A SHORT ANSWER To A. S.  
ALIAS ADAM STEWART'S Second part of his overgrown Duply to the two Brethren.  
Together with certain difficult questions easily answered; All which A. Stewart is desired to consider of, without replying, unless it be to purpose.  
A. Stevart in his second part of his Duply to the two Brethren. page. 166.  
The civil Magistrate cannot be Orthodox, and tolerate a new Sect, [he means independency, and may as well say Presbytery] unless he tolerate us to believe that he is either corrupted by moneys, or some other way, so to do.  Proverb. 12. 13. The wicked is snared by the trasgression of his lips: but the just shall come out of trouble. 
Printed in the year 1644.   

THREE OF A STEVART'S conclusions, with their parallels, which are added for better explanation of them; their contradicting of themselves and their rebellious Doctrine.  

CONCLUSION. 1.  
Pag. 105. The supreme ecclesiastical Judicature itself may fear that if they judge any thing amiss, their judgements will not be approved, and put in execution in particular Churches; and in all probability they are like to be crossed [just as much as Independents ask for, by this ensuing parallel.]  

Parallel.  
Particular Churches or Congregations may examine the judgements of the supreme Ecclesiastical judicature, and if they find them to be amiss▪ they may refuse to put them in execution, they may cross them.    

Conclusion. 2.  
Pag. 30. The Civil Magistrate is subject in a spiritual way unto the Church; he must learn God's will by the Ministers of the Church who are God's ambassadors sent to him: he must be subject unto ecclesiastical Censures.   

Conclusion. 3.  
Pag. 166. Whatsoever the ecclesiastical Senate or presbytery is bound not to tolerate, but must suppress in the Church; That, the Civil Magistrate is bound not to tolerate, but must suppress in the State: Neither is the Civil Magistrate less bound to put it out of the State; than the presbytery is to put it out of the Church▪ [Exquisite popery; Pestilent Doctrine as appears yet more clearly by this following parallel.]  

Parallel.  
If the Presbytery shall think good to excommunicate King or Parliament; the Civil Magistrate, the people in whom the sovereign power resid●s originally, pag. 167. is absolved from all obedience, and bound to put them out of the Civil State.     

A taste OF A. STEVART'S EXTRAVAGANCIES and contradictions in the second part of his Duply to the two Brethren.  
Page 13. The civil Magistrate [even] as Christian, has power not to admit the true Religion, to reject it, yea when it is received or approved, and confirmed by his secular and civil authority, to reject it and exile it. If the Church be corrupt▪ and Church Officers negligent in their charge, and will not reform it [as the Magistrate thinks good;] he may command, yea compel them to do it. When the Church is reformed, he may command them, when they are negligent to be diligent in their charge. If [he conceive] they oppress any man in their Ecclesiastical judgements and censures▪ against the laws of the kingdom, he may desire them, yea command them to reverse their judgements; and in case they reform them not, [again] command them, yea compel them by his civil power, to give him satisfaction, according to the laws of the kingdom▪ if [he conceive] they derogate not from the laws of God, [which neither Popish nor Turkish Magistrates will acknowledge, though their laws be never so contrary to the word of God.]  
Page. 166. The civil Magistrate if he follow God's word cannot grant a toleration [of Independent Churches] without consent of the Church, if he judge it is not corrupted: [as if the Church being corrupted; the Magistrate may be corrupt too, and tolerate what he will.]  
Page. 47. How be it, The Church compel not to subscribe; yet the civil Magistrate after sufficient conviction may compel to subscribe or to begon. Pag. 179. What power hath the King or Parliament to intrude and force upon the kingdom new religions or a toleration of all Sects? the Parliament assume no such power unto itself.   

A short Answer to A. S. alias Adam Stewart's second part of his overgrown Duply to the two Brethren.  
SIr;  
Had you concealed yourself under the two first letters of your name, all the A. S'es' in town and Country would never have been able to clear themselves; for what you make but words of; however, I may not add a tittle in commendation of you for Preamble to this Pamphlet, as you tell us (and is no more than requisite to justify your own Epistle) is ordinary with writers in dedication of their books, lest I be put to a more shameful recantation than A. S. was, and that for nothing but what charity, as himself confesses, induced him to acknowledge in behalf of the Apologists. Give me leave then to observe first, that pag. 21. 23. you say Idolatry is a sin against the second Commandment. Juris naturalis & perpetui; insinuating that the power and duty of punishing both idolatry and heresy is such also: If so; then it obliges all Nations of the world, and consequently supposes them capable to judge of all manner of idolatry and heresy, which we see to be notoriously false, and that, besides the confounding ecclesiastical with Civil power, whilst one State punishes this or that for heresy, it cannot possibly be otherwise, (since they are not only different but diametrically opposite in profession) but that another must canonize it for a sacred truth: secondly if States and Powers must punish heretics, they are bound to punish those for such only, who in their own judgements are such: and if you will engage States in punishing of heretics, and they punish only such as they find themselves obliged to punish in their own consciences and understandings, How can you according to your doctrine, blame them for punishing God's dearest children instead of heretics, since they took them to be heretics, and thought they had done God and you good service to punish them?  
If we may not suffer heretics to live amongst us; then is the Parliament to blame for suffering German, French, Spanish, and Portugal Papists or Dutch Brownists and Anabaptists to live here amongst us, though as merchants, only for a time; since their marchandizing gives them greater advantage of working people to their opinions by the respective civil conveniences and benefits, which they bring both to the whole Nation in general, and to some in particular; nay, the very ambassadors of what States or Potentates soever of different religions, ought not to be permitted to reside Ledgers amongst us under any pretence, if this doctrine be evangelical: So likewise may not we under pretext of merchandise, live in Turkish Popish Lutheran or other countries differing from us in religion, travel into such parts for fashion sake as is usual, nor keep ambassadors there, nor be by foreign States permitted to remain amongst them, if we would, or on any terms join with such in wedlock; Man may by no means dispense herewith, if the command for punishing heresy and schism be natural and perpetual as is pretended &c.  
Pag. 29. You quote out of Deut. 17. 12. The man that doth presumptuously and will not harken unto the Priest, or unto the judge, even that man shall die; aleadging, that there is the sa●e reason for the Ministers of the New Testament &c. But that we may clearly see what dangerous consequences would follow hereupon, it may be best to return back unto the place in Deut. 17. 8. 9 10. 11. 12. 13. The text says; If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgement between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, being matters of controversy within thy gates: then shalt thou arise and get thee up into the place which the Lord thy God shall choose: And thou shalt come unto the Priests and Levites, and unto the judge which shall be in those days and inquire, and they shall show the sentence of judgement: And thou shalt do according to the sentence which they of that place (which the Lord shall choose) shall show thee, and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they inform thee: According to the sentence of the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgements which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do: thou shalt not decline from the sentence which they shall sh●w thee to the right hand nor to the left: then follows how the man that will do presumptuously and will not harken unto the Priest (that standeth to minister there before ●●y Lord thy God) or unto the judge, even that man shall die and then shalt put away the evil from Israel: And all the people shall ●eare, and fear, and do no more presumptuously: To let pass all other exceptions to AS. his misapplication of this text which was directed peculiarly to the Jews, and cannot concern any other people except Papists who interpret Rome to be the place spoken of, verse 18. which God did choose, and the Pope to be sole supreme infallible Judge, Priest and Levite of these days to be inquired after in matter of such difficulty and moment:  
If this law be of natural and perpetual obligation, as is insinuated by saying; there is the same reasons for the Ministers of the Gospel, it will follow, that upon all matter of difference whether for blood, plea, or controversy verse 8. though any people, even God's own, be never so unjustly sentenced, ty●a●●i●ally enslaved, and most Antichristianly persecuted; they must by no means decline such sentence all the days of their life, lest they be thought to do presumptuously and so be put to death:  
What if a good number of the Great Turks subjects should have their understandings enlightened to see the captivity and bondage they are brought into? What if God should open the eyes of Papists in Spain, Italy, and France▪ to see the spiritual fornication they are ravished into, and each of these Nations in a submissive Godly manner humbly implore their Princes both for all common privileges of Nature, and Christian Liberties of the Gospel; If the respective Priests and judges instead of redressing their just grievances shall say as Pharaoh did, Exod. 5. 8. 9 17. To▪ is idleness which makes them seek for lawful privileges and Christian liberties, commanding their Egyption taskmasters to increase both their Civil and spiritual slavery; must they not according to AS. his divinity and policy still suffer themselves and their posterity to continue Turkish bondslaves and Antichristian Idolaters, lest they be judged to do presumptuously and so be put to death? Can AS. avoid this consequence? Will the Priests Levites and Judges appointed in these times and Countries unto which AS. binds them over remediless, give other sentence? Deut. 17. 9 Surely if the case be so, we might well desire that God would make us Jew's to whom as I said those laws were given; or send us Christian laws to govern us withal.  
Tell me a little; when Jereboam set up two calves of gold in Dan and Bethel, crying out behold your Gods O Israel, which brought you up out of the land of Egypt: 1. King. 12. 28. 29. 30. &c. do you not think he did conjure the people not to go up so far unto Jerusalem to sacrifice, alleging from your text in Deut. 17. 8. 9 12. that it was the sentence of the Priest and Judges it should be so, from which they might no whit decline, lest they were found to do presumptuously? Doubtless his plea was this; from hence he enforced his commandment for the people's joining with him in worshipping his Gods, his Calves; and had as good a warrant for it then, as AS. has now to say, there is the same reason for the Presbyterian Ministers of the Gospel to legitimate their own inventions, their Idolatry, The 12. and 13. Chapters of the first of the Kings are worth reading, that beholding their own, in jereboams' sins, and calling to mind God's judgements on him, they may in time repent, lest a worse thing befall them.  
But whereas you would oblige us unrepealably to stand to whatsoever your presbytery degree concerning us, by sacriledgiously producing and blasphemously applying those reasons and effects which were only appliable at such a time, and to such a people as God was pleased to discover doubtful cases to, as by Oracle in the mouth of the High Priest, chief Judge, or Levites; I may not forbear to tell you that your Presbiterians are now no better soothsayers than their neighbours, they must either confess to be of the same royal Priesthood with their brethren in the mass 1. Pet. 2. 9 and so pretend no more than others, or else be out of it, and so be Baal's Priests, if any.  
But that we may clearly understand the full ground, whereupon God required obedience from the people unto the sentence of the Priests Judges and Levites, as also a commensurate reason, why the people might not only without scruple, but with full and entire satisfaction yield such obedience, as was expected from them, it may be exceeding requisite to make search into God's original proceedings, as well before, as after, that he imposed his commands upon the Jews in this behalf.  
First, God calls upon Moses saying, that he would send him unto Pharaoh to bring his Israel out of Egypt. Exod. 3. 10. Moses excuseth himself unto the Lord, saying, they would not beleave him nor harken 〈◊〉 him, alleging, that the Lord had not appeared unto him. chap. 4, 1. Hereupon the Lord furnished him with miracles from verse. 3. to 9 and 17. 21. ordering him to take Aaron unto his assistance, saying, that he would be with both their mouths and teach them what they should say. verse, 12. 15. that Aaron should put upon his heart the breastplate of Judgement wherein was urim and Thuminim, that he should bear the judgement of the children of Israel upon his heart before the Lord continually Exod. 28. 30. Lev. 8. 8. according whereunto Jethro (prophetically no doubt) counselled Moses his son in Law not to beware out himself with continual attendance of the people from morning until evening to inquire for them of God, but that he would provide able men out of all the people, who might judge of all smaller matters themselves, and bring the greater unto Moses, who was to be for the people to godward, and bring the causes unto God. Exod. 18. from verse, 8. 13. to 22. And when Moses was to be gathered to his people, the Lord required him to lay his hands on Joshua, in whom was the spirit, that he might be enabled to go in and out before the people, and stand before the Priest who should ask counsel for them in all doubtful matters. Numb. 27. 13. 17. 18. 21.  
The Priests and judges being thus miraculously qualified, God commanded the people in all straits and controversies of difficulty to have recourse unto them for sentence or direction; according whereunto they were required to yield absolute obedience without gainsaying or murmuring, lest they were put to death as those that did presumptuously, Deut. 17. 8. to 13. and 19 7. 2. ch. 19 11. 1. Sam. 9 9 2. Sam▪ 24. 11. 1, King. 14. 3. 2. King. 8. 8. with diverse others: and well they did deserve it doubtless, when they might see such infallible evidence in these minister of the Lord, that it was his divine pleasure it should be so, and that for their advantage too▪ The children of Israel therefore had recourse unto them upon all occasion, and the Lord kept good correspondence with them, not answering them by amphibologies, doubtful and delusive Oracles, but by discovering to them, his will his purposes and intentions about whatsoever they inquired of him 1. Sam 22. 13. 14. 15. Jer. 23. 37. Amos 3. 7. Judg. 1. 1. and 20. 18 So on the contrary, when they took in hand an enterprise without asking his counsel and advice, we may observe it did not thrive with them, it proved otherwise than they desired, as when Joshua made league with the Gibeonites Joshua 9 14.  
And now not to send you again to the Jews, though you will have much a do to find an other Nation to which you may apply your text of Deut. 17. 8. 9 in which the sentence spoken of, must either be fallible, or infallible; if fallible, than it follows that God required the people to harken, and be Subject unto such sentences as might be sinful; such as they apprehended to be unjust and sinful; such as were in themselves absolutely sinful, (for all these cases might possibly have happened upon such a supposition) which were blasphemy to imagine: If the sentence be to be presumed infallible, then questionless God might very justly require the people to be subject to it and impose a law unalterable after the manner of the meads and Persians, that such as would not hearken to it, might be condemned to die, as one that did presumptuously:  
Do but prevail then with your Presbyters, in courtesy, to discover to us some gleanings of their prophetic spirit; or let us see what signs and wonders God is pleased to do by their mediation, more than by other men's; and than whosoever will not yield a proportionable honour and obedience to them, for my part, let Artaxarxes his decree be put in execution against him, whether it be to imprisonment▪ confiscation of goods, banishment, or death: Ezra. 7. 26. In the mean time if there be any thing of godliness, or understanding of a man in you, dispense with such as cannot make idols, fall down and worship them.  
Pag. 30▪ says the Civil Magistrate is subject in a spiritual way unto the Church, and that the Church is subject to the civil Magistrate in a civil way: But what if these different Judicatiories will not be subject to each other in their respective spher's? What if the civil Magistrate will not learn God's will by the Ministers of the Church? as AS. says he must.  
Pag. 30. What if he become Heretical, schismatical ● must he● not be proceeded against by the utmost of Church censures, to wit, excommunication? And if he be not worthy to remain in the Church; must he not by AS. his doctrine be turned out, or cut off from the civil State? But some perhaps will be so Court affected as to say, If the Magistrate will be so, who can help it▪ w●● must suffer what we cannot remedy: 'Tis true we must; but pag, 166. you say that whatsoever the ecclesiastical Senate or presbytery is bound not to tolerate but must suppress in the Church; that, the civil Magistrate or Senate it bound not to tolerate, but must suppress in the State, since he is a nurse of the State, and keeper of the two Tables: and since whatsoever power the civil Magistrates have, is derived from the people; Who says there is no remedy against a Magistrate thus offending? Are not both Houses of Parliament, are not millions of the people enough to do justice in such a case?  
But what if the civil Magistrate be without, not of the Church? can you not with Paul be contented that God should judge him? 1 Cor. 5 13. If you say 'tis now too late to make such a query, and that he was admitted into the Church by baptism so long since, will he not, think you, repent his baptism, and co●● such little thanks as promised submission for him unto the Church without his order and consent? Nay, will he not plead nonage? you know there are many good laws provided for relieving of the Pupillage in money matters; Having then thus m●●acled the Civil Magistrate whilst he was in swaddling clouts, you say he must now be subject to the Church; and that if he be once turned out of the Church, he must likewise be turned out of the Civil State▪ Is not this the Popish doctrine of l●●●ing Subjects from their obedience to Prince or Parliament? Are we thus leapt out of the Popish frying-pan into the midst of Presbyterian firebrands? But, I dare say, you●●● stagger, & deny the words, being laid unto your charge; the truth is, I find by this discourse, that you have a treacherous memory, which hath led you into such a company of unreconcilable contradictions, far worse than many thieves and harlots, but if your heart or understanding had been better than your memory, this doctrine had never issued: Turn then to p●. 166▪ where you say that whatsoever the Presbytery may not tolerate in the Church, the Civil Magistrate must not tolerate in the State; then turn to p. 179 where you say that all power is Originally in the people, which makes them the supremest Magistrate of all, above both King & Parliament; as King & Parliament are above other inferior and subordinate Magistrates▪ Now if you know how to spell & put these together, this Popish doctrine besides others will clearly arise from thence, to wit; that if Primes and Magistrates become heretics, they may be excommunicated; if excommunicated, the subjects are freed from their obedience to them; and the people which having all power in themselves originally, become the supremest Magistrate of all, are bound to cut them off from the civil State, whether they be Kings or Parliaments. But let us beware of such Infernal tenets, according unto which there would be found no safety, neither for Prince nor Parliament; but each of them, and every body else, all alike, be forced to be of whatsoever religion shall by most voices in a consistory or Synod, be thought to be the true one (which is too great a hazard) or else be deemed to do presumptuously, and so lose their lives: But ch. 3. you say, if the Church be corrupt, and the Church Officers negligent in their charge, and will not reform it, the civil Magistrate may command, yea, compel them to do it; or if they will not, he may extraordinarily do it himself▪ Good now; who shall here reach the Civil Magistrate whether the Church be corruptor no? At what time the Church Officers be negligent in their charge, not willing to reform; and when they oppress any man with ecclesiastical censures? If you say the Civil Magistrate himself may see it by bringing them to the rule of God's word; do you not contradict yourself in page 30. and elsewhere saying, the Civil Magistrate must learn God's will by the Ministers who are God's ambassadors sent unto him? is it possible to reconcile the Civil Magistrate unto the spiritual office-bearers in such a case as this? nay, is it ever possible for AS. to make his atonement with this present Assembly for frustrating so many years' endeavours as they are like to make of it, in saying the Civil Magistrate hath power not to admit the true Church, to reject it, yea, when it is received or approved, and confirmed by his secular and Civil authority, to reject it and exile it Ibid? which yet is true enough; but do you think the Synod would have taken so great pains, and our Scotch brethren have sacrificed so much of their own blood, if even at best it should have been so hazardous whether ever their Presbyterian discipline should be received or no; or when received▪ rest in ●uch daily danger to be turned out again with shame? Is it not an ea●●y matter for the Civil Magistrate to say, these Presbyterian Churches are grown corrupt, their way of government was never Apostolical and good, they▪ Tyrannize over their brethren instead of feeding them▪ aiming at no Reformation so much as to get themselves into the fattest, benefices, and so banish them into America or some worse place? Woe would it have been for any Independent to have been known to publish such theology such heresy:  
Page 47. You say How be it the Church compel men not by external vi●l●●ce to subscribe contrary to their judgements, yet the Civil Magistrate after sufficient conviction may compel you to subscribe or to be gone &c. The Church you say compels not externally, but the Civil Magistrate may: But whence hath the Civil Magistrate this power in Church affairs? or why may not the Church use the Civil external arms in Church matters, rather than the Civil Magistrate should e●terpose with his own weapons in Church affairs? Is it not all one, think we, in the sight of God, for churchmen, Church Officers themselves to hang such a one whom they deem a heretic, as to set a cross a gallows, a mark upon him, out of a tacit compact with the Civil Magistrate to hang him whensoever, or wheresoever He should meet with him? If a combination of any people should thus compass the death of any man, would they not all equally be found guilty? shall a politic reservation of Popish Canon or Civil law to keep the clergy from the peoples odium, thus delud all Christians to the end of the world? may churchmen connive▪ approve, teach, and applaud the Civil Magistrate in punishing whosoever they suppose to be heretics by imprisonment or death; and not as innocently as Christianly be executioners themselves? Perhaps they will say they have no authority nor call to become executioners, to banish▪ imprison or put to death (and yet they have as good a call as to approve it in the Civil Magistrate;) but this is not the point we stand upon: What if a town or Principality were given unto a company of Presbyterian clergymen? (I cannot think they will refuse it) would they in such a case imprison banish or cause heretics to die in this their Principality? If they say (as the Pope in the same case▪ as Pilate when he crucified Jesus▪ and Bishop B●nner whilst he made so many Protestane Martyrs) they may not wash their hands in the blood of heretics; I reply neither in the blood of Civil delinquents by the self same principle of theirs▪ If they refer such judicature and executing of spiritual or Civil Offenders unto Laymen to be their deputies within this Principality of theirs; I answer that this is but a Popish eua●ion; and such blood being shed by their authority or approbation; must be accounted for by them▪ as if they themselves had sat upon the Bench, passed sentence, and been executioners: If heretics were punishable by death as murderers and Traitors, I know no cause but that clergymen▪ if need were, might as actually assist at execution of the one, as of the other: But if any man should expect my opinion of what these Presbyterian clergymen may do upon the proffer of such a Principality; I confess the refusal thereof might seem a very great degree of Evangelical perfection, and the excessive care and travel which is required to govern it, though by a substitute, are altogether inconsistent with the ministry of the Gospel; but to interpret the passing sentence and execution of death by such Deputies or their Officers, to be so entirely the peculiar acts of such Deputies only, as that the said Presbyterian clergymen from whom the jurisdiction is derived, had not even as great a share therein▪ as if they had been present upon the bench, is a mere Popish invention and delusion.  
Our Saviour and his Apostles did neither tell the Magistrates that then were, that it concerned them so much more to become Christians that they might compel their Subjects to be so too; nor yet gave the Christians instructions, or left upon record any such order or warrant▪ that when ever the Magistrate did become Christian they might constrain the people to Christianity &c.  
But in the same Pag. 74. you grant these Spiritual Delinquents must be first sufficiently convinced, alleging that after a sufficient conviction, it is, morally, and should be supposed that they know the truth; or should know it; or if they know it not, that nothing can have bl●dered them, but their own pertinaciousnes, which cannot excuse, but rather aggravates their ●in: But what, I pray, or how much do you call sufficiently convinced? How can any one do otherwise, than yield unto whatsoever you have convinced him of▪ How can you be infallibly assured that a man ●s sufficiently convinced, if he himself denies it? How know you which is God's ●●oure for convincing of a man? May not you likewise possibly interpret a dulness of apprehension in him, or your own want of truly and well informing him, to be his obstinate wilful rejecting of the truth▪ Are there not above 24 degrees of capacity and understanding between some men, and shall such whom God and Nature have made more dull or less ingenious in judging of Presbyterian Discipline or doctrine be condemned to banishment or death for these defects of Nature, believing, or discoursing about matters of belief, or but opinion only? Such you say the Civil Magistrate may compel to subscribe, [against their conscience] or to be gone: But who gives the Civil Magistrate this authority▪ Or how comes he to know or understand them to be heretics? The Presbyterian clergymen, I hope, will be no more informers than executioners; I am sure in most (of such as are aleadged to be) Christian countries, the Informer is counted more infamous than the Executioner, because the one does all the business for the most part in darkness and under board; whereas the other exposes his actions to the public view▪  
But why may not Church Officers themselves as well hang or cut the throat of such a heretic, whom they have prepared and designed for the shambles of the Civil magistrates execution, by their excommunicating of him? If the putting him to death were just, they need not use any Machiavellian Stratagem to prevent the people's censuring them of cruelty, or make so nice to ●owle their fingers with the blood of such as they put to death deservedly: The Levites when Moses required them every man to kill his Son, his brother, companion, and his neighbour, were not so scrupulous Exod. 32 27. 28. 29. And why may not the Civil Magistrate as well excommunicate, as banish or otherwise punish any heretics? Do not all punishments inflicted for spiritual offences, equally become spiritual? Or is it not necessary they should be spiritual to work a Spiritual effect? doubtless they be, or aught to be so; and if hanging of a spiritual offender be as lawful as excommunicating of him, surely, both the Civil Magistrate, and the Presbyterian Church Officers may execute him, both alike.  
Please then to satisfy me concerning these three Queries:  

1. By what authority does the Civil Magistrate punish a heretic?  
2. What is it he punishes him for?  
3. And Thirdly, upon what ●●●all and indictment?   
If the few particular warrants upon special occasion for punishing some certain Idolaters expressy pointed it in the old Testament, obliged all Magistrates then▪ and ever since to do the like; you must condemn the greatest part of Godly▪ Magistrates for omitting it▪ and if you will ha●● extraordinary 〈◊〉 to ●●gage th●● there unto upon all ordinary 〈◊〉 you must in●er that 〈◊〉 the People of the land who have entered into the la●e solemn League and Covenant are bound with one accord to assault & cut the throats of all the Papists they should meet withal, without any farther process or impeachment, just as the Israelites served Mattan, B●als priest after that jehoida had made a covenant between the Lord, the King, and the people 2. King 11. 17. 18. Secondly, For what cause does the Civil Magistrate punish this Church Offender? were it for Civil delinquency, than is he no longer a mere heretic a bare Church offender; the Church would have no jurisdiction to punish him for such Civil delinquency: But that you may see it was for spiritual, for Church offences for which he is unjustly banished, imprisoned or put to dea●h; it will appear upon the third Query or Inquiry, that the Civil Magist●ate proceeds against him after an implicit manner, by passing sentence by putting him to death upon the Church trial and indictment only; or else arraigns him the second time for the self same offence, (a double injury and injustice) which, besides, being spiritual, the Civil Magistrate has no cognizance, is no competent Judge thereof, nor can take upon himself any such authority without confounding the ecclesiastical Judicature with the Civil.  
But I must trouble your patience a little longer with an other touch upon this string, this whipcord which you grant the Magistrate to scourge your Brethren withal, in confidence yourselves for this benevolence shall scape scotfree, and pass for white boys, whatever offences you commit; this no doubt will expiate them all, and make atonement for them though they be never so many:  
You say the Civil Magistrate may compel [men of different opinions] to subscribe or to be gone; nay, you say the Civil Magistrate may command and compel a corrupted Church and negligent Church Officers into a Reformation; and that even when they are Reformed, he may command and compel them by his Civil power, to give satisfaction, and reverse such ecclesiastical censures and judgements, as the Civil Magistrate shall apprehend to be oppressing unto any man, or contrary to the Civil laws: Tell me, is this power which you present the Civil Magistrate withal in spiritual matters, a lesser, less spiritual or efficacious power, than what you reserve as peculiar to the Church? If it be less, the Civil Magistrate surely is much beholding to you that you are so bountiful to him of such scraps; that you will set him ● work (as the Egyptian taskmaster did the Israelites Exo. 5. 18.) with such leavings and shredds of discipline, and yet expect he should do that for you, which all your broad sides and batteries of Decrees, Ordnance, and Canons of Excommunication &c. could not effect; And why I pray may not the Church herself make use of small shot as well as greater? But if you mean really side publica, and this power which you attribute to the Civil Magistrate concerning Spiritual Offenders and offences, be greater, more Spiritual and efficacious to win and gain men unto true piety and godliness by fining, banishing, imprisonment or death; Can you not give him in the vantage? Can you not let him have the lesser of Excommunication and other Ceremonious (in comparison of Civil Coercive) Censures?  
Briefly then; if this power which you give the Civil Magistrate about the Church, be a toy or trifle, bate it him, and let not so many thousand Ind●pendents your Brethren be longer scandalised thereat; But if you insist still to make it of so great concernment and necessity, teaching the people that the Civil Magistrate must likewise be a terror to spiritual offenders; assure yourself that both Magistrate and People, will likely ere long see the injustice and absurdity, of having two Magistrates to punish one offender for one fault, which also may disagree, may possibly contradict each other in their sentences, resolving through the corrupted principles which you instil, that the Civil Magistrate has power and understanding sufficient to discipline and govern both Church and State.  
But perhaps you'll say there is an Act of Parliament, a Civil law declaring heresy, or any different, from the State opinions, such as for the present are in fashion to be censurable by the Civil power: I answer not without all due respect unto the laws and such as made them, that if there be any distinction betwixt a Church State and a Civil State, which all Christians ●itherto acknowledged, the enacting Civil laws to punish spiritual offences, is not only a solecism an impropriety in State, but an encroaching on the church's power, a profaning of the keys, and injurious to the offender, who by this means is punished both beyond the degree and nature of his offence.  
But if you remember, as I put you in mind of before; pag. 1●●, you say, Whatsoever the Ecclesiastical Senate or presbytery is bound not to tolerate, but must suppress in the Church; that the Civil Magistrate is bound not to tolerate but must suppress in the State: But if this be true, must not the Civil Magistrate join with the ecclesiastical in judging of heresy, schism and all Church offences? Or if, forsooth, your meaning be the Presbyterial Officials shall have the pre-eminence and pass their verdict first; Are not the Civil Powers obliged to pass the like implicitly, to do the same good justice whether it be right or wrong, or else set at large, to give a different judgement, and so, ips● fact●, condemn your doctrine as arrogant and Heretical? Oh that you would but ba●e us these impertinencies, these inconsistencies▪ how many fair sheets of paper would it have saved from fowling? But whereas you enthraule the Magistrate hereunto as Nursing-Fathers and Mothers; you may as well engage your Nurse to knock all children on the head, because they speak not so readily or plainly as your own, though sublimated, extracted from Mercury's brain: And yet this rule of yours needs not be so stout to admit of no exceptions no qualifications; since the offspring of Fornication or adultery are forward Imps, and forwardness a character of such Imps, though otherwise undiscovered to the world:  
But for the text in Esa. 4●. 23. which prophesied that the King● of the Gentiles should become Nursing Fathers and their Queen's Nursing Mothers unto the Church: mean you by their fighting for it? By their cruel persecuting or tormenting Christians? 'Tis clearly by submitting themselves unto the Churches spiritual yoke, by whose example their subjects might be encouraged to do the like, of their own free accord and Godly disposition, without the least colour of compulsion, in that the Blessed spirit in the end of the same verse, brings for a reason of these Kings and Queen's administering to the Church, That they shall not be ashamed that wait for him? Now there would want a just capacity in them of being ashamed, for waiting on the Church, or on Christ the Head thereof, if they were constrained to wait.  
Pag. 60. You say an Ecclesiastical judicatore is nothing else but a certain n●mber of men endowed with an authoritive power according to God's word to judge of Church ●usinesses according to God's glory, and the weak of the Church; or in a word, the representative Church of one Parish, ●l●sse Province, Nation or of all the world: But where meet you with any such chimaera of an Ecclesiastical Indicatorie in all the word of God? Where find you such an authoritive power as is by you insinuated? Where find you that it would be either for God's glory, or the church's weal it should be so? and last of all, Where find you that a certain number of ecclesiastical men, may be the Representative Church of the whole world? Though you rack and torture the 15th. and all other Acts of the Apostles by all the ecclesiastical judicatories and Authoritative Powers which you can muster up, you will never be able to get so much as a distinguishable echo from them to this purpose: However, please your own imagination; erect as many Consistorial Babel's as you will; hammer out what Decrees yourselves think good; and if you can, with a good conscience, tell us, we may do well if we observe them: But go no farther; since the Church of Jerusalem (which you will, I believe, acknowledge your only precedent for Assemblies) did no more; and yet there were present there, Apostles inspired men; whereas if there be any thing else in the very best of your ecclesiastical Judicatories, as you call them, besides such infirmities a● are common to you, with any other number of your brethren, 'tis more than all the world believes; and therefore blame them not if they cannot run ●udwink'd with you into Limbo, purgatory or Hell, since the way to heaven is too straight for men of implicit faith, blind zeal, orignorant devotion (which are the best fruits your Presbyterian discipline can produce) to light upon: And besides the manifold weighty exceptions which have been made already, and may yet be farther multiplied, to prove that to be no Synod or Ecclesiastical judicatory in Act. 15. Tell me, good Sir, whether if they will make that a precedent; the Assembly which sits now at Westminster may not according to the same grounds send their Synodal Decrees into Germany, France, Spain, Italy and other pretended Christian Countries, as well as they of Jerusalem did into Syrio, Cilicia, who had no R●presentatives in Jerusalem, that we hear of, at the making of those Decrees? and by consequence, any certain number of men who have but confidence ●nough, and the Civil sword to fight for them, (else they will be thought to say and do a● little to the purpose as their neighbours) may take upon them to be an Ecclesiastical Judicature, the Representative Church, and so condemn the whole world into spiritual captivity, because their fancies tell them it is for God's glory and the church's weal it should be so? But suppose that Antioch, Syria and Cilicia were willing to receive and yield obedience unto the Decrees which were made by the Church of Jerusalem where there were present inspired Apostles; must this needs oblige all other Churches now to do the same towards such as have no more infallibility than their brethren? especially whether they will or no? were not this to hang the Christian liberty of the whole Church Militant upon the arbitrary proceedings of some few particular congregations only? Good Sir consider of it.  
To the exceptions which are justly alleged against the peremptoriness of some Ecclesiastical Synods and Assemblies which think they may Parallel their own decisious with those of the Apostolical Church of Jerusalem Act. 15. which were infallibly certain of the Holy Ghosts Assistance, or else might possibly have erred, and consequently seduced all Christians unto the end of the world, which would be blasphemy of the greatest magnitude to imagine; You ask wherefore may not every particular Minister say it seemeth good to the Holy Ghost and me? To which I answer, that your Ministers and you too, may be rash in saying so, as you are in other matters: Who can hinder you? But must all the world be mad or sottish to believe you? because you are rash to say you know not what? You say, that what seemeth good to the Holy Ghost, should likewise seem good to all Ministers; I say so too; but not contrariwise? which rests on you to prove, or not require obedience as though the Holy Ghost were in your bosom, were at your beck: It is true, that whatsoever the Church does rightly bind or lose on earth, is infallibly confirmed in heaven; but that upon this presumption, every A S. a Synod or Assembly may take upon them to bind and lose, such as are not of their Congregation prescribing both discipline and doctrine unto their brethren, according to their own imaginations; much less expect that others should take their Decisions to be Oracles, and themselves little God almighty's; Is a character of such high floane conceitedness and presumption, as since the creation was never equalised by any, except the son of the morning, Lucifer himself Es. 14. 12. 13. Surely if God should say of these men (as he did ironically of Adam) behold they are become like us; they can make new Scriptures, new religions; they are like enough to take him at his word, still soothing themselves in their fond attempts, until with Adam they were excluded Paradise:  
You think you may say it seemeth good to the Holy Ghost and you; and what if I should grant you may possibly in some sense▪ say so unto your own heart with a good conscience? Must your conscience therefore become a rule, a yoke to other men's? And if the Blessed spirit should at any time be are witness unto your spirit, or unto the spirit of a whole Parliament and Synod, what were this to the spirits of other men? Must not they wait with patience until the Blessed Spirit be pleased to visit their Spirits likewise, before they can join with yours or the Assemblies Spirit? But if the Synods Determination of this or that controversy should seem good unto the Holy Ghost, as the church's Decrees of Jerusalem did; Must they therefore be imposed upon the Country, the whole world? Is not this to equalise your Synodal Canons with those Decrees of the Apostolical Church of Jerusalem, and so make Scripture of yours as well as theirs? Is not this to add to Scripture? Nay, to alter it? For adding to it is ipso facto altering, and it is said thou shalt not add thereto? Deut. 4. 6. Revel. 22. 18.  
Can you or any Synod say they are, or will be at any time, at their pleasure infallibly assisted by the Holy Ghost? If not; Why do you take so much upon you? But you will say, you fast and pray; you mean and hope well; May not a company of tinkers and cobblers say the like? But you are more wise, learned, noble, and therefore think it fitting that others should yield to your determinations; rather than you to such as are rustic, illiterate, and obscure; This in courtesy, may be granted you, in part, that is, the not submitting your consciences to Independents; they seek nothing less, being still willing to expect and pray for you with all long suffering and patience: What postumate dispensation then since▪ the Apostles leaving us, have you, not to do the like? They are the Presbyterian Doctors whose Asses must pass for Trumpeters, and whose Geese are Swans; whose war a● must be thought better, and paid for dearer than any of their neighbours; whatever they say must be accounted Seraphical; and mechanics, all laymen wave their own reason and religion whilst they worship theirs:  
'Tis true, that Jesus does tacitly commend Nathaniel for believing in him, because he heard him only say, that he saw him under the figtree; yet withal he tells him that he should see greater things than those Ioh. 1. 50. that is, he should see that, which would be a full and just ground of a higher degree and measure of faith in Christ: in like manner, Paul when he falls upon intergatories with the Jews his brethren after the flesh saying, How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation? He tells them withal that it was such a salvation as first began to be preached by the Lord himself, and afterwards was confirmed unto us by them that heard the Lord, God bearing witness thereunto both with signs and wonders and with diverse miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost Hebr. 2. 2. 3. 4. From whence it follows, that we may now much less believe new Gospels, new doctrines which are not evident in Scripture within the reach of our own capacities, and apprehensions; or upon slender grounds, such as may possibly deceive us; or upon any other less grounds than what are abundantly able to satisfy both the strongest and weakest reasons and understandings of those from whom faith is required.  
It is said in Paul's Epistles to the Ephesians that Christ gave some to be Apostles, some Prophets, Evangelists, pastors and Teachers for the perfecting the Saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifynig of the body of Christ, till we all come in the unity of the faith; some whereof we find to have been more immediately and largely gifted than the rest, as Apostles Prophets and Evangelists, to whom in their rare indowm●nts and power of miracles, we do not know any to have succeeded since the Apostles days: But whether may we not take the want of them as a grievous curse upon all Christians with the rest of the world ever since? Whether can the Gospel be truly and throughly propagated without such infallible officers? How can we be assured that the Gospel has been inviolably conserved and preached unto ●● without such glorious witnesses to bare testimony thereto by signs and wonders! How can the Jews be certain that they have the law and Proph●ts conveyed unto them without being adulterated considering their several captivities and persecutions? Who knows whether Ezra his memory might not fail him, in restoring unto them the Scriptures, as is reported of him, after they were said to be almost all consumed by fire, when the Chaldea●s took Jerusalem? Sixtus Senensis Bibl: Sanct. l. 1. Ezra. pray, must their own or other men's reason be the handmaid to lead them through these Laberinthes.  
We see in Genesis 27. that when Isaac had an intention to bless Esauh; Jacob by his mother Reb●ckah's counsel, having covered his hands and neck with kidskins, subtly counterfeited himself to be Esauh, and so beguiled him of his blessing▪ in the carriage whereof we see that Isaac conceived it was Jacob's voice, but that the hands were the hands of Esauh; whereof though he doubted, yet he suffered himself to beswaid that way, in regard that Jacob affirmed himself to be Esauh; verse 24. even so is it with multitudes of Christians in many points of controversy, whilst the Scriptures furnish us with testimonies which in some respect seem to make for both sides; however, in regard we cannot believe them both, I conceive a man may safely betake himself to that wherein he apprehends more evidence of the two; and though it prove the wrong, yet God may accept of his endeavours and good intention, who did not blame Isaac for thus blessing Jacob through an error, who yet since he had suspicion of him by his voice, might have satisfied himself concerning him, had he but felt the other parts of his body which were not counterfeited.  
Paul likewise although he was a great blasphemer and Persecuter 1. Tim. 1. 13. Act. 26. 9 10. 11. Yet he said of himself that he had lived in all good conscience before God until that day Act. 23. 1. It is a very small thing that I should be judged of man's judgement; I judge not myself, for I know nothing by myself 1. Cor. 4. 3. 4. and Rom. 14. 6. It is said he that regardeth a day regardeth it to the Lord, and he that regardeth not the day unto the Lord, he doth not regard it: he that eateth, eateth to the Lord for he giveth God thanks, and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not and giveth God thanks: From all which way he gathered, that a good meaning and intention is greatly excusable before God, though it were in an erroneous way of fearing him: For all which respects the Presbyterians do not only show themselves injurious in distip ●●ing, and ruling over their brethren, over whom they have no power, being Freemen, Free-Christians equal to themselves; but sacriledgious to God's bountifulness and long suffering, who like the Scribes Pharises Hypocrites lay heavy burdens upon others, but they themselves will not put a finger to: Luk. 11. 46. who straighten, if not quite damn up the way to heaven, not suffering others to enter, nor yet go in themselves. Math. 23. 13. Good now let us fast or feast; let us observe holidays or not; and so for other matters, according as God's spirit shall guide us thereunto, and not the Spirit of a presbytery, unless we could see more in it than in our own.  
Pag. 105. You say The supreme [Church] judicatory may fear that if they judge any thing amiss, their judgements will not be approved, and put in Execution with particular Churches; and in all human probability they are like to be crossed: Pray demur a little, and consider whether in these few lines you have not utterly demolished that mighty (but imaginary) Babel of unlimmited authoritative Jurisdiction which you had raised unto your Classical Presbyteries or Superlative Ecclesiastical Assemblies? Do you not here of your own accord acknowledge that in some cases, i. e. If they judge any thing amiss, the Supreme Church Judioature itself may fear ●er judgements will not be approved and put in execution (so much as) in particular congregations? yea, and that in all human probability they are like to be crossed? Since than you grant your Synods and highest Church Assemblies may judge amiss; and that in such cases particular Churches may refuse to yield obedience; will it not follow by undeniable consequence that such particular Churches must have Power to examine and even judge the judgements of such Assemblies according to their own reasons and understandings? And that whatsoever shall appear to be decreed or ordered amiss by such Ecclesiastical Assemblies, according to the light of their own reason and understanding which God has given them, and not to be submitted unto with a good conscience, ought and must not be put in execution by particular congregations? This is your own doctrine sometimes though unawares; For even on the top of the next page, 109. where you bring M. S. enquiring what should be done in case an ecumenical or General Counsel err; you say you will return him answer, when he tells you what must be done in case the Parliament should err, or if the great Sanedrin of the Old Testament or the council of Jerusalem had erred; and yet you might remember to have objected thrice in this frivolous discourse of yours upon the like occasion, that Quaestio non solvit qu●stionem: But do you not perceive a little spirit of perverseness in yourself, that you can thus prevaricate? thus play at fast and lose? Did you not just now confess (oh the power of truth! That if the very supreme Church Judicature should judge amiss she may fear her judgement will not be approved and put in execution by particular congregations? And do you so soon boggle at the same query afterwards? Will not this small pittance of ingenuity reconcile you (how fierce soever) unto the Independents? Either then recant this and such other passages; or stand to them, and burn that confused volume of Sophistical distinctions and mere contradictions.  
Pag. 170. 171. You say the example of the Protestants in France suing for a toleration of their Religion serves nothing towards the obtaining the like for Independents in England: But why pray so magisterial and peremptory? Have not the Independents fought for the Parliament against the cavaliers? Did they not refuse to join with the Cavaliers in fighting against the Scots? Your Presbyterian discipline had scarce been settled in Scotland by Civil and Ecclesiastical authority, which you so much boast of in page 160. if Independents had not done that for you which you were not able to do for yourselves? And do you thus require them? Was there not the same reason for the Scots some few years since to have submitted themselves unto the English service-book, then adored by such an English uniformity, and sent, yea attempted to be imposed upon them by the Ecclesiastical authority of England; as that the English and Irish, two numerous and renowned Nations, must now be subjugated by fire and sword unto a Scotch Directory? Surely if there be a God in Heaven, or any conscientiousness on earth, it will never be, or never long endure; nescis quid serus vesper trabat: you say the Protestants of France were compelled to idolatry and to be actors in the damnation of their own souls against the light of their consciences: And what if it be said the Presbyterians profess and practise the same against the Independents, against all that differ from them barely in opinion? All the principles which concern coercive Discipline in, about, or for the Church are common both to Papists and Presbyterians? Instead of arguments and reason, Will you not say 'tis false, foolish, fond, idle, ignorant, childish, currish, contradictory, impertinent, non sense, nothing but wind and words of Goodwin? page 169. &c. How long will this Great Goliath of the Presbyterians thus boast himself? How long will the braying of this foul mouthed AS. disquiet the people of God? Pack up your pedlars budget of such absurd distinctions abominable contradictions, unsufferable tautologies, (to say no worse) and be gone, even anywhere, that we may be quit of you; speak or write to instruction or edifying hereafter, or else hold your peace for shame of God and men: But do you not know that it shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah, than for many people amongst whom Christ wrought most of his miracles? Know you not that many who live and die Papists because through ignorance, (as Paul whilst he persecuted the Saints 1. Tim. 1. 13. Whom God therefore had mercy on) shall rise up in judgement against all Protestants which know God's will and do it not? Do you not take it to be mad doctrine of Paul's when he presupposes there may be a case when the best Christians (I say not Presbyterians) may, nay, ought never more eat flesh drink wine, nor anything where at a brother stumbleth, is offended or made weak? And yet if you believe Rom. 14. 21. 1. Cor, 8. 13. you may find it Evangelical, a little othergate, than such stuff as you baptize with Orthodox, and then think it pleaseth the Holy Ghost, (because such men, such dust and ashes as yourself know no better,) that all the world, will they, nill they, must fall down and worship it:  
If Independents say, they have no faith in communicating with your mixed multitude, and joining in an English Directory, alias a Scotch common-prayer-book; and you notwithstanding by imprisoning or discountenancing compel them to it; do you not make them commit idolatry? Are they not damned because they doubt thereof? Rom. 14. 23. Can the Priests in Frame, the devils in Hell, or Presbyterians anywhere, do worse by Protestants? But you promise largely; you say the Presbyterians will not compel the Independents to act against their consciences: only you will not suffer them to seduce other men's consciences: What an Agrippa-like half Christian paradox is this? Doth the truth constrain you to acknowledge that compelling Independents to join with you in your mixed communions and stinted worship against their consciences, would amount unto idolatry? and may they not instruct their families, friends, brethren, and all such, who gasp after a word of knowledge, or but desire to be instructed by them how to decline idolatry, and worship God in sincerity and truth? Did not Nature engrave it in the hearts of all men, that it is better to obey God than man? Did not the Apostles for our clearer understanding resolve it when 'twas made a question? Act 4. 19 Are not all such condemned for unproffitable servants who put a candle under a bushel? For lapping up their talent in a napkin? For not strengthening others after they themselves are converted? And though you so often upbraid this as a licentious course and way, to let in all heresy and impiety; have patience if I tell you the Papists say the very same for excluding Protestantism out of their Dominions; and neither you as profownd an AS. as you take yourself to be, nor all the Presbyterians in the world, can say one tittle more than Papists do in this behalf: now, wherein your Divinity, your discipline, your righteousness exceeds not that of Papists; take it not so heinously, that Independents who have not so learned Christ, may not, dare not join with you: yet if upon a second consideration hereof you shall still remain headstrong, banishing all farther truth, left some Heresies should creep in therewith; good now, do but discover to us a possibility how after the Presbyterian rule, (which, according to AS. says the Civil Magistrate has power not to admit the true Church, or to turn it out, though it had been admitted and established by low.) The Roman Church can ever be reformed, or the Jews converted to the Gospel:  
Concerning the Churches of New-England, you say their Independency is worse than heresy; you strengthen yourself in denying them a toleration in Old-England, because they will not grant you one in New-England, and yet you bid them be gone thither and live in peace: but tell me a little; how can they be secure in New-England from the omnipotency of the Presbyterian discipline which is as covetous and ambitious as Rome itself which claim's no less than all the World? aught you not to endeavour their conversion equal to your brethren's of Old-England, and that as well unto your discipline as to your doctrine? Are their souls not worth saving? Or their Country not worth living in? the soil is thought no whit inferior, if not better than the best in Old-England; though there be not so good plundering for money and rich moveables: But why should not the souls of your New-English Brethren be as dear unto you, as those of Old-England? Or though your Brethren of New-England should know the way to heaven of themselves; How can you with a quiet mind endure they should get thither without your pass, your Mittimus, your peter-pences? Or why may not the Old-English be thought as charitably on, or find the like favour from your over diligent presbytery? But put the case you did really desire the New-English their conversion? you approve of them in suffering no opinions to be published but their own? If this discipline be strictly observed; How can they possibly attain to better light and knowledge? What course will you take for their informing, for convincing them of this worse than Heretical tenet as you call it, if to theirs, and your Church policy, they should likewise attain as sharp a Civil sword as yours? Or put case that even your own most excellent Doctorship were not so sound or orthodox as self conceited, which many have strong presumptions for, who are thought better able to judge thereof than AS. himself, will you put yourself in an impossibility of ever being reformed except tumultuously or illegally, both ways compulsively? Was ever any AS. so dull, so stupid, so void both of Civil and Christian policy? But what shall I say unto you, since according to your theology, nothing is so likely to prevail with you as cudgeling?  
Page 172. You say that refusing to tolerate the Independents will help to confirm the Churches and people in the truth of Presbyterian Diciplin and doctrine; that many men are led by authority, and take many things upon the trust of great men &c. fie AS! Are you not ashamed thus to uncover the nakedness of your Churches? To tell us and them that the Presbyterian world takes up a religion and government upon trust? And if the Venerable and learned assembly, as you style them, should not grant a toleration of any thing but Poprie or turcism, would not your good people whom you speak of, be as easily confirmed of the truth thereof? Surely they will, unless they be wiser than their Anchesters, which will not be believed.  
Page 179. You ask What power hath either King or Parliament to intrude and force upon the kingdom new religions or a toleration of all Sects? And say the Parliament assumes no such power to itself: If this be true; How can it settle (not to say intrude as AS. does improperly and unmannerly) the Scotch Presbyterian discipline in England, more than the Independency of New-English Churches? For since the Churches of Scotland and New England for doctrine agree in fundamentals, differ only in discipline, and as AS. aleadges, do persecute all opinions but their own; How come the New-English and Scots not to be both Sects alike, since AS. calls the Apologists a Sect? But he says the Presbyterian Government is already established in England in the Dutch, French, Italian and Spanish church's page 160. And I answer that he may as well say the Popish government was settled in England, because permitted to be made use of in in the Queen's chapels and so many ambassador's houses, little otherwise than was the Presbyterian: But if the Presbyterian government be already established, what needs all this imprecating, this conjuring of AS. yet for a farther settling of it? But if the Parliament may not, as AS. says, intrude and force upon the kingdom new religions; and since the Civil Magistrate as you likewise say page 166. if he follow God's word cannot grant a toleration without consent of the Church if he judge it be not corrupted: Why do you not then betake yourself to the Synod, forbearing to be farther troublesome unto the Civil Magistrate, until it be at leisure to talk with you for stigmatising of it worse than mad, corrupted by bribery, or some other way, page 166. unless it descend unto such notions only as AS. arrives to:  
And why, I pray, must the Parliament needs tolerate all AS.' says to think they are worse than mad, corrupted with money or some other way, if they should tolerate a new Sect, you mean Independents, i. e. any that but differ from one another in opinion, and such are all, as will not upon any occasion say, black is white, and white is black, or seem to believe any thing else implicitly? I know your meaning, your grand and common (more than understood) objection; that there is but one true religion, but one faith, one way to Heaven; and why should we then suffer men and women to be of so many different ways faiths and religions? For answer hereunto I can be contented to grant that there is but one true religion, one true faith and way to Heaven; But who can tell me the precise and just precincts thereof? What mean they by one true religion, one way, one faith? The Papists, Luthrans, Calvinists, all Episcopal and Presbyterian disciplined men generally are of this opinion; each of them, whole Nations and People, damn for the most part hand over head, all other professions but his own; and even amongst these who by compulsion they will be sure to make as good Christians as themselves, to any man's thinking but their own, how few of them notwithstanding will they allow to get into Heaven with them? Would it not be wonder if this Circumference, this little continent of earth, should satisfy the vast desires of such, who seem to think, that the Heavens so infinitely more capacious, were only made for them and some few of their familiars? O the malcontentedness of such Spirits! To say nothing of Mahometans nor any sort of Pagans, no nor Jews who yet were the beloved Nation of the Lord, who promised to make all their enemies his own; To say nothing neither of Papists, nor millions of Christians, especially in the East which never heard more of Poprie, than England had of presbytery five years ago; (which you may say was but a little, though since too much) would it not be a harsh sentence for men of the classical Presbyterian-way to pass, which must send headlong to Hell all Lutherans, Calvanists, Independents with sundry other differing Protestants? Perhaps you will say though they live Lutherans or Independents, they may die Converts, or well-willers to the Presbyterian discipline and doctrine: I answer, that this is such a may-be, that if it come not whilst they live, I'll pass my word 'twill never happen afterward: You may as well say or think they may die Jews or Papists, were you not apt to flatter yourself, or glad to say any thing, rather than by plain argument be made appear as if you thought, God had first made the joys of Heaven, and in the fullness of time sent his Son to repurchase them, for your fond opinions only to vapour in; But in case you do not thus reprobate all Lutherans, Independents and such as differ from you in opinion, allowing them a possibility, even whilst they live and die Lutherans or Independents, to find the way to Heaven; why will you then not let them go their own way? What if it should seem to you the farthest way about? May it not prove the nearest home, according to the proverb? I am certain it must be the surest way to them that know and apprehend no other: If then you cannot possibly decipher or chalk out unto me exactly this only true religion and way to Heaven, without imminent danger of streightning or enlarging it, do not take upon you to make enclosure of it, or compel others to leave their own way, unless you could be infallibly assured, that were a better which you put them in, or were able to make them reraration, if it prove a worse.  
There are two great controversies which have set both State and Church on fire, about which so many Pamphlets have been scribbled, and not a few continued musing until their heads grew addle, which yet, in my slender judgement, may be fully Stated in a very few lines only: That in the Civil State, is betwixt Magistrate and Subject; On the one side it is alleged, that if every soul, the whole body of a people or Nation must be subject unto the Higher Powers in all cases, whether they govern justly or tyrannically, then would it rest in the Magistrates breast and power to ruin and destroy the whole Nation at his pleasure: On the otherside, if the people may in some case deny subjection, it must be in such as they apprehend themselves in imminent danger of destruction; and than it will follow, that so often as they apprehend this imminent destruction, this necessity; so often they may deny subjection, which would render the Higher Powers obnoxious unto the bare pretensions of the people, if they did but withal allege their fears were real:  
Both these I confess are great stumbling blocks, yet the latter, as I conceive, is to be adhered unto; because it is a greater evil, to expose a whole Nation to destruction, than a Magistrate only: And lest it should be thought this tenet does expose the Magistrate unto the inconstancy and violence of the People; Let such remember that Magistrates are God's vicegerents and as many times it happens that some scape better, for the present, For offending God than man but pay for it with a witness afterwards; so if a People shall injuriously employ that natural power and might, which God has given them only for their defence, against the Magistrates just commands and privileges; God becomes so much more engaged to vindicate them, by how much being few in number, in comparison of the People, they want an arm of flesh to help themselves.  
As for the Church controversy, it may be said in behalf of Independents, that unless differing and erroneous opinions be tolerated; the most orthodox and rectified are equally Subject to be persecuted: On the other side, Presbyterians say, that the permitting differing opinions in a State, is to open a floodgate to all manner of Heresies and Schysmes: What if we did suppose these to be the two Great Rocks of offence, which in some sense were no otherwise than Scylla and Charybdis; one of which you could not avoid without adhering unto the other? Does it not remain then, that we should consider which of them is accompanied with the greatest inconveniences? The latter presupposes a possibility of entrance unto all Heresies; the former concludes a certainty of withholding a great measure of Truth, and even a possibility of keeping out the whole Truth: Now, this truth is like God himself; even very God himself, invallewable; we may not hazard the least attom, the smallest proportion thereof, for all other possibilities or impossibilities whatsoever: What? Shall we put ourselves into such a condition, that if we be in an error it shall be impossible for us to get out of it again, unless the whole Civil State, the men of war, the world do see it as clearly as ourselves? That if as yet we have but some degrees of truth and knowledge, it shall be impossible for us to attain to greater? That though we were in possession of the true Religion, we should be liable to have it taken from us by every sharper Civil sword than our own? This is your doctrine page 13. where you say the Civil Mgistrate though Christian has power to admit Christian Religion; or when admitted to exile it afterwards; but God keep such Presbyterian Principles from farther taking root in England.  
But if King and Parliament may not force a new religion or Sect, suppose Presbyterian, upon the kingdom; much less can the Synod which neither has, nor yet pretends, as is alleged, to use the material sword? And if for matters of religion, all power originally is in Christ, as you sometimes acknowledge page 179. How can King, Parliament, or Synod wrest it from him? Nay, what think you? Is it not secondarily in the people, as well as Civil power which you affirm in the same page? And so doubtless is spiritual power; unless you will make God to have provided mankind better of a safeguard, or liberty to defend their bodies, than their souls: If then the spiritual power be so inherently in the people next under Christ, as that they cannot so well renounce and part from it in many respects, by what they may of Civil; how can it be thought by any one that the King Parliament or Synod though never so much importuned by a thousand such AS. ses, should go about to settle a N●w Presbyterian Scotch Government, with an intention to force a conformity of the whole kingdom, three quarters whereof cannot, as yet be thought to submit unto it willingly, or for conscience sake?  
Page 180. and elsewhere, you advise the Independents to quit their fat Benefices; but Presbyterian know how to quit the lean Benefices without your counsel: And where do you find the Independents in such fat Benefices? What if you cannot find one of them in a fat Benefice? Will you not say good cause why, because the Presbyterians would quickly heave them out, and get themselves ●n? If they find any fatter than an other, and be so liquorish; If they regard neither flock nor the Great shepherd of the flock Christ Jesus, but with Esa●h or Judas prefer 30. pence or a fat Benefice before them both; let them at least carry it more cau●elo●sly, and not ●●● skipping so, from one fat Benefice or Lecture unto a fatter, that all the world cry shame of them; I need not name them, they are known to every body but themselves.  
But prithee A. S, tell me, dost thou not intend this as a pious plot and masterpiece of thine to accuse the Independents of fat Benefices, that they may be provoked to vindicate themselves by discovering who they were amongst the Presbyterian rabbis that solicited so actively and dextrously, obtaining such an Ordnance for Tithes as all the subtle invention● of Antichristian Bishops could never get the like? Who they were that had more than a finger in helping sundry Ministers out of their Livings partly for not paying the twentyeth part and other taxes; and so soon as Presbyterians had filled all Benefices and Lectures, to move, that Ministers might then be totally freed from all manner of ●essment●; and is it not fitting it should be so, think you? That they should set and keep the kingdom on ● fire, in ● desperate bloody Civil war, and yet be totally exempted from contributing towards quenching, towards obtaining of a blessed peace? I know these Heathenish, Jewish, Popish notions of tithes, Offerings, and 〈…〉 ons, were long since abominated▪ and abolished amongst our Scottish Brethren; And A. S. does well in not flattering the English Presbyterians therein, lest Independents should be farther scandalised at him, who, it is well known, are not guilty of such Si●oni●; they 〈…〉 bargain of the ministry of the Gospel, as if it were an unholy thing; or themselves like so many cobblers or shoemakers to prostitute their labours, to them that proffer most; they compel no man to buy of them whether they will or no, much less at what price they themselves will, what God requires to be given for nothing, Esa. 55. 1. 2; They force no man to pay for that he never had, as Presbyterians do such as cannot with a good conscience communicate with them in their ordinances; as if a Tayl●r or Hatter should wrench your money from you though you liked not, would not have his wares, his service: who will, may see the Bloody Tenet, and John Baptist concerning tithes more largely.  
Pag. 181. You say the power of the ministry, or Ecclesiastical power is able and sufficient to beat down all fin spiritually: But pray tell me; can fin be sin politically, and not be fin spiritually? Now if ecclesiastical power can beat down sin spiritually as you acknowledge; Will it not follow, that fin so beaten down spiritually, ceases to be sin at all either spiritually or politically, and consequently no need of Civil power to punish it?  
But to be brief, as the Title promised for me; Our Saviour bids us do as we would be done to; that is, Love our Neighbours as ourselves, on which commandment hangs the Law and Prophets, Math. 7. 12. and 22. 39 40. and Paul tells us that Love is the fulfilling of the whole Law; Rom. 13 10. Nay our Saviour would not have us dare to ask forgiveness of our heavenly Father, otherwise, than as we forgive our Brethren. Math. 6. 12. 14. 15. Now, amongst all sorts of transgressors, there is no one offendeth so highly, so undoubtedly against this law of loving his neighbour as himself; or doing as he would be done to; as he that persecutes, that but disturbs his neighbour's welfare, because he differs from him in opinion, for cause of conscience though erroneous; which I prove thus:  
Every man hath so much of an atheist in him, by how much he esteems not the enjoyment of his conscience, above all enjoyments under heaven; And though we have known many turn, some with more facility, others perhaps not without some difficulty, from Popish opinions unto Episcopal, and then from Episcopal to Presbyterial, according as either of them became more commodious, gainsome or fashionable; yet, if atheism not having totally taken possession of their hearts, they began at any time to demur or scruple, according to the remnant of conscience which might be remaining in them; it was never known that such were contented to have even these relics of conscience persecuted or disquieted, howsoever absurd and Heretical they might seem to other men; and therefore such as raise any manner of persecution against their Brethren for conscience sake, which they could not be contented to have done unto themselves, unless they were very Athists, must necessarily be the greatest offenders against this Law of loving our Neighbours as ourselves, of any in the world: And although I am enforced at present to apprehend you in this gall of bitterness, yet my prayers and hopes shall be, that with the Apostle 1 Cor. 6. 10. 11. it may be only said hereafter, that such were you once; but you are now enlightened; you are washed; you are sanctify'de; which God grant in his good time and pleasure.   

TWENTY SIX Difficult questions Easily ANswered concerning a toleration of differing opinions.  
Quest. 1. IS it not the greatest presumption for a man to be overswayde with his own opinion, when others for the most part submit themselves to be governed by most voices?  
Ans No: but far more presumptuous are they, who not content to enjoy quietly their own opinions, proceed in compelling others to join with them therein, which yet may possibly be as erroneous as other men's.  
Q. 2. Is it not the greatest hazard for men to build their faith upon their own private interpetations contrary to the Decrees of Synods and established laws of kingdoms?  
An. No: because broad is the gate which leadeth to destruction, and narrow is the path which leadeth to salvation; though many be called, few are chosen; and every man must be saved by his own faith, not by the faith of Parliaments or Synods.  
Q. 3. Is it not great indiscretion to be led away by a man's private reason and understanding contrary to the judgement and sense of many, and those perhaps the wise and learned?  
An. No: because a man is to be guided by his own reason in all things and at all times; and it would be a double error, a Sin against the Holy Ghost, not only to err, but also to err against his own reason and understanding.  
Q. 4. May it not seem singularity for some one, or a few inferior people, to be totally governed by their own judgements and opinions, when the whole Nation is uniform?  
An. No: because there is no mean betwixt being governed by a man's own reason, or that which is his implicitly, his ignorance.  
Q. 5. Is it not an ungodly thing to suffer men to be of any religion?  
An. No: for both our Saviour, his Apostles and the Primitive Christians did the same, neither is it in the power of flesh and blood to hinder it.  
Q. 6. Is it not the most unseemly sight to see the people of one city run scambling from their Parishes to 20. Conventicles where so many several doctrines are taught?  
An. No: but far more monstrous and abominable in the eyes of God, for people of 20. several opinions for fear or favour to assemble and join together hypocritically in one way of worship or Church discipline.  
Q. 7. But may we not yield conformity of the outward man as a matter of great decency and order in such cases which we do but doubt of, not certainly know to be forbidden?  
An. No: Because it makes us hypocrites, twofold more the children of the devil than we were before, and worse than they, who, yet unjustly, did overpresse us ro conformity.  
Q. 8. Ought we not then at least to keep our different opinions and religion unto ourselves in obedience to the Civil Magistrate that co●maunds it?  
An. No: because it is better to obey God than man; and Christ says we must not fear them who can kill the body only; bidding his disciples speak that in the light which he had told them in darkness, and on the house tops what he had told them in the ear, affirming that he would deny whosoever should be ashamed or deny him; Act. 4. 19 Mat. 10. 27. 28. Mark 8. 38. 2. Tim. 2. 12.  
Q. 9 If Jesuited Papists and other subtle heretics be suffered, will they not likely seduce many unto their erroneous bypaths?  
An. Though a toleration of erroneous opinions may gain some to Satan, yet Truth being therewith permitted to be published and improved, will in all probability, not only gain so many more to God; but any one thus won to God, unto his Truth, is worth thousands of those that fall from it, or rather from the seeming profession which they made thereof. 1 Ioh. 2. 19  
Q. 10. But may not the multiplying of Heresies stifle or expel the Truth, like as the abounding of tares and weeds often choke the Wheat, and for this cause not be permitted?  
An. Though it seem so to many at the first, yet our Saviour in the Parable of the Tares Math. 13. teaches us a quite contrary doctrine, and forbids [Heresies] the Tares to be pulled up before [the day of judgement] the the Harvest verse 30. 39 lest the Wheat [the Children of the kingdom True professors] verse 30. 39 be therewith rooted up.  
Q. 11. Is it not wonderful extravagant that men & women should have a latitude to yield obedience to no manner of discipline or doctrine than what they themselves list?  
An. No: unless you will have them obliged to yield unto whatsoever discipline and doctrine others list, though they neither understand nor know it.  
Q. 12. But may it not likely prove a subversion of the Civil State whilst such scrupulous people may upon all occasion pretend out of conscience to deny obedience to the Civil Powers?  
An. No: For such as are truly conscionable in Gods, though but supposed work, and service, are also more exact and conscientious in rendering all due obedience unto man, unto the laws and Magistrate, not only for fear, but more for conscience sake.  
Q. 13. May not diversity of opinions cause dissensions or breach of love in a Country or city?  
An. No: but rather the contrary, whilst the Civil Magistrate countenanceth all alike and each man finds his neighbour not only permitting, but in some manner assisting him out of love, in such a way to heaven as he apprehends to be the only true way.  
Q. 14. Is it not equally impossible for a Church-Society as for a city to continue long without a Government?  
An. Yes: if you mean spiritual Government with its spiritual Relations; for as a Church Society is spiritual; so must be the Government in all Relations and respects.  
Q. 15. But do we not by daily experience in all places and houses find the Independents wrangling with the Presbyterians about Church controversies?  
An. No: but rather the contrary; for if you mark it well, you may see they are still the Presbyterians who generally begin first to find fault, and pick quarrels with the Independents opinions, not the Independents with the Presbyterians.  
Q. 16. May not the permitting men to teach and embrace new opinions be occasion that we quite lose old truths?  
An. No: for if all opinions be permitted, the true ones must necessarily be included.  
Q. 17. But is it fitting then for every man to be of what religion he will?  
An. Yes surely; and far better so, than to be of whatsoever religion an other will have him to be of, since one of them must necessarily fall out.  
Q. 18. Must we then suffer men to run headlong in the way to Hell, if they have neither will nor understanding to prevent it of themselve●?  
An. Surely yes: we must suffer what we cannot hinder.  
Q 19▪ But may it not be hindered by hindering so many erroneous doctrines to be published, which if they never hear of they cannot long after, nor believe in to damn themselves?  
An. N: because a man's own fancy, Imagination and Discourcive facul●y of themselves suggest and present unto his Memory variety of Opinions, though not so clearly perhaps at first; which if it be not granted him freely to debate, ask counsel, judge and make choice of, his condition were worse than beasts, incapable of doing either good o evil; and such as are carried away with every wind of novelty and false doctrine, were never sound in the true doctrine, though they might seem so before, for want of opportunity to show the contrary.  
Qu. 20. If there be but one true religion, why should we suffer above one religion in a Country?  
A. If there be but one true Religion we ought to be the more careful how to get and keep it in the Country; not banishing any religion which in opinion of different Judges may possibly be the true one, and by such as make profession of it, (both, as wise learned and conscientious as ourselves) is proemptorily affirmed to be the only true one.  
Q. 21. Is it not a pious act to compel a company of careless idle people to hear a good sermon, to do a good work whether they will or no?  
An. No more pious an act, then for Papists to use the like compulsion towards Jews and Protestants in forcing them to hear their sermons, mass, or Vespers.  
Q. 22. Yea: but though they be thus compelled to hear good sermons at fi●st against their wills, the power and efficacy of truth is such, as that in likelihood it will win upon their affections, and work in them afterwards a desire to hear and practise them of their own accord.  
An. This is not likely; because we do not find in all the Gospel, that such unwarrantable means were ever sanctified to produce so good effect.  
Q. 23. But have we not seen it by experience, that whilst the Papists in England were made go to Church, many of them were converted, and died Protestants.  
An. The conversion of such Papists was rather to be suspected counterfeit to save their purse; and if it had been real at any time, we must attribute it to some private illumination, or other handiwork of God, and not to such means as are so contrary, both to the doctrine and practice of our Saviour and his Apostles.  
Q. 24. May not the Civil government interpose to punish such Church-members with whom the spiritual, by reason of their refractoriness cannot prevail?  
A. Nothing less; since the Civil State or Government has no more power nor virtue to make a Papist turn protestant in England, than it can prevail to make a Protestant become a Papist in Spain.  
Q. 25. Because Papists do ill in compelling Protestants to hear an idolatrons' mass; may not Protestants do well to force Papists to hear Godly sermons?  
An. A Protestant sermon is as Idolatrous to a Papist, as a Popish mass is to a Protestant; and neither of them can more judge with the understanding, than see with the eyes of the other, besides that God regards only such as serve him willingly.  
Q. 26. But can there be any hurt in forcing refractory people to be present ●● religions Orthodox Assemblies, where, if they will, they may be informed of the truth?  
An. Yes: 1. Because there can come no good thereof through want of willingness, which God only regards, in him▪ which i● thus compelled; and 2. Because this [forcing] is a doing evil that good may come thereof, which is prohibited, Rom, 3. 8.  
FINIS.