A VINDICATION OF THE MAGISTRATES And Ministers of the City of GLOUCESTER, From the Calumnies of Mr. Robert Bacon, in his Printed Relation of his usage there; which he entitles, The Spirit of Prelacy yet working, Or Truth from under a Cloud.  
Together with ten Questions discussed, which tend to the discovery of Close Antinomianism.  
By JOHN CORBET Minister, and Chaplain to Major General massy.  Prov. 18. 17. 
He that is first in his own Cause seemeth just: but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him.  
Published by Authority.  
LONDON: Printed for Robert Bostock dwelling at the Sign of the King's Head in Paul's Churchyard. 1646.   

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE WILLIAM, LORD VISCOUNT SAY and SEAL.  
My Lord,  
I Find myself, with many others, represented to Your Honour's view in as odious Colours as Malice itself could deblazon, in Mr. Bacon's Printed Relation of his usage in Gloucester. Whereupon I conceive myself bound to maintain my integrity both in respect of my person as a Christian, and of my calling as a Minister. I have therefore published this Vindication, which 〈◊〉 present to Your Lordship, beseeching You to receive it as an humble yet necessary address to Your Lordship's Justice. Had I declined this Appeal, I might either be thought guilty, or to derogate from Your equity and impartiality. But I know that Your great and Noble Spirit highly disdains the patronage of the least falsehood, and will condescend to a Vindication of the Truth from what ever hand it comes. Let your Honour be pleased to conceive of me, as one who desires and should joy in your favourable opinion. My prayer is, that according to Your renowned Piety your Name may be precious and Honourable, for promoving a blessed Reformation, and the fixed Ordinances of Jesus Christ: and for this the Souls of the people of God shall bless You.  
Your Honours humbly devoted Servant in the Gospel of Christ, JOHN CORBET.   

TO THE RIGHT WORSHIPFUL the Mayor and Aldermen of the City of GLOUCESTER.  
Gentlemen,  
I Am constrained to publish an Answer to Mr. Bacon's Relation, wherein both you, and the Ministers of your City with divers others, are vehemently traduced. It troubles me that Gloucester should come in question or be spoken of in such a slender business; yet since it is made public I cannot neglect it. Besides, greater Events do take their first Rise from small beginnings: And I know not what influence that vain Relation may have on the public, if it pass uncontrolled. Unto you therefore I tender this Vindication, and cast myself upon your Censure where these things were acted. I value my Reputation with you, and I trust shall still behold my native place with comfort, and the manifestation of a good Conscience, which I can never hope to do if mine integrity fail me. The Lord make you valiant for his Truth, and according to your power to avenge the Quarrel of His Covenant, and to contend for the Faith which was once given to the Saints.  
Your Servant in the Gospel of Christ, John Corbet.   

THe present times do seem to groan under the multitude of Books, which are thrust out into the world by a General opinion of self-sufficiency. Insomuch that the unskilful Reader is quite oppressed, and instead of making progress in the way of solid truth, sits down amazed: Wherefore I should easily resolve never to divert the very loser thoughts of men, by any object cast before them, which according to Solomon's expression, doth neither help to abate the number of that which is wanting, nor to make straight that which is crooked; i. e. neither to make up the defects of the state of knowledge, nor to cure its distempers. And for this cause I much bewail my unhappiness, that I am forced to the public view in a business in itself mean and slender, but now to be undertaken of pure necessity. Which I speak not to detract from the value of the least material circumstance appertaining to Religion: but all inferior passages are not worthy to trouble the world with a large declaration of circumstances. Besides points of high concernment were then slenderly handled in a subitaneous dispute. The reading of this Reply I challenge as a due from them that are acquainted with, have heard of, or are any way interessed in this Contestation, that the truth may be cleared. But for them that are strangers, or have their judgements equally poised, if they will be so courteous as to behold, they may judge where the spirit of bitterness, and calumny doth lie under the insinuations of a sweet spirit of meekness. Let none expect things of an higher nature than the matter itself will reach. And for my Reply, 'tis the labour of six days without the advantage of my Papers, and the help of others engaged with me, when the Relation hath been written well nigh two years since. Let this be accepted from one whose hearts desire is for the glory of Zion in the Church's Reformation according to the genuine, not the constrained and racked sense of the Nationall Covenant.   

The sum and substance of that whole business, which is styled by Mr. Bacon, That great and public contestation had in Gloucester, July 1644.  
MR. Bacon arriving at Gloucester as a mere stranger (whether upon a call to supply the room of an absent Minister himself knows it matters not) was permitted, & by myself once requested to preach there. His first Sermon in public was upon the Monthly Fast before the greatest, if not the only Congregation in the City that day. Divers Ministers then present were much troubled not only at particular Doctrines delivered, but at the whole frame of his Prayer and Sermon, as being no way suitable to a solemn Humiliation. The Magistrates and religious persons of a better understanding and temper, took the like offence Sine Ira, & odio, for they knew him not, nor his former conversation. After this, he preached other Sermons, to supply the absence of Mr Hart; the drift of which Sermons shall be declared in the examination of particulars. The serious people had thoughts of heart concerning this thing, others discoursed, and the whole City was quickly filled with this business. The Magistrates were as much troubled as the Ministers, and that chief upon their own judgement, not others information. The Mayor stopped the course of his preaching (as himself relates) which restraint was taken off by the Governor for a further trial. The general offence was heightened. Whereupon it was moved among the Magistrates, that he should departed the City: but this motion was again let fall, and 'twas ordered that he should come to a dispute or Conference in the Governor's Chamber the next Lord's day after the Evening Exercise. The Mayor, Governor, Committee, and many principal Citizens together with the Ministers met at the time and place appointed. The result of our Conference was to be penned, that there might be no shifting on either party. And because Mr. Bacon's preaching was full of affected ambiguity, we desired in the first place to propose certain Questions concerning fundamental Doctrine, and those only upon which his preaching did immediately reflect. And though he pleaded this dealing to be the way of the High Commission Court, yet the Equity thereof shall be made good. For the debate of these Questions, Mr. Bacon was allowed about three day's preparation: But he instead of accepting the Dispute, brought in at large his own stating of the Questions, and his Judgement upon them. And when the Errors and impertinencies thereof were clearly argued, he utterly disclaimed all dispute, referring us to his Paper, and requiring our Answer in writing, in which way there could be no end of the Controversy. Yet he received from myself an Answer in writing. Nevertheless his own party made great outcries of palpable injury in the manage of the Conference. Whereupon for a general satisfaction a public Disputation was had in the College between Mr. Bacon and myself. Which being ended, the same day the Committee desiring the Ministers to be present, drew up an Order enjoining him to quit the Town. This Order was disobeyed: whereupon a second was drawn up more vehement than the former, but that also slighted, in pursuance whereof the Governor commanded a small party of horse to be his Convoy through places of danger to other quarters of the Parliament, and from these he received civil usage according to his own testimony. This is the truth of his remarkable Story, which he brought forth in so large a Declaration, professing that this Argument might have swollen into a greater Volume, but that there is no end of Disputes.   

An Examination of the particulars in Mr. Bacon's Relation of his usage in Gloucester.  
Wherein if many trivial circumstances shall nauseat the serious Reader, let him take notice that I am bound to follow an extravagant Adversary step by step: And for my faithfulness herein, first let him look back upon my Appeals. Secondly, that these things were acted before many witnesses, to whom I am well known, and with whom I value my Repute. Tbirdly, I am assured of the concurrence of godly Ministers; but am now constrained to appear alone, because haste is my greatest advantage.  
I Cannot pass by the frontispiece without observation, which would raise the thoughts of the Reader to expect some great and admirable discovery. And what is it? The spirit of Prelacy yet working, or truth from under a cloud. What an incongruous beginning yet proportionable to the rest! If the latter part of the Title be an explanation of the former, as such connexion's would import; then the spirit of Prelacy yet working is Truth from under a Cloud. What then is entitled unto this great mystery. A Relation of that great and public Contestation had in Gloucester. July 1644. Certainly this Relater will abate nothing of his value. Such Titles are fit for some general meeting of eminent persons, a dispute before the representative Body of a Kingdom, or some famous result and notable periods of the debates of a Nationall Assembly. Besides 'tis called that great Contestation, as if the whole Kingdom either did or were bound to take notice of it.  
In the intimation to the Reader what greater advantage could I wish, Quam quod accusatori maxime optandum consitentem reum. He doth freely confess, that nothing was done in this matter, but in the eye of Authority, and by their order. Let it be considered that this Authority was the joint consent of the Civil and Military Government of Gloucester, a place famous for its fidelity to the Kingdoms Cause in the greatest strait, that the Parliament was as yet ever cast into since the beginning of the War, a place which was a refuge and Sanctuary to godly Ministers and people in their distress, which they that were refreshed will at this day acknowledge.  
He desires to give an Experiment of the seasonableness of Mr. Colemans' caution to the Parliament, that the Clergy (ut vocant) may not carry on their own self designs, that is in plain English, to hinder the settling of Church-Government. It is well known that they who retard or hinder the Reformation, must needs drive on self designs.  
He speaks also of my Reply, and a rejoinder made by himself at that time. In this point I accuse him of palpable injury in publishing his own stating of the Questions, and concealing my Reply, which was not only given in to him in private, but was read at the public Disputation. Thus hath he prevaricated in a main part of his Relation. Then such partiality what can be more unworthy of an ingenuous Adversary? As for his rejoinder, I never saw it, nor remember that I heard of it. What is this more than to think a rejoinder, yea a mere nothing? For, de non entibus & non apparentibus eadem est ratio.  

Of the Relation itself.  
IT is said, that an offence was taken, but none given at a Sermon preached by him on the public Fast day. Ans. An offence may be given, and justly taken not only at things unlawful, but at things unexpedient. As for this particular case, the whole frame of the Prayer and Sermon was no way fit for a public Fast, Confession of sin almost wholly omitted, the work of Humiliation disparaged, the Doctrine of Repentance, and Contrition or brokenness of heart, as it is taught by our Ministers of the good old way of the Non Conformists, was condemned for Popery, although through many circumlocutions, mazes, and ambiguous terms. An instance was given in an Allegory taken out of the Crumbs of Comfort, called A Remedy for a sinsick Soul, and is inserted in the close of his Relation, which he hath termed a ridiculous and soulkilling Medicine. This Medicine was composed by an eminent Divine, and though it may be questioned whether it be sightly so to allegorise, yet it follows not that 'tis either ridiculous or soulkilling: and being devested of its party coloured coat to appear in proper and plain terms, it will be found to carry no disproportion to the Analogy of Faith; Though he calls it rather the language of Rome then Canaan. But this was not that spark which was blown up into so great flame, but was only an instance selected by him on purpose, because most easy as he conceived to be made odious. Neither was the Fast-Exercise the sole ground of the Controversy, but each Sermon increased the fire.  
The first Charge is given in against Mr. Martial, Mr. Holford, and myself for soliciting the Mayor to suspend his preaching. As for Mr Martial whether he did so I know not, neither doth it much concern the business, but I must tell the world, that Mr. Bacon hath traduced this able, painful, and godly Minister with a gross untruth, that he lived and preached among the Cavaliers. For he hath lived within three miles of Gloucester for many years before the War, and never removed from his own Charge, and whereas he had sometimes a weekly Lecture at Berkly, he discontinued it when that place was possessed by the King's Forces. For myself I remember not that I made known any grievance to the Mayor concerning him, before he was publicly questioned: but I know assuredly that I never solicited that he might be suspended, neither did I move one syllable against his second liberty of preaching obtained from the Governor, as I might easily have done. Besides, the Mayor sent for me to the Town Chamber at several times complaining of this Man. And once meeting Mr. Bacon in the Tolsey I appealed to the Mayor, and others present, whether I had been his accuser. Mr. Holford is accused of labouring to keep in with both sides. This is one man's report; but thus much I can say for my Brother in the Ministry, that he was an open, and earnest opposer of Sectaries, and 'tis hard for me to conceive (let others judge) that a knowing man should seek reputation or advantage by underhand dealing, or comply with that party, whose spirits were embittered against him.  
His restraint being taken off, and he applying himself to clear the Doctrine of Repentance (though indeed he muzzled the truth thereof) he tells us, that one Wheeler set himself to take Notes of his Prayer and Sermon to stir up adversaries by giving information, which we are said to receive with all readiness. What a remarkable and worthy passage, as if we had need of Spies to pry into that which was delivered before so many witnesses: or that one man's information were the ground of all the following trouble, which was raised by a general complaint. But Mr. Wheeler professeth that he was once resolved not to hear him, having been at Gloucester for the space of three weeks before, but was persuaded thereto by the urgent importunity of many of Mr. Bacon's followers: and he upon whose report this aspersion was grounded, hath since acknowledged before witness, that he had done Mr. Wheeler wrong. And the Sermon Notes, which were read at the first Conference Mr. Bacon acknowledged to be true. As for the Minister's readiness to receive information, we acknowledge that we undervalved the business too much, and were blame-worthy in neglecting the truth and ourselves.  
He imputes to Mr. Holford, Mr. Hodges and myself the cause of his summons to the Covernors' Chamber on the Lord's day. Whereas it was concluded the day before by the Magistrates, when they had once thoughts of sending him out of Town without more ado. And of this I had not the least intimation, till the meeting was resolved upon, and the report thereof spread about the City, though he saith he never heard of it till the time came. And thus doth a veyn of Calumny run through the whole Relation.  
He observes that he was sent for by a Soldier as a transgressor. What a trivial circumstance, and absurd collection? Is it not well known, that Soldiers under the Command of a principal Officer are like the Centurion's Servants, who said to one come, and he cometh; to an other go, and he goeth; and to a third do this, and he doth it?  
This meeting consisted of men of quality, common fellows were excluded, except some of his own party who were admitted by our consent; among whom a young preaching Pewterer.  
An other Aspersion is cast upon the Minister's behaviour in time of the Conference, That they upbraided him with much unbeseeming and reproachful language, rushing upon him with a torrent of evil words, till that unseemliness was remedied by the Governor's command. This is a mere slander, having nothing of truth, and herein we can appeal to the Governors own testimony. A greater Acrimony might easily manifest itself in a serious Contest, but without bitter invectives; and if some did inveigh against Heretics and Schismatics in general, yet not against his person. Or if a stream of words might flow from divers men, the cause of it was his refusal of a positive Declaration. And if one man at that present had nothing to charge him withal, yet there were many Ministers, and the Controversy did not depend on the Judgement or manifest of one Man. And whereas he speaks of their laying heads together, let him know there were such men as scorned a Combination, who walked not in the dark, and can offer themselves with much boldness to be judged by man's judgement, although he that judgeth us is the Lord.  
But here is the main grievance which he labours to display, That not finding sufficient matter of accusation, we began to examine him upon certain interrogatories: against which he protested, because it favoured so strongly of the illegality of the High Commission Court. Wherefore to justify our proceed, we offer these things to be weighed by the judicious. Mr. Bacon was looked upon in the notions either of an Erroneous, or of an obscure, and ambiguous Preacher, not by reason of his profound; but his wavering and doubtful Doctrine. First, he was considered as ambiguous, and therefore suspected and dangerous. Which appears in that he did always pretend unto something extraordinary, beyond that which the people had been formerly taught, even concerning the substance of fundamental Doctrine: every mindful hearer took it for a new way, especially his own favourers, & then the terms of legal Preachers, and Preachers of Christ began to be rolled upon every tongue. Besides, in the explication of any point, he would heap up an infinity of words passing to and fro in a constrained way, that one might easily believe, Male res agitur ubi opus est tot remediis. There was still an expectation of some great thing carried aloft in the Clouds, which a while after fell down in a plentiful shower of words. And in such a case who can blame the jealousy of a Minister; who must watch over the Flock, as one that must give an account of their souls? Insinuations of Error slide into the minds of people, when the violent approach of corrupt opinions begets horror, and saves them by fear. Secondly, Mr. Bacon was looked upon as an erroneous Preacher: some things are hinted already; and the rest are to be made known, when I come to discuss the Questions. Nevertheless 'tis worthy observing that he was more liberal in private then in public, the mysteries were unvailed, imis penetralibus, because all was not thought fit for a promiscuous, and unprepared Auditory. One instance shall serve, which will be made good by approved testimony if need require. In private he disputed against habitual graces, not in the way of Argumentation, but according to his proper Judgement; but in public such a design must be carried on through a maze of intricate and perplexed words.  
But we are charged in compelling Mr. Bacon to a self accusation, and therein with reviving the abolished tyranny of the High-Commission. To this it is answered, that we did not require him to betray himself, nor to disclose any secret concerning him or his, that might make him obnoxious to any mulct or penalty. And had he refused to Answer, his danger was no more, than the scandal of his Doctrine. We did not assume a liberty of proposing Questions in infinitum, but such only as immediately reflected upon his preaching, whereby we were scandalised; yea and such things as did arise out of his Sermons. And that not so much to know his opinion, as to lay down some groundwork upon which the debate might rest. Moreover, did ever any that were examined by Authority (suppose of the Prelates) in the principles of Faith, account that Examination a Tyranny, or a means to ensnare them? Besides a Minister is bound to declare his judgement in the principal matters of Divine knowledge, if merely desired by his fellow labourers, whensoever they are publicly offended, yea though unjustly. But there is more yet in this case. Mr. Bacon came as a stranger, and though he had the power of a ministerial calling, yet he had neither power, nor call to exercise his ministry against the consent of the Magistrates and Ministers of that place where he sojourned, And it is provided by Order of Parliament in their Instructions to the Committees of some counties, as in Sommersetshire, that every Minister placed by them in any Sequestered living, shall undergo the examination of three Ministers in the same county. Thus much for the first meeting in the Governors' Chamber.  
The Questions were not propounded as we in our wisdoms (according to his phrase) thought meet; but as his preaching and practice did require. A Debate upon them was reserved for Wednesday following, in that place where the Council of War was wont to be held.  
His tedious mention of many idle circumstances, I pass by, as unbeseeming a grave Relation. At the place appointed, Mr. Bacon brought in an Answer in writing to the ten Questions, as himself pleads, according to a former command. But he fails in the truth of the business: For an Answer in writing was not required, but a Verbal dispute; though it was thought meet that the Arguments urged on both sides should be then written, that we might not lose ourselves in a Chaos of words. The reading of his Paper, I undertook of my own accord; for the Governor intended a dispute, and then challenged Mr. Bacon for refusing. I gave off reading in the midst, not (as he saith) because unwilling that the company should hear altogether; but partly, because I was tired with many tedious impertinencies, and longed to make answer; partly, because the bare reading of a large Paper, containing sundry things, could give no satisfaction to the people. Nevertheless I examined his stating of the Questions one by one, by clear argument discovering his errors and nullities, to which he would give no answer, but referred all to his Paper, which was then Refuted. If there were confusion of language, that was caused by his obstinate silence. For who could endure so gross a tergiversation, accompanied with a self-justification to the highest?  
2. Master Bacon here and elsewhere complains of reproachful language from the Minister's. But I must answer him, In generalibus versatur dolosus. Let him give an instance of such Reviling. I can justify myself, neither do I remember any railing accusation that then fe●l from the mouth of a Minister. But if any of them did vehemently charge him with the shame of a self-baffle, shall that be called reproach? Those Ministers are more ingenuous and of better spirits, than this Relater desires to render them. I could not observe, nor remember every passage that fell from those in Authority, or from the standers by. Neither do I justify their threats, if there were any. But his person was no more endangered than ours, whatsoever be may pretend or intimate. As for that Gentleman whom he reports to be of no mean command, though his Military-Office were not in the Garrison, I can say little to his words what they were. He hath been an ancient professor of Religion, and of approved integrity. But if it be said that the people called him Bonner, it must be the greater part, or the better part, or at least a considerable part. But the speech of one Woman, he is pleased to attribute to the people. So greedily doth our opposite catch at every circumstance, though strangely misrepresented. He adds, that besides divers Ministers, one a Cavalier openly jeered him. This is a malicious slander: let him name the persons. That Minister which was taken in arms against the Parliament, had voluntarily taken the Covenant, and thereupon obtained his liberty: but he had no hand in the manage of this business, being a spectator only: and for his open jeering, if it be true, as I question, others could not prevent that incivility.  
In the close of this unwieldy Conflict, a writing was drawn up, That Mr. Bacon had divulged certain erroneous Opinions, in which at a Conference he had given no satisfaction: The Auditors were to Subscribe if they pleased. But he declares, the reason of this Subscription was, to send him up to the Parliament or Assembly the next day. I profess that I knew not of any such thought, and am assured, that the Governor did not intent it; but I conceive that he grounds his assertion upon some wand'ring speeches scattered among the people: But this is the truth of the business; We have had great experience of the vain boastings of Sectaries, who to wound the Reputation of those that encounter them, proclaim a Victory and sing the Triumph, what ever the success be. This was then feared from that Party; to prevent which mischief, a Subscription was then thought upon, and first hinted by a moderate man, no Minister, nor at that time a Magistrate. And to this none were compelled: only, when we had a meeting, for satisfaction, we desired to know the opinion of the Auditors. And of those Six persons that refused to Subscribe, some pretended that they did not hear, others that they were not present at the whole Conference, one or two would give no reason: but none of them did avow to have received any satisfaction.  
That the manner of our proceed were generally complained of (as is related) and accounted neither Christian nor justifiable by the Law of civil Society, is a gross calumny; and herein I appeal to the Inhabitants of that place. What one man, namely, Mr Shepard, might in private acknowledge is nothing to our purpose. Thus much for the second meeting.  
The Mayor with others are said to spend much time in persuading him to departed the City: affirming, if he were the most Orthodox Preacher in England, he were not fit for Gloucester. Thus they speak upon bare supposition. And the consequence drawn from hence is most absurd, namely, that an Orthodox Preacher should be a burden too heavy for Gloucester to bear. If Mr. Bacon supposed to be an Orthodox Preacher, be not fit for such a place, doth it therefore follow that no Orthodox Preacher is fit? Is Mr. Bacon and Orthodox Preacher convertible? Experience witnesseth, that not only Orthodox, but some good men may not be fit for some Congregations. Besides this thing doth assure us of his importunate contradiction, who would stay in a place where he had no interest, when the Magistrate desired his absence, and persuaded his departure upon this ground, that he was not a man fit for Gloucester. But he saith, He feared the desertion of his own or rather Christ's Cause. Answ. Is the Cause of Christ maintained by a troublesome presence in despite of the Magistrate? 'tis enough, that a man makes answer in a free confession and submits to the censure of Authority.  
The Relation proceeds to the public Disputation; for which purpose there was an Order from the Governor directed to the several Ministers to be read in the Pulpit, That if any doubted of the approvednesse of the proceed in the two former meetings, satisfaction should be given in a more public way. This Order I received as I was going into the Pulpit, without the least intimation or thought thereof before, though the Dispute would rest upon me. The Governor was moved hereunto not to terrify Mr. Bacon as he doth imply in the expressions of his great thoughts of heart; But upon the advertizement of false Reports raised by his followers. Here as in many other places a heap of circumstances are brought in being more fit for an idle Romance, than a serious discourse.  
The Governor, and Mr. Bromwitch of the Committee are said to engage themselves to protect him from slander and wrong, which the one heard, and the other saw he formerly sustained. He makes it the sense of the Governor that he had sustained wrong, which is known in Gloucester to be a manifest untruth, and cannot be rationally conceived by any that knew that business.  
He speaks of a Marshal standing at his elbow with a Halberd though he perceived it not, of purpose, if it might be to daunt him. I observed no such thing, standing opposite and likely to behold his attendance: the Governor protests against it; and to stand with a Halberd, is not a Marshal's posture. Besides, it was so much invisible, that Mr. Bacon observed it not, which could not well have been if any had stood there in terrorem. And is it not a childish conceit, that a Minister should be terrified by a Marshal with a Halberd; and an exploded folly to bless God for his assistance that he was not daunted thereby?  
The way of the Dispute in general, was on this manner. I proposed the Questions; Master Bacon affirmed or denied, and read the stating of them: I read my written Reply, thence drawing concise Arguments, to which he made large Declarations. It seems we must give him leave to proclaim and glory that his Adversaries fell before him, to the great contentment and satisfaction of the believing and more sober-minded people. But it had been better that his neighbour's mouth had praised him. Doth he not arrogate very much, that all the believing people should rejoice at his clearing? Let these absurdities confute themselves. He speaks of Discontent that appeared in the faces of his adversaries. Who made him a judge of our thoughts?  
But it is said, Master Corbet confessed before all the people, that it had been better never to have begun such a task; for the people will run after him much more than before. Answ. It's impossible to remember every word that passeth in the heat of disputation. But my complaint, whatever it was, was thus grounded. Master Bacon would dispute neither in a formal Syllogism, nor Enthymeme, nor in any Argumentation trussed up in a Logical way; but ran thorough many Ambages, and seemed to make Speeches with an affected deliberation; and still he craved leave to explain himself: which prolixity spent the time, lost the Argument, and confounded the Hearers.  
He tells us that the evidence of the truth had for the present struck a deep silence in all his opposers. Here is an absolute falsehood: For unto his Answers I still made Reply, till we were taken off, and caused by them that moderated to pass to another Question, according to the Law of Disputation.  
He relates that some were complained of by witnesses to have vowed to be the death of him. Here is an high Charge given in; but to whom the complaint was made, or by what witnesses, or who those were that had so vowed, it is not signified. In this he deals deceitfully, lurking in generals, and maliciously, in leaving doubtful not only the persons, but the conditions of them who should so vow: the world might suspect Magistrates, Commanders, Ministers, and men of quality. I am not now in Gloucester to inquire into this passage: Let it therefore be thought upon, that I stand upon great disadvantage in this Reply, whereas a longer time of examination would display my Antagonist much more; but that I hasten to crush this bird in the shell: yet having no more, than what I know to be firm truth at such a distance both of time and place, I doubt not but to make a sufficient discovery of his many Untruths, to all indifferent judgements. Wherefore I know that men of any value would highly scorn such an Imputation; nor were any incensed or encouraged by us so much as unto violent speeches. And if this were true, doubtless Master Bacon, who hath stuffed his book with so many idle passassages, would not omit to give some character of the persons guilty of so great a crime.  
Thus ended the first days Dispute: The morrow after, we came together to discuss the residue of the Questions. But our Relator gives out that the remaining part of my Reply, i. e. to the five last Questions, contained little else then invectives against his person. Wherein I charge him with a notorious slander. And if my charge be false, 'tis in his power to shame me: For my Reply was delivered in to him, and had now been printed, had my papers been by me.  
Master Bacon had no more discountenance the second day than the first; only he was required to contract his speech according to the law of Argumentation; and even then, he spoke many words for my one.  
But he saith that the Committee being Judge, in their name (as he supposeth) Master Bromwitch drew up the result of each days dispute, and gave the whole Ass mbly notice that nothing was proved against him, but what was according to Orthodox opinion. To this I make answer, That the Governor, the Mayor, and Aldermen, were Judges as well as the Committee, and that Master Bromwitch, as I conceived, did not speak in the name of the Committee, but in his own name, being a quick and a nimble Disputant. Besides, this Gentleman did not take off the charge of Error: but when M star Bacon running to and fro in doubtful terms, came near to our Tenants, he read it to the people, rather to his conviction then clearing; by which all men might take notice of his Vacillation or halting. Whether the Committee did so clear him, I refer the Reader to their second Order for his removal, which is inserted in his Relation in these words.  
We the Gentlemen of the Committee gave out our Order upon a serious Debate, not of ourselves, as according to our Instructions we might have done, but with the ingredients and consult of many godly and learned Ministers by both parties, and emergent Reasons our Votes were concluded, and (in a more civil manner than Master Bacon deserved) were sent unto him: yet, although he hath rather arraigned, then entreated the Committee to alter their Judgements, we are resolved not to alter our commands, as rather engaged to gratify so many Orthodox Divines then his fancy.  
He remarks the word gratify. What greater reproach could he fasten upon the Committee, than thus to insinuate that they did injure him to gratify us?  
But it is said that Master Corbet with all vehemency exclaimed that Master Bacon had another meaning, though his words were justifiable. It is answered, that I did not justify the greatest part of his expressions, though some of them might admit a fair construction. But I complained of the ambiguity of his expressions, which were not fit for Dispute, though they may suit very well with Exhortation. And when a man shall absolutely disclain such terms as are necessary to Disputation, 'tis no fair dealing, nor sign of a good cause or sound Doctrine. To make instance; at that very time he would by no means meddle with the terms of the habits of grace, or inherent holiness, because they were not Scripture-terms.  
That the Ministers got themselves into a committee that afternoon, is utterly false. For they had no meeting among themselves. Wherefore that Master Hart and Master Close were exc●●ded by consent, is as false. As also, that we should resolve among ourselves (as the Relation imports) that he must departed, or we would leave the city, is a gross untruth. We had no such Debate, no such circumstances, no such meeting. But the Ministers were required to attend the Committee of Parliament. And if Master Hart and Master Close were not there, their own unwillingness was the cause of their non-appearance.  
The Committee are able to justify their own Orders, and their manner of proceeding. Threaten, if they were, or whatever they were, were provoked by his obstinate disobedience.  
What a train of egregious stories brings up the rear of his Discourse, of things done upon a Saturday at two a clock in the afternoon, by the Governors' Captain Lieutenant with a party of Troopers, and their discourse with him; with his several Horses; the Captain Lieutenant's leaving him at three mile's distance from the city; his guidance by the Head-corporal; and that Captain massy did not go in his company to Sudely, but came after late in the night, etc. Such strains will help to swell the Volume of a jesting Romance, or Book of Knight-Errantry.  
But I observe that Master Bacon doth not so fairly alight from off that horse that was taken up to convey him to some other of the Parliaments Quarters; nor doth he sufficiently clear himself from that fraud he saith was laid to his charge. This is the truth of the story: Master Bacon disliking the first horse, was furnished with another more able. Himself reports that his guides having brought him to Warwick, told him that they had no order concerning the horse, but that it was at his own disposal. This was either their neglect or dishonesty. And could he think that those Soldiers had power to give another man's horse taken up for that particular service? or did he conceive that the Governor would either defraud the owner, or pay the price that he might be quit his company? But this horse was challenged at London on the behalf of Colonel Okey, at that time in Sir William waller's Army, at the instance of Colonel Okey's friend, by Master Wheeler, who had an interest in that Army: and imported as much to Master Bacon. But he refused to restore it: and being demanded to declare his interest therein, he replied that the horse was at his disposal, and that he had endeavoured to put him off or exchange him at Northampton. Hereupon he was challenged for a felonious detainer, and still urged to give him back, even by the owner's wife, till for mere shame, and the importunity of his own friends, to avoid further scandal, he was compelled to deliver him. This passage at London, is avowed by Master Wheeler in all the circumstances.  
Lastly, he calls God, and the consciences of those that were present, to witness the truth of his Relation. I also can appeal to heaven for the truth of my Answer; wherein my adversary is convicted of so many falsehoods and impertinencies; and am also assured of the Attestation of the Magistrates and the Ministers of Gloucester, which was the Scene of this Action.  
Concerning these ten Questions, let it be considered, first, that they were propounded without any premeditation; and many of them were not expressed in such searching terms, as might prevent all evasions. Secondly, that we condescended to Mr. Bacon in the wording of them, because he would not be gained to declare himself, except he apprehended some advantage. Thirdly, that Master Bacon hath published his stating of them, and that with a plentiful Commentary upon some; but omitted my Answer not only given in private, but debated upon in public. The copy thereof I have not by me; and the necessity of a quick dispatch permits no delay. But the substance thereof is faithfully delivered: if not, my opposite having the Paper put into his hands, may discover it if he please. Fourthly, the Affirmative and Negative affixed, is Master Bacon's Judgement. Let ours be collected in the discuss of each Question.   

Q. 1. Whether the Moral Law be abrogated? Neg. according to Master B.  
IN the terms we agree, but he states the Question by several Aphorisms, that scarce approach the true meaning thereof; which is, whether we are bound to the Moral as a rule of righteousness.  
He saith first, The Moral Law was revealed from heaven of God himself on Mount Sinai, and in that consideration is to be had in high honour and account. This doth not resolve the question.  
2. 'tis a part of the holy Scriptures, and therefore not to be slighted. So is the Cerimoniall Law.  
3. 'tis the image of God, so that by the Law we may see the holiness and righteousness of God. Neither is the doubt here resolved, whether we are bound to observe the Moral Law, as a rule of righteousness.  
4. Christ was shadowed out in the Law. The Ceremonial Law was a shadow of Christ, not the Moral. Secondly, grant this, and the Moral Law hath herein no more privilege than the Cerimoniall.  
5. All the world shall be judged by it. This doth not come to the state of the question; for the Reprobate shall be judged according to the rigour of that law; and the Elect by the same law as fulfilled in Christ. But this satisfies not whether it remains a binding rule of obedience.  
6. Those, that believe in Jesus, walk more freely in the things enjoined by the Law, than they are without Christ. Still from the purpuse. Secondly, those that without Christ do nothing truly and sincerely, which is contained in the Law.  
7. The Law is exceeding useful to take men off from the damnable opinion of their own righteousness. This doth neither declare that a Christian ought to humble his soul by reflecting up the holy Law of an holy and jealous God, nor that he is bound to the Law as a Rule.  
8. The Law in the Hand of a Mediator is a rule of life; for what the Law doth command in the letter, that the law of the spirit of life doth work within, which is therefore called the Law of Faith, or the Law of Christ, or the Law written in the heart. Here he seems to speak something, but all dark and confused. The Law in itself, and not as considered in the hand of a Mediator, is the rule of life: But the Law given in the hand of a Mediator doth show that the exact righteousness thereof is not required unto justification. Secondly, he brings a reason which hath no connexion in these words, For what the Law doth command in the letter without, the law of the spirit doth work within; except he doth mean, because the Gospel enableth, the Law bindeth. Is this to state a Controverted question. Might not an Antinomian grant these positions if he would study to conceal himself?  
Besides, at the Dispute he did reject this Conclusion, viz. That the Law doth bind a Christian to obedience; for, said he, the Gospel doth enable him. Which the understanding hearers remember (I doubt not) that I refuted, by replying, that 'tis the nature of a Law to bind; and where the Law binds not, there is no sin. Have we not reason to suspect unsoundness in this Point? And as there is a distinction made between separation and semi-seperation, so 'tis necessary to distinguish between gross and close Antinomianism.   

Q. 2. Whether good Works be a means to obtain Salvation. Neg. according to Master B.  
HErein we differ. But this question was at first proposed in other terms. Whether good Works may be called a Way to Salvation; which Master Bacon had formerly denied to myself and another Minister, and at the first Conference more publicly disclaimed the distinction of Via ad Regnum, and Causa Regnandi, affirming that Jesus Christ is the only way: Whereas we mean by a way, such a course as God hath appointed them to take, whom he will bring to salvation, without which salvation doth not ensue. As the narrow way in the Gospel, and the undefiled in the way, Psal. 119. And by good works we declared to understand not only the fruits, but the principles of holiness, namely, inherent grace. But to indulge our adversary in an expression, the Question was thus propounded, Whether good Works be a means to obtain Salvation: By which we understand not the only, or the chiefest means; for I then declared in my Paper, that Christ alone by his superabounding merit hath purchased salvation for us; and now further add, that according to his pleasure he dispenseth his grace, and by his power preserveth his people to eternal life. But holiness is so necessary, that if supposing an impossibility, a man might be justified and not sanctified, he could never appear before the face of God in glory.  
But this expression is rejected as unsavoury; whereas a means doth imply no more, than something aptly disposed and designed to a certain end.  
Thus God's Ordinances are a means to obtain salvation. But holiness is absolutely necessary; follow peace with all men, and holiness without which no man shall see the Lord. But the word obtain is most remarked, which is the Scripture phrase, 1 Cor. 9.24. So run that ye may obtain. Consider other places, Phil. 2.12. Work out your salvation with fear and trembling. Phil. 3.14. it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the reward of victory, 2 Cor. 4.17. our light affliction which is but for a moment, worketh out for us a far more exceeding weight of glory. That holiness is a way to salvation is clearly proved out of the Text which Master Bacon urgeth, Ephes. 2.10. We are created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath ordained that we should walk therein: for if we walk in them they are a way; if a way, there must terminus ad quem, the end of our walking, which is salvation.  
But saith he, to affirm that good works are a means to obtain salvation, is to deny Christ the only means. I answer, Christ is the only means meritorious, and the only means principally efficient; but this doth not exclude other means subordinate unto Christ, as the Word and Sacraments, and such things as flow from Christ by inevitable consequence, as good works being ranked in their own place.   

Q. 3. Whether God be displeased with his people that are in Christ for their sins, we mean such a people as are in the Covenant of Grace: Neg. according to Master B.  
HEre we differ in opinion; but this question was at first propounded in other terms, viz. Whether God be displeased with the sins of his people? which Master Bacon affirmed: Whereupon we urged his own Doctrine publicly taught in these words: You know that when we please men, they will be pleased with us, when we offend them, they will be offended with us; they are up and down, but fare be it from us to entertain such thoughts of God; whom he loveth he loveth to the end, he is not as man to be displeased; the Lord help us, that we rather consider, that we are not sinners so much because of the acts of sin, but rather because of the sinfulness of sin: It is true, to the natural man, to our understandings, God is pleased with us this hour and not that hour; but you must come up higher to the knowledge of God, that he is the same to day and for ever. Here he plainly denies the pleasure or displeasure of God for this or or that act; and hereupon he brought forth this subtlety; That God is displeased with the sins of his people, but not with his people for sin; of which people he exacted so much explanation, as that they are in Christ, as if we conceived God's people out of Christ; but this is not enough, he exacts more, viz. we mean such a people as are in the Covenant of grace, as if it were possible to conceive that God's people which are in Christ are out of the Covenant of grace: He states the Question on this wise:  
1 When we affirm that God is displeased or angry, we speak after the manner of men, for God is not subject to passion: Answ. to say that God is angry is spoken after the manner of men; yet dispeasure is no passion, but agrees with God in the highest perfection of his nature; for God is equally perfect in the dislike of sin, as in the love of good.  
2. When we are chastened of the Lord, 'tis a sign of his love, not of his displeasure: Answ. God's love is not opposed to his displeasure, but to hatred: Yea, the more love the more displeasure when we sin against love; This in Parents is the fruit of paternal affection.  
3 'tis most peremptorily to be affirmed, that God hates sin in whomsoever: This is true; but we speak of displeasure not of hatred.  
4 So fare as the children of God live off from Christ, and walk unworthy of the Gospel, so fare they lie under the sense of wrath; insomuch as the Apostle saith, he scourgeth every son whom he loves; it's impossible that a man should have peace in the ways of sin: Answ. Here he contradicts and refutes himself, and runs out beyond our desire: The children of God walking unworthy of the Gospel, do not always in such a case lie under the sense of wrath, which is the apprehension of the guilt of sin binding them to eternal vengeance; & which is as fare distant from the bare apprehension of displeasure, as the spirit of Bondage from the spirit of Adoption: Where the Apostle saith, he scourgeth every son whom he receiveth, he doth not mean the sense of wrath: But he adds, 'tis impossible that a man should have peace in the ways of sin; whence I infer, where there is no peace, and so ought to be no sense of peace, there God's displeasure must needs be apprehended (for when God is not displeased, there is peace in the soul) and if we must apprehend the Lords displeasure, he is really displeased, except we are bound to apprehend a falsehood: Many times the Saints apprehend displeasure when God is pleased, but they are never bound so to do, but when God is actually displeased; therefore it doth necessarily follow, that if there were no peace in the ways of sin, God must needs be displeased with his people for sin.  
5 The fift paragraph is answered in the former.  
6 The sixth is exceeding tedious and confused; the substance thereof I collect and examine: That a natural man looking upon God in the Law, apprehends he pleaseth God so fare as he keeps the Law, and so fare as he comes short of obedience to the Law, so fare he apprehends he despleaseth God: But a spiritual man seeing himself accepted of God in Christ, ought not to conceive that God is up and down with him in his love, for whom he loves he loves to the end. Answ. God's love is opposed to hatred, not to displeasure; the love of our persons and a temporary displeasure conceived against our persons are well consistent, as in the case of paternal affection: Secondly, God is said to be angry with Moses.  
I demand whether Moses, being in the Covenant of grace, was bound to believe God's displeasure upon Gods own manifestation, or whether he did dishonour God by believing, that he was displeased with him (as Master Bacon imports a believer doth in such a case?) That same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 3.17. is the everlasting love of God, abounding to the acceptance our persons and performances, yea the love of complacency, which doth not exclude the particular acts of displeasure, and the way of atonement and redintegration after our falls.  
7 The seventh proves nothing, but that being reconciled, we are saved from wrath, viz. divine revenge, which we grant.  
But in the last place, he doth extremely subtillize his Notions; he is contented that God should be displeased with sin, but not with the sinner: It is true, that in some cases God doth hate sin, but not the sinner; as a father hates the disobedience of his son, but hates not his son in disobedience; for hatred is the extremest alienation; but displeasure is an act of dislike not of alienation: Now a man may dislike his friend, but never hate him in the notion of a friend; and he must needs dislike him when he offends against the bond of friendship, though that bond be not broken; and a father that is displeased with his child's rebellion, must needs be displeased with his child that rebels.  
To conclude, if God be in no case displeased with his people, they need not confess that by sin they have provoked him to displeasure: Under most grievous falls their condition is as good towards God as ever; they are bound even then to apprehend the light of his countenance, and the brightness of his glory shining upon them, and by consequence David was as much accepted with God, and might have conceived as much spiritual joy in the bed of adultery with Bathsheba, as after that great humbling of his soul.   

Q. 4. Whether those in the Covenant of grace are to try their Justification by their Sanctification, Aff. according to Master B.  
HEre we agree in the terms, but whether in the thing itself it's very doubtful. When we propounded this question we did conceive that Master Bacon would put no other meaning upon the term Sanctification the inherent holiness: But we justly suspect some other sense; first, because he doth here interpret holiness to be that seed of God which John saith abideth in every one that is borne of God, 2 John 3.9. and at the disputation, by this seed, he did understand the spirit; against which interpretation I made reply, that the seed of God must be the work of the Spirit, and not the spirit itself: Secondly, in that he saith, That which is done in foro Coeli, in the Court of Heaven, is done also in foro conscientiae, in the Court of Conscience by the Spirit of Christ, and where the spirit of Christ is, there are the fruits of the Spirit, goodness, righteousness, truth. This is true in itself; but it doth not clear unto our understanding, but that he means by Sanctification, the inhabitation of the Spirit, by whose sole testimony our justification must be evidenced, and that goodness, truth and righteousness are the immediate workings of a supernatural spirit by which we are overacted, and not of habitual graces: I do not directly charge him with this meaning in these words of his, but they do not evince the contrary; and the passages forementioned hold forth grounds of jealousy: Besides, I know that those of his party do much undervalue, if not wholly deny the use of Marks and Signs in this Trial.  
2 In the second Paragraph I assent unto him in this, That when I do some good actions, I must not therefore believe my Justification: but I descent from him in the other part, wherein he saith, when I fail in some works to suspect my justification, tends to overthrow the glorious work of Justification: Had he said that a Christian is not thence absoluetly to conclude, that he is not justified, he had said right; but to say that he must not suspect his justification when he fails in some works (as to instance David in adultery, Peter in denying Christ, which were failings in some works) is no sound nor safe Doctrine. That height and glory of faith, believing in hope against hope, is not exercised in the slighting of our sins, but in a great desertion, and the want of a spiritual fight to behold the brightness of the Lord shining upon us. Or when Faith revives a man from under the sad apprehension of his fall or backsliding, it is done, when he hath made search after his former evidences, and discerns at lest the root of grace alive in the soul.   

Q. 5. Whether Faith be a condition of the new Covenant, Neg. according to Master B.  
1. HEre we differ in opinion. Master Bacon thus differenceth the Covenant of works and the Covenant of grace, That the one promiseth life upon condition, the other gives it upon free promise. Answ. The difference of the Covenants was wont to be made by their conditions. In the first, life is promised upon condition of works; in the second, upon condition of believing. The same place which works had in the first Covenant, faith hath obtained in the new. There is a law of works and a law of faith: Faith is the Gospel's duty, and unbelief is the main Gospel's sin. But let us examine the difference made by him. The Covenant of works promiseth life upon condition, the other gives it of free promise. Answ. A free promise doth not deny all conditioning; as, To as many as received him, to them he gave power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name; neither doth the free promise exclude the condition of Faith; for the Law of Faith is free of the highest grace▪ and doth exclude boasting and bondage.  
2 We are not required to the ratification of the Covenant to bring faith to God, but the new Covenant is to give us faith to bring us to God 〈◊〉 Answ. Neither to the ratification of the first Covenant were we required to bring works to God, nor did any works before the Covenant merit or make way for the promise of life upon condition of works. But God in the very making of that Covenant gave man ability to perform the tenure thereof. On the same manner supposing Faith to be the Condition of the new Covenant, it doth not infer, that we must bring faith to God, but 'tis most necessary that God work faith in us to the ratification of the Covenant. Faith is not pre-required in the way of merit, or previous disposition, but at the very instant, when God strikes Covenant with the soul, faith, though freely given, is requisite to the existence of that Covenant. And whereas he saith, The Covenant doth not depend upon our believing, but upon God's promise and faithfulness. I answer: The Covenent doth depend upon God's promise as the ground, and upon our believing as the Condition. To prove that the Covenant doth not depend upon our believing as a Condition, he urgeth 2 Tim. 2.13. If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful, and cannot deny himself. If he will draw thence any thing to his purpose, he must thus expound it, if we believe not, yet he will give life unto us because he abideth faithful, and cannot deny himself. Whereas the sense is manifest, if we believe not, yet he abideth faithful, and will make good his promises to them who by faith receive them.  
3 In the new Covenant God ties himself, and not the Creature. Ans. The essential form of a Covenant requires the binding of both parties. But how doth he prove this paradox? Because we are in Gods keeping, and not in our own. Is not this sound reasoning? We are in Gods keeping; therefore God ties us not. Or because God doth uphold us above the power of falling away, therefore we are not bound to persevere in believing. And if God ties not the Creature, he hath let lose the reins to all licentiousness. In the last clause he saith, That faith is urged in the Ministry of the Gospel, and given to them that shall be saved, because no man is justified in his conscience before God till he doth believe. Ans. Here we have an Antinomian principle, that Faith doth not receive and apply our pardon, but serves only to read our pardon. Secondly, he confounds Justification before God, and that before Conscience, which are distinct notions.   

Qu. 6. Whether godly sorrow for sin be required of such a one as is the Covenant of grace. Aff: according to Mr. Bacon.  
We agree in the terms of the Question: but first I shall observe that Mr. Bacon's preaching did rather tend to undermine godly sorrow. He had these passages. Pharisaical Repentance doth consist in Contrition, Confession, Humiliation, and Satisfaction. First in Contrition, (i) brokenness of heart, thus the great Pharisees of the world speak of it. That there must be in those, that do repent before they be accepted of Christ, Contrition enough (i.) brokenness of heart, before they come to Christ. Now I would fain know when we should come to brokenness of heart enough, that we may be judged fit to come to Christ. I think none of them are able to give satisfaction. And a little after. You must not think to get a broken heart before you have got Christ, but having Christ he will give you a Broken heart. Here he makes Contrition a part of Pharisaical Repentance, and accounts them the great Pharisees of the time who require Contrition enough before men be accepted of Christ. But those Preachers who in Mr. Bacon's esteem are Pharisees, do teach that true Contrition is wrought in respect of time neither before nor after the receiving of Christ: but at the same instant, without which there is no coming to Christ; though he saith it is wrought after. When Christ proclaims, Come unto me all ye that are heavy laden, can any than come to Christ till he hath a Broken heart? And Contrition enough is required not in respect of quantity and measure, but for quality and kind, which is wont to be set forth by quantitative terms, because 'tis a solid, deeper, and more piercing sorrow then all worldly mournings, and the greatest howl of Hypocrites.  
2. Whereas he now saith, that godly sorrow is required in case of sin: he hath expressly declared the contrary in the forementioned Sermon in these words. Humiliation, for we speak of Pharisaical Repentance, for these things are spoken of those that repent to Salvation but in an other way, is a certain casting down of a man or woman because of sin, or the evil that doth accompany it. This is found in Hypocrites and unbelievers. Gen. 4. Matth. 6.16. Isa. 58. By this dejectment they think to come into the favour of God; but by it may come into the disfavour of God. I shall describe that Humiliation, that is approved by God, and found in the Saints. It is a dejectment of a man's self upon the sight, and knowledge of the glory, greatness, power, and goodness of God in Christ Jesus. So that as the knowledge of God in Christ doth increase in the soul, the soul is abased, as Isa. 6. four first verses. Thus he declares Pharisaical humiliation to be a casting down of a man because of sin: the Saints humiliation to arise from the sight of the glory of God; where as now he saith, godly sorrow is required in case of sin. How can he reconcile this contradiction? We hold that the soul is graciously humbled in the sight of sin, together with the reflection of the glory of God. Which the Text in Isa. 6. would have cleared unto him, had he took in the latter part, viz. I am undone, I am a man of unclean lips, and dwell amongst a people of unclean lips. Now let it be well considered whether this be to handle God's Word sincerely.   

Qu. 7. Whether Confession of sin (i) of ur original corruption, and sinful actions reckoning them before the Lord be required in a Christian. Aff. according to M. B.  
HEre we agree in the terms at least, but in the stating of the Question I shall briefly observe some impertinencies, and so pass on. First, that Hypocrites are wont to confess their sinful actions, but not their sinfulness: the Saints confess not only their sinful Actions, but their sinfulness. Now by sinfulness he doth understand their unclean natures. But know we not that Hypocrites as well as the Saints confess their sinful natures, as their sinful actions? and in this they differ, that the one confess both these in hypocrisy, the other confess both in sincerity.  
2. He addeth, The Confession of the Saints is grounded upon the knowledge of God's love in Christ: but the confession of the Hypocrites upon some other information. Ans. Is not the Confession of the Saints grounded also upon the knowledge of sin, and of the glory and holiness of the Lord, as upon the knowledge of God's love in Christ? Is there any difference between them and Hypocrites in this point, but that they confess upon all the former considerations with sincerity, and resolution of amendment of ways: but Hypocrites upon the same considerations do not confess from the bottom of their hearts, and with a full purpose of Amendment?   

Qu. 8. Whether you hold communion with the Church of England (i) in our Parochial Assemblies to be lawful? Neg. according to Mr. B.  
IN this we differ. First against Mr. Bacon I reply, that this Question is not a matter properly concerning discipline, except matters of discipline can deny Communion in the worship and ordinances of Christ. Also the defects of Reformation is no ground of Separation.  
2 A supposition of the peoples not having repent them of their false worship, is no ground of separation.  
3 That he shall communicate with any people in any Assembly so far as reformed according to the Word of God, is no determinate answer.  
4 His Collection from this Question, That every Parish should bear the name of the Church of England is very absurd. Because we speak of a Church in Parochial Assemblies as the whole in its parts, must every part bear the name of that whole?  
5 That the Church of England doth cease, because discipline is for a while suspended, is a conclusion not worth the refuting.  
6 To understand by the Church of England, all of all Conditions that have indeed faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, and so are of the Church in the eye of God, and are of a suitable conversation towards men in practice; is to give a character of a great part of the invisible Church Christ's mystical body to a particular constituted Church. What more confused notions then these?   

Qu. 9 Whether Repentance be necessary to the Remission of sins. Neg. according to Mr. B.  
HErein we descent. We understand Evangelicall Repentance, and that so necessary, as that God will never forgive our sins until we repent.  
Mr. Bacon is very subtle in remarking the particle To. I cannot understand but a thing that is necessary in any determinate case must be necessary to that thing. But he is afraid that this same To would bring in Repentance as something actually existent (for so I conceive him) before the Remission of sins. But this follows no more than that we must bring faith to God before the Act of Justification. But if he will say, that we are justified by faith, and yet that faith is not necessary to Justification, I must confess his subtleties are beyond my comprehension.  
1 For that charge of bordering nigh unto if not agreeing with that of Bellarmine, who affirms, that Repentance is a way to faith and justification in the remission of sins: If he understand it according to Bellarmine in the way of a previous disposition, I utterly disclaim it; Neither can it be collected from the Doctrine of Repentance as necessary to the Remission of sins. And this answers the next Objection, that we make Repentance to go before the Remission of sins. I give this Instance, to have a reasonable soul is necessary to the being of a man, doth it therefore follow that a reasonable soul is before that being? We say, that Repentance and Remission are coexistent. For at the same instant, when God doth forgive sin, he confers the grace of Repentance, that the soul might be capable of receiving forgiveness: Act. 3.19. Repent and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out. Whereas Mr. Bacon will have Remission of sins to go before Repentance in order of nature. He cannot reduce it to either of those two ways mentioned by Aristotle. After one way, that is said to be first in nature from which the consequence doth not return to some other thing, from whence the consequence is drawn to that former. To instance one is in nature before two. For suppose two, and one is presupposed; but suppose one, two doth follow. Therefore that is said to be first in nature, à quo non retro sequitur consequendi ratio. Now in this manner Remission of sins cannot be before Repentance in order of nature, for then upon the supposal of Remission, Repentance doth not follow. The second way is in respect of causality. But remission is not the cause of repentance. Besides it should be said, your sins are forgiven you, that you might repent, and not repent that your sins might be forgiven. Wherefore Remission of sins doth require Repentance, as a means absolutely necessary, and that not pre-existent, but coexistent.   

Qu. 10. Whether there be a real change in the person that is saved. Aff. according to Mr. B.  
WE agree in the terms of the Question, but we have no satisfaction therein. Truth is, we were too short in the manner of propounding; we understood a real change not in opposition to intentional only, but to a relative change also, and that none only a change of condition but of nature. Such a change Mr. Bacon did never publicly clear among us. And in the close of this Dispute he did peremptorily refuse to declare whether there were in a believer the habits of grace, and inherent holiness.    
FINIS.