JUDAH'S JOY AT THE OATH. LAID OUT IN A SERMON ON the 2 Chro. 15, 15. for England's example in embracing the Parliamentary Covenant with readiness and rejoicing.  
Hereunto is annexed a brief and moderate Answer to the Protestation Protested; discovering the unsoundness of that interpretation of the Nationall Covenant, and the weakness of the grounds there suggested for Separate and independent Churches.  
By JOHN GEREE Master of ARTS, and PREACHER of GOD'S WORD in TEWKSBURY.  
Published by order of the House of Commons.  PSALM 76.11. 
Vow and pay unto the LORD your GOD.  
LONDON, Printed by R. Oulton for John Bartlet, and are to be sold at the sign of the gilt Cup by Saint Augustine's Gate, 1641.   

TO THE Right Worshipful NATHANAEL STEPHEN'S Esquire, one of the Knights of Parliament, for the County of Gloucester: Grace and peace in CHRIST JESUS.  
SIR,  
YOur courteous intelligence touching the Parliamentary Vow, occasioned these meditations presented unto you: It is our Office to communicate the good which we ourselves are partakers of. That good news much refreshed me, 
The next day after the opening of this text there entered into the Protestation above 400 of the Inhabitants of the Town of Tewksbury.  & I thought it my duty to comfort others with the same consolations, that endeavour wanted not present fruit, some expressing present Joy, and very many quickly joining in so good a work. This encouraged me to make more common, what was first provided for a few, and then I could think of no fit Patron than yourself, not only for your long continued, and great respect to me, but especially because this, whatsoever it is, had its first rise occasionally from you: I expect not this should add any light to you, but to others it may, and to you life. The work you have in hand needs much encouragement, not only in regard of many difficulties which require Industry, but many affronts, and censures, which need patience to digest them, and some congratulations to balance them: the best need Encouragement: And respective expressions even of Inferiors sometimes enliven Superiors in place and grace. When Sant Paul saw the brethren's respect in meeting him; Act. 28, 15. he thanked God and taken courage. This Treatise may a little discover unto you, what good acceptance your Endeavours find with the best affected; They rejoice in you, bless God for you, and this I hope will make you with Saint Paul, thank God, and if not add to, yet confirm your courage for all good causes whatsoever the effect be: that is the aim, and shallbe the continual and earnest prayer of him who is  
Yours, much obliged in the Lord Jesus, JOHN GEREE. From my Study in Tewksbury, Maii 24, 1641.   

JUDAH'S JOY AT THE OATH.  2 CHR. 15.15. 
And all Judah rejoiced at the Oath.  
TO be civilly wise (they say) it is requisite that we not only study Books, but men: Experience of the dispositions of men being no less necessary to complete prudence, than the rules of wisdom, but he that would be wise to salvation, needs but the study of GOD'S Book; which God hath so contrived, that in studying it, we study men also: For it contains not only hagiographa, 
2 Tim. 3, 15.  holy writings, holding forth precepts of divine wisdom, but historica deciphering the tempers and dispositions of all men in Spiritual matters, that it may make us expert to work, and win upon them, when we are to deal with them in Spiritual things. And as all sacred stories conduce to this holy prudence, so none more than these of Chronicles, and yet some it may be, may count them superfluous, because in many things so jumping with what we read in Samuel, and Kings; but that Argument is as strong against Deuteronomy, and 3. of the Evangelists, as against this of Chronicles. Besides, this is not a bare repetition, but with weighty supplements. After David's possessing the Kingdom of Israel, there were some Additions to the Ordinances of Moses, and that more than of mere order, as Music? This might have bred scruples in the minds of men, that this was a usurpation by David; or governors have more power of adding to the Ordinances of God, than other Scriptures allow them, had not the story of Chronicles informed us that the rise of this Addition was the command of God by his Prophets, 2 Chro. 29, 25. Furthermore between the former stories and this, there is this remarkable difference. These after the division of the Kingdoms into Israel and judah, are exact in the story of the Kings of Israel, and touch judah's story lightly: on the contrary, Chronicles touch Israel's story obiter, but that of the Kings of juda at large, as may appear by this one story of Asa, which in Kings is comprised in a few verses of one, but here comprehends 3 whole Chapters; Two of which set forth his excellency, the third his infirmity: the one for imitation, the other for caution; the one teaching what we should be, the other what after a long profession we may come to be, though we belong to God, that we may neither be secure of our standing, nor austere in our censures. In the first Chapter is set down his carriage in War, and peace; In peace there is declared his piety and policy. His piety is commended v. 2. proved v. 3, 4, 5. it was complete in putting away evil, and setting up good, and that by command. Things thus settled, lest Asa should Act Rehoboams part, and forsake the Lord, Zera is sent with a mighty Army, to try and exercise his graces; Asa makes preparation, but relies and prays to God, and becomes victorious. This done he returns, and while their hearts were warm with fresh mercy, Azariah who knew how good a word is, spoken in due season, comes in the Spirit of the Lord, and striketh while the Iron is hot, and gives good counsel, showing in God's way, what help they should still find; amplified by the contrary in Israel, forsaking God, and thence he infers a strong exhortation, v. 7. The Son it seems was seconded by the Father, which did so work on the good King that his heart is lifted up in the ways of God, and sets to a more through Reformation, puts away the Idols (Idols should be put down aswell as Jdolatry) and he made this reformation as large as his dominion, and that with great success: God doth use to prosper that courage that is from him, and for him, stirred and directed by his word, and tends to his glory. The people assemble, offer first their Cattle in Sacrifice, and then themselves in Covenant, make a league offensive, and defensive with God, and that with abundance of affection, as appears ver. 19 and not only in, but after the doing as you hear— And all judah rejoiced at the Oath.  
Joy is the inlargment of the heart for some present good. This Covenant joined with an Oath, was apprehended as a Spiritual good, so they rejoiced. Here's then, 1 An affection, Rejoiced, 2 The Subject, judah with its extent, Al●uda, 3 the Object, The Oath the Covenant, for cleaving to the true God & true Religion. This is registered for our learning: hence then,  
All that are truly Godly, Doct. should rejoice at a Nationall Covenant, made for the suppressing of the false, and the preservation of true Religion. 2 Chro. 30, 21, 23. We see joy at the restauration of Religion, then how much more when it is done by Covenant, yea after they counselled to keep other 7 days (not another Passeover) but to spend seven days in the service of GOD, and who knows whether this counsel were not such as Ezra's by Covenant, Ezra 10, 3. It's most probable it was, and it was with joy; how ever we may argue a maiori, so also from that of the Psalmist Psal. 122, 1. But more full to our purpose is that 2. Chro. 23, 16, 17. Where you have the Covenant, the fruit of it, and how it was entertained with joy, ver. 21. so 2 Chro. 29, 10. And this was not personal, but without question Nationall: He did it as a King, and so the Kingdom with him, as appears by the Issue, ver. 20. The Elders go along v. 28. there's a Congregation, and was not this with joy? See verses 25, 28, 30, 36.  
Because this is a sign of the graces of God, Reason 1 not only residing, but excelling in the people of God: To keep up Religion in purity, requires grace, but to renew it & that by Covenant argues zeal and undaunted and unconquered resolutions, as it was said of jehosaphat, 2 Chro. 17, 6. his heart was lift up in the ways of God, carried on the grown wings of Faith and zeal over all impediments. And should not we rejoice in this, to see such signs of grace in a Kingdom? I am sure had we David's Spirit, we should 1 Chro. 29, 9 See what joy there was for that one discovery of good affection to God, Phil. 4, 10. The Apostle rejoiced greatly, that their care of him did flourish again, not for the profit he reaped, but for the grace they shown in such a Nationall Covenant; men's care of God doth flourish again, care of his service, and should not we much more rejoice? sure we should, and will if we be not wicked, and so hating grace, or proud and envying it, which far be they from us.  
A Nationall Covenant for reformation, Reason 2 is an excellent means of reformation, of suppressing the false, and setting up the true Religion, so it is to be rejoiced at. That it is a means of reformation experience may show. Where ever was it undertaken that it failed? See here in Asa, in Hezekiah, in Joash, or Jehoaida's time, when this was made, Idols and Idolatry went presently down, and the service of God as fast up, see 2 Chro. 15, 16, and 2 Chro. 23, 17, 18, and 29, 10, 35, 36. and 34, 31, 32, 33. So Ezra 10.3, 5, 17. And how should it be otherwaves? For entering into Covenant shows zeal, courage, and resolution, and when it is Nationall, there is outward strength added to strength of Spirit, and what can let? 2 Chro. ult. he did it with all his heart, and prospered. When men Covenant, they do it with all their might, and will prosper: when men come to this to renew their Covenant with God, he will renew his Covenant with them, and bless their undertake. And if God be ●ith us, who can be against us? Iosh. 1, 5, 6. There be two promises made to joshua, one subordinate to the other: The main the Apostle makes common, and with the same reason we may infer the latter; the Condition is this, ver. 7. Be strong. Now the Covenanting shows this strength of Spirit or resolution, and therefore all lets come down, and reformation will come up; and if reformation be effected, then there is cause of joy. Reformation is a thing that the people of God have always and should rejoice in. Nehem. 8. the restauration of one ordinance what joy it caused, ver. 17. So likewise 2 Chro. 30. and if any thing be cause of joy, Reformation is: That which removes causes of sorrow, and brings many causes of joy, that will be rejoiced in. But this reformation doth, It removes causes of sorrow, for it removes sin, It's an healing of our backslidings, which is cause of sorrow, so of all corruptions in Religion; now what cause of sorrow these be, see Ezra 93. Pet. 10. 1. Ezek. 36, 33. It removes fears, and fear hath torment, 1 John 4, 18. When we are in our sins we have cause to tremble at the threaten, as Ezra 9, 3.4 It removes judgements, so Hezekiah aimed and found, 2 Chor. 29, 10. and 2 Chro. 15.2, 3, 4, 5. Again, it brings causes of joy: For hereby God is glorified, God is exalted, who was before neglected, false worship is a provocation, giving his glory to another, going a whoring, Reformation is a setting up his word for rule, and giving him the worship he requires. Now when God is glorified, should not we rejoice, Psal. 97. 1. Psal. 42 10. He that was so wounded at God's dishonours, would not he as greatly rejoice at God's glory? without question, and nothing else was the cause of the joy. 1 Chro. 29, 9 Again, the good of men's souls is furthered, for hereby men are brought into the way of life and salvation, Poison is taken out of their food, leaven out of their services, their Souls will be edified, services respected, persons saved, and that we should rejoice in: There's joy in heaven, for this, if for one soul, much more for many. Act. 11, 18. 3. This is the way to prosperity, to have God bless us in all we put our hands unto, for now we keep Covenant with him, he will likewise keep Covenant with us, and that is to bless us in all we put our hands unto. Deut. 28. So 2 Chro. 15, 15. And so in Hezekias' time, the Land recovered its pristine honour, and strength lost by wicked backsliding Abaz. So then there is great cause to rejoice in a Nationall Covenant of Reformation, because it will produce Reformation which is comfortable many ways; It's the regeneration of a Nation.  
A Nationall Covenant is a thing that in time of need all Godly hearts do earnestly desire and pray for, therefore they will rejoice at it; Reason 3 they see the need of it, because without it the work will not be done. The opposites while the standers for purity, stand single, are too hard for them, by some way or other, they see the use of it in examples as hath been laid out, they see it is an ordinance of God, and being regulate by the word, they cannot but desire, and pray that God would stir up the hearts of men to it, how often have you in this place heard and joined in prayer with this Petition, that God would move our Sovereign with Josiah, to bring us into a Covenant of reformation. Now what we pray for, we should praise God for, and can we praise God for that we joy not in; The denying or prolonging of the desire is harsh, but the granting of it, is as the tree of life, most refreshing and strengthening, Pro. 13, 12. All then that have had so much goodness as to desire it, and pray for it, must needs rejoice in it.  
Now if you inquire what a Nationall Covenant is, it is a Bond wherein a Nation joins together to bind themselves to God and one another, for the promoting of any public good. Now this is done in divers forms, sometimes by way of single vow, promise, and Protestation; sometimes there is added an Oath, as here there was, for that which is called a Covenant, ver. 12, is here termed an Oath ver. 15. Yea sometimes there is further expressed a curse against those that will not enter or fulfil it. Nehem. 9, 29. All kinds kind firmly, they differ only in degree, Heb. 6, 17, 18. Word, and Oath, are said to be two things which for God to break is impossible, and then for man to break either, must be dishonest and damnable. Thus for proof.  
1. This is useful, first for information, and it may inform us of 2 things, 1 What cause we have in this Nation, of joy, yea of great joy. May not I as the messenger of the Lord of Hosts, say unto you as the Angels? Luk 2, 11. Fear not, for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy which shall be to all people; for in our Nation now is form a Nationall Covenant against corruptions, and for Reformation. A Nation is either Collective, or Representative: The Parliament is the Nation representative, and so the whole Nation hath taken it; not one of the house of Commons or Peers who were present refusing: The Peers also subscribing it with their hands, according to that expression Esay 44, 
Nehem. 9, 38.  5. or as in Nehemiahs' time they set to their seals. And this they have published partly for our consolation, partly for our imitation, and have we not in this cause to rejoice? May not Israel rejoice in those that made it? and the Children of Zion be joyful in their Parliament, who have begun so good a work?  
2. This may show us, that it is our duty to enter into this Covenant. That as this Covenant is already by the Act of the Parliament Nationall representative, so it may be Nationall Collective by the Act of every subject in particular. Ought we not to do that which is matter of joy to the Godly? If it be so bad to make the hearts of the godly sad, and of the wicked glad, Eze. 13, 22. Is it not very good to make the godly glad, and damp the wicked? Our entering into Covenant will do it. Nehem. 10, 28, 29. When the Nobles went before, all that were of understanding, entered into Covenant after them. Our Nobles have gone before, both noble in blood, and in Office, and ought not we now to follow? he that joys not at the Covenant, is condemned by this text, and he that joys and joins not, will be condemned of himself.  
Object. But it may be some out of ignorance of the nature of this work, may scruple touching the lawfulness of this present bond, for whose satisfaction these Arguments following may suffice.  
1. That which is set before us in the approved examples of Scriptures, and hath been in use in famous Churches and Commonwealths, that may lawfully be undertaken by Christian people: But such is this Protestation for the maintenance of true Religion, therefore it is lawful. In the days of Asa, 2 Chro. 15, 12. and of josiah 2 Chro. 34, 31, 32. of Ezra cap, 10.3. and 5 of Nehemia 9, 38. In all these times they made a Covenant for the maintenance of Religion in its purity, according to the word: So in the Kingdom of Scotland 1680 and 81. So in our Kingdom to maintain the privileges of Magna Charta: Therefore this present bond hath good ground for it.  
Ob. The Covenants of Scripture flowed from the King.  
Ans. Not all, as that in Ezra's time, and Nehemiahs, when they were under foreign power, yet they Covenanted his inconsultis. Secondly, Num. 30. we read, vows may be made by those under Authority, only superiors have power at the first notice of them to reverse them. But their silence is consent: so our Sovereign's suffering is approving, and confirming: besides it cannot be imagined that such things as are so unanimously consented to by both Houses, should not be approved by the King, and the Protestation itself is Printed by the King's Printer.  
2. A Covenant or vow, is an Ordinance of God, for the help of humane frailty, to keep us fast to the performance of any necessary duty which we have or are prone to recede from: whence thus I argue; an Ordinance of God undertaken by fit persons on just occasion is lawful, but such is this vow or Protestation, therefore it is lawful. Persons fit for a vow, must be such as are sui juris, that is, free, or at lest sui juris, in regard of the thing vowed.  
Ob. But here the doubt ariseth, how Subjects that are under a King, can be sui juris, and so be free to Covenant, especially in such a thing, wherein there is possibility that their King may be their opponent, by such evil advice, as hath of late been given.  
Ans. One may be sui juris, & free in one respect which is not so absolutely, as a servant that hath an estate free to himself, though he be not sui iuris, in respect of his person, and so cannot make a vow to engage it, yet he is sui Juris, free in regard of his estate, and may by vow engage that. Now though we be Subjects, we be free Subjects, under the protection of Laws, which measure our subjection, and our Sovereign's dominion according to which the King is bound by oath, and equity to govern, receiving his Crown on these terms: whereby it appears, that though the Subjects of England be not sui juris absolutely, yet are they so in what the Laws tie them not to subjection. Now in this Protestation we Covenant only to maintain things established by Law, and that in legal ways, and to ressist illegal pressures, and therefore in these things we are free to make a vow or Covenant: besides it is to be observed, that this Covenant is made by the Houses of Parliament, the highest Court in the Land, who have power to consult and decree what ever is according to Law for public weal, and by them we are, though not commanded, yet permitted, yea invited to enter into this Covenant, and therefore have freedom to enter into it. And as the persons are fit, so are the occasions just, for what is a just occasion of a vow or Covenant, to performance of any thing, but humane frailty and corruption manifested in former violation? as in Hezekiahs and Josiahs' time, the Apostasy to Idolatry occasioned the Covenant against it: so likewise in Ezra, and Nehemiahs' time, former deviation produced the present Covenant to prevent future, and res ipsa loquitur, yea clamat, what gross deviations in all the particulars may justly require a Covenant that we may be more strong to prevention.  
3. Such bonds as are neither against Law, conscience, nor prudence, may be lawfully entered into: But such is this Protestation, therefore it may lawfully be entered into.  
1. This bond is not against law, because it is only for the maintenance of the law, and the prevention of oppressions and Innovations against Law, and by lawful means, and in such a way as is forbidden by no law, therefore there can be no illegality in it.  
2. Nor is it against conscience, because it binds to nothing unlawful, that bond only is against conscience, which is a bond of iniquity: Now this binds only by good means to prevent corruptions in Religion, and oppression in civil liberties or persons for standing for them, wherein if the persons to be opposed be sometimes governors, we are bound to oppose not their Authority, but their Lust, not to hinder their Government, but their Tyranny, which we are not bound to submit to, and it's their honour, and safety, that it should be hindered rather then furthered, it's better to have power curbed, then to abuse it: It's better and rather to be chosen of a conscientious Christian, not to be a King then to be a Tyrant.  
3. Nor is this bond against Prudence, but this is the hardest task to demonstrate, because it hath not such fixed rules, yet we may prove it thus: That bond which is in matters of weight answerable to the engagement needful and possible, that is not against Prudence: But such is this present Protestation, therefore it is not against Prudence.  
1. This is in matters weighty, as in matter of Religion, for which if we prefer the soul and the glory of God (as all aught to do) before life and all outward things, we may enter into the strongest engagements: so for the King's person, estate, and honour, they that rightly esteem the work and care of Sovereignty for the Subject, and thence the bond of respect from the Subject to the Sovereign, will judge that they ought not to think any thing too dear to engage for the safety of the King and his regal State and dignity, and for the liberties of Parliaments, and of Subjects, he that considers that in these the comfortable enjoyment of all we have is involved, will think nothing too much to engage for the maintenance of them; so for mutual defence, if any suffer for a common cause, all suffer in him, and therefore should stand for him as for themselves, and for bringing to punishment the opposers of these, this is as weighty as the things themselves which cannot otherwise be maintained, but by suppressing those which undermine them. And lastly, for the peace of the 3 Kingdoms, they being now as it were one, the division of them is the way to ruin, and so the whole matter of this Protestation is most weighty.  
2. This bond was needful, for these things have been so violated, and the violation and the violators so strengthened, that the friends of these privileges have not been, nor would in likelihood be able to maintain them, unless strengthened by such an unviolable Bond of union.  
3. This Bond is a probable means to effect the thing Covenanted: If it were impossible or improbable, than it were a certain or likely snare which Prudence would dissuade, but it's neither, there be so many that have so great and cordial engagement in the things themselves, both Religion, Liberties, and Concord, that if they do unite, the opposites are no considerable part, so that the friends of these things want nothing to make them prevalent but union, which this Covenant confirming, is a most probable means to make able for the things Covenanted.  
Obj. But what if some fall off, or enough will not come in, or these things should be opposed by foreign force?  
Ans. If so many should fall off, or that so great force should oppose that the parties Covenanting could not by force maintain the things Covenanted, I conceive the intent of the bond than is not to tie men to run on certain ruin, but to maintain these things in a prudential way, to venture state and life, when there is probability such adventure may effect the thing, or else to wait for an opportunity when it may, and not to be drawn by any means fair or foul, from this purpose or resolution.  
Obj. 2. A man by this Covenant may be engaged to further the punishment of his Father, Son, or dearest friend, and is not that a snare?  
Ans. In matter of seducing from the true to false Worship, the case is clear, we must bring any to punishment, how near or dear soever, Deut. 13, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. which may be confirmed by that of our Saviour, Mat. 10, 37. He that loveth Father or Mother more than me, is not worthy of me, and he that loveth Son or Daughter more than me, is not worthy of me: And in case of public weal, if any persist enemies to it, and will not be reclaimed, affection to the Country, and community must overrule natural and private affection, Cicero in his third book of Offices (a precise book for matter of Justice) moves certain cases of this nature, and concludes that though the things be most heinous, if they reach not further than some present damage, as in robbing of Churches or the Treasury. A Son conscious should be silent, but if his Father affect tyranny, or would betray the Country when the things tends to the ruin of the Commonwealth, than he must prefer the safety of the Country before his Father, and further his punishment, and this resolution is rational, therefore the persons we Covenant against, being such as endeavour what tends to the ruin of the Commonwealth, the Father, and so all of kin, if they will not be reclaimed by warning, may by us be furthered to punishment.  
This is useful likewise for trial, Use 2 whether we be true jews, true friends to Religion yea or no: All judah rejoiced at the Oath: They than that rejoice not at our Nationall Covenant, are not of juda, not true Israelites in whom there is no guile: Were they (if they mistake it not) they would surely rejoice, Psa. 126, 1, 2. When the israelites had their Captivity returned, they were even transported with joy. This Covenant is a kind of returning of a Spiritual Captivity under which our Religion and Religious men have been? And can we choose but rejoice? The Parliament are about to enact that the taking or refusing of this Vow shallbe a Touchstone to discover who in profession be of us, who against us; who of Israel, who of Amaleck, But this text will be a closer discovery, Re. 2, 9, & 3, 9 there is speech of some that say they are jews and are not, but of the Synagogue of Satan; in show with the jew, in substance with Satan: so some there be that be in word with us, in heart with Rome. Now these will take the Protestation (if urged) so that cannot discover them, but they will not rejoice in it, they will not be Cordial, this will convince them: A jew indeed will not only take it, but rejoice at it, he that loves a thing will rejoice at the promotion of it, and no man is Religious indeed, but he that loves Religion 2 Thes. 2, 10. Now this Covenant is a means to promote Religion. Never did Shiboleth better distinguish an Ephraimite then this joy an Hyppocriticall professor of our Religion. He may offer to take the Protestation; but he will say but siboleth, he will lisp, he will not speak out cordially, rejoicing at the Oath, & so is laid open.  
This is for reproof of such as do not joy at the Oath, Use 3 at our Nationall Covenant, that have not their hearts in larged with consideration of the graces of God shining in our Parliament-men, with the hopes of the flourishing of Religion, to see the expectation of Papists utterly dashed: be not these matters of greatest joy? Are you not then like those that dream, doubting whether these things be so, because they are so transcendent? If not, if you want joy, then tell me where is your zeal for GOD? Where is your love to Religion? See you not your desires fulfilled, your prayers returned, and are you yet heart-bound? What will then in large you? Our Brethren of Scotland when they renewed their Nationall Covenant, they of them especially that had seen the making, the breaking and renewing of their Nationall Covenant, wept as fast for joy at the renovation, as ever they had for grief at the breach of the Covenant. And shall we have no enlargement of heart? what shame, what sin is this? When we bring a man some special thing which we suppose he highly prizeth, If he look disdainfully, nay carelessly upon it, we will presently repent that we have done it for him. Is not this Covenant a mercy that God looks England should prise? Will not slighting of it, in not being affected with it, show an unworthiness of it, and make God blast it, curse it? Oh then let them be grieved and ashamed that joy not in it: It shows a cold Spirit, a carnal Spirit, not like that of the godly, whose praise is in the Scripture.  
Hence we may draw a threefold Exhortation, Use 4 1 To rejoice in this Covenant: was there ever such a work in the Church without joy? Let not us degenerate. Do you love God? Rejoice to see him glorified. Do you love the Parliament? Rejoice to see their zeal and other grace's flourish. Do you love yourselves? Rejoice to see salvation coming to you? Do you love the Nation? Rejoice to see God's displeasure removed, his favour procured, fear of judgements vanishing, peace and prosperity approaching. Do you love your Brethren? Rejoice that the evil shall be restrained, the weak preserved, the good protected. If Ministers now be silenced against Law for Preaching down Innovations, or people vexed for refusing subjection to them, they may go to any Peer or Parliament-man, and by his Nationall Covenant (he himself having first taken it) require and enjoy his assistance, to be righted, and to have his oppressing persecutor punished, what ever he be, layman or Prelate: Nay if thou canst not look so high as these Spiritual considerations, yet our Covenant is such as may make thee glad: For if any shall now come upon thee with unlawful taxes, will strain thy goods, imprison thy person, etc. thou mayst go to any Peer or Parliament-man, and by virtue of this, require assistance: and is not here cause of joy? Oh then be joyful all the People of the Land, and serve the Lord with gladness. But because it is the work of our Office, not to have dominion over your faith, but to be helpers of your joy, 2 Cor. 1, 24. Give me leave to lay down a few means to further this joy in you.  
Then ponder the benefits of this Covenant, 
Means 1.  It's the head that must move the heart, holy motions flow from holy notions: the more you apprehend and ponder the cause of any affection, the more it stirs: what the eye sees not, the heart rues not, it is true in evils, and it is as true in goods: What the mind apprehends not, the heart joys not, Psal. 63, 5, 6. David was satisfied as with marrow and fatness, with joy in God: but it was by meditating on him. So we by meditating on this Covenant, and the benefits of it, may have our hearts delighted as with marrow and fatness: you may be helped in pondering to see the good in it by the reasons before alleged, which are convincing.  
2. Look upon the examples of Scripture, in this and other places, and that will work upon you; affection is very catching, seeing others grief or joy is very apt to move us, and so will the consideration of the affection of the Saints in Scripture: The Scriptures are a glass, but they are a strong glass, a transforming glass that changeth our souls to the likeness of that we see 2 Cor. 3, 18. But we all with open face beholding as in a glass, the glory of the Lord are changed into the same Image from glory to glory: so is the word to us, when in it, as in a glass, we behold the gracious affections of the Saints: Sure I am, they will make us blush if we be far short and unlike them, and shame will stir us up to reform, as 2 Chro. 30, 15. The forwardness of the people did shame the Priests and Levites, and make them sanctify themselves.  
3. Excite and stir up your hearts, you know though a man find a damp on his Spirit sometimes, yet if he see cause of joy, and set himself to be cheerful, he may attain it, as they did, Nehem. 8.9, 10, 11, 12. Call upon your hearts then to be merry in the Lord, and say it's not a time of drooping but of rejoicing.  
4. If you find any of this holy flame enkindled in you by this Sermon cherish it, blow it up, keep it up, The word is moving for the present, but the impression will not stay long without renewing it: Repeat it therefore in your houses in your minds: rub it again and again upon your Souls.  
5. Pray: Joy is the fruit of the Spirit; pray for the Spirit to work this affection to anoint you with this oil of gladness, to enlarge you to rejoice in this good work: this will be acceptable to God, and no less to us; for when we rejoice in God's service, God will bless us, as may be seen 2 Cro. 30.26, 27.  
We should praise God for it always, 
Exhor. 2.  that which is matter of joy, is matter of praise too: For they are both for good things wherein we are interested: That praise is heartless that comes not from joy, and that joy is carnal which ends not in praise, and therefore these two are usually twins in the hearts of the Godly: joy is the elder Brother, but praise holds him by the heel, Psal. 126, 2. When their mouths were filled with laughter, their tongues were also taken up with singing. When David settled the Ark it was not only with joy, and exultation, but with a Psalm of praise, 1 Cro. 16, 7, 8. and truly this day is Religion settled in our Land, and therefore this deserves praise, a Psalm of Praise, a day of Praise, and God move the heart of the Parliament to this solemn thankfulness, as well as to this courageous resolutnesse, that as they abound in other, so they may in this grace also: In the mean time let us glorify GOD that hath given such grace to them, such mercy to us in time of need; Let this thankfulness then begin in the soul in inward convincement of engagement, and inlargment to God answerable to such a blessing, let thankfulness as a precious spice, flow out in thankful speeches, blessing God with Ezra, who hath put such a thing into the heart of the Parliament to restore and beautify Religion, Ezra 7, 26, 27. And let us add thankfulness of life, which is the life of thankfulness, giving ourselves to God in all holy obedience, and specially to make and keep this Covenant, which is the third and last Exhortation.  
Enter into this Covenant, 
Exhor. 3.  you have been informed it is a duty, and every duty is to be practised: There is a service which is freedom, the service of Christ: and there is a freedom which is servitude, freedom to sin, Io. 8, 31, 32, 34. There is a liberty which is bondage, as that which is carnal, and here's a bondage which is liberty: Take this Vow, it will make you free from the Antichristian yoke and illegal Pressures: Fear not, for you have the Peers of the Land, and Lower house of Parliament fast bound to protect you in this, with life and state. 
Mot. 1.  To excite you, consider the examples in the Scripture, wherein upon all occasions the people have been tractable, as hath been formerly showed: Add to them the noble example of both Houses of Parliament. It's a very jade that will not follow, & he must needs be a dull Christian who cannot be moved with such a cloud of such leaders. Shall we see the men of Israel and judah contending about priority, in bringing David back to his Kingdom, and shall not we rather strive then strain courtesy, who shall be first hereby to bring Christ back again to us, who was departing from us (as well he might) for he was driven from amongst us; his truths being some suppressed, some disgraced, and Popery countenanced, and by degrees introduced. Shall we show less respect to the Antitype than they to the Type, to Christ than they to David? Hath not the Scotch Nation in this given us a brave example? shall we be behind them in duties, whom God hath made to outstrip in outward mercies? 2. If we enter not this Protestation, we shall seem to desert the Houses of Parliament, especially the House of Commons, from which this Protestation did first flow: The House of Commons are chosen by us, entrusted by us, bear the burden for us, spend their time, their strength for us, employ their gifts, engage their persons and estates for us, and in this way have entered into this Protestation. If they should stand alone in it, it might be misinterpreted, so become a snare, and when they have done it for us, should we discourage them? what ingratitude were that? what unworthiness? who would serve? who would venture any thing for such unworthy ones? That Honourable House represents this whole Nation: we have virtually all entered into it, in them we are engaged in all their just and Honourable Actions, and aught to stick to what they have done, so that our entering into this Protestation, will not be much more than what already we are by consequent engaged unto, save only a more formal and actual expression of that in our own persons, which we have already virtually done in the persons of others.  
3. If we enter not this Covenant, we shall desert the cause of God and be ill Christians, for this is undertaken as an effectual means to confirm true Religion, and wound Popery in these Kingdoms to the heart: And sure if any means under heaven can extirpate Popery, this is it, which engageth men not only to reject it, but oppose it, not only in their own persons to departed from it, but with all their might to keep it from coming in amongst us by the wicked and profane plots of others. Now shall we pull our hand from such a work wherein the honour of Christ, and the salvation of men's souls is so deeply concerned? God forbidden!  
4. If we be not ready to this we shall desert the King and be wanting in the duties of good Subjects, for herein we are to protest to maintain his Majesty's Royal person, honour, and estate, and can we be backward to that without impeachment to our Allegiance? Besides; much of the matter of this Vow is concurrent with that of the Oath at his Majesty's Coronation, so the entering into this will be a strengthening unto the performance of that, and thereby we shall do no mean duty of Allegiance. 5. In denying this Vow, we shall desert our beloved Country, and betray the liberties of it, which we herein should protest to maintain, and this Protestation is a means to vindicate them, so far entrenched upon. Now to be wanting to our Country, is to be worse than Heathens, who for the preserving of public weal, have not shunned the greatest dangers or sufferings, & Christianity should elevate humanity, not take it off, but enable and carry on to all civil duties on better & higher grounds. 6. Unless we be ready to this Vow, we shall be injurious to the Court of Parliament for ever, which is the glory, safety, and sinews of our Nation, the privilege whereof, if once impeached, farewell all that's glorious in in free Subjects, we shall hear no more of such glorious things done by Parliaments: These have been secunda Tabula post Naufragium, to save a sinking State, these have been the refuge of the oppressed, if we want Parliaments, if ever we grow downward, we shall have little hope of recovery: and if Parliaments lose their power and privilege, we shall want them, though we have them. 7. If we refuse we shall be enemies to our own comfort and honour? For you see it is a thing to be joyed at, and a man cannot refuse, but suspicions must needs rise concerning him; either that he is ill affected to Religion, or tainted in Loyalty, or no good Patriot, lies under some secret guilt, that makes him loath to enter into that which may return upon his own head, or that he is a man of a base self-seeking Spirit, without true public generosity to put on for any high and holy work and so indeed a Christian of no value: but we have need of direction how to do it, as well as of Argument to encourage to it: we must then observe these rules; We must do it understandingly, 
Direction 1.  though we do it with company, yet not only for company: Others examples may be inter Motiva, but not fundamenta, be motives, not the only grounds of entering into the Covenant: we must understand what the Covenant is that we undertake, and how good it is, and so embrace it. A man being a reasonable creature, must do every thing understandingly, or else it is not reasonable, and so cannot be acceptable service, Rom. 12, 1. 2. We must do it sincerely, not with the mouth alone, but with the heart: God discerns, & abhors Aypocrisy, as they Covenanted 2 Chr. 15, 12. To enter into a Covenant with all their heart, so they performed it, v. 15. 3. We must do it willingly and freely, not forcedly, no not in a mixed sense, for fear of censure or punishment, but voluntarily choosing it as that which is good and eligible: No action is acceptable, but what is done willingly: some things are sinful which are in voluntary, but none good. 4. Yea, we should do it joyfully, being glad of an opportunity to do good, and approve ourselves to God as they did here. 5. We must do it reverently; a Vow is an Ordinance of God, it is made with God, before God, and when we have to deal with God more solemnly, who is glorious, or with Ordinances that are so holy, should not we be reverend? Lastly, we must do it conscientiously, not carelessly, I mean so that when we have done it, we remember it, and make conscience of the observation of it, else we profane it, we lose the end of it, we break many a strict charge in the word of paying our Vows we have made and so indeed may get a curse instead of a blessing, being to God as deceivers, which thing jacob feared then, G. 27, 12. Our Ancestors, at least, the Peers have bound their posterity in a Curse, if they did not uphold the liberties of Magna Charta, which how well (or ill rather) it hath been observed, is no hard thing to conjecture, and why may not that Curse be one main thing causing our woes? I am sure in the Original the words in jeremy may be rendered thus, 
jer. 23, 10.  For the curse or execration the Land mourns: This Covenant is wiselier contrived, being personal, not for posterity, who having not our occasions may want our care, and may degenerate as we sometimes did: let us therefore who do it out of fresh bleeding occasion, be conscientious in it to observe it, to help us it's good to keep a Copy of what we have entered into: keeping it on a table in our houses, may further the keeping of it on the table of our hearts. And oh that that God, who when he had put it into the heart of Hezekia to keep a Passeover in purity, and declare it by Proclamation, gave to judah one heart to do the commandment of the King, and the Princes, by the word of the Lord, would give England one heart in this manner, to enter this Covenant according to the rule of God's word: then would God give us rest round about, as he did to these jews, 2 Chr. 15, 15. Then would he do according to his promise, subdue our enemies, make the haters of the Lord submit themselves, and feed us with the finest of the wheat, Ps. 81, 14, 15, 16. He would do, do I say? nay do we not see he hath done? For is there not newly a grievous plot discovered, defeated, and we preserved, which is like to turn to the further confusion of the adversaries, the glory of the truth, and perfection of reformation: oh than let this confirm us, and comfort us, in this blessed way, that we may prosper here, and being faithful unto death, may inherit the Crown of life: Which God vouchsafe, to whom be glory for ever, Amen.  
FINIS.   

Vindiciae Voti. OR A VINDICATION OF THE TRUE SENSE OF THE NATIONALL COVENANT, in a brief and moderate Answer to the Protestation Protested: Discovering the unsoundness of that interpretation of the COVENANT, and the weakness of the grounds there suggested for Separate and Independent Churches.  
BY JOHN GEREE, Master of ARTS, and Preacher of GOD'S word in TEWKSBURY.  
Published by the Authority of the House of COMMONS.  
LONDON, Printed by R. Oulton for john Bartlet, and are to be sold at the sign of the gilt Cup, near Saint Augustine's Gate. 1641.   

Christian READER,  
AFter I had sent up this exercise about the Protestation to the Press, there came into my hands a Pamphlet named The Protestation Protested, or a Remonstrance showing what is principally required of all those that have or do take the Protestation: Which Treatise so far as it doth concern this title, seemed to me so irrational, that I thought all understanding Christians would rather have smiled at the weakness, then have been any way moved with the Sophistry of it; But finding by experience that not only many of the more intelligent Christians, but even some of reputation in an higher rank, were much taken with it, and the effect of it, that some were scrupled, some attempted a tumultuous removing of things established by Law, under colour of this Protestation, I thought it necessary, that unto this Treatise, pressing the taking of the Covenant, and directing to do it understandingly, I should annex a brief Answer to the unsound interpretation of it by this nameless Author, lest those that have, or may enter into it, by my means, be afterwards by this bad gloss, cast upon either the incomparable burden of a wounded conscience, or unwarrantable and illegal Actions, which will hinder, not further, an holy, legal, and orderly Reformation.   

AN ANSWER TO THE PROTESTATION PROTESTED.  
THE very Title seems to me a riddle, seeing nothing in the Treatise to answer it, this being not an avowing, but a glozing, or rather a glozing of the Protestation, as will appear by the sequel: But lest we should stumble at the threshold, he hath hanged out a light, adding, Or a short Remonstrance, etc.  ECCLES. 5, 45. Page 1. 
When thou vowest a vow unto GOD, defer not to pay it etc.  
THe Author first lays us down a text of Scripture, from consideration of which, compared with this Protestation, he is made to tremble at the small account that many make of so solemn a vow, under which guilt by his exposition he concludes the most of the best Ministers, and people of this Kingdom, who have entered this Protestation; wherein thus far we willingly agree with him. A vow to GOD is a strait and sacred Band, that should not be entered into rashly, but with serious deliberation, Eccles. 5, 2. else in stead of an help, it may become a snare, and be so far from acceptation, that it prove an abomination, as in jephtaes' case, Ludges 11.30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 39 After avow is taken, there ought to be as much tenderness to observe it, as caution before we undertake it, else we shall but double our guilt, and increase GOD'S displeasure against us. What we vow is in itself good, and so caries with it an engagement to performance. Our Vow is second engagement superadded to the first, if after it we be negligent, we break more bonds, and so must needs be more guilty: It's not to be doubted but many enter this Protestation rather for company then conscience, and so will make too little account of keeping it, and need admonition to observe, as well as to enter this Covenant. But that this neglect should be so general, as to include the generality of the Godly, as this Expositor doth make it, that I dare not assent unto, the Psalmist hath taught me more tenderness, Ps. 73, 15. If I will speak thus, behold I should offend against the generation of thy Children. To condemn the godly was such a thing to this blessed Psalmist, that he would renounce sense, and reason, and set upon a serious review, rather than dash upon it: In whose steps had this Author trodden, he would not have been so rash, to have put the fool upon them: He might with less ado than the Psalmist have freed himself from needless Horror, and the godly from unjust censure. But now to the point.  
He gives us the ground of his Censure.  Pag. 2. 
THe Protestation is to maintain the Doctrine of the Church of England, so far as it is opposite to Popery, which they do not perform, so long as they retain and maintain the imposition of the Liturgy, 2 the Discipline, 3 the Government, 4 the Ceremonies.  
Ans. In his very first Argumentation there is a most palpable fallacy, which is so obvious, that its wonder to me, that any man that would undertake to write a Book in a matter of this consequence, should either not themselves see, or should imagine that so many clear eyes that it must needs touch, would not most easily discern, and discover it, for the Argument must be framed thus.  
He that hath solemnly vowed to maintain the Doctrine of the Church of England, so far as it is opposite to Popery, must renounce all Popery, and particularly the imposition of the Liturgy, etc. or else he breaks his vow, and is a fool etc. But the Ministers and people have protested to maintain the Doctrine of the Church of England, so far as it is opposite to Popery. Therefore they must renounce all Popery, and particularly the imposition of the Liturgy etc. or else they break their vows and are fools, in whom GOD hath no pleasure.  
Now what a manifest fallacy is here, a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter, from that which is spoken in some respect, to that which is spoken absolutely; for the Protestation is not against Popery absolutely; but as this Author expresseth it, so far forth, as it is against the Doctrine of the Church of England: what Popery then the Doctrine of the Church of England doth not condemn this Protestation doth not include, being only to defend the Doctrine of the Church of England against Popery and Popish Innovations. But then some will demand is not the Doctrine of the Church of England, against all Popery. I answer, ad hominem. If the things here objected be Popery, than the Doctrine of the Church is not against all Popery, for these things so far as they may be termed Doctrinal, are yet according to the Doctrine of the Church of England; unless you will say that the Doctrine of the Church of England is contrary to the practice of the Church of England, whence then thus I Argue: Either the Doctrine of the Church of England is not against all Popery, or else the imposition of the Liturgy, Ceremonies, Discipline, Government, are not Popery; for the Doctrine of the Church of England is not against them. If the Doctrine of the Church of England is not against all Popery, he that vows to maintain that Doctrine against all Popery, vows not against Popery absolutely, but only as it is against that Doctrine: and then this Author's inference from this vow against Popery, with this restraint, that we must therefore oppose all Popery absolutely, is a manifest inconsequence: on the other side, if the Liturgy etc. be not Popery, as they must not be, if the Doctrine of the Church of ENGLAND be complete against it, than they are not abjured: So however it be, the Covenanter is free from breach and folly: And this I conceive is so clear, that it needs no further confirmation: yet a little more to evince the absurdity of it, by other particulars in the Protestation, we protest to maintain every person that maketh this Protestation, in whatsoever he shall do in the lawful pursuance of it. If a man should thence infer, that we must defend him whatsoever he shall do in the pursuance of it, if he shall move sedition or the like, were not this a violation of the sense of this Covenant? and is not the same, when we stretch the opposing of Popery so far as it is opposite to the Doctrine of the Church of England; to be meant against all Popery whatsoever? though it be granted, it be maintained in the Church of England? His foundation then is most rotten, and what firmness can be in the building?  
But he makes the objection, Page 2. which he endeavours to answer aswell as he can: The Objection is, that these things are established by the Law, therefore we may not cast them off till the Law be abrogated, and we protest against Popery, to cast it out so far as lawfully we may.  
Thus the Protestor, wherein he hath objected, what he hath not well answered, though all be done very rawly. For first he should have framed the Argument thus, Those things are established by the Laws of England, where the Doctrine of the Church of England is established, and therefore according to the Doctrine of the Church of England, these things cannot be interpreted to be Popery; and so not within the Verge of that Protestation, which is against Popery, as it is opposite to the Doctrine of the Church of England: which objection if he ever answer, erit mihi magnus Apollo. The Objection which he hath made, he strengthens from the words of the Protestation, that we protest to cast out things as far as lawfully we may, which clause doth not at all respect the matter protested against, but the means and manner of pursuance, that we shall not do it in any tumultuous or seditious or illegal way, but by honest and lawful means. A thing needful to be taken notice of by many respective Readers of this Book, who while they learn of him that they must oppose the things mentioned, as parts of Popery, from themselves infer, that it ought to be done in a violent way, without waiting for the direction of Authority which in private persons is not to oppose lawfully, but illegally, and seditiously.  
But now let us hear his Answer. First saith he, All Laws are to be interpreted according to their clear intention and end. Now the Law for reformation never intended to allow or set up Popery in the Church of England.  
Ans. This rule for the interpretation of Laws, in the 
(a) There is a twofold intention of Laws, one general arising from men's goodness, and that may be to remove whatsoever is evil, the other special arising from men's light, and that is to remove such particulars as are discovered to be evil the latter intention is the rule of interpreting Laws, not the former, and this Author speaks of the former.  sense he takes it, is a device of his own, that hath neither authority nor reason, for the confirmation of it. Laws are to be interpreted according to the mind of the Law giver, which the Grammatical sense of the words doth usually discover. Indeed in matters doubtful, where the words are capable of a double sense, the intention of the Law may there clear, what sense is most Genuine: but that the general intention of of the Law shall give a sense contrary to the letter of the Law, is without doubt, a groundless and dangerous fancy. It's true, the Law never intended to set up Popery, but the question is, whether it be destructive of all Popery. The Law can reach no further than the light of the Lawgivers, who if they saw not all Popery, could not by their Laws condemn all, nor did, if the things in Question be Popery. Lex Currit cum praxi. The general practice especially of those that are regular discovers the mind of the Law, and the practice hath been to maintain these things, therefore it's not the meaning of the Law to condemn them, nor of this Protestation to abjure them.  
Secondly he saith, If humane Laws be found to be contrary to God's word, they are invalid and void ipso facto.  
Ans. This rightly understood is in part a truth, but here misapplied, we are subjected to all Terrene superiors by the Lord and under the Lord, when they then command any thing contrary to GOD, the Laws have no binding power, because by a superior Law we are bound to the contrary: But yet such Laws are not Ipso facto void, or if void, yet they are void in foro conscientiae, in the Court of Heaven, not in foro politico, in Courts on Earth, though we are not bound to obey them, yet we are without resistance to submit to such penalties, under the danger of Sedition, which were there no Laws, we were free from. Again, this Thesis of his is misapplied, for thence he infers. Thirdly, that having made this Protestation, we ought to have no communion with the aforesaid particulars, notwithstanding they be confirmed by Law, which inference is therefore faulty, because the Protestation is only against Popery as it is against the Doctrine of the Church, and that which is confirmed by our law, though it be Popery, yet it is not Popery opposite to the Doctrine of the Church of England. If the Laws of the Land, and the Doctrine of our Church, had their establishment in different Courts, then that which is established by Law, might be against the Doctrine of the Church; but the Doctrine of the Church, and the Laws of the Lands, having both their establishment in Parliament, what is confirmed by Law cannot be Popery against the Doctrine of the Church, and therefore this Authors arguing must needs be irrational.  
But now we are furnished with a second Objection which we are to consider of, and whether this Author hath with any better success taken of, than he hath the former, what saith he, If the Parliament did not by Popery understand the Liturgy, Ceremonies, Government of our Church, and he gives good reason to conceive they did not, for then many of them would not have taken it. What shall we do then? that is his Quaere, now hear his Answers. First saith he, we are sure they intended in against all Popery. To which I answer; that its most clear, and so he himself expresseth in the former Page, they only intent it against Popery, as it is opposite against the Doctrine of the Church of England, and such Popery the mentioned things cannot be. Secondly saith he, They express, that the words are not to be extended to the maintaining of any form of Worship, Discipline, or Ceremonies in the said Church: What doth he thence infer, why forsooth? that therefore we may not Protest for the maintenance of these; why, was that the Question whether we should be bound to maintain them, or whether we are bound to abolish them? What ridiculous disputing then is this? But hence I Argue: If the Protestation do not include them for confirmation, because they are no parts of Doctrine; it doth not exclude them for abolition, but leaves them for determination to another opportunity. Thirdly saith he, Suppose that at the first making of the Protestation, that these particulars were not mentioned in the Catalogue of Popery, yet no good Christian can or will deny, that the House of Commons did not at all intent to exclude what ever should pertain to Popery as a branch thereof. This Author is very good at bold assertions, but all as bad in confirmations, for what a good Christian may do in weakness, I will not determine; but no wise Christian, as far as I can conceive, can judge, that what ever shall be found to be Popery, is included in this Protestation, but what ever is found to be Popery against the Doctrine of the Church of England, which is the term limiting Popery in the Protestation. Fourthly he Argues from the hopes that we have by this Parliament, of such a Reformation, as will not deserve the name of Reformation, if all Popery be not made to be packing. I join with him in all comfortable hopes from this Honourable House, but what is this to his matter in hand? All the Reformation to be expected from this Parliament, is not expected by this Protestation, this is one degree to reform whatever Popery or Innovation is against Law established, this done, the Parliament is proceeding further to perfect hoped for Reformation, by removing corruptions established by Law. Fiftly, Suppose saith he, that it could be imagined by any reasonable man, that the House of Commons had no thought implicitly to include the foresaid things in the farthel of Popery: shall private and particular Christians knowing these to be Popery, and Antichristian, being bound by their solemn Vow and Protestation, never reform themselves etc. I Answer no man can; if (as he is rational) he deal rationally. But suppose that these things were not included in the Protestation according to the intention of the House of Commons, which may appear by unanswerable grounds.  
1. Because the express words be against that Popery which is against the Doctrine of the Church of ENGLAND, which these things mentioned, established by Law in our Church cannot be.  
Secondly, Since the general taking, and first making of this Protestation, the Government and Discipline of the Church hath been in strong dispute whether it should continue or no, which had it been Protested against, there had been no place for dispute, which yet doth neither take off the friends of that side from asserting, nor is used by the opposites to Prelacy, to overbeare their Antagonists, which had been the easiest and speediest way of victory, if this Author's fancy had had truth in it.  
Thirdly, Under favour, though (as I shall make it appear) I am no friend to the foresaid things, yet it was not rational that the Parliament should include these things in their PROTESTATION; for these things being established by Law, and fixed in many of the members hearts aswell as Laws, to desire men presently to abjure them, before a full debating of them, seems a point of such rashness, yea Tyranny, as will not consist with the transcendent wisdom, and justice of that Honourable Court.  
Fourthly, Nay further I conceive (under favour) that it would not have stood with the duty of that House to their Sovereign (of which I know they are most tender) nor that respect that they own to the Laws of the Land, to protest against things established by Law, till the Law itself be abrogated, for none may Protest in such a case further than they are free: Subjects can challenge no more freedom than the Laws allow them, where and while Laws do tie them, they are in subjection: and therefore could not in point of duty Protest against such things, in such a manner, to which the Laws binds them. The power of the House of Commons (where this Protestation was framed) is no doubt great, far beyond my apprehension, yet in this case I conceive their power over Laws is with the consent of the Lords, and his Majesty, to abolish them, but not Protest against them, while they are in force. By all which Arguments its manifest that the Parliament neither did really, nor could rationally, intent in the Protestation to Protest against these things established by Law, and if we suppose truly they intended it not, this Author doth suppose still falsely, that we are by our Protestation bound to reject and oppose them, for its an old sound rule, Oaths, and Protestations, are to be expounded according to the meaning of the framer and giver, not of the taker, else by a dishonest aequivocation, any thing almost may be eluded; therefore what the Protestation meant not, we in the taking are not tied to. And if this disputer should think this should bind us in the things mentioned, though the Parliament intended no such thing, but the contrary: He may as well affirm that we are bound to maintain his impendant Churches, for whereas we Protest to maintain the lawful Rights and Liberties of the Subject, and every person that maketh this Protestation; he may infer, but independency is in his judgement, a right and liberty of all Christians entering into this Covenant, therefore we are tied to maintain it: This inference hath less dissonancy from the letter of the Covenant, then that of his about the particulars questioned; yet though I believe he hath as good a will to this as the former; he dare not be so bold as to draw such a conclusion, because though the letter may bear it, yet the judgement of the compilers makes it manifest, it was far from their meaning, which reason likewise might have kept him from including the particulars in hand.  
But now lastly, he comes in with other queries, What then, shall men never reform themselves, but live and die Communicants, etc.  
Ans. How doth this follow, may not men Reform themselves in these things, unless they do it by virtue of this Protestation; did not all that held these unlawful, before this Protestation was form, in their own practice withdraw from these things, so far as they held them unlawful, and against the word of GOD, and so may and aught to do still, though they be not included in the Protestation? But to proceed, this Author next brings in his Scholars, questioning how it may appear, that the forementioned particulars are branches of Popery. And he feigns them, speaking, that if their Consciences were convinced thereof by the word of GOD, then by their Protestation, as well as by GOD'S word, they were bound to renounce them:  
Ans. But by his leave he makes them speak what many will not, and none ought to speak. If these things be Popish, then by the word of GOD we ought to renounce them indeed, but by this Protestation we ought not, unless they be Popery opposite to the Doctrine of the Church of England. I myself must needs account these things, or the most of them of the same alloy with many things by the Doctrine and Laws of our Church already condemned and abolished, else I should not have been nor continued, as in part I do, a sufferer for witnessing against them: And I do as earnestly desire Reformation of them as of any thing; that little grace that I have, doth as much Act that way to wrestle with the Lord, for the rooting up of those plants which our heavenly Father hath not planted, as any way, but nothing engaged by this Protestation, but only by that allegiance which I own to Christ and his word. But some may say, If you be against those things, why do you plead for them?  
Ans. Mistake not, I plead not for them, but to clear the sense of the Protestation, that it may not be wrested to include them, as it is by this Author, of which wresting I see and fear manifest inconveniences.  
First the Honourable Houses of Parliament are by it wronged, and are thereby like to grow more opposite to the removing of the things here pleaded against, and so (as it is usually) this making haste will hinder the work it aims to further, unless this conceit be seasonably corrected.  
Secondly, This misinterpretation will hinder many from entering this Protestation, which remora of so good a work, had need be removed, which this Answer may further.  
Thirdly, Many that have taken it, are partly troubled, because such things are yet suffered that they think they have Protested against; which they think they should not only omit to Act, but also by all means oppose; partly I see men are taken off for praying for the abolition of such things, as they conceive are already cast off by Protestation, and are inclined by carnal violence under this pretence, to do that in the Church, which by a spiritual violence they should endeavour to prevail for with GOD, that so they may be prevailers with men, to have public corruptions purged by public authority, which is a safe, comfortable, and honourable way.  
Lastly, Some that think somethings in themselves lawful and tolerable, I find by this Protestation Protested, to conceive them unlawful, as against the Protestation though in themselves indifferent. As to instance, though they think and justly, That the use of the Liturgy in the whole form of it, as a complete service of GOD to be many ways vicious, yet they think the use of some of the forms there, which are without exception, and most suited to the people's wants, to be in themselves lawful. Notwithstanding though not for his Arguments, to prove them Popish, yet for the exposition of the Protestation they refuse them, and not only refuse them, but lay imputation on those that use them, as breakers of their Vow and Protestation. Now as I have proved, no use of the Service-Book is against the Protestation, so nor the use of some prayers in such a manner out of the Book, can as I conceive, be justly termed Popish: for suppose that the form we use be in the Masse-Book, why may we not aswell ask the same Christian Graces, that Papists and we both conceive to be necessary to a Christian soul, as express the same faith touching the Trinity or any other point wherein we agree in the same words, and that without the guilt or imputation of Popery? And again, he that doth thus use the Book, not according to the whole frame of it, but selecting what is most holy, nor according to the set words of it, but with liberty of correcting the expressions, which to our times seem harsh, and unsuitable, doth hereby as I conceive, avoid his second Argument, the imposition makes it not Popish to him, because he useth it with liberty of conscience; To this we may add further, There is I conceive a true and useful distinction to be made of humane constitutions: some are helps, and so are in genere boni, good in their kind, the other have no ground, but mere imposition, and so are in genere mali, in their kind evil. Now forms of Prayer are humane helps, and so good in their kind: Prayer is an Ordinance of GOD, it requires a form of words, especially in public; all men are not able to conceive a form, and therefore a composed form to them is an help, 
The form of words in Prayer is not the service, but modus, the manner of serving God in that Ordinance.  and so good in its kind. Now for the Governors of the Church where there is need of a form, to tie to one form which they conceive pure, of purpose to exclude others, which they conceive corrupt, is I conceive no usurpation upon Christ. And this was the end of our Godly reformers in appointing this Prayer Book: Now though many men need not this help, and it may be can conceive better expressions, yet being that forms are human helps, and not in themselves evil: I conceive we may use some of the Prayers without sin, for though it's often said, that we may not do evil that good may come thereon, yet I never heard it proved, that we may not sometime do a less good, and not the greater, for peace and order, and to enjoy the greater good at other times, more fully and freely? This giveth me satisfaction, and I believe many godly, and so prevents division from the Church Assemblies, which is desirable, for breaches if they be not necessary are justly scandalous. If any dissent from us, we shall be more ready to contend with GOD then them; with God (I say) that he would move the Parliament to remove this form so excepted against, and corrupt in the general composure of it, and what ever other they prescribe not exactly to tie the well guifted to it, but leave a liberty to vary as God shall enable them, as I have heard it hath been in our dear Sister Church of Scotland: Or if they tie them to any form, that they will rather tie them to the matter, than the words, to prevent the broaching of errors in Prayers, which some think was the first occasion of set forms. There be Haereticall Prayers as well as Sermons: A Socinian may vent his Haeresy against the person of Christ, or the grace of Christ. An Anabaptist may vent his Haeresy against the Magistrates of Christ, or Ordinances of Christ, in his Prayer as well as Preaching, therefore the Governors may justly tie them to set heads of Prayer, though they leave a liberty to the able, to use their own expressions; so Haeresy shallbe prevented, and no breach of liberty justly pretended: but this I refer to the wisdom of that Honourable Court.  
Another Evil of this Treatise, which needed cure, it hath bred in some, and nourished in others, an opinion, that our Churches are not Churches, nor our Ministers true Ministers, nor our Sacraments to be participated without sin, whereby some are drawn to, and others confirmed in a neglect of the servants, and service of God, which is no small evil, that deserveth cure. Give me leave therefore a little to examine his grounds. His first assay against our Churches, is in the close of the prose of his third point, the Discipline of our Church to be Antichristian, whence he concludes we want Discipline: and from the Book-prayer, and pell mell admission to the Sacrament, he affirms in his judgement, we want true Sacraments, and that the Preaching of the word, be generally corrupted, than it wants a third mark of a Visible Church: for answer, I conceive a distinction suggested by the assertor of the Scotch Discipline to be very true, and here pertinent. P. 196. A Visible Church may be considered, either Metaphysically, or politically. It is one thing to consider men as living Creatures, endued with reason, another thing to consider them as Magistrates, Masters, Fathers, servants, etc. So it is one thing to consider a Visible Church in her essentials, as a Society of men and women, separated from the blind world, by divine vocation, and professing together the Gospel of jesus Christ, another thing to consider it as a complete political body, in which the power of Spiritual government and jurisdiction is exercised, some governing, some governed. Now a Church that wants government, or hath one that is corrupt, may be a true Church in the former sense, though not in the latter, & being a true Church in the former sense, her members may communicate together in these holy things, which fall under the power of order, which may be called Sacra mystica, as word, prayer, Sacraments, though not insuch things as are under the power of jurisdiction.  
For his objections about Sacraments, the first I hope hath received already sufficient answer.  
For his second objection of Pell mell admission to the Sacrament, if he dispute against the Church of England in general, he must consider what her Laws are, not what the practice of some is: It's true, the Law enjoins all to come, but it's as true, that the same Law forbids those that are in contention, or are otherwise offensive to the Congregation, to be admitted till satisfaction given: So the command is general, that men may not be let alone in profaneness, and the admission is restrained, that men may not be suffered to be prophaners.  
And for his Third, The Preaching of the word generally corrupted, that shows a mind to cavil, rather than any cause, seeing that corrupting of the Word, was against the Church's Laws, by particular persons, and all such decrees against Laws are declared invalid: But in this he hath an if at the ministry which he further proposeth in his Fourth particular in these words.  
And to these Curates consideration I refer it, whether they be able truly out of good premises to conclude themselves the Ministers of Christ lawfully called, when all of them do immediately derive their Ministry from the Antichristian Hierarchy, as the sole foundation thereof; and under the name of Curates, he comprehends all the Godly, and learned Pastors in the Church, and dare he say, that the sole foundation of their Ministry is the Antichristian Hierarchy? Are the precious gifts and graces that Christ Jesus hath bestowed upon them, and blessed and honoured with the conversion of many souls, no part of the foundation of their Ministry? Is the free choice of their people, desiring them to take the oversight of them, no part of the foundation of their Calling? Will not these in some men's judgements, and it may be of this disputers, serve the turn without any thing else? Have they any thing from the Bishops, but as it were, an external authorising, to exercise their gifts in a public way amongst their people? which if it be in some respects corrupt, shall this corrupt compliment make void the call of God, & of the people? God forbidden! undoubtedly Christ would never so ordinarily work by them as he doth, were they not his Mimsters, but Antichrists: Besides I believe this disputer knows, that by Law the Bishop ought to have divers grave Presbyters with him, and then the imposition of hands is by the Presbytery, as was Timothy's, not of Episcopacy only.  
But having answered his Objections Printed, its needful I answer some others occasioned by him.  
Object. Oh but say some, if these things be not included in the Protestation, of what use then is the Protestation.  
Ans. Very great; Is it not a great matter to fulfil that great charge laid upon the Church of Thyatira, Rev. 14. Hold fast that which thou hast: God hath given this Church some light, whereby almost all the erroneous Doctrines, and superstitions of Popery are removed, which light by the audaciousness and corruption of some Innovators, hath been greatly obscured, our Church's Doctrine in matter of justification, , Free Grace; Gods eternal decrees, etc. hath been almost utterly overthrown: Altars, Images, etc. brought in, and the adversaries were as great as nought, and had proceeded far to work disturbance in the present proceed: whereupon it pleased God to move our wise and Religious Parliament (ever blessed be his name for it) to make this Protestation to maintain the truths and purity by Law established, which was an excellent means to hold fast that they had, and prevent apostasy, give me leave to illustrate this by an homely comparison: When men are lifting up a thing of great weight, or Horses are drawing some great burden up a steep hill, when either are at a stand, wisdom teacheth them to underprop the burden and stay it where it is, till breath is taken, or more help added to raise it to a desired pitch. So was it with our worthy Reformers, they were tugging to heave an heavy weight, and were at a dead lift; This Protestation to defend our Doctrine that is pure, was an underpropping, that things might not go backwards, till they could add more strength to raise things higher, which God be blest, they are busily indeavoring and if men will but wait, I hope they shall see the Reformation raised as high as the Doctrines of Scriptures, which ought to be the only rule, and I doubt not but is theirs.  
Q. But if they were in the Protestation, ought we not with violence to pull them down, and so deal with all superstitious pictures, etc.  
A. To the consideration of the matters Protested against, we must join the manner how we protest to oppose them, and that is lawfully. This Protestation gives men no leave to break their Ranks, it puts not a sword of authority into every private man's hand, but every thing is to be done in a lawful way, without breach of that order that God hath appointed in the world, or our Laws have ordered in our Land. To answer this then distinctly: Things Protested against, are either private things, or public, as for instance, some Crucifixes, and other superstitious Pictures, are our own, at our own full dispose, some are in public places and as it were of public interest, things that are private in a private man's power, this Protestation doth bind him to a present Reformation of without further leave from any. But for things that are public, private persons are to make their address to Magistracy, and entreat them to proceed, and then the private persons may follow as Assistants.  
Again, Some co●ruptions are in our own persons, as our own bowing to, or before the Altar: some are in others; that in our own we are presently to Reform, but if another continue corrupt practices, we may admonish them, Protest against them, but not lay violent hands on them, but detect them to the Magistrate, who by his Protestation, will be bound to punish and Reform them; thus God's work will be done in God's way, with more beauty, safety, and certainty, and suitable to the mature judgements of the wise Compilers of this useful Vow.  
After he hath done thus with the Protestation, he proceeds to other objections, to overthrow all subordination in the particular Churches of a Nation, not only to one another, which was never dreamt of, but to any general government by Officers gathered out of all, and so set over all, and so he lays a ground for independent Separate Churches, which he desires may be erected in this Nation: but this task of his is undertaken and performed with better order and strength, by another Author in the Presbyterial Government Examined. And yet that hath received a solid Answer by the Assertor of the Scotch Government, and that not only in the general, by the grounds there laid down: but by a particular view and answer to the Arguments of the examiner, and therefore thither I shall remit the Reader that will take pains for satisfaction in those points. The full discussing of these things, is also besides my purpose, who do only undertake the Answer of it, in reference to what is said, touching the misinterpretation of the Covenants, as impeaching the Doctrine that in the preceding Sermons I desired to publish, yet because I perceive many are much unsettled (and that even of those to whom I have some relation) with the things that are scattered in this discourse. I will endeavour briefly to run over the things here that are material, especially such as have not a full answer in the abovementioned Treatise.  
In this Author's Answers to his own Quaery, what shall be substituted instead of Prelacy, Liturgy, and Ceremonies, many things deserve examination. First whereas he saith, considering the Church of England to be none other than a National Church, its uncapable of constitution. This word Nationall Church, I find often used, and much put upon it, and yet neither is it a Scripture phrase, nor do any give us a certain exposition of it, if by it they understand a Church that hath some common Nationall Worship, by some common Pastor, at some common place, as all the Jews had the same High Priest, and Temple, and all the Males were to meet thrice a year at the place which God should choose; In which respect I conceive the Church of the jews was properly termed a Nationall Church; in this sense Christians have no Nationall Churches. But he seems to make a National Church to be when an whole Nation is taken into a Visible Church, or Churches, having all of them the outward profession of Religion, which he saith, is impossible now, because particular Visible Churches consist of none but Visible living members, and visible Saints under Christ the King of Saints. But here I would feign know the reason why it is necessary that the members in a particular Church, should be of better mettle than the members of a Nationall Church: doth not God require by his precepts, as much of a Nationall Church, and say as much of them, as of a particular Church? See Exodus 19.4, 5, 6, 7, 8. how often is that Priest on the Nationall Church of the jews, Be ye holy or Saints, for I am holy: The very same charge that is pressed on Christians, 1 Pet. 1.14, 15, 16. where no more is required of the members of Christian particular Churches, then of the members of the jewish Nationall Church, and are not the members of the jewish Nationall Church called holy or Saints, aswell as be commanded to be so? How often is this reason given by the Lord, for you are an holy people: See Deut. 7.6, & 14●, 21, & 26, 19 And many other glorious things are spoken of the church of the jews. je. 2, 5. Ps. 1354 And was not Christ their King? Psa. 44, 4. If he were slain from before the Foundation of the world, and the Redeemer of he Church under the Law, was he not their King too? What difference then doth Scriptures make between the members of a Nationall and particular Church, and who dares distinguish where the Scripture doth not? If they Answer that the Nationall Church of the jews were holy in Profession, or are called holy in regard of some that were so indeed, the denomination being from the better part; will not, nay must not that answer serve us? were all the members of the Apostolical Churches Visible Saints, otherwise then by profession? what those that were carnal in Corinth? Cap. 3. and defrauders and scandalous contenders too? C. 6. Those that were drunk when they came to the Sacrament too? Those that denied the Resurrection too? 1 Cor. 15, 12. and those that had not repent of their uncleanness, fornication, and Lasciviousness too? 2 Cor. 12, 21. And those that traduced the Apostle too. Cap. 11. Then what shall deny the visibility of a Saint, or a living member? So I might ask touching some in the Ancient holy Church of Rome, Romans 16, 17, 18. And the like of some in the Church of Philippi. Cap. 3.18.19. So likewise in the Church of Sardis, Revel. 3, 1, 4. and Laodicea. Revel. 3, 16, etc. Can these be said to consist of Saints, or holy people any more than the jews, must they not have the Title of Saints, in regard of their Profession? or the denomination from the better part? Can Sardis in any other respect have the name of a Golden Candlestick? And then I would know again, for what reason it should be more dishonourable to Christ to be the head of a Congregation that are not all Visible Saints, further than by profession and outward conformity, then to be the head of a Nation, where all are not Visible Saints, or why Christians should be in more danger, for being one by Profession in a congregational body, than Christ and Prophets, for being one with such as were not Visible Saints in a Nationall body, these I confess are Riddles to me: Nay I conceive that though all that do profess holiness and life should in duty be so, yet Christ in the parable of the Tares and wheat, shows it will not be so, and a general separation is not to be attempted till the end of the world, for the Tares signify the workers of Iniquity that grow & are to be gathered out of the Kingdom of him who is styled the King of Saints; and out of what Kingdom but the Kingdom parabolized, The Kingdom of Heaven. Math. 13, 24, 41. and these Tares were not secret Hypocrites, for the Servants did discern them, and tell the Master of them, and not the Master the Servants: nor doth it any way cross us that the field is interpreted the world, as though the wicked and Godly should be in the world together, but in distinct societies. For this cannot be? Why should the Servants wonder to see the wicked in the world? how could the Tares come after the wheat, as they are said to do, seeing the wicked were in the world, before the Godly in the Church? see verses 25, 27: Why should the Servants consult about the wicked in the world? What have they to do with those that are without? yea if the wheat and the Tares be thus interpreted, there must by this parable be nothing but wheat in the Church, no Chaff, no Judas, no hypocrite, for all but the tares are righteous, and shall shine as the Sun in the Kingdom of the Father. verses 41.43. But why then is the Field interpreted to be the world?  
A. For good reasons, because the visible Church was not to be limited to Judea, but extended to the whole world that would entertain it. Secondly, the word of this Kingdom, ver. 19 was to be Preached in the world and by the word of this Kingdom, this Kingdom wa● to be gathered in the world, in which Kingdom should appear the Tares with the Wheat. These things are so suitable to Christ's words & scop, that I do not at all doubt but that this is the true exposition of this parable. Nor doth the Argument so confidently held out against it, any whit overthrow it: if you thus interpret the parable say some, you must of necessity exclude all Church Censures, and so cross other plain Scriptures.  
A. There is no such necessity in it, neither, for its a rule in interpreting parables, we must not extend them beyond their scope, now we must know wicked men are of two ranks; one ordinary, that though they have no grace visible, yet they are formal Professors, not guilty of Crimes, others that are guilty of notorious crimes, as the incestuous person etc. Answerably there may be conceived a two fold separation: One general of all the wicked, the other special of those that are scandalous. This Parable treats of a general Separation of all the wicked from the godly, which is here denied to belong to the State of the Church in this world not of the particular Separation of the evil scandalous by some crime which elsewhere is required to be done by Church censures. And in this Answer I am fully confirmed by this Argument, Church censures are an Ordinance that is to be used not only for the separating of Tares, but Wheat for a time, nay sometimes of Wheat, not Tares, for excommunication is for those that are scandalous, now a man may be in the judgement of charity, godly in regard of his estate in general, and yet in some particular scandalous, and so need, and deserve excommunication. And a man may be so merely formal, that in the judgement of charity, he cannot be deemed godly, and yet he may be faire-conditioned, without crime, and without scandal, here the Tares will scape, and the Wheat undergo Separation, and therefore sigh the Separation here inquired of, is of another nature, then that which is effected by Church censures, to exclude Church censures by it, is to rack it, and wrest it, beyond its scope. I have stuck the longer in this, because this is the Cardo Controversiae, the Hang on which the rest is turned, now I proceed. He after makes great complaint of the State of our Church, to which I so far consent, that I could wish with jeremy, my head waters, and mine eyes fountains, to send forth rivers of tears, for the breakers of Gods Law. But he takes up afterward, and tells us, that like Sardis, we have a few names which have not defiled their garments, and the way of reformation he prescribes it by separating these few names into a new Church, for which he citys 2 Cor: 6, 17.  
But stay, is this Christ's way? doth he so counsel the Church of Sardis? if so, I will yield: if not, is not this way of his humane presumption exalted against the wisdom of Christ? Now Christ's Counsel is to repent of the evil, hold fast the good, ver. 3. to strengthen the things that are ready to die, ver 2. but not a word of separating the few. How dare any than presume to do it? I have often sought, and long, a resolution of this doubt, but could never yet find it, but this Author thinks he hath found a command 2 Cor. 6, 17. Come out from among them, and be ye separate. A strange thing (saith he) be ye separate; but a strange proof say I, That a command to Christians, to come out from among Heathen Idolaters, and not to touch any sinful thing should be thought to prove it the duty of Christians to be separate from formal profane Christians, and not to touch any holy thing with them? what proportion is here for an inference? And for my part, I must confess, I have wondered to see men so strict in this, that they will not join in holy duties with the Profane, which yet I see make no scruple to join in following vain fashions with them which was wont to be counted an unclean thing: But this is further confirmed by a direction to jeremy, jer. 15, 20. If thou take forth the precious from the vile, but this is likewise as unfit a shaft for his Bow, for jeremy lived in a Nationall Church, in which such a Separation as here this disputer strives for, he confesseth is not requisite, nor was it practised by Isaiah 8, 18. though he had occasion, or by any other. I marvel then that this Author, or any other, should bring this place of jeremy, to prove their Separation: There is a Doctrinal Separation which is required in every Minister, if he divide the word of truth aright, and that we are bound to as well as jeremy, and the Godly Ministers do carefully perform: but for such a Separation as this Protestor requires, here can be no ground for, which they affirm was not required from the Church of the jews: But it is further affirmed, that after such an Apostasy as ours, Churches must be gathered anew, as when the Apostles planted Churches where the Gospel had not been Preached, this is only dictated without proof, and yet is neither true nor probable, there being so wide a difference between our Nation now, and when joseph of Arimathea first planted the Gospel in it, when it was purely Paganish: besides, If this were requisite, then must God also give Ministers qualified to gather Churches, and not only to go on in the ordinary work of the Ministry: that is, Ministers endued with extraordinary gifts having immediate callings, to Preach where they will, without the leave of men, with extraordinary assistance, without which ordinarily no liberty can be expected to gather Churches, till therefore I see the like gifts and callings, in some measure, I shall not believe the like work or duty to lie on Ministers now.  
But some may ask what shall then be done?  
A. Can we have better Counsel than was given to Sardis, by Christ jesus our blessed Lord and Prophet? and that is to repent of what hath been amiss; public humiliation, may fit public transgression, which the Parliament may be entreated to apply to this malady, and then not separate from, but labour to strengthen and rectify that which is ready to die. The Parliament are about a great and good work of removing erroneous and scandalous Ministers, and setting up godly and learned lights every where, and withal, giving or confirming rather power to the godly Pastors, to keep off those that are unfit for the Sacrament by gross ignorance, or scandalous life, by which means, Parishes that are already taught, may be quickly brought into for better order, and those that are not, may by teaching be brought to some good measure of understanding, and desire of the Sacrament, and some at least outward Reformation before they be required or admitted to Communion in the Sacrament. But here we have another Quaere what we shall do, where profane and ignorant persons are permitted Pell, Mell, to which he Answers, that if God's Ordinance be Profane (as they are) by ignorant and profaned persons coming to the Lords Table) then others also that Communicate with them, are guilty of the same profanation. What is this so without any exception? profane and ignorant persons profane the Word, and Prayer, and Fasting, and these are Gods Ordinances, cannot we perform this with them, but be guilty? this is new doctrine. In the Church of Sardis to which he did compare us, were the few names guilty of that profanation which the rest must needs do? do not the Scriptures show the contrary? Revel. 3, 4. their Garments were undefiled, is there no other way to keep ourselves free from pollution, but separation? what if we endeavour to remove the profane? is not that a better course? and that which was the burden still laid upon the god●y? but never that in this case they should separate themselves, or if they cannot separate the wicked, but do their part, discovering them, & desiring their ejection, will not that free them from guilt? I think it will: and if not, I believe he must not long keep in any of his new Churches. But the Apostle saith, 1 Cor. 5, 6. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump, so those that are corrupt will leaven all. A. That is, If they be accessary to the corru●tions of others, not else: again, how doth leaven leaven the lump, but by diffusing a real quality into it? now there being two things in sin, the guilt which is a relation, and in this case must come by imputation, and the stain or viciousness which is a quality, and in this respect the corrupt will leaven only thus, when he is suffered and countenanced, he is apt to infect others with his ill qualities, 
Thus this sentence must be expounded, Gal. 5, 9 in egard of infection with the same evils.  from which they shall be safe enough that bewail and distaste his ill qualities, though they be at the Sacrament with him, yet if they can get assistance, one effect of their distaste should be excommunication: But the Apostle applies it to mixed Communion, ver. 8 but he misapplies that Text which others more suitably interpret of ieading our lives, not eating the Sacrament. And for that verse the 9 not to company with fornicators, it's meant of familiarity, not of the Sacrament. For you may see by the two following verses, such an accompanying is there forbidden to a Brother which is allowed with an heathen, and therefore cannot be meant of Communion in the Sacrament. But I hope by the piety of our Parliament, every godly Minister willbe enabled to keep off all that be guilty of such crimes, if that will serve the turn, and remove that objection. The place Ephes. 5, 5, 7. Be not partakers with them, is clearly meant in regard of their sins, not the Sacrament, as appears by the following verse.  
In Answering the next objection, he brings two places to prove that the holy thing of God should not be profaned, but against what adversary? whosoever taught so? but that the profaning of them by one, should profane then to others, it's denied: his place Isa 1, 1●. will only prove that God rejected their service, whose hands were full of blood, not the sacrificers of the good, else how will he excuse Isaiahs' Communion with that Church? or Christ jesus after him, when they were as bad? or where is his inference made or practised by the Prophets or Christ from this place, of necessity of separation where the profane be?  
In answering his next quaere, he tells us that to Communicate with evil doers is to partake of their evil deeds. This is affirmed, but not proved, nor do I think it ever will, that my doing a good action well upon command of God, with one that doth the same good Action will make me guilty of his sin; sure I am, than Christ and his Prophets, and Apostles, were all sorely defiled. His proof 2 Thes. 3, 6. is quite misapplied, for it's spoken of withdrawing from him in regard of company and respect which is free and Arbitrary, not of the Sacrament, wherein they were not to withdraw from him, but if the quality of the offence did require it, were to put him away.  
In his next Answer he affirms that no Communion can be had in our Parish Assemblies possibly, without setting up new Churches: But I hope in this he is much deceived as in the rest. He compares us to Sardis formerly, yet I hope there Communion might be had without this medicine of new Churches. Nay let there be shown any example or any precept in the Scripture that in our case new Churches should be erected, and not the old repaired, and brought back to the rule from which they have swerved, and we will yield the cause: but if there be no such precept nor example, then in vain are all such pleas as he useth, for things which Christ hath neither left precept nor pattern of. And when we see God hath heard the Prayers, and blest the Nation for the prayers of the godly in our Churches, as now they stand, and hath made us a people saved by the Lord, who is the shield of our help, and the sword of our excellency, more we shall not expect by his new Churches, unless he convince the necessity of them, by better evidence out of the word, which when he hath proved, we will never put him to trouble to answer inconveniences, but will with him buckle ourselves to digest them; but we will not cast ourselves, nor will the wisdom of the state suffer it to be cast on inconveniencies for good men's fancies without Christ's command.  
Nor will we ever object it to be too strict, pure or perfect, if the rule for it be convinced, but we will affirm that being its straiter than the counsel which Christ gave to Sardis, and different from it too, the pretence of purity and perfection is not to be harkened to, for it is not such in truth, but show, because it is not after Christ. Col. 2, 8. The like we say for envying at them, we will blame them that envy at them, if they discover the rule for what they do, but till then we shall censure them we hope by this Parliament. The Discipline of Christ will be set up in every Congregation, and this will be a better or weaklier managed, as the Ministers and members are grown in Christ: if then any Christian be where great scandals are, they may remove to other Congregations that have attained a better degree of Reformation, and this without any breach.  
His next quaere is what Nationall government shallbe set up by the Parliament, for which he hearty prays, that God would direct them in so glorious a work, and blesseth God for such instruments, for such a work I thank him for his affection, but yet if his Doctrine of the independency of Churches be sound, this prayer cannot be of faith, for a man cannot pray in faith that men should meddle with that which is not within their sphere or Calling, and sure if independency be a liberty of Christ, all the Parliament hath to do, is to assert this liberty, and what is more, is but usurpation. Then he tells us that the government of a Nationall Church hath no pattern in the word: the full answer of that I refer to the assertion of the government of the Church of Scotland, which I doubt not but will give good satisfaction to the indifferent Reader. Afterward he discovers (me thinks) too much uncharitableness and self love. When he affirms, let them have their liberty, and do for the rest what they will, 'tis indifferent to them, a little more care of the souls of Christians might better suit with those that so far transcend others in outward reformation.  
His last objection is inconveniency of independent Churches, if they err as they may, they want means of reclaiming, which is better set on by the Scotch Assertor, yet he hath said more, than he hath well answered, for having named all the means which their independency is capable of, and being conscious it seems that they were too weak. He adds 2 other that quite destroy the independency. As first that other Churches may excommunicate them, how are they independent, if under the jurisdiction of other Churches? or how can they be excommunicated by those under whose jurisdiction they are not? sure this is worse dependence then under the Presbytery, where a part is only subjected to the whole, but here a part is subjected to a part.  
And this second is no better, for if they be under the Magistrate for any Haeresy, why not for all? those that are guilty will not confess any of their Heresies, for known Heresies, but assert them for truth, and so challenge exception for them, aswell as any, and if that be a known heresy, which is such to the judgement of the Magistrate, then for all heresy they are to be subject to censure, & their independency is a nullity. Thus have I gone through this whole discourse without endeavouring to stifle, but rather sincerely to search out what is truth in every particular. It is my desire and prayer, that I might do nothing against, but for the truth, rather would I desire that God should bring me forth to the severest sufferings for the truth, then leave me though in simplicity of heart, to oppose any the least truth. What remains but that while we that mind the same things, Christ's honour in the salvation of his people, and right performance of his Ordinances, and differ only in the way, labour to keep Unity of heart, till we have unity of judgement, and let our Prayers be united at the Throne of Grace, though our persons be in different Societies, that God may persuade the wanderers into the Tents of those, to whom he hath vouchsafed the better light: That God may have the more honour, and we the more strength, & comfort by our free and scruple-lesse consociation: Which mercy the Lord vouchsafe for Jesus Christ his sake, by the help of the Spirit of truth, leading into all truth, to whom be glory for ever, Amen.  
FINIS.