AN APOLOGY FOR THE Discipline OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH: Intended especially for that of our MOTHER THE CHURCH of ENGLAND: In answer to the Admonitory Letter Lately published.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Nazianz. Ephraim feeds on wind. Hosea 12.1. 
By William Nicolson, Archdeacon of Brecon.  
LONDON, Printed for Willim Leake at the Crown in Fleetstreet, betwixt the two Temple-gates. 1659.   

THE COPY OF A LETTER Written by a Divine, A Friend of the AUTHOR.  
SIR,  
I Thank you for the favour you did me in imparting those papers to me, composed by our learned friend in defence of the Ecclesiastical Government, under which the Church of God hath lived ever since it was established by the Preach Apostolical. I see and love his zeal, and honour his learning, but am most pleased with his method and order of argument; for having prosperously defended and illustrated the Doctrine of the Church of England in his material and grave discourses upon the Church Catechism, he does to very good purposes proceed to defend her Government; that as it already appears that her Doctrine is Catholic, so it may be demonstrated that the Government of the Church of England is no other than that of the Catholic Apostolic Church; she by the same way being truly Christian, and a Society of Christians, by which all Christendom were put into life and society, that is, became collective and united bodies, or Churches. And indeed they are both of them very weighty and material considerations; For more things are necessary to the being of a Church than to the being Christian. First, the Apostles preached Jesus Christ and him crucified, and every day winning souls to Christ did adopt them into his Body, and joined them to that Head; and there they had life and nourishment. But until their multitudes were much increased, they were no Body Politic; they were so many single persons; till the Apostles according to their places of abode, gathered them under one Pastor, and they grew into Communion, and were fastened to one another by the Masters of Assemblies. This Government with the alteration only of some unconcerning circumstances hath continued in the Church of God; and the Church of England was baptised by it at the same time it was baptised into the faith of Christ; only of late some endeavours have been to rifle this Government, and to dissolve her being a body Politic, and almost reduced her only to the being Christian; which because it seemed also to be in some danger, Being and Unity having so near relation to each other, I suppose it very advisedly done of him first to do what he thought fit for the securing the Doctrine, and then by the method Apostolical proceeding to the immuring of that Doctrine by the walls and towers of Government, and I find he hath done it well. His arguments are grave and close; not florid, but pressing; his observations choice, his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and little by-discourses pleasant and full of instructions, his refutation sharp and true; his returns pertinent; and nothing trifling but his adversary; who, because he speaks but weak things, ministers not occasions worthy enough for this learned man to do his best. But he hath made supply (I perceive) and by taking little occasions by the hand, he hath advanced them to opportunities of handsome discourse; and to my sense, hath to better, more full, and excellent purposes than any man before him, confuted the new fashion of Congregational and gathered Churches; which must now needs appear to be nothing but a drawing Schism into Countenance and Method, and giving a warranty to partialities; it is a direct crumbling of the Church into minutes and little principles of being, just as if the world were dissolved into Democritus his dream of Atoms, and minima naturalia. Every man loves Government wellenough, but few of the meaner sort love their Governors; especially if they think themselves wise enough to govern; for than they are too wise to be governed. Now this Independent or Congregational way seems to me the finest compendium of humouring and pleasing all those little fellows that love not, that endure not to be subject to their betters; for by this means a little Kingdom and a royal Priesthood is provided for every one of them; a Kingdom of Yvetot; and some had rather be chief but in a garden of Cucumbers, and govern but ten or twenty absolutely (so they do) than be the fifth or the twentieth man in a Classis, or inconsiderable under the Apostolical and long-experienced government by those Superiors which Christ by himself, and by his Spirit, and by his blessing, and by his providence, and by the favour of Princes hath made firm as heaven and earth, never to be dissolved, until the Divine Fabric of the house of God itself be shaken.  
I pray give my service to the good Man; and I do hearty thank him for my share of the book, by which I have already had some pleasure and some profit, and hope for more, when my little affairs will give me leave strictly to peruse every unobserved page in it. When I only heard of it, I was confident he would do it very well; and now I see it is so very well done, and in that grave judicious manner, if you had not told me, I should have been confident it had been his, Vox hominem sonat. I pray God that he may find encouragement according to the mertt of his labours; and acceptance according to his good intentions, and that his book may not receive its estimate according to the cheap and vast numbers of others, but according to its own weight. The strength that was put to this would have resisted a stronger adversary, but it could not readily have supported a worthier cause; and because I believe it was done with as much charity as learning, I hope it will have the blessings of God, and of the Church, and the peace of all good men. I only have this to add further: I wish that this worthy man would enter into no more war but against the open enemies of mankind; that he would dispute for nothing but for the known Religion of Jesus Christ, that he would contend for no interests but the known concernments of the Spirit in the matter of good life, which is the life of Religion; and my reason is, not only because I find that he calls his adversary Brother, and it is not so good that Brethren should contend; but because men are wearied with disputes, and the errors of this or any age, after the first batteries and onsets by the Church, are commonly best confuted by the plain teaching of positive truths and the good lives and the wise governments of our Superiors; and after all, I believe that though he does manage this contest prudently and modestly, yet the spiritual war against direct impiety he would manage much more dexterously and prosperously; and for his auxiliaries he would be more confident of the direct and proper aides of the Spirit of God. This is very well, and he will I doubt not still do better, when a more concerning argument is managed by so excellent a hand. Sir, be pleased when the Book is printed (in case you think it fit, and that it be approved by authority) to send me a Copy of it into the fare distant place of my retirement; that I may be recreated with the worthiest productions of my friend; for it will be instruction and refreshment too, to  
Your very loving friend and Brother J. T.   

TO THE Reader.  
THe Prince of peace knows who bequeathed peace as his last Legacy to all his followers, that I am not a man of contentions, or have loved to strive, this being the first time that ever I set pen to paper in a contestation with any man. And to this kind of any other I have been most averse, because I have found by experience in falling upon, and passing through the controversies Theological, the ardour of devotion hath been abated, and many hours that might have been better spent in piety, and the study of necessary fundamental doctrines, surreptitiously stolen from me. When therefore I had set up my resolution to meddle no more with the polemics, I was awaked by an importunate Letter, in which finding many foul aspersions to be cast on my Mother, or rather the Catholic Church, (I mean not the Roman, for I never did, nor do acknowledge her to be worthy of that name) in whose steps the Reformed Church of England hath trodden in her Doctrine and Discipline legally constituted, I thought myself bond according to my Talon to vindicate her in her constitutions.  
If any man shall say this needed not, it having been so often, so vigorously done by abler pens; yea, and confirmed to be wisely constituted, by the distractions and divisions which have fallen upon it, since those foundations have been shaken and removed by airy brains, than which there cannot be a stronger plea for the necessity of that Discipline which is here opposed and vilifyed: I must confess this is true, and that by all wise and sober men, our Mother hath gained hence thus much advantage, that Plus colitur, placet, atque viget, laudatur, amatur.  
Yea, and her greatest Adversaries, were they , might come to know quae recta sunt, although Athenian like for some reasons, they are all for news, and therefore facere nolle.  
Yet being provoked I held myself bound to answer, yea, though I did but say over again those things which Wise, Learned, Pious men had said before me; for I intended not to impose upon my Reader, which is usual, by obtruding that for my own, which indeed I have but borrowed from other men. Easie it had been for me to vary phrases, and in other words so to have dressed up the judicious determinations of the Learned before me, (who have in this discourse said so much that little can be added) that men might have attributed something to me. But neither the subject upon which I was to write would suffer it, nor yet mine own inclination. For suppose I should magisterially deliver the self same truth as from myself with those Worthies; yet when were I able to do it with the same vigour and eloquence? how could an equal credit be given to my words, as to their grey hairs, and impartial relations of Church-practice, who were eye-witnesses of what they have delivered? Besides, it more sharply strikes the mind, and more deeply seizes upon the understanding, and wins belief sooner, what the Pillars of the Church have left to us in their Monuments, than what I or Cluvienus shall set down. And this is the reason, that where I found any thing opposite, either in Ancient or Modern Divines, I have expressed it in their own words, and not in such as I could easily have disguised. And in this I have followed the judgement and authority of the gravest men, who have taught me, that in eo laborare quae semel rectissimè dicta sunt, nova orationis forma enunties, intempestivae est ostentationis. 
Moller, praefat. in Psalm.  Therefore whatsoever the Reader shall observe in this Apology spoken to the point in hand, I desire he would not attribute it to me, but to those who have laboured before me upon that subject, whose Disciple I willingly profess myself to be, and a Pigmy upon their shoulders. Only if the Reader shall find their allegations more aptly and vigorously applied and pressed home, or more perspicuously opened and closely laid together, or some defects here supplied, and loser discourses fortified, I have my aim.  
This Apology had not appeared in public, had not the publication of the Admonitory Epistle called it forth. For my intent in it was first to satisfy my friend that sent it, an old acquaintance, though always of a dissenting judgement, which yet I hoped had been better bottomed: and then to put into the mouths of my brethren of the Clergy (to whom I understood the Copy was sent as well as to myself) what to reply. But when I found it abroad, I conceived myself bound to let the World know what might be returned to the imputations; for I conceive to the considerate Reader they will appear no more, after he hath perused the Reply.  
So fairly I have dealt with the Admonitor, that I have not here and there catched at pieces, or taking any advantages by wresting any expressions in the letter; But deduced the whole into parts, and the parts into several paragraphs, and resolved every paragraph into distinct propositions, framed in the very words of the Letter, which the writer cannot deny to be his own assertions, and annexed a several answer to them, that so the Author of the Admonitory should not complain that any wrong is done him, or his sense mistaken, as is usual among Litigants in this kind: And I hope withal I have so demonstrated the Truth, where the matter was capable of a demonstration, that there will be left no more just cause to wrangle. And my hope is in part confirmed by this, that the first part of it being sent to the Author of the Admonitory more than sixteen months since, it received no return; which gives me just occasion to suspect it is not subject to any notable exception. The other two parts have lain by me ever since that was sent; and that they were not made companions with the first, some reasons there are, which I hold it not necessary to make known.  
From any bitterness of language (though sometimes justly provoked to it) I dare say the frowardst adversary will acquit me. Sarcasms you shall meet with none, Astîsmi now and then; and that cannot be imputed; for it was the honour of Socrates, the gravest and wisest of the Philosophers, that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What Tully said of old age, cannot be disliked in any stile, severitatem in senectute probo, acerbitatem nullo modo. That sharpness which having overmuch of the sour will distaste, being brought to a right temper pleaseth the palate, and provokes the appetite. Reader, it was the Authors purpose sometime to delight thee, but most of all to edify, inform, confirm thee, which if it may be effected, he hath his end. For it is my hearty prayer that a period may be set to this wrangle, and that we may all turn to the way of truth and peace.  
Farewell, W. N.   

A KEY to open the Debate about a Combinational Church, and the power of the KEYS. The first Part.  
THE chief point of the Controversy lies in this, to know in whose hands the power of the Keys shall be, or rather who shall be the Prime subject of the Keys.  
Of this I find three opinions. 
Cotton, Burton, Goodwin, Nye, Assert the name. Bayly, p. 132.  The first defended by the Independents or Combinationals. A second defended by the Presbyterians; and a third by the Prelates.  
1. The Combinational Churches are divided in this point; for some seat power in the whole Congregation so soon as associated in Covenant, even before they have any Officers. Others after the Officers are chosen settle it in them alone. A third even then conjunctim, make the whole body the subject of the Keys. Which of these, or whether any of these is like to be true, will appear if we consider these two or three things.  
1. That the Presbyters and Ruling-Elders cannot be the prime subject, is apparent, because that the Keys were seated in some, before they were in them, if you be constant to your own principles; For how came they to be Elders and Rulers? were they not created by the power of the Keys? and who created them? was it not they who did elect and ordain? The prime power then must be in the electors and ordai●ers, not in the elected and ordained, whence it will follow inevitably, that the Ruling Elders are not the prime subject of power; for a power there is which precedes theirs.  
2. After Election and Ordination, they, viz. Ruling Elders cannot be so neither, because it is your common Tenet, that the Congregation may again upon displeasure resume the Key, Depose, Excommunicate, cast out their own Elders, which they could not do, were they not the prime subject of the Keys, and authority primarily in them.  
3. But if you shall say, that conjunctim, people and Elders together are the prime subject, this cannot be neither. Because before they are thus conjoined, the Electors and Ordainers had the true essence of a Church (as you teach) both for matter and form, though they had no Officer nor Elder, and then must radically and originally be invested with this power in the first combination, without any reflection on this conjunction. So that as they are an organical Church heightened by Rulers and Elders, it makes them not the prime subject of the Keys, for this you say they had before.  
That the people divisim without the Elders and Rulers are not the prime subject of this authority, I prove in this Tract demonstratively. I only here add, that the power of the Keys consists in binding, losing, preaching, administering Sacraments, etc. which till you can prove to be in the people originally, I shall never yield the power to be originally in their hands.  
The difficulties are so many, and the subtleties so nice among you in this dispute, that they have forced your finest heads, Robinson, Cotton, Goodwin, Norton, to invent so many distinctions, divisions, subdivisions, that a man must needs think himself in a maze that reads them; the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Schoolmen, which you so much complain of, are exceeded by you. And yet when all's done, by these you could never yet satisfy your own party, and therefore expect not to settle others. It shows you are in a Labyrinth, and would feign help yourselves out by the small threads of these prettily invented distinctions. In a word, that there are very many knots and objections, to which your Tenet is liable. For you know that all distinctions were invented to give light to that which is very perplexed, intricate, dubious, ambiguous, and ae●uivocal.  
2. That this your assertion is mainly denied, opposed, battered and beat down by the Presbyterians, I need not tell you, or that they deny the the Congregation to be either conjunctim, or divisim, the prime subject of the Keys, and settle it upon the Eldership primò, immediate, adaequatè Finalitèr & objectiuè; they will grant you that the whole Church is the subject; but autoritatiuè & formalitèr, they place it in the Guides, or Presbyters without a Bishop. And of this opinion Rutherford is an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But he runs into the same inconvenience with your Rabbis. For to make his thoughts good, he hath so many niceties, so many new-coined distinctions of power, of the Church, of I know not what, that he is able to confound any Reader, and indeed drives on the point till he becomes almost unintelligible. Is not this think you a rare device in him and in yours to find out a Truth, and settle a conscience about Church-government?  
3. The Prelate's are opposite to both, they deny the Congregation conjunctim or divisim to be the first sub●ect of the Keys: They deny the Presbyterian Eldership to be the prime subject of Church power. And they place it under Christ in the Apostles, and their successors; and for this they plead our Saviour's promise, Matth. 16. and his donation, John 20. They plead again the Apostolical practice extant in the Scriptures, Acts 8.17. Acts 14.23. 1 Tim. 4.14. 1 Tim. 5.22. 2 Tim. 1.6. Tit. 1.5. and again the perpetual practice of the Catholic Church ever since: according to that of Jerome, Decretu● est toto or●e, ut unus è Presbyteris electus ceteris superponeretur, which testimony I have at large afterwards cited and opened at full.  
This is the state of the whole question, and which of these is likeliest to be most true, I shall leave it to the  Reader to judge after he hath read over this Treatise.  

In nomine Domini, 
October 29. 1656.  & ad honorem jesu Christi & ipsius Ecclesiae, ad veritatis aram haec offero. An answer to the Admonitory Letter. The words are these. SECT. I.  
Reverend Sir,  
THat the glorious God who is the giver of all grace as well as of every good and perfect gift, would never be weary of conferring on you, or of continuing in you, or yet of increasing by you, those real and rich gifts and graces, which he out of his good will and mere goodness was pleased to endue and adorn your precious soul withal: for the due and daily use and exercise whereof his main aim and uttermost end was his own service, and your own solace to train you up higher in holiness and happiness (as I am hopefully persuaded in my very heart) then most of your companions, or acquaintance, kindred or country (and that at the least) by the head and shoulders; 
1. An humble motion for you.  is one of those motions with which I have frequently and unfeignedly found myself moved (and that as I trust from the highest heavens) for to make unto the hearer of prayers, and the granter of requests. This motion is my humble motion for you.  

the Answer to the first Section.  
AMong those different kind of prayers the Apostle mentions and enjoins, Intercession is one. 
1 Tim. 2.1.  That therefore you are pleased to intercede for me at the throne of grace, is an act of piety and charity, and I hearty thank you for it, and desire the continuance; and I beseech the hearer of prayers, and granter of requests, to hear and grant to us both a clear understanding, a ready will, obedient affections to embrace the naked Truth, as it shall be manifested unto us, all partialities and sactions, or inclination to any parties being set aside. For thus much I may assure you, that I am of a peaceable and docible disposition. Peaceable, and hate contention and wrangling, well knowing that pruritus litigandi est scabies Ecclesiae, 
Eccles. 12.12.  it cools devotion, and animates faction. I verily believe he is the less Christian, that knows best to wrangle. There is no end of making many books, especially of Controversy. For of these there is no end either for cessation or profit. None for cessation, because the parties interessed either through self-love or pertinacy, rarely are by the most forcible arguments drawn to retract what they have once maintained. None for profit, because the contenders are seldom bettered or made more religious, would I might not say far worse, more fierce and of alienated affections. This needs no proof, since it is too apparent in the encounters of all sides, whether for Papistry, Prelacy, Presbytery, Independency, etc. The Writers pens are for the most part steeped in gall, of which tart juice I promise you, you shall not taste one drop, it being so contrary to my nature, whom the Dove that descended on our Saviour hath embued with mildness and a study of peace. And as I am inclinable to peace, so I am very docible also. Wax is not easier to receive an impression, than I am the seal of truth, but than it must be made evident unto me either by plain and express Scripture, or else by some demonstration and deduction evidently drawn from thence, for otherwise I must remain where I was. This because I find not in your discourse, my judgement is not upon it altered. The words I find in it many, the arguments and proofs in it very few. 'Tis a pretty Narrative, not any demonstration; pardon me therefore if I yield not.  
The gifts and graces you take notice of in me, I freely and openly acknowledge are fare short of your conceit; they cannot swell me but humble me, being laid together with my imperfections; and were it not partiality in you, you might behold them fare more eminent in many of my companions and acquaintance. But your friendly mind hath presented me unto you as an object through a mist, which makes it seem fare bigger than indeed it is. Yet your error of love shall not make me believe I am a giant, when I am but a Pigmy, and so rich in grace, goodness, holiness as you intimate, being conscious to my own defects. However I am what I am, 
1 Cor. 15.10.  and I hope his grace which is bestowed upon me is not in vain. My talon I received from him, to him I acknowledge it, and give thanks for it, 
Ephes. 4.12.  and I shall endeavour to employ it to that end it was given, for the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ. Hic labour, hoc opus. And it is my grief, that I am forced to wrap it up in a napkin, and me thinks it should breed in them singultum cordis, that have forced me to it. But no more of this. It follows in your Letter.    

SECT. II. The words of the Letter.  
THat you would call to remembrance, and also seriously consider and lay to heart what (I in the judgement of rational charity am bound to conceive) you cannot choose but know, by what Christ did reveal to you, and by what you did likewise receive from Christ: namely how our God in covenant hath thought meet to constitute three several sorts of visible Churches, and no more to be owned and acknowledged as his, to be founded and found successively on earth from the beginning of the world to the end of the same.  

Answer.  
OF what you writ in this paragraph in general, I am not now to consider, to wit, what hath been the external government of Christ's Church from the beginning to this day. And how fare I agree with you, will by and by come to be examined. But in the mean time let me put you in mind that these words [God hath thought meet to constitute three several sorts of visible Churches] are improper. For the Church of God, before, under, after the Law, was but one in essence and being; so we believe One Holy Catholic Church, the bonds of whose unity are extant, Ephes 4.4, 5, 6, 7. Let then the external government be what it will, yet this cannot constitute three several sorts of visible Churches, because distinction of species must proceed from internal principles, not from  accoutrements. This then is not properly expressed. But if you mean, as I hope you do, That the visible Church of God hath had a different kind of regiment and existence, one from the beginning under the Patriarches to Moses, another from Moses to Christ, and a third from Christ to the end of the world, I assent to you. And I suppose your meaning to be this, by your words which thus follow:  
Whereof the first was Oeconomical or Domestical; the second the National or Judicial, and the third was the Presbyterial or a Combinational Church.  

Reply.  
In the general I told you I assent to you, but about the particulars I shall offer unto you some considerations, especially about the first and the last.  
1. You say the two first, viz. the Oeconomical and Judicial Church continued of a space of time allotted to each of them of two thousand years or near about. Here you are not so exact in your Chronology as you ought, for the first continued longer, and the last fell short, as Junius hath given us the account, and other Chronologers descent not much from him. For the Oeconomical Church continued two thousand five hundred and ten years, and the Judicial and National one thousand five hundred and two only, if you set the period at Christ's ascension; but if at the final overthrow of Jerusalem by Titus, one thousand five hundred forty two. For than it may be better supposed was the abolition of the Ceremonial Law, when the Sceptre was utterly departed from Judah; and now your words will run smoothly on, in this last and third kind of Church Government every child of man, that is an ingenuous child of God, and a conformable member of Christ, either really hath for the present, or else earnestly longs and desires to have for the future both a name and a nail according to what is promised to the believing Gentiles, and was performed to the believing Jews, Isa. 56.5. Ezra 9.8. such a nail was Eliakim the Type of Christ, Isa. 
2. An hearty motion to you.  22.23. Upon this you move me to spend sometimes a few of my morning thoughts, maturely to peruse, ponder and apply what is by you set before my eyes, and propose to my consideration. And I assure you I am not now to begin to do it; for I could present you if I pleased with many animadversions on this subject many years since collected. I am not such a stranger in Israel to be ignorant of these things, which are obvious to any one that hath been conversant but meanly in the Scriptures; however for your monition I thank you. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.     

SECT. III. The Letter.  
NExt you begin to enlarge upon your distinction: and move first, That some others (especially such of yours whom it may more nearly concern to be well seen and skilled therein) may have made known unto their souls by your (that is my) self (how and where you shall see cause and think fit) that the first visible Church, etc.  
This motion I embrace, and it shall be performed. But whom you note out by such of yours I know not. If you mean those of my own Order, I know many of them as well if not better seen and skilled in these things already than myself, so that this were operam & oleum perdere, however they shall have notice of it. But if you mean of the common sort, it hath been so often inculcated by me into them, that to do it again is actum agere.  
Yet by the way, give me leave to intimate, that I am not pleased with the phrase [Such of yours] for it seems to me to be distinctive, and among Protestants I never liked these pronowns, Yours and Ours, they border too near upon separation, which I would not have amongst us, who are all one in Christ Jesus. 
Phil. 3.15.  We may in some things think otherwise, and yet belong to the same fold. God in his good time will reveal the Truth; away then with these terms of distance Yours and Ours. Now I proceed with your words.  The Letter. 
The first visible Church which was constituted by the wise Builder thereof was a Domestical Church, being outwardly guided and governed by the first borne of the family, who were types and shadows of Christ Jesus in the several houses of professing Saints: and did continue from Adam and Abel's days to the time of Moses and Aaron's pilgrimage in the wilderness of Sin: as doth plainly appear to all that do deliberately weigh both what is expressed, and what is necessarily employed in Gen. 4.4. compared with Exod. 12.7.  

Answer.  
IN the substance I agree with you; But I pray take it not ill, that I clear up some expressions that may be mistaken.  
1. You say the first visible Church is Domestical, and did so continue from Adam to Moses. That at first the discipline and government of the Church began and continued in certain families, cannot be doubted, but that it so continued till Moses days, is not easy to conceive, because as families multiplied, there must be a multiplication of these Church's, as there was of houses, whence it will follow that every eldest son must be King and Priest in his own house; and then what will become of the prerogative of the firstborn, 
Gen. 27.29.  who during life was to be Lord over his brethren?  
Better therefore I conceive it is to say, that this reglement was Paternal, and that all the several families were to depend on him durante vitâ, both for instruction and discipline. For while the first father lived, he was, 1. a Prophet to teach. 2. A Priest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to sacrifice, intercede, to bless and give thanks. 3. A Prince to rule and punish. Thus Adam as a common father guided the Church for nine hundred and thirty years. Seth the son of Adam was his father's assistant for five hundred years, and taught his children who were then the Church to call on the name of the Lord, 
Gen. 4.  and continued that charge one hundred and twelve years after his father's death. Enosh did the like to Seth, and all the heirs of the promise to the fathers. God always stirring up the spirits of some excellent men to preach in his Church, while their fathers yet lived and guided the number of the faithful; as for example, Enoch that prophesied three hundred years, 
Gen. 5.22. 2 Pet. 2.5. Gen. 5.27.  first under Adam, and after under Seth, in whose days he was translated. So Noah a preacher of righteousness began under Enoch, and held on for six descents, till the year the flood came, the very year his grandfather Methusalem died. I would call these then extraordinary and immediate Prophets, raised up by God to instruct his Church during the time of their father's principality and priesthood.  
Noah after his grandfather Methusalems' death governed the Church for three hundred and fifty years, and left the reglement to Sem, who succeeding his father in the Covenant, and adopted into the dignity of the firstborn, governed the Church one hundred fifty and two years after his father, even till Abraham was dead, Isaac dim, and Jacob fifty two years old, and therefore might be the Melchizedech, 
Gen. 14. Heb. 7.  the Priest of the most high God. The next that succeeded Sem was Jacob by God's especial choice too, Esau having sold his birthright. As for Abraham and Isaac, they could not lay claim to the●e rights of primogeniture, Sem being yet alive. Called indeed Abraham was, and promised to inherit it, but possessed of he was not, because Sem outlived him, he therefore is called a King, and the Priest of the most high God. In Jacob this primogeniture was estated, among whose sons God divided the honours and dignities of Sem, 
1 Chron. 5.1.  appointing the Sceptre and seed to Judah, the Priesthood to Levi, the double portion to Joseph, which never were again conjoined in any but in Christ Jesus the only Priest that ever succeeded according to the order of Melchizedech.  
By whom the Church was after jacob's and joseph's decease governed in Egypt, is not so certain, but very probable it is, that it was done by the fathers and heads of the twelve tribes, over which I conceive Judah was the chief, 
Gen. 49.8.  according to the tenor of jacob's blessing, Thy father's children shall bow down before thee. The sum of this is, that when the people of God increased and multiplied into a Nation, and divers Nations for aught we know, as before the flood they did, and when after the flood they did the like, it is not so proper to call it a Domestical Church that was so fare extended. And if the instruction thereof was Domestical because every father was to teach his household and offspring: yet the government thereof was Paternal; He that was set over the rest being to be a father to the rest, and to perform all Natural, Civil, and Ecclesiastical offices to them, and they again to do all duties to him by which they are bound by the fifth Command, Honour thy father.  
2. Your next words are, that this Domestical Church was guided and governed by the firstborn of the family]. But this must be understood with a grain of salt; for this though for the most part, yet is not always true; for what will you say to Abel who was younger than Cain? to Sem younger brother to Japhet? as Junius intimates in his notes, Gen. 5.32. and proves, chap. 10. verse 21. which is therefore thus dubiously rendered by our Translatours. Unto Shem also the father of all the children of Eber, the brother of Japhet the elder, even to him were children borne. What will you say to Jacob? to Reuben when his primogeniture was lost? Necessary than it is, that you limit your words, that they carry this sense. God did consecrate the firstborn of the family, as holy to himself, to be Priest in his Church, and increased their dignity with this princely prerogative, that they should be Lords over their brethren, and honoured by their mother's children, as succeeding their fathers in the government and priesthood; unless they were rejected from that honour by God's secret counsels or manifest judgements, and others named by God himself to sustain that charge. Thus the clause is clear, and true.  
3. Again you say that these were types and shadows of Christ Jesus in the several houses of professing Saints]. What then is every professing Saint a King, a Priest, a Prophet in his own house? This I dare not assent to, and I hope you will not; there were no more words to be made of a Presbyterial Church if this were true: for every man might officiate at home, and need not subject himself to any Presbytery; he might baptise, administer the Sacrament, etc. being authorised by this Type. I should rather than say that these were types and shadows of Christ Jesus who is the King, Priest, and Prophet in his Church, and yet executes all these offices for her good and salvation, then make them types of professors in their several houses, who nor may nor can ex officio undertake these functions. It follows,  
4. As doth plainly appear to all that do deliberately weigh what is expressed, and what is necessarily employed in Gen. 4.4. Exod. 12.7.  
These texts I have deliberately weighed, and find not in them, neither expressed, nor yet necessarily employed what you produce them for; In Gen. 4.4. I read, that Abel brought the firstlings of his flock, and of the fat thereof, and the Lord had respect to Abel and to his offering; but can any man either expressly or by necessary implication ever prove from hence, that the first visible Church was a domestical Church, or that it was governed by the firstborn of the family? that they were types and shadows of Christ Jesus in the several houses of professing Saints? Or that this Church did continue from Adam and Abel's days to the time of Moses and Aaron's pilgrimage in the wilderness? That Abel sacrificed to God, that the offering he brought was of the best, that God respects, loves, and is reconciled to the person before he accepts his gift and service, may easily be collected from hence. But I cannot discern which way to deduce from this text any of the former propositions. This text you compare with Exod. 12.7. When I thus read, and they shall take of the blood, and strike it on the two side posts, and on the upper door post of the houses wherein they shall eat it: An injunction I find here concerning the use of the blood of the Paschal Lamb, but not a syllable that can be drawn to your purpose. But the best is that what you say for the substance, is so clear in the book of Genesis, that no man need question it. Let the mistake be but notified, and we agree, and therefore I proceed.    

SECT. iv The words of the Letter.  
THe Church of the second sort was a National Church, consisting merely of Jewish persons, and their Proselytes for its members, who were instrumentally enlightened and led by the Priests and Levites, as their ordinary Ministers; the which kind of Church-government lasted among them from the life of Moses to the death of the Messiah, and no longer, as it is exceeding plain and clear to any one that can find in his heart advisedly to compare the several testimonies of the Old and New Testament together, which will contribute pregnant light to this particular point; such as are Exod. 19.6. Num. 8.10. Deut. 7.7. with Gal. 4 9, 10. Coloss. 2.14.17. and Heb. 7.12.  

The Replication.  
THe substance of this Paragraph is agreed on also. To wit, that the Jews with the Proselytes were a National Church, taught and led ordinarily by the Priests and Levites; extraordinarily by the Prophets; and when they ceased, and the Urim and Thummim, God spoke sometimes to us so by the Bath Col, or silia vocis. And that kind of government began with Moses, and ended at the death of the Messiah, or a little after, as I hinted before, and rather incline to think. For I am sure actually till then it did not, howsoever it ought to have done, Christ's death upon the Cross putting an end to all the rites and sacrifices of the Ceremonial Law.  
Many things I could here observe about their Proselytes, their Priests and Levites, their whole government, which yet I pass by, as not so necessary to the present question. One thing only give me leave to tell you, that some of these texts are not so conclusive to your purpose, as you conceive. For first out of that of Exodus, that the Jews were a holy Nation and people, will easily be deduced, and as much may be said of the Christians, is as evident, if you compare the place with the first of Peter 2.9. for to this place of Exodus I make no doubt the Apostle alludes, when he affirms of the Christian Church, that it is a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy Nation, a peculiar priesthood, etc. I would gladly know why I may not out of these words as well conclude a National Church of Christians, as you do out of the other a National Church of Jews and Proselytes. And then your National Church will not be proper to the Jewish State, but communicable to the State of Christianity also.  
2. Out of Heb. 7.12. you conclude rightly that the Priesthood being changed, there must be a change of the Law, that the Ceremonial Law of Moses was quite abolished, no more sacrifices to be offered, legal purifications to be observed; no nor days, months, times, years in a Jewish sense to be kept up, Gal. 4.9, 10. In a Jewish sense I say; for this is plain Galaticari. 
Tertul.  But to prove from hence, as you usually here do, that no feasts may be observed by Christians, was never meant by the Apostle. Compare the text with Col. 2.16, 17. and you shall find that these were shadows of good things to come; shadows, and then they must point out a body, and that was Christ; 
Amrs. Medul. lib. 2. c. 15. p. 16.  under Christ then the substance of these rites must be looked for; and here give me leave to put you in mind of a rule of Amesius, Festi dies anniversarii, novilunia, & sumiles institutiones, quae merè ceremoniales fuerunt, aequitatem istam generalem in se etiam continent, & adhuc vos docent certos quosdam & accommodatos dies cultui publico assignari debere. But of this more afterward.  
That place you produce from Col. 2.14. speaks home to your purpose, and I shall endeavour to give a further light to it. Thus the Apostle gins, verse 13. And you being dead in tespasses and sins, and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses, blotting out the hand-writing of ordinances that was against, us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his Cross. In which words three things are to be observed. 1. The misery of man. 2. Who freed him from it. 3. The manner of his freedom. His misery was that he was in trespasses and sins, and uncircumcision of the flesh. He who freed, was God in and by Christ, quickening, pardoning; it was a work of power and mercy; for to raise to life and quicken is an act of power; to pardon and forgive, of mercy, which was gratuita, & universalis; free, for it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of free grace then; and universal, for it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, all trespasses. 3. And then follows the manner, Blotting out the hand-writing. A bond or hand-writing is that act which passeth betwixt a Creditor and his Debtor; that put case the Debtor should be so impudent as to plead non factum, the creditor might have his own seal, act and deed to produce against him. This God had against man; it was contrary to him; but now through Christ it was blotted out, it had no power to condemn, it was taken out of the way, it had no force to keep God and man asunder, it was nailed to the Cross, torn in pieces, thrust through with nails, fastened openly there, and as it were proclaimed publicly that it was canceled. And in this all Interpreters agree. But what this Chirograph or hand-writing was, they agree not. For some restrain it to that bond which Christ made with Adam, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat, 
Gen. 2.16.17.  but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat. Others to that Covenant and stipulation which the Jews made with God, All that the Lord hath spoken we will do. 
Exod. 19.8.  Which they did not, and therefore it was Chirograph●m contra. A third sort to that command, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, etc. To which command the conscience within bears witness, non dilexi; and this is also Chirographum contra, this makes against us. The last sort refer these words to the Ceremonial Law, to whom you incline, and I do not decline; for the Ceremonies of the Law might very aptly be called Chirographum contra, in that Circumcision denoted, that our flesh was polluted in the very birth; the then washing and purgations, that we had contracted spot and filth; and the Sacrifices that we deserved to die; which of these senses to fix upon I know not; I suppose it best therefore to take in all, for I am sure all was nailed to the Cross, all blotted out and taken out of the way; whether the curse that fell upon us by Adam's disobedience, or that guilt we contract by breach of our vows, promises, or undertake with God, or that horror that ariseth from an accusing conscience, or our original and actual pollutions for which we ought to die. I pray pardon this digression; the richness and comfort of the text drew me into it. After I shall speak closer to the point, to which indeed now you come, and I shall follow you.    

SECT. V The words of the Letter.  
ANd that the Church of the last and longest constitution was a Presbyterial or Combinational Church, whose commendable opinion and practice (and that without any ground of contradiction in the best judgement of  believers) it is quietly and cordially to subject the earthy, erring and unruly will of every creature therein unto the heavenly, infallible, and uncontrollable will of Christ: who peremptorily wills and enjoins all his professed subjects, and professing Church-members to be indoctrinated and disciplined by the prescribed ministry of these Presbyters or teaching and ruling Elders that are of their own voluntary election and regular ordination. Whose office-extent reacheth from Christ's ascension to the Creation's dissolution: as is witnessed by what is written, Acts 6.5. & cap. 14.23. Rom. 12.7, 8. 1 Cor. 12.8, 28. Ephes. 4.7, 14. Rev. 4.6. & 5.6. & 19.4.  

3. A harmless motion by you.  And here you make this harmless motion by me, That you would resolve (in time whose you are, and in whose hand your life and whole time is) to reveal and manifest unto some of yours, somewhat at least of that much, which the loving and liberal Lord, and lender of pounds and talents did see good to commit to the care of your conscience. This is a third motion, which I was stirred up to spread before you. This motion is my harmless motion by you.  

Reply.  
I Do very willingly embrace this motion, and because I account you in the number of those you are pleased to call [some of yours] I shall begin with yourself, and reveal and manifest (according to the talon which my good Lord hath bestowed on me) to you first what I judge of this Section, after of the rest. And that the truth may the better appear, I proceed to answer methodically; I shall reduce your discourse to these propositions, and after examine them. Of which the first is,  
1. That the Church of the last and longest constitution was a Presbyterial or Combinational Church.  
2. That the commendable opinion and practice of this Church is quietly and cordially to subject the earthy, erring, unruly will of every creature therein to the heavenly, infallible and uncontrollable will of Christ. This proposition is so certain, that it needs no dispute or proof. Only I shall inquire whether you have performed it.  
3. That Christ peremptorily wills and enjoins all his professed subjects and professing Church-members to be indoctrinated and disciplined by the prescribed Ministry. None will deny this but Quakers. Neither do I well see how Itinerants can readily yield so much.  
4. That this prescribed Ministry must consist of Presbyters, or teaching and ruling Elders.  
5. That these Presbyters, teaching and ruling Elders must be of the professing members own voluntary Election, and regular Ordination.  
6. That their Office-extent reacheth from Christ's ascension, to the Creation's dissolution. This is granted in a right sense.  
7. And for all this you bring your proofs out of the Scripture, Acts 6.5. Acts 14.23. etc.  
This is the Analysis of the whole, and I descend to examine it by the parts, and shall open the Scriptures as I conceive they refer to the proposition.   

Proposition 1. That the Church of the last and longest constitution was a Presbyterial or Combinational Church.  
THat the Church you mean, viz. the Church of Christ is to be last, is easily granted; but whether to be the longest or no, is more than you or I, or any man else can tell. But to let this pass. Hic opus est Oedipo; for I conceive not well the sense of your proposition, because you phrase it Presbyterial, or Combinational, since these two by the contending parties are made Disparata, and then must really differ. I know not therefore what to make of this; Or whether it be here a Divisive or an Explanative particle. If you make it Divisive, than it seems not to agree with your following words; for you know that those of the Presbyterial Church, though they will allow your professing members liberty to elect, yet they stoutly, and with open mouth decry their power to Ordain: and you allow the Church you speak of to do both. If you make Or Expositive, than it can but only declare the sense of the former word Presbyterial, and will be fare from your intent, which is, if I mistake not, that all the professing members of a Church be combined in a Church Covenant, which you know the Presbyterial Church will never admit. For although Presbyters can be content to be in their own sense Covenanters, yet they abominate to be in a Church-Combination; and again, though the Church combiners will join in a Church Covenant, yet they will not yield to be Presbyterial Covenanters.  
These Disparata then are not handsomely coupled in this place, neither can I guess at any other intent you have in it, except it be to Umpire betwixt the two parties, by finding out a Church that should be both Presbyterial and Combinational, which hitherto the heat of zeal would never suffer the learnedest of both sides to do. For the Presbyterians condemn your Combination by a Church Covenant as a Chimaera, a fancy, a novelty, a mere humane invention, contrary to Christ's Ordinance, and destructive of all Church power: And the Combiners on the other side, judge as harshly of the Presbyterian Elderships in the whole reformed Churches, as of the Prelacy: nay and worse too, if Bastwicks' words be true, which he hath in the Postscript of his second part, page 6. viz. The Presbyterial government not suiting with the humour of the Independents, they abhor it, and all such as endeavour to establish it, and wish rather that the old trumpery were brought in again, and profess they had rather have the government of Prelates. That which follows I forbear, that I offend not. Thus Bastwick; which if true, 'tis not possible that a Presbyterial and a Combinational Church should be all one as you seem to make it. And therefore you must forgo one of the terms, and make it only Presbyterial, or only Combinational, if you will speak intelligibly in this question. But I shall make the best sense I can of your words, and in order speak to them both. And first of the Presbyterial Church which you call also Combinational, upon what ground I know not; for I meet with neither of these Epithets fixed to the Church of Christ in the Scriptures, nor in any antiquity. The first of these is new, and and the second naught; for I never read of a Combination in a good sense. Why can we not speak as good Christians have done before us, and call it the Christian, Catholic, and Apostolical Church, but must please our fancies with these new terms of Presbyterial, or Combinational?  

Act. 20.28, etc. Col. 1.24. and 13. Act. 11.26. Ephes. 2.20.  I often read in the Scriptures of the Church of God, and that this Church is the Body of Christ, the kingdom of Christ; to whom because it was united by faith it was called Christian. And that this Church was built upon the foundation of the Prophets & Apostles, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone. Whence it was called Apostolic. And again that this Church is Totum integrale, 
Ames. medulla. lib. 1. c. 31. Sect 19  of which the parts quae totum integrant, are all several and particular Churches diffused in all Nations, in all places, at all times, whence it was called Catholic. But of a Presbyterial or Combinational Church I hear not.  
Good Sir, consider how harsh it sounds to style Christ's Church the Presbyters Church, and the number of the Professors that are united by faith to Christ, to be combined in I know not what. But now I shall take into consideration these terms severally, and first I will begin with the last.  
1. A Combinational Church. The first Author whom I meet with, it is Amesius, and he defines it to be Parochialis, vel unius congregationis, cujus membra inter se Combinantur; 
lib. 1. c. 39 Sect 22. cap. 2. Sect. 4.  there's your word, & ordinary conveniant in uno loco ad publicum religionis exercitium. This your Synod at Cambridge in New England, chose rather to call Congregational; for the word Independent they like not, (though I see no cause of dislike, if the particular Congregations must not depend one of another, but remain in full liberty, as Ames delivers in the same chapter, Sect. 20. & 26, 27.) And thus you there define this Congregational Church to be a company of Saints by calling, united into one body by a holy Covenant for the public worship of God.  
But I pray you tell me what needs this combination by a second Covenant? would not the first in Baptism have served, if heeded and kept, to have done all this? and it seemed it did, by the very text your Synod produces to prove it, Acts 2.42. For the Penitents and believers pricked to the heart by Peter's sermon, gladly received the word, and were baptised, and continued steadfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayer, etc. where we read of their Baptism, and continuance in Church-fellowship, and in the duty of that fellowship; but that this is done by a combination, a confederation or holy Covenant, a Vow, other than that made in their Baptism, we read not.  
2. And indeed it needs not; for what is it that Professors can bind themselves unto by Covenant, when they are admitted into the Congregation, that they have not in their Baptism bound themselves to before? Whether you shall consider the Mystery, the Form, or the end.  
1. In Baptism for the Mystery there is an Indument, and a stripping, 
Rom. 13.14. Gal. 3.27.  which the ancient Church reduced to two words, Credo, Abrenuncio: In the first there is the putting on of the Lord Jesus Christ: For as many as are baptised have put on Christ. First, as Lord, acknowledging no other Master, whose voice to hear, whose doctrine to rely upon, but only his. Secondly, as Jesus, assuring themselves, that there is no other Name given under heaven whereby they may be saved. Thirdly, As Christ, as well their anointed King submitting themselves to his will: giving their names in to fight under his banner, and swearing themselves his subjects: As also their anointed Priest, resting in his one sacrifice as the only sufficient; in his sole intercession, as the only powerful. Secondly, In the Abrenuncio, or stripping part, they renounce and forsake the Devil, 
Gal. 5.20.  and all his works, the pomps and vanities of the wicked world, the sinful lusts of the flesh, among which are all Heresies and Schisms.  
2. For the form it is by our Saviour appointed in the name of the three persons of the indivisible Trinity, and so it is performed; neither of Cephas the surnamed Rock, nor of Paul a great Apostle. 
Mat. 28.19. 1 Cor. 1.13.  The reason whereof you may read in my exposition of the Church Catechism, page 172, 173.  
3. For the end, they which are baptised are thereby made the sons of God by Adoption and Grace, invested with an inheritance everlasting: 
Gal. 3.26. Rev. 1.5. Mal. 1.11. Rom. 12.1. Col. 3.5.  made Priests to God, to offer and slay: To offer that mund●m oblationem, pure offering, or living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is their reasonable service, viz. the clean and unbloody sacrifice of prayers and thanksgiving: and then to slay themselves, mortifying their affections and lusts.  
Yea but men may be minded of all this by a new Covenant, and upon a second engagement made more watchful to keep their first vow. Be it so, for this also the Church had provided, without this separating combination, when she ordained, that all baptised children when they could say their Catechism, should be brought to the Bishop to be Confirmed, which order; were it in use, and restored to its original purity, the wrangle about the formality of a Church, Covenant, and collecting of members might be quieted and composed; There being in Confirmation the substance of what is so much and so hotly contended for, and that fare better grounded and bottomed than any new device can be, as I show you in my Catechism, page 6.  
Thirdly, This Elegy you give to your Combinational Church, that it is their opinion and practice quietly and cordially to subject their earthy, erring, and unruly wit, to the heavenly, infallible, and uncontrollable will of Christ.  
That so it should be I confess and desire; but how it is we see and feel ever since the Combination. But what now is this but an opinion, and only commendable? I thought it had been necessary, & de fide; that it must be so, and could not be otherwise. For Opino is eutis vel non e●tis. You shall have it in Amesius words. Assensus ille qui praebetur veritati contingenti propter rationem pracipuè probabilem ab intellectu apprehensam, 
Medulla. 1. Thes. de fidei divina unitate.  opinio vocatur. The truth must be contingent and probable only, of which a man retains an opinion; it may be, it may not be; if no other reason can be produced for it, but a Topical. But that all men must subject their earthy will to the heavenly Will of Christ is so certain, that it cannot be denied by any good Christian: Hereafter let it pass then for necessary, and let it be a principle of faith, which is more than opinion.  
2. But you go on and say; This hath been the commendable practice of your Combinational Church. But here you must give me leave to think; for if I would say what I know, I should fetch blood and perhaps pay for it too. Your Combination was for the worship of God, and that cultus naturalis institutus, Amesius so divides it; the principles of the first are faith, hope, charity; the acts, hearing of the Word and Prayer, under which is an Oath: Of the last, Gods prescribed Will or his Word. This is the Rule; but what's become of the practice? I will not meddle with your faith, which yet you know in many of your Combinational Churches is not sound, nor in the Socinians, nor Antimonians, nor in the Brownists, Familists, nor the Anabaptists, nor the Quakers, nor the Singers. These you'll say are not of you, but are gone out from you; yet you cannot deny, that these are Combinational Churches. The practice then of all the Combinational Churches is not commendable in God's worship in this respect. Your hope may be great, but I fear it may be presumption, when the foundation of faith upon which it should be built is so uncertain and tottering. As for the charity of your party in general, I find it dying rather ●uite dead; charity teacheth a man to love his neighbour as himself: charity to be just, and to do to all men, as he would all men do to him; Amongst your Combinational Churches, what's become of this charity, this justice? Religiously observant a man may find divers of you of three of the Commandments of the first Table, but of the third, your practice shows you make little account; and as for the second Table, he who shall lay to heart your actions, must needs conceive that you esteem it but for a cipher. I will no farther rake into this wound. I wish you had not given me occam on to do it, when you affirmed that it was the commendable practice of your Combinational Church to subject their earthy, erring and unruly will quietly and cordially to the heavenly, infallible, and uncontrollable will of Christ, to which I find their practice so contrary. I pray press me not for instances, for I am resolved not to give the● you. but if you are desirous to be satisfied of the opinions and practice of the Combinational Church I aim at, be pleased to read a book written by Robert Baily a Scot, entitled, A Dissuasive from the Errors of the times, Printed in London, 1645. and published by Authority. Where he makes a large Narrative of the opinions and practices of your Churches in New-England; and whether he says true or no, you can best judge, because you were upon the place. If true, all is not gold that glisters.  
2 A Presbyterial Church.  
THis is your other Epithet, and I suppose you mean by it a Church to be governed by Presbyters. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is equivocal, and therefore till it be distinguished, nothing can be concluded from it.  
1. Presbyter in the Old Testament properly belongs to the Elders of the people, either in a common notion, or as members of the Sanhedrim: not any body or persons peculiarly Ecclesiastic, Numb. 11.16. Nay, 
Godw. ant. l. 5. c. 1.  it is distinguished from it; for in the Civil Consistory the Judges were called Elders; in the spiritual priests, Matth. 21.23. & 26.3. The chief Priests and Elders of the people are named as two distinct Consistories, though Vossius, Doctor Hammon, Downham and Weames admit not this distinction.  
2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the New Testament sometimes, but rarely, is taken in the same sense as in the Old. But most commonly it is attributed to an Order of Ecclesiastiques, whether in a higher or a lower Order and degree.  
3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is by the maintainers of the Congregational and Consistorial Church taken for a mixed company of Lay men and ecclesiastics, to whose government they suppose the power of the Keys is committed, and this they call the Presbyterial Church; and if I am not deceived, of this you speak in this place.  
But against this I affirm, that there never was any such Presbyterial Church before Calvin, and to that purpose I here propose, and hope to make good these Propositions against any opponent.  
1. That there must be government in the Church.  
2. That Christ instituted this government, and Governors for it.  
3. That this government must be perpetual.  
4. That the Apostles were those Governors for the time; and for perpetuity, their Successors appointed by them.  
5. That their Successors were Bishops in Name and Office.  
6. That for the execution of this Office Christ gave to the Apostles the Keys, and they to their Successors only.  
7. That this power consisted in Ordination and Jurisdiction, and therefore that they only could ordain, and juridically proceed.  
8. That at first the Apostles, and after the Bishops, did both without a Presbytery.  
9 Yet that by the Apostles a Presbytery was instituted in some Churches, who were Ecclesiastiques only.  
10. That yet none of these Presbyters were Bishops, but assistants only, being distinct from them.  
11. That this Presbytery without the Bishop, could not use the Keys.  
12. That no Layman was of the Apostolical Presbytery, nor no Layman after for 1500. years.  
13. That at first the people elected not any Church-Officer.  
All these Propositions will require much time to be made good. I shall now therefore omit the demonstration of them, and go on to you fourth and fifth Proposition, where I shall use some of them.   

Proposition 4. Viz. That this prescribed Ministry must consist of Presbyters, or Teaching and Ruling Elders.  
THe subject of this Proposition is the prescribed Ministry, and it hath two Attributes. 1. The Presbyters. 2. Teaching and Ruling Elders, and both must be distinctly considered.  
1. The prescribed Ministry consists of Presbyters. If by Presbyters you mean Presbyters in the second acception, as it comprehends those of an higher and those of a subordinate degree, this part of your proposition is most true, and it shall be granted you. But if you exclude the Bishop properly so called, I absolutely deny it. For the Apostles were Bishops, Mathias elected 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Acts 1.20. There you have the Name, and accordingly the Fathers of the Church called them Apostolos, i. e. Episcopos. Dominus Elegit, 
Cyprian. Epist. 9 lib. 3.  Cyprian. They had the power of the Keys promised, Matth. 16.19. Matth. 18.18. and actually estated on them, John 20.23. In these texts you have the power which lay in jurisdiction and ordination. In that was the office. The Apostles were then in Name and Office Bishops.  

This is performed in the second part.  I will give you a breviate of what I could say at large for the first Government of the Church. I find only in Scripture mention of three Church-Officers, Bishops, Presbyters, Deacons.  
1. The highest function which was Episcopal, the Apostles reserved to themselves for some time, and that for three reasons. At first there were but few convicted, 
Acts 14.27. 1 Cor. 16.  whence their labour was employed in turning the first Key, in opening the door of faith, that great and effectual door; and all the helps they could make either by Prophets, Evangelists, Coadjutors, Pastors, Doctors, Planters, Waterers, to this purpose was little enough. But none of these qua tales, were Bishops. 2. After the conversion of Jews and Gentiles, yet in many Churches they yet settled not a Bishop; first, because a Presbyter fit for a Bishop's office, is not so easily found; it is Saint Paul's rule, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Epiphan.  a Novice, one newly come to the faith, be not made a Bishop. Secondly because while the Apostles remained in or near any place, they reserved the power, 
1 Tim. 3.6.  there being no need of Bishops; The Apostles for that time supplying the wants of those Churches, either with their presence, letters, or messengers, as the cause required. 3. And yet there is a third reason; The Apostles suffered the Churches to make a trial what equality of many Governors would do; but when they found the fruits thereof to be dissension, and that every one would be master, parity and plurality breeding dissension and confusion, they committed the Church to one. I shall set you down this in Hieromes words, 
Hieron. Com. in Epist. ad Titum.  even in those very words which are produced against Bishops. Idem est Presbyter quod Episcopus, & autequam diaboli instinctu studia in religione fierent, & diceretur in populis Ego sum Pauli, ego Apollo, ego Cephae, communi Presbyterorum consilio Ecclesiae gubernabantur. Post quam vero unusquisque eos quos baptizabat, suos putabat esse, non Christi, in to●o orbe decretum est, ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur cateris, ut Schismatum semina tollerentur. Haec diximus & ostendim●s eosdem fuisse Presbyteros, & Episcopos, & ut Episcopi noverint se magis consuetudine, quam Dominicae dispositionis veritate Presbyteris esse majores, & in communi debere Ecclesi●m rege e. I have recited these words of Hierome at full, because in them there be many th●ngs clearly for me, and some other passages seemingly against me, to which I will give light.  
Note here then first the cause of the Bishop's creation. 1. The causa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or occasion, was factions and Schisms; and the end, that Schisms might be taken away: so his words are, cum diceretur ego Pauli, etc. ut schismata tollerentur. Secondly, The time when the Bishop was ordained, old enough; for it was in the Apostles days; for than it was said ego Pauli ego Cephae, etc. 1 Cor. 1. a sufficient authority I suppose for the Bishop's institution: it must needs be granted Apostolical if it began then. Thirdly, this institution was Decretum, and pray say, who then could decree except the Apostles; or durst decree without them. Fourthly, that this Decree was generally assented to; for Decretum est toto orbe, it must be then Apostolical and Ecumenical. Fifthly, now consider the words of the Decree, ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur caeteris. 
Rev. 2. & 3.  1. It is Unus, it is One, not many, that the care of the Church might especially belong to one. Christ directs his message to the Angel individually of such or such a Church. 2. He must be Electus, of whom Hierome saith not, (of that more anon) but I dare say considering the time of which Hierome speaks, it was not without the consent of the Apostles, if not by them. 3. Note out of whom he was to be elected; it was de Presbyteris, and I shall prove unto you after that they were no Laymen. 4. Ut superponerentur caeteris. He was to be supper over the rest, whether Clergy or Laity, and that not only in pre-eminence, honour, and dignity, but in power of jurisdiction also; for otherwise how could the end be obtained here aimed at? how could Schism be restrained and removed? Thus far you see what makes for me; and now I shall clear up, what seemingly makes against me in this testimony.  
1. The fi●st words seem against me. For Hierome saith, Idem est Presbyter quod Episcopus. But he can mean no more than that the Bishop is sometimes called a Presbyter. The Names than may be common, that's true, but not the Office. Now the Office consists in Ordination and Jurisdiction, as I shall by and by make appear. That Presbyter and Episcopus was Idem ordinatione, and consequenly in Office, Jerome could not mean, except he should contradict himself; 
Hieron. ad Evagium.  Ordination he reserves to a Bishop, and debars a Presbyter from it. Quid facit Episcopus, quod Presbyter non faciat, exceptâ ordinatione? Mark, the mood is potential; He may not do it, He may not meddle with Ordination, for that sure belongs to the Bishop in his own judgement. In this power then the Identity lies not. 2. He must then mean in Jurisdiction, and that this is his meaning, is apparent, by those words Communi Presbyterorum consilio Ecclesiae gubernabantur, which your side catch at too, as making for the present Ruling Presbytery, as indeed at the first sight they may, but throughly looked into, nothing at all. I will show you where the mistake lies. First, in the word Presbytery; for yours apply it to the whole Presbytery, Lay and Clergy, whereas Hierom as is manifest, speaks only of the Ecclesiastic; for it is of the Presbytery that was before or when those Schisms reigned. Secondly, he saith gubernabantur in imperfecto; and when was that? in the Apostles days; for then in a Church that had a Presbytery without a Bishop, put case at Corinth, or had a Presbytery with a Bishop over them, as at Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Ephesus, it is most true Communi Presbyterorum consilio gubernabantur, the Presbyters were admitted in partem s●llicitudinis. It cannot be denied that the Apostles ordaining these Presbyters, had power in themselves, and might have governed durante vita, alone retaining the power; when then they gave any power to others, it was deligated; for I hope they lost none of their power in giving Orders. Whence it will follow, that the Presbyters when admitted in some acts of Jurisdiction with the Apostles, cannot challenge a right of governing affixed to their Order, qua Presbyteri, because they did assist in subordination and dependency. That the Apostles assumed these Presbyters in acts deliberative and consiliary to assist first at Jerusalem, Acts 15. was a mere voluntary act, from which example that it was derived to other Churches, will not be denied; and hence the last clause of Jeromes words will be most clear, Noverint episcopi se magis consuetudine Ecclesiae, quam Dominicae dispositionis veritate Presbyteris esse majores, & in communi debere Ecclesiam regere. For by the Commission Sicut misit me Pater, given to the Apostles, and in them to their successors only, they could not challenge it. It may well, proceeding from the voluntary act of the Apostles, be called an Apostolical Tradition and Ordinance; but in strict terms Dominica it was not, nor Dominicae dispositionis veritas, according to Jerome.  
2. But if this sense of Jeromes words like you not, I shall yet offer you another; At first, as I said, the Presbyters by delegation from the Apostles with common advice and equal care guided the Church under the Apostles; but after Bishops were appointed, the whole care by little and little was derived to one, and so at last by custom Presbyters were utterly excluded from all advice and counsel, and Bishops only intermeddled with the regiment of the Church. This indeed grew only by continuance of time, and not by any Ordinance of Christ, or his Apostles; this Jerome disliked, and to that purpose he fixes his Noverint Episcopi, etc. And that this is likeliest to be Jeromes meaning in that place, his following words show, Imitantes Moysen, qui cum haberet in potestate solus praesse populo Israel, 70. elegit cum quibus populum judicaret. The Bishops than ought to do as Moses did. What, to have Governors equal? No, but when they might rule alone, to join with them others in the fellowship of their power and honour, as Moses did. Moses did not abrogate his superiority above others, but took seventy Elders into part of his charge. So Jerome would have them. And thus much the King was content to grant, and restore, as you may read in his book cap. 17. about the middle. I saith he, am not against the managing of this precedency and authority in one man by the joint council and consent of many Presbyters; I have offered to restore it, etc. You see of what Presbyters I am content the prescribed Ministry shall consist, and what Presbytrry I shall allow you.  
2. Or Teaching and Ruling Elders.  
HEre again your words are dark. For if by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Elders, you mean those in Orders, I shall readily admit them to the Church ministry, whether Teaching or Ruling. But if you intent under these words to introduce into the Ministry either to teach or rule men, that are not of the Clergy (so you know we speak, and so I must speak for distinction sake, for else I cannot be understood in this question) I absolutely deny it.  
For there was never any Layman ex Officio, admitted to teach ordinarily in Scripture; called and sent he must be before he did undertake to preach. So the Apostle intimates, 
Rom. 10.15.  How shall they preach except they be sent? If any be gifted, I shall allow him ex debito charitatis, privately and charitably to make use of his talon, to exhort, to reprove, to admonish; but publicly to divide the Word of God, and to teach, I may not admit him. For as a man must have inward endowments, gifts, and sufficiency, so he must have an outward calling before I shall call him a Teacher in the Church of God. And I hear you are not against me in this.  
2. But about a Ruling Elder, I fear you and I shall differ; for in your Presbyterial Churches, you admit into that number those who are not of the Clergy. Many of your Presbyters being mere Lay men. Of the Texts you hope to prove it, I shall consider anon. And here about these Ruling Elders I shall deliver my mind. 1. Negatively. 2. Positively.  
1. Negatively. That Ruling Elders in the Church were never Laics. Presbyters we read of, and Presbyteries in the Apostolical writings, but none Lay. This negative will be proved as all other negatives are; that is, by the contrary affirmative. These Ruling Elders were always of the Clergy, and consequently no Laics: for you know d●ae contrariae propositiones non possunt simul esse verae. I shall therefore show you what I have to say of Ruling Elders.  
2. Positively. The Keys Christ gave to his Apostles, and they to their Successors; and with them so much power as was ordinarily of permanence and perpetuity in the Church, which power consisted in four particulars; the Dispensation of the Word, the Administration of the Sacraments, Imposition of hands, and guiding of the Keys. With the three fi●st I hear not that Ruling Elders of the Laity undertake to meddle; and if they shall lay claim to the last, they must show when and where any such donation was made over unto them; otherwise, I shall call it an usurpation. The contrary is clear in the promise, Tibi dabo claves, and in the performance, sicut misit me pater, sic mitto vos; quorum peccata remiseritis, etc. Let it be showed that any Laic here had any Key, any power made over unto him, or that the Apostles ever made any designation of it to a Lay hand, and you shall for me carry the cause.  
Well then, to whom did they assign it? That is clear to me in the Scriptures, to the Bishops that they ordained. I shall instance only in two, Timothy and Titus; the one at Ephesus, the other at Crete, ordained by Saint Paul; though if you would believe Ancient Records, I could name you many more. James the brother of our Lord Bishop of Jerusalem; Mark at Alexandria; Clemens at Rome; Euodius at A●tioch; Polycarp at Smyrna; Dionysius at Athens; Caius at The●olonica; Archippus at Colossi; Epaphroditus at Philippi; Antipas at ●ergamus; Crescens in Galatia; Sosipater at Iconium; Erastus in Macedon; Silas at Corinth; with others; all which if there be any credit to be given to O●d Records, were set by the Apostles themselves to be the Ruling Elders of the Church.  
But perhaps you'll say these were chief in their own Churches respectively, but they had their Presbyteries and Presbyters to govern with them. Well, be it so, for in some it is evident it was so; Yet it lies upon you to prove, that those Presbyters were Lay-Elders; for otherwise I shall presume to the contrary, because I find it otherwise in the Churches of Ephesus and Crete, where Timothy and Titus were Bishops, and in all the Churches where I read of a Presbytery.  
That it was thus at Ephesus, is beyond all exception. For Timothy was there ordained by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery. 
1 Tim. 4.14.  I hope you will not say, that T●mothy was made the chief Pastor there, by the imposition of any Lay-hands. No man ever yet so interpreted that text; as for the fathers, they expound it of the College of Presbyters, which they say was of Prelates, 
Heb. 7.7. Calv. Instit. lib. 4. c. 6. 2 Tim. 1.6.  because minor non ordinat majorem. Calvin of the Office, and that it was given by the laying on of Saint Paul's hands, and he is resolve, that Saint Paul alone did it, because of that Exhortation, Stir up the grace of God which is in thee, by the laying on of my hands. Take it in which sense you please, here's no place left at Ephesus for a Lay-Presbytery.  
No nor yet in Crete; for to that end was Titus left there to ordain Elders in every City, and in the following words the Apostle tells what manner of persons they must be, 
Tit. 1.5.7.  who were to be ordained; and what their office to be, Bishops; for a Bishop must be blameless; these Elders then at Crete must be Bishops; not then of the Laity.  
And if you shall consider what these Elders were to do at Crete and Ephesus, you will easily conceive that many of them fell not within a Layman's capacity. If any man did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, preach any other doctrine then that was sound, the Ephesian Elder must prohibere; 
1 Tim. 1.4. 2 Tim. 2.16. Tit. 1.9.  if preach profanely or babblingly, he must cohibere, restrain him. At Crete the ordained Elder must have ability 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to convince the gainsayers, and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, with force of Argument. 
Tit. 1.10.13.  For particulars, if any preach otherwise than becomes him, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, his mouth must be stopped, they must be reproved 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, taken up short, 
Tit. 2.15.  with all authority. Say in good sooth, whether you conceive these to be the Works of a Layman; I wish all Clergymen were ad haec idonci. But I fear few are. Lastly, the rod, power of excommunication was in the hand of Saint Paul's Elders, which I shall never yield to be in your Lay Elders.  
But were the Word of God in this point indifferent, which for aught I see is yet very resolute against them: the general consent of all antiquity, that never to your sense expounded Saint Paul's words, nor never mention d one Lay-Presbyter to govern the Church, is to me a strong rampire against all these new devices. And here did I list, I could press you down with a whole load of fathers and Councils; but I spare you, for I fear you would cast them off with some scorn. The Catalogue you shall have, if you desire it; For my part, I shall close up this point with the words of a wise learned man; 
Bilson's preface to the Government of the Church.  I like not to raise up that Discipline from the dead, which hath lain so long (if it ever lived) in silence by your own confession; which no father ever witnessed, no Council ever favoured, no Church ever followed since the Apostles times till this our age. I can be forward in things that be good; but not so foolish, as to think that the Church of Christ never knew what belonged to the government of herself, till now of late; and that the Son of God hath been spoiled of half of his Kingdom (as you use to speak) by his own servants and citizens, for these one thousand five hundred years, without remorse or remembrance of any man, that ever so great a wrong was offered him. You must show me your Lay-Presbytery in some Ancient Writer, or else I shall avouch plainly, your Consistory, as you press it, is a Novelty.  
And yet I shall add one thing more by way of Apology; for I would not be a stumbling block to you in the least; That I have made use of the common distinction, Lay and Clergy, and Presbyters or Elders of both sorts. I have been forced to it, because I could not otherwise speak intelligibly and distinctly enough in this point. And that in this I speak in the language of the Ancientest of the fathers; so speaks Clemens in that famous Epistle to the Corinthians, so cried up by antiquity; and lately set forth by Master Patrick Young. 
Clem. Rom. Ep. 1. ad Cor. Ignat. ad Philip. ad Magnes. Just. Martyr. Apolog. 2. prope finem.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Ignatius, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and again, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and yet again, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So Justine Martyr, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So the Canons attributed to the Apostles; Si quis Clericus abscindens seipsum, etc. Can. 22. Laicus seipsum abscindens, etc. Can. 23.  

Tertull. de prescript. In exhortat. ad castitatem.  Tertullian. Hodie Presbyter, cras Laicus; and again, nisi Laici observent, per quae Presbyteri allegantur. I should trouble you to reckon up infinite variety of other testimonies downward. By these it sufficiently appears, that these two terms Presbyters and Laics, were opposite terms; so that Presbyers were not Laymen, nor Laymen Presbyters; they were m●mbra dividentia, and 'tis a Logic rule, that membra dividentia must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, so disjoynd, that they never interfeer; which will not be so, if Presbyters and Laymen may be affirmed of the same person. What should I tell you, that if you approve not this distinction of the Primitive Church, you may read it plainly in the Prophets; so that it is not profane, nor strange. Isaiah 24.2. It shall be as with the people, so with the Priest; Hosea 4.9. There shall be like people, like Priest. And also Jeremy divides the Church into Prophet, 
Jerom. ad Nepotia●.  Priest, and People, cap. 23.34. and cap. 26.7. As for the Clergymen, Jerome shall give you the reason of the name; propterea vocantur Clerici, vel quia sunt de sorte Domini, vel quia ipse Dominus sors, i. e. pars Clericorum, either they are the Lords portion to do service in the Church of Christ, or that the Lord is their portion and part; that is, to live on such things that are dedicated to the Lord. And thus have I stopped two gaps with one bush.   

Proposition 5. That these Presbyters, Teaching and Ruling Elders must be of the Professing Members own voluntary Election, and regular Ordination.  
Of the Presbyters, Teaching and Ruling Elders, as you call them, I have spoken hitherto; Now of that which you require in them, which are, 1. That they be of the Professing Members voluntary Election. 2. That they have their Ordination frnm them, and that it be Regular. In neither of which I can assent to you.  

1. Of Election of Presbyters and Ruling Elders.  
THe Debate about Elections of Church-Ministers, cannot be better determined than by the Scriptures; let us look then, how it was ab initio. I find three sorts of Election mentioned in the New Testament; By the Spirit, by lots, by voices.  
1. By the Spirit speaking in his own person, were Paul and Barnabas called from Antioch to preach to the Gentiles. By the Spirit speaking in the Prophets, 
Acts 13.2. 1 Tim. 4.14.  was Timothy designed; Neglect not the grace which was given thee by prophecy, with imposition of the hands of the Presbytery. And again, 
1 Tim. 1.18.  This commandment I commit to thee according to the Prophecies, that went before of thee, that is, by direction of the Holy Ghost, and not by voices, as Oecuminius, Theodoret, chrysostom, Throphylact, expounds the place. For this kind of Election was usual in the Apostles times, the Spirit of God directing them on whom they should lay their hands. By that Spirit were Peter and John directed on whom they should lay their hands at Samaria. And so was Paul at Epheses, when he laid the foundation of that Church; so that he might truly say, Take heed to the flock, 
Act. 20.  whereof the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers. For it was the Holy Ghosts doing to notify unto Paul the persons that should receive imposition of hands, and to pour out his wonderful blessings on them, to make them meet Pastors and Prophets, whereto he had chosen them.  
Yea, this dured some time after Paul's death, as Eusebius reports, 
Euseb. lib. 3. cap 23. ex. Clem. Alex.  even in the time of John the Apostle; for after his return out of Patmos to Ephesus, being requested, he went to the Churches adjoining; some were appointing Bishops, some were setting whole Churches in Order, some were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i d. Supplying the Clergy with such men as were signified or marked out for that purpose by the Spirit. Or if you read it as Hanmer translates it choosing by lot, than this was done to avoid ambition and contention: however it was of those who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and so the mixed multitude chose not whom they pleased.  
2. For secondly, by lot, I grant it might be done, and then Saint John followed the pattern in the Election of Mathias to the Apostolate; 
Act. 1.  which is the sole example, that can be given in Scripture in this kind. And in this the people could have no voice, if you will weigh the circumstances of the Text. For first the company that were then present were only one hundred and twenty, of which eleven were Apostles, seventy two disciples, 
Ver. 15.14.  divers women, with Mary the mother of Jesus; now if you deduct eighty three, and the women out of one hundred and twenty, what a small remnant will there be of the people left to vote. Secondly, it is recorded indefinitely; they appointed two not determinately expressing who they were, 
Ver. 23.  and so it might be the Apostles alone, or the Apostles and disciples together for aught any man can say to the contrary. Thirdly, make what can be made of it, yet here is no more than presentation which falls very short of Election; for it is written they presented the two. Fourthly, they committed the Election to God, Show whether of the two thou hast chosen: 
Ver. 24.  and so it was reason; for the place to which one of them was to be advanced, 
Gal. 1.1, 17, 18, etc.  was an Apostles place; and an Apostle might not be chosen by men, but by God alone.  
And here to remove a mistake, I shall entreat you to observe this distinction; that the name of an Apostle hath a double acception. 1. In a strict sense, for an eyewitness of our Saviour's actions, life, death, and one immediately chosen and sent by God, and so there were no more but twelve. Whence saith Peter, 
Act. 1.20, 21.  of these men that have accompanied with us all the time, that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us;— Must one be ordained to be a Witness: 2. Or else the name of an Apostle is more largely extended, for an instructed Witness, and sent by the Apostles, 
Phil. 2.25.  who yet had that honorary name; so Epaphroditus is called the Apostle of the Philippians; Judas and Silas are so termed; Titus and others, 2 Cor. 8.23. and James the brother of our Lord is called an Apostle, Gal. 1.19. He was not Jacobus Alphei, nor Jacobus Zebedei, and therefore none of the twelve; and 1 Cor. 15. this James is named as distinct from the twelve; for there it is written, that Christ appeared to the twelve, then to five hundred brethren at once; after to James. In the first sense no man ever did, ever could choose an Apostle; for they had an immediate vocation, and immediate mission. In the last sense there is not a syllable in the Scripture of their Election by the people. Perhaps, for so it is recorded by Dorotheus, that they were of the seventy; but when they were advanced and authorised to be Apostles, that is, Bishops in the latter sense, the Apostles only elected them, and imposed hands on them.  
3. Hitherto we hear not a word of any Election by the Professing Members to the work of the Ministry; let us then come to the third way, which was by voices; and let us consider whether we can find it that way. It is most true, that the Election of the seven Deacons was referred to the multitude; and to this purpose your text is rightly cited, Acts 6.5. But this proves not what you would infer from it; for by this choice, the Deacons received not the charge of the Word and Sacraments, but a care to see the Saints provided for; and the collections and contributions faithfully and uprightly employed; 
Hieron. ad Evagrium. Epiphan. 4. Conc. Carth. cap. 4.  they were only mensarum & viduarum Ministri. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, consecrated to a service, not to a priesthood. And among you for aught I know, the Deacons have no other office than the care of the poor. And then I pray, what can this place make for the Election of the Presbyters, and Ruling Elders by the people? Are these no more but Deacons, Officers of Tables and Widows? That the people should Elect these there was great reason; for they were to be Stewards and Dispenser's of their Charity; and therefore to stay the murmur that might arise of partiality in them, and suspicion of any unjust dealing, they advised the multitude to choose their own Almoners. The Church's treasure was laid at the Apostles feet to be distributed as every one had need; they left it, 
Acts. 2. Acts 4.  in all likelihood, in the hands of converted Jews to be distributed; these regarded the Widows that were Jews, more than the Hellenists; this caused the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the murmur; To cease this, the Apostle bespeaks the multitude to consider, 
Acts 6.1. Ver. 3. Ver. 5. Ver. 6.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of fit men for that service. They did so, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they chose out seven, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they presented or set out these before the Apostles, that's all. It was but a presentation, so that it seems as yet it was in the Apostles power to admit or refuse even these. But they accepted of their presentation, and with prayer laid their hands on them for the Office; which was at the highest a dispensation of money, and no cure of souls. No hurt then can be done to our tenet by this Election, since as they who urge it, confess they were not in orders; and therefore what hath this example to do for the Professors Election of Presbyters or Ruling Elders?  
Yea, but you'll say, the other text you cite, Acts 14.23. 
Acts 14.23.  will strike it dead; but upon a serious view nothing less. For thus we read there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Ordaining them Elders in every Church. This word is a participle, and must agree with somewhat; and if you look before, it was Paul and Barnabas; the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not to Elect, but to Ordain; of which more by and by. The Ordainers were Apostles, Paul and Barnabas; the Ordained Presbyters; here is not so much as a syllable of the people, no mention of any act of theirs. This then is so plain a perverting of the text, that I hope no wise man will ever more object it. The truth is, the Apostles imposed hands to make Pastors and Prophets in the Churches as they traveled, popular Elections they made none. For your other texts, I shall consider apart, because they are not directly to this purpose.  
Thus I hope I have made it appear, that there is not any firm ground, I had almost said any colour for Election of Presbyters or Ruling Elders by the Professing Members of the Church in the Scriptures.  
Yea, but did not then the People choose their Pastor in the primitive ages of the Church? To gratify you, I confess they did: but this was after the Apostles days, and then Scripture must not be urged for it. It was not a privilege, that belongs to them of right, but out of convenience; and was derived from the rules of Christian equity and society. Hence it came to pass, that the people when their desires were accomplished did quietly receive, willingly maintain, diligently hear, and hearty love their Pastors. And could the people have tempered their grief, when their desires were crossed, their interest in Electing their Pastor had been better regarded, and longer continued: But experience of their Schisms, Factions, Tumults, Uproars, Murders, if they might not have their wills, caused both Ancient fathers and Councils to mislike that the people should bear the sway in these Elections, and forced Christian Princes, if not wholly to exclude them, yet greatly to abridge them. I could if I pleased give you in a long list of examples of both kinds, both of whom, when, where, and how long the custom of their Election continued; and by whom, and upon what occasions abridged: But I spare you. This in a word; when they did Elect, it was not by any Scripture-right, and at most it was no more than a presentation; and it lay in the power of those in Authority to refuse the presented, which was sometimes done. And the emergent mischiefs took it away; which it never could have done, had it been a command of God. Now that it is possible, that such mischiefs may arise, and frequently do arise from popular Elections, I appeal to your conscience, who have been an eyewitness of it in New-England.  
One thing I shall add more; that you, I mean your Combinational Churches in Old-England, should of all other press upon us popular Elections, makes me wonder, since 'tis your practice to eject Pastors approved by their people; and by the approvers from above to settle other over their Congregations. Tell me I pray, what vote hath the people in any of these? If this be not to break your rule, and to practise what you declaim, I must profess I understand nothing. But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I conceive what you may answer, but I will not now reply to it.   

2. The other part of your Proposition is; that these Presbyters and Ruling Elders be of the Professing Members Regular Ordination.  
THat the Presbyters and Ruling Elders in the sense above given of them, have a Regular Ordination, is necessary, but that they shall have this Ordination from or by the Professing Members, I cannot yield.  
That Ordination is an act of the Keys, I suppose is an axiom that will be granted on all hands. For otherwise, your Professing Members can have no right to Ordain, who make their claim to it, because they are subjectum clavium. 
rutherford's plea for Presbytery. Sect. 6.  But that they are not so, Rutherford and B●res demonstrate: whence it will necessarily follow, that they cannot ordain Presbyters and Ruling Elders.  
Before he proves the minor, he thus distinguisheth The power of the Keys is given to the Church of believers two ways. First, As to the end and object; and thus we acknowledge the Keys may be given to the whole Church, because it is the object upon which the power of the Keys is to be exercised; for what have we to do to judge those that are without? and than it was the end why Christ gave the Keys, 
1 Cor. 5.  he gave some to be Apostles, etc. for the perfecting of the Saints, etc. Secondly, The Keys may be said to be given to them who are the subject; 
Ephes. 4.  that is, to such in whom the power doth rest to use them, and who have authority to wield them, and in this sense the believers in the whole body is not the formal subject of the Keys, neither may they authoritatively use them.  
And this is demonstratively thus proved. For that which is primum & proprium subjectum, cum suo accident reciprocatur; The attribute agrees to it primò, 
Rutherford. p. 12.  per se, adaequatè, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as rationale or risibile agrees to man, all these ways: so that a man only is the first and adequate subject of reason or laughter, and consequently every individual man reasonable and risible. To apply this to my purpose, if the body of any visible Congregation be the adequate and proper subject of the Keys, the power must of right belong to every individual of that Congregation; so that every one hath a power to use them; women, young men and all: for quod competit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, competit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but such a power I dare say, you will not put into women and children's hands. Then you must not make the whole Church the subject of the Keys, but that some Professing Members have the keys in their hands and that these only have power to ordain.  
Now let us inquire who these Ordainers must be; You say your Presbyters, and if I mistake not, ruling Elders▪ We say Bishops, 
Austin in Psal. 22.  or at least Bishops with their Presbytery. As Augustine said excellently in another case, so say I in this. Fratres sumus, quarè litigamus? non intestatus mortuus est pater; fecit testamentum & mortuus est; tam●iu contenditur de haereditate mortuorum quamdiu testamentum profetatur in publicum, & cum testamentum prolatum fuerit in publicum, tacent omnes, ut tabulae aperiantur & recitentur; judex intentus audit, advocati silent, praecones silentium faciunt, universus populus suspensus est, ut legantur verba mortui non sentientis in monumento. I●c sine sensu jacet in monumento, & valent verba ejus: Sedet Christus in caelo, & contradicitur ejus testamento. Aperi, legamus; fratres sumus, quare contendimus? pl cetur amicus noster, non sine testamento nos dimisit pater. And for this Will, the search will not be long, nor the trouble much; 'tis extant, John 20.21. As my Father sent me, so send I you; and presently he enstates them in the power of the Keys: Whose sins you remit, they are remitte●, etc. 
John 20.23. Matth. 28.20.  And this power was to be perpetual, to remain and continue till his second coming; for these are his last words; Lo, I am with you always unto the end of the world. With them personally he could not be; for the Apostles are dead; this promise than must be made good to them and their Successors.  
They then questionless had the Keys: which consisted in Jurisdiction, and Ordination, of which I am now to speak. And out of our Father's testament I shall show you how they used it. 
Act. 8.14, 17.  Peter and John were sent down by the Apostles from Jerusalem to Samaria to lay their hands on them that should receive the Holy Ghost. Philip preached and baptizd, but he could not give the graces of the Holy Ghost by imposition of hands, to make fit Pastors and Teachers for the work of the Ministry. The like we find of Paul and Barnabas in the forecited place, Acts 14.23. who visited the Churches where they had preached, and supplied them with Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wh re it were absurd to say, that this was done by lifting up of the hands of the people, since it was the work of Paul and Barnabas alone. And by the way, 
Act. 10.41.  though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth sometimes signify extensio manuum, yet always it doth not so; for Acts 10.41. we thus read, That God shown Christ openly after he was raised, not t● all the people, but unto Witnesses, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordained by God: and I could show you that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in a hundred places of the Greek fathers and Councils. But to let this pass I go on, 
2 Tim. 1.6. Tit. 1.5.  Timothy was ordained by Saint Paul, 2 Tim. 1.6. and Titus by him left in Crete to Ordain: and therefore Ordained himself. For nihil dat quod non habet. All these Ordinations we find in the Scriptures by the Apostles themselves.  
2. Now if you shall demand by whom these Ordinations were performed afterwards? I shall answer you, by their successors. Yea, but who were they? I answer, that it being a matter of fact and story, later than the Scripture can reach to, it cannot be fully satisfied or answered from thence any further than the persons of Timothy and Titus, Epaphroditus, etc. and the several Angels of the seven Churches, (who by all the Ancients are acknowledged to be single persons, that had power over all other in those Churches) but will in the full latitude through the universal Church in those times be made clear by the next and best evidences we have, viz. From the consent of the Greek and Latin fathers, who generally resolve, that Bishops were those Successors. So writes Clemens, Ignatius, Iraeneus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Theodoret, Hilary, chrysostom, who not? Whose Testimonies shall be produced with a wet finger.  
And one part of their Offices in the Church was to Ordain. This is manifest first in Timothy, in the Church of Ephesus, Acts 20. There were many Presbyters before Timothy was appointed their Bishop, yet Saint Paul sent him of purpose to impose hands; 
1 Tim. 5.22.  and say it was with the Presbytery; yet it can never be proved that any of that College was no more than a Professing Member. You know how strongly all the Presbyterians plead for the contrary; and was this injunction only personal, and to end with Timothy's life? 
1 Tim. 6.13, 14  Not so neither. For this charge he lays upon him in fearful words; I charge thee in the fight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Jesus Christ, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession, that thou keep this Commandment without spot, unrebukable, till the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ. 'Tis agreed by all, that Saint Paul in this Epistle especially sets an order for the Government of the Church, 
1 Tim. 5.22.  among which, that a Bishop lay not hands hastily upon any man is one. This than was not Temporary, but to last till the end of the world.  
That they were to Ordain is every whit as plain in Titus; for, for that intent he was left in Crete. Neither would the Church succeeding admit of any other but Bishops to that business for one thousand five hundred years, 
Tit. 1.5.  as I will prove unto you, if you require it by unpregnable records. Two evidences there are of it beyond exception. First, the condemning Aërius as an Heretic for opposing Episcopal power. Secondly, that if any one of an inferior rank presumed to ordain, his act was reversed by the Church as unlawful, and the ordained admitted no otherwise to the Communion than as a Layman. As it befell Ischyras, and those who were ordained by Maximus and another blind Bishop, 
Athanas. apol. 2 Greg. Presb. in vita Nanz. Conc. Constant. 2. cap. 4. Conc. Hisp. 2. cap. 5. & 7.  and others in the Church story.  
I beseech you now, if you little regard the Fathers and Councils, yet view the Scriptures with an unpartial eye, and then if the Commission our Saviour gave his Apostles, or the Apostles to their successors: if the practice of the Apostles themselves, or Apostolical men can any whit move, consider whether the Presbyters or Ruling members ought to be of the professing members regular ordination. Make it plain that the power of the Keys is subjectiuè, formalitèr, inhaesiuè, authoritatiuè in them, and I yield you the whole cause.  
Your sixth Proposition, that their Office extent (understanding by that the Ministry which Christ ordained in his Church) must reach from Christ's Ascension to the Creation's dissolution, I easily grant. I shall therefore say nothing to that, but come to examine your proofs out of Scripture. And here I could have wished that you had applied every text to that part of the Proposition you intended it. For it had been fare easier for me to have judged of the validity of it, and more readily have shaped my answer; whereas now I can but rove at it, and therefore if I mistake, you must thank yourself.     

The texts alleged.  
Acts 6.5. & 14.23. I suppose you refer these to the first part of the fifth proposition for election by Church-members, and I have answered them already, and shall therefore spare my labour.  
The other, if I be not mistaken, are to prove your Teaching and Ruling Elders, Rom. 12.7, 8. 1 Cor. 12.8.28. Ephes. 4.7.14. Rev. 4.6. & 5.6. & 19▪ 4.  
But among these I find not one text to prove your Presbyterial or Combinational Church: nor your regular Ordination by professing members.  
The Text then out of the Romans, Corinthians, Ephesians, and the Revelations I am to examine, and see how they will conclude what you intent.  

Rom. 12.7, 8.  
Or ministry, let us wait on our ministry, or he that teacheth on teaching, or he that exhorteth on exhortation, he that giveth let him do it with simplicity, he that showeth mercy with cheerfulness.  
The words are Elliptical, and therefore must be supplied from the former verses. The Apostle being to deliver divers precepts, first gives a signification of his power, verse 3. Then he prescribes in general 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. To every one God as he pleaseth gives a measure of his gifts, and therefore no man ought to arrogate to himself more than he ought; for this were absurd, as if in the body one part should assume and usurp the faculties of another; for to that purpose he makes use of that comparison of a natural body, vers. 4, 5. As then the parts of the natural body have their proper endowments, so also have the several members of Christ's several graces bestowed on them by God, and these gifts must be employed for the benefit of the whole, and the parts; he thus infers, verse 6. Having then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, freely and graciously bestowed, he shows how we must bestow them. And then he reckons up these gifts, these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. First, prophecy. Secondly, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ministry. 3. Ability to teach. 4. A faculty to exhort or comfort. 5. A heart and power to give. 6, Wisdom to govern. 7. Bowels of mercy. These are the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, those Gratuitoes, those talents we have received from our Lord, and they must be laid out for his honour, for our brethren's good. This I conceive to be the prime intention of the Apostle in this place, for he expressly names gifts, and not men.  
But because these gifts must upon necessity be exercised by men, therefore he intimates on whom they are bestowed more peculiarly, not all gifts to one man, neither is one man by God sitted always for all gifts. One man he calls to be a Prophet, and gives him a gift to foretell things to come, or to interpret the Scriptures; let him then interpret according to the Analogy of faith, not add, nor diminish, nor alter at his pleasure. To another he hath given a gift to teach, let him aptly and in easy, plain, intelligible words explain the will of God, and teach them he ought. To a third he hath given an admirable faculty to stir up and move another to the actions of piety, or else to be a Barnabas, a son of consolation, in raising and comforting an afflicted and oppressed soul; let him use this exhortation, exhibit this comfort as occasion is required. To a fourth God hath been graciou, and gifted him with wealth and riches; of these he is to impart a portion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ingenuously, liberally, freely, simply, without any doubting either in respect of persons, or a regard to his own profit. Upon another is bestowed a gift by which he s made a fit man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Numb. 10.17.  to be over others (you know that God took of Moses spirit and put it on the seventy Elders) and he that hath this gift, must use it with diligence. Lastly, 'tis a touch of the Spirit when a man is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of compassionate bowels; his abilities yet may be small to help the indigent members of Christ Jesus, and his own necessities may retard him, and make him murmur at the duty of alms. Well, what he can spare, yet let him give, though it be but two mites, and when he bestows it, let it be given with a good heart, for hilarem datorem amat Deus. 
2 Cor. 9.7.   
I have not strained the text one jot, and you may see how naturally all this doth follow, if you refer it to that of which the Apostle began to speak, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that God gives to several members of his Church. Whereas if you follow those who are of your mind, the interpretation will be forced, and very improper; For than we must have seven several functions here set down in the Church of God distinguished by these gifts. Next you must prove that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, these gifts of the Spirit belong to the Officers of the Church only, and not to the rest of the faithful, which I know you dare not say, 'tis so contradictory to Scripture, when we read of other that did prophesy, 
Acts 21.9. 1 Cor. 11.5. Acts 18.26. 1 Thes. 5.11. 1 Pet. 4.10. 1 Tim. 3.4. Luke 6.36.  that did teach, that must exhort and edify, that are bound to distribute and minister, to rule, and to show mercy as well as Church-officers. Yet further we must know whether these offices must be distinct and remain divided, or else may meet in one person; if they must remain distinct, no Prophet may teach or exhort, no Ruler may give or show mercy: if they may meet and agree in one subject, then are they no Offices, but graces, and he that hath one may have all, and so you are further from your purpose in concluding any thing from this place than you were before. Lastly, make them Ecclesiastical functions if you list, but than you must appropriate them; & then not any one of them can be attributed to Lay-people.  
That which I fasten upon here I know is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, He that ruleth, for thence you would collect you Ruling Elders. A very strange inference, and illogical; 'tis as if you should argue a genere ad speciem, as thus, est animal; ergo est homo; est substantia, ergo est corpus; est arbour, ergo est quercus, when you know 'tis a certain truth in reason, that A genere ad speciem non valet argumentum. For thus you must argue out of this place. It is a Church Ruler that Saint Paul means in this place, (which is very doubtful too) but if granted, then by your Logic it must be the Lay-Ruling Elder which you intent; whereas you know that we assign you other Ruling Elders that are no Laymen: and among you even your Pastors bear rule too, and so may be understood in this place, rather than those other. There is then no necessity that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in this place must be your Lay-Ruling-Elder, and then you conclude nothing. And as little can you gather from the next place you bring out of the Corinthians, which is indeed parallel to this, and giveth light to it.   

1 Cor. 12.8. & 28.  
For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom, to another the word of knowledge by the same spirit. 
Verse 8.  I profess a blind man may see as much in this verse as I do, that makes to your purpose; I go on then to the 28. And God hath set some in the Church, first Apostles, secondarily Prophets, thirdly Teachers, after that Miracles, than the gifts of healings, helps, 
Verse 28.  governments, diversities of tongues.  
First, I shall give you the judgement of a grave Expositor on this place, though an adversary. Apostolus hic non agit de gradibus hierarchicis; alioquin pastors, Presbyteros, Diaconos praetermittere non debuisset; 
Estius in locum  sed recenset quaedam Ecclesiae membra praecipuis Spiritus sancti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 insignia, sive constitutae sint in ordine hierarchico, five non.  
Secondly, that this place cannot be understood of the functions of the Church, will be evident these two ways. 1. Teachers are here expressed, but Pastors are omitted, and therefore might Governors (the word you catch at) be mentioned in stead of Pastors. If this satisfy not, then tell me, what functions can you call these that follow in the Church of Christ? are Miracles, that is, power to work miracles, gifts of healing, a faculty to speak divers tongues, functions and offices? Ornaments I shall grant you they were of the Pastoral calling, and so was ability to govern. To rule wisely is a great gift of the holy Ghost, and more needful than the other. To the government of the Church belongs more than censuring of manners, and examining witnesses; wisdom to prevent dangers, to direct doubtful cases, to discern spirits, to calm strifes, is requisite, which rarely are eminent in your Lay-Elders. Besides, pray consider, that if in this place you should make your Governors distinct from the Apostles, the Apostles themselves could not qua Apostoli, be Governors, which I hope you will not say. Had not the Apostles, Prophets, Teachers, power in the Church to do miracles, to heal, to speak with tongues? If these three be no divers offices, but graces, and all three found in every Apostle, in some Prophets, and Teachers, then why should not government also that is reckoned in the midst of them be a gift also of the holy Ghost, bestowed on such Prophets, Pastors and Teachers, whom the Spirit of grace and truth would vouchsafe to honour?  
This is my first reason, and my second will be clearer by reflecting upon the gifts of the Spirit, of which we have a list in this chapter, and comparing them with the functions. Let us then number the gifts of the Spirit, and see whether the public functions can be proportioned to them. 
1 Cor. 12. Verse 8.  To one saith the Apostle, is given by the Spirit the word or reason of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit; 
9  to another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; to another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the powerful working of miracles, or the operation of great works; out to another prophecy; but to another discerning or judgement of spirits; but to another divers kinds of tongues; but to another the interpretation of tongues; but all these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 works evidently one and the same spirit, 
10.  dividing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, prpperly or severally to every man, 
11.  as he will. Here are nine gifts of the holy Ghost numbered in verse 28. we meet with two more, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
28.  undertaking or helping, and governing; in the forecited place to the Romans are five different from these, ministering, exhorting, teaching, giving, showing mercy. In all sixteen. I hope you will not say there must be so many distinct Offices and functions in the Church. For so it may happen that the offices may exceed the number of the officers, and so every one must have more than two of them, 
Robinson's Justif. p. 107. & p. 111.  three at least, or else the Church shall nor be supplied. For put case that Robinson's words be true, that a company consisting, though but of two or three gathered by a Covenant made to walk in the ways of God known unto them, is a Church, and so hath the whole power of Christ, 
Answer to the 32. Quest. p. 43  even the same right with two or three thousand. Generally you know it is received among you, that seven will make a full and perfect Congregation, and that the association of these few thus separate by a Covenant, is the essential form of the Church. Which if true, then is it not possible to find so many distinct functions in the Church, because in so small a number, there cannot be found men for them. Let it be then granted, that the Apostle in this chapter speaks of diversities of gifts, not of functions, and the sense will be clear. Apostles there were then in the Church, and they had all these gifts in a greater measure than any other. Prophet's there were and Teachers, and to these the Spirit divided the gifts as he pleased, in what measure, and to what persons he best liked; to one to work miracles, to another to heal, to help and comfort, to guide and govern, to speak tongues, to interpret tongues as might best serve to gather the Saints, to plant the Church.  
I must profess unto you, that I have both now and heretofore looked into this text with as quick an eye as my weakness would give leave, and could never yet find it in any thing that made for your Ruling Elders. No, you perhaps will say, do you not find here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, governments? Yes, I do, but will it thence follow that it must upon necessity be the government of the Lay-Ruling-Elders you dream of? Why might not the Apostles, the Prophets, the Teachers here mentioned by the Apostle be those Governors here intended for aught you know? Of them the other gifts were verified, and why not then this also? They could work miracles, they could heal, they could help and comfort, they could speak all languages, and interpret tongues; what should now hinder but they might by the same Spirit be endowed with the gift of government also? Which if it fall out to be true, as it indeed did, (yet the Apostles either by themselves, or by those they placed in the Churches which they planted, who were Bishops, and only Bishops exercised the jurisdiction) you shall never be able to conclude out of this or any other place of Scripture, that the Governors of the Churches were a distinct company from the Pastors, which is I know, that you drive at.  
But to gratify you a little, I shall here willingly yield you more than I need. That in the Apostolical Church and after till Constantine's time, there might be certain men chosen by common consent of the Church to judge of all civil debates, that might arise betwixt man and man; you perhaps would call these Governors, I should rather call them Arbitratours, because they had no coactive power to compel any Christian to stand to their Arbitration farther than they would bind themselves. And in case that any were refractory and obstinate, the Pastor might and did make use of the Church-Key, and debar him from the participation of Christian privileges, so that he was by them esteemed no better than a Heathen or Publican. 
1 Cor. 6.1, etc.   
And now I will show you the ground of my conjecture, 'tis out of Saint Paul's words; Dare any of you having an action against another, a Christian he means, go to Law before the unjust, and not before the Saints? Paul did not debar the Magistrates that were Infidels of their jurisdiction, nor create new Judges or Governors for civil offences in the Church; it was beyond his calling and commission to do either of them; but when he perceived the Christians for private quarrels pursued each other before unbelievers to the great shame and scandal of Christian profession, he saith, 
Ver. 7.  they were better to suffer loss, to take wrong, to be defrauded. 
Ver. 4.5.  But if this would not satisfy, if yet there were who would be contentious, than he wills them to choose if not the wisest, yet the lest esteemed among them in the Church to arbitrate their causes, rather than to expose themselves and their profession to the mocks and taunts of Heathen and Profane Judges.  
These Arbitratours you may call Governors if you please; but properly they were not so, because they were chosen either by consent of the Litigants, or else appointed as I am induced to opine, by the choice of the Church for that purpose, but they could not interpose themselves as Judges authorised by Christ; because he himself as Mediator claimed no such power, would use none. 
Luke 12.24.  You know his answer to the brother that moved him to divide the inheritance, Man who made me a Judge or Divider among you?  
Now grant that all this be true, and that such Governors began betime and continued long in the Church, even until the Conversion of the Heathen Emperors: Can you hence conclude, that they must upon necessity continue still? no such matter. For the Civil power and the Sword is in the Magistrate's hand, and he is to take up all debates betwixt man and man; of these then there is no use. From these then to argue, that there must be Lay Ruling Elders in the Church is a fallacy, since the causes they were to dcide were other, and their Authority by Church-right none at all. A d such, 'tis probable, may be found in the Scriptures and in the Church-story, but never any other Ruling Elders invested with the power of the Keys, except in Orders.  
I have been long upon this place to the Corinth's, but it was because I would leave no scruple unsatisfied. That I be not tedious of it I will add no more, but consider your next proof which you bring out of the Epistle to the Ephesians.   

Ephesians Chap. 4. Verse 7. and Verse 14.  

Ver. 7.  But to every one of us is given grace, according to the measure of the gift of Christ.  

Ver. 14.  That we henceforth be no more children, tossed too and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive.  
Now here I must confess it befell me, which happens to them who search for gold-ore in the vaults of the earth; they open the turf, dig, delve, labour long to effect their desire, but at last being frustrated of their expectation, they depart in a discontent, resolute that the metal is there, though that it be their hard hap not to find it. This hath fallen to me in the search of this place; I opened the book, I dug and delved deep with all possible endeavour to find out the rich Mine you give notice of, but I could not light upon the least signification of it, or the least inkling that ever it had been there. For tell me I pray, what intimation is there in either of these verses of any kinds of Elders, Lay or Clergy? Every one here, takes in every Inviduum of the mystical body united in all those bonds, who have their particular grace given according to that measure that God pleaseth: and these are advised to be constant, and contend for the faith once delivered to the Saints; 
Judas 1.3.  not babes tossed too and fro with every wind of doctrine. No way then being able to find what you pointed at, in a discontent at my own dulness, I was passing off the place, but as I was departing, by chance I cast my beard upon my shoulder, as the Spaniard speaks, and glanced my eye upon the eleventh verse, where I met with, He gave some Apostles, 
Ephes. 4.11.  some Prophets, some Evangelists, and some Pastors, and Teachers; and then I had a thought to set to work again, as supposing to find what you intended. But upon second thoughts, I found that could not be neither, 
4.  because all the Officers here named extraordinary, or else ordinary, temporary, or to continue, were of the Clergy, not a Lay-Ruling Elder among them. In despair therefore ever to light upon what you signified I should find, I clearly took my farewell of the place, and never stayed till I came unto the Revelation, whether you next and in the last place send me.  
Revel. 4.6. And before the throne was a sea of glass like unto Crystal: and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne were Four Beasts full of eyes before and behind.  
Rev. 5.6. And I beheld, and lo, in the midst of the throne, and of the four beasts, and in midst of the Elders stood a Lamb, as it had been slain, having seven horns, and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into the earth.  
Rev. 19.4. And the twenty four Elders and the four Beasts fell down and worshipped God, that sat on the throne, saying, Amen, Allelujah.  
This Book of the Revelation is so dark, that as King James was wont to say, it needs another Revelation to give light to it. Out of this you have cited these three texts, and one answer will satisfy them all; which is that you can positively conclude nothing hence for your Ruling Elders. There be but two words you can fix on; either the four Beasts or twenty four Elders, or else on both; choose which you will, or both, it will much trouble you to draw your Conclusion; the reason is, the words are subject to so many interpretations, and none make for you.  
I begin with the four Beasts, Or Animalibus rather, for it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
1. The Church is God's throne, 
Calvin. Hieron. Augustine. Ambrose.  wherein his Majesty rides as in a Chariot, and the four wheels of this Chariot are the Gospels; whence some Divines make the four Evangelists these four Beasts that draw the Chariot. Matthew is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that hath the face of a man, beginning his Gospel at Christ's generation as he was man: Mark the Lion, beginning his Gospel with the voice of John the Baptist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, roaring as a Lion in the Wilderness, Repent, for, etc. The Calf represents Saint Luke, for he gins with Zacharies sacrifice. Saint John is the Eagle, for at first he mounts to heaven, beginning with our Saviour's Divinity. 
Napier.  This Napier makes his nineteenth proposition, and by a Metonymy he includes all that profess and believe the Gospel.  
2. Others expound it of those Orders of Angels which excel in dignity, 
Couper. Beza.  and are nearer to the throne, who are generous as Lions, stout and valiant as Bulls, prudent as Men, swift as Eagles; most able to do Gods command, and to aid his servants.  
3. Others hold that these four Beasts are the four great Prophets, 
Jo. Baconth. Albertus. Aretius.  Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel Daniel.  
4. Some again will have signified by these four Beasts, the four great mysteries of our Christian belief; for Christ in his Incarnation was found as a man, in his sacrifice on the Cross as a Calf, in his resurrection the Lion of Judah, in his ascension an Eagle.  
5. Brightman expounds it of the faithful Ministers and servants of God, 
Brightman. Bayly. Lambert. 2 Cor. 5.20.  especially Pastors. But some more largely, of all faithful believers and earnest professors of the truth in all the four quarters of the world. These are in God's seat, when they teach God's people to persist in the truth, and round about his seat, when they labour diligently to defend them from the doctrine of devils and fallacies of hypocrites.  
I remember when I spoke with you, you urged this place and the four Beasts for your Ruling Elders, as you do here. But you see how various the judgements of learned and pious men are upon it, and that the most of them vary clearly from your judgement, and the last which comes nearest, doth only squint that way; for their words carry a larger sense, than you would put upon the place. It can be no wisdom then peremptorily to conclude that from hence, which may and hath been taken By the gravest and modestest Divines in another acception. You must demonstrate to me your interpretation to be solely true, and the mind of the Holy Ghost before I shall yield you this place. viz. That the four Beasts are Ruling Elders. Theologia symbolica non est argumentativa.  
2. And touching the twenty four Elders, Interpreters are of many minds; Quot homines, almost tot sententiae.  

Napier.  1. Napier out of Jerome understands the twenty four books of the Law by the twenty four Elders, and he brings Zanchy to countenance it; to which opinion he is so fixed, that he makes it his eighteenth proposition and asserts it again in his notes, the which saith he, are clothed in white, for that in them is found no lie, and crowned with victory, for conquering Satan, and enlarging Gods Kingdom; but he adds that by these books Metonymicè, all that profess the doctrine of the Old and New Testament contained in the books, are to be comprehended.  

Brightman.  2. Brightman for aught I see dislikes not this opinion, but understands with him all professors, or at the least true believers; but explains aptly the reason of the number of twenty four. For he saith, the Holy Ghost alludes to David's order in disposing all things in the Temple and his Kingdom. The chief Priests were distributed into twenty four orders; so the Levites that served the Priests. 
1 Chron. 24.18, 31. ch. 25.26. ch. 27.  The Musicians also were divided into as many, and the Dore-keepers. There were also of every course that served the King twenty four thousand. Seeing then the whole Congregation of Levi and the people that served the King were divided by twenty four, it might be a shadow and type of that number who were made Kings and Priests unto God to serve Christ; under that number, the whole people; under this, the whole company of the redeemed are contained.  

Couper.  3. And Couper saith the same, that under this number the whole Church both Militant and Triumphant is contained, though he make his allusion otherwise; for he divides the twenty four into two halfs; the first he makes to consist of the twelve Patriarches from whon descended the Jews; the other of the twelve Apostles who converted the Gentiles, the Elders then of both Nations; that is, the professors in both were about the throne; and he proves this sense out of the fifth Chapter. Ver. 9 where the twenty four Elders fell down before the Lamb, 
Rev. 5.8.9.  having har●s in their hands, and they ●ang a new song saying, Thou art worthy O lord— For thou wast slain, and thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people and Nation, 
10.  and hast made us unto our God Kings and Priests, etc.  

Beza.  4. Beza conceives these Elders to be Prophets and Apostles. Summus judex, saith he, comitatu honorificentissimo instructus Prophetarum & Apostolorum, tum veteris, tum novae Ecclesiae.  

Greg. lib. 4 in. reg. 1. ch. 9  5. Gregory expounds this of the Preachers of Gods holy Word, being graves moribus, & sensu maturi.  
6. But most interpret this of the Saints departed out of this world, 
Bullinger. Traber●n. Marlorat.  and now reigning with the Lord Jesus in heaven. Indeed their number is without number, chap. 7.9. But the set and certain number is put for the full and complete number of the Saints under the Law and under the Gospel, descending I say from the twelve Patriarches, or begotten by the twelve Apostles. The Jews and Gentiles with their twenty four Elders are to sit upon twenty four seats clothed with white raiment, having on their heads crowns of gold.  
I leave it now to your choice which sense to follow, and it is evident if you will follow any of them, that your Ruling Elders can never be fetched out of any of these. Among the company I confess they are in the Church Militant or Triumphant, because they are professors; but in a districtive notion to call them Elders, and prove them so from these three texts, is toto errare caelo, that I say no worse.    

Conclusio Parainetica.  
All this while you have bestowed your labour in the building and erecting a Presbyterial or Combinational Church, and having set it up as you supposed, you have called me to view your goodly fabric. I with heed looked upon it, searched into the foundation, and considered the walls and columns, and at last judged that it could not stand, because the foundation was laid in the sand, and the pillars and supporters over-weak; the materials you have dug out of your own fancy, not out of the true Rock; and cemented them together with mortar of your own making. Whether this be so or not, I leave it to them to judge, who shall sadly weigh those stones you have collected and brought out of the quarry of God's book to set out this your work. You in the Acts find an Election by the Church of Deacons; will it thence follow, that all future Elections for Presbyters must necessarily proceed by and from their votes and voices? or that such Election is of the necessary constitution of a Church? the Apostles to avoid an imputation, that might be laid upon them in meddling with many matters; and that they might attend more seriously a greater business, suffered it to be then so done; and is it a good consequent, that therefore it must be always done! Paul and Barnabas ordained Elders in every Church; can any man thence rationally conclude that the Presbyters, and Teaching and Ruling Elders must be of the Combinational Churches Regular Ordination? What, were Paul and Barnabas of the people? or were they the Combinational Church? A twisted cord will never draw and knit the premises and the conclusions together. The Apostle to the Romans, to the Corinthians, gives a large Catalogue of the gifts and graces of the Spirit; and must there therefore be so many functions in the Church? He speaks of governments, must they be of necessity in the hands of such governor's as you suppose? In the Revelation he mentions twenty four Elders, and will you thence deduce that they must be necessarily such Elders as you fancy in your brains? Had all or any of these texts enforced your conclusions; a wonder it is to me, that none of the ancient fathers, none of the reformed Churches 
a Barrow. Cann. Robinson. Johnson. Zion's Prerogative voted by Bayly page 35. 36. Vide etiam eundem. p. 104. 105 108, 109, etc. Bayly page 53, 54, 55.  (for you set them all by, as well as the Church of Old- England in this your device) should out of these Mines dig such stones for the building. In labours they were indefatigable, for piety exemplar, in judgement acute, for learning very eminent, in defence of Religion courageous; great talents and measures of the Spirit they no question received; content they were to hazard all, life, limbs, goods, preferments (as many at this day do) for the truth; and can it be conceived that the Spirit of our good God, would suffer them all to be blinded or hood-winked in this necessary of Church-government till you arose? It is not yet full twenty six years, since Robinson the first persuader of this way arrived at Plymouth in New- England; from him Mr. Cotton took it up, and transmitted it thence to Mr. Thomas Goodwin, who helped in this our land to propagate it; you see then your Discipline hath not yet the third part of the full age of a man. 'Tis so youthful, that as yet the beard is not well grown, and will you then say that all parochial, cathedral, provincial, national, ecumenical Churches are degenerated from it? you must adorn it with more grey hairs, and make it Apostolical (which you can never do) before any man will believe you. Your endeavours I have frustrated by restoring the Scriptures you produce to their genuine sense, about which I have not relied wholly upon my own private spirit, but upon the judgement of the learnedst, gravest, and most pious Divines new and old, indeed upon the concurrent judgement of the whole Church. Tantum veritati obstr●pit adulter sensus, 
Tertullian.  quantum corruptor stilus. And indeed I am possessed with such fear, when I am to interpret the Word of God, lest I should say, thus saith the Lord, when he saith it not, that in any dubious text I call for my books, turn over all expositors I have; weigh well what is said by each, consider of their reasons; and thence collect the conclusion, judging what was the intent of the Holy Ghost. That yet I may mistake, it is possible; but you may see it is not wilfully, when I take along with me such Councillors. Where it is evident to me they did mistake, I lay them aside, yet not without some honour and veneration; where it appears to me they were in the right, I embrace them, and bless God that he hath made them my guides. And what is there why I should not attribute unto them as much as to any new man? If they were ancient, they were nearer the times, 
Euseb. lib. 4.22  when the Church was Virgo a pure Virgin; and therefore were better able to judge what became her Virginity, and I am sure they never adjudged her adulterate for her discipline. If they be new, and of the Reformers, I must say that God hath brought to pass wonderful things by their endeavours, and yet never made them acquainted with this new light. I shall not then easily be drawn to throw them off, and their expositions of these places of Scripture, till I find somewhat to convince. And this conviction must not proceed from blind guesses and conjectures. I shall yield when I find clear demonstrations, which as yet I do not; no nor so much as probable arguments. It cannot be long, but that you and I must stand before that great Tribunal, and because we are both Teachers, account we must give for what we have taught, and upon what ground we have taught it. It will not be enough for us to answer, we followed the judgement of this or that Church, but upon what certain ground we followed it, because we were to lead the multitude, and not to be led by them; to be lights to others, and therefore to have light in ourselves. That Caveat of our Saviour would be lad to heart, Take heed that the light within thee be not darkness; for then how grert is that darkness? 
Luke 11.35 Matth. 6.23.  This light within us is the light of conscience, and the ground of that is science, which always flows from certain, prime, immediate, known principles, not from probable and conjectural. If our science then be not sure and certain, our conscience can never be well fixed; if there be blindness in the one, there will be darkness in the other. We may mistake that for conscience, which is but humour; fancy, a passion, animosities may seduce us, and zeal hurry us too fare; yea, perhaps the zeal of God, for that zeal is a passion still, and the more dangerous, when not guided by knowledge. What should I say, that the actions which conscience may persuade us to, may be an infusion and enthusiasm of the black spirit, as it is, when many works of the flesh come to us under the disguise of Religion and Conscience! It is with the conscience of man, as it is with the eye of the body; be the object never so bright and visible, if there be in the eye any thing that may impeach the sight, either mist, or dust, or lime, the light within us will be but darkness. False doctrine of itself, (set off sometimes by the authority of the Teacher or by the power of some eminent followers and practisers of it, or thickened by pride and obstinacy, always by self-love that always makes us think our opinions the truest) is this same caligo tenebrarum, the mist that dusks the eyes of the understanding: 
Cant. 3.6.  Worldly profit and wealth are the powders of the Merchants, the dust that tickleth the eyes, and blinds the sight of the wisest. Envy by emulation, or prejudice of affection, or wilfulness by opposition, like lime torments the eye, and perverts the judgement concerning the object. To what purpose you will say is all this? you shall now see, it is that both you and I may retain a good conscience (for when I speak to you, I speak to myself) And that I am sure, nor you nor I shall be able to do, if either humour or fancy, or passion, or black Enthusiasm oversway us, or the dust of false doctrine, or the world, or envy, or hatred, or wilfulness dim, tickle, or torment our eyes. The Father of lights remove all darkness from us both, and guide us by the light of his Law. For without all doubt, it can never be truly called conscience, unless it produce his Law for its rule to direct us by in this matter.  
To conclude, I wish I might be so happy as to reclaim you, from what I conceive is a mistake, and bring you home again as Saint John did the young man to your mother. My prayers, 
Euseb. 3. c. 23.  nor my pains shall not be wanting to effect it, might it be effected. For I believe you are of a tender heart, and have a scrupulous soul, that smites you for any error, as the least gritts will trouble a tender foot in a narrow shoe; it persuades me the more, that you may lay to heart what I have written, and the God of heaven give to it such an issue, that you may say it was a happy hour in which you writ your Letter.  
Let it not be an offence unto you, that I account you in the case of that one sheep that strayed into the Wilderness; an innocent sheep I say; not one of the Wolves in sheep's clothing; and this makes me go after you, to try if by any endeavour I may bring you back again to the fold. My endeavour you know was for that before you were quite gone; and I confess it seemed to me not to be taken in vain, which yet puts me in some hope, that such a thing possibly may yet be effected. Why will you remain among those whom the Apostle brands with this mark, they separate themselves? I beseech you lend me your ears or eyes rather with a little patience, and hear me speak; 
Judas Ver. 19 compared with Heb. 10.25.  it may be in voce hominis tuba Dei, God's Trumpet at my mouth; and if you will but listen and suffer yourself to be roused by the shrillnesse of the sound, you may perhaps yet make a stand, consider where you are, and retreat. The enemy smites at your separation, the Angels would rejoice to behold you leaving it, and return back to your Mother the Church of Old- England.  
She is indeed now as the Teyle Tree, or as the Oak, when they cast their leavet, 
Isa. 6.13.  yet the substance is in her. Her beauty is decayed through bitter affliction, and her face furrowed with sorrows, there is nothing now left about her to make her lovely; yet she is your Mother still, she washed you with water, she gave you milk when a babe, she fed you with strong meat when a man; she honoured you with orders when grown; for a Mother's sake I crave one good look, some pity; some regard! Why fly you from her? I cannot conceive you think her so dishonest, as some Separatists report; or that you will fasten upon her the name of a Whore; if you should, I should grow angry; and tell you, that in her Constitutions she came nearest the Apostolic Church of any Church in the Christian world; and this I openly profess to make good against any Separatist whatsoever. Many ungracious sons I confess she had, and they brought an aspersion upon her, and the vials of God's wrath have been justly, justly I proclaim poured upon her for their iniquities. The constitution was good and sound, the execution passing through some corrupt hands too often subject to reproof. Let not her then, who had declared her mind by rules and cautions against all abuses, and taught what only she would have done, be charged with her son's irregularities. Set in Gods Name the Saddle upon the right horse, and let not your Mother bear the whole blame.  
1. But if yet any will say she was blame-worthy; then either it must be in manners, doctrine or discipline. The manners of her children might be unmannerly and unchristian; and are all the sons of your Combination bene morati? were all at Corinth so? all at Thessolonica? at Corinth there were incestuous, factionists, etc. at Thessalonica disorderly walkers; but I read not that the Apostle adviseth them for such enormous persons to separate, to combine, and confederate into a new Congregation. Such were to be separated by the Authority of the Church, and no man farther to separate from the Church for these then by dislike, by disclaiming, by disallowing and discountenancing of their evil deeds: which was done by all good men in the English Church; I never learned yet, that corruption in good manners was a sufficient cause of separation from a Church. Calvin disputes it strongly; Lib. 4. Instit. cap. 1. Sect. 13, etc. will you hear Austin? There are saith he, bad fish in the net of the Lord, 
Austin. Ep. 48. Read Cyprian Epist. 51.  from which there must be a separation ever in heart and in manners; but a corporal separation must be expected at the Seashore, that is, at the end of the world; and the best fish must not tear and break the net because the bad are with them.  
2. To come to the second head, Doctrine. In this you confess that the Church of England was not faulty, in that you approve her doctrine Catholic as expounded by me in the Catechism: your Salvo will fall upon the third. Yet suppose that in her doctrine there had been some error, yet this had not been sufficient to give countenance to a separation. For it is not every light error in disputable doctrine and points of curious speculation that can be a just case of separation in that admirable body of Christ, which is the Church, nor of one member from another. I shall go one pin higher.  
It is not an error in a fundamental point, and yet that amounts to an heresy by conviction, that can justify a departure. 
Perkins in Ep. Judas.  At Corinth there were that denied an article of faith, the resurrection. At Galatia, they foully were mistaken in that great and fundamental doctrine of justification; and yet the Apostle dedicates his Epistles to them as to a Church, as to Saints, and persuades not to separation. Christ gave his natural body to be rend and torn upon the Cross, that his mystical body might be One; and he is no way partaker of divine Charity, who is an enemy to this Unity. Now what errors in doctrine may give just cause of separation in this body, or the parts of it one from another, were it never so easy to determine (as I think it is most difficult) I would not venture to set it down in particulars, lest in these times of discord I might bethought to open a door for Schism, which surely I will never do, except it be as a wise man said, to let it out.  
Among your Combinational Churches, this seems to me to be one of the easiest tasks, among whom there have happened so many unhappy Schisms. Brown's collected Church that went over to Middleburge, 
Bayly pag. 14.  fell to such jarring among themselves, that they soon broke all to pieces, the most turned Anabaptists. At Amsterdam, Ainsworth and Johnson could not agree; 
page 15.  which rend the Brownist Church into three fearful Schisms: 
page 16.  Ainsworth excommunicating Johnson, and Johnson Ainsworth, and all his followers and that for trifles. Mr. Smith not agreeing with his Church at Amsterdam g●● him to Ley in Holland, and accused his Church of Idolatry and Anti-Christianisme; of Idolatry for looking on their Bibles in time of preaching, and their Psalters in time of singing: Of Anti-Christianisme, because in their Presbytery they joined to Pastors other two Officers, Doctors and Ruling Elders.  
At Leyden, Mr. Robinson's small company by divisions was well near brought to nought. 
pag. 54. pag. 57 pag. 61. pag. 75. pag. 76. pag. 77. pag. 79.  Mr. Cotton patronised it in New- England, but fell into grievous errors and heresies, as did the Independents of New- England. At Rotterdam, Mr. Peter's erected his Church, was the Pastor, but he was either quickly weary of them, or they of him; and then Mr. Ward and Mr. Bridge succeeded, at what time Mr. Simson came thither, who divided the Church upon a trifle; and Mr. Simsons separation burst out again to another subdivision, and the Schism grew irreconcilable. At Arnhem in the Church, the spirit of error did predominate, and protruded most abominable errors. I have given you a taste only of these things, that you may see what sober and grave men will be very loath to do; that is, make a rent into the Church: your hot and fiery spirits have done even for slight causes, almost in all your Collected Churches. It would be well considered, what Doctrine that must be for which a man is bound to separate from a Church, before he makes a rent.  
3. And now there is nothing left but discipline, that may be a sufficient cause of separation. And this hath divided you among yourselves, as well as divided you from us. For the power of the Keys radically and originally you place in the Congregation without any subjection to any superior; and by this you make the Church remediless to suppress any disorder or heresy in any other Congregation, 
Bayly pag. 109. 110, 111.  because there is no superior over them but themselves who can have authority to restrain them, which is the cause of many Sects among us at this day.  
In the Congregation you say the power is, (they may elect, ordain, depose, excommunicate Officers) to judge and determine without any appeal. But upon the passage and settling of the power you differ: for Johnson would give all these acts of power to the Eldership: but Ainsworth would reserve it in the Congregation, & adhuc sub judice lis est; though as I am informed, the common opinion among you is, that the power of the Keys is not in the hands of the Presbytery, but the fraternity, and so you are of Ainsworths' opinion.  
Of the power or Keys, I see there is no difference betwixt us; both are agreed to what end they serve, both use them to effect that: the sole quarrel is in whose hands they shall be put. On all sides the buzzle is, who shall be Prelates. The Presbyterians would have them in their hands, and Johnson▪ fights on their side; The Congregation stiffly wrangle for their right, and Ainsworth and most of New- England take their part. 
Cotons' Keys pag. 10. 13.  Mr. Cotton and some others, sensible of what might ensue by this just power of the people over the Eldership, have begun to fall from Ainsworth to Johnson, and to plead the authority of the Eldership over the brotherhood, and the necessity of subjection of the people by divine right to the Elders, as to their superiors. Some wiser than some; yet he hath such fine evasions and distinctions to blind and content the people, that a man would think he were playing at hocus pocus. But be it as it will, a blind man may see that the Prelacy is the game that they have all in chase. Now this methinks is not fair dealing, to put down Covenant, and swear down Prelacy, and hunt after it themselves, to cry out against others, that their whole aim is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, lord it over God's inheritance, when they would be the sole Lords themselves. Now among the heat of these contenders, the old Prelate appears and puts in his claim; he pleads Scriptures, he pleads antiquity, and the perpetual practice of the Church for one thousand and five hundred years. And by my consent, he that can show best Cards for it, let him carry the game. Nor this then hereafter shall be any just cause of separation; separation! O how I hate the syllables, the Author of it sure was taught by the Prince of darkness, and came to some 
a Bolton the first Separatist hanged himself. Brown the second died in prison Ephes. 4.4, 5, 6.  unlucky end. Unity is the child that God blesseth. We all acknowledge one Father, we all hope in one Redeemer, we serve one Lord, we are united by one Spirit, we profess one faith, we were baptised in one water, we have but one hope of our calling, for we all hope to meet in one heaven. Let us therefore endeavour to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. And so the God of peace will take delight to dwell with us, and bless us; And the Son of God who made our peace, and left it to us, as his last Legacy, will give rest and peace; peace of conscience and reconciliation with God, while we live here, and eternal rest with him in heaven. Amen.  
To the first part of your letter you have here my answer, and if it find acceptance, I shall proceed to satisfy the other. First, to vindicate the Church in general from those you call corruptions, and degenerations in her government. And secondly, the Church of England in particular, touching those enormities you conceive committed by her. That I have not now done it, there are some reasons, which I will conceal.    

A KEY to open the Debate about a Combinational Church, and the power of the KEYS. The Second Part. The words of the Letter.  
IN case the frequent pondering of this profitable point (which is of so much concernment to be throughly versed in) should puzzle any one, that gins to question how, where, or when did the Christian Church (which at the first was Presbyterial and pure,) become so corrupt and polluted, as that scarce is the sceleton, fashion or face thereof as much as to be perceived (the more is the pity) in most places, or (as yet) amongst most professors of godliness? I was really persuaded, that a little pains might prove not only acceptable, but advantageous to a person that were so puzzled about the particular; for to hear, and to have it not alone boldly and barely affirmed, but also fairly and firmly confirmed by unanswerable arguments, that it fell to that foul and fearful degeneration (under which it now doth or should groan, and for which it hath good cause to grieve) by no fewer than five distinct degrees, whereof the first was into a Parochial, 2. The second into a Cathedral. 3. The third into a Provincial. 4. The fourth into a National. 5. And the fifth was into an ecumenical, or a Roman Catholic Church.  

SECT. I. The Reply.  
IN this second part of your letter you propose a point I confess of greatest concernment, and such which is most worthy of the sad and serious disquisition; which is, how, where, and when the Church became so corrupt, polluted and degenerate, as scarce the secleton, fashion or face thereof is to be perceived, no not among the professors of godliness.  
Good words I pray; The Reformed Churches you say cannot show it, the Prelates cannot produce it, the Papists are at the same loss, and among the professors of godliness, (be they who they will) the Sceleton is scarce to be perceived, hardly the fashion, the face appears among them. And where then shall we look for the substance, the body itself, of which, if any man be not a part, 'tis but in vain to look for salvation? Since out of the Church no man can have hope of salvation, no more than that creature had of life, who was out of the Ark of Noah. God be merciful to us all poor Christians, if our Mother that should nourish us, be brought to bare bones, have but a face and fashion of a Mother and nothing else; surely she will never be able to give her children milk while they are babes, and strong meat when they come to be men, if this be so.  
Now tell me I pray, what is the case, why she is brought to this pitiful and lamentable condition? how came she so corrupt and polluted? Oh say you, that is quickly discerned; she is fallen from her Presbytery; for all the while she was Presbyterial, she was pure: First, I could advise you to take heed of this affirmative, except you put Combinational unto it. For all the Presbyterians will catch at it, and run away with it in triumph; and where are you then, and I believe your own party will not con you much thanks, that have given the adversary so great advantage. Secondly, it behoved you, (since you have laid the strength of your cause upon this word) to have demonstrated by infallible arguments out of the Scripture, that the Church was at first governed by that kind of Presbytery you mean, which you have not done, before you pronounced all succeeding Churches corrupt and polluted because they degenerated from that Presbytery. This is petitio principii, the foulest way of arguing. Thirdly, that the most learned and modest of the Prelacy, though they will grant you a Presbytery in the primitive Church, yet will never grant you, that from thence the Church shall be denominated Presbyterial; or that if it should vary from thence, that therefore it had no more than the Sceleton, fashion, face of a true Church. All these things should have been better cast up before you had been so positive.  
The degeneration than you dream of, is grounded upon a false supposition, that there was at first such a Presbyterial or Combinational Church, that was conjoined in any Church-Covenant beside Baptism, that had the native power of the Keys, etc. which you never shall be able to demonstrate. The contrary to which Rutherford hath nervously proved, more particularly in his seventh Chapter of his peaceable and temperate plea, to whom I refer you. The sum of whose discourse is, that there were at Jerusalem, 
Father f. cap. 7. Conclus. 4.  at Samaria, at Ephesus, at Rome, at Galatia, at Antioch Presbyteries, (which shall be granted) but that these Presbyteries were not of one single Congregation. From these than you can never prove that the following Church did degenerate, because they were not.  
The manner of this degeneration you make gradual, and you give us in five steps, descending from the Parochial till it came to the ecumenical Roman, as you call it. But supposing a degeneration in the degrees, you are mistaken; for as I suppose the first should be last, and the last first, which will appear, if we examine how the Church was governed from the Apostles times to this our unhappy age. But first I will transcribe your whole discourse.   

SECT. II. The words of the Letter.  
1. THE first rise of the rottening of the Church, was its falling from a pure poor Presbyterial Church, (which in respect of its primitive constitution was made up of living stones, namely, lively Members, and laborious Ministers, being firmly fastened and united to the Lord Jesus as their only head by faith: one to another by a fraternal Covenant of love, according to the pattern that was proposed and prescribed in both Testaments, Is. 44.5. Jer. 50.5. Ezra 20.37. Zach. 11.7, 10, 14. 2 Cor. 8.5. Ephes. 2.13, 19, 22. Col. 2.2, 19 1 Pet. 2.5.) into an impure and unpolished parochial Church: At that time when (ceasing to elect and ordain a Teacher, a Pastor, a Ruler, a Deacon and Diaconesse, or a Widow in conformity to the heavenly Canon, Rom. 12.7. and 15.4. and 16.1. compared with 1 Tim. 3.1. and Titus 1.5, 6.) it was well content to admit and accept of a Parson, a Vicar, a Warden, an Overseer of the poor, and a Midwife. By which wisdom of the flesh, being no better than enmity against God, within a short time after the days of the Apostles, Christ's spiritual house and growing as well as living Temple, was turned and transformed into a carnal and dead Town or Apostatising Parish. The very beginning and breeding of which Parochial Church is seen to have been in the time of Polycarp and Irenaeus, one of them being an Elder of the Church at Smyrna, and a disciple of John the Evangelist, and the other a Pastor at Lions, and a disciple of that Polycarp, as any man may easily perceive, that will peruse what is to be observed in Eusebius Ecclesiastical history. 4. lib. c. 14.15, 16. lib. 5. cap. 23.24.  
2. The second degree of the Combinational Churches corruptions was the Cathedral Church's generation, which did presume to alter, and to elevate the places and appellations of the Teacher, Pastor, Ruler, and Deacon, into those unscripture-like titles of Lord-Bishop, Dean, Chancellor, and Archdeacon, who ventured to usurp the power of excommunication against the Members and Ministers of many Congregations in their Synods and Counsels, contrary to what was practised in that Orthodox pattern, Acts 15.24. which is laid down and left as well for the imitation, as information of after-ages; whose work it was by Scripture-proofs to confute soul subverting positions, and to confirm Christian-doctrines, without any manner of authority to censure any man's person, being that that is the express privilege of the Presbyterial Church, 1 Cor. 5.4, 5. 2 Thes. 3.15. The babe-age of which usurpation is made mention of, as newly appearing in the world by what was exercised by Alexander of Alexandria against Eusebius of Nicomedia, as well as against Arius in the reign of Constantius and Constance the sons of Constantine the Emperor, as it is to be seen in Lib. 2. Socrat. Scholar c. 3. compared with the 32 cap. of 2 book. Evagr. lib. 1. cap. 6.  
3. The third degree of the Presbyterial Church's degeneracy, was its climbing up to the stile of a Provincial Church, whose Pastor was not afraid nor ashamed to assume the name and office of an Archbishop, and Metropolitan; leaving the servile and subservient titles of Prebend, Surrogate, and Vicar-general, as terms good enough to the inferior Officers his underlings. Of which proud and profane Pest-house, that Austin which was sent from Gregory, the last of good Bishops, and the first of evil Popes of Rome, is reputed and recorded to have been the father and founder in this Land; even then when he was stiffly and stoutly opposed by the Monks of Bangor, Anno Domini 596. and in the reign of King Ethelbert, witness Fox Martyrol. page 119. together with the rest of the Eng. Hist. and Evangr. lib. 2.8.  
4. The fourth famous degree of the Combinational Churches infamous defection, was its notably naughty enlarging itself into a National Church; when, and whence without controversy arose that Jewish imitation, and irregularly Religious observation of five frivolous and foundationlesse customs and traditions, of which the first was of National times, as the fifty yearly Festivals, or holy working-days, Cursed-Masse, Candlemas, etc. The second, was the National places, as the Consecrated meeting houses, Porches, Chancels, Churchyards. The third, was of National persons, as the Universal Preachers, Office-Priests, Half-Priests, and Diocesan Deacons. The fourth, was of National pious performances, as st●nted Worship, Choristers, singing of Psalms with the Rubrique Postures. And the fifth was of National payments, or spiritual profits, as offerings, tithes, and mortuaries; the which faithless and fantastical fashions were the illegitimate offspring of National Parliaments in this and the Neighbour-Nations. Witness the public Acts, Statutes and other Ordinances in that behalf.  
5. The fifth and highest degree of Church-deformity, is the ecumenical Church, otherwise called Roman Catholic; the which in the apprehension of I know not how many Kingdoms is the very best, though in the judgement of Christ Jesus it is the very basest; because the beastliest and the most blasphemous of all the bastard-Church constitutions, that ever were till now. Witness what is written, Rev. 13.1, 3, 5, 6. whose Pastor and other Presbyters the sinne-pardoning Pope, Cardinals, Abbots with others, were owned and acknowledged for to be, and that not a few (if not of the summoned Counsels) yet in several Synods, in sundry Countries. Insomuch that Churches abominable iniquities were so increased over their heads, and their traitorous trespasses were so grown up to heaven, as that the long-forbearing Lord could no longer forbear, but was put upon it, and as it were necessitated for to take vengeance on their inventions, as on Aaron's golden Calf, and samuel's grievous connivency at the evils of his sons, spoken of Psal. 99.6, 8.  

SECT. II. The Reply.  
THis is your charge you have brought against our matter, and you have loaded it with all the aggravations you could think of. It brings to my mind a bill exhibited against me in Chancery about thirty years since, being the first and last that I was ever troubled withal, and upon no ground, for aught I know, except for paying another man's debt; when it was brought to my hand, I began to read, and fare I had not past, but I found myself charged with foul crimes, of which I was no way guilty. This put me into some choler; I champed on the b●t, and vowed to be righted on that man that had so falsely slandered me, and cast such foul aspersions upon my credit and reputation. All this while my Attorney stood by, and smiled; I guessing what the truth was that he laughed at me, fumed and fretted the more; at which he let go the sleider of his sides, and burst into an open laughter; this set me on fire to know what the cause should be; but his immoderate bounds and curvets of laughing made such stops and jumps in his words, that as yet I could perfectly understand nothing. These delays were so many spurs in my sides, so that I was all this while upon thorns; I could have burst for anger that my ears were put off from a having a present hearing. But at last, this mountain brought forth its mouse; for the man composing his countenance, gravely told me, that such words were usual in these bills, and that the Clerks commonly used to do so pro form●, that they might fill up their sheets, and that my good name was no way impaired by it; which for the present g●ve me satisfaction.  
Had I not been used to read from your party such a bill as this against the Church, I should have been as much moved at your charge, as I was at my Chancery bill; but I am now satisfied, 'tis pro formâ, it must be done, and so let it pass for this time. Though because I know the particulars in it, you will expect an answer, I promise you to receive it in its due place.  
To the whole, I say, you have not drawn up your bill aright; for supposing the corruptions and deformities you mention, they stole not in upon the Church by those degrees you have thought of. It was not the Parish that was first corrupted, than the Cathedral, after the Province, lastly the Nation; as for the Ecumenical Church I know none,, except the Representative in a General Council, which whether it may be corrupted or no, is a dispute of a high nature. Now. I shall set you right, that against you frame your bill next, you may proceed by a better method. The first Church in respect of Discipline was Cathedral, the next Parochial, the third Diocesan, the fourth Provincial, and the last National; out of all these you may if you please, frame the Ecumenical. Now if you will fancy unto yourself corruptions, which I shall not deny you in Paradise, but altogether in the constitution, which is the true question, you must proceed by these degrees, and not by the former.  
Now that this was the first constitution of the Church, even common reason shall inform and convince you. The Cathedral must needs be first, yea suppose it had been but only Congregational. (That you mistake me not, do not think I speak of a fabric or a stately building, that came in after; for I speak only of some set place, City, or Town, or house if you will, where the people of God were gathered to worship him; put case Jerusalem, Antioch, etc.) This I say must needs be first; and because the Apostles in these greater Cities first gathered Christians, and were in them for some time resident, therefore these Cities had from thence their Appellations, and were called Cathedra Petri, Cathera Jacobi, Cathedra Pauli, Cathedra Marci, etc. which is no other than the place where any Apostle, or Apostolical man seated himself, and in that Seed, seat or place exercised Apostolical or Episcopal jurisdiction. Tertull. to this purpose, Apostoli primo contestata fide in Jesum Christum per Judaeam, & Ecclesiis institutis: deinde in orbem profecti, eandem doctrinam ejusdem fidei nationibus promulgarunt, & proinde Ecclesias apud unamquamque Civitatem condiderunt, à quibus traducem fidei & semina doctrinae caetetae exinde Ecclesiae mutuatae sunt, & quotidie mutuantur ut Ecclesiae fiant, etc. Tertull. de prescript. cap. 20. & paulo post cap. 26. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Euseb. l. 3. c. 21. cap. 4. c. 11. cap. 31. lib. 5. c. 7. cap. 3. c. 28. cap. 22, 23, 27.  Apud ha● adhuc Cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis praesidentur.  
2. That which we can in reason next reflect upon is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is properly the franchises of that city; for it is a foul mistake and abuse of the word to suppose that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports a Country Village, Hamlet or Township. For Parochia in the prime sense of the word, and in Church Records contains the Citizens of any great City, with all such borderers and strangers as dwelled near, and repaired to any chief Church or City. Eusebius calls Alexandria, Corinth, Jerusalem, Ephesus, Athens, Lions, Carthage, Antioch, etc. by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and that must needs be more than Villages are with us. The very same is to be seen in the beginning of Clemens first Epistle to the Romans. Now tell me in reason what can be easilier conceived, than that the Pastor, who had his seat in the City, would employ his endeavour next to bring to the faith those who were his next neighbours, and lived in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Franchises, the Suburbs, and neighbourhood. This Parochial Church then must be second.  
3. These being converted, no question the chief Pastor did extend his charity, and by all possible means sought to win those who were further off dispersed in Towns, lesser Cities, Villages and Hamlets; what he could not do by himself, being to attend the flock in the City, out of doubt he endeavoured to effect by those he sent, God's blessing being upon their labours, it fell out as at Samaria by Philip's preaching, 
Acts 8.  that many were converted to the faith, and by reason of the number that believed, they needed a Minister of the Word and Sacraments to be resident among them, and were able and willing to maintain one; To whom could they repair more fitly, than to the Bishop of the next City, and desire a fit man to serve their necessity? and he appointed them their Pastor and Minister, and he and they became subject to the Pastor of the chief City. This is evident to me, Acts 8. in the conversion of Samaria, 
Socrat. Scholar lib. 1. cap. 19  and in that story of Adesius and Frumentius that converted the Indians. And now the whole, viz. the City, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and these Villages, Towns, etc. thus converted being under the regiment of this Bishop, were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that Bishop's Diocese, which was the Original of a Diocesan Church.  
4. But the charity of the first planters of Christianity stayed not here; they never thought they could bring fish enough into Christ's net. As they were fishers of men, 
The Roman Provinces as I take it, were under Augustus Caesar. 22. After Marius thus conquered Syria, Germany, Brittanny, etc.  so they fished still to catch more, until they gained whole Provinces. (Now a province was a large territory conquered by the Romans, which they put under the government of a Proconsul or Propretor.) Such a tract being converted by the foresaid endeavours, was put under the government of the foresaid Bishop, ●nd so of a Diocesan, his Church had the name of Provincial; and because the City where he was resident was the Metropolis o● Mother-City to that whole Province, and under that many less Cities with their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and Towns and Villages, so that Province being so large, that it was not possible or not convenient for the Bishop of the first seat to oversee all as he ought, therefore prudence taught the Church to appoint Bishops in lesser Cities, and to assign them their Dioceses, over which yet the Bishop of the chief Cities should have a supervision, whom they called a Metropolitan, after a Primate, and in some Churches a Patriarch, and all the subordinate Bishops under him Diocesan.  
5. And again if this Church consisted of Converts of a whole Nation in which there were divers Provinces, as it fell out in afric two, and Spain three, than the Church had the name of a National Church: and there might be divers Metropolitans in it, and more Primates, of which yet one was chief, and under these the foresaid Diocesan Bishops with their Clergy.  
These are steps in the judgement of reason by which the Church arrived to its eminency; and therefore if it decay and rot by degrees, as you will have it, the corruption must begin in the Cathedral, descend to Parochial, and thence spread to the Diocesan, Provincial and National, and settle in the Ecumenical, if such a local Church can be found.  
Besides that great reason, the propagation of the Gospel, why the Church was at the first thus settled, one was, the exercise of government, and the more convenient administration of the discipline thereof. For being thus disposed, the power of the Keys both in Ordination and Jurisdiction might be more easily and prudently turned.  
The great Masters of Policy could never yet acquaint us with any more than three kinds of government, Monarchy, Aristocracy, Democracy▪ Monarchy, when the supreme power is in one. Aristocracy, when it is in more, but those the noblest, the best, the wisest, the prudentest. Democracy, when the people have the power and rule, which if it be in many of them they call Polyarchy, if in a few only, they term it Oligarchy. The two first of these the learned teach us, proceeds a jure divino gratios●; for our gracious God having all dominion and power in his hands, is pleased out of mere grace to impart of it to one, or some choice men, that they may use his power, and rule us for our good. But the last they inform us, proceeds a jure divin● vindicativo, from an angry and revengeful God, that puts such power in the hand of the many, or few, to make use of it for our punishment. This is the worst of the three, and if any man doubt of it, let him call to mind the answer that Lycurgus gave to the Lacedaemonian, that importuned him for an erection of a Democratical government in that Commonwealth; go saith he, 
Plutarch.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and do thou make a trial of that kind of government in thine own family, and if thou find it advantageous to make thy servants Masters in thy family, then renew this suit, and I will hear it. This is absurd in nature, in policy. In nature any body with two heads is monstrous, and in policy a Ship governed by two Pilots, or an Army swayed by two Generals with an equal power, hath not been read of to have good success.  
To apply this to my purpose. The Church of God is a society, and then it must be governed one of these ways. Either by one, or by the best, o● the most. If either of the first two ways, than it is a Deo propitio; if the last, a Deo irato; for I could evidently prove to you if I list, that Democracy is a consequent of God's anger. Now for the government of the Church there are who strain the pin too high, there are who let it down too low; betwixt both lies the medium.  
1. Those of Rome that they may advance that man of sin, and make him an ecumenical Bishop, contend hotly for a Monarchy. The Bishop forsooth of Rome must be accounted the sole Monarch of the whole Church, and be put into the definition of it, so that no Pope, no Church. But we acknowledge no such Monarchy, nor no such Monarch. Christ Jesus alone is the sole head of this body, as it comprehends the Church Militant and Triumphant.  
Neither are Bellarmine's arguments of any validity for Papal Monarchy. In a Kingdom saith he, is but one King; but Christ's Church is a Kingdom; therefore. There be in this syllogism four terms; for Kingdom in the major is taken for an earthly Kingdom, in the minor for a heavenly, whence it will not follow that because in an earthly Kingdom there must be but one King or Monarch, therefore in Christ's heavenly K●ngdome there must be but one also. Then besides there is a great disparity betwixt earthly Kingdoms and the Church of Christ. For the Church Militant remaining one is spread in many earthly Kingdoms and cannot well be ordered like one particular Kingdom, and therefore it follows not though in one particular Kingdom there be many visible Judges and one supreme, that in the Universal visible Church there must be one supreme.  
To that his other popular Argument, that Monarchical government is the best, and therefore that undoubtedly, which Christ instituted for his Church, 'tis sufficient to answer, that a Monarchy is the best form of government in one City or Country; but it follows not, it is best in respect of the whole world, where the parts are so remote, and the dispositions of men so various; The Courtiers of Rome go too high.  

Arist. Ethic. lib. 8. c. 10.  2. On the contrary side all the Combinational Churches fall too low, who plead stiffly for the people's right to govern; the administration of discipline say these must be Democratical. The Papalins are not more hot for one, than they are zealous and contentious for the manyheaded multitude. But say in good sooth, whether this can be likely. Even the very Heathen Politicians have branded this kind of government. Plato Aristotle, Lycurgus, profess it is of the three the very worst, and experience convinceth us it is the worst: and shall any man imagine that Christ who so loved his Church, that he bought it with his own blood, would institute in it the worst kind of government? A discipline he left to it; that's confessed; and would he leave the rod in the hands of the bellua multorum capitum? credat Judaeus Apella, non ego. Besides popular government proceeds from vindicative justice; 'tis absurd in nature, 'tis absurd in policy. But Christ was not angry when he gave the Keys, than he was pleased, than he was reconciled to the world; he could not when he was thus affected with love, give them to the people in anger. The end he gave them was to purge his Church, to keep out scandals, to keep out Schisms, Errors, Heresies out of his Church; but being in the people's hands, by this means they are let in, and that not thinly, but in whole swarms. Deny if you can since the people have gripped the Keys, whether Arianisme, Atheism, Antinomianisme, Montanisme, Euthusiasme, Anabaptism, Familisme, Quakerism, Chiliasme, Socinianism, I want breath to reckon the rest, hath not polluted, and to use your own word, rottened the Church? shall we say this government is from Christ which hath brought forth such effects? The children betray the mother.  
And now they are brought forth, the Key you so much boast of in the people's hand, hath no power to shut them out of the Church; out of your particular Church you perhaps may (though I have good ground to doubt of that too, especially if they grow nume●o is as they do of all Sects.) How I pray was it Arnhem Rotterdam, Amsterdam, New England? what is this to purging of the whole Church? I had thought the Keys had been given for the benefit of the whole, and not for the cleansing only of one single Congregation. Well, keep your own as clean as you can, without spot, without wrinkle, and let many of your sister-Combinationals remain defiled as they do, than you may admonish, council, grieve for them, lament over, press your non-communion to them. They'll do as much for you, as you do for them, but power nor means you have none to mend them, nor they you, and so Christ's Church by commssiion of the Keys unto single Congregations becomes remediless. If a corrupt or negligent Presbytery do not censure their own Members, all the Assemblies of the world may not attempt to censure any of them, 
Bayly pag. 112.  though most apparently they did corrupt a whole Nation with the grossest heresies or most scandalous vices.  
What can make the house of God worse than a den of thiefs, if this do not? Well, you may perhaps reply, which is indeed all you can say for yourselves, This may be the conseqent, but not the cause: Be it so, which for present I shall give you, but never grant you; even this, were there no more, should rouse you to look about, whether your tenure of your Keys be good, and your claim and possession justifiable by clear evidence of Scripture. Show me the words there written, to●idem syllabis, and I will yield. Show such an evidence as others can, sicut ne misi● pater, sic mittovos, and I will never question the people's right any more. Nay, I will go lower, show me but one example of the people's practice in this matter, and I have done. Mr. Cotton saw the inconvenience, and with fine distinctions struggled what he could to withdraw the power from the people, and I hope in good time, God will open your eyes to see this error, and leave the Keys in their hands to whom Christ bequeathed them.  
3. There is but one way left by which the Church can be governed, and that is Aristocracy. Which is no sooner named, but all parties strive, and eagerly contend that their title is good to it, as the two women did for the child. The Presbyters put in for their right, the Independents will have it in their Congregations; but the Prelates will not suffer themselves to be so cheated out of their old inheritance, but stoutly maintain their Church, and that it is alone to be found among them. With the first I am not to skirmish at this time; were I, than I should tell them, that Aristocracy is not like to be found in their Country-Presbyteries. The second are the men, whose claim and title I am to show invalid; and though I have done it in part before, yet I will more clear it here by an evident and demonstrative argument. The first we know, that opposed holy societies were Anabaptists; the next who followed was John M●rell, who stood up for popular government of and in Independent Congregations, whose opinion when we object to the Combinational brethren, their common assertion is that they are far from Democracy, and ready to forsake their tenet, if that can be demonstrated. Democracy then even in these men's eyes is no lovely and beautiful child, that at the very name they startle and fly from it, tanquam pedibu● qui presserat anguem. And now you shall see, how I can make it appear, that it is no false imputation, and I believe I shall be able to do it. Let us only cast our eyes upon the birth of this child the Combinational Church; and denied it will not be, that three, seven, twenty, thirty, more or less joined together in a holy Covenant made this Church (for the greatest number I have here named were at first ample Congregations.) These as Democritus his atoms which were only similar parts, falling together made up this body; but by their own confession all this wh●le it was homogeneous, one part, equal, every way like to another, it was inorganized, having no distinction of parts, nor head, nor eyes, nor hands. Methinks I behold Aristotle's materia prima, nec quid, nec quale, nec quantum. When they saw themselves Chaos like, they thought it not good to remain thus mishapen, and therefore they cast about how they might lick themselves into some form. An Heterogeneous body they thought it necessary to be, and to have Organs by which they might work; and at last their fancies suggested how they might clap a head to this body, and supply it with eyes and hands. They agreed that actu primo they had power sufficient and authority in themselves, viz. the power of the Keys, and therefore they might organize their own body at their pleasure; upon this thus set to work, they elected, they ordained, they chose a Pastor for their head, and Elders for their eyes, and other Church Officers for their hands, and so out of a lump they became a man; of a Homogeneous and Inorganical, an heterogeneous and organical body. At first they were but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a people, but this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, power and authority in themselves; for why else did they all this! And if this be not an act of Democracy, I must profess I understand not the name, nor definition of the word; I shall take it kindly that any man will inform my ignorance. Yea, but it may be said, that now in organizato corpore this Democracy is at an end; for now it is a well shaped creature, it hath a head, it hath eyes, it hath hands, and all other parts in a goodly symmetry (though I could ask, what kind of Church was that of Mr. Canns at Amsterdam, which for a time had no Pastor, that lived a long time without Officers or Eldership, yet I spare you.) Not so neither; 
Answer to the thirty two Questions. pag. 48. pag. 44.  for the people for aught I can see, as they had authority in actu primo to elect and ordain, so they have authority in actu secundo to depose and excommunicate their Pastor and Elders, and so to reduce themselves to what they were in puris naturalibus, from an heterogeneous body to make themselves homogeneous; from an organised body, to make themselves inorganized; and either to remain so if they please, or to choose again. And for aught I conceive, 
Cottons Keyes.  Mr. Cotton intends no other by his new-coined and applauded distinction of power and authority, and power of liberty; for whatever authority he gives to the Eldership, he makes it vain and frustaneous without the consent of the people; and notwithstanding all the obedience and subjection he puts upon the people, yet he gives to them such a power of liberty, that their concurrence with the Eldership in every act of power is not only necessary, but authoritatiuè. In a word, if the people have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 authority of institution and destitution, as your parties say, if you should tell me a thousand times over, I shall never believe otherwise but your Combinational Church is governed by a Democracy.  
I hope I have proved sufficiently what I undertook; and now I return to my purpose, for I leave the destructive part, and come to build. And here I shall lay that in the foundation, which none but Papists for aught I perceive will deny; That our Saviour Christ left the Church Militant in the hands of the Apostles, and their Successors, and an Aristocratical government, which I shall illustrate unto you by an induction of particulars.  
1. The first constitute Christian Church we read of in the world, 
Isa. 2.3.  was that of Jerusalem; for the Law was to come out of Zion, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem. There the Apostles and Disciples first preached; so that Eve was not more properly termed the Mother of all living, than this Church by Theodoret, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Theodoret.  the Mother of all believing Churches. From thence, the Apostle being to departed, for that they might execute our Saviors command to preach unto all Nations, left the government of that Church unto James the brother of our Lord, not the Apostle; and ordained him then the first Bishop. 
Euseb. lib. 2.1, & l. 1.19. Jerom Hegesip. Ambr. Euseb. 3.11. Hegesip. 4.22. Jerom. in Isa. 3. Ambr. in 1 Tim. Ignat. ad Trall. Acts 21.18. Acts 15.  Et post Martyrium Jacobi— traditur; saith Eusebius, Apostolos common concilium habuisse, quem oporteret dignum successione Jacobi judicari, omnesque uno concilio, & uno consensu Simeonem Cleophae filium decrevisse, ut Episcopatus sedem susciperet. And if I list, I could give you in the Catalogue of the succeeding Bishops, for the first six hundred years.  
To him I doubt not but there was joined a Presbytery, which Jerome calls Senatus Ecclesiae; some Collegium Presbyterorum, Ignatius, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which he thus describes, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and they were those Elders present with James their Bishop, to whom Saint Paul went in. And if I shall name Judas and Silas for two of them, I am partly assured, that I am not mistaken, because the Decree made by the Synod at Jerusalem was sent by them. The government here then was Aristocratical.  
2. 
Acts 11.22, 26, 27, 28. cap. 13.1. Origen in Luc. Hom. 6. Euseb. 3. cap. 35 Ignat. ad Antiochen.  The next instance I shall give you for a constitute Church is at Antioch. And in this City being the Metropolis of Syria, Barnabas, Paul, and other Prophets and Teachers, Simeon, Lucius, Man●en were sound: and hither also Peter came, Gal. 2.11. Of this Church, Origen, Jerome, and Ignatius who best knew it, for he conversed with the Apostles, Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 8. make Saint Peter the first Bishop, that Evodius succeeded is the testimony of Ignatius. He, saith he, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Ignatius was the next himself, from whom I can give you a clear succession to the term I mentioned.  
And those I mentioned, Barnabas, Simeon, Lucius, etc. I shall not doubt to call the Presbytery, of which almost in every Epistle, Ignatius makes express mention, as Counselors, Assistants, and Co-assessours of the Bishop. At Antioch then was an Aristocracy also.  
3. At Ephesus we meet again with a constituted Church, where Timothy was made Bishop by Saint Paul. The subscription of the second Epistle shows that he was the first Bishop there, 
Euseb. lib. 3. c. 4.  and Eusebius who saw the Records of the Primitive Church affirms the same. That he was ordained by Saint Paul by the hands of the Presbytery, Calvin conceives is beyond question. Now if it be demanded when Timothy was made Bishop? it is most probable, when Paul was at Miletum.  
When the Apostles departed from any Church which they had planted, in that then they appointed a Bishop. For while they remained in or near the place, there was no such need, the Apostles supplying the wants of those Churches with their presence, letters or messengers, as the cause required. But when they were finally to forgo those parts, than they began to provide for the necessity and security of that Church, by settling Episcopal; power; which in all probability was the reason, that they so soon provided a Bishop for the Church of Jerusalem. Saint Paul at this time was to take his leave of the Churches at Asia; he saith it plainly in that Chapter, 
Acts 20.25.  that they should see his face no more; most probable than it is, that at this time he left Timothy to supply his place of Ephesus: yea, and that the six other Angels of the Churches were then by him ordained. Think of these seven Angels of the Churches what you please; I shall not doubt to esteem them single persons and Bishops, and that upon stronger evidence than any can be brought to the contrary. But that's no discourse for this place. I suppose, that it is very probable, that they were ordained at this meeting at Miletum; except you judge that Saint John the Apostle settled them in those Churches before his banishment to Patmos; for in those Churches they had the power, when he wrote the Revelation.  
Howbeit it will serve my turn well enough, if they were only Pastors with a Presbytery; for this will prove the government then of the Church to be Aristocratical.  
4. If we come to Rome, there we find Paul an Apostle; and as all Church Records assure us, Peter. Bishop there needed none where they lived. 
Rom. 16.  Presbyters there were then many, Junius, Clemens, Cle●us, Andronicus, Urbane, Tripheus, Perses. Of these, Cletus and Clemens were Bishops after the Apostles Martytdome, and their Succesours so apparent, that I need not recite them.  

Euseb. lib. 2. cap. 24. Hieron. ad Evagr. Origen. Ambrose.  5. What should I speak that Mark was Bishop of Alexandria, who died six years before Peter, in whose Church there was a Presbytery? of Titus appointed Bishop by Saint Paul, and left to ordain in the Island Presbyters, and to have jurisdiction? Of Dionysius the Areopagite, the first Bishop of Athens? Of Archippus at Colosse? Of Onesimus at Philippi? Of Gaius at Thessalonica? The Records were infinite that I could produce in this kind. You see I have not instanced in any but such who were Bishops, viventibus & videntibus & approbantibus Apostolis, that so the truth may be apparent. I shall not therefore doubt to affirm that the government of the Apostolical Churches was by Bishops, as such who had the chief power, and that it was Aristocratical.  
Neither can all the Arguments of the Presbyterians any whit enervate this; for you see I grant and prove a Presbytery; in these two only lies the difference betwixt them and us. First, that they would have a Presbytery established by the Apostles without a Bishop, which I shall never grant, and I know they can never prove. Secondly, that the power of this Presbytery without a Bishop, should be the most supreme in the Church, and that to it, without a Bishop the Keys were delivered.  
For this is it which I affirm, that originally the whole power was in the Apostles, and by them exercised where they settled no Bishop. But to him, where they fixed a Bishop, they committed their power; yet so, that so long as they lived it was but in subordination and dependency on them; for out of question they might have governed alone; when therefore they gave any power to others, it was only delegated, and they lost not any of their own in giving orders. What therefore Bishops were to the Apostles, that must needs all Presbyters ordained by the Bishops be to them; voluntarily assumed they were in partem sollicitudinis & reginimis, and had their power by delegation to assist in acts deliberative and consiliary. But by virtue of their order, they had no jurisdiction in causes criminal. For in the Scripture there is not any commission extant to mere Presbyters; there is no institution of any power of Regiment in the Presbytery; no constitution Apostolical, that mere Presbyters should alone, or without Bishops govern; no example in Scripture of any censure inflicted by any mere Presbyters; no specification of any power they had so to do. But the contrary to this may well be collected, because to Churches where Colleges of Presbyters were resident, Bishops were sent by Apostolical ordination; as Titus to Crete, Timothy to Ephesus, the seven Angels to the seven Churches, with power of ordination, excommunication, and taking cognizance of causes and persons, even of Presbyters themselves, as is apparent in th' Epistles to Timothy and Titus, and in the Revelation. And a more evident example cannot be given then in the Churches of Corinth and Thessalonica, in both which were Presbyteries; but as than not constituted Bishop: In one of which was an incestuous person, in the other disorderly persons; why did not these Presbyters than cast them out? It was for want of coercive power; the Apostle as yet kept that power in his own hand, and therefore adviseth the Thessalonians, that if any man obey not his words, 
2 Thes. 3.14, 15  that they signify that man by an Epistle to him; they in the mean time should forbear his company, and admonish, but not count him as an enemy; that is, eject him by Church censure: that they should leave to him in whose hand as yet the power was. But at Corinth upon signification, he gives order to the Presbytery to execute his sentence. For I verily absent in body but present in spirit, that is, by my Apostolical power, 
1 Cor. 5.3, 4.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have already judged or determined; the judgement you see was his, the decretory sentence his, as though I were present concerning him that hath done this deed; In the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, and my spirit, that is, my power with you, with the power of our Lord Jesus ●hrist, that is, which power the Lo d Jesus Christ hath committed unto me, that then you prono nce my sentence, and deliver such a one to Satan. This shows clearly where the power was settled, in the Apostle first; In them secondly; In him it was primative; from him to them it was derivative. All was to be done by his spirit.  
And that this was so, viz. that the Presbyters power was not absolute, but dependent; not prime, but delegate, there be two testimonies; the one in Ignatius, the other in Cyprian, which seems to me to evince it. Ignatius writes to his Church of Antiochia, being then in prison in Rome; and he gives his Presbyters there this advice, that they rule the flock of Christ, 
Ignat. ad Antioch.  until God should declare who should be their Pastor. His words are, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Presbyters were to feed or rule the flock, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 until God should show and design him, qui principatum habiturus sit, as Varlonius renders it, who to be their chief Pastor. Their government there was to last till then; but when God had once designed him, 
Cyprian Ep. 21.  their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was at an end. The other testimony is that in Cyprian, in the case of Candida, Numeria and Etecusa, women that were accused to have fallen in the persecution, and offered incense to Idols. Of these the Presbyters in the exile of Cyprian the Bishop took the cognizance, and were ready to pass a sentence upon them; Cyprian interposeth, and upon it, causa audita, perceperunt propositi eas tantisper sic esse, to remain in the state they were, Donec Episcopus constituatur, until the Bishop should be appointed. Here again, we see the verdict suspended till there were a Bishop, intimating that the prime power of jurisdiction and censure was in him, and that without him it might not be lawfully laid on. Nor do I see what can be answered to these two fathers.  
Hitherto I have kept myself within the bounds of the Scriptures, and out of them clearly demonstrated as I suppose, that the first government of the Church was Aristocratical. It was in the Apostles and the Bishops which they settled with their Presbyteries.  
Now should I descend lower, and show the practice of the Church, especially for the first three hundred years, I should fill a volume; here I could tell you of those famous Presbyteries of Alexandria, in which Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, 
Euseb. lib. 6. Euseb. l. 6. c. 43. Cypr. lib. 3. Ep. 6.10, 14, 17, 18 19, 21, 22, 24.  Pantenus, Hieroclas, were the Presbyters of Rome; in which under Cornelius and Stephen, there were forty six Presbyters with many other Officers: Of Carthage in which under Cyprian, as appears, in many of his Epistles which he writ to them in his exile, there were many Presbyters. Of Smyrna, Antioch, Philippi, Magnesia, Trullis and Ephesus, all whose Presbyteries are remembered by Ignatius in the Epistles he writ to those Churches. This is so clear, that it is written as it were with a Sun beam, and it were ignorance and impudence to deny it. To which, if those who so hotly contend for their Presbytery, would add but these two things, which are as evident in Records, as is the Presbytery itself; First, that none of these Presbyters were Lay-Elders; and secondly, that after the Apostles days, there never was any Presbytery without a Bishop, the contest were at an end.  
One thing only more I shall add about these Presbyteries, that they never were erected but in the greater Cities, where the Patriarch, Primate, Metropolitan, or Diocesan Bishop had their seats, (pardon me if I speak in the language of those Ancient times) and therefore to distinguish them from the Presbyters dispersed in the less Villages and Towns, 
Conc. Ancyr. Can. 13. Can. Apollon. Can. 37.  they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and sometime 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; the Presbyters of the City or Metropolis: and their institution was to help the Bishop in sacred actions, and to advise him in all judicial and Ecclesiastical proceed. In ordination what they were to do, 
4. Concil. Carthag. cap. 3.  is set out by the fourth Council of Carthage, cap. 3. Presbyter cum ordinatur, Episcopo eum benedicente, manum super caput ejus tenete, etiam omnis Presbyteri qui praesentes sunt, manus suas juxta manum Episcopi super caput illius teneant. 
1. Council Arel. Can. 19 Apollon. Canon. Can 35. Concil. Antioch. Can. 9  A custom which was continued in our Church. And for their jurisdiction, that was limited by another Canon, Presbyteri, sine consensu Episcoporum nihil faciant. The Ancyran Council was before the Nicene, and that of Arles under Constantine. So ancient were these provisions about the Presbyters and their power.  
But methinks it were worth enquiry, how these Presbyteries that so long continued in the Church, became in difuse; for I will not say they were ever abolished, in that I find them in many Churches after the three hundredth year of Christ. I shall deliver what I conceive to be most probable; and I conjecture these to be the causes of it.  
1. Upon the general prevailing of Christianity, Synods began to assemble, and the Pastors of divers Churches in these meetings conferred and agreed upon such rules, as they thought needful to be observed in all their Churches, which they committed to the oversight of the Bishops in their Dioceses; and in case they were negligent, the especial supervision and execution was laid upon the Metropolitan; and if he were slack in doing what was enjoined, an appeal was permitted to the Patriarch. This was the first occasion that gave Presbyteries leave to play, by reason provincial Synods undertook the debating and resolving those doubts, and ordered those difficulties which before troubled the Presbyteries. And reason it was, that the consultation and determination of Synods should be preferred before that of Presbyteries, as Courts of greater Judgement, higher power, better experience, and more indifferency.  
2. Another reason may be, that when Emperors became Christian, all those civil cases betwixt man and man, which were (to avoid the scandal that might arise by Lawsuits among Christians if tried under Heathen Judges) debated and ended in these Presbyteries, fell to be decided and adjudged in the Imperial Courts, and men had reason to repair to that seat of justice which had a sword and power compulsory to force obstinatemen to do right to any injured party, which the Church Court had not. When the causes grew less, the less respect was had to the Court and now the Presbytery having less to do, weakened & mouldered away by little and little of themselves.  
3. And yet I shall venture at a third reason. Upon the great peace which the Church enjoyed, with the privileges, immunities, and ample endowments granted by Christian Emperors, Magnificent Temples, and goodly fabriques' were erected for the public service of God; some there were before, but not so many, nor yet so beautiful. These commonly were built where the Bishops had their Seas, and were therefore after called Cathedral Churches. In them the Bishop at first with his Presbyters of the City made his residence, and to his Court there kept the greater matters of the whole Diocese or Province referred. Found it was that in this Presbytery it was too easy a matter for the Bishop to bear so great a sway, that matters were ended often, as the man was by him friended. The dignities in that Church were in his donation, the dignified were his creatures, were subject to him, and many ways might be displeased by him, if he would seek revenge. This being perceived, brought a great neglect and contempt upon the Presbyters. And the Bishop taking his advantage thereby made use of his power, more than was fit. And if you shall say, that by this door corruption entered into the Church, I shall not deny it. But then I shall rejoin, that it was not the institution; not in that the Church became Cathedral, Diocesan, or Provincial; not in that it was governed either by a Bishop, a Metropolitan, a Primate, or a Patriarch with a Presbytery, and so was Aristocratical; but in that this just and regulated power was ill used. It was not the constitution of the Church that was corrupt, but the Churchmen; and then lay the load upon the right horse, and fly not violently in the face of your Mother.  

Cant. 6.4.  For the constitution was holy, good and wise. God himself in the Canticles gives this testimony of his Church, that she is terrible as an Army with Banners; if an Army, than she must be ordinata; and the order in an Army is, that there be a General, a Major General, Colonels, Captains and Under-Officers. Wisdom than taught the Church to order herself; and yet she sat up no other orders than God had appointed. viz. Bishops and Presbyters, Deacons; these only she prudently marshaled; some she thought good to place in more eminent degree. Will you then ask me, what are Metropolitans, Primates, Patriarches? I readily answer, gradus in Episcopatu, all set in the chief places of the Army, for the safe guard of the whole, and for the better advantage to fight against the enemy. Yea, but who set them there? Prudence, and 'tis ne'er the more to be disliked for that it was prudentially done; for I must tell you that prudence is to bear a great sway in Church-Discipline. The substance it may not alter, neither hath it; but in the circumstantials it hath a power; and if Saints Paul's rule be observed, 
1 Cor. 14.40.  Let all things be done decently and in order, all's well. What more decent among Church-governors', then that some be superiors, some subordinate; how can order be better observed, then making the Church like an Army? Even among the twelve were there not chief Apostles? They were all equal Apostolatu, all equal in power, yet some priority and precedency might be among them. For Peter, James and John are called Pillars; 
Gal. 2. Chrysost. in loc. Victor. Antioch. in Mar. cap. 9 Hieron. ad Evagr. Cyprian de simplicitate Praelatorum.  high tres tanquam Coriphaei, prímas inter Apostolos obtinebant: Thus is it with their Successors the Bishops; they are all pares potestate, in the power: he at Eugubium, is as great as he at Rome; he at Tanais, equal with him of Alexandria; for he is ejusdem meriti, ejusdem sacerdotii; that rule of Cyprian being undoubtedly true, Episcopatus unus est, cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur. But yet for all this, one Bishop may be set in a higher degree than another, and one set over another; and I shall make little doubt to make m words good out of the Scriptures; for what was Titus and Timothy? were they not more than ordinary Bishops? Titus had the charge over the whole Isle of Crete, 
Miraeus lib. 4. de Notitia Episc. pag. 181. Chrysost. H●m. 1. in Titum.  in which there were seven Bishops besides. This was Paul's companion, saith chrysostom, that was approved; otherwise Paul would not have committed unto him all whole Island, and the trial and judgement of so many Bishops. To Timothy, if we believe Theodoret and other Ancients, was committed all Asia the less; in which were questionless instituted by the Apostles many Bishops. Of the last example there may be some scruple; of the first there can be no doubt to any one that lists not to be contentious: but the Ancient, evident, and constant course in the Primitive Church to admit of these degrees in Episcopacy; and to have Primates and metropolitans for the calling and guiding of Synods in every Province, is to me a pregnant proof, that this order was either delivered or allowed by the Apostles and their Scholars: o● found so needful in the first government of the Church, that the whole Christian world, till some of late fell from it, ever since received and continued the same.  
If you suppose it came from Rome, you are much mistaken; for it bore sway in all the Eastern Churches, before the Roman Bishop was of any great note, power or reputation, or at least had any more precedency than any of the Eastern Patriarches. Socrates relates that the first Council of Constantinople, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ordained Patriarches; 
Socrat. lib. 5.8.  may be the title was then given to those who were only called Primates or Metropolitans before, and bounds set to their jurisdictions, which any man will judge, that considerately reads that place in Socrates.  
The truth is this. The name of Patriarch I find taken in a double sense; largely or strictly. Largely, for a Primate of any Province that was under the chief Patriarch; and so there are man● at this day, 
Brexwoods' enquiry of Religion and Languages.  as the Abannah the Patriarch of the Aethiopians; or the Primate of Moscow, who is the Patriarch of all Christians under the Muscovites Empire: The Primates of Sic and Sebasha, who are the Patriarches of the Armenians. The Primate of the Jacobites, who hath his Patriarchal Church in the Monastery of Saphran, near the City Merdin in Mesopotami●. The Primate of the Maronites, who resides in Mount Libanu●. The Patriarch of the Nestorians, who hath his residence in Muzal or Mosal. I could give in a list of many more of this kind, as well in Europe as in the Eastern Churches; by which it appears, that in a large sense the Prime Bishops set over one or more Provinces may be called Patriarches. 
Spalat. lib. 3. c. 10. Sect. 43.44  And it is the judgement of a learned, but unhappy man, that were there more of this kind erected in Europe, who should have no dependence on Rome, that it would be a ready way to restore peace and unity to the distracted Church, and to shut out the confusion we groan under. All which are under one or other of those Patriarches of the Church, as their jurisdictions were limited in the fi●st erection; for that is the strict acception of the word.  
2. And three they were only at first. The fi●st at Rome, the second at Alexandria, the third at Antioch; the first had the power in Europe, and in the West; the second in Africa and in the South; the third in Asia, and over the East. Neither were their seats there placed, as Baronius would persuade us, because that the Apostles founded those Churches (for were this reason good, we should have more Patriarchates than these three, there being more Churches planted by the Apostles than these; neither were all the Churches they founded Patriarchates, 
Hegesipp. de excid. Urb. Hieros. lib. 3. c. 5.  not Corinth, not Ephesius, not Philippi, Smyrna) the reason than is that which Hegesippus the younger hath given, because these three Cities were the three Metropolies of the Empire, and so the Church in the institution for the seats of their Patriarches followed the secular power of the Roman Empire. The dignity of the Cities gave them the dignity and priority of their Seas. And it should seem the erection of these three was very ancient, in that when the Alexandrian Patriarch began to encroach upon his neighbours, 
Concil. Nic. can. 6.  the Nicene Council made this Decree, Mos antiquus perduret in Aegypto, Lybia, Pentapoli, ut Alexandrinus Episcopus horum omnium habeat potestatem, quoniam quidem & Episcopo Romano parilis mos est, similitèr autem & apud Antiochiam. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith the Canon; it seems even then 'twas an old custom; and the Council of Antioch in the like case, though it names not the Churches, 
Concil. Antioch. c. 9  yet provides to secure the rights, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, secundum antiquam consuetudinem à patribus nostris constitutam. And again upon the unjust claim of the Patriarches of Antioch over the Bishops of Cyprus the Ephesine Council decreed, ut singulis provinciis pura & inviolata manerent quae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Ephes. Conc. cap. 8.  from the beginning upward they had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, according to old prevailing custom. You see I do not exspatiate beyond the bounds of the first three Ecumenical Councils, all which confess that these Metropolitans, afterward Patriarches, were no late nor new device; first authorized by the Council of Nice, but their right and pre-eminence was even then an ancient usage and Canon of the Church, even from the beginning. Now if I may take liberty to conjecture, I may strongly presume, that the fathers of these three Councils had an eye to the constitution extant in the Apostolical Canons; The Bishops of every Nation must know 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the chiefest, the first, 
Apost. Can. can. 35.  the Primate, and willeth him to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as head among the Bishops of that Province: who in the African Council is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
These three were the three first and most ancient of the Patriarches. To whom the first Council of Constantinople erected that Bishop into a Patriarch, and for the honour of that City, being now called Nova Roma, gave the Bishop the second place, next after old Rome, who remains a great Patriarch to this day; and thus there became four. As for the fifth, it was of Jerusalem, and it obtained the privilege of a Patriarchate in the fifth general Council. 
1. Concil. Constantinop. can. 5. G. Tyrius de bello sacro. l. 14. c. 12. Nic. cove. can. 7  Thus the case stood, Jerusalem being destroyed by Vespasian, Caesarea was made the Metropolis, and so is acknowledged in the Nicene Council, and the Bishop Primate, even to ●erusalem. A great honour they are content should be yielded to the Jerusalem Bishop, or Aeliae, as he is there called, according to the old custom, yet manente metropolitanae civitatis propria dignitate, meaning Caesarea. In the Council of Chalcedon there was a trial passed betwixt the Bishop of Antioch, and Juvenal Bishop of Jerusalem about jurisdiction, in which it was decreed that the Phaenicia's and Arabia should be given to the Patriarch of Antioch, and all Palestina, 
Concil. Chalced. Act. 7.  jure Metropolitico should be under Jerusalem, and so Caesaria lost the Metropolitical right, and Jerusalem was preferred, which afterward in the fifth General Council as I said, was advanced into the first Patriarchate.  
And now if you shall ask me why I have so enlarged myself to discover the rise, the antiquity, the institution of these Patriarches, it was, that you may see how the Church was governed at first. There was no Monarchy in it, no Democracy, but an admirable Aristocracy; it was like a well marshaled army indeed; it had the Primates after called Patriarches, as it were the Generals; the Metropolitans as Major General, the Bishops as Colonels. The Bishops again with their Presbyteries as a Council of war, The Presbyters of the C●ty and Country as Captains and under-officers, the people as the soldiers under obedience, but without command. Never tell me this was a corruption; for thus it was ab incunabulis Ecclesiae, if credit may be given to all Church stories, to Acts of Councils, to Records, to Fathers; and thus it was not in one, but in all Churches throughout the four quarters of the world. And if you shall yet demand upon what ground of Scripture this Hierarchy was taken up, Saint Paul shall inform you, where he commands, Let all things be done decently, and in order.  
Calvin being to set down the form, this very form of government in the Primitive Church, in the beginning premiseth these words: 
Calvin. instit. cap. 8. Sect. 51, 52, 53, 54.  Tametsi multos Canones ediderunt illorum temporum Episcopi, quibus plus viderentur exprimere, quam sacris litter●s expressum erat, ea tamen cautione totam suam oeconomiam composuerunt ad unicam illam Dei normam, ut facilè videas, nihil ferè in hac parte habuisse à Dei verbo alienum. And again, Sect. 54. Quod autem singulae provinciae unum habebant inter Episcopos Archiepiscopum, quod item in Synodo Nicaena constituti sunt Patriarchae, qui essent & ordine & dignitate Archiepiscopis superiores, id ad disciplinae conservationem pertinebat. By this means all inferior Clergy were better kept in order, informed in their duty, contentions were composed, which to use his words, ex aequalitate nascerentur, confusion was avoided; & dissentionum semina tollerentu●, cum ad unum omnis sollicitude est delata, which he hath out of Jerome; 
Hieron. ad Evagrium.  and if antiquity of the institution may satisfy, Jerom derives it from the Evangelist Saint Mark. This form of Government, the ancients called the Church Hierarchy; and it is true, that Calvin conceives the name improper; but then I pray mark how with in four lines he shuts up his discourse, Verum si omisso vocabulo, rem intuemur, reperiemu● veteres episcopos non aliam regendae Ecclesiae forman voluisse fingere, ab ea, quam dominus verbo suo praescripsit, and he means that which I have set down. Men are much mistaken, 
Calvin. Epist. ad regem Polon. pag. 140, 141. edit. Genev. an. 1576.  who conceive Calvin to have been an enemy to this ancient Church-government; let them but read his Epistle that he writes to the King of Poland about the Reformation of the Kingdom, and they will tell me another tale; for he there sets down to the King the order of the Primitive Church for a pattern, where, saith he, there were Patriarches and Primates, and subordinate Bishops to tie the whole body together with the bond of concord; And adviseth the King to establish Bishops in every Province, and over them an Archbishop and Primate of that Kingdom; 
Calvin. Instit. lib. 4. c. 12. artic. 6.  and if the Popish Bishops were true Bishops, he would allow them some authority, not as much as they challenge, but as much as he thinks would serve for the right governing of the Church. Not so much as they challenge; good reason for that, for this would set up regnum in regno. Independent for soothe than they must be of any but the Pope, which Princes have no reason to take well; but if they shall be content to move within their proper Orb of Church-government, he is not against it.  
Now with Calvin agrees that learned and judicious Zanchy; his words are, Non improbamus patres, quod juxta variam tum verbi dispensandi, tum regendae Ecclesiae rationem, 
Zanch. de relig. Christ. cap. 25. Sect. 10, 11.  varios quoque ministrorum ordines multiplicarint, quando iis liberum fuit, sicut & nobis, & quando constat, id ab illis factum honestis de causis, ad Ordinem, ad Decorum & ad aedificationem Ecclesia, pro eo tempore, pertinentibus. And thus he gins the next paragraph, Novimus enim Deum nostrum Deum esse Ordinis non confusionis, & Ecclesiam servari Ordine, perdi autem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, quo de causâ non solum in Israele, verum postea in Ecclesia ex Judeis & gentibus collectâ, multos etiam & diversos ministrorum ordines instituit; and about twenty lines after adds these words, Hac sone ratione, quae etiam de Episcopis, imo & de quatuor Patriarchis, ante ipsum etiam Concilium Nicaenum creatis, constituta suerunt, excusari, defendique posse sentimus.  
And that this learned man may give more light and strength to what he delivers in these two paragraphs, in his observations upon these paragraphs he inserts a very sober and clear discourse out of Master Bucer de disciplina Clericali, which is very well worth your reading. The sum of it is, what I have already set down, and Bucers' conclusion is, Quia omnino necesse est, ut singuli Clerici suos habeant proprios custodes & curatores, instauranda est, ut Episcoporum, ita & Archidiaconorum, aliorumque omnium, quibuscunque censentur nominibus, quibus portio aliqua commissa est custodiendi gubernandique Cleri authoritas, potestas: sed & vigilantia, & animadversio, ne quis omnino in hoc ordine sit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This is the close of Bucers' discourse, not only reciting, but praising and commending the constitution and custom of the old Church, in the various distribution of the Ecclesiastical functions and degrees.  
I have many years since heard a wise man affirm, that a little insight into Natural Philosophy is apt to make a man an Atheist, as a little knowledge in Physic creates an Empiric, a little sight in the Law a petty fogger; for it prides men with the confidence of knowledge, and makes them pragmatical: whereas a deep search in any art humbles the man, brings him to the sight of his own mistakes, and makes him sensible, that truth, as Plato was wont to say, lay in the bottom of a deep well, and without labour and a long rope it was not to be fetched from thence. Was it not so with Aristotle, with Plato & c? whereas others upon the slight search of nature became Atheistical, the last of these by his depth of enquiry, became to acknowledge the prime cause of all things to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, very little differing from that ineffable name, by which God was made known to Moses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
Justin. Martyr. Paraenetic. ad Hellenas'. Exod. 3.14.  I am that I am. And the other, not being able to search, why the Euripus should ebb and flow seven times a day, cried out, O eus entium. This shows what a little skill in any science, and what a profound knowledge will do. The one will raise strange confidences, and Chimaeras in the brain, the other will allay and settle them.  
He who would be quieted and satisfied about Church-government, I could advise him to search this point to the depth; for otherwise he may be transported with strange fancies. His little knowledge may swell him too much, and make him over-confident to practise upon the Church, and make experiences before he is throughly skilful. Whereas if he will stay his pace, and not venture and vent his drugs, till he hath consulted the Ancients, and seen what judgement his forefathers, and those that lived nearest the Apostolical times gave of them, I believe he will not be overhasty to prescribe any new dose; especially when he shall find, that the old was held safe and sufficient to preserve the health of the Church, and to prevent encroaching diseases.  
This course if you disdain and dislike, you condemn the whole Church of Christ from the first increasing and spreading thereof to this present age; and prefer your own wisdom before all the Martyrs, Confessors, Fathers, Princes, Bishops that have lived, died, governed in the Church of God since the Apostles times. How well the height of your conceits can endure to blemish and reproach so many religious and famous lights of Christendom, I know not. What? all the old Fathers, all the zealous first Reformers, all blind, in comparison of yourselves? for my part, I wish the Church of God in our days may have the grace for piety and prudence to follow their steps; and not to make the world believe, that all the servants of Christ before we lived, favoured and furthered the pride of Antichrist, till now in the fag end of the world, when the faith of most men, and their love and charity are quenched and decayed; some new lights arose to restore the Church to that perfection of discipline, which the Apostles never mentioned, the Ancient fathers and Councils never remembered, the Universal Church of Christ before us never conceived, nor our chief Reformers never imagined: for they have as you have heard, delineated and commended the old way of discipline.  
But here before I end my general answer, I must remove one block which some have cast in my way. For I have heard it objected that these Patriarches were Independents, which I confess in some sense is true, because one Patriarch was not to intermeddle in the jurisdiction of another; the Canons of the Church having set out the extent of their Provinces, and limited their power. But this will make nothing for the present Independency of Combinational Churches; for they had Churches, many Metropolitan sees, many Dioceses under their power and oversight. But these have but one single Congregation. Those could call Synods through their whole Province, and punish any Bishop or Churchman or other under them: An Independent dependent Church can call no Synod, nor punish nor reform any member that is not of their own society or Combination. Those were not so absolute neither, but they were bound upon their elections to inform their fellow Patriarches, and by their communicatory letters to give account of it, and of their faith: The Pastors of the Combinational Churches are not accountable to any sister-Church. Lastly, put case, as it sometimes fell out, that Factions, that Schisms, that Heresies arose in their Patriarchates, the Church was not left remediless; for the Patriarch or Church being not able to quell, compose, or extirpate them, a General Council was called to which they were all inferior, and to whose verdict they were bound to stand, as is evident in the case of Nestorius, Dioscorus, etc. who were deposed by general Councils, and their Heresies condemned; and the like may be said of Arrius and Eutiches, condemned in general Councils; which shows that the general Council was the supreme judicature, and that the Patriarches had their dependence on it, and so were not absolute Independents. Now for the calling of these and other Councils, they had their warrant and pattern from the Apostles, Acts 15. who to redress a contention than arose in the Church, called that Synod to Jerusalem, and composed it.  
And indeed were there no other argument against Independent or Congregational Churches, 
Rutherford peace, plea. c. 7. Concl. 4. Bayly c. 10.  (as there be very many and very strong, as you may read in Rutherford and Bayly out of him) yet this one drawn from this Apostolic Synod, I suppose were unanswerable. No Synod can impose Decrees upon any Combinational Church; That's your own Maxim. But this Synod did impose her Decrees upon those Churches which you say were Combinational: This proposition is evident in the Scripture, Acts 15. and verse 22, and 35. Therefore now if this Church of Antioch were subject to the authority of Synods, what Church might plead a freedom from the like subjection? and consequently none is Independent.  
Thus have I as it were in a Table, presented you with the plain face of Truth, and sent it you bare and naked as Truth should be; If the visage seem old, the better; 'tis as I intended it; that hinders not, but she may be comely, venerable, amiable; for he that will reverence and love truth, he must do it, because she is an Ancient Matron. For Quod primum, verum, sed enim in omnibus veritas imaginem aniccedit, p●stremo similitudo sucoedit. 
Tertull. Praes. c. 29. cap. 31.  Ex ipso ordine manifestatur, id esse Dominicum & verum, quod sit prius tradijtum; id autem extraneum & falsum, quod sit posteriùs immissum. A rule which that learned father often inculcates, but nowhere more clearly then in this fourth book against Martion, where he hath these words by aggravation: 
Tertull. l. 4. adversus Martion. c. 5.  In summa si constat, id verius quod prius, id prius quod est ab initio, ab initio quod ab Apostolis, pariter utique constabit id ab Apostolis traditum, quod apud Ecclesias Apostolicas fuerit sacrosanctum; which Chapter is worth your reading, for there the learned man refers the Original of Bishops to the Apostles; intimates their succession, which in many Churches he doth more clearly in the thirty second Chapter of his prescriptions.  
This prime Truth I have here represented with her Ancient Officers about her, the Bishops with a Presbytery; of which in wisdom she thought fit to raise some higher, not in Office, but in Degree; ne quid detrimenti Ecclesia capiat. And this advancement was no new device neither, for we read of Metropolitans, and Primates, before the Nicene Council, as I have proved after of Patriarches. Yet all this while, the Church remained a pure Virgin; Thebulis being the fi●st that corrupted the Church, 
Hegesipp. apud Euseb. l. 4 c. 21. Tertull.  because he could not be a Bishop, as did afterwards Valentinus and Martion upon the same occasion: and I had almost said Tertullian himself. This certainly shows that the Office of a Bishop even then was no contemptible dignity. For certainly the rejection of such men from the oversight of a Congregational Church, could never work such men to so great discontent; Of such parties they were the chief, even after they had failed of their expected hopes. No question they were of Diotrephes mind, 
John Epi. 3.10  they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they desired to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Primates (so old is that word) in the Church; to which because they could not be admitted, they corrupted it with their doctrines. Ambition is by Charron called the shirt of the soul, 
Charron of wisdom.  being the first garment that it puts on, and the last that it puts off! for men while there be men, will be of aspiring minds.  
— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Even a beggar will strive to be chief of his company, and a tradesman to be Master over those of his own profession; this cannot nor ever will be avoided. Such thoughts have always tickled Churchmen. Now to satisfy this desire, God hath appointed higher places in his Church, and so they be desired in a fair way, and to lawful ends, it is commendable. 

1 Tim. 3.1. ver. 31.  
Conc. Afric. Chalced. Sardic. Naz. in Athanasij vitâ.   This is a true saying, saith the Apostle, If a man desire the office of a Bishop, he desires a good work; and again in the same Chapter, they that have used the office of a Deacon well, purchase unto themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a fair step to ascend to a higher degree;) as first to a Presbyter, then to a Bishop. And it is written of Athanasius that he ascended by all these steps, till he became Patriarch of Alexandria; then he was set upon the highest step: and yet this advancement of his, or any other, cannot hinder the government of the Church for being Aristocratical, but confirms it rather; since in this eminence he was to guide the Church, not according to his own pleasure, but according to the prescribed Canons of Synods and Councils; from which if he erred, he was liable to answer to the supreme Court of an Ecumenical Assembly.  
I have you see laid the foundation of the Church's government in Aristocracy, of which Monarchy and Democracy are the extremes. If you can show me any Church that hath deviated from the middle way, I shall confess it to be corrupt. And for the first it is easy to instance; viz. the Roman Church, whose Patriarch affects a Monarchy, and his Courtiers and learned Rabbis the Jesuits plead stiffly for it. But than you must not take that way you do to prove it; for the erection of Cathedral, Parochial, Diocesan, Provincial and National Churches through his Patriarchate will never do it; Since these were from the beginning in other Patriarchates, and in his too, when no Monarchy was ever dreamed of or challenged. That his challenge I acknowledge to be a corruption.  
And if any Church shall affect Democracy, I shall say it is corrupted also; in that it observes not that Apostolical rule of government and discipline which was then used, as I have demonstrated. It is then a great mistake in you, to make the Presbyterial or Combinational Church to be the sole pure and Apostolical Church; and that all Churches that are fallen off from that government are corrupted. This if you can confirm fairly and firmly by unanswerable arguments as you make show of, than you have reason to fasten your degeneration and corruption on Cathedrals, Parishes, Dioceses, Provinces and Nations; but if this can never be done, as I am assured it cannot, than I shall affirm, that the casting the Church into Cathedrals, Parishes, etc. was not error, since by that the discipline of the Church might be better administered, and the Aristocratical government far advanced and furthered.  
And so having expressed unto you my thoughts in the general, I now come to examine what you lay to the Churches charge in particular; in the discussion of which I hope you will give me leave to prosecute my own method; and I shall begin with the Cathedral, which you say was the second degree, but I conceive it the first. Of this your words are.    

SECT. III. The words of the Letter.  
The second degree of the Combinational Church's corruption was the Cathedral Church's generation, which did presume to alter and elevate the places and appellations of the Teacher, Pastor, Ruler, and Deacon, unto those unscripture-like titles of Lord-Bishop, Dean, Chancellor, Surrogate & Archdeacon, who ventured to usurp the power of excommunication against the Members and Ministers of many Congregations in their Synods and Councils, contrary to what was practised in that Orthodox pattern, Acts 15.24. which is laid down and left as well for the imitation as information of after-ages; whose work it was by Scripture-proofs to confute soul subverting positions, and to confirm Christian doctrines, without using any manner of authority to censure any man's person, being that that is the express privilege of the Presbyterial Church, 1 Cor. 5.4, 5. & 2 Thes. 3.15. The babe-age of which usurpation is made mention of, as newly appearing in the world by what was exercised by Alexander of Alexandria against Eusebius of Nicomedia, as well as against Arius in the reign of Constantius and Constance the sons of Constantine the Emperor, as it is to be seen in Socrat. Scholar Lib. 1. c. 3. compared with the 32 cap. lib. 2. and Evagr. lib. 1. cap. 6.  

Reply.  
That I may return you a full answer, I must take asunder into propositions what you here deliver. You say, 

1. The Combinational Church's corruption was the Cathedral Church's generation.  
2. The corruption was by changing the places and appellations of Teachers, etc. into the titles of Lord Bishop, Dean, Chancellor, Archdeacon.  
3. That they ventured to usurp the power of excommunication in their Synods and Councils.  
4. That this was contrary to the Orthodox pattern, Acts 15.  
5. Authority to censure any man's person is the express privilege of the Presbyterial Church, 1 Cor. 5.4, 5. 2 Thes. 3.15.  
6. Alexander ab Alexandria, began this against Arrius and Eusebius of Nicomedia, so that it was an usurpation, and a new age in the Church.     

1. Proposition. That the Combinational Church's corruption, was the Cathedral Church's generation.  
IT is a rule in Philosophy, 
Non entis non sunt accidentia.  that corruptio is mutatio entis ab esse ad non esse tale. That which is corrupted then must have an entity, for else it can never be corrupted. Now your Combinational Church in the time you speak of was a non en●, there was no such thing, and then it could not be corrupted, nor any other Church rise from that corruption.  
Which shall further appear, if we shall distinguish of the term Cathedral, which I hinted at first; for as among Logical notions there be termini primi, and à primo orti, so also it is in this; the word Cathedral being taken in a primitive and in a derivative sense. If you take it in the prime sense, it denotes unto us those places or chief Cities where the Apostles for some time, or Apostolical men by their appointment took up their residence for conversion of the people, and reglement of the Church; hence it is, that we so often read of in the father's Cathedra Jacobi, which was at Jerusalem; Cathedra Petri, which was for seven years at Antioch; after at Alexandria; and last of all, Cathedra Apostolorum Petri & Pauli at Rome. In those Churches where they stayed for any long time and preached, and planted Religion, which were commonly the Metropolis of that Province or Country, as Ephesus, Corinth, Philippi, at their departure, they left a Bishop with a Presbytery to govern, and thence these Churches were called Ecclesiae Cathedrales. This is the prime importance of the word. But after as Christianity was extended, and Bishops were seated and erected in divers Dioceses they began to build Churches, in which at first the Bishop and the Presbyters did reside, who were to oversee the Diocese; and because of their residence in this place, the Church in imitation of the Apostles Chairs, was called the Cathedral Church. Neither was this Cathedral so new, 
Euseb. l. 2. c. 17.  as most men suppose. For I shall not stick to call the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Egypt mentioned by Eusebius out of Philo the Jew a Cathedral; it will seem so to any man, that shall advisedly read that Chapter; for he writes of their government, of them to whom the Ecclesiastical Liturgies are committed; Of their Deaconships, of the presidency of Bishops, placed above all. To which, that of Palladius will give much light; for he saith, 
Palladius in Histor. Lausiaca.  that in this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there were eight Presbyters, and that so long as the chief over them lived, none of the rest might 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Here the Scriptures were read, prayers continued, Hymns and Canticles in every kind of Meeter sung to God, penances transacted, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, upon the old Sabbath and every Lord's day. I cannot conceive but this might be a Cathedral, even in this last sense. I shall instance in another which was old, 
Euseb. l. 3. c. 23.  even in Saint John's time the Apostle. He commended the young man to the chief of all the Bishops, (can any man think he was less than a Metropolitan?) the man proved deboist, ran from the Church and became a thief. At his return, John demanded of the Bishop his charge; the Bishop sobbing and sighing said, he is dead, dead to God, for he is become wicked and pernicious, and to be short a Thief; for he keeps this Mountain over against this Church together with his associates; 'tis more than probable this was a Material Church; for how else could the hill be over against it? and presently it is said, that the Apostle hastened out of the Church. Now I judge it to be Cathedral, because he that was the chief of the Bishops had his residence in it. Let it be also considered what Eusebius writes in his tenth book, 
Euseb. l. 10. c. 2.  cap. 2. that in the beginning of Constantine's reign, that the Temples were again from the foundations erected to an unmeasurable height, and received greater beauty than ever they enjoyed before their destruction. They were then before, and were but now again erected. And we of all other have least reason to doubt of this, since Joseph of Arimathea erected a Church at Glastenbury, as the best of our Historians record, 
Gildas, Spilman, Cambden.  and Spilman hath in picture given us the extent and fashion, and materials of it. After, divers other Cathedral Churches were erected in this Island by King Lucius, if there be any truth in our Records, at Landaff, at London, at Chester, etc. as you may read in Ephraim, Pagetts Christianography, part 3. page 1, etc.  
Now take the Cathedral in which of these acceptions you please, your assertion cannot have any truth in it. Not in the first; for than you make the Apostles the authors of this corruption, since they were the erectors of these Cathedrals; not in the last, because they were erected after the Apostolical pattern. The plain truth is, that the corruption of the Combinational was not in the erection of either, because the combinational never was before either. What was it precedent to Saint James his Cathedra in Jerusalem? I marvel when it should begin? His was then set up before the Apostles departed to preach to the whole world, and under him it is not possible to conceive the Church could be Combinational; 
Acts 1. & 2. Acts 4.41. Acts 4.4. Acts 5.14. Acts 6.1.  for upon necessity in that Church at that time there must be more than one Congregation; for from 120. to 3120. to these were added 5000. which makes 8120. and yet more multitudes of men and women were added, and still the number of disciples were multiplied. And out of doubt the increase stayed not here, God adding to the Church daily such as should be saved. That so many thousands should meet together in any house to perform their Christian duties was impossible; they must be divided into several Congregations, Had these been Combinational, than Saint James had been by the Apostles made Bishop of Jerusalem to little purpose; for he could nor must not have taken the oversight but of one of them, the rest had been out of his jurisdiction, which I suppose no wise man will ever think, since the Apostles no question had the same charity, and would have the same care of the rest, as of that one, and then would have set up as many chairs as there had been Congregations. But of such we hear not, of this one we do, which is a sufficient evidence to me, that all the Christians of that City at least, if not of all Palestine, were under his jurisdiction, and subject to his Cathedra. Out of which it will necessarily follow, That the Cathedral Church was the prime institution, not the Combinational, and that therefore the Combinational Church's corruption, was not the Cathedrals generation, but rather the contrary, which we have lived to see, that the Combinationals generation, is the Cathedrals corruption.  
And what I have said in particular of the Church of Jerusalem, is as true of all other Churches the Apostles planted, and in others planted by their pattern, Antioch, Corinth, Atheus, Rome, etc. for the same reason holds in all these Cities where the multitudes of believers grew so numerous; one Congregation could not hold them. I ask now, had the Apostles, put case Peter or Paul there present, had they jurisdiction over them all, or had they not? If they had, than the Combination and Independency of Churches is at an end in the Primitive Church. If they had not, I wonder they should stay for divers years in one place, having no more to do, than to supervise one single Congregation; besides, that then there must be as many as there were Pastors in those Churches of equal power in their several Churches with the Apostles, which he that can believe, may digest any thing.  
Ephesus was a great City, 
Rev. 2.3.  and had in it those who took upon them to say they were Apostles, the Angel (be it Bishop or College of Presbyters) is commended for trying them, and finding them liars; if they were not of his own Congregation, what had the Angel to do to try them? if your Tenet be true, he deserves no commendation at all, but rather reproof for being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But that they were, is more than ever you can prove. I am apt to believe, that if it had been so, the Epistle had not been directed to the Angel of the Church of Ephesus, but to the Angel of such or such a Congregation in Ephesus. 
Verse 24.  And the like may be said of the Churches of Pergamos and Thyatyra, 
Verse 18.  the last being reproved for suffering the woman Jezabel, calling herself a Prophetess to teach and seduce. For if the Angel had not power over all the Congregations of that City, say that this Jezabel had taught in another Combinational Church, which is very possible, and not in his, the answer had been easy, Jezabel is out of my reach, out of my jurisdiction, and therefore you have nothing against me for her misdemeanour.  
This that I have said destroys clearly the subject of your Proposition, the Combinational Church, and that being gone, what you affirm of it will fall of itself. I shall therefore hereafter desire you to lay your foundation deeper, before you go about to build, or to speak more properly, to destroy any thing upon such a groundless supposition, which you and I have reason to suspect, were it only but for this, that all the Churches of the Christian world, East, West, North, South, for these 1600 years and more have been of another constitution. Were it Rome alone, I should suspect; but when all are otherwise, none Combinational, no not those who scarce ever heard of Rome, and all Cathedral, I cannot be persuaded that the love of Christ hath been so cold to his Catholic Church, to suffer this Cathedral corruption as you call it so long, so universally to overspread her face. It seems to me contrary to his promise, behold, I am with you to the end of the world. And so I end what I had to say to this Proposition. I now come to the next, in which you tell us, what this corruption was, viz.   

Proposition. 2. A presumption to alter and to elevate the places and appellations of the Teacher, Pastor, Ruler, and Deacon, into those unscripture-like Titles of Lord-bishop, Deane, Chancellor, .  
TO this I in the first place shall return you the words of Zanchy. Quid quod in Ecclesis etiam Protestantium non desunt reipsa Episcopi & Archiepiscopi? 
Zanchy append. de fide Aphorism. 11.  quos mutatis bonis Gracis nominibus, in male Latina convertimus; vocant superintendentes & generales superintendentes. Sed ubi etiam neque illa vetera bona Graeca, neque haec nova malè Latina nomina obtinent, ibi tamen solent esse aliqui primarii, penes quos est authoritas. De nominibus ergo fuerit controversia, verum eum de rebus convenit, quid de nominibus altercamur? This first.  
2. Next to your Distribution I say, that perhaps by Teachers and Pastors you may intent two sorts of Ministers in the Church; for so I know some distinguish, that Pastors in Saint Paul were such as had not only the office to preach the Word and administer the Sacraments, but had also the Church and care of souls committed to them; Teachers, those who laboured in the Doctrine, but received no charge of Sacraments or souls. Some make the Teachers to be public professors of Divinity, and Governors of Ecclesiastical Schools; but Pastors, to be the Ministers of particular Congregations, which I will not deny but it may be true; but I shall remember you that four of the Fathers, Jerome, Austin, chrysostom, Theodoret, were unacquainted with the nicety; for they thought the Apostle expressed what belonged to the Pastoral office under two names, that the Pastor was to be Doctor, to remember he must labour in doctrine, as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which often signifies to rule. And then your third word Rulers will come under that notion also, and so Teachers, Pastors and Rulers will not denote three distinct sorts of Church Officers, which I have some reason to think you aim at, but one and the same man qualified both to teach and to rule. At Geneva, Calvin and Beza were made both Pastors and Readers of Divinity, being men so able to discharge both; and yet no man did say, that they did not content themselves with their pastoral votation, or allege against them, He that teacheth on teaching, or he that exhorteth on exhortation. For as I have often told you, and have proved, Lay-Ruling Elders, except you mean Arbitratours, there were never any in the Primitive Church.  
The last word you use is Deacon. 
Hieron. ad Evagrium. Epiph. lib. 1. Tom. 1. de adventu Christi in carnem.  And under that name are properly comprehended those who by the first institution were only mensarum & viduarum Ministri: who if we believe Epiphanius, were chose out of the seventy; of which, two of them did preach. Stephen and Philip, they were more than Deacons, they were Evangelists, and so Philip is styled. But he that shall heedfully consider Saint Paul's precepts, and the conditions required by him in those that should be Deacons; would easily collect, that their Office was not only a charge to look to the poor, but that they were to attend the sacred services and Assemblies, and even to be a step to the Ministry of the word.  
I shall therefore willingly admit of the distinction, that there were in the Primitive Church two sorts of Deacons. One of the first institution, who were to have a care of the poor; and of a second kind deputed by the Church, who were to attend on the Church; give unto eve y one present of the sanctified bread and wine, to command the people silence, attention, 
Concil. Ancyr. Can. 2. Cypr. lib. 3. Epist. 9. ●ust. Apol. 2. Ignat. ad Heronem.  and devotion; all which may be collected out of the Council of Ancyra, Cyprian, Justin Martyr, and Ignatius, who mentions his own Deac Heron at Antioch, and Stephen to be the Deacon to Saint James at Jerusalem.  
Thus much it was necessary to premise before we joined issue; now you charge us with presumption in removing the Landmarks, that we have altered the places and appellations, by bringing in of new names, unscripture-like titles: So belike it is not lawful to use any titles of honour or command, but such as are used in Scripture. The Jews then belike offended, when they used these unscripture-like titles of Reschignim, Tsadikim, Chasidim, and so after the captivity they divided the people. The Reschagnim, were the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the wicked; the Tsadikim, their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their just men; the Chasidim, their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their good and holy men. And yet Saint Paul serves himself of this distinction; for questionless he alludes to it, 
Rom. 5.6, 7.  amplifying the great love of Christ dying for us. Scarcely for a righteous man will one die, yet peradventure for a good man, some would even dare to die; the gradation is this. Some peradventure would die for one of the Chasidim the good men, scarcely for one of the Tsadikim, for the just or righteous men; But for Reschagnim or ungodly, none would die; In this than appeared the love of Christ, that when we were Reschagnim ungodly sinners, Christ died for us. A man is a Ruler of an Army, and he shall not call some Majors, some Colonels, some Centurions, Pentacurions, Decurions, etc. because these are unscripture-like titles. Nomen is rei notamen, invented it was to denote the thing, neither do I know which way it is possible to understand and distinguish but by names; vox being rei & conceptuum signum; and therefore must necessarily be admitted, if we will not confound ourselves in the understanding of things. But now to the names you mention, Lord-Bishop, Dean, Chancellor, Surrogate, Archdeacon. The end of two of these, I find in Scripture, Bishop and Deacon; but you'll say the syllables, Lord and Arch, are unscripture-like. I must confess, that I find not Lord before Bishop in the Scripture, nor Arch before Deacon; but this will not prove that we have altered the places and appellations: for what place have we altered either of Bishops or Deacons, by calling one Lord-Bishop, or the other Archdeacon? Still the place and office is the same; for the Lord-Bishop hath no other power than he had at first, which is potestas clavium; nor the Archdeacon any more than he had, to be oculus Episcopi, and see that all be well administered that concerns the poor, and service of the Church. To be offended with a title is to pick straws, especially when the substance is observed.  
For how have we altered the places, when we have yet in our Church Bishops, who are Pastors, Teachers, and besides these public Professors of Divinity, Doctors, Catechizers, whom Saint Paul, saith Saint Ambrose, meant by Teachers, such as were in the Churches of Alexandria, Clemens, Pantonus, Origen, Hicroclas. As for those other three appellations, Dean, Chancellor, Surrogate, no Scripture can be brought for them, nor needs it, it being lawful, no question, to give fit names to things, though no text can be produced; otherwise your parties were to seek, who call him who is to preside in a Synod by the name of a Prolocutor, and those that govern in your Combinational Churches Lay-Elders; and are not these unscripture-like? for I find no such titles in the Scriptures.  
As for the name of Deane, it is ancient, and it signifies no more than that Presbyter who was the chief in any Collegiate Church, and was to have a care that the Statutes of the Church were observed, being like the the Principal Warden or Precedent of a College, and you may as well be offended with any of these Appellations as with this, with which yet it is evident many of your party are well pleased, for they enjoy it, and the honour and profits, notwithstanding the names are not found in Scripture. And should any man lay this objection against any of them, I dare say he would answer him with a smile. I am confident he would, who being a prime man among you, at this day enjoyeth a Deanery, and doubtless hugs himself, applaudít sibi ipsi domi; Aha, I am warm, I have been at the fire. That you like the name ne'er the worse it was fetched from the Militia. The Roman soldiers were when drawn to their winter quarters to lodge by companies, and so many as lodged together, being commonly ten, were called Contubernales, the chief over them was called Decenus, or decurio, 
Hadrian. Junius.  being praeses manipuli, dexinier en guerre Gall, or the Corporal from the Italian word Caporale, or Spanish, Corporal. We in Enlglish Corporal: and from hence it was borrowed and brought into the Church, that the chief of the Capitulum should be called Decan, which I think is Arch-Presbyter.  
3. I come now to your other two disliked Appellations, Chancellors and Surrogates. That the Bishop was at first the chief Judge in his Church I have before proved, and then no dought he might appoint his subordinate Officials. This being a confessed rule in the Law, that when any cause is committed to any man, he is also conceived to receive full authority in all matters belonging to that cause. When the Emperors became Christian, they judged it equal and pious to reserve some causes to be tried in the Christian Court, in which they constituted the Bishop to be the Judge. These causes were properly called Ecclesiastical, such as were Blasphemy, Apostasy, Heresies, Schisms, Orders, Admissions, institution of Clerks, 
Cook's Reports fol. 8.  Rites of Matrimony, Probates of Wills, Divorces, and such like. To give audience to these, the Bishop otherwise employed, could not always be present; and yet there was no reason that for his absence justice should not take its course. And in some of these had he been present, great skill in Civil Laws is requisite, that they be ended aright. This gave occasion to the Bishop to appoint his Chancellor and Surrogate. A Chancellor (who had his name à Cancellis within which he was to sit) a man brought up in the Civil Laws, and therefore fit to decide such causes that did depend upon those Laws, who being at first a mere Layman, and therefore having no power of Exommunication, therefore the Bishop thought fit to adjoin a Surrogate to him, that in case that high censure were to be passed, this man being in Orders, and therefore invested with power, actu primo, and by Commission with the Bishop's power actu secundo sub Episcopo rogatus, being demanded, and an Officer under the Bishop, 
Actu primo.  might pronounce the Sentence. This was the original of their names and power. Now prudential necessity first instituted them, and prudence where Episcopal power is of force continues them. If a Superior shall be pleased to revoke some of these causes, which were by him made of Ecclesiastical cognizance, and cause the litigants to take their trial at Common or Civil Law, 
Vide the book of Order of Excommunication in Scotl. & Hist. of Scot Amon 2. pag. 46.  then in the Church I confess there will be no use of the Chancellor. And if the rest shall be tried by the Bishop and his Presbytery, as they were at first, neither will there need much a Surrogate. But now if that rule of the Presbytery should prove to be true, who do challenge cognisance of all causes whatsoever, which are sins directly, or by reduction, than they have power, if not to nullify, yet to give liberty to play, all Courts and Judicatories besides their own, and must bring in thither solicitors, Attorneys, Counselors, Proctors, etc. which will be as un-Scripture-like names as Chancellors and Surrogates.  


Cinod. de off. Eccl.  
Joannes Epis. Citri in respon ad cabasil. Naz. Testam.   4. The fourth Appellation that offends you, is the Archdeacon, who was a very ancient officer in the Church, and of great esteem in the Greek Church. Neither was he chosen to that place by the Patriarch, but came to it by seniority; the name than gave him no power, but only this prerogative to be chief of the Deacons of the Church, as if you would say of the eldest standing. In the Church of England he was more than a Deacon, for he was a Presbyter, and his office was to be present at all ordinations, to inquire into the life, the manners, the abilities, and sufficiency of him who was to be ordained, and either to reject him if he saw occasion, or to present him to the Bishop to be ordained, to induct into any Benefice that man who was instituted by the Bishop, to have the care of the houses of God were kept decent, and in good repair: lastly, to take account of all who had to do with the poors money. And this last was it which gave him the name of the chief Deacon; 
Ambr. lib. 1. the off. c. 41. Prudentius.  for when the charity of the Church was great, and ample gifts were bestowed to the relief of the poorer Christians, the Church stock was ample, (as appears by Laurence the Martyr, who was Deacon to Sixtus Bishop of Rome martyred under Valerian) This being committed to the Deacons care, that no fraud might be committed, as it happened too oft in money-matters, the Church thought fit to set one of the Deacons over the rest, who might call them to account, as ours were to do the Churchwardens and Overseers of the poor, to whom they gave the name of the Archdeacon.  
Now speak impartially, what harm was in all this? What that may offend you? Deacon cannot, and Arch should not, since you know it signifies no more but chief or prime, as in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Patriarch. And that you may carry some affection, or at least not a loathing to it, I pray call to memory, that a worthy Martyr of our Church John Philpot adjudged to the fire, and burnt in Queen mary's days, 
Fox Martyrol. An. 1553. primo Mariae.  resigned up his soul in the flames, being then Archdeacon of Winchester. And that with him Master Cheiny and Master Elmour that refused to subscribe to the doctrine of Transubstantiation in the Convocation-house, were both Arch-Deacons.  
5. But now I return back again to that Appellation Lord-Bishop, at which so many have stumbled and been scandalised; that others before you have done it, I have reason to attribute to envy & an evil eye, but in you I shall only impute it to inconsideration. 
Gen. 24. 1 Kings 18. 2 Kings 2. 2 Kings 4. 2 Kings 8.  For you are mighty in the Scriptures, and therefore might have known that the Hebrew Adoni, or the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the Latin Dominus, which in the Spanish is Don, in the French Sciur, in English Sir, is only a name of civility, courtesy, respect, reverence. By this Rebecca calls Abraham's servant, Drink my Lord. By this Obadiah the Prophet, Art thou my Lord Elijah? By this the children of the Prophets, the inhabitants of Hiericho, the Sunamite, and Hazael, the Prophet Elisha. By this, Marry the Gardener, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Lord, or Sir, if thou have taken him hence; with this civil respect the Greeks accost Philip, 
John 20.15. John 12.21. 1 Pet. 3.6.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sir, we would see Jesus. In all which places, the word imports only a courteous and respectful compellation. And St. Peter commends the woman that shall with this name endear her husband, proposing the example of Sarah that obeyed Abraham, and called him Lord.  
To a Bishop double honour, respect, reverence is due; for he is comprised under the name of father in the Commandment, and whom we must honour in heart and deed, why not in words? shall the lips neglect, whom the heart regards, especially when the tongue is the interpreter of the mind within? And what do we more, when we call a Bishop Lord, 'tis but respect, honour, reverence, that we then tender unto him. And if Rebeccah signified to a servant; if Obadiah and Hazael to a Prophet; if Mary to a Gardener; if Hellenists to Philip; if an obedient wife to a Mechanic, a hardhanded Artisan, may attest her reverential regard, by this word Lord authorized in Scripture: why should the same word be called an unscripture-like compellation, when affixed before the name of those, who are by their place and office to be the lights of the Christian world, and really endued with power for the regiment of the Catholic Church? Had they yet assumed this name, and fastened it upon themselves, there had been some exception to be laid against it. For 'tis but reason, he who exalts himself, should be abased; but they were others, and those no mean ones, that thought them worthy of this honourable title. To omit other Kingdoms, the Princes of this Nation, who were the fountains of honour, thought it fit that no Laws should pass for the government of the Nation, to which they gave not their vote; and for that end, called them to their Parliaments, by the same Writ that they called other Lords. And I am certain, before some men's heat had corrupted good manners, it was the guise of Christendom, not to speak of Bishops, fine praefatione honoris, in particular this honour. I shall give you an instance or two. The inscription of a letter to Julius' Bishop of Rome from some of his brethren, 

Sozomen. lib. 3. cap. 23.  
Nazianz. ad Greg. Nyssen. Theodoret. lib. 5. c. 9   is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Let no man speak untruths of me, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith Gregory Nazianzene. And the Synodical book of the Council of Constantinople, is inscribed Dominis Reverendissimis, ac piissimis fratribus ac Collegis Damaso, Ambrosio, etc. and they were Bishops. I spare more testimonies; these may suffice that the title Lord-Bishop was not new, nor invented in this Land. Yet that those, who were honoured among us might bear this title without any derogation to Scripture; even by Scripture testimonies I have said enough.  
I am not ignorant that there be two places of Scripture produced, as if they were a prohibition to this title, Luke 22.25. 1. Pet. 5.3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But he that shall considerately weigh both places, will never be able to infer any such conclusion For let it be thought on, what was the occasion of our Saviour's words; Zebedees' wife comes and petitions for her sons, that one might sit at the right, another on the left hand in his Kingdom; which out of a Jewish opinion they then thought must be earthly and temporal. At this ambition of the two brethren the Disciples murmured; they thought they had deserved as well as mother Zebedees' children, and knew no reason why they should be preferred before them. To still this contention our Saviour tells them, that this his Kingdom was not to be like that of the world, in that the Kings of the Nations, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dominantur, so Junius, so Beza translates it, do domineer, rule and govern with a high hand, in potentia gladii, or as it is in Saint Matthew, 
Mat. 20.25.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, do pro arbitrio exercise dominion, and exercise authority over them; but with you it shall not be so; You no such Lords as they are, use no such domineering power as they do. A power you are to have, but not like theirs; yours is to be spiritual, their's temporal: their power they use with pride, rigour, sometimes tyranny, and against the good of their subjects; for it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the genitive case (and the Scholiast upon Nazianzene observes, 
Scholiast. Nazianz. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in any compound Verb with a genitive case, signifies against) But your power must not be so used, vos non sic; It must be with mildness, meekness, humility; he who is to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among you, let him be your servant. It is not the word, it is the ambitious seeking of a temporal principality, as an affix of the Apostolate, that Christ interdicted his Disciples. 
Bern. lib. 10. de Consider.  Forma Apostolica haec est, Dominatio interdicitur, indicitur Ministratio. Dominatio is forbid, is therefore the word Dominus? were this so, a temporal Lord must go without his title of honour, as well as the Lord-Bishop; for the dominion they use may possibly be more rigorous, arbitrary, Lordly, tyrannical, than ever was that of the Bishop. Well, however they use it, who can help it? with them it must not be so, though they have and may be allowed in civility to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, yet they never were allowed to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, tyrannous, rigorous Lords; Saint Peter's words are clear against that, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; the Apostle would not that any superior should lord it over or against God's inheritance. That service, that humility, that meekness, which our Saviour prescribes his Apostles, is against that: and who so shall make use of the text to any other purpose, goes about to find in it, that which our blessed Saviour never intended; he may as soon fetch gold out of a pebble.  
One thing yet doth amaze me, that those men should be so much startled at a civil title, who yet make use of the power even in the most rigid construction. They who first pressed it against Bishops, were the Anabaptists of Germany; nothing was so frequently in their mouths, as the Kings of the Nations, but these at length had Consuls and Kings of their own erection among themselves. To them succeeded the Presbyterian consistory, and so eager they are for this government, that they call their Discipline the Kingdom of Christ, the Tabernacle which God hath appointed; and where this Ecclesiastical Synod is not erected, 
Browne in a Treatise against one Barrow.  they say that God's Ordinance is not performed; the office of Christ as he is King, is not acknowledged; and in this Kingdom who were like to bear most sway? are they not the Ruling Elders? This Brown, not I, calls a Lordly Discipline; and saith, that instead of some Lord-Bishops in name, we should have a thousand Lordly Tyrants indeed, which now do disdain the name; for, saith he, if you could but once get up the names of Elders and Presbyters, what mischief, cruelty and pride would not stream from that name? with much more to that purpose. At last we feel into whose hands the power is come, and this I may be bold to say, that the loins of the Lord-Bishops were not so heavy as have been the little fingers of such of your Pastors, who have declined the name. I list not to grate your ears with this harsh music; but lay your hand upon your heart, and say, whether the Masters of your Congregations be not the men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. God is my witness, and you partly know that I never was guilty of the smoothing of any man's pride, of favouring of any man's rigorous domineering. Of honour I always thought him most worthy, who I saw did least affect it; affectation of honour, and desire of superiority, I know, our Saviour prohibits; and on the contrary, humility, lowliness and meekness is that which he commands▪ And yet I see no reason why it should grieve any godly mind to hear a Bishop called by that name, with which Saint Peter willed every woman to call her husband, and Mary Magdalen called him who had but a spade in his hand. They are not titles that can swell any man, who hath not pride in his heart, and that may leven as much and puff up him, that puffs at this title, and bears other names, as he that was once called Lord Bishop. And so much of the titles you except against; I come now to what you lay to their charge   

Proposition. 3. Who ventured to usurp the power of excommunication in their Synods and Councils.  
WHO is a Relative, and it hath so many Antecedents, that I know not whether you refer it to all the foregoing titles, or to some in particular. To all you should not, for the Dean intermeddled not with excommunications; the Chancellor de facto did; but should not; so I grant you that was an usurpation, and complained on; and preached down by me, as well as decried by you. The Surrogate and Archdeacon did; but than it was not jure nativo, but delegato; for their commission they had from the Bishops: I shall therefore more willingly conceive your thoughts reflect upon them, and especially because you mention Synods and Councils, which they alone at first had power to assemble. But then to affirm that it was an usurped power in them to excommunicate in Synods and Councils, seems to me a Paradox. For I shall here ask, whether the Bishops being not assembled in Synods or Councils had power to excommunicate or no? If you say they had, than it will seem strange that meeting in Synods and Councils they should lose this power. This is as if you should say, that Corporations meeting in Council should lose the power, which every single Alderman had before he came thither, or the people their rights and privileges when assembled in Parliament, which they had before; Vis unita sortior; and certainly what power any man hath to act singly and by himself, when he meets with other Commissioners associated in that power, he works more vigorously, and his act is of the greater authority. But if you shall say, that the Bishops had no power of excommunication, nor then, nor before, nor in Council, nor out of it, you plainly contradict the Scriptures, which I shall evidence unto you, by examining the Commission given the Apostles and their practice; and what is true of the Apostles, will be as true of the Bishops: for I have before proved unto you, they were their Successors, and by them settled in some Churches, And the ordinary power which was given to the Apostles was given to them; for otherwise Christ's promise cannot be verified, behold, I am with you, signanter, to the end of the world.  

John 20.  The Commission is extant. As my Father sent me, so send I you; and then presently breathing on them, he adds, Receive the Holy Ghost. Whose sins ye remit, they are remitted; whose sins ye retain, they are retained: 
Cyril. lib. 12. in Joan. cap. 55. Cyprian. de unit. Ecclesiae. & Epist. 73. ad Julian.  which words are understood by all the Ancient Doctors of authority, as though he said that with the same power and authority my Father sent me into the world to gather and govern my Church, I do also send you, that is, with all spiritual power necessary to your office and charge. Now I ask, whether the Apostles must be assembled in Council or not, when they were to execute this authority? if you say they must, than you grant the question; for then the sentence of excommunication may be passed in a Synod or Council. If you should say they could not, than a single Apostle could not excommunicate, which I yet never heard affirmed; all granting, that they were pares potestate, except the Papist, who will have all Episcopal power and authority originally invested in Saint Peter, and from him derived to others. But this I conceive you will not say neither, when I find St. Paul assuming this power to himself. 
2 Cor. 13.10.  Therefore I writ these things being absent; lest being present, I should use sharpness according to the power the Lord hath given me. What can be more plain? power given by the Lord to me, a single Apostle; and therefore he tells them that heretofore had sinned, 
Ver. 2.  and to all other, that if he came again he would not spare, spare to lay his rod upon them. For in the first Epistle, he proposeth such a thing to them, and wills them to consider of it; quid vult is? what will you? 
1 Cor. 4.21.  shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love, or in the Spirit of meekness? as who should say, choose which you will. Compare this with 2 Cor. 10.4, 8, 9, 10, 11. verses, and you will easily conclude that a single Apostle had authority enough to lay his rod upon a scandalous contumacious offender. This for the power, now to the practice.  
According to this power Saint Paul exercised judgement, and gave sentence in a certain grievous case of incest among the said Corinthians, in these words. I absent in body, but present in spirit; have judged already, as though I were present concerning him that hath done this deed; in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ when ye are gathered together, 
1 Cor. 5.3, 4, 5  and my spirit with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such a one to Satan. Who I pray was it that censured this man? was it not the Apostle himself? If I understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ego judicavi, it must be so. And the same Apostle writing to his Scholar Timothy, makes mention of another sentence by him pronounced against Hymenaeus and Alexander, two seditious and heretical men; whom saith he, I have delivered, ego tradidi, 
1 Tim. 1. 2●  to Satan: i. e. excommunicated, and cut off from the Church of God, that they may learn not to blaspheme. What should I tell you that the learned draw the words of Saint Peter to Simon Magus to this purpose? 
Acts 8.21.  Thou hast no part nor lot in this matter. That Diotrephes cast some out of the Church, it was his fault; but for this, Saint John when he came, 
Joh. Ep. 3.10.  threatens to remember his deeds; i e. as all Expositors agree, by his Apostolical power to proceed against him.  
From the Apostles I descend lower. First, to the Angels of the Churches, who were commended for not bearing with them that were evil; and for trying them who said they were Apostles, 
Revel. 2.2.6.20. 1 Tim. 5.19, 20 21, 22. Tit. 3.10.  but found upon trial liars: and again, blamed when they neglected their duties. They were neither worthy of praise, nor yet blame-worthy, had they not had authority in their hands. Timothy is commanded to do the like at Ephesus, Titus at Crete.  
Yea, but perhaps it may be replied, these directions were not given to Timothy and Titus as single Bishops, but as chief of a Presbytery: well then, the conclusion will hence easily follow, that a Bishop with his Presbytery may excommunicate. If so, than I pray tell me, what usurpation it can be for Bishops assembled in a Synod or Council to do the like? They being chief cannot want that authority which the Presbytery hath; and why then should they not use it? From an inferior to a superior power, the argument follows strongly. The Justices may punish such or such a Malefactor, much more the Judges, but much more the Superior that empowred them. The reason is the same; The Bishop with the Presbytery may cast a scandalous person out of the Church, therefore much more the Bishops themselves assembled in Councils, because among them there is a subordination. And what a lesser power may do, that a higher may, which is empowered to that end. Thus have I wrestled with your assertion, and foiled it. I come next to grapple with your reason, and if that prove to be weak, your affirmation will fall of itself. You say,   

Proposition 4. That this was contrary to what was practised in the Orthodox pattern, Acts 15.24. which was laid down and left as well for the imitation as information of after-ages.  
FIrst, I thank you, that you grant this Synod to be a pattern for after-ages to imitate, and be informed by. For first, than we have from this a sufficient authority to call Synods and Councils. Secondly, a pattern to imitate in making Decrees, that it be by way of deliberation, declaration and decision. 
Act. 15. ver. 7.  For the acts of this Council which the Presbyters and brethren used, were disputative, or in genere deliberativo; they disputed; Saint Peter's act was declarative; and when there had been much disputing, 
Verse 12. Ver. 19  Peter risen up and said, etc. and the like was that of Barnabas and Paul. But Saint James his act was decisive, wherefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I judge or give sentence. Thirdly, There aught to be a Precedent in a Council, who is to moderate the whole action, and to pronounce the sentence. Fourthly, That the Synodical decrees materially and Ecclesiastically are obligatory, 
Ver. 22.23. Acts 16.4. Acts 21.25.  and tie the absent, as this did the Churches of Syria, Cilicia, yea, and all the Churches of the Gentiles, who had no Commissioners in that Synod, as well as those of Jerusalem and Antioch. Fifthly, that the chief man of a Council is, that you say, by Scripture-proof to confute soul-subverting positions, and to confirm Christian doctrines, as it was in this. But this was not the sole end; for another there was; viz. to cast out of the Church, Disturbers and Heretics, as I shall by and by make good unto you: and so your position of usurpation in Bishops of the rod will not prove true.  
But this you say, was contrary to the orthodox pattern; how so I pray? if a contrariety, than it must be opposite, and I have never yet heard, that subordinate ends come under any species of opposition. A man binds his son Apprentice, his end is, that he learn and be skilful in his profession, but yet he hath a farther reach, which is, that he may get a livelihood; the first he intends less principally, the last chief; and can a man say now, that these two ends are contrary, or thwart one the other, when indeed they are but subservient the one to the other? and the like is to be said of all intermediate ends. For that rule of the Civilians is most true, finis principalis non tollit accessorium; to apply this, the chief end of the Apostolical Synod was to confute false positions, and establish the truth; suppose now, that they had there pronounced an Anathema against those Jewish Christians, who would be still zealous for circumcision and the observation of Moses Law after the publication of their decree, had this been contrary and opposite to their first and prime intent? you cannot say it. Neither is it then contrary, when a company of Bishops meet in a Synod or Council to illustrate and hold forth the truth, and condemn heresies, that they pass also a censure upon the Heretics. I can find no contrariety or opposition in this. Yea, but you'll say, here's no pattern for it. Neither is it necessary; it sufficeth that here is a pattern set to compass the chief end of all Councils; as for the accessories they may be regulated by prudence. A Prince calls a Parliament; in it there be good Laws established for the peace of his Territories, and not one delinquent punished or censured. Must this particular Session be such an absolute pattern to all following Parliaments, that shall only make good Laws, and never call to question, or pass sentence upon any offender? I hope you will not say so; neither can you say it in this case. For I find the Apostles singly, as I have proved, and out of Council to have done it; and therefore I doubt not, that if being in Council assembled they had done it, it had been no error. Yea, but this you'll say could not be done. For it follows,   

Proposition 5. To censure any man's person, is the express privilege of the Presbyterial Church, 1 Cor. 5.4, 5. 2 Thes. 3.15.  
Privileges and Prerogatives are tender things; and it behoves those who stand for them, to produce infallible Records, lest it appear their claim be louder than their right. A Corporation struggles hard for a privilege, fees a Lawyer to plead their Charter; he picks out some weak words in it that may look that way; at last the Judge tells him, that he hath betrayed his Client's cause, for the words in the Charter carry no such meaning. The like I must say to you; A privilege you plead, for your Corpse the Presbyterial Church; the evidence you give for it, is out of God's great Charter, 1 Cor. 5. 2 Thes. 3. Now if you had studied to betray your case, you could not I believe have lighted upon two more weak evidences.  
For doth Saint Paul assert a privilege of the Presbyterial Church in that place of the Corinth's, where he makes himself the Judge; where he passeth censure himself? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I have decreed or judged? he asketh not their consents, he prayeth not their aid, he referreth not the matter to their liking; I have saith he, already determined, afore he wrote, and before they read that part of his Epistle. And what to do? to join with them, to deliver this trespasser to Satan! No saith he, I have already decreed to deliver him. By what means? what, by their power and privilege? not so, but by the power of our Lord Jesus Christ. Then for aught we can find in this place, the Apostle though absent, decreed to do the deed himself, by the power of Christ, and not by the consent and help of the Corinthians. Certainly had this been a Privilege of the Presbyterial Church, Saint Paul would never have invaded it; what an Apostle guilty of such presumption, such usurpation?  
Yea, but the sentence was to be pronounced by them. When ye are gathered together in my Spirit, i. e. my power, my authority, then deliver. True, they were bound to do it; but by what right? their own, or the Apostles? by his certainly, for it is In my spirit. So all their power is delegate, not native; 'tis derivative, not primitive; declarative, not judiciary, and consequently from this place no privilege of the Presbyterial Church to censure any man's person can be deduced. But rather the quite contrary, in that the Apostle a single person judged and decreed without them.  
I shall mind you what may well be concluded hence, which is, that the censure should not be passed in a corner, but in a full Assembly, because the Apostle saith, When ye are gathered together; and if you shall complain that it was otherwise, I shall not stick to confess that your complaint is just, and I have and shall ever join with you in it.  
But I shall add what strength I can to your plea out of this chapter. Some may say the authority was in the Presbyterial Church, because the Apostle reprehends them, verse 2. that they had not past censures on the peccant. Ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed may be taken from you. That I may give light to this dark place; A custom was used in the Church, when any was to be excommunicated, to join in mourning. This duty the Corinthians had neglected, and he reproves them for it; they were puffed up in an opinion of their own deeper wisdom, they joined not in mourning; they complained not to Christ or his Apostle, that a Censure might pass on such a one. This was their fault; for a course they should have taken, that such a one should be taken away. But by whom? that's the question; Not by them to be sure. For Taken away from you, implies that it is by the power of another, not by their act; for no man can take any thing from himself. He may put it away, not take it; the expression had been veen very imperfect if this had been the meaning. And so for you nothing can be included hence.  
But again, it may be objected, verse 7. Purge ye out the old leaven. And again, verse 12. Do ye not judge these who are within? where purging and judging is laid upon vos, and is therefore a Church-priviledge.  
I answer, that vos is no way exclusive of the Apostles power, but rather includes it; for sure he may judge them that are within the Church, and doth it, verse 3. Vos then hath reference to this third verse. Vos you gathered together in my Spirit, do you purge out the old leaven? do you judge those who are within? You to whom the Keys are given, you to whom I have delegated, my power, being of the Presbytery, not the Laity; do you judge and purge. This is the clear intent of the Apostle, and so hath been given by all ancient Interpreters. Whence it will follow, that a Presbyterial privilege to excommunicate can have no footing in this chapter.  
As for that other place, 2 Thess. 3.15. it gives no countenance at all to the Presbyterial Church for Censure. For the Apostle gives order only about a disorderly person, that he might be signified to him by a letter, that if occasion required he might be censured; yea, in express terms forbids them to Censure him. 
Matth. 18.17.  For he saith, Count him not as an enemy, that is, as an Heathen. (for so the word enemy probably signifies, Rom. 11.28. Ephes. 2.16.) I must confess ingenuously unto you, if I would pick out an argument against the Presbyterial privilege to censure, I would make choice of this place; for to what purpose would the Apostle have this unruly man noted by a letter, if they had power to proceed against him? Now why nor they nor the Church of Corinth had not power without the Apostle to Censure, I have given you an account before, and need not here repeat it.  
You see you must produce stronger evidence for your privilege than hitherto you have done, before I can yield it. And I am confident that better you cannot bring forth. Since the power of Censures must be necessarily in some hands, I shall leave them in theirs that they have been for sixteen hundred years; Primarily in Bishops by commission and delegation in Presbyters, and therefore much more in both assembled in Councils, so that it cannot be any presumption or usurpation of power, if in them they use their authority to censure any man's person; of which you assign the time to be Anno Dom. 320. or thereabout when   

Proposition 6. Alexander Patriarch of Alexandria began this usurpation against Arius and Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia in the reign of Constantius and Constance.  
IF there were no more to be said for it, yet this were Antiquity sufficient, that it was used in the Church before the Nicene Council about 1300. years ago. This would be thought on.  
2. Next I could wish that you were better versed in the Records of the Church, the histories of those first times, and acts and proceed of Councils; for than I am persuaded you would never have pointed out Constantine's days for the babe-age of that usurpation; for clear it is, that there then was no more done, but what was ordered to be done, and was done before. Read but the Apostolical Canons, 
Apost. Can. 3.6, 7, 8, 12, 29.  and in most of them you shall meet with these phrases, Si quis Episcopus, Presbyter, Diaconus, Laicus, etc. be found guilty of such or such an offence, deponatur, excommunicetur, dejiciatur, eijciatur, abjiciatur, communione privetur, damnetur, ab Ecclesia penitus abscindatur. Again, in the Council of Ancyra order is taken that some be deprived of the Sacrament for three, some for four, 
Conc. Ancyr. c. 4, 6, 8.  some for five, some for fifteen years, some a longer time, all which space they should be reckoned among the penitents; 
Basil. Can. 58.77.  to which order those two Canons in Basil give great light, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And again, Can. 77. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
Zozomen. lib. 7. cap. 17.  For these were the four Classes of the Penitents in the Primitive Church. And it is evident that they charged the execution of these Canons upon the Bishops, first because they had power, that to those, who by humility, and tears, and patience, 

Zonara's in Explic. Can. 12. Conc. Nic. Alcimus Epist. 16.  
Conc. Nic. Can. 5. Conc. Antioch. cap. 20.   and alms-deeds did demonstrate their conversion to be sincere and unfeigned, to remit the severity of the Canon. So Alcimus to Victorius the Bishop. Authoritatis vestrae est, errantium compunctione perspectâ, severitatis ordinem temperare. And secondly, because they ordained that in every Province twice ever year there should be a Synod, that all the Bishops of the Province meeting together might in common examine such questions as are occurrent in every place, and particularly to inquire, si forte aliqua indignatione, aut contentione, aut qualibet commotione sui Episcopi, excommunicati quidam sint.  
This was the Church Ordinance, set before the time you speak of, which clearly makes against you, and now I shall show you de facto, what was done, before that time too. In Asia there was held sundry Synods about the time of the Emperor Commodus, 
Euseb. l. 5. c. 16, 19  in which Montanus was excommunicated, and his Heresy condemned. Victor about the same time held a Synod at Rome, and excommunicated all the Eastern Bishops about the celebration of Easter, 
Euseb. l. 6.23, 24, 25.  which Act of his, though unjust, yet it shows the judgement of those times, that such a thing upon a just occasion he might do, and that it was no usurpation in a Bishop with his Council to censure any man's person. Again, under the Emperor Decius there was a Synod gathered together at Rome of 60. 
Euseb. l. 6. c. 43.  Bishops, besides many Ministers and Deacons, whither also there came many Pastors of other Provinces, where by uniform consent of all it was decreed, that Novatus together with such as swelled, and consented to his unnatural opinion repugnant to brotherly love, should be excommuicated, and banished the Church. And the same was confirmed by another Synod held at Antioch by Elenus, Firmilian, Yheoctistus. I pass by here the several Censures passed in the Synod held at Carthage upon the Lapsi and Thurificati, as may be seen in very many Epistles of Cyprian. To give light to this, there is not any example more evident, than the Synod of Antioch held about sixty years before the Council of Nice, where Paulus Samosatenus, the Bishop of Antioch was deposed, and condemned for Heresy. 
Euseb. l. 7. c. 30  The Epistle then written by the Bishops, Presbyters, etc. to Dionysius Bishop of Rome, and Maximus Bishop of Alexandria, etc. is yet extant, wherein they writ thus. Wherefore necessity constraining us so to do: we excommunicated the sworn adversary of God, viz. Paulus Samosatenus, and placed Donneus in his room, etc. Farther yet there was a Council of 320. 
Caranza. Platina. Tom. 1. Conc. apud Binnium.  Bishops called together at Sinuessa in Italy, where Marcellinus Bishop of Rome was condemnatus, & anathematizatus accepit Maranatha. And all these instances I am able to give you before that yo name, so that there it cannot be true which you say, that the babe-age of this usurpation is made mention of as newly appearing in the world by what was exercised by Alexander of Alexandria against Eusebius of Nicomedia as well as against Arius in the reign of Constantius and Constance, etc. In relation of which story, you are not exact enough neither. For I read not of any power that Alexander usurped over Eusebius, nor any Censure he passed upon him; he wrote indeed a letter to the brethren of the Churches, that they should beware of Eusebius and his Arianism, because he was the patron and ringleader of the Apostates; in his letter he sharply reproved him, but he censured him not, neither indeed could he, because he belonged to the jurisdsction of another Patriarch. But touching Arius and his adherents, he summoned together a Council of many Bishops, and deprived him and such as favoured his opinion; Achillas, Aeithales, Carpomes a second Arius, etc. of the Priestly order. And this he might do, for they were under the jurisdiction of the Church of Alexandria. But the Heresy being not so extinct, and matters growing by the contenders to greater heat, Constantine thought good to call the Nicene Council, where the question was debated, the Creed called the Nicene composed, the clause of one substance ratified, and the 318. Bishops, except five, subscribed unto it, viz. Eusebius, Theognis, Maris, Theonas, Secundus. These derided the clause, 
Socrates lib. 1. cap. 8.  and would not subscribe to the deposition of Arius. For which cause the Council accursed Arius and all his adherents, and forbade him Alexandria. Moreover by the Emperor's Edict, Arius, Eusebius, Theognis, were banished. 
cap. 14.  But Eusebius and Theognis recanted. All this was done in the reign of Constantine; while he was alive it was that Alexander first, than the Council proceeded against Arius and his adherents; 
cap. 38.  and under Constantine it was that that Arch-heretic came to that miserable end. Yea, and Alexander himself died also, and Athanasius was chosen Bishop in his stead before Constantine died. 
cap. 15.  So that it cannot be possibly true which you say, that Alexander of Alexandria did exercise or usurp authority against Arius in the reign of Constantius and Constance, for while their father lived they were not Emperors. 
Socrat. l. 2. c. 32  Well as you intimate and direct me, I turn to the second book of Socrates, cap. 82. but in the Gree. 40. and 41. chap. but there I find no mention of Alexander nor Arius. A Council at Seleucia we there read of called in Constantius' time, and that there was hot disputes betwixt the Arians and the Orthodox, but at last the Orthodox prevailed, deposed Acacius the Arian, and his complices; and excommunicated divers others, among which was Eusebius; 
Socrates lib. ●. cap. 2. lib. 1. cap, 23. 29. graec.  whether it was he of Nicomedia or no, it appears not; but in all probability it is the same man, because after his recantation he relapsed to his Arianism, and was one of the persecutors of Athanasius. However this makes against you; for here we find some Bishops deposed, others excommunicated by a Council. But this by the way. In the last place you send me to Evagrius; lib. 1. cap. 6. but to seek for what, I know not; for I pray look again, and you shall not find any thing of Alexander, Arius, 
Evagr. lib. 1. cap. 6.  or Eusebius, no nor their names in that chapter, 'tis wholly of another matter, and nothing to your purpose, and therefore I pass it by, and set it for a cipher.  
But were your opinion true, that it were usurpation for Bishops assembled in a Council to censure any man's person; consider I pray what an aspersion you lay upon the first four general Councils, who have been hitherto received with so much veneration by the whole Church of God. For in every one of these we find the Heresies, and the Heretics censured. In that of Nice, Arius and Arianisme; in that of Constantinople, Eunomius, Arius, Macedonius, Photinus, Apollinarius, and their Heresies; in that of Ephesus, Nestorius, and Nestorianisme: in that of Chalced●n, Dioscorus, Eutyches, 
Caranza in his Council.  and Eutychianisme. I verily believe these grave Fathers, the flower then of the Christian world, renowned for piety, honoured for learning and integrity, would never have ventured to have passed so dreadful a Censure upon any man's person, had they not been verily persuaded that from the Word of God, they had a sufficient warrant to authorise them unto it. I shall shut up this point, when I have told you that it seems to me very unreasonable that a few met together (as in a Congregational Church, they cannot be many) should have a privilege to do that, which the Catholic Church assembled in a general Council should not be able to do: or if they did, should be noted with the black Character of usurpation or presumption; and so much of this. I come next to that corruption, which you say was brought upon your Combinational or Presbyterial Church by the Parochial. Of which, your words are these that follow.    

SECT. iv The words of the Letter.  

Mr. Matthews.  THE first rise of the rottening of the Church, was its falling from the pure poor Presbyterial Church, (which in respect of its primitive constitution was composed & made up of living stones, namely, lively Members, and laborious Ministers, being fastly and firmly knit unto the Lord Jesus as their only head by faith: and one to the other by a fraternal Covenant of fervent love, according to the pattern which was proposed prescribed in both Testaments, Is. 44.5. Jer. 50.5. Ezek. 20.37. Zach. 11.7, 10, 14. 2 Cor. 8.5. Ephes. 2.13, 19, 22. Col. 2.2, 19 1 Pet. 2.5.) into an impure, unpolished parochial Church: At that time when ceasing to elect or ordain a Teacher, a Pastor, a Ruler, a Deacon or Diaconesse, or Widow in conformity to the heavenly Canon, Rom. 12.7. 15.4. 16.1. compared with 1 Tim. 3.1. and Titus 1.5, 6. it was well content to admit and accept of a Parson, a Vicar, a Warden, an Overseer of the poor, and a Midwife. By which wisdom of the flesh, being no better than enmity against God, within a short time after the days of the Apostles, Christ's spiritual house as well growing and living Temple, was turned and transformed into a carnal and dead Town or Apostatising Parish. The very beginning and breeding of which Parochial Church is seen to have been in the time of Polycarp and Irenaeus, one of them being an Elder of the Church at Smyrna, and a disciple of John the Evangelist, and the other a Pastor at Lions, and a disciple of that Polycarp, as any man may easily perceive, that will peruse what is to be observed in Eusebius his Ecclesiastical history. lib. 4. c. 14. 15. lib. 5. cap. 23. 24.  

The Reply.  
That my answer may be the clearer to what you here propose, I shall cast your words into this method. For first I will consider of, 

1. The constitution and description you give us here of your Presbyterial Church, and the proofs you bring for it, out of both Testaments.  
2. Whether the rottening of this Church, was the falling of it, from a poor pure Presbyterial Church, into an impure unpolished Parochial Church?  
3. Whether your assertion be true, that when it ceased to elect or ordain either a Teacher, a Pastor, a Ruler, a Deacon, deaconess or Widow in conformity to the Canon, Rom. 12.15, 16. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1.5. but admitted of a Parson, Vicar, etc. that then it was corrupted, and became an Apostatising Parish.  
4. Whether the beginning and breeding of this Apostasy and corruption began in Polycarps and Iraeneus days.    
These four points being examined, the weakness of your aspersion will very evidently appear. And first to the first.   

1. You say, That the Presbyterial Church in respect of its Primitive constitution, was composed and made up of living stones, namely, lively members, etc.  
NOw here I must put you in mind of an old Proverb, Cantherius in porta. For you stumble in your first setting out, and go about to impose upon me by a fallacy, which if you will not grant, I shall clearly deny your description; for you discourse à dicto secundum quid, ad dictum simpliciter.  
I am confident you will not deny but your Presbytyrial Church is a part of Christ's Militant Church, visible with us on earth. And that is compared to a Net, in which be good and bad fish; to a field, in which are wheat and tares; to a Barn-floor, in which is Corn and Chaff; to a house, in which are vessels of honour and dishonour. Your visible Presbyterial Church for aught I know then must be like all other Churches; have in it professors, as well as true believers; hypocrites, as well as sincere worshippers: which if you should deny, I would ask you whether the Church Acts 2. or any that the Apostles planted, were Presbyterial Churches or not. If they were not, there was never any; if they were, than there may be hypocrites and profane persons in them. For in those we read of Ananias, Sapphyra, Simon Magus, Hymineus, Alexander, Demas, Diotrophes, the Nicolaitans, and those that said they were Apostles, and were not. How then was the Primitive Church composed and made up of none but living stones?  
Here then lies the fallacy, à dicto secundum quid. The Church in respect of the Elect, who to us are invisible, that belong unto the mystical body of Christ, is composed of living stones, namely, lively members, etc. and thus much those texts you produce very strongly prove. But the Church as it is Militant and visible of which you must speak, because you speak of a Presbyterial Church, comprehends all sorts in it, who though they be true, real and univocal parts of the visible body, yet they are but aequivocal parts of the mystical, and to them your description belongs not. To argue then from the part to the whole, is a fallacy. Some in the Presbyterial Church are living stones, therefore the whole Presbyterial Church is in its Primitive constitution composed of these, is fallacious.  
We grant that it were earnestly to be wished, and all lawful means would be diligently used both by Pastor and people, to have all the members of a Church most holy and gracious. But to say a Church hath no right constitution where all the members are not such, is a foul error.  
For never yet was their any Church of such a constitution; not the Domestical under the fathers, not the Jewish or National under Moses, not the Christian under the Apostles themselves, and therefore assume not that to your Presbyterial Church, which yet never was in any, nor never shall be. All Churches as visible, consist of heterogeneous parts, and so doth yours; which if it should mar the constitution of a Church, it must needs mar yours as well as others. For I hope you will not say, that all yours are Saints more than by calling, and so are all Christians, even those at Corinth and all, 
1 Cor. 16.2. Cap. 1.12, 13. cap. 5.1. cap. 6.15. cap. 11.21. cap. 15.35. cap. 8.12, 13.  among whom yet were schismatical and contentious persons, envying and strife, incest, and incest tolerated, going to Law with their brethren, Harlotry, coming to the Lords Table drunk, a denying of a fundamental point of saith, the resurrection, little charity to the weak brother. Now than if Corinth were a Presbyterial Church, certainly in the Primitive constitution it was not composed of living stones only, etc.  
To conclude, to the constitution of a Church there can be but two things required; the materiale, and the formale; the matter, are a people gathered and united, called by the Word to live in a divine policy under Christ their head. The form that unites them to him, is as you say rightly, faith and charity. That they be truly and indeed united to him, requisite it is that their faith be lively working by love. But that they be united to the body the visible Church, which is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, there is no more, nor can be no more expected, but that they make outwardly a profession of faith, and fraternal love. For whether either be true, unfeigned and sincere or no, we can never know, and should we stay till those were manifest unto us, it would be long enough before we should constitute ours, or you your Church: pray take this better into your consideration. Now I proceed to that which you more aim at; viz.   

2. That the rise of the rottening of the Church, was its falling from a pure poor Presbyterial Church into an impure, unpolished Parochial Church.  
TO which I have this to say. First, that if this position be true, than Amesius was mistaken, 
Ames. Med. l. 1. cap. 39 Sect. 22.  who makes a Combinational Church all one with a Parochial. He tells us there of a Church instituted by God, and saith, that it was not National, Provincial, nor Diocesan, but Parochialis, vel unius Congregationis, cujus membra inter se combinantur, & ordinary couveniunt in eodem loco ad publicum Religionis exercitium. If you shall say, that this kind of Parochial Church differs from ours at this day, because it is combined in Covenant, which ours is not: I grant it: but add, that such a Combination is not necessary. For I know no other Covenant requisite, but that in Baptism to make a man a member of any Church, as I formerly proved unto you. Neither can you give any one instance of any such Covenant before your time, was taken by any Parochial Church in Amesius sense.  
Secondly, I shall here again put you in mind of that I intimated at first, about this word Parochia, and give you farther light in it. For Parochia hath a double acception, eirher as it was at first, 
Selden. of tyths, cap. 6. Sect. 3.  or as it is used in our days. At first the word Parochia denoted a whole Bishopric (which is but a greater Parish) and signified no other than a Diocese. That in these there were Towns and Villages cannot be denied; for the proof of this we need but run over the names of Cities, Towns, etc. of Judea mentioned in the Old and New Testament, and all plantations will teach us, that in process of time it comes to be thus; at first in greater Cities, then in these Religion was planted. Among these it cannot be well conceived, that the whole hamlet was at once converted, but it must be done by little and little, till at last the whole Township received the faith. Together than they met for the service of God, and as the Jews in their several Towns had to that purpose their Synagogues; so Christians began to think of convenient places, where they might meet to this purpose, (as you in New-England) they built them Churches, and so from meeting in private houses, they met in these. Where yet they entered not into a Combination to be an absolute and Independent Congregation, but did depend on the chief Church, where the Bishop was resident; and this is evident, by what I shall now say. The Pastors of these Parishes were such as the Bishop appointed under him to have care of souls in them; and those are they, 

Conc. Neoces. cap. 58.  
Conc. Antioch. cap. 87. & 89.   whom the Old Greek Councils call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And in the Churches where they kept their cure, the offerings of devout Christians were received. All that was received in the Bishopric, was as a common treasury to be thus dispensed; one part of it was allowed the maintenance of the Ministry; another, to the relief of the poor, sick and strangers; a third, 
Conc. Antioch. cap. 103, 104.  to the reparation of Churches; the fourth part to the Bishop. Thus it was many years before the Council of Nice, that the Bishops Parochia extended far; and that the whole was under his jurisdiction, and consequently, had not absolute power within themselves.  
2. But when the word Parish in that sense it is now used, began, it is not so easy to avouch; yet for it we have these Records: 

Damasus in pontific. Euseb. l. 2. c. 17. Epiphan. Haeres. 69.  
Euseb. l. 6. c. 43.   Evaristus who lived in Trajan's time, and succeeded Clemens, divided Rome into seven Parishes, assigning to every one a Presbyter. And it may be easily collected out of Eusebius, that it was thus at Alexandria; and Epiphanius names many which bore these titles; Theonae Serapionis, Pierii, Persiae, Diseae, Mendidii, Amriani, Baucalis, etc. For indeed necessity required it, when the Christians grew to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Cornelius called the Christians, and did implore omnia. Tertull. Apol. cap. 37. Then they were forced to divide Congregations, and assign several Presbyters to their cures, yet in subordination to their Bishops, as is evident in all Records of the Church.  
This being so, how is it possible, that the rottening of the pure poor Presbyterial Church, should be the rise of the Parochial? when the Parochial in the first sense was the first Church that ever was in the world as I have before manifested. In which sense it is that Cyril calls Saint James, 
Cyril. Catechis. 16.  primum hujus Parochiae, meaning Jerusal. Episcopum: and in that signification it is very obvious to be read in the old Councils of both tongues, as Filesacus hath observed; you then argue ex non concessis. For in the first sense, the Parochial had the precedency, and was older than your new device. Your Combinational might corrupt and rotten it, but that could never corrupt and rotten that which was not. If you take it in the last, for Parishes as they after were restrained, and are constituted at this day, you must show that your Church had the priority of them, which you are never able to do: else you cannot say that they corrupted it. And indeed your allegation that follows is so weak, that any man who reads and considers it, will suspect that you have little to say for your cause.   

3. At that time this was, when ceasing to elect and ordain either a Teacher, a Pastor, a Ruler, a Deacon or deaconess, or Widow, in conformity to the heavenly Canon, Rom. 12.7. & 15.4. & 16.1. compared with 1 Tim. 3.1. Titus 1.5.6. it was well content with a Parson, a Vicar, a Warden, an Overseer of the Poor, and a Midwife.  
THE time of this corruption you point out, and set it to be when it ceased to elect and ordain a Teacher, etc. Here again you commit the same error, supposing I am bound to trust and believe you on your bare word. Ceasing to do any thing, presupposeth that there was a time when one might or did do it: Now it behoveth you to show the time when Parishes in general, (for particulars will make no rule, and few, very few are to be given;) did ever elect their Pastor. I am sure to ordain him, in antiquity you can produce not one example. 'Tis not possible, since the Records of the Church are open, and he that runs may read them; that at first the Teacher and Pastor sent to any Church, was sent and there placed by the Bishop. The instances are so many, and the practice of the Church so universal, that it were lost labour to produce them; yet here I shall ask you only one question; if this were a corruption, I wonder why by your pure Presbyterial Church it is retained? why are men now elected, approved, sent and settled to be Parsons and Vicars in Parish Churches? who you know are neither elected nor ordained by that Church over whom they are set. Remove this beam out of your own eye, before you see the mote in you brothers.  
Well, but what was the error? this, that the Parish contented itself with a Parson and Vicar, for a Pastor, Teacher, and Ruler; as if the Parson and Vicar might not be all these; might not feed, teach and rule his flock? what should hinder him? for call him by what name you please, his office and duty is the same; and a Parson and Vicar is bound as much to feed, teach and guide his flock, as is your Pastor, Teacher and Ruler; and must answer the neglect of it as well as they; this is to seek a knot in a rush. Be pleased to translate Parson by a Latin word, and you shall always find it rendered by Pastor or Rector Ecclesiae, and how then is the man or his name changed? and if the Latins may content themselves to be under the Pastor or Rector, I see no reason but the English may as well be content with their Parson. He because in case of necessary absence, disability of body, age, or other casualties which may be, when the Parish was of a very large extent, assumed unto him a helper; who because he was vices ejus supplere, was called Vicarius; this was the original of Vicars; and that you look not so strangely at the name; in the old Law, the High Priest had his Sagan, 
Casaubon. Exerc. 13. Num. 9  who in case of the High Priests pollution performed his office; such was Zephaniah 2 Reg. 25.18. and nAnas unto Caiaphas; the Chorepiscopi were of the same kind to the Bishops of old. And the Protosincelli to the Patriarches of Constantinople. And in this there was no hurt that came in from Rome, when by appropriations of the revenues of the Church to Abbeys, Monasteries, 
Selden of tyths, cap. 12. Sect. 1.  etc. perpetual Vicarages were erected. But this was so late, that no injury could be done to the Combinational Church by it, since that was corrupted and gone, when Parishes were erected many hundred years before, and then there were none of these Vicars in rerum natura; I see not then to what purpose this name is here inserted, except to make up the tale; and the same may be said of the Parson also, for it is no ancient name. A Deacon we retain, though in another employment, and probably in the very office that Timothy puts; 
Vide sis Aretii loc. Commun. loc. 66. de Diaconis.  and indeed instead of those that served Tables, we have Wardens and Overseers of the poor, which at first was but a mere secular, but charitable employment, as was a deaconess; and putting honest men into such an employment, though under another name, is no corruption of any Church's constitution, for it mars not the matter nor form of it. How your Midwife comes in, I must profess I am to seek; for I never heard any man more look upon her as an officious and useful handmaid of the Church, then upon the Midwives of Egypt. About these two last, the Deacon and deaconess, 
Aret. in Tim. 1.3.  Aretius in his Commentary upon 1 Tim. 3. hath a very good observation, that these were very necessary in the first planting of the Church, and before there were Christian Magistrates; but after that Kings became nursing fathers and nursing mothers to the people of God, they took a care that the poor Christians should be relieved in another way than by the Church-stock. There were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 erected in Hospitals, Almshouses, etc. they were provided for, than they made Laws for a common-stock to be collected in every Parish for that purpose, and appointed by Statutes, Overseers of the poor, and other Officers. We, saith he, therefore have not in our Churches such Deacons and Deaconesses as they had; neither is it requisite we should have, because the duty is so wisely ordered by the political Magistrate. To this purpose, that grave and wise expositor.  
But this you say should be done in conformity to the heavenly Canon, and many texts you cite for it; but I can find no Canon at all in any of them for what you aim at. Rom. 12.7. I read, he that hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, let him wait upon it. But I have told you it is of gifts the Apostle there speaks, not of functions, 
2 Cor. 4.1. & 6.3. Rom. 11.13.  or if of functions, the words is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and the doctrine of the Gospel is adorned with this title, and the Ministers in what degree soever, called passim Diaconi, Col. 1.7. & 4.17. & 1.23.25. 1 Cor. 3.5. 2 Cor. 3.6. The next citation, Rom. 15.4. passeth my reach, for I see not how it can be drawn to say any thing to this purpose, therefore I pass it by. You urge Rom. 16.1. and that indeed speaks of Phoebe as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a servant of the Church of Cenchrea. Be it so, that una hirundo non facit ver, were it true in your sense, yet one example will make no rule; again, a servant she might be, and yet not such as you intent; for if you will admit of Ignatius description of those servants, (and he was near the Apostles age, and could best describe them,) I dare say you will not acknowledge your Deaconesses to be such; his words are, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
Ignat. Ep. ad Antioch.  But to yield to you all you can ask, Aretius gives you a reason why they may be spared. You advise that these places be compared with 1 Tim. 3.1. I suppose it should be the 11. And then Expositors will tell you, that Saint Paul speaks not all of Deaconesses, but of the wives of Deacons, and other Church men, enjoining that they be grave Matrons, no Slanderers, but sober, faithful in all things. Your last place, Tit. 1.5, 6. makes clearly against you; for if Titus were left in Crete to ordain, than the Combinational Church was not to elect and ordain Pastors, Teachers, etc. Here I can find no Canon for that.  
Logicians observe that those arguments have little force in them, that mutatis mutandis may be returned, for they are but like Tennis balls that are banded from hand to hand, and serve only for sport. Will you have but patience then, while I return your discourse? The first rise of rottening the Church, (being its falling from a poor pure Apostolical Church, which in its primitive constitution was made up of living stones, etc.) was at that time when ceasing to elect and ordain Bishops, Presbyters, Evangelists, Teachers, Catechizers, in conformity to the heavenly Canon, 1 Tim. 3.1, 2, 3, 4. Titus 1.5, 6. Ephes. 4.11. 2 Tim. 4.5. Gal. 6.6. it was well content to admit & accept of Approvers, Ruling Elders, Lecturers, Itinerants; by which wisdom of the flesh, being no better than enmity against God, in this last age of the world, long after the Apostles days, Christ's spiritual house, and growing as well as spiritual Temple, was turned and transformed into a carnal and dead Congregation, an Apostatising Combinational Church. No question the argument thus returned will displease, and yet there is as much strength in this, as in the other. This may make us both wary, how we make use of such Cothurni, reasons that as buskins may be drawn on either leg. That which in the last place you allege is   

4. The very beginning and breeding of which Parochial Church is seen to have been in the time of Polycarp and Irenaeus.  
WHat's this I read? a Parish Church of that antiquity? Parsons, Vicars, Wardens, Overseers of the poor then? What these while Saint John might be for aught we know yet alive? For Polycarp you confess was his Disciple, and in it you say true; for thus Irenaeus witnesseth; Polycarpus non solum ab Apostolis edoctus, 
Iren. lib. 3. c. 3.  & conversatus cum multis ex eyes, qui Dominum nostrum viderunt, sed etiam ab Apostolis in Asia, in eâ quae est Smyrnis Ecclesia constitutus Episcopus. This is greater antiquity for a Parish Church in that sense you intent, than I or any body else could ever find before. That which deceived you, as I am apt to believe, is the translation by Hanmer, who renders the words of the Epistle of the Church of Smyrna, unto the Parishes throughout Pontus, 
Euseb. l. 4. c. 15.  not understanding that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Greek word is often taken, and most usually in the eldest of the Greek Writers, for regiones suburbicariae the neighbouring habitations, before there was any distinction of Parishes; Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamus, Laodicea, were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as in respect of secular jurisdiction, so also in Ecclesiastical regiment; when then the Smyrneans directed their letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they meant no other than those Churches which were under the Smyrnean jurisdiction.  
But admit it were true in your sense, what have you gained by it? nay rather what have you not lost? for to say your Combinational Church should fail in the Apostles or his Disciples time, by the setting up of the Parochial, will give such encouragement to the adverse party, that they will not doubt to say, That was well done which was then done; especially when they cannot find for sixteen hundred years any man that opened his mouth against it. And the selfsame answer will serve to your other instance of Irenaeus.  
Of these two worthies you affirm, that one of them was an Elder of the Church of Smyrna, the other Pastor of Lions. And I pray, why could you not as well have called them by other names? I am sure your Author Eusebius doth. For of the last thus he saith, 
Euseb. l. 5. c. 5.  that when Pothinus of the age of ninety years had ended his life,— Irenaeus succeeded him in the Bishopric. He was a Bishop then, but if you take Pastor in that sense, as it is almost taken in Church Records, we agree. But yet I must remember you that Lions was a great City, and somewhat more than a Parish, as you mean.  
As for Polycarp, your Author tells you that he was Precedent of the Church of Smyrna, and so Irenaeus calls him Episcopus ab Apostolis constitutus, and under that title Ignatius writes to him; 
Ignat. Epist. ad Polycarp.  and in all probability he is that Angel of the Church of Smyrna, to whom that Epistle was written, Rev. 2. He was then capable of a higher title then of an ordinary Elder; he had indeed in his Church many Elders, even a whole Presbytery; and therefore Ignatius gives this direction to those of Smyrna, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
Idem Epist. ad Smyrn.  In this elegant gradation, you see he makes a distinction of Laics, Deacons, Presbyters, and a Bishop; and therefore Polycarp was more than a common Presbyter, to whom he persuades all the Presbyters to be in subjection. And which is yet more, which makes clearly against your Combinational Churches, (for you grant there were Parishes at Smyrna) in the close of his Epistle to Polycarp, he persuades them to continue in the unity of God; and the Bishop his words are these, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In which unity had we remained, we had not lived to see the Church so rend, and overcome with so many Heresies, as we behold and lament at this day. I come to your third degree of corruption.    

SECT. V The words of the Letter.  
The third degree of the Presbyterial Church's degeneracy, was its climbing up to the stile of a Provincial Church, whose Pastor was not afraid nor ashamed to assume the name and office of an Archbishop, and Metropolitan; leaving the servile and subservient titles of Prebend, Surrogate, and Vicar-general, as terms good enough to the inferior Officers his underlings. Of which proud and profane Pest-house, that Austin who was sent from Gregory, the last of the good Bishops, and the first of the bad Popes of Rome, is reputed and recorded to have been the father and founder in this Land; even then when he was stoutly and stiffly opposed by the Monks of Bangor, Anno Domini 596. and in the reign of King Ethelbert, witness Fox his Martyrol. page 119. together with the rest of our Eng. Hist. and Evagr. lib. 2. c. 8.  

Reply.  

Sect. 5.  YOu so promiscuously use these terms Presbyterial, and Combinational, that I know not readily how to shape my answer; for were I to deal with the Presbyterians, I should reply one way; but to you I must return another answer. You say here, that the third degree of corruption was when it degenerated into the Provincial Church. But this is not likely,; for when the Church became Cathedral and Parochial, your Combinational Church vanished, it was no more; now what hath no existence, cannot by degrees degenerate: since degrees belong to qualities which have, must have some subject to exist in. Had you then said the Church by these degrees rottened, it had been sense, but to say that that which long before this, was not, did rot and degenerate, is not intelligible. But to omit this, I shall now consider in what you place this Degeneration.  

1. This was when it climbed to be styled a Provincial Church.  
2. When the Pastor was not afraid nor ashamed to assume the name and office of Archbishop and Metropolitan.  
3. When he left the servile and subservient names or titles of Prebend, Surrogate, and Vicar-General to inferior Officers.  
4. That of this proud and profane Pest-house, Austin sent from Gregory was the father and founder in this our Land.   
This is the sum of what you deliver. To which I return you this answer with what brevity I can.   

1. The degeneration was, when it climbed up to be a Provincial Church.  
But what if this prove no Degeneration at all? For every thing is said to degenerate when it is changrd to the worse, whereas this change (if there were any, which I shall not easily grant you) was into the better; for by this the Church was better ordered and governed than it could be without it. At first the Church was so small, that an upper room was able to contain it; it enlarged in Cities, then in Countries, after into whole Provinces. Governed it must be, when small or great; and governed it was by the Apostles while they lived, and by those whom they appointed. These Governors by them placed, were seated in chief Cities, as at Jerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus, Corinth, etc. And because they had the Provinces allotted to them, the Churches were called Provincial. This I have showed before clearly in Titus, who was set over Crete. But it may be said the Provinces were not then converted, how then could such Governors be set over them? This is not material. For as the Apostles might rightly be called the Governors of the whole world (because Christ committed all Nations to their charge) though at first a small Congregation did obey them actually: So that Governor that was placad in any Metropolis or chief City by them, though actually he had in his communion and subjection some few, yet he had in Charge, the conversion of the whole Country; and being converted, they were under his government, and he was called their Metropolitan. That you startle not at the word, I have told you before, that it was very ancient, to be found in the Apostolical Canons, in the Nicene, Antiochian, 
Conc. Ephes. edictum post adventum episc. Cypri.  and Ephesine Councils, the words of this last Council being these, It seemeth good to this sacred and Ecumenical Council to reserve unto every Province untouched and undiminished the rights which they have had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from the first beginning, every Metropolitan having liberty according to the old custom to take the copy of our Acts for his security.  
I know well what you will cast in my teeth, that this was the wisdom of the flesh, and the wisdom of the flesh is enmity with God. But first consider that it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a custom of old, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a custom from the beginning; and the period of that may be for what we know to the contrary set in the Apostles. Secondly, I deny it absolutely to be the wisdom of the flesh. For there is flesh that is unregenerate, and the wisdom of that flesh is enmity with God; for ambition that is a corrupt quality residing in it, will prompt it to desire honour; covetousness to aim at wealth; self-love to promote and serve its lusts. But there is flesh again that is regenerate and borne anew, which is contented to be guided by God's Spirit instructing a man to obey Gods will revealed in his Word, and this is not enmity with God. I shall never think that Grace outs any man of his reason; it may perfect, heighten, enlighten it, but darken or dim it, it can never do. Whatsoever therefore a man shall do by the light of reason raised by Grace to this pitch, I shall not call it the wisdom of the flesh, nor be persuaded it is enmity against God.  
The first Fathers of the Church were men very eminent for the graces and gifts of the Spirit, men who were signal for illuminated reason: Even reason taught them that there must needs be confusion where there was no order; where there was equality, there could be no order, and therefore in an equality it was not possible the Church should continue. They saw that there was in one family but one Master; in one Army but one General; in one ship but one Pilot; in one Beehive but one King; reason taught them that there must be, and experience that there was sub & supra in all Societies, and therefore that it must be so in the Societies of God's people. Thus fare nature. But Reason improved by Grace taught them again, that God would not be served according to man's inventions, and therefore they must look, that though Reason suggested this or that, yet nothing must be done, that was contrary to Gods will revealed in his Word. They here then cast about to find, if they could, any thing contrary to what reason dictated; now this appeared not, but rather the contrary; for they found it written, Let all things be done decently and in order, all to edification, and that this was a precept for the regulating of the Church. And upon it, it was established 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from the beginning to this day, that in all Provinces there should be one chief Bishop, which from the mother City was called a Metropolitan, to whom all the other Bishops should be subject, and who to him should be accountable for what was done through the whole Province. This than was not the wisdom of the flesh, but the wisdom of God, who would have all things done in order. If any man did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, teach other things than he taught, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, teach any new things, and not according to the Analogy or rule of faith, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, teach any vain things, he might according to that direction that Saint Paul gives Timothy, have his mouth quickly stopped. For Discipline is the preservation and hedge of Doctrine; and Discipline can never be well administered among them that have an equal power. I pray tell me, what was the reason that moved his Highness the Lord Protector to take upon him the government of this Commonwealth? was it not because he foresaw that all would come to ruin in a parity of Governors? which was the aim of those who fancied a fifth Monarchy. This is the very reason that he himself assigns. And say what you will to the contrary, this is and will be the fate of the Church, except in one Province there be one chief. Can I give no other instances of it, yet that which we have lived to see is enough.  
This Calvin, Bucer, Zanchy, in their testimonies before alleged, foresaw, 
Bezae responsio ad tractatum de ministrorum evang. grad. fol. 143.  and therefore commended and allowed the ancient Primitive institution. I shall only add the testimony of Beza, and so shut up this point, especially having said so much before about it, when I spoke of Patriarches. Dicamus ergo Primatum illum ordinis per mutuae successionis vices (for such the Presbyterians plead for) ipsa tandem experientia compertum fuisse, non satis virium, nec ad ambitiosoes pastors, nec ad auditores quidem vanos, alios vero adulatorio spiritu praeditos compescendos habuisse, communicata viz. singulis pastoribus per vices hujus primatus dignitate. Itaque quod singulorum secundum successionem commune fuit, visum fuit ad unum, & eum quidem totius Presbyterii judicio delectum transfer, quod certe repraehendi nec potest, nec debet: quum praes●rtim vetustus hic mos Presbyterum deligendi in Alexandrina celeberrima Ecclesia jam inde à Marco Evangelista esset observatus, etc. Yea but say you say   

2. This man was not afraid nor ashamed to assume the Name and Office of an Archbishop and Metropolitan.  
AND what fear or shame than should be in this assumption, I see not. The Office was very useful, and the Name not so impious and profane, as you imagine.  
1. His office was to call the rest of the Bishops of the Province to the Synods, which were to be held twice every year, 

Concil. Antioch Can. 19  
Conc. in Trullo. cap. 8.  
Antiochenum. Can. 9  
Conc. African. cap. 127. & 28. Concil. Sard. cap. 14.   to appoint the place of their meeting, when the Ordinations of Bishops were examined and determined, and the deprivation and rejection of all such as were found unworthy of that honour and place was handled. In the Synod he sat as Precedent, and things were so moderated, that neither the rest might proceed to do any thing without consulting him, nor he without them, but was tied in matters of difference to follow the major part; when they assembled but once a year, many causes that abide no delay, were committed by them to the Metropolitan hearing the judgement. To him then lay Appeals. And yet his power was not absolute and arbitrary, for he was to execute the decrees of the Synods only, and to judge according to the Canons. And if he neglected his duty, he was by the Canon's liable to Censure and punishment in a general Council. And the Church story is a plentiful record, that by Councils Metrapolitans have been punished, censured, deposed. Now say truly, what is there that in this Office or Order that should offend any discreet man?  
2. Oh but his name is profane, and it is blasphemy to assume it; and for this afterward you give in this reason, because it is such a stile and title as is not communicable to any creature, but is proper and peculiar to Christ's own sacred person, being that besides himself none can be safely said to be an Archbishop, or chief Shepherd.  
I shall first encounter your reason, and invalidate it. For first you impose upon me; for Saint Peter's word is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
1 Pet. 5.4.  but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Secondly, were it so, yet it is but an argument à notatione nominis, which of all Topick arguments is the weakest. Thirdly, if this reason were good, than it would hold as well in all other names of Christ, and it were profane and blasphemous for any man to bear any of them. And yet I read there is not one of them except Immanuel, which hath not been attributed to man; 
Psal. 105.15. Matt. 2.6. Heb. 2.17. Heb. 3.1. 1 Pet. 2.25.  Jesus is attributed to Joshua, Hebr. 4.8. Christus to Kings and Patriarches: Nolite tangere Christos meos. He is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and so are the praepositi, Heb. 13.17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. He is styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and yet how many in the Gospel are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; he the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, and yet Saint Paul often calls himself an Apostle; he by Saint Peter is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and yet under him the Ministers of the Church are often styled Shepherds and Bishops. There can be no strength then in this reason, which is everted by so many examples; it must needs be as much profaneness and blasphemy for any creature to bear any of these appellations, since they were the names of Christ, as it can be for an Archbishop to take that name, if it had been his, which it was not. But it was no profaneness or blasphemy in them, and therefore not in him.  
But that the name may the less offend you, call to mind the antiquity of it, and what kind of men have born it, and yet the Church never held them for profane persons. It is as old as are Metropolitans, and they are as old as Metropolies or chief Cities, where Christianity was planted. chrysostom sticks not to call Titus' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and well he might who had seven Bishops under him. 
Cypr. Epist. 45. Edit. Pammelii.  Cyprian was Archbishop of Carthage a Martyr, a great Archbishop, for he saith, latè pa●et nostra provincia, habet Numidium & Mauritaniam sibi cohaerentes. Athanasius, who stood against all the world for the truth of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and had all the world against him, was Archbishop of Alexandria. What should I tell you that the first thirty two Bishops of Rome, who were all Martyrs, except one, bear that name? and that chrysostom, Epiphanius, Basil, Nazianzene, Cyril, etc. were all called Arch-Bishops? And that you be not quite out of love with it, that glorious Martyr of our Church Cranmer died Archbishop of Canterbury. I can never be drawn to imagine, that had there been profaneness and blasphemy in the name, such glorious lights of the Church, such pious, good, learned men, such pillars of the Faith, such Martyrs in defence of the Truth, would ever have owned it, been once styled by it. And so you see that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

3. When he left the servile and subservient names of Prebend, Surrogate, Vicar General to inferior Officers his underlings.  
THese names or titles I never heard the Archbishop or Metropolitan had, therefore I know not how he could leave them. Under him perhaps these were; but for the Prebend, he was no Officer. The Bishop and his College of Presbyters first lived together, and were maintained out of a common stock or treasury of the Church, the Bishop allotted to every one his salary monthly, which in Tertullian is called stipes, in Cyprian sportula; 
Tertull. Apol. c. 39 & 42.  and it was an honourable stipend or portion, as appears by the words of Cyprian, when he would have Clemens and Aurelius who were Confessors, admitted into the College of Presbyters, that they might be honoured with this stipend. Sciatis nos honorem Presbyteris illis jam d signasse, 
Cypr. Ep. 34. Edit. Pammel. & 27. 36.  ut iisdem sportutis cum Presbyteris honorentur; and in another Epistle he calls these, menstrae divisiones, agreeing with his Master Tertullian, who saith these stipes were given menstruâ die. Thus it was at first, but afterward when Cathedral Churches were built, these Presbyters were called prebend's, and their salary Praebenda, 
Spalatens. lib. 2. cap. 9 Sect. 6.  not that they had a separate part or portion of that Church revenue to themselves, as afterwards it was thought fit; sed quod cuique ex communi illius Ecclesiae reditu alimenta praebebantur. Now this was the Original of prebend's, neither was he any more a Church Officer, then as a Presbyter, which if you take in the old sense, you have no reason to carp at.  
2. As for the Surrogate, I do not find that ever any Archbishop had such an Officer; I suppose, that you should aim at, 

Conc. Ancyr. Can. 13.  
Neoces. 13. Antioch. 10. Conc. Sardic. cap. 6,  
Laodic. cap. 56. Socrat. Scholar lib. 5. cap. 21. Possidon. in vita Aug.  
Aug. Ep. 110. Naucler. Vol. 2. Generate. p. 667.   is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Rural Bishops, who were brought into the Church to supply the Bishop's place in absence or sickness, who because they abused their power, were disliked, and timely abrogated. Or if not these, yet the suffragan Bishops or Coadjutors, for such than were, as it appears in the Church Records. Agelius the Novatian Bishop being ready to die, first imposed hands on Sisimius to succeed him, but upon the request of the people, made choice of Marcian, then of Sisimius; the story is worth your reading in Socrates. Austin was also made the Suffragan to Valerius in Hippo; and afterward Austin himself took for his Coadjutor Eradius. Thus you may see a Coadjutor was allowed, but such a one as should be only a Presbyter, while the Bishop lived; and therefore long after the time of Augustine, when Zachary Bishop of Rome associated another Bishop, as a Coadjutor to Boniface the Bishop of Mentz, he confessed it to be a thing forbidden by the Canons, and worthy reprehension, but that upon his importunity, of special favour, he had yielded so much unto him, that he might have such a Coadjutor, whom with the advice of his brethren he might appoint to succeed him when he should die. Now if you do aim at these, there could be no great error in the institution, if the Bishop either when he was in remotis agendis as the Lawyers speak, or disabled by infirmity or age, he made choice of some worthy person to be his Coadjutor; no otherwise then the High Priests among the Jews did of their Saganim. For I read not of any express text of holy writ, that could or did warrant them to do it.  
3. Thirdly, the last name that doth displease, is the Vicar General, but neither was he properly any Church Officer. A Judge he was in the Arch-Bishops Court, for such matters as were reserved by Princes to the Christian judicature, to visit for the Metropolitan the whole Province, and and so came into the place of them, whom the Laodicean Council calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Caranza translates the word Visitatores, but Meursius Circitatores, Lustratores, quorum munus esset circumire per omnes universae regionis Ecclesias, 

Laodic. Conc. Can. 57  
Meursii. Lexico mixobarb. Balsam. in Can. 57 Conc. Laodiceni.   & inquirere de illarum statu. And of these Balsam●● upon the Canon of the Laodicean Council hath these words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. A Commission to this purpose I find given by Henry the eighth to Thomas Cromwell, after Earl of Essex; that great instrument of expulsion of the Pope's power out of England: by which authority he visited all the Abbeys and Monasteries of the Land, and finding in them foul enormities, opened them in Parliament the next year, in which he sat with the title of Vicegerent, or Custos spiritualitatum; this power was not much unlike a Vicar General. And were it safe to utter my thoughts, I should not stick to put you in mind of those, who have lately done the same work under other names. For what else I pray, were the Propagators of the Gospel? what else the Commissioners for scandalous and ignorant Ministers? what else the Committee men? under whom I am sure the Clergy felt a sharp visitation, yea, and sharper than that of the Custos spiritualitatum; for then the ejected had a competency of maintenance allowed them for their lives, which by these is not done. Lastly, if I should call your Approvers Vicar Generals too, I should not much err; for have they not the care of all the Churches? Modesty retains me, or else I could say, that some of your Pastors of Congregational Churches have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and been Informers or Agents to the prejudice of many an honest and laborious Minister.  
But you say these Officers were Underlings; how otherwise could it be, if they were Officers? for Officers must be under; they were subservient, so they must be also; for indicitur ministratio, whosoever will be great among you, 
Mat. 20.26.  let him be your Minister. To be under was humility, to be subservient their duty; but if among them any were servile, so slavish as to be at the Arch-Bishops or Metropolitans beck, and to drudge for his ends, this was baseness; and if you note the men, they shall not be defended, but condemned by me as well as you.  
But while I go along with you in the pursuit of these, I find myself in some danger; for I find a Pest-house nigh, in which plaguy people are used to be put; and to this those you mention are sent for their pride and profaneness, and I wish that all who are infected with the same Leprosy were placed there with them; for then 'tis possible we might meet with Corah, Dathan, and Abiram there, as well as Moses and Aaron. For is pride and profaneness only in Prelates? I shall speak a bold word, and I know I can make it good, that I can show you many more Arch-Bishops and Metropolitans exemplar for humility and piety, than you can exemplify as notorious for pride and profaneness. The birth of it in this land you intimate in these following words.   

4. Of which proud and profane Pest-house, that Austin who was sent from Gregory, the last of the good Bishops, end the first of the bad Popes of Rome, is reputed to be the father and founder in this our Land, etc.  
1. OF Gregory, I know what you bring is so common that it is in every man's mouth, for as it is in M. Fox in the place you cite, that of the number of all the first Bishops before him in the Primitive Church, he was the basest, and of all them that came after him he was the best. Upon what ground the first part of this sentence was spoken I know not; let them give account that said it. For this is certain, that he was a learned and pious father of the Church, as his works testify; and the strongest battery out of the fathers we can make against the Pope's claim and usurpation to his universal supremacy, is fetched from him. For he calls the title of universal supremacy by these appellations; 1. Typum superbiae. 2. Nomen novum. 3. Vocabulum temerarium stultum. 4. Superbum pempaticum. 5. 
Jewel. Cont. Hardingum. Act. 4. Sect. 4.  Perversum. 6. Superstitiosum Profanum. 7. Scelestum. 8. Nomen erroris. 9 Nomen singularitatis. 10. Nomen vanitatis. 11. Nomen hypocriseos. 12. Nomen blasphemiae, as Bishop Jewel hath taught me out of his Epistles. Some men may perhaps esteem meanly of him for giving countenance to some then growing superstitions in the Roman Church; but the commendation given him by two, who lived near the same time is great. The first is Isidore Archbishop of Syvil, who writes thus presently upon his death, Gregorius Papa Romanae sedis & Apostolicae Praesul, 
Isidore de viris illustrib. cap. 17  compunctione timoris Dei plenus, & humilitate summus, tantóque per gratiam Spiritus sancti scientiae lumine praeditus, ut non modo illi praesentium temporum quisquam, sed in praeteritis quidem par fuit unquam. 
Hildef. de viris illustrib.  This is the testimony of Isidore, which Hildefonsus Archbishop of Toledo having cited not long after, adds these words, Ita virtutum omnium claruit perfectione, ut (exclusis omnium virorum comparationibus) nihil illi simile demonstret antiquitas. Vicit enim sanctitate Antonium, eloquentia Cyprianum, sepicutta Augustinum. And though no question these praises of Gregory were hyperbolical, yet they justify the latter part of Mr. Fox's words, that of all the Popes which came after him he was the best. He that shall read his life in Paulus Diaconus, will have just reason to have a charitable opinion of him; that I say not his own writings yet extant proclaim him in the gate.  
Before I come to his Legate Austin the Monk, 
. Artic. 3. Sect. 24.  necessary it is that I premise somewhat. That Christianity was early planted in this our Island, is evident by the testimonies of Tertullian, Origen, chrysostom, Theodoret, which you may read in : 
Patric. Junius Annot. in Ep. Clementis. Dorotheus in Synopsi.  That Paul and Peter came hither and preached, there are some Records; some say Simo● Zelotes, some speak of Aristobulus; but that which is generally received, and for which there is good evidence, is that Joseph of Arimathea sailing out of France with his son Joseph and ten others, travailed through Britain, and preached the Gospel there; 
Vide Ephraim. Pagit. part. 3. pag. 1. 2, etc. Baron. Annal. Anno 35.  to which purpose serves that testimony of Gildas, Tempore ut scimus summo Tiberii Caesaris radios suos huic insulae primus indulget Christus, and Cardinal Baronius sets down the year of joseph's coming hither, out of an Ancient Manuscript of the Vatican, viz. the nineteenth of Tiberius' reign, and the 35 of our Lord. Some testimonies also there are for the improvement of it in the next Century, but the light broke forth clearest under King Lucius about the year 180. who consulted Eleutherus the Bishop of Rome, and from him received advice. 'Tis the honour of our Nation, to have had the first Christian King of the world: he was instructed in the faith by Elvan and Meduni, 
Lib. Til. Bal. Script. Britanniae. Cent. 1. pag. 17. Bishop Godwin, Dr. Pitsae.  and with these he sent his own Ambassadors Fugatius and Damian, qui quibusdam ritibus, ac solenni Episcoporum dispositione eandem formarent Ecclesiam. And he erected three Archbishoprics, one at London, and record we have of the particular Bishops that governed in that Sea. A second at York. A third at Caerleon upon Vsk, in which Dubritius and Saint David were Arch-Bishops wirh others too long to name. For four hundred years then and more, that is, from the conversion of King Lucius to Augustine's coming, this was the state and government of the British Church; but in the latter times much eclipsed by the incursion of the Scots and Picts, and the tenth persecution under Dioclesian, but more by the invasion and cruelty of the Saxons, 
Beda. lib. 3. cap. 6.21, 22, 24. etc.  when they were forced to retire, and their Pastors with them into Wales and Cornwall. The greater part of the Land being now again become Idolatrous and Heathenish: this gave occasion unto Gregory to send Austin the Monk for their conversion, which he effected in some part; but the greatest part may not be attributed unto him; since it is well known that Aidan converted the North parts; Finan the East Saxons and the Mercians, whose Coadjutors were Ceadda, Colman, etc. These professed no subjection to the Church of Rome, and deserve to be partakers of as much honour from our British Nation, as Austin. Him I shall easily grant you, upon the credit of the Records, to have been a proud, undiscreet, and cruel bloody Prelate: 
Bale. Fol. 35. Cent. 1. Bed. lib. 2.2.  but never that he was the father and founder of this proud and profane Pest-house as you called it in this Land; I mean the government of the Church by Arch-Bishops and Bishops. For it is evident that in King Lucius time they were instituted: And before Augustins' arrival, Anno 522. at the Coronation of Arthur, there was a great meeting of Lords, 

Galfrid. Monum. lib 9 cap. 12. 13.  
Bale fol. 28.   Princes and Bishops at Caerleon; and that of the three Arch-Bishops of Britain at that time, Dulritius Archipraesul, Primas, Archbishop of Caerleon did the Office of the Church that day, being the feast of Pentecost. This Arch-Bishops seat was afterward by his Successor Saint David translated to Saint david's, which so continued till the Norman Conquest. 

Bale. Cent. 1. fol. 30.  
Bede. lib. 2 c. 2. Galfr. Monum. lib. 11. cap. 12. Godw. page 45.   But the answer which the British Bishops gave to Austin, being summoned to give him a meeting, where by persuasions, threats and all manner of means, he endeavoured to draw the Britain Bishops to an entire conformity to the Church of Rome, is so clear an evidence, that I cannot see how it can be evaded; for the answer was short and peremptory, that they might not submit themselves to him, having an Archbishop of their own, etc. And in a second meeting, being offended with his pride, 

Sir H. Spelman. Conc. Britan. An. 590. ex Manusc. Saxon. Bed. lib. 2. c. 2. Bale Cent. 1. fol. 35.  
Bede lib. 2. c. 2.   because he would not rise to them at their coming into the Assembly, they gainsaid him in every thing; for say they, si modo nobis assurgere noluit, quanto magis si ei subjici ceperimus, nos pro nihilo contemnet?  
This repulse occasioned the slaughter of the Monks of Bangor, over whom Dinoth was the Caenobiarcha, as Bale calls him, who as it is supposed was that holy man in Bede, that taught them how to discern whether he was sent of God to them or no. For saith he, if he be a meek and an humble man, it is an evident sign, that he bears the yoke of Christ, and offers the same to you; but if he be stout and proud, he is not of God, you may be sure; and his deportment was such as I said, which alienated the Bishop's minds, and the Monks with them. Our adversaries of Rome take it very ill, that Austin should be thus accused of pride and cruelty, and use all their wits in his excuse. They would persuade us he was dead, when this Massacre was committed; but Bishop  hath evidently confuted their allegations, and made it appear that in that War he was alive, 
. defence. Apolog. quinta pars. cap. 1. divisio prima.  and the instigator of it. Had you then set the saddle upon the right horse, and fixed those Epithets of proud and profane upon Austin, you had some colour for it. But to fasten it upon the whole order, upon Arch-Bishops and Metropolitans, for one man's sake is want of charity, of which he was not the founder neither in this Land, as I have proved to you. Nor Fox, nor any English Historians, nor Evagrius say any such thing; Evagrius could not, for nor Gregory was Bishop of Rome, nor Austin sent hither when he writ & ended his History. All that Fox or any other Historian can say, is that Austin was the first Archbishop of Canterbury; and that shall readily be yielded you; now when I hear, how you can improve that concession to your advantage, you shall receive an answer. I could if I pleased anticipate your objections, but I will not now do it, because I hasten to what follows.    

SECT. VI The words of the Letter.  
THe fourth degree of the Combinational Churches infamous defection, was its notably naughty enlarging itself into a National Church; where, and whence (without controversy) arose that Jewish imitation, and irregularly Religious observation of five frivolo s and foundationlesse customs and traditions, of which the first was of National times, as the fifty yearly Festivals, or holy working-days, Cursed-Masse, Candlemas, etc. The second, was of National places, as the Consecrated meeting houses, Porches, Chancels, and Churchyards. The third, was of National persons, as the Universal Preachers, Office-Priests, Half-Priests, or Diocesan Deacons. The fourth, was of National pious performances, as stinted Worship, Choristers, singing of Psalms with all the Rubrique Postures. And the fifth was of National payments, or spiritual profits, as offerings, tithes, and mortuaries; all which fruitless and fantastical fashions, were the illegitimate legal offspring of National Parliaments, in this and in the Neighbor-Nations. Witness the public Acts, Statutes, and other Ordinances in that behalf.  

The Reply.  
SIr, that affection which I have always borne you as a friend, and that duty which I own you as a Christian, moves me in plain words to tell you, that the indulgence you bear to the Combinational Church, hath in this Paragraph transported you beyond the bounds of moderation and truth. For to omit your common Sophism, petitio principii, which is the foulest in all Logic; that there was at first a Combinational Church, and that this did precede a National; which is as if you should say, the parts are before the whole, when the contrary in nature hath hitherto been received for truth, that omne totum sive universale sive integrale est prius partibus. But to omit this, you over-load your assertion with many unnecessary Epithets, and those sometimes unapt; whereas attributes are ornaments, and where they are not decently affixed, they become our speech no more, than a fair gold lace doth a corpse garment, or a rich jewel fastened to a straw hat. Thirdly, the five frivolous customs and traditions you reckon up, are no proper accidents of the National Church, but were common to the Provincial, Cathedral and Parochial, and so no distinct notes to know that the National Church was corrupted more than they; should I yield them to be corruptions. Lastly, you say they were brought in by a Jewish imitation, which if granted, it would not at all help your cause; as I will after make appear. These are your undertake in this Section, and I shall not need to analyse it, as I have done before; because you have methodised it to my hand, for which I thank you. The first thing than I shall prove unto you, is that there is such a thing as a National Church, and that it was before your Combinational, so that it cannot be true which you affirm; that the fourth degree of the Combinational Church's defection, was its notably naughty enlarging itself into a National Church.   

1. That there is a National Church, and that this was, first, is consonant to Scripture, to reason, to experience.  
1. FIrst it is very consonant to Scripture. God after Adam's fall made a Covenant with mankind for salvation: The seed of the woman shall break the serpent's head. The words of the Covenant were obscure, and therefore God was pleased to add light to them, 
Gen. 3.15. Gen. 12.3. Gal. 3.8.  in that promise he made to Abraham; In thy seed, i. e. Christ, shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed? That this promise was made to the Church, is beyond all question; and who were this Church but all Nations? not to Abraham's seed after the flesh, 
Rom. 4.13. & 9.8.  but to Abraham's seed through the righteousness of faith was the promise made; not to the Jews, but to the Gentiles also was the promise made, and both go here under the name of Nations; and what should hinder now, but the Church into which both should be gathered, should be called a National Church? The argument is drawn à Denominatis; Natio is Denominaus, National denominativum, Jew's and Gentiles Denominatum; the proposition than is true, that Jews and Gentiles make one National Church. Hence it is, that what God said of the Jew, 
Exod. 19.6.  ye shall be to me a Kingdom of Priests and an holy Nation, is by Saint Peter affirmed of the Christian Church, ye are a chosen generation, 
1 Pet. 2.9.  a royal Priesthood, an holy Nation. Which when effected, our Saviour's words were fulfilled, other sheep I have which are not of this fold, 
John 10.16.  them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, that there may be one fold, and one Shepherd.  
Farther yet a prophecy is extant, Isa. 2.2. 
Isa. 2.2. Mic. 4.1, 2, etc. Jer. 4.2. Isa. 65.1. Zach. 2.11. Zach. 14.9. Psalm 2.8. Psalm 22.27. Matth. 21.43. Rom. 4.17.  And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lords house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills, and all Nations shall flow unto it. Let other texts be compared with this, which speak the same thing. Thus it was foretold, and that what was foretold might accordingly be fulfilled, our Saviour gave his disciples a Commission in these general words, Go ye therefore and teach all Nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, Son and holy Ghost, etc. Matthew 28.19. And I pray call to mind, that when Peter baptised the penitents, Acts 2.39. he comforted them with these words, for the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as our Lord God shall call. And yet after this even Peter himself, and the Apostles, and the brethren that were in Judaea, of this had but a confused notion; for when Peter came up to Jerusalem, 
Acts 11. Acts 10.  they that were of the Circumcision, contended with him about it, to whom he was feign to make his Apology, opening to them the vision of the sheet, which when they heard these things, they glorified God, saying, then hath God also granted to the Gentiles repentance unto life. In effect, they attested the truth of Peter's words, 
Verse 34.  Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons, looks now no more upon a Jew, than he doth upon a sinner of the Gentiles, but in every Nation, he that feareth him, and doth righteousness, is accepted of him. The partition wall being broken down, what could they be but one church?  
I can never sufficiently wonder at your words, when you call this access of all Nations a naughty enlargement. What? is that which God by Covenant with Abraham promised naught? that naught which he foretold should be? that naught which Christ gave Commission to his disciples to do? that naught which the Disciples did? All Nations, Isa. 2.2. All flesh, Isa. 66.23. All the kindreds of the earth, Psal. 22.26, 27. A multitude, which no man could number of all Nations and kindreds, and people, Rev. 7.9. are said to be the people of God under the New Testament, and yet you will not allow them the name of a National Church.  
But a stronger foundation for this Truth there cannot be, than that which Saint Paul hath laid under the similitude of an Olive which had two kinds of branches, natural, verse 21. and wild, 17. 
Rom. 1ST  The natural were the Jews, the wild the Gentiles; the natural were broken off through unbelief, and the wild by faith graffed in. These wild now being naturalised, are in the same condition that the Natural were before they were broken off. But the Natural branches were in the Olive totally, the whole Nation, they and their children, which made the National Church of the Jews, and therefore the wild branches must be so inserted, they and their children also, which will make the National Church of the Gentiles, which is the full scope and intention of the Apostle in that chapter. Finally, the very same Covenant that was made with Abraham, 
2 Cor. 6.16.  is made with the Corinthians, 2 Cor. 6.16. I will be their God, and they shall be my people. As that then was extended to the whole Nation of the Jews, 
Leu. 26.12.  Levit. 26.12. so also is it now to be extended to the whole Nation of the Gentiles, so that all those Nations that have had the Gospel preached unto them, and answering that Gospel, have received the doctrine of Christ, submitting to his Ordinances in the profession of his Name, are to be reckoned as they were, 
1 Pet. 2.10. Acts 8.12, 13. John 6.66. Acts 11.26. 1 Cor. 1.2. 1 Cor. 12.13. Matth. 8.11.  the people of God, 1 Pet. 2.10. Believers, Acts 8.12, 13. Disciples, John 6.66. Christians, Acts 2. Saints by calling, 1 Cor. 1.2. The Church of the Gentiles, 1 Cor. 12.13. The Kingdom of Christ, Matth. 8.11. Thus have I shown you that since the whole Church quoad materiale doth consist of Nations, there can be no impropriety or absurdity in it, when we call any part thereof a National Church, or the Church of Believers in any one Nation. And now let us see what help you can have for the confirmation of this besides Scripture out of the principles of reason.  
2. We believe in our Creed the Catholic Church, and Catholic it is called in respect of all ages and times, because, before, under, and after the Law it always was: and secondly, in respect of persons; for there is not any person of what degree, sex, condition or age, that may not be a member of it. And thirdly, in respect of places, in that as formerly the Jews, so now all persons in all Nations have a capacity to be of the Church of Christ. Universality then being an attribute of the Church, it cannot be found in any one Church limited either in respect of time or place. Either then make your Combinational Church the Catholic, or you must extend it farther; and if so, why not to a Province? and if to a Province, why not to a Nation, nay many Nations? And be it you should assume the name of Catholic, and fasten it to every particular Combinational Church, yet particular Societies of Christians can lay no farther claim to it than they can demonstrate themselves to belong to that Church that hath a true and a just title to it; which not particular Church can do, but by proving that it holds the common faith once delivered to the Saints without heretical innovation, 
Ames. lib. 1. c. 31. Sect. 20.  or schismatical violation of the Unity and Peace of the Christian world. This being the way for particular Churches to demonstrate themselves to be Catholic, necessary it is that they be united at least to those Congregations of that Nation; whence we may infer that there must needs be a National Church, which also that must do, and show clearly that it maintains whole and undefiled the foundations of faith, before it can be acknowledged to be Catholic.  
2. That which makes men mistake in this point, is, that they make the Church to be species specialissima, whereas it is Locale genus, such are other collective words, exercitus, 
Keckerm. syst. in fin. c. de gen.  respubls. which kind of genus being but Analogum, must have under it species Analogas, not such as are true, as it is in true Entities, but such as have an Analogy with them, and fall into a Logical consideration under that similitude. Say then, that this word Church is totum universale, than it must have parts subjectivas under it, and so it hath; for Ecclesia Britanica, Belgica, Genevensis, Germanica, Scotica, etc. are as it were so many Species, where you may find so many National Churches that do equally participate of the nature of the Genus, and under them so many Individuums as there be particular Congregations in any of these Nations. Neither doth Amesius, 
Ames. Loc. citato Sect. 18.  who affirms the Church to be a Species specialissima, give any teason for it, but that nullas habet species propriè dictas, which is illogical; for I told you, that it was Genus analogum; and will any Logician expect species propriè dictas? it is sufficient for such a genus to have species impropriè dictas, by comparison and resemblance only to a true Genus; and such the Church hath as I have proved, and therefore there may be a National Church.  
Thirdly, that which is capable of the definition of the Church, may be called a Church. But a National Church is capable of the definition of a Church; therefore there may be a National Church. The major is out of question, and needs no proof. The minor I make good by setting down, and applying the definition of the Church to it. Amesius. 
Ames. lib. 1. cap. 31. 7. Junius de Ecclesia c. 2. Trelcat. lib. 2. cap. de Ecclesia.  Ecclesia est caetus hominum vocatorum. But his definition though it would serve my turn is a little too short. junius hath more fully expressed it. Ecclesia est caetus eorum quos Deus evocat è natura & modulo naturali ipsorum per gratiam in dignitatem filiorum Dei ad ipsius gloriam. Trelcatius gives us three definitions one after another.  
First, to the Church in common, which is, Ecclesia est caetus eorum quos Deus gratuita vocatione, ad gratiae suae & gloriae communionem evocat, Matth. 11.29.  
And secondly, that belongs to the visible Church, Ecclesia visibilis est caetus eorum quos Deus externa vocatione, seu praeditatione verbi, & Sacramentorum administratione evocat ad cultum gloriae suae, Mat. 28.17.  
A third, which belongs to the invisible Church, which is, Ecclesia invisibilis est caetus praedestinatorum, qui vocatione efficaci & salutari ex statu corruptionis in dignitatem adoptionis filiorum Dei evocantur, & Christo tanquam capiti adun●ntur, non ad cultum tantum, sed ad fructum gloriae. Luke 1.33.  
All which definitions, especially those of Junius and Trelcatius, are full and artificial; for Ecclesia is by all put in the predicament of relation, and all relations are defined mentione subjecti, relati, correlati, fundamenti, 
Keck. syst. Log. cap. de definite.  quod supplet locum causae efficientis, & Termini vel finis. And in these last we meet with all these. The relatum is vocans, the correlatum is evocati, the subject or materiale, Men, or more largely, those who who have a capacity, è natura & modulo naturali ipsorum, to be called, which takes in Angels also. The Formale or foundation of this Relation, is that gracious call that God gives; and the end is, that they being adopted for his children, may communicate in his worship, grace and glory.  
Now what one word is there in any one or all these definitions which are not as well applicable to a National Church, 
Deut. 5.22. Exod. 16.1.  as a Combinational? Is this caetus, kahal, an Assembly, a Gnedah, a Congregation? that is much more. Doth this consist of men? There are more in that. Have those in this a Call, a gracious call given them by God? so have the other. Are they adopted and brought into the state of sons? so are they too. I have nourished and brought up children: Are these called to worship God, to be partakers of grace and glory? 
Isa. 1.2. ● Cor. 6.18.  So are all Nations whom the Lord our God doth call. They then who partake fully of the nature and essence of a Church, and to whom all the causes that constitute a Church may be attributed, of whom the efficient, matter, form, end are verified, without question are a Church; but such is the National as I have declared; I pray therefore let it have the name.  
I know your exception lies against the formal cause; for that gracious call of God will not satisfy you, which hath contented all other judicious Divines before you: But you assign another, viz. a Church-Covenant, fancying that none can be truly members of Christ's Church, but who have combined and joined themselves together in this League of Church-fellowship. This say you, is the chief essential part of a Church, and the true formality of it.  
Amesius teacheth us truly, that Ecclesia is à Deo instituta. If so, let it be shown where God instituted his Church under this condition; produce the precept, bring forth the command for it, or else you shall never persuade me that this Institution is from God. Nay, I shall yet descend lower, Demonstrate to me the practice of it, or the pattern for it, either in the Apostles age, or any age after it, till you arose, and you shall carry the cause. I know that the wisest among you is not able to show me one example for it in all antiquity.  
We cannot therefore choose but set upon it the character of Ionah's gourd, that is, filia noctis, a daughter of a night's growth, it sprung up so lately. The farthest the pedigree can reach, is either to the Montanists, Novatians, or Donatists, those children of Separation; and yet when all's done it doth but resemble them neither, since I read not that they and their parties were ever bandied together by a solemn Covenant. They could think themselves a Church, and indeed the sole Church without this formality. They had their Bishops under whose jurisdiction all the several Congregations of their profession were. And therefore I shall again repeat my words, that no pattern for this in any age can be found; and I add to it, no not among Heretics and Schismatics.  
Secondly, we shall give a poor account of former Churches and Christians, if this Covenant-invention should be of such concernment to Christianity: when it is not easy, nor as I believe, possible to find a Church anciently so bound.  
Farther, yet this seems to me altogether useless and superfluous, and that in two respects. First, it seems useless to them who are so bound; for these new small bodies are so loosely tied together by these sorry with'hs of man's invention, that they quickly upon humour, anger and heady animosities fall asunder, and break into several fractions and subdivisions; so that they by reciting a certain form of words, seem to meet as pieces of wood finely glued together, which a little spittle or wet dissolves. Then again, it is useless to them who are bound already by a higher and more solemn Covenant; for this is as it were to bind a man with wisps of straw, that is already bound with chains of gold. For every true and conscientious Christian knows and owns himself to have upon his conscience, fare more strict and indissoluble ties, not only of nature and creation, but of the Law and word of God: yea, and of Christian Covenant and Profession by his Baptismal vow, besides that bond of the other Sacrament, that I speak not of his vows renewed by often promises in his prayers, and repentant promises: All which binds the consciences of all good Christians to all duties of piety and charity according to the relations wherein they stand to God and man, fare more firmly than any external profession in a Church way can do. An external I say; for so it is, and being merely external, it cannot ingredi rei essentiam, make any man formally a Church member; that which doth this is the call of God, and not the profession of man. And now having removed this rub out of my way, I shall go on to give you a fourth argument for a National Church.  
4. That to whom the proper, essential and inseparable notes of the Church belong is a Church; but to a National Church these notes belong; therefore a National Church is a Church. The major is certain, for it is nota proprii; the minor I easily prove. The essential notes of the Church, as Junius hath excellently demonstrated against Bellarmine; 

Jun. de Ecclesia. cap. 16.  
Doctor Field of the Ch. lib. 2. cap. 2.  
Whites Orthodox. cap. 3. Sect. 6.   first the entire profession of these supernatural verities which God hath revealed in his Son: Secondly, the use of such holy Ceremonies and Sacraments as he hath instituted and appointed: Thirdly, an union and connexion of men in this profession and use of these Sacraments under lawful Pastors and guides, appointed, authorized and sanctified to direct and lead them in the happy ways of eternal salvation.  
Now do not these belong to a National Church? is there not in it a profession of supernatural verities? is not the Word of God publicly preached in it? are not holy Rites and Sacraments administered according to Christ's institution? is there not a succession of lawful Guides and Pastors in it, as I have elsewhere proved? what then can hinder, but there should be a National Church? Whatsoever you can say against these notes, I have so clearly as I conceive proved, that I hold it superfluous to add any more; and therefore I come unto my third proof, experience.  
3. Experience is that wisdom and knowledge of any thing that a man hath by the trial of particulars. For when upon a sad examination he finds that so many Individuums agree in aliquo tertio, he presently concludes, that they all partake of the same nature. Let us then take a view of several Churches, and those most eminent at first; and if it appear that those were National, we may from hence easily infer, that the constitution of a Church may be National. It is in all Church Histories most evident, that as soon as the Gospel was first planted, it spread from great Cities into the Neighbour Territories and adjacent Countries; which Christians so converted, though they exercised the acts of Religion in particular Congregations, yet still continued in a fraternal subjection, and filial submission to that Bishop and Presbytery which resided in the Mother City: It is a foul mistake for men to conceive of the Church of Ephesus, Smyrna, Thyatyra, etc. of Corinth, Antioch, Jerusalem, Rome, etc. as confined to that City; whereas he who is acquainted with Histories profane and sacred, must know that under these Cities were principalities, and so the jurisdiction of that Church was extended to all Christians in that Territory. Which to deny, is to slight all Records, and to prefer his own single imagination before all antiquity; Titus was Bishop of Crete an Island; Timothy of Ephesus a Province; Polycarp of Smyrna a Territory; and what is true of these, is as true of all the rest; whence we may conclude, that a Church may be National; for if jurisdiction of one Bishop may extend over so great Cities as they were, being then the chief of the world; why not then to a Province? why not to a Nation? especially since by this way, mutual peace, truth and good order is best preserved.  
This consideration caused the first small company of believers, multiplied from a Church in one family, to a Church in many Congregations, that could not meet together in one place, yet as branches to continue still united to the root Christ Jesus; and also to the main body and bulk of the Church by union to that part whence they descended, and to which they related. For reason taught them that they should be weaker, and exposed to more danger, if they should be disunited and rend from the body, and quickly whither, as boughs separated from the stock. I need not mind you of that old Apologue of Menenius Agrippa, that the head and feet quickly starved and windred away, when they would not hear of any longer dependence upon the belly.  
He that would be magnified for Simon Magus, or magnus, Simon the great, and wise for his invention of rarities and Paradoxes in any art or science, aught to furnish himself not with popular and specious, but with solid and sound arguments, if he intent to win prudent and sober men to be of his judgement: for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; wise men will not be catched with those sophisms, with which it is easy to take the multitude. After the flood, there were but eight persons in the world; they lived together in a family for some time, and Noah as a Prince ruled them. But they quickly increased, spread, multiplied, grew into those Nations that now live, and being dispersed over the earth, they yet joined in societies, and for their mutual preservation, thought it fit to be governed that way that we now behold. Suppose now some great and wise Magus, should in these words charm and bewitch the people, Non sic fuit ab initio, in Noah's days the ordering of the world was not as we see it now; there were then no mighty Monarches, no surly Lords, no Judges, no Magistrates. Who then spoke of National societies or civil confederations? Oh 'twas a brave world then, when the government was domestical; a golden age when no man ruled beyond his own doors, but every one was a King at home. Can we but contrive a way, and live to see it so in our days, 'twould be no question a brave world again.  
When Adam dug and Eve span, who was then a Gentleman?  
The like argument to this is used by those of the Combination. At Rome they find a houseful of Christians; at Corinth another handful met together in the house of Cloe. 
Rom. 16.5. 1 Cor. 16.29. 1 Cor. 1.11.  In Asia there is mention made of single Churches. (but by the way, that these were board together by a Church Covenant, and a separate, and Independent Congregation, that had no relation to the Presbytery in those Cities, that is not mentioned, not a word of that) Then there were no National Churches; this was afterwards brought in by lordly Prelates: Oh if we might but see the Church restored again, and all things done according to the pattern in the Mount, than it would be a glorious Church, God's people, precious people, all Kings, Priests and Prophets within their own doors. You then of the people, even the poorest Ploughman, and ignorantest Mechanic should recover his right, primo questu, and be subject to no other Pastors and Elders than were of your own choosing, nor to them no longer then pleased you. Now is not this kind of arguing very plausible in the people's ears? Oh how they will hug themselves, when they shall find themselves to become some body? Let us, say they, but join ourselves in this Combination, and then God knows what goodly great things we may come to be; we may come to be Pastors to feed; we may come to be Elders to rule the flock; we may come to be Deacons and carry the bag: and if we sail of these our hopes, yet however we have voices in the Election of Church Officers, and the highest of them all must depend upon us. This is that which tickleth the multitude to reduce the Church to the house of Cloe, as those Sophists would do the world to the Ark of Noah.  
Now one of these is as absurd as the other; as contrary to reason to bring back the Church to particular houses and Combinations, as it is all the societies of men to domestical government. Shall an example or two, (which yet comes not home neither) be pleaded against a cloud of witnesses to the contrary? when we can instance in Presbyteries constituted by the Apostles in chief Cities, which were heads of whole Provinces; shall we plead that two or three houses were patterns in the Mount? This is so childish a fancy, so weak and unreasonable an imagination, as if they would reduce themselves to their infant's Coats, now they are grown men; or think they are bound to wear a leathern girdle, because Saint John Baptist did so.  
To conclude this point, we dare appeal to the consciences of any of these bodying Christians (whom charity may presume to be godly and judicious) 
Dr. Gauden.  whether they find in Scripture, or have just cause to think that the blessed Apostles ever constituted such small bodies of Covenanting Churches, when there were great numbers, and many Congregations of Christians in any City, Province, or Country, so as each one should be thought absolute, independent, and no way subordinate to another? Whether ever the Apostles required of those lesser handfuls, those pettitoes and fingers of the body (which might and did Convene in Cloes house) any such explicit forms and Covenants, besides those holy bonds, which by believing and professing of the faith by Baptism and Eucharistical communion were upon them? Or whether the blessed Apostles would have questioned or denied them to be true Christians, and in a true Church, or have separated from them, or cast them off as not engrafted in Christ, or growing up in him, who without any such bodying in small parcels had professed the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, in the due use of the Word, Sacraments, Ministry? who endeavoured to lead a holy life themselves, and sought by all means which charity, order, or authority allowed them to repress the contrary in others. The wisdom of these first planters of Religion was so great, their charity so warm, their persuasions to unity so earnest; the Character they set upon those who separate, so black, that it cannot be believed that ever they would admit of a rent in that body, which was instructed by one head, enlived by one spirit, form by one faith, and quickened by one and the same hope. And if these excellent Christian virtues had continued, we had not seen the seamlesse Coat of our Saviour rend into such small shreds as we behold and lament at this day. And so much of this.   

2. The next thing that in general you charge the National Church withal, is, that they took up the customs you name by a Jewish imitation.  
COncerning which I have divers things to reply. First, if we must be accused for this apish imitation of the Jews, yet we are not the only Apes, since you for this are no less guilty than ourselves; and than you know, qui alterum incusat probri, ipsum se tueri oportet. For do you not imitate the Jewish Sanedrim in your Elderships? why is it else that from it most of your party fetch their defence? why from it do they borrow their light to expound dic Ecclesiae? Again, that the Scripture is not to be read, except expounded, is your common tenet; we press you for a precept for this, and none you do, nor none you can bring; only you produce the example of Ezra the Scribe, 
Nehem. 8.8.  that he read the book, and gave the sense; and upon this example you do it, and tell us it is to be done; now what is imitation, but the following of an example? Besides you yourself would have all your Elders stand and sit together in the face and full view of the whole Assembly; now what command can you find for this? all you can say for it, 
Verse 4.  is the pattern in the former place of Ezra; and then I hope you will not deny but you in this are to answer for a Jewish imitation also. Your letter bears date the 22 day of the eighth month, which is you know to speak the language of the old Jew.  
Secondly, I ask how ever you can make good that, in most of the instances which you allege; that the Christians took their pattern from the Jews after they were form into a National Church, and were put under the Ceremonial Law. If in these they imitated any, I may as easily say that they took their pattern from the Patriarches for these; before the Ceremonies of the Law were imposed, as you can reflect upon the Nation of the Jews. For the Patriarches had their feasts, their places whether to bring their offerings, Gen. 8.20. & 13.18. & 28.22. & 33.20. 
Gen. 2.2. Exod. 5.1.  They acknowledge a high Priest, Gen. 14.18. They paid tyths, Gen. 14.20. & 28.22. Four then of these five frivolous traditions, as you call them, were in use before the Jews were a settled Nation, and to those old and first people of God the Primitive Church might have an eye when they admitted these usages, as well as to their posterity. And the Jew strictly so taken need be cast in our teeth no more.  
Thirdly, Suppose it were granted that these customs were brought in by a Jewish imitation, yet it will not hence follow that they are ere the worse, or are therefore to be rejected. The objection is old, 
Hook. Eccl. pol. lib. 4. Sect. 11.  and to it Mr. Hooker hath given a satisfactory answer. For the Jewish Ordinances were of two sorts, positive, or moral. The moral were never to be abolished; the positive again were such which were not necessary for ever to be retained, or such as were left indifferent to be kept or not. Sacrifice and circumcision were of the first kind, and must necessarily be removed, which was done in their due time; in these the Christian Gentiles, no not at first after the decree, Acts 15. must not imitate the Jews. But for the second sort, such which were of an indifferent nature to be kept or not to be kept, (of which kind I will by and by produce many instances,) the Gentile Christians were no way , if they conformed themselves to the Jewish custom; 
Leo Serm. sept. de jejun. mensis septim.  which gave Leo occasion thus to begin his Sermon. Apostolica institutio, dilectissimi, quae Jesum Christum Dominum ad hoc venisse in hunc mundum noverat, ut legem non solveret, sed impleret, ita veteris Testamenti decreta distinxit, ut quaedam ex iis, sicut erant condita, Evangelicae eruditioni profutura decerperet, & quae dudum fuerant consuetudinis Judaicae, fierent observantiae Christianae. And this very fast of the seventh month then kept, may serve for one instance. Another shall be that Apostolical decree, Acts 15. imposed on the Gentiles, that they abstained from meats offered to Idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication. 
Acts 15.29. R. Solomon. liber, qui Seder Olam inscribitur.  For the understanding of which decree, know we must that among the Jews were two kind of Proselytes; the first were called Gertzedek or Proselytae justitiae, or foederis, for he submitted himself to circumcision, and the whole Mosaical Law. The second were called Ger-sahagnar Proselytae portae, a Proselyte or stranger within thy gates, Deut. 14.21. such was Naaman the Eunuch, etc. He was not circumcised, nor bound to observe all the Mosaical Rites. Only it was an opinion constantly received among the Jews, that God delivered unto the sons of Noah seven precepts, which went under the name of Noah's seven Commandments. 1. Judgements and punishment for Malefactors. 2. Blessing and calling on the Name of God, under which was contained the keeping of the Sabbath. 3. Disclaiming Idolatry. 4. Uncovering of one's nakedness, or all unclean knowledge in the flesh. 5. Shedding of blood. 6. Robbery and rapine. 7. Not to eat of any living creature whereof the blood was not let out. Four of these Commands the Gentiles were apt to observe of their own accord, nature leading them thereunto; but the other three, the Apostles thought good to impose upon them; viz, the third, the fourth, and the seventh, to give content to the Jews, that the Gentiles being conformable unto them in the observation of these Laws of Noah, they might cleave the better together. Dare any man now say the Apostles were too blame, to bring the Gentiles to a Jewish imitation? what should I tell you, that all the East Church, and we in this Island did celebrate the Feast of Easter upon the fourteenth day of the first month, upon what day of the week soever it fell, until Constantine's time? and was not this a Jewish imitation? for which indeed Pope Victor condemned & excommunicated the Eastern Churches, and all the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; but he himself for this presumption and rashness, is condemned and censured by Irenaeus. That the Christians at first kept the Jewish Sabbath, as well as the Lords day: That the West Church celebrated the Eucharist in unleavened bread, is a known truth to all that are acquainted with antiquity; and what were these but Jewish Rites? and whence could they learn them, but from the Jewish Synagogue? and yet I never read any condemnation of the Primitive Church for these. Whence had they their osculum pacis? whence then Ag●pae but from the Jews? From hence then two conclusions there are, which may be evidently drawn. The one, that whatsoever positive Laws the Apostles or their Successors did bring in, between the Churches of Jews and Gentiles, it was in those things only which might either cease or continue a shorter or a longer time, as occasion did most require: The other, that things indifferent though brought in by the pattern of the Jewish Synagogue, yet are not to be condemned and cast out upon this ground, because they are of a Jewish imitation.  
If these instances be not sufficient, I yet shall add more that may convince any man who will not be obstinate. It is an ordinary observation, which P. Fagius in his notes on the Targum first suggested to me, and after him Dr. Godwin, 
Fagius in praeced. Hebr. Godwin antiq. lib. 3. cap. 2. Hamm. vind. Liturg. Sect. 43. Cass. Liturg. pag. 1. Gen. 48.14. Godw. ant. lib. 1. cap. 3.  and Dr. Hammond, and George Cassander assert, that many of the Jewish Ceremonies were imitated by Christ himself under the Gospel. I might show it you in the imposition of hands, a form of benediction among the Jews, as ancient as old Jacob, in blessing Manasse● and Ephraim, and as often used by Christ to the same purpose. But I rather choose to do it in the two Sacraments, and in the censures of the Church. To the making of a Proselyte, one of the three Ceremonies required as purification by water, which yet was not Sacramental till Christ's institution; now the Baptism by water commanded by our Saviour, related to this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or washing of Proselytes, which was used by the Jews at their admission or initiation. After the Jewish Feasts they had a Postcaenlum, of which Cassander at large thus discourses. Primum omnium Judaeus Paterfamilias cum fuis convivis mensae accumbit, 
Cass. Liturg. cap. 1.  p●culum vino plenum dextra manu tenens, Precatur in haec verba, Benedictus sis tu Domine Deus noster Rex mundi, qui creas fructum vi●is. Quo dicto primus omnium vinum degusta●, quod idem continuo onnibus mensae accumbenibus bibendum por●igit. Postea panem (quem int●gram esse massam oportet) accipit, eumque utraque manu tenendo, his verbis consecrat, Benedictus sis tu Domine Deus noster, qui educis panem de terrâ. Hoc dicto pan m frangit, & ex eo particulam comedit, ac singulis mensae accumbentibus singulas buccellas distribuit. Hinc cons●quenter prolixam dicit precem, qua in prece grati●ram actiones, non solum pro concesso omnibus alimento, sed pro omnibus beneficiis, olim patribus, & hodie quoque Israelitiae genti collatis, concipiuntur, etc. As for their present food, 
Drus. in N. T. parte altera. pag. 78. Fagius in Deut. 8. Luk. 22.17, 18.  for their deliverance from the Egyptian servitude, for the Covenant of Circumcision, for the Law given by Moses, This grace of  they called Bircath hasasen, the blessing of the Cup, with which Christ himself seemeth to have begun his supper; He took the Cup and gave thanks, and said, Take and divide it among you. After the blessing of the Cup, the Master of the house took the bread, and consecrated it in the words before, which they called Bircath halechem, or the blessing of the bread, and then broke and divided it. So did our Saviour, 
Verse 19  He took bread and gave thanks, and broke it, etc. At the end of the Feast, they again gave thanks, and then the Master of the house took a Cup of wine in both hands, beginning thus, Let us bless him who hath fed us of his own, and of whose goodness we live. This grace they called Bircath hamazon, and the Cup Cos hillel, poculum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and both these Cups are mentioned by Saint Luke; but the words of institution added only to the last. This Cup is the New Tstament or Covenant in my blood, 
Verse 20. Scalig. de emend. temp. lib. 6. pag. 273.  which is shed for you. After all this they sung Hymns and Psalms, which also was practised by our blessed Saviour, Mark 14.26. These Rites were all Jewish, and yet our Saviour dislikes them not for that, but observes them in the institution of the blessed Sacrament. That you may see the weakness of the argument, that no usage of the Jew may be followed in the Christian Church: I promised you one instance more; it was in the Jewish censures, in which they observed three degrees; Niddui, Cherem and Schammatha. Niddui signifieth separation, 

Buxtorf. ex Rabb. Epist. Heb. pag. 55. Lex. Rabb. pag. 827.  
Godw. Ant. lib. 5. cap. 2.  
Dr. Hamm. of the Keys, cap. 4. Sect. 60.   and by it the delinquent was separate from all society or commerce with others for four Cubits, and for thirty days. The second was Cherem, which is thus defined by Buxtorf; an exclusion from the sacred Assemblies, a casting out of the Synagogue, with all the curses of Deut. 28. The third was Schammatha, the Etymology of which word, Godwin tells us is twofold; for saith he, Schem is Lord, and Atha cometh; others say it sounds as much as, There is death; for Scham is there, and Mitha death. Hence it may be rendered excommunication to death; and so Dr. Hammon out of D●lhen. defines it. Ea excommunicatio, qua quis totaliter & finaliter ab Ecclesia segregatus, divino judicio sit devotus, & cum ea mors & exitium. Now to these three the censures of the Christian Church were very correspondent. 
Luk. 6.22. John 9.22. John 16.2.  The first was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, separation or remotion, that answers to Niddui. The second was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that answers to Cherem, which in other words is tradere Satanae, 1 Cor. 5.5. The third was Maran-atha, 1 Cor. 16.22. To which he was to be left, who loved not the Lord Jesus, which was the selfsame with Schammatha; for Maran is Lord, and atha cometh: so that it is evident in the Church censures also, the Christians took up their pattern from the Jews. All this I have said, and could add to it much more, to make the proposition appear no unreasonable maxim; that it may be lawful for the Church to use a custom which hath some resemblance of some Ceremony in force anciently among the Jews.  
4. Lastly, I observe that you make your Jewish imitation very ancient, in that by the Adverbs, quando and unde, when and whence, you fasten it upon the National Church; had it been a birth of yesterday, I should have suspected it; but when I find it a plant of so many ages, I cannot choose but rise up to the grey hairs; either accuse the Apostles for it, (who did imitate the Jews, as I have proved, as well as we, and at that time when they preached and gathered of all Nations into the fold,) or else we are blameless. This was it I had to return to your two Generals; now I come to your five degrees, in which this imitation lies, and will consider them in the same method you propose them. You say  

1. Yhe first was of National times, as the fifty yearly Festivals, or holy-working days, Cursed-masse, Candlemas.  
WHich words I must profess I clearly understand not in all points; for what is it you mean by these fifty yearly Festivals? are they all the Sundays of the year? if that, we own them, & that not upon any Jewish imitation. If you mean those other, which our Church enjoined to be observed for holy-days, the number will not arise to fifty. For they are only twenty seven, and so you have over-shot yourself.  
As for your term Cursed-Masse, I hope you intent not the day of our Saviour's Nativity, when for the glad tidings the Angels joined in a Choir, and sang an Athemne in the fields of Galilee. Can I conceive you intended to black that day with that accursed word, I should grow impatient, and return, The Lord rebuke thee. But the word Candlemas that follows it at the heels, makes me somewhat suspicious that you might squint an ill eye that way. If so, you are much to blame; if not, there's no harm done.  
I know yet that these words Christmas and Candlemas often offend many; but than you must lay the blame (if there be any) on those who deserve it. It is the multitude and vulgar that hath taken up and makes use of these names; the Church so imposed them not. Turn over our Calendars, and you shall find them appointed to be kept holy under these titles. The Nativity of our Lord, the Purification of the blessed Virgin.  
And yet had the words received countenance from the Church, there is no such cursedness in them as is conceived, if we shall cast our eyes upon the first native use. For no question missa, from whence Mass came, is a Latin word, and signifies no more than remissa, used by Tertullian and Cyprian for remissio; for remissa peccatorum, is with them remissio peccatorum. 

Tertull. advers. Martion.  
Cypr. l. 3. Ep. 14. Amb. lib. 5. Ep. 33.  
Chem. Exam. Trid. Conc. de Miss. Pontif. . artic. 1. 31. Cass. Liturg. cap. 16.  
Whites Orthodox. lib. 2. Sect. 26.  
Zanch. de cult. exter. cap. de Sacrific. Sect. 13.  
Cass. Liturg. cap. 26.   Ambrose is the first of the Latin Fathers that used it. It first signified no more than to call together to celebrate divine service, as both Chemnitius,  and Cassander have observed; and therefore when the Greeks used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Latin Translatours turned it missas facere, missas celebrare. After it came to signify the whole form of public prayer, which the Greeks called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, we our Liturgy. Lastly, it was most strictly taken for the administration of the Eucharist, whereunto the Converts unbaptised, the Catechumeni, the Penitents, the Energumeni were not admitted, but dismissed and commanded to departed. For when the celebration of those mysteries began, the Deacon stood up and said a loud to those, Ite, missa est. Now let it be taken in which of these senses you will, there can be no great harm in the name Mass, being a suffix to these days. For it is not intended, that thereby men should meet on these days or any other to say Mass, i. e. to offer a propiatory sacrifice for the quick and dead: But only that they should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meet and convene in God's house, that there they should have the glad tidings which the Angels proclaimed to the Shepherds, hodie natus est vobis; that they should praise God for it, and pray, that as he was born for them, so he may be given to them. Of which the Sacrament being a sign and a seal, they there met together to be partakers of it. This is all, that to a good intelligent Christian the Mass can import; and if any be other minded, they may be easily informed, and then I see not what scandal can be taken at the name of Christmas.  
And I am sure much less at the Feast; For if ever God bestowed a blessing upon the world, it was his Son, and the flesh of the Son of God, is the Channel in which it flows to us: This flesh he took at his birth; his birth day than is worth remembrance; that then we perform opus diei in die suo: and the opus diei is that we be glad and rejoice in it. Never fear, there is no Judaisme in it; then I am certain in this you cannot imitate; for they are enemies to his name, enemies to his birth, enemies to his day; they if they could would expunge his memory out of the hearts of Christians, out of the Calendar; join not with this perverse and obstinate generation. I shall set before you a more noble example to imitate, the first Martyrs, the first Confessors, the first Fathers of the Church: for these worthies kept this day; to them it was a holy, no working day; on that day they did feast, not scorn and revile.  
Telesphorus celebrated it in the Roman Church; but it is so ancient, 
Caranza in vita. Telesp.  and of so general observance in the Church, that Zanchy confesseth he knows not when it began. No Council instituted it, that we know of; and therefore by Augustine's rule, it should be ab Apostolis traditum. That it was a very ancient and universal Feast of the whole Church, appears by that Sermon of Cyprian (and he lived divers years before the Nicene Council) which he preached upon the day, 
Cypr. Sermo de nativitate Domini.  which he gins with these words; Adest Christi multum desiderata & expectata nativitas: Adest solemnitas inclyta, & in praesentia salvatoris grates & laudes visitatori suo per orbem terrarum sancta reddit Ecclesia. Whence it is evident, that it was a solemn universal Feast in his time, kept with thanks, with praise; and after him there is so frequent mention of it in all the Fathers, and their Sermons; as of Basil, Nazianzene, chrysostom, Leo, and who not? extant, preached on the day in honour of Christ, and his birth day; that it were to light a Candle to the Sun to produce them. Other men may follow what new lights they please, but I shall desire to be guided by these old Lamps in this practice of praise and thankfulness. I know there is no superstition,, no imitation of Judaisme in it. It is a Christian, a laudable, a pious, a profitable duty, and 'tis no fear of a shadow shall drive me from it.  
2. And so having accounted for this particular Festival, I come to answer for our Church holy-days in general; Christ is both the Author and Finisher of our Redemption, which work before it could be consummated, the purchase must be made, applied, proclaimed. That he might be apt to lay down the price, he must be made man, conceived of the Holy Ghost, born of a woman a Virgin, born under the Law, of which he gave an evidence when he was circumcised the eighth day, presented in the Temple at his Mother's purification, and baptised by John in Jordan. This shown that he took upon him the form of a servant, and humbled himself. But he thought himself not low enough, till he humbled himself to the death, even that bloody, shameful, painful, accursed death of the Cross, upon which he was crucified, upon which he died, and was afterward buried. By all this the purchase was fully made, and the ransom fully paid, Consummatum est. But it must be applied also, and conveyed to us, or we are ne'er the better. To effect this, he risen again for our justification, he ascended into heaven to make intercession, and prepare a place for us, he sent down his Spirit to make all sure. And that all this might be made known, published and proclaimed, he gave some to be Apostles, some to be Evangelists; these to write the whole story, and those to attest it, publish it, and apply it in their Epistles.  
Now this is the original of our Festivals, there being not one retained in our Church, which is not to the honour of Christ, to the memory of some Evangelist or Apostle. The wisdom of the Church was such, that she would not have so great benefits forgotten, nor the purchase, nor the application, nor the proclamation. Into the Creed they are all put, but words are like wind, they may quickly pass away. The wise founders therefore of our Church, and first planters of Religion, set out a day for every Article, that in the time to come when the children shall ask their fathers, What meaneth these days, these Festivals? they should answer and say, This day Christ was conceived, this day he was born, this day he was circumcised, this day his Mother was purified, this day he was baptised, this day he was crucified; and so laid down a ransom for us, and so redeemed us that were all lost. And that we might know, that what he undertook, he went through, and hath conveyed unto us; this day he arose from the grave, this day he ascended to heaven, this day he sent down his holy Spirit upon the Apostles, who have proclaimed and published so much to the world, and with their blood sealed the testimony to be true. All this was the work of the whole Trinity; for the Father he gave the Son, he was given, and the Holy Ghost filled him full of grace for this work; And that so great benefits might never slip out of our minds, these days are set apart for commemoration, for praise, for thanksgiving, for imitation. Men may feed themselves with fancies if they please, but it may be well feared, that when the Festival and solemnities for the birth, life, death, resurrection, ascension of Christ, the mission of the Holy Ghost, the Trinity, and the Lessons and Sermons upon them, with the Creed also, shall be turned out of the Church, 'twill not be in the power of weekly Sermons on some head of Religion to keep up the knowledge of Christ in men's hearts. A thing it seems observed by the Casuists, who use to make the number of those things that are necessario credenda, no more than the Festivals of Christ make known to men; and how sure a way this is, to instill these necessary principles into the heads of the easiest capacity, give me leave to assure you upon my own experience. For when all I could say, would not teach the Article, the mention of the day, and inculcating why the day was to be kept, did with much ease and facility do it: I can never therefore sufficiently admire the wisdom of the Church in the institution of these Festivals.  
And yet had this been an institution of the Church, 
Vide sis Zanch. in expos. praecep. quarti. de diebus festis. Thes. 1.2, 3.  after she ceased to be a Virgin, I should have suspected it. But when I find a Record for the Festivals, that concern our Saviour in the best times, and that these were observed as Augustine saith, semper, ubique, ab omnibus, this so far sways with me, that I dare not assent to abolish them.  
It is with days, as it is with men. They are pares in esse naturae. 
Ecclus. 33.  All equally from the ground, the first man an earthen vessel, and the best since but sherds of the old pot. But in esse morali, an imparity there is; some are vessels to honour, some to dishonour. The comparison will hold in times, and seasons; the periodic motion of the Sun gives being to them all; yet are they not all of equal esteem. For some are made holy, some common; these put among the days to number; those raised and made high days, and set above their fellows to a holy purpose. Which yet was not done by chance, as it falls out in the advancement of men; but it was propter opus p ivilegiatum, quod Deus in eo fecit; some extraordinary beneficial work that God did upon that day: this is the formale diei, that gives it being and pre-eminence above another. This God would have remembered; for this work he would be thanked and praised, and to that end he will have some especial time set apart.  
Neither of this is there any doubt, when the Author and Institutor is God. But man, say some, may not usurp upon God, and set apart any day of the six appointed for labour to a holy use, and thus much you intimate, when you call these holy working days. But of how little strength this is, will hence appear. To work upon the six days the Jews were bound, no less than we are; and yet even then, when they were to do all things according to the pattern in the Mount, they never thought they should transgress Gods holy Command, though without any express precept they set out some days to remember his mercies, and bless his Name. Upon no other ground did Mordecai institute the Feast of Purim, and ordained it to be observed in their generations for ever: An anniversary Festival it was to be, 
Esth. 9.21, 22. 1 Maccab. 7.49. & 4.54. John 10.22.  and yet we find no precept to warrant it. The Encenia or Feast of Dedication of the Temple was no other. The ordainer was Judas Maccabaeus, a Civil Magistrate; the observation required by Law, by ordinance, and the solemnisation continued 165 years. And yet notwithstanding the Author man, and the obligation a Command; our Saviour himself went up to Jerusalem to observe it. I cannot believe that our good Lord, that did nothing amiss, would have honoured the Feast with his presence, had the ordinance of man in such a case been displeasing to God. To come closer to the point, should a man press these straitlaced men for a Command to keep the Lords day, I am sure they could not find it. That it was observed by the Apostles I easily believe, because upon the first day of the week they broke bread, they enjoined the Collect; because even then it is called dies Dominicus. 
Acts 20.7. 1 Cor. 16.2. Revel. 1.10.  But still the difficulty remains, quo warranto? by what Command is this done? where is the precept for it? Neither is it possible to remove the scruple, but by acknowledging power in the Superior to appoint a day as for humiliation, so for thanksgiving. Which because it is done, and daily practised by yourselves, you of all other should not make this objection: and if it be sinful not to work the whole six days, you make men sin, when you call men from their work to follow you, and hear your Lectures.  
But still being indulgent to your error, if it be an error, you ever set the same Coleworts before us, and would make us believe it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will-worship; and upon the same ground because we have no precept for it. But first, if it be so in us, so also it must be in you; because you find no more precepts for your days of thanks and fasts, nor yet for your lecturing upon working days, than we can do for these. Secondly, you understand not the nature of will-worship, as it will appear, if you will vouchsafe to read, 
Dr. Hamm. of will-worship.  Dr. Hammonds Tract of that subject. Thirdly, what if no precept in Scripture for them? which of the Ancients ever taught men in Adiaphorous things to conclude ab authoritate Scripturae negatiuè. The Scripture hath not taught, will never teach all those rites and customs in Religion, 
Socrat. Scholar lib. 5. cap. 22.  which have been in continual use and practice in the Church; Sufficient those Oracles of God are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the end they were ordained to perfect the man of God. Other things what if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they ordain not; The essential parts of God's worship are there found; no man may add or diminish from it. The agends in many things are left to the prudence of the Church, who then ordains a right, when she ordains nothing contrary to the Word. Should you be pressed with these queries, upon what text or subject a Minister must preach, in what method and place, or how long time, and how often he must pray or preach; and the people must hear Sermons, and attend holy duties; I know you would be to seek for a particular rule in Scripture; your answer must be that Christian prudence must guide these actions, and angry you would be, if any man should fasten upon you will-worship for these or the like, because you can produce no express text. Be not then so hasty to fasten upon a whole Church, what every single man of you does, and thinks he may do, and be blameless.  
But to return, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this case we are about is very inconsiderately objected; for that in the institution of holy-days there is very much light given from the heavenly Lamp. 1. Ratio legis Mosaicae, the equity of God's Law that enjoins a thankful remembrance now as well as then; for it is unconceivable, that a Jew should have a command upon him to be joyful and glad-hearted, when the day came that God had done him a good turn; and that a Christian had a dispensation to be unthankful, and to receive blessings with a heavy dull soul. This Amesius saw, and therefore saith, Festi dies anniversarii, novilunia, 
Ames. lib. 2. Medulla. cap. 15. Sect. 16.  & similes institutiones quae merè Ceremoniales fuerunt, aequitatem istam generalem in se etiam continent & adhuc nos docent, quosdam & accommodos dies cultui publico assignari debere. 2. Exempla piorum. The Worthies in old time performed some Religious duties without a special warrant. Abraham pays his tyths; Jacob consecrates his Bethel; David prays seven times a day; intends to build a Temple to God; The Rechabits refrain wine; Mary breaks her box, and freely bestows her ointment, Precept than was none for any of these particulars; performed they were upon common prudence, guided by a general rule; and yet I dare say of all these, as our Saviour did of the last, they did a good work, a work acceptable in God's eye.  
How fare is will-worship from such services, that being merely a fiction, a fancy of man's brain, taken up without any foundation at all in the Word of God, either by precept or pattern, or the equity of any Law? The Characters thereof are vain. 2. Erroneous. 3. Repugnant to the will of God. Now I wonder what vanity, error or impiety can be affixed to the Church in the institution of holy-days? The object of our worship then is the everliving God, and so no vain worship. The form of worship the same as at other times, and so no more erroneous then at other times. 'Tis not the time then, but the form, that must be faulty, if at all. 3. But that it is not so, the whole is conformable to those general rules and Canons of the Holy Ghost delivered for the external circumstances of God's worship, (as I shall prove it after) and so not repugnant.  
Yea, but say our good Mother the Church may be quit from will-worship, yet she and her sons may be charged with superstition. For this is an old relic of the Jew. But who told you, that to observe these Feasts was to bring back Moses from the dead? what of Judaisme is in them? The days are not the same, the cause of observation is not the same, the service in them not the same; they are neither materially nor formally the same; why then should you cast the old Synagogue in our teeth? I know not any thing they participate with the Jews, except it be because they are Feasts. And in the same respect you may call them Heathenish also if you please; for they had their several Feasts, their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Meursius Graecia feriata.  etc. as you may read in Meursius his Graecia feriata, no less than we have our Feasts; and if general resemblances be strong arguments, you may prove an Identity of any thing. But here those of your opinion, put us in mind of that of Saint Paul, who reproves the new planted Churches of Galatia and Colossi for Judaizing in observing of days, months and years, and part of a holiday. But had these diligent Textuaries more diligently ploughed with the Apostles Heifer, 
Gal. 4. Coloss. 2.15.  they might have better guessed at his riddle. It was never Saint Paul's intent to decry Christian Festivals; his purpose is to beat down the Jewish opinion, not the day. The new converted Proselytes conceived they must keep their old Sabbath, and the ancient Feasts as afore, when Moses Law was in force, expecting justification by the observation of those legal Ceremonies. Thus to keep any Feast, is to bring Moses back from the dead; and what Christian is there that keeps a holiday upon this motive? this were indeed to use Tertullia's phrase, planè Galaticari; his words are, Galaticamur planè, 
Tertull. advers. Psych. cap. 14.  si Judaicarum Ceremoniarum, si legali um solemnitatum observantes sumus. For these were buried with Christ. Quod si nova conditio, jam & nova solemnia esse debebunt: aut si omnem in totum devotionem temporum & dierum & mensium crasit Apostolus, cur Pascha celebramus, annuo circulo in mense primo? cur quinquaginta exinde diebus in omni exultatione decurrimus? Out of which words we may easily collect these Conclusions.  
1. That Christians being in a new condition, must have new Feasts.  
2. That they, even then 180 years after Christ, kept their Pasch, and Pentecost.  
3. That they kept not these upon the Jewish ground. Id planè Galaticari.  
4. That notwithstanding the Apostles text, their Festivals they had; and therefore it never was the Apostles Intention to abolish them: mark his words. Si omnem in totum devotionem temporum, dierum, m nsium erasit Apostolus, cur celebramus Pascha, etc. Upon which words lies the strength of his argument.  
It is then a fallacy to argue from the Jewish Feasts to the Christian, and to urge that Text to the abolition of ours, which Saint Paul pressed to the evacuation of theirs, betwixt which there is not any Analogy. For as Athanasius said of Judaical Baptism, so I may say of all their holy-days now; 
Athanasius.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The superstition than is on your side, not on ours; not on ours, who observe them not out of a superstitious and Jewish opinion; but on yours, who prohibit them, and will not have them observed. For in things indifferent it is certainly as criminous and superstitious to place piety in the negative, as in the affirmative; in abstaining scrupulously from Ceremonies, as in using them over scrupulously. These are the men, who have always in their mouths, touch not, taste not, handle not; being false Apostles, 
Col. 2.21. Thomas Estius in locum.  who have a show of wisdom, but not true; being placed in superstition, which shapes and affects a Religion and worship out of their own brains.  
To close this point, this we say, and we colour not to say it, that these Festivals are days hallowed, consecrated and set apart to the performance of holy duties. Holy they are in use, not in virtue, holy by application merely; for there is not any holiness either of inhesion or infusion more in them, than in any other days. Let not then this flower of our time suffer by an Ostracism; nor fancy, nor imitation, nor superstition, nor will-worship hath set the mark upon it: the Jew may lie in his grave, and yet our holy-days live. These are like the good and virtuous Ladies of our Land; few they are, and being observed they make us happy. Suffer them but to departed, and you will deface the splendour and dignity of Christian Religion. You will blot out the memorial of ancient Truth, give a great impediment to the increase of faith, give an occasion of ingratitude, obstruct the praises of God, hinder the Hymns and Psalms we ought to sing to his honour; in a word, deprive yourselves of the shadows of your future felicity. I come to your second exception of places.   

2. The second was of National places, as the Consecrated meeting houses, Porches, Chancels, and Churchyards.  
BEfore you fell foul upon the times, now upon the places of God's service. I see nothing can please, but what is according to your mind. Quod volumus sanctum est. That seems to befall you, which happens to eyes over-runne with the icterisme; every thing they behold seems to be yellow; or to such who are in a high , whose palate is so affected with the overflowing of choler, that the most pleasant Dose seems bittet to their taste. How comes it else to pass, that these innocent, but necessary circumstances for the performance of Religious duties should so strangely disgust you? Time and place are such necessary circumstances of all individual actions, that they cannot be done without them. And therefore, if men will serve God, some time must be set out when, and some place where to do it; where God hath assigned none, there the choice is left in their own breast: if the service be private, a private time and place is to be chosen; if public and in conjunction with others, a public time and place must be thought on. To this last only I am now to speak of public service to be performed, for which there must be designed a public place, which you in scorn are pleased to call a meeting house, Tie Cwrdd; but I pray do you not unawars Judaize in the name? for tell me what's the English of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Synagogue? is it not the place where the Jews first met together; pray take heed, that you turn not Jew on a sudden, by erecting of meeting houses, instead of Christian Churches.  
In these there is nothing can escape your rigid censure, not the Porches, not the Chancels, not the Churchyards. Alas, what have these done? The Porches were set up for beauty, for shelter; & upon the same reason you may find fault with the Trees growing in the Churchyard, which serve only to beautify the place, & defend the Church from injury of wind & weather. But Zanchy in precept 4. Loc. 2. in Thesi. Sect. 3. gives us another use of these Porches, that in them the Ostiarii stood. Horum enim officium erat primum temporibus, quibus sacra publicè peragebantur, cavere, ne indigni admiscerent se sacro cetui, ne quod sanctum canibus. Deinde Catechumenos jussos per Diaconum egredi, è Templo educerent, foresque occluderènt, & post sacra peracta clauderent Templum, ne cuivis in illud pateret accessus. Quid ita? quia quae usibus sacris destinata sunt, in alios usus profanos usurpari non debent. The Chancels were thought fit to be separated Cancellis from the body of the fabric, that in them the Tremenda mysteria, and the action belonging to them, might be celebrated with the greater reverence. The Churchyards were enclosed, that in them the dead bodies of Christians might decently be composed & laid to sleep in their beds of dust. And what harm is there in all this? what subject to so sharp a censure? must the Combinational Church be corrupted, if all this be done? certainly not; for even you, who were wont to assemble in other places, can now be content to make use of these, notwithstanding the Porches, Chancels, and Churchyards. You meet in them, you preach in them, you bury your dead in them, without any scruple that I can hear of. Nobis non licet esse tam profanis.  
Oh but you say these were consecrated. Grave crimen Caie Caesar; and to it I shall return you my answer by and by. But first I shall show you, that the Christians borrowed not their pattern from the Jews to erect houses and places for the public service of God. Even that light of reason, which taught the whole stock of men, before and under the Law, I had almost said Heathens themselves, that public places must be set apart for public Religious duties, directed them to set up these structures.  
Before the Law, the Patriarches had their set places to serve God; Adam's sons a place where to sacrifice. In Enos days there were Assemblies; Noah and Abraham had assigned Altars; Jacob his Bethel, with which place God was so well pleased, that he would be called the God of Bethel, as you would say, the God of God's house, to which this title was given. Haec est domus Dei, & porta caeli, that you be not quite out of love with Church-Porches. Well, jacob's children are carried into Egypt, and become bondmen there; all that while we read not of any designed places for Sacrifice, for Prayers, for Religious performances; and no marvel, for they were in bondage; and to look after public places then, were as if you seek for Solomon's Temple in the Captivity, 'twas enough that then they met as they could, assemble by the River's side, and sit down and weep by the Waters of Babylon.  
Flebile nescio quid queritur Lyra, flebile lingua  
Murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae.  
But when once God had delivered them from that servitude, and brought them into the Wilderness, even in that vast Desert, when they had no settled habitation, yet a moving Tabernacle they had for God's worship. 
Exod. 26.27.  After they were brought into the Land of Canaan, this Tabernacle was first fixed for five years at Gilgal; in the sixth it was translated to Shilo, 
Rivet. in Hos. cap. 4. 15.  where it remained till Eli's days, when taken, but after restored, it was set in Kiriathjearim, and last in Misphat. Israel then was never to seek whether to resort for their public service. And when they were dispersed in the Land, and settled in their divisions, that they might acquaint themselves with Moses Law, and offer up their petitions and thanks to God, they built themselves Synagogues, even before the Temple was erected. For they were in David's time, that appears by his complaint, 
Psalm 74.8.  They have burnt up all the houses or Synagogues of God in the Land. But when God had chosen Jerusalem, and in Jerusalem Mount Moria, there to have his standing habitation made, it was in the chiefest of David's desires to have performed so good a work; but Solomon built him a house. The Temple then was like a great Cathedral, 
Sigon. de rep. Hebr. lib. 2. c. 8. Marc. 1.39. Maimonides in Tebilla. cap. 11. Sect. 1.  and the Synagogues were like our Parish Churches, of which there were in Jerusalem alone 480. and out of Jerusalem many Synagogues in Galilee, Matth. 4.23. Synagogues at Damascus, Acts 9.2. Synagogues at Salamis, Acts 13.5. Synagogues at Antioch, Acts 13.14. Yea, their tradition is, that whersoever ten men of Israel were, there ought to be built a Synagogue: and in these our Saviour preached.  
The Church of Christ which began at Jerusalem, and held that profession which had not the countenance and allowance of public authority, could not exercise some duties of Christian Religion, but in private only. What they did as Jews, they had access to the Temple and Synagogues; what as Christians, they were forced otherwhere to assemble themselves, which at first must need be private Rooms, and private houses. And as God gave increase to his Church, they both there and abroad, sought out not the fittest, but the safest places. And it was not long but they began to erect Oratories, denominating these places from the principal part of God's service; Prayer, to which how our Lord himself stood affected, we may acknowledge by that, where he calls his Church his house of prayer; and such an one Tremellius finds, Acts 16.16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
Tremell. in Acts 16.13.  And the thirteenth, And on the Sabbath day we went out of the City by a River side, where prayer was wont to be made; the Greek is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he reads it ubi conspiciebatur, it should be, ubi decernebatur domus orationis; for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is used sometimes not for the action, but the house itself. In qua te quaero Proseucha. 
Juvenal.  And then if Tremellius version and note be true, we have an early Oratory. But be it as it will, thus much may easily be granted, which I have learned from a great Clerk, 
Selden de decimis.  yet no great friend of the Church; that it cannot be conceived how Christianity should be in any Nation (if publicly and generally received) much ancienter than Churches, or some convenient houses or places in the nature of Churches appointed for the exercise of devotion. And therefore in the Apostles time, places they had to meet in upon the Lord's day, perchance at first made of private houses public, dedicated by the owners and accepted, and set apart by the Apostles for that use. In these public services was solemnised, a woman might not speak, 1 Cor. 14.35. In these she was not to be uncovered, a man not covered, 1 Cor. 11. In these the Eucharist was administered, Acts 20. In these the collect for the poor gathered, 1 Cor. 16. Other houses they had to eat and drink in, and a man that could not make that distinction, did despise the Church of God, 1 Cor. 11.22. And this place was some noted place; otherwise Saint Paul could not have said as he doth, 1 Cor. 14.23. If therefore the whole Church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in one that is unlearned or unbelievers, will they not say that you are mad?  
Soon after this, we read of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Kirks, Dominica set apart to God's service. I mentioned three before, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Nitria in Egypt; the Church where Saint John with his Asiatic Bishops kept his Synod; That built by Joseph of Arimathea at Glastenbury; Theophilus house in Antioch was consecrated into a Church. 

Clem. Recog. lib. 10.  
Dion in Adriano.   The Centurists confess Anno 193. that Severus the Emperor allowed the Christians a Church ad pium usum, and before him Adrian had done the like.  
I do not say, that these were at first sumptuous; the poverty of the Church, and the envy that thence might be drawn upon Christians would not permit it. But at length, when it pleased God to raise up Kings and Emperors, favouring sincerely the Christian faith, that which the Church before either could not, or durst not do, was with all alacrity performed. Basilicae were in all places erected, no cost was spared, nothing was thought too dear, which was that way spent. And their bounty this way, was to this day spoken of with honour, till the Anabaptists first cast in their exceptions against them; and you after them show your displeasure, for some certain solemnities usual at the first erection of them. At which you aim, when you call these  
Consecrated meeting houses.  
That there may be some Ceremonies blame-worthy in the consecration of them shall be confessed; But yet notwithstanding these, that they should be the worse for consecration, this we deny. For what is intended by consecration more than that we make them places of public resort, that we invest God himself with them, that we sever them from common uses?  
1. It behoveth that the place where God is to be served, be a public place: For leave but every man alone to serve God in a Parlour, and it will never come to be what it was in the Primitive Christians, who were all of one heart and one soul. Men may conceive as they list, but as experience teacheth, men will never be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, busily and piously intent about the same thing, till they meet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same place. Division of places will not be long without division of minds, which the ten Tribes were jealous of, 
Josh. 22.  when they questioned their brethren for building their Altar; 
Deut. 16.16.  and God prevented by requiring the presence of all the males at that place three times a year that he should choose. For by this meeting in a public place, the instillation of heretical and schismatical positions may be prevented. But this is not all, the razor of sharper tongues may be dulled, who have given deep wounds and gashes to the reputation of the best Christians; even then, when they were forced to serve in Grots, and Cells, 
Tertull. Justin. Epiph. Euseb.  and retired places: The setting apart then of public places, hath both these benefits to attend it, that it prevents heresies and scandals.  
2. By this the place is delivered from common hands, and a surrender made of that right which the Owner of the ground might claim in it, till this Ceremony; that being once past, the possession is severed from the free hold. His own it was, and he might have kept it; now it is a Deodate, God's house, not his; his for no other purpose, but to serve his God. The Workman might draw the line and plummet upon it, and make it a house, but it is the assignation of it to Religious duties that makes it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Lords house. Good it were, that some difference were put betwixt Gods dwelling place, and our houses. Now consecration is that which sets the note of difference; by it there is a dedication and assignation given, and livery and seizen taken. And that you be not so much offended hereafter with it, I could put you in mind of the consecration of Solomon's Temple; 
1. Reg. 8.  but I know you will say that was Jewish, though it be an exception of no moment. I shall therefore bring to your remembrance an older example, which hath nothing of the Ceremonial Law in it. The first that erects a fabric to God's service, is the Patriarch Jacob, and very Ceremonious he was about it. He takes the stone whereon he slept, 
Gen. 28.20. 21, 22.  makes it as it were the first stone of the building, then pours oil upon the top of it, as the consecration; calls it Bethel, God's house, and endows it too, vowing the tenth of all he had. A place we have here separated to God's use by a Religious Ceremony; a Dedication, a Consecration, a Dotation: and I doubt not but the equity of the Law which prevailed with him, will also justify us in the like case. Under Severus, Gordian, Philippus Arabs, 
Euseb. l. 8.1, 2. lib. 10.2.  and Galienus, the Christian ability growing greater, and their liberty enlarged, they built spacious Churches. These the bloody Dioclesian threw down, and good Constantine gave leave to reaedifie, where no Ceremony was omitted that might honour such intents. The Celebration of Dedications, and Consecration of Oratories lately builded was the desired spectacle of those times, to which Prince and people, people and Clergy resorted, and some with Orations, some with Sermons, and some with the sacrifices of prayer, in an Assembly of the greatest part of the Bishops solemnised that happy day. You may at your leisure read a whole Sermon, extant in Eusebius, directed to Paulinus Bishop of Tyre, 
lib. 10. c. 4.  by whose means that famous Temple in Phoenicia was builded and consecrated in a solemn manner. The story accounts of the day of Consecration as of a wedding solemnity, when the new erected Church as a Virgin was joined fast in the bands of Matrimony by the Bishop's prayers and office unto her Lord Christ. I could add to this that the same Constantine so often as he was forced into the Field in Arms to encounter his enemies, carried along with him a Consecrated Tent, which he set up and spread in the fashion of a Church in that place, he did castrametari, that in that with his Army he might offer his devotions to his God.  
To Consecrate is no new word, nor to be disliked, for it signifies no more than to depute to a sacred use, and dedicate and assign to God; whether times, persons, things. To draw to an end, there ought to be among Christians scarce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any thing common or profane. A kind of Consecration passeth upon all we have. Our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our income is not profane, that is consecrated by a Collection, set apart for the Saints. Our meat nor our drink are not profane things, 
1 Cor. 16. 1 Tim. 4.5. Mal. 3.8. ad 12.  when they are Consecrated by the Word and Prayer: Our goods are not then profane, when God's part is set aside: Ourselves, our Children are Consecrated to God by Baptism, and so of profane, become holy persons. And shall the Church then, in which we are to render our thanks for all these, and to pray for a blessing upon these, want its Consecration by the Word and Prayer? for other Consecration we allow none.  
It hath often put me into an astonishment to find out the cause why you should dislike these places, because Consecrated; and at last I could find no other, except this, that you would not be bound to put off your shoes, nor to take heed to your feet, when you entered into the house of God; 
Exod. 3.5. Eccles. 5.1.  but left at liberty to use other homely familiar gestures. If any guests be right, in this place I shall say little to it, only remember you, that the Publican who entered the Temple, and stood afar off, and smote his breast, thrived better than the Pharisee in his loftier garb, for he went home to his house justified. 
Luke 18.14.    

3. The third was of National persons, as Universal Preachers, Office-Priests, Half-Priests, or Diocesan Deacons.  
TO this my answer shall be in brief, that among the Jews I find no Universal Preacher, no Office-Priest, no Half Priest, no Diocesan Deacon; and therefore these among us could not be taken up by imitation from the Jews. Priests indeed they had, but no more like ours, than an apple is like a nut. Similitudes in general make but a poor resemblance; Men and metals may be all one this way.  
Secondly, I reply, that against Universal Preachers, you of all others have lest reason to take exception, because you allow all that have gifts to be so. Millers, Mercers, Thatchers, Weavers, Trunck-makers, and who not? for of such consist the greatest body of your Itinerants, upon whom, what name can you more aptly put than Universal Preachers, since they are not confined to any one flock? 
A Sermon preached by a Presbyt. Anno 1589. pag. 27. 28.  Concerning whom, let me return you the words of one of your opinion, whose name is to me unknown, in a godly Sermon preached and printed Anno 1589. Alas, must we not look for the heavy hand of the Lord, when we see many ignorant men, not only void of all skill in the Hehrew, Greek and Latin Tongues, in Logic, Rhetoric, and other Arts; (but also which I am ashamed to speak) not acquainted with the true Doctrine of Repentance; who are yet so bold, so impudent, and of so hard faces, that they dare to extend and stretch out (I will not say) their gifts, which they have not, nor the shadow of a gift, to take upon them the high Message of God, to carry to his people the glad-tydings of salvation, which Christ hath purchased for them with his precious blood. Oh shameless impudence! shall he take upon him to hold the Helm, that is scarce worthy to labour at the Pump? O damnable boldness! O wretched covetousness! That for an Annual stipend, will undertake so sacred a work. O foolish men, that will commend them whom they ought to dispraise. O miserable,— that lift up those to Moses Chair, who ought rather to be thrust to the tail of the Plough. What doth more dishonour God, discredit the Gospel, confirm the Adversaries of the Truth, than this ignorance and boldness of your Universal Preachers? For I beseech you tell me, can the honour and praise of God's Wisdom be commended by the folly and ignorance of his Minister? Can the inestimable treasure and riches of a gracious Prince, be seen in the beggarly nakedness of a base Ambassador? Can the Adversaries of the grace of Christ, by looking upon an Idol which hath nothing but a show of that it is not, be dissuaded from the worship of Idols? Can he bring men from Error, that knows not when he teacheth Truth? Finally, can the carnal minded Atheist be persuaded that Christ is the Redeemer of the World, whose Ministers these be? These are the words of that Author, which I thought good to transcribe, that you should not impute to me any Satirical expressions; let him who hath printed the passage answer for it.  
Farther yet, that I may a little allay your odiun and spleen to these Universal Preachers, I pray tell me the meaning of those words of your New-englands' constitution, delivered in these words, 
Synod at Cambridge. cap. 9 Sect. 6.  Nor can constant residence at one Congregation be necessary for a Minister, nor yet lawful, if he be not a Minister to one Congregation only, but to the Church Universal: because he may not attend to one part only of the Church whereto he is a Minister, but he is called to attend upon the whole flock. I see that magna est veritas, & praevalebit: that Truth, when men are out of their heats, shall have a fair testimony, even from its enemies. For what could be said more clearly by us for Universal Preachers than is here delivered? And what is more consonant to our Saviour's charge to Peter, which Saint Paul ingeminates to the Pastors of Ephesus, Feed the flock, 
Joh. 21.15, 16, 17. Acts 20.28.  over whom the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers? Every Minister is a Minister of Christ Jesus, and aught to have a care of the whole Church, though more particularly of that Congregation to which he is designed; yet with this proviso, that he remember that the whole is within his charge, and that therefore he ought to promote the welfare of the Catholic, so far forth as lies in his power.  
2. Office-Priests.  
You delight in compounded words, which the Greek elegantly, but our language kindly bears not. I must then take your compound asunder, and ask you, which of the words displease, whether the Priests, or their office? The word Priest is derived some say from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and then 'tis the same with St. Paul's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from whence you derive your Ruling Elders. and will you catch up the Office, 
Etymolog. magn.  and not own the Name? But others more probably from the French word Prebstre, in which the letter b is quiescent, as all know that know the language; and then I hope you will not so much scorn the name hereafter, since that Prebstre is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the word so often used in Scripture; you say for a Lay-Elder, we for a Priest, yea for that very Priest you jeer at, the Office-Priest.  
For what is an Office, but that duty which every one is bound to do? and shall a man be mocked for doing his Office? The Office of him who is sometime by us called the Priest, sometime the Minister, sometimes by other names (and yet all's but one and the same man) is to preach the word, to administer the Sacraments, to make prayers and supplications, to give thanks, and make intercessions for all men, which when he performs he does his Office, and for the doing you ought not to condemn him. If you, or any other in your place, shall not conscientiously perform these Offices, I shall say he is unworthy to carry the name of a Presbyter, which is all one as if I called him Priest.  
But make the most and worst you can of it. I tell you that there was to remain a Priesthood under the New Testament, not that of Aaron, but that of Melchizedech. For Christ was to be a Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedech. 
Heb. 10.10. Thom. part. 3. 9 48 art. 3. Jewels reply. Art. 7. Sect. 9 Id. art. 17. 14. Fulk. in Matth. 26. Casaub. exer. 16. Sect. 43. Rom. 12.1.  And an Analogy there is betwixt these two. They had their bloody Sacrifices then, and we have our Sacrifices now to offer. For as Christ offered up himself once for all, a full and all-sufficient Sacrifice for the sin of the whole world, so did he institute and command a Memory of this Sacrifice in a Sacrament, even till his coming again. For at and in the Eucharist, we offer up unto God three Sacrifices. One by the Minister only, that's the Commemorative Sacrifice of Christ's death represented in bread broken, and wine poured out. Another by the Minister and people jointly, and that's the Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, for all the Benefits and Graces we receive by the blood of Christ. The third by ever particular man for himself only, and that's the Sacrifice of every man's body and soul to serve God in both. Then in this for aught I know to the contrary we all agree, that though the propitiatory Sacrifice was made by Christ himself only, yet that in the Eucharist there remains a sacrifice of Duty, and a sacrifice of Praife, and a sacrifice of Commemoration. And therefore I see no reason, but the name of Priest may be retained also, who is to do the chiefest work in the offering of all these sacrifices.  
3. Half-Priests, or Diocesan Deacons.  
But you are not offended with the whole Priests only, but with the half-priests also as you call them, and you interpret yourself by the Deacons, whom in scorn you call Diocesan. But I pray over what Diocese were they ever set? in what Diocese employed? That the Bishop of the Diocese ordained them, and permitted them as Probationers sometimes to preach, no otherwise than the Catechizers were allowed in the Church of Alexandria, or as Origen by the Bishops of Jerusalem and Caesarea, this is certain; 
Euseb. lib. 6. c 20.  but that they were Diocesan Deacons, I never heard before.  
I know what you drive at, that the Deacons must only be viduarum & mensarum Ministri, as at first, and must not meddle with the word. But to this Mr. Hooker if you please to consult him, will give you a full answer, which is the same I formerly gave in its due place. 
Hook. Eccl pol. lib. 5. Sect. 78.  Distribution of the Church stock, and attendance on the divine service, was the use for which the Deacons were first made; but if the Church hath since extended their Ministry further than the circuit of their labour was first drawn, we are not herein to think the order of Scripture violated, except there appear some prohibition, that had abridged the Church of that liberty. Suppose we the office of teaching so repugnant to the Office of distributing, that they cannot continue in one and the same person? How was it with the Apostles before that Election? How with the 70. out of which they were chosen? It seems then, that these duties are not so incompatible, but they may be found in one man. When the duties are such that they cannot be well discharged by one, than it is good to make a division, and substitute under officers, as did Moses. But when the same man is of ability to do what is laid upon him, and to undergo somewhat more, it can be no error to lay a double Task upon him. I proceed. You say.   

4. The fourth was of National pious performances, as stinted worship, Choristers, singing of Psalms, with all the Rubrique postures.  
I could forgive you the rest, because you acknowledge these performances to be pious; for if they had piety in them, I see no reason why you or any body else have cause to note them for corruptions. But when I came to this place I entered into debate with myself, which part of Solomon's counsel I should take, whether I should answer or not answer. Not to answer, 
Dr. Bancroft. Featly. Hammond. Fulke. Taylour. Hooker Prideaux. Preston.  might give you occasion to boast I could not. And to answer, was to say over again that which hath been so often said by worthy and learned men, whom if you have not consulted, you are to blame, and I wish you would; if you have and are not satisfied, I fear my labour will be lost. However I shall set before you, what they have said before me. And first I shall speak to your stinted worship.  
1. And here give me leave first to ask you, to what you refer this word stinted, whether you strictly restrain it to the word worship, or to the Spirit by which we are to worship. If to the first, I see you are against all set forms of worship; if to the last, that you think the Spirit is restrained by these set forms. And because both are said by your party, I shall answer to both: and to the last first.  
These conceived forms are either premeditate, or extempore; if premeditate, than the Spirit is as much limited in their conceived forms, as by any form conceived by the Church. But if extempore, than the Spirit only of him that makes the prayer is left at liberty; for the whole Congregation is by that means as much stinted and bound to a set form, to wit, of those words the Minister conceius, as if he read them out of a book. And is not the Spirit restrained when the Congregation shall be confined to the form of this one man's composing? If this be not stinted worship, if this be not to stint the Spirit, I know not what it is. And I can see but one way to avoid it, that every one in the Congregation conceive and offer up a prayer with his own spirit, and not be forced and confined to the Ministers single dictate; this would preserve entirely that liberty of the Spirit you pretend; that other will not. To this if you will not yield, as I know you will not, it lies upon you to answer the objection, which I never saw yet done.  
2. As for set forms of prayer, which I conceive you principally intent by stinted worship, I shall next endeavour to justify them upon many grounds.  
1. In the old Testament we find set forms of blessing and thanksgiving, and prayers appointed by God himself. He it was that framed to his Priests the very words with which they were to bless the people. 
Numb. 6.23.24, 25, 26. Numb. 10.35.36. 2 Chron. 29.30. Exod. 15. Selden in Eutychium.  Speak to Aaron and his Sons, saying in this wise shall ye bless the people; The Lord bless and keep thee, etc. At the remove of the Ark, a form is set and taught the Priests, exurgat Deus, dissipentur inimici. At the Arks return a form, Return O Lord into thy resting place. Hezekiah prescribed to the Priests to sing praise to the Lord with the words of David and Asaph the Seer. Moses Hymn for the overthrow of Pharaoh is extant, and in the same chapter taken up and sung by Miriam, which afterward grew a part of the Jewish ordinary Church Liturgy, for such they had, being instituted by Ezra and the Consistory. What should I tell you that the 92. Psalm is a Psalm composed for the Sabbath? The 20. Psalms to be sung by the people when the King went forth to battle; The 113. to the 118. the great Hallelujah; 13. whole Psalms, or as some say, 15. viz. from 119. to 134. Songs of degrees, 
Moller. Ames. Musculut. in Ps. 21.  because upon every one of the steps, which were 15. betwixt the people's court and the Temple, the Priests made a stay, and sung one of these Psalms; and the 21. Psalms composed by David to be sung by the people for the King when he came home with victory.  
Yea, but say some this was in the infancy and minority of the Church, as children than they needed their Festra's; as infirm bodies, their crutches; but now under the Gospel it is otherwise, we have more light and gifts of the Spirit than they had. True, more light we have, because the Mystery kept secret from the beginning of the world, is more clearly revealed to us, than it was to them, but that's not the question; prove they should, if they speak to the purpose, that we have now more ability to compose a prayer than they had, more of the Spirit of Grace and supplications. Men may have a high conceit of their own abilities; but I suppose no wise man will conceive but that Aaron and his sons, Moses and the Priests, Hezekiah and the Levites had as great an ability to pray ex tempore, as great a measure of the Spirit of grace and supplications, as any man that now lives, and yet they used and prescribed set forms. Their minority then was in respect of the object of faith, not in respect of the spirit of supplications. These men therefore show themselves children to talk of Festra's, and cripples in their understanding to talk of crutches; since those men's legs were far stronger than theirs, and their graces of the Spirit far beyond any Enthusiasts in these days. We may think of these forms as meanly as we please; but chrysostom was of another judgement; 
Chrysost. Hom. 1. of prayer.  for thus he gins one of his Homilies of prayer. For two reasons it becomes God's servants to wonder and bless him, both for the hope we have in their prayers, and that preserving in writing the Hymns and Orisons they offered to God with fear and joy, they have delivered to us their treasure, that so they might draw all posterity to their zeal and imitation. Yea, but the Spirit must teach us to pray, it helps all our infirmities, 'tis the promise of God to his Church, I will pour upon them the Spirit of Grace and supplications. 
Zach. 12.10.  And all this may be done in a set form, as well as by any extempore prayer. True, it is the Spirit must teach us to pray, both for matter and form; for we know not what to ask and must teach us how to pray, for we know not how to ask; zeal and fervour, and faith, and perseverance, and importunity, all necessary affections in every supplicant are gifts of the Spirit; and groans and sighs proceed from the Spirit; he moves the heart first to supplicate, brings a man to see in what a wretched case he is, one that by his sins hath pierced the Son of God & therefore to deprecate & ask pardon; deprecentur ipsum, implorent illius misericordiam. 
Junius in Loc. Zach.  But why all this may not be as well in a petitioner that prays in a set form, as in him who pretends to the Spirit, and yet utters so much cold and low stuff on a sudden, no wise man can imagine.  
Compare but these extempore raptures with the words of Moses, David and Asaph the Seer, with the prayers, intercessions, Hymns and Psalms of the Servants and Prophets, and holy men of God uttered and left upon record, and then it will be easy to put the difference betwixt those who are truly taught by the Spirit, and those who presume to be taught. For from the one hath proceeded prayers and supplications, and forms of thanksgiving so high and admirable, that they are beyond imitation: from the other a shower of words so flat, so jejune, so confused, so unsignificant, that sometime they pass all understanding. Will you but have patience to hear the Censure of Brown himself after his conversion, 
Bancroft ser. preached 1588.  who thus speaks to his friends concerning their extempore prayers. Good God, what worship or prayer do you use! I am ashamed to name the boldness and folly of some, who scarce able to utter three words orderly, will yet take upon them to babble out a tedious, long, and stuttering prayer, wherein every tenth word shall be the repeating of O heavenly Father, O merciful Father, O dear Father, O good Lord, O merciful God, etc. and all things so foolishly packed together, that their prayer seems rather the lisping and prattling of an infant that would tell a great tale could he hit of it, than the petition of a zealous devout soul to his God. These are the words of Brown the Patriarch, and woeful experience doth justify him; for in many Extemporaries, the matter of the prayer is so indigested, the words so incongruous, the periods so broken and interrupted, the length so tedious, the Tautologies so many, that a mean capacity may be apt to say, The prayer was never dictated by the Spirit.  
To break off from this; to pray by the Spirit is two ways taken. Either for prayers made by the assistance of the Spirit, and so they which use premeditated prayers or set forms, may pray by the Spirit as well as others, for the Spirit assists in the premeditation and in the delivery. Or else to pray by the Spirit, is to pray by the immediate inspiration of the Spirit; as the Prophets and Apostles spoke and wrote, and thus neither they who now use set forms, nor yet they who pray extempore, can be said to pray; for than their prayers should be of equal authority with the Psalms of David and Asaph, and other prayers set down and taught by divine inspiration. And it seems that wisdom is the daughter of time; for even they in whose mouths there were no other prayers lawful but extempore, have now persuaded and commended to their proselytes the Practice of Piety, and advised them to make use of those set forms in their devotions, which I am sure will as much stint the spirit as any Collect in the Liturgy.  
2. But I leave the old Prophets, and that which occasioned this discourse, and come to the Christian Church. Christ did not only use himself a set form of words in prayer, but three times together used the same words. 
Mat. 26. Luk. 11.  Saint John Baptist taught his disciples to pray, and it cannot be conceived but it was in a set form, for two reasons. For had he said to them, the Spirit shall teach you, than he had not taught them, but the Spirit. Secondly, a form sure it was that the disciples came to be taught to pray, as John taught his disciples, and upon it Christ prescribed them a form; When you pray, say, In Matthew indeed it is, When you pray, say thus, but in Saint Luke, where the form is prescribed, say This, Our Father, etc. It seems he meant it not only as a pattern, but as a form itself (as the standard-bushel is not only a measure of all bushels, but may itself be used) which precept no man can with a good conscience obey, that holds all set forms of necessity to be cast out of the Church.  


August. epist. 59  
Tertull. in exposit. orationis dominicae.   And therefore the ancient Churches began and concluded their Liturgies with it. This Tertullian calls Legitima oratio, and affirms that this being premised, men have liberty to add other petitions, praemissa legitima & ordinaria oratione quasi fundamento, accidentium jus est desideriorum, jus est extruendi extrinsecas petitiones. His words are very material. This prayer is lawful, and legitimate; this is ordinary, it must be premised, it must be the foundation of our petitions; and this being laid, than a man may lay his right and claim upon it to build other desires, other petitions. And as the Ancients would begin with it, so also they had a care to end with it also, it being a comprehensive prayer, 
Directory. Perkins on the Lord's prayer.  that whatsoever might be defective in the rest, this might complete it. And this again is the most powerful eloquence to draw God to audience; Can we speak with the tongues of men and Angels, yet certainly our petitions cannot find so easy an entrance into our heavenly Father's ears, as when we tender them in his Sons own words. This was the judgement both of Cyprian and Chrysologus, Qui fecit vivere, docuit & orare, ut dum prece & oratione, quam filius docuit, apud patrem loquimur, audiamur: agnoscit filii sui verba, 
Cyprian de orat. dominicae.  cum precem facimus: & in dictandis precibus vota supplicum praevenit. Add to this, a man is bound to say Amen at the end of a prayer; now a man may much scruple whether he is bound to say Amen to such a prayer, which he hath not time to weigh, which he hath not time to consider. For put case that he who takes upon him to speak unto you in the Name of God, 
Chrysologus in eadem.  shall teach some false doctrine, or covertly deliver unto the people some error; and after pray that God would bless the seed which he hath sown; is it not dangerous to join with him in his desires? Such a thing may possibly fall out. And this inconvenience is quite removed, partly by subjoyning this prayer, partly by using those forms the Church hath enjoined, to which a man may upon deliberation say Amen.  
But this is not the sole example we have in the New Testament patterns for set forms. The Apostle nine times reiterates the same words. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. And to put the matter out of doubt, the Saints for their victory over the Beast, sang the triumphal song, as Moses and the Israelites sang of old, when they were delivered from the Egyptians. No marvel if the same benefit be celebrated with the same song. In these passage, 
Revel. 15.3. Bright in lec.  of holy Scripture we have set forms of prayer somewhere commended, somewhere commanded, somewhere used, somewhere reiterated, and all inspired by the holy Ghost; and therefore certainly the use of them can be no quenching of the holy Spirit, whom we find to inflame our hearts in rehearsal of these sacred forms.  
3. And in the last place if we look upon the custom of God's people, find we shall that in all places, and in all ages they have made use of public set and sanctified forms of prayer. H●gesippus an ancient writer, one that was near the Apostles times, writes that St. James chosen Bishop of Jerusalem by the Apostles themselves for a form of service or common prayer composed by him for that Church, yet extant, was called Jacobus Liturgus. To omit Justin Martyr, in whom I find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Common prayers, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prescribed prayers in Origen. 

Just Mart. Apol. 2. Orig. lib. 6. contr. Cells. Cypr. in Orat. dominicae.  
Perk. resut. of the real presence Fox. Mart. fol. 1275.   In Cyprian we find the Priest before prayer using this Preface; S●rsum corda, and the people answering habemus ad Dominum, which form as Perkins confesses was used in all Liturges of the ancient Church. This than was no rag of Rome, but as Mr. Fox truly saith, was borrowed from the Greek, not the Latin Church. Which is so true, that the Centurists confess, that in the blessed Martyr Cyprians days without all doubt, formulas quasdum precum habuerunt. Be pleased to look in the latter end of my Catechism, where you shall find the old Liturgies cited to that purpose.  
And as Christianity begun more and more to flourish, so were the Fathers of the Church careful that the people should not be destitute of these excellent means to serve God; the Bishops for their several Dioceses composing their Liturgies; Basil for Cappodocia and those parts: chrysostom for Constantinople, and the Greek Church under his jurisdiction: Ambrose for Milan, Gregory and Isidore for the Western Churches; all which are extant to this day; and out of these and some more ancient attributed to the Apostles themselves, all the famous and known Churches of the world have composed their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and we among the rest, so that it was no vain brag which Archbishop Cranmer made, that if he might be admitted to call Peter Martyr, and four or five more unto him, he would make it appear that the same form of worship which was set forth in the Book of Common Prayer, had continued for substance even then one thousand five hundred years: and give me leave to add this to the honourable burial of it, since it must be buried, that before it was authorized and published in that beauty we lately saw it, it went under the file fifteen times. And by what men? even by those, who many of them, sealed the truth of it with their blood in the fire.  
It should seem about those former times, when those Liturgies were first published, there were some so wedded to their own fancies, that they preferred their own conceptions before the Church's Ordinances, and yet they came not to that brain-sick-fancie as to bring into the Church extempore prayers. Angry they were not with set forms, but displeased because they might not make them. And against these, two famous Counsels have provided; 
Concil. Laod. Ca 18. Can. 159. Concil. Mil. c. 12. Caranza legit comprobatae.  first that of Laodicea, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & ad horam nonam & vesperum celebretur, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And in Africa the Milevitan Council more expressly, Placuit ut preces & orationes, quae probatae fuerunt in Concilio ab omnibus celebrentur, nec aliae omnino dicantur in Ecclesia, nisi quae à prudentioribus tractatae vel compositae in Synodo fuerunt, sufficiently divised, considered or approved by the wiser men, and allowed in a Synod; and the reason which the Council adds is most essectual, ne forte aliquid contra fidem, vel per ignorantiam, vel per minus studium sit compositum. Which is the very reason that Master Selden one of the last Assembly gives for the Jewish Liturgy from Ezra's time. 
Seldens notes in Eutychium.  The Jews, saith he, about the end of the Babylonish Captivity, had their ancient manners as well as language so depraved, that without a Master they either were not able to pray as they ought, or had not confidence to do it. And therefore that for the future, they might not recede, either in the matter of their prayers through corruption, or expression through ignorance from that form of piety commanded by God; this remedy was applied by the men of the great Synagogue, Ezra and his one hundred and twenty Colleagues; out of which words Doctor Hammond makes this collection, 
Ham. viero of the Direct. Sect 15.  That one special use and benefit of a set form is not only to provide for the ignorance, but to be a hedge to the true Religion, to keep out all mixtures and corruptions out of a Church.  
To this purpose 'tis no news to tell you, that all reformed Churches abroad have some form of worship or other; that Master Knox in Scotland composed a Liturgy for that Church. That those zealous brethren who were so earnest for Reformation in Queen Elizabeth's days, Anno 1585. though they complained to the Lord Burleigh against the Church Common Prayer-book, yet professed they were not against Liturgy, and 'tis evident they were not by the composing of two forms, one year after another. And here I cannot choose but put you in mind of a passage of Master Cartwright which I have seen in a little Manual of his in answer to one that charged him as an enemy to set forms; To which his reply was, that he was so fare from this conceit, that if any were pleased to come to Coventry (where he then did preach) and hear his Lectures, they should before and after his Sermons hear the same prayers used by him, except that portion of Scripture upon which he insisted, gave him occasion to add some few words. I shall shut up this point with the judgement and practice of Master Calvin; 
Calvin. epist. ad Protect.  his judgement he hath fully declared in his Epistle to the Protector then, Quod ad formulam precum, etc. As for forms of Prayers, and Ecclesiastical rites, I very much approve, that it be set or certain. From which it may not be lawful for the Pastors in their function to departed, that so there may be provision made for the simplicity and unskilfulness of some, and that the consent of all the Churches among themselves may more certainly appear: and lastly also, that the extravagant levity of some who affect novelties may be prevented. Thus he. And his practice is evident, The Liturgy by him composed for Geneva being yet extant.  
I am no Prophet, nor the son of a Prophet, yet thus much I dare be bold to forecast, that when all hears and animosities being deposed, men shall return to an humble, sober and Christian temper, some form or other for prayer will be judged necessary to be composed, set forth & enjoined, without which the dislocated parts of a Church will never kindly join. The experience of the present distractions ever since a set form, as you in a Sarcasme call them, stinted prayers, hath been cast out of the Church, will make men wiser for the future.  
Let men in private use what forms they please, and choose their own helps, to which they may add, as occasion requires, words suited to their present necessities: But when they are to join with the Church, the petitions being such as are more necessary for the whole Corpse of Christians, than for any one part, fit it is, that the mother be judge what is useful for her children, and teach them what and how to ask. Leave men to their own inventions, and possible it is, that the petition be not framed to the present exigent, which the Church in all particulars hath taken care of. Yet if this fall out, another inconvenience there is, that too often happens; These extempore men dealing by their prayers, as schoolboys do by their lessons, or Musicians with their plain song: Those the children vary into so many formulas for want of judgement, till they come to nonsense: and the unskilful artists run so far in their divisions and descants, till they mar the plainsong. And the like will happen to thy, great service of God, when it shall fall to the variations & descants of inartificial swains, and heavy-headed Mechaniques. The house of prayer will be a house of pratlin and Zion turned into Babel.  
To conclude with the words of a wise man, I never yet could see any reason why any Christian should abhor, or be forbidden to use the same forms of prayer, since he prays to the same God, believes in the same Saviour, professeth the same Truths, reads the same Scriptures, hath the same duties upon him, and feels the same wants daily, for the most part both inward and outward, which are common to the whole Church. When we desire the same things, what hinders, but we may use the same words? except we measure our God to be like our own appetites and stomaches, which are best pleased with fresh and fresh. I go on.  
1. Choristers and singing of Psalms with all the Rubric postures.  
The Rubric I have consulted, and I meet not with any posture at all prescribed at the singing of any Hymn or Psalm. But say it had, some posture or other must be used, and had it been the worse, because prescribed? I trow not. For prescriptions in adiaphorous things doth not so alter their natures, as to make them nought; to prostrate the body in prayer, to lift up the eyes and pure hands, are actions of indifferency; and do they become nought, because God in his Word prescribes them? God in his Word hath given the Church liberty to prescribe in these things; Let all things be done decently, and in order; Say then the Church had prescribed by the Rubric, that a man should have stood, have kneeled, have sat, have lift up his eyes and hands at the singing of this or that Psalm respectively; she might have done it, and the singing of the Psalm had been near the more un-Christian, had the Rubric posture been observed. You needed not therefore have girded at this, and the rather because it was not. But I see nothing can escape you, not the poor boy, the Quirister. But happily you will say, you take it in a larger sense, and by it mean the whole Choir, and so I think you do, and therefore I shall shape my answer accordingly.  
2. Choristers and singing of Psalms.  
Can I imagine that you were of the Anabaptists opinion, who will not admit of singing of Psalms in the Church, I should put you in mind of that which Saint Paul writes to the Ephesians and Colossians, Be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess, but be filled with the Spirit, speaking to yourselves in Hymns and Psalms, 
Eph. 5.18, 19 Col. 3.16. Beza in loc.  and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your hearts to the Lord. Beza conceives that the Apostle alludes to that Music then in use among the Jews, who had their Mismorim, their Tehillim, their Schirim. Be it then which you here object, that these were taken up by Jewish imitation, yet it follows not they were the worse; for we have here Apostolical authority to make good the use, let this then be cast in our teeth no more.  
The Christian Psalms were like the Jewish Mismorim, Odes they were, either Doctrinal or Ethical; 
Hieron. Chrysost.  written upon sundry matters or arguments, exhortatory, consolatory, precatory, deprecatory, such as are many Psalms of David. 2. The Hymns were like their Tehillim, setting forth the praises of God, for his greatness and goodness to the sons of men; such were the Hymns of Moses, Deborah, Zachary, Mary, Simeon. 3. The songs answered to their Schirum, which were peculiar songs composed for general blessings; praises they continued, but in a more large and universal sense. When any of these were expressed by voice and instrument together, they were called properly Psalms; when by voice alone without the consent of instruments, they were named Hymns and songs. 
Zanchy in loc.  This is the descant that the Learned have used in their Expositions of these words; & that we are hence to collect, is, that Music hath its use in the service of God.  
1. By this the honour of God is more magnified and celebrated, than it could be by a still and soft voice. To speak of God doth well, to whisper out his Name is commendable; this is for those who have received primitias Spiritus; but such who are filled with the Spirit they ought to go further; as the Apostle exhorts, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they will magnify his Name in Psalms and Hymns and spiritual songs, and so make his praise to be glorious. The concealment of God's praise did never like him, no nor the cold expression of it, as if men would slip it over; it hath been best pleasing to him, when it hath been most made known: And therefore he hath had in all Ages perpetual remembrances of what he hath done, Chronicles, Annals, Books of Record. These indeed speak out his noble Acts, but it is for the most part to the Wise and Learned. But let but one of these be conveyed into a song, and it will quickly be upon the tongue of the unlearned; you shall have the Maid at her wheel, the Apprentice in the shop warbling upon it; and if any be skilful in Music, it will please him to sing to his Harp or Viol. the wonderful works of God. The praises of our God are conveyed into the soul with more delight, are fastened with more affection, are perpetuated to succeeding ages with more certainty, when they are measured out by Hymns.  
2. This is one reason; but this is not the sole; for this is done to edify. Men I conceive are then most edified in Religious Worship, when their affections are ordered, as becomes pious and devout men. Now in the World there is not any thing of more power, than is a Musical Harmony either by instrument or voice, to quicken a heavy spirit, to temper a troubled soul, to allay that which is too eager, to mollify and soften a hard heart, to stay and settle a desperate. In a word, not any way so forcible to draw forth tears of devotion, if the heart be such as can yield them; whence Saint Augustine makes this Confession to Saint Ambrose, 
Aug. Conf. l. 9  Quantum flevi in Hymnis & canticis Ecclesiae tuae! Men may therefore speak their pleasures, but let reason be heard to speak, and then the songs of Zion will much edify, if not the understanding, because as they say they teach not, yet they will build up the affections very much, which are more requisite in this work; or he that doubts of it, let him remember Bassa's Ministrel that composed his own soul, and David's Harp which allayed saul's madness. No art in Divine Worship can be of more use than this, in which the mind ought sometimes to be inclined to heaviness, sometimes to a spiritual ecstasy of joy, sometimes raised to a holy zeal and indignation, ever carried with such affections as is suitable to the present occasion.  
3. And yet I do not, I dare not say it doth not teach; for are there not good instructions in Psalms? not many profitable lessons in Anthynms? and these by the sweetness of melody find the easier entrance, and longer entertainment. Hear the judgement of the great Basil, When the Holy Spirit foresaw that mankind is to virtue hardly drawn, 
Basil in Psalm.  but is propense to what delights, it pleased the wisdom of the same Spirit to borrow from Melody that pleasure, which being mingled with the heavenly mysteries, might by the soft and smooth touch of the ear, convey as it were by stealth the treasure of good things into the mind. To this purpose were the Harmonious tunes of Psalms devised for us, that they who are yet in knowledge but babes, might, when they think they sing, learn. Oh the wise conceptions of that heavenly Teacher, which hath by his skill found out a way, that doing those things wherein we delight, we may also learn that wherein we may profit!  
4. This is the lesson may be learned from the Ditty; now from the sweet agreement of these voices and instruments, Christians may learn to agree. One Harp or Viol. out of tune abates the pleasure of the rest; and one jarring Christian, 
Couper in Rev. 5.8.  and therefore much more many mars the Music of the whole Church. Oh how melodious was the praise of God, when it came from men of one heart, and of one mind, as pleasing then, as is the symphony of well tuned instruments. Let us then learn from the songs of Zion to come into tune again; these discords and harsh sounds God likes not in his service.  


Pliny secundus. Ep. lib. 10. 103. & citatur a Tertull. Apolog. cap. 2.  
Euseb. l. 2. c. 17. Pallad. in Hist. Lausiaca.   5. Upon these reason's the Primitive Christians sung their praises to God. In Pontus and Bythinia, Pliny writes to Trajan the Emperor, that their only fault was, that they met before day to sing Hymns to the honour of Jesus, secum invicem. I pray mark those words, for they speak for the use you mock at of Choristers; for it was secum, together, and Invicem by turns, that is Quire-wise. And in Nytria, Philo the Jew, (and he lived in Caius Caligula's time,) and after him Palladius, deliver, that they were accustomed in their Temple, with Hymns and Psalms to honour God; sometimes exalting their voices together, and sometimes one part answering another, wherein he thought they departed not much from the pattern of Moses and Miriam. In Ignatius the first of the Greek Fathers, we read of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Ignat ad Antioch. Concil. Laod. Can 15. 1 Cor. 14.16. Socrat l. 6. c. 8.  and after mention of them in the Councils, and what should they be but Choristers, which Saint Paul is also supposed to intent, when he asks Hath he a Psalm? At Antioch, Socrates affirms that Ignatius began the custom of singing of Hymns interchangeably upon a vision of Angels. And if Ignatius did not, yet one who is of more authority did, I mean the Prophet Isaiah, for he saw the Lord sitting upon his Throne, and above it stood the Seraphims, 
Isa. 6.1, 2, 3.  and one cried to another, and said Holy, Holy, Holy. Flavius and Diodorus continued it in the same Church against the Arrians. Damasus and Ambrose brought it into the West. 
Vide Hooker. Eccl. Pol. lib. ●. Sect. 39  And among the Grecians, Basil having brought it into his Church of Neo-Casarea, to avoid any thoughts of singularity and novility pleads for his warrant the Churches of Egypt, Lybia, Thebes, Palestine, the Arabians, Phoenicians, Synians, Mesopotamians, among whom the custom was, for his was such, to give power to one, by him called, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the chanter, 
Basil ad Neocas.  to begin the Anthymne, and then the whole Choir came in, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
These were the songs of Zion, which our forefathers used, and it is, and aught to be our grief, that they are not heard still. For who that hath an Harmonious soul, would not sit down and weep to be deprived of that Harmony, which the Angels and Saints practice, which so many Christian Churches have received before Papistry was thought of, so many Ages kept on foot? That which entunes the affections, that which teacheth us so many good Lessons, filleth the mind with comfort and heavenly delight; teacheth us to be of one heart, one mind, and makes the praise of God to be glorious; In a word, that so fitly accords with the Apostles exhortation, Speak to yourselves in Psalms and Hymns and spiritual songs, making Melody, and singing in your hearts unto the Lord; would not upon slight, or rather indeed no grounds be cast out of the Church.  
And that you or any other doubt the less, that Psalmody is no new device, but of very ancient institution in the Church, David exhorts young man and Maidens, old men and children to praise the Name of the Lord. In which even Children were so skilful, 
Psal. 138.  that they received Christ into Jerusalem with an Hosanna, and applied fitly those words to him, Blessed is he that cometh in the Name of the Lord. Among us, saith Hieron, 

Hieron ad Marcellum.  
Basil in Psal. Chrysost. Han. 9 in Coloss.   you may hear Ploughmen singing Psalms at the Plow-tail. And Basil bids an Artisan sing Psalms in his shop. chrysostom lays this charge upon the parents, that they teach their children to sing Psalms. And Augustine is of the same mind. It was then no dull and heavy age, such as we now live in, in which a man shall scarce hear a Psalm in a shop, or out of a child's mouth; Now it may well be supposed, that this they practised alone, that they might be the better able to bear their part, when they met in the Quire. For here I shall make bold to tell you, what I know is true by my own experience. I have known Artisans by bearing their part at home, grow so skilful in Psalmody, that when they met in the Church, one would bear the Base, another the Treble, others the inner parts so skilfully, so Harmoniously, that I suppose had you been present, you would never speak against a Choir more. And this custom so prevailed, that there was not any in Congregation, but according to his voice, could bear his part in such time, in such tune, that these six notes being curiously varied and carried from the ear to the spiritual faculties of the soul, were able 
With rare divisions of a choice device,  
The hearers soul out of his ears entice. Du Bartas.   
If I grate your ears too much upon this subject, you must pardon me; for from my childhood I have born a great affection to this divine art, and glory in it, that I am able to sing a Psalm or Hymn to the praise of my God, in or without a Quire. I come to your last exception.   

5. And the first was of National payments or spiritual profits, as offerings, Tyths and Mortuaries.  
For the first and last of these, I believe you have little knowledge beyond the names. For what were offerings but free and voluntary contributions? and I hope you will not be against such, who would have your Pastors to be maintained by what the people should contribute. But it seems in New-England you were quickly weary of this way; for charity growing cold, a better provision was made, not only by a proportion of Land, but by a certain tax of money which was laid on by the Magistrate, 
Plain dealing pag. 19  both upon the Members of the Congregation, & upon all the Neighbours, though no Members of the Church; yea, and others are beholding now and then to the general Court to study ways to enforce the maintenance to the Ministry. But this by the way.  
Offerings were used in the Primitive Church, and they were of two sorts. 
Acts 24.17.  1. Properly Alms, for the Church then raised a stock for the relief of the poor Brethren; to that purpose were they collected, to which Saint Paul adviseth, 1 Cor. 16. 2. Or else they were offerings which the Rich contributed for other uses, being like the Jewish Therumaths which belonged to the Priests. Out of these there was a treasury made; and out of these, 

Selden de decimis. cap. 2. Sect. 1.  
Cap. 4. Sect. 1, 2.   those who first laboured in the Ministry were maintained; and a treasury out of these offerings continued in the Church, till such time as Ministers were provided by a settled maintenance; then these stipes, sportulae, mensurnae divisiones ceased. After I know none imposed by the Church; if any were, it was custom brought them in, and time continued them; and what was freely given, might be freely taken. And yet I could if I list, acquaint you with constitutions against them.  
2. Mortuaries.  
Mortuaries you needed not have named, and I believe you would not, had you understood the original of them. In an old Synod of Ireland, it appears that any man might bequeath his body to be buried in what Abbey it pleased him; 
In statut. Synod. Ms. cap. 9 Seld. cap. 9 of tyths.  and that the Abbot to whose Monastery the bequest was made should have the apparel of the dead, his Horse and his Cow for a Mortuary. Abbots with us there are none, and Abbeys are dissolved, and therefore we have nothing to do with this charge.  
3. Tithes.  
To give you an answer to this charge, I shall refer you to those who now receive them, and keep such a buzzle about them. I hope they are best able to defend their receipts, since they grumble so much, when they hear of the least news that they should be taken away. Had you asked me, when I was in possession of them, and if you should ask me an account, if ever I come to enjoy them again, you shall see I can prove, and will make my title good jure divino: without which, I suppose they of your party, who pretend they may do nothing without an express text of Scripture, cannot with a quiet conscience grow so pursy and fat with them. You should do well to call them to account about this point, and it will not satisfy us to tell us of public Acts, Statutes, and other Ordinances in this behalf; for than we shall tell them in your own words, that these were faithless and fantastical fashions, the illegitimatelegal offsprings of National Parliaments in this and in the Neighbour Nations. Pray consult with them about it, they are of age to answer for themselves. I leave them, and return to your Paper.     

SECT. VII. The words of the Letter.  
THe fifth and highest degree of Church-deformity, is the Ecumenical Church, otherwise called Roman Catholic; the which in apprehension of I know not how many Kingdoms is the very best, though in the judgement of Christ Jesus it is the very basest; because the beastliest and the most blasphemous of all the bastard-Churches constitutions, that ever were till now. Witness what is written, Rev. 13.1, 3, 5, 6. whose Pastors and other Presbyters, the sin-pardoning Pope, Cardinals, Abbots and others, were owned & acknowledged for to be, and that by not a few if not by them of the summoned Counsels yet in several Synods, in sundry Countries. Insomuch that Church's iniquities were so increased over their heads, and their traitorous trespasses were so egregiously grown up to heaven, as that the long-forbearing Lord could no longer forbear, but was put upon it, and as it were necessitated for to take vengeance on their inventions, as on Aaron's golden Calf, and samuel's grievous connivency at the evils of his sons, spoken of Psal. 96.6, 8.  

The Reply.  
My reply to this Paragraph shall be very short, since it concerns not us of the Church of England. I had thought at first to have said something of an Ecumenical Church, which you know we call usually a general Council; but since you otherwise interpret yourself, that by it you mean the Roman Catholic, I will not meddle with it. For we no less than you are against all Papal usurpations. 
Jun. de Eccl. Rom. cap. 17.  I shall only return you the judgement of Junius about this matter. Ecclesia Romana, quod divina habet omnia, à Deo est: quod corrupta habet omnia, ●ib ipsa est: quod divi●a habet omnia, Ecclesia est: quod eadem habet corrupta omnia, Ecclesia corrupta est: Ecclesia non tollitur corruptione nisi rotati, quam vocant interitum. Ecclesia non tollit partialis corruptio, sed infirmat: Ecclesia Romana omnia habet corrupta, sed non omnino, haet non interitus est, fed partialis corruptio ejus disendu est. And therefore to your accusation it is fit for them to answer, not for me, who maintain none of their corruptions.  
God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ grant by his eternal Spirit that Spirit of eternal Truth, that all the deceits and fallacies of Satan being laid asidet, we may daily grow up in Christ and his Church, and in the truth of Christ and his Church, and that we may confirm and establish one another more and more by unfeigned Charity, and the bonds of peace to his glory, and the common salvation of ourselves and all Christians, Amen.     

A KEY to open the Debate about a Combinational Church, and the power of the KEYS. The Third Part.  
HItherto you have held forth the doctrine in your Letter, now you come to the use and application, and that you may be the better understood, you have thought upon five heads, and upon every one of these fastened either a bitter or a joculary Epithet; one is vile and virulent, another is violent, a third is haughty and horrible, the fourth is idle and addle, and the last an odd head. The Spaniard gives us this caution, that he, whose head is of glass, aught to take heed how he casts up stones into the air, left by chance they fall upon his own pate and crack his crown. Before than you made yourself so merry with these heads, you should have considered whether some ridiculum caput, could not have created to himself and others laughter at the invention of more heads in your Combinational Churches, than yet you could find in the Catholic; and tell you, that you are a Monster of many heads, that the Presbyter is a vile and virulent head, the Independent a violent, the Anabaptist a haughty and horrible, the Notioner an idle and addle, the Quaker an odd head. You perhaps will ask him, how it will be proved; I will answer for him; on the same day when you prove your words true of these Churches you jest at. 'Tis but the imagination of your own head it is so, and I know not anybody that is bound presently to fall down and worship it. But I come to your Letter.  The words of the Letter. 
MAy not any one, to whose inwards the knowledge of these particulars is come, ingenuously confess that his very soul is clearly convinced of the mighty and wonderful corruptions which have crept into, are cherished within, and contested about by many, yea, by too too many Christians, of too too many Churches?  

The Reply.  
Those indeed who are convinced, that they are mighty and wonderful corruptions, in ingenuity can do no less but confess it. But it is not a bure relation or recital, without any proof (as you for the most part have done) that will convince any ingenuous man. You must set to work again, and fortify your words with plain Scripture, or sound domonstration; yea, and remove those blocks I have cast in your way, before you shall convince any one who is not of a weak and servile judgement. If they crept in, you must show when, and by whom? which you have not done, your bare affirmation being of no validity. That they were cherished was well, because no corruptions as I have showed. That too too many Christians, and too too many Churches contest about them, I am sorry for it. Better it were we were at peace with ourselves, and employed our forces against the common enemy, to whose entrance by our dissensions we have opened too wide a gap. I fear me, we shall contest so long, that his words will be verified, who said at his death, Venient Romani.   

The words of the Letter.  
ANd may not I (though a stranger to my nearest friends, because an Exile, newly arrived in the Land of my Nativity) safely appeal to any person either of conscience or common sense, whither Christ Jesus our supreme Lord Protector, upon whose shoulder the government of the Churches is laid, hath not of late years bo n a loud witness against every one of those five aforementioned kinds of deformed Churches, and that in these very Countries, which are counted and commonly called Christendom? If so, God forbidden that there should be any Christian man, and more especially any Clergy man so carnal, or so careless in all those coasts, as not to be both able and willing to conceive and to conclude himself to be called upon for to consider and lay to heart the great and grievous desolations which his hand hath made, amongst the most and mightiest of the sons of men.  

The Reply.  
And here I shall with tears in my eyes Echo back unto you, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, God forbidden it should be otherwise. Oh never let any Christian of what rank soever, add that talon of lead to that sin which hath so highly provoked our good God to pour out the vials of his wrath against this our Church, and these three Nations, (that I mention not the other of Christendom) as not to lay it to heart. Conceive not there can be so much carnality or carelessness yet left in any person imbued with conscience and common sense, who hath not considered what God hath done unto us in the fiercnesse of his wrath. 
Mic. 2.3. Lam. 2.17. Dan. 19.14.12 Psal. 79.1.2, 3, 4.  We do acknowledge that God's Word hath taken hold of us, that the Lord hath devised a device against us, and hath done that which he devised; that he hath watched upon the evil, and brought it upon us; for under the whole heaven hath not been done, as hath been done upon Jerusalem. O God the people are come into thine inheritance, thy holy Temple have they defiled, and made Jerusalem an heap of stones; the dead bodies of thy servants have they given to be meat to the fowls of the air, and the flesh of thy Saints unto the beasts of the earth; their blood have they shed like water round about Jerusalem, and there was no man to bury them; we are become a reproach to our neighbours, a scorn and derision to them that are round about us. God's sinking the gates, his destroying the walls, his slighting the strong holds of Zion, his polluting the Kingdom, his swallowing the Palaces, his cutting off the horn of Israel: Gods hating our Feasts, his abominating our Sabbaths, his loathing our Solemnities; 
Isa. 1.  Gods forgetting his footstool, his abhorring his Sanctuary, his suffering men to break down all the carved work thereof with axes and hammers, 
Psal. 74.6. Lam. 2.6.  are all evidences to me, that in the indignation of his anger, he hath despised the King and the Priest.  
Neither are we so carnal nor careless neither, but to consider why this is done; Justly, justly we suffer. For the Lord our God is righteous in all his works which he doth; for we obeyed not his voice. We have sinned, 
Dan. 9.14. 5. 6.  and have done wickedly, and have rebelled, even by departing from his precepts, and from his judgements; neither have we harkened to his servants the Prophets, which spoke in his Name to our Kings, our Princes, and our Fathers, and to all the people of the Land. Yea further, that I enter no Apologies; no not for them I plead (for I set myself now before God's Tribunal, not yours.) I never read those piercing Scriptures, 1. Sam. 2. & 3. Jer. 23. Ezek. 33. Hos. 4. Mal. 2. I never reflect upon the common conversation in the day of our prosperity, and behold Hophni and Phinehas with a fleshhook in their hand, ravening for their fees, and wallowing in their lust at the door of the Tabernacle, but I find we were highly defective in every duty, and thence conclude that our sufferings are not the sufferings of pure Martyrs, but of grievous transgressors. There is no credit lost by giving glory to God. And therefore we shall not stick to acknowledge as much as Cajetan did of the Romish prelate's, when the Army under Charles the fifth 1527. took Rome. He was then upon the interpretation of the 5. chapter of St. Matthew. Ver. 13. Ye are the Salt. of the earth; if the salt have lost his savour, what is it then good for but to be cast out, etc. The Army had then entered the City, and had offered great abuse to the Clergy in it, which he presenting in a Christian meditation, inserts these words; We Prelates of the Church of Rome, do at this time find this truth verified on us in a special measure; we who were chosen to be the salt of the earth, Evanuimus, we are become light persons and unsavoury; and therefore by the just judgement of God we are cast out and become a spoil and a prey, and Captives; not to Infidels, but Christians.  
Habes jam confitentes reos, and yet I see not what advantage you ever shall be able to make of it no more than Romanists. They tell us these miseries are fallen upon us because we departed from them; you, because we oppose your forms; for this you intimate Christ of late years to have borne a loud witness against every one of those fire  kinds of deformed Churches. But both they and you are mistaken, assigning Non causam pro causâ. For the cause was not because the Church was either Parochial, Cathedral, Diocesan, Provincial, National, or a true part of the Ecumenical; but that which I have said, the abominations that were committed by us, our formality and coldness in God's service, our ill administration of the keys, our not profiting and bringing forth fruits worthy of repentance. This hath provoked our God to jealousy. This hath moved him to remove, for aught yet appears, our Candlestick. This hath caused him to visit the iniquity of the fathers upon the children. And for this there be yet those that mourn in Zion, and melt in the threns' of Jeremy, c●ing night and day unto him, 
Joel 2 17. Isa. 18. Exod. 34.6, 7.  saying; Spare thy people O Lord, and give not thy heritage to reproach; wherefore should they say among the people, Where is their God. And who can tell if the irreversible decree be not past? but the merciful Lord will be jealous for his Land, and pity his people. For he is a merciful and gracious God, long-suffering and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquities, transgression and sin. I will not despair when I shall see a sincere national humiliation, for this national sin, or sins rather, but God will return and have mercy on this National Church. He that would have spared Sodom upon Abraham's request, could ten righteous men have been found in it, will yet I hope spare this Church, 
Jer. 14.20.21. Isa. 5.30. Isa. 1.25.26, 27.  in which there be hundreds of ten who pour forth their hearts with Jeremy. We acknowledge O Lord, our wickedness, and the iniquity of our fathers, for we have sinned against thee. Do not abhor us for the name sake, do not disgrace the throne of thy glory, remember, break not thy Covenant with us. And that though now, if one look unto the land, behold darkness and sorrow, and the light is darkened in the heavens thereof, yet these penitent sighs and groans will be so effectual, that God will turn his hand upon us, and purely purge away our dross, and take away all our tinn, and will restore our Judges as at first, and our Counsellors as at the beginning, and that afterward our Church shall be called the City of righteousness, the faithful City. Zion shall be redeemed with judgement, and her Converts with righteousness.  
This was considered before you returned into the land of your Nativity, (from which I knew not that you were exiled before, but thought you voluntarily departed) and shall be considered after your return: For you appeal to men of conscience and common sense. And now also I shall make my appeal to you, whether or no it be not a bitter thing to help forward affliction when God is but a little displeased. Remember the insultation of Edom, and what came of it. Men should take small content in being flagellum Dei. For Jerusalem shall be a burdensome stone, and a cup of trembling to all them that cry down with it. 
Zach. 12.2.3. Isa. 10.5.6, 7. ver. 16.17.  Assur was the rod of God's anger, and the staff in his hand was his indignation; sent he was against an hypocritical nation, and against the people of God's wrath to take the spoil, and to take the prey, and to tread them down as the mire in the streets; howbeit he means not so, neither doth his heart think so; but his heart is to destroy and to cut off nations not a few, etc. Therefore shall the Lord, the Lord of hosts send among his fat ones, leanness, and under his glory he shall kindle a burning like the burning of a fire; and the light of Israel shall be for a fire, and his holy One for a flame, and it shall burn and devour his thorns and his briars in one day, etc. Compare this with the 14. Chapter, and tell me then what comfort any man can have in being the rod of God's wrath against his people. An office which I must plainly tell you, I read not any of God's servants ever employed in. Howbeit we shall patiently submit unto it, and kiss the rod: For thou Lord, hast ordained him for our destruction, and established him for correction, even for our correction, to purify us sons of Levi from our dross; and by his hand who punisheth us for our sins to put upon us Confessors Robes, by that contrivance both chastening and covering our sins; as the Persians used their Nobles, beating their , and sparing their persons. Though by it, qui foris est, the outside be scorched, yet qui intus est, the inward man is renewed day by day, 
2 Cor. 4.16.  the faith, hope, obedience, charity, humility, and patience of many by this fiery trial hath been made more conspicuous.    

SECT. 1. The words of the Letter. Of the vile and virulent head the Pope.  
1. FIrstly, hath not the long provoked Lord begun in this Island and in Ireland to pull down lowest that lose, that lofty, and lawless Church, which the corrupt Clergy had lifted up highest? namely the Ecumenical or Roman Catholic Church; whereof the sinne-pardoning, or rather soul-poisoning Pope was the Vile and Virulent head; who was therefore, and upon that account publicly declared, and generally (though not universally) believed to be a horrible Monster, as well as a very abominable beast because of his ten horns, Witness what is written, Revel. 17.3.5.  

The Reply.  
To what you say of the vile virulent head the Pope, I assent, and so did and do all Orthodox Divines of our English Church; holding his claim to be Universal Bishop to be Antichristian, profane, proud, foolish, blasphemous, by virtue whereof he doth engross to himself full power and authority over all Christians in the world, both Ecclesiastical and saecular; the principal actions whereof are. 1. To frame and set out for all Christians the rule of faith and good manners; to point out the books of Canonical Scriptures, and the traditionary word, and to deliver the sense and interpretation thereof; and to determine all controversies in religion with an unerring sentence. 2. To prescribe and enact laws for the whole Church equally obliging the conscience to obedience with the divine Law. 3. To exercise external power of directing and commanding, and also of censure and correction of all Christians. 4. To grant dispensations, indulgences, absolution from oaths and vows. 5. To canonize Saints, institute religious orders, to deliver from Purgatory. 6. To call and confirm general Counsels. 7. To dethrone, and conculcate Kings, etc.  
All this we disclaim as well as you, and you needed not have said, that it begun in this Island and Ireland, as if it begun with you: for it begun more than one hundred years since; assume not therefore that to yourselves, which was done to your hands; to take down this head was the work of the National Church you so slight, and had it not been done to your hands, I doubt whether all the power you could make, had ever been able to have done it. And for this, that head being of a revengeful nature, hath ever since been plotting which way it might unroot us that unrooted it; For the proof of this I shall acquaint you, with what a friend acquainted me and others about five years since. A good Protestant he is now, but about 30. years before, was as he confessed, reconciled to Rome, by one Meredith an ancient and learned Jesuit (for he was one of those that Dr. Featly had to deal with in France.) This man told him that in England they had been long and industrious about their work of conversion; but it went on slowly, and so would till they took a wiser course. Two things there were that must be done before they should bring their business to a full effect. They must first find a way to remove the Bishops and Ministers, in whose room they must bring it so about, that all should have liberty to preach. Then secondly they must get down the Common Prayer book, and suffer every man to use what prayer he list. Thus much the man offered to make good upon his Oath before any Magistrate he should be called. And now I pray tell me out of what shop do you think your work comes? That generation are a sly subtle people; as the devil, they can transform themselves into an Angel of light. If many printed books lie not, there have been many among you, and they know to insinuate their poison under guilded pills. Positions they have many like yours, and beware least when you think you suck in the Truth, you drink not poison. Verbum sat Sapienti. They own us a spleen for casting off their head; and they will never give over to seek a revenge.  
We were the men that cut it off, and take heed least unwittingly you set it not on again. 'Tis too true; I speak it with grief; they have won to their side in the time of our dissensions more proselytes than they did in divers years before. The Laws are now silent, and any man may be now any thing, so he be not an old Protestant of the Church of England; that if he profess, than there will be a quick eye upon him; An Ordinance shall be sure to reach him, which for aught I heard is but brutum fulmen to a Papist. Boast not then of your taking down that same vile and virulent head the Pope, when it is permitted to stand in more favour than a Protestant, whose work hath been to take down that abominable beast with his ten horns as you call him.    

SECT 2. The British King the Violent Head. 
Mr. Matthews.   
2. SEcondly, hath not Christ hid his face from, and bend his brow against the National Church, as being that very next naughtiness. Whereof the British King was (although not an invincible) yet a violent Head; which was therefore less victorious and more vincible, partly because the head, not only of a very uncanonical, but also of a very unspiritual corporation: and partly because of the said national-corporations inconsistency with the Scripture precepts, Matth. 18.17. & 1 Cor. 14.23. which doth require its ordinary congregating in one place; seconded and aggravated by its notorious inconformity to the Scripture patterns, Eph. 2.19.22. Philip. 2.15. Revel. 5.9. where the Scripture Combinational Church is called not a whole nation, but a holy City, a growing Temple, a Spiritual house, or a sin-enlightning, and a soul-enlivening Church; gathered, built, framed, culled and called out, of, and from a carnal and crooked nation, which was both dark, and darkness itself; witness what is written, Ephes. 5.8.  

The Reply.  
That Christ hath hid his face from, and bend his face against this National Church, you have reason to lament and grieve, and not to stand by and clap your hands at it; Rather take up the Lamentation of David for Saul and Jonathan. The beauty of Israel is slain upon the high places; how are the mighty fallen! 
2 Sam. 1.19.20  Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Ashkelon, lest the daughters of the Philistims rejoice, lest the daughters of the uncircumcised Triumph, etc. Posterity will have cause to mourn, when you and they shall be invaded and set upon by those uncircumcised Philistims of Rome, who will smile at the armour wherein you trust; and the spears you brandish against them as a dart of a bulrush. 'Tis not your Sophisms that will prevail with them, nor your popular arguments that they will regard; and they as smoke being vanished, set upon you they will with armour of proof, and so environ you, that you will wish again for those worthies of the National Church to fight your battles. These were the men that stood up in the gap, these have boar the burden and heat of the day, these have beaten these Philistims at their own weapons; from the blood of the slain, from the fat of the mighty, the bow of Jonathan turned not back, and the Sword of Saul returned not empty. 
Verse 22.  Rejoice not therefore at their fall, since after ages may have occasion to say, if we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the Prophets. 
Matth. 23.31.   
2. Yea, but you say Christ hath bend his brow against this National Church, as being next in naughtiness.] Next? to what? to the Roman Church. That's to be proved. And 'tis more than ever you shall be able to make good, that quâ National, or quâ a Church in her constitution she was naught. It was the acknowledgement of that great and learned casaubon's then whom there was none more skilful in all the Records of antiquity, that there was not any Church in the Christian world, that came nearer in her Doctrine and Discipline to the Primitive, than this of England. His words in his Epistle Dedicatory to King James are these, before his exercitations to the Annals of Baronius. 
Casaub. Ep. de die. ad annal.  Tuum est, proprie tuum pro veteris Ecclesiae disciplina pugnantes regii clypei, quem pro sincere pietatis defensione gestas, umbone propugnare. Qui Ecclesiam habeas in tuis regnis, partim jam olim ita institutam, partim magnis tuis laboribus ita instauratum, ut ad florentis quondam Ecclesiae formam nulla hodiè propiùs accedat, quam tua, inter vel excessu, vel defectu peccantes mediam viam sequita. This man lived in and was brought up in the Reformed Church in France, and might be therefore thought to incline to a Presbyterial Discipline, and yet after he came into England, and took notice of the constitution, you hear what he attests, that was no question able to judge, that had seen and read so much. And in this point he stands not single, nor alone, for from Alexandria we have like approbation, from Cyril the Patriarch, there in his Letter sent to my sometimes Lord George Abbot Archbishop of Canterbury. 
Cyril. Litt. ab Aegypto missae. 1616.  Fix not then this naughty term upon the Church of England, because National. The naughtiness that was in her I have confessed, and for which we justly suffer under the hand of a just God, and for which when you come to be as naught as we, think not you shall escape. 'Tis not your Combination shall privilege you from the Cup of God's wrath. Think you that those Galileans on whom the Tower of Siloam fell, were greater sinners than all that dwelled in Jerusalem? I tell you nay, but except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.  
3. You go on to the British King. Placida compostus pace quiescat. Soil not his ashes. Invincible he was not, nor any man ever thought him so. For thine, O Lord is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, 
● Chr. 29.11.  and the Majesty, for all that is in the heaven and earth is thine; thine is the Kingdom O Lord, and thou art exalted as head above all. But whereas you say that he was a violent head, & was therefore less victorious, and more vincible, you are a little too quick with your ergo. More can never be in the conclusion, than is in the premises, and say he had been a violent head, which I shall by and by prove he was not, yet it will never necessarily follow, that thence he should be less victorious. For how many violent heads in your sense, meaning National Churches, have their bone, who yet have obtained victories? Sometimes God punisheth a people for the transgression of a King, sometimes a King for the transgression of his people. Israel is smitten with the pestilence for David's sin, and Eli is cast off, and the Ark taken for the sin of his sons. Where therefore there may be divers causes of a discomfiture, is overmuch rashness to fix upon one, nay, to imagine that to be the cause, which was not, viz. because he was.  
4. A violent head.] For what I pray? is it a sin for a Prince to be the head, that is, the governor of a National Church? so you seem to affirm. Beware, look about you, and consider with whom at unawares you join, for the Jesuit will make you a low Congee, and thank you that you shall assert their rebellious position, that Princes and supreme Magistrates have nothing to do in the Church; in temporal things supreme, and Lords they are, but in spiritual matters they may not meddle. The difference lies only in this, that they would draw the Supremacy to one, even, that man of sin, and advance him to the head-ship. You draw the Supremacy to the Pastors and Elders in every Combinational Congregation, and so there should be as many supremacies and heads, as there be of these Churches.  
For which his Highness the Lord Protector hath little reason to thank you; for of what Church will you make him a governor? Not of the National, that was the King's sin; a violent head he was, and God forbidden that according to your tenet any should come into that place again. His headship and government can extend no farther than the Combinational, that very Combinational, of which he is a member, & in which he must act not as Protector, or the Supreme in the Nation, but as an Elder only. In all other Combinationals he hath nothing at all to do, for they have a supremacy among themselves. He may not then order National Fasts, nor days of Thanksgiving; he may not make Ordinances to eject scandalous and ignorant Ministers; he may not set up Approvers of Ministers for the whole Nation; he may not punish Papists, imprison Blasphemers, ask any man out of his Combination, why he doth so or so, if your position be true. 'Tis violence, 'tis usurpation, 'tis tyranny. Supreme he is now in the Nation, and by the power of the supremacy all these things are done, and you and I, or any body else would be smiled at, if not frowned upon, that for this should call him a violent head. And what did the British King more than this?  
It may be thought, that I have put in this plea in favour of the British King; he needs it not, for he hath long ago answered for his violence, if there were any. I tell you plainly I plead for his Highness, and for as many, who are supreme in any Nation, be they Potentates, Princes or governor's over any Christian Church. For the cause is alike in all, and they have external government of the Church in charge; and to say the contrary, is to open a sluice to the overflowings of impiety. I shall put you a case. Suppose the Jew should be admitted into a Nation, and shall fall to their old work of crucifying children to the scorn and disgrace of our Saviour; say that a Heathen should be enfranchised, and worship the Sun and the Moon, and all the host of heaven, yea, and make their children pass through the fire to Moloch; Be it that one should say he were God, another the Devil; a third acknowledge not God nor Devil; say there arise false Christ's and false Prophets, one who will blaspheme and say he is the Messiah, and rejoiceth to hear Hosanna cried before him; If there be no supreme over a National Church, I wonder what order could be taken with any of these? suffered they must be to go on, and blaspheme still, for any power you have to restrain them. Convent them before your Congregation, they appear not. Cast them out, if they be of your Combination, they regard it not. The gangrene goes on, the blasphemy increaseth, and will increase, except you admit of one supreme head in a Nation, who may have so much power over the body, that he may cut off that part from the body, which is like to infect and poison the whole. The mischief that may ensue upon a Church by the admission of this your paradox is unconceivable. I can never enough admire the wisdom both of God and man, who hath appointed a supreme power in all Nations, for the suppression of all inconveniences. With their Civil power I am not at this time to meddle; I shall only insist upon that which is Ecclesiastical; and that you may the better go along with me, I shall reduce what is to be said to certain heads.  
1. The first work of the supremacy is to call Assemblies. For, for men to assemble together, without leave of the supreme power, and consult of Religion, is to make a Rout. In Israel God commands Moses to make two Trumpets, 
Numb. 10.12.  and to keep them for that end to call the Congregation. Moses had no other right but that of the chief Magistrate. In that right he received his Trumpets, and in that right he had the property of both. Aaron, verse 10. had the use, but the use only, never the right. May be if we call flesh and blood to counsel, it will be thought more convenient, that God delivered one Trumpet to one, and the other to the other, and so have power to call; but God saith peremptorily to Moses, erunt tibi, they shall be and remain in thy hands: and so, no man hath power to remove the Camp, to assemble the Congregation, to found to the Celebration of the solemn Feasts, but Moses and his Successors.  
By virtue of this power, Joshua assembles all the Tribes, Levi and all to Sichem. 
Joshua 24. 1 Chr. 15.4. & 23.2, 3, 6. 2 Chr. 15. & 20.3. & 24.5 & 34.29.  David calls together the Priests and other Ecclesiastical persons; and for what matters? for secular? nay, mere Church-work; first, when the Ark was to be removed; again, when the offices of the Temple were to be set in order: things merely pertaining to Religion. Asa, Jehosaphat, Joas, Josias, gave a solemn call in matters of Religion. But the fact of Hezekiah is of all most memorable. He gave forth a precept for the Priests, and all their brethren to assemble; 
2 Chr. 29. Verse 12, etc. Verse 15.  and to what end? ad res Jehovae. There be fourteen men, chief men of the Priests set down there by name, that by virtue of that Writ came together, they and their brethren all ex praecepto regis ad res Jehovae, for matters merely of the Church.  
Thus it was while there was a King in Israel. But after, when the Sceptre was departed, how was it then? how, when the fullness of the Gentiles was come in? who then called the Assemblies? A time there was after Christ, when Kings were Infidels, and the Church under persecution. As the Jews at Babylon, being under pressures, they must meet, and did, as they could; and yet divers such meetings in Synods we find recorded, as I have instanced before, which for the present were called by their Patriarches.  
But no sooner did God raise up Constantine to be a nursing father to the Church, but he resumed the right of Moses; and his Successors lay claim to them at this day; the four general Councils, the great Nicene against Arrius; the second of Constantinople against Macedonius; the third of Ephesus against Nestorius; the fourth of Calchedon against Eutichus, were all called by several Emperors. And by the same power all other National and Provincial Synods have been accustomed to be assembled till this our age.  
2. And the Church being assembled by this Warrant, had power to establish Laws for the Discipline of the Church, so they be consonant to the Word of God, tend to edification, decency and order; So that if there be no error of man concerning their determination, the determining of them is to be accounted as if it were divine. Though then he who is the chief in any State, hath not power to determine judicio definitivo, what is sound and to be received in the worship of God; yet judicio executivo, 
Synod at Cambridge in New Engl. cap. 2.  he may and aught when the Church hath determined, command the profession thereof in his Territories; and from this I do not see that your Synod held at Cambridge doth much dissent. Cap. 17. Sect. 7, 8, 9  
I have hitherto opened unto you what the supreme power may do. I shall now show you by what right he may do it, which is indeed by all right, jure naturae, jure divino, & positivo.  
First, they deceive and are deceived, who go about to persuade that the supremacy in Church matters is derived unto any superior by municipal Laws; for this is a right with which he is invested by God himself. Declared it may be, and made known to the world, written more at large, and expressed more clearly in Acts and Statute Laws; 
Cook de jure. reg. & Ecclesiae. pag. 8.  but this jurisdiction was from above, whence the Fathers of the Law have thus delivered this truth to us, that the Act past concerning Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, non novam legem introduxit, sed antiquam declaravit.  
Ask the Fathers and they shall tell you, the grey hairs and they shall declare unto you. In the Law of nature, it can be no question but causes Civil and Ecclesiastical belonged to one man, since the King and Priest was united in one man; The eldest ordinarily of the Family being chief Magistrate and Priest; And after the partition was made, yet the chief power remained in the Superior. Such Religion as the Heathen had, was yet ordered by the Prince's directions, which gave Aristotle reason to say, Quae ad Deorum cultum pertinent, 
Aris. Pol. lib. 3. cap. 10.11.  commissa sunt regibus; and again, Imperator est Rex & Judex rerumque divinarum ei cura commissa est.  
A Law there was made by Solon, that all Assemblies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Plutarch in Solone.  were unlawful, that the highest authority did not cause to meet. Among the Heathen Nabuchadnezzar makes a Law, Darius a Decree, the King of Nineveh sends forth a Proclamation for a Fast, for a Religious service, which certainly they had never done, had it not been received, that they were empowered. And among the Romans there was no sooner an Emperor, but he took upon him potestatem pontificiam. In the Acts we read that the City of the Ephesians was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which Mr. Selden teacheth us, was an Office to take care of the whole worship and Temple of Diana. 
Seld. not. in Marmor. Arundel.  Now this could not be done by any warrant from Scripture, evident therefore it is, that even by the light of nature seen it was, that the supreme power is invested with authority in Religious duties. Care they ought to take, that God be served, as well as the people governed, since they have been hitherto taken to be Custodes utriusque Tabulae.  
2. Thus it was, while reason bore the sway. But now let us look into the Scripture. How is it written in the Law, how read you? There it was ordained, that the King should have a book of the Law, written by the Priests, and the end was, 
Deut. 17.18, 19, 20.  that he might fear the Lord, and keep it. And in this Law there be many precepts that concern him as a man, many as a Prince; for as Austin Rex servit Deo, aliter qua homo, aliter qua Rex, as a man by a holy Conversation, as a Prince by making and executing holy constitutions. 
Austin Ep. 50.  As he is the Superior, he is there made the Guardian of God's Law, and the whole Law is committed to his charge. By virtue of which Commission, when the Kingdom and Priesthood were divided, Moses the Civil Magistrate made use of his power over Aaron, and reproved him for the golden Calf. Joshua a Prince, no Priest, by the same authority circumcised the sons of Israel, erected an Altar of stone, caused the people to put away their strange gods, and renewed the Covenant betwixt God and the people. And what other Kings did, you have heard before. These Acts of these famous Kings performed in Ecclesiastical causes, shows clearly what power Kings had under Moses Law. And one thing more let me put you in mind of, that when there was no King in Israel, that was a supreme power, for it was no more, every man did that which was good in his own eyes, and that good was extreme bad, as the story shows.  
3. Yea, but it may be said, that thus it was, while the Judicials of Moses were in force; but why so now? Now the Superiors authority is confined to Civil Laws: Now the Kingdom is Christ's, and he must rule. Indeed could we find in the Gospel any restriction, or rather revocation of what power had formerly belonged to Superiors, this plea were considerable, but since the rule is true, that Evangelium non tollit precepta naturae & legis, sed perficit. The Commission once granted to the Superior, by nature, and the Moral Law must be good.  
And be it that the Kingdom is Christ's, and all power in his hands; yet this will be no impediment to what I contend for neither. That Christ wants no Vicar on earth, but as head of his Church doth govern it, is a truth beyond exception. But this is to be understood of the spiritual internal government; not of that which is external; because he must be served with the body, as well as with the Spirit, in an outward form of worship, as well as an inward; therefore he hath left superiors to look to that. Their power extends not, their account shall not be given for what is done within; for they cannot see, nor cannot judge what is done in that dark cell; they have nothing to do with the secret affections of the heart, with the sacred gifts of the Spirit, with the steadfast trust of future things. They are only to moderate and direct the outward actions of godliness and honesty, and what may externally advance Christ's Kingdom. So that the question is not here of the internal, and properly Spiritual; but of the external government, order, and discipline of the Church; which when the supreme power administers as it ought, it sets up, and no way pulls down the Kingdom of Christ. These two are then well enough compatible, that the Kingdom is Christ's, and yet the Superior way make use of his power in Christ's Kingdom.  
A Prophecy there was, that under the Gospel Kings should be nursing fathers, and Queens nursing mothers to the Church. 
Isa. 49.23.  Nourishment than they must give; that ordained for babes; that for men, the Word and Sacraments they cannot give; no more than Uzziah could burn incense, or Saul burn Sacrifice; no, nor yet ordain any to do it: The sustenance then which Christians are to receive from them, must be that of external discipline and government. Those that gave such food were called nursing fathers; those that denied it, tyrants and persecutors; without the favour and execution of this duty, Christian Religion had never been so highly advanced; and therefore the Apostle ordains, that Christians pray for those in authority, that we may live a quiet and a peaceable life in all godliness, 
1 Tim. 2.  and honesty. Godliness comprehends all duties of the first Table; Honesty all duties of the second; and where those who are in authority are careful, both will be observed, both shall be preserved, because they know they have a charge of both. Thus you see reason, Law and Gospel have given a supremacy to those in power, non solum in ijs quae pertinent ad humanam societatem, verum etiam in ijs quae attinent ad religionem divinam.  
I have enlarged myself on this subject beyond my intention, lest you should split upon that dangerous rock of Jesuitism, while out of a dislike of the British King, you make him a violent head of the National Church; for what you say of him, is as true of all others; and what is denied of him, is denied of all others, in that their claim and right is all alike; and in case it be not just, their violence and usurpation is all alike, which to affirm is perfect Jesuitism; And wheresoever this doctrine is turned into practice, it sets up regnum in regno: and if it should be brought into this Commonwealth, would reduce again what Henry the eight cast out, though under another notion; for every Eldership of a Combinational Church would be perfect Papacy, absolute, independent, answerable to none, to be guided by none in Church matters, punishable by none but themselves; to which if you will give a right name, it is mere Popish power.  
This is it which Superiors have wisely disclaimed, and not admitted themselves like children to be cheated out of their native rights and inheritantes, as they must if you deny a National Church; for that power is in vain which hath no subject to work upon; on the Church National it cannot, because in your opinion it is not; on the Combinational it may nor, because that is absolute, and to be ordered and disciplined by its own Elders; non datur tertium; and so the supremacy which all Superiors challenge is frustrated.  
To this the British King did never yield nor would; and I believe his Highness will be as little persuaded by you. For this you make him less victorious and more vincible; but you cast up your account too soon; for had you said, for the male administration of his supreme power this had fallen upon him, that might have carried some colour of sense with it, (which will also happen to any that shall not use it as they ought) but to affirm, that the claim to the power, and exercise of that power was the cause of his fall, is rash, false, inconsiderate, dangerous. But you go on, and endeavour to make it good by two reasons.   


Mr. Matthews. The Admonitory Letter.  1. Partly because the head, not only of a very Uncanonical, but also of a very unspiritual corporation.  
BY Corporation I conceive you mean the body of Professors within this Land, or at least the Clergy, upon whom you bestow these two Epithets, that they were very uncanonical, very unspiritual. How can you be ever able to make good this charge? Had you said seemingly only such, it might have been passed over, but that they were verè, truly such, is a high part of presumption in you; for peremptorily to prononounce such a sentence, belongs to a higher judicature. The judgement is Gods alone.  
But to remit unto you that slip of your pen; Why I pray uncanonical? Those are uncanonical, who reject and throw aside the Canon, either in judgement or practice. Why unspiritual? Those are unspiritual who have not received the Spirit; neither of which you can with a good conscience more affirm of this corporation then of your own.  
1. For what other Canon can you name for Christians, than the books of Canonical Scriptures? 
Gal. 6.16. Phil. 3.16. 2 Cor. 10.13.  which appellation was taken up after St. Paul, who thrice calls the Scripture the Canon. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and yet more plainly he saith, we stretch not ourselves beyond our measure, meaning the doctrine of the Gospel, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, according to the measure of the rule or Canon which God hath distributed to us. And Chemnitius hath observed, that the word is derived from the Hebrew word Chan, 
Chemnitius Exam. Concil. Trid. part. 1. de script. Can.  which signifies that perpendicular line which Masons use in building, by which the exorbitancy or evenness of their work is proved. And the Metaphor is very apt. For the Church is the house of the living God, the builder is God, the Ministers of the Word the Architects; that then their work go evenly and conformably on, they had need of a Canon, or a rule by which the Architects examine their work, lest the building, should just too far outward, or lean too much inward, and so deviate from the just order and proportion. For the proof of this, the Master Builder hath left to his under workmen his line and level, which is the Canon of the Scriptures, the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles; whatsoever agrees to this rule, is right and sound, and Apostolic; what is not every way conformable to it, but either in excess or defect swerves from it, that is, supposititious, adulterine, erroneous. And now I pray, hath not this Corporation you mention, professed to the world that they receive the books of the Canonical Scriptures, and only those books for their rule and Canon? do they not confess that they fully comprehend all things that are needful for our help? that they are the sure and infallible rule, whereby may be tried whether the Church do swerve or err; and whereunto all Ecclesiastical doctrine ought to be called to account; and that against these Scriptures, neither Law, 
The English Confession art. 10.  nor Ordinance, nor any custom ought to be heard; no, though Paul himself, or an Angel from heaven should teach the contrary. How unadvised then and inconsiderate is this Epithet of yours, by which you brand us for an Uncanonical Corporation, who stick so close to the Canon, and have and do maintain it against the Church of Rome, who would with it, as if it were imperfect, obtrude another Canon upon us? God give you repentance for this your uncharitable Censure, and make you as Canonical as we are. In doctrine I am sure; as for the practice we have both too much to answer; The Lord have mercy upon us miserable sinners.  
2. Now you thought it not enough to put us out of the Canon, except you deprived us of the Spirit also. We are in your judgement an unspiritual corporation. What Sirs, have you such a Monopoly of the Spirit, that none can partake of it, except he be a member of one of your corporation? Pray show your Charter, produce your Grant, that the Spirit would not descend upon any, nor impart his gifts and graces to any, except he were within your Church Covenant; For if that be not the sole impediment, I see no colour why you should call us unspiritual. The graces of the Spirit are by all Divines reduced to two heads; either they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; The one peculiarly called Graces, the other more properly styled Gifts. The Graces are media salutis immediata, such by which the good will of God shapes the heart within, freely justifies a sinner by the imputation of Christ's righteousness, wonderfully converts a heart of stone into a heart of flesh, clears the conscience towards God, and settles a welcome peace. These are gratiae gratum facientes, are bestowed upon all God's Saints. The Gifts are media mediorum, which it pleaseth the wisdom of God to use, as fit means to perfect in all his those former gifts of grace, such as are gifts of prophecy, eloquence, utterance, knowledge of tongues, depth of learning, wisdom in government, functions, and ability to discharge these functions, etc. And now consider which of these endowments, whether gifts or graces of the Spirit hath not been as eminent and evident in our National corporation as ever it was, or ever will be in your Combinational? I cannot therefore with any patience hear that you should call us unspiritual; and you, had you had any of the meekness of the Dove in you, would not have done it; since you know, that those who have not the Spirit of Christ, are none of his: and that you cut us off from Christ, can you think that we can take it patiently? There was less charity in this word, then when you writ it I believe you were ware of; and therefore I hope when you write next, you will show more Christian love; To conclude the Corporation of which the British King was head, was as I have proved, both Canonical, as adhering to the Canon of the Scriptures; and Spiritual, as endowed with the Gifts and Graces of the Spirit; and so your reason hath no reason at all in it. Well, if this will not do it, a second shall, which is,   

2. Partly because of the said National Corporations inconsistence with the Scripture precepts, Mat. 18.17. 1 Cor. 14.23. which doth require its ordinary congregating in one place. 
The words of the Letter.   
A Wonderful demonstration' The Church must be gathered together in one place to the service of God; as that place of the Corinth's proves, and must be assembled to exercise discipline, as in that of Matthew; therefore there may be no national Church, therefore no head or governor in that Church. Baculus in angulo; 'Tis as if you should argue thus; such or such a County must meet together to elect a Burgess to the Parliament, or to see justice done at a Quarter Sessions, or at an Assize; therefore it is inconsistent that there should be a head over the Nation, whereof they are parts. Who sees not the absurdity of such an argument?  
But now in particular to these places. The first is Matth. 18. vers. 17. And if he shall neglect to hear thee, tell it to the Church, which is so difficult, that St. Austin saith of it, dicant qui possunt, si tamen probare possunt quae dicunt, ego me ignorare profiteor. And the reason is, because the word Ecclesia is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a term of divers acceptions; and from terms aequivocal nothing can be concluded till distinction be made. But this I must tell you by the way, that no man by Ecclesia understood the Combinational Church, till you arose; and therefore you can never conclude out of this place, that a head of a National Church is inconsistent with Christ's precept. For the Pope, Presbyter, Praelate, all acknowledge a National Church, and a head of a National Church, and yet never thought that they did transgress Christ's precept. Your proof therefore cannot stand secure till you have everted the claim of every one of these, no more then till he who pretends a right to a piece of Land, which is in other men's possessions, hath showed his own title to be only good, and all the rest of no force. Be not so hasty then with your inference; for there's not one of these who will not say you are an intruder.  
It would fill a book to tell you what is written, and what I have read upon this place. Whether by the Church you are to understand a civil or an Ecclesiastical consistory, or whether a mixed, because our Saviour alludes out of question to the Jewish Sanedrim. 
Beza Annot. in locum. Rutherf. cap. 8.  Then whether by the Church again you are to understand the whole Congregation, or the chief in that Congregation; the Elders say the Presbyters only; you, as by rutherford's disputes against you, I guess the whole body of believers; or as the Prelates contend, those to whom Christ gave the Keys, meaning the Apostles and their successors. Yet farther, whether the wrong to be here tried by the Church be only that which is private; because of those words, If thy brother trespass against thee. Lastly, whether our Saviour speaks here of any Church censure at all, because our Saviour saith not, let him be excommunicate, but sit tibi, Let him be unto thee as a Heathen and a Publican.  
Among many interpretations of these words, I shall propose one, which I prefer above the rest, as that which to me carrieth the fairest evidence with it. The Jews were at this time conquered by the Romans, under their power and judicatory; yet they left unto the Jews so much power as to judge betwixt man and man, according to the Law of Moses: reserving strangers and Publicans to be tried in the Roman Court. This being the state of the Jews, when our Saviour spoke these words, in private quarrels and actions Christ proposeth three degrees of proceeding. The first by the Rule of charity. If thy brother trespass against thee, tell him privately of the wrong offered thee, betwixt thee and him alone: and if this prevail not, in charity go one step further, call two or three Witnesses and rebuke him before them, manifest the wrong; if he hear thee, thou hast won thy brother; there ought to be an end of the debate. This is the first direction. 2. But say he be yet refractory; then thou mayst proceed further, even by the order of Moses Law, then convent him before the Mosaical Magistrate, the Triumvirate, the 23. or the great Sanedrim, the 71. Dic Ecclesiae. 3. But if he will not hear them, to which he is bound by Moses Law, then take help from the Roman Sovereignty. Let him be unto thee as a Heathen or Publican; esteem him for a brother Jew no longer, but proceed against him in that Court where Heathens and Publicans were to take their trial. This is the natural and genuine Exposition of these words; the precept belongs to the state of the Jews at that time, and cannot be applied to the Christian Church, except by the way of Accommadation. For it is clear that the case Saint Peter put was of private wrong, Master, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? and the case is put of a private wrong, if thy brother shall trespass against thee, etc. Whereas those cases in which the Church ought to proceed must be notorious and scandalous, in which it is not necessary that the two admonitions precede, either that private, or the other under Witnesses, neither after sentence passed by the Church, is the man to be accounted in the state of a Heathen or Publican; for Christ and his Church did never refuse to converse with either. So that it as not proper to understand these words of the Christian Church, which then was not.  
That yet they may be referred thither, I gainsay not; but than that which will be collected from hence, can be no more but this, that in the Church of Christ there must be a Court erected; And so there always hath been; that it be Combinational only, there is not any man, who looks upon this place with an unpartial eye, can ever say that in this place there is a precept for it. He may with more reason conclude the contrary, because the Church concerning whom the precept was given, Dic Ecclesiae, was the Jewish Church, which is confessed at that time to have been National, not Combinational. In this place than you miss your mark. As for the other,  
That to 1 Cor. 14.23. I wonder what you can pick out of it for a Combinational Church, much less a precept for it. The words are, If therefore the whole Church be gathered together in one place, etc. or as it is in the Original, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and that may be about the same thing. It puts me to stand what you can collect from hence that may serve your turn. Gather you may that the whole Church at that time was small, or so many as could conveniently meet together in one place, or that they met about one and the same service; but that there was a precept here given, that those which met together must be combined in a Church Covenant, is a collection out of your own brain. Before your Combination was heard of, the Church met together in Synods Provincial, National, Ecumenical; men met together in one place to serve God; and therefore the meeting together in one place will never be inconsistent with Scripture precepts. But in case these two places should prove infirm, you have thought upon your Optiones, your seconds to undertake the Combat.   

3. Seconded and aggravated by its notorious inconformity to the Scripture patterns.  
SEconds commonly are men more skilful at their weapons, than the prime Combatants, and so then should these Scriptures be of more evidence to prove what you intent, that the National corporation is inconsistent with these Scripture, and no way conformable to the Scripture patterns, which are as you allege.  
Ephes. 2.19, 22. Philip. 2.15. Revel. 5.9. Where the Combinational Church is called not a whole Nation, but a holy City, a growing Temple, spiritual House, or a sinne-enlightning and soulsaving Church, gathered, built, framed, culled, and called out of and from a carnal and crooked Nation, which was both dark, and darkness itself; witness what is written, Ephes. 5.8.  
These places of Scripture I have reviewed, and I do not find one syllable of the Combinational Church in any of them. Alchemists who profess themselves skilful to extract gold out of a pebble, may perhaps light upon some such thing, but this passeth my art. There was a man, who was wont to stand upon a Key at Athens, and every ship that approached the Harbour, he judged to be his own. The like you do by Scripture, and every Text where you can but meet with the name of Christ's Church, presently you conceit it makes for your Combinational; had not your head run this way, you would never have alleged these.  
In that Chapter to the Ephesians, 'tis the Apostles purpose to show that the partition betwixt Jew and Gentile was by Christ taken down, He was laid in the foundation for the cornerstone, and both Nations built and united in him unto one Church, so that both by him in one Spirit had access to the Father. The Gentiles were no more strangers and Foreigners, but fellow Citizens with the Saints, and of the Household of God, built upon the foundation, Jesus Christ being the corner stone, in whom the whole building fitly framed together, grows into a holy Temple. The end was, as you cite, Philip. 2.15. That they should be blameless and harmless, and the sons of God, without rebuke in the midst of a crooked and perverse Nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world. And these were they, Rev. 5.9. who were redeemed by Christ's blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and Nation.  
But what could not all this be effected but within your Combination? No fellow-Citizens of the Saints? none blameless and harmless, and sons of God? none redeemed by Christ's blood, but those within your Church Covenant? What Arrogance is this? what Papism? what Do●●isme? all other are notorious Inconformists, without the lists of Christ's Church, by your rule, a carnal, a crooked Nation, darkness itself; and how then can they ever hope for salvation? Fie, fie, give over this peevish singularity, and since Christ hath redeemed by his blood some out of every kindred, tongue, people, Nation; let those whom he hath so freely and dearly bought be fellow Citizens with the Saints, whether they be of your Combinational Church or not. The consequence is very sad, which may be drawn out of your own words; and if I have forced them beyond your intention, I am not altogether too blame in it, since it may move you hereafter to look, that words which may be construed to an uncharitable sense fall not from you.  
But yet that I may be more particular in my answer, The Apostle here describes to us the Catholic Church, and not any particular in the judgement of all interpreters, under the similitudes of a City, a Temple, a House, a City which is governed by the same Laws under one King, a Temple consecrated to the same God, and sanctified by the same Spirit; a house in which the domestics are all under one and the same father of the family; The Citizens of this City, the Worshippers in this Temple, the children, servants and attendants in this house and family are both Jews and Gentiles. The time was when it was not so, for the Gentiles were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aliens and strangers, no free denizens of this City, but now they are enfranchised, and made fellow-Citizens of the Saints; they were not a people, but now are admitted for his people, but now admitted into his Temple with his people, to offer praise and prayers unto him; nay, which is yet more, are themselves living stones of this Temple; they were afar off, but now are come so near, that he acknowledges them for sons and household servants. This City is so ample, this Temple so spacious, this house so great, that it takes in both the Saints triumphing in heaven, and that part also of this Corporation yet Militant on Earth, of what Nation soever.  
This being the full scope of the Apostle here, I wonder that you should put such a restraint upon his words, as to limit them to your Combinations; 'tis overmuch boldness in any part to usurp and appropriate that to itself, which belongs to the whole.  
A holy City this is called, you say, not a Nation; true 'tis so here; yet in Saint Peter, 
1 Pet. 2.9.  this holy City is a holy Nation; which shows there is no strength in your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in that the same Church, which is a City in one Apostle, is a Nation in the other; and then out of the one I shall as easily prove a National Church, as you out of the other shall prove a Combinational. A City it was, and who were the Citizens? Jews and Gentiles; that is evident in the chapter; now say if you can without blushing, that such a multitude of all kindreds, languages, nations, people, could combine and meet together in one place; which is one of the ingredients of your Combination, if Amesius says true. Farther yet, had it been only of the Ephesians, that St. Paul had spoken, this had been no convincing argument, that he spoke of a Combinational Church; For that the Ephesians were a people, and Ephesus the Metropolis of that people, which did impart her privileges to all those in Asia the less, who were under her jurisdiction; A City at that time being not taken, as it is now with us, strictly for one determinate Town, as London, Bristol, etc. but for a whole people which enjoyed the privileges and immunities of that republic, as in A hens, Lacedaemon, Corinth, etc. and is now at Florence, Venice, and divers other places.  
A holy Temple you say it is, and what of that? must it therefore be of necessity a Combinational Church? this would shrink your Combination to a small number; nay to principium numeri, to one alone if you press the Metaphor too far; for St. Paul asks every Christian, Know you not that ye are the Temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the Temple of God, 
1 Cor. 3.16.17 2 Cor. 6, 16.  him shall God destroy; for the Temple of God is holy, which Temple ye are. You see then out of this Metaphor you cannot conclude a Combination.  
Yea, and much less out of that which followeth, a spiritual house. For the house of God is taken for the whole Church; nay, a National Church Moses was faithful in all his house, Heb. 3.2.5. and that I am sure was a National Church. Again, judgement shall begin at the house of God, 1 Pet. 4.17. what shall judgement, the judgement of afflictions begin at the Combinational Church only? I have hitherto thought it the cup of which all that are of Christ's household must taste; for datum est vobis pati, for our Saviour's words must be verified; 
Philip. 1.23. Joh. 16.33.  In the world you shall have tribulation. And to return to this very house of which the Apostle speaks, that of the Ephesians, over which Timothy was appointed the Bishop, St. Paul writes his Epistles to him, that in case he tarry long, he might know how to behave himself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, which is the ground and pillar of the Truth. St. Paul calls the Church indefinitely without addition, 
1 Tim. 3.15.  either of National or Combinational, the house of God, and who can conceive that the Combinational, as put case that of Swansea, Ilston, etc. should be the pillar to hold out, or the foundation to support the Truth? This is somewhat worse than those of Rome, who plead these words for their Church with more colour, with more reason; and yet we believe them not, because they are but a particular Church; and why then should we believe you?  
Observe farther the absurdity that would follow upon your collection. The Church of God is a house, therefore it must be a Combinational Church. Possibly it may fall out, that a house may consist of two persons only; Tota domus duo sunt, an old man, and an old woman; and thus much you confess when you bring your proof for it, when two or three are gathered together. Now say that one of these two trespass against his brother, what will become of Dic Ecclesiae, to whom shall the Plaintiff complain? where be the witnesses he shall bring with him? who shall be judge? Do not then use to press Metaphors too far, for they will bring you into inextricable difficulties.  
I shall therefore put you in mind of an old rule, 
Kecker. 1. Syst. log. part. 1. c. 4.  Similitudo seu parobola adaequetur principali scopo, & intentioni declarantis, atque extra eam non extendatur. To which had you had a regard, you would never have brought these comparisons of a City, a Temple, a house to prove your Combinational Church. Similitudes do very well in a Pulpit; they are of excellent use to illustrate, to amplify a doctrine, but they are of little use in the Schools, because they prove nothing that is not true without them. The position must be true in proper and plain words, before it can have any truth at all in the improper and Tropical. As for example, it must be true, that the Minister was not to be debarred of his just allowance and maintenance, before St. Paul could prove it by that text out of Moses, thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Ox that treadeth out the Co n. And so you must prove there is a Combinational Church, before you produce these allusions to prove it; Then indeed I shall give you leave to illustrate your position by them, and descant as you please by these excellent Metaphors upon them, but not till then. For nulla Theologia symbolica est argumentativa, and the reason is, 
Chrys. in Mat. hom. 65.  because, omne simile est etiam dissimile. Whence saith chrysostom excellently, In parabolis non oportet miniâ in singulis verbis curá angi, sed cum quid per parabolam Dominus intendat, dicimus inde utilitate sumptâ, nihil ulterius anxiis cogitationibus investigandum. And so as I have showed, out of your Metaphors is nothing proved.    

SECT. III. The words of the Letter. Of the Provincial Church and its haughty head the Archbishop.  
THirdly, did not Christ's own mouth marvellously condemn the prevailing corruptions of the Provincial Church; whereof the chief Prelate or Archbishop was the haughty and horrible head? which was therefore so much the more absurd and bold head, because of its base and blasphemous blindness, in daring to take up and ascribe to its self, such a stile and title as is not communicable to any creature, but is proper and peculiar to Christ's own sacred person, being that besides himself none can be safely said to be an Archbishop or chief Shepherd; if one of the Eminenst of the Apostles may be believed, whose words imply no less, 1 Pet. 5.4. When the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive an incorruptible crown of glory. Who was that Church Minister? what was his name? or where did he dwell, who came once into a capacity to be accounted such a Superlative Counsellor or Comforter, as was endued either with ability or authority, as to confer a spiritual Crown on any one of the sincere Elders of a Church of Saints, which is such a matter, as a dying son of man should not dare to have, much less to make any mention of, without some measure of amazement in his very soul.  

The Reply.  
Two of your heads I have considered already, and now out of your own shop you present me with three more; for I never heard any one of them called heads before. And the first of these is the Archbishop, about whom you are pleased to open your purse, and very liberally to bestow your benevolence; presenting him unto me, for a haughty, a horrible, an absurd, and a bold head. He is haughty, that is, puffed up with pride; horrible, that a man cannot without some amazement approach; absurd, that acts against reason; bold, that will attempt any thing. I will not deny, that it is possible to meet with such an Archbishop; but then blame the man, fly not upon the Office. Only before you be over hasty to do it, look at home: And perhaps you may find that true, which hath been observed, That there hath been more haughtiness, horror, absurdity, boldness found in some of your Pastors; than you can exemplify in any Archbishop. If among you or us any Prelate were guilty of these foul enormities; I excuse him not, only object not these faults of particular persons, till you be free.  
But how do you prove your aspersion? by a demonstrative reason no question. It was say you in daring out of base and blasphemous blindness, to take up and ascribe to its self such a stile and title as is not communicable to any creature, etc. To this I have given you your answer before, and I list not to repeat it.  
The rest of this Section I understand not well, not your interrogation; who is that Minister? what was his name? where doth he dwell? etc. To the Archbishop sure they belong not, for none that I know, that was ever in that place, did conceive himself in a capacity to be accounted such a superlative counsellor or comforter, that was endued either with ability or authority, as to confer a spiritual Crown on any one of the sincere Elders of the Church. Among us there never was, nor never will be any such man; if you can find him in the society of your Combinationals, you should do well to name him; for to us he is a non ens. These words therefore I pass by, as I would the noise of a sounding brass, or a tinkling Cymbal, that make a great disturbance in the ear, but signify just nothing.    

The words of the Letter.  
FOurthly, was it not Christ's own hand that did pour out a dreadful Vial of visible vengeance upon the Cathedral Church? where the Lordly Diocesan, was not so much the idle, as the addle head, which therefore under that notion was not venerable, nor tolerable, because of its direct and point-blank opposition unto divers and downright peremptory prohibitions, as Mat. 20.26. Ye know that the Lords of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them; but with you it shall not be so, etc. & 1 Pet. 5. Feed the flock of God which depends on you,— not as though you were Lords over God's heritage. Which Royal Laws do testify all such lofty Lords, and Lordlesse Outlaws to be such illegal and irregular livers, as that their unhallowed dwellings appear to be long since destined and appointed for hedghoggs to house and harbour at, yea, for Limb and Ohim with the wild Satyrs to dance in, and for Owls and Vultures to dungeon, being afraid of none to drive them away, thus verifying that terrible threat to be performed and fulfilled at length, which was prophesied of old: witness what is written, Isa. 13.19, etc.  

The Reply.  
We are ready to acknowledge more than you can say, that Christ's hand hath fallen heavy upon us, that the vengeance is just & visible, 
Rev. 16.5, 7.  and with the Angel of the Waters at the pouring forth the third Vial, we are ready to praise him saying, Thou art righteous O Lord, which art and waste, and shall be, because thou hast judged thus; and to echo unto you those words, from the other Angel out of the Sanctuary, even so Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgements. 
Verse 10.11.  For whereas that Antichristian train under the Throne of the Beast, blasphemed the God of heaven, for their pains, and for their sores, and repent not of their works; we under the Cross bless God, and are hearty sorry for our misdoings. For this is a true difference betwixt the servants of God, and Vassals of Antichrist, that under God's severe hand the one blesseth, 
Jer. 5.3. 1 Tim. 3.13. Bernard in Cant. 26. Serm.  the other blasphemeth, the one rejoiceth, the other rageth, the one reputes, and amends, the other goes on, and grows worse and worse. Stellae nocte splendent, quae die non videntur. And we have hope in this our sorrow and amendment, that God may yet stay his hand, and not make us drink the dregs of the Cup. For remember that this plague was poured out of a Vial, which is a certain measure, and more or less he can dispense of it, 
Jonah. 3.9.  as he pleaseth. Insult not then over us in our misery. For who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger that we perish not.  
2. But whereas you say this Vial was poured out on the Cathedral, 'tis true, but you must prove that it was poured out upon it, quatenus or because it was Cathedral, or else your censure is uncharitable and rash. For many enormities and misdemeanours there might be in the Cathedral, which I excuse not, that might cause God in his fierce wrath thus to proceed against her, and yet she no way guilty, quatenus Cathedral. God punisheth his servant David, the sword shall not departed from his house, for the matter of Vriah; but was this heavy judgement inflicted on him, because he was King of Israel? The punishment overtook him for his sin, not for his regality; his power was justifiable, not his wickedness, and God shown his anger against his sin, not his Crown. The case is the same, the Cathedral I grant was sinful, and for that God proceeded against it, but not in that Notion as Cathedral, for that was justifiable, as I have before proved unto you. It is then a great shortness of discourse in you, to conclude, that as Cathedral it was punished, which if you conclude not, you conclude nothing: since this vengeance proceeded against the sin of the Cathedral, not the Church.  
3. Of this Cathedral, you joy that the lordly Diocesan was not so much an idle, as an addle head.] I little doubt but you pleased yourself with this paranomasia, as much as the Mathematician did with his Diagramme, for the invention of which he offered to Jupiter a whole Hecatomb. But what now, were these qualities proper or common to the Diocesan? if common, than it is possible that the Pastor of a Combinational Church may be an idle and an addle head as well as the Diocesan; because common accidents are communicable to subjects of divers kinds: if proper, than it must agree omni, to every Diocesan, and so every Diocesan an idle and an addle head. Cranmer, Ridly, Latimer, Hooper, idle and addle heads; Jewel, Armagh, Andrews, Morton, White, Montague, Bilson, both the Abbots; all those eminent and learned Bishops of our Church, that have stood up in the gap, and fought the battles of the Lord, against that Goliath of Rome, idle and addle heads. Do you not blush at these obloquys, by which you impute idleness to them, who wore out their bodies in continual study and labour in defence of the Truth; and addleness, such as in a rotten egg, to such, whose names, say you what you please, will be venerable to posterity for their wisdom and constancy. You usually call all yours, painful Preachers, and yet what is their pains more than that of the lungs? since by your own principles they may not take pains for what to deliver, but must rely upon that ill applied promise, It shall be given you in that 〈◊〉: Which yet no man, but he that hath an addle head will trust too; and so your itinerants may be idle and addle heads also, Nobis non licet esse tam disertis. Most of our Bishops were laborious, wise, discreet men; if all were not so, let not the whole order be branded with that black coal of reproach, for sums sake. I know you would be loath to have the same measure meated out to you.  
4. But you have reason for what you say, and then very good reason you should be heard. Reason the strongest that may be given, even out of our Saviour's mouth and his Apostle Saint Peter. There must be no lordly Diocesan; so say I to, that is no domineering and tyrannical Superior in the Church; and yet they may be called Lords for all that; neither are these words of Christ or Peter any prohibition against it, as I have showed you before, when I gave you the true intent of those Scriptures, whether for the meaning I now refer you.  
And yet one thing more I shall be bound to tell you, that if you look heedfully into the Text, the word Lord is not in the Original; for thus the words are, they that bear rule, are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Benefactors; or Ptolemy in Egypt, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but with you it shall not be so. The simple then may be deluded by you, but the Learned know 'tis a gloss besides the Text; your illation, no translation of the words. There is no more prohibition for being called Lord, then for Rabbi, or Master, or Doctor, 
Mat. 23. v. 9.10.  or father, as is evident in the Gospel, and may not then a man be called Master or father? Let an answer be thought upon for these appellations, and it will serve for the other without any sensible error. Lord and servant are opposite terms, and not Lord and sons or brethren; now the flock are no servants, but brethren, and the Pastors no Lords over God's inheritance, but fathers to the faithful; what marvel therefore if Christ prohibited a Lordly authority to his Apostles, since they were to entreat them kindly, as fathers do their children, as one brother should do to his brother, and not think to command and compel them as their Vassals; for this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which Saint Peter forbids. Such an usurpation, tyranny, domineering as this, would have made your words good, and testified them to have been lofty Lords, and Lordlesse Outlaws, to have been illegal and irregular livers; which I shall not yield you true of that Diocesan you speak, much less that because they were called Lords, that this was the cause that their unhallowed dwellings were destined and appointed for hedgehogs to house and harbour in; yea, for Limb and Ohim to dance in, and for Owls and Vultures to dung on: had there been no greater transgression than this, I believe they might have kept their dwellings still.  
But what now, are those that house and harbour in their dwellings, become hedgehogs, and hobgobling, and Satyrs? good words I pray, lest this prove scandalum magnatum; should I say so much, I fear I should have swords about my ears; for consider who they be that have taken possession, and dwell in these houses. They be Saints I hope; not Devils; the meek that are to possess the earth, and not prickly hedgehogs, the chaste, no wanton Satyrs, and they'll have a care no doubt to keep their houses clean, so that no Vulture nor Owl shall dare to a light and dung there, for they have power enough to drive them away. Or if by these houses you mean the Cathedrals themselves, pray consider again, who hath the use of them, who preach in them? and are these also hedgehogs, and foul spirits, unclean Satyrs, Vultures and Owls? do these defile these places with their dung? should they do so, 'twere your grief, that no man dare drive them away. What Phineas birds suffered to defile God's Temple? Deus meliora.  
Yea, but so it must be, for so it was prophesied of old; how could that terrible threat be performed and fulfilled? at length it came to this, witness the Prophet, Isa. 13.19, etc. For so much you shall evidently confess, if you look but on the first verse of that Chapter, where you shall read onus Babylonis, The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son of Amos did see; and this Prophecy was never fulfilled till England became Babel. And so much again, if you read but this 19 And Babylon the glory of Kingdoms, the beauty of the Caldees excellency shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.  
Your luck is very ill in alleging of Scripture; this I am certain which makes so little to your purpose. Had you inferred from hence, let Tyrants beware how they oppose the people of God, as the Babylonians did the Israelites, before they were overthrown by the Medes; let them take heed that they commit not Idolatry, and serve not Devils in their Temples, as did the Chaldeans, upon whom the words you allege were fulfilled; then you had hit the Prophet's meaning; for what he foretold came so to pass; but to tell us, that thus it should be done to our Cathedrals, that this terrible threat might be performed and fulfilled at length, and that this was prophesied of old, and to call the Prophet Isaiah for a witness, it must be so, is to take God's Name in vain, no less then if you should take a vain or a false oath. I am loath to say it, but your impertinent allegation hath forced it from me.    

The words of the Letter.  
FIfthly and finally, was it not Christ's own foot that hath kicked at, and cast contempt, and that not a little, upon those ill-favoured and condemned Churches, which are yet standing in many Countries, though they are remarkably reeling, and ready to fall? Is't no! Christ's own voice, that is at this time, and in most places audibly pleading his own cause against the Parochial Church? whereof the preaching Parson (being it must not be denied, that many of the Parish Parsons are no preaching Parsons, witness all the oppressing Impropiators) is openly seen to stand upon his Trial, as the odd, and the eldest evil head. And though this head be the last head, and did the least hurt of all the other heads, yet the Almighty Lord hath as yet lift up his hand against him: yet at this time 'tis his turn to lie down under the lash, and like the lukewarm Angel of Laodicea, (by taking shame and confusion of face unto himself) to receive whatsoever sharp correction, shall (as a cordial of love) be administered unto him, for the preventing of the spuing his name out of Christ's mouth, as is manifest by what is foretold, Revel. 3.19. Therefore the whole half-blind political body of the Parish Church doth openly appear to be, though not utterly incurable, yet in respect of its present posture, in its numerous abominations altogether unapprovable, because its rejecting the Commandments of God, that it may observe the traditions of men. Against which hateful offence Jesus Christ doth sadly complain, Mark 7.7, 9 And concerning which offensize hatred, Christ's sincere servant doth seriously caution, Col. 2.8, 18. Beware lest there be any man that spoil you through Philosophy and vain deceit, through the tradition of men according to the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.— Let no man at his pleasure bear rule over you by humbleness of mind, etc. which holy watchwords, and wholesome warnings had they been heedfully harkened unto by such as were Church-Officers, would without question have restrained the multitude of Church hearers from many such observations and aberrations as must of necessity be either amended timely, or mourned for eternally; witness what is written, Revel. 14.9.  

The Reply.  
Hitherto you coupled your heads together, the virulent and the violent, the haughty or horrible, and the idle and the addle, and now you have one odd, which I think you so call it, because it is the fifth, five being an odd number; For other reason I can guess at none. This is the poor Parish Parson, who might have escaped your fingers sure, for any injury that I know he hath done you, but that you are resolved to break every head that comes in your way. 'Tis enough that you will have him the head of a Parochial Church, which he never was, nor never took upon him, and upon that you take up your quarrel against him. His sin if any was, his submission and obedience unto his superiors in those indifferent things that they had power to command him, and therefore you for charity sake might have passed him by. No, no, that may not be, to his trial he must come too, for being an odd, an old, nay, the eldest evil head. Pity him for his grey hair's sake, if it be but because he is an Elder, a Presbyter, though not odd, nor yet eldest as you may suppose. For there was an Elder before him, old Polycarp an Elder of Smyrna, and his Cathedral, before this his Parochial, as I have proved unto you.  
But against him and his Church you say, Christ hath proceeded, kicked at, and cast contempt, and that not a little upon them both. Easie it is for men to cast what they do maliciously upon God. 
Isa. 36.10.  Am I come up now without the Lord against this Land to destroy it, said Rabshekah? Many things God permits to be done, of which he is not the doer; it is therefore over hastily said, that Christ's own foot hath kicked at the Parochial Church, had you said only, that he hath suffered you in justice for our sins to kick at it, and cast it into contempt, I would not gainsay; but do not attribute the action to Christ, before you have better warrant for it. God hath nothing to do in the malice of men, except it be to restrain it, that it break out no farther than he is pleased. I will put a hook into his nostrils, etc. except it be to order objects and means in such sort, that they may be by way of occasion incentives to provoke the wicked to exercise that maliciousness which is in them, and from themselves, where, when and how God will have it so break out, for punishment, correction, example, trial. Your censure was here overrash.  
2. But those following scorns and insultations you bestow upon the Parish Churches, those ill-favoured and condemned Churches yet standing, (which it seems you grieve at) that yet are remarkably reeling and ready to fall, (which I suspect you joy in) I read not I say, these words without passion and compassion; without a deep passion of sorrow in respect of them, without the bowels of compassion in respect of you. When our Saviour beheld Jerusalem, foresaw that one stone of the Temple with the City, should not be left upon another, he wept: when God's people remembered Zion, it pitied them to see her in the dust: When David heard God's adversaries roar in the midst of the Congregations, 
Psal. 74., 56, 7, 8, 9 Psal. 84.1.  and set up their Banners for signs; when he saw them break down all the carved work thereof with Axes and Hammers; then his heart was moved within him, sadness and astonishment surprised him, and he prays, Lord how long shall the adversary do Thee this dishonour? He that loves God, will love his Sanctuary, it is an amiable dwelling; you must pardon me therefore if you find me in a melting affection, when I find them in that reeling tottering condition ready to fall; For I am as much affected to the Cathedrals and Parish Churches, as ever Jew was to their Temple and Synagogues; for there is an equal reason, both erected by prudence, not command, (what I say I will justify, if you doubt of it) both equally the houses of prayer, both of equal holiness; for not one nor other capable of inherent holiness, but holy only as applied to holy uses; lastly a promise of audience to both. Blame me not then if I be struck into much sadness, heaviness and sorrow to see the stones of these lie in the dust. You have the cause of my passion; sit down and mock on, which if you do, it matters not, I am resolved to mourn still. And next I shall give you the reason of my compassion; that is for you, for my bowels yearn within me; that any man who bears the name of a Christian, should call that ill-favoured, which God will call the beauty of holiness; that should be glad, that that is condemned, which Christianity through the whole World hath hitherto approved; that should stand by and clap his hands, that those sacred buildings are reeling and ready to fall, which the piety and bounty of our forefathers hath erected to the service of God; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a proud sin, but to rejoice and in this, is a superlative degree of it, a sin out of measure sinful. The charity therefore that I own you, stirs my very inwards to be compassionate toward you, and to solicit the Almighty for you, that you may repent of this wickedness, and pray to God, 
Acts 8.22, 23.  if perhaps the thoughts of your heart may be forgiven you, for I perceive you are in the gall of bitterness, and the bond of iniquity: for else your gall had never so overflowed against the houses of God. And I pray yet satisfy me in one thing more; if they be such abominable places, such unhallowed buildings, how comes it to pass that you, I had almost said solely, make use of them? Two or three years since, Sheer Halls, Market Houses, private Conventicles were the only lawful meeting houses; but now these are of no esteem, none now to the old Fabrics; these you frequent, these you invade; in these you preach, censure and break bread. So that it seems now, that the Parish Parson being turned out of doors, all the ill-favourednesse and unholiness went out with him.  
3. Against this poor Parson you are very bitter; arraigned he must be, brought to the Bar to take his trial. And him you indite for lukewarmness; like he is to the Angel of Laodicea, not hot, nor cold, and therefore condemned he is to lie under the lash, and take his correction kindly.  
'Tis manifest indeed, that all lukewarm, hypocritical Professors, shall be spewed out of Christ's mouth; for vomitum faciunt Deo. To him they are as lukewarm water to the stomach that procures a vomit; and if so, 'tis good counsel you give him, or any other in his case, to receive what ever correction shall be as a cordial of love administered unto him, for preventing of what may follow.  
But here I must put you to it, to prove your indictment, the punishment he is under will never do it; 
— careat successibus opto  
Quisquis ab eventu facta notanda putet.   
This will prove him culpable and guilty, and so I admit he was; but whether he were hot or cold, an hypocrite or otherwise, is more than you can ever know. For zeal and sincerity in Religion are qualities that lie very much inward; and he that is cold in it, may seem to be very zealous, as did Jehu; and he whose heart is not upright, may pretend to be very sincere, as did the Pharisees; Now how can you pass your judgement in such a case? And it seems you cannot, for you confess there may be hypocrites, lukewarm men, even in your Combinational Churches, which if you knew, you would cast out from among you; and so would we do, spew them out after God's example. Forbear therefore hereafter these harsh and uncharitable censures, especially against a whole order of men. For they must ●and and fall to their own Master.  
Were they ignorant and scandalous? so were these. But now I remember it, this is no sign of lukewarmness in the Parish Parson, since they who were truly ignorant and scandal ●, were for the most part kept in; and those who were knowing and blameless, were cast out.  
1. But now I pray tell me in what sense it is that you accuse them; is it for being Parsons, or for preaching, or for preaching Parsons? Take it in what qualification you will, beware upon whom this blow will light, and what a company of precious ones you will presently indite to be like the lukewarm Angel of Laodicea. For how many of your Preachers are now become Parsons? you know they have the fattest Benefices of this whole Country. If plurality were an argument of the Parish Parson's lukewarmness, it is theirs. If nonresidence an argument, they are guilty of it. If handling the fleshhook too much, none more guilty. If neglect of Catechising, they cannot be excused. If frequent preaching, they exceed. If forbearance of Sacramental administrations, this by them is seldom done. That I say not, that in life and example they are no whit better. In God's name therefore, since in lukewarmness they are so like the old odd head, the Parish Parson; let them lie down under the lash with him, and with shame and confusion of face to themselves, receive a sharp correction, that they may prevent the spuing of their names out of Christ's mouth, as it is manifest by what is foretold, Revel. 3.19. One thing only I may not forget, that whereas the old odd head you mention did least harm, this last Parish Parson you have imposed upon us does all the mischief.  
4. In your conclusion; yet God be thanked, you show more charity to the Parish, than to the Parson; of it you say, that the whole half-blind political body doth yet appear not to be utterly uncurable. You do so load your sentences with strong words, that they pass my capacity. I know not what to make of this political body of a Parish; for I never understood they were under any other policy then that of the Commonwealth or Church in which they lived; nor that they were any Corporation at all. I profess, I understand not what you mean, if you intent any thing besides this. But whatsoever you intent by it, this I find that you affirm, the whole was half-blind; they have not yet then lost their sight altogether; that little light they have, may in good time make them see how they have been deluded, and so free them from all the fallacies that have been put upon them; which when it happens, both you and I are in hope of their cure. But that you say must not be expected, so long as they remain in their present condition. For in respect of its present posture and numerous abominations, it is altogether unapprovable, and I say the same too; and upon the very self same ground, because it rejects the Commandments of God, that it may observe the traditions of men.  
For what is the whole constitution of your Church, but the tradition of men? what's your plea all this while, but a tradition of men? That a company collected under a Covenant, without either Pastors or Elders is a true Church, is a tradition of men; That they may create, elect, ordain their Pastors and Elders, is another tradition of men; That the power of the Keys subjectively and authoritatively to invest and divest, is in them: is a third tradition of men. That there must be Lay-Presbyters, which must be Ruling Elders in the Church, is a fourth tradition of men. That the erection of the Cathedral, Parochial, Provincial, National Church was the corruption of the Combinational, is another tradition of men. That the Supreme power in any Nation is a violent head; the Archbishop a haughty horrible head; the Diocesan an idle and addle head; the Parish Parson an odd head, is another of your traditions. That there may be no set forms of prayer used in the Church, no singing of Psalms in mixed Congregations. That the Scripture may not be read in the Church, except expounded. That those Rites which you call but falsely Romish and Humane, may not be used in the Church. That Godfathers and Godmothers may not be used in Baptism, nor the children of those who are out of your Combinational Church baptised. That those whom you usually call profane, ignorant, scandalous persons, may not be admitted to the Sacrament: That there must be an upper seat erected for the Elders, to sit in their ranks, as Aldermen upon the Bench in the Church. That there must be Tables set up for the maintenance of the Ruling Elders. All these are the traditions of men, and doctrines of men; and therefore I give this counsel to the whole half-blinde political body of the Parishes, where you have prevailed most, that while they are curable they tender their health; and to beware of the Scribes and Pharisees, who in vain worship God, teaching for doctrines the Commandments of men; and to beware lest any man spoil them through Philosophy, or vain deceit through the tradition of men, etc. This is a holy watchword, and a wholesome warning, and I desire it may be heedfully harkened unto by such as are your Church Officers, for than I doubt not, but that they who have so much power, and have such an influence on the multitude, might be excellent instruments in this cure, and quickly be able to bring back the multitude of Church hearers, from those many  observations and aberrations, into which they have been cunningly, and in simplicity of heart drawn, as those poor Israelites were to follow Absalon.  
That it be speedily amended, I wish with all my heart; but say it be not, but these poor simple souls seduced by and through Philosophy, do not amend so timely as is desired, my charity will not permit me to damn them eternally; and that they shall partake of the judgement of those who worship the Beast; that they shall drink of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the Cup of his indignation, and that they shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy Angels, and in the presence of the Lamb, and that the smoke of their torment shall ascend for ever and ever, as you threaten out of Revel. 14.9, etc. This is a harsh sentence; and though it may affright and terrify those, who for doctrines teach the commandments of men, and make the Word of God of none effect through their traditions, which is a wilful, obstinate, presumptuous sin; yet I have great reason to hope that those who have simply, and ignorantly, and weakly, followed such Teachers, may find mercy, especially if they shall call to God with David, Who can understand his errors. Cleanse thou me from my secret faults? 
Psal. 19.12, 13.  keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins, let them not have dominion over me. Then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great offence.  
But because this danger lies as you say, in the observation of Traditions, it will not be amiss to set down that about this point, 
Dr. Whites Orthodox. cap. 4. p. 3. Sect. 1.2.  which may satisfy any sober man, which because I am not able to do better than Dr. Francis White hath done, I shall transcribe the Sum of what he delivers.  
The word Tradition in general signifies any doctrine or observation delivered from one to another, either by word or writing, Acts 6.14. 2 Thess. 2.15. & cap. 3.6. 1 Cor. 15.3.4.  
The Protestants simply do not deny Tradition; but first we distinguish of Traditions, and then according to some acceptions of the name we admit thereof, with a subordination to holy Scripture.  
1. First, the Romanists maintain there be doctrinal Traditions, or Traditions that contain Articles of Faith, and substantial matters of divine worship and religion, 
Decret. prim. 4. Sess. Syn. Trident.  not found in the holy Scripture; and that these are pari pietatis affectu ac reverentia sucipiendae, ac venerandae with Scripture, and to be believed no less than the prime Articles; such are Purgatory, Transubstantiation, Invocation of Saints, the Pope's infallibility, etc. These, and all other such Traditions, containing new parts and additions to religion, the Protestants simply condemn and renounce.  
2. But secondly, the name of Tradition in the writings of the Primitive Doctors and Fathers is taken in three other senses.  
First, for external Rights and Ceremonies of decency, order, and outward profession of religion not found expressly in the holy Scripture, but used as things adiaphorous, being not of the substance of divine worship; but only accessary, as the sign of the Cross; and many of those, you in your following words mention; and these we say may be used, or disused according to the Laws of every Church, as they serve for aedification, or otherwise.  
Secondly, The report of the Primitive Church concerning matter of fact, and concerning the practice of the Apostles is another Tradition; as that the Apostles did baptise infants; that they admitted none to the Lords Supper, but those who were of years to examine themselves; that they ordained such and such in several Churches to be Bishops; That, that very Canon of Scripture which we now maintain, was the Canon at that time with many other, which can be best proved by Tradition. And therefore we willingly admit of these Traditions also delivered unto us by the Histories and Records of the Church, because such reports explicate the meaning, or confirm the doctrine of the Scripture.  
Thirdly, The sum of Christian faith, as the Creed, and the explication of Christian doctrine in many principal parts thereof, concerning the Trinity, Incarnation, descent of Christ into hell, etc. is oftentimes called Tradition, being received from hand to hand, as the Apostles lively teaching; and such Tradition found unanimously in the Fathers we admit also, because it gives light to the doctrine found in Scripture.  
But in the admittance of these we require two Cautions.  
1. That the holy Scripture be the rule of all Traditions whatsoever thus far, that they be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, up on examination conformable to the Scriptures, and every way subservient to the same.  
2. That they have the Testimony of the primitive Church in the prime age thereof, and descend to our days from the same, by the stream of succession through ages following, and were received as Apostolic in the Catholic Church.  
The Question of Traditions being thus stated unto you, easy it will be to answer to your two alleged Texts of Tradition, Mark 7. Col. 2. For they make as much to your purpose, as Ecce duo gladij doth to confirm the Pope's claim to the Temporal and Spiritual power; or Pasce oves, to uphold his Supremacy; Or God made two great lights, to prove the Pope's power to be above the Emperors, as much as the Sun exceeds the Moon; or that Parson who would undertake to prove the Parish must pave the Church, and not he, because it was written in the Prophet, paveant illi, ego non paveam.  
For how doth that place of Mark 7.7.9. pertain to the spiritual, historical, or interpretative Traditions of the Christian Church. It was of the Scribes and Pharisees of whom our Saviour there spoke, and of their Traditions; of washing of pots and cups, and many such other like things of their Corban. And in their washings they placed not decency and civility, but made a matter of Religion of it; and by their Corban they took away the duty of the fifth Commandment. Look into the place you urge, and tell me whether I say not truth; and this it seems you saw, and that made you skip over the 8. verse, and never mention the 11. which if you had done, and weighed, you would not for shame have equalled our Traditions with theirs; or judged us as superstitious for observing our Traditions, as they were for theirs. We have a command for the institution of our Ceremonies; let all be done decently, in order, and to edification; we have good authority that our Traditions are Apostolical, we observe them in obedience to the Command, Honour thy father and mother, who have authority in indifferent things. And therefore your imputation is rash; for we reject no Commandment of God, by receiving the commands of men. Besides, you know we never maintained these as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Doctrines, which was the Pharisees superstition; but only as Rites and Ceremonies, not placing Religion, but the decency of Religion in them.  
That other place in the Colossians you understand not; it is a difficult place; I shall labour to give some light to it. 
Good. Ant. lib. 1. c. 12.  Some conceive the Apostle in this chapter intends the Essens, who were a strict Sect among the Jews; and in many passages the Apostle seems directly to point at them. 
vers. 16.  Let no man condemn you in meat and drink. Let no man bear rule over you through humbleness of mind, and worshipping of Angels; why, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
vers. 18.  why are you subject to such Ordinances? ver. 20. The Apostle useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which the Essens applied to note their Ordinances, Aphorisms, Constitutions. In the 21. vers. he gives an instance of some, touch not, taste not, handle not: Now the Junior company of Essens might not touch their Seniors; and in their diet, their taste was limited to bread, salt, water, and hyssop; which Ordinances they undertook 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith Philo, a love of wisdom; but the Apostle concludes, that the observation of this had only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a show of wisdom; this their doctrine was, as Philo saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a kind of Philosophy received from their Fathers by tradition; and therefore St. Paul bids Christians beware of it; Beware, lest any man spoil you through Philosophy.  
Some other refer these words to some Philosophers who mingled their saecular Philosophy with the Religion of the Jews; delivered at that time many false dictates, 
Estius in loc.  of God, of Angels, of the Son of God, of the eternity of the World, of purgation of souls, which were partly received from the Platonics, partly invented out of their own brains. Of which kind was Simon Magus, from whom descended the Sect of the Gnostics. Touching this Philosophy, and these Traditions the Apostle gives his caveat, Beware least, etc.  

Zanchy, Aretius, Daven. in loc.  Others, without reflecting upon either Essens, or Gnostics, more simply expound the words as a Caveat given against all Sophistical Philosophy, Pharisaical traditions, and all Mosaical Ceremonial Rites. Philosophy the Apostle here condemns not, as all note upon the place, but as it had vanity and deceitfulness added to it; for a man may condemn the sophistry and knavery of any art, that likes the art well enough. The Traditions of men he utterly dislikes, such as were accompanied with superstition and folly; as were those of the Pharisees disliked by our Saviour, mentioned before. And so also the Mosaical ceremonies, which may well be called Elementa mundi, as they are Gal. 4.3. and also vers. 9 weak and beggarly rudiments. Elements, such as A. B. C. for children to begin with, but now by Christ being utterly abolished, Now if any man say, Touch not that man, he is unclean; taste not that meat, it is forbidden; handle not that cup, it is defiled; believe him not.  

Tertul.  Here then the Apostle gives us a Caveat against three sorts of men, or rather against their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, their doctrines, the Philosophers, the Pharisees, the Jews. The Philosophers were Patriarchae haereticorum; and he means the Gnostics; vain and deceitful arguments they bring, beware you be not spoiled by them. The Pharisees are a sort of superstitious hypocrites; they have Traditions taken up by themselves, which Moses never delivered; beware of them. The Jews walk not after Christ; their dictates are, that you yet are bound to keep Moses Law; harken not unto them when they say unto you, Touch not, taste not, handle not; subject not yourselves to their Ordinances, after the commandments and doctrines of men, etc.  
This is the true intent, scope and sense of St. Paul's words, as the wise and judicious Interpreters have taught me. And that therefore the word Traditions, that you here catch at, is but a shadow, in laying hold of it to serve your turn; you put upon the unlearned a vain parologism, a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter; the Pharisaical Traditions are forbidden, therefore all Traditions; the doctrines of those men, therefore all other doctrines that the Church shall teach; for which there is not a manifest and express text in particular.  
For let the Question then be proposed, whether it can be proved from these places, that all Traditions and external Rites brought into the Church by men, aught to be exploded, ejected, condemned? And I answer, No; partly for that these texts aim at another matter, partly, because there must be power granted to the Governors of the Church, to institute rites for order and decency; the Apostle himself being the Author of it, Let all things be done decently and in order, 
1 Cor. 14.40. Heb. 13.17.  and partly, because we are bound to obey them in all things that are honest. Austin hath left us a good rule about Rites and Ceremonies, which were it observed, 
Austin ad Januarium Epist. 118. cap. 22.  would settle much unity and peace in the Church. In his nulla melior disciplina prudenti Christiano, quam ut eo modo agat quo agit Ecclesia, ad quamcunque devenerit: quod enim nec contra fidem, nec contra bonos mores injungitar, indifferenter est habendum. But here three Cautions are to be observed.  
1. That no man prescribe external Rites with that mind, to hope for justification by them, or remission of sin. For this is Jewish.  
2. That these adiaphorous rites be not imposed, as if they laid alike obligation upon the conscience with the Laws of God: so that a damnable guilt should be incurred upon the breach of them, although it happen without contempt of those who are in authority and command, or without the scandal of others.  
3. Heed must be taken that they be significative, 
Dr. Ham. tract. of superstition à. Sect. 35. ad 43.  few, wholesome; significant, that they be not empty. Few, that they impose no yoke upon the Disciples necks; and wholesome, that they edify. In obeying and observing such Ceremonies imposed upon me by a lawful power, I shall never fear to be damned for rejecting the Commandments of God, and observing the doctrines of men: nor to incur that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with our Saviour out of the Prophet Isaiah, in the Chapter cited by you fastens upon those Pharisaical hypocrites, 
Mark 7.5.  This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.    

SECT. 6. The words of the Letter. Of divers other things jeered at by the Epistler.  
IF there were nothing amiss or out of order to be observed in the Parish meeting houses; if there were never so full freedom from Communion-book-praying, and from Homily-book-preaching, as well as from Canon-book-swearing: if all bareheads were barred out from those places, and utterly rejected for ever being any spiritual overseers again, afore they were inwardly qualified by Christ's sinne-crucifying and soul-quickning Spirit in a cleansed conscience, and also outwardly and orderly called by Christ's Covenant-servants in a cleansed Combinational Church. If there were an unanimous voting down of all double-reading, I mean that babbling-reading of two chapters, which is not seconded with the opening and expounding of the same, being it cannot but be confessed that 'twas such a course as is quite contrary to what is commanded and commended in the Scriptures of truth, as all do well know, that are acquainted with what is written, Ezech. 33.2. Nehem. 8.8. Luk. 4.16. Act. 13.15. 1 Cor. 14.23.24. If there were no news amongst them, of any one relic of all the Romish rites, or other humane inventions, as Matrimonial bands, Marriage Ring, sign of the cross, white surplice, choristers singing, funeral Sermons, Idol-sureties of Godfathers and Godmothers, or groundless application of public or private baptism unto the infants of profane Parents; and if none but Christ's own faithful friends and followers were admitted to be fed or physicked at his Supper feast:  
Yet the mere sight of a Monarchical put to stand in the stead of a Ministerial Pulpit, is a strange plea of a strange Apostasy from the commendable practice of the primitive Christians: Seeing that such Coop is not of a sufficient capacity to contain at once, any more persons than one: Whereas it is of Moral equity, and consequently of perpetual observation, that a rightly reformed Presbyterial Church should have all her Elders, who are engaged by virtue of their Office to begin and end all the public Ordinances, and to transact all the open concernments of the City of God, for to stand and sit together in the face and full view of the whole assembly; and by so much the more, seeing they are as plainly warranted, and so punctually prescribed as they be to walk, and to walk according to the pattern shown in the Mount, witness Exod 25.40. Act. 7.44. Heb. 8.15. And as in all other points, so in this particular concerning the Elders pulpit, they are tied and limited by their Commission to hold conformity with what is upon sacred Record, as this is, and that not only necessarily employed, but eminently expressed in several Scripture expressions: as Neh. 8.4. Eccles. 12.11. 1 Tim. 4.14. Rev. 4.6. & 5.6. & 19.4.  
The Reply.  
When I came to consider this place of your letter, I was at a stand; I paused a while, not knowing what affections to stir in myself; whither of mirth or mourning; that humour of Democritus, or the contrary of Heracl●tus. I saw I had reason to make myself merry at your high, profound, rare, admirable conceit: But yet I had more cause to weep at this heinous and abominable wickedness committed in the Parish meeting houses. O unheard of villainy! O unsufferable wrong! an express of the Luciferian pride! The Monarchical Pew is exalted above the Ministerial Pulpit, it is put in its place, in stands in stead of it; were there no other, yet this were a strong plea of a strange Apostasy. Quis audivit talia? such an abomination ought not to be committed in Israel; Consider of it, take advice and speak your minds. For this my soul shall mourn in secret. Non feram, non patiar, non sinam. All other injuries and abominations might have been passed by, in comparison of this: The Communion-book-praying might have been remitted; The Homily-book-preaching might have been forgotten; the Canon-book-swearing might have been buried, the bareheaded Priests, the babbling reading of two Chapters; All the Romish rites, the humane inventions, the bands of Matrimony, the Ring in Marriage, the sign of the Cross, that smock of the Whore, the Choristers cherping, the sermons at funerals, and the rest of that trumpery might have been forgiven and pardoned, had it not been for this presumptuous pew, and narrow Coop: For if there had been nothing amiss or out of order in these Parish meeting houses; yet the mere sight of a Monarchical Pew, suffered to stand in the stead of a Ministerial Pulpit, is plea and argument strong enough, that the Parish is Apostate, not guilty of a small offence, some venial sin or peccadillo; but fallen from grace, lapsed into that heinous guilt of Apostasy, and degenerated from the practice of the Primitive Christians. By this the Elders are kept out from taking the highest place in the Synagogues, by this they are hindered to sit round about the throne, by this they cannot sit on the right and left hand, as Mother Zebedee desired for her children in Christ's Kingdom; by this they are excluded to stand and sit together in the face and full view of the whole assembly, by which notice might be taken of them for prime and principal men; and a fearful trembling might fall upon any of the Combination that should incur their indignation, no otherwise then a Malefactor is terrified at the sight of his judge. Away then with this same Monarchical pew, this pinfold, this coop, since it is an obstruction and derogation to the Ministerial Pulpit, and Elders Bench; 'tis a Remonstrance of Monarchy, and a Relic of Popery; and since Monarchy is thrown aside, and Popery with it, hue this also down, and cast it into the fire: So shall we have these meeting houses reform and restored to their primitive constitution, room made for the Elders to sit in their places, that they may begin and end all the public Ordinances, and transact all the open concemments of the City of God. This a rare device, and at after I shall tell you what I think of it; in the Interim I return to consider of your Ironical paraleipsis, in which you make yourself merry with many particulars; the use of which you scoff at as abominations in the Parish meeting houses; and the first of these was.  
1. The Communion-book-praying.  
Touching this I shall only ask you whether you except against the whole or the parts, 
Hooker Eccl. pol. lib. 5. Sect. 26.27, 28.  and when I see your exceptions, I shall return my answer. In the mean time I refer you to Mr. Hooker, and to Dr. Hammonds tract in vindication of the Liturgy, and view of the Directory, but especially to Dr. Tailor's Preface before his Collection of Offices; lest I should draw a line after Apelles.  
2. Homily-book-preaching.  
St. chrysostom calls all his Sermons Homilies, and if you look into the Ancients, those Lectures which they made to the people, especially upon the Epistles and Gospels, were called Homilies; the word both in Greek and Latin authors is very ancient. To the word therefore, I see no reason you should except no more than preaching, which in the Original is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that signifies to proclaim, as a Herald, the Word of God; now whether this be within, or without book, is not material. The Sheriff reads a Proclamation, what then? does he not therefore proclaim it? And a man reads a Sermon to the people, and this materially is the Word of God, such that for the truth of it you dare not except against; shall you then disavow it barely for the reading? This is a childish exception, yea, and very dangerous also; 
Hook. Eccl. pol. lib. 5. pag. 51.  For than it would necessarily follow, that the vigour and vital efficacy of Sermons doth grow from certain outward accidents, which are not in them, but in their maker; his virtue, his gesture, his countenance, his zeal, the motion of his body, and the inflection of his voice, who first uttereth them as his own, is that which giveth them the form, the very nature, the essense of instruments available to eternal life. Put case a man cannot read, but desires to have a Sermon read unto him, of Mr. Cottons, Mr. Burroughs, etc. I would now ask you, whether any good might come of it or no; if not, to what end are they published? what merely to publish to the world, that the man is a man of rare parts, and to no benefit of the Reader? But if this last, in earnest tell me why that the auditory may not be as much benefited by the Church Homilies read unto them, as they may be by any private man's works? should you nor I find any profit by what we read, we might cast away our books.  
Had indeed the reading of these Homilies, quite excluded Preaching, you had had some colour to except against them; but the words of the Rubric are these, If there be no Sermon, then shall follow one of the Homilies already set forth; So that it presupposeth there should be a Sermon; but in case there be not, (as if you look into the paucity of Ministers able to preach; when that Constitution was made, it was not possible there should be) than it ordains Homilies to be read, which only differ from a Sermon in this, that the man hath it not without book. Put case one of your own should in one Church read a Sermon that is in print; and in another, having committed it to memory, preach it to the people; would you not say that he did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proclaim God's Word in both places? Indulge as much to us, and then we will say, he that reads, and after committing the same homily to memory delivers it without book, Preacheth. In a word, Impartially consider these Homilies, that they are found for doctrine, plain for the stile, composed of the most necessary points of Religion, and framed to the capacity of the vulgar; so that those Ministers that were wont to read them, had taken the pains to have learned them without book, & viva voce have delivered them to the auditory, you had wanted what to say against them.  
3. Canon-Book-swearing.  
This exception might have been well spared; First, because the Canons were not to be sworn too, but subscribed; as was the engagement. Secondly, because the holy Covenant, and the negative oath were pressed upon us. You must then acquit your party for what they did, before you can justly lay the pressure of the conscience upon us.  
4. If all bare heads were barred out from these places, and utterly rejected for ever, for ever being any spiritual Overseers again, afore they were inwardly qualified by Christ's sinne-crucifying and soul-quickning Spirit in a cleansed conscience; and also outwardly and orderly called by Christ's Covenant-servants in a cleansed Combinational Church.  
The Reply.  
To cover or uncover the head in these places in the time of divine service, is a Ceremony; and therefore if the observation, or non-observation of Ceremonies be a superstition, he that uncovereth not his head, may be as superstitious as he who is bareheaded. The reason is, because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we usually translate superstition, hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a fear in it, which proceeds from an imbecility of the understanding, which fears where no fear is; is afraid that God will be displeased if such or such an external act be omitted, or such or such an act done; when one and the other may be omitted and done, as occasions and circumstances offer themselves, and God no way displeased. The covering or uncovering of the head is one of these Ceremonies; and he that thinks he may not be uncovered out of a fear to offend God, is superstitious, yea, while he speaks against all Ceremonies, is Ceremonious: And he that thinks upon no occasion he may cover his head, is Ceremonious also; and yet for his superstition he hath a fairer excuse than the other. For the one doth it for the most part out of contempt and perverseness, and in a disobedience to some higher power; the other out of a kind of necessity, which his present condition may put upon him, (and 'tis a certain rule that charity dispenseth with all Ceremonies.) The one by it, may give occasion to suspect his irreverence; the worst that can be made of the other, is, that he desires to serve his God with fear and reverence, as judging himself in his presence, before whom he cannot be too vile. The one, hath no countenance nor colour of any Scripture for what he does; the other looks upon those plain words of the Apostle, Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonours his head: 
1 Cor. 11.4.  and thinks he is obliged to it, as indeed he is, till the meaning of the Text be otherwise cleared to him.  
The question than ought to be this, whether a man ought to be covered in the service of God? If uncovered, why do you jeer at our bareheads? If covered, why do you not keep your own rule, but sit covered at one part of service, and uncovered at another? covered when a Chapter is read and expounded; covered all the time of Sermon, (which yet I hope you will not deny, is a chief part of God's service, which if you should deny, I know not how you serve God,) and yet uncovered again, at the singing of a Psalm, at your extemporarie, prayers before and after Sermon, at the administration of the Sacraments. Tell me what privilege you have to dispense with this Ceremony in one part of divine service more than another, Let it then be but considered who it is that speaks from heaven unto us; that in voce hominis tuba Dei, that it is God that speaks by man's mouth, that the message is his, and man only the Ambassador to deliver it; and then I think no man deserves a scoff, that hears it with a bare head.  
When some of your party were pressed with this argument, at last they came to this result, 
Bayly pag. 122.  that there was a necessity for all men to keep on their hats all the time of divine actions, more particularly at the time of the Celebration of the Sacrament. For this act was a right significant to the communicants of their table-honour and fellowship with Christ; also, that the Minister at the Celebration must be uncovered, and that in sign of his service to the Communicants as the Lords much honoured children, sitting covered when they eat of their father's meat. This irreverence with the reason of it, if you disclaim, as I hope you do, it lies upon you to show me a reason, why a man may be irreverent at any other part of God's worship: which I interpret the covering of the head out of contempt and obstinacy to be, which guilt you may unadvisedly draw upon yourself, when you impute to us in a scoff bareheads.  
2. These you say should be utterly rejected from being my spiritual Overseers again.  
What will you cast us aside with the shavelings of Rome? not rejected, but utterly rejected? rejected for a poor Ceremony, that we were bareheaded in God's service? never to be made spiritual Overseers again merely for this? This were a very harsh sentence; but you lenify it with two exceptions, that of inward, and an outward calling.  
3. Afore they were inwardly qualified by Christ's sinne-crucifying and soul-quickning Spirit in a cleansed conscience.  
This your qualification is exceedingly to be desired; O how happy were the Church, if all the Overseers were quickened by that Spirit, which would effectually work in them a crucifying of sin, and a new life, that their conscience were cleansed by the blood of Christ, and a pure faith! that her Nazarites were purer than snow, whiter than milk, that they were more ruddy in body than rubies, and that their polishing was as saphire. But this is rather to be wished than hoped for; while this world stands, Saul will be among the Prophets, and Judas among the Disciples. So than you have here put an impossible talk upon yourself and all others, to be assured of an Overseer before you receive him, that he is inwardly qualified by Christ's sinne-crucifi d and soul-quickning Spirit in a cleansed conscience. For this requires a great deal of more ability in the Rulers of the Church, than ever can be found in any mortal man: For not to speak of the impossibility of a grounded and certain persuasion of true grace in the heart of an hypocrite, who hath no grace at all: how is it possible to attain to any grounded certainty of true grace in the heart of another man? conjectures we may make, and in charity judge it is so, but this is no evidence of assurance. For the hid man of the heart, and the new name, are not certainly known to any man, but he that hath them. You must then abate very much of this proposition, before any wise man will be of your judgement. And if men must not be admitted for Overseers, till you know them to be thus inwardly qualifyed, nor you nor we shall ever admit any Overseers. Gifts I grant they all ought to have, before they be admitted into that order; but such as men may judge of, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, abilities in learning, outward evidences of grace witnessed by a holy life; but whether they have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, gratias gratum facientes, that must be left to the searcher of all hearts. To us a Bristol stone may glister like a Diamond, and till we know the contrary, it were folly to reject it.  
4. And also outwardly and orderly called by Christ's Covenant-servants in a cleansed Combinational Church.  
This is your second restriction, by which you would reject the Parish Overseers as you call them: the old Ministers. But now see how fare it will take hold of those among yourselves.  
1. For first, if this outward calling be necessary, then what will become of your Itinerants, who never pleaded this outward call, but their gifts only.  
Secondly, For those old Ministers that turn unto you, and for gain dance after your pipe, they then must renounce their old orders, and be newly ordained by you; which were, as if a man that had received his commission from his Prince, should slight that, and take up another from the people; that I say not it justifies that old exploded maxim, laid upon Wickleive, Praelatus in mortali peccato existens desinit esse Praelatus.  
Thirdly, Here you would fasten upon us again the old Sophism, that there is no outward and orderly calling but by Christ's Covenant-servants in a cleansed Combinational Church; which you shall make good ad Graecas Calendas.  
Fourthly, You say that this outward and orderly calling must be had in a cleansed Combinational Church. So that if the Combinational Church be not purified and cleansed, what assurance can any man have of his outward calling? Are the Anabaptist Churches clean? Are the Antinomians clean? Are the Millenaries clean? Are the Quakers clean? yet all these are Combinational, and they ordain their Ministers. It seems then that unclean Combinational Churches both outwardly and orderly called: or else all these have no Pastors. But I proceed with your words.  
5. If there were an unanimous voting down of all double-reading, I mean that babbling reading of two Chapters, which is not seconded with the opening and expounding of the same, being that it cannot but be confessed, that it was such a course as is quite contrary to what is commanded and commended in the Scriptures of Truth, as all do well know that are acquainted with what is written, Ezek. 33.2. Nehemiah 8.8. Luke 4.16. Acts 13.15. 1 Cor. 14.23, 24.  
The Reply.  
1. Reading the Scripture publicly was of great use in the Primitive Church, and to that purpose they had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or public Readers officiated; even Julian before he became an Apostate, was such a one in the Church of Nicomedia. 
Nazianz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Just. Mart. Apol. 2. Tertull. Apol. cap. 39 & lib. 2. ad uxorem. Chrys. hom. 3. de Lazaro.  It was one part of their Liturgy, as you may read in Justin Martyr and in Tertullian, Commentaria Apostolorum, aut scripta Apostolorum leguntur. We meet together, and there is Divinarum Scripturarum Commemoratio; and that you be not mistaken in Tertullia's meaning, Ibi fomenta fidei de Scripturarum interlectione. And here also is double-reading at lest for you, for it was interlectio. And therefore chrysostom wisheth the people to get them Bibles, and diligently to read them, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as in their Temples; observe that. They therefore used not to call the giving forth a Text, and preaching upon it the reading of the Scripture. Now that reading is preaching, that is proclaiming the will of God, is evident. Moses had in old time, in every City those that preach him, since be is read in their Synagogues every Sabbath day. Dives brethren are sent to Moses and the Prophets, and to what end but to read them? 
Acts 15.21. Luke 16.  for they were dead, and viuâ voce could not preach; and had not the reading of them been a sufficient Sermon to reclaim them, in pub ishing God's anger to such lose men, Abraham's counsel had been to little purpose. Further Saint Paul commands that that Epistle which he wrote to the Colossians be read in the Church of Laodicea, upon which words Doctor Davenat hath this note, Errare eos, qui ipsam lectionem Scripturarum negant facere ad aedificationem populi in fide & charitate, 
Col. 4.16.  nisi accedat eodem tempore en●rratio, & explicatio earundem per praedicatorem; which he that list may see proved by Master Hooker at large. 
Hook. Eccl. Pol. lib. 5. Sect. 22.  For let men extol Sermons as they please, Plus apud me valebit vera ratio, q●am vulgi opin●o, that hath taught me that the Scripture itself any way made known, is sufficient to make the man of God perfect. Sufficit ad fidei apprehensionem, assensum, ad fidem ingenerandam, augmentand●m, c nfirmandam; and to say the contrary is to join with the Papist in their load clamours, That the Scriptures are obscure and insufficient to salvation.  
That there may be babling-reading I deny not, as there may be babbling prayer and babbling preaching; but then let the Babblers answer for their coldness, and not the Ordinance be thought the worse of. How other men are affected I know not; to me a Chapter distinctly read, punctually accented, and harmoniously tuned, enters and more insensibly surprises my soul, than any Exposition I have heard upon it. And I rejoice in it, because in the one, I hear methinks God from heaven immediately speaking unto me; in the other, God only speaking by his servant. And therefore I have always endeavoured to speak to my auditory in the words of God, and have ever cast by all other phrases and expressions, when I could serve myself out of the Scriptures.  
Yet do not think all this while I am against Expositions. I persuade them, I like them, I encourage them. But yet I do not think every man fit to be an expositor. Grammar teacheth the meaning of words, Rhetoric of Tropes and Figures. Logic judgeth of the strength and weight of reasons; so that he who is not skilful in all these Arts, is no fit man to be an expositor; for either he will fall short in the language, or not discern betwixt what is properly, and what is Tropically or figuratively spoken: or else be to seek upon what medium the conclusion is inferred. Without these instrumental Arts no man shall be able 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to divide aright the Word of God.  
He that will give forth and maintain a Paradox contrary to the judgement and practice of the whole Church, had need of mighty and evident arguments to evince it. And such you have here vented. viz. That reading of Chapters in the Church that is not seconded which opening and expounding of the same, is quite contrary to what is commanded and commended. I expect your demonstration to prove this; do not think you shall gain upon me by such a crafty insinuation as this is; [being that it cannot but be confessed] when nor I, nor any other sober man ever confessed any such thing, much less that this course is quite contrary to what is commanded and commended; when we find no such course extant upon command; and though we allow the thing to be commendable, yet in the places by you cited, we find no commendation at all given to it. For they are bare relations of what was done and no more; and that we do the like may very well be warranted by them; but that by them there is such a necessity imposed, that Scripture may never be read except expounded, you shall never prove: or that not to do it, is quite contrary to what is commanded and commended. This might serve in answer to all the places you allege; but I shall more particularly consider them.  
You first produce the Prophet, Ezek. 33.2. Son of man speak to the children of Israel, and say unto them, when I bring a Sword upon a Land, if the people of the Land take a man of their Coasts, and set him for their Watchman, etc. What syllable do you here find of reading first a piece of Scripture, and then expounding it? That every Prophet sent by God is a Watchman, that it is his duty to acquaint them with the message he hath received from God, and of the danger they are in; if they hear it not; and of the danger he is in, if he give them not warning: thus much might properly be concluded out of this context; but to your conclusion, I do not discern that this place shows the least favourable countenance. For I hope such a Watchman as Ezekiel was, a Prophet might stand upon his Watch and give warning, without reading any parcel of Scripture before extant, and expounding it to the people. For my part I have always conceived that the Prophets delivered visions immediately received from God, and that they were not ordinarily Expositors of Prophecies or Revelations entrusted to other Prophets. Show this, and it may evince in part what you intent; In part I say, but not in the whole; for you must prove that they first read, and that they never read any part of the Scripture to the people, but that they expounded it; or else you prove nothing.  
The next Text you produce, is Nehem. 8.8. The Levites caused the people to understand the Law, and the people stood in their place, and ver. 9 So they read the Book in the Law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.  
I observe first, that in Josiahs' time I find the like done, that the book of the Covenant which was found in the house of the Lord, 
2 Kings 23.2.  was read in the ears of all the people, and yet there I read of no Exposition.  
Secondly that this in Nehemiah was done presently after their return from the Captivity, in which time both the Law and sense might be forgotten, and therefore there might be the more reason for it.  
Thirdly, That they read the Law first distinctly, before they gave the sense, the neglect of which, is that we complain of; for a Text only is taken, and that preached upon, but the Scripture is seldom read or expounded.  
Fourthly, the example is particular, and except you can prove that it was brought into a rule, ever after to be so done, and never otherwise, from it you cannot conclude a general, no more than I can out of that practice of Josiah, where I find it read, and not expounded, conclude that therefore it must be read and not expounded.  
Fifthly, Were we against Expositions, you might well produce this practice of Nehemiah against us; but we like well that after the Chapter read, there follow a short Exposition. These two then might well like Abraham and Lot live together; and why then should there be any wrangling and controversy between my herdsmen and thy heard-m●n about this matter? Press not your necessity, that it must be so and not otherwise, and we have done.  
The third place you allege, is Luke 4.16. where we find that our Saviour read the Text of the Prophet Isaiah, and applied it; and so much liberty shall be granted to any Minister, if he be able to do it aright. The Text was a Prophecy, and every Prophecy is obscure, till light by the opening of it be brought to it. This did our Saviour, and this do you, and it shall not displease. The reading of the Text may be proved from hence, and the lawfulness of a Commentary or Exposition upon it; but that necessity which you would enforce, never. This is still to be demonstrated.  
The fourth place, is Acts 13.15. Which no way proves what you intent; for there we thus read, after the reading of the Law and the Prophets, the Rulers of the Synagogue sent unto them, saying, Ye men and brethren, if you have any word of exhortation to the people, say on, than Paul stood up— and said, Men and brethren.  
1. Tremellius and Beza observe upon this place, that first in their Synagogues there was the reading of the holy books, that is the Law and the Prophets, which they divided into so many Sections, as there were Sabbaths in the year, and to every Section out of Moses, applied a Section out of some Prophet, that was most agreeable unto it. These readings than could not be very short, for otherwise they could not go through the whole in one year.  
2. These readings being ended, than a Master of the Synagogue they had, who gave liberty to preach. Upon which Aretius notes, that Admonemur hic, observandum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & modestiam in proponenda doctrina, quod non observant spiritus phanatici qui solent passim discurrere, more furiosorum, & quosvis caetus interturbare suis clamoribus sine certa vocatione.  
3. It appears not here, that Saint Paul preached upon any part of Moses or the Prophets, that was then read, neither was he moved by the Ruler of the Synagogue to do it, but only to make an exhortation. So that you can never conclude from this place that the Scripture may not be read, except expounded.  
Your last place is out of 1 Cor. 14.23, 24. which makes less to your purpose then any of the rest; the words are, If therefore the whole Church be come together in one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, and unbelievers, will he not say, that ye are mad? But if all prophecy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all.  
The Apostle in this Chapter shows some inconveniences that might happen, even upon that gift which then God bestowed. viz. an ability to speak divers languages. That in this verse is, that this their confused ostentation of tongues might alienate two sorts of people, the weaker Christians, whom he calls Idiots, and those, who were not yet converted, whom he calls unbelievers. For put case, that any of these should come into the Congregation, and hear them speak confusedly in unknown languages, would he not say you were mad? for mad men do use to babble that which no man understands; but sober men clear words, which are intelligible. But in Prophecy now there is no such inconvenience to be feared, but the quite contrary profit to be expected. For if it happen that all in the Church Prophecy, that is, out of the Oracles of God, declare his justice and wrath against sin, his mercy toward the penitent; shall enlarge themselves about the true worship of God, the obedience and pious life that ought to be in Christians, of sanctification, of justification by Christ, of eternal life, a life of joy to the good and believers; of a life of pain to wicked men and Infidels: These or the like being heard from your mouths, Infidels and unlearned men will say, God is in you indeed. i e. that you never speak so aptly and wisely of such divine things, but by assistance and motion of God's Spirit.  
This being now the genuine sense of the words, I put it to yourself to judge, whether you can any fair way deduce your conclusion from them. That there was then such who did instruct the people, and preach unto them all necessary points of salvation, may easily be collected from hence, and that God bestowed upon them extraordinary abilities to perform that duty. But that Scripture may never be read, except expounded, he that can conclude from hence, I shall say, that he may as quickly gather that an Ape being like a man in something, therefore he is a man.  

The words of the Letter.  
IF there were no news amongst them of any Romish Rites or humane inventions, as Matrimonial Bands, Marriage-Rings, sign of the Cross, white Surplice, Choristers singing, Funeral Sermons, Idol-sureties of Godfathers and Godmothers, etc.  

The Reply.  
Romish Rites are of two sorts; either such as are used by the Church of Rome, and were of Ancient use in other Churches; or such as are merely Roman, taken up and used in the Romish Church, after it began to degenerate and was corrupted. All those that are of this kind we have exploded, not only because there might be superstition in them, but also because they were superfluous, burdonsome, and full of vanity and folly. Those of the first kind, (and such are those of which you speak) because we have found them of perpetual use in the Catholic Primitive Church, we yet retain. 
Hook. Eccl. pol. lib. 4. Sect. 3. ad 10.  Now whether every Ceremony be to be abolished, because it is in use among the Papists, be pleased to consult with Mr. Hooker, and he will resolve you that it is not. And indeed if this were not true, we might not kneel and lift up our hands and eyes at our prayers, nor enter reverently into the house of God, nor put our hand on the book when we take an oath, nor sit in our Pues in the Churches when we hear, nor preach upon any portion of Scripture, because the Papists do so. Evident than it is that Ceremonies are not to be excluded, quâ Romish, but as they have some other viciousness adherent to them.  
2. Oh but these are humane constitutions; that may be granted, and yet the Rite near the worse, nor the less to be regarded. About this point, read again Mr. hooker's three first books of Ecclesiastical policy, and he will satisfy any man that lists not to be contentious. 
Synod. of New Engl. cap. 1.  The distinction is your own; there are some things essential, and some things circumstantial in Religion; what is of the essence of it, is immutable, and must be prescribed by the word; but what is circumstantial is circumscribed with general limitations, according to the nature of the things themselves and civil Church custom; so that if there be no error of man concerning their determination, the determining of them is to be accounted as if it were divine. It lies now upon you to show where the error lies, and that the prescriber had not an eye to those general limitations in Scripture, before you cast out these humane constitutions, and explode them as inventions of men.  
But now let us go on, and examine Qui viri, what kind of men these were, who brought these Rites into the Church; they were no men of yesterday, they were not any way infected with the Roman leaven. They were the Primitive fathers, and some of them Apostolical men; men who hazarded their lives for Christ. These were the Inventors of those Rites you speak of, as I shall now show you by induction of particulars, being guided by your own thread.  
1. Matrimonial Bands.  
'Tis a Rule of Zanchy, that since there is nothing clearly prescribed about Matrimonial Rites in the Word of God; 
Zanch. de sponsalibus. Thes. 4.  ●itus hi petendi sunt ex consuetudinibus Ecclesiasticis, & constitutionibus, quae nihil cum verbo Dei pugnans contineant. You must show then that in the publication of these Bands there is somewhat repugnant to the Word of God, or else this custom may be well retained. And you have no reason at all at this time to except against them, since you know that there is an Act of Parliament extant at this time, made by your own party, that before the solemnisation of marriage, the parties names who are to be joined in wedlock, shall be openly proclaimed either in the Market, or in the Church three several times. It seems by this Act, the selfsame reason which prevailed with our forefathers, prevailed with them, viz. that thereby all clandestine marriages should be prevented; divorces upon pretences of former Espousals by contract voided, and the surreptitious stealing away of Orphans and children without the consent of their Parents, hindered. When therefore you find fault with this custom and constitution, you find fault with you know not what, and reprehend you know not whom.  
2. Marriage Rings.  
If you think this to be a Popish Rite, you are very much deceived. For it was used before the Romans were Christians, and yet is ne'er the worse for that neither. For the Jews though prohibited some, yet were not forbidden to be like in nothing to the Nations; for that was impossible. Among the Romans the Ring of marriage was used, 
Pliny Hist. lib. 33. cap. 1. Tertull. Apol. cap. 6.  and it was first of Iron, and afterwards of gold. Whence Tertullian commending the temperance and modesty of the old Roman Matrons, saith, Aurum nulla norat praeterquam unico digito, quem sponsus oppignorasset pronubo annulo. Among the Romans jus annuli, right to wear a Ring, belonged not to every man; at first it was conferred upon men of honour; this than might be one cause of continuing this custom, that whereas marriage is honourable, the husband by giving the Ring, shown that he had bestowed honour upon the woman, she every whit as honourable as he was; ubi ille Cajus, ibi illa Caja. But then the bed must be undefiled, and that it be so kept, so often as she looks upon her Ring she may well be admonished; for by this pawn given and received, she pledged her faith and fidelity to keep herself only to one. This will be never done, except their love be endless and continue, of which the Ring is an apt symbol, for a circle knows no end. Whether then we consider the honour done to the woman by her husband, or that mutual love and fidelity in heart and mind agreed on betwixt the married couple, this harmless Ceremony needs not be cast aside with a scoffed.  
3. The sign of the Cross.  
This is a Ceremony at which you are wont to be affrighted, as the Devils of old. But you must know that this was a Rite used in the Church, many ages before Popery was heard of. There was a twofold kind of Cross used by them, either transient or permanent; the transient was made with the motion of the hand, but left no sign behind. This was of common practice in the Primitive Church, as appears to any man who hath ever read Justin Martyr against Tryphon the Jew, and his second Apology; and used after Baptism, is evident in Tertullia's Apology, in his book de Corona Mil, & de resur. carnis, in Cyprian de lapsis, and other fathers. But till Constantine the great carried it with enriched gold and pearls for his Standard, I read not of a permanent Cross erected; after his time the erecting of these was frequent in all Christian Kingdoms; so that the Papists were not the Authors of either, but abused both. And that the abuse of any thing should take away the use of it, seems to me unreasonable. We have it in no other esteem than the Ancient Christians; we carry it in our flags, and on our coin; we glory in it as a Badge of Christianity, we sign our children with it after Baptism: But to give the same honour to it as unto Christ; to pray to it, to burn incense before it, we utterly reject as superstitious errors, and ungodly vanities. Let the Papists answer for this their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Thomas calls it; we have it in no other use & honour than what we may justify; and if you are desirous to see upon what grounds, I refer you to Mr. hooker's Eccl. Pol. lib. 5. Sect. 65. a Tract that was never yet answered. And to Dr. Mortons' defence of the Ceremonies of the Church of England, because it were overlong and needless to transcribe them. The sum of which yet I shall be ready to give you, if you shall require it at my hands.  
4. White-Surplice.  
To this Ceremony I answer I see not why that vesture should be more excepted against, than I should that a Minister should preach or officiate with a black cap on his head, a Cloak, or a Gown; for I know there is Scripture equally to be alleged for both. But for fuller satisfaction for this I refer you to Master Hooker! Eccl. Pol. lib. 5. Sect. 29.  
5. Choristers singing.  
To this I have answered before:  
6. Funeral Sermons.  
This is the first time I ever heard any exception against them; that the dead were decently composed I know, and that the Church carried them to their graves, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Saint chrysostom hath taught me, 
Chrys. Hom. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Naz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  and that Constantius was brought from Nicomedia where he died, to Constantinople where he was buried in that solemn manner. But I never heard before that it was not lawful to have a Funeral Sermon, in which the virtues of the man might be proposed as an example to the living, by which also we might show our love to the party deceased, which nature requires of us: then to do him that honour that is fit for his person; and lastly to comfort the living with the hope of the resurrection, to which end, that office appointed for the burial of the dead especially tended.  
For which purpose let any man of a reasonable judgement, consider whether it be more convenient to bring a dead Corpse in a dumb show to the grave, and cover it with earth, then to hear those Lessons and Psalms sounded in their ears, that may put them in mind of their estate and condition both now and hereafter. At that time our hearts softened with mourning are become more malleable, and the Lessons then heard and exemplified by the sight of our departed brother, may make the deeper impression. Say then there were no more but this in it. viz. a discharge from the imputation of rudeness and incivility (which Christianity teacheth no man) to those bodies which shall have their part in the resurrection; yet I see no cause why these exiquys should be so cast aside, reviled, imputed to us; David himself followed the Beire of Abner, and lift up his voice and wept at the grave of Abner, and the King lamented over Abner and said, died Abner as a fool dieth? 
2 Sam. 3.31, 32, 33, 34.  etc. where we have not a dumb show, but words of commendation expressed over the dead. I never conceived that the mourning for Jacob at the threshing floor of Atad was a silent spectacle; seven dayer it continued, 
Gen. 50.10, 11  and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation, insomuch that the Canaanites called the place Abel-Mizraim. Now that such mournings may be accompanied with words, is evident by the Lamentations of Jeremy, which was composed as it were a Funeral Sermon for the good King Josiah. For Jeremy lamented for Josiah, 
2 Chr. 35.25.  and all the singing men and singing women spoke of Josiah in their Lamentations to this day, and made them an Ordinance in Israel, and behold they are written in the Lamentations.  
God never ordained that his servants should be laid in their graves with the burial of an ass. And the fear that some men conceive that we be thought to pray to or for them, over whom, or near whose Hearse, or toward whom we thus pray, is a mormo fit to scare children. When 'tis sufficiently testified even by the prayers set out to be then read; that we pray not for the dead, but comfort the living with hope of the resurrection, and expectation of the consummation of all things.  
7. Idol-sureties of Godfathers and Godmothers.  
Of the antiquity and benefit of these sureties, Godfathers and Godmothers, I have said sufficient in my Catechism, pag. 11. whether I refer you. But now I wonder why you should call them Idol-sureties; If you had only noted them for their idleness and carelessness, in that they take so little care for the Religious education of those, for whom the Church accepts them as sureties, I would not have gainsaid you, but lamented it. But that you make them Idols is unsufferable; for what is an Idol? it is nothing in the world, a mere invention and fiction of man's brain set up to be an object of adoration; and were these brought in for any man to worship? what child was ever encouraged to adore his Godfathers and Godmothers? But to make the best of it, the calmest meaning of this odious word can be but this, that many have given these an higher estimation than they deserve. So you have done to many things, to Preaching, to Ruling Elders, to your Combinational Church, to your Ministerial Pulpit; and yet I know it would sound very harsh in your ears, if we should fix the name of Idol before them. How would you storm to hear of Idol-preaching, Idol-Elders, Idol-Combinational Church, Idol-Ministerial-Pulpit? And yet there is as much reason for the one as the other. For if the estimation of any thing beyond that it ought, will presently make it an Idol, you have made Idols of all these, and so are equally guilty of Idolatry with us.    

8. Or groundless application of public or private Baptism unto the infants of profane parents: 
Mr. Matthews.  and if none but Christ's faithful friends and followers were admitted to be fed or physick'd at his supper feast.  

The Reply.  
That this popular exception put in as a a bar of applying the Sacraments to infants of Christians and other persons may be removed, necessary it is that we fetch our principles farther than at the first view may seem requisite; for we must look as fare as Abraham when God renewed his Covenant with man; the words are, I will establish my Covenant betwixt me and thee, and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting Covenant, 
Gen. 17.7.  to be a God to thee, and to thy seed after thee. That is, whereas other Nations have their several gods, yet I will be thy God, thou shalt have no other Gods but m●, and I will be a God unto thee; for I will reveal my will unto thee, according to which thou oughtest to live, for I will write it in thy heart, Heb. 8.10, 11. Secondly, I will pardon thy transgressions, and be merciful to thy unrighteousness and sins, ver. 12. Thirdly, I will give grace or strength, which though it may not enable thee to live without sinning, yet such as is sufficient to perform what is necessary under this Covenant, Rom. 10.8. Deut. 30.11, 14. This Covenant I make with thee, but not with thee only, but with thy seed. Now can we but know who was this seed, we might easily discern to whom this Covenant doth extend. In the primary sense thereof it was Christ, Gen. 3.15. Gal. 3.16. For this Covenant was made in Christ, sealed in his blood, and in him made Yea and Amen, verified and ratifyed. Secondly, thy seed takes in all men whether Jew or Gentile, as Saint Paul evidently proves, Rom. 4. For Abraham had two kind of sons; ex carne, or ex fide, of the flesh, and under the Law, as the Jews, 
Rom. 4.8, 9  of faith and under the regiment of the Spirit, as the Gentiles also. For is this blessing come on the circumcision only, or the uncircumcision also? For we say, that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness, and that it was reckoned so to him when he was in uncircumcision, evident it is, that it belonged to the uncircumcised, as the Apostle argues.  
The Covenant we see, and with whom it is made, Abraham, and with his seed the Jew, and to all that are a fare off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call, as Saint Peter openeth the promise, Acts 2, 39 Now let us see upon what conditions this Covenant was made with Abraham; that is expressed also, Gen. 17.1. Walk before me and be thou perfect, which is also required of all his seed, if they mean to have benefit by the Covenant. They then are to walk before God in faith and obedience as Abraham did, and be perfect, not that either can be exact and perfect in this life; but it is required by this Covenant that we become new creatures, renewed in sincere, honest, and faithful obedience to the whole Gospel. In a word, the condition required of us is faith, hope, charity, self-denial, repentance, a careful and industrious husbanding of God's grace, daily prayer for daily increase, and attending diligently to the means of grace.  
To strengthen the faith of Abraham and his seed in the assurance of what was promised, and for a memorial of what was to be performed, it pleased God to have a seal set in his flesh, and in the flesh of his seed for that time, which was circumcision. To this seal all the males of the Jews had a right, and this seal was cut into them, yea, and as many Proselytes also; who were content to become proselytae foederis, Proselytes of the Covenant. The other whom they called the Proselytes of their gates, they entered them into the Covenant, and bound them to the observation of the seven Commandments of Noah by a kind of purification by water, and the blood of oblation, in the same kind as they admitted their women.  
The Covenant is the selfsame under the Gospel that then God made with Abraham, on the same conditions, of the same extent; only it hath another seal; theirs was circumcision, and ours baptism; the cutting of the flesh gave entrance to them, the washing by water gives an entrance and admission to us. And about this the question is, whether it be to be withheld from the children of any who bear the name of Christians? And it is observable how this question fi●st grew, and what progress it had. At first some good-minded men set it on foot, being occasioned by the children of professed Pahists living among them whom they conceived to be Idolatrous, and consequently out of Covenant; this caused Farel to write to Calvin about it: 
Calvin Ep. 149.  whose answer to him is this, but not sound; Where both the parents are Popish, we think it an absurd thing for us to baptise them which are not members of our body; and sigh Papists children are such, we see not how it should be lawful for us to administer Baptism unto them. But sounder by much is that answer of the Ecclesiastical College of Geneva unto Knox, who scrupled at the same and grew more rigid, and wrote to them that he held it not only unlawful to baptise the children of Idolaters, but even Bastards, 
Ep. 283.  and excommunicate persons till reconciled to the Church. To whom they returned this sentence, that wheresoever the profession of Christianity hath not utterly perished and been extinct, 
Ep. 285.  infants are beguiled of their right, if the common seal be denied them, which conclusion as I will by and by prove, is sound. But I go on, for the mistake stayed not here; for when it came to Mr. Cartwright: Anvil, he beat it broader; for he asserted that none might receive the Sacrament of Baptism but they whose Parents, at least the one of them, are by the soundness of their Religion, and by their virtuous demeanours known to be men of God; 
Hook. lib. 5. pag. 155.  and by this rule the children of those they called Heretics, Misbelievers, and Profane livers also came to be excluded. Next the Brownist took it up, and conveyed it over to you of the Combinational Church, both imparting Baptism to very few infants, 
Burtons' vindication pag. 62.  viz. to those alone, whose immediate Parents are members of their Congregation. Out of you arise the Anabaptists, and they peremptorily deny the Baptism of all infants, born to the members of the Combination or to any other, till they are able to give an account of their faith, and enter into a Church Covenant for themselves. At last the Shaker comes upon the Stage, and gives out of his Cup of trembling a vomit to all Ordinances; these are outward Rites; Baptism, the Eucharist, needless seals to any, old or young, since he and his company are inwardly sealed by the Spirit.  
This was the stratagem of that old Serpent; for had he presented this bewitching position to the world at fi●st in the last ugly shape it now appears, he knew that all men would have with honour heard it, therefore he insinuated it, and caused it to be taken down by certain gulps, steps and degrees, that the potion might be swallowed, and the poison not at all perceived.  
Now this error, that I call it no worse, in some hath been nourished, in that they have not fully weighed the purport of this distinction of the mystical and visible body of Christ. This is but one, and we usually call it the Church, which contains in it two sorts of people, either outward Professors, or true inward believers. These last belong to the mystical body of Christ, which therefore is called mystical, because the mystery of their conjunction is altogether removed from sense; in these their love is sound and sincere, and comes from a pure heart and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned, and they (no doubt) do and shall obtain whatsoever was made over by the second Covenant. Those outward professors, who either before Christ's coming, or since his appearing in the flesh, have been called by the name of Christians; we call the visible body, because being Jews or Gentiles they are incorporated into one body; have but one Lord, whose servants they profess themselves to be; have one faith, which they all acknowledge; one Baptism, by which they are all initiated. For although we know the Christian Faith, and allow it, we are then but entering; entered we are not into this visible Church, till our admittance by the door of Baptism: and who they are that enter that way, is very well known even to the eye, whence we usually call these the visible Church, which is not so to be understood, as if those of the invisible Church, were not visible Christians also. For both moleties, whether mystical or visible, as touching their profession, are the object of the eye: easy it is for any man to say, this man is a Christian, that man a Heathen: But this distinction ariseth from the sincerity or unsincerity of the professors, because we are never able to see and discern who they are that sincerely profess the Truth, therefore we call these invisible; but because we are easily able to judge of the men who enter by Baptism, therefore the whole is called a visible Church. In whomsoever therefore is found the profession of one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, those the Church doth acknowledge for her children; and all those none of hers in whom they are not found: as Jews, Turks, Heathens, etc. Others for their external profession are Christians, and are of the visible Church of Christ. And among these there are some who profess the Truth, but not wholly and entirely, and these are Heretics; some that profess the whole saving Truth, but not in unity, and these are Schismatics; some that profess the whole saving Truth in unity, but not in sincerity and sanctity, and these are hypocrites and profane persons; others that profess the whole saving Truth in unity and sincerity of a good and sanctified life, and these are true believers and good Christians.  
Yet Christians by external profession those all are; who carry that external mark I now named, yea, although they be impious Idolaters, wicked Heretics, Schismatics, Hypocrites, profane persons, and excommunicable, yea, and cast out for notorious improbity. For they are but so cast out, that they may be taken again upon their repentance, and that without the setting the seal anew; which might not be done, if they had been utterly cast off. There is but one way only, after a man is entered by Baptism, that can make him forfeit his whole estate in Church society, and that is a general revolt and Apostasy from his Christian profession, as turning Turk, Jew or Infidel.  
All these, except the sincere professors, we deny not, may be the Imps and Limbs of Satan, even as long as they continue such; is it then possible for the selfsame men to be the Synagogue of Satan, and to be the Church of Jesus Christ? unto that Church which is his mystical body, it is not possible, because that body consisteth of none but true Israelites, true sons of Abraham, true servants and Saints of God. Howbeit that they be true and real, and not equivocal Members of the outward visible body, it is very possible, notwithstanding the unsincerity of their profession, and the wickedness of their conversation, which is worthily both hateful in the eyes of God himself, and in the eyes of the sounder part of the visible Church most execrable.  
If you doubt of the truth of this, remember the Parables of the Corn Field, the Net, the ten Virgins, the Barn-floor, the house in which were vessels of honour and dishonour. And if these satisfy not, then look upon those two plain Texts, 1 Cor. 5.11, 12. There are scandalous persons enumerated, a fornicator, Covetous, a Drunkard, yet within, that is, within the Church and Covenant, yet a brother of the visible society for all that; and indeed except he be looked upon as a brother, and as within, how could he be cast out by excommunication? for what have we to do to judge those who are without? The other place, is 2 Thess. 3.15. Among whom there was a disorderly person, yet he was not to be counted as an enemy, not to be esteemed as one out of the Church, an Unbeliever, an Heathen, but to be admonished as a brother.  
For lack of diligent observing this difference, first, betwixt the Church of God, mystical and visible; then betwixt the visible sound and corrupted, corrupted sometimes more, sometimes less; Thirdly, in not taking notice of the latitude of the Covenant which belongs to the visible Church, as a proprium quarto modo; i. e. as an essential mark, the oversights are not few nor light that have been committed. To pass by others, you, because Christ's true body is made up of none but sincere professors, presently conclude, that none but sincere professors are of Christ's body, which is true of the mystical, but not of the visible. Then you restrain the Covenant, as if it belonged to none but the Elect, whereas it belongs to all those to whom God said to Abraham, I will be to the a God, and thy seed after thee, whether son's ex lege, or ex fide. Thirdly, whereas the Covenant was made with the Catholic visible Church, you restrain it to your Combinational; so that they who are not Members of that, shall have no right to the seals; nor to it, not any other shall they claim any right at all, who are not regenerate, whereas this distinction observed, would set you right. We must distinguish betwixt the effectual benefits of Christ, held forth in the Ordinance, and a right to the external Ordinance. The former right and privilege belongs only indeed to the regenerate; for they only effectually to life receive the seals. But the latter to all within the Church, to all Church Members, for a night they have to the external Ordinance. Or you may if you please conceive it thus. The Sacrament may be considered in sensu composito, that is, with the entire fruits and benefits of the Covenant, unto which truth of grace and faith is necessarily required, and so to the Reprobate the Sacrament belongs not; or else in sensu diviso, precisely in the Ordinance itself, abstracted from those graces, and so it is Church-membership alone, or external Covenant-relation, denominating men, subjects, sons, Saints, believers, disciples, brethren; Christians, that gives men right unto the seal. Fifthly, You over-hastily and uncharitably censure all Heretics, Papists, wicked persons, and excommunicable, or excommunicate to be without the Covenant; and that therefore if they be Parents of children, the applying of public or private Baptism to their children is groundless. Which mistake of yours how great it is, I shall make it farther appear by these evident arguments.  
1. That which is unjust may not be done; but to debar a Christians child from the seal of the Covenant is unjust; therefore it may not be done. Minor probatur.  
It is unjust to punish the child for the father's sin, Ezek. 18.20. But to debar from the seal, it is to punish the child for the father's sin; therefore to debar a Christians child from the seal of the Covenant is unjust.  
If to the Major it be answered that this is sometimes done, and that the child suffers for the father's offence, it may be admitted in a temporal punishment, but never in a spiritual, of which kind this is, and therefore may not be inflicted.  
2. They who were not to be kept from the seal of the Covenant under the Law for their father's iniquity, may not be kept from it for that cause under the Gospel: But under the Law children were not kept from the seal for their father's iniquity; therefore not to be kept from it under the Gospel: and consequently not to be hindered from Baptism.  
The Major of this Syllogism is easily proved, because the Covenant of the New Testament is said to be better than the Old, Heb. 7.22. & 8.6. But to account this privilege of the seal to belong only to some Christians children, which was in common to the Jews, is to make it worse in the New Testament than in the Old; 
Calvin institut. lib. 4. cap. 16. Sect 6.  which is injurious to do: Arbitrari Christum adventu suo patris gratiam imminuisse, aut decurtasse, execrabili blasphemia non vacat. Upon this ground then to keep a child from Baptism is great injustice. Minor probatur. This was not done among the Jews; for make the Jewish Parents as bad as you will, a generation of unbelievers, who knew not God, that tempted him, and grieved his Holy Spirit in the Wilderness, yet for this, the children were not to be deprived of the seal for their father's sin; for Joshua was commanded to circumcise the children of these Rebels. So again, they came to be worshippers of the golden Calf, adored the Brazen S rpent, bowed the knees to Baal, 
Joshua 5.  etc. howbeit they remained the sheep of his flock in the depth of their disobedience, and those very children they offered unto Moloch, were his sons and his daughters born to him. 
Jer. 13.11. Ezek. 16.20.  Hic children, because born within the Covenant, of which they yet retained the seal. Let it be showed that ever the child of any wicked Jew was uncircumcised, or therefore not admitted to be circumcised, because his father was wicked. And certainly there is so much strength in the instance of circumcision, Josh. 5. for this large right of Ordinances from Covenant relation, that it will hold out against all that can be said against it.  
3. Those who have a right to the Covenant, have also a right to the seal. But Christian children have a right to the Covenant; therefore a right to the seal.  
The Major is manifest in reason; for it were a strange thing to say a man had right to Land, and yet had no right to the evidences and the seals of the Writings by which that Land was conveyed over unto him. Minor probatur. But Christian children have a right to the Covenant, be the Parents never so ungracious, Gen. 17.7. Ishmael circumcised, and Esau. Acts 2.38. To you and to your seed, among whom were Ananias, Sapphyra, Simon Magus. But thus I prove it yet more clearly.  
Those who are holy have a right to the Covenant. 
1 Cor. 7.14.  This is granted. But children of Believing Parents are holy. Therefore, etc.  
You can in this Minor except only at two terms, believing and holy, and I shall justify both. For perhaps you may say Idolatours, profane persons, are no believers; but you are mistaken; for in the number of believers they are to be accounted, till they renounce their faith. The denomination of a believer is as well derived from a right object believed, as from the holiness of the subject believing. And I have my ground for this out of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 7.14. Where the unbelieving husband is said to be sanctified by the believing wife, where believing and unbelieving and opposite terms; and therefore as by unbelieving you are to understand a 〈◊〉 by a believing wife you are to understand a Christian, who might 〈◊〉 guilty for aught you know of some of those sins for which Saint Paul 〈◊〉 the Corinthians, and yet because she was a Professor of Christianity, and within the visible Church, therefore he saith, your children are holy. 2. Holy, which is the other term; which being not possibly to be understood of inherent holiness, because the child of the best Saint, at his birth is no more holy than another, there being an equal guilt of original sin upon both: must be understood of a relative holiness, that is, as they who stand in relation to the Covenant, into which they are actually admitted by Baptism; And then again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unclean are in Saint Peter's sense, Acts 10.14. the Gentiles, such who might not be received into the Church; and then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, holy, being such as are opposed to it, must necessarily signify those children who may be admitted. Lastly, if this were not the importance of that place, there were no privilege imaginable, no sanctity which could be attributed to the infants of Christians, which could not belong to the infants of Heathens, which is affirmed of the one, and denied of the other by the Apostle.  
Lastly, They who by their iniquity lost not their right and privilege in the Covenant, cannot be the occasion that their children lose it. But profane persons lose not their right, as I proved before, because notwithstanding their iniquity, they remain still Members of the visible Church; therefore there is no reason for their sakes, their seed and children should lose their right. Divers other reasons I could give you for this, did I not study brevity. Our application then of Baptism to the children of profane persons, is not groundless, but hath its foundation in that gracious Covenant that God made with Abraham and his seed, which was extended to the whole Church of Christ, whither invisible or visible, which last, because it takes in all professors as well as believers, their seed also no less than the other as they have a right to the Covenant, so also have they a right to the seals of the Covenant, may be baptised and admitted to the Lords Supper, whatever you think to the contrary. To Baptism you would have no children of profane persons admitted, supposing they have lost their privilege, and to the Supper of the Lord, none but his faithful friends and followers. For thus you say,    

2. If none but Christ's faithful friends and followers were admitted to be fed and physick'd at his Supper Feast  

The Reply.  
That all who come to be fed and physick'd at the Lords Supper, were Christ's faithful friends and followers, is as much desired by us, as can be by you; and as much endeavoured by us, as can be by you. Why is it else that the Church hath prefixed those several exhortations before the Communion, in which the negligent are checked and excited to their duty, the presumptuous, scandalous and obstinate sinners presented with their danger and punishment if they approach unworthily in their sins, all that come exhorted to judge themselves, to repent them truly of their sins past, and amend their lives; To have a lively and steadfast faith in Christ our Saviour; to be in perfect charity with all men, and above all things to give humble and hearty thanks to God the Father, the Son, and Holy Ghost, for the redemption of the world, by the death and passion of his Son, and for the institution and ordination of the holy mysteries? What rules can you give beyond these? or what cautions can you prescribe, that if observed, can make men worthy communicants?  
All this you will easily grant, but of all this you will have a certain knowledge before you admit of any, and that knowledge shall be grounded upon their conjunction with your Combinational Church, and the Covenant then entered, not with the Covenant God made with Abraham; So that uncharitably you exclude all those who have right unto the seal by the tenor of God's Covenant, except he have a new acquired right arising from your Covenant also. These I know you mean by Christ's faithful friends and followers, and none but these your practice shows you would have admitted.  
That then the mists may be dispelled, and the mistakes rectified, that have prevailed too fare about the admission to, and exclusion from the Lords Table, necessary it is, that we distinguish between the right which any man hath to this seal, and the use that a man may make of his right, and how he may be debarred of it.  
1. The right that any man hath to this or any other Ordinance of God, ariseth out of the Covenant of God made with Abraham and his seed, 
Mr. Humphryes.  that is, with the visible Church; so that every one that is admitted a Member of the Church visible, hath a right to this and all other Ordinances. For it is Membership alone that gives right, so that though a person be unregenerate, an infant, distracted, ignorant, or scandalous, if he be a Member of the visible Church, he hath a right to the Ordinance, the external right being the same in one as in the other.  
2. Now in the use of this right, the difference especially lies betwixt us. We acknowledge that infants and distracted persons may not be admitted to this use of the seal, the Lords Supper, not for any want of right, as appears invincibly by the other Sacrament, to the use of which they are admitted, because capable: But not to this, because of their incapacity natural as in children, accidental as in mad men. For it is required of every one that comes to the Lords Table, that he examine his knowledge, repentance, faith, charity, and be able to discern the Lords Body, which because neither infants nor distracted persons can do; therefore we debar them justly from the use of their right; No otherwise then a child though he be heir of all, yet is not to be admitted to the use of his inheritance, while he is thought fit to be under a Tutor or Governor. 
Gal. 4.1, 2.   
That which we say of infants and ignorants, the selfsame you would have applied to the unregenerate, ignorant and scandalous, so that none of these should be admitted to the Sacrament. First, for the unregenerate you have set yourselves a very hard task; for how is it possible for you or any man else with the judgement of faith to be assured that any man is so? regeneration lies deeper than the eye of man can discern. If it be but upon the judgement of charity, than it is but hope and suspicion, and upon that account you may admit the ignorant and profane also, hoping and charitably presuming, that they have knowledge and repentance enough; for otherwise they would not presume to present themselves at this Feast; want of regeneration is then no sufficient Bar to exclude a man from the Sacrament.  
2. But if irregeneration will not do it, yet ignorance may. But here again you have undertaken another hard task; for I shall here ask you, how much knowledge is precisely requisite in a Communicant before he be admitted? Saint Paul requires no more but that he discern the Lords body; know that it is no common bread, and common wine, but one represents Christ's Body broken, the other his blood shed for the redemption of the world; and that he examine himself, about which the Church hath set him a plain way in the last answer of the Chatechismes; And so saith the Apostle, let him eat. So much knowledge as this I see not, but easily may be, and I verily believe is in most Communicants. And if it were but confused before he came, yet it might be there more distinctly taught him, by what he there hears, and sees done. The Sacrament through the Word is a teaching Ordinance; 
Godw. Ant. lib. 3 cap. 4. Exod. 12.26, 27.  the Novices of the Jews were instructed in the meaning of the Passeover, and some mysteries of their Religion, at that very time they came to eat, the Pashcal Lamb being fore-appointed for a teaching sign, as well as a memorial. If any man be found among Christians that are so grossly ignorant, that they know not so much as I mentioned, or so dull, that they cannot by what is there done be instructed; let them for me be reckoned among Idiots, and be excluded with them; but in the mean time I fear me, you will cast aside under the title of ignorant, many knowing Christians, because they are not come up to the height of your mysteries; which is both rash and injurious; rash to prejudge another man's knowledge; and injurious, for that to debar him the use of that seal which God hath commanded every one of the visible Church to take in these words. Do this, drink ye all of this.  
3. As touching the profane and scandalous in the next place, no man can be more unwilling that they should be admitted then myself. But I shall not allow every man to be a judge of profaneness and scandal. True it is, that every sinner approaching this holy Table in his sin and profaneness eats unworthily, and ruins himself. Again, it is true that the Governors of the Church, when they know any man goes on scandalously and impenitently in any sin, aught to inflict the Church censures upon him, and withdraw the Sacrament even in charity to his soul. In respect of the first, the Minister is to do what lies in him, to dissuade the profane man to abstain, lest that by coming and eating unworthily he do himself a mischief; and if in prudence he refuse him, I am not against it. In respect of the second, the Governors are to do their duty, who alone because the Keys are in their hands, have power to debar men from the use of their right.  
If you shall now ask me who are to be admitted to the participation of Christ's body? and who are to be debarred? I answer.  
Ad hoc Altar, quod nunc in Ecclesia est in terra positum, terrenis oculis expositum, ad mysteriorum signacula celebranda, multi etiam scelerati possunt accedere. August. tom. 10. homil. 50. Vide Pelarg. de fruct. panis Eucharist. pag. 66.69.  
1. All that have right by the Covenant, and are visible Members of Christ's Body, yea, though they be unregenerate, ignorant, and profane, till such time as they be convicted, and not only de jure, but de facto, excommunicated. My reasons are,  
1. Because the Apostle commands the Corinth's, 1 Cor. 5. Not to keep company with those Brethren that were Fornicatours, Drunkards, etc. Laying down expressly this reason of his proceeding; do not we judge those who are within? so that this not keeping company is intended no otherwise then upon a sentence or judgement foregoing, passed upon the scandalous person. Afore they might keep company with him, but not after.  
2. It seems unreasonable that a punishment should be inflicted on a Person, before a judgement be passed, Qui omnium pessimi, usque dum Ecclesia suâ sententiâ pro canibus & porcis habendos declarav●rit, nolim cum illis ut canibus & porcis agendum. Let●onem, qu● mortem commeruerit, nullus jure de vitâ tollat, usque dum judex & reum de●●● verit, & sententiam tulerit.  
3. Because there are like to follow many slippery and dangerous inconveniences upon it. Much heartburning betwixt the Minister and his people, many a private grudge thus revenged, self-love and spiritual pride in him that is thus received, a wilful animosity and peevishness in him who is so rejected. Which Beza wisely foresaw, and thus delivers his judgement; 
Beza contra Erastum.  Etiamsi suis oculis Minister quempiam viderit aliquid agentem, quod coenae exclusionem mereatur, jure tamen nec debeat, nec possit nisi vocatum, convictum legitimè denique secundum constitutum in Ecclesia ordinem damnatum, à mensa Domini cum authoritate prohibere.  
4. Because exclusion from the Sacrament is not to be allowed upon those reasons which are most stood upon. 1. Not because the men are supposed to be unregenerate. 2. Not from the nature of the Ordinance itself as distinct from others. 3. Not because you may not give holy things to dogs. 4. Not because there is a pollution feared, which the pure may contract from the profane. All these reasons are very weak, and therefore none upon these reasons to be excluded. I shall say a little to every one of them.  
1. The irregenerate conditon in which the receiver may be conceived to be, is of no validity, as I have formerly proved from the nature of the Covenant made and sealed to the whole seed, ex carne. I shall only add this, that Christ who well knew that Judas even at that very time, when he was in full resolution to betray him, yet admitted him to the Sacrament, and administered it. And could any man be more carnal and unregenerate? To be unregenerate then is no good reason.  
2. No nor that great reverence which is to be given to the Sacrament, as if the Sacrament were to be advanced above all other Ordinances and parts of God's worship. For though this be tremendum mysterium; yet the same qualities are required to effectual prayer, hearing of the Word as to the Sacrament; and therefore the defect thereof should as well exclude a profane man from those, as from this, which I know you will not say, in that you admit these to your prayer and Sermon.  
3. Much less from that often alleged Text, Give not that which is holy to dogs, 
Mat. 7.6.  nor cast your pearls before swine, etc. For holy things are all those things which are subservient to holy uses; wholesome Scripture Counsels, pious Conferences, precious say, advice, actions, etc. as well as Ordinances; these not wise man will cast before dogs and swine; But what before no dogs and swine? i. e. no ignorant and scandalous sinners? No, that cannot be our Saviour's intention, because the word, and wholesome admonition is to be used to these. But before such dogs and swine that the Text describes, these pearls are not to be cast, to wit, such as will crample the holy things under their feet, such which will turn again and rend us, such swine, to whom there is no necessity that calls upon us to do it. The substance then of our Saviour's counsel is, that in the managing of spiritual things we be prudent, and have regard to the persons to whom we dispense them; that we forbear when we shall exasperate them, and gain but contempt to our own hurt; as 'tis but in vain to give good counsel, or reprove a man when he is in a passion; a dogged humour to watch an opportunity doth far better.  
Now those whom you suppose to be dogs and swine, are of another nature; though profane and scandalous persons, yet we are sure they are not contumacious, because they come to us, and desire the Sacrament at our hands; we are sure they will not turn again upon us, and rend us for that; sure we are, they are no swine that will trample upon it, neglect, vilipend, despise or reject it, but so far as we can possibly conjecture, do reverently receive it. And so from this Text we find no ground why we in prudence, should not administer the Sacrament unto them; nay, we find much in it that may persuade us unto it. For say now we withhold the Sacrament from them, they in fury, when they hear we reckon them no better than dogs and swine, may grow dogged and hoggish unto us, turn upon us and rend us, and trample upon the Sacrament as no pearl. Consider but what effect the Bulls of Pius Quintus had upon the state of Venice; or those thunderbolts of the Pope against Henry the eighth, and tell me whether I say not true; loath I am to say it, but truth compels me; your rigidness and want of charity in registering many good and pious Christians, in the black brutish book of dogs and hogs, hath alienated from you more minds than you will easily recover.  
4. But then after all this, upon the admission of profane and scandalous persons, there is a pollution to be feared. Whence we are to put in practice such directions as these; Purge out the old leaven, put away from yourselves that wicked person; avoid, withdraw from them, keep no company with such, no not to eat. Let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican. 
1 Cor. 5.7, 13, 9, 11. Matth. 18.  All these precepts at first sight, seem very favourable for an ejection or not admission of profane persons; but on a serious view, it will appear that they are not concluding for what they are brought. For if there be any pollution by this mixed communion, it must either adhere to the Sacrament, or Admitters, or Communicants. To the Sacrament it cannot adhere, because that is the savour of life unto life to every worthy receiver, notwithstanding the supposed pollution in the receiver; for I hope the Sacramental essence was not polluted, and consequently an unholy Ceremony to the rest of the Apostles, though Judas was present at it, and received it with them. To the Admitters this pollution cannot adhere, because they do but their duty; for they are bound to maintain every man's right, and further every man in the use of his right, so long as he is not debarred of it. Now that a moral uncleanness is no bar, is proved before. The rule is, when an action hath evil in its own substance, it is to be omitted; but when the action of itself is the matter of a precept, and hath evil externally cast upon it by the Agent that doth it, here the action is not to be omitted, but the Agent reform. I explain my meaning, and apply the rule thus. This action of Administration of the Sacrament hath no evil in it in its own nature; had it so, it were to be omitted; 'tis a matter of a precept, and must therefore be done: Say, that had evil been cast upon it externally by some unworthiness of the receiver, yet the action is not to be omitted, but the receiver to be reform. 3. Neither is this pollution conveyed over to the Communicants; for all uncleanness that is contracted by another's sin, is either from counsel, assistance, defence or imitation; now what worthy Communicant is guilty of any of these ways? Did ever any Minister or Communicant encourage or counsel a scandalous or profane person to come to the Lords Table in his sin? was he ever any assistant to him in it? did he defend that it was to be done? nay, the contrary is apparent, as appears in the Liturgy, where the Minister exhorts, Therefore if any of you be a blasphemer of God, a hinderer or slanderer of his Word, an Adulterer, or be in malice or envy, or in any other grievous crime, bewail your sin, and come not to this holy Table, etc. and in charity he is bound to believe (seeing he cannot search the heart) that he, who after this admonition comes, is a true penitent.  
And therefore from hence there can arise no pollution. 'Tis possible indeed evil company may draw to an imitation of sin and so pollute. But if not so, (for I know no good man will therefore be profane, because a profane man is admitted to the Sacrament) the very keeping company with them in these sacred meetings, is far from being a sin. It is only a clear acknowledgement that they are of the number of the redeemed, whereof yet some are damned; 
2 Pet. 2.1.  then that they join with them in the profession of Christianity, which certainly I may do with all Professors; lastly, a confederating in vow to live a Christian and sincere life, and that I may lawfully do in the company of them that are not sincere. And for this practice I conceive we have the Apostles example among the Corinthians▪ 
1 Cor. 5. 1 Cor. 3.3.  of whom there were fornicatours, incestuous, carnal persons; and yet I read of the incestuous only excommunicate, with him they might not eat, with the rest they are not prohibited; from which I conclude that to communicate with such, is not unlawful in a Christian Church.  
And to make this point yet more clear; if to communicate with profane person be unlawful, because their sinful company would pollute, it is because the sin is patent or latent; because it is open and notorious say they; but this is a strange thing that in natura peccati, an open sin should have a stronger infection in it, than that which is secret; it is as if you should say, that plague-sore will less infect which is hid and kept secret, than that which is discovered; no no, secret or known, is all one: if per se the sin that is not consented to, nor imitated, infects another only by the approach; Hypocrisy a hidden sin, shall as much pollute as any notorious wickedness, and then God be merciful to all Communicants, since it is not possible but that in the purest Church they may approach the Lords Table with hypocrites.  
The pollution then which is so much feared by admittance of scandalous and notorious sinners to the Lords Table is no  pollution, which cannot be, while a man's own conscience is not defiled. Nor is it a bare pollution by evil example, for so the good are not defiled. But a pollution or defilement there is, which is merely  to this business, wherewith the whole Church and fellowship may be said to be stained, discredited, disgraced by scandalous and notorious sinners, which was imputed by Celsus a Heathen to Christian Religion, that it admitted all sorts, Publicans, sinners, Harlots. That then such spots and blemishes be not suffered, to the disparagement and danger of the whole body: Christ hath provided us a remedy; he hath left the power of the Keys with the Governors of the Church, that they may exclude from thence all inordinate walkers, and proclaim to all, that Christianity is not a doctrine of security, licentiousness and impunity to all profane persons and impenitents, but of strict, precise, and exact purity and holiness, and therefore when Christ's Name is or may be blasphemed and evil-spoken of for such Miscreants, to recover her own reputation, and the good name of Christian Religion, and to warn and admonish others not to incur her displeasure, she ejects them, and debars them, though not from their right, yet from the use of their right in the Ordinances.  
Which is not done lest the good should be polluted by their presence among the profane; as they that touched the unclean thing were polluted under the Law, which is the common error of the proud fastidious Pharisees of all ages, but for those ends I named, the recovery of the Church's honour, and a fair caveat to others. And for the execution of this Discipline it is, that all those former alleged places of the Apostle tend, purge out the old leaven, etc. In which the Scripture commands excommunication, that is, an exclusion from the Church and society of the faithful in general, therefore from the Sacrament also.  
If then you shall now ask me who are to be excluded at Christ's Supper Feast? I answer briefly, 

1. None but those whose incapacity is either natural, or moral, as children, Idiots, distracted persons.  
2. Non● but such who are under the censures of the Church, & iuridicè convicted under two or three Witnesses  
3. All other professors of the visible Church must not be de●●●ered from their right, nor use of their right by any single Minister, because the power of the Keys was not committed to him, but 〈◊〉 the Governors of the Church; yet we require in him so much pray, that in prudence, discretion, and charity to the soul of a scandalous and notorious person, he withdraw the Sacrament from 〈◊〉 for a time, till he give in evidence of his amendment. So that you see our labour is to admit to Christ's Supper Feast, such as in the judgement of charity we are bound to take for Christ's faithful friends and followers, because we find no Church conviction to the contrary, nor can, till they renounce their profession; we deliver it to none but such whom we are persuaded may be fed and physick'd by it: of which two you may read if you please, at full in my explanation of the Chatechisme, à pag. 200. ad pag. 204.    
Thus have I considered of your whole 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which I might well have passed over, because you directly impute not these corruptions to the Parochial, but insinuate them only, which is flily to disprove them. But I was willing to remove out of your way every straw at which you might stumble: So careful I have been to reduce you to a right understanding in these things; and if I may obtain my end, I shall think my pains well bestowed. However I have done what I could, and I leave the success to God. Your Letter calls upon me to follow you, and so I am unwillingly drawn; for I find it thus by you written:    

The words of the Letter.  
YEt the mere sight of a Monarchical Pue to stand in the stead of a Ministerial Pulpit, is a strong plea of a strange Apostasy from the commendable practice of the primitive Christians.  
Your adversative particle Yet made me start; for I must tell you that I understand so much in act, that when it follows any long concession, as it doth in this place, it intimates that all things were light that went before, in comparison of that which followeth; he being but little versed in the Art of Rhetoric, who will grant to his Adversary any thing of which he cannot make his advantage. This then that you here mention must be a greater abomination than any one, or indeed all the particulars you before mentioned, or else your Yet was not considerately placed. What, the justling out a Pulpit, and placing a Pew instead of it, a greater offence, than admitting profane persons to the Lords Table? what, this a stronger plea of Apostasy, than the Common service book? what is it to tithe mint and anise, and cummin, and to let pass the great and weightier matters of the Law, if this be not it? doth God take care for Oxen? is he pleased or displeased with Pues, with Pulpits, with Elders seats? No question, it is all one with him, in what part of the Church, or by whom they are set. 'Tis the inward man of the heart that he looks upon; as for these outward accoutrements of his service, he hath entrusted to the hands and heads of discreet men. And methinks you of all others should least insist upon them, who are so great enemies to all outward worship, or what may be ordained by men for the decency and order of that worship.  
2. Farther, I think you have misplaced your Epithets, and bestowed them on wrong subjects; for it were far truer to say the Monarchical Pulpit, and the Ministerial Pue: for whatsoever was done in the Pew, was but merely Ministerial; but since you have invaded and engrossed the Pulpit, you thence dictate and dogmatise like the violent Monarch you before named. Thence you damn whomsoever you please. I have heard this black sentence thence pronounced, that all the old Clergy are frying in an iron grate in hell; that they that will not come to hear you, do tread under foot the blood of the Son of God; and make a mock of him; and thence again you save whom you please, as if all the Legislative power were in your hands; what you deliver from thence, be it never so crude and indigested stuff, you call the Gospel of the Kingdom, the very Word of God. 
News from Ipswich. Apologista. c. 3.  A man would think you were inclining very far to that opinion of the Apologist for the Jesuits, who saith, jungantur in unum, dies cum nocte, tenebrae cum luce, calidum cum frigido, sanitas cum morbo, vita cum morte, & erit tum spes aliqua posse in caput Jesuitae haeresin cadere. I ever took Sermons and so do still, to be most necessary expositions and applications of the holy Scripture, and a great ordinary means of saving knowledge, but I cannot think them or the Preachers of them out of a Pulpit divinely infallible; And it may be observed too, that no men are more apt to say then they, that all the Fathers were but men, and might err; and if then they be not transcended the condition of men, when they are ascended the Pulpit, possible it is that they may err too.  
But to proceed, what an Idol (pardon the word, it is from your own shop, when you call the Liturgy Idol-service, and the sureties in Baptism Idol Godfathers) have they made of the Pulpit, ever since from thence they dispense all their Administrations. The child to be baptised by the Minister in the Pulpit; the Sacrament to be sent by the hand of the Deacon to all the Congregation out of the Pulpit: The Word and all the prayer then used out of the Pulpit; and whether the censures be to be pronounced out of the Pulpit, 
Bayly pag. 121.122.  I yet know not. So that if there were any sense at all to be collected out of this word [Monarchical,] I should rather attribute it to the Pulpit, than to the Pew, which I am sure was never guilty of any Monarchy.  
3. And since we are entered into a comparison of the Pew and Pulpit; I shall add one consideration more, which I profess to you I do very unwillingly, it having been known to you and others, that I have been as industrious in the Pulpit, as any other in the Pue. The Pew and Pulpit are in themselves inanimate things, wood and stone; no prerogative can accrue to either from them; if there be any priority, it must be from the actions that were performed from thence. In the Pew we had the Liturgy of the Church celebrated, in the other the Word of God explained, and pressed on the conscience for practice by the tongues of men; if then I would contend for any privilege of either, I should give it to the Pew, because in that was celebrated cultus ipse, which is the prayers; in the other is held forth no more but doctrina cultus, a doctrine which teacheth us to worship God; in the one there is exercised only actus imperatus, a command is only laid upon us, do this; but in the other there is actus elicitus; for we choose to practise what we have been taught, which how far it is more acceptable than bare preaching, and teaching, and hearing, read our Saviour's words, Mat. 7.22, 23.  
As for Sermons, I hope men do not undertake to prove, that they are as eminent a part of God's worship as prayer. If they do, I must less blame the poor ignorant people, that think when they have heard a Sermon or two, that they have served God for that day, or that week; nor the generality of those seduced ones, who place so great piety in hearing, and think so much the more comfortably of themselves for the number of hours spent in that exercise, which of late hath been made the main church-business, and yet is no more than may be done by a Heathen or profane person. I shall think him to serve God best, that devoutly prays most, and comes oftenest, and falls down and knelt, and worships before the Lord his Maker. It cannot be thought equal, that prayer and preaching should be so unwarily placed in competition, as that prayer should lose by the comparison. There may be always need of preaching, but then most of all, when the Auditory is unchristian. This reason prevailed very much in the Primitive times, when it was but in vain and unprofitable to go about to convert the world no otherwise than by our prayers. Yet even in those Primitive times, which had most cause to call for preaching, we shall find that this duty was of rarer exercise, and less solemnity than that of prayer, as it may abundantly be discovered by the Liturgies of both Churches yet extant. 
Maimonid. More Neboch. cap. 32. Antioch. Hom. 106.  Maimenides that profound Doctor of the Jews, instituting a comparison betwixt their sacrifices, and the more substantial services required, instead of all other, nameth prayer and Invocation; these, saith he, are nearer to God's first intention, these necessary at all times, and for every man. With him agrees the Christian Antiochus, who affirms of prayer, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of a more sublime condition than any other virtue. And how our Lord stood affected to this, we may acknowledge by that, where he calleth the Church his house of prayer, not preaching, which took so well in the Elder times, that all their Temples were called by the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Oratories.  

Prov. 15.18, 29  Nay, the Preacher himself, Solomon I mean, is so confident of a just man's prayer, that it is God's delight; nay more, he heareth, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he is obedient, if I may so say to it. And it well may seem to be so; for when all the preaching of Lot could prevail no otherwise, than to bring vexation to his righteous soul; the prayers of Abraham might have saved Sodom, if among so many thousands there might have been found but ten just men.  
By this I have said it is not my purpose to detract any thing from preaching, but considering the age we live in, that we should so far moderate our opinion of the Pulpit, that we disdain not the Pew, that we beware lest by magnifying preaching, we bring not discredit and disadvantage upon necessary prayer.  
Lastly, whereas you say that this Pue justled out the Pulpit that was erected by the Primitive Christians; I believe you would be very hard put to it to prove, that then there was either Pew or Pulpit in any common use among them, for how could it be, when Temples and Churches were thinly erected? the greatest part of Christians under the ten bloody persecutions, meeting where they could, and sometimes in Caves and Grots to serve God. The first Testimony that looks this way, I read in Cyprian, and yet that will make more for the Pue than the Pulpit; 
Cypr. Ep. 34. Pamm. edit.  since to the place of a Reader Cyprian had admitted Celerinus, as he in that Epistle gives notice to the Clergy and people of Carthage; Hunc illustrem, quid aliud quam super Pulpitum, id est, super Tribunal Ecclesiae oportebat imponi, ut loci altioris celsitate subnixus, & plebi universae pro honoris claritate conspicuus legat praecepta & Evangelium Domini, etc. The Pulpit in this place he calls the Tribunal of the Church, being a word borrowed from the Roman custom, who were wont from some higher seat or raised place, jus dicere Tribubus. To this seat Celerinus was advanced, and yet he was no more but to read the ten Commandments for aught I know, and the Gospel; for Cyprians words are restrained, Ut legate praecepta & Evangelium Domini: which office, if he well performed, then indeed he might be promoted higher; for so it follows: Viderit, an sit ulterior gradus, ad quem profici in Ecclesia possit. Nihil est in quo confessor magis fratribus-prosit, quam ut dum Evangelica lectio de ore ejus auditur, quam ut lectoris fidem quisquis audierit, invitetur; jungendus in lectione Aurelio fuerat, etc. where you meet with another Reader, that you have in the less contempt these tail of Readers, as you have blasted them; nor the Pew out of which they read, for that may be the Pulpit as you see in Cyprian, and yet the name ne'er the more profaned.  
When these two became distinct you had best inquire, for to me it appears not. Late I believe both were brought into the Greek Church, 
Walfridus Strabo de Rev. Eccl. cap. 6. Germanus in Hist Eccl.  because they have no other word for a Pulpit, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is pure Latin, derived ab ambiendo, quia intrantem ambit, & cingit. And it was first of stone, as are many of our old Pulpits in the Ancientest of our Churches at this day. But that's not material; You must show that among the Primitive Christians the Ministerial Pulpit was before the Pew, which for aught I see might be all one; again, that this Pue after it was brought in, justled out the Pulpit, which you know among us it did not, for we were contented both should stand together, and have their several uses. Or say, that all you charge us withal had been done, the Pew set up in the Pulpits place, will this prove that this had been a strong plea of a strange Apostasy from the practice of the Primitive Christians? I have always thought that Apostasy had lain in doctrine or in manners; in either of these, when men degenerate, they may in some sense be called Apostates; but if they shall change a Pew into a Pulpit, or a Pulpit into a Pew, to lay to their charge Apostasy for this, is what I never heard before, and am confident I shall never hear again. But you go on.   

The words of the Letter.  
SEeing that such Coop is not of a sufficient capacity to contain at once any more persons than one.  

The Reply.  
And this exception lies as strong against your Ministerial Pulpit, where your Preacher the Cock that crows there, is as much cooped up, as is the Reader in our Pew; at once I know, you will allow but one Cock in it, and pity it is it should be of greater capacity to contain more, 
Apolog. de cato & gallo.  one being sufficient to disturb a house.    

The words of the Letter.  
WHereas it is of moral equity, and consequently of perpetual observation, that a rightly, etc.  

The Reply.  
What's this I read here? moral equity, and the consequent upon it, perpetual observation? If you would have studied for an Axiom to undo your own cause, you could not have found out such another. I wonder why we contend all this while about Rites, Ceremonies, indifferent things instituted for decency and order in the Church, where the governor's of the Church, as is proved before out of your New- England's constitutions, might ordain them to those ends. Now it is but moral equity that in all lawful things we obey our Superiors, and consequently of perpetual observation. Talk no more than hereafter of a Surplice, of Banes, of a Ring, of a Pew, of a Pulpit, and such trifles; for equity and morality require that they be observed: Arraign us for observation of Rites and Ceremonies; moral equity is our Tutor, and hath taught us to embrace them. This I have seen to happen to all men that struggle against the truth, to let fall at unawares some such words which will wound, if not destroy that cause they seek most to defend. Magna est veritas, & praevalebit.    


Mr. Matthews.  THat a rightly Reform Presbyterial Church should have all her Elders, who are engaged by virtue of their Office to begin and end all the public Ordinances, and to transact all the open concernments of the City of God.  

The Reply.  
These words I understand not well, because I know not your practice; but if it be consonant to the sound of these lines, I find a very deep engagement lies upon the Elders; for what, are they ex officio bound to begin and end all the public Ordinances, to transact all the open concernments of the City of God? This is a very high charge and a large power; for the Ordinances of the City of God are the dispensations of the Word, the Administration of the Sacraments, Imposition of hands, the application of the Power of the Keys, with all the other accessories and circumstantials to these. Were your words true, than no Sermon must be begun or ended, no prayer begun or ended, and the like is to be said of all the rest, nothing of them or about them, begun, transacted or ended, but by their advice and decision. Of which there is not one syllable that I believe, and therefore for such a claim, it behoved you to produce a very fair and clear Charter; for else all those that bear no good will to your Discipline and Combination, will indite you for encroachment and usurpation of another's right. Which aspersion you will never be able to get off, by telling us barely on your word, this is the Elders power. Nor by affirming.    

The words of the Letter.  
THat the Reformed Church should have all her Elders for to stand and sit together, in the face and full view of the whole Assembly.  

The Reply.  
I cannot think what you aim at here, except at that place which in the Ancient Church was appointed for the Presbytery to sit together in. For they had a place enclosed from all the Laity, where the Lords Table was set, the Bishop's Chair and Presbyters seats being round about it. This place Sozomen calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Sacrary, with us the Chancel, which divided the Bishops and Presbyters from the people. Cyprian would have this granted to Numidicus, 
Sozomen lib. 7. cap. 24. Cypr. Ep. 35. Pammel. editionis. Concil. Laod. Ca●. 56. Theod. l. 5. c. 18.  Numidicus Presbyter ascribatur Presbyterorum Carthaginensium numero, & nobiscum sedeat in Cl●ro. The Council of Laodicea calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by reason it was somewhat higher than the rest of the Church, the Canon Law Presbyterium. Into this place when Theodosius the Emperor would have entered to have received the Communion, Saint Ambrose then busied at divine service, sent him word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. These places were in the Sacraries of the Church, to be entered by those who were in orders only, where they sat together with the Bishop, there was not any place then for Lay-Elders. And therefore si quid tale forsan vestras pervenerat aures, you see it makes nothing at all for you, till you will admit your Lay-Elders to be of the Clergy, which I know you abhor. I proceed to your proofs.    

The words of the Letter.  
ANd by so much the more seeing they are so plainly warranted, and so punctually prescribed as they be, to wait, and to walk according to the pattern prescribed in the Mount, witness Exod. 25.40. Acts 7.44. Heb. 8.5.  

The Reply.  
Et cui non hic dictus Hylas, there being not any one who pleads for change of Ecclesiastical Discipline, or that hath been discontent with any custom or Ceremony of the Church, who hath not made this Axiom the head Theorem of their discourse, and when well it might have gone a mile with them, they have angered it forcing it to go twain. The Anabaptist to prove his Antipaedobaptisme, hath often in his mouth these words, and every new light this Oggannition, all must be done according to the pattern in the Mount; and that we may take the more notice of it, as a firm argument for your Elders seats and proceed, you have cited here three Scriptures, one upon the neck of another for it, all which, as Joseph said of Pharaohs dreams are but one. The occasion of these words are in Exodus 25. When God gave order to Moses for the erecting of the Tabernacle, about which God left him not to his own choice, but commanded him to frame it according to the pattern shown him in the Mount: This Tabernacle and order Saint Stephen mentions, Acts 7. But Saint Paul Heb. 8.5. opens the mystery and applies it: to wit, that the Tabernacle of Moses was but a shadow and exemplar of heavenly things, or of that Tabernacle which Christ had set up for his in heaven. Here then are to be considered three distinct things, the body itself, the reality, or truth of this shadow, and that is the true Tabernacle of the Saints in heaven. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or type of it, that was presented for a pattern to Moses in the Mount, and the exemplar or picture or copy of it fair drawn by Moses in the Tabernacle, which he is commanded to frame according to the pattern presented to his eyes, when God was pleased to call him up to him into the Mountain; which things he also after did.  
Now I wonder what you or any body else, can for your purpose collect from hence. Moses was commanded to make the Tabernacle according to the pattern in the Mount; therefore the Lay-Elders are plainly warranted, and punctually prescribed to stand and sit together in the face and full view of the Assembly. A strange thing it is, that out of a particular pattern you should frame a general rule. For before you shall be ever able to bring this rule home to your purpose, prove you must that it was thus prescribed in the Mount, which I know will be a very hard task.  
Besides, suppose you extend the rule further, as I know you do, to beat down that which you ordinarily call will-worship, and the inventions of men: Yet so it will not come home neither, in that the Apostle applies it not to any such purpose; but only what was done in the Mount, was a shadow of things to come; the Tabernacle on earth, a representation of our being with God in heaven. And to stretch it further, is to deal by it as the Cobbler doth with his leather, that tugs it so far with his teeth till it crack again.  
Farther yet, if in that sense you intent it, this Text had laid an injunction upon any, it had certainly tied up the Jews; the pattern in the Mount, must certainly have restrained them from adding any thing even the least in the external worship of God, which yet it did not. For in the Church of the Jews it must be granted that the appointment of the hour for daily sacrifices, the building of Synagogues throughout the Land to hear the Word of God and pray in, when they came not up to Jerusalem; the erecting of Pulpits and Chairs to teach in; the order of Burials and Rites of Marriage; the Musical Instruments invented by David; the Ordinance for Priests to serve in their courses, with others of the like nature, being matters appertaining to the Church, yet had not their pattern from the Mount, nor are any way prescribed in the Law, but were by the Church's discretion instituted and continued. What, shall we then think they did hereby add to the Law, and so displease God by what they did? none yet so hardly persuaded of them; the Truth is that Rule and Canon-Law which is written in all men's hearts, and Saint Paul's reduced into precept, Let all things be done decently and in order, doth clear them from doing any thing in these and the like, that was amiss; neither do we find that God or any Prophet ever reproved them for these Accessories taken up without a pattern in the Mount. Seeing therefore Saint Paul's rule binds by the edicts of nature, which the Jews observing as yet unwritten, and thereby framing such Church-Orders as in their Law were not prescribed, are notwithstanding in that respect unculpable: It followeth that many things may be lawfully done in the Church, so as they be not done against the Scripture, although no Scripture do command them, but the Church only following the light of reason, judge them in discretion to be meet.  
And in effect, they who first opposed, seemed to grant so much; For this Cartwright gave forth, that nothing ought to be established in the Church which is not commanded in the Word, if not by special precepts, 
1 Cor. 10.32. 1 Cor. 14.40. 1 Cor. 14.26. Rom. 14.6, 7.  yet by general rules; which are nothing scandalous and offensive; All things in order and seemliness; All unto aedification; All to the glory of God. So then these Rules being observed, all things in the Church may be appointed, not only not against, but by and according to the Word of God. By this large concession for aught I see, even that which they oppose may be according to the pattern in the Mount. And if you had intended utterly to exclude the use of rectified reason and prudence in ordering any thing in God's house, why did you but now say that it is of moral equity, and consequently of perpetual observation, that a rightly Reformed Church should have all her Elders stand and sit together, in the face and full view of the Assembly; in reason and prudence, I grant you may find somewhat to persuade it, but search as long as you will for a pattern in the Mount for it, and it will not be found; for what you in the following words allege, are but mere colours, as I will make it plainly appear.    

The words of the Letter.  
ANd as in all other points, so in this particular concerning the Elders Pulpit, they are tied and limited by their Commission to hold conformity with what is upon sacred Record, as this is, and that not only necessarily employed, but eminently expressed in several Scripture expressions, as Nehem. 8.4. Eccles. 12.11. 1 Tim. 4.14. Rev. 4.6. & 5.6. & 19.4.  

The Reply.  
To those Elders you speak of, I find no Commission granted upon sacred Record, as I have formerly proved. They who have received a Commission, I grant, are tied and limited to hold conformity with that which is upon Record in all points; but neither for those nor these, do I find any thing so eminently expressed about a Pulpit. Oh but it seems this Elders Pulpit is a matter of great weight and moment, that there should be such several Scripture expressions about it. And indeed it would make any man wonder that God who gave an express order in the Mount about the Tabernacle, and also a pattern for it, should not then have given a special direction for the matter and form of this Pulpit also, but have left it to the discretion of the Jews to erect it of their own heads after the captivity; for than is the first time we hear of a Pulpit of wood, and the sole in all the Scripture.  

Nehem. 4.8.  The words Nehem. 8.4. are, And Ezra the Scribe stood on a Pulpit of wood, which they had made for the purpose, and beside him stood Mattithiah, and Shemath, and Anajah, and Vehad, and Helkiah, and Maaseiah on his right hand, and on his left Pedajah, and Mishae, and Malkiah, and Hashum. and Hashbadana, Zechariah, and Meshullam. The Old Translator reads thus, Stetit autem Esdras Scriba super gradum aut turrim ligneam, quam secerat ad loquendum, 
Ver. 1.  & steterunt juxta eum, etc. Junius and Tremellius thus, Stabat autem Ezra legis peritus in suggestu ligneo, quem fecerant ad hanc rem, etc. In which passage I observe many things. First, That this meeting, reading, and interpreting the Law was in the street that was before the water-gate. Secondly, That here was built for Ezra this Chair of Wood; which whether it were in strict terms a Pulpit or no, is not apparent, in that the Vulgar reads it gradus or turris; Tremellius suggestus, and so it might be a Gallery raised to that end, or a little Turret ascended by steps; for suggestus is locus editior unde ad populum fit concio, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Or if you will needs have it a Pulpit, that you like it ne'er the better for that name, 
Varro. Glossar. Hadri. Junius. Vitruu.  this was at first locus scenae editior, è quo tibicines & Citharaedi musicá actione populum demulcebant. Or as it is in Vitruvius, Podij provectior pars, seu pergula quaedam. Thirdly, That those who stood about this Pulpit on the right and left hand, were all of the Tribe of Levi, as is apparent in many places of this book. Fourthly, That this for aught we know was but once done, and occasionally by the Jews immediately after the Captivity. Now lay all this together, and you shall see what it will amount to.  
You may be yet to seek for your Elders Pulpit, for ought you know, for all this place, except you will place them in a little Turret or Gallery; for such you see it may be. And about it the Levites were placed on the right hand, and on the left; and I know you will not allow your Elders to be of the Tribe of Levi. This Pulpit was erected in the street, and will you take it well that your Consistory be erected there? This was occasional, whereas yours must be; as you say, of perpetual observation. This was done by the Jews at that time, and will you take out a Jewish pattern? God forbidden the Christians should imitate the Jews. Remember what for this you before allege against the National Church. Lastly, this was but a particular case, & ex particulari non est syllogizari. To collect a necessity of observance for all future ages from one example of the Jewish Church, is an argument of a very shallow and short discourse.  
The second place you allege, is Ecclesiastes 12.11. 
Eccl. 12.11.  The words of the Wise are as Goads, and as nails fastened by the Masters of Assemblies, which are given from one Shepherd. In the reading of which words you may see our Translatours were at a stand, in that to make up their sense, they put in the particles, [are, by, which.) Let us see then how others render them; the Vulgar, Verba sapientum sicut stimuli, & quasi clavi in altum defixi, quae per Magistrorum consilium data sunt, ab uno pastere; Jun. & Tremell. thus, Verba sapientum similia aculeis, & similia clavis infixis, lectissima, tradita à pastore eodem. And they note, that what we read the Masters of the Assemblies, is in the Hebrew, Domini Collectionum.  
First, I must tell you that in this Text I read ne'er a word of the Elders Pulpit, and therefore cannot conceive that it is here eminently expressed, no nor yet necessarily implied neither, in that Domini Collectionum, may have another sense than you thought of; do but read the Prologue to the book of Ecclesiasticus, and you may see what it meaneth. The Grandfather to Jesus the Son of Syrach was a man of great diligence & wisdom among the Hebrews, who did not only gather the grave and short sentences of wise men that had been before him, but himself also uttered some of his own, full of much understanding and wisdom; they that gathered these might well be called Domini Collectionum, and Junius not to be blamed, when he reads Verba sapientum lectissima. For every Scribe instructed to the Kingdom of heaven, is like unto a man that is an Housholder, 
Matth. 13.52. Isocrat. ad Demon.  which brings forth out of his Treasury things new and old. Isocrates likens such a man to the Bee, which lights upon every flower and gathers honey or wax from all: so saith he, it behoves every man who desires instruction, to leave unattempted not Authors, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, there you have the word, from all places to collect together profitable Rules, Maxims, Apothegms, Parables, Proverbs, Sentences, Arguments, etc. For when all's done, all will be too little to amend the pravity and obliquity of our nature. Now where there is this choice made by the wise, 
Hieron. in loc.  than their words will be both stimuli & clavi. Goads they will be in the side of every slothful man, to quicken and prick him forward to any duty; pungunt verba, non palpant, they do not flatter and bring asleep, but they rouse and move every resty soul. And because that men that are up, are of a flitting nature, and apt to fall back, being too like a deceitful bow, 
Psal. 78.57.  whose string being drawn up, if not well fastened, is apt to slip the nock and relapse: therefore their words also are like to nails, that being driven in deep, fasten and hold together what is joined by them. This than I take to be the true meaning of Solomon in this place, that when by the Masters of the Collections there is a good choice made, than words are of excellent use both against slothfulness and recidivation; they will goad a Scholar up, that he be not dull in, and fasten him to, that he fall not back from any duty. And to that end they were delivered; for they be but tradita, given or committed to them, and given they were by one and the same Shepherd, 
Junius in loc. Ambros.  that is, by Christ, whose word alone hath been heard in the Church in all ages. For that saying of Ambrose is most true, Veritas à quocuuque dicitur, à Spiritu sancto est profecta. He must have Lynceus eyes, that can find any countenance in this Text for Lay-Elders, or for their Pulpit. What is it not possible that no men besides themselves should be Masters of Assemblies? none Masters of Collections, no wise men's words be goads and nails besides theirs alone? shall no men be entrusted by this one Shepherd and the Holy Ghost, but they alone? this I hope they will not arrogate to themselves; and if there may be a partition made, as there must be, except they will assume to themselves the Monopoly of all wise words, I see no necessity either by implication or eminent expression, that your Ruling Elders should be the Masters of the Assemblies that the Preacher means. And I am sure he could not; for in his days there were no such heard of. And so not finding their Commission in the Old Testament, by your direction I will inquire for them and their Pulpit in the New.  
And the first place you send me to, is in the first Epistle to Timothy, cap. 4. ver. 14. Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by Prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery. This place I conceive you intended not at all for proof of the Elders Pulpit, because no Cart-ropes will be strong enough to hale it that way. Only that by it they should have a Commission to transact all the concernments of the City of God, and in particular to ordain Church-Officers. For I know by the Consistorian Divines it is drawn that way, though very violently.  
This is the sole place in Scripture where the Presbytery is named; and it seems somewhat strange to me that you should ground and build your foundation of your Lay-Eldership on a place that hath so many sound and sufficient answers as this hath.  
That there was a Presbytery in the Apostolical times I have formerly proved, but that it consisted of Lay-Elders it lies upon you to make good, before you can derive their Commission from this place. Secondly, Jerome, Primasius, Ambrose and Calvin, tell us that by Presbytery the function is meant, and not the College, and then the place will stand you in no stead; and that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used for Presbyter, I could show you if I list by more than ten testimonies of the Greek Fathers and Counsels. Thirdly, chrysostom, Theodoret, Oecumenius, Theophilact, inform us that Paul by the Presbytery meant the Bishops; for a mere Presbyter might not impose hands on a Bishop. Neque enim fas erat, aut licebat, 
Ambros. in loc. Calv. institut. 4. cap. 3.  ut inferior ordinaret majoreme, nemo enim tribuit quod non accepit. Fourthly, Saint Paul himself testifieth that he laid hands on Timothy, which Calvin strongly presseth. Lastly, granted it must be that Timothy was an Evangelist, which function the Presbytery of no particular Church could give him by your tenets. This place then being set aside, I find not any other that can carry so much as a colour for the Commission you speak of; and that from this they can claim no power, I have partly made good here, and more fully before, and therefore I say the less of it.  
One thing only I shall add, that the Latin Fathers expound it abstractly; viz. to signify the Office of Priesthood, that is, neglect not the grace of the Presbyterate, that is in thee, by the imposition of hands; and this Erasmus helps, by making Presbyterii to depend upon gratiam, in regimine; reading it thus, noli negligere gratiam Presbyterii, quae data est,— per manuum impositionem, and such trajections are no new things in Scripture.  
To those places you cite out of the Revelation I have answered before, and shown that they concern not at all your Elders, and therefore I shall not need to say any more to them.    

The words of the Letter.  
TO sum up in short the whole sum and substance of what I would show; Until such time as the Parochial Churches of the Nations become truly Presbyterial, and so reform in their essential parts, consisting of visible Converts, and an explicit Covenant, which are the matter and form of a Church: witness Jer. 50.5. Ezek. 20.37. Isa. 44.3. Acts 2.47. Rom. 14.1.2 Cor. 8.5. & 9.13. And until also they be refined in their integral parts, which are the Organs and Officers thereof, that as eyes, mouth and hands are to see, speak and act in their behalf: until they both desire and endeavour to be endowed first with a Teacher to dispense the word of knowledge and information to the judgement; Secondly, with a Pastor to dispense the word of wisdom and exhortation to the will and affections. Thirdly, with a Ruler to dispense the word of rebuke and admonition to the irregular in life and conversation: And fourthly, with Deacons and Widows to receive and dispense the weekly contribution, that is belonging, and also brought to the King of Saints from his subjects in Covenant toward the maintenance of the Table of the Lord, the Tables of the Church Elders, and the Tables of such of the fellow-members as be in lack: And all this in obedience to what is enjoined in his revealed will, namely in Rom. 12. 2, 7, 8. & 16.1. 1 Tim. 3.2, 5, 10. & 5.10, 20. Until I say, that the Parochial Churches be thus qualifyed; can you upon good grounds expect as to them, either the manifestation of sure mercy, or the enjoyment of solid peace? knowing that Combinations are properly appertaining to vile and violent sinne-loving sinners, as 'tis showed by the Oracles of God, Psal. 5.5 & 11.5, 6. Rev. 12.10. & 22.15. And that Church-promises and Church-priviledges as well as Christ's Consolations are peculiarly applicable to such Covenant-makers with God and men, as through the strength of their surety are Covenant-keepers with both? which Covenant-making and Covenant-keeping is expressed and perceived by a regular walking toward them who are without, as well as them that are within, according to what is written, Isa. 55.3. Gal. 6.16. 1 Tim. 4.8. If you can tell any such tidings as a heavenly promise to unheavenly persons, or a holy privilege to the souls or seed of unholy parents, that you would find in your heart to give me some notice thereof, and to acquaint me with any one of those good grounds of any lively hope, that they will be everlastingly happy, is the last of these motions, which I make bold for to leave with you to consider of, and meditate upon. 
A heavenly motion for myself.  This motion is my heavenly motion for myself, the granting of which will engage me, yet further, to be, to remain, and also acknowledge myself.  
Your thankful Remembrancer In his nearest Approaches To the Throne of Grace.  
From my lodging this 22. of the 8. Month. 1656.  

The Reply.  
This is the recapitulation of the whole, which I have showed partly not subject to so harsh a censure, partly built upon a weak foundation, and therefore I sh●ll need to say the less to it. Yet because I may not leave you unsatisfied in the least, I shall give you some short animadversions upon this also.  
1. You here set down your whole platform, shaping it into the fashion of a natural body, which hath essential and integral parts; and till the Parochial be so qualifyed, you afford it no mercy, nor hope of solid peace.  
Your constitution of a Church I allow of, both in the essentials and the integrals; for 'tis a body, and must be so composed; and when organical, if perfect, it must be entire. In the General than I shall agree with you, but in the special assignation of your parts will lie the difference.  
For what Church is there of what Sect soever, that doth descent in general terms from this assigned and necessary constitution, that you may know that it is no special Character of your Combinational, or as you call it here the Presbyterial Church? The Brownists, Barrowists, Anabaptists, Presbyters, Socinians, Episcopal men, will allow you visible men for your matter, a Covenant for the form, and Church-Officers for the integral parts of your organical body.  
And for your matter, the Brownists, Barrowists, Anabaptists, Socinians will agree with you, that they must be visible Converts, meaning thereby a company of faithful people, every one whereof in the face of the whole Congregation hath given so clear tokens of true grace and regeneration, as hath satisfied the minds of all. This is to be proved by you; for Episcopal men with the Presbyters require no more of visible members, than that they profess one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, as I have proved before; for all that carry the name of Christians, whether in sincerity or otherwise, they reckon in the bosom of the Church, as in the type the Ark of Noah there were clean and unclean Beasts, in the net good and bad fish. Judas among the Apostles, Ananias and Sapphyra, Simon Magus, Demas, etc. among the baptised.  
In your form also the explicit Covenant, the four forenamed will agree with you; for your doctrine is, that this company must be incorporate by Oath and Covenant to exercise all the parts of Christian Religion in one place under one Pastor, to which they will admit no more people then commodiously may with their ease convene in one meeting house. This is endeavoured to be proved by you; but how weakly, I shall make it appear, when I come to examine your texts you allege for it.  
The Presbyters, though they like not your engagement, yet came somewhat near to it in imposing their solemn League and Covenant upon the consciences of many tender souls, who chose rather to be undone then to yield to their encroachment; and how pleasing this was to God, you may judge by the success, which is your own common argument. Now for the Episcopal men, they admit of a Covenant also; but that is Baptism, which they say is the Sacrament of Admission into the Visible Church; and this I have proved to be sufficient; and another Covenant more than needs.  
In the enumeration of your integral parts, your Teacher, your Pastor, your Rulers, your Deacons, your Widows for the general, I know not any man that will gainsay you, and some of your Texts do well prove it. But in the Misnomer of these, and their absolute necessity there is not a full agreement. For Mr. Cann at Amsterdam thought his Church sound enough when in his Church there was but one Pastor, 
Bayly pag. 15.  and could not agree till very lately of any other Officer; and in the year 1645. they lived without an Eldership, as they did before without a Pastor.  
And first touching your Teachers and Pastors, I have before shown you that it is not necessary that they be distinct persons, both the duties being possible to be performed by one man, as it fell out at Geneva, where Calvin and Beza, men of great abilities thought they might, and did supply both places both of Teacher and Pastor; and your reason you here give, and your practice also confirms me in it. For your Teacher you say must dispense the word of knowledge and information to the judgement; and the Pastor the word of wisdom and exhortation to the will and affections: Pray tell me what should hinder that one and the same man may not teach and inform the judgement, and make wise to salvation, exhort and move the will and affections in the same hour? Were it otherwise, you yourself preach by a wrong method, who explain and apply, who raise a Doctrine out of your Text, by which you inform the understanding, and then labour to apply it, and make it useful to the will and affections of your Auditors. Tie up your Teacher to these strict terms, and he shall only study positive Divinity, and your Pastor no Art more than Rhetoric, especially that part that concerns 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; for he must be his master in that before he shall work kindly upon the will, and move the affections of men.  Ille movet dictis animos & pectora mulcet. 
Besides, were these two Offices so necessary, the Teacher should never stretch himself beyond his tether, but stint and end when he hath given forth and proved his Doctrine, and then your Pastor should enter, take his Cue, and begin upon what is taught. But why do I trouble myself in battering this Trivial, since among you it is not strictly observed? for I dare say it, let a Scrutiny be truly taken, and it will be found that not in one among ten of your Combinational Churches a man shall meet with these two distinct Officers, your Teacher and Pastor. As for us, we dislike them not; and where conveniently they might be had, and maintenance for them, they were in use, witness the Professors of Divinity in our Universities, and the Public Lectures and Readers in our Cathedrals; but to bind every Parochial Church to this, or else it must be defective in an integral part, is more than ever you will be able to prove, yea, or any man else.  
Next you insist upon your Ruler. And whoever yet denied that Rulers were necessary in the Church, yea, and for that end (though not the sole) you name. But none will content you, except they be of your own election and ordination, none except the Lay-Elders; this also must be proved by you. For you know we had, and assigned others, and upon better grounds than you will be ever able to disprove.  
Your last Officers were Deacons and Widows, whom you make to be Receivers of the weekly Contributions, and dispensers of it to three uses. In the Primitive Church such I grant you there were, as is evident out of the Texts you allege, & that to the last use they employed the collected money: But that any of it was employed to the two first uses, either for the maintenance of the Table of the Lord, or for the Tables of the Church Elders, I put you to prove again. And for this last, I am persuaded it was not, these being likely (if ever there had been any) as now among you, of the richer and abler sort, and therefore no reason their Tables should be furnished out of the poor man's box. But if you will take Elders for the true Presbyters of the Church, such who were to labour in the Word and Doctrine, I shall easily grant you that they had their maintenance (till there was other provision made for them) out of these Collections and Contributions, though not from the Deacons, but the Bishop's appointment. These Deacons and Widows are not in our Church now, and thereupon infer it wants of its integral parts. No such matter, for these Officers were but Temporary, taken up according to exigence of those times; for the necessity being over, the Office was at end. When once Christian Princes, and charitable men, provided by wholesome Laws away of relief for the poor, and assigned Officers to that purpose, where Hospitals, Almshouses, Nosecomia, etc. were erected and endowed to that end, there was no farther use of these Officers; neither is the Church defective in an integral part, though now it want them, as I before shown out of Aretius.  
You have then taken a long day for obtaining mercy and settlement of peace to the Church; if neither of these may be enjoyed, until it be reform and refined in the essential and integral parts according to your fancy. For what can she not have her Officers, but of your appointment? no Rulers, except your Lay-Elders? no Members, but such visible Converts as you will be pleased to admit? Lastly, be bound to her duty by no Oath, but by your explicit Covenant? upon this you insist, this you labour to prove to the purpose, and as if you intended to convince any opponent, you here heap Text upon Text out of Old and New Testament, which I shall now consider how far they make to your purpose.  The first is out of Jerem. 50.5. They shall ask the way to Zion, with their faces thitherward, saying, Come and let us join ourselves to the Lord in a perpetual Covenant that shall not be forgotten. 
Saint Peter teacheth us that unstable souls wrist the Scriptures, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a speech borrowed from those who put a man upon a rack, which causeth the man to speak what he never meant. And this is the fault of too too many, who strain the Scriptures to a wrong sense. Whereas they should first consult the Scriptures, and make them the ground of their conclusions; they first harbour a strong conceit of the conclusion, and then seek out Scriptures to confirm it. And this for the most part befalls not yours alone, but all other wanderers from the Truth; they blot their books and margins with variety of quotations out of God's Word, as if by the inspection only of their Copy this way, they purposed to affright the unlearned Reader or Hearer into their opinion, who being astonished with the fearful noise of the Chapter and Verse, (as the Frogs were upon the fall of the Log into the plash of water) might presently stoop into a veneration of what is taught. Here I meet with seven places alleged for your explicit Covenant; but I adjure you, as you will answer it at the great day, whether you are fully persuaded in your soul and conscience, that either the Prophets or Apostles had an eye to it when they wrote those words, and what assurance you can give us that this must be the sense and no other. For if you have not a certainty of faith in this behalf, you do very ill to produce these Texts, press them upon tender consciences, and to maintain a Rent, a Schism, a Separation in the Church of Christ. That which makes me, and should you, suspect your sense of these places, is, that having consulted with the best and wisest Expositors I have upon them, I find not one syllable that sounds to that you intent and collect from thence. What, Masters, are you the sole wise men? were all men blind till you arose? Besides, 'tis not long since there was an Oath and a Covenant eagerly pressed, and then the Covenanters served themselves with these Texts; then they sounded in our ears these words of Jeremy, Come let us join ourselves to the Lord in a perpetual Covenant that shall not be forgotten. Then the people were terrified with the words of Ezekiel, I will cause you to pass under the rod, and will bring you into the bond of the Covenant. Then the Covenant of Moses, of Joshua, of Asa, of Josiah, of Nehemiah, in a word; all places that mentioned a Covenant, were pressed and urged to attest the necessity of that Oath. What, is now God's Word become a shipman's hose, that it may be worn on either side? what, Presbyterians and Combinationals justify their way from the same Texts? this cannot be; for if it serve one, it will not serve the other; if it serve to prove a National Covenant as that was, it will never prove a Combinational, since these two are disparata, and admit no reconciliation, no more than a National and Combinational Church can be one. One of you 'tis certain juggle with us, and go about to impose upon us, and the truth is, you do both so, as shall appear upon farther examination.  
A custom it was among the Jews, when they had revolted from God to Idols, solemnly to renew their first Covenant with him, and to take him to be their God, renouncing all other, and to be his people, and observe his Laws, which gave occasion to all the former practices: In Jeremy's time for their Idolatry; especially the Jews were to be carried into Captivity; but the Prophet in this Chapter and the next foretells the ruin of the Babylonians their severe Masters, and their return, which when it came to pass, then saith he, they shall ask the way to Zion with their faces thitherward, etc. It than cannot be denied, but this Text must primarily be understood of the Jews, and if ever it were literally fulfilled, it was when in Nehemiahs' days, 
Nehem. 9.38. & 10.28, 29.  the Princes, Levites, Priests made and wrote, and sealed the Covenant, in which the people engaged with them: and let me tell you, that the Jews in the principal point ever after kept this Covenant, and so it may well be called perpetual; for after their return from Babel, though they were divided into divers Sects to the corruption of sincere Religion, and were guilty of many other abominations, yet no man can charge them with the worship of strange gods. Of the Jews then these words were spoken, and in them verified, and cannot be applied to the Christian Church any other way but by the way of accommodation. For say I shall allow you that the Jewish Church was the type of the Christian, than the Christian must be the antitype; and what then will you gain by it, except the overthrow of your own cause? for the antitype must every way resemble the type, which in this it will not. For this Covenant was voluntary, Come▪ say they let us join ourselves to the Lord in a perpetual Covenant. You press necessity upon men's consciences; this explicit Covenant is the essential form of a Combinational Church, so that no Covenant, no Member of the Church, to which Christ hath promised salvation. The Covenant in which the Jews engaged, was of the whole Nation, yours is of a selected people in a Nation. They, the whole Corporation of them, notwithstanding this Covenant, continued to be a National Church, went up to Jerusalem at their solemn Feasts, separated not into private divisions and subdivisions. You by your Covenant are enemies to all National Churches, make it a distinctive note, not of true and sincere worshippers from Idolatours, but of those which profess the same faith with you from those of your Congregation, that I say not, you have as many Covenants as there be factions and fractions among you.  
That every good Christian daily come up closer to his God, by joining in a perpetual Covenant, and by renewing his vow made in his Baptism to renounce, to believe, and obey, I exceedingly approve. But that this cannot be done, except he enter a new Covenant in your Congregation, or that he is bound to do it, or can be no Member of a visible Church, I shall never believe; for mark what will follow upon it. First, there must be a dissolution made of all the reformed Churches of Christendom, that there may be way made for this new erection; for the Covenant sealed to their Members in Baptism will not serve the turn, till they have a new admission and matriculation by this seal and engagement.  
Then again, consider what countenance is hereby given to the whole order of Roman Votaries, which to me seem very like to so many Combinational Churches, in that, every order have their particular statutes, to the observation of which they tie all they take into their societies, and upon the Vow and Covenant made, they are admitted. Only that in this they are a little more charitable than you are, that they acknowledge such as are out of their fraternities for good Christians, and Members of the Catholic Church: But you judge those who are not of one or other of your Combinations, to be Members of no Church. And this is all you have gained by your Text of Jeremy. I now come to that of the Prophet Ezekiel 20.37. where we thus read.  And I will cause you to pass under the rod; and I will bring you into the Bond of the Covenant. 
The full scope of this place is at ver. 33. a promise made to the Jews, that they should be gathered under the Gospel. To this end God tells them, that I will cause you to pass under the rod, which whether it signifies a sharp affliction, in which the Jews we know have had their share; or else a trial by the rod, as a Shepherd doth his flock, as was used in decimation, I cannot say; if thls last, than the sense is, I will reject the bad, and choose the good, 
Jun. in. loc. Levit. 27.32.  and will bring you into the Bond of the Covenant; or as Junius reads it, in exhibitionem foederis, I will impart the Covenant of the Gospel unto you, and all the blessings and promises of that Covenant, as it is here amplified in the 45. ver. Now let any man which is not swayed with prejudice, judge whether any thing can be picked from hence, that can countenance your assertion. What, is the Covenant that God hath made with his people in the Gospel of no longer extent than the Combinational Church? Out of this Covenant I know none can be saved; without your Combinational Covenant I know they may, or else heaven before you risen would be very empty, and the time since you risen being not long, you have not sent many thither. Monopolise not then thus the mercies of God to yourselves, and engross not the bounty of the Covenant to your own Churches, lest you damn all the World besides. I must tell you the Covenant of God with man will stand, and be made good, were there ne'er a Combinational Church in the world; he can cause his people to pass under the rod, and bring them into the Bond of the Covenant, without conducting them through that new way of your Combinational Church. This place than makes nothing at all for you, and it is a plain fallacy to argue à genere ad speciem, by which you collect, that what is spoken in general of the Covenant, must be understood of your Covenant, just as if a man should collect est substantia, ergo est corpus.  Your third place is out of Isa. 44.5 One shall say I am the Lords, and another shall call himself by the name of Jacob, and another shall subscribe with his hand unto the Lord, and surname himself by the name of Israel. 
As if all this could not be done, but within the walls of your meeting houses; As if none could surname himself an Israelite, or subscribe with his hand Jehovae sum, but he must enter your Combination. Interpreters have not thus restrained these words, (I omit many of the Ancients, and make choice of the Moderns) not Junius, not Piscator, not Sculetus; they unanimously teach, that under the Gospel every one should subscribe and profess them sons and servants of God, sons of the Church and Christians, who are called the sons of Jacob and Abraham, Rom. 4.11, 12. & 11.26. Gal. 3.29. & 6.16. and Scultetus so applies it, Sic hodie omnes reformatae Ecclesiae ment & confession adjungimus nos Catholithae ill● Ecclesiae piorum Jacobitarum & Israelitarum ubi per orbem sint dispersi. See then what injury you do the Reformed Churches, 
Scul●et. in loc.  and how far you are from their judgement. They could be content to be joined to the Catholic dispersed all the world over; they thought that enough to make them Israelites; you are more straight laced; they must be no Israelites with you, no parts of the Church, except they be joined by a Covenant together in your Combination. But remember in these words of the Prophet there is no mention at all of a Covenant, and therefore it makes nothing at all to your purpose. From the Old Testament you come to the New, and the first place you bring, is, Acts 2.47. And the Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved.  
Till you have made these two propositions good, that the Church here mentioned is the Combinational Church; and that this Church was joined together in such a Covenant as you imagine, I see not to what end you should produce it: when that is done, you shall receive my answer. In the mean time I shall tell you what you might well have collected from hence; that ordinarily there is no salvation to be had out of the Catholic Church, & therefore it is the mercy of God by the Ministry of the Word, to add daily to it such as shall be saved. These conclusions are rightly drawn; but to assert, God added to the Church daily such as should be saved, therefore they that will be saved, must be Members of a Combinational Church, therefore added by your Formal Covenant, savours neither of Logic, nor Charity.    
Rom. 14.1. Him that is weak in the faith receive you, but not to doubtful disputations. Graec. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 

The Reply.  
The farther I go, still the weaker I find your proofs, and I hearty wish that you would not deceive those who are weak in the faith with such shows, being those little birds that are over eager to peck at your painted grapes; such you present here in colours laid over with your own Art; for there was Art in it in figures to point me to the Chapter and Verse, and not at full to cite the words, as indeed you have done in all the rest, which had you produced, it would have at first amazed a Reader to find out your Riddle, or what was to be found in them (there being no syllable of Church or Covenant) that might be useful to you in this debate: as it did me, till at last I cast my eye upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, receive him; for than I began to think that that might be it, and that from it you would conclude, that a man weak in the faith must be received into the Combinational Church: but that methought could not well be it neither, since the man about whom the precept is given, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a weak and sickly Christian; whereas all those that you receive, must be healthy, strong Christians, no Babes, but Men, all tried and approved for regenerate persons, 
Bayly pag. 134.  such of whom every Member of the Church may be fully satisfied in the truth of the grace that is in them, 
Cottons way. pag. 7.  and the suitableness of their spirits with the Spirit of the Church. All this considered, I could not tell what to make of your allegation, and I was once resolved to let it pass without any farther examination. But being desirous to remove every scruple, I thought it best, fully to open the Apostles intent and meaning in this Chapter, which being cleared, the mist you brought over it would easily vanish.  
Though the Apostle inscribes his Epistle to the Romans, yet among them there were many natural Jews dispersed thither, who could not be dissuaded easily from the Mosaical abstinences, but continued their obligation to the Law, even after they had received the Christian Faith. There were also among these some who were Proselytae portae, who were bound to observe the seven Commandments of Noah, but being not circumcised, were not strictly bound to observe the Law of Moses. Christians both these were in the positive part, acknowledging so much as was required by the new Articles of the Creed, etc. yet in the negative part they were not; they held the Judaical Law not to be evacuated, and so weak and feeble some of these were in the faith, that lest they should offend in eating forbidden flesh, some would eat no flesh at all, and came to eat nothing but herbs. About these sick, these weak, 
Ver. 2.  these scrupulous, these tenderhearted and lesse-instructed Christians, the Apostle gives these directions. First, that the stronger and healthier, more orthodox and knowing, do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, assume and take them to them; First, friendly to afford them communion, and not to separate from them for this error; next, to labour to cure their malady, & get them out of their mistake; Thirdly, that they do not vilify them, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver. 3. set them at naught, as if they were senseless empty fellows. Lastly, that they be not over contentious, and hot in disputations with them; for though they err, yet they were not to be disquieted, but to be informed and tolerated; God hath received him: ver. 3. who then art thou that judgest another man's servant? ver. 4. Imitate good then, and show this weak brother mercy, assume and receive him to friendship and communion first, then help and cure him from his former defect or disease, and labour to bring him to perfect growth and health in Christianity. This is the full scope and intent of the Apostle, that charity be showed to a weak brother.  
Now was this Weakling in the Church before the Apostle writ, or was he not? it were against reason and the purport of the Epistle to say he was without: 
Chap. 1.7, 13. Ver. 10.14, 21.  the Epistle is written to the Saints at Rome; in this very Chapter he is said to be in the faith, and five times called a brother. And if he were within, to what purpose do you urge the reception of him that was received already? Received then he was to be for instruction, for information, for cure, as you do, and may do those who are already in the bosom of your Church; and yet I hope you will not be overhasty to conclude that then he was first received. When a Mr. bids one of his better Scholars take such or such a Boy to you, and instruct him perfectly in the meaning of this or that Rule, will you say that the child was first entered into the School? The case is the selfsame, and therefore you can conclude nothing from this Apostolical direction, and much the less if you take to consideration the following words, take him not to any doubtful disputations, take him then to you; but not by vain disputes and cavils to raise more doubts in his head, but to allay and satisfy those which are already raised.  
But well to grant you more than I need, or ever you can prove, that the man was to be admitted, and to be received now into the Church; was there no other way of entrance but your explicit Covenant? this you must prove, or else this Text will never suit to your purpose, which will then be done, when any of Anaxogoras Scholars will prove the snow not to be white. But I go on as you lead me to,    
2 Cor. 8.5. And this they did, not as we hoped, but first gave their own selves to the Lord, and unto us by the will of God. 

The Reply.  
It is of the Macedonians that the Apostle here speaks, and of their ready mind, and liberal hand to contribute to the necessity of the poor Saints at Jerusalem; 
Ver. 3.  From a people in no plentiful condition such a liberality could not be expected; yet saith the Apostle this they did, praying us with much entreaty to receive the gift, 
Ver. 4.  and take upon us the fellowship of ministering to the Saints; their Alms, their Contribution they brought to Saint Paul, and entreated him earnestly to take the care of it, and find a way to see it disposed of to the Saints necessities. Now, saith the Apostle, such was this their readiness and bounty, that they gave far more than ever we could have hoped from so indigent a people.  
And that you marvel the less at this their liberality, a thing of a greater price they had than their money, their souls, their bodies, the whole man, and this they gave also, even themselves; first to the Lord, then to us; to the Lord, whose due it was, to us, as the Lords servant and Minister; aliter domino, aliter servo, to the Lord, under whose power by right we are, 
Muscul. in loc.  being our Redeemer and Saviour: but to Paul, as the Lords servant and Apostle, when they yielded themselves to obey, and be lead by his Doctrine. These three things chief may be collected from this place, that fullness of piety consists in this.  
First, that we give ourselves too God.  
Secondly, that we give and yield ourselves to his Ministers, as is the will of God.  
Thirdly, that we love the Brethren, and according to our abilities supply their necessities. All which was done before the Combinational Church was heard of, or entering by a Covenant thought of, yea, and perhaps better too; for let it not displease that I whisper in your ear, that I never heard any great good report of any of your Combinational Churches for their liberality and bounty to the poor distressed Saints; it is observed that you are quick-handed with the Rake, but very slow with the Fork.  
But what is it that in this verse you catch at? Is it dederunt scipsos nobis? 'Tis an argument of a desperate cause, when men lay hold on any thing that may but seem to make for them, as you do here, as if you thought that because with such annotations you carry the Vulgar into a belief, you must have all other for your followers. There be that can tell you, and make it good, that good Christians may give themselves to Paul, and be obedient and obsequious to his Ministers, and yet never come within the Walls of your Combinational Churches; nay, I am bold to say it, the less they come there, the more docible and ducible they will be; ever since they have came among you, they have taken out Corabs Lesson.    
2 Cor. 9.13. Whiles by the experiment of this Ministration, they glorify God for your professed subjection unto the Gospel of Christ, and for your liberal distribution unto them, and unto all men. 

The Reply.  
The end of the example of the Macedonians liberality proposed by the Apostle, was to stir up the Corinthians to the like beneficence, and it had the hoped effect, as is evident in the former and this Chapter, of which when the Saints of Jerusalem should have experiment, they would glorify God; first, for the Gentiles profession of the Gospel, and their subjection to it; then for their liberal distribution and charitable benevolence which they bestowed upon their needy brethren. This is the plain sense of the words.  
And he had need to have a very sharp and piercing brain that can fish out any thing from hence in the favour of a Combinational Church, or an explicit Covenant. What, can there be no profession of Christianity, or no subjection to the Gospel, except in such a Church? so you seem to say in your following words, of which I shall consider hereafter. O poor Grecians, oh miserable Armenians, Melchits, Russians, Cophties, Aethiopians, that I name not the Reformed Churches that are not within, and most of them never heard of your Covenant; for by your Rule they are no Professors of Christ, neither were ever subject to the Gospel. And in what a damnable condition than they are, let the world judge.  
I must profess ingenuously unto you that when I read these your proofs for your explicit Covenant, that had I been educated among you, and one of your Church, it would have made me doubt of your whole platform, when the very formal cause, which is the main principle that gives essence, being, and operation unto anything, is built upon so sandy a foundation, a foundation that is not laid upon any pregnant Text of the sacred Record, but such slender and far fetched, and forced collections as these are. I beseech you weigh them once more in the balance of sad reason, and set aside passion, humour, fancy, prejudice, and overmuch love to that cause you labour to defend, and say if you can without blushing whether they directly speak out, what you have produced them to witness. 'Tis no llight offence to take God's Name in vain, but to deliver that for his word which he never spoke nor meant, is a heinous transgression. You seem to me to have done that here, which you and I and others were won● to do in the Schools, when we were young Sophisters; our aim you know was to press the respondent with an argument, till we had clapped upon him a Text of Aristotle, which he durst not for shame deny; whether the Philosopher intended to say that in that place, for which we produced his words, we never regarded; we thought it enough if we put our Adversary to a nonplus: And thus you have done here, offered your assertion and backed it with This is witnessed by God in Jeremy, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Saint Luke, Paul, not much regarding what was the purpose of the Spirit in those words; sufficient I suppose you thought it, to say something that might serve the turn for the present, and nonplus a weak Adversary. But it ought to be Truth for which we should contend, and not victory, which will never be, till we weigh our words in the balance of the Sanctuary, and value our Texts by weight, and not by number. God amend what is amiss; for, Iliacoes inter muros peccatur & extra.  
Till then, to use your own words, nor you nor we can upon good grounds expect the manifestation of sure mercy, or the enjoyment of solid peace. You go on.    
Knowing that Combinations are properly appertaining to vile and violent sinne-loving sinners, as is showed by the Oracles of God, Psal. 5.5 & 11.5, 6. Rev. 14.10. & 22.15. 

The Reply.  
This no man will deny you. And you prove it well out of the Psalms and the Revelations; but if you will be pleased to consult the places, and view the Characters by which those vile and violent sinne-loving sinners may be known, you may with a wet finger pitch upon the men. Only I shall desire you in that twenty second Chapter of the Revelations to look a little further, and at the twenty ninth verse you shall read, that if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy City, and from the things that are written in this book. Tantum veritati obstrepit adulter sensus, 
Tertull.  quantum corruptor stylus. I say no more, we have enough to tremble at.    
And that Church-promises and that Church-priviledges as well as Christ's Consolations, are pecullarly applicable to such Covenant-makers with God and men, as through the strength of their surety are Covenant-keepers with both. 

The Reply.  
This is well observed by you, for there is no reason that any man expect a comfort or benefit from any promise, or by any privilege, who doth not as much as lies in him, keep the condition of that Covenant upon which the favour was promised. The privileges we know, and of the promises we are not ignorant; but if they belong to none but such who have made and kept their Covenant with God and man, then let them look to it that have kept neither. In the next place, you show us the way how this may be known.    
Which Covenant-making and Covenant-keeping is expressed and perceived by a regular walking toward them who are without, as well as towards them that are within, according to what is written, Isa. 55.3. Gal. 6, 16. & 1. Tim. 4.8. 

The Reply.  
That godliness is profitable unto all things, having the promise of the life that now is, and that which is to come: that as many as walk according to this Rule shall find peace and mercy, 
1 Tim. 4.8. Gal. 6.16.  is evident by these Scriptures, and therefore the Prophet calls, Incline your ear and come unto me, h●ar, and your souls shall live, 
Isa. 55.3.  and I will make an everlasting Covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David. Thus much is here expressed, and you over and above show us how it may be perceived; even by a regular walking towards them that are without as well as toward them that are within: which rule of yours, had some had a care and conscience to walk in, I assure myself those who are counted to be without, had been better dealt with. For the inhumanity and incivility that some have found from your Combination hath alienated many a man's mind, and as I have been credibly informed, kept off many a poor Heathen from turning Christian. I could tell you, if I list, an odd story, but I spare you. You may read it in Dr. S errs History of France, in the life of Lewis the ninth.    
If you can tell any such tidings as a heavenly promise to unheavenly persons, etc. 

The Reply.  
I, nor any Orthodox or conscientious Minister hath or will ever undertake to bring any such tidings. 'Tis not unknown to you that I have reduced all the Articles of the Creed to practice, and drawn into duty the whole Catechism; without any ifs or and's here is no promise made to an unheavenly person. We constantly teach that we were therefore delivered from the hands of our enemies, that we serve God in righteousness and holiness without fear all the days of our life; you needed not therefore closely by your if, insinuated us as guilty for teaching false and impious Doctrine. If there be any among you, that being wolus in sheep's clothing, send abroad their Diurnals stuffed with such news, we are not apt to believe them; for heaven is prepared for heavenly persons. But then again we say, that all those whom you will call heavenly, are not presently so, because daily experience informs, that they mind too much the things of the earth: neither are many of those unheavenly, whom you superciliously cast aside. God be blessed for it, heaven is a large place, and in it are many Mansions, and they are prepared for more than ever yet were of your Combination.    
Or a holy privilege to the souls or seed of unholy parents, that you would find in your heart to give me some notice thereof, and to acquaint me with any of those good grounds of any lively hope, that they shall be everlastingly happy, is the last of those motions, which I make bold for to leave with you to consider and meditate upon. 

The Reply.  
Your proposal is disjunctive, and therefore must receive a different answer; for you cunningly clapped together things that should be separated, there being great disparity betwixt the souls and the seed of unholy parents. That the souls of unholy parents shall be everlastingly happy, I know not any man that is conversant in the Scriptures will dare to affirm, since into heaven no unclean thing shall enter; and therefore, 
Revel. 21.27. 1 John 3.3. 2 Cor. 7.1.  he that hath this hope purifieth himself, even as he is holy; and to that purpose those directions and exhortations are, 2 Cor. 7.1. Having therefore these promises dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God, and Rom. 12.1, 2: 1 Thess. 5.23. with infinite places to the same purpose. Do we not teach the Doctrine of Regeneration, as well as yourselves? that a man must be born again if he will enter into the Kingdom of heaven? and that of this Doctrine there be two parts, 
John 3.3. Rom. 6.  a death to sin, and a life to righteousness? your demand is therefore very unreasonable, and I interpret it somewhat like a mock, that I would find in my heart to give you some notice of that, which you know I do not defend, and acquaint you with the grounds of that which hath no ground, and therefore no good ground to stand upon. This motion then, as touching this part, might have been spared, and needs from me no farther consideration and meditation, except it be to practise it. And to that end, you and all other Christians have need of it also, if they are desirous to have a lively hope, that they shall be everlastingly happy.  
Now to that other part of this disjunctive, [or the seed of unholy parents] you by this time know what I will answer, that there is a right and privilege belonging to the seed, if the parents though wicked, be Professors and Members of the visible Church. It is but in vain to repeat the grounds upon which I have formerly defended it, and till I see them made n●ll▪ I shall defend it still; and yet not so frowardly & obstinately, but that when I am convinced, I shall readily yield. You conclude all with these words.    

This motion is my heavenly motion for myself, the granting of which will engage me, yet further, to be, to remain, and also acknowledge myself,  
From my lodging this 22. of the 8. Month. 1656.  
Your thankful Remembrancer In his nearest Approaches To the Throne of Grace.  

The Reply.  
That the motion is for yourself, I very much respect it, because I have ever since I knew you, born unto you much affection, as judging that dislike you bore first to this my Mother of England, to proceed rather from a mistake in judgement, than any peevishness, malice or frowardness of will, not from any carnal or secular end, but from tenderness of heart. But now that you have added heavenly to it, it quickens me to embrace it the more; for what friend, what Christian friend, would not lay out himself to help his friend forward in his way to heaven? It was cain's churlish answer, what am I my brother's keeper? this is the voice of a Reprobate, not of one guided by the spirit of lenity; for such a one knows he owes to his brother consilium & auxilium, 
Bernard.  and that debt I have here paid. If it may any way conduce to that end I intent it, let God have the honour, whom I have often solicited in my prayers to assist and direct me in it. All the weakness I take to myself, and shall be ready to acknowledge and retract it, when discovered. Some passages in it you must needs pass by, because you begin, and a reviled parent hath made a dumb son speak. If the words seem many, consider how many and several things I had to answer. In this length, I have studied brevity, and said as little as I could to every head, and yet not so little, but I hope I have cleared up all difficulties. If it work not fully to change your judgement, yet I hope it may have this effect, to make you conceive a little better of our cause then hitherto you, or rather yours have done, and that it is not without reason, that we remain what and as we were. Pray let us have your pity, if we may not partake of your mercy, and think of us yet so charitably, as Luther did of the Anabaptists of his t me, O quam honesta ment hi miseri errand, 'tis with a good meaning these poor souls do mistake, and therefore made a request unto Frederick Duke of Saxony, that in his Dominion they might be favourably dealt withal and spared; for that their error exempted, they seemed otherwise very good men. The infamy that we were wont to be loaded withal, was, that we were worldlings, time-servers, pleasers of men, not of God; but time hath washed off these aspersions, and shown that we have little regarded the world in comparison of that we are fully persuaded is truth, and God's Ordinance. Those indeed among us who were time-servers, have served the time, and become servants of men; and if you look with an impartial eye upon the men, you have little reason to boast of your purchase by them, being for the most part such, who should not have been continued among us, but have been ejected by us, could the desires of honest men have prevailed. The better part have been constant, chose rather to lose all, than not to follow Christ. Nudi nudum. Some pity than I beg, if it be but for their sake.  
You may perhaps except, that in many passages I make use of the Fathers, Counsels, and Church-Records. Pray remember that you began the way, and cited to my hand Eusebius, Socrates, Evagrius, the book of Martyrs. Secondly, remember of what the controversy is. It is about the Agends, and practice of the Church in all ages, and of that how can any man be certified but by Records? he must be held an unreasonable man, who would look to find that in the Scriptures, no part of which was written in the Apostles days, and could not therefore relate what was done afterward. If any thing in them can be found contrary to the Scriptures, by their own open Confession they may be rejected. But when they tell you plainly what they were taught out of the Scriptures, and what they find generally believed and practised through the whole Church, have they not reason to take it unkindly to be cast aside? If you will examine their veracities by all those circumstances that are usually considered in taking men's depositions, you will find them strong on their side. They were gracious and right honest men, not only believed, but known to be such by all the world. They are acknowledged on all hands to be so judicious, as would more blemish one's judgement, than theirs, to call it in question. What they wrote of, were matters of their own cognizance, art and profession, in which sure they would have a great care not to be mistaken. Why then should we brand them, (in whom there was so much ability and good meaning to inform us of truth) with the imputation of falsehood and ignorance, flattering ourselves, that new and clearer lights shine unto us, and that we know better how to regulate Christ's Church than they? Their private opinions do not interest our belief; in such points we are as free as they. But when we find in them an universal concurrence, and a constant narration of Apostolical constitutions delivered to Apostolical men, and by them practised, and so handed over from age to age, we are deeply obliged to be well persuaded of it, and to embrace it, before any new invention whatsoever.  
Had the dispute been of Articles of Faith, I had forborn this passage, (for those are of another consideration) but when it is merely of the Discipline of the Church, and that which depends upon that Discipline, their authorities sway very much with me, as all credible Authors must in matters of Fact, with all wise men, without which it is impossible for any man to be informed and confirmed in any thing that hath passed in the world before he was born. I shall desire you therefore to take this into your consideration, and not to pass too hasty a censure upon the fathers, nor upon me for producing the testimonies of those Fathers.  
It is now high time for me to beg your pardon, for assuming so much licence to your trouble. To another I would have been more sparing; but to you I have thus enlarged myself, because I hearty desire your information, at least, that you may see that though I differ from you, yet it is not out of a stubborn and perverse mind, nor self-will, as hath been imputed to me, but upon such solid and evident reasons as it will not be easy for you to revel. As I told you at first, I am not of a contentious humour, nor love not to tug at one end of the saw, if you or any other take a delight to tug at the other; I am sorry for it. Far more comfort it were for us (so small is the joy, I take in those strifes) to labour under the same yoke, 
hooker's preface.  as men that look for the same eternal reward of our labours, to be joined with you in the bands of indissoluble love and amity, to live as if our persons being many, our souls were but one, rather than in such dismembered sort to spend our few and wretched days in a tedious prosecution of wearisome contentions, the end whereof, if they have not some speedy end, will be heavy even on both sides. The numerous company of Shakers', and other Sectaries that have sprung out of your root, and the harvest the Pope hath made by these divisions, together with the herds of Atheists and profane persons, that as the Locusts out of the bottomless pit are risen to overspread the Nation, makes me more than fear what will be the end thereof. The manifest godliness we glory in, is to find out somewhat, whereby we may judge others to be ungodly. Each others faults we observe as matters of exprobration, and not of grief, and then it is no marvel if the witty Atheists stand by and laugh, and warm themselves at our fire.  
I have here brought my bucket to extinguish it, and my earnest motion is to you to bring another; I know your endeavour may contribute very much to the cessation of this flame. Lay it to heart, and set it forward what you may, and the God of peace will reward you for it. I have somewhere read of an answer that Bishop Ridly then in prison, and condemned to die, returned to a friend, being informed that Mr. Knox was discontented with some things in the Liturgy, which is worthy of Record, and worthy to be well weighed: Alas, saith he, that our brother Knox could not bear with our book of Common-prayer, in matters against which, although I grant a man of wit and learning as he is, may produce popular arguments, yet I suppose he cannot be able sound by the Word of God to disprove any part thereof. The like say I about the constitution of our English Church and Discipline, though the wits of discontented men have been sharpened to find out what to say against it, and their arguments have prevailed too far on weak judgements, yet I know that no man can be able to disprove any thing thereof from the Word of God; which as to me it seems, very far prevailed after that conference at Hampton Court with Dr. Reinolds, who after lived a very quiet, peaceable and sedentary life, never disturbed the Church-government in the least, nor dissuaded any man from the embracing of the Discipline of this Church; it may be his reputation would not suffer him publicly to recede. And this, let me be bold to tell you so, is a great Remo●a, that hinders many a learned man to confess his error, and retract. To which, if that bewitching sin of profit be added, the man is charmed, as is the Chobber Chobberim, the old Adder, that stops his ears at the voice of the Charmer, charm he never so wisely.  
And yet for all that, I will not despair, but will make a trial whether it be possible to charm this serpent. Every man that undertakes to execute an office, must be sure that his calling is justifiable; otherwise, though the work he does be good, and his intent honest, yet he commits a grievous sin. There is no office in the Church higher than that of the Minister, the duties he is to perform are sacred, the administrations holy; he ought then to be fully upon certain grounds confirmed, that he is called to administer, which can never be without he derive his power from those to whom God hath given a Commission. That of the people, as I have proved, is a new, a slight, a fallacious foundation, and for such I shall always account it, till I see it demonstrated to the contrary. With what comfort then can any man execute his Ministry, who till his Commission be assured to his conscience upon Scripture principles, sins very heinously in every action that he does, though done with never so honest a mind. The punishment of Nadab and Abihu for offering strange fire, of Vzzah for touching the Ark, of Vzziah for invading the Priest's office, aught to sink very deep into the heads and hearts of such men. Till they can assure me infallibly that the Power of the Keys is in the people, which I am persuaded they will never do, I shall never acknowledge their vocation, and therefore much fear their doom.  
This I would have seriously weighed, and God Almighty give the success to it; then I shall the sooner hope that unity will be restored to the Church, peace and prosperity to the Nation, Religion will again flourish, and the gates of Zion shall be built; the Wolf shall dwell with the Lamb, and the Leopard shall lie down with the Kid, and the Calf, 
Isa. 11.6.  and the young Lion, and the Fa●ling together, and a little Child shall lead them, and the Cow and the Bear shall feed, their young ones shall lie down together, 
7.  and the Lion shall eat straw like the Ox, 
8.  and the suckling Child shall play on the hole of the Asp, and the weaned Child shall put his hand to the Cockatrice's den. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy Mountain, 
9▪  for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the Sea. Which that it may come to pass, is the hearty prayer of him, who is,     
Yours, D●o Opt. Max. & filio suo Jesu Christo, & Spiritus sancto sit laus, gloria, honour, in saecula saeculorum. Amen. Janu. 15. 1656.  
— Amphora caepit  
Institui, currente rotâ, nunc viceus exit.  
FINIS.   

Books printed or sold by William Leak, at the sign of the Crown in Fleetstreet, between the two Temple Gates.  

YOrks Heraldry, Fol.  
A Bible of a very fair large Roman Letter. 4.  
Orlando Furioso. fol.  
Perkins on the Laws of England.  
wilkinson's Office of Sheriffs. 8.  
Parson's Law. 8.  
Mirror of Justice. 8.  
Topics in the Laws of England. 8.  
Delamans' use of the Horizontal Quadrant.  
Wilbeys second Set of Music, 3, 4, 5, and 6 parts. 4.  
Corderius in English. 8.  
Dr. Fulks Meteors, with Observations. 8.  
Malthus Artificial Fireworks.  
Nyes Gunnery and Fireworks.  
Cato Major with Annotations.  
Mel Heliconium, by Alex. Ross. 8.  
Nosce te ipsum, by Sir John Davis. 8.  
Animadversions on Lilies Grammar. 8.  
The History of Vienna and Paris. 4.  
The History of Lazarillo de Toroms.  
Hero and Leander, by George Chapman, and Chr stopher Marlowe.  
The Posing of the Accidence.  
Guilliams Heraldry. fol.  
Herbert's Travels. fol.  
Man become guilty, by John Francis Senalt, and Englished by Henry Earl of Monmouth.  
Aula Lucis, or the house of Light.  
Christ's Passion, a Tragedy by the most learned Hugo Grotius.  
Mathematical Recreations, with the Horological Dyal, by William Oughtred. 8.  
The Garden of Eden, or an accurate description of Flowers and Fruit, now growing in England, with particular Rules how to advance their nature and growth, as well in seeds as herbs, as the secret ordering of Trees and Plants, by Sir Hugh Plat. Knight.  
Solitary Devotions with man in glory, by the Archbishop of Canterbury. 12.  
Exercitatio Scholastica.  
Book of Martyrs. fol.  
Adam's on Peter. fol.  
Willet on Genesis and Exodus. fol.  
The several opinions of sundry Antiquaries, viz. Mr. Justice Dodrige, Mr. Ager, Francis Tate, William Cambden, and Joseph Holland, touching the Antiquity, Power, and Proceeding of the High Court of Parliament in England.  
The Idiot in four books; first and second, of Wisdom; third, of the Mind; fourth, of the experience of the balance.  
The Life and Reign of Hen. 8. by the Lord Herbert. fol.  
France painted to the life, in four books, the second Edition.  
Sken de significatione verborum. 4.  
The Fort Royal of Holy Scripture, by J. H. the third Edition. 8.    


The sum of what is contained in the answer to the first part of the Admonitory Letter.  

THe controversy about the subject of the Keys opened. fol. 1.   

Sect. 1.2, 3, 4.  
The Author studious of Truth and Peace. fol. 3, 4.  
The Admonitours distinction of three Visible Churches improper. fol. 5.  
Some observations about the Domestical Church, and some mistakes in the Admonitory rectified. fol. 9  
The alleged Texts examined. fol. 10.   

Sect. 5.  
The words of the Admonitory drawn into Propositions and answered severally.  
The Propositions out of the Letter, these. 

1. That the Church of the last and longest constitution was a Presbyterial or Combinational Church; this examined. fol. 13.  
2. That it is the opinion and practice of the Combinational Church to subject their earthy, erring and unruly will to the heavenly, infallible and uncontrollable will of Christ. 'Tis examined what truth may be in this assertion. fol. 15.  
3. That Christ peremptorily wills and enjoins all Professors to be indoctrinated and disciplined by the present Ministry. This granted.  
4. That this prescribed Ministry must consist of Presbyters, and Teaching and Ruling Elders. This proposition fully examined and refuted. fol. 18.  
5. That these Presbyters, Teaching and Ruling Elders must be of the Professing Members own voluntary Election and regular Ordination. This also fully examined and refuted. fol. 24.  
6. That the Ministerial Office must reach from Christ's ascension to the dissolution of all things. This granted.     

Sect. 6.  
An answer to all the Texts produced by the Admonitour, as, 

Rom. 12.7, 8. fol. 31.  
1 Cor. 12.28. fol. 33.  
Ephes. 4.14. fol. 36.  
Revel. 4.6. & 5.6. & 19.14. fol. 36, 37.     

Sect. 7.  
A Paraenetical conclusion. fol. 39 ad finem.    

The Sum of the second part. pag. 46.  

THe danger to assert the Church brought to a Sceleton. Sect. 1. fol. 47.  
The corruption came not into the Church by such degrees as is supposed in the Admonitory Letter. Sect. 2.  
The government of the Church proved to be Aristocratical. 52. ad 59  
A Presbytery with a Bishop the Apostles living. 59, 60.  
Of Patriarches, Primates, Metropolitans, Bishops. 63.  
A little knowledge in some men an occasion of error. 66, 67.   

Sect. 3.  
That the Combinational Church's corruption, was not the Cathedral Church's generation. 71.  
Churches at first could not be Combinational. 73.  
Of the names of Teacher, Pastor, Ruler, Lord-Bishop, Dean, Chancellor, Surrogate, Archdeacon. 75.  
No usurpation for Bishops assembled in Synods and Councils to excommunicate offenders. 81, 82.  
This was not contrary to the Orthodox pattern, Acts 15. 84.  
To censure any man's person, not the privilege of the Presbyterian Church. 85, 86.  
That Alexander of Alexandria began not this usurpation against Arrius. 88, 89.   

Sect. 4.  
That the Presbyterial Church in respect of its primitive constitution, consisted not only of living stones. 91.  
That the rise of the rottening of the Church was not its falling from a poor, pure, presbyterial Church, into an impure, unpolished, parochial Church. 92.  
Of a Parson, Vicar, Warden, Overseer of the Poor, Widow, Midwife. 94.  
Of Polycarp and Iraeneus. 97.   

Sect. 5.  
The original of the Provincial Church, the Metropolitan, that this was no degeneration, nor wisdom of the flesh. 99  
The name, office of the Archbishop not profane and blasphemous, but honourable. 101.  
Of the subservient names, Prebend, Surrogate, Vicar-General. 102.  
Of Austin the Monk's conversion of Britain, and Pope Gregory. 105, 106.  
Of the conversion of Britain to Christianity. ibid.   

Sect. 6.  
That there is a National Church, and that this is consonant to Scripture, reason, experience. 108.  
That the customs charged upon the National Church taken up by Jewish imitation, is more than can be proved, or if true, yet not therefore to be rejected. 116.  
The five instances examined. 

1. National times and feasts. 120, ad 127.  
2. National places, as consecrated meeting houses, &c ibid.  
3. National persons, as universal Preachers, Office-Priests, etc. 132.  
4, National performances, as stinted worship, Choristers, etc. 135.  
5. National payments, as Offerings, Tithes, Mortuaries, etc. 146.     

Sect. 7.  
The charge is upon the Ecumenical or Roman Church, which concerns not the Church of England, and therefore let them answer it.    

The Sum of the third part. pag. 149.  

A Preamble.  
AN ingenuous confession of our just provocation of God's anger, and a justification of his proceeding against us, but that Papists and Sectaries allege non causam pro causâ, and the Author hopes that upon our repentance and amendment, God may return and have mercy on us. 150. ad 153.   

Sect. 1.  
Of the vile and virulent head the Pope. ibid.   

Sect. 2.  
Of the British King, called in the Admonitory the violent head of this National Church. 155, 156.  
That this National Church was not next in naughtiness to the Roman. ibid.  
That the British King was no violent head, since in his Dominions he was the supreme Governor. And every Superior is in Church-matters Supreme, by occasion of which the supremacy of all Superiors is vindicated. 156. ad 161.  
The Reasons of the Admonitour to prove the British King a violent head, proved to be very weak. 161. ad 168.   

Sect. 3.  
Of the Provincial Church, and its haughty horrible head, as the Admonitour is pleased to call him, the Archbishop. 170.  
Of the Cathedral Church, and its head the Lordly Diocesan, blamed by the Admonitour to be an idle and addle head. 172.  
The vial of God's wrath poured on the Cathedral justly, but not quatenus Cathedral. ibid.  
Of his Epithets, idle and addle. ibid.  
The title lordly Diocesan examined. 173.  
The Prophecy of Isaiah, 13.19. ill applied. 74.  
Of the Parochial Church and its head, the o●de and eldest evil head as he is called in the Admonitory. 175. ad 178.  
The Combinational Church a tradition of men. ibid.  
What is to be thought of traditions. 180. ad 182.   

Sect. 7.  
Of divers other things jeered at in the Admonitory, as, 183. 

1. Communion book praying. 185.  
2. Homily book preaching. 186.  
3. Canon book swearing. 187.  
4. Covering or uncovering the head in time of divine service. 187.  
5. Of outward calling to be Overseers in a cleansed Combinational Church. 189.  
6. Of reading the Scripture in Churches. 190. 191, 192.  
7. Of Romish Rites imputed to us. 194.  
8. Of humane constitutions imputed to us, such as are, ibid. 

1. Matrimonial Banes. 195.  
2. Marriage Rings. ibid.  
3. The sign of the Cross. 196.  
4. White Surplice. ibid.  
5. Choristers singing answered before, part 2. 142.  
6. Funeral Sermons. 197.  
7. Idol-sureties of Godfathers and Godmothers. 198.      
The question discussed whether Baptism may be applied to the infants of profane Christian parents? 202. ad 205.  
As also whether such, whom our straitlaced men are pleased to call ignorant and scandalous livers, may be admitted to the Lords Supper. 205. ad 212.  
Of the Pew called in the Admonitory Monarchical, and the Ministerial Pulpit. 212. ad 215.  
A strange privilege attributed to the Combinational Elders. viz. That the Elders must stand and sit together in the face and full view of the whole Assembly. 217.  
An answer to the recapitulation of the whole Letter. 224.  
In the constitution of a Church how far all parties are agreed, in what they disagree, both in matter and form, and integral parts. 224. ad 225.  
That the texts alleged being well examined, prove not the Covenant required by a Combinational Church. 227. ad 236.  
A fault on all hands for misalledging the text.  
We make no promise of eternal life to profane persons.  
The conclusion wholly Apologetical. 238, etc.   
Place these Tables before fol. 1.    


Calais learned Readins on the Stat. 21. Hen. 8. Chapter 5. of Sewers.  
The Rights of the People concerning Impositions, stated in a learned Argument, by a late eminent Judge of this Nation.  
An exact Abridgement of the Records in the Tower of London, from the Reign of K. Edward the second, to K. Richard the third, of all the Parliaments holden in each King's Reign, and the several Acts in every Parliament, by Sir Rob. Cotton, Kt. and Baronet.   

PLAYS.  
Philaster.  
The Hollander.  
The Merchant of Venice.  
The strange discovery.  
Maid's Tragedy.  
King and no King.  
Othell● the Moor of Venice.  
The grateful servant.  
The Wedding.   
FINIS.