A DISCOURSE CONCERNING PURITANS. TENDING TO A VINDICATION of those who unjustly suffer by the mistake, abuse, and misapplication of that NAME.  
Vivere qui vultis sanctè, discedite Româ,  
Omnia cùm liceant, non licet esse bonum.  MANTUAN. 
You who would guiltless be, depart from hence,  
No guilt is here so black as Innocence.  
The second Edition, much enlarged, augmented and corrected by the author.  
LONDON, Printed for Robert Bostock, 1641.   

To the Puritan Reader.  
IF thou art such a one as dost confess thyself a Puritan (as the name is now unjustly used) thou wilt soon find in this short Tract, that my endeavour has been to do thee right, but not to humour thee; to take off unjust aspersions from thee, but not to insinuate by flattery into thee. An Ambidexter I would not be in two contrary factions, by seeking to please both; neither would I be a Neuter, if I could avoid it: but in things where I dissent, I will depart from both sides, rather than from that which I think the truth. I shall not use the word Puritan factiously, as if all Puritans were alike to be embraced: but cautiously, as if that difference and contrariety might happen amongst Puritans in England, as did once amongst the Disciples in our saviour's own school. Charity urges me not to censure any man in particular for an hypocrite, yet wisdom teaches me not to free all men in general from being hypocrites: such charity may well stand and agree together with such wisdom, and such wisdom with such charity; but if I do not at all scruple any man's integrity, this necessitates me not therefore to ascribe an infallibility: for if I can easily yield to hope and think well of all Puritans, yet it ought not to be expected that I should yield my consent to all Puritans in all things. I am free and open in declaring my opinion as well against the rigorous and necessary urging of presbyterial as episcopal Government in all places, and at all times; but I rely upon proof not mere fancy, and my proof being enervated by my clearer judgement, it will be a pleasure to me to retract. Variety of opinion and understanding (some say) has place amongst those glorious spirits in Heaven, amongst whom no other kind of discord can have place: and even the Apostles themselves though inspired by God, yet when they spoke not by inspiration, they were not desirous to lead captive the beliefs of other less-knowing men. Heat and acrimony amongst such as dissent in opinion has done more mischief in the Church of God, than any thing that I can imagine besides; and certainly 'tis not the mere love of truth, but some other sinister respect that works thus violently in the minds of men so naturally dim, as we all are. For why should I burn with indignation against another, because he is less understanding than I am? or why should I so far presume upon myself, if I think I am liable to error, as well as other men? can the mere love of knowledge make me abhor ignorance more in another then in myself? or make me arrogate more freedom from error to myself, then to other men? Sure, truth has more affinity with charity then so, and charity with humility. For my part, I do acknowledge myself not only subject to much ignorance, but to much scandalous offence too; my greatest enemy shall not charge me of more stains, than I will myself; I will confess myself the chief of sinners, and that not only in regard of sins past, as perhaps Saint Paul did, but also in regard of my present sinful condition; but certainly since sin and ignorance are such things as cleave radically to all men, and must be accounted sortis humanae; therefore to bear mutual reproofs, and to forbear all bitterness and censure, aught to be professed as virtues, and to be accounted Sortis Christianae. And since I my self notwithstanding all my other defects▪ do not glory in them, but confess them to my shame, and since I do not malign the graces of God in rigid Puritans, but rather rejoice thereat, I am persuaded, howsoever I appear to the eye of God, no man living aught to despise me, much less to expunge me out of the book of life. If God does not give me so much grace as he does thee, wilt thou say, He gives me not that which he accounts sufficient? and if I am not in this or that so unblameable as thou art, wilt thou say, my grace generally is not equal with thine? if thou exceedest me in all other virtues, and yet art by me exceeded in humility alone, wilt thou upon this proceed to censure me? Puritans have not made themselves more inexcusable by any thing then by condemning other men: for though they see not as God sees, yet they will often undertake to judge as God ought to judge: and in this they have not been greater enemies to themselves, then to the whole state of piety and Religion. It does not appear to the contrary, but that the Pharisee in the gospel, of whom our Saviour put his case, might be a good man, and his cause might be good to praise God for not leaving him to the scandalous excesses of some other men: but when he would undertake to judge particular men, more righteous perhaps in God's sight then himself, we know what judgement he received himself. And if it be not lawful to censure a Publican, much less will I censure a Pharisee, except alone in that particular wherein he is himself censorious, and wherein our Saviour Christ condemns him: that doctrine therefore which I shall recommend to all men both Pharisees and Publicans, is, to be Charitable, to be Humble: to be Charitable, because they are Christians, to be humble, because they are men. The Times have lately received a very great and wonderful change, almost equal to that of Edw. the 6. and yet still there is the same use of charity, as was before. Lukewarmness that odious and nauseous bane of Religion was hitherto decored and guilded over with the title of Moderation: but now we are in danger to suffer in the other extreme, for Moderation that blessed pacifical virtue is now likely to be as much debased, and defaced under the title of lukewarmness: Both ways Charity is violated, both ways Piety is opposed: and what difference is it to Satan, if he prevail, by which extreme he does prevail, whether he sinks us by a Tempest, or confound us by a calm? For a remedy of all mischiefs than let us embrace charity, and that charity may dwell amongst us, let us all learn to censure, despise, and abhor ourselves more, and other men less hereafter.   

A DISCOURSE CONCERNING PURITANS.  
ITis a common Maxim amongst Politicians, that a State is maintained by Accusations, but ruined by Calumnies: and therefore (Says marquess Malvezzi) Happy shall the Subjects be of that wise Prince, which countenances Accusations, and checks Calumnies: for the suffering of Accusations to go less in repute, and Calumnies to get footing, hath been the increase of manslaughter, and the continuance of enmity in all ages. Many believe that nothing which is done would be known, if this means of dispersing privy calumnious speeches were not used, whereas little is known because it is used: for falsehood constantly affirmed for truth, sometimes deceives, and when it does not, but is known to be falsehood, yet it forces to some suspension of judgement, and makes us yield some way even to that which we believe not. This is most apparent at this day in this kingdom in the Case of Puritans, for did accusation and legal process take place, few crimes would be proved against Puritans, and did not malicious calumny prevail, as few men would be proved Puritans, whereas now nothing is so monstrous, which is not branded upon Puritans, and no man is so innocent as to escape that brand. So great also is the audacity of those which lacerate the fames of Puritans, and with so much confidence do they vent their obloquies, that they which know the falsity thereof, and easily perceive that the same aspersions are more truly due to the authors and raisers of them, yet they are dazzled, and driven to some doubtful admittance thereof. Neither could this audacity be so prevalent amongst the vulgar, but that Scholars, and the greatest of the Clergy are now become the most injurious detesters and depravers of Puritans, having taken up in Pulpits and presses, almost as vile and scurrilous a licence of fiction and detraction, as is usual in Play houses, Taverns, and Bordelloes. Some men divide generally all Protestants into Puritans, and Antipuritans, but I shall admit of subdivisions in both, for all men are not alike, which either affect or disaffect, either Puritans or Antipuritans. Antipuritans I shall thus divide. Some Antipuritans are so termed, because they are no Puritans, but such I dislike not, for I myself am neither the one nor other, I neither merit the name of Puritan, neither do I hate them so as to profess myself an Antipuritan.  
Others are accounted Antipuritans, because they are of the Romish Religion, and so profess themselves, but their enmity is but a due antipathy, and as a necessary consequence of their Religion, and such I take no notice of, I think Puritans expect no other from them. Others again there are which are very averse from some puritanical Tenets, and hold Puritans in very many things erroneous, but yet they mean well themselves, and bear no hatred to the persons of Puritans, they allow Puritans sound in the most and weightiest matters of faith, they hold dissent in disputable things no ground of malice, and they attribute no infallibility to themselves in those things wherein they dissent: from these men I am but little removed. The worst sort of Antipuritans, and they which ought only to be so called, are they which bitterly hate and persecute many good men under the name of Puritans, and many goods things in those which are Puritans, whose antipathy is to men's persons, as well as opinions, & in opinions those which are sound, as well as those which are erroneous. These are the Antipuritans which I shall now strive to detect, whom I now hold to be of great number and power in the State at this day, whom we may account the chiefest causers, and procurers of all those mischiefs and plagues which now encumber both Church and Commonwealth, and to be guilty of all those crimes, which falsely they charge upon Puritans, being therein like Caesar's enemies which therefore only hated him, because they had deserved hatred from him. By such Antipuritans is all love to goodness and zeal to the Protestant Religion, and all hatred of vice, and dislike of Popish Superstition, brought into contempt. For as they admit all true of Puritans which Papists object against Protestants, so they account all Protestants almost (besides their own faction) Puritans. By such is the Religion of the Scots made ridiculous; by such is the amity of the two Nations, and therein the Honour and safety of the King, his Crown, and Progeny endangered. By such is Calvin, & the Reformers of our Religion for harkening therein to Calvin, traduced, and another reformation attempted; by such is Antiquity preferred to obscure Scripture, Uniformity in Ceremonies to the disadvantage of unity in hearts; by such is the outside and walls of Religion trimmed and decored, whilst the soul thereof is neglected and defaced; by such is the King's heart stolen from his Subjects, and the Subjects estranged from the King: by such is the Name of Royalty pretended whilst a papal Hierarchy only is intended; by such is dissension nourished in the State, that they may fish in troubled waters: by such is truth in other men styled faction, and faction in themselves styled truth; by such are innovations preached and printed for necessary points, whilst necessary doctrines in other men are prohibited. In the power of such it now remains to teach and publish all things consonant to their own ends, and to quash and silence all gainsayers, and either to promote or detrude all suitors for preferment at their discretion being absolutely possessed of Presses, Pulpits, and the ears of great men; by such are many good men reviled and oppressed for their constancy to the true Religion, whilst many factious, semipopish Dunces are unduly preferred everywhere for neutrality in Religion, or some worse innovation; by such are Puritans made as Sinks and Sewers to unload and discharge their own filth into, whilst their black railing tongues expume nothing against Puritans, but what is true of themselves. These things (if I am not deceived) will appear in this ensuing discourse.  
In all ages true Religion hath been odious amongst Heathens, and true devotion amongst Sensualists, Judaism appeared to names mere Superstition: Christianity seemed to the Jews gross blasphemy: and now amongst Christians Protestantism is nothing else but heresy: and amongst Protestants Zeal is misnamed Puritanism; But in this word Puritanism is a greater mystery of defamation then ever was before, it may well be called {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, it is a word of depravation, fit only for these times, wherein the shine of the Gospel is at the brightest, and the malice of Satan at the highest. This word sprung up almost with the Reformation, no sooner had the woman brought forth, but the Serpent pursued her to devour her issue, and she being fled into the wilderness, this stream of infamy was spewed forth after her to overtake her.  
The Bishop of Downe in Ireland, in his Visitation speech 1638. endeavours to make it credited, that Puritans have increased since the Reformation by degrees, both in number and malice: but the contrary is most apparently true.  
Dissent in ecclesiastical policy about Ceremonies and other smaller matters, being not of the substance of Religion, first gave occasion to raise this reproachful word Puritan in the Church: but since that time men's minds being better satisfied, and peace being more firmly settled about those indifferent things, the more few Puritans remained, and the more moderately those few became inclined, the more furiously their enemies raged against them, Bastwick, Prin, and Burton, the only men which Law can take hold of, are Names now as horrid in the world, as Garnet, Faux, Ravilliack. Precisians have now won the Scene from Jesuites: poisoning of Emperors, massacring of Provinces, blowing up of Parliaments are all now grown into oblivion, and drowned in the stories of Ceremony-haters. Howsoever as amongst Antipuritans, so amongst Puritans (it must be confessed) there, are some differences to be observed. Some Puritans think all Puritans alike to be loved, and all Antipuritans alike to be hated, but sure there is truer affinity in mind between some which are Puritans, and some which are not, then between some Puritans and others, or some of the contrary opinion and others. Paul unconverted equally opposes Peter as Simon Magus does, and in regard of this joint opposition, both are unanimous, but even in this opposition both have their opposite ends. Magus opposes maliciously for ambition and lucre's sake, but Paul ignorantly seeking thereby the same God's Honour whom Peter serves in a truer way. Therefore in regard of the main end, there is more unity and consent betwixt Paul the persecuter, and Peter the persecuted, then betwixt Paul and Magus, though both persecutors of the same cause. The like is now visible in England, for every man which is an Antipuritan is not so for the same Reasons, some have more of malice, others are more ignorant, some are pestilent Engineers, and through the sides of Puritans knowingly stab at purity itself, others are but Engines misemployed, or by their own blind zeal misled, and these perhaps whilst they persecute God's children, imagine they do God a grateful service therein.  
In Samaria, from an unkindly mixture of Israelites and Syrians, a strange heterogeneous offspring different in Religion from both did arise; and the like is now in England, nay, it may be said here (as it was in Constantine's days) There are almost as many Religions as Opinions, and as many Opinions as Men. Papists have their differences, Protestants theirs, therefore needs must there be many more differences where Papists and Protestants live so confusedly blended together. For example's sake, how many differences have we even about indifferent Ceremonies; and that merely amongst Protestants? Some men loath Ceremonies out of Antipathy to Popery, which too superstitiously extols them; others again admire them for Antiquities sake, which before Popery innocently (yea, and perhaps profitably for those infant times of the Gospel) used them. These two sorts of men, though different are not dangerous. Again, some men are thought to disrelish Ceremonies out of stomach to that authority which commands them; but if there be any such, I think they are very few, and scarce visible to the eye of man. Others on the contrary give reverence to them for Poperies sake, which depends so much upon them; and I fear there are many such amongst us. Again, some men stand devoted to Ceremonies, as they are the lightest things of the Law: like the Tythers of Mint and anise in the Gospel, embracing them instead of weightier matters, and none are more unmerciful than these to scrupulous minded men. Others in the mean while account all things of the same moment, both great and small, pretending to spy some faults, and some truths on either side, and therefore they hold it indifferent to assent to either, or dissent from either in any point whatever. But the wisest sort conceive there may be errors on both sides, but not alike gross and pernicious, and therefore such eschew the wrong, and apply themselves to the right in either side, yet neither honour, nor despise either side alike. And these instances show that all men do not profess, or condemn Puritanism alike, or from the same ends, and yet in the Chaos of this country, as things now stand. 
Frigida cum calidis pugnant, humentia siccis.  
Mollia cum duris, sine pondere habentia ●ondus.   
I could wish therefore that all well meaning men would take notice of these things, and affect by reason, not passion; for since some good men are Puritans, and not all, and since some ill men are Puritans, and not all, this ought not to be a rule of love and hatred in all cases alike. That which is most objected to Puritans, is fury, faction, and hypocrisy: if I see these in a man reputed no Puritan, yet to me He is a Puritan: and if I see not these in a man reputed a Puritan, as to me He is no Puritan.  
If Gracchus be invective against Sedition, I censure him by his actions, not by his words, and if Cato be accused of mutiny, I censure him by himself, not by his accusers, I condemn none merely because condemned by others; for it is usual for the wolf to sit on the Bench and condemn the lamb at Bar, for that which is most proper to the wolf most unnatural to the lamb, and yet this proves the wolf the more a wolf, and the lamb the more a lamb. I cannot but profess it, there is nothing more scandalises me at this time, then to see Puritans being so few in number, so despicable in condition, so harmless in example, so blameless in opinion, yet sentenced and condemned in judgement, as if they were the greatest Incendaries, and the only Innovators in the Christian World. Doctor Heylin a violent pamphleter against Puritans, calls Burton the great Dictator of Puritans, and the Law hath past upon him with great severity, yet Burton's crime was that He wrote against Altar-worship, and it was adjudged that his style was seditious. It is not manifest that his intention was seditious therein, and if it was so, it is manifest that He was most vain and absurd therein as our State is now established, and as our King is generally revered, They which pretend great danger to the King likely to ensue out of such paper machinations as these, may have three mischievous ends therein. First, that they may be thought the only solicitous men of the King's safety. Secondly, that they may disparage the common people's loyalty. Thirdly, that they may crush their adverse puritanical party; but, it is thought, they which pretend most danger hereby to the King: do least believe themselves, and therefore they do spin that affection and division out of the sufferings of Burton, &c. which his attempts could never have effected.  
My Lord of Canterbury in all his invectives against Puritanism, ever made fury and turbulence the ground of all his hatred and enmity against it, and yet let the whole world judge if the earth ever brought forth any thing more furious and turbulent than himself. At the same time whilst he adjudges torture to that incendiary Burton, &c. for writing a Pamphlet against Altars, &c. He himself is busy in sowing the dragon's teeth (I may say the great red dragon's teeth) all over England Scotland, and Ireland, and putting all the three kingdoms into a posture of war, that like earthen vessels they may be dashed to pieces by conflicting one against the other. To whom can it be credible that Burton's quill should blow the flame of war amongst Nations so combined in spiritual, carnal and political consanguinity; under the protection of so peaceful a Prince, in such Halcyonean days of tranquillity, when even my Lord of Canterbury himself with all his ill accomplices at home, and Spanish, Italian, French confederates abroad, ought for ever to be admired for his prevalence in that vast stupendious disservice? Howsoever, as the times lately were, we beheld sedition grievously upbraided, and punished in Burton by my Lord of Canterbury, and that old verse applied as a proverb: 
Quis tulerit gracchoes de seditione loquentes?  But it's no wonder that Burton should be an incendiary in that mouth, wherein Calvin was a knave, Good God, could he think the Reformed Religion any thing else but knavery, when he calls God's most sanctified and best inspired instrument of Reformation Knave? Because God doth not now work by miracles, as he did in the first plantation of the Gospel; are not therefore his works as sacred, and his instruments as venerable? And since the Redemption, what work hath God ever performed more noble, and for ever to be exalted then the Reformation? for what was that work, but a reviving of lost salvation, and a new restauration of the buried Gospel amongst us? and in that glorious work who was anointed by God for a more egregious charge than Calvin? Is it not therefore the same sin in kind if not in degree so to conspurcate and defile this blessed messenger of this blessed tidings with impure terms of obloquy, as it was to ascribe the work of our Saviour to Beelzebub? O the execrable gall of that breast, and venom of that tongue, which through the sides of Calvin did strive to defame the most gracious services of Calvin, nay that most pure and fiery Spirit of God himself, which enabled Calvin for those services! Needs must he hate and prosecute all Puritans whatsoever, and reject and disrelish all things whatsoever in Puritans, which is so maliciously bent against Calvin himself merely because Puritans have him in so high esteem, for that holy Spirits sake which rested so abundantly upon him.  
But let us a little further search into the mysterious abuse, and misapplication of this word Puritan. Those whom we ordinarily call Puritans are men of strict life, and precise opinions, which cannot be hated for any thing but their singularity in zeal and piety, and certainly the number of such men is too small, and their condition too low, and dejected: but they which are the Devils chief Artificers in abusing this word when they please, can so stretch and extend the same, that scarce any civil honest Protestant which is hearty and true to his Religion can avoid the aspersion of it, and when they list again, they can so shrink it into a narrow sense, that it sha●l seem to be aimed at none but monstrous abominable heretics and miscreants. Thus by its latitude it strikes generally, by its contraction it pierces deeply, by its confused application it deceives invisibly. Small scruples entitle me to the name of Puritan, and then the name of Puritan entitles me further to all mischief whatsoever.  
The Scots rise up against episcopacy, it is questioned by some, whether they so rise up, for the good of Religion, or for the overthrow of wholesome Discipline.  
Answer is soon made, that episcopacy cannot be unpleasing to any but Puritans, there is no opinion can smell stronger of Puritanism, then that of a Church parity, and of Puritans what good can be expected? but the Scots also desire redress in other grievances, and here their intention is again questioned. Answer is as soon made again. That the Scots being declared open Puritans, they must needs be enemies to monarchical government, and that no redress can ever satisfy them, but such as shall debase royal dignity, and establish a popular rule among them. But some of the Scots in some actions do very much misdemeane themselves, and here it's thought by some, that this ought not to redound to the prejudice, or blame of the whole Nation: but straight the Antipuritan steps in again with answer to the former purpose, that the same faction which makes them all Puritans, makes them all mutineers, and that there is no trust to be given, nor favour showed to any whose very religion is disobedience. Other the like examples may be instanced in. Parliaments of late in England have been jealous of religion, this laudable zeal made them at first come into contempt as puritanical, and then the imputation of Puritanism made this laudable zeal contemptible; and so by degrees, as any thing else might be charged upon Puritans, as disobedience, and disaffection to Monarchy, so nothing could be charged but proceeding from Puritanism. Some scrupulous opinions make Say, Brooke, &c. Puritans, Puritanism infers them mutineers, mutiny makes all that they can do or say, all that they forbear to do, or say, it makes their very thoughts wicked and perverse. Thus we see what a confused imposture there is in this infamous term of Puritan: but we will yet further evidence by plain instance how broad the devil's net is in the vast application of this word, and how deep his pit is by its abominable sense, and the nature of its importance, that we may the better discover that net which entangles so many, and shun that pit which ingulphs so sure. Puritans (as I said before) were at first ecclesiastical only, so called because they did not like a pompous or ceremonious kind of discipline in the Church like unto the Romish: but now it is come about, that by a new enlargement of the name, the world is full of nothing else but Puritans, for besides the Puritan in Church policy, there are now added Puritans in Religion, Puritans in State, and Puritans in morality. By this means whole kingdoms are familiarly upbraided with this sin of Puritanism: As for example, All in Scotland which wish well to the Covenant, though some Papists, some Courtiers, and almost all the whole body without exception have now declared themselves for it, yet all these are manifest Puritans. So also in England, all the Commons in Parliament, and almost all the ancient impartial temporal Nobility, and all such as favour and relish the late proceedings of both the houses, which is the main body of the realm, Papists, Prelates and Courtiers excepted, nay, and its likely all Scotland, and more than half Ireland, all these are Puritans. They which deprave this great council of the kingdom, suggest to the King that the major part is gulled and dorde by the Puritan Party; but this is only because they are ashamed to speak it out openly in gross terms, that all the major and better part in the Court of Parliament is puritanical. But this suggestion is utterly false and impossible, for such as the major part in Parliament is, such are those that chose them and sent them thither, and such are those that now approve their actions there, and both in the elections of Parliament men, and in the consultations of Parliament affairs, the King's party is as wise, cautious and vigilant (if not more) as the other party, and no subtlety could circumvent or cheat them out of their votes, if the Puritans were so small and inconsiderable a side, as now they make them. No man of what capacity soever can admit this; it is to all undeniable, that the blame of a Parliament, is the blame of a whole kingdom. But I return to my ecclesiastical Puritan. Though it be true that ecclesiastical Puritans are fewer now, then heretofore they have been, yet it is as true that ecclesiastical Puritanism is made a larger thing by far than it was, being now spread abroad like a net to ensnare the more, as our many late additions and innovations testify, which have crept into the Church (as may be feared) for the vexation and molestation of such men, as were not disquieted with former ceremonies. It is generally suspected, that our Prelates have aimed at two things in the novelties which they have lately induced into the Church; first, the suppression of those which are enemies to their pride, avarice, and ambition, by them termed Puritans: secondly, their own further ease, promotion, and advantage. Both these ends seem to be levelled at in sanctifying the Altar, and unsanctifying the Lord's day, in advancing auricular confession, and corporal penances by external mortifications, and crying down lecturing, and preaching; for if we mark it, these new Doctrines do not only serve to terrify and scandalize tender consciences, and thereby to deprive, and silence many painful good Ministers, and to scare away into foreign Plantations whole troops of Laymen, and to inwrap the rest in opposition▪ but each of these doctrines besides hath a further reach in it of benefit to the clergy. The Communion Table hath lately gained a new Name, a new Nature, a new Posture, a new Worship that Emperors and Kings may be brought again to take notice how far the persons and offices of Priests excel in sanctity the persons and offices of Princes. Theodosius within one hundred years after prelacy began to arrogate to itself, was presently taught this lesson, for taking his seat in the chancel according to the Eastern and ancient fashion, a Deacon was sent to him in great state, to let him understand that none but men in holy Orders might presume to set their feet on that sacred ground. This was then the Bishop's Law, not the Emperors, nor known in any other of his Dominions, but Italy only; but sure it was fit discretion, that much should be ascribed by Bishops to that place, from which they were to derive much, and which would be sure to repay their homage with so great an advantage of homage back again. Preaching is now also grown too burdensome, and the Lord's Day to Priests according to that sanctity which Puritans allow it, it requires too much praying, preaching, singing, which are not only to them tedious, but also apt means to increase, and foment Puritanism amongst the people. Auricular Confession also is a godly device to bring the Laity into subjection, and to make the people bow before the power of the keys, and it may aptly force the consciences of Kings themselves to fear the scourges of gowned men. Add lastly Mr. Wat's his bodily mortification to Mr. Sparrows confession, and then Laymen will be soon enured again to find out the fittest penances, especially Praesbyteris, & aeris advolvi, and so in time their purses, their bodies, their consciences shall all be made sensible of the spiritual sceptre of Priests.  
It's no great wonder then if our Court Divines, and their dependants do what they can to draw us nearer daily towards Popery, under show of Antiquity, Uniformity and Charity, for (without all doubt) of all Religions, Popery is the most beneficial to Priests, most tyrannous to Laymen. Neither is it strange that they pretend so much zeal and devotion to the King's crown and Prerogative, as things now stand in England, as if none truly affected the same but themselves, for its clear, that they cannot subject the people but by the King, nor the King without the people: and so long as they stand possessed of the King's good opinion, no man shall have power to confute them.  
King James is a great instance for Antipuritans, and a great prop to the episcopal Cause, it's alleged of him that he hated Puritans for their hatred to episcopacy, and loved episcopacy for its amity to monarchy: His aphorism was, No Bishop, no King: Let us therefore appeal from King James in their words to King James in his own. In his Preface before his Basilicon Doron his words are: The style of Puritans properly belongs to that vile Sect of the Anabaptiss, only called the Family of love, Such were Brown, Penry, Howbeit there are others which participate too much with Anabaptists contemning civil Magistrates, &c. It is only this sort of men which I wish my son to punish in case they refuse to obey Law, and cease not to stir up Rebellion. But I protest upon mine Honour, I mean it not generally of all Preachers or others, which like better of the single form of policy in our Church of Scotland, then of the many Ceremonies in the Church of England, which are persuaded that Bishops smell of a papal supremacy, that Surplices, Caps, &c. are outward badges of popish error. No, I am so far from being contentious in these indifferent things, that I do equally love and honour the learned and grave of either opinion, It can no ways become me to pronounce sentence so lightly in so old a controversy. Since we all agree in grounds, the bitterness of men in such questions doth but trouble the peace of the Church, and give advantage to Papists by our division. These were the golden words of that peaceful, just Prince upon his second thoughts: o that they were now duly pondered, and taken to pieces word for word! O that they were esteemed, and understood in their own weight amongst us, that they might reconcile our present differences, and that the same peace which followed him to his glorious urn, might still bless these our times! ò how contrary are these mild words to the unnatural suggestions of Antipuritans! Such as daily accuse all good men for Precisians, and all precise men for Puritans, and all Puritans for the only Firebrands of the World, thus aiming the King against his Subjects, and by consequence raising Subjects against the King; Puritans here are described both what they are, and what they are not, the King had been misinterpreted before, writing generally of Puritans, now to avoid all mistake, he expresses himself plainly and definitely. A Puritan positively in King James his sense, is He which imitates Anabaptists in rebellion, turbulence and opposition to Law, and such are liable to Law; but negatively a Puritan in the acception of King James, is not He which dislikes episcopacy, or the Ceremonious Discipline of England. This King James protests upon his honour, though to his great dishonour He be now often cited to the contrary. As for those which relish not Bishops and Ceremonies or the English policy, Wishes them to be at peace only with those of the opposite opinion, he himself vowing equal love and honour to the grave, and learned of either side, and not taking upon him to be a Judge in so old and difficult a controversy; He only like a sweet arbitrator persuades both parties to peace and amity. I wish our Bishops would now stand to this arbitration, I wish they would neither condemn the Scots discipline, nor urge the English; I wish they would put difference between seditious and scrupulous Puritans, and not infer the one out of the other; I wish they would either disclaim King James as a manifest favourer of Puritans, or else imitate him in the same definition, and opinion of them. King James further takes notice, that the reformation in Scotland was far more disorderly, then in England, Denmark &c. whilst the main affairs there were unduly carried by popular tumults, and by some fiery-spirited Ministers, which having gotten the guiding of the multitude, and finding the relish of government sweet, did fancy to themselves a democratic form of policy, wherein they were likely to be Tribuni plebis. That the Crown might be disincombred of these usurping ringleaders, the King advises the Prince to entertain and advance godly, learned, and modest Ministers, promoting them to bishoprics, but restraining them heedfully from pride, ambition, and avarice. These things than are hence observable. First, Scotland differs from England in turbulent Ministers: Secondly, this is imputed to the iniquity of the times, not to Puritanism, as if by nature the Scots were more inclining to Puritanism then other Nations. Thirdly, notwithstanding that iniquity of those times, there was a number sufficient of worthy Ministers fit for preferment. Fourthly, King James erects Bishops Sees in Scotland for peculiar reasons, and therefore He speaks not of Denmark, &c. Lastly, notwithstanding that peculiar reason, He advises the Prince to be indifferently at war with both extremes alike, as well to repress papal Bishops, as to curb proud Puritans. For (Says the King) the natural sicknesses which have ever troubled and been the decay of all Churches since the beginning changing the candlestick from one to another, have been pride, ambition, and avarice: and these wrought the overthrow of the Romish Church in divers countries. King James knew well how apt Churchmen had ever been to abuse their power and pomp, what enemies the High-Priests had been to our Saviour, and what a tyranny Bishops had erected over all Christendom ever since Constantine almost, and therefore though he dislikes a democracy in the Church, (as he had reason) yet he so limits and circumscribes his Bishops both in power and honour, that they might be as sensible of their chains and fetters, as of their mitres and Crosiers. I wish King James had particularly signified what bonds and bounds he thought fit to prefix to episcopacy, to preserve it from corruption, and what his opinion was of a prelacy so active in secular affairs as ours is now in England, and how it would have pleased him to see a Metropolitan amongst Protestants almost a rival to the French Cardinal. The world, in my opinion, hath little reason to dote upon a gowned Empire, we have all smarted long enough under it, men of mean birth commonly bear preferment with little moderation, and their breeding having been soft and effeminate, in their malice and cruelty they nearest of all approach to the nature of Women: and by the advantage of learning they extend their power, and win upon others more than they ought.  
When the Church was at first under Heathen, or Jewish governors, which sought as enemies to ruin it, not as Fathers to protect it, they which were within could not live in peace and unity without some political bonds, so at that time there was a necessity of some coercive power within, besides that which was without. The world is now unsatisfied what kind of power that was, whether episcopal or presbyterial, or what Episcopacy, or Presbytery was in those days. Yet methinks what government so ever then was, it is not necessarily precedentary to us now. The episcopal faction at this day takes advantage by the abuses of the presbyterial, and the presbyterial by the episcopal, and most men think either the one power or the other necessary, and some more favour the episcopal as K. James, some the presbyterial as M. Calvin; but sure the presbyterial is less offensive than the episcopal, and yet neither the one nor other of necessity. King's may grant usuram quandam jurisdictionis either to Bishops or Elders, but the jurisdiction itself is their own property, from which they ought not to depart, nor can without wrong to their charge committed to them. For the power which God gives the Prince, is not given for his use alone, but for the people's benefit, so that since He cannot let it fall to decay without making it insufficient for good and entire government which is mischievous to the people, he cannot justly lessen it at all. And it is manifest that except one supreme head be alone in all causes as well ecclesiastical as civil, human nature must needs be destitute of those remedies which are necessary for its conservation, since power cannot be divided, but it must be diminished to him which suffers that division, and being diminished it proves insufficient. All confess some government necessary for men in holy Orders, to whom the power of the keys belongs, but some account Princes but as mere temporal or Lay persons, and therefore conclude against their authority over sacred ecclesiastical persons as incompetent, especially in cases merely ecclesiastical. For this cause spiritual governors have ever been in the Church to whom some have attributed a divine right depending from none but God, and subordinate to none but God, but this hath been controverted by others, and no little debate and strife hath followed hereupon. But it seems to me, that Princes do receive from God a spiritual Unction, whereby not only their persons are dignified, and their hearts prepared and enlarged with divine graces fit for rule; but their functions also ennobled and sanctified above any other whatsoever, and higher advanced than the sense of laic or Secular will bear. To Princes an assistance of counsel is requisite in spiritual as in civil affairs, but that, that counsel ought to be composed only of persons ecclesiastical, or that those persons ought to be invested with all those ensigns of Honour and Authority which our Bishops now claim as of divine right, seems not necessary. Clergymen are not always the most knowing in all ecclesiastical cases, neither are they at all indifferent and impartial, in many which concern their own honour and profit, (as the world feels to his regret) therefore for jurisdiction they are not the most competent. But be they of what use soever, they may still remain subordinate, and at the Prince's election, and admitted of ad consilium solum, not ad consensum, and it had been happy for all Christians these many hundred years by past if they had not been further harkened to. The sacerdotal function is not at all disparaged by this subordination, for whether the order of Princes be more sacred than that of Bishops, or not, it is all one to Priests, for an obedience they owe, and must pay, be it to the one Order or the other. Our Bishops at this day stand much upon their Divine right of Jurisdiction, and they refer their style to the providence of God immediately, not to the grace of the King: and though in words they acknowledge a supremacy of power to remain to the King; yet indeed I think they mean rather a priority of order. Whatsoever supremacy they mean, if it be not such as makes them merely subordinate, and dependent, so that the King may limit, alter, or extinguish their jurisdiction, as far as He may to his civil Judges, they derogate much from his Kingly office.  
Bishops for their claim of Jurisdiction ought to prove that they alone did exercise it over all in all causes from our saviour's days, till the entrance of Christian Princes: and that being cleared, they must further prove, that those times also are leading, and precedentary to ours. In both these their proofs are lame, especially in the latter; for neither is the power of the keys the same thing as jurisdiction, nor is jurisdiction now as it was in the Apostles days, nor is the State of the times now the same as then.  
In those days either Christians were to implead one another before Infidel magistrates whatsoever the case were, criminal or civil, spiritual or temporal, or else they were to erect some tribunal in the Church, or else they were to await no justice at all: and because some judicature within the Church was most fit, therefore Christ himself according to the exigence of those times, did endow his Church with a divine Oeconomy, which was partly miraculous, and of use then but not now. The Spirit of God did then internally incite such and such men at such times to reside and preside in such & such places; and some of the Apostles at some times could judge by inspiration without proofs and allegations, and could execute sentence of death or other spiritual punishment upon secret hypocrites, not entrenching upon temporal authority, but in these times this discipline is useless, and therefore decayed. Whatsoever the offence than was, what injury or trespass soever betwixt brother and brother, the only remedy was Dic Ecclesiae, and yet that precept serves as strong for temporal as spiritual trespasses, so that it cannot be enforced now to continue, unless we mean to drown all temporal authority. As for the extent also of spiritual power in those days, I will only cite a learned Politician of the Popish religion: who admitting (it seemed) that the keys of heaven were given to Saint Peter alone, and his successors, and not to all Bishops and Ministers whatsoever thus proceeds. By the keys given to S. Peter many Holy Fathers mean, the one of knowledge, and the other of power, and that that power ought not to be understood universally, but only concerning the kingdom of Heaven which is spiritual: for the civil, royal, and temporal power is expressly forbidden him by Christ. Even so that also of knowledge, it is not to be understood of natural, politic, or moral things, but as Saint Paul saith, of Christ's mysteries only.  
Wherefore in matters of faith ecclesiastical authority may approve, and Secular cannot condemn, but in matters of policy what all the Prelates in the World approve, temporal authority may condemn. It is a great wrong to pretend, because Christ hath given Saint Peter the cognizance and power of the kingdom, and forbidden him the earthly, contrary to this precept, to extend spiritual things to temporal. Saint Augustine often saith, That Grace doth not destroy any thing in Nature, but leaveth her all her own; adding moreover divine perfection. The temperality hath of its own nature, power to forbid all things repugnant to public quietness and honesty; and Christ came not to take away this authority from Magistrates, He only adds power to his Ministers in matters of faith, not known by nature, but revelation. For aught we know, this power of opening or shutting Heaven, of binding and losing sins was miraculous, and so but Temporary: but admit it in this Catholic Writers sense, yet we plainly see, it is no prejudice at all to limit Secular Princes thereby. The same learned Papist writes: That the Eastern and Western Churches continued in unity and charity for the space of nine hundred years after Christ, and this peace was easily kept, because the Supreme power was then in the Canons, to which all Churches acknowledged themselves equally subject. Ecclesiastical Discipline was then severely maintained in each Country by its own Prelates, not arbitrarily, but absolutely according to canonical rigour, none of them intermeddling in another's government. No Pope of Rome did pretend to confer Benefices in other Bishop's dioceses, or to get money out of others by way of Dispensations and bulls: but when Rome began to shake off all subjection to Canons, then notwithstanding any ancient order of the Fathers, counsels, or Apostles themselves, in stead of her ancient Primacy she brought in an absolute Dominion, free from any Law or Canon, and this made the division. Neither could any reunion be brought to pass within these 700 years, because this abuse which caused the Division is not remedied. Whilst the union held, Saint Paul's doctrine was jointly observed, that Every one should be subject to Princes, no man pretended to be free from punishment. Nay, and after the division, the same opinion remained, that every Christian in temporal businesses is subject to the Prince. And nothing is more temporal than offence, because nothing is more contrary to the Spirit. Amongst the Greeks also it is still held that Bishops ought to judge what opinion is sound, what heretical, but to punish those of hurtful opinions belongeth to the Secular.  
The State of Venice, as well as other Catholic kingdoms, walks between two extremes, between Protestants, which have no other aim but to diminish ecclesiastical authority, and the Court of Rome which hath no other aim, but to increase it, and to make the temporal her servant.  
Those of the Court of Rome, making use of Religion for worldly ends and respects under a spiritual pretence, but with an ambitious end and desire of worldly wealth and honour would free themselves from obedience due to the Prince, and take away the love and reverence due by the people to draw it to themselves. To bring these things to pass, they have newly invented a doctrine that talks of nothing but ecclesiastical greatness, liberty, immunity, and jurisdiction.  
This doctrine was unheard of, till about the year 1300, than it began to be written scatteringly in some books, but till 1400, there were not written above two books which treated of nothing else; after this such Writers increased a little, but after 1560, there were scarce any books printed in Italy, but in diminution of Secular authority and exaltation of the ecclesiastical: And now the people have scarce any other books to read, nor have the Confessors any other doctrine, or need any other learning. Hence comes this perverse opinion, that Magistracy is a human invention, and to be obeyed for policy only, not for conscience: but that every intimation of ecclesiastical persons is equivolent to a divine precept; there want not in Italy, pious, learned men which hold the contrary, but they are not suffered to write, or print. Neither are foreign Books permitted, or ancient authors left ungelded of all which serves for temporal authority: as appears by a book printed 1607, called Index Expurgatorius: and Clement the Eighth in 1595, published a rule in his Index, that all Catholic Writers books since 1515, might be corrected not only by expunging but also by interlining, and this hath been practised though not publicly above seventy years. Thus we find the Court of Rome's, but not the author's meaning, and finally, we are sure to have no book true. I have hitherto cited this egregious Politician, for these purposes.  
First, That we may see how easy it is for clergymen to wrest all authority out of the Temporalties hands, if Princes will be so easy to be hoodwinked, and deluded by them, and to resign their judgements to them in such cases as concern their profit and advancement.  
Secondly, That we may take notice how far the learnedst of Papists themselves do discover, and detect the errors and tyranny of the Court of Rome, and that mystical way of deceiving, whereby all hope of remedy is cut off. I observe this also the rather because our Prelates in England at this day assume to themselves almost as vast and unquestionable a power of stifling and repressing all adverse disputes, and of authorising and publishing all arguments whatsoever favouring their cause, as the Court of Rome does.  
Thirdly, that I might produce the same Author against himself in those points wherein he taxes Protestants. We will yield that for the space of nine hundred years the See of Rome did not usurp over other Sees, but did acknowledge equal subjection to the Canons, and that the division and separation of the Eastern Churches happened when Rome arrogated above Canons; but withal we must have it yielded to us, that those Canons had been composed only by clergymen, and that in too much favour of clergymen, and too much abridgement of temporal Rights and privileges, and that they did concern matters more than merely spiritual, and speculative, and things known by mere revelation. So that though one Prelate did not usurp over another, yet all Prelates had usurped over the Laity from the times of Constantine almost.  
It is true, the Church had Bishops before in its times of persecution, but of what power or pomp? It is said of Calvin, that in regard of his sway in Geneva, he wanted nothing but the Name of Bishop; and it may be as truly said of the Bishops before Constantine, that they wanted all but the Name.  
The power of Bishops before the instalment of Christian Princes, was rather like that of Arbitrators then of Judges, and that held in all cases alike, civil and spiritual, but in case of disobedience they did not entrench so far upon the Lay power, as to inflict any pecuniary, or corporal punishment, but they did deny the Sacrament, and eject delinquents out of the Congregation, and this was then an abscission from Christ, being done cleave non errante: that is, whilst God did inspire (according to his promise) a miraculous power of binding and losing infallibly.  
The Priestly function was then an Office, not a jurisdiction, of sacred dignity, not power: but the Function of a Prince was ever sacred both for honour and power, for dignity and command. Constantine the Great was the first Prince which took upon him the care and protection of the Church, after that it had suffered contempt and poverty for 300 years: and now did even that authority and protection cease, and devolve into his hands, which the poor persecuted Bishops had but feebly managed before; but such was the extraordinary indulgence of this pious Emperor, as well to religious persons, as to Religion itself, that taking little notice what the Church had gained by him as its Head and governor, He heaped up greater Titles and honours upon Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, and Popes, as if some other supreme Ruler more sacred and competent than himself were necessary. Nevertheless it is thought, that this was as poison poured into the Church, and not balm, for from that very time clergymen began to be more glorious, but less gracious, more rich outwardly, but more poor, and vile inwardly. Within a little space after Constantine there was just cause of complaint that excessive Honours had corrupted the Church, and that Religion had prospered better in former times, when it had wooden Chalices and golden Priests, than now, when it had golden Chalices, but wooden Priests. It is remarkable also, that soon after Constantine the temporal power being too much restrained, and abased, and the spiritual as much enlarged and exalted, the whole face of Christendom began to be embroiled with wars, and poisoned with heresies, so that the Historians of those times have almost nothing else to write of but the forcible investing and divesting by arms of such Bishops and Patriarchs, and of the oppositions of such and such counsels and Synods, and of the Appeals, jars, schisms, Excommunications, and Commotions of such, and such Priests, and Monks. Nay, such were the ill effects of those ages, which were certainly more zealous than politic, that they cannot yet be wholly rectified, and purged in these our latter times, which are grown too too contrary, being more politic than zealous: Thus did the Church fare for 900. years till the Roman Bishops began to Empire above all, and then did the greatest part of the clergy themselves, especially East from Italy, make their departure and separation. Neither did the Romish vicegod after this great rent and division in the world hang his head for shame, or seek any reunion by letting fall his pompous, painted plumes, but audaciates himself rather to mount higher yet, and to detrude the Western Emperor quite out of the bounds of Italy. And in this, his industry fails him not, for after much bloodshed in many cruel conflicts he gains in Italy a temporal, and in all Europe besides a spiritual Monarchy, making a triple Mitre shine as gloriously upon the seven-hilled City, as the Diadem had done before. During his wars with the Emperor of Germany, He had other contestations also with England, and some other Potentates at sometimes, but all dismayed him not, only once He was heard to say, It was time for him to compound with the Dragon, that he might crush the lesser Adders at his pleasure. Yet after this even this Holy tyranny grows too insolent and insufferable, and so conspires its own dissolution, so that many Countries in the northwest parts lying more remote from Rome, quite revolt from her allegiance, and protest against her. Amongst those other Countries also less distant, which still in words confess her Supremacy, her reign is now but little more than precarious: Venice regards not bulls and anathemas, France disdains a younger brothers benediction, and Spain being honoured with the title of the Popes eldest Son, confesses him a Father but employs him as a Chaplain, gives verbal, but reaps real honours by him.  
Augustus having cashiered an unworthy Commander, gave him leave to say, that he had cashiered Augustus: and so the Pope's great sons shake off his yoke by degrees, but conceal it, and give him leave to do the like.  
It is now very good policy in the Pope, not to pretend to temporal things as they stand in ordine, or have relation to spiritual things, but rather to relinquish his right to spiritual things, as they stand in order to temporal: it is eminent wisdom in him to forbear threatening, roaring, cursing, and sending his ridiculous Epigrams, out of his own Territories: as he was wont to do: Nay, his very last refuge of sending forth his poisoning and stabbing Ministers cannot remain in season much longer. But to return to our learned Statesman: as he justly taxes the Court of Rome, so he unjustly taxes Protestants of the contrary extreme, and this will appear out of his own words. For He grants, first that the Secular Magistrates have nothing diminished of their authority by Christ's coming▪ and it is clear that Princes were absolute governors of the Church before Christ both in spiritual and temporal Cases.  
In the next place He yields, that the power and knowledge of clergymen, called the power of the keys, is no other but such as Christ infuses in mere supernatural things, known only by Faith and Revelation, not by any physical, or ethical Principles; but it is easily proved by us, that such power can extend to no proper jurisdiction at all in human affairs, but is a mere speculative Notion, and such we deny not.  
Thirdly, he yields that in Jurisdiction there be three things distinct.  
First, matter of Law.  
Secondly, matter of fact.  
Thirdly, matter of execution: whereby retribution is made to every fact according to Law. The first of these, and that in spiritual Cases alone being tryable by clergymen only. Admit this and nothing follows, but that things merely spiritual, are best known to spiritual persons, there is no power here concluded. As for example. In case of heresy, that I hold such an opinion, must appear by witnesses and proofs, and herein all kinds of witnesses besides clergymen are competent.  
Next, that this opinion is heretical, requires the judgement of ecclesiastical persons, but it does not follow, if they be the fittest Judges herein, that they must be the supreme Judges herein, and not as well Dependent and Subordinate as our civil Judges are in common actions. But in the last place, that such an heretical opinion, so dangerous and pestilent to the Church and commonwealth ought to be corrected or eradicated by such coercive force, and the raising of that force whereby it is to be punished, is in the judgement, and in the power of the Supreme Magistrate, for two Magistrates cannot have a Supreme power of the same sword. Either the Secular must command the ecclesiastical, or the ecclesiastical must command the Secular, as to coercive power, or a worse confusion than either must needs follow.  
So then, it is the Execution of justice alone, which is essential to the Supreme governor, Matter of Law requires a counsellor, Matter of fact a witness, Matter of Execution alone intimates a Prince, and that Principality cannot be divided betwixt two persons of a several nature.  
From hence then it appears plainly that no Catholic differing from the Court of Rome ascribes more to clergymen, than this first point of adjudging according to the Law of God in things Divine; and this implies rather a dependent, than an independent condition in the judge: and in this Protestants join with full consent. But all this while I find myself in a digression: my scope is not to prove that Protestants do attribute sufficient to Priests, it lies upon me to prove that they attribute too much to them, and herein I am to undertake not only the episcopal, but the presbyterial side also, not only Protestant Prelates, but even Master CALVIN that great Antiprelate also.  
Divines have much trumped the World hitherto in not setting forth the true bounds and limits of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, but if I mistake not, the first power (which they claim as most essential) they take to be the power of the keys, though they define not certainly, what that is, whether a power, or Office; or to whom belonging, or of what extent, and continuance.  
The second power which they insist upon, as next issuing out of the power of the keys, is in Excommunication, Ordination of Ministers, Exposition of Scriptures, &c.  
The third and more remote kind of causes wherein they challenge an ecclesiastical power, is of such as concern matrimony, Testaments, Heresies, Fasts, tithes, and Immunities of clergymen, &c. And further doubtless they would proceed, but that these savour so much of the temperality, and discover their trumpery; but I have said, if in all these cases clergymen are necessarily more knowing and impartial than all men else, there is necessity of their counsel to declare matter of Law, but not of their Consent in applying coercive, and forcible remedies for the execution of Law. I have said also that clergymen being as well Citizens of the commonwealth, as sons of the Church, and these Cases importing as well perturbance of the State, annoyance to the Church, that there can be but one Head which ought to have command over both, and in both. It is manifest also that many Cases are partly temporal, and partly spiritual, and that scarce any is so temporal, but that it relates in some order to spiritual things, or any so spiritual, but that it hath some relation to temporal things, so that the true subject of ecclesiastical and civil justice cannot rightly be divided. Further, also it is as manifest that where any doubt, strife, or uncertainty may arise between one Jurisdiction and another, neither acknowledging any supreme power of decision, no assured peace can continue, and by consequence no stability or permanent subsistence to either, is to be expected. It is natural therefore to be inferred, that either the temporal or the ecclesiastical Magistrate must be in all Cases absolutely predominant, and that since the ecclesiastical ought not by Christ's own command, therefore the temporal aught, as hath been further proved by sundry arguments, and Scripture proofs alleged out of this famous Politician. So much of the temporal power, and its necessary supremacy: my endeavour shall be now to maintain that no ecclesiastical power is at all necessary in mere ecclesiastical persons.  
Master Calvin according to the popish grounds maintains, that spiritual jurisdiction differs from temporal, and is not incompatible but assistant thereto, because it proposes not the same ends, but several, which by several means may be the better compassed. But the spiritual Magistrate (as I conceive) can propose no other end, than what the Secular aught to aim at, for either the Prince ought to have no care at all of the Honour of God, and the good of men, and that which is the prime mean of both, true Religion, or else his ends must be the same which the Prelate aims at, viz. to vindicate Religion by removing and correcting scandalous offenders. Secondly, to preserve the innocent from contagion by the separation of open offenders. Thirdly, to prevent further obduration, or to procure the amendment of such as have transgressed by wholesome chastisement.  
This is beyond all controversy, as also that the person and power of a Prince, are as sacred to effect these ends, as the Prelates: and certainly, God did not so sanctify their persons and offices for any less end. And therefore in ancient times Holy Bishops did preach and recommend nothing more to Princes than the care of Religion, though proud Prelates now arrogate this only to themselves, and though it be still apparent, that no offence is so spiritual, but that it is a civil evil, as well as a blemish to Religion: forsomuch as true Religion is the foundation of a State. And this could not be, neither were Princes answerable to God for the corruption of Religion, if God had not given them a supreme power, and that effectual to bring all offenders whatsoever to confession, satisfaction and contrition, or to expel them the congregation by themselves, or their surrogates.  
Master Calvin instances in adultery and drunkenness, &c. and says, That the temporal power punishes these by external force, and for public examples sake, as it concerns the State, but the spiritual judge punishes them without force internally for the amendment of the delinquent. he might as well have named swearing, lying, stealing, murdering, and all sins whatsoever, and so have made all men twice punishable, and the ecclesiastical Courts as full of business as the temporal to the great vexation of the State, and danger of division, out of this false ground only that temporal power hath not a competence for the amendment of offenders, or for the care of Religion, but only for the satisfaction of wronged parties, and the expedition of civil Justice.  
This is a way to erect regnum in regno, and to maintain such concurrent jurisdictions, as cannot possibly stand together, for all being subject to sin and offence, as well the spiritual as temporal, either the one or other must go unquestioned, and this may produce division, or else both; and that will cause most certain confusion. Both sides here seem strangely puzzled, the rigidest of the episcopal faction allow Princes a coercive power over Priests, and prelates, where they perform not what their duty is in their functions or jurisdictions, and this power requires a higher power of summoning, arraigning, and legally trying them: and yet the moderatest of the presbyterial faction would have Princes questionable, tryable and punishable by the Spiritualty. This is a gross confusion, which will appear to be so more plainly in the sequel; when it is more fully cleared, that to Princes alone God has precisely committed utramque tubam, and utramque tabulam too, as our reverend Andrews says.  
'Tis true, as Calvin alleges, Princes are sons of the Church, they are in it, not above it: the word intending the Church universal, such as is both militant and triumphant; past, present, and future; for that hath no other head but Christ: to that all Princes and Priests are equally sons: but take Church for such or such a national, local Church, and then the Prince is head thereof, under Christ; and the Clergy are part of his charge, and under his protection.  
The same man also may in diverse respects be both father and son to the same man without confusion of relations. A King, a Bishop may hear the Word, and receive the Sacrament from an inferior Minister; a Subject may be natural father to his Prince, and in this respect, a filial subjection is due from the superior, and so a King may refer his own case to his Chancellor, yet this destroys not the greater, higher, and more general superiority in other things, at other times. And to me it seems that even in the exercise of the Keys, the Priest officiates under the Prince, as the chancellor does in matters of Law, even when the Kings own case lies in judgement before him, and when perhaps he makes a decree against his own Master, and contrary to his own Masters private advertisement: and yet the King is not properly either Lawyer or Theologue, though both are actuated, and organised as it were, by the soul like commanding, overseeing, and overruling of his more sublime and divine power.  
Herein the Priest also may learn a limitation from the Lawyer, for though the judge be bound to pronounce right judgement against his own Master, yet this holds not in all cases alike; because of his limited condition, for in criminal cases such as concern the safety of the Kings own person, or the royal dignity of his calling, therein judgement must be utterly mute. And therefore it is a weak argument of Master Calvin, though it be his best: when he infers a necessity of an ecclesiastical judicature from hence, because else the Prince himself wanting punishment, should escape free: for the reason is the same in matters of Law; the King is not questionable, or responsible, for personal crimes, and yet this is held no political mischief. Besides if the Prince shall not go unquestioned, or undisciplined by the spiritual, yet the supreme spiritual Magistrate must, and this is an equal, if not a greater mischief: for both cannot be equally liable to the judgement of each other. Neither is it to much purpose that the example of Bishop Ambrose so harshly, so unreverendly treating pious penitent Theodosius, is so confidently cited always by either faction episcopal and presbyterial; for though the name of Ambrose be great, yet I will crave leave to speak as an Advocate against him in the name of the Emperor Theodosius.  
Reverend Sir, you take upon you to be a judge over me, and to condemn me of a bloody Massacre committed unjustly at Thessalonica, and being so condemned, you proceed against me with your ghostly punishment, subjecting me to your ecclesiastical severity: But I pray consider what mischiefs may follow hereupon; if Emperors may be punishable by Bishops, then common equity requires that Emperors have the benefit of a fair hearing and arraignment, or else were their condition more miserable than the condition of the meanest vassals: for as Prince's actions are more inscrutible, and their counsels more mystical; so also their ends are for the most part more liable to envy, and misinterpretation: It is not possible for you without due discussion, inquiry, and examination of impartial witnesses, perfectly to understand all the true circumstances, reasons, and grounds of this my fa●●; and without this understanding it is not possible for you to pronounce a just censure against me. It's necessary then that some tribunal be prepared for you, and some bar for me, that upright Sentence may pass, and that justice may be done understandingly, and upon this it must needs follow that I am your mere Subject, and must lay down my sceptre to bow myself under your Crosier, till this difficulty be fully ended. Admit this also, and then you may use what procrastination you please in this intricate decision; or in the like manner question me of all other enormities, and scandalous deviations, which rumor, envy, or treason itself forges against me; and thus shall I have no leisure to judge other men, it will be scarce possible for me to acquit myself in judgement from other men: that power which God hath put into my hands for the protection of so many Myriads, will be utterly disabled by that higher power which is put into your hands over me. By the same reason also that I am to render an account to you in this place, I am to render the like to all your superiors, equals, or inferiors in other jurisdictions, of all sins whatsoever, whether real, or imputable, ecclesiastical, or Civil, so that no end is like to be of my trials, purgations, or condemnations.  
You will say, my crime is sensibly evident; if I would deny this, you could not prove it so; and if I would not confess this, you could not force me, for it was a political thing, and far off acted: and my mere confession can give to you no jurisdiction. But be my crime as manifest in itself as the disobedience of Saul was to Samuel, or as David's murder was to Nathan, or as Salomon's incontinence was to all the World, or as Manasses his Idolatry: yet why should I suffer more than they? What new coercive, vindicative authority have Priests gained over Princes by Christ's Gospel, which the Jewish Priests never used, claimed, or heard of? If Excommunication, &c. be now necessary, sure it was in use before Christ; and then we should have heard of some Kings Excommunicated, &c. by some Priests; for if the temporal power had not of its own nature a competent force and habitude to restrain all things repugnant to public quietness, and honesty, a spiritual power was necessary; and yet we read of none such. But if there was a sufficiency in the temporal power, as is most manifestly apparent; then we cannot imagine that Christ came to take away any of this authority from Magistrates: but that power which he added, was rather an excellency of grace and virtue in matters of Faith, and illumination.  
It cannot be alleged by you, that that punishment is merely spiritual, and so no political evil: for as it puts other men into the condition of Publicans, Heathens, and worse; so it further yet degrades, disables and oppresses Princes. How shall he be honoured and obeyed as the Vicegerent of God in all causes, whom the laity sees ejected out of the Church, and expelled out of the Communion of the faithful, as a rotten contagious member? How shall he be held more sacred than a Priest, whom the sentence, interdiction, and the confounding blow of a Priests spiritual execration, shall render so contemptible, miserable and abominable in the eyes of the world?  
Saint Paul being accused in matters of Doctrine, made his appeal to a wicked Heathen Emperor; and yet now a Christian godly Emperor being accused by any churchman, no appeal is allowed, though in mere civil accusations. S. Peter's keys did either induce some new power not before known unto the world, or not; if it did, than our saviour's gospel came into the world to the detriment of civil government, which is contrary to Religion, and all reason: and if no new addition of power were imported, than Tiberius himself, though a Heathen, and Tyrant, remained as absolute as before; and yet in his time there was more necessity of an ecclesiastical judicature, than is now. But you will say, if Princes be not subject to some chastisement, than some scandals must pass unremediable. Not so, for here God is the revenger, and strikes often, as he did Uzziah; but if not, yet either the temporal or spiritual governor must pass unchastized, which is all one; for two supremes cannot be, nor no entire Government without some supremacy, nor no supremacy without immunity, and exemption from judgement.  
The perpetual conflicts and contestations between Princes and prelates, which are likely to ensue, will soon clear this; that either Princes must at last submit to the tribunals of churchmen, and reign at their discretion; or else churchmen must submit to them: For both Tribunals cannot stand compatible. For my part, I excuse so grave a Father as you are, of ambition herein; and therefore I am the less cautious in summiting myself at this time: but I conceive this Doctrine may be the ground of dangerous consequences to others, and therefore I desire it may not from me pass into a precedent for the time to come.  
Let not proud Prelates from this my voluntary humiliation, arrogate to themselves as if it had been due; or derogate thereby from the more sacred order of Princes: neither let Princes from this particular learn to yield to any spiritual Monarchy whatsoever. My belief is, that the Prince is the Head, the fountain, the soul of all power whatsoever, spiritual, or temporal; wherein he ought not to endure at all any kind of rivality of ecclesiastical persons, nor can admit of any diminution in any part of his jurisdiction, without offence to God, damage to his charge, and danger to himself. So much for Theodosius, and so much for that jurisdiction, which is due to prelates: I should now speak of the exercise thereof, as it is granted by the favour of Princes, but this is a very tender point.  
It seems to some, that Princes ought not to encumber men in Sacred Orders, in any kind of judicature which is not purely spiritual; nor that Prelates can accept of any temporal employment whatsoever, without dishonour to their Orders, and neglect to their cure of souls: and yet now none so greedy of such employment. A sacred place may not be put to secular uses, that's profane: but a sacred person may, that's honourable.  
A bishopric now adays is but a Writ of ease, to dismiss from Preaching, and attending God's service; whereby the man is preferred from the Church to the Court, from the Altar to some tribunal, from God's spiritual to the King's temporal affairs. In the High Commission, at the council Table, in the Star-Chamber, and the Chequer, churchmen are now more active than in their own Consistories, and yet their ambition further aims (as 'tis said) to the Chancery, Court of Requests, &c. which could not choose but redound to the scandal of Religion, the obstruction of justice, and vexation of the Subject: if there were not learned and skilful men enough in Policy and Law to serve the King, unless Divinity were deprived of some of her followers, there were some seeming umbrage why the King might borrow of God; as in the shady times of Popery it was usual: when all learning was as it were engrossed by the Clergy, and purloined from the laity: but when the clouds of universal Ignorance are now dispelled as well from the laity as Clergy; now the Clergy are not so necessary in temporal affairs, unless we judge it fit that God's more Holy Offices should be neglected, for this purpose only, that the King's meaner business may be worse administered.  
The functions of Divines are too sacred for any secular person to officiate, and therefore it should seem, their persons also ought to be too sacred for secular functions; for it seems preposterous, that it should be thought an honour to Priests to relinquish spiritual, and adhere to temporal employments. Nic. Machiavelli did observe that Christian Religion had long since fall'n to the ground, had not the regular strictness of poor inferior Priests and priors held, and propped up the reputation of it in the world, as much as the Pride and Luxury of the great Cardinals, and Princelike Bishops, did strive to sink and demolish it. The same observation holds true amongst us Protestants at this day, for the more our prelates enjoy, the more still they seek; and all our three kingdoms are grown so sick of their Pride, Injustice, and pragmatical faction, that scarce any remedy but blood-letting can cure them. We find in Scripture the most High and Holy Offices of Religion performed by Princes, even amongst, and above the greatest of Priests; but we scarce find any instance at all where Priests intermedled with any State affairs, either above, or under Princes: and yet with us now the employing and entrusting of clergymen in temporal businesses, is held as politic as it was in times of Popery: although no time could ever justly boast of that use. But to pass over temporal businesses, how violent have our Bishops been in their own Canons about Ceremonies, and indifferencies? and what disturbance hath that violence produced? They strive as for the beauty and glory of Religion, to bring in the same forms of Liturgy, the same posture of the Communion-Table, the same gesture at the Communion, &c. in all our three Dominions; as if uniformity were always beautiful: and yet we see, all men are created with several faces, voices, and complexions, without any deformity to the universe.  
'Tis not external variety, but internal dissension, which spoils the harmony of Religion; and dissension is more nourished by the harshness of Pastors over their flocks, especially over the weak ones in scruples, than by permitting various Rites and forms in the external worship of God. Certainly, liberty and variety in indifferences, and Ceremonies is more favoured in Scripture, than any universal similitude, or rigorous force whatsoever, over the perplexed, anxious consciences of weak men. We see in Scotland, where there is no Ceremonies, they enjoy that uniformity without contention, which we aim at only, and seek to purchase with infinite debate, and persecution; and under their peace and unity, the Protestant Religion thrives, and Romish Superstition utterly ceases: whereas under our strife and disagreement, Religion and true Devotion is overrun, and overgrown, like corn choked with weeds. Nay, it is thought that if our Bishops had been more gentle-handed all this while towards such as disrelished Ceremonies for Poperies sake, and had rather pitied them as men of tender consciences, than persecuted and defamed them, as seditious Puritans, these differences had not lasted so long: for when the Reformation was not yet fully perfected, the Puritans of those days were more fiery than now; but not being so odious in the Church, less combustion followed thereupon: whereas now they are so unmercifully treated, that no moderate compliance can serve the turn.  
There seems now little remaining of Puritanism, but the breathless carcase of it, and yet till that too be interred and consumed, no truce can be admitted. The very sufferings of Puritans now are sufficient guilt, and imputed as the effects of their own malice, their punishment is argument enough for the desert of their punishment; the more they have borne, the more they must now bear; and the more they now bear, the more they shall hereafter. Fury is one of the main things objected to Puritans; but in truth, the World has not any thing more furious than such as most pretend against them.  
Hence it is, that the hatred of Puritans flows and descends from the Highest of the Clergy to the lowest: and young Students in the university know it now their wisest course to Study the defamation of Puritans, as the first and most necessary point of their Learning and qualification, and as their surest path to promotion. And to make their detestation sure, and themselves irreconciliable, they must engage themselves by some notable service of novelty, quarrelling with some point of Protestantism, or refining some point of Popery; they must tax Protestants as some ways injurious to Princes, or extol Papists as zealous observers of Antiquity. It must be maintained that royalty cannot stand without the prop of Episcopacy, though it never yet found greater enemy; and that Puritanism only hinders the stretching of our Religion, or else Papists an we should soon agree. Those of vulgar wits which serve not for such strains, that they may be redeemed from suspicion of Puritanism, must do something factiously, or be vicious, or else their hopes of preferment are almost desperate.  
Charity to Papists, conformity to Ancient Fathers, and decent uniformity amongst ourselves, are the specious colours wherewith they dress and deck all their pretences; for want of Sectaries living in these days, they rack out of their tombs Hacket, Copinger, Brown, &c. to upbraid us, for want of opposites enough here in England, they calumniate the Scots to our dishonour; for want of true imputations, they forge any crimes how monstrous soever, and their most sure one is, that which is most undiscernable, hypocrisy. Nevertheless it must be believed that the Antipuritan disparages not our Ancestors in the Reformation, but for love of Antiquity; nor tears in sunder the bonds of Religion Nature, Policy betwixt two the most close-united Nations of the World, but out of love to unite: nor fills whole kingdoms with blood, but out of love to Order. Such was sure Diogenes his humility, trampling upon Plato's Couches; such was Nero's uniformity, setting on fire the streets of Rome; such was Procrustes his symmetry, cutting his guests according to his beds. And therefore it's thought Puritans are not so much hated for their opposition to Ceremonies, as Ceremonies are multiplied, and enforced for suppression of all zealous Christians, under the umbrage of Puritans: and that for the same purpose the enemies of Piety have blown those coals which they might have quenched.  
Hooker that sweet and noble Antagonist of ecclesiastical Puritans says much in defence of the church's authority in imposing of Ceremonies, but he says nothing in defence of the church's Charity in imposing many, and displeasing Ceremonies. So S. Paul might have justified himself, as fitter to be subscribed unto and complied withal then his scrupulous brother, and he might have justified his case concerning eating of such and such meats: but S. Paul in wisdom, and Charity, would do neither. S. Paul made not his strength an Argument to make his brother yield who was weak, but he made his brother's weakness an Argument whereby to prevail and win upon him being strong. And why then does our Mother the Church maintain her authority against her own scrupulous and tender-minded infants? If in justice and rigor they ought to obey her, and conform to her wise commands; does it therefore follow that in wisdom and Charity she ought not to pity, and prefer their foolish, groundless doubts and jealousies? Is it honourable for the nurse to contest about authority with a forward child, when by indulgence she may better still it? If Ceremonies be but things indifferent, they are not so valuable, as peace, for that is necessary. Admit fit and decent Ceremonies to be the outworks of Religion, the better to secure it from contempt, and profanation: Yet let not the outworks be too vast, lest they take up more admiration, than they repulse disregard. Neither let us suppose that all times are alike liable to profaneness. Before Moses, Religion was very naked and simple in her Ceremonies, and yet we must not think that God did then make ill provision, or was careless of the government of his Church; but under the Law, Ceremonies were strangely multiplied to the Jews, and that by God's own appointment; and yet in those times, I cannot think that any Discipline could be invented more honourable for Religion. I shall desire therefore to walk between two extremes, neither wholly condemning all Ceremonies as superstitious, nor embracing many as necessary, besides the Ceremonious use of water in baptism, and of Bread and Wine in the Eucharist; the gospel recommends no external rites, but such as the general rules of decency enclose, to our observation: but it seems utterly to discountenance all Jewish, carnal ordinances; yet certainly if multiplicity of pompous ceremonies had been very useful where knowledge abounds, and to be looked upon as the outworks of Religion, the gospel would not have been so silent as it is concerning them. Were we now to plant a Church in the West-Indies, amongst rude savages, perhaps the external splendour of our worship might be as convenient as it was amongst the Jews to attract Proselytes: Or had we now such a dreadful presence of God residing amongst us, as the Jews had in their Oracle, perhaps music vocal, and instrumental, and stateliness of attire, and fearfulness in our Gestures, and Postures would beseem us in our solemn addresses and festival celebrations: but the difference betwixt these times and those, and these Christian countries, and those that are Barbarous is very great. What manner of Divine Service the French Protestants and the Scots use, and some other Nations I cannot tell, but I hope it is not so nasty, and slovenly as some of our Formalists would make us believe: for it seems not impossible to me, but that in times of so much Light, as these are, God may be very honourably and zealously served without many Stately Ceremonies.  
The Bishop of Downe makes a very sharp speech to the Puritans in Ireland, as being very disobedient, and animated therein by the Scotish Covenanters; but his chiefest eloquence is uttered against his own countrymen the Scots, whom bee paints forth, as the chiefest traitors, Perjured Rebels, heretics and Hypocrites in the World: nay, he denounceth them worse than Anabatists, and such as have more than justified the powder-traitors, and all the rebellious practices of the Jesuites. Afterwards he adds also, That Puritanism is not the national sin of Scotland only, but that they of the same faction in England had been as deep in the same condemnation, had they had so much power. See here the lively portraiture of an Antipuritane, see a true B●ner revived again, but in Protestant habit; and for aught I see, here are none exempted from this black venomous censure in all the King's Dominions, but those of the Popish and episcopal Faction. It's not to be wondered at that the King thinks ill of his subjects, or that Burton or Prin suffered worse than traitor's merits. It's rather to be wondered at, that our streets do not run with blood daily, since this is the gospel our Reverend Fathers of the Church preach.  
This Speech was thought worthy to be dispersed in Print over all our kingdoms in English; but since, because it redounds so much to the honour of the three Nations, and the repute of Protestant Religion, it's Translated into Latin, and copies are Printed for all Christendom to take notice of. In this Speech it's urged, that Puritans, who began about 80 years since, have proceeded from bad to worse by six degrees; first they did dislike, then contemn Bishops; then they did disobey their Jurisdiction; then separate themselves; then they fell into the heresy of holding no difference between Bishop and Presbyter: lastly, they rebelled, and grew more immoderate than Anabaptists: And here S. Cyprian is alleged, who says, that the contempt of Bishops is the beginning and ground of all Heresies and schisms.  
Here we see what Puritans are, the most cursed Miscreants on earth; next we see who Puritans are, all such as hold not with Episcopacy: that is in probability half Ireland, more than half England, all Scotland, and many other Protestant countries. King James did put a difference betwixt such as dis●relisht Bishops, and Ceremonies merely, and such as under that pretext fraudulently sought to perturb the State, and make a factious separation. But here the difference of all Puritans is gradual only, not substantial: for dislike of Bishops is the beginning of all heresy, and must needs end in Anabaptism and rebellion.  
How plainly d●es it here appear, that Episcopacy is the true Helena of all this war; and yet S. Cyprian is to be understood of the pastoral function, not of the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of a Bishop, or else in his sense the Genevans, and the greatest part of Protestants are heretics, and King James made a frivolous distinction.  
Such stuff as this had not mis-beseemed a Papist, but it's very odd in a Protestant Bishop; except we consider him, as one who hath looked back towards the Onions and fleshpots of Egypt, and is enamoured again upon those glorious Titles and ensigns of Honour and pomp, which Rome confers upon her Courtiers.  
But to conclude this point, I wish Princes would not allow such Bishops to be carvers to themselves, and make them judges in cases of their own interest: they are surely good spectacles for Princes in theological deliberations, as temporal Counsellors are in State affairs; but miserable are those Princes whose eyes cannot see without such spectacles. If Religion did not prosper worse, if peace were not more violated, if persecution were not more common in countries where Bishops govern, than where they are expelled, we might suspect the Scots as heretical and rebellious by nature; for choosing all the plagues of war rather than Bishops: but when we see the contrary, we may as well listen to the Scots against Bishops, as to Bishops against the Scots. So much of the ecclesiastical Puritan, next after whom sprung up the Puritan in Religion, of whom I shall speak very briefly.  
There are many men amongst us now, which brook Bishops and Ceremonies well enough; and perhaps favourably interpret our late innovations: and yet these may be too grave to escape the name of Puritans. To be a Protestant may be allowed, but to dispute against Papists, smells of preciseness: to hold the Pope fallible is tolerated, but to hold him Antichrist, is abominable Puritanism: to go to Church is fashionable, but to complain of the mass, or to be grieved at the public countenance of Popery, whereby it entwines our Religion, and now drinks up that Sap which is scarce afforded to Protestantism, or at all to take notice how far some of our Divines are hereat conniving▪ if not cooperating, is a symptom of a deep infected Puritan.  
He that is not moderate in Religion, is a Puritan, and he that is not a Cassandrian, or of Father Francis Synclers' faith, is not moderate: he favours too much of Calvins' gross learning, exploded now by our finest wits.  
Sir Robert Cotton professes, that he stands much amazed to behold the magnificence of Churches built by our Ancestors, we their Successors being scarce able to keep up the same: but that he is farther beside himself with exceeding marvel, when he casts his eyes back upon the excellent groundwork of Religion laid by our Fathers in the Reformation, and yet sees the same so ill built upon, and so negligently seconded by us their children: But this (he says) is not to be attributed to the hanging up of Pius 5. his Bull upon the Bishop of London's gate, or to that favour which has been showed to Priests, but it is the idleness, and insufficiency of many of our own teachers, conspiring with the people's cold zeal, that has wrought this apostasy. The Name of Recusant was scarce known till the II. of Queen Eliz. the Marian persecution, being yet fresh in memory, and great zeal being begotten thereby, and the fingerwork of God being so apparent in the sudden alteration of Religion. Then did the laity and Clergy with holy emulation, strive who should show themselves most affectionate to the gospel: then were our Ministers as frequent in great men's houses, and as active as Jesuits now are: then were Praying and Preaching both equally precious to great and small. The name of Papist smelled then rank even to themselves, all sorts resorting daily to Church, to avoid the shame thereof, until Archbishop Grindal's disgrace, and Hatfield's hard conceit of Prophecies, brought the flowing of these good graces to a still water: But when Sanders the Coripbeus of Catholics had slily pinned the Name of Puritans upon all such as were most forward in encouraging, and courageous in opposing Catholics, and when he perceived that the word was pleasing to some ill affected of our own side; He quickly heated some of us beyond the temper of discretion. And now with the cross tumults of both factions in extreme choler vented in Pulpits, and Pamphlets, most men grew to be frozen in zeal, and so benumbed, that whos'ever (as the worthy L. Keep. Bacon observed) in those days pretended a little spark of earnestness, seemed red-fire-hot in respect of others. Thus it betided Protestants, as those which fare the worse for ill neighbours, for whilst they curb Papists, or reprove idle drones, they are incontinently branded with the ignominious name of Precisians.  
See here Sir Robert Cotton's judgement, as touching the occasion and original of our Religious Puritans: and see also his censure of the State, as touching the same: For where he taxes the indiscreet zeal of those who were so violently incensed at Sanders his nickname, so maliciously and subtly fastened upon them there in his Margin, his Note is this; If these men's zeal had been employed otherwise, and a task set them to do some good, they might have been reformed, or made harmless by diversion.  
But I pass from this kind of Puritan to another, whom I shall call my Political Puritan; for the bounds of Puritanism are yet larger, and enclose men of other conditions.  
Some there are yet which perhaps disfavour not at all either ecclesiastical Policy, or moderate Papists; and yet nevertheless this is not sufficient to acquit them from the name of Puritans, if they ascribe any thing to the Laws and Liberties of this realm, or hold the Prerogative royal to be limitable by any Law whatsoever.  
If they hold not against Parliaments and with Ship-money, they are injurious to Kings; and to be injurious to Kings, is proprium quarto modo to a Puritan.  
Our present civil, nay more than civil war with Scotland, and all the mischiefs thereon attending, the disaffection between the King and his Subjects, and all the mischiefs thereon attending the discontinuance of Parliaments, the proper remedies of all State-maladies, and universal grievances, which is a mischief whereby all mischiefs become incurable, all are caused by the abusive mistake, and injurious misapplication of this word Puritan.  
The Scots are Puritans, and therefore enemies to Monarchy, the English are Puritans, and therefore haters of royal prerogative, both the Nations have been hitherto famous for their devout reverence, and obsequious zeal to their Princes; but now Puritanism has infected them, and perverted them to disloyalty.  
Thus is the King's heart alienated from his Subjects, and by consequence, the Subjects loyalty blunted towards him, to the incomparable, almost irreparable detriment of both: neither is this disaccord b●tween the King and his best Subjects, more fatal and pernic●ous to the commonwealth, than his accord with the Recusant faction. Papists have now gotten the repute of the best Subjects, and fittest for trust in places of eminent service; nay 'tis almost necessary that foreign Papists be brought in for the supporting of the endangered Royalty: for though the Popish faction at Court be strong and active enough for matter of counsel, yet for matter of force, the Puritans in City and country be too predominant.  
The Bishop of Downe in his visitation speech lays all the calamities of Church and commonwealth upon Non-conformists, and for proof thereof instances in the Covenanters, whom he charges of rebellion, charging withal that rebellion upon Puritanism. The first thing (says he) that made me out of love with that Religion, was their injurious dealing with Kings, which I observed both in their Practice and Doctrine. he taxes first their Doctrine, because they deny the King's supremacy in causes ecclesiastical, and allow Subjects to resist, nay and depose their King, if he be a Tyrant Surely Ahab could say little for himself, if he could not lay his own crimes upon Elijah; but see here by what art of confusion all Scots are called Puritans, and all Puritans rebels.  
King James spoke not so confusedly as if Puritanism were a Religion; and all that disliked Bishops and Ceremonies were of that Religion; and all of that Religion were enemies to Kings. If a Bishop needed any proof, it his {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} were not unquestionable, I would desire him to prove all Covenanters Puritans; deniers of the King's supremacy: or to instance in any Kings which have been deposed or murdered by presbyterial authority. How far Bishops have encroached upon Kings, is known to all the world: our Protestant Bishops lately have by Oath and Canon, combined together to bind the King's hands, though he be Supreme, that he shall not govern our Church but by Archbishops, Bishops, Arch-deacons, &c. And yet these troublers of Israel have the face to tax Elijah of their own sin.  
Presbytery indeed has heretofore passed her bounds, yet not of late, but Episcopacy has ever from Constantine claimed an independence of Divine right, till this instant. I conceive there are not in all the King's Dominions, three men, except Papists and Anabaptiss, which hold it lawful to depose, or by any force to violate the persons of Kings, how ill soever. The Scotch Divines indeed maintain that a great body of men may defend themselves against the unjust sword of misled Kings, because they cannot fly, or otherwise save themselves; and this they take now to be their own case; whereas our Court Divines in England hold, that in such case, we ought all to yield our throats without defence. This seems unnatural, and truth was never unnatural, but I forbear to dispute a point so horrid to man's imagination.  
The Bishop next instances in the rebellious practices of Puritans, & reckons up some Fasts in Scotland appointed by the Presbytery, without King James his privity, and some other seditious Sermons, and actions whereby he was much annoyed. But what? Did not King James know his own enemies, or how to blame them? Did he condemn all Scots alike, or all Bishop haters alike, or join the English in like condemnation? We know well enough, that King James called rebellious precisian's Pu●itans, but he never called all Puritans rebellious precisians; He never used those terms as conve●tible, but declared his contrary meaning by a manifest difference taken between them. But the Bishops main ●nstance is in the present Scotch insurrection; this he calls a rebellion of Puritans, and far greater than the Powder-treason: For (says he) that plot was but the act of a few discontented Gentlemen, but in this rebellion of the Puritans they have engaged a great part of the kingdom, so that this may be said to be the common sin of that Sect. What could have been raked out of Hell more slanderous to our Religion, more apologetical for Popery?  
The powder-traitors are here preferred before the whole sect of Puritans: The sin of the powder-traitors was, that they being but an inconsiderable party, sought the destruction of their King and his issue, and the flower of the Nobility, Gentry, Commonalty, and the extirpation of the true Religion, by a most diabolical bloody practice and conspiracy. And it ought not to be charged upon the mere actors, as a symptom of discontent, only we know how far the Romish Religion itself favours and gives ground to such damned feats, and how far it has owned some having proved prosperous, and justified the doing thereof in nature as impious, though perhaps in degree not so heinous as this. For take this as it was conspired, and questionless, since the crucifying of Jesus Christ, the Light never discovered any treason more ugly and horrible.  
Now to outmatch this deed of darkness, the Scotch Nation by a strange general unanimity have armed themselves to oppose the ill government of Bishops, and other alterations in the service of God, and the administration of justice, and being invaded therefore by another Nation, have used force to defend their lives; and seeing that defence not safe in their own country, they have since pursued it further by way of prevention in the Country of their Invaders.  
That is the greatest act of Rebellion whereby the common Peace and safety of a kingdom is most disturbed and impeached; but by the common act of a whole kingdom, that mischief cannot be effected: therefore the Bishop fails in his politics when he thinks that the Major part disturbing the Minor, is more traitorous, than the contrary.  
The unanimous act of a whole kingdom ought to be presumed to be less injurious, and more wise than the act of any small inconsiderable party, for it hath scarce ever been seen that a whole kingdom, or the majority thereof hath ever been treasonable to its self in procuring its own ruin.  
Many States have perished by the machinations of a few ill-affected, ill-advised Counsellors, (scarce ever any perished otherwise) but the total body and collection has never been guilty of its own ruin: and if it were, such Treason could not be so great as that which is plotted by a few. Whilst the Scots contained themselves within their own territories, and were considered as a kingdom within themselves, as they were when the Bishop past his censure, they were not rightly so censured: neither was he then privy to their intrusions, that they would infest our kingdom with the same combustion, and so prove a disturbance to the greater part of our British Monarchy, whereof they themselves are but a member of less bulk and value. Cursed therefore are those uncharitable exasperating censurers, whereby the King is too far incensed, and by whose rash instigations the commotions themselves become the harder to be appeased.  
Great insurrections are like great fires, wherein delay is mischievous, and small remedies rather turn to fuel, then extinguish: and violent counsel against an enraged multitude, is like oil, or pitch cast into the flame. The wise politician proportions his remedy according to the mischief, if water will not prevail, he useth milk; if a little quantity will not suffice, he powers as the combustion itself requires. Unfortunate Rehoboam stands as a Seamarke to warn all Princes how to shun this rock of violent counsel against a people violently enraged and aggrieved. Some men have interpreted the designs of the Scots to have been treasonable from the beginning, and wholly bent upon the spoil and havoc of the English Nation from their first stirring: Others have wholly justified their intentions and proceedings hitherto as defensive only, and enforced by necessity: both these, I conceive, are too rash and headlong in their guesses. In so great a body of men, there must needs be variety of opinions, and its likely contrariety of affections; and therefore it behooves the King to be the more tender, moderate, and circumspect in his deliberations, as well for the one side as the other, especially since the Scots have not evidently and universally as yet declared themselves for the worse. We may at once be charitable in hoping the best, and wise withal in preventing the worst; nay, a charitable and sweet demeanour, if it be not too fond, may prove a great part of our prevention: doubtless Rehoboam himself, had he not been wilfully devoted to young, rash, and violent Counsellors, might have easily retained within his obedience many of his well-meaning Subjects, and reclaimed others of more moderation; and by that means have divided and dissipated the most obstinate, headstrong, and furious of all the rebellious party. Some Princes think themselves bound in Honour to do unwise things, and this was the error of Rehoboam, his aged counsellors advised him to that which was most politic, concluding that to be most honourable; but his Genius rather led him according to the advice of his young Gallants, to conclude that most politic, which to his haughty stomach seemed most honourable: but what was the event? to avoid the scorn of young men, he incurred the scorn of old men; to avoid the unjust censure of fools, he incurred the just censure of wise men; to gain the honour of appearing stout, he purchased the dishonour of being rash; to show a contempt of danger he made himself a prey to it; rather than to decline a blow by a gentle bowing of his body, he yielded himself to be inevitably oppressed by it.  
At this time of revolt the Israelites were not so wicked, as their revolt after made them; it may be so with the Scots, they are yet Protestants, and perhaps may be retained so: and who can think of Protestants, that so great a body of them, can at one fall so desperately tumble into the depth of mischief, as to make Fasting, Praying, Oaths and Sacraments, mere instruments and trains to commit murder, theft, sacrilege, treason, and the most unnatural of all crying crimes? But to return to our own Nation, and what we suffer by our own Divine.  
Manwarings Doctrine is common at Court, and 'tis not long since a Bishops chaplain in termtime, challenged a judge of Treason, for delivering Law according to conscience. And this is now no prodigy, for Pulpits are not public enough to preach an unlimitable prerogative in; 'tis fit our learned Doctors should mount the Benches of justice also; there to advance logic instead of Law; for Law is grown injurious to Princes, and smells rank of Puritanism. Divines themselves will lose nothing to Princes, but all other men shall, that they may gain the more: and neither Lawyers nor statesmen must direct them in any thing, but both Lawyers and statesmen must be directed by them in all things: but let us a little examine how the conditionate and absolute forms of government come within the circle of theology. The Israelites were governed by Monarchs, but not all alike absolute. The Patriarchs were not so absolute as the judges, nor the judges as the Kings, nor the Kings as those Heathen Emperors, which at last made them tributary. The due of Caesar, and the due of Solomon, and the due of Samuel, and the due of Jacob, was not the same as to all points of State, or all degrees of Royalty, and yet the nation was the same, and the form of government still remained the same: viz. monarchical.  
It should seem that God approved that degree of sovereignty best, which was by himself settled in the person of Moses, for when that people afterwards desired a King, of a more awful and large prerogative, in imitation of other Nations, the thing displeased God. Samuel also wrote a book of this subject, showing the just conditions of regal power; (the loss whereof is much to be lamented) for if it had been God's will that all Kings should be equally absolute in all respects, and free from all limitations and obligations alike, Samuel needed to have written little thereof; one word had determined all. But in Scripture, as it now remains, Samuel's book being not extant, our chiefest light and guide now is by example, not rule; and example we find very various.  
The State and sovereignty of the Jewish Kings in general, we find mild, and gracious; but much differing in particulars. Solomon was heavy over his Subjects, and under his Son they would not bear the like; yet Solomon's pressure was not upon the estates of his Subjects by taxes, and impositions, for He made silver in Jerusalem as stones for plenty; nor did He vex their persons by Military hazards and services, for He was at peace with all the world: Neither did He any way let fall, or lessen their honour amongst other Nations; He made them rather a spectacle of glory and prosperity to the world. Solomon's harshness was only in employing so great multitudes for his own pompous attendance, and for the performance of such public works, and structures, as did tend to the Magnificence and beauty of the State. Besides, Scripture does not satisfy us, neither by rule, nor example, whether Kings ought to be successive always, or elective; or whether primogeniture of Males, or unigeniture of Daughters, aught to take place: many things are left so uncertain, that it is not always safe for Kings wholly to rely upon examples; and for the rule of obedience, it is general, and no more advantageous for free Monarchs, than conditionate Potentates; no more for supreme, than subordinate commanders.  
The Law of Nature best determines, that all Princes being public Ministers for the common good, that their authority ought to be of sufficient latitude for that common good; and since Scripture is not express concerning that latitude, as to all people, the same not being to all alike necessary, the several Laws of several Countries best teach that certain latitude. I could wish therefore that Princes herein would not so much consult with Divines, as Lawyers; or rather with Parliaments, which are the grand Courts and counsels of kingdoms; for (as Cotton says) Every man in particular may deceive, and be deceived; but no man can deceive all, nor can all deceive one. Ancient times are not precedentary to ours by any necessity, for laws are now more learned, exact, and particular; and Courts and Tables of justice, and Policy, are more wisely and methodically composed and elected, than they were; and therefore there needs not that vocal power, or indisputable force to remain in the breasts of Princes, as was of old.  
The Courts of Parliament, and their unquestionable Acts▪ and Ordinances, and their infallible avisoes, are now in all well-governed Countries, the very Oracles of all Policy, and Law, they are the fountains of civil blood, spirits, and life; and the sovereign antidotes of public mischiefs. That Prince was never yet deceived which relied upon them, nor can he choose but be deceived, which thinks he can be assisted with any more wise or faithful advertisement, then that which is given him by his whole realm united, and contracted in a less circumference. What end can all the flower of the Nobility, Gentry, and Commonalty of a Nation, being wise and religious, have in seducing their sovereign, or in limiting that sovereignty, by which alone they are protected? Or what one party of particular men can better understand the true limits of sufficient sovereignty, and the profit thereof; then this collective universality, whole rays like the Suns, are everywhere dispersed; and yet whose body of light is here as in a refulgent Globe concentred?  
individuals may have many particular ends, severed from the Princes or the States, but Communities can aim at nothing but the common good; as the lesser fountains scatter their branching streams up and down in various Maeanders, whilst the Sea contains itself in an entire body, within its constant bounds. Individuals also have but their own particular set limit of perfection, and have judgements beside apt to be darkened by their own several interests and passions; whereas the common body enjoys a confluence of several perfections, and hath the less force from abroad to overcloud them. Of all men therefore it will most concern Princes to suspect them which are enemies to public assemblies, and to confide in them most, whose ends are not divided from the generalities; and as they tender their own happiness, to expect it chiefly from that generality, by which they are Kings, to which they are God's, from which their very Diadems receive honour and sanctity, to which their very royal Order imparts life, and breath, and necessary subsistence. I come now to my ethical Puritan.  
The name of Puritan must not rest here, for there may be some moderate, well inclined, facile men, whose education may be such that they are not much versed or insighted either in matters of Religion, or matters of State; they may be such as are no ways busy but in their own particular affairs, and yet it behooves that these men too be brought in within the opprobrious compass of Puritanism. To the Religious, ecclesiastical, and political Puritan, there must be joined also an ethical Puritan.  
This detested odious name of Puritan first began in the Church presently after the Reformation, but now it extends itself further, and gaining strength as it goes, it diffuses its poisonous ignominy further, and being not contended to Gangrene Religion, ecclesiastical and civil policy, it now threatens destruction to all morality also. The honest strict demeanour, and civil conversation which is so eminent in some men does so upbraid and convince the Antipuritan, that even honesty, strictness, and civility itself must become disgraceful, or else they which are contrary cannot remain in grace: But because it is too gross to deride virtue under the name of virtue; therefore other colours are invented, and so the same thing undergoes derision under another name. The zealous man is despised under the name of zealot, the Religious honest man has the vizard of an hypocrite, and dissembler put upon him to make him odious.  
Here I may allege even Hooker himself in justification of this ethical Puritan, that good ingenuous man in these days, though he opposed them in polity, yet honoured them in morality, and certainty if he were now living, he would strongly inveigh against their opposers in this respect. He citys Aristotle in his 5. book of ethics, and 3. cap. that many men in domestical things may be virtuous, and yet offend {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, yea, I am persuaded (says he) that of those with whom we strive in this cause, there are whose betters amongst men could hardly be found, if they did not live amongst men, but in some wilderness amongst themselves. And the cause (says he) of their disposition so unframeable to Society is, for that what they think privately to be convenient and just with some show of probability, the same they think themselves bound to practise and uphold, notwithstanding any Law of man to the contrary: and thus by following the Law of private reason, where the Law of public should take place, they breed disturbance. See here the main taxation of Puritans amongst their honest and wise opposers (such as I allow Hooker to be,) is this, that in things indifferent, they will not recede from their own consciences, for any command whatsoever, in all necessary points of morality there cannot be found better men. I cannot tell, I am left to pronounce here with the Poet. 
Crudelis Mater magis, an puer improbus ille?  
Improbus ille puer, crudelis tu quoque mater.   
I will only wish that neither the child would be so disrespectful of his mother's judgement in indifferencies, nor the mother so unpittifull of her child's weakness in scruples. Hooker also in his preface confesses, that Puritans at first were pitied only in their errors, and not much withstood by any: for the great humility, zeal, and devotion which appeared to be in them, was in all men's opinions, a pledge of their harmless meaning. The hardest (Says he) that men of sound understanding, conceived of them, was but this: O quàm honestâ voluntate miseri erant! and for this cause Luther made request to Frederick of Saxony, that within his dominion they might be favourably dealt with, and spared, for that, (their error exempted) they seemed otherwise right good men. So than whilst their meaning is honest, and whilst their honest meaning tends only to make themselves miserable, that is, objects of scorn, and punishment, favour ought to be showed. 'tis true, Hooker after complains, that this favour produced ill effects amongst Puritans, who by means of such merciful toleration gathered more strength than was safe for the State: but under favour, this does not appear so with me: In France, Scotland, and those parts of Germany where Zealots have had most liberty, and favour, I do not see any effects so evident thereof, as these: that Popery hath the sooner vanished, and enmity been the better prevented. It seems to me, that England of all Protestant countries has least cause to boast of her rigorous discipline towards Puritans, having never yet been either quiet, or safe till this instant, and now scarce being able to believe, that great work of deliverance, which God hath mercifully wrought for us. It cannot be denied, but the yet unsettled condition of these times hath been scandalous in multitudes of anabaptistical sectaries, whose several conventicles cry, here is Christ, and here is Salvation: but what? Is this the blame of the church's indulgence to weak brethren in nice scruples? surely no: for it is to be hoped, that when government is again settled, as favour shall be used in matters of indifferency, so the rod shall be resumed again against all obstinate offenders in matters of weight.  
And who does not see, that these swarms of conventiclers which now sequester themselves from us, are but the dregs of the vilest and most ignorant rabble, whose doctrines cannot prevail though they meet with no opposition, nor subsist when authority once lifts up its hands or shakes its staff against them.  
The feeble flies of summer, which every shower, and cloud almost disperses, are not more contemptible, than these wretched throngs, whose works not being of God, no nor scarce of rational man, cannot prosper in such an age of Knowledge, Learning, and Piety, as this is. Let us not then for some Gnats, or frogs sakes ungratefully murmur against summer, or undervalue all the sweet influences of the Sun, and the softer gales of Heaven.  
Puritans by some are parallelled to Jesuites, Jesuites are called Popish Puritans, and Puritans, Protestant Jesuites; yet this is not indeed disparageable to them: For doubtless fiery zeal and rigour were not blameable in Jesuites, were not their very Religion false; as celerity and expedition in a Traveller is not in itself faulty, but commendable, though the Traveller being in a wrong path, it causes him to stray the further from his journey's end.  
My Lord of down professes that the first thing which made him distaste the Religion of Puritans (besides their gross hypocrisy) was sedition: So gross hypocrisy, it seems, was the first. What is gross or visible hypocrisy to the Bishop, I know not, for I can see no windows or casements in men's breasts, neither do I think him endued with Saint Peter's prophetical spirit whereby to perceive and search into the reins, and hearts of hypocrites; but let him proceed. It is a plausible matter (says he) with the people to hear men in authority depraved, and to understand of any liberty and power appertaining to themselves, The profession also of extraordinary zeal, and as it were contempt of the world works with the multitude. When they see men go simply in the Streets, and bow down their heads like a bulrush, their inward parts burning with deceit, wringing their necks awry, shaking their heads as if they were in some present grief, lifting up the white of their eyes at the sight of some vanity, giving great groans, crying out against this sin and that sin in their superiors, under colour of long prayers, devouring widows, and married wives houses; when the multitude hears and sees such men, they are carried away with a great conceit of them, but if they should judge of these men by their fruits, not by outward appearance, they should find them to be very far from the true Religion. See here the froth of a scurrilous libeler, whereby it is concluded that he that is of severe life, and averse from the common vanit●es of the time, is an hypocrite: If these descriptions of outward austerity I shall not only show what is an hypocrite, but point out also who is an hypocrite, our Saviour himself will hardly scape this description; doubtless our Saviour, and many of his devoutest followers did groan shake their heads, and lift up their eyes at the sight of some public 〈◊〉, and vanities, and did not spare to tax the vices of superiors, and to preach to, and admonish the meaner sort of the people; yet who but an Annas or Caiphas will infer from hence that therefore their inward parts burn with deceit, and that their end is merely to carry away the multitude; such as judge only by outward appearance, and have not their senses exercised to discern betwixt good and evil? It is likely the High Priests and Pharisees did thus blaspheme in those days, and that the rather, because from their own feigned sanctity, they were the more apt to suspect the same in others: But what I must we needs follow them, or this Bishop in this? But to proceed with this Bishop, Saint James (says he) gives us a full description of true Religion.  
Wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without judging, and hypocrisy. None of these properties will agree with the Religion of Puritans. It is not pure for it allows usury, sacrilege, Disobedience, Rebellion, &c. It is not peaceable, for these men are the incendiaries of Christendom, It is not gentle, nor easy to be entreated, for they are more austere than Cato, and not to be moved by persuasion or command. It is not full of mercy and good fruits, for they are all for sacrifice, nothing for mercy; for the first Table, not the second; for faith, not charity; they pull down Churches, but build no hospitals. It is not without judging, for they are known to be most rigid censurers. And he is an Hypocrite which spies a mote in his brother's eyes, and not a beam in his own.  
Here is a confused proof, that such Puritans are hypocrites, but no proof at all, that this man is such a Puritan. If my Lord Say be such a Puritan, this denotes him an hypocrite, but this does not prove that my Lord Say, or Brooke, or Dod, or Clever &c. or any the most famous Puritan living is guilty of usury, sacrilege, Rebellion, pulling down of Churches, setting the World on fire, or of renouncing the second Table and all works of justice and charity, or of censuring and condemning malignantly other men: If these things were true of particular men, calumny were needless: Accusation would better suppress them. And sure it is not out of favour that Law proceeds not, for malice has often enough showed her teeth, and would have bitten if she could, neither would she now calumniate if she could accuse.  
The Bishop expects not to be believed; if he puzzle, and work some into doubt, it is sufficient: but since bitter censuring, and calumnious condemning of others is s● infallible a sign of hypocris●: how doth the Bishop wipe this off from himself? Can Puritans, speak worse of any, than he doth of Puritans? Sure they may well join with him upon this issue, that the greatest slanderer is the greatest hypocrite; and yet seek no further for slanders, than this very speech, wherein he so eagerly inveighs against slander; but if individuals cannot be thus convinced by the Bishop, how shall these signs and symptoms be applied to whole Sects, Religions, kingdoms?  
The most ordinary badge of Puritans is their more religious and conscionable conversation, than that which is seen in other men's: and why this should make them odious or suspected of hypocrisy amongst honest and charitable men, I could never yet learn. A seeming religious consists in doing actions outwardly good, and the goodness of those actions is apparent to man; but the false hypocritical end of them is only discerned by God: and therefore with what conscience can I condemn that good which is visible, for that evil which is not visible? Say, Brooke, Dod, Clever, &c. are known to me; yet no otherwise but as men singularly devote, and as all the Prophets, and apostles would, if they were now living: and shall I conclude because they seem so, therefore they are not so? I am so far from this, that my own conscience binds me to honour them, and that in those things, wherein I have not the grace to follow them. I have been a diligent inquirer into Puritans, and have exactly tried them three ways. First, in themselves; and so I find them zealous, at least seeming so outwardly, and distinguished principally from other men by their remarkable, and singular zeal to God and the Truth: and this to me is no ground of uncharitable censure. Secondly, in those, which in these times think and speak charitably of them; and they are so many in number, and of so good quality, that indeed to the Popish and episcopal faction, all the kingdom almost seems Puritanical; but for this I cannot think the worse of them. But thirdly, when I consider Puritans, and compare them with their common notorious adversaries, than their goodness seems most evident to me, and if it were legibly ingraved in the open wickedness and scandal of their chief opposers. Nothing but Truth, holiness, and goodness, seems to me to be the cause, that Papists do so implacably abominate them: that our proud Hierarchists, Ambidexters, and Neuters in Religion, do so uncessantly pursue their subversion; that Court-flatterers and time-serving Projectors, and the ravenous Caterpillars of the realm, do so virulently prosecute them with defamations and contumelies; that Stage-poets, Minstrels, and the jesting buffoons of the age, make them the principal subject of derision: Lastly, that all the shameless rout of drunkards, lechers, and swearing ruffians; and the scume of the vulgar are so tickled with their reproach, and abuse. Certainly, nothing but an unappeasable antipathy could be the cause of all this, and no testimony of goodness can be more sure, unerring, and unanswerable than such antipathy.  
Amongst wicked men there may be particular hatred, but not a general antipathy: One wicked man hates not another as wicked, but rather loves him therefore, or else the World did not observe a decorum in loving her own, and hating strangers: As there cannot be division in Satan's kingdom; so there cannot be communion or compatibility betwixt Christ's and Satan's Subjects. But 'tis a miserable thing to see how far this word Puritan in an ethical sense dilates itself. Heretofore it was puritanical, to abstain from small sins; but now 'tis so to abstain from gross open sins. In the mouth of a Drunkard, he is a Puritan which refuseth his cups; In the mouth of a Swearer, he which fears an oath; In the mouth of a Libertine, he which make any scruple of common sins; In the mouth of a rude soldier, he which wisheth the Scotch war at an end without blood. It is sufficient that such men think themselves tacitly checked and affronted by the unblamable conversation of Puritans, Bishop Lake that good and godly man moved at the declining state of his time, is said to have expressed his regret thus: We fear, saith he, a relapse into Popish error, and superstition; but my heart misgives me worse than so: utter irreligion and atheism, me thinks, begins to prevail strangely amongst us: we are not so likely to lose the light of truth, as the heat of zeal; and what benefit is in Religion, where the name of it is honoured, but the power of it is not at all seen? where God's Will is truly understood, but his commands are wholly slighted? where men know like Christians, but live like Heathens? The soul of Religion is hearty devotion, and that grows daily more and more ridiculous amongst us; and yet Religion without the soul of it, is rather a curse than a blessing to us. No impiety is so heinous in an ignorant Sodomite, as want of Piety is in a right instructed Israelite. In this wise I have heard that good Prelate did complain; and this makes me think, that he had in his complaint some respect to this word Puritan, than which, certainly the devil hath not a more fatal engine whereby to confound religion, and to subvert all true zeal, goodness, and devotion. Thus far it appears what a vast circumference this word Puritan has, and how by its large acception it is used to cast dirt in the face of all goodness, theological, civil, or moral: so that scarce any moderate man can avoid its imputation. And thus it does mischief to men, not commonly noted for Puritans, but if a man be so noted, though perhaps irregularly, than it is farther otherwise abused: for all such a man's evil shall be charged upon his Puritanism, and all his good defaced for his Puritanism. Such a man is condemned for murder, and adultery; and at his death gives strong assurances of unfeigned repentance, and contrition of heart. He was a Christian, a Protestant, a Minister, a Puritan; yet this crime is recorded and blown abroad, not for the shame of Christians, Protestants, Ministers, but of Puritans. And as for his attestation of deep humiliation, how excellent soever, the honour of them, if any be acknowledged, shall redound to the Christian, the Protestant, the Minister, to any thing else except the Puritan.  
Howsoever in the first place it ought to be observed, that an unclean stream does not always receive its uncleanness from the filth of the fountain, but in the second place a pure stream necessarily infers a pure Source. 'tis true, Trees are known by their fruits, and so are men generally by their works; but this similitude holds not in all men, at all times: for good men sometimes commit soul sins, and bad men perform laudable services. David defiles Uriah's wife, and to conceal it from the world, makes drunk and murders Uriah; and together with him casts away the lives of many other faithful soldiers: yet nothing moved at this his own misdoing, at the same time he sentences to death a Subject of his for damnifying a neighbour, to the value of a poor lamb: what might Joab, and the other privy Ministers of these his foul deeds, censure all this while of this his externally professed sanctity, and purity, and strictness in point of justice to other men; or of his so great indignation against pet●y offenders? what might they judge of the root, from whence these fruits sprung? did they conclude these fruits, good? or did they conceive that such fruits might grow upon a good stock? It's strange, that he which would be so rigid to a petty felon, should himself find no remorse at his own murder and oppression, in spoiling so gallant a Commander, of his wife, of his sobriety, of his life, and to continue so long a time without regard either what himself had done, or what Uriah had suffered. But it's well, David lived in those times when the name of Puritanism was not invented to blast all goodness: had he lived amongst us, he had been accounted a Puritan, and being a Puritan, God might have forgiven him, but the world never would: but it seems the world was not then poisoned with the same base word, though I believe under some other nick-name goodness was always odious: for we read, that for that very sin of David, God's name was evil spoken of amongst the wicked. So Solomon the son of seduced Bathsheba, if we censure him by many of his actions, perhaps Jeroboam, and Ahab that made Israel to sin, were not personally addicted to so much excess of bodily lust, and pollution, nay perhaps many heathens and Turks have detested his enormous lubricities.  
I speak not this to countenance sin, but to discountenance rash censures of sinners, wishing all that think themselves frail and mortal, to turn their eyes inwards, and to lay their hands upon their own mouths, forbearing to censure all sins, but most especially the most latent and obscure of all sins, hypocrisy.  
Solyman the magnificent is held the honestest of all the Princes which reigned in his time, not excepting Christian Princes, nay not excepting the great Father of them all, the Apostolic man of Rome: yet this is no shame to Christianity, but to Christians rather; nay I wish it might be accounted rather a rebuke, than a shame; rather a rebuke to humble them, than a shame to confute them. For Christ tells us that many times the first are last, and last first, God sees not as man sees, and yet he that will judge uprightly aught to see as God sees, and not as man. So much of the extensive infamy of this word Puritan, now of its intensive malignancy: but little more needs to be spoken hereof, for he which tells you who is a Puritan, for the most part tells what is a Puritan.  
The Papist we see hates one kind of Puritans, the Hierarchist another, the Court Sycophant another, the sensual Libertin another; yet all hate a Puritan, and under the same name many times hate the same thing. He which is an enemy to our Religion which is the truth, hates the Puritan as an enemy to Truth; he which is an enemy to Piety, Policy, Morality, charges the Puritan of being the same: wherefore whatsoever is hated by the perverted and disaffected in Religion, Piety, Policy, Morality, is a Puritan, and whosoever is a Puritan, is censured, hated, and slandered as a man perverted and disaffected in Religion, Piety, Policy, and Morality.  
This sufficiently appears by the common slanders of all goodness in these days, and particularly by the Bishop of Downe, for as he justifies Jesuits, Anabaptiss, and the Powder-Traiters before Puritans; so he describes, and proscribes whole Religions, Sects, and kingdoms for Puritans.  
In the year of grace 1588., when the Spanish Armado had miscarried, notwithstanding that his holiness of Rome had so peremptorily christened it, and as it were conjured for it, One of that Religion was strangely distempered at it, and his speech was as 'tis reported, God himself was turned Lutheran: By which, for certain, he meant heretical. 'Tis much therefore that my Lord of down, now that Episcopacy is so foiled in Scotland, has not raged in the like manner, and charged God of turning Puritan: but surely, if he has spared God, he has not spared any thing else that is good; and if he has spared to call God Puritan, he has not spared to call Puritan devil: but to conclude, if the confused misapplication of this foul word Puritan be not reformed in England, and that with speed, we can expect nothing but a sudden universal downfall of all goodness whatsoever. AElius Adrianus the Emperor, about an hundred years after our Saviour, having been certified by Serenius Granianus, Proconsul of Asia, that the Christians in those parts were illegally oppressed by the malice of unjust Sycophants, sends this his imperial edict to the next successor Minutius Fundanus.  
If the Provincials can prove aught against the Christians, whereof they charge them, and can at the bar of justice make good the same, let them proceed in a judicial course: but let them not appoach, the Christians merely for the name, by clamouring, and railing scandals against them: For it is expedient, if any be disposed to accuse, that the accusation be throughly known, and judicially tried you; therefore if any accuse the Christians that they transgress the laws, see that you judge and punist according to the quality of the offence, but if any upon spite or malice by way of calumny complain agai●st them, see you chastise such for their malice, and repay them with condign punishment. I began with a Marquesso, I end with an Emperor, both read the same Lecture, both teach us a difference betwixt privy malicious calumny and open judicial accusing, or impleading; God sends us to harken to both, as much as the necessity of our case requires it.  
FINIS.