, as Popery was▪ and our Reformation comes to be in effect but an exchange of one Italian Pope, for many English ones: for as in Popery, we must submit our judgements to the Pope and Church of Rome, or be esteemed putrid rotten members; and be shut out of heaven's gates; and suffer Inquisitions, persecutions, excommunications and what not; so among us, you must believe Scripture as interpreted by the Church of England, or you are condemned by them; you must believe Scripture as interpreted by the Presbyterians, or you are accursed by them; you must believe as Anabaptists do, or you are damned by them; and not one Congregation among us, but would root all the others out of the world, if it could; and we do not fear that danger whereof S. Paul Gal. 5.15. warns us, If we by't and devour one an other, let's take heed, we be not consumed one of an other; giving us likewise a wholesome advice in the same place, how to prevent this evil; Stand fast in the liberty, wherewith Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage: The world did groan under this heavy yoke in Popery; wherein our Rule of faith, was Scripture as interpreted by the Pope and Church: Scripture was kept from the hand of the flock: no man permitted to give or believe any interpretation or sense of it, but what the Pope, Church and Fathers did approve: our reason, our judgements, our consciences were slaves under this yoke, until that God raised our glorious and blessed Reformers Luther, Calvin, Zuinglius, Beza and others who took a holy Liberty, and gave v● all liberty for to read and interpret Scripture: to believe no Doctrine, bu● what we judged to be true by Scripture▪ to believe any sense of it, which we judged to be true, though contrary to all th● world: they took for their Rule of fait● Scripture, and nothing else but Scripture as each one of them understood it; thi● same Rule of faith they left to us, and ● holy freedom and liberty of our judgements and consciences, that any man o● sound judgement may hold, and believ● whatever sense of it, he thinks to b● true.  
This therefore is the scope and end o● my following Treatise; that, whereas ou● Rule of faith, as I will prove by th● unanimous consent of our whole Reformed Church, is Scripture or God's Wri●ten Word, as interpreted by each people of sound judgement; that whereas b● the Principles of our Reformation, n● man is to be constrained to believe an● Doctrine against his judgement and conscience: (otherwise why were not we left in Popery) it is impious, tyrannical, and quite against the spirit of the Reformation, to force us by Acts of Parliaments, Decrees of Synods, invectives, and persecutions of indiscreet Brethren, to embrace this or that Religion; that every one ought to be permitted to believe what he please; if you think Bigamy to be the Doctrine of Scripture: if you think by Scripture there is one Nature and four Persons in God; if you think Transubstantiation to be true; if you judge by God's Word there's neither Purgatory nor Hell; finally whatever you think to be the true sense of scripture, you are bound as a true Reformed Child, to believe it; that it is quite against the spirit of the Reformation to censure, oppose or blame the Doctrine or Tenets of any Congregation, or of any Doctor of the Reformed Church; because, that any Doctrine professed by any Christian Congregation, whatever (the Popish excepted) or that ever was delivered by any man of good judgement of the Reformation, since the beginning of it, until this day, is as truly and really the Doctrine of the Reformation, as the Figurative Presence or king's supremacy is. Consequently Protestant's are deservedly to be checked for persecuting Quakers; Quakers, for murmuring against Presbyterians; these, for their invective against Anabaptists and Socinians; A● are very good; and you may lawfully according the Principles of our Reformation believe them, or deny them.  
This Evangelical liberty of believing any thing, which we judge to be the sen● of scripture, though all the rest of the worl● should judge it to be a blasphemy, the most distinctive sign of the Reformation from Popery; for Papists are th● Children of Agar the slave; they liv● in bondage and constraint to believe at Doctrine, which the Pope and Church pr●poses to them; and if a learned man ● university should judge it to be contra● to Scripture; he must submit his judgement to that of the Pope, or be condemned as an Heretic: in our Reformation, we are the Children of Sara t● Free; our Rule of faith is Scripture ● each Person of sound judgement in th● Church understands it; if we do n● like the Doctrine of the Pope, Church ● Council, we may gainsay them all, an● hold our own sense of Scripture: ● enjoy the Prerogative of Rational cre●tures, we are lead by our own reason, which God has given us for our conduct, and are not like Beasts, constrained to follow that of others. We follow the Rule given us by S. Paul Rom. 14. He who eats, let him not despise him who does not eat; and he who does not eat, let him not despise him who does eat, for God hath received him: that's to say, he who believes let him not check him who does not believe, as he does: and he who does not believe, let him not blame him who does believe: but let each one believe, or not believe as he thinks best in the Lord: This holy liberty and freedom is the Spirit of God, for, where the Spirit of God is, there is liberty, 2. Cor. 3. says the great Apostle: The Lord inspire to our Parliament that now sit● upon a perfect and new settlement of Gouvernment and Religion, to follow the footsteps of our first renowned Reformers: to enact that there may be no other Rule of faith, but that which we received from our Reformers, and which is laid down for us in the 39 Articles of the Church of England: that is, Scripture as each one best understands it, without regarding the judgement, sense, or interpretation of any but the pure Word of God, as we understand it: and to enact Penal Laws against any so bold and uncharitable, as to censure or blame the Tenets of any Congregation, be it Lutheranism, Presbytery, Arianism, Judaisme or Paganism: or any Doctrine whatever, that any man of sound judgement thinks in his conscience to be the sense and Doctrine of Scripture.  
Three things make me hope, that this Treatise will be welcome to the well inclined and pious Reader of our Reformed Church: first, that there is not one author quoted in this book, but our own Doctors, learned and godly Children of the Reformation; and this I observe, that my Reader may know there's not a Jot of any Doctrine here but what is of the Reformation; and also advertise our Writers and School men, how much, they discredit our Reformed Church, by making so much use of Popish Drs and Books in their Writings; as if we had not great and learned men of our own; if we look into our Bishops and Ministers libraries; we shall meet but books either of confessedly Papists, or strongly suspected of Popery; and you shall hardly meet in any of them, the works of Lurher, Calvin, Beza, or any of our own authors, if you do not meet some Comedies, or Romances: if you read our Modern Writers, you shall find their books to be stuffed with arguments stolen from Stapleton, Peron, Bellarmin, and other Popish Drs. whereas they ought to take their Doctrine from Luther, Calvin and our other first Reformers, Apostles raised by God's heavenly Spirit; Oracles by whose mouths and pens he delivered the pure and Orthodox Doctrine of the Gospel; heavenly Fontains, from which we ought to drink the Doctrine of the Reformation: therefore, I have made a particular study, for the comfort of my Reader, not to profane this Treatise with any quotation of any Popish Writer, none but our own Drs.  
Secondly my Reader will be pleased with this Treatise, because I do not oblige him to believe the contents of it: if he mislikes any Doctrine couched in this book, let him not believe it; if he likes it, let him believe it; what I pretend is, to maintain his liberty for to believe or not believe what he please and that none can say black in his eye, for believing whatever he judges to be the sense of Scripture; let all others think of it what they will; for, our Rule of faith, as I will prove, being Scripture as each Person understands it, who can be so bold as to check you for teaching and believing what you understand scripture to say? some Doctrines there are in this book delivered by Luther, Calvin, Zuinglius, Beza, and others; which our Church of England and some others do call blasphemies, and scandalous Tenets; and their irreverence and arrogance is run so far: as to condemn those blessed men, for teaching such Tenets, and say that they swerved from the truth; and had their frailties, in so much, that many of us are ashamed to own those great men to have been our Reformers and leaders: this is an impiety altogether insupportable, it cannot be suffered with patience, that such Apostolical men, who were undeniably our first Masters of the Reformation, should be so vilified and abused: therefore I do prove, that there's no Doctrine delivered by them, but is to be esteemed and called the Doctrine of the Reformation: and can be according the Principles of the Reformed Church, believed and taught by any Reformed Child: for what is our Rule of faith in the Reformation, but Scripture as each Person of sound judgement vndestands it? consequently what is the Doctrine of the Reformation, but what any Person of sound judgement understands to be of Scripture: whatever Doctrine therefore, Luther, Calvin, or others judged to be of Scripture: how can you deny it to be the Doctrine of the Reformation: or blame them for teaching and believing it? if you do not like it: the most, you can in justice do, is not to believe it: but you cannot justly say it's not the Doctrine of the Reformation, because it's Scripture as understood by Persons of good judgement: nor can you in justice blame them, or any other for believing it, if they like it: for, must not we believe, what we judge in our conscience to be the Doctrine of Scripture?  
Lastly my Reader will be pleased with the sincerity and plain dealing of this Treatise: as much as we are all offended by the dissimulation and double dealing of our Modern Writers, whose aim and scope in the books they give out Seems to be nothing else, but to say so●what whereby they may be thought t● be no Papists, and nothing is less foun● in their Writings, than the pure and orthodox Doctrine of the Reformation● and what is to be bemoaned, that you● hardly see in the houses or hands of th● flock the works of Luther, Calvin, o● our other first Reformers, they are hi● from us, to keep us in ignorance of th● true Reformed Doctrine, and we see bu● Bramhal, Tillinson, Taylor, Stillingfleet Thorndik and such others, whose Doctrine is neither Popery, nor of the Reformation, but a new compound of both they do so mangle the questions controverted with their scholastical subtleties and distinctions, as if they wer● ashamed to own openly our Tenets and did endeavour to get the opinion o● moderate sober men with the Papists by drawing as near as their Interest ca● permit them, to their Doctrine. Ask them, if we be obliged to believe the Doctrine and sense of scripture delivered by a general Council? our first Reformers resolved roundly that we are not: nay Luther, says expressly we are bound to gainsay, and work against the Decrees of any Council: but our Modern Doctors answer with a pretty Distincction, there's a civil obligation, quoth one, but no obligation in conscience: there's an obligation in conscience, says an other, provided you do not believe they are infallible: you may believe they are infallible objectively or terminatively, says an other: but not subjectively: they are infallible in fundamental points, says an other, but not in inferior Truths. An other will come yet, and say they are absoluty infallible in all Articles, and thus by little and little, the Papists gain ground against us, and the lustre of our Reformation is clouded by the cowardliness, or insincerity, or hiprocisy of our Modern teachers. 1. Kings 18. How long halt ye between two opinions? if the Lord be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him: Luther, Calvin, Beza and our other first Reformers were raised by God to teach us the purity of the Gospel: let us not be ashamed to follow their Doctrine: to speak, preach, and believe as they did: Therefore, I do propose their Doctrine in this Treatise in its native colours, that if you like it, you may believe it, and if any be so bold as to Say you believe falls or scandalous Doctrine, you must answer: i● the Doctrine of the Reformation, b●cause its Scripture as understood b● Persons of judgement, and the great Oracles we had: and if you do no● like it, you may deny it, but bewa● never to blame or check any other fo● believing it: this is the Holy liberty o● the Gospel and of our Primitive Reformation.   

FIRST DIALOGUE.  ISHMAEL. 
I have read your Preface and Principles, & me thinks you drive to establish a new Religion; for that unlimited liberty, which you assert for to believe or not believe whatever we please with a safe Conscience, is not allowed by any of our Reformed Congregations; and it were to be wished you should rather stick to some one of the Congregations now established, than to erect a new one for we have but too many already.  Isaac. 
The Lord forbid▪ I should think or speak otherwise then as becometh a true child of the Reformation: If you will oblige me to believe Scripture as interpreted by the Lutheran Church (the like I say of any other Congregation) and deny the Tenets of all others, what difference betwixt me and a Papist in the electic of my Religion? for the Papist's Religion must be no other, but Script● as interpreted by the Pope and Council my Religion must be Scripture as int●preted by the Lutheran Church, a● no other; my judgement and Conscie● therefore is as much constrained as t● of the Papist; and our separation fr● Popery will come to be but an exchange of one slavery for another; in th● our judgements and Consciences w● slaves to the Pope and Councils ● this, we are slaves to the Luthe● Church: We became a Reformat● by shaking of the yoke of Pop● from our judgements, and leaving th● free for to believe Scripture as w● the assistance of God's spirit, each o● best understands it; and if we ● continue a Reformation, we must ● submit again our judgements to a● other, but retain that blessed liber● we recovered for to believe the Te● of any Congregation. I confess this ●bertie is not allowed by any one p●ticular Congregation, as you observe but you must also grant me, that ● allowed & taken by the whole bod● of the Reformation, for in this who● body, as it comprehends Protestants, Lutherans, Presbyterians, etc. one Congregation believes what the other denies, and in any of them a man may live with a safe Conscience (which you will not deny;) therefore any man has full liberty for to believe or deny with a safe Conscience the Tenets of any Congregation: hence it follows (and to my grief I speak it) that no particular Congregation, be it of England, France, or Germany, has the true spirit of the Reformation, in doting so much upon their particular Tenets, as to think they cannot be as well denied, as believed; and in looking upon them with so passionate eyes, as to censure, check and force others to believe them: you shall see by this discourse, that the true spirit of the Reformation is not in any one particular Congregation separately taken from the rest; for each particular Congregation constrains as much as it can, all people to believe its own Tenets: Protestancy would have us all to be Protestants, and would root Lutherans out of the world as well as Popery; Lutherans would, if they could, draw all to their own Net; Presbytery esteems itself to be the best of all, & would crush Protestancy if it could: This than i● the spirit of each particular Congregation, a Limiting, confining spirit to some particular Tenets with an exclusion of all others; but look on the whole Body of our Reformation, a● it includes all Reformed Congregations distinct from Popery; there i● a holy extension of spirit and liberty for to be either Lutherans, Presbyteriants, Protestans, and any thing but Popery, and whatever any Congregation may say of an other, but all unanimously agree that the spirit of the Lord is in the whole body of the Reformation, since therefore that in this whole Body there is a latitude & liberty for to profess divers and opposite Tenets, and that each Tenet is believed by one, and denied by others▪ we must grant that this holy liberty for to believe or deny any Tenets we please, is the true spirit of our holy reformation.  
It's not therefore to be wished, as you do, that I should stick to any one particular Congregation or Tenets; for such a restriction is mere Popery; and your bemoaning the multiplicity of our Congregations is profane and Popish: No, it's a blessing of the Lord upon our Reformation, for which we shall never sufficiently thank him, that we see it divided into so many Godly branches. In the house of my father, said Christ, there are many mansions Joan. 14.2.  Ishmael. 
By your discourse you seem to allow that we may with a safe conscience change Religions as often as we please, and be to day a Protestant, to morrow à Lutheran, next day a Presbyterian, and so run over all.  Isaac. 
I know you will be startled at my answer, for I am not ignorant that all men apprehend it to be absurd to change & run over so many religions; but truth must be declared though it may seem a scandal to the jews, and a folly to the Gentiles: It's therefore the Doctrine of the Reformation that we may with a safe conscience be to day Protestanrs, to morrow Lutherans▪ in France Hugonots, in Hungary Antitrinitarians, in Poland Socinians, ad in London of any Religion but Popery.  Ishmael. 
For shame you foully impos● upon the Reformation; there's not an● Congregation that teaches such à scandalous and absurd Doctrine.  Isaac. 
By your favour, I love th● Reformation as the apple of my eye and will never yield to any in my zeal● for its honour and doctrine; I am so fa● from imposing upon it, that I will evidence your error in denying this to b● its Doctrine, and it will appear tha● whoever will deny it to be very lawful to change Religions as time and occasion requires, must renounce the bes● and fundamental Principles of our Reformation, & must impiously condem● the practice of our first Reformers.  Ishmael. 
How will you make it ou● that this Doctrine is grounded vpo● the fundamental Principles of our Reformation; whereas there is not on● Congregation of ours, but abhors it▪  Isaac 
Sr. You may well perceive by the tenor of my discourse that I am piously and charitably jealous with each particular Congregation, & tha● my drift is to show that each of them, none excepted▪ swerves from and transgresses against the true spirit, and solid Principles of the Reformation, as will further appear in this discourse.  
It's v●contestedly true that the Rule of faith of the Reformation, is Scripture as the humble of heart assisted with the spirit of the Lord understands it; for Lutherans will never admit their Rule of faith to be Scripture as interpreted by the Church of England, but as interpreted by themselves; nor will England admit Scripture to be their Rule of faith as it is interpreted by the Presbyterians; but as interpreted by the Church of England: so that the Doctrine of each Congregation is but Scripture, as interpreted by them, and whereas all these Congregations jointly compose the whole Body of the Reformation, and each Congregation is truly a member of the Reformation; the Doctrine of the Reformation comes to be Scripture, as each Congregation, and person of sound judgement in the Reformation (says the Church of England in her 39 Artic.) interprets it. This being an uncontrolled truth; what man of ever so sound a judgement, but may read to day Scripture, as interpreted by the Lutheran Church, and judge in his conscience that interpretation and Doctrine to be true: consequently he may with a safe conscience profess that Religion; soon after he may meet Calvins books, & charmed with the admirable strength of his reasons and glosses upon Scripture, he may judge in his conscience, he is to be preferred beforre Luther▪ and so may lawfully forsake Lutheranism for Calvinism; then again he hits upon Scripture as interpreted by the Church of England, whose Doctrine ravish's him with that decency of Ceremonies, that majesty of her liturgy, that harmony of her Hierarchy; he is convinced its better that Calvinism, & embraces it: Then again he reads the works of Arius, and convinced by the energy of his arguments and texts of Scripture produced by him, may alter his judgement and become an Arian. Wherein can you say does this man transgress against the Doctrine or principles of the Reformation? Does he forsake the Reformation because he forsakes Lutheranism for Calvinism? No sure; for Calvinism is as much of the Reformation as the other: Is not Protestancy as much the Doctrine of the Reformation as Presbytery? though he changes therefore one for the other, he still holds the Doctrine of the Reformation: Is not the Doctrine of the Reformation Scripture, not as Protestants only, or Presbyterians only interpret it, but as any Congregation or man of sound judgement holds it? It is therefore evident that according the Doctrine and principles of the Reformation, he may with a safe conscience change Religions, and be to day of one, to morrow of an other until he runs all over. Point me out any Congregation (the obstinate Papists excepted) who will dare say, I cannot live with a safe conscience in any other Congregation but in itself; all other Congregations will laugh at it; Why then may not I lawfully forsake any Congregation, and pass to an other? And be in England a Protestant, in Germany a Lutheran, in Hungary an Antitrinitarian or Socinian.  Ishmael. 
It's against the grain of man's reason to believe that we can with a safe conscience change Religions, as you say: If you be a Protestant, and you judge it to be the true Religion; you are bound to stick to it, & neve● to change it.  Isaac. 
If I did discourse with a Papist I would not wonder he should say it against the grain of man's reason t● believe it lawful; but I admire tha● a Child of the Reformation, be he o● what Congregation he will, should b● so ignorant of his principles, as to sa● a man cannot change Religion's whe● he please: nor do I undertake to prov● against the Papist, that this is lawful but I undertake to prove it lawful against any Reformed Child, or for● him to deny the principles of the Reformation. Is it against reason th● a man may read to day Scripture, ● the Lutherans interpretation upon i● & like it very well; & that he shoul● in this case embrace that Religion Is it against the grain of man's reaso● that this same man should next year● afterwards hit upon calvin's work● upon Scripture, and after better consideration, think his Doctrine to surpass that of Luther, & could not he then (being obliged to choose the best) forsake Lutheranism and stick to Calvinism? And is it against man's reason that he in following years may meet other books of Arians, Socinians, etc. & do the like? Have not we many examples of his in our best & most renowned Reformers? Did not Ochinus that great light (says B. Bale) in whose presence England was happy, reading Scripture judge the Reformation to be better than Popery, & of a Capuchin friar became à Reformed; after some years reading Scripture he judged Judaisme to be better than the Reformation & became a Jew: Did not Martin Bacer one of our first Reformers of England & composers of our liturgy, reading Scripture, judge Lutheranism to be better than Popery, & of a Dominican friar became a Lutheran? soon after reading Scripture, he judged Zuinglianism to be better than Lutheranism, & became a Zuinglian; not long after he became a Lutheran again as he confesses, 
a Epist. ad Noremb. & in Comment. in 10.6. & 16. Matt.  & forsook Lutheranism the second time, and returned again to Zuinglianism as Sklusser: says. 
b Theol. Calvin. l. 2. fol. 70.  Did not Cranmer one of our fir●t Reformers also of England, & composers of the 39 Articles, a wise and Religious man profess Popery i● Henry the VIII. time and compose ● book in defence of Real presence; the● in Edward the VI time upon bette● consideration be professed Zuinglianism and writ a book against Real presence; then again in Queen Mary'● reign, being sentenced to death, he declared for Popery; but seeing his recantation could not preserve his life, he renounced Popery and died a Zuinglian. I would tire your patience i● reading & mine in relating the number of our prime, and most renowne● as well first Reformers, as Learne● Doctors, who without any scruple chā●ed several times their Religions; no● in te Principles of our Reformation ought they to be blamed: for when our Rule of faith is Scripture as wit● the assistance of God's spirit we understand it, who doubts but we may t● day judge sincerely Luther's sense of i● to be true, to morrow we may rea● with more attention & judge Ari●● his sense to be true; next day that o● Calvin, & so of the rest: And do no● think but that we have in England many Abettors of this Doctrine: alas how many Bishops, Deans and rich Parsons do we know & have we known, who were Zealous Presbyterians and declared enemies of protestancy in our Gracious Soueraign's exile, and no sooner was he restored, & had Bishoprics and Ecclesiastical dignities to be given but they became stiff Protestants.  
Observe the difference Betwixt the Papists and us, if of a Papist you become of any other Congregation, the Popish Church excommunicats you; thou art Looked upon as an Heretic, & Apostate, a strayed sheep; they will not admit you to their communion or lyturgy; nay could they well avoid you, they would never admit you to their Company; and why? Because they are fond persuaded their own is the only true Religion, and all others to be synagogues of Satan; and if any of us will become a Papist, he must first abjure his former Profession: but if of a Protestant you should become a Presbyterian, a Lutheran, Quaker or of any other of our Societies, you are never Looked upon to be a jot the worse for it; we are not a Whit scandalised at such change● which we daily see; and it is an ● speakable blessing with what accoy unity and charity, you may s● at our liturgy & communion the Pr●testant, Presbyterian, Anabaptis● Socinian and Huguenot, all praysi● the Lord in one Congregation in o● Churches, none bid out of the Church none excommunicated, no previo● abjuration required of their form● Tenets, & there's nothing more f●quent among us then to go to t● Protestant Lyturgy in the morning in the evening to the Presbytery especially if our interest or con●niēcie requires it: Can there be a m● convincing proof that we este● it all alike what Religion & Ten● we profess? let a Lutheran go ● France; alas! he'll never stick to● to the Hugonots meeting and service let a Protestant go to Germany, he● go as cheerfully to the Luthera● Church, as in England to the Pr●testant: let a Huguenot or Presbyteria● go to Hungary or Poland he is wescom to the Antitrinitarians, & Soc●nians; and when any of them return home he'll be as before.  Ishmael. 
But can you prove this Doctrine by the testimony of any of our synods? Did any teach that we may with a safe conscience change our Religion as you say?  Isaac. 
Yes I can: the Synod of Charenton in France held about the year 1634. expressly says that for your salvation it's all alike whether you be a Calvinist, Lutheran or of any other Congregation of the Reformed, because says this Venerable synod, they all agree in fundamental points, and the Lutherans have nothing of superstition or Idolatry in their manner of divin worship. Change then as often as you list; be a Lutheran, be a Presbyterian, be an Anabaptist, by the mouth of this synod you are assured you'll never miss to hit right. And I pray can any synod of our times have more authority in point of Doctrine than Luther our first Reformer, a man extraordinarily raised by God (says the synod of Charenton) and replenished with his spirit for to repair the ruins of his Church? He teaches 
c in parva Confess cerm. fol. 55. & in Colloq. fol. 110.  the elevation of the sacrament is Idolatry, yet he did practise i● and commanded it should be practised i● the Church of Wittenberg to sp●te th● Devil Carolstadius: Giving you t● understand that for just reasons, yo● may teach now one Religion, no● an other. Zuinglius also whose virtue and Learning is known to the work says 
d To. ●. fol. 202.  that God inspired him to preac● what Doctrine was suitable to the times which as it often changes, you ma● often change your Doctrine: and consider you if it be not therefore tha● Christ our lord says his yoke is swe●● & his burden light (that is Religion because we can withdraw our Ne●● from it, as time and just reason requires.  Ishmael. 
Could you give me any s●nod of the Church of England whic● delivers this Doctrine, you would g● near hand to convince me; for, th● some particular Doctors should hau● taught or practised it, does not prov● it to be the Doctrine of the Reformation.  Isaac. 
And what greater authority has a synod of England for to prov● a Doctrine to be of the Reformation than a synod of France which I have produced? Or than Luther and Zuinglius our first Reformers inspired by God to teach us the purity of the Gospel? Was it not from Luther and Zuinglius that England received the Doctrine of the Reformation? and if England be so bold as to say they erred in this, what assurance can we have, but that they erred in the rest? But since nothing will please you but a synod of England, you shall have not one, but many. Can there be any synod in England of so great authority as our wise and prudent Parliaments? Read our Chronicles and you'll find, that in few years' time, they changed and established different Religions by public acts of Parliament: In Henry the 8. Reign they voted for Popery, and made Acts and Statutes against the Reformation; In Edward the 6. time they banished Popery and voted for Zuinglianism; In Queen Mary's they pulled down this, and set up Popery again; In Queen Elizabeth's, they decried this, and set up not Zuinglianism, but Protestancy; in the midst of her reign, they polished this, and added some new perfections to it; In King James and succeeding kings times, Protestancy is of a different stamp from that of Queen Elizabeth's: Hear Dove in his Exhort: to the English Recusants an. 1603. pag. 31. Henry the 8 had his liturgy which was very good: Edward the 6. condemned it, and brought in an other composed by Peter Martyr and Bucer: in Elizabeth's time, that was condemned, and an other approved, and in the middle of her reign, her Lyturgy was also misliked, and ● new one introduced, we are so want●● that nothing will content us but novelties▪  Ishmael. 
Dove does not commen● this Doctrine, for he calls that frequent exchange of Religion Wantonness and love of novelty.  Isaac. 
It's no great matter what he says of it; my drift is but to convince you that this is the Doctrine▪ & practise of the best Members of our Reformation; even of England, and if you be convinced its the Doctrine of the Reformation; you cannot deny but that it is good Doctrine: if Dove calls it wantonness, S. Paul Ephes. 4.22. Coloss. 3.9. & Rom. 6.6. commends it, and exhorts us to put of the old man with its deeds (that's Popery with its ceremonies) and put on the new man (that's the Reformation) where there's neither Greek nor jew, Circumcision, nor Incircumcision, Barbarian, or Scythian, bound or free, but Christ is all and in all: that's to say; where there's no distinction of Protestants or Presbyterians, Socinians, or Arians; it's all one which Religion you profess.  Ishmael. 
But is there no Tenet of Religion which we are all indispensably obliged to hold?  Isaac. 
Yes there is, and no more but one: we are bound to have faith in jesus Christ, son of God and Saviour of the world. This is the substance of Christian Religion; be an Arian, be a Presbyterian, be a Socinian or what you please, be also plunged to your ears in wickedness of life, and manners, so you have faith in Jesus Christ son of God and Redeemer of the world and live in charity you will be a member of the true Church and be saved. Do not imagine this is any new Doctrine invented by me; search the vulgar sort of our Reformed Brethren, you shall get thousands of this opinion in our Realm; search the Books of our Learned Drs, you shall find it in them also. Dr Morton in his much applauded book dedicated to Queen Elizabeth, for which he deserved a Bishopric, 
e The Kingdom of Isr. pag 9  says: The Arian Curch is to be esteemed a true Church, because they hold the true substance of Christian Religion, which is faith in jesus Christ son of God, and Redeemer of the world: and again in the same place sect. 4. whose Title, is, Heretics are members of the Church, he says, whosoever believes in jesus Christ though by wickedness of life, or Heresy in Doctrine they should err in Doctrine, they are still true Members of the Church. Therefore our learnt 
f Acts & mon. pag 36. lib. 3. c. 5.  Fox, 
g Catal. tes●ium pag. 976. & 978.  Doctor Field●, and Illiricus say the Greek Church notwithstanding their error in denying the Procession of the H. Ghost from the son, are holy members of the true Church, because they have faith in Jesus Christ.  Ishmael. 
Sure you will not say this Doctrine is of the Reformation or can be safely believed.  Isaac. 
I do admire how you can doubt of it, and that it may be believed: for what is the Doctrine of the Reformation but as we have said in our Principles, Scripture as interpreted by any man of sound judgement in the Church? and were not Doctor Morton, Fox, Field and Illiricus men of sound judgement, eminent Learning, and Godliness? if-therefore this be Scripture as interpreted by them how can you deny it to be the Doctrine of the Reformation?  Ishmael. 
And what Jesus Christ are we obliged to believe in? for Jesus Christ as believed by the Arians Socinians, Luther and, Calvin, is far different from Jesus Christ, as commonly believed by the Protestans and Popish Church, we believe in Jesus Christ the son of God, of one and the same substance and nature with the Father; they believe in a Jesus Christ, son of God but of a distinct and different nature and substance from the Father.  Isaac. 
Pish! that's but a nicety; believe what you please, and what you vndestand by Scripture to be true and have charity.  Ishmael. 
I confess you have puzzled, but yet not wholly convinced me; were I but persuaded that what you have discoursed is truly the Doctrine of the reformation, I would cheerfully embrace it, and I will be better informed by yourself, but not tire your patience: we will meet again and pursue our Discourse upon this subject.   

II. DIALOGUE.  ISHMAEL. 
Reflecting in my solitude upon your last discourse, I find it bottomed upon a falls principle; for you suppose that what ever Doctrine is of Luther Calvin, or any of our Learned, Drs, Synods, Parliaments, or Congregations, is the Doctrine of the Reformation and may without any more proof or scruple be believed by any Reformed Child; who but sees this is ridiculous, to fasten the Doctrine and absurd opinions of each particular Dr, or Congregation upon the whole body: this is the uncharitable and unreasonable art of the Papists, who keep a great coil with some exorbitant opinions of Luther and Calvin, and would persuade their Proselyts, they are the Tenets of the Reformation; whereas the Reformation disclaims those opinions as much as the Pope does: and they do not, poor people, observe how many absurd and scandalous Doctrines we meet in their Casuists and Divins, which when we reproach them with, they answer it's not the Doctrine of their Church, but of some particular Drs; as if we might not with as much justice as they, answer the same.  Isaac. 
Your reflection is good, and my discourse will fall to ground if I do not prove that principle, which will be no hard task: Let us imagine we are here a full synod of Protestants, Presbyterians, Hugonots, Lutherans, Antitrinitarians, Anabaptists, Quakers, and of all and each of our Congregations; our Reformation is not any of these Congregations with an exclusion of the rest; but all of them jointly; for whatsoever Congregation would say itself alone is the Reformation, and no other, would be hissed at by the rest; and justly; because that our Reformation imports two points essentially: first a Profession of Christianity according the Rule of the Word of God, and a detestation or abjuration of Popish Errors; and none of these Congregations but does both.  Ishmael. 
I know some of these, Pharisee like. despise others, and Look upon them, not as Reform, but as putrid members; but the Lord forbid I should be so devoid of charity; I see no just challenge any can have to the Title of Reformation, which all have not.  Isaac. 
Let us ask this synod by what Rule of faith does the Reformation walk? what must a man believe for to be a true Reformed? Protestants will say, that Scripture and Apostolical Tradition; but Protestants say of Papists; and Presbyterians and Anabaptists say of Protestants; that many human inventions are obtruded upon us as Apostolical Traditions; that we have no way to discern the one from the other, and consequently Tradition, as being an unknown thing unto us, cannot be our Rule: others will say that Scripture and the indubitable consequences out of it, is our Rule, all will grant this: but then enters the Controversy, if the consequences of Lutherans be such, and if the consequences of Presbyterians be indubitable out of Scripture, and each Congregation will say that their peculiar Tenets are indubitable consequences out of Scripture, and the rest must allow it to be true, or deny such a Congregation to be of the Reformation: Others will say that Scripture and the four first General Councils, with the Apostles and Athanasius' Creeds are our Rule of faith; but most of the assembly will no more admit the four first, than the subsequent Councils, nor Athanasius his Creed more than that of Trent; nor will the Quakers, Socinians and others value the Apostles Creed.  
But there is none of all the Assembly, who will not admit Scripture that's the pure written word of God, to be a sacred and full Rule of faith, because it's replenished with Divin light and all Heavenly instruction necessary for our salvation: and such as add, as a part of our Rule of faith, the Apostles or Athanasius his Creeds, or the four first General Councils, they will confess that all they contain is expressed in Gods written word, and are but a plainer, or more distinct expression or declaration of the Contents of Scripture.  Ishmael. 
Truly I must grant you this, that I have been often present at several discourses of Protestants with Papists, and never yet could I hear a Protestant make Councils, Tradition, or any thing else the Test of their discourse but only scripture; not but that I could hear them say and pretend in their discourses that Apostolical Tradition, and the four first Councils were for them against Popery; but still their main strength and ultimat refuge was Scripture; for when ever they harp upon that string of Tradition and Councils, the Papists are visibly too hard for them, and then they run to Scripture, than which there is no plus ultra. I have been also often at several discourses betwixt Protestans, Presbyterians and our brethren of other Congregations, and have observed that the Protestant, for to defend his liturgy, Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England, and her Episcopacy against the others, could never defend himself by scripture alone, and placed his main strength against them in Tradition, Primitive Councils, and ancient Fathers, all which the others rejected and reproached the Protestant with Popery, for making use of that weapon; that if thy would stick to those Principles as their Rule of faith, they must admit many Tenets of Popery, which they disavow; that nothing but scripture is a sufficient warrant and Rule of faith: And I find by all I could ever well understand, that its the General apprehension and belief of all the Reformation, that Scripture abundantly contains all we are obliged to believe, and is our sole and adequat Rule of faith, and that our recours to Tradition, Councils, Fathers etc. are but shifts of some of our Drs. who being Non plust in their particular engagements, and Sophistries, patch the incoherencie of their discourse with these rags of Popery.  Isaac: 
I commend your ingenuity, but not that heat which transports you to check our Drs for their glosses and particular Doctrines upon Scripture, which, as the Manna relished of all sorts of Victuals which the Eater● fancied, admits several senses according the different spirits and measure of light that God gives to the Reader, and it is undoubtedly the the Spirit of the Reformation to follow what sense of it he likes best, and not to check others for following this or that as they please: Lutherans, Protestants, Presbyterians, etc. have all for their Rule of faith Scripture, which each of them interprets in a different sense; Luther for the Real, Protestants for the Figurative Presence; Protestant's for Episcopacy; Presbyterians against it; and so of others: and though each esteems his own sense to be the best, yet none, is so bold as to say the others may not be saved in their own sense of it, or deny them to be true Children of the Reformation; nay that Venerable Synod of Charenton, as I quoted above, has declared that the Lutherans, though opposite to them in their chief Tenets, are their beloved Brethren and have nothing Idolatrous or superstitious in their manner of Divin worship: the fundamental reason of all this is, that our Rule of faith, is but Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it.  Ishmael. 
I grant all your discourse as to this particular; for its certain Lutherans will not admit Scripture as interpreted by Protestants, but as interpreted by themselves; and so of each other Congregation.  Isaac. 
If you admit our Rule is Scripture as each understands it; than you must grant that our Doctrine of the Reformation is whatever Doctrine each Person of sound judgement understands to be of Scripture; and from this, it appears plainly that my Principle whereat you bogl'd is true; That, whatever Doctrine is professed by any of our Congregations, Synods▪ Parliaments, Drs. or particular Dr. of our Reformation, is to be truly reputed and esteemed the Doctrine of the Reformation; which Principle being true; my discourse of yesterday is undeniable, that you may change religions, as often as you please, and remain still a true Reformed Child.  Ishmael. 
But you have said that not only the Doctrine of each Congregation and Synod, is the Doctrine of the Reformation; but also whatever any one particular Doctor teaches; and this seems to be very absurd.  Isaac. 
It's not so absurd, as it is true; I'll prove by the Principles of our Reformed Church, by the testimonies of our most Learned and Best Drs. and Reformers, and by reason and experience that the Doctrine of any particular Doctor among us, has as much right to be called and esteemed the Doctrine of the Reformation, as Protestancy, Presbytery or Lutheranism; for, what is Lutheranism, but the judgement of Luther a particular Dr, against the whole Church of Rome? what is Calvinism, but what Calvin a particular Dr, judged to be the sense of Scripture against that same Church? what is Quakery, but honest Naylor's godly and pious sentiments upon Scripture. It's undeniably the Principle of our Reformed Church, that our Rule of faith is Scripture as interpreted, not only by Synods or Congregations, but by any Person of sound judgement in the Church. No Congregation or Synod is to us a Rule of faith: because all are fallible; but God's Written Word, as each one understands it; and if we do not like the sense of it delivered by any Council Synod or Congregation, we may safely deny it: therefore our great Calvin 
a l. 4▪ instit. c. 9  says and proves with great energy of Scripture and reason, that we are not obliged to the Decisions and Doctrine of any Council Synod or Congregation, if after having examined Scripture, we do not find their interpretation and sense of it, is conformable to the Word of God. Let Synods and Congregations say what they will, if any particular Doctor thinks his own private sense of it to be better, he may stick to it against them all, and be a good true Child of the Reformation; as Arminius in Holland did withstand the Synods of Dordreet and Delpht; as Luther and Calvin did against Rome. I will be free, says our unparallelled Proto-Apostle Luther, 
b To. 1. Edit. jen. in resolute.  I wil● not submit myself to the authority of Councils, Church, Drs Universities or Fathers, but will teach and preach whatever I think to be true. Did ever any Apostle speak with more courage? and the blessed man acted with no less; he knew full well the whole Stream of antiquity, Drs, Fathers and Councils were against him, as he confesses himself, and dit not care a rus● for them all: Lay aside, says he, 
c lib. de serv. Are bit. cont. Erasm. edit. 1.  ● arms of Orthodox antiquity, of School● of Divinity, authority of Fathers, Councils, Popes, and consent of ages we receive nothing but Scripture; but s● that we must have the authority of interpreting it.  
Nor was it only Luther and Calvin spoke thus, but all our first blessed Reformers; and why? because our Rule of faith is Scripture, not a interpreted by the Church of England, (France will not admit it) nor as interpreted by the Quakers, (the Anabaptists and Independents will not hear it) nor as interpreted by Luther▪ (Calvin rejects it) nor as interpreted by Calvin (Thorndic and Bramhal will not yield to it,) nor will Stillingfleet stand to their interpretation; nor others to that of Stillingfleet. Finally our Rule of faith is Scripture, not as interpreted by any, but as each Congregation Synod, particular Dr, or man of sound judgement interprets it; and consequently what ever Doctrine any man of sound judgement judges to be of Scripture, is to be esteemed the Doctrine of the Reformation; and you may safely believe it, if you like it, and remain still as truly a Reformed Child, as the proudest Protestant of England.  Ishmael. 
Can you prove that our Rule of faith is Scripture as any particular Dr or person of sound judgement understands it?  Isaac. 
Behold how convincingly; first we have heard Luther, quoted but now, say, We receive nothing but Scripture, but so as that we must have the authority for t● interpret it: hear him again; 
d In Colloq. Mensal. fol. 118.  Th● Governors and Pastor's haver powe t● teach; but the sheep must give thei● judgement whether they propose the voy● of Christ, 
e To. 2. Wittem. fol. 374. & 375.  or of strangers. And again: Christ has taken from the Bishop's Councils and Pastors the right of judging of Doctrine; and given it to all Christians i● General; and the Rule is Scripture ● each one will think fit to interpret i● And consequently to this, we hav● heard him say above, I will be fi● and will not submit to Drs Councils, ● Pastor's, but will teach whatever think to be true. Barlow; 
f In Defence. Art. Reliq. Protest. pag. 199.  The Apostles have given to each particular t● Right and power of interpreting a● judging by his inward spirit, what i● True; its needless that either man ● Angel, Pope or Council should instru● you; the spirit working in the heart, an● Scripture are to each particular person mo● assured interpreters. Bilson Bishop o● Wincester says the same, 
g In his true Differ. par 2. pag 353.  The people must be discerners and judges of wha● is taught. Our Religion has no other Rule of faith (says our French Reformation by the mouth of Dumoulin, 
h Bouclier de la Foy▪  Drelincourt, and the holy Synod of Charenton) but the Written Word of God, as interpreted by us. Lastly says the Church of England in the 6th. Art. of their 39 We have no other Rule of faith but Scripture as each person of sound judgement in the Church understands it, and what is proved by it: and again in the Catholic Doctrine of the Church of England pag. 103. which is but an exposition of the 39 Articles. Our Rule of faith is but Scripture as each Person of sound judgement in the Church understands it: Authority is given to the Church and to each person of sound judgement in it, to judge in Controversies of faith; and this is not the private judgement of our Church, but also of our Brethren of foreign Countries  Ishmael. 
I confess, not only these, but many other Drs abet your discourse, and the General Vogue of our Reformation, is for Scripture as each one understands it; but alas! you see well, that we can never settle any Religion or Church by such a Rule of faith.  Isaac. 
You can never settle any but rhis, That every man may without le● or hindrance believe what he please: and why should not this be a good Religion? if Scripture as each one understands it be not our Rule of faith; if we must be constrained to believe Scripture not as we understand it; but as it is understood by this or that Congregation; wh● difference betwixt us and Papists▪ They must believe Scripture as interpreted by the Pope, and Council● have ever so much light from God be ever so wise and witty, you mu● depose your own judgement, a● submit to that of the Pope, Councils and Popish Church: to this pass ● are come also; we must believe t● king's supremacy, Episcopacy, Figurative presence though perhaps we d● not judge by Scripture it be tr● Doctrine; we are constrained by Penal laws, and Acts of Parliament t● believe them, as Papists by the Inquisition; and why? because th● Church of England understands b● Scripture, its true; and if you, repl● you do not interpret Scripture s● you'll not be heard; you must submit and believe against your judgement: and what's this but plain Popish Tyranny over men's consciences? Did Luther and Calvin forsake the Pope and Councils, for to submit their judgements to any other? No, but to follow Scripture as each one of them understood it: and though Luther was a man raised by God and replenished with his spirit to repair the ruins of the Church; yet Calvin did no more submit to him, than Luther did to the Pope; nor did Zuinglius submit to Calvin, but followed his own sense of Scripture; nor did Oecolampadius submit to Zuinglius; but every one searched the Scripture, believed and taught what they thought to be true; and thus we became a Reformation of Popery: if therefore we will continue a Reformation, and walk by the spirit of our first blessed Reformers; we must not be constrained to believe any man's sense of Scripture: we must believe whatever we think to be true, and have no other Rule of faith but Scripture as each one understands it.  Ishmael. 
And what then? what do you infer from this discourse?  Isaac. 
This consequence, that whereas no true Child of the Reformation, be he of what Congregation you will, can justly deny our Rule of faith to be Scripture as any Person of sound judgement interprets it; it follows avoidable that the Doctrine of the Reformation is, Whatever any Person of sound judgement interprets to be the true sense of Scripture, and whatever Luther, Calvin, Beza, or any other of sound judgement in the Reformation, since its first rise until this day, taught to be the true sense of Scripture, is to be called and esteemed the Doctrine of the Reformation, though to others of this or that Congregation it may seem to be wicked and scandalous Doctrine▪  
And now let me answer to an objection you made against this Principle in our entrance to this discourse: you objected that many Papish Drs and Casuists delivered scandalous and base Doctrines, which the Papists will not admit to be the Doctrine of their Church, though delivered by Papish Drs; and thence you pretended, that the particular sentiments of private Drs of the Reformation are not to be called the Doctrine of our Church. But be pleased to observe the difference betwixt Popery and our Reformation; the Rule of faith in Popery is, Scripture as interpreted by the Pope and Council, or their Church; they will admit no other; consequently no Doctrine is to be called Popery but what is judged by the Pope and his Church or Council to be the sense of Scripture; and if any Dr or University holds any sense contrary to theirs; it is to be called the Doctrine of that particular person, and not the Doctrine of the Popish Church; because their Rule of faith is not Scripture as interpreted by any Person of sound judgement; but as interpreted by their Pope and Council. But whereas our Rule of faith in the Reformation, is Scripture as each person of sound judgement interprets it; whatever Doctrine or sense is said by any man to be of Scripture, is justly to be called the Doctrine of the Reformation: for example, Melancton, a man of sound judgement, great learning, and of an upright conscience, taught Bigamy to be the Doctrine of scripture; Beza taught, the Lords supper might be administered in any kind of victuals, as well as in bread and wine: Calvin taught, that Christ despaired on the Cross, and suffered the pains of hell after his death: why then, let all the Bishops and Universities of England condemn this Doctrine; let all the Synods of France and Germany decry it; the Doctrine will be still of the Reformation; because its Scripture as interpreted by men of sound judgement.  Ishmael. 
The heat of your discourse has tired you; and my memory i● sufficiently loaden with what yo● have said; let me digest it in my private retirement, and we will mee● again.  Isaac. 
Content; carry with yo● these three points, which I have proved convincingly: first our Rule of faith is Scripture, not as interpreted by this or that, but by an● man of sound judgement; secondly i● follows hence that the Doctrine of th● Reformation, must be and aught to be called whatever any man of sound judgement says is the sense of scripture: thirdly it follows, we may change Religions as often as we please.   

III. DIALOGUE.  ISHMAEL. 
I remember well the summary of your last discourse, given me in three points; and I find the second to be absurd, and repugnant to reason: you'll never persuade it, though you have pleaded for it with great energy; what? if a silly Woman, Cobbler, or other tradesman read Scripture and give their sense of it, that, forsooth, must be called the Doctrine of the Reformation? and it shall be lawful for them to believe it against the Doctrine of the whole Church?  Isaac. 
Do not limit Gods infinite goodness, by measuring his mercies towards his Creatures with your narrow apprehensions: take notice he says, he has chosen the weak and contemptible of the world for to confound the strong ones: I confess unto you Father, 
Matt. 12.  that you have hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to the little ones. And therefore he choosed poor simple fishermen to be his Apostles: ● know it's the practice of Papists, and from them your Church of England borrows it, to despise the Ministry of Women, tradesmen, and illiteral people in preaching teaching and interpreting Scripture; 
Tim. 2.  but S. Paul tell us The word of God is not bound thats to say, is not entailed on th● learned, rich, or great ones, the Wind bloweth where it listeth: 
Io. 3.  o● Bishops and Ministers would make ● Monopoly of the Word of God, and have themselves to be the only Retailers of it; for to have some plausible title for to enjoy great Rents and shear the flock: but we have seen, as well among the Quakers, a● in other Congregations, silly Women and Tradesmen replenished with God's Spirit, preach and expound the great Mysteries of our Religion with as much of good success and edification of the Auditory, as any Penny-booke Man in England.  Ishmael. 
It seems you approve the Ministry of Women and silly Tradesmen for preaching and teaching the flock; and if so, you'll overthrow our Hierarchy of Bishops and Ministers.  Isaac. 
It matters not much for you to know, what I approve or condemn; but to know what the Doctrine of the Reformation is; It's this; that none can teach, preach, administer Sacraments, or exercise Ecclesiastical functions if he be not in holy Orders, Bishop, Minister or Deacon; for the Church of England teaches it, and you may believe it if you please. You may also deny it; and say, any Woman or tradesman has as much power for to preach and administer the Sacraments as the richest Bishop in England: this also is the Doctrine of the Reformation as well as the former, because Quakers▪ Presbyterians, Brownists; Anabaptists, etc. believe and teach it, and they are men of as sound judgements, and as good Reformeds' as Protestants; nay the most learned of our Reformers teach and commend the power of Women for to exercise Spiritual functions, and administer the Sacraments: 
a In lib. ad Corin. c. 11.  Saumaise, Peter Martyr, and 
b In Explan. Art. 17.  Zuinglius expressly defend the Priesthood as well of Women as of Men: and Luther proves it efficaciously; The first office of a Priest says he, is to preach, 
c To. 2. de Minist. Eccles. inst●t fol. 369 & lib. de Capt. Babyl. c. de Ordin. & lib. de abroganda Missa.  this is common to all, even women; the second is to baptise; which is also common to women; the third is to consecrat the bread and wine, and this also is common to all as well as to men and in the absence of a Priest, a woma● may absolve from sins as well as the Pope, because the words of Christ, whatever ye shall untie on earth, shall be untied in heaven, were said to all Christians.  
And when so eminent men ha● not said it, reason and Scripture convinces it; Reason, because that our Rule of faith being Scripture a● each Person of sound judgement understands it, many women undoubtedly are of sound judgement, and why should not their interpretation of Scripture pass for the Doctrine of the Reformation, as well as that of our Bishops and Ministers: Scripture, because we read the Samaritan Woman was the first who preached the Messias to the City of Sama●ia, and Christ commanded Mary Magdalen to go to preach his Resurrection to his Disciples, and we know by our Chronicles that our glorious Queen Elizabeth of blessed memory, did not only govern the state, but was a great Apostoless in Church affairs.  Ishmael. 
To what purpose then, have we Bishops and Ministers, who enjoy so vast revenues, if any man or woman can preach and administer the Sacraments as well as they.  Isaac. 
You may believe, Bishops and Ministers are very needful for the service of the Church; for they being commonly learned witty men, and having Wyves, they come to instruct their wyves so well, that the good women come in a short time to be as learned as their husbands, and as nimble and quick in the Ecclesiastical Ministeries as they, if they were permitted to exercise them; as some Authors of credit relate unto us, that a Gentleman of Constance, writ to his friend in a Village (about thre● leagues distant from that City, whose inhabitants were for the mos● part of our Lutheran Reformation the good Pastor exhorted his floc● to prepare for Easter Communion and that none should presume t● come to the holy Table, but shoul● first confess and receive absolution of his sins: Easter holy day's bein● come, such a multitude flocked to confession, that the Pastor could not satisfy the devotion of so great a cro● he called his wife to help him, f● to hear Confessions, and give absolutions, in which Ministry the goo● Lady did labour with great satisfaction of the Penitents; but neith● the Pastor nor his virtuous Conso● being able to dispatch so great a multitude, he called his Maid Servant who did work in the holy Minister with as much expedition as her Master. But for all this, the Church o● Scotland, France and all England (Protestant's excepted) will tell yo● that Bishops and Ministers are no● needful; nay that they are very prejudicious to the Reformation and State; To the Reformation, because this Hierarchy with the Bishop's Court, surplices Corner Caps, and other trumperies, puts the flock in mind of Popery, whereof its a perfect resemblance; and whilst the Papists see our change from them, comes to be almost no more but to substitute new Priests and Bishops in their own place, for to manage more conscientiously the Rents and revenues which they profanely abused; and that those Rents and revenues are still in the hands of an Ecclesiastical Hierarchy; they live in hopes of recovering them some day, when our Bishops and Ministers will come to be as bad stewards of them as they were; and ●hat the flock will be weary of them, ●nd call back the Ancient Possessors: ●ts therefore perhaps the Emissary's ●f the Pope do incessantly blow in ●ur ears; how ill our Ecclesiastical revenues are bestowed, for to maintain wyves and Children, Pomp and ●anitie of Bishops and Ministers; no ●ess than in Popery. To the State, they seem to be prejudicious, whera● any but a Bishop or Minister, would think, it would be more advantageous to the Commonwealth, that the king should have those Revenues for to maintain his fleet and army, and eas● thereby the subjects of subsidies an● taxes, than that a handful of Bishop and Ministers should have them specially when others can preach an● teach as well as they, for nothing, b● the pleasure of being hea●d.  Ishmael. 
But do not you see it woul● be a Sacrilege that the king shoul● deprive the Clergy of their Church Revenues.  Isaac. 
And do not you know, th● almost all our Congregations do hol● our Clergy to be no true Clergy, b● as mere laymen as you or I; the admit no Clergy or Episcopal Character; But Elders chosen by the Congregation: and if they be no tr● Clergy, they have no right to th● Church Revenues, and it's no sacrilege to deprive them of them. Th● Popish Clergy in Henry the VII time, had visibly a greater right ● them, than ours now have: s● neither the king himself nor any other did doubt of their Right, and now most of our Congregations, do absolutely deny any Right in our Clergy to those Rents; because they are no Clergy: yet none will be so bold, as to accuse Henry the VIII. of sacrilege, for having taken the Church livings from them, for to put them to better use. And why should we dare say, our king would commit any, for depriving our Clergy of those Rents: believe he can lawfully do it; or believe he can not, you'll be still a good Child of the Reformation. Believe what you please.  Ishmael. 
This is a ticklish point; let's leave it to the consideration of our wise and prudent Parliament; and be pleased to answer to my doubt; how can we live in peace and tranquillity in Religion, if our Rule of faith be Scripture as each one understands it: I remember a discourse started in the house of Lords, not many years agone, by his Grace the Duke of Buckingam; he desired to know, what was it to be a Protestant; wherein did Protestancy properly consist? the Bishops, who were present looked one upon an other, and whether, they feared the difficulty of the question, or that for modesty's sake, each expected to hear an other speak first● they stood silent for a while; at last the ice was broken by one; others followed; but hardly any two agreed; and all that the Duke could gather out of their several answers, was that our Rule of faith, was Scripture as each one understood it; and Protestancy nothing but Scripture as interpreted by the Parliament and Church of England: whereupon he concluded, We are these hundred years very busy for to settle Religion, and for aught I perceive, we are as vnsettled now as at the beginning: And truly he had great reason; for, Religion and faith is nothing else, but that sense of Scripture, which each Person of sound judgement understands; and as it's impossible we should all jump and agree in one sense and meaning of the text, so its impossible we shall ever be settled and agree in Religion.  Isaac. 
The reason of our unsettlement hitherto and at present, is the violent efforts, what by persecutions, Acts of Parliaments, and other oppressions; what by Invectives, intrigues, and cabals of the Church of England, to draw all to be Protestants; of the Presbyterians, to make us deny Episcopacy; and of each other Congregation, to force us to their respective Tenets: and whilst this constraint and severity is used against men's consciences, it's in vain to expect peace or settlement in our Reformed Church: but let us follow our Rule of faith; let cach one believe as in his conscience he best understands Scripture; let us all believe what we please, and be permitted so to do; and we shall without doubt enjoy perfect peace and Tranquillity: believe you Figurative Presence, if you will; let the Lutheran believe his Real Presence, if he likes it; and let me believe no Presence at all, if I judge there's none; why will not you permit me to follow that Rule of faith which the whole Reformation, even the Church of England gives me in her 39 Articles, Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it. To say, we can never have settlement in Religion, whilst this arbitrary interpretation of Scripture is permitted, is to speak like a Papist: this the Pope and Papists said to our first blessed Reformers; and the Popish Church says this day to us; that we ought to submit our judgements to the Church and Councils; that we ought not to believe what sense we think to be true, but what the Pope and Councils propose unto us; and if Luther and our other Reformers did not do ill, in follwing their own sense and interpretation of Scripture against all the world, why do you blame me or any other for following their example?  Ishmael. 
When you speak of our Reformation and Congregations, I hear you reckon the Arians, Socinians, and Antitrinitarians among them; sure you do not believe they, or such like ancient condemned heretics, were of the Reformation; for we Protestants do believe the Mystery of the Trinity against them, and will never own them to be our Brethren.  Isaac. 
And, do not you believe Episcopacy against the Presbyterians; some Canonical Books against the Lutherans; Supremacy against the Quakers, and Infant's Baptism against the Anabaptists; and yet you own them as your Brethren and godly Congregations of the Reformation; or if you will deny them, they will also scorn you, and say they are more of the Reformation than you are; and why will not you own the Arians, etc. as your Brethren though you believe the Trinity against them? you say they are old condemned Heretics: and does this language become a Child of the Reformed Church? by whom were they condemned? was it not by the Popish Church, which also condemns us, and says we are as much Heretics as they; and as we ought not to be so called, and judge the Pope and Councils sentence against us to be bold, uncharitable, and injust; so we must say of the Arians, Pelagians and others condemned by them. You say Protestants will never own them to be their Brethren; God forbid the Protestant Church should be so uncharitable to their fellow Christians, and so injust to themselves. B. Morton,) as I cited in my first Dialogue) as learned a man a● the Church of England bred, says the Arian Church is a true Church, and will say no less of the others: but what need we the testimony of any, for what reason so convincingly proves; They who walk by one and the same Rule of faith, are of one and the same Religion, therefore Lutherans, Protestants, Presbyterians and Independents do esteem themselves to be of the same faith and Religion, because they all have the same Rule, which is Scripture ● each Congregation understands it also notwithstanding the difference and variety of Congregations in Popery; they hold all but one faith as they say; because they have al● but one Rule of their belief, whic● is their infallible Pope and Church but it's evident that those which yo● call, Ancient condemned Heretics, have one and the same Rule of faith with our Reformation; for ours is Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it; without any obligation of holding the sense of it delivered by Pope, Church, Councils or any other; therefore our first blessed Reformers did not care what sense of it, the Church or Pope did hold when they began to preach the purity of the Gospel; but each of them interpreted it as he thought fit in the Lord, and so purged the Church of many Errors: This is the very self same Rule of faith, which Arians, Pelagians, Nestorians, and others, peremptorily condemned by Rome as Heretics, did follow and walk by: each of them read and interpreted Scripture, preached and believed what sense of it they taught to be true, though they knew it was against the Doctrine of the Church, looking on Scripture alone as their Rule of faith, without any regard of the Pope, Church, Councils, or Fathers: The Church of Rome proud and impatient of any opposition, condemned them as Heretics for not submitting their judgements to her; for takeing Scripture as they understood it, and not as the Church and Councils understood it, for their Rule of faith; and if this be a crime, we are as guilty as they; we are equally nocent or innocent; we are both Heretics, or none is; we are therefore concerned in their honour and aught to defend the integrity of their procedure against the Common enemy which is the Pope● they were Reformers of the Church in their times, as we are in ours and whereas thy have the same Rul● of faith; so they have the same Religion with the Reformation.  Ishmael. 
Then, you will say Ari●nism is the Doctrine of the Reformation, and we may lawfully believe i●  Isaac. 
I say God's Unity in Nature and Trinity in Persons is th● Doctrine of the Reformation, because the Protestant, Lutheran, and H●gonot Church, judge by Scripture i● is true; and if you judge also b● Scripture it's the true Doctrine, yo● may believe it: I say also if yo● judge by Scripture this Mystery is not true, you may safely deny it according the Principles of the Reformation, and be still as good a member of the Reformed Church, as they who believe it; for whoever believes what he judges by Scripture to be true, is a true Reform: and, that the denial of the Trinity is as much the Doctrine of the Reformation as the belief of it; it appears not only because it was the Doctrine of the Arians, who as I proved are truly of the Reformed Church; but because it was taught by the greatest Ligths of our Church: 
d In Harm. in Math. c. 26 vers. 64. & i● admonad Polan. in Tract. Theolog. pag. 794.  Calvin says the text, My Father is greater than I, must be understood of Christ, not only as he is Man, but also as he is God. And that the Council of Nice did abuse the text: 
e Comm●nt. s●. per joanc. 10.  My Father and I are one, for to prove the Unity of both in Nature; whereas it only signifies their Unity by conformity of Will. Again he says Epist. 2. ad Polon. in tract. Theol. pag. 796. That prayer, Holy Trinity one God have mercy of us, is barbarous, and does not please me. And adds 
f In Act. Serueti pag. 87.  The son has his own substance distinct from the Father. His Disciple Danaeus 
g l. cont. ●enebrar.  says, it's a foolish insipid prayer: and our great Apostle Luther (who as Fox witnesseth, was the Chariot and conductor of Israel, and a man extraordinarily raised and replenished with God's spirit, to teach the purity of the Gospel) caused that prayer to be blotted out of the Litanies. 
h In Postil. Major. in e●arrat. Evang. Domin. Trinit.  That word Trinity, says he, sounds coldly; my soul hates that word Homoousion, and the Arian did well in not admitting it. Lastly Ochinus that great Oracle of England impugns this Mystery with a strong discourse: 
i lib. 2. Dial. 2.  We are not obliged to believe, says he, more than the Saints of the Ancient Testament, otherwise our condition would be worse than theirs; but they were not obliged to believe this Mystery; therefore we are not obliged. Examine I pray the works of these eminent Drs. where I quote them; consider if they be not, not only men of sound judgement, but men extraordinarily raised by God, (says the Synod of Charenton; the chariots and conductors of Israel, says Fox: men to be reverenced after Christ, says our Dr Powel, and Apostolical Oracles sent to teach us the purity of the Gospel; and conclude, it's an undeniable Verity that this is the Doctrine of the Reformation, whereas its Scripture as interpreted by such men: O! but England France and Scotland believes this Mystery; well? and what then? that proves that the Mystery is also the Doctrine of the Reformation, because whatever any Man of sound judgement thinks to be Scripture, is its Doctrine; but is England or France alone the whole Reformation? are not Luther, Calvin, Danaeus, Ochinus as well of the Reformation; and men of as sound judgement as they? since therefore they understand by Scripture there's no Trinity, it's the Doctrine of the Reformation also that there's none: believe it or deny it, which you like best, and you'll be still of the Reformed Church.  Ishmael. 
By the Principle you run upon, you may say any blasphemy is the Doctrine of the Reformation; for there's hardly any so execrable, but some Dr of ours has delivered and taught it.  Isaac. 
The Principle I run upon is this, Scripture as each Person of sound judgement interprets it, is our Rule of faith: judge you, if that be not a good Principle in our Reformed Church; whereas this is the Rule of faith given us by the 39 Articles and generally by all our Drs as I proved in my first Dialogue: this being our Rule of faith and Reformed Doctrine, its evident, that whatever Doctrine is judged by any Person of sound judgement to be contained in Scripture, is the Doctrine of our Reformation: some Persons of sound judgement say the Real Presence is expressed by Scripture; this therefore is the Doctrine of the Reformation; others say, only Figurative Presence is taught in Scripture; this also is the Doctrine of the Reformation; some understand by Scripture, there is a Mystery of the blessed Trinity; this therefore is the Doctrine of the Reformation; others understand there's no such Mystery; this also is the Doctrine of the Reformation: so that whether you believe or deny this or any other Tenet controverted, you'll still hold the Doctrine of the Reformation.  Ishmael. 
Calvin 
k Harm. in Evang. Mat c. 26 verse 39 etc. 27 vers. 46. & lib. 2. Instit. c. 16 sect. 10. & 1●.  says Christ prayed unadvisedly, the Eve of his Passion; that he uttered words whereof he was afterward sorry, that in his passion he was so troubled of all sides, that overwhelmed with desperation, he desisted from invoking God, which was to renunce all hopes of salvation: And says he, 
l In Luc. par. 2. hom. 65. & in joan. hom. 54.  if you object us absurd and scandalous to affirm Christ despaired, I answer, this desperation proceeded from him as he was man, not as he was God. And this is not only the Doctrine of Calvin, but of Brentius, 
m In Math c. 26.  Marlotus, 
n In Recogn. pag 376.  Jacobus Minister (quoted by Bilson) and of Beza▪ will you say this is the Doctrine of the Reformation, or that we can without scruple believe it? Also Calvin says, 
o lib. 2. Inst. c. 16. fact. 10. & seq.  That Ch●ist's corporal death was not sufficient for to redeem us, but that after having despaired on the Cross, he suffered the death of his soul; that's to say, that his soul after his corporal death, suffered the pains of the damned in hell. And says he in the same place, they are but ignorant doltish brutish men, who will deny it. Luther also teaches the same Doctrine: 
p To. 3. W●ttemb. in sp. 16.  As he suffered with exceeding pains the death of the Body, so it seems he suffered afterward the death of his soul in hell: Epinus 
q in ps. 16.  a learned Lutheran says, Christ descended into hell for thee, and suffered not only corporal death, but the death and fire of hell. Mr. Fulk and Parkins avow this is also the express Doctrine of Illiricus, Latimer and Lossius. Also Lurher 
r In Conses. majori de Coena Dni.  most impiously affirms, that not only the human nature of Christ died for us, but also his Divin nature: see Luther's words quoted at large by Zuinglius, 
s To. 2. in respōs. ad Confess. Luth. fol. 458.  and Hospinian: 
t In Histor Sacram. par. ●. fol. 57  If you say such scandalous blasphemies may be safely believed, you will render you● Christianity suspected; and if yo● say, that they are the Doctrine of th● Reformation, or that they may be believed according the Principles ● the Reformation; you will make th● Reformation and its Principles t● be hated by any good Christian.  Isaac. 
If I walk by the Rule o● faith of the Reformation, I'll prove myself a true Reformed Child; and if I prove myself to be a Reformed Child, my Christianity cannot be justly suspected. What Tenet have you related of all those which you call blasphemies and scandals▪ but has been judged by those Eminent Drs. of our Reformation to be express Scripture, or conformable to Scripture; and since our Rule of faith is Scripture as each person of sound judgement understands it, and since the Doctrine of our Reformation is but whatever any such Person of sound judgement, judges to be expressed in, or proved by Scripture; its evident that all those Tenets are undeniably the Doctrine of the Reformation: I say then, and will say without any offence to my Christianity, or blemish to our Reformed Church; that those Tenets are the Doctrine of the Reformation and may be as safely believed by any Child of it, as Figurative Presence, supremacy, or Two Sacraments: and let not any Bigot pretend to freghten me from this Doctrine by calling it blasphemy and impiety; No, its Scripture as interpreted by our renowned Reformed Doctors; therefore it's no blasphemy: let any man convince me, that our Rule of faith must not be Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it; and he will convince that this cannot be justly called the Doctrine of the Reformation; but whilst that Principle and Rule of faith stands vnshaken, nothing that is taught by any Person of sound judgement to be the Doctrine of Scripture, but is to be called our Doctrine, and may be safely believed.  
You say that whoever has any love for Christianity, will hate the Reformation and its Principles, if they give liberty for to believe such blasphemies: but, can any mother be more indulgent to her Child than the Reformation is to us? such as think those Tenets to be blasphemies, the Reformation gives them leave not to believe them; and if any judges by Scripture, that they are not blasphemies but pure Doctrine; as Luther, Calvin and others did, they have liberty for to believe them. He who denies them, cannot in charity check them who believe them; nor can they who believe them, check those who deny them, whereas each follow our Rule of faith, and believe what they judge by Scripture to be true. And if you or your Church of England cry out Blasphemy, Blasphemy, against all that you judge to be falls; why do not you cry blasphemy against Presbyterians, Lutherans and other Congregations from whom you descent? and what difference betwixt you and the Church of Rome? the folly of this is to call Heresy and blasphemy all that is not her own Doctrine: and all that your Church of England mystikes, must be fanaticism, blasphemy, and impiety? must our Rule of faith be Scripture as the Church of England understands it, and not otherwise? Presbyterians and Lutherans will never allow it: if therefore our Rule of faith be Scripture as each Person understands it; any Person of sound judgement in the Reformation, may without scruple believe what he understands to be the Doctrine of Scripture.   

IV. DIALOGUE.  ISHMAEL. 
You still insist upon that Principle that our Rule of faith, is Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it; and from that Principle will follow many absurd consequences destructive of piety and Religion.  Isaac. 
That Principle is not invented by me; it's of our holy Reformation; if I did discourse with a Papist I would prove the Principle to be true and Gods express Word; but since I discourse with a Reformed Child, I suppose, and not spend my time in proving it: this Principle then, being an unquestionable truth in our Reformation, no Reformed Child must be so irreverent and bold as to say, that any Doctrine which clearly and avoidable follows out of it, is blasphemous or impious, for that would be to condemn our Principle by which we walk: Ex vero non sequitur nisi verum: from a true Principle nothing can follow but true Doctrine: can you deny, but this was the Rule of faith and Principle of our first blessed Reformers, and of the Church of England mentioned in her 39 Articles? if therefore they judged, and if any other judges by that Rule and Principle, that those Tenets which you call impious and blasphemous be true Doctrine; they cannot be blamed for believing them.  Ishmael. 
I confess our first Reformers did speak so, but I say such Errors and impious Doctrines cannot without irreverence be called the Doctrine of the Reformation and cannot without impiety be believed; because our Reformation, at present condemns and detests those blasphemies, for we must grant, that our Reformation in its beginning was not in its full perfection of Doctrine; God began it by Luther, Calvin, Zuinglius and others: those great men ha' their frailties; they did overlash in some things; and what they said amiss, God's heavenly spirit inspired to the Church from time to time to correct it, and has at length brought our Church to that purity of Doctrine, and fullness of perfection which now it enjoys: Nothing is to be called now the Doctrine of the Reformation, but what is now believed by our Congregations, and none of them believes those execrable Tenets you related.  Isaac. 
you wrong the Reformation very much, in saying it had not its full perfection in the beginning, it's rather to be thought, that that polishing and refining of it in ensuing years with new perfections, and correcting the first draught of it by our first Reformers, has been a corruption of it with some mixture o● Popish errors and superstitions: for all religious Congregations, and Pretenders to piety, are at the first beginning in the height of their perfection, and in progress of years they decline and decay from their primitive Spirit into errors and corruption of manners: Religious Congregations are not like Arts and Sciences, wihich by time and experience receive new perfefections; but like chimneys, which grow daily blacker by continual smoke and fire: witness the Jewish Church and law, in its beginning, flourishing and holy, but corrupted in progress of time by Traditions of men and superstitions of Pharisees: witness also the law of the Gospel in those happy times of the Apostles, holy and pure, but corrupted after some years by errors of Popery: If we be to seek for the pure and Orthodox Doctrine of the primitive Church; ought not we to be said by the Apostles, men raised extraordinaryly by God and replenished with his Spirit to teach us the Gospel? and if we be to seek for the pure and Orthodox Doctrine of the Reformation, ought not we to be said rather by Luther, Calvin, Melancton, Zuinglius, Beza and our other first Reformers, than by a few Ministers and Bishops of England, who, though they be wise and pious men, yet they are not of that stamp as the others. And if our present Congregations presume to correct them, and say they overlasht in their Doctrine; will not the Papists say; if they have been such scandalous Masters and falls teachers, why did you receive their Reformation, and as they erred so grossly in such prime articles of Christianity, why do not you fear and suspect, they have also erred in the rest? secondly the Papists will say, if as they reform us, you reform them; than you must expect and permit that others may reform you; and forsake your Doctrine, as you forsake theirs.  Ishmael. 
I wish you could make out, that the Reformation was in its full perfection in its beginning; had you read some Writers of ours; perhaps you would judge otherwise; 
a Dom 1. Adventus, & libr de Proph. Christi.  Musculus, a learned Lutheran writes thus, Thus it is with us at present, that if any be desirous to see a great rabble of knaves turbulent Spirits, deceitful persons, Cozeners and debauch men, let him go to a Ci●ty where the Gospel is purely preached, and he shall find them by multitudes; for its more manifest than the day light, that never were there more unbridled and unruly people among the turks and other infidels than the Professors of the Reformed Gospel. 
b In Postill. super Evangel. Domi. 1. Advent. & Dom. 26. post Trinit.  Luther himself says as much; The world grows daily worse, and men are now more covetous, revengeful, and licentious than they were in Popery. Mr. Stubs 
c Moriu●● to Good Works in the Ep●st. Dedic▪  says no less: After my travels round about all England, I found the people in most parts proud, malicious, ambitious and careless of good works: Mr Richard Geferie in his Sermon at St. Paul's Cross printed in: 1604. I may freely speak what I have plainly seen, that in Flanders ●ever was there more drunkness, in Italy more wantonness, in jury more hypocrisy, in Turkey more impiety; in Tartary more iniquity, than is practised generally in England, and particularly in London. Certainly our Reformation at present deserves a better character; never did the Alehouses and Taverns complain more heavily of want of trading; which is a proof of our Sobriety: the Churches which we see a building in London, is a good testimony of piety; and we are so far from any smack of hypocrisy, that you shall not see in all London the least appearance of Virtue so hiddenly its kept from mortal Eyes, but what you may meet in our honests Quakers.  Isaac. 
I confess our Congregations as now they are, are very good both in Doctrine and manners; but I say also, that the Doctrine and manners of our Reformation at its first beginning was as pure, as holy, and as true as now it is, or ever it will be. Nay supposing and granted, their manners and Doctrine were so corrupt as those Drs. mention; I say that amidst all those vices, their life was as holy, innocent, blameless and pure as yours is now: and that you may be convinced of this truth, know that Calvin expressy teaches: 
d lib. 3▪ Inst c. 4. sect. 28.  We believe, the sins of the faithful (he means of the Reformation) are but venial sins; not but that they deserve death, but because there is no damnation for the Children of Grace, in as much as their sins are not imputed to them; And again 
e lib. 4.  he says, We can assure ourselves, 
Inst. c. 7. sect. 2.  we can no more be damned for any sins, than jesus-christ himself. Luther 
f In loeis' common class 5 c. 27.  is of the same opinion, As nothing but faith doth justifiy us, so nothing but incredulity is a sin. Again 
g To. 2. Wittem. de capt. Babyl. fol. 74.  No sin is so great that it can condemn a man; such as are, damned are damned only for their incredulity: Whitaker, 
h de Eccl. cont. Bellarm. cōf. 2. quaest 5  No sin can hurt a man who has faith. The same is taught by Wotten, Fulk, Tindal, and Beza. It's therefore the Doctrine of Scripture, as interpreted by these Persons of great and sound judgement, that incests, murders, intemperance or whatever else you call a sin (incredulity excepted) either is no sin at all, or but venial sins, which do no harm, nor cannot damn the children of the Reformation; if therefore our Brethren lived in the beginning of the Reformation, as those authors relate; they lived according Scripture as interpreted to them by men of sound judgement, and this being our Rule of faith and manners, they did not ill but very well in following it.  Ishmael. 
They were men of the Reformation, its true, who taught these errors, and dissolution of life and good manners; in so much they swerved from the spirit holiness and purity of the Reformation, and must not be believed nor commended: look upon the Reformation as now it is, and you will not find any such scandalous Doctrine or corruption of manners.  Isaac. 
They were not only men of the Reformation; but the greatest Oracles of it, which you will not match with any of our present congregations; and it's not pardonable in any Reformed Child to say, such Oracles extrordinarily raised by God to teach the purity of the Gospel, should have taught either Errors in Doctrine, or dissolution of manners: they taught what in their conscience they understood by Scripture to be true; if you will not be so irreverent as to say that they were knaves, Who spoke and taught against their conscience and knowledge. Therefore they taught the Doctrine of the Reformation purely and truly: the consequence is euident● for, what is the Doctrine of the Reformation, but what wise learned men of sound judgement think and understand by Scripture to be true? why is figurative Presence the Doctrine of the Reformation, though denied by Lutherans, (who are Reform also) but because wise learned men judge by Scripture as they understand it, it's the true Doctrine? or can you give me any other Rule of faith, by which we may know what Doctrine is of the Reformation, and what not, but Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it? or what Rule can you give for to know what is good or evil to be done, but Scripture as understood b● such Persons: if therefore Luther, Calvin and the other Drs. I quoted judge by Scripture that Doctrine, and manner of life to be true and good; why may not we say its the Doctrine of the Reformation: if you or the Church of England, or Scotland judge that Doctrine to be false, and that manner of life to be a dissolution and corruption of manners: why; you are men of sound judgement, you understand Scripture so; that will be the Doctrine also of the Reformation, you may believe it: but you must not deny that Luther and calvin's Doctrine also is of the Reformation, because they were men of as sound a judgement as you.  
You transgress heinous against modesty in saying those sacred Organs of God swerved from the spirit and holiness of the Reformation; which having no other Rule of faith but Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it; it's Spirit and holiness consist in framing our life and Doctrine to that Rule, as our blessed Reformers and Reformation in its beginning did; believing those Tenets, which you call Errors and blasphemy; and living that life which you call Dissolution and corruption of Manners; because they judge by Scripture, as they understood it, that Doctrine and manner of life was true, innocent and good; and if you like it as they did, you may believe, and live as they did, and be a good Child of the Reformation: consider I pray all the works and Doctrine of Luther, (the like I say of our other first Reformers) the three parts of his Doctrine is against Popery, and They say, all are Heresies and blasphemies; the rest is contrary to the Church of England, and she says, this is also Errors and blasphamie, so you conspire with the Papists to destroy the credit of our first and best Reformer; and betwixt you both, you unplume him of all his Feathers, and leave him not a bit of good Doctrine.  
But I will stand to the Spirit, and Principles of the Reformation and Congregations as now they are, since that you do so much boast of its purity and great Perfections; and I will prove that Doctrine, and manner of life, may be believed and followed lawfully standing to its Principles: for if the Spirit of the Reformation be at present among us, we must not be forced, as in Popery to believe against our proper judgements, what others believe by Scripture to be ttue and holy; but what each one thinks in his own conscience to be such; because even now at present, our Rule of faith, is Scripture as each person of sound judgement understands it, and this is the same Rule which Luther and the Reformation in its beginning had: this holy liberty is the best jewel, the greatest perfection, and most glorious prerogative the Reformation has: if therefore now at present any man judges by scripture, that he can marry ten wyves at a time; that he can kill his own son as Abraham intended; that he may commit incest with his own Daughter, as Lot did; that there is no sin but incredulity, as Luther believed; nor any Mystery of the Trinity of Persons in one nature, as Calvin believed: with what justice can the Church of England say a man does not believe and live as becometh a Reformed Child, or that his Doctrine and life is scandalous? whereas he lives and believes as he understands by Scripture he may or aught to do, which is the Rule of faith of the Reformation, even of the Church of England? the Church of England says, the Lutheran Doctrine of the real Presence, is not the Doctrine of Scripture; that the Presbyterian Doctrine against Episcopacy, is not the Doctrine of Scripture; that the Anabaptist Doctrine against infant's Baptism, is not of Scripture; and yet you permit them all to live in peace; you confess they are true Children of the Reformation, though dissenters from you; why? because they follow Scripture as they understand it, and this is our Rule of faith: and why will not you say, the belief and life of that other man is also of the Reformation, though absurd it may seem to you; since he believes and lives as he judges by Scripture he may: it follows therefore plainly that this is the Doctrine of the Reformation.  Ishmael. 
I confess our Rule of faith in the Reformation, is Scripture as each person of sound judgement understands it: but you cannot doubt but that its needful to moderate and curb this liberty, or it may run too far: for if every man be lycenced to believe and teach every thing he fancies to be according Scripture; as there is no Doctrine so execrable but some ignorant Reader may hit upon a text, which, ill understood, may seem to favour it; so there will be none but may be believed, and called the Doctrine of the Reformation: for example Beza 
i Epist. 2▪ 2. & 25.  teaches, (and says its also the Doctrine of Calvin, Saumaize and Geneve,) that the Lords supper may belawfully administered in any kind of victuals as well as in bread, and wine; in Eges, flesh, fish, etc. Where there is no bread and wine, says he, we may duly celebrat, if instead of them, we use, what we usually eat and drink. And again in the same place; If there be no water at hand, and that baptism' cannot be with edification differed I would baptise in any other liquor:  Isaac. 
and why should not it be lawful to any Reformed to believe this, whereas its Scripture as interpreted by a man of so sound a judgement? but I do not in any wise like that opinion of yours and of the Church of England, that its convenient to limit and curb men's judgements lest they may run too far: this is the Policy of Rome; They will not permit an arbitrary interpretation of Scripture, alleging forsooth, for inconveniency, the multitude of absurd Doctrines which the word would swarm with, if such a liberty were granted: No, No▪ far be it from any true Reformed Child to mislike or blame that all people should interpret Scripture, and believe what they judge by it to be true: and if what the judge to be true, should seem to you falls and scandalous; do not you believe it, but let them believe it, and they will be of the Reformation, because they follow our Rule of faith.  Ishmael. 

k To. 5. wittem: serm. de Matrim. & in 1. ad Corint. 7.  Luther, 
l Consil. Theol. par. 1 pag 648. & 134.  Melancton, 
m In Epist Paul. add Phil. & in 1. ad Tim. 3.  Musculus, 
n lib. 2● Dial. 21.  Ochinus, 
o lib. de Repud. & Divort. pag. 123.  Beza and others teach the lawfulness of Bigamy or multiplicity of Wives, and prove it with the example of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: and Ochinus expounding the text of S. Paul; It behoveth a Bishop to be a man of one Wife: The prohibition says he, is not to be understood so, that a Bishop should have but one wife at a time for certainly he may have many, but S. Paul's meaning is, that he ought not to have too many wyves at a time; that's to say ten or twenty.  Isaac. 
And will you deny this to be the Doctrine of the Reformation, whereas its Scripture as interpreted by men of so eminent and sound a judgement?  Ishmael. 
The synod of Geneve; 
p Canon. ●enerales Gewen. 1560.  and the 
q Chap. 13. art. 31:  Ecclesiastical Discipline of France printed at Saumure, has decreed, that a wife whose husband is a long time absent, may have him called by the public Crier, and if within a competent time he does not appear, without any further enquiry, the Minister may licence her to marry an other, or marry her himself.  Isaac. 
I say, all honest Women may practise this Doctrine without scruple or shame, whereas its Scripture as interpreted by that thrice holy synod: but let seamen beware how they undertake long voyages, for fear their Wyves may take other husbands in their absence.  Ishmael. 
Luther 
r To. 5. Wittem. serm. de Matrim.  teaches its lawful to a wife, if her husband does not please her, to call her Man servant, or her neighbour; which Doctrine they say is come to the ears of our London Sisters; and he gives the like liberty to the husbands, if their Wyves be pettish and humorsom. If the husband says he, cannot correct the humorsomness of his wife, he may imagine she is dead, and may marry an other because it's not in the pow●r of a Man to live without a Woman, nor in hers to live without a man.  Isaac. 
This is Scripture as interpreted by Luther, and consequently must not be denied to be the Doctrine of the Reformation; nor can any of our Reformation be justly punished or blamed for practising it, if he judges by Scripture it be true, (as Luther did) for this is our Rule of faith. But Luther never gave this liberty, but upon condition, that the husband or wife should first make their complaint before a Magistrate, for to have a redress of their injury and discontent: but this condition seems too cumbersome to the modesty of our sisters; they do no● submit to it, but do themselves justice without any address to the Magistrate. 
s To. 5. Wittemb. serm. de Matrim.  I know also that not only Luther, but Bucer, 
t In Scriptis Anglic de Reg Chr. l. 2. c. 26. & in Math c. 19  Melancton, 
u in Consil. Theol. par. 1 pag. 648● & 134.  Ochinus, 
x Dial. 200. & 204 in Epist. s. Paul. ad Tim 3.  Musculus and Calvin● do tea●h that a Man who finds his wife in Adultery, may cast her of by Divorce and marry an other; and our french synods have ordered thi● Doctrine to be put in their Ecclesiastical Discipline, so that its the Doctrine of Scripture as interpreted by these Persons of sound judgement, and consequently of the Reformation: you may therefore believe and practise it; 
y l. 4. Inst. c. 19 sect. 37.  our Sisters, particularly our Ministers wyves, were much alarmed at this Doctrine, 
Discip. Eccl c. 13.  and say its à damnable Heresy: believe as you please.  Ishmael. 

z serm de Matrim.  Does not Luther say it● impossible a young man of 20 years can live without a woman; or a young maid of 18 years, without a man● whereby all Parents may believe their Daughters of that age are defiled, if not preferred in due time: sure you will not say this is the Doctrine of the Reformation.  Isaac. 
And who doubts but tha● its the Reformed Doctrine; Scripture as interpreted by so sound a judgement: the contrary Doctrine is also of the Reformation, and you may believe it because our glorious Queen Elizabeth died a Virgin; and it's credibly reported some few fellows of Oxford and Cambridge live continently.  Ishmael. 
But what do you think of a Child Christened in Popery by a Monk or a Friar, ought he to be Christened again in our Reformation? and what if a Popish Priest or Friar did become of our Reformed Church, can he lawfully marry, whereas he made a vow of Chastity?  Isaac. 
As to the first Quere, it's the Doctrine of the Reformation declared by many french Synods and recorded in their Ecclesiastical Discipline, that he must be Christened again, because the first baptism was Null: it's also the Doctrine of the Reformation declared by the Church of England and many Synods of France, that the first Baptism is sufficient and valid: believe which you please. It's also the Doctrine of the Reformation, that Infant's baptism is not at all needful (nay nor Lawful say the Anabaptists) so says Calvin 
a lib. 4 Inst. c. 15. sect. 20. & 21.  Zuinglius, Beza and many others, it's likewise the Doctrine of our 39 Articles 
b Act. 27. ; and our holy Synod of London 
c Can. 29.  that Infant's baptism is lawful and needful. Believe which you like best; both are of the Reformation.  
As to the second Quere, it's the Doctrine of the Reformation that Priests and Friars are obliged to the vow of Chastity which they made in Popery, and cannot marry; this is the Doctrine of many of our Brethren and particularly of 
d lib. 2. Eccles. Polit. pag 103.  Hooker, 
e In Tim. c. 50.  Marloratus, Budellus and 
f In defence. Ho keri art. 8  Covel; who say the Papish vows of Poverty, Obedience and Chastity are commendable and aught to be kept. You may also believe this is wicked Doctrine, and that they may take wyues notwithstanding their vow of Chastity, as well as Benefices notwithstanding their vow of Poverty: believe which you please; both Doctrines are of the Reformation; but the best is to say they can marry; for if marriage and benefices were denied them, no Priest or Friar would ever embrace our Reformed Doctrine: We know our great Zuinglius himself would not at all preach the Gospel unto the Suitzers, until that he presented a petition for himself and his companions, (all Priests and Friars) extant yet in his 1. Tom. pag. 110. and obtained the contents of it, which was to have Wyves; Nor can we doubt this to be the best Doctrine, whereas Luther, Beza and almost all our other Reformers, were Priests and Friars, and the first step they gave in the Reformation was to Marry: the Papists and some weak Brethren were much scandalised at Luther's marriage, and Erasmus his raillery upon it was much solemnised, Luther yesterday a Monk, to day a husband, and next day à Father, because that honest Cate Boren, his virtuous Bride, was happily deliured of a lovey Boy eight days after he married her: but the Servant of God did not regret the action, which proves that he judged by scripture it was very lawful.   

V. DIALOGUE.  ISHMAEL. 
You know I have been born and bred in our holy Reformation, and a Church of England man; you tell me I may believe this or that, and whatever I please; I would gladly settle once for ever, and resolve what I may, and aught to believe, and not to be every day carried away with every wind of Doctrine: let me, to that purpose propose unto you, and hear your resolution of some doubts. What do you think, have not we a Church on earth established by Christ, wherein we are to live and serve him, and believe her Doctrine?  Isaac. 
I will give you no other instruction nor answer but the pure Doctrine of the Reformation; which when you have heard, you may determine as you like best, what religion to embrace; but know this, that after you have determined with yourself to believe this or that; you may with a very safe conscience alter that resolution next day after, and believe the quite contrary to what you resolved to believe, if upon better consideration you think the contrary to be true; this is the liberty of the holy Reformation as I proved in my first Dialogue.  
As to your present doubt I answer, it's the Doctrine of the Reformation, that it was Jesus Christ the son of God who established the Church; you may believe it therefore: It's also the Doctrine of the Reformation, that it was not Jesus Christ the son of God who established the Church: that this is the Doctrine of our Reformation its apparent; for its Scripture as interpreted by Ochinus a man of sound judgement, whom all Italy could not match, says Calvin; in whose presence England was happy, and unhappy in his absence, says B Bale: Ochinus speaks thus, 
a In Praefat. Dialog.  Considering how the Church was established by Christ and washed with his blood; and considering again how it was vtter●y overthrown by Papacy; I concluded that he who established it, could not be Christ the son of God, because he wanted providence; and upon this reflection he renounced Christ and became a Jew: And no man can say but that he acted and behaved himself like a true Child of the Reformation in so doing; for he followed scripture as he understood it; and as he was a true Reformed Child in forsaking Popery, because he understood by Scripture, that the Reformation was better; so since he understood by reading Scripture more, that Judaisme was better than the Reformation, he acted like a good Reformed, in choosing that which he understood by Scripture to be the best: this is the Reformations Rule of faith: do you, if you please, as he did, and you'll be as good a Reformed as he.  
And if you choose to believe that there is a Church established on earth by Christ, you must beware never to believe or persuade yourself that we are bound to believe her Docctrin, or live in her, if you do not judge by scripture that she teaches the Doctrine of Christ: This is the most essential point of Popery; An obligation of submitting our judgements to the Church, and believing her Doctrine without any more examine; and in this the Church of England is much like the Popish Church, which by acts of Parliaments and other severities, would oblige all men to believe her Doctrine Rites and Ceremonies: No, God has given us scripture for our Rule of faith; as we forsook the Popish Church, because we discovered by Scripture her many Errors in Doctrine; so we are not bound to believe the Doctrine of any other Church, but as we find by scripture her Doctrine is true. Do, and speak as Luther to. 1. Edit. Jen. in resolute. I will be free, and will not submit to the authority of Councils, Pope's Church or university; to the contrary I will confidently teach whatever I judge to be true; whether it be Catholic Doctrine or heretical; condemned or approved.  Ishmael. 
Must I not believe that the Doctrine of Jesus Christ, delivered to his Apostles and the Church is true Doctrine?  Isaac. 
The Reformation teaches it is, and you may safely believe it: You may as safely believe it is not, in the Principles of the Reformation; because it teaches that Christ erred in Doctrine and manners: Vere Pharisaei e●ant viri valde boni, says Luther; 
b serm. de 50. Artic. in summa summarum.  & Christus minime debuit eos taxare: and Calvin says, it's a folly to think he was not ignorant in many things; 
c In Harm super ●uc. c. 2.  lastly David Georgius 
d Epitome. Cent. 16. par. 2.  (a Man of God and of a holy life says Osiander) writes. If the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles had been true and perfect; the Church which they planted had continued, but now it is manifest that Antichrist has subverted it, as it's manifest in Papacy; therefore it was false and imperfect. See these words quoted in the history of David George printed by the Divins of Basile, at Antwerp an. 1568. both Doctrines are Scripture as interpreted by men of sound judgement; a Child of the Reformation, may believe which he will.  Ishmael. 
Is it not the Doctrine of the Reformation that the Apostles were infallible in their Doctrine! much more must we believe that Jesus Christ was so.  Isaac. 
Yes it is; you may believe it: and it's also the Doctrine of the Reformation that they were not infallible, neither in their written or unwritten Doctrine; so, many of our most renowned Drs speak; and whatever any men of sound judgement judge to be true by scripture, is the Doctrine of the Reformation: Zuinglius, 
e Tom. 2. cont. Catabapt. fol. 10.  one of the greatest Oracles of our Church says; It's a great ignorance to believe any infallible authority in the Ghospels or Epistles of the Apostles; Beza not inferior to Zuinglius, blotted out of S. John the history of the Woman Adulteress▪ judging it a fable. Clebitius 
f Victoria verit. a●g. 5.  affirms, that Luk's relation of Christ's passion is not true, because it does not agree with that of Matthew and Mark, and more credit is to be given to two, than to one. 
g In cap. 2. ad Gal.  Calvin says, Peter consented to, and added to the schism of the Church, to the overthrow of Christian liberty, and Christ's Grace. 
h de Eccles cont. Bella●m. Cont. 2. q. 4.  Whitaker sais, It's evident that after the Descent of the Holy G. the whole Church, even the Apostles, erred; and Peter erred in Doctrine and Manners 
i To. 5. Wittem. ●n 1554. & in Epist. ad Gal. c. 1.  Luther says Peter lived and taught extra Verbum Dei; and Brentius 
k In Apol. Conf. c. de Concil.  his disciple says, that Peter and Barnabas, together with the Church of jerusalem erred after receiving the H. Ghost. If our Rule of faith be Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it, undoubtedly this must be the Doctrine of the Reformation, and may be believed by any Reformed, since its Scripture interpreted by such renowned men.  Ishmael. 
This is most wicked Doctrine, I'll never believe it.  Isaac 
If you think by Scripture its wicked, do not: follow your Rule of faith, Scripture as you understand it: but if an other understands by scripture (as those authors did) that the Doctrine is good, give him leave to believe it; he'll but follow his Rule of faith; Scripture as he understands it.  Ishmael. 
I would gladly know which are the true Canonical books of scripture.  Isaac. 
The Reformation teaches and you may believe with the Church of England that S. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews; those of James and Judas; the 2. of S. Peter; the 2. and 3 of S. John, are true Cononical Scripture; the Reformation also teaches they are not Canonical, because Lutherans deny them; believe which you like best. But if you'll ' live in peace, and out of all strife with Protestants, Lutherans, and others, who dispute, if this or that be Canonical Scripture; your readiest and speediest way will be, to say there's no true Canonical Scripture; Scripture is no more to be regarded than other pious books: if you say this is not the Doctrine of the Reformation; read Hossius de expresso Verbo Dei, & lib. de Haer. where he relates this to be the Doctrine of the Swi●feldians, as good Reformeds', as the best of us: they say, that we are not to regard any instruction from man or book, but God's immediate inspiration, which speaks secretly to our hearts; for which they allege those comfortable words of the prophet, I will hear what my Lord my God speaks in me: for say they, the book which we call Scripture, is a creature, and we must not seek for light and instruction from any creature, but from God the Father of Lights. This is Scripture as interpreted by men of sound judgement: any Child of the Reformation may believe it.  Ishmael. 
I thought to settle my mind in my choice of some Religion, and you go the way to beat me from all; for if you renvers the authority of Scripture, what warrant shall we have for any Religion? God forbid the Reformation should deny the true Canon, or the infallible truth of Scripture; and let all the world say the contrary, I will constantly revere and believe its Gods infallible word.  Isaac. 
How can you say I beat you from all Religion, when I directly persuade you to follow the Rule of faith of our Reformation, Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it; let this be your Religion, if you will be a true Reformed; Whatever you judge in your conscience to be true; let the Church of England, or France or any other say and believe what they will; you are to believe but what you judge by scripture to be true, and this is the Religion of the Reformation.  Ishmael. 
I would gladly know, if it be lawful to chop or change the text?  Isaac. 
It's the Doctrine of the Reformation, that you cannot, because God has forbid to add to, or take away from his word: and therefore we condemn the Papists for their Traditions, obtruded upon the flock as the Word of God: It's also the Doctrine of the Reformation, and the practice of our best Reformers, when the text does not speak clearly enough, that for to refute Popery and establish our own Doctrine, we may add or diminish a word or two; which is not to change the Word of God, but to make it speak more expressly: as when Luther had a mind to preach justification by faith alone; finding the Text said but, Man is justified by faith, he added the word Alone, and made the Text very clear against Popery, which formerly was somewhat obscure: Zuinglius being to teach the Figurative presence of Christ in the Sacrament, found the Text, this is my Body, to be too pat against his Doctrine; and instead of Is, put in, this signifieth: The Church of England being to preach the kings Spiritual Supremacy, could not convince the obstinate Papist by the Original text which said 1. Pet. 2 submit yourseluts unto every human creature for the Lord's sake, whether it it be the king as excelling, or to, etc. But in king Edward's time they altered one word, and made the text thus, submit yourselves to every Ordinance of man, whether it be to the king as being the chief head, and the following impressions of the Bible the year 1557. and 79. say, To the king as supreme. And so the true Ductrin is clearly convinced out of Scripture: as also the lawfulness of Priests marriage's for the text before the Reformation said 1. Cor. 9 have not we power to lead about a Woman sister; and now our Bible's say, have not we power to lead about a Wife being our sister: hence its evident according the Doctrine and practice of our Reformation, that when you have a mind to establish a Doctrine which you judge to be true, you may change the text and make it speak to your sense and meaning, provided you judge your sense to be true.  Ishmael. 
What do you think of justifying faith? does faith alone justify us?  Isaac. 
It's the Doctrine of the Reformation, that without charity it cannot, because S. Paul says 1. Cor. 13. if I have faith so as to move mountains, and have no charity, I am nothing, It's also the Doctrine of the Reformation, that its impious and wicked to say, faith alone without charity does not justify; this is Scripture as interpreted by Luther a man of sound judgement: 
l In cap. 2. ad Gal. & serm. Angl: pag 204.  Who say, quoth Luther, that faith alone though perfect it be cannot, justify without charity; say impiously and wickedly; because faith alone without any good works doth justify. Believe which Doctrine you please, both are of the Reformation.  Ishmael. 
Luther was insolent in checking the Doctrine of S. Paul.  Isaac. 
Probably he did not reflect that it was the Doctrine of the Apostle; and if you will have it to be a check of S. Paul, Luther 
m In Epist. ad Gal c. 1. & 2. & Tom. 5.  will answer for himself Be it, says he, that the Church, Augusti● or other Drs, also Peter and Paul, 
W●ttemb. an. 1554. soi. 29.  nay and an Angel from heaven should teach otherwise than as I teach, yet my Doctrine is such that it setteth forth God's glory; I know I teach no human, but Divin Doctrine.  
It's the Doctrine of the Reformation that faith alone without any good works, and notwithstanding all sins you are guilty of, doth justify you: this is Scripture as interpreted by Luther, who says, nothing can damn you but incredulity, as nothing but faith can save you; of Whitaker, Wotten fulk and Beza whose words I related in our precedent Dialogue; which I believe you remember, and I need not repeat.  
Jts also the Doctrine of the Reformation, that good works are meritorious of grace and glory; 
n lib. 5. de Eccl. Polit. sect. 72.  Hocker and Harmonia confess: 
o Pag. 495. & ●73.  say its the Doctrine of scripture; and what any Person of sound judgement judges to be the Doctrine of scripture, he may believe it; for this is our Rule of faith: it's like wise the Doctrine generally of all our Church, that good Works are not at all meritorious: Tindal (called by Fox 
p Acts. and Mon▪ pag. 514  a Man of God and a constant Martyr) judges this to be so true that in his treatise de Mammona iniquitatis he says, Christ himself did not by all his good Works merit the glory: and though the scripture says expressly he did; Calvin 
q lib. 2▪ Inst. c 17● sect. 6.  affirms, that its a foolish curiosity to examine, and a rash proposition to say Christ did merit.  
Jt's the Doctrine of the Reformation, that though good works be not meritorious, nor have not the least influence in our justification or salvation; yet they are absolutely needful for both; in as much as that true faith cannot be without good Works; because they are the marks and signs of a living faith, by which alone we are saved; this is the judgement of the Church of England expressed in the 11. and 12. Article, of the 39 and of Melancton in locis Commun. de Bonis operibus, and you may believe it: You may also believe, and its the Doctrine of the Reformation, that good Works are so far from being needful, that they are prejudicious and hurtful to our salvation, and the best way to be saved is to do no good Work at all; this is scripture as interpreted by Jlliricus, Flaccius, Amsdorfius quoted in Act. Colloq. Aldeburg. pag. 205. and 299. and Luther 
r In Comment. in cap. 2. ad Gal.  was so deeply persuaded of this truth, that though Christ said, If ●hou wilt enter into the kingdom of heaven, keep the Commandments: Luther says, it's an obstacle to our Salvation to keep them: Where it is said, quoth he, that faith in Christ doth indeed justify us, but that it is necessary also to keep the Commandments, there Christ is denied, and faith abolished; because that which is proper to faith alone is attributed to the Commandments. And again 
s To. 1. Proposit. 3.  says he, if faith be-acompanied with good Works, it's ●o true faith; that it may justify it must be alone without any good Works. This is Scripture as interpreted by such Eminent and sound men; and consequently the Doctrine of the Reformation; and who doubts but that any Doctrine of the Reformation may be believed. Hence forward, when you hear the preacher exhort you to good Works, you may believe him, if you please, and have a mind to spend your moneys; because he preaches the Doctrine of the Reformation: or you may laugh at him, and believe not a word he says, because he preaches against the Doctrine of the Reformation.  Ishmael. 
These are dangerous and scandalous Tenets destructive of piety and Christianity; and let Luther and those Authors you quoted say what they please, the Reformation, nor no honest man will ever believe such abominable Doctrine.  Isaac. 
I do not say that the Children of the Reformation are obliged to believe them: they may believe as you do, that all are wicked Tenets: but if Luther and the others cited, judge in their conscience these Tenets to be the Doctrine of scripture, and if Peter, John or James like their interpretation; I say they may according the Principles of our Reformation believe them, and be as truly Reformed Children as you: for our Rule of faith is Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it, and in believing those Tenets, because they judge them to be the Doctrine of scripture, they stick fast to, and follow our Rule of faith: why is Figurative Presence, and the king's supremacy the Doctrine of the Reformation; though denied by Papists, Lutherans and Presbyterians? but because the Protestants judge its the Doctrine of scripture: if therefore those great Authors I quoted, and any other with them judge those Tenets to be the Doctrine of Scripture, they can be justly called the Doctrine of the Reformation: must Protestants be forced against their judgements to deny Real Presence and supremacy, because Lutherans say its wicked Doctrine? and why must Luther, Jlliticus, Flaccius and others be forced to deny those Tenets, though Protestants or Papists judge them to be damnable I let each one believe what he thinks to be the Doctrine of Scripture, and he will still be a true Reformed Child.  Ishmael. 
Does not our Reformation teach that it's possible to all men assisted with God's Grace to keep the Commandments?  Isaac. 
This is the Doctrine of the Church of England, and consequently of the Reformation: It's also the Doctrine of the Reformation delivered out of Scripture as interpreted by Luther, Calvin, Willet and several others, that its impossible to any man, assisted with what Grace soever to keep the Commandments. None has ever yet, says our great Calvin, 
t lib. 2. instit. c. 7. sect. 5.  and God has decreed none shall ever keep the Commandments: Again, 
u Harm. Evang. in Luc. c. 10. vers. 26.  The law and Commandments were given us, to no other end but that we should be damned by them, in as much as that it is impossible for us to do what they command. The same Doctrine is taught by Luther in several places of his Works, by Willet, 
x In Synop. Papismi pag 564.  and by our Brethren the Gomarists of Holland, and many of our french Synods. Believe which you please, both Doctrines are of the Reformation.  
Jt's also the Doctrine of Luther and Calvin, that God does not cast men into hell because their sins deserve it; nor save men because they merit it; but merely because he will have it so: He crowns those who have not deserved it says Luther, 
y lib. de servo. Arbit cont. Erasm.  and he punishes those who have not deserved it: 'tis God's wrath and severity to damn the one, 'tis his Grace and mercy to save the other. Calvin also, 
z lib. 3●. Instit. c. 21. sect. 5. & 7! etc. 22. sect. 11. & cap. 23. sect. 1.  Men are damned for no other cause but because God will have it so; he is the cause and author of their damnation; their damnation is decreed by God when they are in their Mother's womb, because he will have it so; this is also the belief of our Gomarists in Holland, of many french Churches, and of several learned Calvinists: though the Church of England denies this Doctrine, none will dare say it's not the Doctrine of the Reformation, because its Scripture as interpreted by such Eminent men of our Church.  Ishmael. 
I will never believe such execrable Doctrines; nor will I ever be of any Congregation which believes them.  Isaac. 
I do not advise you to believe them; but to give others leave to believe them, if they think them to be the Doctrine of Scripture; as Luther, Calvin, Willet, Gomarists and others do: you must not, if you be a true Reformed Child hinder any man from believing, nor be displeased with him for believing what he judges in his conscience to be the Doctrine of Scripture, for this is our Rule of faith: Will not you be of the Congregation and Religion of those, who follow Scripture as their Rule of faith, and Believe what they judge in their conscience to be the Doctrine of Scripture?  Ishmael. 
Yes I will, and am of such a Congregation, for this is the Rule of faith of the Reformation.  Isaac. 
Why then, you must be of the same Congregation with the Gomarists, Luther, Calvin and the others, who believe those which you call execrable Doctrines, because they follow Scripture as they understand; and believe those Doctrines, because they judge them to be of Scripture: you both follow the same Rule, one goes one way, and the other an other, and both are of the Reformation. The Church of England understands by Scripture that God is not the Author nor cause of sin, that he does not force us to sin; who doubts but that this is there fore the Doctrine of the Reformation? But Calvin, Brentius, Beza and several others vndestand by Scripture; that God is the cause and author which forces our Will to sin; that man, and the devil, are but God's instruments to commit it: that murders, incests, blasphemies, &c are the works of God, that he makes us commit them: and who doubts but this also is the Doctrine of the Reformation being Scripture as interpreted by such eminent and sound judgements? God says Calvin, 
a Lib. 2. inst. c. 4 sec. 3 & l. 1. c. 18 sect. z & l. 3 c. z3 sec. 4. Lo. 1 de deprovid. c. 6. in Synops. pag. 563. In manifest. stratag. Papist.  directs, moves, inclins and forces the Will of man to sin; in so much that the power and efficacy of working, is wholly in him; man, nay and satan when he impells us, Being only Gods instruments which he uses for to make us sin. Zuinglius, Willet, Beza teach the same.   

VI DIALOGUE.  ISHMAEL 
I am weary of hearing such horrid blasphemies; my heart trembles to hear you say, that such abominable Tenets may be believed according our Rule of faith and Principles of our Reformation: I beseech you let me hear no more of such stuff: I conceive very well that men's judgements and consciences are not to be constrained to believe or deny this or that Tenet, because the Pope or his infaillable, forsooth, Church will have it so;  Isaac. 
and must they be constrained to deny or believe because the fallible Church of England or France will have it so?  Ishmael. 
No, I do not say they must, have patience, and hear me speak a while: I say that Scripture must be our Rule of faith, and not any Pope, or Church, or Congregation; and that we are no to be forced by any to believe, but what we understand to be true by Scripture; and that if we judge by Scripture any Doctrine to be falls and contrary to God's Word; we must not be forced to believe it: but we must not abuse this liberty: that we should have liberty for to believe or deny supremacy, figurative Presence, Communion in one or both kinds, and such other inferior Truths controverted among Christians; and that each Congregation may in such Articles, believe as it understands by Scripture to be true, may pass; and it's practised in our Reformed Churches: But that we should run so far, as to have liberty by our Rule of faith to believe or deny the Fundamental and chief Articles of Christianity, as the Trinity, Incarnation, Divinity of Christ, etc. that liberty ought not to be given: our Reformation very wisely and piously permits the Lutherans to believe one thing, the Presbyterians an other, the Protestants an other, and so of the rest: and all are true Reformed Children, because each of them believes as they judge by Scripture to be true: but the Reformation has never given, not never will give liberty to interpret Scripture against the fundamental articles of Christanity: we must be moderate; and keep our rambling fancies within compass, and if any should judge and interpret Scripture in favour of any scandalous and abominable Tenets against Christianity and good Manners, he must be checked, and not commended: this moderation the Church of England uses and will never permit the contrary.  Isaac. 
I percevie a great deal of Popish blood to run in your veins, and that if you and your Church of England, were in p●ower at the beginning of our Reformation, we should never have had a Luther, Calvin, Beza, or such other noble and renowned Reformers: by what I gather from your discourse, I do not see the breath of an inchs' difference betwixt the Church of Rome and you and your Church of England; for the Church of Rome will not stick to grant, that God's Word alone is her Rule of faith, but so that none must believe any sense of it, but as she believes it, nor interpret any text, but receive her interpretation of it: The Church of England has Scripture for her Rule of faith, and gives us liberty for to interpret, understand, and believe some texts of it, as each one thinks best; and so permits Presbyterians to deny Episcopacy, Lutherans to deny Figurative Presence, etc. and confesses they are all her Brethren of the Reformation, but she will give no liberty at all for to interpret other Texts, but all must understand them as she does, or all must be heretics and damned men: No, that text, My father and I are one, must be interpreted to signify the Unity in Nature of the Father and son, as the Church of England believes; none must interpret it otherwise: so that the difference betwixt the Popish Church and that of England is; the first gives us no liberty at all: the second gives us some liberty; the first robs us of all; the second but of the one half: the Rule of faith in Popery is Scripture as interpreted by the Pope and Councils; the Rule of faith in England as to some Articles is Scripture as interpreted by the Church of Enggland; and as to other Articles, Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it: and thus Protestants, are but half Papists, and half Reform, and both these ingredients will never make a good compound.  
Let any vnbyassed and impartial man judge if the Church of England proceeds justly in this: for if our Rule of faith be Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it, as she mentions in her 39 Articles▪ and as the whole Reformation believes, if we are not to be constrained, to believe any Church, Council, or man's sense of Scripture, if we do not judge by the Word of God its true; by what authority Rule or reason, can the Church of England give me liberty to understand and believe some texts as I please; and deny me liberty for to understand and believe others, as I judge by Scripture they ought to be understood? I pray observe well this discourse: here are Luther, Calvin, Beza, Zuinglius and our other first Reformers; they interpret some texts against the Doctrine of Rome, and others against the Doctrine of the Church of England: they are praised for the first, and esteemed Apostolical Reformers, because without any regard of what the Church of Rome said, they freely taught and believed what they judged by Scripture to be true; why must not they be praised and esteemed true Reformers also, for not regarding what the Church of England or any other says; but teach the impossibility of God's Commandments, the sufficiency of faith alone, and all those other Tenets which you so much mislike, since they judge by Scripture, that to be the true Doctrine: are they bound to submit their judgements to the Church of England more than to that of Rome?  Ishmael. 
But in those Tenets they do not only contradict the Church of England; but all Christian Churches and Congregations; for all will say those are wicked and scandalous Doctrine.  Isaac. 
And if they judge by Scripture that those Tenets are not such, but sound and good Doctrine, may not they believe them, though all the world and ten worlds did gainsay them? is not Scripture our Rule of faith, and are we to regard what any Church or all Churches say, further than we find by Scripture that they say well? But being these Tenets, which you call horrid blasphemies displease you I'll change my discourse; and because I see you are Popishly inclined, I will show you how by the Principles of our Reformation, you can be as good a Papist as the Pope; one principle excepted, wherein you must descent from the Church of Rome, if you intent to remain a true Reformed Child.  Ishmael. 
You promise too much, and more than I desire to know; I don't desire to have any Communication with the Pope, I know by the Writings of our Authors what kind of beast he is.  Isaac. 
By your favour, you may believe the Popes are worthy, honest, and godly men; many Drs. of our Reformation, and our Travellers to the Court of Rome give this testimony of them? you may also believe, that Popes and Cardinals are knaves and Atheists, who look on Scripture as a Romance and deny the Incarnation of Christ, for Calvin says so, 
l. 4. Inst. c. 7. sect. 27.  and would never have said it, if it had not been true: but beware not to speak so in Rome, or they'll lodge you where honest Tailor the Quaker was; nor in Spain, or they'll stop your mouth with an Inquisition faggot.  Ishmael. 
I care not what the Pope or Cardinals are; but I would gladly know, what religion and Congregation you are of; for whereas you are my immediate instructor; it behoves me to know what religion you have.  Isaac 
As to my Religion, I doubt not but that my Readers will be divided in their judgements of me; if a Papist reads me, he'll swear I am an Atheist; but I hope he will not pretend to be infallible as his Pope: if a Protestant, he'll say, I am a Papist; and that my drift is to cast dirt upon his Church: the honest Quaker will say, I am a profane man; others perhaps will say I am of no Religion, but a despiser of all; and our Congregations are so uncharitable that likely none will accept of me, because I say all religions are very good: a sad thing that a man must be hated for speaking well of his neighbours; and that each one must have all the world to be naught but himself: this than is my Religion, To suffer persecution for justice and truth; to render good for evil; to bless those who curse me; and speak well of all congregations, whilst they speak all evil against me: reflect well upon what I discoursed hitherto, and you will find, I am as great a lover of the Reformation as they who may think me its enemy; and read my following discourse and you will find I love Popery as well as the Reformation: the Spirit of God makes no exception of Persons.  Ishmael. 
You promised to prove by the Principles of the Reformation, that we may believe all the Tenets of Popery, and remain still of the Reformation: how can this be?  Isaac. 
You remember I excepted one Principle of Popery, wherein you must necessarily descent from them: and if you deny this one Principle, you may believe all their others Tenets as well as the Pope; and be as ●ood a Child of the Reformation as Luther.  Ishmael. 
What Principle is this, which you seem to make the only distinctive sign of a Reformed, from a Papist.  Isaac. 
Listen a while: a Papist is not a Papist because he believes Purgatory, Transubstantiation, Indulgences, and the rest of Popish Tenets, but because he believes them upon the testimony of the Pope and Church, because they assure him they are revealed Truths: if a Papist did say, I believe these Tenets because I myself do judge by scripture that they are revealed; and not, because the Pope and Church say they are; he would be no Papist: The Papist believes the Mystery of the Trinity, the Incarnation and passion of Christ: the Protestant believes the same Mysteries; yet the one is a Papist and no Protestant; the other is a Protestant and no Papist. And why? because the Papist believes them upon the testimony of the Pope and Church, the Protestant believes them upon the testimony of God's Written Word: believe then whatever you please of Popery, provided you believe it, because you judge by Scripture its true, and not because the Pope or the Church says it; you'll never be a Papist but a perfect Reformed.  Ishmael. 
If this discourse be solid, you may hedge in all the Articles of Popery into our Reformation.  Isaac. 
If you peruse the works of our Reformed Drs you'll hardly find any Article of Popery, but has been judged by many, or some of our best Reformed Drs, to be the true Doctrine of scripture; and whereas any Doctrine which any Person of sound judgement understands by scripture to be true may be justly called the Doctrine of the Reformation; it follows that hardly is there any Article of Popery, for which we see so many persecutions againsts subjects, and such troubles in our Parliaments, but is truly the Doctrine of the Reformation.  Ishmael. 
Show me some examples of this.  Isaac. 
The Veneration of Relics and Saints dead bones, is generally believed by us to be mere Popery and superstition; therefore we made no store of Luther and calvin's bones, though we know them to be as great Saints as any in the Popish Church: but Veneration of Relics and Saints bones, is the Doctrine of our Reformation; for whatever is set down and commended by our Common Prayer book, must be undoubtedly esteemed our Reformed Doctrine and practice, and our common Prayer book printed since our King's happy restauration, in its Calendar sets down a day to the Translation of S. Edward king of Saxons Body in the month of June; and dedicats an other to the translation of the Bodies of S. Martin and Swithin, in the month of July.  
The Veneration and use of the Sign of the Cross, is flat Popery in the judgement of all our Congregations; yet any Reformed Child may laudably and piously use it; whereas our Common Prayer Book in the Administration of Baptism, commands the Minister to use it, saying, We sign him with the sign of the Cross, in token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed, to confess the faith of Christ crucified, and manfully to fight under his banner against Sin, the world and the Devil. And in our calendar printed since his Majesti's restauration, it's called the Holy Cross.  
Our Congregations generally believe, its Popery to keep Holy days (except the Sabbath day) and Saints days; to fast Lent, Vigils, commanded, Emberdays, and fridays; and all this is recommanded to us in our Common Prayer book, and the Minister is commanded, in the Administration of the Lords Supper, to publish the Holy days of the week, and exhort us to fast; and surely, he is not commanded to teach, or exhort us to any thing, but to the Doctrine of the Reformation: It's true the Students of our Colleges of Oxford and Cambridge, are much troubled with scruples in this point: these Pauperes de Lugduno, are compelled to fast all fridays throughout the year; and it's not hunger that makes them complain, but tenderness of Conscience, because they fear its Popery.  
It's a Popish error, we say, to believe that Penance, or our penal works of fasting, almsdeeds, or corporal austerities, can avail and help for the remission of our Sins, and satisfying God's Justice: No, we say, penal works, serve for noting; all is done by Repentance; that's to say, by sorrow of heart for having offended God. This is the Doctrine of Danaeus, Willet, Junius and Calvin, who says Francis, Dominick, Bernard, Antony, and the rest of Popish Monks and Friars, are in hell for their austerities and penal Works: for all that, you may very well believe, and its the Doctrine of the Reformation, that Penance and Penal Works, do avail for the remission of our sins, and are very profitable to the soul; for, our Common Prayer book in the Commination against sinners, says thus; In the Primitive Church, there was a godly Discipline, that at the beginning of Lent, such as were notorious Sinners, were put to open penance, and punished in this world, that their souls may be saved in the day of the Lord. And our Common Prayer book wishes, that this Discipline were restored again; and Surely, it does not wish that Popery were restored; therefore it's no Popery to say, that Penance or penal Works, do satisfy for our sins in this world, and avail to save us in the other.  Ishmael. 
I know, many of our Congregations, mislike much our Common Prayer book for these Popish Tenets; but what do you say of the grand errors of Popery, can a man be a true Child of the Reformation, and yet believe the Pope's Supremacy; deny the king's supremacy; believe Transubstantiation and Communion in one kind; are these Tenets, the Doctrine of the Reformation, or consistent with its Principles?  Isaac. 
The king's supremacy is undoubtedly the Doctrine of the Reformation; because it's judged by the Church of England to be of Scripture: yet not only the Quakers, Presbyterians, Anabaptists, and other Congregations, judge it's not of Scripture, but as erroneus a Tenet, as that of the Pope's supremacy; Calvin 6. Amos, says; They were unadvised people and blasphemers, who raised king Henry the VIII. so far as to call him the head of the Church; but also that no Civil Magistrate can be the head of any particular Church, is the Doctrine of the Centuriators cent. sept. pag. 11. of Cartwright, Viretus, Kemnitius and many others; who doubts then but that in the Principles and Doctrine of the Reformation, you may deny the King's Supremacy, though the Church of England believes it. The Pope's Supremacy is the Doctrine of Popery; who doubts it? but it's also the Doctrine of the Reformation, for many of our Eminent Drs. have judged it to be the Doctrine of Scripture; as Whitgift, 
a In Defence. etc. pag. 373.70. and 395.  who citys Calvin, and Musculus for this opinion: but its needful we relate some of their express words, I do not deny says Luther, 
b In Respons t●edecem Propos.  but that the Bishop of Rome, is, has been, and aught to be the first of all; I believe, he is above all other Bishops, it's not lawful to deny his supremacy: Melancton 
c in Epist. ad Card. Belay Episo. Pariens.  says no less that the B. of Rome is above all the Church; that it is his Office to govern, to judge in controversies, to watch over the Priests, to keep all Nations in conformity and unity of Doctrine: Somaisius, 
d In Tract, Euchar. ad P. Sermondum  The Pope of Rome has been without controversy the first Metropolitan in Italy, and not only in Italy, nor only in the West, but in all the world, the other Metropolitans have been chief in their respective districts, but the pope of Rome has been Metropolitan and Primate, not only of some particular Diocese, but of all. Grotius 
e In ●not. supe● Nowm Testam. cap 10. Matth. & soepe alibi.  has expressly the same Doctrine and proves this supremacy belongs to the Pope de jure Divino. I pray consider if these Drs. be not men of sound judgement, and of eminent learning and credit in our Reformation, and if our Doctrine be Scripture as such men understand it, consider I say with what justice can this Doctrine be called Popery more than Reformed Doctrine.  
As for Transubstantiation, it contains two difficulties; first if the Body of Christ be really in the Sacrament; and this Real presence, the Lutherans defend to be the Doctrine of Scripture, as well as the Papists; why then should it be called Popish, more than Reformed Doctrine? the second is, if the substance of bread, be in the Sacrament together with Christ's Body: Lutherans say it is; Papists say it is not, but that there is a Transubstantiation, or change of the whole substance of bread, into the Body of Christ; but hear what Luther 
f To. 1. Edit. Ie●ae. l, de Capt. Babyl.  says of this that we call Popish Doctrine? I give all Persons liberty to believe in this point, what they please, without hazard of their salvation, either that the bread is in the Sacrament of the Altar, or that it is not. Would Luther have given this liberty, if Transubstantiation had not been the Doctrine of the Reformation as well as any other? 
Westph. defence 2. Orthod. ●it.  Calvin 
g Admonit. 2. ad  also and Beza 
h Lib. de Coena Domini.  affirm, that Luther's Doctrine of the coexistence of Christ's Body and the bread, is more absurd, than the Popish Doctrine of the existence of the Body alone; if therefore we be true Reform, and safely believe the Doctrine of Luther, which is the most absurd; much more will we be of the Reformation, by believing that of the Papists, which is less.  
Communion in One kind, is the Doctrine of the Reformation, no less than Communion in both: for besides that Luther says, 
i lib. de captain. Babyl. c. de Euchar.  They sin not against Christ, who use one kind only, seeing Christ has not commanded to use both; and again, 
k Epist ad Bohemos in declarat. Euch. & in serm● de Euch.  though it were an excellent thing to use both kinds in the Sacrament; and Christ has commanded nothing in this, as necessary, yet it were better to follow peace and Unity, than to contest about the kinds; but also Melancton; 
l in Concil. Theol. ad Mareh. Elect. de usu utriusque speciei pag. 141.  who in the opinion of Luther surpasses all the Fathers of the Church; expressly teaches the same Doctrine: and the Church of England Statut 1. Edward VI commands. That the Sacrament be commonly administered in both kinds, if necessity does not require otherwise; mark, he says but Commonly; and that for some necessity it may be receved in one; lastly th● sufficiency of one kind in the Sacrament, is plainly set down by our Reformed Church of France in her Ecclesiastical Discipline printed at Saumur, chap. 12. art. 7. The Minister must give the bread in the supper to them, who cannot drink the Cup, provided it be not for contempt. And the reason is, because there are many who cannot endure the taste of Wine: wherefore it often happens among them, that some persons, do take the bread alone: and truly if some of our Ministers in England, do not give better wine than they are accustomed, who very irreverently serve that holy Table with naughty trash, it's much to be feared, that our flock will also petition to be dispensed with in the Cup; because there are some of so delicate Palates, that they cannot endure the taste of bad Wine. Now, you may admire the injustice of the Papists in condemning our Reformed Doctrine and Doctors as Heretics, whereas those Tenets are believed by many of us, as well as by them; and the groundless severity of our Congregations in exclaiming against that Doctrine; it being the Doctrine of the Reformation, whereas so many eminent men of our own, judge it to be of Scripture.  Ishmael. 
Whereas I see people persecuted by the Church of England for these Tenets, I can hardly be persuaded they are the Doctrine of the Reformation: at our next meeting we will pursue this discourse; the Bell rings for morning Prayers; A Dieu.   

VII. DIALOGUE.  ISAAC. 
You come from Church, as I guess by the Common Prayer book I see in your hands, I pray let me see the Calendar of it; if it be à la mode nouvelle, which was made by the Church of England, since his Majesty's restauration.  Ishmael. 
Why? have you met any thing in it, which shocks you?  Isaac. 
Shock me? No Doctrine or practice of any Congregation, or man of sound judgement of our Church can shock me; you know, I plead for liberty to believe and practise as each one judges by scripture to be true and good. But I observe in your Calendar, you have a day consecrated to S. Ann in the month of of July; I would gladly know, what Ann is this, which the Church of England honours so much?  Ishmael. 
It's Ann, the Mother of the Virgin Mary.  Isaac. 
Is't possible? I thought it was Ann Bolen the mother of our Virgin Elizabeth: I am sure the Church of England, is more obliged to her, than to the other: but as you have put here the Mother of the Virgin Mary, why did not you put in also Elizabeth mother of the great Baptist; and the Angel Gabriel, as well as Michael?  Ishmael. 
I know not indeed.  Isaac. 
Nor do I know, if it be not, because that Elizabeth and Gabriel made the Popish Ave Maria, as Scripture relates; but can you tell, as the Church of England put in your Calendar, S. George, S. Andrew and S. David, Patrons of England, Scotland and Wales; why did not she put in S. Patrick Patron of Ireland?  Ishmael. 
I can't tell; what may be the reason, think you?  Isaac. 
I know not, if it be not that he forfeited his place for his Purgatory; for though the others were as deep in Popery as he,) if we believe the Papists;) but the Parliament passed an Act of Indemnity for England, Scotland and Wales after the kings return to his kingdoms; and thereby the sin of Popery was forgiven to their Patrons; and no act of Indemnity was passed for Jreland, whereby Patrick is still guilty; if it be not, that the Seven Champions of Christendom tell us S. Patrick was S. George his footman, and it was not thought good manners, to put him in the same rank with his Master.  Ishmael. 
For shame, if not for piety, forbear, I cannot endure to sully sacred things with profane Raillery's; the Calendar is a holy institution of the Church, and aught to be reverenced.  Isaac. 
And so is Episcopacy, surplices, Bells, Organs, and Corner Cap; yet I hope you will give Presbyterians, Anabaptists, Quakers, etc. leave to laugh at them: and be still as good Children of the Reformation as you: if you esteem them to be sacred and holy, reverence and honour them; I commend you for it; if others judge otherwise let them follow their humour; each one as he fancies, says the fellow kissing ●his Cow; this is the holy Liberty of the Reformation, Scripture as each one understands it.  Ishmael. 
Let us return to our last discourse; how is it possible, that those Tenets of Popery, should be the Doctrine of the Reformation, whereas we see the Church of England so severely persecut the Professors of them?  Isaac. 
Do you think a Doctrine is not of the Reformation, because it's denied by the Church of England? or because she persecutes the Professors of it? do not they persecute all non Conformists, as well as Popery? persecution is no proof of a Doctrine to be bad; it's but the effect of a blind zeal armed with power: for to know certainly if a Doctrine, be of the Reformation, you must try it by our test or Rule of faith, which is the Written Word of God; and whatever any man of sound judgement, of a sincere and humble heart judges to be contained in Scripture, or an indubitable consequence out of it; that man, may believe that Doctrine, let all others judge of it as they list; and by so believing will be a true Child of the Reformation; wherefore, since that the Church of France, that of England in Edward the VI time, Luther, Melancton, Grotius, and the other authors I quoted, do judge Transubstantiation, Pope's Supremacy, and Communion in one kind to be the Doctrine of Sctipture: we must call it the Doctrine of the Reformation; and if you judge as they did, you may believe that Doctrine, and be still of the Reformation, as well as they.  Ishmael. 
Can you show me any other Tenet of Popery, which you can call the Doctrine of the Reformation.  Isaac. 
Alas! you can hardly show me any Tenet of Popery, but what is its Doctrine; what Doctrine more Popish than that of Confession and Absolution from sins? yet it's as truly the Doctrine of the Reformation, as Figurative Presence: for not only 
a In Disput. Theol. pag. 301.  Lobechius, 
b in Conciliat loc. Scrip. loco. 191.  Altamerus, 
c In locis Commun. To. 1. de Potest. Eccl.  Sarcerius and 
d in Apol. Confess. Aug. art 13. & l.b. 1. Epist. pag. 234.  Melancton say, it's a Sacrament: but the Church of England in our Common Prayer book, declares that Priests have not only the power of declaring their sins to be forgiven to the Penitents, but also the power of forgiving them: and sets down the form of Absolution, which the Minister is to use; Our Lord jesus Christ, who left power to the Church, to absolve all sinners which truly repent, of his mercy forgive thee and thine offences; and I by his authority committed unto me, do Absolve thee from all they sins: the ministers of the Diocese of Lincoln in their Survey of the book of Common Prayers, checked this Doctrine as Popery, and petitioned to have it blotted out; but could not prevail; whereby we are given to understand, it's the Doctrine of the Reformation.  
It's Popery, we say, to call Extreme Unction, Confirmation, and Holy Order of Priesthood, Sacraments: and who can justly deny all this to be the Doctrine of the Reformation? for Calvin 
e In cap. 5. Epist. lac. v. 4.  says, I confess, the Disciples of Christ did use Extreme Unction as a Sacrament; I am not, says he, of the opinion of those, who judge it was only a medicine for corporal diseases: Calvin 
f lib. 4. I●st. c. 14. sect. 5.  also, and with him our Common Prayer book and all our Divins say, a Sacrament is nothing else, but a Visible sign of the invisible Grace we receive by it; and they say with 
g In modest. Examine.  Covel, 
h in Eccl▪ Polit. l. 5. sect. 66.  Hooker and others that this definition fits exactly Confirmation; wherefore the Ministers of the Diocese of Lincoln, checked the Common Prayer book, for giving the Definition of a Sacrament to Confirmation. 
i In locis Commun. tit. de Numero. Sacram!  Melancton, 
k in perpet. R●gim. pag. 109.  Bilson 
l In Eccl. Pol●t lib. 5. sect 77.  Hooker and 
m lib. 4. Inst. c. 29.  Calvin expressly teach, that the Order of Priesthood, is a Sacrament. And when men of so eminent judgement of our Reformation teach, this to be the Doctrine of Scripture, who doubts but that it is of the Reformation.  Ishmael. 
By this, you destroy the Doctrine of the Reformation, of two Sacraments only.  Isaac. 
Destroy it? God forbid: Because the Church of England says, there are but two Sacraments, I say its the Doctrine of the Reformation, there are but two: and because so many eminent men judge by Scripture there are more, I say its the Doctrine of the Reformation there are more, that's to say six, Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction and Holy Order: and every likely our Bishops and Ministers, for their Wyves sake, will not stick to grant that Matrimony also is a Sacrament.  Ishmael. 
But can you say, that Prayers to Saints and Jmages, Prayers for the dead, and Purgatory, are not mere Popery, and in no wise the Doctrine of the Reformation?  Isaac. 
Without doubt, those Tenets are Popery; but all the world knows, the Lutherans use Jmages in their Churches and pray before them; and the ●oly synod of Charenton has declared, as we said in our first Dialogue, that the Lutherans have nothing of Superstition or Idolatry in their manner of Divin Worship; this is also the Doctrine 
n Epit. Colloq. Montisbel.  of Jacobus Andreas, 
o In Centur. Exercit. Theol. pag. 270.  Brachmanus, 
p Exam. par. 4.  Kemnitius, Luther and Brentius quoted by Beza 
q in respons. ad acta Colloq Montisbelgar. par. 2. in Praefat.  and why should not a Doctrine judged by such eminent men to be of Scripture, be called the Doctrine of the Reformation? Prayers for the dead and Purgatory, is Popery confessedly; but alas, it is taught expressly by Urbanus, Regius 
r In locis common c. 18. & 19  Bucer, 
s ●n script. Angl. pag. 450.  Zuinglius, 
t To. 1. in Explan. Art. 90. & Art. 60.  Melancton, 
u in Apolog. Confess. Aug.  Luther, 
x To. 1● Wittem. in resol. de Indul. concl. 15.  the Common Prayer book in king Edward's time printed 1549. and many others of our learned Drs, and what can you call more properly the Doctrine of the Reformation, than what such men teach to be the Doctrine of scripture: And though our Brethren, Quakers, Anabaptists, Presbyterians and Protestants judge Prayers to Angels and Saints to be nothing else but Popery: yet our Common Prayer book has the same Collect or Prayer to Angels in S. Michael's day, that the Popish Mass Book has, and desires that the Angels may succour and defend us on earth: and prayers to, and intercession of Saints is taught by Luther, 
y Epist ad Spalat.  Bilneus and Latimer quoted by Fox 
z Acts. and Mon. pag. 46●. & 1312.  and consequently its the Doctrine of the Reformation.  Ishmael. 
If all these Popish Articles, may be safely believed by the Reformation, and be the Doctrine of our Reformed Church, as well as of Popery; what difference then betwixt us and Popery: or why are we called a Reformation of Popery, or why did we separat from them?  Isaac 
I have told you already, that our difference from Popery, is not, because we must deny what they believe, for we believe as well as they the Unity and Trinity of God, the Jncarnation of his son, etc. but in this, that the Papists believe because the Pope and Church says this is true revealed Doctrine: but we believe not because any Church, Pope or Doctor says so, but because we ourselves judge by scripture it is so: for if a Papist did say, I do not believe this is a revealed Truth, because the Pope and Church says it is, but because I find by scripture it is; he would be no Papist: believe then whatever Doctrine you will, either Popery, judaism, Protestancy, Arianism or what else you please, provided you judge by scripture it is true, and that you believe it, not because this or that Church, Congregation, or Drs believe it, but because yourself judges it to be true; you'll be a true Child of the Reformation: And this is the reason why we are called a Reformation, and why we separated from them, because they would have us take for our Rule of faith Scripture as interpreted by them; and believe, not what we judge to be the Doctrine of Scripture, but what they judge; and this is also the Reason why Ptesbyterians are jealous with the Church of England; why Anabaptists forsake Presbyterians, why these are forsaken by Quakers, because each one would have the world judge as they do, and persecute and trouble one another, which is quite against the Spirit of the Reformation, for where as our Rule of faith is no Church, Congregation or man, but Scripture as each one understands it; it follows that by our Principles, every one must be permitted to believe whatever he pleases; and by so doing, he will be a true Child of the Reformation.  Ishmael. 
The Church of England nor any of our Congregations, will never believe any of those Popish Tenets.  Isaac. 
The time may come, that they may believe them all, and be still as good Reformeds' as now they are: for if the Pope and his Church should to morrow deny and excommunicate those Tenets, which now they so steadfastly believe (and I hope they will some day) than it would be a pious and virtuous action in all Reformed Children, to believe them all, as much as now they deny them: and let us pretend what other reason: we please: but it's very certain that the strongest reason we can have to deny those Articles, is because the Pope and his Church believes them, and consequently, if the Popish Church, would but deny them, we might and ought to believe them: you will think this a Paradox; but listen to our Apostolical and Divin Luther: 
a To. 2. Germ▪ fol. 214.  If a general Council, says he, did permit Priests to marry; it would be a singular mark of piety and sign of Godliness in that case to take Concubines, rather than to marry in conformity to the Decree of the Council, I would in that case command Priests not to marry under pain of damnation. And again says he; 
b de formula ●issa & To. 3. Germ.  if the Council should decree Communion in both kinds; in contempt of the Council, I would take one only kind or none. See these words of Luther quoted by our learned Hospinian 
c in hiftor. Sacram. par. 2. fol. 13.  and Jewel 
d In replica count. Hardingum.  and see it's not only my Doctrine but of great Luther, that in case the Pope and Council deny all the Tenets, they now believe; we may, and it will be a pious godly action to believe them, and make as many Acts of Parliament for them, as now we have against them. But what's the matter? me thinks you become pale some thing troubles you, speak, what ist?  Ishmael. 
It's the horror I conceive against your discourse, my countenance cannot be in a calm, when my mind is in such a storm and confusion; pursue no more: you said enough, that I should curse the day I have ever seen you, or heard that, which you call Holy Liberty, which is but a prostitution of Consciences, a profanation of all that is sacred, and an open gap to all impiety in Doctrine and manners: but I hope the Lord has given me that profound respect and attach to our holy Reformation, that I shall not be beat from it by all your engines, able to inspire a contempt and hatred of it to any weak Brother: for who would live a moment in it: if such impious Tenets, such sandalous and blasphemous Doctrines were of it, or were unavoidable sequeles out of its principles: No, No, the Principles of the Reformed Church, are sound and Orthodox, and no Doctrine can follow from them, but what's pure and true.  Isaac. 
Let me tell you, I have as tender a love for the Reformation, as you: and I will maintain the holy Liberty I assert, cannot justly be called a prostitution of Consciences; for, you dare not deny but this is an Orthodox and sound Principle, that our Rule of faith is Scripture as ●ach Person of sound judgement understands it; that it is lawful for each person of sound judgement to read it, to give his judgement of the true sense of it, and to believe and hold that sense of it, which he thinks in his Conscience to be true; is there any prostitution of Consciences in this Doctrine? or is it not the Doctrine of our Reformation?  Ishmael. 
All this in true, the prostitution of consciences leys not there; but in the scandalous and blasphemous Tenets, which you pretend that follow out of that Rule of faith.  Isaac. 
But you wrong the Reformation in calling such Tenets blasphemies and scandals: for since our Rule of faith is Scripture as each Person of soud judgement understands it; if this Rule of faith be good and sound; if it be religious and holy; any Doctrine that is conformable to this Rule, must be good, sound, religious and holy; this being our Rule of faith and manners, it's clearer than day light, that all and each Tenet which I rehearsed in all my former discourses, are consormable to our Rule of faith; for our Rule is, Scripture as each man of sound judgement understands it. our Doctrine therefore must be, what any Person of sound judgement understands to be the Doctrine of Scripture. This is an evident sequel out of that Principle, and whereas there is not one Tenet of all those which I rehearsed, whether they concern Doctrine or Manners; but was judged by the Doctors, which I cited for it, to be the Doctrine of Scripture; it follows unavoiably, that there is not one Tenet of them, but is the Doctrine of the Reformation: therefore you must be forced to either of these two; either to say that our Rule of faith, by which such Doctrines are warranted, is naught, wicked and scandalous, and leads to a prostitution of consciences and Manners; or that all those Tenets, are good, sound, pious, and no prostitution or corruption of our consciences: for, pick and choose out the Doctrine which you think to be the most wicked and scandalous of all those I rehearsed; you cannot deny, but that it was taught by the author I quoted for it, and judged by him, to be the Doctrine of Scripture: and if no Doctor hitherto had believed it, you or I, or some other person of sound judgement, may judge it to be the Doctrine of Scripture: either of both then, you must be constrained to grant: or that the Doctrine of the Reformation, is not what each Person of sound judgement understands to be the Doctrine and sense of Scripture, which is as much as to say, that our Rule of faith must not be Scripture as we understand it, but that we must believe against our own judgement and conscience, what others say is the Doctrine and sense of Scripture: or you must grant that all and each of those Tenets I rehearsed, is the Doctrine of the Reformation, though you, or this, or that man may judge them to be blasphemies and scandals  Ishmael. 
I confess our Rule of faith in the Reformation is Scripture as each Person understands it; for all our Reformed Churches, with the Church of England inhere 39 Articles do give us this Rule of faith: I confess consequently out of this Principle, that we must not believe what Doctrine or sense of Scripture others judge to be true and orthodox, if we do not ourselves judge it to be such, for we must not be forced to believe against our judgements: lastly I confess we may safely believe, whatsoever Doctrine we seriously judge to be Doctrine of Scripture, but provided, that such a Tenet or Doctrine be not plainly against Scripture, and be not plain and downright impiety and blasphemy.  Isaac. 
And in case you, or the Church of England, Rome, France, or Germany judges a Doctrine to be blasphemous and against Scripture, and Luther, or Calvin or I, or an other, judges it is good Doctrine and conformable to Scripture; to which judgement must I stand? must I believe yours against my Conscience and knowledge▪ or must not I believe my own? is it not the Principle and practice of our Reformation, that I must believe what I judge in my conscience to be Scripture, and not what others judge, if they judge the contrary? when Luther began the Reformation, did not almost all Christians, and the whole Church believe Purgatory and Prayers to saints to be the Doctrine of Scripture; and did not he, very commendably, deny it against them all, because he judged by Scripture it was not? will a Presbyterian believe Episcopacy because the Church of England says its the Doctrine of Scripture; no, but deny it because himsef judges it is not.  Ishmael. 
It's true, each one may lawfully believe what himself judges to be the Doctrine of Scripture; provided he be a godly well intentioned man, humble and meek in Spirit; provided secondly, that what he understands to be the sense and Doctrine of Scripture, be not absurd and impious in the judgement of all the rest of the faithful: for, let a man be ever se learned and godly, if he gives an interpretation of Scripture, which is denied by all the Church, he must not be followed  Isaac. 
Your first Proviso is very good, and I hope you will meet no Doctor of all those I quoted for those Tenets, which you call blasphemies, who was not a learned, godly humble and well intentioned man, who will be so bold as to deny it of Luther, Calvin, Beza, Zuinglius, etc. Your second Proviso is not just, and in it you overthrow the whole Reformation, and our Rule of faith; for this being, as you granted, Scripture as each Person of sound judgement vndestands it; whatever interpretation or sense any man of sound judgement understands to be of Scripture, he may safely and piously believe it, though all the rest of the world should judge it to be impious and blasphemous; otherwise our Rule of faith, must not be Scripture as we understand it; but as it is understood by others: and whereas no Tenet, of all those I rehearsed, but was judged to be the sense and Doctrine of Scripture by some of those eminent Drs. I quoted; it follows, they might have safely believed them; and if you or I judge as they did, we may also believe as they did, and be still of the Reformation.  Ishmael. 
It's wicked and pernicious to say, any particular Person may believe his own private sense and interpretation of Scripture, if it be judged by all others to be naught; and therefore the Church of England, prudently and wisely, puts a stop and bridle to the extravagant and rambling imaginations of particular Persons; they must conform themselves, and believe but what the Church judges may be safely believed.  Isaac. 
Pray Sr., since when is it commendable to constrain men's judgements to believe, not what each one thinks best, but what the Church thinks may be safely believed? was this commendable in the beginning of our Reformation, when our blessed Reformers began to teach their private judgements against the Church then established? if it was; then the Church of Rome is to be commended, for persecuting and excommunicating our first Reformers; and if this was not, nor is not commendable in the Church of Rome; why is it commendable in the Church of England? this is a piece of Popery, whereof the Church of England is guilty, and for which all our Congregations are jealous of her: be it known to you, our other Congregations, Lutherans, Calvinists, Anabaptists, etc. are as truly and godly Children of the Reformation as the Church of England; and they will not submit to that Popish tyranny, nor suffer any curb to their judgements, but will have our Rule of faith to be but Scripture, and each one to understand, and believe it, as he thinks best in the Lord.  Ishmael. 
I confess, other Congregations will admit no such curb, nor bridle to their judgements, but follow Scripture as they understand it; but the Church of England has a reverend regard for the sense and interpretation of it given by the Primitive ages, Fathers and Councils; and that we prefer before the private interpretations of particular Persons.  Isaac. 
And just so said the Popish Church to Luther and our first blessed Reformers; and if that had been well d●n; we should have had, neither Protestancy, nor any other Reformation: but you confess at least, that the Rule of faith in all other Congregations, is but Scripture as each Person understands it, and each person may consequently believe his own sense of it, and deny the sense of any other if he does not like it: than you must confess, that in all other Congregations, except the Church of England, any Reformed Child may believe any sense and Doctrine, which any Person of sound judgement judges to be Scripture, if himself likes it, though all the rest of the world may think it naught; and whereas you cannot deny, but that all and each Dr. quoted by me for those Tenets, which you call blasphemies, were sound and able judgements; you must confess, that it is a necessary sequel out of their Rule of faith, that in all other Congregations they may piously and safely believe all those Tenets, and be still true Children of the Reformation.  Ishmael. 
I confess if they speak coherently and stand to their Principles, they may believe them safely; but as I hate those blasphemous Tenets, I abhor and detest also that Principle and Rule of faith of other Congregations, from which such Tenets are unavoidable sequels.  Isaac. 
Good Ishmael; you forget what you have hitherto all along avowed, and you are quite astray from the Doctrine of the Reformation: you have often granted me, that our Rule of faith is Scripture, not as this or that Congregation, Doctor, or Church, but as each Person of sound judgement understands it; and now you tell me you hate and detest that Rule, because that out of it, there follow strange and blasphemous Tenets? you say, the sense and interpretation of the primitive ages, Church and Fathers must be preferred before the interpretation of any private Person or Congregation; and what think you of our whole Reformation, and particularly of our 39 Articles of the Church of England, which allow no other Rule of faith but Scripture as each person of sound judgement understands it? what say you of Luther, Calvin, Beza, and the rest of our first Reformers, who preferred their own private sense and interpretation of Scripture, before that of the whole Church? what say you to the Presbyterians, who prefer their own sense and interpretation of the Bible, before that of the Church of England? what say you of all the Congregations of the Reformed Church, each one of which, holds its sense and Doctrine of Scripture, different from all the rest? I grant, there ought to be a respect for the judgement and interpretation of the Text, given by the Primitive Church and Fathers; but if a Doctor, or man of sound judgement, replenished with God's Spirit, reads Scripture with an humble heart, and pure intention, and judges by it, that Bygamy is lawful; that there is no Mystery of three Persons in one Divin Nature; that Christ despaired on the Cross, etc. though these Doctrines be quite against the judgement of Fathers, Church, and Councils, he may believe them, and be still a true Reformed Child, because he follows our Rule of faith; and if he must deny these Articles, because others decry them; then he must go against his own judgement and conscience, for to conform himself to them, and his Rule of faith must not be scripture as each man of sound judgement understands it; but as the primitive Ages, Church, and Councils understand it; and this is Popery.  Ishmael. 
Prithee friend Jsaac, let's give over: all that your discourse drives at, by what I can perceive, is either to beat me from the Reformation by showing me the absurdity of its Rule of faith; or oblige me to believe scandalous and blasphemous Tenets as necessary sequeles out of that Rule: I am à Child of the Reformation, and never will be otherwise.  Isaac. 
The Lord, who is the Searcher of hearts, knows, you misconstrue my intentions: how can you say I intent to beat you from the Reformation; do not I insist and persuade you to stick fast to its Rule of faith, and acknowledge no other but Scripture, as you understand it? how can you say, I oblige you to believe falls and scandalous Tenets? to the contrary, I advise you not to believe them, if you judge by scripture they are falls and scandalous: what my discourse drives at is, that you should not censure, blame, or call any Doctrine blasphemous, scandalous, falls, or heretical (Popery excepted) for, though you judge by Scripture it is not true; an other will judge it to be the true sense and Doctrine of the Text; and if he does, he may with a safe conscience believe it, and ought not to be blamed by you or any other for believing it; if you do not like that Doctrine, do not believe it; but let the other believe as he judges by Scripture he may, and let every tub stand on its own bottom.  Ishmael. 
Once more I beseech you give over; I will not discourse any more with you.  Isaac. 
Nay Dear Ishmael, I see you are troubled, and I will not leave you in that perplexity: be pleased to listen to three points I will propose unto you, and you'll not miss to find satisfaction in either of them.  Ishmael. 
Let's hear them.  Isaac. 
Will you believe Scripture, as it is interpreted, and in that sense which the Church, Councils, and Fathers propound unto you?  Ishmael. 
I will not be obliged to that; for I may judge by Scripture that sense and interpretation of it, to be falls and erroneous; and I will not be obliged to believe any thing against my judgement and conscience; that is Popery.  Isaac. 
That's well, in so much you follow the footsteps of Luther, Calvin, and our other fist Reformers, who would not believe what the Church believed in their time, nor regarded not, what the Papists alleged out of the Councils and Fathers against them; because they held themselves obliged to believe Scripture as they understood it, and not as it was understood by others: Will you then believe Scripture in that sense and interpretation which yourself judges to be true, though the Church, Councils, and all other Congregations, judge it to be falls and erroneous; and give the like liberty to all others?  Ishmael. 
That's dangerous; for it would follow, that any man might believe without check or blame, the greatest blasphemies imaginable, if he judges them to be the sense of the Text.  Isaac. 
Why then, since that the first does not please you, for fear of constraining your judgement Papist-like; and the second displeases you, for the scope it gives for to believe any thing, or nothing; your best way will be to lay Scripture aside, whereas Christ has forgot, or neglected to appoint us some assured means for to know, what sense of it he would have us believe.  Ishmael. 
And what Religion shall I profess, if I lay Scripture aside?  Isaac. 
The same which now you have by Scripture; that's to say, whatever you judge to be the true Worship of God: be sure to profess a reverence for Scripture, and seem to believe its the Word of God; lest you may scandalise weak Brethren; pretend always that your sentiments are grounded upon the Text; but betwixt you and God, believe whatever you think to be true, worship God, as you-judge he is to be worshipped, and that's the way to live in peace: do you think but that those Noble Spirits, which they call the Wits of England, have a good Religion? in public they speak reverently of the Bible, but we know what they have, and do declare in their private discourses, that it's but a Romance or mere fiction: Do you think but that there was a Religion in England before it saw Gregori's Emissaries, Austin and his Monks? what need therefore of a Bible for to have Religion? Were not the Swinfeldians a religious Congregation and of the Reformation to, yet they cared not for Scripture, but grounded their belief upon God's inspiration and inward speech to the heart?  Ishmael. 
If I were not well acquainted with you, and had not very convincing proofs, and signal testimonies of your piety, solid Religiosity, and Christianity, I would judge you by this last piece of your discourse, to be an impious Atheist or Pagan: and I wonder that so good a Christian, as I know you to be, should speak so irrevently of the Bible, and so much in commendation of Paganism as you do: There was indeed a Religion in England before they knew what Scripture was; but that Religion was Paganism, which Austin and his Companions happily banished from our Land.  Isaac. 
Happily? do you call an exchange of Paganism for Popery (introduced by Austin) a Happiness? is it not generally believed in our Reformation, and most strongly proved of late, by that incomparable Wit and Penman Doctor Stillingfleet, that Popery has as much of Idolatry, as Paganism: our land therefore had in Paganism, as good a Religion, as it received by Austin in Popery: does not this our noble Champion, and most of the Scribes of the Church of England teach, that Popery is a saving Religion, that we may be saved in the Church of Rome? if Popery (not withstanding it be Idolatry, as they say) be a saving Religion; how can they deny but that Paganism is also a saving Religion? what need had our Forefathers therefore to abandon Paganism? why was it not left in the land?  Ishmael. 
Whatever may be said of Popery, it cannot be denied, but that Christianity is better than Paganism: the expulsion therefore of Paganism by Austin was a Happiness, because by it Christianity was introduced, and established in our Kingdom.  Isaac. 
Alas Ishmael, if England had been as well informed of the merit of Paganism, when first Christianity was preached, it had never exchanged the one for the other.  Ishmael. 
What, not Paganism, which adored a Multitude of Gods, for Christianity which adores but one? Not Paganism, which adored jupiter, Saturn, Venus, etc. who were Devils and Evil Spirits, or wicked Men, who caused themselves to be adored, for Christianity, which adores the only true, immortal and eternal Deity?  Isaac. 
You speak with the vulgar sort; and believe as you have been instructed by your Ancestors: I confess, the Apostles, and Ancient Doctors of Christianity do teach, that the Gods of the Gentiles were Devils or Evil Spirits; I confess also, all the Christian World since the first preaching of the Gospel, was so persuaded, grounded upon Scripture, which in several places says, the Gods of the Gentiles were Deuds, grounded upon the Doctrine of the Apostles, and their Successors the Fathers of the Church, and the World being persuaded by the Apostles, by the Doctors, Fathers, and Preachers of Christianity, that the Gods which the Pagans adored were but Devils, which by sorceries, and marvellous works deceived mankind, and made themselves to be adored as Gods, all men were ashamed to adore but Devils, forsook Paganism, and embraced Christianity. And all was but a mere Policy of Popery, to cast so much dirt and calumny upon Paganism, and make its Gods but Devils, for to introduce and establish Christianity; Dr. Stillingfleet in his Charge of Idolatry against the Church of Rome, Pag. 40. and 41. says plainly, that the Pagans are charged with more than they were guilty of; page 7. says that jupiter adored by the Pagans, was so far from being an Arch-Devil, in the opinion of S. Paul, that he was the true God, blessed for ever more: that the Pagans adored but one suprem and Omnipotent God, which they called Jupiter, and which they did believe to be neither a Devil, nor a Man, but a true, and the first and chiefest of the Gods; and that the rest of the Gods, which they adored, they looked upon them, as upon Inferior Deyties, and gave them no other adoration, but such as the Papists give to their Saints.  
If therefore the Pagans adored the true God under the name of Jupiter, and the other Gods but as inferior Deyties, as the Papists do their Saints; was it not injustly done by the Ancient Fathers and Teachers of Christianity, to have imposed upon the World, and made us believe the Pagans adored but Devils and Evil Spirits? have not the Pagans Right and justice on their side, for to plead before our wise and religious Parliament, that Paganism may be restored, or at least tolerated, and jupiter, with the rest of the Gods, may be adored, as formerly they were; first because Paganism is no more Jdolatry than Popery, as Dr Stillinfleet, Mr Burnet and other Reformed Writers prove convincingly; secondly, because that Paganism having been banished out of our Land upon the falls information of our first Teachers, that it was an Adoration of Devils, or Evil Spirits, and wicked debauched Men, who by counterfeited wonders, and cheat, gained the People's adoration; since that Dr Stillingfleet, Mr. Burnet, and other Reformed Writers will make it out, that the Pagans adored no Devils, but One, true Omnipotent, suprem God, blessed evermore, which they called jupiter, and the rest of the Gods as inferior Deities, as Papists do their Saints; and will prove that the Pagans were charged by the first DDrs of Christianity, and by all our Ancestors, with more than they were guilty of; why should not Paganism be restored again to the Land, and heard to speak for itsselfe, and Dr Stillingfleet and his zealous companions be lycenced to plead for them, and for holy jupiter, so foully misrepresented by Antiquity, as to be believed an Arch-Devil, whom Dr. Stillingfleet will prove to have been, a true God blessed for ever more.  Ishmael. 
The more I discourse with you, the more I am perplexed in mind; I bid you a Dieu, and do confess I carry with me from your discourse, a dislike of what I have been hitherto, an unsettlement in my persuasion, and a compassion of the poor Pagans, so unjustly banished from our Nation, if what Dr Stillingfleet says, be true: he is a learned, religious, and diligent searcher into Scripture; the Ancient DDrs and Fathers of the Church reading Scripture, judged and taught, that jupiter was a Devil, as well as the rest of the Gods which the Gentiles adored; Dr Stillingfleet and other Reformed DDrs reading Scripture judge he was no Devil, but the true God, blessed for ever more; any Child of the Reformation may believe either of both, and put Jupiter in our Litanies, as well as Jesus Christ, and offer Sacrifice to him as formerly our Ancestors did; for whatever any man of sound judment judges to be the Doctrine of Scripture, may be safely believed, and is the Doctrine of the Reformation: as for my part, I see our Wyse Parliament sits now upon a new settlement of Gouvernment and Religion, and I will not resolve upon any Religion, until I see what it concludes. If Dr Stillinfleet be so zealous, as to put in a good Word for Paganism before the Religious Assembly, he may find Abettors, and as the Parliament cherishes Dr Oats for the extirpation of Popery, so it may cherish Dr Stillingfleet for the introduction of Paganism, and the erecting of Temples and Altars for holy jupiter, his true and evermore blessed God; and if he be successful in this undertaking, as for exchanging Presbytery for Protestancy, he was promoted to the Deanery of S. Pole, so by changing Christianity for Paganism, he may expect to be his Holy Jupiter's heigh Priest, in London Capitol, and reign with him everlastingly in the other life, in case he believes there is an other.  
FINIS.