ENVYS BITTERNESS CORRECTED WITH THE ROD of SHAME: OR, An Answer to a Book lately Published by Richard Haines (a person withdrawn from) Entitled, NEW LORDS, NEW LAWS; Wherein is showed such an Image of Envy, as in late Ages have not appeared, by his heaping up false accusations, and abusive Expressions to a great number, with Malicious Insinuations, thereby to provoke (if possible) the Civil Magistrate to have suspicious thoughts of the Innocent, with a great Outcry of Usurpation and Tyranny, proved to have no other Foundation but his own evil Imaginations, and so Neither LORDS, Nor New LAWS. Wherein also the several Persons therein Accused, are in Righteousness quitted, to the Shame of the Accuser. By Matthew Caffyn of Horsham in Sussex.  He that is first in his own cause seemeth just, but his Neighbour cometh and searcheth him, Prov. 8.17. Neither can they prove the things whereof they accuse me, Act. 24. 
LONDON, Printed in the Year, 1674.   

A WORD, to his WORD, To the Ingenious and Learned Perusers.  
WHereas Richard Haines is pleased to suggest, that neither Nature nor Education had furnished him with Arts and Accomplishments necessary for such public undertake, and thereupon entreats their favourable construction in the ensuing leaves, as often as they found him unskilful in Language or methodical Order. I would only say, that Persons of an ordinary Capacity may easily judge him a man somewhat wanting simplicity and singleness of heart in so speaking; for that 'tis so well known, and understood by many, (himself being the cause thereof) that another person (whom both Nature and Education hath furnished with Accomplishments necessary for such public Concerns) did frame his matter into that form and manner of language wherein it now appears, and is sent forth to public View.   

Envy's Bitterness Corrected with the Rod of Shame: OR, An Answer to a Book lately published by Richard Haines, (a person withdrawn from) Entitled, New LORDS, New LAWS.  
Christian Reader,  
HAving perused the Book, entitled, New Lords, New Laws, subscribed by Richard Haines, and observing the many reproaches, false accusations, and abusive expressions therein contained, and more especially those his malicious insinuations, whereby he (as one much out of the fear of God, and greatly in the Spirit of Envy) endeavours to suggest amongst the Sons of Men that we are, but especially myself, (in and about our proceed against him in way of Excommunication) Enemies to his Majesty's Laws, and Royal Prerogative (the contrary whereof, I doubt not but through grace, will appear:) having (I say) observed these things, was made to remember Simeons' description of envy (as may be read in the Book of the twelve Patriarches) after this manner. Envy (saith he) maketh a man's Soul to grow Savage, breedeth War in his thoughts, setteth his Blood on fire, driveth him out of his wits, and suffereth no reason to bear sway or rule, maketh his body ghastly, pineth away at the prosperity of the person envied, and is always egging him to slay the same. For (as saith the Apostle) the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. Now the many bitter, and dreadful streams that flow from this fountain of malice and envy, you, in the ensuing discourse, are desired to observe; And first touching his too common Language, how bitter, how unsavoury, how unbecoming any professor, but more especially such as excel in knowledge of the Father's will, even, that every idle word must be accounted for at last, who yet shall not only so do, but as it were outstrip therein the deeds of the wicked! as this following Catalogue of his expressions, gathered out of his Book, do plainly demonstrate. To wit, Usurper, Tyrant, Idol, new Lord, Bell, infallible Apostle, Idol-God, Seducer, Deceiver, Upstart Lord Ecclesiastic, narrow Throated tender-Conscience of his Lordship's grace, Pope-ship, that, had he the privilege of a torturing Inquisition, would severely deal with all that should dare oppose him, a second Popish infallibility, Tyrannical cruelty, Deotriphes. As touching the Congregation (whom but a while ago, with myself, was highly esteemed by him) he now saith, that they are such whose zeal hath been much more fervent for the adoration of their Idol, than for God, whose principles and practices (meaning I suppose, with respect to their dealing with him) are Popish and Antichristian, confederates with a usurping Tyrant, whose actions he supposeth are like the hair-brained Proclamations of John of Leyden, or the extravigances of a Popish Bull, and in one of his Letters sent to (C.G.) saith, That they are the seat of the Beast.  
Now that such Language should proceed out of the mouths of men always accustomed thereunto, is no marvel; (though every where to be lamented) but that it should proceed out of the mouth of a professor, and not only so but against his Friends, but awhile ago by him esteemed most beloved brethren, is more than a little to be admired, yet not so much as when his reproachful words shall be considered in conjunction with his malicious designs, no less threatening than ruin and destruction, and that to his late-esteemed (and to use his own words. Page 2.) Most worthy and most faithful Brother: whereby just occasion is given for considerate persons to determine, that something more than ordinary, gave being to this height of envy, at which root, (as the undoubted cause thereof, and preceding the controversy about his Patent too) our friends at London struck at, when by mutual consent on his, and my part, the matter was to be revealed (without which, to intermeddle with other matters, is questionless no more in order to communion than the plucking of branches, while the bitter root, I mean his envy against me, and others, as some think, for my sake remains) but how this than was prevented by his means (contrary to earnest expectations) friends may well remember, though the making that private case from being in some kind a public case was not prevented; for which he may complain of no man's folly more than his own, for hereby and other such like unwary proceed of his elsewhere, the case by me only hinted at, when thoughts of presenting it to the Church's consideration was entertained, (the only Judge of such cases as many believe) though from a holy design the better to regain him, afterwards to the contrary resolved, there being for other causes sufficient ground to withdraw from him: the case, (I say, to that degree private) is now become, and by some called; The private public case.  
But since he pretends, and still would lay the cause of his so great displeasure upon injustice, supposedly, acted on our parts towards him in the case of his Excommunication; though that was no preventing cause of his expected gain by his Patent, thereby to enrage him; nor could (in likelihood) the apprehension of his, supposed, illegal Excommunication, (especially when good reason according to the common belief of Christians) so plainly testifieth our design therein to be good) provoke to such a height of malice, for that we have no precedent (I suppose) of like malice, in the whole Nation, amongst the many excommunicated persons that are there, who doubtless are as strongly persuaded as he can be (at leastwise many) that their Excommunication was unreasonable and unwarrantable: but since (I say) he otherwise pretends, the matter of his Book is now to be considered.  
And first that pressing necessity that (he saith) engaged him to this publication, is worthy observation, namely, that our proceed against him did appear to him no less than usurped Authority; to which I say, that had our proceed against him been according to his representation thereof in all points, some reason he had to manifest (at leastwise) some dislike, but forasmuch as the ensuing account will hereunto be a resolution, I shall not here insist thereon.  
As to his second reason for publication, to wit, his care to preserve the truth, and the professors thereof from reproachful abuses and censures. I answer, that to us 'tis unknown that any reproach was upon the account, of the method and manner of our proceed, neither indeed could it be, for that persons not in Communion with us, were ignorant thereof, if he have represented it after that abusive manner (as he hath in his Book) to some, and thereby some reproachful words have been raised, that lieth at his door, and not at ours; and as to the ground and cause of our proceed with respect to his coveting the Patent, nothing is more apparent than that we are (amongst men) very generally justified, and rendered is doing well and wisely therein; but, alas, how may the Reader be convinced that his plea to preserve the truth from reproach, is a candid and real plea? since he hath not ceased to do, and justify that which is so great an occasion of reproach, and so generally too, as the like in our time scarce have been, so many persons, in so many places being concerned therein.  
As to his third Reason for publication, to wit, because all admonition and advice had been disregarded, and that from a full meeting, and (as he saith) of the most eminent in London, to hear and determine that case. I answer, that all this splendid show of rejecting Counsel when stated in plainness, was no more than that some few friends at London, (willing to make an Assay for Peace, for some good reasons expressed in their Letter to me, wherein only I was by a Friend or two desired to come up) did appoint to meet at a Coffey-House, and this without the least advice or consent from us, which surely must have been as one thing necessary in order, to the meetings Authority to determine as he would suggest, the which was so far from their intention, as that plainly and publicly they declared the contrary, as may very well be remembered; yet (by this) my meaning is not that therefore the counsel and advice of any men fearing God may be rejected, but rather (as a truth nothing to be doubted of) to follow the Souls conviction of truth, by what means soever convicted; now this appointment, by those few Friends, being known, several others came, who, I suppose, had a mind thereunto; at which place, Mr. G. by his desire was (and some others of the same differing persuasion from us) who most principally spoke, and advised in the case, as being (with others) not satisfied that he deserved such blame as we thought him worthy of, though they readily believed (with us) that his undertake were of an ill report, and of a gospel-dishonouring Nature. And whereas he saith, that some have declared that they do not own our London-Friends, nor regard their Counsel; for the rectifying those mistakes, that, very possibly, may from thence arise, all may know (if any there be that know not) that there is the same concord between them and us, and agreement in Communion, and that not only with some, but with all the Elders and Congregations in London, as was before this difference happened, too evident to be denied. As for Mr. G. and those Friends of the same persuasion with him, 'tis indeed true that we, and as true that others in City and Country as well as we, have for some well known cause, forborn communicating together at the Table of the LORD with them.  
Whereas our Publication of his Excommunication to the World within three days after 'twas done, and that to them that hated him most, is pretended by him to be the original cause of this publication. My answer is, that neither within three days, nor any day since did I to those persons open my mouth thereabouts, what others have done, certainly I know not, but this I know, that since our with-drawment from him was (partly) to preserve the truth, and the professors thereof from reproach, the divulging thereof was not so improper as he may conceive.  
And whereas he further adds, that when he was at the General meeting at London, in order to make his appeal there, I hindered the determination thereof, when as (he saith) I promised to do what I could to have it determined there. I answer, first you may observe that (as himself confesseth in his Book) I seeing him there, did move his request to the assembly, whereupon, after some little debate about the matter, a very fair and unanimous result was given, that they, by reason of an agreement formerly made, could not then hear his case; but if he would first make his appeal to the Country association, or quarterly meeting whereunto he belonged, and they, by reason of the difficulty of the case, or difference thereabouts, could not decide the matter; that then they would readily hear it: nor could he reasonably mistrust this result as proceeding from his supposed Enemies, because they were generally silent in the case; and when his motion was thus stopped, by virtue of that aforesaid agreement, I then offered my willingness to condescend (beyond what is common) namely, that, if he would accept of the assemblies advice by making application to the quarterly meeting, I should be willing that the present Assembly should choose out six men or more, who with the quarterly meeting in the Country, should be the only Judges of the matter depending betwixt us, and that I and the congregation would not be concerned, save only to give evidence: all which he very obstinately refused; whereupon some motion was made by some one or more about choosing some certain persons out of the Assembly, to whom the case might be referred, to which was replied by some of the meeting, that the matter concerned the Congregation, and they were not present; and that I said any such thing, I am not certain; if I did, 'twas true; and besides he may not think that the Assembly would have imposed any such thing upon them, if they had been present; what may be done by mutual consent, is another case; nor may it be thought strange that I did not engage them to be there, because of our former agreement, whereby I well knew that many cases upon that account had been refused; nor may he think that Churches are obliged to follow the motions of excommunicated persons whither they please; but rather (as some think) that the Church appealed unto, should (if they see cause to stir) by their representatives come to the Church, concerning whose actions the appeal is made, but by this my account aforesaid, I do not thereby mean that in pursuance of such a promise as he speaketh of, I did what I did in and about his case, for no such promise can I remember, nor do I in the least incline to believe that I did so speak, and have forgot it, (though in many cases that is probable) because I certainly know (and in the same page himself confesseth) that I told him, as I, with another Friend, (J. S.) Who is ready to witness the truth thereof) sat with him in his own Parlour by the Fire; I say, that I told him of this our agreement, whereby (to use his own words) he was made by me, and others, to doubt that his cause could not be heard; probably if the whole Assembly had pressed for the hearing thereof (as they wholly declined it) I should not have endeavoured to have hindered it, both parties being there. The case then being thus, why he should further charge me (as he doth) for wanting civil honesty in not telling him before to prevent trouble and unnecessary charges, I verily know not.  
And whereas he rejected the general Assemblies Advice, first to Appeal to some Country and Quarterly Meeting, he would very willingly justify the same, by saying, (pag. 4. Epist.) That in some respects they were inferior to me, and that I was adered, and esteemed by many of them. To which I answer, that were I such a person as he now represents me to be, 'twere not likely I should be thus esteemed, or doth he think that they are all in the dark, and he only in the excellent discovering light, while a Reviler, a Reproacher, and false accuser of his Brethren, but how observable is it that while he in his fourth Page of his Epistle represents me to be thus esteemed and adored by the Country Congregations, in the sixth Page of this Epistle, he in answer to some (I know not who) that strange why he doth not withdraw from the Baptised Congregations, saith, That he knows not any other Congregation of that persuasion, corrupted with those Errors, but that their actions and conversations are according to their Profession, If so, why then would he not (I pray) make his Appeal to some of them according to the Assemblies advice? but 'tis happened to him according to what is written, where envying is, there is confusion, as well as every evil work.  
Now, whereas the Country's motion and stirring against his coveted Patent, and that with more than a little pains and charge, while from Town to Town, and from one Gentleman's house to another, persons did Ride up and down, in obtaining their Hands subscribed against him, by which, as also the plead of Counsel eminent in Law, the Patent before the Lord Keeper was threw out, whereas (I say) the Country's Motion thus against him, but especially their Prevailing, seems to bare hard against him, not only as an Infallible Testimony that his design proved scandalous, and of an ill report, but that also it seems to render the reasonableness pretended by him for his Patent, questionable; he thereupon (I fear) have desperately launched out into false accusations, in order to the helping his cause, namely, in publishing (pag. 3.) That I and my Confederates did report (whereby the Country was provoked to Conspire against him) that his design by his Patent was to hinder Persons from cleansing Clover as well as Non-such, and that other persons had made discovery thereof before him, than which nothing is more evidently false.  We the Congregation Assembled, and judging ourselves concerned, do hereby declare, that we never heard our Brother Caffyn at any time either plainly declare, or by any hints suggest such an intention to be in R. H. concerning Clover; nor did we at any time believe, and thereby declare to others, any such thing: nor do we know that our Brother Caffyn, or any Confederates, (as he speaketh of) that did believe, and so report that other persons had made the discovery before him, thereby to provoke those persons at the first to conspire against him, for the most discourse of that kind coming to us from persons not in the Profession, (whether true or false, we certainly knew not) was after those persons had actually conspired (as he calleth it) against him, as is easy to be demonstrated. 
But whereas the falseness of this charge cannot appear to the Reader, but upon his preferring my Testimony in conjunction with the Congregations Testimony, before his bare and single Testimony, in a state of apparent Envy, and Excommunication, (though that be a case of much clearness and plainness) I therefore am made willing here to present an accusation of his, for nature and kind such, as that many persons, in many places, upon their own knowledge, may determine the slanderousness thereof, these lines of his, I suppose, not likely to be read in many Congregations, either in City or Country, but where either my words sometimes there, or my practice there, or agreements made by me, and others to the contrary there, or however some that well knew my judgement to the contrary there, may testify against him as a false accuser therein; his accusation is, (pag. 12.) That by my Law I maintain that when a Widow or Maid shall Marry with one not in fellowship, she shall be accused as an Offender, and no humility to be accepted of, but Excommunicated she must be, and she not to be forgiven to the hour of Death, except they part, or he be converted to them, but in the mean time she is to be adjudged to live in fornication, and so their Children are Bastards. Now, what show in Reason he had thus to speak, I can by no means conceive, there having been at no time, either while he was with us, or since he was separated from us, any person so Excommunicated here, or by me, as an instrument elsewhere; nor did I ever believe any such thing, that persons so Married, might be separated (as he insinuates) nor that they were to be adjudged such as lived in Fornication, so as that no humility might be accepted of, nor that their children were Bastards, the contrary being most evident from the actual receiving and embracing several, in several places, upon their professed humility for their so doing; and whereas he excuseth them at London, as men of other Principles; they of London can tell him that I was one of the Assembly at London, where these things were treated of, and well do I remember that I then wrote the agreement, in contradiction to the thoughts of some few that way inclined, as by him is mentioned: If from some reports these things have been suggested to him, (though not likely) why did he not at some time speak of it? and not thus to have as it were sold us into the hands of Scorners: and besides, if it were true, (as nothing is more false) what is it so great an evil now, and thought worthy thus to be published, and no evil at all when he was in fellowship with us? for he never shown the least dislike as (I know) to our Principles in this case. Oh! what will not Envy do? well said the wise Man, Prov. 12.18. There is that speaketh like the piercings of a Sword, but the Tongue of the wise is health.  
We the Congregation, do hereby testify and declare, that neither we with our Brother Caffyn, did after the aforesaid manner Excommunicate any person at any time, nor did we ever hear him, either publicly or privately, teach any such Doctrine.  
Now if R. Haines, (too regardless of God's honour, and the Gospel's credit) shall thus, even to the knowledge of most of you, publish falsehoods, what credit and esteem his bare say, and naked suggestions may justly require, when they shall lie in the balance together with our Testimonies to the contrary, let the judicious judge.  
The next thing in the way considerable is, our proceed at the Quarterly Meeting, where we thought it expedient to offer to our Brethren, the Strangers, the case of (R. H.) his coveting the Patent, that in the mutual consideration thereof we might the better be confirmed what to do, whom we found in like manner dissatisfied, they not knowing how his case might be justified, so as that the truth might be justified, and quitted from reproach: also as touching my calling the laws of men unjust (as he saith there I did) and saying, what have we to do with the Laws of men? whereby (as one much beneath not only Christianity, but even moral civility) he would have the reader to suppose that I am a man (as his Title Page declareth) Acting grand Usurpation in contempt of the good Laws, and Royal Prerogative of his Majesty. In answer thereunto, first let it be observed, that this so confident a Publisher of a matter so criminal, if true in his Sense, was not (as himself saith) at this meeting himself to hear it; he being about thirty or forty miles of; and so this his publication (as to this particular) is only from information, and with no small probability from one then present, who bears much of his envious image, and also out of communion for want of a good conversation.  
How much therefore beneath the actings of men (qualified with but common honesty) he in this case appears, is not hard to conceive; for that he neither considered how probable it was that the informer might be mistaken in his relation (a case very common among men, where nothing of prejudice rules, but much more where 'tis manifest) nor yet considered the great unliklyhood of the truth thereof that might very easily to him appear from the expressions themselves; which supposeth no less than my passing judgement against the Laws of men in general as unjust, which cannot rationally be thought to proceed out of the mouth of the greatest Fifth-Monarch in the world, (much less from him that is a Writur, a Preacher, and a disputer against them; for 'tis not the injustice of the civil Laws of Nations that by them is so much opposed (however not in such a general sense as envy here represents me) as the unworthiness by them supposed in some persons that have to do in the execution of those Laws; however right well do we know, and accordingly have we always declared, that by the justice & equity of the civil Laws, our common Rights, Privilegdes, and properties are preserved from such as are unreasonable; as also our lives secured from the hands of bloodthirsty men: nor since reason will not permit the entertainment of such thoughts may any one think that the Laws of men, in relation to Patents, were generally by me condemned as unjust, for that frequently I have said, and do now again say, that for Persons to have Patents in several cases, as they may be circumstanced, is both legal and reasonable, as many can testify; his frequent therefore representing me an Enemy to Patents (generally) and the King's Prerogative thereabouts, is altogether groundless and unjust.  
Nor is there so much in that Question, what have we to do with the Laws of men? (though that it was ever so spoken I know not) if righteously considered, the outmost thereof being no more then that we, apprehending the Laws of the Gospel, to forbid this his Gospel dishonouring Patent, did not think ourselves concerned in our Congregational affairs with the Laws of Men, if they did allow it: No more surely did Paul judge the Corinthians concerned with the civil Laws of the Country where they lived, and therefore (knowing the Gospel rules would not allow them in the apprehension of wrong and trespasses received in civil things, to do what the civil Laws would allow them to do) said, Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to Law, (that is, with their Brethren) as if it had been said, you may by no means so do, for that you have another Rule from Christ to act by, as you are Members of the Church of Christ: what have you to do with the Laws of Men, thereby to trouble and vex your Brethren withal? yet might not any therefore think (though R. H. think so of me) that Paul was an Enemy to the civil Laws of the Country, nor to the Prerogative of the King, or Governor that made them: but such have been my Doctrine where ever I came, with respect to Christian obligations, To be subject to the higher Powers, and to obey every ordinance of Man for the Lords sake; such also have been my public Reasonings, and private Conferences in divers places, in opposition to that spirit that despiseth Dominion, such hath been my forwardness, not only that Festus his civil Laws should be observed, but that his person also should be honoured, as most noble Festus, though as to matters of Religion, he be found telling Paul, that he is besides himself, yea, and such have been in that case my Principles many years ago published in Print (which is yet visible) subscribed by me and many others, as that I do not suppose the unworthy insinuations of a man thus overmastered with the spirit of Envy, will gain credit among many, if any.  
At this our Meeting, 'tis true, that in answer to a question proposed, some discourse we had touching such as should make opposition against, and condemn the Church, in abeting, and justifying a person that should by such means be the occasion of so much dishonour to the Truth, but that I, by any Usurped Authority or Threats, conjured them to do my will (as he abusively speaks) by me is denied.  
Neither do we the Congeregation know any such thing, nor do we suppose that our Brethren the strangers, if they shall be enquired of can testify any things of that Nature, no nor any thing tending to the contempt of his Majesty's Laws, or Royal Prerogative as by him is suggested.  
Nor is it true that Patents was at this meeting rendered odious (as he would suggest) nor that I could as freely have fellowship with an Idolater, or an unclean person, as with a man that should obtain a Patent, the truth being only, that his Patent in that particular case, thus circumstanced, neither I nor others could bare with, no more than other public transgressions.  
Nor had he reason to say, That I with the advice of my adherents, did all this Meeting enact by Usurped Authority, that none might buy or sell for him: since no more is true of that Nature, save only that (in answer to one enquiring, whether it might be safe for him to be concerned, if desired in some one particular place, to Trade in Buying and Selling that particular Seed for him, who was thus defamed, censored, and evilly spoken of upon that account) some, very few, did declare their present thoughts that it was not; but that there was an agreement of the Assembly, neither I nor others do know, and that he that reported this matter unto R.H. was (in the best sense imaginable) mistaken, is evident by our peaceable communion with his Servants that we well know Trades in Buying, Selling, cleansing, if not also Buying the same Seeds for him; and yet may this be published as a sign that his Brethren (but a while ago, Beloved, and most faithful Brethren) are now like unto the Antichristian Beast: Ah poor piece of Envy!  
The next thing considerable, is that R. H. being formerly by several Friends persuaded to desist his design, and he not being persuaded, was afterwards desired to come to a Church Meeting to treat with our Friends thereabouts, before he did endeavour the accomplishment of his design, the which also being obstinately refused by him, saying, that we had nothing to do to meddle in such matters, and so he prosecuting effectually his design, at a Meeting some time after, we desired him to appear, he accordingly did appear, where, saith he, we excommunicated him as a Sinner, before we had proved him to have Transgressed any known Law. In answer to which, I say, that sure I am, there was some endeavours to convict him of his Sin, and to prove his proceed unwarrantable, but that what we said appeared to him as good evidence or proof, that he was a person so offending; I cannot say, I rather think that the love of Gain, (supposedly great) in conjunction with his malice manifestly great, might blind his eyes: but what is his complaint against us herein, more than the complaints of persons excommunicated very generally elsewhere.  
And whereas he multiplieth many words of Lordly Usurpation and Acts of Tyranny, it may be observed that at this meeting there was also charged against him, his unrighteous dealing with a man about a bargin of Clover, the which then I did and still do believe deserved blame, and in like manner 'twas judged by the friends, two persons only excepted, whom I perceived not without some doubts, in the case, whereupon I condescended, and so that case was omitted; and one of those two persons was he, of whom he abusively speaking in his Book, saith, that he would have a man damned for displeasing his Lord Caffyn, rather than for displeasing the most High: which if it had been true that I was thus Idolised by this friend, then surely he would have pleased me in giving consent with me and others in the case; or if it were true that I were such a Lordly Usurper (as he would suggest) surely than I should some way or other have constrained them (or as he speaks) threatened them into a consent; but while he is thus speaking reproachfully of others, worthy consideration it is, whether himself did not act somewhat like an Usurper, in that he (called there as an offender) would (and it seems is yet greatly offended because he could not) stop my mouth, (who, as 'tis well known, was concerned with the Congregation in the Congregations affairs) so as that I might not speak in the discourse of the matter, till he had first disputed with the brethren; a ready way for seducing Spirits to corrupt assemblies, while their Elders silently stand by, without doing what is their duties to do, even, to defend the flock, if such Usurping motions of transgressors might be gratified; and whereas he, saith, (pag. 5.) that he was not suffered to treat with any of the Congregation, nor they with him by reason of my perpetual interruption, as they if they be honest will testify.  
We the Congregation in the honesty and uprightness of our hearts, do testify that R. H. did at that meeting reason with several of us, and the only thing denied by our brother Caffyn, and yet no more by him then by ourselves, was only that unreasonable Usurping request of him to stop our brother Caffyns mouth as v, he being willing in himself, and we seeing no cause to the contrary, did many times, as well as the rest of the assemblies, offer something to the matter in hand, which he not willing to allow (though it no ways savoured of Lordliness in him desiring it, but rather of Lordliness in him denying it) by that means a deal of obstruction we meet withal.  
As touching our proceed against him, he (the better to render it odious) would have persons believe that I as a New Lord had made new Laws, called by him also a new cheat, namely, that no person may offend the weak brethren in any case, or oppose his Lordship's design upon pain of Excommunication, and further, that when a man shall have a lawful right to do any thing in civil matters, if any weak brethren should say they were offended with it, it may not be suffered. Pag. 20.21. But as one not content thus far to abuse us he further insinuateth, that if the weak brethren should be offended with his Majesty's Crown, etc. It being made of Gold (they being already, saith he, offended with such professors as wear Gold) according to our principle he must submit or be dealt with. Pag. 22. And as if this were not enough to represent him weak indeed, while he thus reproachfully speaks of the weak, he further suggesteth that if a weak brother should cry unto him in a fair for a Ballard, as a fairing, and he should offend him by not answering his request, by our Law, (though in truth it be his own evil imaginations) he saith, thereby he may incur an Excommunication, Pag. 28. Oh how is Wisdom turned into folly, and strength into weakness! and yet thus (I suppose) he thinks the matter of his Book will agree with the Title thereof, New Lords, New Laws, and so having imagined and framed this image by the art of malice, falls on furiously in several Pages fight against it, as a most odious thing, thereby intending that the Reader should understand that we excommunicated him for offending the weak brethren.  In answer to which we the Congregation, with our brother Caffyn, do declare that we never heard of such principles (or practices) till his own Book informed us, and therefore we think that they may very well be called, New Laws indeed; our principles being the same as when he was amongst us, the same with other Churches, yet never such as did allow that persons should be Excommunicated for not parting with their lawful rights upon weak brethren, saying, they are offended with it, or that required persons upon pain of Excommunication to gratify any one's design, or thus to humour the weak brethren offended in any case, as he suggesteth; rather have we believed, and still do, that in such cases the Congregation with her Elders, should endeavour the information of such weak brethren, that they may be more strong, and so no longer offended with the Legal proceed of their brethren, and commonly such endeavours prove effectual; and as we are of no such principles, so neither are we in our deal with him, men of such practices (as he supposeth) for that he was Excommunicated to humour and gratify a company of weak brethren, upon their saying they were offended, we do with all clearness deny. 
Further, in answer, the Reader is to observe, that after his Excommunication there was (according to his desire) a paper sent him, containing the grounds of our proceed against him, the which (had he dealt uprightly) he should have truly stated in his Book, and so have endeavoured an answer thereunto, but to pass it over in silence, without the least making mention of any such Written account from the Church, and yet pretend to give an account of the Churches proceed against him and not only so, but in the mean season to frame a false account of the Churches proceed, with endeavours to father that upon the Church, and so with many swelling words from a vain mind, exclaim against it, is such a practice that is seldom heard of, and surely never found among any but such as want either wisdom or sincerity, or both, what did he think that he being first in his own cause, should meet with none coming after him to search him out?  
Now that the account given by him is a false account, our paper (yet visible, and that since have been read by many) will evidence, (though his silence about this paper may sufficiently Minister suspicion to the Reader of the trueness of his account) in all which paper of ours (considerably Large) those expressions (to wit, weak brethren) so often named by him, is not once named; nor that a party of weak brethren, being offended with his proceed, was by others not so offended, gratified and humoured by casting him out of the Church, once signified; but rather his resolutions (against all Counsel to the contrary) to persist in his Patent design (in conjunction with his unworthy carriage) as a practice savouring of his preferring the gain of this World, before the honour of the Gospel, for that thereby Reproach and Scandal was brought upon the same, whereby the brethren, (that is, the Congregation, being sensible thereof, and not a party only) was offended, and yet are that he should so seek himself, his own profit, as no more to regard the obligations of the Gospel, to avoid such occasions for the profit of others, that they might be saved.  
Though it be also true that we were not satisfied that his coveting this Patent was upon just and lawful grounds, for that nothing (Worthy consideration) can be pleaded (either as great charge, long study, or more than common ingenuity) as might with a good conscience enright him thereunto; and it seems the like judgement was made thereof by Counsel (Learned in the Law) Sir E. T. and Sir H. P. Before the Lord Keeper when the Country appeared at London, in their great dislike and discontent about it, with a paper subscribed by the hands of many, as well persons of quality, as others; where one of the Counsel to evade the cause of this desired Patent, Pleaded (if I mistake not the information) what (saith he) if a man shall devise a new way to thrash his Corn, shall he therefore have a Patent? surely no. However they soon made judgement against it. Nor did we think it a consideration void of Reason, that he a separate, a professor, should seek a Patent in this case of Nonsuch, there being Clover (as a precedent) cleansed after the same manner long before; when as no person out of the profession sought after a Patent, in the case of cleansing Clover upon the account of being the first inventor thereof, though without a precedent; Nor did we think it a vain consideration that he, having an estate considerable, and having besides no small advantage by cleansing this seed, while others cleansed it as well as he, that he should now, as one not content there with endeavour to grasp all into his own hands, thereby opening the mouths of men to judge him and revile him as a covetous person; to the dishonour of Religion; and indeed how he may be cleared (I cannot tell) from censures of that kind, since, for the sake of this wedge of Gold, (circumstanced as aforesaid) he could part with his brethren (greatly beloved) at once, and not only so, but all his Christian privil does respecting communion; and as he parted with, and lost these on the one hand (with who, upon the like account, besides a Worldly-minded man would do?) so on the other hand he purchased infamy to himself, and reproach to the Gospel, and also rendered himself an occasion of stumbling to the Sons of Men, while sometimes upon the road, sometimes in the Markets, and sometimes elsewhere, persons were heard reviling, defaming, and cursing him upon this account: and what, may such a man that shall lose freely so much good, and purchase unavoidably so much evil, and all for that which is but momentary, yet think himself innocent herein? Oh how is it to be lamented!  
The matter then before specified, and thus circumstanced, being had in public consideration, and those wholesome Laws, and Gospel rules, mentioned and given in charge by the Apostle for the prevention of offences, and things of an ill report, being produced, and treated of without offering the least alteration of his mind, he also after an unworthy manner censoring some of his brethren in the face of the Assembly, we thereupon did judge him as one that did transgress the wholesome Laws of the Gospel, and so unfit for, and unworthy of, communion. Even, those wholesome Laws (we mean) that the Saints of old (in order to a Gospel-Honoring conversation) were enjoined to observe; namely, give none offence neither to the Jews nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God, and that not only in Eating and Drinking, but whatsoever we did, we should do all to the Glory of God, and not please ourselves, nor seek our own profit, but the profit of others that might be Saved. 1 Cor. 10. and that, if their be any virtue, if there be any praise, whatsoever things were lovely and of good report, they ought be the thinking on those things. Phil. 4.8. Which counsel of the Apostle, occasioned by that foregoing discourse of his, where he chargeth them not to eat that which was lawful to be eaten, when by their so doing, others were offended, showeth that Christians (in order to their doing all things to the Glory of God) should carefully avoid all occasions of ill reports, and not give offence to any, neither the Church nor the World, which (as cases might be circumstanced) they might do by the performance of things, (otherwise) lawful; provided always that it be construed to such things as are only lawful, and so may be done, and not such things as are matter of duty, and so must be done. The which is readily granted by Richard Haynes himself, saying, Pag. 27. That if his brother (formerly a Jew) being week dares not eat swins Flesh, because once forbidden, and so could not have communion with those that he knew did eat it, rather than to offend such a one, he would eat no meat while the World stood, notwithstanding swins Flesh be lawful in its self to be eaten: so that now that which he hath conceived to be our Judgements about the not offending brethren, is no other but that his own opinion and judgement in the same case of not offending, is come within, even, a hairs breadth of the same; the difference being only (as himself defines it) that the strong should bare the infirmities of the weak, in all such cases as have relation to matters of Religion and Worship, and not in such civil cases as his; now so much as the eating swins Flesh is contrary to the true Religion and Worship of God, in the weak brother's account, more than his coveting this Patent, thereby raking, and grasping in all to himself, to the Gospel's reproach, and offence of the brethren, is contrary to the pure Religion and Worship of God in our account, (which plainly is that a man keep himself unspoted from the World) so much and no more is the difference betwixt us. Surely, either none at all, or now if any there be, let it be shown, at leastwise any requiring such a publication, what, may one weak brother (formerly a Jew) who by reason of his weakness cannot have communion in case swins Flesh be eaten, though the eating thereof be lawful in the sight of God, may such a one (I say) find more favour with R.H. then a whole congregation, that could not have communion with him in case he did prosecute that Patent design.  
Nor is that all which may be wondered at, for as in the case justified by him about the not eating swins Flesh, there is not only a disproportion betwixt a single person offended, and a whole congregation offended; but also that the single persons offence is only injurious unto himself without any such attendance as the dishonour of the Gospel and injury to others, when as the Congregations offence is attended with (as a main thing too in our account) dishonour to the Gospel, and so injury to many others, that by that means may stumble at the Truth.  
And whereas he supposeth injustice and cruelty in our proceed against him, for that he conceives he hath not broken neither the Law of God nor man: doth not R. Haines himself (that hath laid so many grievous complaints against us) now plainly justify us? by saying that he might justly be charged as an offender, and (as in his other initance) publicly to be blamed if obstinate. Pag. 27. (as was his case) and all this for eating swins Flesh, which to do, is neither the transgression of the Law of God nor man; nay, when I inquire whether he doth not now justify us? may I not say that he doth (as it were) more than justify us? because in our proceed against him, we were not satisfied that his Patent might as lawfully be prosecuted, as swins Flesh might lawfully be eaten: but if to that satisfaction we had attained, yet that pen which hath so often and so much abused us, is made, even, in such a case now to justify us. And doth it not then follow that this so great a heat of Spirit flows from something besides and before, the Patent too?  
Moreover, since the eating things offered to Idols, whereby the weak brother is made to transgress in matters of Religion, is in his account a sin, and such a sin too, that deserves public rebuke (as he confesseth, Pag. 27.) is it not as much, if not more deserving rebuke, this his Patent proceed (against all Counsel and advice to the contrary) since not only one person (as he states the case thus blamable) but many persons of the World, is thereby liable to disesteem the true Religion and Worship of God, and so to harden themselves in their self ways of Religion, and so many may come to perish for whom Christ died? and therefore if he did esteem it his lawful right (though one may think it could not be done without some doubts, being circumstanced as aforesaid) should he not have said (and accordingly done) that, rather than thus to dishonour the Gospel, offend the Congregation (and many others) and lose communion and Christian privileges, I will not have such a Patent as long as the World stands? consider in the true fear of God.  
Whereas also he often affirms, that I should say that Patents were of the Devil. My answer is, that therein (as in many other cases) he chargeth me falsely. Secondly, we the Congregation do testify that we never heard our brother Caffyn so to speak. Thirdly, I. H. S. desired to come to London by letter from R. Haines, to be a witness for him, in which letter he seems to speak that I did not only hear brother Caffyn say that Patents were of the Devil, but also that he did declare it at the latter end of his sentence of Excommunication: I. H. S. do hereby declare that I neither heard brother Caffyn so to speak in the latter end of his sentence of Excommunication, nor at any other time, save only that he at some time said, that the evil one put him upon his Patent particularly.  
And whereas he is pleased to call me great Apostle, and to say (in answer to a supposed question. Pag. 43.) that he was wholly ignorant of my great Office and Authority. All may know (if any yet do not know) that I never pretended to any thing of that kind, save only, as one sent to preach the Gospel, but in divers respects beneath, and inferior to those sent out heretofore, as the Apostles of Christ; and so never thought myself to be, nor was thought of others to be, in any other Office, or place of Authority, than those that he again and again appealed unto at the general meeting at London: so that his pointing at my name particularly, must needs flow from a Spirit of malice against me particularly; but to be as short as I can, the Reader is to observe, That  
Whereas he saith, I think myself equal with St. Paul. Pag. 6. that I (with the Congregation) do judge that my displeasure is punishable (without submission) with no less than eternal damnation. Pag. 15. That I do contemn the Authority of all above me. Pag. 18. That 'tis not necessary in my Government to reprove according to the Scripture Rule, that I have in effect Autherity to do all, to wit, accuse, judge and condemn. Pag. 20. That Whoredom, Fornication, or Idolatry, is rather allowed of then this of the Patent. Pag. 21. That if a certain person did not confess her sin to me, she must (according to my principle) be damned eternally. Pag. 44. That I prophesied he should not prosper neither in body nor estate, Pag. 53. That I question the King's Royal prerogative in secular things. Pag. 41.  
All which, I do hereby solemnly protest against as false, and most unworthy accusations, which together with those many before named, and yet is to be named, respecting particular cases yet to be spoken to, (passing over other things of like kind) will make up such measure, as if it were heaped up, pressed down, and running over to the great shame of the accuser, and I could wish that in the issue it might tend to his humiliation, for I do not desire that the Lord may lay it to his charge.  
Further, he chargeth against me partiality, and conniving at sin, etc. And I suppose none may think (considering his so great malice against me) that he hath left unmentioned any thing that either near, or afar of, lately or formerly, he could meet with, all which fairly answered as it respecteth me (which to do, through grace, I nothing doubt of) he may reasonably doubt of ever obtaining his end; for these things now considerable were, (I suppose) partly more than seven Years ago, and in a nother County, and partly (I suppose) about five and six Years ago, and partly more lately, but all of it (a very little excepted) while he was in communion with us; nor can he plead (at leastwise to all) that he was ignorant thereof till now, for in the case of the woman dying under blame, himself tells the Reader, Pag. 44. That 'twas before the difference betwixt us, gathered from a certain discourse between he and I, about which he then signified not the least dislike as I know of, nor at any time since, this publication being my first information; and now with no less aggravation than an infallible mark of Popish infallibility: but as touching the matter, I remember nothing thereof, save only a few words with him in way of some mistrust of her condition, but that I should, for want of her confession to me, that I might forgive her myself, say, that 'twas all one if she did repent of her sin before she died; and so conclude her one that could not enter into the Kingdom, for want of my pardon: my answer is, that I know no such thing as ever spoken by me, nor at any time believed, but rather that a sinner may truly repent before God, and so enter the Kingdom, who yet for want of either opportunity, or capassity of body, may not confess his sin to the offended; neither is it true that the controversy lay between the woman and I, if thereby he mean, the woman and I only, for sever I were acquainted therewith, and her Husband the party that was originally offended, (and in some respects more concerned then ever I was) who is ready to testify the truth thereof.  
And whereas this woman's infirmities, reproved by me and others, consisted in her two much bitterness of Spirit (to the preventing her Husband's will) against her Husband's daughter that came home with a great belly (one never in the profession) who charging it upon a certain person, he readily confessed it, and so married her; whereas (I say) the case was so, he having no other cause (for doubtless if he had, he would even gladly have published it, he concludes the matter, with this question, namely, which of the two, the Mother or the Daughter, I had most kindness for.  
To which question, and what else seemingly may look that way elsewhere; I shall only say, that God Almighty (the alone searcher of hearts) knows both his and mine, and if I should be innocent herein, and in all cases of that kind, (as the Lord knows I am, and ever was, who, should I not be upright herein, would be a swift witness against me) and he should be a man that have been really and foully guilty in cases of that kind, and now become an Enemy to him that has told him the truth; how dreadfully, presumptuously, and daringly, doth he thereby Treasure up Sin and Wrath, against the day of Wrath, unless timely and greatly he doth repent?  
And whereas he endeavours to render me partial in my proceed against a man and his wife, whom he would suppose to be my Favourite, because my kinswoman, of whom he speaking, Pag. 11. saith, that there was a necessity of marrying her to some body, as if she were with Child by some one besides her espoused Husband. The case was thus, to wit, that these persons being engaged one to the other, did, before public marriage according to Law, accompany together, the which when they had done, being under trouble of conscience (as was declared) did voluntarily tell the same to a certain friend, from whom I had the Relation, and so did immediately take an opportunity to treat with them about their transgression, and finding them in a humble fram, considered with their voluntary acknowledgement, did proceed no further as to any public rebuke; yet not so satisfied as to permit either of them to communion, neither have they unto this day: in process of time some imaginations did arise, and at last a discovery of the unlawful fact, as that the Gospel thereby was liable to be evil spoken of, whereupon we at a public firstdays-meeting before the Church (and others) bore our testimony against their ungodly proceed, without the least show of favour to one more than another.  
The truth of which we the Congregation do testify. And further say, that we never heard before (the fruit of malice discovered it) the least word drop from any of our brother Caffyns favouring his kinswomen in that particular.  
As touching the person that did Beat and (as he saith) Curse his tired Horse, from the relation of which, he further argues partiality in me; the Reader is to observe, that when I understood there was such a report of this person, and that he did deny what was reported, I nevertheless did (with another Friend, and two more sober persons, not in fellowship with us) go to the place where 'twas reported that such words of Cursing was spoken, and went from house to house treating with those that were concerned in the report, and finding them partly to differ in their testimony, and partly mistaken, as in the case of his Riding by the Reporters house after such a manner as was described, when as it appeared that he came by the house on Foot, driving his Horse before him, having also the testimony of one that Rod along the Road with him, not very far from him, when the Reporters say he spoke those words, who testifieth that he heard him speak no such thing: so likewise saith some others, who were nigher them than the Reporters, having also a paper subscribed by several of his neihgburs, that under the greatest provocations, they never heard him to Curse nor Swear. We (I say) finding the case after this manner, though it were true, that two or more did testify they heard him speak such words, which he did positively deny, we knew not, neither yet do we understand that 'twas our duty to condemn him as a Transgressor in the case of Cursing, upon their bare testimony, in contradiction to his denial, and the circumstances aforesaid: though as to beating his Horse too furiously and intemperately, (yet with nothing but a common flash) we did judge him worthy of blame, which he also readily confessed, neither may R. H. think it strange that we receive not the testimony of these persons, while we blamed him (as yet we do) for not dealing righteously with a poor man about a bargin of Clover, he being accused by one single witness in the same capacity; because our blaming him respects his own account and confession of the matter, and not a contrary account from the party concerned, which must have been true to have rendered his charge against me just and reasonable.  
And whereas R. H. further declareth this person's unworthiness, (I suppose more than seven years ago) in smiting his Apprentice with his Fist, he being one that was in the Profession, and consequently that I was guilty of partiality, in reproveing the same but gently and sparingly: The Truth is, that at our Meeting, with respect to this persons Transgression, after due blame laid upon him, and his ready acknowledgement of the same, he was required to go to the people, where in his passion, this evil was acted, and there to confess his sin before the people, the which accordingly he did, as may be proved, whether therefore this may evidence my partiality, or his malignity, let the Reader judge.  
Further as to this person R. H. saith, That in his apprehensions he serveth two Gods, to wit, me as one, and his belly as another God. From which person, (I being not at all concerned in the case) take this acount, namely, whereas such and so great Idolatry is suggested against me, because that I did for some time forbore eating and drinking with him, and yet nevertheless at a certain time did in his Chamber eat and drink with him, and said that I could do so again, and since have refused to eat and drink with him, from whence I am published to be guilty of so great Idolatry, p. 11. these are to let the Reader understand, that my eating and drinking with him at that certain time, though true in the same Chamber, was no more (at leastwise in my judgement) then what might consist both with my former and latter practices; for as he called for something for himself, I also called for something for myself, and after a distinct manner, eat the same by myself, though at the same Table; which measure of distinction (however others might do in such a case) I thought to agree with my Principles, and therefore said, I could do it again; how then righteously it could be said, that I thereby did Idolise Brother Caffyn, I verily know not; since what I did, was with respect to Religion, as himself in his own Relation confesseth, I pretended for my so refusing to accompany with him, but then how I should, either justly or reasonably be thought by him to serve my Belly as another God, I neither can understand, unless by concluding that in eating with him (as aforesaid) to please and satisfy my Belly, thereby I did what I was persuaded really and Religiously I ought not to do, which if so he thought, then doth he at once destroy the only foundation laid to bare up his other argument to prove that I did Idolise brother Caffyn as another God, to wit, that I did sorbare eating with him to please my Idol Caffyn. Alas, the darkness! Alas, the envy of this poor man! again, how it should be thought that I (or any) should forbore eating and drinking with persons Excommunicated to please brother Caffyn (which supposeth him displeased, if not) I reasonably cannot think, because 'tis manifest (too evidently to be denied) that several friends are not (nor ever were) convinced that 'twas their duties to abstain from eating with such, who nevertheless are his wellbeloved brethren.  
As touching another person whom he represents as one covetous and deceitful, for that he, having some-estate, and a good Trade, nevertheless covets another, and to maintain the same, bound himself as an Apprentice to a person at some distance. The true Relation whereof (according to my best information) is thus, namely, that this person having served an Apprenticeship with a Master that was a Tailor by Trade, and also sold Cloth and other things (very common to persons of that Trade) he in process of time, when Trading for himself as a Tailor, did also sell Cloth with other commodities, during which time, he came to obey the Gospel, keeping forth his Trade as before, with whom R. H. as well as we had communion several Years, without the least dislike shown on his part, as ever I heard; and afterwards when he had a Trial at the Assizes about his selling Cloth, etc.  
He was (serving such a Master as aforesaid, who was present to bare his Testimoney thereunto) he was (I say) justified by Law, without the least plea from, or advantage by, his being an Apprentice, which through some fear he submitted unto.  
Further, R. H. to prove another of his brethren an Idolater, and that he was more ready to do the will of his new Lord, than the will of him in Heaven, he saith, that while he was forward (with others) to Excommunicate him for a pretended sin against his new Lord, he was backward or neglected his duty towards God, in way of reproving him in another case according to what he thought his sin deserved. To which I say, that unless he had first proved that this persons not bareing with him, and so concuring with the Church, in their proceed against him, had been because he had sinned against me, his New Lord, as he is pleased to speak, Pag. 14. and not in conscience of his duty towards God, not only without good, but also without show of Reason; and so I return it back to his shame: it being well known that this person was so far from censuring R. H. to please me, as that he was, and yet is, convinced that his coveting this Patent was not only a sin against God, as many believe it, but in some respect a sin wherein others do not so understand it; and as touching this persons presenting R. H. his sin in another case after that manner in the meeting, which for some time before was acted, and had not been publicly reproved, the account from the said person is, that though it be true, sometimes he was made to doubt, by Reason of his smooth words, whether it might deserve such reproof or no, though at some other times again satisfied that it did, yet that he did readily confess his sin therein, and not only to him but also at the meeting at London, where R. H. did accuse him for it, before all the friends then present, he did confess his fault therein, as I suppose many do well remember, and as I do well remember: what should be the occasion of its now publication I cannot interpret, unless his continued wrath which worketh not the righteousness of God.  
Further R. H. Pag. 15. To prove another of his brethren to be an Idolater, tells the Reader that he at a certain time should say, that he could as freely Steal a Horse as to have a Patent. From whence he proceeds thus, saying, I pray Sirs observe how great zeal appears in this deluded person for the observation of the new Laws of this his new Lord, for rather than to sin against his commands, he had rather sin against the commands of the most high God. And thereupon concludingly speaks that I must needs be their Idol, and so calls upon all that are not seduced to judge in this matter. Alas, poor man! will he judge all men are seduced that doth not see the weight of Truth and Reason, which (by this general appeal) he supposeth attends him in this his arguing? may it not be thought rather that among even the seduced, in many points, and much more among them that are not seduced, that unless he had first proved that this persons zeal against his Patent had been to please me (called by him, his New Lord) and not out of conscience to God, may it not (I say) rather be thought, that judgement may be given against him, as one Reasoning without Reason?  
But while he thus, either for the want of the Use of Reason, or uprightness, pleads, and all this too from the report of another disorderly person, the person concerned saith, that his words were only that he thought he could as freely have fellowship with him that had stolen a Horse, as with him that should have such a Patent, for that in his account 'twas covetousness: and so a transgression of God's Royal Law as stealing was.  
And whereas he Further represents me as an actor of Usurpation, because sometimes I have signified my fears, that while persons are intent upon, and deeply exercising their understandings about matters of civil controversies, they may (and sometimes do) forget their Christian obligations, and so misbehave themselves, as also because of the reproaches that probably may come by the discontented parties; he might as well have known (however others do) that I have not usurpingly withstood such undertake, for that several amongst us have concerned themselves in making peace between their Neighbours. Where then is this New Law of Usurpation which he speaks of? Pag. 8. Doth a man's fears and so his particular dislike make it a Law? surely no. Much less an Act of Usurpation deserving such a publication. But this only more shall I say to it, that while he so much pleads for making peace between men, himself is become an enemy to the peace of them that very lately he esteemed most faithful and beloved brethren.  
But saith he also, I reproved him for keeping company with great Persons. What, would he hereby, while himself insinuates into their favour, endeavour to cast me out of their favour, that so he might the better accomplish his malicious design? Alas, poor man! I would have him know that in simplicity and humility to stay upon God, is a more surer refuge, and Rock of defence, then by sinful subtlety to comply with, and put confidence in the Arm of Flesh. True it is, that I having some fear that he might among some persons of note, take that liberty which would neither be Honourable to the Truth, nor conducable to the good of those he associated with, did cautionally, but not censuringly, drop a few words of that import, yet is it no other than what occasionally many do without gainsaying: but the better to effect an evil eye in them against me, he (as one little questioning whether their prudence would lead them to comply with his reasonless distracted thoughts of malice) further imagineth, and so declareth that I had some great antipathy against such Men; and, as an agravation of my supposed transgression in those cautionary words, he tells the Reader, that those persons of Quality that he associated with, were such as I well knew to be sober men of good report, and Favourites to that which is good.  
To which I say, that if I conjecture aright, whom he means (of which I do not much doubt) than I must confess that I have no reason to gainsay him therein, nor have I any Reason to think, that he doth not associate with some other persons of whom those things cannot so well be spoken. Yet again have I no Reason to think that among any of them, such a Spirit of malice against professors rules, that leads them to do, not only what he thinks may be done, but what he believes is his duty to do; the which (if I mistake him not) his words do employ, which are these, Pag. 37.  I must tell you that according to what is Further my duty I am resolved to prosecute what I have undertaken against him; as though I never knew him, but as an Usurping Tyrant; and further, saith he, Pag. 29. Suppose the worst imaginable, to wit, that the civil Magistrate for contempt of Authority, should cause him to be punished, can he complain of them, or be offended with me, considering what himself hath done infinitely beyond it? what? shall I punish a Man with eternal torments for doing that which is no transgression of any known Law, and cry out by reason of so little pain, as may be over in a quarter of an hour? 
Now, whether he doth not by all this, intimate a compliancy of his Spirit, that I should be prosecuted against, even, unto death temporal, who have (as he suggesteth, if any one would believe him) punished him with eternal torments, (though in truth the end of our punishing him by the censure of the Church is to preserve him from punishment eternal) now whether (I say) by all this he do not intimate such a thing, I leave to be considered; in conjunction with his Dream, which (were it Divine) signifieth no less than that he that used to stand at the upper end of the Table, and perform his Devotion (called by him, in way of reproach, unjust Judge or false Apostle) was lost and could no where be found. Pag. 51. To which I shall only say, he that hath a Dream, let him tell his Dream, and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully, what is the chaff to the Wheat saith the Lord?  
And whereas he seemeth to render me as one faulty, Pag. 9 For that I did not accept of an Offenders confessing of his offence, for that 'twas not from the heart, I pretending (as he saith) to know the heart. My answer is, that from what appeared, and doth yet appear, I with the Congregation were, and yet are, dissatisfied with that person in respect of communion: nor is that true touching this persons committing, 〈◊〉 in my conceit many Years ago, the which as 'twas a sin against God I could bare with, but when he had sinned against myself, than I could not: For that 'twas no more in my understanding, save only suspicion of sin from report, and that not several Years ago neither (as he saith) but some late report that lead me, but no Further then into private enquiry; without the least discovery on my part to the infamy of either of the persons concerned. 'Tis true that some endeavours on my part have been to make discovery of sinners (for which it may be feared that some hate me,) but none of the Godly and Truly gracious Souls; but I consider that to lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, is no more than what the more worthy Prophets of the Lord have meet with, Isa. 29.21. But yet as to the creeping into a House and standing behind a wall, to hear the discourse of some persons thereby to make discovery of sinners, the Reader may observe that (passing by the mistake of the Relation) what thereof is true concerning me, is no more than what the same disorderly person, now abeting this man, (and the reporter thereof) did (before the discovery of his now transgressions) speak in way of justification thereof, as J. E. doth testify being an ear witness. And whereas the Relation supposeth some fear and mistrust of one of these persons, 'tis to be observed that accordingly in time it did appear, that is, some uncivil behaviour, for which cause the person was kept out of communion some Years: and also observable it is, that the matter concerning which the Reflection is, was about six Years ago, since which time both Richard Haines and the other disorderly person, and the now reporter thereof, have had long communion with the Congregation; and yet is it far more evident that a malicious Spirit is the now Author of this Relation; for that long ago the reporter was told in the Congregation (as also before) when there the case was proposed by him, that such a practice as he spoke of then (and as is now printed) was not justified nor allowed of neither by me, nor any other; The truth of which, we the Congregation can testify.  
Moreover, he declareth that he had beforenamed that I did (to evidence that self interest could 〈…〉 induce me thus to appear against him, but rather t●●●●prehension of my duty towards God) makes mention of his respects considerably large towards me; and thereupon doth (in a way much beneath Christianity, if I may not say common humanity) reflectingly say these words. Pag. 35. To wit, that he did always 〈◊〉 his contributions to one of the Deacons to be disposed thereof according to 〈◊〉 discretion; and whether Bell devoured all, and the poor eat none, and the Idol ignorant (till of late) from whence he had his belly full I know not. To which we the persons (S. L. D. P.) receiving his contributions in in order to the disposing thereof, do hereby testify that as 'tis true we received some thing from him, so also 'tis true that according to his direction, the same was faithfully disposed of, that is to say, partly to the poor, and partly to our brother Caffyn, without the least show given for this Reflection.  
Nor had he cause to Reflect ingratitude upon me for that I could, I suppose, show him the very place where it was signified, but had there been somewhat really worthy of reproof, the Reader may easily conclude that the time, which his contributions now spoken of respects, was while he was in fellowship with us; which if so, what may be the Reason of these public reflections now, and not the least suspicion then signified, I cannot conceive, unless to gratify the Spirit of malice, and vain glory that doth as it were hereby, blow a Trumpet of what formerly he hath done.  
And whereas he also Further suggesteth to the Reader, that I hold an error concerning the Lord Jesus, and that Mr. M. had Wrot something against it; the Reader is to understand that the Title of the Book is but partly represented by Richard Haines, to wit, a cure for the Cankering error.  
Which being 〈…〉 presented is, a Cure for the Cankering error of the New Eutychians, which error at no time was, nor yet is by me believed, nor do I, as concerning the Lord Jesus, nor any other point of Faith, or religious Worship, 〈…〉 then the very same 〈◊〉 was believeed 〈…〉 ●●●fessed when he for many Years 〈…〉 And if by his saying, that I deny that Jesus Christ took his Flesh of the Virgin Mary, he means, that the Redemption of Mankind is no more precious than the Death, and Bloodsheding of a body of Flesh, in the fallen Estate, under Condemnation for Original sin, and that was in the beginning of the Earth, as the first Man Adam was, then do I readily declare my dissent thereunto, and so will (in some respect) the Author of that Book, (Mr. M.) and most others.  
But this I consent unto, and verily believe, that the true Messiah, whom the Father hath sealed to be the Blessed Saviour of the World, was conceived in the Virgin Mary, and there took our Nature, and our Form, and so was in all points like unto his Brethren, sin excepted; the Son of Abraham, the Son of David, confessed to be, while the first Man was of the Earth, Earthey, the second Man the Lord from Heaven, 1. Cor. 15.47.  
Finally, as it is true that there is many more great swelling words of Vanity, proceeding from his troubled Spirit, unanswered, as if I were a friend to Popish infallibility, and had an unlimited power, and admirable greatness, and that knowingly, purposedly, and designedly I told a lie, without making any mention wherein, together with many other things unworthily, and untruly charged, too large here to repeat, nor do I see material cause obliging me thereunto; there being such a cloud of Witnesses 〈◊〉 his more than ordinary envy, his malicious insinuations, his bitter expressions, his false accusatival 〈◊〉 ●is manifold reproaches cast upon me (and 〈…〉 ●ot long since were judged by him (as his 〈…〉, Pag. 2.) most faithful most worthy 〈…〉 with a discovery of 〈…〉 regardlesness 〈…〉 Honour, the 〈…〉 credit 〈…〉 good of Souls, by this his publication 〈…〉 feared that 〈◊〉 is as 〈…〉 by 〈…〉 seems to 〈…〉 if 〈…〉 you my 〈…〉, then let me beg of you the●● 〈…〉,  
First, That you all in God's fear, whose judgements are made manifest, take heed of rejecting or slitting the admonition of God's people, as this poor man to his great injury hath done.  
Secondly, That you do, in the sense of the great danger, and deplorable condition he seems to be in, pray for him, that God may not lay all these things to his charge, so as hereafter to suffer the due desert of the same.