THE DISPUTES BETWEEN Mr. CRANFORD, AND Dr. CHAMBERLAIN. At the house of Mr. WILLIAM WEBB, at the end of Bartholomew Lane, by the Old Exchange: On March 1. 1652, and April 1. 6. 13. Published for the satisfaction of all that love the TRUTH. MATTH. 11.19. Wisdom is justified of her Children. LONDON, Printed by Gartrude Dawson, and are to be sold by Gyles Calvert at the Black Spread-Eagle near the West end of Paul's, 1652. THat the Children of Truth may be sustained with Truth, as the Children of Error gorge themselves with the contrary: It hath been thought requisite by divers to let those hours fly abroad into the World with faithful Records, which were for a while limited to a private house, and small auditory. Dr. Chamberlain being, at first, confined to two or three of his party, and all the rest of Mr. Cranfords' party unconfined. The occasion was from one of Mr. William Webb's servants, (Mr. John More) who being convinced of the Erroneous Practices of the Ministers of England, was Baptised the first of February one thousand six hundred fifty two, whereupon his Master being displeased, these Letters and Disputes following, were occasioned. The Copy of a Letter left at Dr. Chamberlen's about the second or third of February last. A Letter left at my house intimating the first occasion of this Dispute. BROTHER CHAMBERLAIN, OUr brother John More, (who was lately baptised) and myself were here to acquaint you, that through the earnest solicitation of his Master, (who is at present very much displeased with him about his present judgement) he is engaged to procure your assistance under God, to dispute these two points with Mr. Cranford: Our Brother's Master being very confident that Mr. Cranford will give you the foil therein. The Questions are these. 1 Whether or no a private person may Preach without Ordination? 2 Whether or no the Presbyterian-Ministers be not the true Ministers of the Gospel? Our Brother's Master desireth the meeting should be at his house, he having a convenient Room. We desire you would consider of the Challenge, and likewise of a convenient time to meet Mr. Cranford, which is all at present from. Your ever loving Brothers, John More, John Spittlehouse. At your house February 2. 1652. UPon which Letter Dr. Chamberlain consented to a meeting when Mr. Cranford should appoint: (The Questions being sent him under Mr. Webs hand;) but being delayed, and the noise of it being amongst Mr. Cranford's Party, they began to report that Dr. Chamberlain durst not meet, which put Mr. John More to a more eager prosecuting of the business with his Master and Mr. Cranford, till at last he went with a Paper (whereof the Copy followeth) from his Master to Mr. Cranford. The Copy of the Paper is thus: The Questions stated by Mr. William Webb, he engaging for Mr. Cranford his appearance to dispute them with Dr. Chamberlain, for whom I engage. Feb. 24. 1652. JOHN MORE. Sir, The express words are these, which if you shall please to correct you may, provided you underwrite them. 1 Whether the Ministers of London, Presbyterian-Ministers, be not Ministers of Jesus Christ? 2 Whether private men, I mean tradesmen, may preach the Word of God without Ordination in the City of London? This Paper was presented by the said Mr. More to Mr. Cranford, which he owned, but would not subscribe it. To my much desired Friend Mr. Cranford. SIR, ALthough the Discourse that passed between us, hath done that work which (you say) you intended, yet hath it not taken that Effect I desired, so long as you are disobedient to the Truth, and so many misreports scattered into the ears of those that were not present, I shall therefore humbly desire you to peruse these our Discourses in all faithfulness too your own soul. They come forth with the Syllogism completed, that they might not be fruitless to the Reader. I have not accompanied them with many Observations, till I see what acceptance they find on your behalf, for I would feign win you by Truth and Love. If all the Particulars of our Discourses be not in, you may if you please supply what is wanting from some of your Party, on whom I have waited somewhat the longer, in expectation that you would have published them (as was reported.) If yet you are not convinced, but desire rather to mend any of your Answers, or Discourses, and to proceed in writings as formerly in speakings: I shall be ready to endeavour your satisfaction by writing also, provided, that whatsoever is published on your behalf, do bear your Name, since no man can likely meddle with your business without your approbation. In all which I shall endeavour not to departed from the civility and sincerity of being Yours in the Lord, Peter Chamberlain. A PRAYER. O Father of Lights, (John, 1.17.) who gavest thy Son (John, 3.17) a Light unto the World, (Chap. 12.46.) to be the Way, the Truth, and the Life: (Chap. 14.6. Who hath promised to give a mouth and wisdom to thy servants which all their adversaries shall not be able to gainsay, nor resist, (Luke, 21.15.) Unveil thy Truth (O Lord) to all that love it, that they may find, and come into the way which leadeth unto Eternal Life. And give me a mouth and wisdom, to convince gainsayers, to the saving of Souls, (Tit. 1.9.) Through Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen. On the 25. of MARCH, 1652. was the first meeting: The Result whereof followeth. AFter prayer against Prejudicacies, and for the the Truth, and a solemn Protestation to endeavour Truth not Victory: The Questions being read by Dr. Chamberlain, and owned by Mr. Cranford to have been presented to him: It was thought good to fall upon the last first according to the first Letter: because it was a subject which had been formerly disputed of between Mr. Cranford and Mr. Rowley at one Mr. Williamsons, Mr. Chamberlain coming in accidentally, The Conclusion of the Dispute ended in this, That Mr. Cranford freely granted. That, in Eclesia non constituta, or, male constituta: It was not only lawful for any Man but any Woman, or Maid to preach the Gospel. The Arguments then by Dr. Chamberlain having been from 1 Cor. 14.31. Where all might Prophesy one by one; and from Rom. 16.1. where Phebe is termed a deaconess of the Church of Cenchrea, and divers other places and instances, of Deborah and H●ldad, and 1 Cor. 11.5. Act. 21.9. Act. 18.26. Pilip 4.3. etc. The Question sent was, Whether Private Men, I mean Tradesmen, may Preach the Word of God without Ordination in the City of London? But Mr. Cranford not liking of the Question in those terms, the Question altered by him was thus: Whether Prvate Men or Tradesmen, may Preach the Word of God without Ordination? Having propounded the Question, he explained it as followeth. That by, Private Men, he meant in reference to Station or Calling. And that sons of the Prophets might be Private Men, though Public by Designation. By Preach, he meant, to Expound and Apply, to Admonish, Exhort, Reprove. Preaching is either Authoritative, or Charitative: Ordinary, or Occasionaliter: Publice, or Private. That is, Authoritatively, or in Charity: Ordinarily, or Occasionally: Publicly, or Privately. Whence he laid down this Thesis. That, No Private Man, that intends not the Ministry, may Exhort, Admonish, Reprove, Authoritatively, Ordinarily and Publicly, in a true Church, without Ordination. By Ordination, he meant Approbation, and Imposition of hands by the Preaching Presbytery. Candidati, may Preach several times, and a considerable number of times for Approbation. By Authoritatively, he meant in relation to Christ and Men. Then Mr. Cranf. laid down these Theses. He that is a Tradesman, and continues so, ought not to Preach the Word of God; not being Ordained. Major, And being once Ordained, he ought not to Work. By the change of the Question, and those several limitations, restrictions, and distinctions, it was almost brought to what Dr. Chamb. might within a little have consented to. But upon these last Theses, Dr. Chamb. inferred this Minor following. Min. But Paul was a Tentmaker, and did continue so, notwithstanding his Preaching. Act. 18.1, 2, 3. and 20.34. and 1 Thes. 2.9. Conclu. Therefore Tradesmen Ordained Ministers, or Ordained Ministers, may Work. Major. Mr. Cranf. answered, that though Paul might, it was not lawful for other Ministers to Work. Whereupon Dr. Chamb. replied, Min. But the Elders of Ephesus, (Act. 20.17.) ought to Work, Vers. 35. Conclus. Therefore Ministers Ordained, may Work. There was no Answer by Negation, or Distinction, but a miscelaine of Discourses, therefore Dr. Chamb. proceeded as followeth: Ma. If Paul being Ordained to Preach, and more privileged from Working than others, might Work, than others less privileged might work also. Min. But Paul being Ordained to Preach, and more privileged from working than others might Work, Conclus. Therefore others less privileged from Work, might Work also. Mr. Cranf. affirmed, that Paul was not more privileged from Work. Dr. Chamb. proved it from 1 Cor. 9.6. Have not we power to forbear working, etc. The whole scope of the place is to set forth Paul and Barnabas' privilege above Others. Which being denied by Mr. Cranf. Dr. Chamb. referred it to the Auditory. Whereupon Mr. Cranf. affirmed, That the privilege to Paul and Barnabas was not more, but was common to others. Dr. Chamb. then replied. If Paul, who was like privileged as others, might Work, than others might Work also. Here Mr. Cranf. made a long discourse, in the close whereof, upon some words interposed by Dr. Chamb. Mr. Cranf. by way of consent affirmed, That whosoever hath an immediate Call by Christ, may Preach, any where without Ordination. To this Dr. Chamb. argued. Ma. They who are immediately called by Christ, may preach any where without Ordination. Min. But some Tradesmen are immediately called by Christ, Con. Therefore some Tradesmen may preach without Ordination. Mr. Cranf. denied the Minor, which Dr. Chamberlain proved thus, Ma. They who are immediately called by the Word of Christ, are immediately called by Christ. Mi. But some Tradesmen are immediately called by the Word of Christ, Con. Therefore some Tradesmen are immediately called by Christ. The Minor was denied. Ma. They who are gifted by the immediate reading of the Word of Christ, are immediately called by the Word of Christ: Mi. But some Tradesmen are gifted by the immediate reading of the Word of Christ, Con. Therefore some Tradesmen are immediately called by the Word of Christ. There Dr. Chamb. understood that Mr. Cranf. did not allow gifts by the Word to be gifts of Christ. Whereupon he offered this Syllogism. Ma. All that are gifted are gifted by Christ, (Ephesians. 4.8. 1 Peter 4.10. Mi. But they that are gifted by the Word, are gifted. Con. Therefore they that are gifted by the Word are gifted by Christ. Rom. 1.12. and 1 Cor. 12. was also instanced. Mr. Cranfords' Answer was, that those gifts were limited to men's approbation, not to execution, till after approbation. But after approbation they not only may, but must Preach. Which Dr. Chamb. referred to the Auditory, because it seemed to contradict what he hath formerly consented to: And seems to set up the approbation of man above the gifts of God, and to oppose the Command of the Apostle, 1 Peter, 4.10. On this Reference there was a Discourse between Mr. Cran. and Dr. Cham. Whereupon, on some Questions propounded by Mr Cranf. these following Particulars were agreed to and subscribed by Dr. Chamb. In a true Church Organical of Christ, it is not lawful for any man to Preach or Prophesy, Ordinarily in the ordinary sense, without Approbation and Imposition of hands, Nor at all unless it be in reference to the said Approbation and Imposition of hands. Except they have immediate infallible revelation. Upon further discourse, Mr. Cranf. affirmed: It was not lawful for any out of Office to Prophesy. Dr. Chamb. affirmed it was lawful for any to Prophesy, (1 Cor. 14.31.) else the whole Church might be Officers. Mr. Cranf. upon further proceed said, That, By Prophets, He meant such as had immediate inspiration. By Teachers, Such as instructed others. By Ordinary, What was in relation to endowments, or frequency. That Revelation of Scripture he counted Ordinary. That Ordinary Revelation was to the Conscience, Extraordinary to knowledge. Immediate Revelation, was such as was to B●laa●, Num. 23. Immediate teaching was such 〈◊〉 Judas from Christ. And that was no Revelation that was either by preaching or reading. Then Dr. Chamb. Instanced that of Peter; Mat. 16. Where Christ saith, Flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee. And yet it was a thing that was ordinarily preached and known. So that the Devils could tell that he was the Son of God, Mark. 1.31. And it was declared at his birth Mat. 3.17. etc. And 1 Cor. 2.14. The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, etc. Mr. Cranf. here would have distinguished upon the word Receiving, as different from knowledge, though the words following do in express terms say neither can he know them; For they are Spiritually discerned. Therefore Dr Ch. affirmed, that knowledge to be extraordinary whensoever Scripture is revealed without men's teachings. But Mr. Cranf. affirmed that extraordinary, was not by Scriptures, nor Spirit, but by Visions or Dreams. Which upon revew he mended, and said: Not only by Scriptures and Spirit: But also by Visions and Dreams. But this was the close of the first meeting, ending in Prayer. The Second meeting at Mr. WEBB'S, was on the first of APRIL, 1652. AFter Prayer and solemn Protestations, as before Dr. Chamb. having desired there might be no offence taken at the phrases of the Scripture which he should make use of in his Arguments. The Question was read. Whether the Ministers of London, Presbyterian-Ministers, be the Ministers of Jesus Christ? Mr. Cranf. took the Affirmative. Dr. Chamb. was to prove the Negative. The first Argument was taken from 2 Cor. 11.15. Major. They that are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousness; are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ: Minor. But the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousness, Conclusion. Therefore the Ministers of London, (Presbyterian-Ministers) are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ. Mr. Cranf. denied the Minor, to wit, That the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousness. Dr. Chamb. proved it. Ma. They that are not form as the Ministers of Righteousness are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousness. Mi. But the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are not form as the Ministers of Righteousness, Con. Therefore the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousness. The Minor was denied, which was thus proved: Ma. They that are form as the Ministers of Antichrist, are not form as the Ministers of Jesus Christ, Mi. But the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are form as the Ministers of Antichrist. Conclus. Therefore the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are not form as the Ministers of Jesus Christ. The Minor was again to be proved. Ma. They that are Ordained as the Ministers of Antichrist, are form as the Ministers of Antichrist, Mi. But the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are Ordained as the Ministers of Antichrist, Con. Therefore the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are form as the Ministers of Antichrist. The Mi. was again denied, and thus proved. Ma. They that are Ordained in the manner, succession, and power of Antichrist, are Ordained as the ministers of Antichrist: Mi. But the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are Ordained in the manner, succession, and power of Antichrist, Con. Therefore the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers are Ordained as the Ministers of Antichrist. Mr. Cranf. denied the Mi. Which containeth three Particulars, and therefore three several Series of Sylogismes. First for the manner this Syllogism was prepared. Ma. They that are commonly required to have had their Education in Schools, to be furnished with Antichristian Titles, to have Approbation from men of such Titles, and sent from them, to be over a flock (oftentimes) whether the flock will or no: are Ordained in the manner of Antichrist. (For the Pope likewise dispenseth sometimes with Education, and Titles, and some flocks are not unwilling to receive Antichristians.) Mi. But the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are commonly required to have had their education in Schools, to be furnished with Antichristian Titles, and approved by men of such Titles, and by them sent out to be over a flock (oftentimes) whether the flock will or no. Con. Therefore the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are Ordained in the manner of Antichrist. But the Succession was desired to be proved, and therefore the Syllogisms for that followeth. Ma. They that have their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist, are Ordained in Succession of Antichrist: Mi. But the Ministers of London (Presbiterian-Ministers) have their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist, Con. Therefore the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are Ordained in the Succession of Antichrist. The Mi. was denied, and thus proved. Ma. If they have it by Succession, and there were no other Succession but from Antichrist: then they have it by Succession from Antichrist. Mi. But they had it by Succession, and there was no other Succession but from Antichrist. Con. Therefore they had their Ordination by succession from Antichrist. Here Dr. Chamb. desired to express, that by Succession he meant public Succession, allowed of by the Powers of the Nation: which Mr. Cranf. assented to, and denied the Mi. Which was thus proved. Ma. They that had their Ordination from the Bishops, had their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist. Mi. But the Ministers of London (Prsbyterian-Ministers) had their Ordination from the Bishops, Con. Therefore they had it by Succession from Antichrist. Here the Dispute grew into some disorder, but the thing to be proved was they that had their Ordination from Bishops, had it from Antichrist. As thus, Ma. If Bishops themselves had their Ordination from Antichrist, than they that had their Ordination from Bishops, had their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist. Mi. But Bishops themselves had their Ordination from Antichrist, Con. Therefore they that had their Ordination from Bishops had their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist. Mr. Cranf. Minor. Dr. Chamb. If from Rome, then from Antichrist. But from Rome, Therefore from Antichrist. Mr. Cranf. deny the Consequence. Dr. Chamb. replied. If from Rome since Antichrist was Antichrist, then if from Rome, then from Antichrist: But from Rome since Antichrist was Antichrist, Therefore if from Rome, then from Antichrist. Here Mr. Cranf. made a long digression concerning the Church of Rome, and a Church in Rom●: and said, That 1 The Church of Rome was a true Church, till our separation from it. 2 The Pope of Rome was Antichrist these thousand years. 3 A true Church in Rome till this day. Which when Dr. Chamb. read over, there were exceptions taken, that he had not read as Mr Cranf. spoke. For they affirmed he said, there might be a true Church in Rome till this day; Nempe Fidelium, So Dr. Chamb. form a Syllogism against it. Ma. That Church which hath not the true Signs and seals of a true Church, is no true Church, Mi. But the Church of Rome hath not the true signs and seals of a true Church. Con. Therefore it is no true Church. Mr, Cranf. said you would feign draw me to believe it, but you shall not draw me to it with Horses. The Church of Rome might be a true Church, though full of Errors: as a man may be a true man, though full of sores and Ulcers. And though the Church were Erroneous, yet the Ordination might be true. As many other things may be true which the Church of Rome did hold. And that Ordination was not Antichristian, till Protestants separated from them. Dr. Chamb. then said, they separated from a true Church: and so the separation made it false. Mr. Cranf. said, they separated from them, when they began to be false. Dr. Chamb. offered to prove, they were not yet separated from them. Ma. If you did separate, then either you did separate from their Doctrine or their Power. Mi. But you did separate from neither, Con. Therefore you did not separate. The complaint was that now the Question was lost, and they were gone to new Questions. So Dr. Chamb. returned to the Question thus. Ma. If no other public Ordination but from the Pope since separation, then from Antichrist by your own confession. Mi. But no Ordination but from the Pope. Con. Therefore from Antichrist. Mr. Cranf. said, The Church of Rome was a true Church still. But because Mr. Cranf. in his discourse did either let fall sometimes what he would not own, or Dr. Chamb. was supposed to mistake what Mr. Cranf. spoke, it was desired that Mr. Cranf. would write down his own Words, and Positions, which he did, as followeth. 1 The Church of Rome was once a true Church of Christ. 2 In the Church of Rome there happened many corruptions in Doctrine. 3 The Bishop of Rome, sometimes a true Minister of the Church, usurping a universal power over all Churches, became Antichrist. 4 After his usurpation, there wanted not many (both Bishops and other Teachers) that opposed this usurpation of the Pope till the Protestants departed from it. 5 There remained, oppressed by the Papacy, a true Church of Christ in Rome, till our separation from them. 6 From this true Church (I say not pure Church) in Rome, our first Reformers had their Ordination, which was in the essentials true, and from Christ. 7 The Pope of Rome, hath been Antichrist, I believe about a thousand years, that is so long as he hath usurped power over all Churches. 8 There was a true Ministerial Church in Rome, when we separated from the Papacy. Ja. Cranford. Dr. Chamb. argued to the last. Ma. If no Ministerial Church in Rome, since the Pope was Antichrist, but what was from the power of the Pope, than there was no such Church in Rome when you separated. Mi. But there was no Ministerial Church in Rome since the Pope was Antichrist, but what was from the Power of the Pope, Con. Therefore there was no such Church in Rome when you separated. Mr. Cranf. said, That all that the Pope doth is not Antichristian. Dr. Chamb. Replied, Ma. If the Pope were the root of Antichrist, Then all Ministerial Officers from him were Antichristian. Mi. But the Pope was the Root of Antichrist. Con. Therefore all Ministerial Officers from him were Antichristian as Branches. Mr. Cranf. denied the Consequence. Though the Pope were the Root of Antichrist, yet all Ministerial Officers under him were not Antichristian. Dr. Chamb. then mentioned Mat. 7.16, 17, 18. But there being a disorderly discourse, he argued thus: Ma. If all power derived from the Pope acknowledged his power, as a power over all Churches, than they were all Antichristian. Mi. But all power derived from the Pope, acknowledged the Pope's power as a power over all Churches. Con. Therefore they were all Antichristian. Mr. Cranf. then fell into discourse again, and said, That the Roman Church at the time when Luther separated, was a true Church. Dr. Chamb. offered to prove, it was then no true Church. Ma. Where there were no true Sacraments, there was no true Church. Min. But in the Church of Rome when Luther separated, there were no true Sacraments. Con. Therefore then there was no true Church. The Minor was denied. That in the Church of Rome when Luther separated, there were true Sacraments. Which was thus argued against. Ma. Where there was no true Baptism, there were no true Sacraments. Mi. But in the Church of Rome, when Luther separated there was no true Baptism. Con. Therefore in the Church of Rome, when Luther separated, there were no true Sacraments. Mr. Cranf. There was a true Baptism. Dr. Chamb. Ma. Where it was not administered on the true subject, there was no true Baptism. Mi. But in the Church of Rome, when Luther separated, Baptism was not administered on the true subjects. Con. Therefore in the Church of Rome, when Luther separated, there was no true Baptism. Mr. Cranf. denied the Minor, which was to affirm, That in the Church of Rome when Luther separated, Baptism was administered on the true Subjects. Dr. Chamb. p●●●●●ed his argument thus. Ma. They that a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 red 〈◊〉 no● on Believers and Repenters, administered 〈…〉 the true subjects. Mi. But the Ch●●●h of ●●me when Luther separated, did not administer it on Believers and Repenters. Con. Therefore they did not administer it on the true subjects. Minor was to be proved. Ma. They that administer it on Children, administer it not on Believers and Repenters: Mi. But the Church of Rome, when Luther separated, administered it to Children, Con. Therefore they did not administer it on Believers and Repenters. Mr. Cranf. denied the Major. Dr. Chamb. asked whether Children could believe and repent. Mr. Cranf. answered they had Faith and Repentance in their Parents. But he denied the Major, because, though the Church of Rome did administer Baptism on Children supposing them a false subject, yet they might administer it on others also: And might administer it both on true and false, and the administration on the false, did not hinder, but it might be administered on the true also. Hereupon Dr. Chamb. undertook to prove, that they did administer it to none but false, by the Syllogism following. Ma. They that only administer Baptism to no believers or misbelievers, to no repenters or mis-repenters, administer it only to the false subject. Mi. But the Church of Rome administer it only to no believers or misbelievers, to no repenters or mis-repenters. As Children and Roman Proselytes. Con. Therefore to none but false subjects. Here Dr. Chamb. was desired to return to the first Question, and so he proceeded to this Argument following out of 2 Cor. 11.20. Ma. They that bring the flock into bondage, or devour them, or take of them, or exalt themselves, or smite them on the face, are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ. Mi. But Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) do some or all of these, Conclus. Therefore Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ. Mr. Cranf. denied both, but desired Dr. Chamb. rather to prove the Major. Wherein Mr. Cranf. was to hold, that they who brought the flock into bondage, or devour them, or take of them, or exalt themselves, or smite them on the face, are the Ministers of Jesus Christ. This was thought somewhat strange, being the Major were the very words of the Text. But Dr. Chamb. proceeded. Ma. They that are Fools are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ: Mi. But they that bring the flock into bondage, or devour them, or take of them, or smite them on the face are fools: Con. Therefore they that bring the flock into bondage, or devour them, or take of them, or smite them on the face, are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ. The Major was again denied. Whereat Dr. Chamb. professeth he was not a little startled, that Mr. Cranford. should allow fools to be the Ministers of Jesus Christ. For though the Ministers of Jesus Christ may be sometimes accounted fools, yet he could not imagine that fools should be accounted Ministers of Jesus Christ, but this Syllogism followed. Ma. They that are not Qualified as, 1 Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. are no Ministers of Jesus Christ. Mi. But fools are not qualified as, 1 Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. Con. Therefore they are no Ministers of Jesus Christ. Mr. Cranf. here was pleased to confirm the Text by way of restraint only to the wicked fool, though the qualifications require a vindication from Idiotism also. As (Vers. 2.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and Vers. 4. and 6. of 1 Tim. 3. and Vers. 9 of Tit. 1. And therefore Mr. Cranf. affirmed, that men may be wicked, yea false, and yet the true Ministers of Jesus Christ. Whereupon Dr. Chamb. said, it was true that the Devils themselves in some sense may be said to be the Ministers of Christ in executing his judgements, and all the wicked also in such a large sense, which if that were it which Mr. Cranf. contended for, it were granted him. Whereupon Mr. Cranford (ironically) put off his hat, and made a leg, and said, we thank you Mr. Doctor, we thank you. Dr. Chamb. with the same pleasantness bade him, much good might it do him. But said he, do you allow wicked men to be Presbyterian-Ministers? No, said Mr. Cranf, we would hinder them, and forbidden them. Then you would forbid the true Ministers of Jesus Christ, (said Dr. Chamb.) by your own saying. I said no such matter, (said Mr. Cranf.) You said, that true Ministers of Christ might be wicked (said Dr. Chamb.) Said Mr. Cranf. They cease to be Ministers of Christ when we forbidden them. Then, till then (said Dr. Chamb.) you affirm they are so. Yea, (said Mr. Cranf.) Then Dr. Chamb. appealed to the Auditory. But (said Dr. Chamb.) why do you not forbid them? That is our grief, (said Mr. Cranf.) we would, but have no power. Whereupon Dr. Chamb. brought this Syllogism. Ma. Ministers of Christ want not Power. Mi. But Presbyterian-Ministers want Power, Con. Therefore they are no Ministers of Christ. Mr. Cranf. answered, Habent Potestatem, non Potentiam, which was left to those that could cut a thread between them. The third Argument was from Mark, 9.39. and Luke 9 vers. 49 Ma. They, who forbidden what Christ hath commanded not to be forbidden, are no true Ministers of Jesus Christ. Mi. But Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) forbidden what Christ hath commanded not to be forbidden, Con. Therefore the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are no true Ministers of Jesus Christ. Mr. Cranf. denied the Major, which was to affirm, that they, who forbidden what Christ hath commanded not to be forbidden, are the true Ministers of Jesus Christ: and instanced Gal. 2. and Act. 11. Which Dr. Chamb. referred to the Auditory. Whereupon Mr. Suit was pleased to side with Mr. Cranf. in the Quotations. But Dr Chamb. asked, where any command of Christ was there forbidden? For though Peter were reproved in both places: yet neither Peter, nor the Apostles, did there forbid any of the commands of Christ. The Apostles (indeed) did examine Peter about his going unto the Gentiles, but upon Peter's Relation, were so fare from forbidding, that they held their peace, and glorified God. Act. 11. vers. 18. The time being somewhat late, that meeting broke up, ending in Prayer. And Mr. Cranf. appointed the next meeting on the sixth of April, 1652. The Third meeting was on the Sixth of APRIL, 1652. AFter Prayer, Mr. Cranf. made a Repetition (memoriter) of what had passed, wherein many things were spoken different from what had been said: Whereupon Dr. Chamb. was occasioned to read what had passed, that so Mr. Cranford's mistakes might be rectified. In the Repetition (by way of Justification of the successive Ordination from Rome) Mr. Cranf. declared, that the Oath which every Minister took in Ordination under the Pope, was, To preach the Truth according to the Gospel. Where men may see how uncertain that Religion is that is founded upon humane Oaths, and Protestations. The Question was as formerly. Whether Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) be the Ministers of Jesus Christ? Dr. Chamb. began the Dispute with this Syllogism. Ma. They that forbidden what Christ hath commanded not to be forbidden, are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ. Mi. But the Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) forbidden what Christ hath commanded not to be forbidden, Con. Therefore Ministers of London (Presbyterian-Ministers) are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ. Mr. Cranf. said the Major was Nonsense. Dr. Chamb. appealed to the Auditory. Then Mr. Cranf. denied the Major and Minor. The Major if it were affirmed, that Presbyterian Ministers, did purposely and maliciously forbid, what Christ hath commanded not to be forbidden. The Minor, if with restrictions mentioned, to wit, that Presbyterian Ministers do not forbid any one in Ecclesia constituenda or coufusa. Dr. Chamb. would not urge the Major, as that Presbyterian Ministers did purposely and maliciously, therefore, forbidden any thing because it was the command of Christ, though ignorance itself doth not excuse a toto, sed a tanto. For 2 Thes. 1.8. the vengeance is on them also that knew not God. And divers other places. Therefore the Min. was proceeded in. Ma. They that forbidden Preaching by true Ministers of Jesus Christ in a true Church, forbidden what Christ hath commanded not to be forbidden. Min. But Ministers of London (Presbyterian Ministers) forbidden Preaching by true Ministers of Christ in a true Church Conclus. Therefore Ministers of London (Presbyterian Ministers) forbidden, what Christ hath commanded not to be forbidden. Saith Mr. Cranf. you shall never prove the Minor whilst your head is on your shoulders. Dr. Chamb. replied, I hope my head may continue on my shoulders without offence to any, and yet I shall prove the Minor. Ma. They that forbidden gifted men Ordained by a true Church to Preach in a true Church, forbidden Preaching by true Ministers in a true Church. Mi. But Ministers of London (Presbyterian Ministers) forbidden gifted men, Ordained by a true Church, to Preach in a true Church. Con. Therefore Ministers of London (Presbyterian Ministers) forbidden Preaching by true Ministers, in a true Church. Mr. Cranf. denied the Major, if in Ecclesia Fidelium: The Minor, if in Ecclesia Organica. Dr. Chamb. here took the liberty to make a short discourse concerning a Church, and that both in regard that Mr. Cranf. did constantly run into divers discourses between several Syllogysmes, therefore Dr. Chamb. might take that liberty once, and because that now there was such an occasion given to explain that word which hath occasioned so many great controversies, and did now necessarily require an explanation, as might appear by Mr. Cranford's distinguishing upon the word. Therefore in the first place Dr Chamb. showed, that the word ought to be explained from 1 Cor. 14.11. And that for want of explaining this word, and the word Bishop, and Presbyter, and Deacon, and the like, so many Barbarous Wars and Actions have been in the world. The word Church is from the Saxon, Kirk, as the Scots yet pronounce it. It is thought to be derived from the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a derivative from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. (Lord) as dedicated to the Lord. And the place where the Lords of the Senate did meet in Athens, was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (a Court Comitia.) But Church amongst us, is supposed the translation of the Original word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So that Church should signify to us, what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signify to the Grecians. Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (to call forth) doth signify a company of People called together from among other People and so, any Assembly whatsoever, that are called together, as the Interpreters themselves have plainly declared, by interpreting the word in Act. 19.25. an Assembly, though it were not to the worship of God. And whether it were a lawful assembly, (vers. 39) or unlawful (vers. 32 41.) But by way of excellency, because no Assembly so worthy as that which is called together to the worship of God: Therefore it is ordinarily taken for such, wherein we must also distinguish between the Church of Christ, and a Church of Christ. The Church comprehends all the faithful Saints from the beginning of the World to the end. As Ephes. 1.22. and 3.21. and 5.23. etc. Col. 1.18.24. and 1 Cor. 12.28. Heb. 12.23. A Church of Christ also is taken for any Church of Christ respectively, as Mat. 18.17. and 1 Cor. 14. and 4.17. etc. 1 Cor. 7.17. and 11.16.15.9. Philip. 3.6. And it hath also several other Appellations, as House, City, Body, Spouse, and Family, or definitively either: And that an uncertain providential Assembly or meeting; as Mat. 18.20. Wheresoever two or three are gathered together in the name of Christ. In which sense Mr. Cranf. distinguisheth it, Ecclesia Fidelium. Or more settled and constant, which likewise are distinguisted, by Times, Nations, or Places. Distinguished by Times, we read, Act. 7.38. the Church in the Wilderness. And, by Nations, Rom. 16.4. all the Churches of the Gentiles. By Places, as Countries, (α) Kingdoms, (β) Provinces. (γ) By Countries, (α) 1 Cor. 16.19. Church of Asia. And, by Kingdoms, (β) 2 Cor. 8.1. of Macedonia. And, by Provinces, (γ) as Galatia. 1 Cor. 16.1. Gal. 1.2. and Judea. Gal. 1.22. Cities of Corinth, 1 Cor. 12. and 2 Cor. 1.1. Ephesus. Smyrna, Pergamus, Thyatyra, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea. Revel. 1.11. And Houses, as Aquila and Prisscilla, 1 Cor. 16.19. Rom. 16.3, 5. and Nymphas, Col. 4.15. The Church of Christ is then, and so long, the Church of Christ, as she saith, and doth, what Christ gave her to say and do, even as Christ himself, John, 7.17. and 8.26, 28. and 12.5. and 14.10, 24. and 5.19.30. And when she saith, or doth otherwise, she speaketh, or playeth the Harlot in that particular. By Organical was meant a definite settled Church of Christ, completed with Officers, as a body with members 1 Cor. 12.12. Here Dr. Chamb. being called upon to prove, that Presbyters did forbid Ministers of a true Church. He proved it by this Syllogism. Ma. They that forbidden Ministers Ordained by the Presbytery of Baptised Churches forbidden Ministers of a true Church. Mi. But Ministers of London (Presbyterian Ministers) forbidden Ministers Ordained by the Presbytery of Baptised Churches. Con. Therefore Ministers of London (Prebyterian Ministers) forbidden Ministers of a true Church. Mr. Cranf. denied the Major, because no true Presbytery, and because no true Church: but desired that the last should be proved. To which Dr. Chamb. argued. Ma. They that have the true Marks of a true Church, are a true Church. Mi. But Baptised Churches have the true Marks of a true Church, Con. Therefore they are a true Church. Mr. Cranf. denied the Minor, which was thus proved. Ma. They that have true Preaching of the Word, and true Administration of the Sacraments, have the true Marks of a true Church: Mi. But Baptised Churches have true Preaching of the Word, and true Administration of Sacraments. Con. Therefore they have the true Marks of a true Church. Mr. Cranf. denied the Minor. That they neither had true Preaching of the Word, nor true Administration of the Sacramets'. Dr. Chamb. asked which he should prove? Mr. Cranf. bade him prove the true Administration of Sacraments. Ma. They that have the true Administration of Baptism and the Lords Supper, have the true Administration of Sacraments. Mi. But Baptised Churches have the true Administration of Baptism and the Lords Supper: Con. Therefore Baptised Churches have the true Administration of the Sacraments. Mr. Cranf. denied the Mi. but bade him prove Baptism. Ma. They that have the Administration of Baptism in the true manner, and on the true Subject, have the true Administration of Baptism. Mi. But Baptised Churches have the Administration of Baptism in the true manner and on the true Subjects. Con. Therefore Baptised Churches have the true Administration of Baptism. Mr. Cranf. denied the Mi. Dr. Chamb. asked whether he should prove first the manner, or the subject? Mr. Cranf. said any, which he would. Then (said Dr. Chamb.) First I'll prove the manner and then the Subject. Ma. They that Administer Baptism in the same Manner as it was Administered unto Christ Matth. 13.16. And as Philip Administered it to the Eunuch, (Act. 8.38.) have the true manner of Administration of Baptism. Mr. Cranf. cried out, and some with him, prove the subject for that is desired by some here. Then Dr. Chamb. proceeded. Ma. They that Administer Baptism on Believers and Repenters, Administer Baptism on the true Subjects. Mi. But Baptised Churches Administer Baptism on Repenters and Believers. Con. Therefore Baptised Churches Administer it on the true Subject. The Mi. was denied, and thus proved. Ma. They that Administer Baptism upon those that confess their Sins, and profess their Faith, Administer Baptism on the true Subject. Mi. But Baptised Churches Administer it upon those that confess their Sins, and profess their Faith. Con. Therefore Baptised Churches Administer Baptism on the true Subject. Mr. Cranf. denied the Minor, and said, they do not Baptise such as do confess their Sins, and profess their Faith. Dr. Cham. said, that might be attested by any that ever were present at their Baptism. Besides it were against their very Principles if they should not do so. Saith Mr. Cranf. I say they do not Baptise Believers and Repenters. Saith Dr. Chamb. now you go back to the former Syllogism. Mr. Cranf. said, they do not Baptise Believers and Repenters, but Renegadoes. Dr. Chamb. said, I gave no ill language, but used the words of the Scripture, and I hope you will not be angry with the language of the holy Ghost, when I must use it in argument. Renegado is language of Scripture saith Mr. Cranf. Where said Dr. Chamberlain? Mr. Cranf. said because it signified Apostate. Said Dr. Cham Then why did you not rather use that Word. The debate here made Dr. Chamb. forget to take notice how in denying the Baptism of Believers and Repenters, Mr. Cranf. denied the Conclusion. But he proceeded to prove that they did Baptise Believers and Repenters. Ma. They that baptise such as shall be saved, baptise believers and repenters. Minor, But baptised Churches baptise such as shall be saved, Con. Therefore they baptised believers and repenters. Mr Cranf. denied the Major. Dr. Chamb. urged Mark, 16.16. Whosoever believeth and is baptised, shall be saved. Mr. Cranf. denied it. Dr. Chamb. replied, Contra Principia negantem, non est disputandum. Saith Mr. Cranf. you are to prove it. Dr Chamb. then argued thus. Major. They that baptise such as confess with their mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in their heart that God hath raised him from the dead, (Rom. 10.) baptise such as shall be saved. Mi. But baptised Churches, baptise such as confess with their mouth, the Lord Jesus, and believe with their heart that God hath raised him from the dead. Con. Therefore baptised Churches baptise such as shall be saved. Mr. Cr. and some of his Party began to deride and say this was in gyro, idem, per idem. All that are saved, confess and believe. All that confess and believe, are saved. Said Dr. Chamb. it is the greater truth in being reciprocal, according to all the rules of truth. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. With this the Company seemed to acquiesce, in continuation of this promiscuous discourse. Mr. Cranf used the word Renegado again, and said, that baptised Churches, baptised such as denied the Faith, not such as professed the Faith, therefore we were all Renegadoes. Dr. Chamb. replied I shall prove you so. Mr. Cranf. bid him do. Dr. Chamb. Ma. They that practise, what they neither have command nor example for, practise what they should not. Mi. But you who sprinkle Infants, practise what you neither have command nor example for. Mr. Cranf. cried out, is this to prove us Renegadoes. Make your Conclusion. Said Dr. Chamb. I was loath to use words of provocation, and that are not written. but Mr Cranf. continuing in derision, Dr. Chamb. said then I'll prove you Renegadoes. They that speak Lies in Hypocrisy, are Renegadoes: But you speak Lies in Hypocrisy. Here the meeting broke up abruptly. The last meeting between Mr. Cranford, and Dr. Chamberlain, at Mr. Webs house, at Bartholomew Lane end, was on the 13. of April, 1652. THe Question was still, Whether Ministers of London (Presbyterian Ministers) were the Ministers of Jesus Christ? Mr. Cranf. (as before) Respondent. Dr. Chamb. Opponent. After Prayer (as formerly) the Dispute began in writing, being so agreed the time before. Dr. Chamb. began his Argument thus, Ma. They that are Ministers of Jesus Christ, are Ordained by Jesus Christ. Mi. But Presbyterian Ministers of London are not Ordained by Jesus Christ: Con. Therefore they are not Ministers of Jesus Christ. Mr. Cranf. Negatur Minor. The Ministers are Ordained by Jesus Christ, Mediately. Dr. Chamb. Ma. They that are Ordained by Antichrist, are not Ordained by Jesus Christ. Mi. But Presbyterian Ministers of London are Ordained by Antichrist. Con. Therefore they are not Ordained by Jesus Christ. Mr. Cranf Negatur Minor. Dr. Chamb. Ma. They that are Ordained by the Pope, within these thousand years, are Ordained by Antichrist. Mi. But Presbyterian Ministers of London are Ordained by the Pope within these thousand years. Con. Therefore they are Ordained by Antichrist. Mr. Cranf. Negatur Minor. Dr. Chamb. Ma. They that are ordained by those who were Ordained by the Pope within these thousand years, are Ordained by the Pope within these thousand years. Mi. But Presbyterian Ministers of London, are Ordained by those who were Ordained by the Pope within these thousand years. Con. Therefore they are Ordained by the Pope within these thousand years. Mr. Cranf. Negatur Minor. Dr. Chamb. Ma. They who were Ordained by the Bishops of England, and their Successors within these thousand years, are Ordained by those who were Ordained by the Pope within these thousand years. Mi. But Presbyterian Ministers of London are Ordained by Bishops of England and their Successors within these thousand years. Con. Therefore they are Ordained by those who were Ordained by the Pope within these thousand years. Mr. Cranf. Negatur Major. Dr. Chamb. Ma. If they were Ordained by the Power, or Ministers of the Pope, etc. then they were Ordained by the Pope etc. Mi. But they were Ordained by the Power, or Ministers of the Pope within these thousand years. Con. Therefore they were Ordained by the Pope within these thousand years. Mr. Cranf. Negat. Min. Dr. Chamb. Ma. If the Bishops of England within these thousand years, were not Ordained by the Power nor Ministers of the Pope, within these thousand years. Then there were some Bishops in King Henry 7. and K. Hen. 8. days neither Ordained by the Pope, nor Ministers of the Pope, within these thousand years. Mi. But there were no such Bishops in K. Hen. 7. nor King Hen. 8. days. Con. Therefore they were Ordained by the Power, or Ministers, of the Pope within these thousand years. Mr. Cranf. Negat. Mi. Dr. Chamb. Name any. Mr. Cranf. do you prove there were none. Dr. Chamb. Ma. If there were any such, then either they were allowed, or disallowed. Min. But there were neither any allowed, nor disallowed, that were such. Con. Therefore there were none such. Mr. Cranf. Negat. Minor. None of the allowed Ministers were Ordained by the Pope. Dr. Chamb. Ma. If the Pope had power at that time to place, and displace whom he pleased, than they were Ordained by the Pope. Mi. But the Pope had power to place and displace, whom he pleased. Con. Therefore they were Ordained by the Pope. Mr. Cranf. Negat. consequentia, & Minor est falsa. Dr. Chamb. Power of Ordination, you grant, is Approbation and Imposition of hands. Ma. If their placing and displacing, were a consequence of their Ordination, than the consequence is true. Mi. But their placing and displacing, was a consequence of their Ordination. Mr. Cranf. Negat. consequentia Dr. Chamb. Ma. If the Pope had power of placing and displacing of Bishops, than he had power of their Ordination. Mi. But the Pope had power, of placing and displacing of Bishops. If placing and displacing of Bishops, be greater than their Ordination, than the Pope who did place and displace did also Ordain. Mr. Cranford, Negatur consequentia. The Civil Magistrate may remove or displace Ministers, but may not Ordain Ministers. To place and displace, is not greater than to Ordain. Dr. Chamb. Ma. If what the Pope did, he did it as an Officer of the Church, and it was so publicly acknowledged, than the consequence is true. Mi. But what the Pope did, he did it as an Officer of the Church, and it was so publicly acknowledged. Mr. Cranf. Negat. consequentia. Though the Pope had power to do it, he did not do it. Some discourses, as betwwen all the rest of the latter Syllogism, interrupted the clear dispute, and then Dr. Chamb. followed with this argument to the discourse that was. Ma. If all the particular parts and faculties of the Church of England, were under the power and Ministry of the Pope of Rome, than Bishops were Ordained by the power of the Pope of Rome. Mr. Cranf. Negat. consequentia. Dr. Chamb. Ma. If so, then Ordination is no part or faculty of the Church. Mi. But Ordination is a part. Ergo. Mr. Cranf. Ne. consequentia, Minor etiam est falsa. The Church of Rome though it were Ulcerous, yet was a true Church of Christ, as a man is a man though full of Ulcers. Truth came out of the Church of Rome. The Scriptures that have been conveyed through the Church of Rome, are true Scriptures. Dr. Chamb. denied, that Truth came out of the Church of Rome, or that the Scriptures were conveyed through the Ulcerous Church of Rome. What is of their conveyance is not true. Mr. Cranf. often acknowledged, that the Church of Rome was Ulcerous: and Dr. Chamb. (upon it) replied, that we may then take up the lamentation of the Prophet Isa. 1.5, 6. From the sole of the foot, even to the head, there is no soundness, etc. But can a clean thing come out of an unclean. Job. 14.4. Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter. Jer. 3.11, 12. Do men gather Grapes of Thorns, or Figgs of Thistles, Mat. 7.16, 17, 18. Luke, 6.43, 44. Either make the Tree good, and the Fruit good, or the Tree corrupt, and the Fruit corrupt, Mat. 12.33. Many other things were spoken on both sides, which could not be written down, and (indeed) this Dispute was the most disorderly, because some things were written and some not: By reason whereof, it is probable, that both Mr. Cranf. and Dr. Chamb. might have their thoughts diverted from a clear pursuit of their Dispute, and Dr. Chamb. at this time was so ill, that he was scarce able to speak for Hoarseness. Yet the Arguments will sufficiently show, what might fully have been proved in the matter. And many other Arguments were provided: All which may hereafter be mentioned if there be occasion. They that are desirous of Truth, may hereby be whetted on to a further enquiry, if they be not satisfied: They that are not desirous, but of itching ears (2 Tim. 4.3.) this is too much for. He that is of God heareth God's Word. John, 8.47. and 10.27. Something may chance be further brought to memory, if Mr. Cranf. or his Party shall think good to add their Collections also. Upon misreports of these Disputes, these following Letters were occasioned: which losing their place in the beginning, are thus added for the better manifestation of the occasion of the Press. Erata. IN Page 11. For, you would fain draw me to believe it, but you shall not draw me to it with horses: Read, Doctor, I perceive what you would feign draw me to, but you shall not do it with all the Cart-ropes and horses in Town. Meaning as we supposed, Infant's Baptism. For my much respected Friend, Mr. CRANFORD. SIR, THere are some think much, that so many hours of Discourse should be buried in a Napkin. you may be pleased to unfold it to the World, to prevent the overspreading of misinformations, unless you desire I should do it. Let Truth be set up on a hill: They that look upwards will see it; they that love it will receive it: They that receive it not in love, may then justly be given over to strong delusions, 2 Thes. 2.10, 11. Sir, Let us not study ourselves more than the Glory of God. Your loving Friend, PETER CHAMBERLAIN. April, 19 1652. Be pleased to return me your Answer. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Sir, THe discourse that passed between us was undertaken by me upon a particular occasion, and hath had its effect, and done that work which I intended. It is neither in my purpose to unfold it to the World, nor in my desire that you should: there are books enough already of this argument, (out of which they that desire satisfaction, out of love to the Truth, may by the blessing of God receive it) to which our discourse will add little, if any thing. Yet if you have a mind to be printing, I pray you deal ingenuously, and truly in your Relation. I conclude as you; the Lord give us that we may study ourselves less, and the Truth and glory of God more. Sir, I rest, Yours to serve you as I may, JA. CRANFORD. April, 24. 1652. For my Reverend Friend Mr. CRANFORD. SIR. I Have no itch to provoke the spleen of men against me, as all printing of the truth will: But it having been reported, that you had so convinced me, as to make me forsake the Faith which I do profess, and had subscribed to your Party, I suppose I am bound to let the Truth appear to the contrary, by giving (as nigh as I can) the true relation of what passed between us, not endeavouring so much to remember the weaknesses as the main scope, so solemnly protested before the Lord, to inquire after the Truth, so that having those things before your eyes, you may have opportunity in cool thoughts to meditate thereupon, and give glory to the living God, and purchase assured comfort to your own soul in obeying the Truth. And Sir, I beseech you consider, whether Paul were more glorious when he was riding to Damascus with Power and Authority, and Attendants given him from the once beloved people of God against the true Churches, or when being reviled and persecuted he escaped for his life in a Basket, and ran to Jerusalem, Acts 9 When he profited more than many of his Equals in the Traditions of his Fathers, or when he preached the Faith which once he destroyed, (Gal. 1.14, 23.) Yet, Sir, you may now profess the Truth upon easier terms, I beseech you in the Lord consider, what a miserable Ordination that must be, which is squeezed out of an ulcerous Church (as you confess it) and to believe, that the most Holy God with such sacrifices, can be well pleased. Consider also what a strange kind of Discipline that must be, that must be found in the Mother's belly, (as you say Children are taught in their Parents and what a refuge is this, to pick out Children out of the Disciples of Moses, in John, 9.28. Therefore I humbly desire you, in all Christian love and faithfulness, to lay to heart, whether it will not be better for you once for all to deny yourself, and confess the Truth, then to be always subject upon all occasions of discourses, or controversy concerning these and some other points, to have such poor refuges, and weak evasions: Consider also what Glory you may bring to Almighty God, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ, in bringing many to confess the Truth with you, and no more to resist the Spirit of Truth, and power of the Word of God; Sir, I know none can come unto Christ, but those whom the Father draweth (Joh. 6.44.65.) and all that the Father hath given him, shall come unto him, v. 37. of which number if you be, I profess I shall be willing to contribute all my endeavours, and to hazard my life for you, and look upon you as so much the more precious, by how much, not many wise, etc. are called (1 Cor. 1.26.) so praying for you to the Lord, who is able to do abundantly above what we can ask or think: I rest, Yours in the Lord, PET. CHAMBERLAIN. April, 26. 1652.