To my honoured kinsman, Mr. William Rook▪  
SIR,  
YOu know the occasion of my meddling with this controversy: It remaineth that I give account of my permitting these rude papers to the public view; which is, first, because all good Christians are not satisfied herein: if I may hereby undeceive some of them, I have so much of my end; next I conceive it the duty of every good son of our sacred Mother the Church of England, to defend her rites and holy decrees against the calumnies of turbulent spirits, possessing so many in these times: whose study is to cavil at all, but the vain Minerva's of their own brains. If my endeavour may happily contribute any thing to peace, I shall think my labour well bestowed. Lastly, the candid Reader may be advertised that the satisfaction which he receives herein, he oweth to you. The God of peace compose all our unhappy differences, which is the constant prayer of  
Your affectionate Kinsman, I. R.   

An answer to certain Crudities and frivolous Objections made against the observation of a day in memory of our Saviour Christ his Birth.  
A true copy of the objections.  
THe Question concerning the Observation of a day in memory of Chri●●'s birth, is the same which our Saviour put to the Pharisees, Whether John's Baptism were of heaven or from men? Luke. 20.  
So the observation of this day, if it be of God, it is a duty and a sin to omit it. But if it were set up by man, all men do acknowledge, That what man shall set up, man may take down. Therefore first.  

1. Have we any command in scripture for it? if not, then  
2. Did the Apostles or Disciples ever observe it?  
3. Would they have omitted it, if it had been a duty?  
4. Was it observed in the Primitive Church for fifty years after the Apostles were all dead? search the Scripture and ecclesiastical history.  
5. How came it to be Christ's day? tell us the Original of this duty, that we may know, whether it be Divine or human. Is it like to be a duty and no footsteps at all left in the word, either Precept or Example looking that way?  
6. Whether the Papists may not say as much for all their heaps of Traditions, as we can say for this? And if we once follow traditional Divinity, where shall we stop?  
7. Give us a definition of that sin which the Scripture calls Will-Worship.   
I suppos● these Queries duly weighed, will satisfy ●ny ingenuous spirit, That man was the founder of this festival.  
Object. Do we not celebrate days of thanksgiving at the appointment of the Magistrate (as the 5. of November.) and may we not this day as well as those?  
Answer. 1. Wherever the Magistrate appoints such days, it is lawful for him to forbid them again when he will.  
Answer 2. If God had not appointed what memorial he would have of his Son Christ, man had the greater liberty. But where we are directed how and when to celebrate the remembrance of our blessed Saviour, for us to superadd, we have cause to fear, lest we become guilty of that sin which Scripture calls Will-worship. Like whereto is that sin taxed, Ezek. 48. 8. setting our threshold by his threshold, and our posts by his posts, which is there called a defilement.  
Besides, consider the constant abuse of this solemnity; and though I know, abusus non tollit usum; yet where it is never otherwise, but the devil hath more service at this time than God, I think it concerneth the Magistrate to look to it. He that would read more on this Subject, let him read Mr Cawdry's book against Dr. Hamond concerning holydays and Superstitious▪ worship.  
Consider that there is nothing more often blamed in Scripture then this, to follow the inventions of man in the worship of God, which is the case in hand.  
I would ask that man who blames the neglect of this Festival whether he that will not keep this memorial, doth break any of the ten commandments in so doing? and if not, then sure it is no sin to omit it.  

Sect. 1. THe Question concerning observation of a day in memory of Christ's birth, is the same which our Saviour put to the Pharisees, Whether John's Baptism were of heaven, or from men? Luke 20.  
In all orderly di●putes, the Question should necessarily be stated▪ now by your strict prohibition of our solemn commemoration of our saviour's nativity, it seemeth the question is, Whether it be lawful on any day to remember our saviour's birth, and therein to meet in holy assemblies, to preach and hear the word of God, to sing Psalms, pray, give thanks, administer and receive the holy Saeraments? we affirm, your sect deny it, as if some Act of amnesty had passed upon that day as, Job 3. 〈◊〉 &c. and it were resolved upon the Question, The day of Christ's birth shall be no more had in remembrance.  
This Opponent not so much as repeating the question, as in some sudden passion when furor ar●a minist●at, snatcheth up that which first comes to hand, and so precipita●ely rusheth on to the encounter, that he stumbleth in his onset saying, The Question concerning the observation of a day in memory of Christ's birth, is the same which our Saviour put to the Pharises, &c. We answer 1. in the Scr●pture which you cite, Luk▪ 20. 1. there is no mention of the Pharises, neither Math. 21. 23. Mark 11. 30. where the same history is recorded: We read {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, the chief Priests, and (or with) the Elders of the▪ people: Consider whether you do well translate that, the Pharisees, &c. 2. We say, that the ●ord answered their question by another question, which was concerning the Baptism of ●ohn; there is not a word concerning the day of his nativity; now to say that things so much differing are the same, consider what you would call it if another had said so? what a silly animal would you deem him who would admit such conclusions? In many respects this pretended parallel runs uneven. 1. ●hrists dilemma was necessary to show that if they had believed John Baptists testimony, they would have known by what authority Christ did those things▪ but your objection is unnecessary, as will appear. 2. That was an holy refutation of Jewish u●beliefe; but yours a Schismatical caption, to the contempt of the Christian Churches customs. But to pass by these first oversights of yours; we may use Goliah's sword to cut him shorter, and thus retort the point of your argument▪ The prohibition of our observation of a day in memory of Christ's n tivity, is it from heaven, or of men? if from heaven, show us an● place of holy Scripture forbidding the same: If you say, that prohibition is of men; we shall with good conscience follow venerable an●iquity, rather then▪ trouble the Sacred peace of the Church about things of such nature.   

Sect. 2. SO the observation of this day]  
What supplement is here necessary for your elliptical speaking? we would rather that you should consider, than we determine, being unwilling to injure you. So the observation, &c. Do you mean, ho● dato, that Christ's forementioned question and yours, are the same? you have no● much reason so to beg the question▪ and we should have as little to ●rant you that which you shall never be able to prove.   

Sect. 3. If it be of God, it is a duty &c.]  
Deal syllogistically, and your assumption will be, But it is no sin to omit it, which your better informed conscience, we hope will show you is false, when you shall know that contumacy against the lawful decrees and customs of the Church of Christ, disturbance of her peace, breach of holy unity, uncharitable censuring and condemning your brethren, offence of weak consciences, bringing an odious scandal on the Church, opening a wide and dangerous window to sects and perni●ious heresies and other mischievous consequences hereof, are a sin whose name is Legion.   

Sect. 4. All in ●n do acknowledge, that what man shall set up, man may take down]  
It is very troublesome handling such disjointed arguments, but their infirmity may not excuse their falsehood— That all men acknow●edge, or ought so to do, is very false; for some better understand, and so we hope will you.   

Sect. 5. THat what man shall set up, man may take down]  
We are very willing to think that these lame expressions veil some more solid and sincere meaning: if your proposition be, Man may lawfully take down that which man seateth up (which you must mean if you dispute, {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, and to any purpose) than we may justly inquire concerning the quantity of the proposition, viz. Whether you universally affirm it; your sense being thus, Whatsoever man seateth up, he may lawfully take down; if it be but indefinite, as (some things which man setteth up &c. suppose an house, barn &c. he may lawfully take down) if it be to no other man's pr●iudice, we shall willingly grant it: but if you universally affirm, in a determinate Subject, subordinate to the service and glory of God, your second thoughts will inform you that your assertion is false and erroneous: for it will not hold in things dedicated to God. The Centurion built a Synagogue for the Jews, L●ke. 7. 5. he might not after dedication thereof have taken it down. Again by Setting up, we conceive you use a translatitious manner of speaking borrowed from builders, founders, appointers, or authors of things, to customs▪ or rites appliable; as if you said, Whatsoever man foundeth, determineth, appointeth or bringeth into use or custom, may lawfnlly be annulled and taken away by man; which is very false, if the instance be in things subordinate to the Service of God, whether we consider circumstance, or thing: for example; there are two circumstances to every action of man appertaining. 1. place, concerning which a due consideration of the forecited instance may satisfy: it was lawful for the Centurion to design that place for a Synagogue on which he did build it, but not lawful, thence to take it being consecrated or dedicated to the Service of God, Durante usu:  
2. It was lawful for a man to appoint or determine his days of Nazaritship for a certain time, concerning which he might vow, or set up that resolution, but not lawfully take down or annull the same: See Numb. 6. So the vow of Jonadab son of Rechab, commanding his posterety to drink no wine, build house, sow seed etc was at first, arbitrary, and so it was but an appointment by man; yet they might not annull or take it down. See Je●em. 35. 6, 7, 8, 18, 19 and there are now some temporal vows binding.  
3. A thing determined by man in Subordination to God's Service, however arbitrary it be for the proprietor to ordain it so, or otherwise to dispose of it as he pleaseth; yet after he hath so ordained, and set it up, he may not lawfully take it down or impropriate the same, lest he bear his sin, as Ananias and Saphira too late knew. Act. 5, 3, 4. &c. whence the falsehood of your ground appeareth, and what your Superstructions are like to prove, may easily be conj●ctured.   

Sect. 6. Have we any Command in Scripture for it?]  
If you mean in terminis terminantihus, thus, Is there any express Scripture which saith▪ on the 25. of December▪ keep the feast of Christ's nativity? we affirm not, neither were it needful, seeing that in Christ, God freed us from the band of l●gal ceremoni●s as well concerning detemined times by the Levitical law appointed and limited, as places: we are not now bound to go to Je●usalem to worship: John. 4. nor to the 14. day of the first month (Exod. 12. 6.) but for circumstances of time and place, it is left to the authority of the Church, orderly▪ and conveniently in things public to determine for the government of the Church, in which the ●eremoniall law left no such liberty: But God never did, never will permit the publi●e government to the fancies or judgements of private spirits: for what order or peace ever was, or can be in such a confused liberty▪ yet we must know that God never▪ lefr it arbitrary, whether man would worship hiw or no; or whether they might at their pleasures contemn the authority of the Church, and disturb her sacred peace, the Apo●●le saying— But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God. And again, Despise ye the Church of God? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. 1. Cor. 11. 16, 22. If you wo●ld here Syllogistically dispute, your arguement would be to this purpose. That which hath no command in terminis in Scripture for it, may not be done or may be left undone, though the Church otherwise determine:  
But the observation of a day in memory of Christ's birth, hath no command in termin▪ s in Scripture for it. Ergo &c. Who perceiveth not the falsehood of the first proposition? seeing that we have no express command in terminis in Scripture for any thing indifferent (for were it expressly commanded or forbidden there, it were not indifferent) those things being left to the Church to determine: we have not express command in Scripture for some things necessary, as administration of the Lord's supper to women, &c. And if you will allow payment in your own coin, may not the Anabaptis●s say as much for their denial of poedobaptism? if you say women are included in the general precepts, as also infants of believing parents, which is true; then allow us the same liberty of concluding, and we shall satisfy those who will understand. Lastly we say (concerning the observation of a day in memory of Christ's birth) have we any command in Scripture against it? you will not affirm that: being then neither expressly commanded nor forbidden, you grant it of its own nature adiaphorous or indifferent; and we are sure that in things of that nature you must acknowledge that the Church of Christ hath power to determine, if at least you will allow her any.   

Sect. 7. DId the Apostles or disciples ever observe it?]  
We answer, doth it appear that they did not observe it? further we say that all that which our Lord Jesus did, is not recorded in Scripture, John. 20. 30. John. 21. 25. And can we reasonably think that all things which the Apostles or disciples did, are written in holy Scripture? we read not that all the Apostles were baptised, where, when, and by whom; will you therefore conclude, that they were not at all baptised? In things simply necessary to Salvation, the general precept was sufficient to show it so; and for things subordinate to decency, unity, & order, it was left to the Church to determine conveniently in respect of times, places, and persons: hence appeareth a sufficient answer to your next. Quaere.   

Sect. 8. Would they have▪ omitted it, if it had been a duty?]  
To dispute ex non concessis, either presupposeth much igrance in the Respondent, or bewrayeth it in the Opponent; Who ever granted you that the Apostles &c. omitted it? or when did you, or ever shall be able to prove that they did? what vain trilling use you in such a frequent begging of the question?   

Sect▪ 9 Was it observed in the Primitive Church for fifty years after the Apostles were dead? search the Scriptures and ecclesiastial history.]  
We answer again; that you found us in possession of many hundred years' prescription, and therefore it rests on your parts to show us that it was not observed in and from the Apostles times (except until now of late days) which when you attempt to do, or to show that any consent of the universal Church ever annulled the observation thereof, we shall begin with you upon a new score. If your argument lie thus, It is not found in Scripture nor in Ecclesiastical history, &c. Therefore in the Apostles times and Fifty years after the Apostles were dead, it was not observed; The consequence is l●me; for, A non Scripto ad non factum, non valet argumentum: how absurd is it to say, It is not found written; therefore it was not done? all is not written which Christ did, as hath been said before: if therefore you find any thing to the contrary in your search of the Scriptures, &c. proclaim your {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in open streets, and sacrifice to your invention: We find that good and ancient authors spoke of the observation of that day, as of a thing long before their times accustomed and in use. See Ammianus Marcellinus. l. 21. who lived about Three hundred and sixty years after Christ. Gregory Nazianz▪ Orat. 32. who lived about the same age, Augustin and many others. And we further say, that the reason why little or no mention of this days observation, not only for Fifty but many more years can be found in the ancient Ecclesiastical writers, may be, and most probably is, because so long, none opposed that rite and custom of the Church: So was it in case of paedobaptism, unto Cyprian time and the Conncils of Carthage and the Milevetan. An. 416. 417. (in which Pelagius and Caelestius were condemned) because no opposition did before that, for some hundred years, give the Orthodox father's occasi●n to dispute or write in defence of it: indeed, to what end should any write in defence of that which none opposed? But when some pretenders to Christian religion opposed the truth, or raised schisms dangerous to the unity of the Church, or the wholesome Rites and customs of the same, than the Orthodox wrote, and many of their works are yet extant, and so are divers of their Sermons and godly Or●tions delivered to the people on the same day, which sufficiently testify▪ the custom of the Church of Christ concerning the observation of the day in memory of our saviour's nativity: Lastly, it is well known, that there were some obscure ages, wherein few or none writ, or none so eminent and known, as that there writings were transmitted to posterity.   

Sect. 10. HOw came it to be Christ's day?]  
If you believe that which the Angel told the shepherds. Luke. 2. 10, 11. that Christ was on that day borne, this quere is superfluous; mark the words, The Angel said unto th●m, fear not, for b● hold I bring you good tidings of great joy which shall be to all p●ople▪ for unto you is born this day in the City o● David, a Saviour which is Christ the Lord. You pos●ibly will say, what is that to us? what cause of joy or commemoration have we? Certainly the same that all the people of God then had, if Christ were born your saviour: for in that he saith, which shall be to all people, he includeth us Gentiles as well as the Jews, for he is not only the Saviour of the Jews, but of the b●l●iving Gentiles also, Rom 3. 29 neither of those only who lived that day, but of all ages: you may say, how know we whether he were born on that day which we observe? we answer, how know you the contrary? One day of the year he was born; you that so obstinately deny the day which we observe to be it, assign us one other which you will affirm, was the day of his nativity, except you think he was not born in any time: You will say again; ●ut why should we yearly observe a day? we say first, for the same reason which Moses gave Israel for the yearly observation of the Passover; When your Children shall say unto you, what mean you by this service? you shall say, As this day (by the computation of the Church of England) was our Saviour Christ born, whom God sent into the world to deliver us, not from a temporal bondage but from the eternal misery of hell and damnation, to which sin had enslaved us. Again Secondly, you may as rationally say, Why should we at all, or any time be thankful to God for this his greatest mercy conferred on the elect, considering the end of his incarnation, his suffering and man's redemption, which Paul reciteth under the motion of a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation. 1. Tim. 1. 15. and our Saviour recounteth as a principal specimen of God's love to mankind, John. 3 16. indeed it was the chief; non enim prodesset nasci, nifi redimi profuisset. Ambros. And is it not worth thanks in your sense?   

Sect. 11. ●ell us the original of this duty]  
They who will not learn of Christ (the only mediator between God and man, through whom, and by whose merits only, they can be heard) to say, thy will be done in earth, as it is heaven, &c. may possibly doubt concerning the original of this duty, not knowing, or not believing the practice of an holy Angel, or a multitude of the heavenly host, praising God on the day of Christ's nativity, Luke. 2. 10. 13. to be a sufficient warrant (without consent of Pharisees) to prescribe a duty to men on earth; but believers, whose hearts and tongues do indeed accord in prayer, neither question the original of this duty, nor whether it were divine and from heaven, or of men; guided by God's Spirit they were. The ground of your doubt is a mere caption and begging of the question, sufficiently refuted in that which hath been said. ●hat you say, no footsteps at all are left in the word, either precept, or example looking th●t way; consider better and know that the gospel (Luke. 2.) is the word of God, and the practice of a multitude of holy angel's example sufficient for them who desire ind●ed to do the will of God on earth as it is don● in heaven: Lastly, we say, show us before Mr Calvin's time any footstep or example, I say not of holy Angels, but of any true Christian for your new discipline.   

Sect. 12. Whether the Papists may not say as much for all their heaps of traditions, as we can for this?]  
They may, and do say (as you do) some things untrue. But for satisfaction in this behalf, you must know, 1. That some traditions were Apostolical. 2. Thes. 3. 6. and they were either written, as the dogmata, doctrines of holy Scripture, which Jr●naeus calleth veritatis traditionem l. 3. c. 4. or sine charactere vel atramento▪ of which, saith he, many nations of the Barbarians, who believe in Christ, diligently holding the old tradition, believing in one God the maker of the heaven and earth▪ & all things that are therein, by Christ Jesus his son, through faith please God▪ &c. Therefore some traditions Apostolical, were not written but delivered viva voce, to the Churches which they planted, as rites for o●der and convenience of the same. The ground of this d●sti●ction, the Apost●e himself lay●th down 2 Th●s. 2 15. saying, {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, Hold fast the traditions, which ye have been taught, whether by word, or by our Epistle: And we must remember that the Apostles committed not all to writing, but only those things which appertained unto the ground and essence of faith and sanctification, or thereto nearly subordinate▪ Again it is ne●essary to distinguish ri es of the hurch from doctrines, and things necessary from indifferent; also things perpe●ual, from changeable, which are not universal, as some of the others are: for som● of the Apostolical traditions were acc●mmodated to times, places and persons, and so not to be esteemed universally binding, a● all times, places, and all persons; as for example, saluting with an holy kiss▪ anointing the sick (Jam 5. 14.) abs●inence from blood. Act. 15. 0, 29. Also, as it is necessary to distinguish in these things; so, to know that in things of their own nature indifferent, thou art bound to give no offence to the brethren with whom thou livest, but to observe such their rites; there being necessary to all men ever, and in all places, as one faith, so one love, but not one rite or custom, though these are not rashly to be violated by any person, the institution whereof was from its beginning in public authority of the Church, not any private spirits.  
Moreover by traditions, good writers sometimes understand any thing concerning rites, doctrine and discipline Ecclesiastical, not expressly written in Scripture, but that which is by good and necessary consequence, thence to be concluded, as paedobaptism, observation of the Christian Sabbath, &c. wherein it is observable that Christ condemned the Sadduces of error, through ignorance of that Scripture, whose consequence they knew▪ not or would not acknowledge. Moses said, I am the God of Abraham, &c. here was no express word to prove the resurrection of the dead; but necessary consequence here is, because God is the God of the living. Thus understand in holy duties, that though we must ever be regulated by the holy Scriptures, yet is it not always necessary to have express Scripture in terminis for our warrant therein, where a necessary consequence from the general rule is sufficient; for example, we find no express word commanding us to pray in the English tongue; you cannot hence conclude, that praying in English is will worship, because we have no express word of God for it; because the general rule is sufficient, omnis lingua laudet Dominum, and the sense of Scripture, that we should pray in a known tongue, viz. in that tongue which we, & those with whom we pray, do understand: we read not in any express Scripture that we must preach the Gospel in England, or that the Apostles ever did so; yet you will not say that it is will-worship, or Popery so to do; because the general rule is sufficient warrant, which saith, Go into all the world▪ preach the Gospel to every Creature. Mark. 16. 15. but this is a tradition and practice of the Church since religion was planted among the English; though we sinde no express mention of England in holy Scriptures, yet we know no cause to doubt whether we ought to preach in England, or may lawfully so do, without danger of being guilty of will-worship, because we have no express Scripture for it; and if it be lawful to preach in this place upon the general warrant, why not also to preach, pray, praise God, on the 25. of December? the general warrant concerning the circumstance of time being, rejoice evermore, pray without ceasing, in every thing give thanks. See Ephes. 1. 16. and 5. 20. 1 Thes. 5. 16, 17, 18. 1 Thes. 2. 13. 2 Thes. 1. 3. Phil 1. 3. Col. 3. 15. 1 Tim 2. 1. Hebr. 13. 15. In what Scripture find you your exception to the 25. of December? may we not on that day give God thanks for our meat and drink with your good leave? and why not for the greatest of blessings, the bread of life bestowed upon us on that day?  
To conclude, hence it may appear that the Church may appoint and use external rites and orders for conveniency and decency tending to edification; though we hold that no tradition be●●des holy Scripture is simple necessary to salvation; yet as Augustin saith, ●p. Casulano, In his rebus de quibus nih●l certi statuit Scriptura divina, mos populi Dei vel instituta maiorum pro lege tenend sunt, that is, In those things concerning which divine Scripture determineth nothing certain, t●e custom of God's eople, or institutions of our ancestors are to be held instead of a law: provided that there appear nothing therein constituted▪ accustomed, or used, contrary to the word of God: so much be spoken concerning Apostolical and holy traditions.  
2. Apostolical traditions are tares of the envious man's scattering, mere inventions of men, not subordinate to faith, sanctity and edification, nor consonant to the holy word of God; many such crept into the Jewish Church before our saviour's incarnation; whereof see Math. 15. 2. 3. 6. Mark 7. 13. Gal. 1. 14. Paul before his calling, saith, that he was more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of his fathers. With these we may arrange that same faraginem of the Talmudists, and if you will so call them, heaps of traditions which crept into the Church of Rome, to the corruption of doctrine and truth; for which traditions the Papists so eagerly contend; see their long Council of Trent; and consider the vast difference between their traditions, and our rites. Popish traditions are generally against express Scriptures, or necessary consequences thence to be deduced; and of them, some against the fundamentals of religion; which none but the very ignorant or malicious can object against the rites of the Church of England. Popish traditions (properly so called) are points which generally were never received by the Church or orthodox fathers, thereof but rather generally opposed by them of the purest ages; but ours, for instance this concerning the observation of a day in memory of our saviour's nativity, was never opposed until of late years: Popish traditions, as also the pharisaical, did make void the doctrine of God; which none can justly object against us: now we speak of Popish traditions properly so called; for we are not of their number who call all that Popery, which either they understand not, or which agreeth not with their fanatical opinions; for when they speak for truth and Apostolical traditions, they do no more speak their own, than the Devil did speak his own words, or sense when (in hope thereby either to gain credit to his lies, or to bring a suspicion on the truth of the Gospel) he affirmed Christ to be the holy one of God, Luk. 4. 34. Mark. 1. 24. Nay but when he speaks a lie, than speaketh he of his own, John. 8. 44. All is not devilish which the devil said; so neither count we all Popish which the Papists say: when therefore they speak for those traditions whereby they slid away, and continued not in the truth of Christ, then speak they for their heaps of traditions, such as their Council of Trent equalled with the dictates of God's ●pirit in sacred Scriptures; and such other inventions of man may hereto be added, as the old Pharisees did, or the modern now do obtrude upon their deluded hearers for doctrines, whereby they elevate the commandment of God, and as much as in them is, make then of less power and authority with men; and so force God's commands to give place to old traditions, as Papists do, or to new, as some, therein as bad, or worse, now do. And now bona vestra cum venia, we would gladly be satisfied, whether you (who would fain pin your fancy of will-worship upon our sleeves) do not you in your Classical traditions, fall into a more just censure, or suspicion of will-worship and depowering the commandments God, who expressly saith, endeavour to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, Ephs. 4. 3. and Heb. 10, 24. 25. let us consider one another to provoke unto love, not forsaking the assembling ourselves together, but your tradition (not so much valuing the unity and peace of Christ's Church as your own wills) will not admit any to communicate with you, except he can reach his conscience so wide as to subscri●e to your new discipline. God's word ●aith (Rom. 14. 6.) be that observeth a day, observeth it unto the Lord; and ver. 10. why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? and ver. 13. let us n●t judge one another, and ver 15. if thy brother be grieved, now walkest thou not charitably; destroy not him with thy meat for whom Christ died: And ver. 17. for whosoever in these things serveth Christ, is acceptable unto God▪ let us then follow those things which concern peace, and wherewith one may ●dify another: but you would have all follow your rigid opinions, or else you will neither hold communion nor charity with them; but brand them with that bloody name of malignant, than which you can say no worse, but only reprobate.   

Sect. 13. ANd if we once follow traditional divinity, where shall we stop?]  
What will not unskilful confidence venture on? Had you been well informed to●distinguish between traditions, you might have spared yourselves this trouble. Certainly they that follow the Apostolical traditions or doctrine of the Gospel only, shall safely stop, and rest satisfied therein, which ●uide and constancy we heartily wish you, but as yet know not that in ●our late-born discilpine vou follow ei●her, who have so many off-sets of several Sects sprung from you, as are oft to seek where to stop, or of what religion to be; I speak things too well known; witness the miserable divisions which have torn in sunder the late happy unity of the Church of England. Lastly, you vainly trifle, and would imply, that we observing a day in remembrance of our saviour's nativity, do therein follow traditional divinity in your sense, which is a parologism and silly begging of the question, which a junior Sophister would account very absurd and ridiculous.   

Sect. 14. GIve us a definition of that sin which the Scripture calleth will-worship]  
If you know not what that is, why take you up a medium to prove your opinion with, which yourself understand not? could you teach, who understand not what you say, nor whereof you affirm? if you do indeed know what {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is, why are you not theticall in laying down your own sense and definition thereof? you that would catechise us concerning will-worship; rather dispute fairly; and your argument will thus lie.  
Whatsoever the Scripture calleth will-worship, is a sin: But, The Scripture calleth observation of a day in remembrance of Christ's nativity will worship: Ergo. observation of a day in remembrance of Christ's nativity, is a sin.  
We answer; until you show us where the Scripture so calleth it, we shall laugh at your bold weakness, who durst undertake this q●arrel: yet to do you a courtesy, we tell you that will-worship is any thing brought into the worship of God, without his commands or by the widow of man only, which hath not its ground in ho●y Scripture. As for our parts, we worship n●ither time nor place (though we cannot worship without these circumstances) we worship God through Christ (by whom he made both time and place, Heb 1. 2. Gen. 1. Joh. 1. 2. Col, 1. 16.) we worship him by prayer, thanksgiving, preaching and hearing the holy word on that day; w●ich being according to the will of God, and the express word of God, bewa●e that you bespatter not with your dirty terms of will-worship, and the like: we suppose you will not blame the Angels for coming from heaven, that they might sing and praise God for Christ's nativity on the d●y thereof, and preach the same unto men: O but say you, you count it a holy day; why not? seeing according to the custom of the Church of Christ, we set it apart to God's s●rvice. But say you then, Is not that will-worship? we demand; Is dedicating of a thing to God's service, in that act, a making it holy? or is a counting a consecrated thing holy, concluded will-worship in your Schools? nay but it doth not universally conclude any worship: we suppose that you will grant the elect Angels are holy; that supposition concludes no adoration of Angels at all due.   

Sect. 15. I Suppose these Queries duly weighed will sati●fy any ingenuous Spirit, that man was the founder of this festival.]  
To argue by such often queries may breed doubts rather than resolve them: how you come to lay claim to ingenuous, or witty, who are satisfied by these questions, we wish that we were satisfied; seeing that the more we weigh them, the lighter and more frivolous we find them: your consequence from your supposed ingenuous sense is another begging the question, which wise men account the most foolish of all fallacies.   

Sect. 16. Ans. 1. WHere ever the Magistrate appoints such days, &c.]  
we remit you to the former answer, Sect. 5. to which we only add, Was the Magistrate or Power appointing that half the day, Novem. 5. should be kept holy (in memory of God's great mercy that day showed in delivering us from eminent destruction of our bodies) authors of will-worship? or the due observation of that statute, such? which you seem ingenuously to suppose; if not, why had not former Magistrates, and Parliaments as much power in the days of old to appoint or consecrate unto the same Lord, days of thanksgiving and solemn commemoration (for their deliverance from eternal destruction of body and soul) as they had for the other in these last times? and why may not we without offence, observe them still? our consciences being not satisfied, how any authority or consent of men may lawfully recall, impropriate, or, in your phrase, take down that which they have with a general and unanimous consent of lal parties interessed, once dedicated to the service of God, the same reason, end, and use thereof, still remaining.   

Sect. 17. Ans. 2. but where we are directed how, and when to celebrate the remembance of our blessed Saviour, for us to sup●radd &c.]  
How and when? If you mean in praising God by Christ, preaching him, hearing his word, adminstration and receiving the holy Sacraments, which represent, and remember us of our ever blessed Saviour; we are so far from superadding, that we only desire free liberty of doing those very things which God's word evidently directeth us to do in his service: consider well, whether it be not a superaddition of yours to permit remembrance of our blessed Saviour, adding this exception, only upon the 25. of December it is a sin so to do: and whether in your sense, this be not like that sin taxed Ez●k 43. We understand not why we may not remember our saviour's birthday and coming into the world (without which he had not suffered for our salvation) or why it should be esteemed good on any day of the year, but evil on the 25. of December, if you can solidly teach us, we shall indeed think you ingenuous, and ourselves your debtors; but in the mean time we confess, that a day prohibited time and place, we cannot understand.   

Sect. 18. LIke whereto is that sin taxed Ezek. 48. 8. &c.]  
We suppose you mean Ezek. 43. 8. which is as much unlike this business, as yourself to a sound Interpreter; show us that there is any abomination (which in that place is charged on Israel) in remembering that we had a Saviour born on the 25 of December, in preaching on those texts of holy Scriptures, which either foretold, or declared the truth of God accordingly fulfilled concerning the same, or to praise, pray, sing ●salmes, and read Scripture, or to administer the holy Sacraments; this is all we desire should on that day be permitted us: if your weak stomachs cannot bear the smell of superstitious pies, or pottage, we will forbear them, rather than lose your company at Church. But to the matter, That place of the Prophet, teacheth how Isreal sinned in defiling the temple of the Lord, by setting up idols therein, or in places and chapels near to the place which God had set apart to his own service, this is idolatry is there and else where called whoredom, which he said, ver. 7. should be no more, which was literally fulfilled after their return from their Babylonish captivity; and to so this day they have no idols, though they worship not the true God aright because they believe no● in Christ, whom they do not think yet to be born, and therefore would willingly accord with you in forbidding a day in remembrance of Christ's nativity: But to your parallel, like whereto &c. it is easily and truly refuted, by saying unlike whereto is that sin taxed &c. for there Israel defiled God's house by idolatry; is it so when we preach, pray, or communicate? your ingenious application is admirable, and 'tis strange that whatsoever you think, the bells must ring.   

Sect. 19 YEt where it is never otherwise, but the devil hath more service that time &c.  
We answer concerning this Cup put into Benjamins Sack, with whomsoever it be found, let him die, and bear his sin: but we desire the calumniator to read and well consider Deut. 19 16, 17. &c.   

Sect. 20. I Think it concerns the Magistrate to look to it.]  
It doth so, if you mean the abuse of it; but that you say, is never otherwise, is a calumny which would suit with the accuser of the brethren, but such untruths ill become a Christian: here your own concession is answer enough, were your assumption true, abusus non tollit usum: you may know howmuch prayer, preaching, &c. are abused; should they therefore be used no more?   

Sect. 21. Loe him read Mr▪ Cawdryes &c.]  
Let him for us, who knows no no better use of preceious hours.   

Sect. 22. WHich is the case in hand]  
Still begging the question? 'tis not the case in hand: here is no following the inventions of man in the wors●●p of God; what a silly combatant would you judge him, who inst●ad of using his arms, would only entreat his Antogonist to give him that which is contended for?   

Sect. 23. ANy of the ten Commandments in so doing &c.]  
We retort your argument, and shoot your bolt back again, asking you Who blame the observation of this festivial; whether he that keepeth this day in memory of our▪ Saviours nativity, doth thereby break any of the ten Commandments▪ and if not, then sure it is no sin to observe it; and what ground then, have all your clamours against so constant a custom of the Church of Christ? but to come nearer to you, this your Quaere is not much more rational than that ridiculous question, What part of speech is Qui ante non ●avet, post dolebit? what if one should ask you; doth he that violateth charity and the unity of the Church of Christ, break any of the ten commandments, would you not readily answer, that he breaks them all? because you know that Charity is the sum and end of the law. Math. 22. 36, 37. 1 Tim. 1. 5. without which whatso●ver else we do, is nothing worth, 1 Cor. 13. 1. &c. and therefore the Apostle saith, Rom. 14. 1, 2. &c. (speaking of things in their own natu●e indifferent, whereof he instanceth in two, choice of meats, and observation of days) that God may be glorified on this ground, that he giveth God thanks, ver. 10. and earnestly blameth judging or censuring a brother in such things. ver. 15. concluding that, if thy brother be grieved &c. now walkest thou not charitably, or according to charity; and if I by thanksgiving am partaker of Christian liberty and freedom to serve God and to give him thanks and praise him on any day, why is my liberty judged of another man's conscience? and why am I evil spok●n of for that for which I give thanks? Have you for these and other like respects so much rent the sacred unity of the late happy Church of England, that we now seem like those dry and scattered bones in the prophet's vision, Ezek. 37. whereof the question may be, Can these dry bones live? have these quarrels caused the English to be a scorn and derision to foriagn nations? hath the contempt of the holy church's authority opened the door to so many ridiculous, irrational and impious heresies, which all know were at first but your off-sets? hath the bloody sword so often disputed these unhappy questions, undone so many noble and good families? and 
Sed praestat motos componere fluctus;  I say no more, but do you question whether they by whom these offences come, do therein break any of the commandments? please yourselves, conclude, Sure it is no sin: for our part, we look upon these prodigious divisions with grief of heart, and fear of the issue, being truly sensible that these breaches are too wide already, and heartily desire their happy closure, as for many reasons of greatest moment, so for that which the holy Ghost recordeth, Gen. 13. 7. to mark the dangerous importunity of that strife, between Abraham's and Lot's pastors, The Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then in the land. Let us therefore entreat all in the Apostles words Phil. 2. 1. &c. If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, be like● minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind &c. And now join in petition with us, unto the God of peace that he would be pleased to breathe the Spirit of unity and life upon our divided parts, and to give a right understanding to all parties, that with one heart and tongue we may glorify him, and live to him, that we may be saved by him.  
Amen.   
FINIS.