THE GROTIAN Religion DISCOVERED, At the Invitation of Mr. Thomas Pierce in his Vindication.  
With a Preface, vindicating the Synod of Dort from the calumnies of the New Tilenus; and David, Peter, &c. And the puritans, and Sequestrations, &c. from the censures of Mr. Pierce.  
By Richard Baxter, catholic.  
LONDON, Printed by R. W. for nevil Simmons Bookseller in Kederminster, and are to be sold by him there, and by Tho. Brewster at the three Bibles, and ●y John Starkey at the mitre at the West end of Pauls. 1658.   

Errata.  
PAg. 3. l. 10. blot out to myself; p. 17. l. 13. for its r. is; p. 31. l. 25. for Vol. r. Vot. p. 32. l. 5. for formerly r. undoubtedly; p. 31 l. 8. r. Votum; p. 35. l. 15. blot out know; p. 36 l. ult. r. Catholicism; p. 37. l. 1. for convertitur r. connectitur; p. 42. l. 16. r. tell us; p. 51. l. 18. r. alios; l. 19 r. ad eas es; p. 55. l. 9. r. magnam; p. 64. l. 2. r. Confessio; p. 87. l. 23. r. For ●.  
The lines and numbers between each Section, are put by the Printers mistake.   

The Preface, to the Reverend Mr. Thomas Pierce.  
Reverend Sir,  
Sect. 1. I Do plainly and faithfully 
§. 1.  here render you that Account of my thoughts of Grotius and his English followers, which in your rejoinder to Mr. Barlee, you are pleased to demand, and make my Duty. I had much rather have been excused from stirring in this unpleasing business any more: But if it seem necessary to you, I must yield: For I confess it is so odious a thing, to calumniate so Learned a man as Grotius, and all others of his mind and way, that I must needs Repent and Recant if I be guilty of so great a crime. But while I am confident that I am not, to pretend Repentance were an hurtful hypocrisy. By that time you have returned me your thoughts of my Reasons, I shall be more capable of discerning whether I have be●n mistaken or not. And if I find that I was, I shall promise you a Recantation instead of a Reply.  
Sect. 2. In the mean time I join with you 
§. 2.  in Charity to Grotius: You vindicate him from Popery, and I from Dissimulation. Had he been living, I think I should have had more thanks from him then you. If I understand him, he took it for his glory to be a member of that Body of which the Pope is the Head, even to be a Roman catholic: and therefore would have given you little thanks to vindicate him from such an imputation.  
Sect. 3. If any shall hence gather, that 
§. 3.  you are such yourself, as I manifest Grotius to have been, I protest against such accusations of you, as no part of my intention: But as you have given too much occasion of them by your vindication, so is it in your power at your pleasure to remove that occasion, by disowning what in Grotius you dislike. But if still you like his Doctrine and Design, but not the name of a Papist, you know that custom is the Master of Speech, and it is not in the power of one or two to alter the signification of common words: But for the things we shall better understand each other.  
Sect. 4. For your Brotherly and moderate 
§. 4.  dealing with myself, I must aclowledge your gentleness and charity; but I would I had been of your counsel, and had been able to have persuaded you to the like to others. In my opinion it would have adorned your Labours far more then all that Learning and Command of words that subserves your partial interest or passion.  
Sect. 5. You seem, as Grotius, to be too 
§. 5.  much affencted to your opinions commonly called Arminian: and too much embittered against other mens. I must confess to you, that I am grown to a very great confidence, that most of our contentions about those points, are more about words then matter, and that such eager men as you and your Antagonist, do make themselves and others believe that we differ much more about them then we do: And pardon me if I add, that thereby you tell the world, that you do not well understand the true state of the controversy, or else you would not take the breach to be incomparably wider then it is. Our differences are of four sorts, 1. About points which the Calvinists themselves do not commonly hold: Such as that of Physical Predetermination, which is much commoner among the Dominicans then the Protestants: To which( were it of moment) I might add the Supralapsarian Doctrine of Predestination or Reprobation at least; and the Doctrine of Christs dying only for the Elect. You know that the Synod of Dort owneth none of these: and it is that Synod that is the Test of the Calvinists Anti-Arminianism. 2. About matters unrevealed, and utterly unknown to all contentenders, and to all the world. 3. About mere names, and words, and methods. 4. About revealed Doctrines of weight. I suppose you will easily consent, that all our quarrels be laid by about the three first. For why should you charge a Party with the opinions of a very few, which upon greatest deliberation in a Synod, the Party will not own; Nay with those opinions that are more proper to their Adversaries? And why should we quarrel about bare words, or unrevealed things? And truly if you will cut off these three sorts of controversy, it is so little that will be left of the fourth sort, that it will find small work for hot contentions, and be but a poor excuse for such loads of odious inferences, and uncharitable censures as Grotius and others are too much gulity of. I have thoughts, if God will, to demonstrate this; but I know not whether I shall have time. In the mean time consider but this, that the Doctrine of the Divine Decrees is resolved into that of the Divine operations: Lets agree of the last, and we agree of the former: And almost all the Doctrine of the Divine operations, about which we differ, dependeth on the point of Free-will, and will be determined with that. And how far we differ( if at all) in the point of Free-will, I desire you to consider by what I have briefly spoken ad populum in my Treatise of Judgement, pag. 141, 142. And I desire you hereafter to charge none of the errors upon the Anti-Arminians, which in those forty Excuses I have confuted, unless you can show that I across the Principles of the Synod of Dort: Or at least, charge them not in these Controversies, with any thing, which that Synod did not own, if you will be just.  
Sect. 6. And here I think it my duty to 
§. 6.  rebuk the unworthy dealing of your friend that wrote the Examination of Tilenus( I am glad to find you disowning it as none of yours) pag. 28, 29. he pretends to give us [ concisely but truly] the sum of the Doctrine of the Synod of Dort in the five Articles. And when he hath made this Promise, he presently falls to falsifying, and calumny, unworthy a Divine, a Christian, or a Man: the weight of the case and greatness of his sin, command me to be thus plain: Yea were I of his Party I must say the same. What! shall so many Countries purposely consult to declare their thoughts, and their writings be common in the hands of all, and the adversary purposely writ against them, and pretend to be acquainted with their Doctrine, and make it his design to bring it to be odious to the world, and yet shall falsely tell the world that they hold and assert the things that they are not only silent in, but disown, detest, and are contrary to their Doctrine. Truly this is an exceeding shane to the Arminian and jesuit cause, to find the Learned Patrons of it, to deal so unconscionably that a Reader cannot believe them; and that where it is so easy to any to see their falsehoods.  
Sect. 7. 1. Saith he [ They hold, that God by an absolute Decree hath elected to 
§. 7.  Salvation a very little number of men, without any regard to their faith or obedience whatsoever, and secluded from saving grace all the rest of mankind, and appointed them by the same decree to eternal damnation, without any regard to their impenitency, or infidelity,] But 1. Where talk they of a very little number? 2. Its not true that they say he doth it [ without any regard to their faith or obedience whatever,] for they profess that he hath regard to it, 1. as the benefit which he decreeth to give them. 2. As the condition of the Glory which he decreeth them. He decreeth to save none but for their obedience as the fruit of faith, which is not a means or Antecedent to Gods Decree, but to our salvation, as the most rigid Anti-Arminians teach. 3. He calls that secluding all the rest from saving grace, which the Synod calls but Preterition, and Non electon, and reliction. 4. He unworthily feigneth them to say that God [ appointeth them to eternal damnation without any regard to their impenitency or infidelity,] when they profess, that it is propter infidelitatem& caetera peccata, that he decrees to damn them, as the Causes of damnation, though not of the Eternal Decree: and they do not only respect Infidelity and other sins as the cause of damnation, but as the state in which God findeth many when he denieth them the grace of faith; and of all the non elect they determine that God leaves them but in that misery, into which by their own fault they precipitate themselves: and that he leaves them by his just Judgement to the Malice and Hardness of their own hearts:(§. 6.& 15. art. 1.) Though they deny election to proceed upon foreseen faith( because God decrees to give that faith, before we can be foreseen to have it) yet they purposely pass by the question, Whether foreseen Infidelity be in any the qualification of the object of Reprobation or preterition: But plainly they took foreseen[ Malice, Hardheartedness, mens own sin, and their own ways and common misery] to be the qualification of that object: And they make Preterition an act of Justice in God.  
Sect. 8. And where now is the odious error 
§. 8.  that this second Tilenus puts such aface upon? 1. Is it in the Number? If he think a greater number are saved or absolutely decreed to salvation, then they do, he should speak out. 2. If he think that God fore-saw that they would believe and obey, before he decreed to give them faith or the grace of obedience, and consequently that these are only or principally of themselves, and not of God, he must condemn Austine and the rest of the Church, and the Council of Orange and other Councils and Popes themselves, and all the Thomists, Dominicans and Iansenists, and many more, at well as the Synod of Dort: And for my part I wish no more in this of him and you, then may consist with Rational Prayers and Thanksgivings for the Grace of God. Would you not have men pray for faith that want it? Or for more that have it? and give thanks for it when they receive it? Was it not a Rational Prayer [ Lord increase our faith] and [ Lord, I believe, help thou my unbelief.] And was it a Rational thanksgiving of Paul for his converts that God had given them both to Believe and suffer for him? Sure you do not mean when you pray for [ Increase of Faith] that God would give you natural free-will which you had before, or that he would sand the Gospel to you; but some way that he will effectually procure you to believe.( and doubtless the way of his internal operation is beyond our reach, and therefore beyond our dispute.) 3. If his offence be at Gods Preterition of men without a foresight of their demerit] as taught by the Synod, it is not their doctrine( true or false) but his forgery, yea it seems contrary to their doctrine. But indeed they( well) affirm that there was the same sin and demerit, in many whom yet God decreed to convert and save. 4. If his offence be that they think that[ God doth not effectually convert and save all the rest of the world,] if he be a ●hristian he believes the same himself: or if he be not, one part of it may be seen. 5. If he be offended that they teach that God doth not give sufficient Grace to the rest; I answer, that which he calls sufficient Grace( or those of his way) they confess that God giveth to other men as well as to the elect; To give them the Natural Power of Free-will, and a Christ to be believed in, and an offer of Christ and life, and an earnest persuasion to them to accept him, and to leave the matter to their own choice, yea and to add common exciting moving help of the Spirit, which yet is uneffectual, this is it that the jesuits call sufficient Grace. Who quarrels with them for the name? the Dominicans yield it them; and though the Iansenians deny it them, the Protestants have no mind to quarrel about a word, the thing is yielded them by all: This General and Common Grace which such call sufficient, leaving the matter to the sinners choice, we yield that God giveth to the worst that perish. But be not angry if we thank God for more, even for giving us both to will and Do.  
Sect. 9. 2. Saith this New Tilenus[ they 
§. 9.  hold, that Christ Jesus hath not suffered death for any other but for those elect only: having neither had any intent nor commandment of his Father to make satisfaction for the sins of the whole world. Answ. A most shameless falsehood, made, as they say, of his fingers ends. There's not a word of the Decrees of the Synod that hath any such importance. They do indeed assert, Art. 2.§. 8. That it was only the Elect that God the Father intended by the death of Christ effectually to bring to faith, Justification and Salvation: which is the same doctrine with that of Election before mentioned. And if this Tilenus think that God Intended the Justification and Salvation of all by Christ, its absolutely or conditionally. If absolutely, they shall be saved: which no Christian that I know believeth; If but conditionally, 1. The rigidest Anti-Arminians, even Dr. Twiss doth over and over grant it you of Justification, and Salvation, that Christ died to procure this common grace, that men shall be Justified and Saved if they will believe. 2. But did God purpose to cause in men this condition or not? If he did, then it was Absolutely or Conditionally: If absolutely, it will be done. If conditionally, what is the condition? and so in infinitum—.  
2. But contrary to this Accuser the Synod declareth, Art. 2.§. 3. that [ This death of the Son of God is the only and most perfect Sacrifice and satisfaction for sins, of infinite value and price, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world,] and that it is [ therefore sufficient— because this death was joined with the sense of Gods wrath and curse which we by our sins had merited] that is, that the sins of all the world were charged on Christ, and he bore their penalty, as Paraeus in his writings to the Synod( and there contained) expresseth it. They add also(§. 5.) that the promise of Salvation to all that will believe must be preached to all without difference, with the command of Faith and Repentance: And(§. 6.) they add that [ the reason why many that are called by the Gospel do not repent, or believe, but perish ●n Infidelity, is not through any defect of the sacrifice of Christ offered on the across, or insufficiency of it, but by their own fault] And the british Divines, and the Bremish especially, and most clearly Martinius( and Crocius well,) did give in their suffrages for Universal Redemption, which are recorded in the Acts of the Synod, and these Decrees are plainly agreeable.  
Sect. 10. And can Tilenus, or you, or any that is most passionate in these points, tell us 
§. 10.  of one jot more that you ascribe to the death of Christ for all, then the S●nod of Dort doth? I must say if you can, its yet beyond my reach or my remembrance. They give more to Christs death for the Elect then you, but no less that I know of, to his death for all then you. For you say that he dyed to bring it to mens choice whether they will have Christ and life or not? and so say they, and Calvinists commonly( as Dallaeus hath  told you, in the very words of abundance of th●m.) If you say that according to you, Christ hath Parchased sufficient Grace for all, or for more then the Elect, to cause them to believe I answer, 1. That the highest Grace with you doth but bring it to their choice; and help, but not determine their wills; and this they grant to other● as well as you do. 2. Is it the name of sufficient Grace, or the Thing? The thing that you call so, as I said, they grant to be as common as you can reasonably expect them to imagine, and Christ did not die to purchase empty Names as a benefit. The difference is plainly but in this: The Synod thought that Christ purchased more for some, then you do; but no less for others.  
Sect. 11. 3. Saith this Tilenus, they hold 
§. 11.  [ that by Adams fall his Posterity lost their ●ree will, being put to an unavoidable Necessity to do, or not to do, whatsoever they do, or do not, whether it be good or evil; being thereunto predestinate by the eternal and effectual secret decree of God.]  
Answ. Unworthy falsification still! Not a word to any such sense in the Synod. Well might this Author conceal his name for shane of the world. As the words be not in the Decrees of the Synod, so much is there and in many suffrages against the sense. 1. It is but the Moral or Dispositive, or Habitual Freedom of the Will, that they or other Protestants commonly say that man hath lost. They all profess that man hath the natural faculty of Free-will. See my forecited pages in my Treatise of Judgement of this. 2. There is not a word in the Decrees of the Synod, that men are put to unavoidable Necessity. 3. Much less to do or not do, whatver they do or do not, good or evil: All this is such a self-devised tale, that no honest man should have been guilty of against the poorest neighbour or enemy, much less against a Party, and a Synod of so many truly Learned and Worthy men. The Question is whether men have original sin or not? Those of you that are of Dr. Jer. Taylors mind in this, speak out, and disown the Pelagians no more, but speak as bitterly of Austin as of the Synod of Dort. Do you believe that all ungodly men, or any man Naturally, hath the Habit of Faith, or Love or Holiness? This is the very Question, if you will rightly understand it.  
Sect. 12. The fourth Article forged by 
§. 12.  this Ghost of Tilenus is, [ that God to save his Elect from the corrupt Mass, doth bege● faith in them by a power equal to that whereby he created the world, and raised up the dead, insomuch that such unto whom he gives that Grace, cannot reject it; and the rest being reprobate cannot accept of it, though it be offered unto both by the same preaching and Ministry.] Answ. 1. Where did the Synod say that this was to save his Elect from the corrupt Mass, excluding all others Salvation. And if you quarrel not with a supposed exclusion but an inclusion, then he that denieth a necessity of Salvation from the corrupted Mass, may tell God he will not be beholden for such a Mercy, and stand to the venture. But if you mean it Exclusively, they profess that faith is the means of our Salvation, not only from the corrupted Mass, but from Infidelity, and the Curse of the Law, and from damnation, and all the sin that would procure it. 2. If you think that God doth not cause faith in us, you will not then pray for it, nor be beholden for it. 3. But if you yield that he causeth it, but not by such a Power as you mention, you either think that God causeth it without Power( which is an opinion that needs no censure) or that he hath many Powers, and causeth one thing by one Power and another thing by another: which is as unbeseeming a Divine or Christian to assert. Is not all the world of sober Christians agreed, that Omnis Potentia Dei est Omnipotentia? either God causeth faith by the same Omnipotency by which he created the world, or else he causeth it not at all: For he hath no Power but one, and that is omnipotency. In these several senses it may be said, that a thing is the effect of Omnipotency. 1. Properly and strictly as denominating the cause. And so all that God doth is the effect of Omnipotency, even the life of a worm or fly: and therefore you cannot deny it of Grace. 2. Improperly, as meaning that the Agent doth act to the utmost of his Power, and could do no more: and thus never did any Divine that was well in his wits say, that Grace is the effect of Gods Omnipotency. 3. Improperly also, as meaning that so much Power as was put forth in causing faith, would have created a world, had it been that way employed. And this cannot be their meaning, because sober Divines do not use to ascribe several degrees of Power( unless denominatively ab effects) to God: and if they did, yet would they not pretend to judge of the scantling, and say, This work hath more power and this less: especially in such Mysterious works: Gods will is sufficient to cause the thing willed: And the willing of Grace, will not cause a world, nor the willing of a world will not cause Grace. 4. Improperly, as only describing the degree of excellency in the effects, as related to the cause; As if they said, there is so much excellency in this effect of Grace, that no cause below Omnipotency, that is, below God himself, could procure it. And he that denieth this, let him prove if he can, that any creature without God can sanctify. 5. And if only the several effects are compared, as if the meaning were,[ the work of Grace doth more clearly Demonstrate Omnipotency in the cause, then the creation of the world] I have met with none that dare pretend to be a judge in the comparison or competition. In some respect the work of Grace demonstrateth Omnipotency more, as being against more actual resistance: In other respects the creation demonstrateth it much more. But sure sober Divines did never intend to make themselves judges of these things, or trouble the Church with disputes about them.  
Sect. 13. 4. You slanderously say that 
§. 13.  the Synod saith [ the Reprobates cannot accept it] They have no such words: And for sense, they deny them no Power but Moral, which is the willingness Habitual itself; they knew that all had a Passive and Obediential Power, and also a Natural Active Power or Faculty of willing, and so far can Accept: The Question is only of the Moral Disposition: And I pray you, if you are a Christian, or a man of observation, tell us whether you think that an Infidel hath a Habit of faith, or a Disposition of Believing; Or whether a drunkard have a Habit or Disposition of sobriety, or a Whoremonger of Chastity, or a worldling of Heavenliness. The Synod never doubted but that men have the Natural Power of Willing; and what then can be moreover imagined to be in the Will, besides the Moral Inclination to Will? Now I dare appeal to any reasonable man whether these vicious persons have holy inclinations to the contrary virtue? that is, whether a wicked man be Habitually or dispositively a godly man? This is the very question when you have driven it to the Head, about the Power of unsanctified men to Repent, believe, love God, &c.  
Sect. 14. And you wrong them also in 
§. 14.  feigning them simply to say, that those to whom God gives grace cannot reject it. They say indeed that [ Post Dei operationem,( quoad ipsum) non manet in hoins potestate regenerari vel non regenerari, &c.] For when effectual Grace hath done its work, the man is regenerate already, or else grace were not effectual: besides, by [ Power] here they mean nothing but the Proportion of mans corruption and resisting disposition, compared with that Grace that shall infallibly prevail against it. For the manner of Gods operation, they cenfess it such as man cannot here comprehend( Art. 3, 4.§. 13.) And§. 16. they tell you that [ Sicuti post lapsum homo non desinit esse homo, intellectu& voluntate praeditus, nec peccatum, quod universum genus humanum pervasit, naturam generis humani sustulit, said depravavit& spiritualiter occidit: ita etiam haec divina regenerationis gratia, non agit in hominibus tanquam truncis& stipitibus, nec voluntatem ejusque proprietates tollit, aut invitam violenter cogit; said spiritualiter vivificat, sanat, corrigit, suaviter simulac potenter flectit.] So that you see they deny not Natural Free-will, which is a Power of Choosing or Refusing, but Moral Free-will, which is a Spiritual Inclination: And so they deny not in the Regenerate the Natural Power of sinning and resisting grace,( much less in the elect unregenerate) but only that this Power, or any ill disposition of theirs, shall eventually frustrate the Grace that comes from a Resolution to renew them.  
Sect. 15. I would at this time only ask 
§. 15.  you, Whether every jesuit will not confess that God did from Eternity fore-know who would Believe and Repent, and who not? If so, then whether it be a rational conceit, that God in sending Christ to die, and the Word and Spirit to convert men, hath as full a purpose that these shall be effectual to convert and save them that he fore-knew from Eternity would never be converted or saved, as them that he fore-knew would certainly be converted and saved? And will not most of your most odious inferences fall upon your own Doctrines, if you confess Gods fore-knowledge, as well as upon theirs that maintain his Decree of giving effectual Grace to some.  
Sect. 16. The fifth feigned Article of Tilenus 
§. 16.  is, [ That such as have once received that Grace by Faith, can never fall from it finally or totally, notwithstanding the most enormous sins they can commit.] Answ. This also is in his own abusive language, and not in theirs, whose words concerning falling away are [ Quod quoad ipsos non tantum facilè fieri posset, said& indubiè fieret; respectu autem Dei fieri omnino non potest; cum nec consilium ipsius mutari, promissio excidere, &c. non posset.] So that if you speak of Power in them, they say that the Regenerate cannot stand, and not that they cannot fall: But because Gods purpose is unchangeable, &c. therefore necessitate consequentiae at least you must confess yourselves that it follows that the Elect must necessary persevere; and so there is a Logical or Moral Impossibility of their apostasy. Will not any jesuit confess this, that all that( suppose on fore-knowledge) God electeth to salvation, must necessitate consequentiae infallibly be saved? No doubt they will: and some of them much more.  
Sect. 17. Your addition is a perverse insinuation 
§. 17.  [ notwithstanding the most enormous sins they can commit.] It seems to intimate, that they may commit as enormous sins as others, and yet not fall away: When the Synod holds that in committing gross sins, they fall into a present incapacity of salvation, but that God will keep them from such sins as are inconsistent with Habitual Grace,( or Charity, as some call it.) So much for Tilenus.  
Sect. 18. And now on this occasion 
§. 18. ( having done with your friend) I return to you Mr. P. yourself. You recite some words out of my third Dispur. of Sacraments; which you bid your Reader believe not a word of, pag. 115. Wherein had you done justly, 1. You should have noted some difference between a man godly, and one that is not notoriously ungodly. 2. You should not have feigned me to speak that of Solomon, which you utter assertively as my own, when I purposely added that it is the common opinion, and that I desired all men to take heed of taking such controverted passages for certainties in their temptations. 3. And in reason you should have intimated to your Reader, that as I lay down ten particular proofs of Notorious ungodliness; so I suppose, both that the sin of Peter, David, &c. was exceedingly in regard of manner, ends, concomitants, &c. different from the like fact in a graceless man, and yet that it put them into that present incapacity for heaven, that Actual Repentance, and deep and serious Repentance too, was necessary to their recovery and forgiveness: A scrap of my words may easily be misunderstood  
Sect. 19. I suppose, by my Papers of Perseverance, 
§. 19.  you will not think me your violent or rigid adversary; and truly I am hearty willing of further information: And therefore to debate this point a little with you, I will tell you why I cannot yet believe that Peter or David( for of Solomons case I  told you my own uncertainty) were utterly unsanctified graceless men, and such as had need of another New birth, after their fall; or as the Papists say, that they had wholly excussed Charity, or the Spirit of God, or Habitual special Grace. 1. I do not find any mention of them or any others that were twice regenerated, or sanctified in Scripture. 2. Those passages, Heb. 6.& 10. seem to import, that if men should thus wholly excuss the Spirit of God, there were no renewing them by Repentance. 3. Christ saith, that the Hearers like the good ground that give deep rooting to the seed, do not fall away in trial: But David and Peter were such by Gods own testimony; ergo— I shall pass by all the common Arguments for perseverance, because they are mentioned by so many: but 4. No Scripture tells us that David or Peter were voided of Charity,( though as to the degree, and act and sense, we are agreed that it was decayed, and so far David begs for a recovery.) 5. David prays Psalm 50. that God would not for that sin, take his holy Spirit from him: which implies that yet he had it. 6. The thing in itself seems utterly improbable to me, that David or Peter should have no Love to God, after those particular sins. The sins I know were odious, and deserved an utter desertion of God: But God inflicts not all that we deserve. 1. It is not imaginable that this sudden prevalency of sensuality did so far change the judgement of David or Peter, that hereupon they Habitually esteemed the creature above God, and valued the pleasures of sin before the Pleasing and the favour of God. Its true that Actually in the time of sinning, the power of sensuality prevailed against the Act of Charity; and so it doth in every sin that men commit, according to the measure of the sin. But that Habitually God was afterward set less by then the sensual pleasure, by these holy men, is utterly improbable. 2. And you cannot imagine that the Faith of David and Peter were Habitually extirpated, and they were turned Unbelievers. And I cannot think( whatever the Papists have yet said to the contrary) that a sound Christian faith is separable from Charity, though a superficial opinionative belief may. 3. Do you think that if David or Peter had after their sin, been upon sober deliberation put to it, they would not have chosen the Love of God before the world or sinful pleasure? I think they would. 4. ●s is it likely that this one Act should turn their hearts into as Graceless a frame as the ungodly themselves that never were sanctified? It is not likely. Yet so it must be, if they excussed all the Love of God. 5. I think it was the Habit of Grace, that the Gracious looks of Christ on Peter, and the words of Nathan to David, did excite and bring again to Act; Peter was converted indeed by a particular Conversion from that sin, when he Repented; but surely he was not converted a second time from a state of unbelief, or of ungodliness, or uncharitableness, or unholyness. 6. I verily think that after his sin, David went on in his ordinary course of Religion and Obedience in all things else( abating in the Degrees): Otherwise his apostasy would have been noted by those about him, and so his very sin would scarce have been hide, which he desired to hid. And I do not think that he went to God daily in public and private, without any love at all. These things to me are utterly improbable. 7. Christ prayed before hand for Peter that his faith should not fail: therefore his Charity was not totally extinct. To conclude this: They that build on the Rock persevere in trial, Matth. 7. 25 because they build on the Rock; But David and Peter had built upon a Rock: therefore I think they did not totally fall from Habitual Grace.  
Sect. 20. Truly Sir, I am willing to learn 
§. 20.  better that Doctrine that is according to godliness, and to disclaim all that is against it: But you must hereafter learn to do us that justice, as not to take our expressions of the worst that the mercy of God will cover in a man obedient in the main, to be our descriptions of Godly men. My thoughts are, that men are to be judged godly or ungodly according to the predominant Estimation, Election, Resolution and Operation of their souls, and the bent and course of their lives, and not by a particular act: because no Act will prove us holy indeed, but what proveth a Habit; and a predominant Habit. And withal, that men thus Habituated, never live in a course of wilful sin, nor have any one sin which for Ends, Concomitants and all, is such as that of unsanctified men: And that the ungodly have never one true act of saving Love to God. But yet for all that, I think, that Good men may have one hour of their lives so bad'( or a day, or more) and bad men may have some hours of their lives so far good, that you will make but a blind unjust judgement of them, if you will judge them both by that one hour; the good by the worst hour of his life, and the bad by the best: and especially if you cull out that one hour of a good mans life, and silence the bent of heart and life that is for God, and then say, [ This is Mr. Baxters Godly man.] I do not think that God will d●al thus by us. And I would make this motion to you in the daily exercise of your watch: Try whether in the very omission of some duties to your flock, or condemning of your Brethren, &c. you may not have sins that are a companied with as little love of God, as Davids and Peters more disgraceful and( materially) heinous sins. Is so, consider whether they prove you graceless. You little suspect that the uncharitable passages in this very learned Book of yours, are as probable a symptom of the absence of Charity as the sin of David or Peter were. I would have you fear it, and search with jealousy, and judge yourself as impartially as you do David and Peter. Be not n●t angry with me, if I tell you that if I must needs choose one of the two, I ●ad rather die in the state of David before Nathan spoke to him, or of Peter after he had denied his Lord, then of Mr. Pierce that hath committed no such sin, now after this Book, which it s like you repent not of( with the rest of your failings, which are known to God.)  
Sect. 21. To save the labour of oft repetitions, 
§. 21.  I entreat you to take my judgement of the sins of the Godly( as Peter, &c.) to be that which I have expressed in my Directions for Peace of Conscience, but more distinctly in my Disput. of Justification, pag. 397, 398. in the end of my Papers to Mr. tombs: For that is it that I yet stand to.  
Sect. 22. Its strange that in an Age that 
§. 22.  knows the Lives of those that you are for, and against, you can make it the ground of opposing the puritans, as you call them, because their Doctrines led men to Licentiousness, and destroy godliness: And the same saith Grotius, when still he confesseth the Papists Lives to be such as if they believed not their Doctrine. If really your Doctrine be so much more holy then theirs, and theirs so much more unholy then yours, its strange that the difference appeareth not in mens lives; or at least, that their lives should be so much better then their Doctrine, and other mens so much worse. Help them but hearty to promote Holiness, and the men that you are so much against, will love and honour you whether you will or no.  
Sect. 23. Having H. Fitz Simmon's 
§. 23.  Brittanomachia in my hand a little before I saw your Book, where that most Petulant jesuit devideth us English Protestants into Formalists and puritans, and inveigheth against the puritans as their greatest enemies, with a double measure of malignity, I was sorry to find yours to use so much of his language, and that the jesuit and his Formalists should so far accord in so bad a work. Doubtless it is your desire to be understood by your Readers: And if so, you must expect that the word [ puritan] which you use for a reproach, should be taken in the vulgar sense: or else you were too blame that you would not give us your Description of a puritan, that we might know your meaning. A puritan is not the same thing to one man as to another. With a Papist, a puritan is a zealous Protestant, that i● nearer the Dominicans then the jesuits in Doctrinals, and is most averse to the Papal way. With King James a puritan was a turbulent seditious Separatist, or Non-conformist: For he professed he meant not all Presbyterians or Non-conformists by that name, much less all Calvinists. With some Protestants, a puritan is one of the old Catharists, that thinks a man may be perfect without sin in this life, as Grotius and the Papists do: And because this is the ancientest use of the word, take heed lest by vindicating Grotius you make folks think that you are a puritan yourself. With an Arminian a puritan is one that is against Arminianism. With the old Episcopal party, a puritan was a Non-conformist. With the late Prelates, a puritan was either a Non-conformist, or a Conformist that in Doctrine was no Arminian( of which sort Pet. Heylin gave us a Description by their opinions); Or else a Conformist that would not bow towards the Altar, or red the Book for Dancing on the Lords daies, or that Preached twice a day, &c. such variety of puritans were then made: These were the senses of this word among the Leaders of the several parties: But among the vulgar a puritan( all over England where ever I came) was one that would speak seriously or reverently of God or Heaven, or of the Scripture, and that would talk of Hell or the life to come, or call men to prepare for death or judgement, or that would not swear, or would reprove a swearer, or a drunkard, or a profaner of holy things: or would not spend part of the Lords day in sports or idleness; or that would pray in his family, or red the Scripture and pious Books, or religiously educate and instruct his children, or teach his servants to fear the Lord, or would go hear a Sermon at the next Parish when there was none at home, &c. These were the people( whether they were conformable or not) that in all Countries were called puritans and Precisians, and hated and reviled openly as if they had been men not be endured on earth. And in Preparation to the war, not very long before it, your party in their wisdom, gave them a new name, and the puritan was called a Round-head( A Learned invention; intimating that the puritans do speak, and not as Long-heads, bark or grunt.) And when the wars had given Liberty to the rage of such as hated puritans, then ordinarily he was a puritan or Round-head that was heard to pray or sing a Psalm in his house, and such like. Sometimes the sign of Purgation, by which men must prove themselves no puritans, was, If they could swear nine oaths in a breath. The way that one company of the Kings Souldiers testified their freedom from this crime by( as credible impartial witnesses in Somersetshire  told me, that saw them do it) was by Pricking their fingers, and letting their blood run into the cup, and drinking a health to the Devil in their own blood. Now among all these senses, me thinks you should have  told men which is yours, before you had talked so much against the puritans, unless you would comprehend them all. In the mean time, as Custom is the master and interpreter of speech, so you that speak to the vulgar, must by them be supposed to mean as the vulgar, and by a puritan to mean a man that feareth God, and seeketh first his Kingdom and Righteousness, and more carefully provideth for heaven then earth, and is so precise, that he will not drink, and swear, and go to hell for the company of good fellows. The impious rout of the vulgar will understand you thus, whether you will or not. By which you may conjecture what good your Book is like to do them, whatever you intend. Had you been writing against Papists, would you not be loth to say that they are all heretics and Traytors? And yet if you will say that you mean by Papists only such a● Grotius doth describe and mean, when he speaks against them, you might easily justify the truth of such words. But all the Papists in Europe that know of it, would nevertheless suppose you wronged them, as long as the common use of the word [ Papist] doth teach men to make a more extensive interpretation of it. And so in the present case.  
Sect. 24. And let me tell you that whereas 
§. 24.  in your commendation of Grotius, you intimate that you are a friend to Catholicism, in Principles and Disposition, you lamentably deviate from it, in your uncharitable censures of the puritans and Presbyterians; Its no catholic Church that cannot hold such men as these, nor a catholic Disposition that cannot embrace them with that unfeigned special Love that's due to Christians. I am confident, upon long acquaintance with those that the world calls puritans, that God thinks not of them as so odious a Generation, as you endeavour to make them seem to the world. I can say with boldness that I have attained to so much impartiality in my Religion, that I would gladly cleave to any party how much disgraced soever, that I could perceive were in the right: And after the best account I can take of all the parties now on earth, these are my fixed resolutions and desires, even to be catholic in my Estimation and respect to all, Loving all Christians of what sort soever, that may be truly called Christians; but not partaking of the errors or sins of all that I thus love; and therefore not to imitate all in their way of worship or conversation; but with this catholic Charity to have the Conversation of such as the world hath long called puritans; and in this state I desire to die. And I had rather my right hand were used as Cranmers, then I should have written against puritans what you have done. O how should I fear that terrible saying of our Lord, Mateh. 18. 6. Whosoever shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a Mill-stone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the Sea.  
Sect. 25. But to pass by these: I have 
§. 25.  here in these following sheets obeied your invitation, about my censures of Grotius and his English followers, and given you the Reasons of what I said. But I desire you to consult with some that are more impartial then you or I, whether you be not guilty of injustice in calling your Book [ A vindication of Episcopal Divines] from me: Intimating to those that take words in their common sense, that I had laid some charge upon Episcopal Divines in the general, when it was so few that there I spoke of, with a description of them, and a profession of my great respect and reverence to so many of the rest. And if you would know more then yet I have  told you, what evidence there is that England befriended the design of Grotius, I pray you red Mr. Prins Introduction to Canterburies trial; and his History of his trial; and his Rome's Master-piece; and his Popish Royal Favourite: Of all which I now recommend nothing to you, but the Proved Evidences and Matters of fact, which you may receive from the greatest enemy.  
Sect. 26. One thing I have a mind to advice 
§. 26.  with you about for my own information: I perceive( without distinction) you do with some reproach and bitterness express your dislike of Ministers living on Sequestrations: Not knowing your Reasons, I am desirous to be better informed herein, to avoid much guilt which else I may and do incur if I be mistaken: For I must confess to you that it is not only my opinion that the thing is lawful, but that I take it for one of the best works I can do, to help to cast out a bad Minister, and to get a better in the place: So that I prefer it( as a work of mercy) before much Sacrifice. As for casting out Able, Faithful, Godly Ministers, because they are Prelatical, Presbyterial, Independent, Arminians, or interested in the late civil differences, this I utterly disown: But the casting out of the utterly insufficient, ungodly, unfaithful, scandalous, or any that do more harm then good, I take it to be one of the most pious and charitable works( supposing a better put in the place) that I can put my hand to: Now if I be mistaken in this, I should be glad of your help for my conviction: For I am still going on in the guilt. I need not go to Mr. Whites Centuries to be acquainted of the Qualities of the Ejected: Our Countries have had too many of them, that have long been a burden instead of a blessing; Some never preached, but red the Common-Prayer Book, and some preached much worse then they that were never called Preachers. Some understood not the Catechism or Creed; many of them lived more in the Ale-house then the Church, and used to led their people in Drunkenness, Cursing, Swearing, quarrelling, and other ungodly practices, and tmend all by railing at the puritans and Preocisians: Some that were better, would be drunk but now and then, and preach once a day( remembering still to meet with the Precise, lest their hearers should have any mind to become Godly), but neglected most of the Pastoral care, and lived in much worldliness and profaneness, though not so disgracefully as the rest. Now my opinion hath been and is, 1. That it is a work of great charity to souls, and honour to Christ and the Church and Gospel, to cast out these men, till they prove reformed. 2. That when they are cast out, others that are more fit must be put into their places, and live on the Church maintenance as these did. My Reasons for the first are, because I am a Christian, and believe that there is a God, a Heaven and an Hell, and that our people have souls to save or lose, and that a Ministers [ taking heed to himself and unto Doctrine, and continuing therein, is Gods appointed means of saving himself and them that hear him, 1 Tim. 4. 16. with many the like Reasons, which being obvious I recite not. My Reasons for the second are, 1. Because the maintenance is for the Ministry, and the Ministry is for the end, even the good of souls and the honour of God, &c. He therefore ceaseth to be the Minister, or do the work, or be capable of the ends, and thus by his own viciousness, doth cease to have a right to the maintenance: and he that is the Minister and doth the work, ought by the Magistrate to have the maintenance conferred on him. 2. From a Parity of Reason: If it be just and necessary in lower cases, much more in this. If every City had a physician that was maintained by a public stipend for the public service: and if ignorant, or malicious, or careless men get in, that kill men instead of curing them, it were cruel and bloody Charity to keep in these men, and let them kill more, for fear of sequestering their maintenance. To let a cowardly, unskilful or traitorous Commander, keep his place and undo the Army, and cast away his Souldiers lives, for fear of sequestering his pay, is cruel Charity. To let an ignorant Pilot cast away the Ship, for fear of sequestering his pay, is also cruel Charity: So by a Schoolmaster, a Steward of your estate, or the like: And to leave the City without a physician, the Army or Regiment without Commanders, the Ship without a Pilot, lest another should live on the Sequestration, is as cruel still. 3. It was the intent of the Donors, and of God himself in requiring and accepting the Donation, that the maintenance should be finally and chiefly given to God and the Church, and not to particular men, but in order to these ends: and therefore the Right must be secured( and the use) to God and the Church; or else the Intent of the Donors will be frustrated. 4. What a misery else will the Church be cast into, if the souls of thousands must be left desolate, because a wolf is once crept in? 5. This would discourage others from ever being Benefactors to the Church, if they see that the Churches enemies must keep it as their due, because they have got possession. 6. So long as the fore-described men did keep their Church-maintenance▪ I think, before God they were usurpers,( like the physician that takes money for killing men by ignorant applications, poisons, or neglect) And therefore that they are bound, if possible, to make Restitution of all the tithes or other maintenance that ever they received( while they were such) as truly as if they had broken mens houses for it, or robbed them by the high-way. And if it be so, then cannot it be unjust for the Magistrate to dispossess them of it, and deliver it to others. If( as you seem to mean) you would have had none of all those Insufficient ones, Drunkards and the rest before described, to be sequestered, nor any better put in their places, but all to be as it was under the Prelates; or if you think the fore-described to be as good as the puritans that are now substituted, that differ from you, pled then no more to this Generation for the Piety of your Principles: For its easy to see what a friend you are to the Church, and what a case you would bring it to if you had your will. You would then with Grotius, do more then wish that there were not a puritan left in the world. But if this be not your meaning, it had been meet that you had spoken with limitation, and  told us what Sequestrations you are against, and not have spoken so in general.  
Sect. 27. Your phrase of [ growing fat 
§. 27.  or lusty upon Sequestrations] with such like, do seem to intimate, that you either are one of those, or uncharitably judge others to be such, that take the carnal Accommodations of the maintenance, to exceed the flesh-displeasing duties and sufferings that faithful Ministers must expect. I will not say to you as Grotius to Rivet, Viles, vaenalesque ainae, &c. Men judge as they are: but I will seriously profess to you, that I unfeignedly judge myself far below many Ministers about me that live upon Sequestrations, in point of self-denial, and of exemplary holiness; and yet I that am so far below them, can truly say, 1. That if you could give me but probable evidence that my Ejection and Sequestration and Silence would be more to the good of souls( by a better supply) then my continuance in the Ministry, and that the Church would have a better provision if we were out, I would prevent a Sequestration, and be so far from being against it, as that I would presently surcease myself; yea and be glad to further the Ejection of all the puritans, as you call them, in the Land, if I did believe that the Church would be bettered by the change; and I would not beg for the Mercy of a fifth part for them, but let them live as well as they can, if the Church have benefit by it. 2. And that if you could but assure me that it were lawful for me, and better for the Church thus to surcease, and deliver up to you or any other my work and maintenance, my flesh would rejoice in the ease, and my mind in the benefit of the Church; and if I know what is in my heart, I should be no more sorry for the loss of my Church-maintenance and place, then the Ox is for being unyoked, or the School-boies for the breaking up of School. Do you in the ears of the world, give out such thoughts of the painful, burdensem, suffering life of faithful Ministers, as if their Sequestrations were so valuable for men to grow fat and lusty upon, as to make such a life seem desirable to the flesh, which calls for so much patience and self-denial? So many temptations have I felt myself, to run away with Jonas from Gods work, and so oft am I provoked to look back, and such delightful thoughts hath my flesh of a retired private life,( looking towards it at the horse to his Provinder or Pasture) and so oft have I been driven to pray to God for the pardon of this sin, and strength against it,( when yet my discouragements are less then most about me meet with) that I must needs take it to be my duty both to rejoice with thanks and praise to God, that so many Godly painful Ministers can still hold on, under all their discouragements from the wickedness and ingratitude of men, and the greatness of their burden, and also daily to beg of God that he would support them with patience, and help them to bear their heavy burden, and conquer the with-drawings of the flesh, lest they should forsake the work and burden, and therewithal the power, pre-eminence and maintenance, which you would make men think they do so highly value.  
Sect. 28. As for your main controversy 
§. 28.  with Mr. Barlee, I find no call to interpose in it any further then to tell you, that If it shall be proved to you that the Calvinists that follow the Synod of Dort, or contradict them not, do extend the Mercy of God, and the Merits, Sufferings and Grace of Christ as much to all as you do or as the jesuits themselves do; then me thinks I should entreat you to be reconciled to them, and to forbear your indignation, and odious characters and inferences: But whether they do so, I shall leave you to judge, when with what is said you have considered what follows.  
Sect. 29. 1. That the jesuits about 
§. 29.  Election say not that God hath Absolutely Elected all to life, but that he hath Elected certain qualifications to be the Condition, and so hath chosen all men to be saved on Condition they Repent and Believe, &c. This much do the friends of the Synod of Dort grant you as a common thing. They confess that God hath from Eternity Decreed that Faith and Repentance shall be the Conditions of life, and that none but the persevering shall be saved; and that he hath Decreed that there shall be a General Gift or promise made of pardon and life to all upon these Conditions: And though they like not the name of a Conditional Decree as importing that the Act of Decreeing is suspended on a condition, yet hey profess( even Dr. Twiss himself oft) that the Decree doth suspend the Benefit offered us, upon a Condition. So that truly( if I can understand them) they are for as much General Election to the utmost as the jesuits are: But the difference is that the Synod is for more: Even for a special Election of some to be Infallibly saved( agreeable to the Scriptures): which no whit diminisheth the Mercy that is common to others: They have not the less because we have more.  
Sect. 30. And the same may be said of 
§. 30.  the Purchase as of the Decree. That the sins of all the world were the cause of Christs death, or as Paraeus saith, in Script. Synodal) were laid on Christ, the Synod never denied; nor that it is a satisfaction sufficient for all( which they maintain); nor that Christ hath procured a Grant and offer of pardon and life to all on condition of faith and repentance: So that they grant as much for All as the jesuits: Only they say, he hath done more for some, that are given him in a special manner by the Father.  
Sect. 31. The same also I may say of the 
§. 31.  Gift of Grace. The jesuits say, that all men( that hear the Gospel at least) have so much Grace bestowed from Christ, as that the matter is brought to the choice of their own wills, whether they will have Christ and life or not; And so say the followers of Augustine and the Synod: Only they add, that Christ doth more for some, then this; not only bringing it to the choice of their wills, but giving them the Grace infallibly to choose it.  
Sect. 32. The same also may be said of 
§. 32.  the Grace of perseverance. The jesuits say that he giveth all men to persevere if they will: And the Synodists say that and more, with Augustine, that he giveth the will and perseverance itself to the Elect.  
Sect. 33. It is true that whereas Augustine 
§. 33.  thought that Eventually the Elect only persevere; and some that are sanctified and not Elect, do fall away; the Synod do judge otherwise: But note, 1. That they deny not but men may fall from a present capacity of salvation, and under the necessity of a renewed Repentance to put them again into a present capacity. 2. That this is nothing to the point in hand, of the extent of Grace, save only that the Synodists do extend Grace further, or advance it more then the jesuits do. For they allow as much to all as the jesuits, even for perseverance; but as Augustine and the Dominicans give more to some( the Elect) then the jesuits; so the Synod gives more to some then Augustine; or if you say, they give less, because they deny Sanctification to the non-elect; as that is but a mercy that increaseth their misery according to the jesuits, so it s more fitly said, that they give more then less: He that saith[ All that ever are sanctified truly, shall be saved] doth more advance the grace of God, then he that saith[ Some that shall never be saved are sanctified.]  
Sect. 34. And a● for the point of Free-will, 
§. 34.  the jesuits and Dominicans differ about the Definition of it; and the Feuds seem unreconcilable: The Synod hath not meddled with defining Natural Free-will: and therefore you cannot say they are your adversaries; And if they had, yet that is a Philosophical controversy, and not about the extent of Grace: So that I think I may conclude that the Synod gives as much as the Arminians or jesuits to Universal Grace, both in Decree, Redemption, and Execution by Collation of Grace; but they give more to the Elect.  
Sect. 35. And seeing this is( I think) 
§. 35.  undeniable, judge I beseech you but impartially, whether it be Christian dealing to give out, that they do by the restraint of Grace, make God a Tyrant, Cruel, not lovely to man, a Dissembler, with abundance of the like; when they came not a step behind the jesuits or Arminians in setting forth Gods Love to All, but go beyond them in extoling his special Love and Grace to some, even to his Elect.  
Sect. 36. If you say, that they withall 
§. 36.  assert, that without this special Grace men cannot Repent, Believe, &c. and therefore they make God cruel in denying them that which is of necessity to salvation. I answer, 1. If they do say this, they do not deny a jot of Grace that you assert, but only assert that Original Pravity which the adversaries deny. Let that then be known to be the difference, that they make God more Gracious, and man more sinful and impotent then you do: and do not say that which is not so, that they make God less Gracious, because they make man more sinful. But 2. I  told your Tilenus the truth even now, that it s an hard Question whether in this you differ at all,( unless with the flat Pelagians you deny Original sin.) For what mean you or they, when you say men Can or Cannot Repent and Believe? Is there any thing in the will besides a Natural Power or Faculty, and an Habit, Disposition or Inclination to act, and the act itself? I know of no more: And as to the Natural Power of Willing, the Synod is agreed with you that it is in all: or else ●hey were no men: And so far all Can Repent and Believe: But as to the Inclination or Habit, the jesuits themselves cannot deny but the Impenitent are without it; yea more, that they have the contrary habit of evil; and so far they Cannot Repent or do well. So that when the Synod says they Cannot, they speak but of a Moral Impotency, which is nothing else but Habitual unwillingness; and so the Cannot and the will not is the same thing: and its all one to say, [ The Impenitent Cannot Repent without special Grace] as to say, [ The Impenitent are so Habitually Impenitent, that they will not Repent without special Grace.] Some other objections I know may here be raised, which I may not be so tedious as to discuss at this time.  
Sect. 37. These things considered, I beseech 
§. 37.  you Brother in the name of Christ, to cease your too uncharitable distances and censures, and entertain yet those Principles that are truly catholic, and dare not to shut out any from your Love, or Peace, that you cannot Prove that Christ shutteth out. Especially take heed of using thus the choicest of his servants, but look upon them with a single eye. And for them and the Synod of Dort, I may well challenge that Justice from you, as to impute no such opinions to them which they purposely disown and publicly profess to detest: As [ That the most heinous sins do not hinder the salvation of the Elect, however they live: That the Reprobate cannot be saved, though they truly perform all the works of the Saints; That God by his own mere will, without any respect at all to sin, or sight of it, did predestinate and create the most of the world to damnation; That Reprobation is the cause of Infidelity and Impiety, in the same manner as Election is the fountain and cause of faith and piety; That many harmless Infants of Believers are snatched from the mothers breasts, and tyrannically cast into Hell, so that neither Baptism, nor the Churches prayers in Baptism can profit them. These with abundance more( that are charged on them) the Reformed Churches do with all their hearts detest.] Saith the Synod themselves, in Conclusione Decretorum.  
Sect. 38. To conclude, we should live in Peace, if the advice of the Synod ( ibid.) 
§. 38.  were followed [ A phrasibus denique iis omnibus abstineant quae praescriptos nobis genuini sanctarum scripturarum sensus limits excedunt,& protervis sophists justam ansam praebere possint, doctrinam Ecclesiarum Reformatarum sugillandi, aut calumniandi.] And if withall we were humbly conscious of our own frailty and fallibility, and could maintain that unfeigned Charity to our Brethren, which beseemeth all the Disciples of Christ, and which would cause us to say and do by others( even in our Controversal writings and private speeches of them) as we would have them say and do by us.  
Dear Brother, you must either take this course, or wish you had taken it.   

These Books following of the same Authors, are also Printd for Nevil Simmons Book-seller in Kederminster.  
TRue Christianity, or Christs Absolute dominion, and mans necessary self-resignation and Subjection, in two Assize Sermons preached at Worcester, in 12o.  
A Sermon of Judgement preached at Pauls, before the honourable Lord mayor and Alderman of the City of London, December 17. 1654. and now enlarged, in 12o.  
Making light of Christ and Salvation too oft the Issue of Gospel Invitations, manifest in a Sermon preached at laurence Jury in London, 8o.  
The Agreement of divers ministers of Christ in the County of Worcester for Catechizing or personal Instructing all in their several parishes that will Consent thereunto, containing 1. The Articles of our Agreement. 2. An Exhortation to the people to submit to this necessary work. 3. The Profession of Faith and Catechism, in 8o.  
Guildas Salvianus, the Reformed Pastor, showing the nature of the Pastoral work, especially in private instruction and Catechizing, 8o.  
Certain Disputations of Right to Sacraments, and the True Nature of Visible Christianity, 4o.  
Of Justification: four Disputations clearing and amicably defending the Truth, against the unnecessary Oppositions of divers Learned and Reverend Brethren, 4o.  
A Treatise of Conversion preached and now published for the use of those that are strangers to a true Conversion, especially the grossly Ignorant and Ungodly, 4o.  
One sheet for the Ministry against the Malignants of all sorts.  
A Winding-sheet for Popery.  
One sheet against the Quakers.  
A second sheet for the Ministry Justifyng our Calling against Quakers, Seekers and Papists, and all that deny us to be the Ministers of Christ.  
Directions to Justices of Peace, especially in Corporations, to the discharge of their duty to God, written at the request of a Magistrate, and Published for the use of others that need it.  
The Crucifying of the world, by the across of Christ: With a Preface to the Nobles, Gentlemen, and all the Rich, directing them how they may be Richer.   

THE Religion of Grotius DISCOVERED Upon the Invitation of Mr. Thomas Pierce's Vindication.  
April 9. 1658. Incept.  

SECT. I.  
IN a Book called Christian 
§. 1.  Concord, having to do with some that will have no Peace, but by the degrading of all the Protestant Ministers, and unchurching all the Protestant Churches that are not Prelatical, I thought it my duty to warn those that are in danger of the design of such as under the name of Episcopal Divines, do prosecute the design of Cassander and Grotius, to reconcile us to the Pope, upon certain abatements and Reformations of the Romanists. Hereupon I find the Learned and Reverend Dr. Sanderson take notice of it in his Preface to his Sermons, as if it tended too much to raise a jealousy of Episcopal Divines; and the same offence is fullier expressed by the Reverend Mr. Tho. Pierce in his rejoinder to Mr. Barlee. But these Reverend persons should have noted, that I purposely protested against any accusation of the Episcopal in general, and as such, or any of them, except the guilty, whom I there in part described, which was fitter then the nomination which Mr. Pierce would have. And by name I profess my very great reverence to Dr. Sanderson and such as he.  
But Mr. Pierce wonders how I was betrayed to speak so severely of so excellent a person as Grotius, unless by taking things on trust; and therefore he makes it part of the Title of his Book, to be [ A Vindication of Grotius from Mr. Baxter.] I took him to be a Cassandrian Papist; and Mr. Pierce and many more among us that vindicate him do take this to be an injurious imputation. I am here in a great straight! For now if I prove Grotius a Papist, I fear much lest I shall offend his Learned followers and vindicators, as if withal I proved them also to be Papists; which is none of my design; nor would I so be understood unless they follow him in the very points that I charge him with. And if I say nothing, I shall be unjust to myself to myself, in lying under the injurious charge of being a false accuser of so great a man But Truth is Truth; and I hope will do less harm then silence, when I have so loud a call to speak. Forbearing therefore the search of Mr. Pierces words concerning me, because I would not trouble myself, or him, or the Reader with unneceslary altercations, I shall only give him a plain account of my Reasons for such thoughts and words of Grotius( and consequently of all that are therein of his mind,) as he takes offence at; and let him see that I use not to charge men so deeply upon the trust of any accusers words.  
And here 1. I shall te●l him how far it is that I blame Grotius and dislike his design, and how far I approve it, and honor the man. 2. And then when I have opened the reasons of my offence, I shall produce my evidence to prove that Grotius was a Papist as far and as deeply guilty as I charged him to be.   

SECT. II.  
AND for the first, I shall speak of his 
§. 2.  person and worth in other respects, and then of this design in special. 1. I do indeed take Grotius for so Learned and Judicious a man, that Mr. Pierce might boldly conjecture as he doth, that I judge not myself worthy in any such respect to be name with him: A small measure of humility may make meserious in this Profession. But I cannot be of every mans opinion in all things, that is more Learned then myself, unless I will hold a hundred contradictions. Yea I must in Gratitude Profess, that I have learnt more from Grotius, then from almost any Writer in those subjects, that ever I red:( I speak not of Practical Divinity, which my soul doth live upon, and is the happiest part of my learning:) Especially his Books de satisfactione Christi, de veritate Religionis Christianae, de Imperio summar. Potestat. circa sacra. de Jure belly& Pacis, and his Annotations on the four Evangelists. For the blemishes commonly reported of his life, in some points, I ever stopped my ears against the accusation, susspending my censures of him, as being in a matter that less concerned me to take knowledge of, so that if I might be partial for any man, it were very likely to be for Grotius.   

SECT. III.  
AND 2. For his Pacificatory design, 
§. 3.  in General I take it to be one of the most Christian, noble, blessed works, that any man can be employed in, to heal( if it be possible) the Divisions of the Churches, that laying by our passions, and uncharitableness and contentions, we might Loveingly and Peaceably serve the Lord, and walk together in the fellowship of the Gospel to everlasting life. O that the souls of all the Pastors and People of Christs Church, were sensible of the sinfulness and hurt of our Divisions, and were as zealous for the Unity and Peace of Christians, as they are for duties of a lower nature, and as desirous of the healing of our sad distractions, as they are for many a lesser Mercy: O that they would follow God as hard in their Prayers, and men in their solicitations, for the return of Charity, and the Recovery of Peace, as they would pray or strive for their Estates or Lives or the saving of their souls. For my own part, I am a person of so little worth or interest, that I cannot in reason expect that my endeavours, in such a work should have any considerable success: But yet, though I saw not a man in the world that would regard it, or return me any better thanks then a reproach, ● am resolved, if God vouchsafe me opportunity and assistance, to speak for Peace, while I have a tongue to speak, and to writ for Peace, while I have a hand to writ, and to live to the Churches Peace, while I have an hour to live, and am able to do any thing that may promote it.  
It is not therefore the Pacificatory desires or designs of Grotius or any other that I distaste. Could I find such a heart within me, I would cast it in the dust, and condemn it to shane and sorrow and recantation; so much as I love the Churches Unity and Peace less then Grotius or you, so much I am a worse man then Grotius or you; and so I freely warrant you to judge of me. But were it meet for me to play the fool and glory, I know no inward affection of my soul that I can more confidently and assuredly boast of, and say, I feel it reign within me, then an uncessant burning desire after the Reformation and Concord of the Churches. Nor will I for fear of the censures of any man, that will call me Pharisee or Proud, conceal that work of God upon my soul, the mentioning whereof may tend to excite the like in others. As the Hallowing of Gods Name and the Coming of his Kingdom, and the doing his will throughout the Earth in conformity to Heaven, is prescribed us as the matter of our first requests, so must I needs say that when I let my prayers loose to follow the bent and inclination of my soul, they begin in a compassionate deploring of the condition of the Nations of Heathens, Mahometans and other Infidels that are strangers to Christ, and thence they proceed to a Commemoration of the state of the Church universal, before they come home to this clod of earth on which we tread: If then you say that I blame you or Grotius for seeking Peace or common Good, I take it as if you said, that I blame you for being Christians, if not for being men, and that I would have you turn the enemies of the Church and all mankind. The Lord knows the most honourable employment in this world in my eyes is the Conversion of the Unbelieving Nations; and the next to it is the Healing of the Polluted and Divided Churches. No man on earth is honoured in my thoughts for his works sake more then Mr. Eliots in New England, the Apostle to those Americans, with his Helpers; and truly next him I have very Honourable and Grateful thoughts of the Labours of the jesuits and friars for the Japenians, Brasilians, Chinenses and other Infidel Nations; so that my heart riseth against their fopperies and Papal interest that by interposing marreth so good a work; and against either Hollanders or any others that have hindered them in it; and I could wish that the world had a thousand jesuits for one, on condition they were employed in no other work. And next to these, there is none so grateful to my thoughts as the Reformers and Peace-makers. Oh how delightful is it to me to red Bishop Halls Peace-maker& his Pax terris, and Davenants, Mortons, and his Pacificatory Tracts: and to red such Tractates as Calixtus, Crocius, Joh. Bergius, Conrad. Bergius, Hottonus, Morinus, Amyraldus, Hayn, yea and Acontius too, with many the like, that have written for Pacification. The Irenicon of Junius, of Paraeus, of Jer. Burroughs and others, are delicious recreations to me, when I have leisure to review them. Melanctthons peaceable Spirit and writings, are acceptable to me as well as to Grotius. But his own words and Pezelius have satisfied me, that Melanchthon and Grotius were not of a mind, in many a weighty point of doctrine, for all his constant glorying in Melanchthon: Much less were Junius and he of a mind.   

SECT. IV.  
MOreover, I must say, that though 
§. 4.  I dissent much from Grotius his way of Pacification; yet are not my thoughts of Grotius, Cassander, Erasmus, Modrevius, Wicelius or others of that strain, no nor of Thuanus, and many more moderate Papists, either bitter, censorious or uncharitable; nor did I ever damn them in my censures, or reckon them with the Spanish, Italian, violent, bloody, persecuting sort. When I red the writings of Cassander, Thaulerus, Ferus and others of Germany, I think they are now blessed souls with Christ. And when I red the writings of Espensaeus, Albaspinaeus, and many other moderate French men, especially those of the Nobility who are most impartial, I cannot but red them with a great deal of Love and Honour to the Writers. The French Moderation is acceptable to all good men: That Nation is an honourable part of the Church of Christ in my esteem 
Its great blemish, is, the streams of blood that have been spilled by Massacres. . Much more must I Honour the pacificatory endeavours of any that attempt the Healing of the Church; So that thus far Grotius and Cassander and their followers are deservedly esteemed by us. And if if I knew never so many Grotian or Cassandrian Papists in England, though I would not be one of them, nor have others misled by them, yet would I love them, and much prefer them before the more violent sort of Papists.   

SECT. V.  
THE things then that I dissallow in 
§. 5.  Grotius his design and doctrines, are these. 1. That he was not truly catholic in those designs and doctrines. So far am I from condemning him for extending his charity& Healing attempts as far as to the Papists, that my greatest dislike is that he extended them no further. He begun his Pacificatory attempts with the Protestants only, for the uniting of the Arminians and Calvinists( see his notable Oration in Senatu Amstelodamensi.) Afterwards he thought this too narrow a design, and unanswerable to his later principles, and so turning Papist, imagined that Rome must be the Head of the Unity, or else it could not be expected. But by this means he dropped into a deplorable Schism, excluding all the african, Asian and European Churches that cannot submit to the Roman Head, and to many of those Doctrines which Grotius now at last doth patronise. Saith Bishop Bromhal to Mileterius( p. 51.) [ If you seek to obtrude upon him the Roman Church with its adherents for the catholic Church, excluding three parts of four of the Christian world from the Communion of Christ, or the opinions thereof for Articles and Fundamentals of catholic Faith, neither his Reason, nor his Religion, nor his Charity will suffer him to listen to you.] Was this Catholicism, ro set up a Head or Center of Union, with other terms of Union and Peace which three parts of four of the( already) catholic Church do dissent from? What may be called Schism if this be a catholic design? This is my first dislike.   

SECT. VI.  
ANother thing that I dislike in Grotius 
§. 6.  his design, is, that it would make the unity and Peace of the Church seem impossible and our divisions desperate, by calling us all to Impossible terms of unity as the only terms. And then as this will engage men in a great deal of zealous toil for nothing, and draw them that are of Healing dispositions, to misled desires and prayers, and to lose all their labour; so it will entice others that ●ome after them, to think that Unity is impossible, because such great attempts were frustrate( which might have been blessed with much more success, had they been better guided, and gone upon truly catholic terms.) He that saw so much of the catholic Church( three parts of four saith Bishop Bram●●●) to stand so long at such a distance from the Roman Principles which Grotius propoundeth as the Healing terms, and that sees what endeavours of the jesuits and friars, in Aethiopia, Syria, armoniac, Thracia, Russia, and almost all over the Christian world, have been frustrated already, me thinks should never have taken it for a thing Probable,( if possible) that this must be the Healing way. Its an uncomfortable Physician that tells the Patient that there is no hope of his cure but by those same means that have been long used by the skillfullest men without success; But he is much more an uncomfortable Physician that tells his Patient that he must fetch a medicine from the Moon, or the Antipodes or have the brains of a phoenix, before he can be cured. The terms that Grotius propoundeth for our Unity and Peace are as impossible. For the catholic Church throughout all the world to be united in one visible Head and governor, and to own the Doctrines that Grotius must have them own, even the Tridentine Creed and Council with the rest of that nature, is a thing that cannot be. For, 1. The plain commands of God are against it. 2. The workings of Gods Spirit in the soul are against it. The catholic Church is Holy; He that hath not the Spirit of Christ is none of his. This Spirit will not suffer the Church to be guilty of those Practices that Grotius propounds as the way to peace. Though it may permit some to fall so far, it will not do so by all; nor let the catholic Church be cemented by such error and corruption. 3. And the Society that Grotius would incorporate us in, is not One in itself but many, under the name of one: For many Heads have many Bodies: And how can we Center with them in a Head that is yet unknown? Or how can that be a Means of our Unity, that will not procure their own? Saith Bishop Bromhall to Mileterius( p. 169.) [ You tell us moreover that this Church is the Roman Church: That is not true: but suppose it were most true, as it is most false: What should a man be better or nearer to the knowledge of the Truth, and consequently to his salvation for his submission to the Roman Church? As long as you cannot agree among yourselves, either what this Roman Church is, or what your Infallible Judge is? One saith, it is the Pope alone; Another saith, No: but the Pope with his Conclave of Cardinals; A third will go no less then the Pope and a Provincial Council. A fourth will not be contented without the Pope and a General Council. A fifth is for a General Council alone, either with or without the Pope. A sixth party( and they are of no small esteem among you here at this present) is for the Essential Church, that is, the company of all faithful people, whose reception, say they, makes the true ratification of the Acts of its representative body: It were as good have no Infallible Judge, as not to know or agree who it is.]   

SECT. VII.  
THE third cause of my dislike of Grotius's 
§. 7.  way,( or design in respect to the terms of Concord) is, because it is Uncharitable and Censorious, cutting off from the catholic United Society, the Reformed Churches that yield not to his terms, and will not be Reconciled to the Pope of Rome. And thus under pretence of Healing he woundeth; and in the name of a Peace-maker, he Divideth, and cuts off( if I may speak my own judgement of men) the holiest parts of the Church on earth, and those that are so dear to Christ, that he will never give thanks to them that thus reproach them or seek to cast them out. As you reproach those throughout your Book by the name of Puritans that differ from you( a people much dearer to God then to Mr. Pierce) so doth Grotius make the name of the Reformed or Protestants a note of reproach to those that will not be reconciled to the Pope.   

SECT. VIII.  
A Fourth reason of my dislike of the 
§. 8.  way of his design, is, because it is a trap to tempt and engage the souls of millions into the same uncharitable, censorious and reproachful way, which he thus entered into himself. When a false Center of the Churches Unity is set up, and impossible or unlawful terms of Concord are thus pretended to be the only terms, it will easily follow that they that believe this, will uncharitably censure all that close not with them on these terms, for schismatics or heretics: and in their writings and speeches will thus reproach them. And how great a wrong it is to the Church of God, thus to tempt and engage so great a number in a constant practise of so great a sin, me thinks all tender consciences should easily discern.   

SECT. IX.  
A Fifth reason that moves me to dislike 
§. 9.  this design, is, that it tendeth to engage the Princes of Christendom in a persecution of their subjects, that cannot comply with these unwarrantable terms. And that its likely to be no small number, nor the worse part; but the soundest, and wisest, and holiest men. For if once Princes be set on this kind of Pacification, and are persuaded that these are the only terms, and so that the dissenters are factious, Schismatical or unpeaceable men; no wonder if they silence the Ministers, and leave their flocks in lamentation, and persecute the people, and think all this while that they do God service, and are but suppressing a company of tu●bulent rebellious schismatics, and are mercifully promoting the peace of the Church: This is the unhappy issue of the attempts of Pride; when men have such high thoughts of their own imaginations and devices, that they think the Churches wounds can be healed by no other plaster but by this of their compounding; and specially when men depart from the Word of God and the simplicity of faith, and the true Center and terms of Unity and Peace, they are involved in the guilt of persecution before they are ware.   

SECT. X.  
A Sixth reason of my dislike of Grotius 
§. 10.  his Pacification, and all such as his, is, because it engageth the Church of Christ in a way of sin, both in false Doctrine, Discipline and worship, as if these were the most desirable way for the Church. God hath forbidden that Popery, and many of those errors, that Grotius would make the way to Peace. And the displeasing of God, is a most unlikely way to the Unity and Peace of Christians; and a way that should not seem desirable to any that are indeed the servants of Christ. That's not a Means that hath no tendency to the End; much less which crosseth and overthroweth the End. What's the end of the Churches Unity and Peace, but the increase of Holiness and the Honour and Pleasing of God, in the salvation and felicity of his Saints. But these mistaken ways do tend to led men from God, to diminish Holiness, and promote sin, and consequently to hinder mens salvation, and to displease and dishonour God: And is this a desirable way to Peace? The Turks have more Unity and Concord then the Christians; and yet Mahometanism is not desirable. Satan is a friend to Unity and Concord in evil. He would not have his Kingdom divided against itself; For then how shall it stand? It is not therefore every Peace, but that which promoteth the Holiness& Salvation of men, that is desirable. I abhor their disposition that can despise or violate the Churches peace for every petty conceit of their own, which they have called by the name of Truth, or Duty. But for all that, I had rather have a contention that promoteth Holiness and Salvation, then a Peace that doth destroy it. For its no Means with me that destroyeth the End.   

SECT. XI.  
THis much may suffice to satisfy you of 
§. 11.  the Reasons of my dissent from such unhappy Pacifications as Grotius did attempt; that you may see also to what ends I dissuaded men from complying with this design: It was no uncharitable dis-affection to the persons, but an apprehension of the exceeding hurt that the Church was like to receive by it, in such respects as these, that moved me to say what I did against Grotius and such as he. I love and honour them much more then violent Papists; but I am satisfied that the Reformed Churches are more amiable Societies then their Pacification would make us. I am zealously desirous of the Healing of the breach between Papists and Protestants: But if the best of them be as a briar, and the most upright sharper then a thorny hedge,( Mic 7. 4.) I would entreat all the sons of Peace, that they will not too hastily condemn us, because we shake not hands with them. If it be possible as much as in us lieth, we would live peaceably with all men,( Rom. 12. 18.) But that which God hath forbidden, is Impossible: It lieth not in us to have Peace and Unity with them that will have none with us, unless we will break with God, and our consciences. Its a dear price to pay for peace with men, if we must buy it with the loss of our Peace with God, and the hazard of our Salvation and Eternal Peace, and the prosperity of the Church and Truth.   

SECT. XII.  
MAny of the late Episcopal Divines 
§. 12.  do propound terms of Peace that are much lower( to the Romanists) then the terms of Grotius were. And yet though I honour their Peaceable dispositions, I durst not consent to their terms, nor do I think that they will ever prove truly Healing in the end. I mention them to let you know, that it is not all Episcopal Divines that I suspected of a compliance with Grotius and Cassander; no nor all of the later strain: Which one would have thought might have been believed at the first affirmation. The old sort of Episcopal Divines that received the public Doctrine of this Nation, contained in the 39. Articles, the Homilies, &c. I wholly acquitted from my jealousies of this compliance. And I extended it to none of the New Episcopal party, but such as I there described. I will instance in Bishop Bramhall, because I suppose that you value his judgement, and I as highly honour his Reason and clearness of discourse, as any mans that I have lately red. I may well hope that many of your present friends do intend no nearer a closure with the Pope then he: And I take him for no Papist, though I dare not follow him. His terms of Peace with Rome are these. 1. He will not admit the Popes Universality of Jurisdiction, by the Institution of Christ. 2. Nor his superiority above ecumenical Councils. 3. Nor his Infallibility of Judgement, pag. 138.(& p. 151. Edit. 2.) 4. But he saith,( fol: ult.) [ If you could be contented to wave your last four hundred years determinations, or if you liked them for yourselves, yet not to obtrude them upon other Churches; If you could rest satisfied with your old Patriarchal Power, and your Principium unitatis, or Primacy of Order, much good might be expected from free Councils and conferences from moderate persons; and we might yet live in hope to see an Union, if not in all opinions, yet in charity, and all necessary points of saving truth between all Christians; to see the Eastern and Western Churches join hand in hand, &c.] And it is a Primacy as of Christs Institution that he would here grant them. For pag. 165.( Edit. 2.) he saith,[ Cyprian gave a Primacy or Principality of Order to the chair of Saint Peter, as Principium Unitatis; so do we.] This with his Doctrinal Concessions, and others about worship, are his way of Unity.   

SECT. XIII.  
I Take not this Learned Bishop for a Papist, 
§. 13.  though I take Grotius for one; 1. Because I find him more disowning a fellowship with that party then Grotius did. And every man shall by me, be taken to be what he Professeth to be, and supposed to be of no other way but what he owns, till I have very weighty Reasons to Judge otherwise. 2. Because he gives them no more then some Reconcilable members of the Greek Church would give them: and( except the points after name) seems to be just of the Greek way of Religion. 3. Because he disowns their Council of Trent, and last four hundred years determinations. 4. His two knocking Arguments conclude against them, much otherwise then Grotius doth;( pag. 196. Edit. 1.) which are these, and worthy the reciting, [ That Church which hath changed the Apostolical Creed, the Apostolical Succession, the Apostolical Regiment, and the Apostolical Communion, is no Apostolical, Orthodox, or catholic Church. But the Church of Rome hath changed the Apostolical Creed the Apostolical Succession, the Apostolical Regiment, and the Apostolical Communion. Therefore the Church of Rome is no Apostolical, Orthodox, or catholic Church. They have changed the Apostolical Creed, by making a new Creed, wherein are many things inferred, that hold no analogy with the old Apostles Creed: The Apostolical Succession, by engrossing the whole Succession to Rome, and making all other Bishops to be but the Popes Vicars and Substitutes, as to their jurisdiction: The Apostolical Regiment, by erecting a Visible Universal Monarchy in the Church: And lastly the Apostolical Communion, by excommunicating three parts of the holy catholic apostolic Church. 2. Again, that Church which resolves its faith, not into Divine Revelation and Authority, but into human Infallibility or the Infallibility of the present Church, without knowing or according, what that present Church is, whether the Virtual, or Representative, or the Essential Church, or a Body compounded of some of these, hath no true faith. But the Church of Rome resolves its faith, not into Divine Revelation and Authority, but, &c. Therefore the Church of Rome hath no true faith.   

SECT. XIV.  
YET cannot I consent that these should 
§. 14.  be made the terms of Union that the Bishop here grants. For, 1. If when he excludeth [ Universality of Jurisdiction by Christs Institution] he intend to grant them( which yet I know not) an Universality of Jurisdiction by human Institution or Agreement, then it would be but to set up an human Popery instead of a pretended Divine: But this I charge not on him as his judgement; though some will think it intimated. But 2. that Peter hath a certain fixed Chair to which a Primacy of Order is annexed, and a Head ship of Unity, is not a Truth, and therefore not a Pinciple Necessary to Heal the Church. 3. That the Pope should hold to himself and his Church his [ last four hundred years determinations] and so continue such as the Bishop here concludes to be [ no Apostolical, Orthodox, catholic Church, nor to have true Faith] is an unlikely thing to stand with the Unity and Concord that he mentioneth: We shall cement but sorrily with such a Body as this. 4. That the Pope should hold his Patriarchal Power, is a mere Innovation and human Institution, as is his Primacy of Order, and such privileges( the Council of Calcedon averr's it.) And therefore it is no necessary thing to be conceded for the Churches Peace. 5. Multitudes that live in the Western Nations of the world, will still dissent both from the Popes Patriarchal Power, and more from his way of exercising it: and so will be forced to fall under the reproach of schismatics by these terms: and that for obeying the Laws of Christ. If the Pope as patriarch of the West, should impose upon us only,( and not on the East) the Doctrines, and Worship, and Ceremonies which he now imposeth on the Papists,( excepting the excepted before) doth any man of reason think that the Reformed Churches would ever yield to them, or ought to do it? We will Unite on Christs terms, and that will be a sure and more General Union; and not on such human devices as these. Let those that made the Pope our patriarch, maintain his Power: For Christ did not. 6. Many things in Doctrine and Worship which on these terms would be imposed both on East and West, and prevail in most of the Churches at this day, are sins against God; and therefore how small soever they may be, are not to be consented to for Unity. 7. The Ethiopian and other Churches that were still without the verge of the Roman Empire, will never aclowledge this much to the Pope; seeing that even those human Constitutions that gave him his Primacy of Order, determined of no more then the Roman world, and had nothing to do beyond Euphrates; nor did the Popes lay any claim, or meddle any further. And abundance among the Eastern Churches also will deny this Primacy. 8. There is no hope of Uniting the Churches on any terms but what are Necessary and Divine: For its vain to expect that things human and unnecessary should be consented to by all: Much less things sinful. 9. There is no Union to be had but upon the terms on which the Churches have sometimes United. For a new way of union is not to be expected, or attempted. But never was the Church united on such Concessions as these; and therefore never will be. 10. It would be an exceeding dishonour to God, and injury to the souls of many millions of men, if but under the Popes Patriarchal Jurisdiction in the West, the Papists way of worship were set up, and their Government exercised as now. The good will of Rome, or the name of Peace would not recompense the loss of so many thousand souls as some one of the Papal abuses might procure: For instance, their driving the people from the Scriptures and other means of knowledge. Besides most of the evils that I before charged on the Grotian way,( as Censures, Persecutions, &c.) would follow upon this.  
Yet this I shall yield, that if the Papists will Reform what the Bishop requires them to Reform, it will undoubtedly make way for nearer Concord, and make them capable of our more charitable thoughts. But if it be expected also that we yield to them as much as the Bishop yields them, and these be made the terms of Peace or Concord, I dare say that the Churches will never have a general, or safe, or durable Peace or Concord on those terms.   

SECT. XV.  
BUT though I am thus confident that 
§. 15.  neither the terms of Grotius, Cassander, or this Bishop, will serve for a catholic Agreement; yet I desire not to make the work seem utterly Hopeless, or take off any mans just endeavours for a general Peace: Nor shall I leave the business thus, and content myself to show the ●mpossibility of other mens terms, lest while I pull down all, and offer nothing in the stead, I be thought to be but an enemy to Peace, while I pretend to love it. In general therefore I say, that the terms of an Universal Concord or Peace, must be Purely Divine, and not human; Necessary, and not things unnecessary; ancient, according to the Primitive simplicity, and neither New, nor yet too Numerous, Curious or abstruse. Particularly, Chillingworth hath already  told the world the way of Unity. And I have cast in somewhat of my thoughts in another Disputation of this subject, and more in a Treatise against Popery called, A Key for catholics,( not yet Printed, but finished, and going to the Press.)   

SECT. XVI.  
I Have now  told you how far I dissent 
§. 16.  from Grotius, and on what accounts, and how far I approve Pacificatory attempts, between us and the Papists, that you may not misinterpret me any more. And now I come to the matter that you call me to, which is to prove that Grotius was a Papist of that strain as I supposed him to be. And I think he would have taken it as an injury from you or me, if while he had lived we had denied it.  
And here it is supposed that you and I are so far agreed what a Papist is, as is necessary to our prosecution of this question. For 1. you'l grant me I doubt not, that the French Church are Papists, though much more moderate then the Italians, and though they deny the Popes superiority over a Council, and so his Infallibility alone. 2. You do grant me ( pag. 93, 94.) that Thuanus and Cassander were Papists, and the Emperours Ferdinand and Maximilian( as I understand you) And this much shall suffice us at this time. I would Grotius had gone no further then Maximilian. His mind was to have had the Scripture taken for the only Rule of faith, and to have adjoined for Church Government that frame of Policy that Grotius was for. But many of Grotius doctrines are not in the Scripture, but against it, and fetched from pretended Tradition.   

SECT. XVII.  
IF Cassander was a Papist, then he that 
§. 17.  owns the Doctrine of Cassander, and his way of Discipline and Worship, is so too: But so did Grotius. For 1. He Published his Consultations as the very way to the Churches Peace, professing himself in many writings to own them, and desire their Reception, and making it the very design and business of many writings and of his life. 2. He calls them [ Cassandri Veracia scripta] in his Poem before his via ad Pacem. 3. In his Annotations, he approveth of that which you can call Popery in Cassander, but seems to be more favourable to the Papal cause in many points then Cassander was. red but Cassander of Images( for instance) and Grotius in his Annot. his Vol.& Discuss. and see which of them was nearer, or more favourable to the Papists. If then Cassander be a Papist, and Grotius professedly of the judgement of Cassander, th● Grotius was a Papist. The same I may say of Erasmus( whom Thomas White and many more Papists vindicate, as formerly one of theirs) and Modrevius, and many more whom Grotius owneth and adheres to.   

SECT. XVIII.  
HE that owneth the Tridentine Creed 
§. 18.  is a Papist. But so did Grotius: For he first printed it in his Via ad Pacem, as that which should be received for the Churches Peace, or which the Augustan Confession must be reconciled to; professing to hold them reconcilable with the expositions and Correctives that Cassander& he have given of this Confession: Not offering the least Corrective for the Trent Creed in order to the Reconciliation. Yea he purposely in divers writings maintaineth the Agreement of them( thus far) and vind cateth the Trent Creed, and the doctrines of it.   

SECT. XIX.  
HE that is for the Trent Council, and 
§. 19.  all that is determined by it or any other General Council which the Papists own, professing the Agreement of his tenants therewith, is a Papist: But such was Grotius, as appeareth through his Discussio Apologet. Rivet his volume, &c. I shall produce some of the particular words anon.   

SECT. XX.  
HE that purposely& professedly through 
§. 20.  his Books doth call the Papists by the name of the catholics, and defend them, and join himself to them as one of them, in opposition to the Protestants, whom he mentions with distaste, as pretended Reformers, and disowneth them that are not reconciled to the Papists, is himself a Papist. But so doth Grotius, as is visible throughout his Discussio Apol. Rivet. still joining himself with the catholics, that is, the Papists, in opposition to Reformation itself and to the Protestant Churches and Doctrines. Yea Professing himself openly a Papist. I mean not in the name of [ Papist] for so few of the Papists themselves will do, because they like not the name: But that he owned the Thing, I shall now prove from his words.   

SECT. XXI.  
IN his Discuss. Apologet. Rivietiani p. 255. 
§. 21.  he saith as followeth [ Restitutionem Christianorum in unum idemque corpus, semper optatam à Grotio, sciunt qui eum norunt; existimavit autem aliquando etiam postquam innotuerat Illustrissimo D. Vairio, incipi posse à Protestantium inter se conjunctione. Postea vidit, id plane fieri nequire; quia praeterquam quod Calvinistarum ingenia ferme omnium ab omni place sunt alienissima, Protestantes nullo inter se communi Ecclesiastico regimine sociantur, quae Causae sunt cur factae partes in unum Protestantium corpus colligi nequeant: immo& cur partes aliae atque aliae sint exurrecturae. Quare nunc plane ita sentit Grotius, & multi cum ipso, non posse Protestantes inter se jungi, nisi simul jungantur cum iis qui sedi Romanae coherent; sinc qua nullum sperari potest in Ecclesia commune Regimen. Ideo optat, ut ea divulsio, quae evenit,& causae divulsionis tollantur. Inter eas non est Primatus Episcopi Romani secundum Canones, fatente Melanchthone—] Here you see that Grotius judged that the only way for union was for all Protestants to join with them that adhere to the sea of Rome: And then I hope you doubt not whether Grotius did that himself which he endeavoured to bring all the Protestants to as necessary to their unity; that is, to join with them that adhere to the Pope. If you say that he mentioneth only the Primacy of the Pope at last, I answer 1. He speaks of that only as Melanchthons confession, 2. And he well know knew that the Pope hath not yet given away all save his mere primacy of Order, nor is about to do it, nor is it a thing to be expected: And yet at present Grotius would have all to join with Rome propter commune Regimen; and that is the Papal Regiment; for there is no other. The rest that followeth shall further explain this; so that here either Grotius calls to us all to become moderate Papists, or else he talks below the rates of a Rational man, about our adhering to the Roman seat.   

SECT. XXII.  
HEreby we may expound the Beginning 
§. 22.  of his Votum pro place, where he tells us his judgement that the Church be one, non an mo tantum, said& eâ communione quae conspici potest,& maximè conspicitur in Regiminis vinculo.— The ground of our common Divisions is, a conceit that the visible Church must be one visible Political Body having a visible Head, whether Pope, Council or whatever it be; which sets men still a tampering to do a thing neither possible nor desirable, no more then an Universal Civil Monarchy or other form of Government. All the world cannot much better be Governed in Ecclesiast●cals by one Head that in Civils. And if men will lament the state of the world, and cry out, Alas, we are distracted and torn in pieces, till they can get them under one Universal Civil Government, they must permit us to think that the complainers are more distracted then the Church.  
So page. 7.( voti) he saith of Vincentius his requisites and notes of true Catholicisms, [ Videbam ea manner in Ecclesia quae Romanae convertitur] And his way to Peace pag. 9, is aut per Papae eximie boni authoritatem, aut Concilium universale, &c.] And p. 10. He professeth that be doth not novum moliri opus, but add his helps to Cassanders works.  
And in his Dissertatio de summo Pontifice, p. 310, 311, 312. In answer to the Question p. 309. Quae sit ratio restituendi sacerdotii Universalis,& cum eo Sacerdotio unitatis, &c.] He saith [ In Gubernatione observandum, eam specie quadam externa posse esse quasi Monarchiam; reipsa autem talem ut plus de Aristocratia trahat.]   

SECT. XXIII.  
HEnce he saith Discuss. page. 2. Quare 
§. 23.  non est Culpandus Duarenus, qui ita Catholicae pacis amantem se ostendit, &c. which Duarenus was a moderate Papist, of whom he saith in the antecedent lines, [ ita Romanae sedis fuit communione, ut acerrimè obstiterit iis quae nonnulli sieve Romae, sieve Genevae, contra Regum aut Episcoporum jura moliuntur. And p. 18. he saith Talem pacem quae Papae Omnipotentiam tribuat,& in Ecclesiae& imperii rebus, sicut Casaubonus non probavit, ita nec probat Grotius, nec qui in Gallia& alibi sunt sapientes Catholici, qui& falli posse Papas putant,& Authoritatem eorum certis finibus contineri: sicut in Florentia Synodo decretum est, Papam esse Principem Sacerdotum,& Gubernatorem Ecclesiae secundum Canones Conciliorum universalium,& salvis juribus Patriarcharum Orientis] Here you see 1. That he is of the French Religion, who no doubt are Papists. 2. That he is for the Popes Universal Principality, yea and Government of the Church, though he will have him Govern according to the Canons& not arbitrarily,& notincroach on the rights of the inferior Patriarks. 3. That he is for the Power given him in the Council of Florence, which is commonly supposed to set up the Pope above a General Council; Though its like in that Grotius might dissent; yet I think he doubted not but that Council was Papal, for all the compliance of the Greeks there at that season. And 4. Whereas he excludeth the Popes Omnipotency in Civil and ecclesiastic matters, so do, as he saith, the French and thousands of Papists as well as he, that yet are still Papists.   

SECT. XXIV.  
TO this purpose Discuss. p. 20. he saith 
§. 24.  [ Tryannis Papae metuenda non est, ubi Primatum Metropolitanorum, Episcoporumque aliorum jura been servantur,& ubi Reges in Electionibus Episcoporum pie utuntur eâ potestate quam Siciliae Reges habere se dicunt.—] With these limitations we need not fear, he thinks, the Tyranny of the Pope. And so say thousands of Papists also, that Bishops Rights should be preserved. If all be excluded from the number of Papists that are of this mind, the Kingdom of the Pope is smaller then they will believe, or willingly hear of, especially in France.   

SECT. XXV.  
HEreupon in the next sentence he addeth, 
§. 25.  Spopondit autem pridem pro Papa Cardinalis Perronius Jacobo Magnae Brittaniae Regi, si cum seed Romana concordiam velvet, nihil ipsi de jure Regio periturum] so that if Perron was no Papist, then Grotius that would have a Pope with the same limitation is no Papist neither: And if Perron was none, its a doubt whether there be any such thing at all as a Papist of the French.   

SECT. XXVI.  
DIscus. p. 27, 28. he comes to the 
§. 26.  point of Unity, and saith, [ Quae ergo via exeundi ex tot scissuris, inter quas cum magno periculo fluctuant populorum ainae? An ea quam D. Rivetus indicat, ut Scripturas sequamur solace? At eas,& quidem solace, sequi se clamat Menno, Socinus, Brunus,& alii— Parendum ergo est Traditioni, dummodo been probetur, id est quantum aequo homini satis esse debet— Ea autem de qua loquor Traditio, colligi quidem potest ex veterum Scriptorum Consensu, said optime tutissimeque colligitur in Concilio universali, ubi tot sunt viri Eruditi ut nullus sit liber ignoratus omnibus:— Consensus autem istius qui in veterum Scriptis, maximeque in conciliis universalibus apparet, Custodes quidèm sunt Episcopi omnes, said Authoritatis ad veritatem, unitatemque retinendam praecipue Romanus Episcopus, quem Ecclesiae aliae, ad vitanda ex rebus dubiis Schismata, consulere, ex quo Apostoli in terris vivere defierunt, sunt solitae. Et hinc est quod Ecclesia Romana ab antiquis dicitur aliarum Ecclesiarum Magistra.— Corrumpi quidem Mores Romae& alibi passus est Deus: at Doctrina, illis ipsis malis moribus contraria, Deo ita res dirigente, corrupta non est.] Here you see, 1. That the Scripture alone is taken as utterly insufficient to unite in( and then we shall never have Union by all the Devices in the world) but Tradition must be the sufficient means: We are for Tradition as well as Grotius; but its only in subserviency to the Scripture which is sufficient in its kind, and affordeth us matter enough for our agreement, and needeth not Tradition as a supply to its defects for the Matter of our Faith or necessary Concord. 2. You see also that Fathers and Councils are the Collectors of these Traditions. 3. And the present Bishops the Keepers of the Dicisions of these Councils. 4. And the Pope of chief Authority for the preservation of Truth and Unity; so that here is such Authority as is more then Primacy of Order. 5. And that the Churches since the Apostles dayes have consulted with it, for avoiding Schism about doubtful things, which having reference to the said Priority and Authority, is false. 6. And that therefore it is called [ The Mistris of other Churches] which also, relating to the Authority mentioned, is false. 7. And that God hath kept this Roman Church from corruption in Doctrine, which is very false. Though he here and oft grant them to be corrupted in manners;( and yet they would be known to be the true Church by their Holiness) If this be not Popery, surely it is the name, and not the thing that we differ about. If Mr. Pierce and the other Patrons of Grotius will tell that they hold all these things themselves that Grotius held, and yet are no Papists, we shall the better know how to understand them hereafter. And yet I am thankful to God, that Popery is so dishonourable a thing among us, that the name is so much disowned as it is: For till men dare openly own the name, they will miss of many advantages to propagate it( though others I confess in secret they may have) we have hitherto taken this for Popery.   

SECT. XXVII.  
SO Discuss. p. 62, 63. [ Pauli locus 
§. 27.  Eph. 4. oftendit Concordiam egere ordine, ordinem gradibus— Nam cum long lateque disjecti essent Apostoli ad spargendum seemen Evangelii, siquid incidisset dubii, ut de Apostolatu Pauli, quo iri potuit nisi ad Petrum?] Peter then must be Judge of Pauls Apostleship? Or they had none but Peter to go to for resolution of such doubts? When Paul was not an Apostle by the will of man, but of God, nor craved or needed the Testimony of Peter, but by signs and wonders, and mighty deeds, the works of an Apostle, and not by the Approbation of Peter, did prove himself to be an Apostle. But how false is all this, and how contrary to Scripture? Why might they not go to James, or John, as well as Peter? Where do we find that he had any more Authority in advising then the rest? He addeth, [ Sine tali Primatu exiri è controversiis non poterat: sicut hody apud Protestantes nulla est ratio qua ortarum inter ipsos controversiarum reperiatur finis. Et hic Primatus post Apostolos mansit in Romana seed.] So that it is a Primacy with Divine Authority, necessary to decide controversies, that Grotius said belongeth to the Pope. And for want of this, there is no ending of the Protestants Controversies. And yet this man is either a Protestant, or no Papist with Mr. Pierce. He adds,[ Cypriani locus antehac à Grotio productus, legi tantum opus habet ut appareat ab eo, agnosci Petri Primatum cum Authoritate.] 1. So that it s still a Primacy with Authority. 2. Cyprian de Unitate, is basely corrupted by the Papists. Blot out but the corrupt additions( according to Jerom. Stephens Edition out of the Oxford Manuscripts) and leave out but his spurious Epistles( mentioned also out of those M. S. S. by Mr. Stephens) and then the Papists will have small cause to boast of Cyprian. He addeth, [ Non male Gelasius— approving his saying of Peters Principality. And I think by this much more its easy to understand Grotius.   

SECT. XXVIII.  
SO pag. 66. Discuss. he saith, [ Inter 
§. 28.  seeds autem illas eminentissimas, ut Primus locus, ita& Authoritas prima fuit sedis Romanae. Et hoc esse quod potentiorem principalitatem dixit Irenaeus, satis apparebit ei qui nullo partium study infectus eum legerit—] Still here is a Primacy of Authority: And Irenaeus unworthily abused. I dare say I have sine partium study, with an unfeigned willingness to know the truth, perused that place of Irenaeus long ago, upon the boasts of Bellarmine concerning it. And it seems most plain to me that it s the secular Principality occasioning a concourse to that place that Irenaeus speaks of. And if it were not so, yet is it much more likely that it is an ecclesiastic Principality, ex nobilitate Materiae, because the Greatness of that City occasioned the gathering of a more numerous famous Church where Apostolical persons were still at hand, and opportunities were greater to preserve Church History, then that it should be any Instituted Principality of office or seat? Nor do Grotius his Arguments do any thing to Prove this Roman Principality which he pleads for.   

SECT. XXIX.  
HE descants thus on Irenaeus words, 
§. 29.  [ Vides agi de Principalitate quae ad Custodiam Traditionis pertinet: eam vero dicit Potentiorem, id est, summae authoritatis.] Here Grotius tells us, it is Potentior Principalitas, id est, summa Authoritas, that he pleads for: So that his meaning is plain. But to his Comment on Irenaeus it needs but a denial, having no proof; We grant that it is Principalitas quae ad traditionis custodiam pertinet, and yet deny it to be summae authoritatis, or of any instituted formal Authority. The Roman Emperours Authority drawing a concourse to that City, tended to the Preservation of Tradition. The Churches Eminency on that occasion, ex nobilitate materiae, may be all that he means by the Potentior Principalitas, if it had been spoken as an attribute of the Church: But this is no proof of an Authority, and chief Authority of that Church over the rest of the Churches.   

SECT. XXX.  
DIscuss. pag. 67. he applauds and comments 
§. 30.  on the words of certain ancients thus, [ Hinc est quod apud Ambrosium convenire cum Episcopis Catholicis, exponitur, id est cum Ecclesia Romana: Et par ei aetate scriptor in Epistolam primam ad Timothaeum, Ecclesiam quae est domus Dei, sic denotat, Cujus hody rector est Damasus; cvi Damaso scribens Hieronymus, Qui tecum non colligit, ait, spargit: Idem adv. Ruffinum,[ Fidem suam quam vocant? Eamne qua Romana pollet Ecclesia? Si Romanam respondent, ergo Catholici sumus. Sozomenus. 3. 7. Episcopus Romanus, ideo quod omnium cura ad ipsum pertineret, ob throni dignitatem unicuique Ecclesiam suam reddidit.] Unicuique, id est, Alexandrino, Constantinopolitano,& Ancyrano. Roman. council in Epist ad Imperat.[ Damasus quibus aequalis est munere, praerogaetivâ tamen Apostolicae sedis excellit.] council Aquil. in Epist. ad Gratian. Imper. Romanam Ecclesiam vocat totius orbis Romani caput, unde in omnes vener andae Commonitionis jura dimanant. Valentianus 3. Imperator[ Romanae sedis Episcopus, cvi Principatum Sacerdotii supper omnes Antiquitas contulit.] You see here what it is that Grotius pleads for: that Romanism and Catholicism should be convertible: That the Pope was Ruler of the whole Church; that all that gather not with him, do scatter: that the care of all belongs to the Pope: and that by reason of the dignity of his Throne, he had power to restore even the great patriarches of Alexandria and Constantinople: That he is the Head of the whole Roman world; and Laws flow from him to the rest; that the Pope hath the Principatus sacerdotii over all: Me thinks he speaks as plain as you can desire. But as to his Authorities here cited, 1. I desire the Reader to observe, that they are over and over by Protestants proved to be part of them forgeries, and part of them nothing to the business. I should digress from my intended course, if I should stand to confute all that he saith as I go. I have said enough to them in another writing before mentioned ( A Key for catholics.) And among others you may see almost all these and many more sufficiently answered by Jacobus Cappellus, against Bulinger. 2. And note here a remarkable passage that truly tells you the height of the Roman claim and ambition till of late: that it was but orbis Romani caput, that his greatest friends and flatterers called him. And when ever they called him the head or chief of all Bishops, or Churches, &c. they still spoke in the Roman Dialect. For he had never any thing to do with Ethiopia and other Churches where the Roman Emperour had nothing to do. So that I will not lay my censure on others; but sure I should be blind myself if I should not see that the Papal power was the effect of the Emperours Greatness, and Pleasure, and Beneficence; who thought it most for the Unity and Honour of the Churches in their Dominions to be thus Headed by the Bishop of the Imperial seat. If any man will needs take it for an Infallible consequence, that Bancroft or Laud were chief Bishops of all the world, because they were the chief in England, I will not much dispute against them. But I am sure when all the world was taxed by Augustus Caesar,( Luk. 2. 1.) there was many a man on earth that heard nothing of the business. The Roman world was but a little world& the Roman catholic Church is too little a Church for me to own, as such, or to join with. But let us go with Grotius and see whether we wrong him.   

SECT. XXXI.  
DIscuss. pag. 69. he praiseth King James for saying, [ Si Romanus Pontifex probet, non suam se, verum Dei immortalis gloriam quaerere,& populorum pacem, concordiam ac salutem sibi curae esse, se sine cunct atione primas ei delaturum, dicturumque non invitum, à Pontifice totam Ecclesiam curari.] And he adds, [ Neque vero Cardinalis Perronius aliud à Rege illo exigebat, quam ut Papae tribueret illas Primas, id est, praecedextis dignitatis praerogativam in omnibus negotiis ad Religionem aut Ecclesiam spectantibus.] Though he mis-interpret King James his [ Primas] yet he is easy to be understood himself, that if Perron were a Papist, and would have drawn King James to be a Papist, then Grotius was for Popery: Otherwise not: And when I call him a Papist, I mean it no otherwise then as Perron was a Papist.  
In the next words he cites Bucer,( I know not where, and therefore cannot vindicate him) saying [ per Protestantes posse Pontificem Romanum& caeteros Episcopos omnes suam potestatem retinere: tantum sua potestate utantur in aedificationem Ecclesiae.] But Bucer took not that to be their power which Grotius did.   

SECT. XXXII.  
IBid. p. 69. he adds a twofold use of the 
§. 32.  Papal Primacy: the first is, [ In tutandis illis qui per inimicorum coitiones opprimebantur:] the other, [ In praeveniendis aut sanandis scissuris.] This shows that he would have in the Pope some Governing power over all the Christian world; or else he cannot by his Primacy have power to right and help the oppressed, and end divisions. And how well he doth either of these, I have shewed elsewhere.   

SECT. XXXIII.  
PAg. 70. [ Oggeritur etiam alos Episcopos 
§. 33.  non malam ad as res operam posuisse] And he answereth, [ Posuerunt merely, said non sine Episcopo Romano, cvi semper primas in hac re partes detulerunt.] Though this be false; yea so false that they have done it contra Episcopum Romanum, yet it shows still the meaning of Grotius; who it seems would not have Schisms ended, and the oppressed righted without the Pope of Rome; Let him put it into his motion that no sick man shall be cured without him, and then put it to the vote.   

SECT. XXXIV.  
PAg. 71. He cites as approving it, the 
§. 34.  French esteem, that take none for a General Council that is not confirmed by all or most of the Patriarchal seats: and yet admit not promiscuously a custom of appealing from the Pope to a future General Council, lest bad men win time, &c. By which it appears that he would have the Pope to Govern in the Intervals of Councils.   

SECT. XXXV.  
YET would you have him speak more 
§. 35.  plainly? Discuss. p. 95. [ Quid vero Ecclesia Romana, aliarum Magistra, jam olim senserit, optimè cognoscemus ex Epistolis Episcoporum Romanorum ad Afros& Gallos, quibus Grotius promptissimo animo subscribet.] In the language of the Trent Creed, he calls Rome the mistress of other Churches; and therefore no doubt acknowledgeth more to her then a Primacy of order.  
So pag. 245, 246. he again abuseth the place in Irenaeus for Romes principality. But I will say no more of this first point, the Papal sovereignty, but pass to the next.   

SECT. XXXVI.  
THat Grotius received the Creed, and 
§. 36.  Canons, and Decrees of the Council of Trent, and all other Papal Councils, I think is evident by what here followeth: Or at least that he received as much of, them as will prove him a Papist, if not more then some Papists do.  
Discuss. p. 7. Accusat Bullam pill Quinti quod Articulos habeat extra illos Symboli. At plures habet Synodus Dordrechtanae— At novi sunt illi in Bullâ, ut vult D. Rivetus. Contra sentiunt eruditi plurimi, non novos esse si rectè intelligantur, idque apparere ex adscriptis ad marginem canonum Tridentinorum locis tum Sacrae Scripturae, tum eorum quorum magna semper in Ecclesiis authoritas fuit. At Grotius non eam Bullam approbantem quae in Concilio Tridentino fuerant explicata, solam edidit, said& confessionem Augustanam, existimans commode acceptas doctrinas Tridentinam& Augustanam inter se non ita pugnare, nt multi credidere▪] Though his [ contra sentiunt plurimi] and his [ non ita pugnare] may be pretended to wave a peremptory owning of them himself, yet indeed he plainly signifieth in this with his via ad pacem, 1. That he takes not the Trent Creed to contain any new Articles. 2. Nor that Creed or Council to be unreconcilable with the Augustane Confession,( with his correctives distorting it to the Tridentine sense.) And if he be not a Papist that owns the Council and Creed of Trent, I know not what a Papist is. By this which Grotius owns as the means of Unity, Bishop Bramhall will prove them to be no Orthodox, or catholic, or apostolic Church. I think Francisc. à Sancta Clara is a Papist( and so thinks the foresaid Bishop, and so thought the Queen of England that choose him to be her Ghostly Father, and so thought Tho. White, that dedicates his Book to him:) and yet he hath endeavoured to Reconcile the English Articles with the Tridentine, even as Grotius did by the Augustane: not healing or correcting theirs, but distorting ours, to mean what they would have them mean.   

SECT. XXXVII.  
YET more plainly, Discuss: pag. 14. 
§. 37.  [ Distingui● Grotius inter dogmata Scholasticorum quae neminem obligant,( magna enim Schola nostra, inquit Melchior Canus, nobis indulget libertatem) ac proinde non potuere justam dare recedendi causam: Et inter ea quae Conciliis sunt definita, etiam Tridentino: Quorum Acta siquis legit animo ad pacem propenso, is inveniet, ea commode,& convenienter, tum Sacrarum Scripturarum, tum veterum Doctorum locis ad marginem positis, posse explicari Quod si praeterea curâ Episcoporum& Regum, tollantur ea quae cum pia ista Doctrina pugnant, 
☞ & non conciliorum authoritate, aut veteri traditione, said malis moribus sunt introducta, habebit jam Grotius,& multi cum ipso, id quo possint esse contenti.] Would you wish a man to speak plainer? Here are four things that Grotius takes notice of among the Papists. 1. The free opinions of the Schoolmen. 2. The ill manners and customs that are contrary to their own Doctrine. 3. The Doctrine of the Council of Trent and the rest of the Councils. 4. ancient Tradition. The two first he is content that none be bound to. The first he would have free, and the second mended: But the two last he is for, as consonant to Scriptures and Fathers. And is there any Papist,( even the highest Italians) that go any further? Would Molina or Mariana, or Vasquez or Suarez, or any Pope, oblige all the Church to all the Articles contained in Aquinas, Scotus, Ockam, Durandus, Alensis, Bonaventure, and an hundred such like? Or would they have us all take the licensed Whore houses at Rome or Bononia for Articles of our faith, or obligatory examples of our practise? You see here that Grotius is for the Council of Trent, and for all the rest of the Councils: He thinks those agree with Scripture, that can never be agreed among themselves. He is for the 
☞  Council of lateran, that set the Pope above a Council; and he is expressly elsewhere, for the Council of Constance and Basil, that set a Council above the Pope, and damned the contrary Doctrine as Heretical. He is for the Council of lateran that puts it in the Power of the Pope to depose Princes, and absolve their subjects from their fidelity, and give their Dominions to the Government of others: And yet, he is stiff for the right of Princes. He is for the Council of lateran, Florence and Trent that are for Transubstantiation, and in a word, for all the rest of Popery: and yet Mr. Pierce saith he is no Papist. I confess most words have their ambiguity. This may be no Popery with Mr. Pierce: I will not contend with him about the name. Let him call it what he please, and I will call it Popery. You see here that Grotius and his followers will be Content without any more ado, if Bishops and Princes will but take away those things that ill manners have introduced, contrary to the pious Doctrine of the Papists, without ancient Tradition or Authority of Councils; let all the rest that this Tradition and Councils have introduced or determined of, continue, and spare not. Beshrew Bellarmine, or Baronius, or Stapleton, or Parsons, if they will not stand to this motion and profession. Nay he needs not [ a Pope eximiously good] to consent to this much, unless that Pope be eximiously good, that exceedeth not the ordinary sort of the wicked in impiety: Which I confess I find some Papists speaking of the Holy Seat.   

SECT. XXXVIII.  
AND yet, when I pass but one page. 
§. 38.  further( 15) I find indeed for all this that Grotius is no Papist:( I may possibly understand this word at last.) But then he tells us what he means by a Papist, [ Papistas Grotius in illa Epistola— eos intelligebat, qui sine ullo discrimine omnia Paparum dicta factaque Probant, honorum aut lucri, ut fieri solet causâ.] I would be glad if Mr. Pierce will tell us whether this be the description of a Papist that he will stand to. It seems with Grotius, a Papist is one that, sine ullo discrimine, doth like Marcellinus sacrificing to Devils, yea as well as his worshipping God: and one that will approve of John the thirteenth, for ravishing wives and maids at his doors; and one that will own the Adulteries, Sodomy, Murders, &c. of all the Popes that ever were guilty of them, and this sine discrimine, as well as their good deeds: A Papist is one that for honour or lucre sake will approve of John the two and twentieth ( alias the three and twentieth) for denying the Resurrection of the Body, and the Life Everlasting, and of all those other Articles of his Belief and practise which the Council of Constance have left us at large: And one that liketh of lo the tenth his Profession of faith to Cardinal Bembus, Quantum nobis lucri haec fabula de Christo—] Or at least he is one that approveth the heresy of Pope Honorius, and the Arian subscription of Liberius, &c. Now we know what a Papist is. I blame not Grotius then for the wish that Mr. Pierce commendeth, as to the Papists, when he saith, that [ if he had accomplished his wishes, there had not been in all the world a Papist or a puritan]( pag. 92.) And I hope there are but few Papists in the world, if these only be Papists. I do not think that the very Infidels and Atheists that call themselves Roman catholics( for some such wear the Roman Vizor) are so bad as these of Grotius his description, that sine ullo discrimine omnia Paparum dicta factaque probant.   

SECT. XXXIX.  
IN the next words, p. 15. he tells us that 
§. 39.  by Papists he meaneth not them [ Qui salvo jure Regum& Episcoporum, Papae,( sieve Episcopo Romano) eum concedunt primatum, quem mos Antiquus& Canones,& veterum Imperatorum& Regum ei assignant. Qui quidem Primatus non tam Episcopi est, quam ipsius Ecclesiae Romanae, caeteris omnibus praelatae communi consensu— Sic Liberio Episcopo ita lapso, ut Ecclesiae esset mortuus, Ecclesia Romana jus suum retinuit,& Ecclesiae Universalis causam tutatae est.] But 1. If it be but communi consensu that Rome hath this Primacy, why do you so often derive it from Peter? and why may not that Consent on weighty causes be withdrawn? 2. If it be that which is granted by Canons, and Emperours, how comes it to reach to the Universal Church, of which so great a part was out of the reach of the cannoners, and from under the Power of those Kings and Emperours? I pray you when did Prester John( as they call him) give power to the Pope, or Primacy either, in reference to his dominions? The like may be said of many more Princes, and populous Churches that had none to represent them in any of the General Councils. 3. But by this( with the rest) we understand the sense of Grotius: He is no Papist that is for that Supremacy only of the Pope and Church of Rome, that Canons and Emperours granted of old. And he hath sufficiently  told us that he takes in Gratian and Valentinian among these Emperours: And Valentinians Letters or Grant are the highest testimony that the Popes upholders pled for his Universal sovereignty or Heap-ship( to which see Jacob. Cappellus answer. uhi sup. to Bulinger.) So that this is even to give them what they wish. 4. But I would be glad to learn what is that Church of Rome that hath a Power to defend the Universal Church, and heal Schisms, and do the rest of the Popes work when he is dead? If it be the Cardinals, sure Peter and many a Generation after him were utter strangers to them. If it be the Clergy of the whole Patriarchate, or but of the suburbicarian Churches, they are all too new to be the Successor of Peter in his Primacy, and have no better title to show for it then any of their neighbours. If it be the City presbytery, they may do well to prove their power over Bishops, and all the Bishops of the world. Sure this is like to be but an unwelcome conceit to the Episcopal: This is too hateful a Presbyterian Government, for them or us or any wise man to own. What's left then but that it be [ the Church Essential] as they call it, that is, the Roman people, who must carry it by the vote: But truly this is such a kind of Independency or Popular Government, that I am resolved never to be Independent of this sort: Let it be enough for the people to be over their own Rulers, without being over all the Rulers of the Churches in the world. Truly I know not what that Roman Church is that Grotius would have to be the Universal superior of all Churches when the Pope is dead. Thus we see who is and is not a Papist.   

SECT. XL.  
DIscuss. p. 185. he professeth that he 
§. 40.  will so interpret Scripture, [ Deo favente,& consultis viris piis, ut non incurrat in Regulam& à semet& ù Synodo Tridentina traditam, &c.] Which he mentioneth, pag. 182. Nihil in eo fecisset, ne contra Synodum quidem Tridentinam: Regula enim prudentissima ejus Synodi de non interpretanda Scriptura contra unanimem Consensum Patrum, non obstat quo minus ad loca Scripturae, historica praesertim aut prophetica adferatur nova expositio, said veteri Traditioni dogmatum nihil repugnans] For which he refers us to Alcazar. So that still he is fast to the Tridentine Creed. But we may see what a jest the Patrons of it do make it. They are devoutly to swear according to that Bull [ that they will never interpret Scripture but according to the unanimous Consent of the Fathers.] But if there be no unanimous Consent of them at all, yea if they unanimously dissent, yet Grotius thinks this Oath is kept, so be it the exposition be not against their consent in matter of Doctrine: In expounding history and prophesy we may safely venture upon novelty, and let the Fathers keep their expositions to themselves. Verily I had the charity till I red this explication of the Trent Oath, to think that the very novelties and contradictions of the Fathers, found in some late expositors, had been a sufficient argument to prove them to be no Papists. But I see I was deceived.   

SECT. XLI.  
DIscus. pag. 239. he saith [ Confessu 
§. 41.  Augustana commode explicata, vix quicquam habet, quod non conciliari posset cum iis Dogmatis, quae antiquitatis& Synodorum Authoritate apud Catholicos sunt recepta quod& ex Cassandro& ex Hoffmeistero datur cognosci. Et sunt etiam inter Jesuitas, qui non aliter sentiant] Here again you see that the design is( to which some jesuits consent) to make the Protestant Confession speak up to the sense of all those opinions which the Papists( for those are Grotius catholics) have received either from the Authority of Councils or Antiquity. He will not with Bishop Bromhal abate us the Determinations of the last four hundred years: though if he did, it would prove but a pitiful patch for the torn condition of the Church.   

SECT. XLII.  
ON this same account it is also that in 
§. 42.  particular cases Grotius still pleads the Council of Trent, as that which he was resolved to comform to; so Discus. p. 35. when he is speaking of the Real presence of Christs body in the Sacrament, he saith [ Et hoc est quod dicit Synodus Tridentina; in isto Sacramento Jesum Christum verum Deum atque hominem verè, realiter, ac substantialiter sub specie earum rerum sensibilium contineri, non tamen juxta modum existendi naturalem, sed-sacramentaliter,& ea existendi ratione, quam etsi verbis exprimere non possumus, possibilem tamen esse Deo cogitatione per fidem illustrata assequi possumus.] And indeed in owning the Trent Creed, he must needs own this and more [ fierique oonversionem totius substantiae panis in corpus,& totius substantiae vini in sanguinem, quam conversionem Catholica Ecclesia Transubstantiationem appellat.] So p. 37. he citeth with approbation the same doctrine as agreed to by the Greeks in the Council of Florence: which with many more such passages in his writings, show us his faith in the point of transubstantiation.   

SECT. XLIII.  
SO of the Article of Justification: Discus. 
§. 43.  p. 38. he saith that the true and ancient Doctrine of Remission of sin, and of the causes and nature of Evangelical Righteousness [ Semper fuerit in Ecclesia Catholica,& a Synodo Tridentina optime sit explicata] And with him ( ibid.) Justitia est purgari à vitiis commissionis& omissionis: Sanctitas, ad opera eximia ferri heroico impetu. Nec illud rectè dicitur justificationem nostram in eo consistere, quod Christus peccatorum remissionem nobis acquisivit( he should have said donavit) Justificari enim est, aut justum facere, aut ut justum tractare. Justus fit homo, cum per fidem habitam Evangelio purgatur à vitiis;& p. 39. Malè adjecit illius( justitiae)[ inhaerentis;] nulla enim est justitia alia. And Rivet having denied that Inherent Righteousness is so perfect in this life, as may endure the exact judgement of God; He saith [ Talis Perfectio, id est, Pietas ad summum gradum producta, fuit in apostles, Martyribus, aliisque And of Christs satisfaction and our own he saith ( ibid.) Satisfecit pro nobis Christus generatim, quia passione sua jus acquisivit omnibus se per Christum conversuris, id est, Deo satisfacturis pro criminibus suis. And for the nature and office of faith, he saith, p 40, 41. Credere, Abrahamo imputatum est in Justiciam; id est, pro magnifico facto id habitum est▪ non quod credidit Messiam pro peccatis ipsius mortem toleraturum, quod tamen an noverit, hic non disputabo: said quod Deo vocanti& jubenti confisus est.— Quia vero fides tanti est apud Deum, ideo ei datum est hoc munus long maximum, purgandi hominem à vitiis, sieve quod idem est, hominem justificandi. So that they that think his Annotations on Rom. were not fully his own, because of his doctrine of Faith and Justification there, should rather think that indeed they were his own, as agreeing so punctually with what he published himself. But then they must not be offended, that his later doctrine differeth from his former: For he frequently professeth that he was progressive, growing wiser and wiser in such things, and very prove to dislike what a little before he was pleased with ( ut in Epist.& alibi passim.)  
Again, pag. 77. he defendeth the term [ Transubstantiation] and pag. 78. addeth [ said de hoc mysterio, eo minus necesse est multa hic disseri, quia de eo satis dictum est supra, allataque verba Synodi Tridentinae, ita commeda, ut lights quaerat qui eis se velit opponere] he must be a fellow so quarrelsome as to seek matter of contention, that will oppose the terms or doctrine of Trent about Transubstantiation, so admirably are they fitted.   

SECT. XLIV.  
DIscus. 79. He defendeth the Council 
§. 44.  of Trent for saying that the Sacrament is to be adored with Divine worship, saying [ Cum Synodus Tridentina dicit, sacramentum esse adorandum cultu divino, nihil aliud vult quam ipsum Dei filium adorandum] Which is very true in their sense that think that to be really, substantially, ipsum Dei filium, without any remaing substance of bread or wine, which we think to be substantially Bread and Wine, and to be but Representatively a Crucified Christ. But here you see that Grotius is for the Trent divine Adoration of the Sacrament, as it is Christ. Let his followers answer Daile and others that have said so much to prove this to be Idolatry, before they expect that we should all be of their faith.   

SECT. XLV.  
ABout Priests marriages he thinks that the Church did justly make a Law 
§. 45.  against it, yet alloweth them a power to change it, Discus. p. 129, 130.[ Quod si constet, aut nullos aut paucos inveniri in sacerdotibus Castos— Coelibes, omnino Ecclesiae est luxare legem gravi de causa quam non levi de causa fixerat So that it was not a light cause that fixed the Law that forbids Priests marriage: but it should yet be altered, when it is manifest( when Priests will confess it, or be nought in the open streets) that either none or few unmarried Priests are found chased. There is hope then of repealing this Law; but the Roman Church must be made a Holy Society of perjured whoremongers first.   

SECT. XLVI.  
I Am weary of this unpleasing work 
§. 46. ( which within this week I hoped I should never have been put upon,) and therefore I shall not stand particularly to recite his sayings for Images( even of God himself) of the sacrifice of the Mass as expiatory of the sins of the living and dead, of oblations for the dead, of Prayers for the dead, and to the dead; of a penal Purgatory, of Traditions as part of the Apostolical Doctrine, not found in Scripture, with abundance more of which his Annot. in Cassand. his Animadvers his Votum pro place, and his Discussio Apolog. Rivet. will give him a sufficient account that would be acquainted with his mind, especially the last. red impartially and judge as you find cause.   

SECT XLVII.  
ONly one point of his judgement more 
§. 47.  I shall rehearse, concerning the Holy Scripture, Discus. p. 171. Afflatu Dei locutos quae locuti sunt, scripsisse quae scribere jussi sunt, Prophetas, toto animo agnoscit Grotius; Idem judicat de Apocalypsi& Apostolorum praedictionibus Christi dicta omnia quin Dei sint dicta dubitari nefas. De scriptis historicis,& moralibus Hebraeorum sententiis, aliud putat; satis est quod pio animo Scripta sint,& optima fide,& de rebus summis. Quos libros tales judicavit Synagoga, ii sunt Canonici Haebraeis. Quos tales Ecclesia Christiana, ii sunt Canonici Christianis. Neque Esdras neque Lucas Prophetae fuere, said viri graves, Prudentes, qui nec fallere vellent, nec falli se sinerent. Dix●tne Lucas[ Factum est ad Lucam verbum Domini,& dixit ei Dominus] ut solent Prophetae? Nihil. tale. Quid ergo?[ Quoniam quidem multi conati sunt ordinare narrationem quae de nobis completae sunt rerum] Dicit se non praecepto, said aliorum exemplo, adductum ut scriberet.— Quomodo assecuto? ex ipsis testibus, non ex revelat●one.— long ergo aliter acti Prophetae; aliter Lucas, cujus tamen tam pium Consilium spiritui sancto potest ascribi. Haec ipsa veritas est, non blasphemia.— Pag. 172. Quae autem sint literae eximie sacre sieve d●v●nitus inspiratae, exposuerat Grotius ex Secunda Petri, nempe sermo Propheticus, sine Prophetia Scr●pturae, idque scriptis libris consignata.— And page. 177. Speaking of the books of the New Testament, he saith [ Quod ne in illis quidem scriptis ea sit certitudo, quam à Traditionibus abbess queritur D. Rivetus.] I make no Comment on any of these words, or collection from them, but leave them to the Readers judgement.   

SECT. XLVIII.  
ONE thing he tells me Discus. p. 172. 
§. 48.  that I knew not before, that the learned Papists themselves are not agreed, what Canon of Scripture it is that the Council of Trent hath established: There are Particulae quaedam excepted by Grotius from the honour of ancient reverence,[ quas an in authoritatem Ecclesiasticam receperit Synodus Tridentina, docti nunc quoque dubitant. And yet poor Protestants have no hope of Unity, or Peace, nor can the Holy Scriptures be understood but by the Determination of such Synods, or other judge, that can no better themselves be understood. The Papists it seems cannot tell which is the caconical Scripture, after the council of Trent hath undertaken the decision of it!   

SECT. XLIX.  
THE next point by which I leave you 
§. 49.  to judge whether Grotius was a Papist, is, His constant joining himself with them under the name of catholics, and applauding their jesuits, and reproaching the very Reformation itself, and the Protestant Churches, and his disowning, if not nullifying them. red his Discussion throughout and judge. Pag. 10. He tells us that the Greek Church, are easily reconciled to the Roman, as the Council of Florence declareth, yea that they have the same Sacraments and opinions, adding to this falsehood a Calumny against their patriarch Cyril( as if his blood did not satisfy the cruel Papists, unless they also destroy his surviving reputation) [ said sumenda est Ecclesia Graeca, non qualem ex suo capite Cyrillus nuper inductus pretio confinxerat, said qualis est revera, qualem nobis exhibent scripta Jeremiae.—] Should he not have proved this as well as said it, that he was pretio inductus, if he could? We do not think that all the Greek Church was so much Reformed as Cyril; and we have as little reason to think that that they were all so deformed as Jeremias. Neither of them was the Greek Church, though both were Patriarks: We have fuller helps to know their minds, then by either of them. And I suppose the Papists know by experience, that the Reconciliation is not so easy as Grotius pretends: And whether Protestants and Papists are liker to Purchase a Consent from them by money, is an easy matter for any many of common reason that knows them to discern. Thomas à Jesu, and Possevine, and many more Papists will trulyer tell us of the distances between them, then Grotius hath done. Though for my part, I make no doubt, but among us all, they are pretended in Doctrinals to be much greater then they are, by men that understand not the state of the Controversies.   

SECT. L.  
SO Discuss. p. 48. Haec, de quo Deo sit gratia, 
§. 50.  Catholici ita non credunt, quanquam multi qui Catholicos se dicunt, ita vivunt, quasi ista crederent; said Protestantes quidem ex vi dogmatum, Catholici ex lapsu Disciplinae.] Here( as throughout oft) catholics and Protestants are opposed. Indeed many catholics have wicked lives, but it is the Protestants only that have the Doctrine that makes men wicked: For pag. 28. he  told us, that God hath suffered their manners at Rome to be corrupted, but the Doctrine is not corrupted. It were a hard censure of Grotius, to judge him such a dissembler, or so unwise as after all this to be a Protestant. I must needs vindicate him from such unjust imputations.   

SECT. LI.  
DIscuss. pag. 71. he tells us what it is 
§. 51.  that he aimeth at. The Churches that join with Rome have not only the Scriptures, but the Dogmata explained in the Councils, and the Popes Decrees against Pelagius, &c. [ Receperunt etiam constitutiones egregias Conciliorum& Patrum, in quibus abundè est unde vitia corrigantur: said non omnes iis utuntur quantum oportet. Manent illae plerumque conditae in chartis, ut in vagina gladius: Et hoc est quod omnes pietatis& pacis amantes corrigi velint:] and tells us of the example of Car. Borromaeus, as oft he doth. So that Borromaeus Reformation is plainly it that Grotius would be contented with. I am as ready as another to think that this Cardinal was a Saint indeed;( and it seemeth Saints are rare at Rome even among the Clergy and the Cardinals, when this one mans Piety and Reformation must be noted by a Canonization.) But I am confident that the Pope would never have Sainted him, had he been better then he was, if he had not taken him for a Papist: We have his Canons at large in B●nnius, in which are many things that show him to be a Christian, and not a few that show him to be a Papist. And the Papists would take it for no small injury, if you would ●ob them of this Saint.   

SECT. LII.  
HEnce it is that the Protestant's is falsely 
§. 52.  called by him [ a new Religion] and [ non multis seculis per manus tradita.] Discuss. pag. 206. Whereas we desire nothing more then to appeal to Antiquity, and let the eldest carry it, and the newest be cast out. Of all new things, we have no mind of a new God, or a new Gospel, or Religion.   

SECT. LIII.  
HEnce is it also that he often reproacheth 
§. 53.  the Reformation, as an impious, tumultuary, rebellous thing. Discuss. p 16. [ Vitia qu● agnoscit optimus Cassander( that is, among the Papists) agnoscit& Grotius. Si, qui secessionem fecerunt( that is, the Protestants) partem eorum abstluerunt, invexere alia, seditiones, vim contra Principes, imperiorum mutationes suo ex usu, morem frangendi aedes sacras, altaria, imagines, bella excitandi& fovendi sub Sancto Evangelii nomine invexerunt quidam( that the Calvinists in special) & dogmata in id comparata ut homines, de misericordia Dei nimium sibi pollicentes, in peccatis indormiscerent.] How true this Charge is, I shall briefly touch upon anon. But here you see his mind.   

SECT. LIV.  
HEnce also he hath so many eulogies 
§. 54.  for the jesuits, and so many censures for the moderate Protestants, whom he sometime most highly honoured for their Learning and Moderation. Petavius is vir eximius, and his Books de dogmat. Theolog. are libri eximii. Discuss. p. 11. And pag. 12. benè ostendit liber à summae eruditionis viro Jacobo Sirmondo nuper editus.( Salmasius hath given another Character of him, de Eccles. suburbicariis: and yet no man greater with Grotius a little before then Salmasius.) And p. 91. Sunt autem inter Jesuitas, qui in Gallia vivunt viri eruditi, rerum antiquarum& nostrorum quoque temporum periti— And so proceeds to show their peaceableness, and to vindicate the Society of jesuits, from the dishonour of the writings of Mariana, Santarellus and Becanus, and to charge Pareus writings on others. I would not have the greatest adversaries defrauded of their due praise. But the injustice and partiality shows the meaning of the man. What men greater with him a while before then Casaubone and Scaliger,( and the foresaid Salmasius)? But Discuss. p. 20. [ Casaubonus hostiliter à quibusdam tractatus, ut erat bili● non expers, nimis ostendit sibi suas injurias leves non videri( one would think that mutato nomine de se fabula—) praesertim instigante Scaligero, qui multa locutus eleganter, moderate pauca. Men change with Grotius as he changed himself.   

SECT. LV.  
YEA Augustine himself escapeth not 
§. 55.  his censures, though he be above them, because he was not of his mind. Discuss. 96. [ Sapientiores fuere semper Romani Episcopi, quam ut Augustini omnia probarent.] Doubtless they approved not all that was Augustines, for he approved not all himself. But, 1. They approved more then Grotius did. 2. O that either semper, or saepenumero, or but aliquando, the Roman Popes had proved Augustines. 3. As they were wiser then to approve all that Augustine wrote, so are the Protestants wiser then to approve all that is the judgement of the Pope. But saith he, pag. 97. Ut dicam quod sentio, puto Augustinum, adeo non cum prioribus, ne secum quidem per omnia posse conciliari: ita contranitendi study se in illas ambages induxit, ut non invenerit qua se extricaret: Paucis Scripturae adductus locis, quae facilè commodam interpretationem recipiunt, locis aliis& pluribus& clarioribus, per quae Deus significatur omnium salutem velle, interpretationes dat violentas,& nunc has, nunc illas, incertus quo se vertat. Ut dicam aliquid amplius, fuit utilis Augustinus ad monita danda piae vitae, ad interpretandas Scripturas satis infaelix, certè Graecis multis inferior.] If the Dominicans only were Papists, I would say that Grotius was none.   

SECT. LVI.  
AND Discuss. 139, 140. & passim, 
§. 56.  he rejecteth our Churches as wanting a Succession of Bishops from the Apostles, which he saith the catholics( that is, the Papists have. [ Semper apud Catholicos ista praescriptio valuit: Vos à vobis orti estis: non potestis Episcopos ostendere, quorum series ad Apostolos ordinatores decurrat.] Would you think this were the same man that wrote de Imperio sum. Potest. or that gave it as one Argument, upon the reading of Clements Epist. to the Corinth. that it was genuine, [ Quod nusquam meminit exsortis illius Episcoporum auctoritatis, quae Ecclesiae consuetudine post Marci mortem Alexandriae, atque eo exemplo alibi, introduci coepit; said plane ut Paulus Apostolus ostendit Ecclesias communi Presbyterorum, qui iidem omnes& Episcopi ipsi Pauloque dicuntur, Consilio fuisse gubernatas?] Epist. 162. ad Bignon. p. 397.  
Well, are the Romanists more blessed then we in their succession? Yes, saith he in the next words, ( Disc. p. 139.) [ In electionibus saepe valuere, quod dolendum est, gratia aulae, seditio plebis, arcanae nunditiationes— At non propterea intercidit Ordinatio per Episcopos cujusque temporis, ad illos ab apostles factos Episcopos scandens; quam radicem& matricem Ecclesiae Catholicae vocat. Cyprian. Ep. 45. Aut si alicubi intercidit, id vitium postea sanatum est ab aliis Ecclesiis legitimae ordinationis tramitem retinentibus.] But this will not heal the Roman intercisions, who receive Power from no other Churches, but all from them: nor de facto, have they always had this remedy from other Churches: Of which elsewhere.  
He proceeds: [ At quomodo ordinati in Ecclesia, in quibus non observati Canones Ecclesiae? Quomodo Ecclesia quae non ab apostles derivata, said ex se nata est?— It seems that the observation of the Scripture, without the Canons, will not prove us ordained in the Church, though some Churches never had a vote in making those Canons. I would we knew which Canons are Essential to the Church and which not; For sure I am that the Papists have cut off many. And I would knew what Church it is that hath Power to make a new Canon, the observation of which shall be Essential to a Church, or Pastor, or Church-member; and so to make us a new kind of Church. And for Apostolical Succession, in the necessary part, we are afore-hand with the Papists; and in the not-necessary part they are more grossly defective then we, as I shall elsewhere show. But by all this we see, that we are no Churches or Ministers, in the esteem of Grotius( if I understand him) but the Papists are.   

SECT. LVII.  
IT was this gross abuse of the Protestant 
§. 57.  Churches, that many among us have been guilty of, and still are, that occasioned me to give that warning in my Christian Concord as I did, concerning the promoters of Grotius his design. Those that unchurch either all or most of the Protestant Churches, and maintain the Roman Church and not theirs, to be true, do call us to a moderate jealousy of them, and to the defence of our Churches: Of which I have said somewhat in my Second sheet for the Ministry, and hope, God willing, to say more. Had we no better proof our Ministry, then a Roman Succession is to them, we should think as hardly of our Case as Grotius did in this.   

SECT. LVIII.  
TO all these I must add, that the design 
§. 58.  of Grotius, while he pretended to Moderation, and Catholicism, and Liberty, doth seem to me to have been Schismatical, Partial and Cruel: I speak not of his desire of the blood of any particular person; but of his motion in general, and the effect that it was framed and fitted to procure. That Popery is a mere Schism, and Papists a Sect, I have proved in two or three writings against them. That it was Grotius his wish, that there might have been no puritan left in the world, and that he had more for this then empty wishes, Mr. Pierce tells us, pag. 92. But I shall charge Grotius with no mans words but his own. Discuss. pag. 1, 2. speaking of his catholic Peace, he saith of Rivet,[ Non illum, qualis est, ad pacem invitaverat Grotius: namque ad eam, siquando illa Dei beneficio restituatur, admitti D. Rivetus, & qui ei sunt similes, nunquam potuerunt: obstant dogmata ab E●clesia vetere damnata,& noxia: obstat ardens ejus studium ad convellendum ordinem illum regiminis, quo nititur pax Ecclesiae: obstat libertas quam defendit pro novis opinionibus erigendi novas Ecclesias, &c.] Grotius his catholic Church and Peace then is too narrow to hold such as Rivet, and such as hold the opinions that he held, and such as are against the Government that Grotius was for; and such as must have the liberty of particular Churches exempt from the persecuting power of his catholics, because of a difference in some opinions. But, without a Spirit of prophesy, I dare foretell, that the Church shall never have catholic Peace upon such terms as these: Nor is it truly the catholic Church that shuts out such as Grotius here describeth. Alas when I look to Russia, and most of the Greek Churches, and to armoniac, Syria, Ethiopia, &c. how incomparably below Rivet and the rest that Grotius here excludeth, are millions and millions, that yet are members of the catholic Church, had I not more charity to the Papists, then Grotius to the Protestants, I must take few of them to be members meet for catholic Peace. Peace-makers on such terms as these, are not the least Peace-breakers.   

SECT. LIX.  
SO Discuss. p. 5. he professeth it his duty 
§. 59.  to persuade the Swedes, Ne tam inquietum hominum genus in terras suas unquam admittant. And saith that Magistratus omnes sibi ab illis timere debent; nam nisi ad Prava ista Consilia exequenda,& praesertim ad opprimendos alios, se ministris Calvinistis satellites praebeant, hi illos dimovebunt per plebem, per militem, aut quovismodo.] By these and many other passages, I find that Grotius his catholic Peace, is too narrow and too uncatholick to reach to the Calvinists. As for such reproaches as these here mentioned, as I have said more to the like, against the Papists in my Key for catholics, concerning the late proceedings here in England so I desire the Reader to peruse but what Rivet hath said to Silvester on that subject, and Bishop Usher in his Sermon before the Parliament, and Bishop Bilson, besides abundance more. And then judge whether it be the Protestants or Papists that best deserve this charge.   

SECT. LX.  
AND if after all this there be any 
§ 60.  doubt of Grotius his meaning, Mr. Pierce may have some further light from his last Epist. ad Gallos, to the jesuit Petavius, which begins, [ Saepe tibi molestus esse cogor,& ad opem antehac faeliciter mihi cognitam refugere. Postremo libello meo pro place scripto, opposuit Rivetus Examen, quod mitto— Sumpsi hanc ultimam operam mea antehac dicta& famam quoque à Ministris allatratam tuendi. In eo scripto, siquid est aut Catholicis sententiis discongruens aut caeteroqui à veritate alienum, aut minus idoneum ad pacem, de eo abs te viro eruditissimo& cujus judicium plurimi facio, moneri percupio. Rogo permittas mihi lumen de lumine accendere.] Had there been any thing in Grotius his writings against Rivet, that Petavius had thought to be dissonant from the catholic opinions, you may conjecture by this, that we had never seen it.   

SECT. LXI.  
I Have now done one half of the work 
§. 61.  that Mr. Pierce hath called me to, in giving in the Reasons why I take Grotius to have been a Papist. If I have made it good, I have no cause to retract my former judgement, and the warning that I gave concerning him to others: Yet I desire that none be so injurious as to interpret my warning of others as intended to the reproach of him: ●or 1. I think it no reproach to any man to say that he is of that Church which he saith he is of himself, and to take him to be of the mind that he professeth himself to be of: but rather it would be a reproach to him, if any man shall say that he is such a dissembler as to be of a Party or Religion contrary to his open voluminous profession. 2. And my censuring Grotius to be a Moderate Papist, intimateth not so much uncharitableness in me to him, as it would have done in him to have taken me for a Protestant: For have much more charity( I dare boldly say it) for moderate Papists, then Grotius had for any Protestants that will not be Reconciled to the Pope, if we may judge of his Charity by his words. And yet I will not take it for a reproach to be called a Protestant. Even as in case I should say Mr. Pierce were an Arminian, or Prelatical, or of Grotius mind( which yet I do not) this were not such a note of uncharitableness in me, as it were in him to judge me but a puritan or a Presbyterian; Because an Arminian, yea or a Grotian Papist, is not near so deformed, and odious a creature in my eyes, as a puritan or a Presbyterian seemeth to be, by the portraiture and Characters vouchsafed them by Mr. Pierce. And yet I will take it for no reproach to be called a puritan or a Presbyterian, by him that intends not these names for a reproach. Though I cannot say that I am either, or that I am not, till I better understand the signification of the terms; especially with the speaker.   

SECT. LXII.  
YEA I must say that my thoughts have 
§. 62.  ever justified Grotius from that heresy which he hath too oft been charged with; viz. Socinianism. I never could perceive that he was of that sect: but whatever he hath said or done that way, I have reason to think, was no more then the jesuits ordinarily would have done: and that he complied much more with the jesuits then the Socinians: For it is his own profession;( and I will believe him) and his doctrines signify it. Indeed the jesuits themselves are not near so far from the Socinians as the Reformed Churches are; but have many opinions complying with them, which when men find in Grotius, they mistake him( I think) for a Socinian. If he oft say that Imputed ●ighteousness is unknown to Scriptures, and that Justitia imputata frigus injecit& plebi& plebis ducibus, &c.( Discus. p. 170.) or that Christ satisfied by meriting that we by Conversion should satisfy, &c. No such passages as these will prove him a Socinian any more then all the jesuits are Socinians. And the doctrine of the Trinity he expressly owns, however he deal with particular Texts of Scripture that concern it. Nor do I know of any Passage in his Explication of that doctrine in which he gives so much occasion of offence this way, as Thom. White( Instit. Theolog.) and many other Papists do, that are on the side that Grotius disliked; much more as the jesuits do.   

SECT. LXIII.  
I Dare boldly say that he was an unjust 
§. 63.  man in his Censures of the Doctrines of the Calvinists, pretending the differences to be much greater between them and the Lutherans then they are, and putting a more odious Vizor on the face of their doctrines of Faith, Justification, Certainty of Salvation, Election, Perseverance, effectual Grace, &c. then beseemed any judicious man, that understood the state of the Controversies, or the strength of an argument, and had any Christian Charity left. Or else we should never have had it over again, after full Confutations, that it was [ Editum saepe,& à nonnullis defensum; Pecca fortiter, said creed fortius,& nihil nocebunt tibi centum homicidia,& mill strupa] When I red such passages ( Discus. p. 217, 218.) my conscience is in a straight, whether it be my duty to open the falsehood and abomination of such inhuman Calumnies in their colours in faithfulness to the Church and servants of the Lord; or whether I should forbear, because the partial and offended will take it to be railing and reproach. But because I am more blamed by others, for too much sauciness or keeness, then for defect, I will sit down by their judgement, and forbear. Only I must profess that if I were in every point of doctrine of Grotius mind, I think I should abhor this dealing with an adversary. And indeed, as far as I am able to judge through all his later writings, it was the too much dearness of his Remonstrants Opinions, and thinking the distance between him& his adversaries greater then it was, and his too highly esteeming his espoused conceits, and too odious thoughts of the contrary way, that inclined him so strongly to fall in with the jesuits, as finding them to agree with him where the Calvinists differed in points which he thought to be of such exceeding moment. But of the Dominicans he expresseth lower thoughts; though in this he applaudeth them that they deny certainty of Salvation, though they agree with Rivet in other ponts. Discus. p. 95.   

SECT. LXIV.  
IF after all this noise and bitter accusation of the Reformed Churches which 
§. 64.  he poureth out, it should be made appear, that the difference between the Protestants and many Papists in certainty of Salvation( excepting the point of perseverance) is next to none; yea Alvarez. in Respons. ad Object. saith that some jesuits, naming Gregory de Valentia, do maintain not only a cerrainty of perseverance itself, but a necessity in the confirmed; and if it shall be made appear that in the very points of imputed Righte●●sness, of Free will, of Reprobation, of universal Redemption, the difference between the Remonstrants and the Synod of Dort, is incomparably smaller then Grotius makes it, and so that his alienation and censures run upon a mere mistake, that he odiously aggravates the opinions that deserve it not, or that were far ne●rer his own then he imagined; what a dishonour would this be to his bitter censures, reproaches and clamours, and to his factious uncharitable way of Pacification, that must exclude men as uncapable of the Churches Peace, that the Lord of the Church and Peace will not exclude? and that on such mistakes he should change his Church or Religion, was none of his honour. But then I must add, that when he takes all unmeet expressions that he can find in any Divines, as if they were the common doctrine of that party, he is guilty of his own mistakes, and deals as he would not do by the Papists.   

SECT. LXV.  
THE second part of my task is yet behind, 
§. 65.  which is set me by Mr. Pierce, which is to give some account of my suspicions, and the warning I give of the Grotian party and design in England But here I must expect that neither Mr. P. nor any moderate man will presently charge me with motioning a persecution of all that I prove guilty; or understand me as if I were provoking the Magistrate to rigor against them. May we not so much as know our danger, nor give warning of it, nor bid men take heed, but we are presently persecuting them that we are in danger of? It were a hard case with the Church, if men may do their worst to undermine our Churches and Religion, and we might not take notice of it, nor be called on to avoid it, for fear of dishonouring the Miners or disturbing them. We hate persecution, and yet we love the Church and our souls.   

SECT. LXVI.  
BUT the Reverend Doctor Sanderson 
§. 66.  thinks I should also have given notice how the taking down of Episcopacy, &c. hath advantaged the Papists, &c. to which I say, 1. All men cannot say all things that are true; especially at once. 2. All men see not that which some see: May I not give notice of a danger which I see, because I say nothing of another which I see not? 3. My subject and business in that writing called me to no more then I did. 4. I am not addicted, for all that, to hid my mind: and therefore God willing, I shall shortly give the world an account how far I think Episcopacy good or bad for the Church of God, and consequently what I think in this case. 5. Yet this I will say now to satisfy Doctor Sanderson and my own conscience, that of late I begin to have a strong suspicion that the Papists had a finger in the Pie on both sides, and that they had indeed a hand in the extirpation of Episcopacy; but my jealousies will not warrant me to affirm it, or to be confident of it, or to accuse any. When I can prove this by them as well as I have proved what I said by Grotius, you may perhaps hear more of me. In the mean time I must blame, and again blame any of you all, that will not disclose this if you are able to prove it. I find in Mr. Prins History of Canterburies trial, that Cardinal Richlieu was a promoter of the Rebellion in Ireland; and I find in Bishop Bramhal against Militerius these words [ There was a Bishop in the world( losers must have leave to talk) whose privy purse and subtle Counsels did help to kindle that unnatural war in his Majesties three Kingdoms,] &c. I suppose he means Cardinal ●ichlieu. But what they did directly against Episcopacy, I must leave to them to prove that can.   

SECT. LXVII.  
WHether I had any just cause to 
§. 67.  think that Grotius had followers here in England, and consequently that the warning that I gave was necessary, let his own words tell you, Discus. page. 16. 
☞  [ Aequis multis non displicuisse Grotii pro place Ecclesiae labores, norunt Lutetiae,& in omni Gallia multi, multi in Polonia& Germania, in Angliâ non pauci, placidi pacisque amantes. Nam insanientibus in quantum nunc videmus Brunistis,& siqui eorum sunt similes, quibuscum D. Riveto melius quam cum Angliae Episcopis convenit, quis placere, ab illorum veneno intactus postulet?] If Grotius[ his Piety and Learning were very equally matched] as Mr. Pierce thinks page. 92. then doubtless he is here to be believed, and therefore had among the Episcopal party, no small number of approvers: though the Brownists and such others were against him. Indeed if I have not proved Grotius himself to be as much a Papist as I there mentioned then neither are his adherents and approvers such; and so all lies upon that.   

SECT. LXVIII.  
AND if I have proved Grotius a Papist, 
§. 68.  then me thinks it is strange that any man should approve of his Opinions in those things, and yet take it ill to be judged himself to be what Grotius was, even while he defendeth him. Mr. Pierce is not the first or only man that hath patronized him: And Mr. P. I must needs think is not unacquainted with his writings, 1. Because he so highly valves him. 2. Because he so confidently vindicates him. 3. Because he suspected it as my error to have [ taken things upon trust, from some unfavourable censors of his intention,] p. 93. and therefore would not take his judgement upon trust himself. 4. Because his own words intimate it: He was prepared by the reading of Thuanus for the reading of Grotius, page. 93. Yet M. P. affirmeth page. 94. that there [ is not any the least reason that Grotius his moderation should procure him the name of Papist.] They that speak to the Vulgar, must speak with the Vulgar. We common people, call such Papists as Grotius professeth himself to have been. But if Mr. Pierce will call him otherwise we will not stick much with him, for the name, while we are agreed on the thing. I confess that Grotius was no such Papist as himself describeth [ that without any difference approveth for honour or lucre sake all the sayings and deeds of the Popes.] But with us a man is a Papist that is for the Popes Universal Headship and Government of the Churches, and that is for the Trent Creed and Council, with all the rest before mentioned. Now would it be any injury for me to believe that Mr. Pierce himself is of Grotius his mind, after so full an Approbation and vindication of him? And yet I will not affirm any such thing: For I know not till I hear again from Mr. Pierce what mistake he might incur; and I would take men to be of the Religion which they profess. But yet I must say that Mr. Pierce could not blame any for such a censure.   

SECT. LXIX.  
BUT Mr. Pierce thinks [ it had been 
§. 69.  well if I had name those Papists, and then have publicly declared that I meant no more: p. 94.] I am not of that mind. For 1. Some of them have very lovingly sought to proselyte me, as having( by the reproaches of some unadvised Brethren) been brought to have some hopes of me; And truly ingenuity prohibits me to betray them that manifested their love to me, though in a mistaken way: For I am confident, they think they are in the right, and intended my good while they endeavoured my hurt. 2. What if I had name Bishop Goodman, and all the rabble that your Friend in the Legenda Lignea describes( which are more then Dr. Vane, and Dr. Goffe and Dr. bailie, and H. P. de Cressy, as you may there see,) had it been reasonable that I should have thought there are no more? 3. Grotius assures me himself( whom I have reason to believe) that not a few such there were among the Prelatical men: And what if I knew not the name of one of them, should I not therefore take any notice that such there are? 4. By this time I suppose both you and all men see that the Papists are crept in among all Sects, especially the Quakers, and Seekers, whom they animate, and also among the Anabaptists, Millenaries, Levellers, yea and the Independents, and if this weeks Diurnal say true, one was taken that was a pretended friend to the Presbyterians. Must I needs name all these, or else say nothing of them? Or are you able to name all the Papists, the friars and jesuits yourselves that are now under the Vizor of any of these Sects, playing their parts in England? you would take it to be an unreasonable motion: when yet you know, or have reason to believe that at this day there are hundreds of them here at work.   

SECT. LXX.  
THE truth is, I judge it unmeet to 
§. 70.  name even those that have given us just cause of suspicion, because it may tend to breach of Peace, and to the harder censuring and usage of the persons, which is none of my desire. My warning was only for defence, and Mr. Pierce would provoke me to do that which must needs turn to the offence and suffering of others, which no provocation shall force me to without necessity. Verily I desire nothing to be done against the grossest Papists among us, but what is necessary for the security of Church and Commonwealth, and the saving of mens souls from their infections delusory doctrines. Nominations are more to the danger of mens persons, when descriptions serve as well to our own security; which was my professed end.   

SECT. LXXI.  
AND in this Description I beseech 
§. 71.  you blame us not if we be jealous of such men as these. 1. Of Those that actually were the Agents in the English illegal Innovations, which kindled all our troubles in this land, and were conformable to the Grotian design. 2. Of those that bend the course of their writings and persuasions to make the Roman Church honourable, and vindicate them, not only from the charge of Antichristianism, but from the most of the imputations that the Reformed Churches lay upon them; and that labour to make the Doctrine, Discipline and Worship and Practices of the Reformed Churches as odious as they can, using the same common arguments against them, and reproaches of them, as the Papists do. 3. Of those that labour to prove the Church of Rome a true Church because of her succession, &c. and the Reformed Churches to be none for want of that succession( except this corner that had Bishops:) and that labour to prove the truth of the Papists Ministry and administrations, and to degrade or disprove the Ministers of all the Reformed Churches that have not Prelates. 4. Of those that are for a Visible Head of the universal Church, whether Pope or General Council. 5. Of those that deny the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures in all things necessary to Salvation, or Universally to the Peace of the Church, and that tell us that Scripture is but part of the word of God, and Tradition contains the rest, as needful to the foresaid ends. 6. That will not be persuaded to join on any reasonable terms for the healing of our present divisions: unless all the Churches be unchurched, and all the Ministers degraded, that be not Prelatical, they will have no Peace or concord with us. When all these, or many of these go together, you must not blame us to be eautelously jealous, as far as is needful to our own preservation, when in general we know that there are Papists among us, and are acquainted with their doctrine and Interests and designs.   

SECT. LXXII.  
BUT yet I say again, if you think that 
§. 72.  I any more by the foresaid warning intended to raise a jealousy on all the Episcopal Divines, then on any other party, among whom the Papists are known to insinuate, you are guilty of very gross injustice, when I professedly excepted all the Protestant Episcopal men, and as reverently spoken of them, I think, as you would have wished me. Do you think that all men that have eyes do not see that between the old Episcopal Divines, and the new( even such as yourselves) there is much more difference then between the Presbyterians and them? Do you think that Bishop Jewel, Pilkinton, Hall, Carlton, Davenant, Morton, Abbot, Usher, Potter, Downame, grindal, Parker, Hooper, Farrar, Cramner, Latimer, Ridley, and forty more Bishops here, did not differ far more from Grotius, yea and from you and all of your mind, then from the Ministers of England that you call Presbyterians at this day? You are exceedingly deceived if you think they did not. We honour and reverence all honest faithful Episscopal Divines as much as any other men. We take not Episcopacy to be either so excellent or so odious a thing, as that all other matters of Concord or Discord should be estimated by that. And therefore go not about to make men believe that we jumble all Episcopal Divines together; or that we cannot see more difference between one sort of them and the other, then between the Presbyterians and the ancient Bishops. Take my description, and apply my words to none but those that it agreeth to. All that hold to the Doctrine of the Church of England are Protestants with me.   

SECT. LXXIII.  
IF I should rise higher and show the 
§ 73.  Probability that the Grotian design was the cause of all our wars and changes here in England, I should neither please you nor myself. And therefore I will only say this, 1. That Franc. à S. Clara's design and Grotius's seem the very same, and their Religion and Church the same. 2. That this S. Clara is yet the Queens chaplain,( as White tells us;) and the French Religion being the same with Grotius's, we have reason enough to believe the Queen to be so moderate as to be of the same Religion. 3. How far the King was inclined to a Reconciliation, I only desire you to judge; 1. By the Articles of the Spanish and French match( sworn to) 2. By his Letter to the Pope, written in Spain. 3. By the choice of Agents for Church and State. 4. By the residence of the Popes nuntios here, and the college for the jesuits, &c. 5. By the illegal innovations in worship, so resolvedly gradatim introduced. All which I speak not with the least desire to persuade men that he was a Papist, nor do I believe any such thing( His conference with the marquis of Worcester may satisfy men for that) but only to show that while he as a Moderate Protestant took hands with the Queen a Moderate Papist, the Grotian design had great advantage in England, which he himself boasted of.   

SECT. LXXIV.  
AND though the moderate Papists 
§. 74.  might promote the English change, yet I must confess I see cause enough to think that the Pope and the Italians so much feared it, as that they might very probably have a considerable hand in raising our wars, to break the plot. Had Grotius and such as he prevailed for a combination of France, England, and the( now Popish) Queen of Sweden, and others that were inclined to a moderation, no doubt but the Pope would have thought himself unsafe: For it is not the terms of Cassander, Grotius, or the French that will serve his turn. And though it were not a Reformation of Doctrine, or the Form of Government or Worship that Grotius seemed to desire, but of Manners& such Corruptoins as without Councils or Traditions were brought in; yet even this much of Reformation is so hardly obtained at Rome, that neither Councils nor Emperours could ever hitherto procure it, as Grotius frequently confesseth: And therefore Grotius plainly intimateth, that unless he could have a Pope eximiously good, he would have Kings combine to force a Reformation: and this was it that the Pope was afraid of, more then of many shattered adversaries that stood at a far greater distance from him. Though the Calvinists would have used him hardlyer if they had power, yet their weakness and broken state made them seem more inconsiderable at Rome, then such a combination of Princes for a lesser Reformation. And such a Grotian design was like to have found such abundance of favourers among the Moderate Papists in all Countries, that if it had gone on, the Pope would have found himself nowhere safe. Though among Protestants such Pacifications are very serviceable to the Pope, by taking off the edge of opposition, and drawing in the unsettled under the pretence of Unity, and opening a door to the Roman Agents to draw in more; yet if such designs were set a foot in Italy, Spain, Bavaria, Austria, &c. they would mar all. So that I do not wonder if it be true that some have Printed and confidently aver, that the Papists did not only kindle our wars here, and had afterwards an influence on both sides to blow the coals and look to their interest, but also that it was by this Roman influence that the late King was put to death: Of which to the Papists in another Treatise I have given somewhat a fuller account.   

SECT. LXXV.  
BUT yet I remain confident that as the 
§. 75.  design of Grotius, so that which in England was carried on, was very much against the will of God: And though it had a great probability of displeasing the Pope, if it had extended far enough among his own subjects, yet was it very unjust, and proceeded on unwarrantable Grounds; having many or most of the unhappy ingredients that I mentioned of the design of Grotius in the beginning: It was not a truly catholic design: Or else it would not have shut out so many faithful servants of Christ, and members of the catholic Church: It engaged men in a persecution: It was apparently destructive to Godliness and the prosperity of the Churches here: It animated the Impious haters of Piety, and common civility, while those that they hated for Godliness sake( though most of them twenty for one were Conformists) were discountenanced, troubled, reproached by the then odious name of Puritans, silenced, or suspended, and many thousands driven out of the Land: So that it was safer in all places that ever I knew, for men to live in constant swearing, cursing, drunkenness( for all that the Laws were against these) then to have instructed a mans family, and restrained children and servants from dancing on the Lords day, and to have gone to the next Parish to hear a Sermon when there was none at home; and in some places, it was much more dangerous for a Minister to preach a Lecture or twice on the Lords day, or to expound the Catechism, then never to preach at all. Hundreds of Congregations had Ministers that never preached, and such as were common drunkards and openly ungodly, when yet the most Learned, Godly, Powerful, Painful, Peaceable men, that durst not use the old Ceremonies or the New, must be cast aside, or driven away, to the great increase of ignorance and ungodliness, and the provoking of the wrath of God against us. These were not likely terms or ways to a catholic Peace and Concord of the Churches. I know well enough that the persecutors did and do pretend that these Puritans and Calvinists as they called them, were men of unpeaceable principles and spirits, and therefore not to be endured, or taken into Peace; they would not consent to moderate terms: But God will not be satisfied with words, when his servants are persecuted and his Churches destroyed, or his interest trodden under-foot. Talk for them as long as you will, these are not the ways of catholic Peace, but crooked paths of your own hewing out, and whoever goeth in them shall not know Peace. If these men could not have complied with you in your Innovations, or approaches to the Roman way, should they not have had leave to live in Peace by you, and serve God in their own way, as long as they were true members of the catholic Church, and so useful for the good of souls?   

SECT. LXXVI.  
I Know you will say, that it s you that are 
§. 76.  now persecuted, and others are guilty of the same that they blamed you for. But I answer, 1. If that be so, the sense of it should cause you to confess your former sin, and not to justify that in your party which you blame in others. 2. I have heard of an Ordinance or Proclamation while the mayor Generals were on foot prohibiting any sequestered man to preach, but I know not of one that ever was punished for preaching. What may be done out of my knowledge or hearing, I cannot tell. 3. The casting out of the Insufficient and Scandalous, is so far from being a persecution, that it would have been a cruelty to mens souls for the Magistrate to have forborn it. 4. If any Able, Godly, Faithful Minister be anywhere cast out upon the account of our late Civil differences, or being for Episcopacy, or the Form of Liturgy lately used, let them look to it that are guilty of it: for my part I detest it, or any other act that tends to the diminution of Piety, or the desolation of the Churches. I think if all the Able, Godly Ministers on earth were employed in the Lords harvest to the utmost of their power, they would all find work enough to do, if they were forty for one. Of what Opinion or Party soever they be, that is consistent with godliness and the edification of the Church, I dare say, we have no Able, Godly Ministers to spare; and therefore none of them should be laid by. Yea Princes should put up some injuries at their hands, rather then silence them to the apparent injury of the Church, and Christian cause, and the souls of men. 5. And yet I must add, that the restraint of the exercise of the Prelatical Government, in these times of common Liberty, doth seem to me to be so far from such a persecution as some make it, that a slander by would strongly imagine it were purposely contrived by your friends for your greatest honour and accommodation. For it was not a mere spiritual Governing of the Willing and conscientious that you formerly exercised, but it was the Magistrates Sword that did the work, by forcing men to your obedience: So that Episcopacy hath the honour of the Unity that seemed to be among us; and they that see the late risen sects applaud Episcopacy for it, that deserved no more of that applause, at most, then presbytery that in other Countries did as much: It was the Magistrates that did it, and the Bishops have the honour of it. And now when all have liberty and the Magistrates Sword doth Second none,( though some think that you have Liberty still upon Consenters, yet really or seemingly) a restraint is laid on Prelacy: And so the people that see the sects and heresies that arise, do acquit you from the guilt, and think with themselves, that if Prelacy had liberty, it would not be thus. But really do you think that if you had a mere liberty now as Presbyterians have, it would not be the greatest blow that ever was given to your Government? What more could any of your enemies wish against you? Should one of you now pretend to be the Bishop of a diocese, its two to one, but ten parts of the Clergy would disown him, and those the best( unless he came in on terms that are not yet set on foot:) So also would the best of the people for the most part: So that you would have a small Clergy, and none of the best, and the people in most Parishes that are most ignorant, drunken, profane, unruly, with some civil persons of your mind among them that fear God, who would be inconsiderable in the crowd of the ungodly: these would be at first your Church or diocese: And what would you do with them? Either you must exercise Discipline on them, or not: If you do, you must mad them by casting abundance of them out again, and then they would fly from you, and hate you as much as they hate Presbyterians or Independents. For the cause of their love to Episcopacy is, because it was a shadow( if not a shelter) to the profane heretofore, and did not trouble them with Discipline, and because they troubled and kept under the puritans, whom they hated. But if you did not exercise Discipline on them, your Churches would be but the very sinks of all other Churches about you, to receive the filth that they all cast out, and so they would be so great a reproach to Episcopacy, that would make it vile in the eyes of sober men: So that a Prelatical Church would in the Common account be near kin to an Ale-house or Tavern( to say no worse) where some honest men may be; and yet its taken for the note of an honest sober man to be as little in them as may be. Had Episcopacy this day in England an equal Toleration with Presbyterians and Independents, it would make so conspicuous a difference between them( in their Churches and administrations) in the eyes of the sober sort of men, as would be likely to make the Prelacy odious, and do more against it by far then that which you call persecution doth.( And I cannot take it for a persecution, that you are not armed or seconded by the sword; and enabled to persecute others): So that for my part, were I your enemy, I would wish you a toleration; but being really a friend to the Church and you, I shall make a better motion: Yet desiring that you may have your choice for a Toleration, if you refuse this.   

SECT. LXXVII.  
YOU cannot more convincingly show 
§. 77.  yourselves true catholics, and free from the partial designs of the Romanists, which I mentioned, then by a readiness for a truly catholic Pacification. Will you then begin at home? our breaches are wide enough, and have continued long enough: Forbear▪ your reproaches and uncharitable courses that tend to widen them. You complain that you are persecuted: will you but yield to terms of Peace and Piety, such as are not fitted to a Party, but to the increase of Faith and Holiness, and the good of all? and I would be one that should with all possible importunity Petition for your Liberty. Will you lovingly consult with your Brethren whom you now reproach and censure, to find out, 1. The way of nearest Closure and Agreement; and 2. Of such a Brotherly forbearance in the points wherein you cannot Agree, as most tendeth to maintain our Unity and Peace, and promote the common Truths that we are agreed in? If you would but signify your Readiness to such an healing course, that the Protestant Churches might be strengthened, and owned, and faithful Ministers of both persuasions might( not be degraded as by many of you they are, nor persecuted as you say you now are, but) be used for the service of their Master, and none of their gifts lost to the Church of Christ; we should then be the more confident that you are not for a faction but the Christian catholic Interest: Especially if in deeds as well as words, you will manifest this Consent. I dare boldly say, on long consideration, that the terms of Peace are within our reach, even such as moderate men should agree upon: Were it as easy to find a Peaceable Disposition, the work would be soon done. Without consulting the Presbyterians in the point, I dare venture to say with very great confidence, that they will yield to the terms that Bishop Hall himself hath propounded as satisfactory in his Peace-maker, pag. 47, 48, 49, 50, 51. and Bishop Usher in his model called the Reduction, &c. Are you moderate Episcopal Divines! Why then are we not agreed without any more ado? Two of your own Bishops,( as Pious, Reverend, Learned men, as most ever the Church had) have already laid down the terms,( To which I may add Forbes his Irenicon.) If you are agreed, we are agreed: I mean, very many that I know to be of my own mind in this; and very many of the most learned, godly Presbyterians in England. I agreed with Bishop Usher in a quarter of an hour, proposing to him some Healing terms, which he professed were sufficient with moderate men, though with others he found they would not take. When we attempted our Association in this County, we purposely left our terms so wide as that we might have Communion with Godly Episcopal men as well as others. But when two of them( Learned moderate men) approved of our Design, and were about to join with us( though of another County) in promoting it, a famous, learned man of the New way( of Mr. Ps. acquaintance, and one of his Epistelers) by an unpeaceable writing blasted all: persuading one of them not to Covenant with Schism, and( in my judgement) fomenting a Schism, and that by poor insufficient reasonings, under pretence of avoiding schismatics. In a word; Peace is before you: If you love it, and are really friends of it as you pretend; accept it, that the Church may have the benefit. If you refuse it, pretend not to be lovers of it; and blame yourselves if you choose rather to smart, then to suffer the Churches wounds to be healed: And you shall give us leave to enjoy the comfort of our desires and endeavours for Unity and Peace, whether we attain them or not.   
Finitur, April. 14. 1658.