THE DEEDS OF Dr. Denison A little more manifested. BY HIS ANSWER TO THE DEFENCE OF John Etherington. Which he published in Anno Dom. 1641. against his false accusations and the depositions of his false witnesses. Whereupon he was censured by the High Commission Court.  
And his reply to the Doctor's Answer. Which answer he hath added to his Woolfe-Sermon Book.  PRO. 11.6.9. 
The righteousness of the upright shall deliver them, But transgressors shall be taken in their own naughtiness,  
An hypocrite with his mouth destroyeth his neighbour: But through knowledge shall the just be preserved.  PRO. 12.6. 
The words of the wicked are to lie in wait for blood, but the mouth of the upright shall deliver them.  
LONDON, Printed by F. L. and are to be sold by john Wright, in the little Old-Baily, 1642.   

THE DEEDS OF Doctor Denison, a little more manifested.  
JOHN ETHERINGTON's Reply.  
IN the first page of your Answer Mr. D. on the 77. page, as it stands in the end of your novellish book not to reply to every word or saying of yours unmateriall. I charge you with falsehood in this, that you say I complained first against you; whereas I complained not first to go to law in the High-Commission Court which you would seem to infer, and make people believe, but only in way of request to have things heard in peace and ended without law; And this was after you had scandalised and reviled me by name in your Pulpits, and that I had sought unto you often, and you would by no means be spoken with according as I have declared in my defence. And to the Archbishop you prevented me, and got letters Missive granted to sue me in the Court, all which you know very well to be true. Let the Reader now judge who is here to be blamed for false speaking, and evil doing you or I  
And in the second page of your Answer, in that you say you might have required of me costs of suit, but did not; you tell the Reader a manifest untruth, for you did move the Court for costs of suit the same time that I was discharged, and were checked and reproved by some of the Court for the same, and bid hold your peace, as can be proved by sufficient witness if need be; therefore let the Reader consider how you favoured me as you say.  
And whereas in the same page, you deny that you sought after, or thirsted for my blood; besides the report of a Minister, on Master Ward, that told it me when I was in prison, as a thing that he heard from your own mouth. Your Wolf Sermon as you preached it at the Cross, did discover your desires in that respect, to many that then heard you, and so judged. And in your book of that Sermon, though it be much altered and refined of many hateful and bloodthirsty words you then uttered; yet there is still enough therein that proves the same: And in that you deny you said of me by name, Whether he be dead or alive, with God, or the devil, I cannot tell, etc. There is witness sufficient to prove that you did so speak in your Pulpit at Creechurch, and that you were my chief accuser, except the chiefest wicked one, it is well enough known to many. And concerning the Depositions of your witnesses, whom you style honest men, Ministers, and Professors, no knights of the Post, etc. Let the Reader but consider their depositions, which neither they nor you can deny to be their own words, and my defence also; and he shall see if he be judicious, and not partial, what honest professors they are. Men may profess strictness in Religion, as the Pharisees did, and yet be no better than they that bore false witness against Christ, and persecuted him.  
And whereas in the third page, you blame me so greatly for that in my defence, Mr. Robrowgh is set down Curate, if he had wrong done him therein, let the Reader blame the Register, or Robrowgh himself; for so I found it in his deposition Recorded, which I have yet under the Registers hand to show, and whatsoever he is now, he might be so then for aught I know; and to have the care of, or be a curer of souls, need be no disparedgement to him; nay rather it would be happy for him if he were so.  
And for your wondering that I so charge Sir Henry Martin whom you so greatly extol, in the same third page, which you say I durst not have done if he had been alive. Whereas it is well known I did it at least ten years before openly to the Court, and in his own hearing and sight, and he was living after my defence was published in print, though you (caring not to publish lies) say the contrary. But Master Doctor, you have great reason to set forth the praise of Sir Henry Martin, and to extol him, because he holp you so well out of the mire, wherein you had so unadvisedly befowled yourself, not only in this your evil and unchristianlike dealing against me; but also in respect of your other business at Cree-Church, concerning some of the chief of your Parish, for which the Archbishop and Court displaced you, and especially that of the women for which that Knight got you a purgation granted by the Court, that you might thereby cleanse yourself therefrom without any Repentance or Remition.  
These are some of your sure signs that Sir Henry Martin was a righteous Judge, and for which he suffered blame by some great men, as the Archbishop and some other of the Bishops the same time as you know.  
Your saying in your fourth page, and your glorying in the presentation and dedication of your book to the King, I refer to the consideration of the Reader that hath or shall reademy defence, and request him also to read and consider well your Epistle Dedicatory (of your Wolves book) to the King, and see how you play the Sycophant and Colloguer especially with the High Commission Court, and Bishops of Canterbury and London, Abbot and Mountney.  
And in your fifth page, where you say I pretend I could never obtain to speak with you, etc. and tell of Master Cleaver, Robrowgh, Stephens, etc. and then say that I know you have met me divers times in the streets of London, and said unto me john Hetherington, I pray let me speak with you, etc. This tale of yours is a very untruth, for until I complained of you to the Bishop of London, all the while that you scadalized and reviled me by name in your Pupits, which was the time wherein I say, and you know I often sought, and could never obtain to speak with you. And within three days after we had been before the Bishop of London, you entered your suit and got Letters Missive out against me.  
It is true, after you had gotten sentence passed against me, and that I had enduted three years' imprisonment, and being discharged and at liberty, I met with you at the end of Cornhill by the Stocks; and I spoke to you, and requested that I might now speak with you once after all my troubles; and your answer or words first were, I am glad thou hast renounced thy errors; and I answered you, nay, not so, but I disclaimed before the Court those false and evil things which you, and your witnesses had charged me with, I renounce nothing that I held; and so we went together up Cornhill, and into the Exchange, where I told you of your false and evil dealing toward me, and of your false and wicked Sermon, full of bitterneste, malice, and lies, which you had published and preached against me; and you took me up short I confess, and reproved me for my boldness, saying; Dost thou speak thus to a Doctor. And upon some words of reproof that I used unto you for your wicked dealing; you told me, Thou hast not the keys, I have the keys etc. and then after other words you slung away in a fury threatening me.  
It is true also, that I have met with you, and you with me oftentimes since? when you have given me very currish and threatening words as I passed by you, once in Thames-street near Queen-hive, when you said, Hetherington, I hear you keep Conventicles still, I must have you up agaive, And another time in Cornhill by the Conduit, when your foul matter concerning the women was in suit in the Court? where you said to me I hear thou hast a hand in my business, and threatening me with something you would do if I had, your conscience as it seems accusing you; whereas I had no hand in that business at all from the beginning thereof, to the end. And once I confess about two years ago, since your business with the women was past, I met you in the street behind the Exchange, and you called to me saying, (not as you say I pray let me speak with you; but john Hetherington I would speak with thee, and these were the favell words that ever you spoke to me, and this was but once not often, as you say. And I answered you, speak with me, to what end, and so I passed by you; but as for grinding at you with my teeth; or saying I scorn it, is a mere lie, I never used any such gesture or words to you, or any man else. So that in all this, you have showed yourself to be both foolishly proud, to use your own phrase, and a false canning equivocator in deed and word.  
As touching your 6, 7, and 8, pages, I need not say any thing more than what is in my defence.  
And in the ninth page, where you mention sundry books, as an Epistle to the Church of Rome the tree of Regeneration, T. L. upon some part of the Revelation. And my book against Anabaptists; I advise the Reader not to believe your bare report, but to read and consider the books, and then judge as he finds.  
And concerning the Sabbath, and the observation of the first day of the week, I have declared my mind in my defence, and elsewhere; which I request the judicious Reader to think of and judge as he seethe cause, and not let D. D. be the judge.  
And in the tenth page you say that I vilify the Sacraments, particularly that of Baptism; in that I say it doth not convey grace, nor consume it to the heart of any man, no more than circumcision did. Let the Christian Reader that is not Arminiamish nor Popish, but truly Orthodoxal, judge if this be a vilifying of Baptism, or if it be a holding of no baptism, but that of Repentance and Regeneration, or a point of Familisme as you speak.  
And to say that Caesar may command a place for the public worship of God, so he forbidden none in private, and explaining my indening as I have done in my ●●●●ence; if this be equivocation, or a familisticall wick, or that of yours M. Doctor, in your Wolvish-Sermon book, page 44. where you quote a page of my book against Anabaptists; where these words Caesar may command a place for the public, etc. are, and 〈◊〉: out two of my words and put in one of your own instead of them, as your reverend witness Henry Robrough hath also done affirming them upon his oath to be my words.  
I pray you Master Doctor, why do you not answer this, and clear yourself and your witness of this equivocation, falsehood, and false-witness-bearing, but smother it over with this new trick of your old lying and scandalous speaking as before in your Pulpits and Sermons, so now here in your answer to my defence.  
And I pray you Sir, why do you not mention the words of those factious books of mine (as you call them) that do condemn all Reformers? I own no such books, or words. These are but your old scandalous and false affirmations; In my defence it may be seen by my words what I mean concerning the Church of England.  
And whereas in page 11. you affirm, that because I say the true Church of Christ consisteth of true regenerate servants of God, sanctified by faith in Christ: therefore I hereby deny the Church of England to be a true Church of Christ. It is manifest by this affirmation of yours, that yourself do deny the Church or England, to be a true Church of Christ; for if you deny it to be of that holy universal Church which consisteth of Saints regenerate (as by necessary consequence from your words) you do; than it is you that do it, and not I.  
I say the Church of England as it is, and may be called a true Church of Christ, is and must needs be a part of that holy universal; although in the outward estate thereof, there are, and may be many in it that are not sanctified (and so not of it. And it is not your often clamour, and scandalous terms of familisme, etc. that can make your matter good, or clear your witness Henry Robrowgh (that deposeth this very thing against me upon the same ground) whereby he himself denies the Church of England to be a true Church of Christ, nor prove any thing against me. Let the Reader consider and judge of these things.  
And in that you say, and your witnesses swear that I charge the Church of England with teaching false doctrine, because I have charged you, and some such as you are, therewith, as if the Church of England consisted of them, and you; Nay, Sir, that is not so, neither will it so follow, though your false witness hath sworn it.  
The Doctrine that I except against both in you, and them I will mention some part. And first this of yours.  
That the fourth Commandment touching the Sabbath was always, and in every part mortal, and in no part Ceremonial; affirming for proof thereof, and saying, It was command in Paradise, before any Ceremony was hatched.  
2 That Christ between his resurrection and ascension did alter the Commandment from the seventh day; to the first; and informed his Apostles thereof.  
3 That Christians are now bound by the same fourth Commandment, to as strict an observation of the first day of the week, as the Jews were of the seventh.  
4 That Christ when he bid the man that was healed on the Sabbath day, take up his bed and walk, He commanded the the breach of a mortal precept.  
All this he said in his inveighing against me by name in his Pulpits; and because I had once (many years before) done some small work upon a needful occasion on the first day of thee week, which he had heard of, he broke out against me vehemently affirming that I could not be of God; and saying for proof thereof (using the words of the Pharisees against Christ) We know (as it is written) this man is not of God, because he keepeth not the Sabbath day, john 9.16.  
5 That; ustifying faith is before repentance, and affirming that it is a damnable error, to hold that repentance doth necessarily go before justification from our sins by faith, or justifying faith.  
6 That when God to prove Abraham, commanded him to offer his Son for a sacrifice; he commanded him to murder him, and to break the sixth Commandment.  
7 That the Isralitas in taking such things of the Egyptians. as they in favour let them have, did steal from them and break the eighth Commandment, and that God did approve of the breach thereof.  
8 That God is not only a spectator, but a powerful agent in sin.  
9 That God did preordain that Adam should fall and break his commandment.  
10 That the Prophet Elisha in saying to Naaman the Assyrian, Go in peace; did say as much, as get thou gone thou hypocrite, get thee hence.  
11 That Christ may yet personally descend from heaven to the earth before the day of judgement, for any Scripture there is to the contrary, and that although it be said the heavens shall receive Christ until the times of the restitution of all things, Yet it is not said they shall contain him till then.  
These are part of Stephen Denizens doctrine which he delivered in his Sermons preached at Creechurch, and great All-hallows, while he was reviling and scandalising of me, all which doctrine I account false.  
And by some others whom I will not now name, but shall hereafter if occasion require. It hath been taught, that the Jews should be delivered (every one of them remainig alive) out of all Countries to the land of Canaan, and be converted all of them to be true christians, and dwell in the land in great glory, with a great King of their own stock (either Christ himself, or some other in his stead) for a thousand years before the end of the world.  
And by others, that Christ shall indeed come personally and raise up all the Saints that have suffered) or as some of them teach) all the Saints in general that are asleep, and reign with them on earth a thousand years before the end of the world, and resurrection of the unjust; which doctrine of these. I also account false and contrary to the Scriptures.  
And concerning Robrowghs false doctrine, I have in part spoken in my defence, and I hope hereafter things shall be manifested more fully concerning that passage between him and me.  
And whereas in the end of your eleventh page you affirm of me that I stick not to say, that I hold the Sabbath to be in force, and that the last day of the week is to be observed. I pray Mr. Doctor, when, or where have I spoken or writ these words, that the last day of the week is to be observed, who juggles and equivocates now?  
And in your twelfe page, how you have answered my defence, I refer to the judicious Reader, that hath, or shall read both, to consider. Your foul terms with those that are wise, will work nothing against me.  
And for your false clamours in the thirteenth page, that I will have no duties pressed on the Lordsday, neither prayers, nor preaching, nor coming to the Sacraments; but christians left to do what they list. I hope the Reader will discern you in this, because he may see in my defence it is otherwise, and that you utter out false words of your own inventing, having no respect at all unto truth, or a good conscience.  
And for those Authors which I have quoated in my defence, whom you say I have notoriously abused, I refer the Reader to their own Records; to see if I have abused them or no.  
And as touching the two last books of Esdras, I have declared my mind already in my defence; only this I say further, that it is manifest by the account of the Generalogie, and other passages in Ezra the 7. compared with 1 Esdras 8. they are one and the same; and therefore in sundry former bibles these two last books are numbered the 3, and 4, of Esdras. And for those words or names of distinction, Canonical and Apocryphal, I take them to intent nothing but this; That the one part of Scripture being found written in the Hebrew tongue, and being for that cause, and sundry other more manifest, and certain proofs concluded in the first times of the Church to be the Word of the Lord certainly, was therefore called canonical. The other part not so found, nor as yet for that present so evidently proved and manifested to the Church, to be so certainly the word of the Lord, as the other was left as Scriptures, yet secret and hidden; and therefore called Apocryphal; not but that it might (at least some part thereof, be found and proved certainly to be the Word of the Lord, as well as the other, and so concluded and received by the church of God; though it be not, nor hath any need to be called canonical, nor is ever the worse in itself, for the name Apocryphal; nor unto such as understand in their heart, and believe the truth thereof.  
And in the 14. page, or 90. as it stands in the end of your wolvish sermon-book, were you speak of private meetings by the laws prohibited, and poisonful doctrines, etc. what you please there to speak. As touching the first part, I refer the Reader to my defence against your last Article.  
But as concerning the other part which you call the seventh thing culpable; where you say I affirm, and that most pestilently, that outward baptism doth neither confer nor confirm grace to the heart of any man, no more than circumcision did etc.  
I pray sir, are you a Papist, or an Arminian, or an Anabaptist, for belike you hold it doth, as they teach. I confess I hold that it doth not no more than circumcision in the flesh did, according as the right Protestants hold; neither is this a most pestilent thing, as you blasphemously speak, but the very truth in this point. Grace is conferred and confirmed to the heart of a christian by a more supernatural power, then is or can be in the outward act of baptism, even by the power and Spirit of God. Outward baptiseme, I hold to be an outward seal of God's faithfulness; in, and as touching his covenant to the faithful, and their seed; as circumcision in the flesh was to faithful Abraham, and his seed. And that it is an outward sign showing that we must be circumcised, or cleansed in heart by the grace and Spirit of God, through faith in Christ, if ever we be heirs with Abraham. And so I hold outward baptism to be in force unto christians, as circumcision was to the Jews, contrary to your lying words, that say I deny it. Neither is this a familisticall trick as you so scandalously speak, according to your old customs in your wolvish book, and in your former invective Sermons.  
And although there be now no High-Commission Court, as you tell me; implying that you would complain against me again there, if there were; yet let me tell you sir, there are other Courts as high and as good as that, and laws also as just, and good to judge of these matters, unto which you may complain if you please.  
And whereas in your 91 page, otherwise the 15, you say I have a fling at the Lords Supper (a fine phrase for a Doctor) And that under colour of speaking against the carnal eating and drinking the body and blood of Christ in that Sacrament. You say I condemn also the opinion of spiritual eating; for say you, these are my words; Neither do we by the actions of eating the bread, and drinking the wine of the Sacrament, eat or drink the grace of God purchased by the body and blood of Christ. I confess these are my words in my defence.  
Now I pray sir, do I in these words deny, or condemn the opinion as you speak, of spiritual eating and drinking the body and blood of Christ, or the spiritual enjoyment of the grace and love of God through faith in Christ, which that Sacrament of the Supper doth show forth unto all true christians. Nay, let the judicious christian Reader judge and consider what is further expressed in my defence.  
But you Mr. Doctor, your opinion and doctrine belike is, that Christians by the very acts of eating the bread, and drinking the wine of the Sacrament, eat and drink the grace of God. Is this your orthodoxal doctrine sir,, is this your opinion of spiritual eating? a fit man sure, are you not, to preach the Lecture of preparation to the Sacrament, as you are admitted to do at Buttolph's without Algate, and well are the people taught there the while, are they not, let the orthodoxal Reader judge.  
That religious gentlewoman (as I suppose she truly was, which gave you that legacy to perform that work) had done far better if she had given it to the poor widow and fatherless, or have left the same to such overseers as should have disposed it to some one that could and would have performed the work better, and more found them so.  
Now to make some use of your own phrase, M. Doctor, who doth grossly abuse divinity, who is the proud ignorant sot, who is meet to be censured to stand at Pauls-Crosse with a paper on his breast expressing his grossly abusing divinity, and venting false doctrine poisoning of others, with a thousand eyes looking upon him, Doctor Denison, or who, let the judicious reader judge?  
It is true, M. Doctor, that through you, and your false witnesses Henry Robrostgh, and john Okeie, and by their false depositions; false I say, as the Reader by my defence may plainly see. One Bishop said in passing sentence, according as you in your answer at the end of your wolvish book have set it down; which I had myself written in a copy of my defence, which you had unjustly gotten, and kept among you from me, otherwise I suppose you could not so readily have mentioned them; but it is no matter, I have suffered a great deal more than that, by your false and wicked dealing, and the rest of your false witnesses, Rowland Thomson, Thomas Rogers, George Dun, Peter Worcester, Christopher Nicholson, and the rest; as I have in my defence in some part declared.  
And now M. Doctor, let me propound a matter or two unto you. You may see, and so may others by this and by my defence especial; how plainly and openly I have declared and published the things by you charged, by your witnesses deposed, and by the High-Commission Court passed in sentence against me, and what in part I have suffered, and do still suffer through the same. And you may see how I refer all to the judicious christian Reader, to consider of, and judge.  
You know sir that after this cause of yours against me, there was (as I have a little remembered you of before) a Cause or two commenced against yourself in the same High Commission Court, concerning some of the chief of your Porish of Creechurch, and some several women, whom you were charged to have abused. They of your Parish publicly in your Pulpit, and the women secretly in your chamber; I will not here name the particular abuses, they were plainly enough spoken and read in the Court; the foulness whereof being such, as caused all, or the most part of the people there present, hearing the same, to hang down their heads greatly ashamed thereat, when you stood holding up your head boldly in the face of the Court, not seeming to be ashamed at all, which many did wonder at to behold; and one Bishop observing you, and having heard the foul matters that were deposed against you by so many witness (as you know) not knight of the post sir, any more than as you tell me they were not, that deposed your Cause against me; but such, as if the Reader please he may inquire of as you speak. This Bishop as you may remember, reproved you very sharply; and said, do you see how boldly he stands here before us, facing us, he hath a forehead of brass.  
Now sir, if your Cause be so good, and yourself so honest and innocent as you would have all men think (which yet they do not) wright done all what your accusers have charged you with, and what hath been deposed against you, and by what manner of persons, every thing in their own plain words, and what the sentence of the Court was, and publish the same openly in print, with your defence unto every particular charge and deposition, as you see I have done that of yours against me. Do this I say if your cause be good, and clean, and yourself honest, and upright, (it will be no greater chage I suppose then the new reprinting of your wolfe-sermon; that so all men may see plainly, and judge of the cause, and you accordingly. But otherwise, if it be naught and foul, and yourself justly charged, as you in your own conscience know best; then let it alone except in the way of humble confession of your sins unto God in true repentance, if it be possible.  
Another thing that I propound unto you is, concerning myself, and you, and your witnesses; seeing my defence will not silent you, nor all that I have unjustly suffered by your means, satisfy you; that you, and they will be willing with me, to have all matters between us heard and considered of anew in a fair way, either before the Bishop of London, and some other Ministers chosen on both sides, or else by some Committee of the Parliament, if it may be obiained, that so the blame may be laid rightly where it ought.  
And as touching your Pauls-Crosse wolvish-sermon, that masterpiece of yours, which you in the conclusion of your answer to my defence; say you have for this Cause caused to be new printed, that so the Reader may see whether I have answered what concerns me in it, or no, telling in print, of purpose, a manifest lie, it being not in any part new printed, but only the rem under of an old impression, printed in Anno 1627. fourteen years ago, to which you have put a new title page, dated 1641. and added your answer to the end, numbering the pages thereof, according to your old book, as if indeed all were printed anew together according to your saying; so to delude the Reader, as your usual custom and manner in all your matters is and hath been to do, with cunning equivocations, falsehood, and lies, whereof that wolvish-sermon book of yours is full, agreeable to your Articles against me in the Court, and to your witnesses depositions, for like master, like scholars and servants, like accuser, like witnesses. And for your book, I say no more of it at this time, but this, let it remain among the rest of your deeds, as it hitherto hath been a monument to the world of your wickedness and folly. And so I leave you, and your witnesses together a while, to consider of all what you have done, and of my propositions; though I have not any belief that you will regard my motion, or have a thought in your heart to do either the one, or the other.  JOHN 3. 
For every one that doth evil hateth the light. neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.  
But he that doth truth, cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest.  
FINIS.