A RELATION OF A DISPUTATION BETWEEN Dr Griffith and Mr Vavasor powel.  
And since some false Observations made thereon, by Dr Griffith (or one of his Symonicall Brethren) to keep up the cracked credit of their bad Calling and Cause.  
As also to reflect upon Mr Moston (whom they suppose to be the Author of that Relation) Mr powel, and others.  
This therefore is to show briefly the falsity of those Animadversions: and with all to justify that Syllogism (objected against by him) by good Authors, Examples and Arguments.  1 Tim. 4. 2. They speak lies in hypocrisy, having their Conscience seared with a hot iron. 
Lydi mali, post hos AEgyptij.  
LONDON  
Printed by M.S. and are to be sold by Livewell Chapman, at the Crown in Pope's head Alley. 1653.   

A RELATION OF A DISPUTATION BETWEEN Dr Griffith and Mr Vavasor powel.  
IN Page 1. The Doctor denies that he promised a Sermon. Answ. There came a man in the name of the Doctor, and the builder of the Chapel, with a Paper in his hand, and publicly (after Mr Moston and Mr powel had Preached) before a full Auditory, in the presence of many of the Doctors own friends, and proclaimed, that Doctor Griffith would Preach there at nine of the Clock upon the disputation's day: but it's not strange for Doctor Griffith to deny that; for he denied his own Doctrine Preached against honest people, though several men at the Disputation justified it to his face; and this made Mr powel say to him; That a Liar ought to have a good memory: although he said deb●t, yet presently he said lap sus lingue, etc. And said Oportet mendacem esse memorem. The captious Doctor might have remembered, That the wicked make a man an offender for a word: Also that he himself praying for a sick man at Llandrynio, said, Lord heal him as thou didst Peter's servant, and the Captain's wives Mother.  
Page 4. The third Rule proved a tempting Question. Answ. That is not so; for the third Rule was, that what could not be ended then, might be referred to another day: and the Question was propounded by Mr powel, after he had declared he was not willing to dispute against other men's Callings, but to justify his own.  
Page 4. Then Mr powel repeated his words. That's false, he spoke them first: and the Doctor said only, that he was both.  
Page 5. He said he had nothing to say against the Church of England, and the Calling of her Ministers. Answ. That's untrue, his words were he had nothing to say against the godly people, or godly Ministers in England: and this he hath oft publicly and privately spoke in my hearing: and that was the Reason why he asked the Doctor whether he was an Episcopal man, or a Presbyterian: and whether he did undertake to defend the corrupt part of the Ministry of England: for the godly party he would not dispute against.  
Page 5. The Doctor demeaned himself in Christian meekness. Answ. Was it Christian meekness for him to give Mr powel (without the least provocation) the lie twice. To which Mr powel answered the first time, I thank you Doctor: and the second time, Turpe est Doctori, cum culpa redarguit ipsum.  
Page 5. All the knowing people of the Company were on the contrary side. What nothing but untruths? There were there above a dozen University men of Mr powel's side; besides several scores of godly people, who were able to Catechise your profane Brethren, the Ejected Priests, who were better known there by their Adultery, drunkenness, swearing, gaming, and rebelling against the State, then by their godly preaching, or conversation.  
Page 5. The Doctor had some Interest in the Intention: as challenged to be a party, etc. This is as unjust an Assertion, as that Mr powel published the Doctors first Letter; for both in Mr powel's Letter and his words to the Doctor, he expressed fully he sent not at all to the Doctor any challenge, which if he had the Doctor had given Cause thereof by his invective Sermons against the godly Ministers and people.  
Page 6. It is well known, That the Doctor hath withstood Popery. Answ. How? by maintaining holiness of places, setting up the Communion Table Altarwise, (as it remains to this day in one of his Cures called Llandrynio) maintaining Godfathers, the Cross in Baptism, prayer over the dead, wearing Surplices, singing of Psalms before dead corpses, going procession (as he did last year) receiving all the ignorant and scandalous that come out of several Parishes to the Sacrament, as he did last Easter. Is this withstanding of Popery? Numa religiosior.  
Page 6. It is too evident, that Popery is now improved against us. Answ. It is true amongst you; for I think one of the Doctor's old Parishioners and friends, a Papist hath endeavoured to make some Popish (as the Doctor doth Prelatical) proselytes. The Doctor and his friends would remember, how in opposition to the Acts of Parliament, there was a scandalous Interlude or Play set up in the Doctors Parissh in Shropshire about two years since, and another near this year (and that by the Children of some of the Ejected Clergy) when they durst not do it in Wales.  
Page 7. The Moderator esteemeth of the Doctor as of his brother and friend. Answ. That's like enough to make him partial: besides their drudging and drawing together in the Bishop's times: and the harmony that still holds between these Organstrings. The Proverb is herein true, When Bullocks are once yoked, they will hardly be ever parted.  
Page 8. That party looketh on the Doctor as a man standing in the gap before them. Answ. It's very true he is looked so upon, and not without cause, for he hath set up a Monthly Lecture (which he never did till now) to cry down private meetings, laymen's preaching, etc. And that he might do his work more effectually, he would have brought in an Ejected Priest, who preached publicly that the Spirit in the Preachers approved by Parliament was a Hobgoblin Spirit, and that the present powers were Traitors and Rebels that had shed innocent blood. This will be proved against him.  
Page 9 That the laughter did not immediately follow upon the Doctors excepting against the Syllogism. Answ. It was immediately thereupon: and in such an unchristianlike way (by a crew of carnal Cavaliers and outed Clergymen) that made Mr powel ask the Doctor whether he had brought a pack of Beagles to bait him. Afterwards the Doctor did ask in what figure the Syllogism was in: and Mr powel going to say the first figure, answered suddenly Barbara: upon which the Ceutes did lift up a second cry, but that was the last; for afterwards God did so silence and shame them, that they hung down their heads: when they saw their Champion (the Doctor) could not repeat an Argument (unless it were first written and read) and it will not be amiss here to help the Doctor's memory when he said there was a fallacy in Mr powel's. Argument: Mr powel asked what fallacy it was, and whether in dictione, or, extra dictionem (which argued Mr powel was not ignorant in the Moods and Figures, nor in those Elements of Arts, which I heard him use several times, both publicly and privately) which Question the Doctor could not (and did not) answer; which made Mr powel say, how now Doctors, what a man of so many fallacies, yet ignorant of this fallacy?  
Page 10. There was some talk of making Red-Castle an University. And yet in Page 11. You say that they must take this notice from you (as from a Promoter) That the Separatists are upon disclaiming all Interests in Arts, and Universities, and Scholars. Behold a palpable contradiction, and the two next neighbouring Pages confronting one another. What to be for Universities, and yet against them, Nun es in puteo constrictus Doctor? If we had been against learning, we would not have sent to Oxford and Cambridge for Preachers, and Schoolmasters, nor sent some thither to be made Scholars (as we have done.) By this you may guess the truth of the rest.  
Page 11. On this passage I ground my Conjecture I spoke of, concerning the Author of the Exact Narrative. Answ. By several passages in these Animadversions it may be more surely concluded, that Doctor Griffith himself was the Author of them: then Mr Moston of the Narrative. But be it Mr Moston or another, its certain the Narrative in the Substance of it is true, and if all the Circumstances had been set down, it would more have galled, and shamed the Doctor, as how he coming strutting with a band of profane men with him (that thirty or forty of the scum of two or three Countries might have been picked out) and his countenance falling like Nabals' hearts, and fear surprising him like Beltashazzar, by reason of the Consciousness of his cause, and the convictions of his Conscience, in appearing against God's people and ways: as was told him by Mr powel then; now I see that Scripture fulfilled, Isai, 29. 10. He shall cover the Seers.  
Page 11. I trouble you with no more of the silly nonsense (meaning Mr Mostons good sense) he understands, speaks, and writes as good sense as any of you: your books, and stolen, self-stuffed Sermons, will all verify the Confession of one of your brethren (that hath since left Preaching to attend upon your Pamphlet-Presse) I am a pen and inkhorn Divine. If Mr Mostons savoury, solid, spiritual Sermons, were compared with your slight, superstitious, supercilious, self-exalting and sinner-hardning Sermons, they that did read them would say; What is the chaff to the wheat? Jer. 23. 28. But you say, Page 12. One Orthodox true Sermon is more set by now then a hundred heretofore: Such is the famine of the Word.  
First, Your Sermons and opinions are like Mr Alexander Griffths (your great Master-Minter) who did the last of September 1652. at Kinton in Hertfordshire, before many hundreds, deliver publicly in a Sermon this Doctrine (from Judas 13.) That the Church and Parishes of England were Saints, and the Faith was delivered to them: also that all England were Saints, and godly people: and then in his disputation did affirm, from 1 Pet. 3.19. That Christ in his Soul went locally to hell to preach to the damned Spirits. Afterwards from Matth. 13. He affirmed there was no Separation at all till the end of the world, (though he had before granted it) but that Heathen, Jews, Turks, Papists, Protestants, and all were to live without any Separation to the end of the world. Betwixt your Doctrine and his there is only pilus in medio.  
Secondly, Is there a famine of the Word? the more shame for you and your brethren, to follow that principle, No penny no pater noster: but this is your false suggestion; for it is known and acknowledged by the very Enemies of the Truth, that they never had more preaching; for at least (in this County of Montgomery) there is weekly preached about sixty Sermons. But you say 'tis prating. So did the Epicureans and Stoics (your Brethren) say of Paul's preaching, Acts 17. 18. But we must ssay as Joh. 3. Ep: v. 10. You prate maliciously against us, Multa & stulta loquuntur (loquimini.)  
Page 12. I will help you and so he did. Mr powel told you then he would not seek your help: and I heard him presently reduce and repeat the Syllogism ever the Doctor repeated it: and this may be said for Mr powel, that he intended not as he then, before, and after declared to be opponent against the Doctor's calling; but respondent for his own: and I saw all his arguments were framed to that purpose: and what ever argument he urged against the Doctors Calling, he was constrained to form them extempore, for unless Mr powel would dispute against his Calling, he would not go on: but as soon as his Calling and conditions were brought to light, Murem ostendit pro Leone.  
Page 13. That Mr powel offered not any proof against, that forms were against the gift. Yes Sir by your (bad memories) good leave Mr powel urged, Ephes. 6. 18. Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit. From whence he argued thus: If all prayers are in the Spirit, than the forms of mere men's make without the Spirit, as yours are, doth exclude the gift: But the Text saith, that all prayers are to be in the Spirit. Ergo. The Doctor after long pausing, puffing, and some prompting, said, there was a fallacy in the argument. Mr powel asked him what fallacy it was, and whether in dictione, or extra dictionem (as is heretofore mentioned:) the Doctor gave no Answer, remembering better his ten years used form then Logical fallacies: And hereupon the Doctor answering nothing, but being amazed, denying somewhat (if he knew what) Mr powel asked him a reason of his denial. This is the sum of what the Doctor doth now do largely with his pen (in Page 14.) what he could not do then with his tongue. And truly Reader these men can eat their meat without their teeth as soon as give thanks either before or after meat without a form.  
Oh but of the Doctor's personal qualification he hath given sufficient testimony, by his praying in true Latin. Hath he so Sir, your principle does speak you to be a neighbour to a Papist (if not to have a Pope in your belly) Again, if this be a qualification to pray a formal prayer in Latin, Westminster School boys are equal with your Doctor; nay an old Popish toothless woman may use a formal Latin prayer: but it seems the Gentlemen conceives none of this Opponents could do so much: but Sir know (though that may be your Masterpiece) that more than one of your Antagonists, can pray and write in Latin and Greek, etc.  
Page 14. You should have said that powel, Moston, and Nevet, had nothing to say. They had said so much, that it caused whispering between the Doctor and his Cassack Counsel what they should answer, at last the Doctor's Council (one of the long Robe) said that Mr powel shot at a man of straw; to which Mr powel replied, why then did you bring such a strawen man hither.  
In Page 16. The Doctor tells you what Commission he had from Oxford; and how he was invested by the Bishop and the Law of the Land. Not one word how he was qualified, called, and commissioned by Christ and his people: he tells you of his Polygamy or being married to three places (yea too three together, till the Commissioners did divorce him from two of them) but not one spiritual child begot in any of the three; nay I dare assure thee, that I know no Parishes in Montgomery-shire more profane and opposite to godlinsse, than those Parishes named by him, especially Newtowne and Llandrynio.  
Page 17. The same way of captious arguing he uses still ask Questions. That was the way of Christ and his Apostles; Christ was found in the Temple among the Doctors, ask them Questions, Luk. 2. 46. see Rom. 3. 6. & 4. 1. 1 Cor. 15. 30. But because Questions tend to clear the truth, these men fall out with that way. What is said in Page 17. & 18. is most of it true concerning the Gentleman's ingenuity above them all (save that Mr powel did not at all scoff at him) for Mr powel commended the Gentleman: who indeed (being more prompt) prompted the Doctor far more than Mr Nevet prompted any, for I was one of the next to Mr Nevet, and heard not any thing from him, but what he spoke publicly, for he saw no need to prompt.  
Page 18. But a slander by, I remember not who the slander by was, unless that Simon Magus the false accuser and blasphemer Mr Kyfyn, who was disproved (in some things he did affirm) to his face, which made him turn his back for shame. Yea Adulterers and Buggers, the Company understood his meaning 
This Buggerer was a wicked man that lived in Wrex●zm, but no Professor, much less of that church  without saying more, etc. Does not fear of being found a liar, or punished as liars take hold upon the heart of such a false Informer and Accuser? Was the Buggerer which you mention, ever a Professor of Religion, much less a Member of any of our Churches, nay was he not one of you, and of your churches? Again, what Adulterer or other public Transgressor is either permitted or unpunished amongst us. Discover it if you can. Latet dolus in generalibus. But we could tell you of one of your Priests that made his brags (as was proved against him) of several adulteries; another of the Ejected Priests that marked and stole his Neighbour's sheep within these four Months: another who with his man stole brick from his neighbour, and got a Mason to work it by night: another who married two wives, lately in prison for it: another Curate who went from house to house last Easter giving the Lord's Supper, who being, drunk broke his neck (within this Month:) and of several Adulterers: But to come closer home to the Doctor, hath not his own Curate a Bastard by his wife's Sister, who is now in the house with him? If you go to speak of such things, we could write in folio of your brethren's abominations. So that I may say to you according to the Proverb, Coelum non animum mutant, qui trans mare currunt.  
Page 19 A few of the Doctor's Parishioners did sing Psalms coming to bury a dead corpse July 23. 1652. Therefore they were superstitious & scandalous that Elected him or approved of his Election, March 20. 1633. They were not few but many that did so: and they are of the same lump with those that chose him: and this with their kneeling and saying prayers at cross ways, with many heathenish and Popish practices besides, which however the Doctor would not then own, yet he hath formerly both allowed and countenanced; otherwise that Scripture like Priest like people, could not be verified (which indeed is) in them. But in pag. 19 That popish custom of canting before a dead Corpse is rather justified here, then condemned: only it is minced and mitigated, because it is in a reformed Church. Tho singing of P psalms be lawful, yet let it be considered whether it was seasonable then (being contrary to the direction in Scripture, Jam. 4. If any be merry let him sing Psalms) and whether it was not superstitious both in the end, and the manner of the action; the end to follow humane Popish tradition, the action so done was to do what is prohibited. Under such fine (but false) pretences were all the Popish Trumpery brought into you deformed Church.  
Page 19 In charity the Doctor conceives the greatest part of his Parishioners are Saints (or such Saints as are in Heaven.) 
Meaning his old Parishioners now dead.  It is more than ordinary for these men to confess Saints to be-on Earth. (for several of their Ejected Priests preached to the contrary) But the Doctor's Saints, are like the Chapel, which the Doctor in one of his latin Letters faith was dedicated to the holy Trinity: whereas the building of it was a penalty inflicted upon the builder for begetting bastards. But like Church like children, and such as the Sanctus doctus is, so are the indocti sancti.  
Page 20. Mr powel thought himself facete in popping the Moderator in the mouth with the Directory. If you count the Church of England your Mother; and the Directory a Rule for the Church, why should you digress from it? Oh but you have not yet done with the old English Mass, nor digested the Directory, nor learned to practise your own principles.  
Page 20. The Doctor distinguished and said, Apostles were considered either in their persons or office. But have you forgot, the Doctor's answer or distinction, which was in these words (as it was then taken in short hand) Apostles are either taken in Scripture for the immediate, or primary Apostles, or for their successors. To which Mr powel replied, Ubi scriptura non distinguit ibi non distinguendum. The Doctor said, that distinction was in Scripture. Where said Mr powel? the Doctor after silence (which made all indifferent men cry, what hath nothing to answer) brought out that in John, Whose sins ye remit, they are remitted. How pertinent this was to the Question judge ye. Upon which Mr Moston said, what are ye silent? have ye no Scripture for what ye say? we'll help you to Scripture. Is not all this true Animadverter? do you then blame Mr powel for ask you Questions? and did not the Doctor and his Associates deny Timothy and Titus to be Evangelists and of the 70 Disciples, though Mr powel cited Scriptures to prove it; and the very Page in Translation of Bish. Honmer out of Eusebius to confirm it, yet the Doctor and his 
Bishop Hon. 4 Edit. pag. 517.  pupils continued still to deny it. Did not this improve the Doctor's credit much, viz. to be ignorant of Scripture (as the cloudy Clergy of Wales are generally) and of prelatical historito?  
Page 21. It was time to call for an end of the Disputation. So it was indeed when the Doctor was in his Masterpiece (Ordination) so wounded, and weakened, that two of his own friends, that were Scholars, said afterwards, they wondered at the Doctor's weakness therein; and being therein wounded he would not hear an argument more.  
Page 21. This passage that he might choose another is not remembered. The Proverb is true, Whether you would not, you know not the way. What, do not you remember Mr powel and Mr Moston urged it oft, and called by name upon Mr Kyssin (the great Reviler) or upon any other to stand up in the Doctor's stead.  
But you are told one challenged one of the bench and he refused. But that was after the dispute, and the young man was Mr Jones (the Lord Herbert's Chaplain) who challenged Mr Charles Edwards to dispute it in Latin, and he received the challenge in my (and many more peoples) hearing, but your Champion laid down his cudgels, as your Doctor did his courage, and this I observe in these Vines your (improperly called Clergy) they are like the old Cavaliers, that never stand above one charge. So did the Doctor, he would not receive but one of Mr powel's Arguments, and one Arrow taken up by the way, so wounded him and his party, that I am persuaded they will never appear again in that cause.  
Pag. 22. Mr powel declared for himself that he received Imposition of hands with fasting & prayer by a Presbytery in London. He did not say so, but that before these wars he was chosen by fasting and prayer, by a Congregation of Saints: and since he had a Certificate or Testimony, under the hands of twelve of the Assembly besides the Prolocutor. He further said, That there was one there that had received Imposition of hands by a Presbytery in London: which notwithstanding your Confederates (by name the upholder of your drunken Alchouse called a College, & the builder of your sacred Chapel) shut out, though he was an University man, approved by the Commissioners, & without exception: And this was one of those that preached upon the side of a Hill after the disputation, which you falsely accuse for inveighing against learning. But you cry out that we send out, Weavers, Smiths, Cappers, Soldiers. It is true, there is one Weaver a blessed understanding man, and one Smith a religious godly man (and one that hath more learning than some of your Curates) & it may he two or three gifted godly tried and approved men besides, (who may be Soldiers or rather Officers) that go along with our Preachers, as Fellow-helpers (even as the Apostles & Ministers had in the Primitive times) in the work of God, and God hath made them successull. But is it not as lawful for such men (who are godly and gifted) to exercise their gifts; as for simple Sir john's, lack latin, lack-gifts, lack-grace, who kept poor Alehouses in the Mountains: where they and the people spend togethers the greatest part of the Sabbath in profaneness: of this sort we can produce four, for every Tradesman the Commissioners have sent forth. Nay in point of learning they that are now sent out and approved, shall compare with so many of the Ejected Priests, for spiritual gifts and graces (I trow) most of your Ejected Clergy will not pretend to.  
Pag. 23, 24, etc. You say the Doctor made answers to such Scriptures as were cited by Mr powel. The truth is, he did answer; For  
First he confessed that it was lawful for gifted brethren to preach (yet in his Sermons he railed against them, though he confessed publicly he knew them not) but he excepted against the long try all of them. It's to be wondered the Doctor (having been a Bishop's domestic Chaplain) should forget that Scripture, Lay hands suddenly on no man, 1 Tim. 5.22. But it seems the Doctor would have other men run into the same errors which his Bishop rather and himself ran into. And it would be better considered by the Doctor (& his brethren) whether gifted men may not continue to exercise their gifts, and yet never be made Ministers, or receive Ordination at all? And if the Doctor (or any of his friends) puts Pen to Paper again, I shall desire them to answer these Scriptures that justify gifted brethren's teaching without Ordination, Num. 11. 25. Pro. 14. 25 Act. 8. 11. & 11. 19 Rom. 12. 6. 1 Cor. 12. 7. & 14. 3. Heb. 5. 12. & 3. 13. 1 Pet. 4. 10. and to prove that Ordination is essentially necessary to a Minister and without which one cannot be a Minister: also let him anser those assertions of learned men; as  
1. Electio nil nisi complementum Electionis.  
Vel Confirmatio Electionis, as another faith,  
Vel Testificatio Electionis.  
Vel Ritus liber e observationis. It's true the Doctor will have Bellarmine to join with him herein, but few (or none) of the Protestant Writers, or Churches.  
Secondly, The Doctor acknowledged a Separation from persecuting profane people (this is contrary to Mr Alexander Griffiths Non concordant inter se) which made Mr powel say, I wish Doctor you may express this your Principle next Easter. But I fear as the Doctor did now willingly forbear to relate this truth, lest his brethren (who to speak truth, are for most part but like Ravens to the Swan in comparison of the Doctor, as Mr powel's expression was) should fall foul upon him. Truly reader, thou mayst believe it, the Doctor did ingenously (whether out of policy, piety, or because he could not speak against them) confess our separation from persecuters and profane people to be lawful, & our Ministry, & that he had nothing to say against our Ministers (which made Mr powel answer, I hope the Doctor will become a separatist, and one of us: at which the Doctor smiled.) And this is all Mr powel and those of his judgement would have maintained; for they have publicly, and privately, in their Churches, and elsewhere declared, they separate from none of the godly Ministers, or godly people of England: and that they will receive any that are godly (as godly) without respect to their opinions, if they hold the head Christ, to join & partake with them. Take notice that the Preacher who they say was (beaten in Dolgelly) a tradesman, was an University man; so there is one untruth more. But I will follow them no longer in their falsities, but will come in the next & last place to justify the Syllogism, which the Doctor & his brethren, then excepted against, and still ignorantly maintain, because they would not acknowledge either their own weakness, and ignorance, or the Truth, on the contrary side. Let's therefore examine the Syllogism, and the Exceptions against it. The Syllogism runs thus;  
They that are not qualified, elected and ordained, according to the word of God; are not called of God.  
But Doctor G. and his brethren, are not qualified, etc. Ergo.  
1. The Doctor exception was, that the Syllogism consisted all of Negatives. Answ. The Syllogism does not consist of all Negatives (much less or mere Negatives) for the word (not) joined with the subject in the Major, doth not make a negation, but only a medium infinitum (implying an affirmative word uncertain and unlimited) and so the word (not) is to be taken in the Minor Proposition: and so the most wife and solid Logicians take it for an affirmative predicati infiniti.  
2. The Syllogism must be negative in matter, & for me, before that rule is verified; Neve negativis, etc. vel ex meris negativis nil concluditur: but this Syllogism is not so, for the Minor Proposition (as before) is an absolute affirmation: but you are not qualified, etc. The great Prophet Jesus Christ (who is perfect wisdom) shall be produced against the Doctor herein. Joh. 3.36. He that believeth not shall not see life: (The Minor Proposition must be) But you Jews believe not Ergo. You Jews shall not see life. So Joh. 5. 23. He that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father. The Minor must needs be; But you Jews honour not the Son. Ergo. You Jews honour not the Father. The like argument you find by Paul (a better Disputant than Doctor Griffith) Rom. c. 4. etc. 8. Let the Doctor deny these to be true Arguments if he can; and if he acknowledge these I am sure he must acknowledge the other, for there are no more negatives in the other then in these. But the Doctor (who would wave Scripture merely to cavil against and occult the truth) may object that the Minor is not expressed in the text. What 
Granger in his Syntag. doth oft supply that part of the Syllogism which is wanting; and it is rational so to do.  tho? does it follow, it's not right arguing? Sure the Dr would understand if a man should say, All Doctors and Ministers, that subscribe not the Engagement, & acknowledge the present Powers, shall be Ejected. If the Minor Proposition were not expressed: yet I suppose the Doctor would conceive that it did concern him: but its probable he would cavil against that Law (the sstroake of which by friendship he now avoids) as much as he doth against this Syllogism, because that would touch his profit as much as this doth his credit. But  
3. Because the Dr conceives that Mr Moston & Mr powel do not understand, or else wrong Burgerdicius, and Keckerman: let's see what's their verdict herein, and for whom they will find. Burg. Instit. Leg. lib. 2. chap. 8. pag. 178. faith, Si negatio sit pars medij, bonus Syllogismus, es duabus negatibus conficitur.  
Exempt. great. Quod non sentit non est animal.  
Planta non sentit. Ergo. Planta non est animal.  
See further there: as also in Keck. Edit. 6 pag 419. who gives the same example as above. So Tho. Granger in his Syntagm. Logic. lib. 3. cap. 10. pag. 265. So Saunders and others. I might add here the opinions of four or five of the best Logicians I know in Wales, who had this Syllogism propounded to them; yea one of the best Scholars that was at the Dispute that day, (who adheres in his Judgement, in other things, rather to the Doctor then to Mr powel) said it was a good Syllogism. But suppose the Syllogism had not been true in form, yet consider what learned Alstedius faith in his AEncyclopedia Printed An. 1630. pag. 437. Max. Materia necessaria, libera est a legibus formae syllogisticae Itaque syllogismus saepe numero concludit necessitate materiae, ubi forma non est bona, Aquila non capit muscas. And as for the Doctor's Syllogism (or whose ever else they are) they differ very much from Mr powel's, for they are mere negatives (to was not his) Secondly, if they could be found as they are laid down in any figure, yet they are not in the first figure as his was: and therefore the Doctor (or his Amanuensis) should leave off blinding the people with their captious, vicious, fallacious arguing; and receive the Syllogisms more truly and properly retorted upon themselves, thus;  
1. Syllog: No unreasonable Creature is to be taken to be in capacity to dispute.  
But Dr Griffiths and his brethren are unreasonable Creatures. Ergo.  
Dr Griffiths and his brethren are not to be taken to be in capacity to dispute.  
Or thus; That which is according to the word of God, is not to be spoken against.  
But Dr Griffiths and his brethren's practice, is to be spoken against.  
Ergo. Dr Griffiths and his brethren's practice, is not according to the word of God.  
And so likewise the third Syllogism in the same manner. Thus you see Dr Griffiths, by Christ's, and Paul's way of reasoning, and by the best Logicians, (yea by his own witnesses) found guilty of ignorance, or forgetulnes in Logic: and by that time the Dr hath read this, and further considered, he may possibly be sorry he gave heed to the cavils then put into his head by a young Sophister, newly come from Oxford. Sed dolus & fraus patrocinaniur nemini. I shall conclude with the saying of two learned godly men, whom the Doctor would call Fathers, if they did not whip him, as he deserves.  Chrysostomus. 
Non solùm ille veritatis proditor est qui palàm mendacium pro veritate agnita loquitur: Sed etiam is qui veritati agnitae pertinaciter resistit. Et  Augustinus. 
Nimis perversò se ipsos amant, qui ideò alios errare volunt, ut ipsorum errorers lateant.  
Haec est prima mali labes, hinc corruit omnis Antique pietatis honos. Sed bonis dicat malè seque mentiri neget: tamen viget, vigebit, victa vincit veritas.  
Hear truth through weak ones doth prevail,  
When Error in strong hands do fail.  
Reader, pass by, or correct what faults have herein escaped.  
FINIS.