Bishop Bramhall's vindication of himself and the episcopal clergy, from the Presbyterian charge of popery, as it is managed by Mr. Baxter in his treatise of the Grotian religion together with a preface shewing what grounds there are of fears and jealousies of popery.

Bishop Bramhalls Vindication of himself and the Episcopal Clergy, from the Presbyte∣rian Charge of Popery, as it is managed by Mr. Baxter in his Treatise of the Grotian Religion.

CHAP. I.

Of Mr. Baxter and his Books, and Sequestrations.

BEfore I saw Mr. Baxters late Trea∣tise called, The Grotian Religion, it was to me, nec beneficio nec injuria, neither known for good nor hurt. I acknowledge the very Title of his

Book did not please me. Different Opinions do not make different Reli∣gions. It is the Golden Rule of Ju∣stice, not to do thus to another, which a man would not have done to himself. He would take it unkindly himself to have his own Religion contradistingui∣shed into the Prelatical Religion, from which he doth not much dissent, so he might have the naming of the Prelates; and the Presbyterian Religion, which he doth profess for the present; and the Independent Religion, which he shaketh kindly by the hand; and the Anabaptistical Religion, which chal∣lengeth Seniority of all Modern Sects. And then to have his Presbyterian Re∣ligion subdivided either according to the number of the Churches, into the English Religion, and the Scotish Reli∣gion, and the Gallician Religion, and the Belgian Religion, and the Helve∣tian Religion, and the Allobrogian Re∣ligion; of all the names of the Refor∣mers, into the Calvinistical Religion, and Brownistical Religion, Zuinglian Religion, and Erastian Religion, &c.

For all these have their differences. And so himself in his Preface to this very Treatise, admits those things for pious Truths, for which we have been branded with the names of Papists and Arminians, and have been plundered and spoiled of all that we had.

Let himself be judge whether this be not to have the faith of our Lord Iesus Christ with respect of persons. Iam. 2. 1. The Church of Christ is but one, one Fold and one Shepherd; Christian Religion is but one, one Lord, one Faith, one Hope. Then why doth he multiply Religions, and cut the Christian Faith into shreds, as if every Opinion were a fundamental Article of Religion? Let him re∣member that of St. Hierome; If you shall hear those who are said to be Chri∣stians any where, to be denominated not from the Lord Iesus Christ, but from some other person, know that this is not the Church of Christ, but the Sy∣nagogue of Antichrist.

So much for the Title of Mr. Baxters Book, now for his design. His main

scope is to shew that Grotius under a pretence of reconciling the Protestant Churches with the Roman Church, hath acted the part of a Coy-duck, willingly or unwillingly to lead Prote∣stants into Popery. And therefore he held himself obliged in duty to give warning to Protestants to beware of Grotius his followers in England, who under the name of Episcopal Divines, do prosecute the design of Cassander and Grotius, to reconcile us to the Pope, Page 2. And being pressed by his ad∣versary to name those Episcopal Di∣vines (vir dolosus versatur in genera∣libus) he gives no instance of any one man throughout his Book, but of my self. I shall borrow a word with him of himself, a word of Grotius, and a word or two concerning my self.

First for himself, he doth but wound himself through Grotius his sides, and in his censuring Grotius, teach his own Fellows to serve him with the same sawce. Grotius and Mr. Baxter both prosecute the same design of reconcilia∣tion, but Mr. Baxters object is the Bri∣tish

World, and Grotius his Object is the Christian World. Mr. Baxter as well as Grotius in prosecuting his de∣sign, doth admit many things which the greater part of his own Fellows do re∣ject. As that Praeterition is an act of justice in God, Praef. Sect. 7. That God giveth sufficient grace (in the Je∣suits sense) to those that perish, Sect. 8. That Redemption is universal, They (the Synod of Dort) give more to Christs Death for the Elect than we, but no less that he knows of to his Death for all than we, Sect. 10. He is as much for Free-will as we, They all profess that Man hath the natural faculty of Free-will, Sect. 11. He who had all his other Treatises which I did never see, in probability might find much more of the same kind. I do not dislike him for this, but rather commend him for unwrapping himself as warily as he could without any noise, out of the endless train of Error. And for other points wherein he is still at a default, I hope a little time and better informa∣tion, may set him right in those as well

as these. But others of his own Party do believe all these points which he ad∣mits to be as downright Popery as any is within the Walls of Rome. And with the same freedom and reason that he censures Grotius, they may censure him for the Popes stalking Horse or Coy-duck to reconcile us to Rome. Neither can he plead any thing for him∣self, which may not be pleaded as strongly, or more strongly for Gro∣tius.

He may object that those things which he admitteth, are all evident Truths; but sundry of those things which are admitted by Grotius, are Po∣pish Errors. This is confidently said, but how is he able to make it good to other men. Grotius took himself to have as much reason as Mr. Baxter, and much more learning and reading than Mr. Baxter. But still if his Fellows do no more approve of what he saith, than he approveth of that which Gro∣tius saith, they have as good ground to censure him, as he hath to censure Gro∣tius. Those very points which are ad∣mitted

by Mr. Baxter, are esteemed by his Fellows to be as gross and funda∣mental Errors, as any of those other su∣pernumerary points which are maintain∣ed by Grotius. But to come up closer to him, What if those other points disputed between Grotius and him be meer logomachies, or contentions a∣bout words, or mistaken Truths? He himself confesseth as much now of all the Arminian tenets, Pref. Sect. 15. I am grown to a very great confidence that most of our contentions about those [Arminian] points are more about words than matter. Again, in the same Section; The doctrine of the divine decrees is resolved into that of the di∣vine operations. Let us agree of the last, and we agree of the former. And almost all the doctrine of the divine operations about which we differ, de∣pendeth on the point of Free-will, and will be determined with that. And how far we differ (if at all) in the point of Free will, &c. I see Truth is the daughter of Time. Now our Armi∣nian Controversies are avowed to have

been but contentions about words. Now it is become a doubtful case, and deser∣ving an if. whether we have any diffe∣rence at all about Free-will or no. The wind is gotten into the other dore, since we were prosecuted and decried as Pe∣lagians, and enemies of Grace, because we maintained some old innocent Truths which the Church of England and the Catholick Church even taught her Sons, before Arminius was born. Some of their greatest Sticklers do owe a great account to God, and a great re∣paration to us, for those groundless ca∣lumnies, which they cast upon us at that time. For the present I only lay down this disjunctive Conclusion; Either Mr. Baxter and his Fellows have chan∣ged their judgment from what it was then, which makes the distance seem less now, or they did us abominable wrong then; or both these Propositions without any disjunction, are undoubt∣edly true. Mr. Baxter, who was so much mistaken in his Arminian points then, may be as much mistaken in his Grotian points now.

He noteth the time when he began his Book, April 9. 1658. and when he ended it, April 14. 1658. by which ac∣count it cost him but six days inclusive∣ly, comprehending both the day when he began, and the day when he ended. In my judgment this circumstance might better have been omitted. Among those who seem to approve his Work, some will ascribe it to the fortune of Augustus in Suetonius in the life of Clau∣dius, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, hap∣py men may have children at 3 months. Some others will take it as a symptom of vain-glory, other men must dig deep to lay a good foundation; but Mr. Bax∣ters happiness is only by turning the Cock to spout out whole Pages in an instant, as if he had found them set to his hands, and his part had been only to imprint them. Here was neither multa dies, nor multa litura, neither much time lost, nor much pains taken in cor∣recting. Thirdly, All men will say that he undervalues his Adversary, and makes his Victory too cheap, without ei∣ther blood or sweat.

And on the other side, among those who dislike his Work, some will make bold to tell him, that he presumes too much upon his Readers courtesie to pub∣lish such raw undigested fansies upon fewer days deliberation than the Poet requires years, nonumque prematur in armum. Others will not stick to say that they knew by the Treatise it self, though he had held his peace, that it cost him no great labour. And lastly, His saddest and most judicious Readers will suspect that he hath not weighed his Citations as he ought. Certainly all those testimonies which he produces out of Grotius in this Book, if he had ex∣amined them as exactly as he ought, with their coherence with the Antecedents and Consequents; and compared them with those Authors whom Grotius doth alledge for confirming of his own judg∣ment, would have taken up thrice as many days as he assigneth to this Work, yea though he had made use of Aristo∣tles Ball and his Bason to keep him wa∣king.

Before I leave his own part, I cannot

choose but tell him that I do not, I can∣not approve of his defence of Seque∣strations. And what he believeth of idle ignorant unworthy Pastours that they are obliged to make restitution, the same do I firmly believe of his Se∣questrators, that without restitution according to the extent of their power, they can have small hope of salvation. But first I must crave leave to tell him, that he doth utterly mistake the que∣stion. First he doth disown the casting out of able and godly Ministers, because they are Prelatical, or supposed Armi∣nians, or interested in the late civil differences. But we know that the greatest part of sequestred persons were such; and ejected for those very reasons. So he disowns the question.

And as he disowns the question, so he diverts it from sequestred Ministers, to ignorant unsufficient reading Mini∣sters. There was no need why he should have put reading Ministers in∣to his Apology: and yet he cannot choose but know that good use may be made of reading Ministers in a consti∣tuted

Church; and that there is much less danger of them than of ignorant or seditious Preachers. Our reading Ministers of all the Clergy were in least danger of their Sequestrators, who looked more at the value of the Benefice, than at the qualifications of those per∣sons who were turned out. He who doubteth of this general Truth, upon inquiry into particular Cases, may quickly satisfie himself.

And as he disowns the question, and diverts the question, so he begs the que∣stion; that those Ministers whom they put in, were incomparably better than those they turned out. No, nor yet worthy to be named the same day with them. Compare those Provosts, and Presidents, and Professors, and Fellows, and Scholars, who were turned out of our Universities, with those Bulrushes in comparison, whom for the most part they introduced, or read but the Marty∣rology of the City of London alone with an impartial eye, and consider sadly how many eminent persons for Learning, Piety, and Industry, have

been turned out of their livelihoods, meerly for those reasons which he dis∣owneth, and dares not justifie. He who shall do this thing seriously, and compare them with their crawling Suc∣cessors, will find cause enough to write upon the dores of their habitations, O domus antiqua quam dispari domina∣ris Domino? From this Foot a man may easily conjecture the proportion of the whole Body, and what have been the sufferings of our Orthodox Clergy throughout the whole Kingdom, con∣trary to the Laws of God and Man; how many of them have been beggered and necessitated to turn Mechanicks or Day-Labourers; how many imprison∣ed, or forced to forsake their Native Country and seek their bread among strangers; how many have had their hearts broken, some starved, some mur∣thered, and the spoyl of their houses gi∣ven for a Reward to the Murtherer. But this is a sad Subject to dwell upon. God Almighty pardon them who have had any hand in these cruel courses, and give them true repentance. In the

mean time their Sequestrators, notwith∣standing their former censures against all Pluralists, and their present preten∣ded self-denial, were well contented to hold Pluralities themselves with con∣fidence enough.

But now I will suppose all that which he desires, and which he is never able to prove; yea which his own conscience tells him to be much otherwise, that all persons who have been sequestred or turned out of their Benefices by them, had been such undeserving persons as he feigneth: and all those who were put in their places had been such lear∣ned, honest, and Orthodox Divines; such as out of conscience and a desire to do good, did seek as much after the sti∣pendiary Cures of Reading Ministers, as after the larger Benefices of more eminent Scholars; yet these sequestred persons had a just title to their Benefices by the Laws of England.

That which was theirs by Law, can∣not be taken from them without Law, or against Law. Dominion is founded in Nature, not in Grace. Nothing is

more hidden than true Grace: we un∣derstand it not certainly in another, hardly in our selves. Therefore if Grace should give every one that pre∣tends to it, interest in that which is ano∣ther mans lawful Possession, no mans title could be certain to another, scarce∣ly to himself; from whence must neces∣sarily follow an incredible confusion, and an inevitable perturbation of all estates.

By the Laws of England they were possessed of their Benefices, and by the Laws of England they ought to be outed of their Benefices. They who decried Arbitrary Government, should not be the only men to introduce Arbitrary Government into England. The Law of England knoweth no way to out a man of his Benefice but death, cession, or deprivation. It knoweth no depri∣vation but for crimes committed against Law, and that Law more ancient than those Crimes, where there is no Law, there is no transgression, and where there is no transgression, there can be no deprivation. The Law of England

knoweth no deprivation but by persons to whom the ancient Law of England hath committed the power of depri∣ving. So every way their Sequestra∣tions are unlawful, and they who hold them are like Moths which inhabit in other mens Garments. Of all the Com∣mandments the eighth is most dange∣rous; other Commandments oblige to Repentance, but that obligeth both to Repentance and Restitution. His in∣stances of a Physitian, and a Comman∣der, and a Pilot, who hold their Offices ad voluntatem Domini, so long as their Masters think fit, are not appliable to a Benefice, which is the inheritance of the present Incumbent and his Succes∣sors. Sequestration may have place during the vacancie of a Benefice, or until the decision of some Process de∣pending, or for the discharge of some Duty which by Law is incumbent upon the Benefice; but such lawless Arbi∣trary Sequestrations as these were, are plain Robbery by all Laws of God and Man.

CHAP. II.

Of Grotius, and what Communion he was of.

NExt for Grotius and others of his charitable way, I acknowledge freely, that I preferr one page of Wice∣lius, or Cassander, or Grotius, for true judgment before all the Works of Taulerus, and ten more such Au∣thors. Yet I have read sundry of them, and sometimes have approved more of their piety than of their judg∣ment; and at other times repented of the loss of my time. Yea, I do preferr these three before an hundred yawning wishers for Peace; whilest they do no∣thing that tendeth to the procuring of Peace. Particularly, I do admire the two former for this reason, because their clearer judgments did pierce so deep into the Controversies of Religion, before they were rightly stated. And their free spirits dared to tell the World impartially what was amiss, according

to the dictates of their Consciences, though with the hazard of their lifes, without any other motive than the discharge of their duties. And if any of them be reviled for their Charity, the greater is their Reward in Hea∣ven.

Yet I cannot pin my Religion to any of their Sleeves. Plato is my friend, and Socrates is my friend, but Truth is my best friend. Perhaps I may disap∣prove some things in Grotius his Works, or some parts of them, more than Mr. Baxter himself. He extol∣leth his Book of the right of the Sove∣raign Magistrates in sacred things: But when I did read it, he seemed to me to come too near an Evastian, and to lessen the power of the Keys too much, which Christ left as a Legacie to his Church. It may be he did write that before he was come to full maturity of judgment; and some other things, I do not say after he was superannuated, but without that due deliberation which he useth at other times, where∣in a man may desire Grotius in Grotius.

Or it may be that some things have been changed in some of his Works, as I have been told by one of his nearest friends, and that we shall shortly see a more authentick Edition of them all. This is certain, that some of those things which I dislike, were not his own judgment after he was come to ma∣turity in Theological matters.

But whereas Mr. Baxter doth accuse him as a Papist, I think he doth him wrong: Nay I am confident he doth him wrong, and that he oweth a re∣paration to his memory. I have read all that he alledgeth to prove him a Papist, but without any conviction or alteration in my judgment. And I believe that one who delighteth in such kind of contentions, would find it no difficult task to clear all his Objections, and demonstrate the contrary out of the Writings of Grotius himself, and others of the most learned and judicious Protestants. Sometimes he accuseth him of that which is not true at all, sub modo, as it is alledged, Nothing can be so truly said, but that it may be

depraved by misrelation or misinter∣pretation, or inconsequent inferen∣ces.

At other times he accuseth him of that for Popery which is no Popery, the greater, and better, and sounder part of Protestants being Judges. Yet if Gro∣tius his Genius had been somewhat less critical, and so much more Scholastical, he had not laid so open to Mr. Baxters accusations,

Unum hoc maceror & doleo sibi deesse.

It shall suffice me to say, that he was a person of rare parts, of excellent Learn∣ing, of great Charity, and of so Exem∣plary a Life, that his fiercest Adversa∣ries had nothing to object against him of moment: but were forced to rake into the faults of his Family, which whether true or false, was not so ingeniously done.

But lest any man might chance un∣awares to hit his own spiritual Mother out of a mistake, I will endeavour to give some further light, what was the

Religion of Grotius. He was in affe∣ction a friend, and in desire a true Son of the Church of England. And upon his Death-bed recommended that Church, as it was legally established, to his Wife, and such other of his Fa∣mily as were then about him, obliging them by his Authority to adhere firmly to it, so far as they had opportunity. And both my self, and many others have seen his Wife in obedience to her Husbands commands, which she decla∣red publickly to the World, to repair often to our Prayers and Sacraments, and to bring at least one of his Grand∣children to Sir Richard Browns house then Resident for the King in Paris to be baptized into the Faith and Com∣munion of the Church of England, and be made a Member thereof, as it was accordingly. If any man think that he knoweth Grotius his mind better by conjectural consequences, than he did himself; or that he would dissemble with his Wife and Children upon his Death-bed, he may enjoy his own opi∣ni••n to himself, but he will find few to joyn with him.

CHAP. III.

No Grotian Design in England.

ANother branch of his Discourse is, concerning the Grotian De∣sign in England. He pretends that there was a Party of Grotius his fol∣lowers in England, who prosecuted his design of reconciling us to the Pope, under the name of Episcopal Divines, Pag. 2. That Grotius had a Pacifica∣tory design, all men acknowledge; and he himself extolleth it as much as any of us, Pr. S. 3. For his Pacificatory design in general, I take it to be one of the most Christian noble blessed works that any man can be imployed in. That Grotius was a Stalking-Horse for the Pope, or had any design but in order to Peace and Truth; or that he had any Party in England, who followed him further than he followed the Truth, after all Mr. Baxters preten∣ces, we have no reason to believe. This is his own absurd and groundless pre∣sumption.

For certainly Grotius could have no thoughts of introducing any Popish errours into England, who loo∣ked upon the Church of England, as the right medium of reconciliation. Neither were there any genuine Sons of the Church of England who thought upon any change either in Doctrine or Discipline. We may fafe∣ly take our Oaths of the truth thereof. It was his own Party, only his own Par∣ty, who were plotting and contriving a change underhand, and cried out against other mens feigned innovations, to conceal their own real innovations. But how doth he make it appear that Grotius had such a Party of followers in England, who sought to reconcile us to the Pope? If it be sufficient to accuse, no man can be innocent. Let him speak out distinctly, we fear not his charge; would they reconcile us to the Pope and Papacy as it is now esta∣blished? Let him not say it for shame, they abhor it. Or would they reduce the Pope to what he was from the be∣ginning, and so reconcile us? All good

Christians joyn with them in so pious an Act. If his own meaning do agree with his words, he himself doth not quarrel the Pope for his just rights, but for his Innovations. If he mean it not, it is a double shame.

His first Reason to prove that there was such a Party of Grotians in Eng∣land, who nourished such a Design, is taken from Grotius his own words, P. 96. Paris knows, and many through∣out France, many in Poland and Ger∣many, not a few in England, quiet persons and lovers of Peace, that Gro∣tius his labours for Peace, have not dis∣pleased many moderate persons. He addeth, that Rivet agreed better with the Brownists, than with the Bishops of England. For pity sake let him shew us wherein the strength of his Argu∣ment doth lie. He may as well per∣swade us that we see a Dragon flying in the air, as that there is any design of introducing the Pope couched in these words. Doth the strength of his Argument perhaps lie in this, that there were lovers of Peace in England?

So there were all over Christendom before Grotius was born. France, Germany, Poland, all Christendom shake hands with us in this. He him∣self professeth that he is resolved to speak for Peace whilest he hath a tongue to speak; and to write for Peace whilest he hath an hand to write, p. 6. Or doth the strength of his Argument lie in this, that Rivet agreed better with the Brownists than with the Bishops of England? Whether he did or did not, whether it be true or false, what doth this concern Episcopal Divines? Such are his proofs against Grotius al∣ways halting on one side, most com∣monly on both sides. I am afraid this great mountain-design will prove but a ridiculous Mouse in the conclu∣sion.

He asketh, What if he had named Bishop Goodman, and all the rabble described in the Legenda lignea, which are more than Doctor Vane, and Doctor Goffe, and Doctor Baily, and H. P. de Cressie, &c. p. 99. I answer, First, If he had named these for Epi∣scopal

Divines of the Church of Eng∣land, of whom he held it necessary to admonish his Readers, that they might beware of them as Promoters of the Grotian design, he had made himself guilty of one of the grossest and silliest calumnies that ever was. For some of these were dead, and all of them apo∣stated to the Church of Rome before he gave his warning. And Bishop Good∣man in particular, was branded by the Church of England for his inclination to Roman Errours.

Secondly, I answer, that if he had named these, he had wounded his own Party more than Episcopal Divines. Abate only Bishop Goodman, whom I did never know, and of the rest whom he nameth, not one was throughly a genuine Episc pal Divine. Excuse me for telling the truth plainly, many who have had their education among Sectaries, or Non-Conformists, have apostated to Rome, but few or no right Episcopal Divines. Hot water freezeth the soonest.

He addeth, That Grotius himself

assures him (whom he hath reason to be∣lieve) that there were not a few such among the Prelatical men. How! not a few such as these, who have apostated from the Church of Eng∣land. For ingenuities sake, let him tell us where Grotius saith any such thing. Grotius hath not one word to his purpose, when it is duly examined. But this it is to confute Books in less time than wise or modest men would require to read them.

Hitherto he is not able to shew us any tolerable reason of his warning. But he sheweth us the occasion, p. 82. Those that unchurch either all or most of the Protestant Churches, and main∣tain the Roman Church and not theirs to be true, do call us to a moderate jea∣lousie of them. This is farr enough from proving his bold suggestion that they have a design to introduce the Pope into England. So though all he say were true: yet he can conclude no∣thing from thence to make good his ac∣cusation or insinuation. I wish he would forbear these imperfect Enthy∣mematical

forms of arguing, which serve only to cover Deceit, and set down both his Propositions expresly. His assumption is wanting, which should be this: But a considerable Par∣ty of Episcopal Divines in England, do Unchurch all or most of the Prote∣stant Churches, and maintain the Ro∣man Church to be a true Church, and them to be no true Churches. I can assent to neither of his Propositions, nor to any part of them, as true, sub modo, as they are alledged by him.

First, I cannot assent to his major Proposition, That all those who make an ordinary personal uninterrupted suc∣cession of Pastors to be of the integrity of a true Church (which is the ground of of his exception) have therefore an intention, or can be justly suspected thereupon to have any intention to in∣troduce the Pope. The Eastern, Sou∣thern, and Northern Churches are all of them for such a personal succession, and yet all of them utter enemies to the Pope. Secondly, I cannot assent to his minor Proposition, that either

all or any considerable part of the Epis∣pal Divines in England do Unchurch either all, or the most part of the Pro∣testant Churches. No man is hurt but by himself. They Unchurch none at all, but leave them to stand or fall to their own Master. They do not Unchurch the Swedish, Danish, Bohe∣mian Churches, and many other Chur∣ches in Poloma, Hungaria and those parts of the World, which have an ordinary uninterrupted succession of Pastors, some by the names of Bishops, others under the name of Seniors unto this day. (I meddle not with the So∣cinians) They unchurch not the Lu∣theran Churches in Germany, who both assert Episcopacie in their Con∣fessions, and have actual Superinten∣dents in their practice, and would have Bishops name and thing if it were in their power. Let him not mistake himself, those Churches which he is so tender of, though they be better known to us by reason of their Vicini∣ty, are so far from being all, or the most part of the Protestant Churches,

that being all put together, they amount not to so great a proportion as the Bri∣tannick Churches alone. And if one secluded out of them, all those who want an ordinary succession without their own faults, out of invincible igno∣rance or necessity, and all those who desire to have an ordinary successi∣on either explicitely or implicitely, they will be reduced to a little slock indeed.

But let him set his heart at rest, I will remove this scruple out of his mind, that he may sleep securely upon both ears. Episcopal Divines do not de∣nie those Churches to be true Churches wherein salvation may be had. We advise them, as it is our duty, to be cir∣cumspect for themselves, and not to put it to more question, whether they have Ordination or not or deserve the general practice of the universal Church for nothing, when they may clear it if they please. Their case is not the same with those who labour under invinci∣ble necessity. What mine own sense is of it, I have declared many years

since to the World in print; and in the same way received thanks, and a pub∣lick acknowledgment of my modera∣tion from a French Divine. And yet more particularly in my Reply to the Bishop of Chalcedon, Pref. p. 4. and cap. 1. p. 71. Episcopal Divines will readily subscribe to the determination of the learned Bishop of Winchester, in his Answer to the second Epistle of Molineus. Nevertheless, if our form (of Episcopacie) be of Divine Right, it doth not follow from thence that there is no salvation without it, or that a Church cannot consist without it. He is blind who does not see Churches con∣sisting without it; he is hard hearted who denieth them salvation. We are none of those hard-hearted persons, we put agreat difference between these things. There may be something absent in the exteriour Regiment, which is of Divine Right, and yet salvation be to be had. This mistake proceedeth from not di∣stinguishing between the true nature and essence of a Church, which we do readily grant them, and the integri∣ty

or perfection of a Church, which we cannot grant them, without swer∣ving from the judgment of the Catho∣lick Church.

The other part of his assumption is no truer than the former. We do ac∣knowledge the Church of Rome to be Metaphysically a true Church, as a Thief is a true Man, consisting of soul and body; so did Bishop Morton, Bi∣shop Hall, Bishop Davenant, old Epi∣scopal Divines; so did Mr. Primrose, and other Presbyterian Divines; so doth he himself in this very Treatise. What a weakness is it to accuse Epi∣scopal Divines of that which he him∣self maintaineth. But we all denie that the Church of Rome is morally a true Church, because it is corrupted and erroneous: we make it to be a li∣ving Body, but sick and full of ulcers. So we neither destroy the body out of hatred to the ulcers, nor yet cherish the ulcers out of a doting affection to the body. And therefore he had no reason in the world to suspect Episco∣pal Divines of a plot or design to intro∣duce

Popery into England, which they look upon as the very Gangrene of the Church.

He pleadeth a reason why he doth not name those Episcopal Divines who had this design for fear of doing them hurt. Sect. 70. As if it were not less hurtful to discover the nocent, if he knew any such, than to subject the in∣nocent both to suspition and censure, by his general descriptions. I cannot ex∣cuse his first intimation of such a design, because he had no ground at all for it: but I can easily excuse his silence now, upon another reason, because I am con∣fident there neither are, nor ever were any such designers among the Episcopal Party.

Whereas he ought to prove his in∣tention that there was such a design, in the place thereof he gives us some symptomes or signs whereby to know the designers. This is one great fault in his Discourse. But the worst is, they are all accidental notes, which may either hit or miss; there is not one essential mark among them. His first

mark is, They are those that actually were the Agents in the English illegal Innovations, which kindled all our troubles in this Land, and were con∣formable to the Grotian design. Those last words [and were conformable to the Grotian design] were well added, though they be a shameful begging of the question, and signifie the same thing by it self. A strange kind of proof: for without these words all the World will take him and his Party to be the illegal Innovators, and no body but them. The Episcopal Divines hold their old Canons, their old Arti∣cles, their old Liturgy their old Ordi∣nal still without any change: They took the Protestation against Innova∣tions without any difficulty, and are rea∣dy to take it over and over again. Their fault was that they could not swallow down New Covenants to innovate. His Party have changed Canons, Ar∣ticles, Liturgy, all things, and yet have the confidence cry Innovators first.

His second mark is, They bend the course of their Writings to make the

Roman Church honourable, and to vin∣dicate them from Antichristianism, and to make the reformed Churches odious. This is a poor note indeed, as if men were obliged out of hatred to the Church of Rome, to deny it that ho∣nour which is justly due unto it, or out of affection to the Protestant Churches to justifie their defects. What reward did ever any English Protestant get from Rome for doing them this honour? I know no man who honours the Church of Rome more than himself. He calls Cassander, Thaulerus, Ferus, Blessed souls with Christ: He esteems the French Nation to be not only an erroneous, but an honourable part of the Church of Christ, p. 10. Episco∣pal Divines have learned to distinguish between that great Antichrist and les∣ser Antichrists, between the Court of Rome and the Church of Rome, which he confounds. I dare not swear that the Pope is that great Antichrist, but I dare swear that I never had any design to bring Popery into England, I hope I never shall have, and that all genuine

Episcopal Divines may take the same Oath.

His third note of distinction, where∣by to know an English Grotian is this, They labour to prove the Church of Rome a true Church, because of their succession, and the Reformed Churches to be none, for want of that succession, Sect. 71. This note is already an∣swered. Elsewhere he presseth this point further thus; that he would gladly know what Church hath power to make a new Canon, the observation whereof shall be essential to a Church or Pastor. I an∣swer, that he doth doubly mistake the question, which is not whether the Catholick Church can make new Es∣sentials, but whether it can declare old Essentials. Not whether the Ca∣nons of the Universal Church of this Age have divine Authority, but whe∣ther they do oblige Christians in con∣science, and whether it be not timera∣rious presumption for a particular per∣son or Church to slight the Belief or Practice of the Universal Church of all succeeding Ages.

His fourth note of Grotians is, that they are for a visible head of the Uni∣versal Church, whether Pope or General Council. They who are for the Head∣ship of a General Council are no fit instruments for the introduction of the Popes tyrannical power. It seemeth he rejecteth the Authority of General Councils, either past or to come, as well as Popes: so dare not we. If under the name of the Universal Church he include the Triumphant Church, we know no head of the Universal Church but Christ. If he limit it to the Mili∣tant Church, we are as much against one single Monarch as he, we dislike all tyrannical power in the Church, as well as he: yet we quarrel with no man about the name of Head, or a Meta∣phorical expression. But if he think that Christ left the Catholick Church as the Ostrich doth her Eggs, in the Sand, without any care or provision for the governing thereof in future Ages, he erreth grosly. So the Ca∣tholick Church should be in a worse condition than any particular Church,

yea, than any Society in the World, like the Cyclops Cane where no man heard or heeded what another said. Particular Churches have Soveraign Princes and Synods to order them, but there never was an universal Monarch. And if he take away the Authority of General Councils, he leaveth no hu∣mane helps to preserve the Unity of the Universal Church: what is this but to leap over the backs of all second Cau∣ses? The first Council was of another mind, It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, Act. 15. 28. And so have all the Churches of the World from Christs time until this Age.

His fifth note of Grotians, To de∣ry the sufficiencie of Scripture in all things necessary to salvation, might well have been spared, for we all main∣tain it as well as he; but he shuffles in∣to the question such impertinent and confused generalities about the Peace of the Chur••••, and Traditions, as deserve no answer. The sufficiency of Scri∣pture is not inconsistent either with pru∣dential Government, or the necessary

means of finding out the right sense of Scripture. When he expresseth him∣self more distinctly, he may expect a Categorical answer.

His last mark is, that they will not be perswaded to joyn on any reasonable terms for the healing of our present di∣visions. This dependeth upon his own interpretation, what he judgeth to be reasonable terms. We have seen his dexterity in making wounds, and would be glad to have experience of his skill in healing them. He com∣plains only of illegal Innovations. Dare he stand to the ancient Laws? If he dare, the Controversie is ended. If he like not this, for we know their exceptions were against the Laws them∣selves, not against illegal Innovations; let them name those Laws which they except against, and put it to a fair trial, whether there be any thing in any of them, which is repugnant to the Laws of God, or of right reason. If they will but do this seriously without pre∣judice, the business is ended. I will make bold to go yet one step higher,

though our Laws be unblamable, yet if the things commanded be but of a mid∣dle or indifferent nature, we are ready to admit any terms of peace, which we can accept with a good conscience, so as we may neither swerve from the ana∣logy of Faith, nor renounce the ne∣cessary principles of Government, nor desert the communion, and ancient and undoubted customs of the Universal Church. Such an accord would be too much loss both to you and us.

He would perswade us that there are two sorts of Episcopal Divines in England, the old and the new. And that there is much more difference between the old and the new, than between the old and the Presbyterians, Sect. 67. O confidence whither wilt thou? what is the power of prejudice, and pride? The contrary is as clear as the light; we maintain their old Liturgy, their old Ordinal, their old Articles, their old Canons, their old Laws, Practi∣ces, and praescriptions, their old Do∣ctrine and Discipline against them. Then tell us no more of old Episcopal

Divines, and new Episcopal Divines; we are old Episcopal Divines, one and all: out of his own words I condemn him; The old sort of Episcopal Divines that received the publick Doctrine of the Nation, contained in the 39. Ar∣ticles, Homilies, &c. I wholly acquit∣ted from my jealousies of this compli∣ance, Sect. 12. If they be old Episco∣pal Divines, who maintain the Do∣ctrine of the 39. Articles and Homilies, then we are all old Episcopal Divines. In acquitting all them he acquitteth all us. If he can shew any thing that I have written contrary to these, I retract it: if he cannot, let him retract his words. He might have taken notice of my submission of whatsoever I writ to the Oecumenical essential Church, and to its Representative, a free general Council; and to the Church of England, or a National English Synod, to the de∣terminations of all which, and each of them respectively, according to the di∣stinct degrees of their Authority, I yield a conformity and compliance, or to the least and lowest of them an acquiescence.

Pref. to the Reply to Bish. Chalc. So far am I, and always have been from opposing the Church of England wit∣tingly.

He maketh a shew as though he could make it appear that the Grotian design was the cause of all our Wars and changes in England: but it is but a copy of his countenance. How should the Grotian design be the cause of all our Wars, when our War began be∣fore Grotius himself began his design, or to write of the reconciliation of Pro∣testants and Papists, which was in the years 1641, and 1642. But without all controversie, either the Grotian design was the cause of our Wars; or the de∣sign, and more than the bare design of his own Party. The World knows well enough, and I leave it to his own conscience to tell him whether of the two was the right Mother of the Child.

Though he fail in his proofs against Episcopal Divines: yet he produceth sundry other reasons to prove that there was such a Plot on foot to introduce

Popery into England, but they do not weigh so much as a Feather; nor signi∣fie any thing more than this, how easily men believe those things which they wish. He saith, Franciscus à Sancta Claras design and Grotius his design seem the very same, and their Religion and Church the same, Sect. 73. Nay certainly, (that is more than seeming∣ly) their Religion and Church was not the same; unless he mean the same Christian Religion, and in that sense his own Religion is the same with theirs, but in his sense they were not the same. This is begging of the que∣stion which he ought to prove, Grotius was not of the French Communion. And for their designs, the World is so full of feigned Plots and designs, that I do not believe that either of them had any design, except that general and pacificatory design, which he himself professeth and extolleth every where. I wish every mans Books had as much learning and ingenuity in them as A Sancta Clara's have. Yet if he con∣clude from hence, that I and he are of

the same Communion, he doth me wrong. Judge Reader, how partial men are, to deny that liberty to ano∣ther which they assume to them∣selves.

He proceedeth, This A Sancta Clara is still the Queens Chaplain, &c. And we have reason to believe the Queen to be so moderate as to be of the same Re∣ligion. Whether he be the Queens Chaplain or not, is more than I know. The Queen hath had many Servants of Mr. Baxters own Communion, who have had more influence upon her Counsels than ever A Sancta Clara had. He hath reason to believe that the Queen and he were of the same Reli∣gion: but no reason to prove that so seriously and so weakly, which all men acknowledge, that either the Queen or he had any hand in the pretended design of Grotius and his Followers, no man can believe.

From the Queen he passeth over to the King; what to do? to accuse him of Popery. He cannot prove it, nor all the World to help him. Yea, he

professeth openly that he believeth no such thing. Not only his Conference with the Marquess of Worcester, but his Life and Death, and that Golden Legacie which he left to his Son, do proclaim the contrary to all the World. What is his aim then? To shew how far he was inclined to a reconciliation. That is the duty of every good Chri∣stian. But did he preferr peace before truth? Had he any design to introduce Papal Tyranny into England? That is the crime whereof he accuseth those whom he nick-nameth Grotians. The Devil himself cannot justly object any such thing against him.

He cites the Articles of the Spanish and French matches; but is not able to cite one word out of them which maketh for his purpose. And this alone, that there is nothing in them for his pur∣pose, is a convincing proof against him, that all his pretended design is but a dream. I may well call it his design, for it is the phantasm of his own brain, and never had any existence in the nature of things.

He mentions the Kings Letter to the Pope, written in Spain. If he himself had been there at that time, upon the same condition the King was at that time, he would have redeemed his li∣berty with writing three Letters to the Pope, such as that was, or else he had been much to be blamed. But what is there in the Letter? Is there any thing of the Grotian design? No I warrant you. Observe how all his conjectural reasons make directly a∣gainst himself. Perhaps the King calls the Pope Most Holy Father; a great crime indeed, to make such a civil ad∣dress, which the common use of the World hath made necessary. He who will converse with a Fryer in a Roman Catholick Country, must do little less; and he that will write to the Great Turk must do more. Such compellations do not shew always what men are, but what they ought to be, or what they are, or would be esteemed.

Next he tells us of the choice of A∣gents for Church and State. Very trifles. Kings must chuse their Agents

according to the exigence of their af∣fairs. But if the qualifications of A∣gents did always demonstrate the reso∣lutions of Princes, I could more easily prove King Charles a Presbyterian, than he a Grotian, and bring more instances for my self. I am confident he cannot instance in any one Agent for Church or State, that ever had his Grotian design; but I can instance in many who have had contrary and worse designs. I shall not stick to tell him with grief, that which hath been in a great part the cause of all our woes. In some Courts it hath been esteemed a singular policie to nourish two Parties, upon pretence that the one might bal∣lance the other, and the one watch over the other. But it proveth too often true that the one Party is disgusted, and ordinarily the weaker and worser Party doth countenance heterodox and seditious persons, to augment the num∣ber of their dependents, which ever∣more tendeth to manifest sedition. By this means the rents of the Church have been perpetuated and enlarged,

and Subjects have been debauched with destructive and seditious Principles, the evil influence whereof, we have felt to our cost.

He proceedeth to the Residence of the Popes Nuncios in England. It may be during all the Kings reign there were one Nuncio and his Proctor or Deputy, or two Nuncios at the most. And if we had never had them, it had been the better, not so much for any great hurt they did, but for that oppor∣tunity which his own peevish Party got from thence, to raise jealousies and Panick fears among the Rabble. Un∣less he could have told something that the Popes Nuncio did in England ten∣ding to that end which he pretends, he might as well have instanced in the King of Morocco's Ambassadour, and said that he came over to convert us to be Turks. I thought he would have produced the Popes Bull to his Nuncio to reconcile us to Rome; or at least have discovered some secret Cabal, or Conferences between him and those Episcopal Divines whom he accuseth.

He knoweth well there was no such thing, and therefore it were much bet∣ter to be silent, than to urge so many things, and to fail in every one of them.

His next instance is in the Jesuits Colledge, which had been much bet∣ter omitted for his credit. Did the King found the Colledge? No such thing. Was he a Benefactor to it? Nor that. Did he give the Jesuits a license of Mortmain, to purchase Lands for themselves to that use? Not so much. What did he then, did he know of the Jesuits and the Colledge, and connive at them and it? O no. So soon as ever it was discovered, it was suppressed. By the same equity he might accuse an innocent Prince of all the crimes that are committed in hugger mugger throughout his King∣dom, and make him Head even of the Presbyterian Rebellion.

The last of his odious instances hath less shew of truth in it than any of the rest, how vain or empty soever they have been; that is, the illegal inno∣vations

in worship so resolvedly grada∣tim introduced. Perhaps he calls the execution of old Laws, Innovations, because they themselves had taken the boldness to disuse them. It were bet∣ter to spare this charge, lest they get a round peal of their own Innovations rung out in their ears. Theirs are In∣novations indeed.

To conclude, Doth he think that such disloyal and uncharitable insinua∣tions as these, are salved by pretending that he hath not the least desire to per∣swade men that he was a Papist; or that he would not have other men to believe it: As if he should say, Here are violent presumptions indeed, that the King had Popish inclinations: yet my charity will not give me leave to believe it, other men may judge as they find cause; when all he saith doth not weigh one grain in the Scale of Rea∣son. Our Case-Divinity will hardly excuse this from downright Calumny. But that is their only weapon, and their only strength, and Skill hath ever laid in idle and malitious suggestions.

CHAP. IV.

This Plot weakly Fathered upon Episcopal Divines.

I Mused some while why he should rather father his imaginary design of reducing the Pope into England up∣on Episcopal Divines, than upon any other Divines. For in the first place this is certain, that both Presbyterian Divines, and Independent Divines, and Millenary Divines, and Anaba∣ptistical Divines, and each sort of their Divines, (if any of them may be al∣lowed that Title) have all of them, and every one of them contributed more to the reducing of the Pope into England, than Episcopal Divines ever did, or were likely ever to do. Men do naturally preferr Antiquity in Re∣ligion before Novelty, Order and Uni∣formity before Confusion, Comeliness and Decencie before sordid Unclean∣liness; Reverence and Devotion before Prophaneness and over-much Sawciness

and familiarity with God; Christian Charity before Unchristian Censures; Constancy before Fickleness and fre∣quent Changes, they love Monuments of Piety, and delight not in seeing them defaced and demolished; they are for Memorials of ancient Truth, for an outward splendor of Religion, for helps of Mortification, for adjuments of De∣votion; all which our late Innovators have quite taken away. Nature it self doth teach us that God is to be adored with our Bodies as well as with our Spi∣rits. What comfort can men have to go to the Church, where they shall scarcely see one act of corporeal devo∣tion done to God in their whole lifes? These are the true Reasons why the Roman Emissaries do gain ground daily upon them, why so many apostate from them. If the Pope have a fairer game in England, he is beholden to them for it, not to the Magistrates Sword, much less to Episcopal Di∣vines.

Some may perhaps urge that this ad∣vantage is accidental to Episcopal Di∣vines,

therefore I propose a second consideration; That Episcopal Di∣vines cannot be the Popes Stalking Horses, nor promoters of the Papacy, without deserting their principles a∣bout Episcopacy. Episcopal rights and Papal claims are inconsistent. This appeared evidently in the Council of Trent, in the debating of that great Controversie about Episcopal Right, whether it be divine or humane. Thus much the Spanish, Polonian, and Hun∣garian Divines saw well enough And consulting seriously about the Refor∣mation of the Church, they could find no better ground to build so noble a Fa∣brick upon than the Divine Right of Bishops, as the Archbishop of Granato well observed. Hist. Conc. Trid. l. 7. p. 588.

Father Lainer the General of the Jesuits saw this well enough, and con∣cluded, that it is a meer contradiction to say the Pope is head of the Church, and the Government Monarchical; and then say, that there is a power or jurisdiction in the Church not derived

from him, but received from others, that is, from Christ. Hist. Conc. Trid. ibid.

The Popes Legats themselves found this out at last, when it was almost too late, l. 7. p. 609. Octob. 19. When the question was set on foot in the begin∣ning, the Legats thought that the aim was only to make great the Authority of Bishops, and to give them more reputa∣tion. But before the second Congrega∣tion was ended they perceived very late by the voices given and reasons used, of what importance and conse∣quence it was. For it did imply, that the Keys were not given to St. Peter only, that the Council was above the Pope, and the Bishop equal to him, who had nothing left but a prehemi∣nence above others, &c. the dignity of Cardinals was quite taken away, and the Papal Court reduced to nothing

But before the Papalins discovered this, the Party bent for a serious Re∣formation, was grown numerous and potent in the Council. The Divine Right of Bishops was inserted into the

Anathematisms. Fifty nine of the prime Fathers voted for it, besides all those whom either an Epidemical or a Politick Catarrh deteined at home; notwithstanding all the disswasions and perswasions, threatnings and pro∣mises, and other Artifices used by the Papalins, whereof the chiefest, and that which saved the Court of Rome from utter ruine at that time, was to represent to the Italian Bishops, whose number was double to all the rest of the Christian World in that Council, (a very unequal composition) how much they were concerned in the pre∣servation of the Papacy, as being the only honour which the Italian Na∣tion had above all other Nations. This I urge to shew that Episcopal Divines cannot be Papalins without betraying their own Principles. The very name of Episcopal Divines renders this de∣design less probable.

Thirdly, In stiling them Episcopal Divines he doth tacitely accuse him∣self to be an Anti-Episcopal, or at least no Episcopal Divine. What odious

consequences do flow from thence, and how contrary it is to the title of Catho∣lick, which he gives himself in the Frontispiece of this Treatise, I had much rather he should observe himself, than I collect. Catholick and Anti-Episcopal are contradictory terms.

From Christs time till this day there was never any one Catholick in the Ea∣stern, Southern, or Northern Churches, who professed himself to be Anti-Epi∣scopal, but only such as were cast out for Hereticks or Schismaticks. The same I say of the Western Church for the first 1500. years. Let him shew me but one formed Church without a Bishop, or the name of one Lay Presby∣ter in all that time, who exercised or challenged Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, or the power of the Keys in the Church before Calvins return to Geneva in the year 1538. after he had subscribed the Augustine Confession and Apology for Bishops, and I will give him leave to be as Anti-Episcopal as he will. I will shew him the proper and particu∣lar names of Apostles, Evangelists, Bi∣shops,

Presbyters, Deacons, in Scri∣ptures, in Councils, in Fathers, in Hi∣stories; if he cannot name one parti∣cular Lay-Elder, it is because there ne∣ver was any such thing in rerum na∣tura, for 1500 years after Christ.

I will add one thing more for the ho∣nour of Episcopal Government, that all the first Reformers did approve it, and desired it, if they could have had it. Second Reformations are commonly like Metal upon Metal, which is false Heraldry. After the Waldenses, the first Reformers, were the Bohemian Brethren: and both these were careful to retain Episcopacy. Take their own Testimony in the Preface of their Book called, Ratio, Disciplinae, Ordinisque Ecclesiastici in unitate fratrum Bohe∣morum, lately translated out of Bohe∣mian into Latine, and published by themselves. And whereas the said Waldenses did affirm that they had lawful Bishops, and a lawful uninter∣rupted succession from the Apostles unto this day, they created three of our Mi∣nisters Bishops solemnly, and conferred

upon them power to Ordain Ministers. From that time this Order is continued in all their Churches until this day.

The next Reformers were the Lu∣therans. These retained Bishops name and thing, in the Kingdoms of Sweden and Denmark, and the thing under ano∣ther name of Superintendents in Ger∣many. The Confession of Saxony is subscribed by seventeen Superinten∣dents. Harm. Conf. Sect. 19. p. 290. The Snevick Confession complaineth of great wrong done to their Churches, as if they did seek to reduce the power of Ecclesiastical Prelates to nothing. Sect. 11. p. 65. And in Chap. 33. Of the Rights of the Civil Magistrate, they declare most plainly for the Ecclesia∣stical Jurisdiction of Bishops. There cannot be a more luculent Testimony for the Lutherans approbation of Bi∣shops, than the Augustine Confession it self, cap. 7. de Potest. Eccles. It is not now sought that the Government be taken away from Bishops: but this one thing is desired, that they will suffer the Gospel to be purely taught, and re∣lease

some few observances which can∣not be kept without sin. And the Apo∣logie for the same Confession, Cap. de numero & usu Sacrament. This our will shall excuse us both before God and all the World, that it may not be imputed to us that the Authority of Bishops was taken away by our means.

I need not say any thing of the Bri∣tannick Churches. He knoweth well they never wanted Bishops from their first Conversion until these late Tu∣mults, wherein our Native Country was purpled with the Blood of English Subjects, to take them away by force and Rebellion.

The next Reformation was the Zuin∣glian or Helvetian in Switzerland, wherein as they erected no new Bi∣shopricks, so they pulled down no old ones. There was a kind of necessity laid upon them to want Bishops in their own Territories: because the Bishop of Constance, under whose Jurisdiction they were, was of another communion, and lived out of their Territories. But they would gladly have had him to have

continued their Bishop still. They made their addresses to him, they cour∣ted him, they besought him to joyn with them, or but to tolerate them. For proof of this, I produce that fa∣mous Letter written by Zuinglius him∣self, and ten others of their principal Reformers, to the same Bishop of Con∣stance, recorded in the Works of Zuin∣glius, in all humility and observance be∣seeching him to favour and help for∣ward their beginnings, as an excellent work, and worthy of a Bishop. They call him Father, Renowned Prelate, Bishop. They implore his clemency, wisdom, learning, that he would be the first fruits of the German Bishops, to favour true Christianity springing up again. They beseech him by the com∣mon Christ, by one Christian Liberty, by that Fatherly affection which he did owe unto them, by whatsoever was di∣vine and humane, to look graciously upon them; or if he would not grant their desires, to connive at them; so he should make his Family yet more illu∣strious, and have the perpetual tribute

of their praises; so he would but shew himself a Father, and grant the requests of his obedient sons. They conclude, God Almighty long preserve your Excel∣lency.

The last Reformation of those which he approveth, was that of Cal∣vin. How farr Calvin and his Party were Episcopal or Anti-Episcopal in their desires, let their own testimonies bear witness. First Calvin himself acknowledgeth that he subscribed the Augustine Confession formerly mentio∣ned, or the Apology for it, both which are for Bishops. And in his 190. Epi∣stle to the King of Polonia, he repre∣senteth Episcopal Government as fittest for Monarchies; where having shewed the regiment of the Primitive Church by Patriarchs; Primats, Bishops, in these words: Indeed the ancient Church instituted Patriarchs, and gave certain Primacies to particular Provinces, that Bishops might remain bound one to ano∣ther by this bond of Concord. He pro∣ceedeth thus, As if at this day one Arch-bishop should be over the illu∣strious

Kingdom of ••olonia, &c. And farther, there should be a Bishop in each City or Province, to attend peculiarly to the preservation of Order, as nature itself doth dictate to us, that in every Colledge one ought to be chosen, upon whom the principal care of the Colledge should rest. And in his Institutions ha∣ving described at large the Regiment of the Primitive Church, and shewed the end of Arch-bishops, and the con∣stitution of Patriarchs, he concludeth, that some called this kind of Govern∣ment an Hierarchy, by a name improper, or at least not used in the Scripture. But if we pass by the name and look upon the thing itself, we shall find that the ancient Bishops did go about to devise no other form of governing the Church, than that which God hath prescribed in his Word, lib. 4. Inst. c. 4. Sect. 4.

And in his Answer to Cardinal Sa∣dolet, on the behalf of the City of Ge∣neva, as it is cited by Archbishop Bancroft, for I cannot procure the first Edition at present, and in the later Edi∣tions they have made a shift to purge it

out. Talem nobis Hierarchiam, &c. If they make tender of such an Hierar∣chie to us, wherein Bishops may retain their eminence, so as they refuse not to be under Christ, and have their depen∣dence upon him as their only Head, and refer themselves to him, and observe such a brotherly society among them∣selves, and be bound together with no other bond but the truth, then I confess that they deserve all sorts of curses or anathemas, if there be any who do not observe it with reverence and the highest obedience.

Lay all these together, If the Law of Nature, which is divine Law, writ∣ten in our hearts by God himself, and needing no other promulgation, do di∣ctate that in every Society there ought to be one upon whom the principal care of the Society should rest. If the an∣cient Bishops devised no other form of governing the Church by Patriarchs, Archbishops, Bishops, than that which God had prescribed in his Word; If they deserve the severest curses and anathemas, who shall not regard such

an Hierarchy with reverence and obe∣dience, where Christ is acknowledged to be the only Head of his Church, where the Pastors are freed from all Oaths and Obligations to the Bishop of Rome, let him be his own Judge what they deserve, who have destroyed the Church of England.

Before Calvin, Farellus offered the Bishop of Geneva terms to retain his Bishoprick, if he would give way to the Reformation. Beza his Successor was not for the divine Right of Bishops in express terms by the Evangelical Law: But he was for the precedencie of one Clergy man above the rest by the Law of Nature.

From Geneva let us pass over into France, where we find Monsieur Mou∣line as high or higher than any of them, in his third Epistle to the Bishop of Winchester. I am not so brazen-faced as to give sentence against those lights of the ancient Church, Ignatius, Poly∣carpus, Cyprian, Augustine, Chryso∣stom, Basil, the two Gregories Nissene Nazianzene Bishops, as against men

wrongfully created, or as usurpers of an unlawful Office. The venerable an∣tiquity of those Primitive Ages shall al∣ways weigh more with me than any mans new-fangled Institution. And a little after, in the same Epistle, I spake with honour of the Bishops of England, I derived the Episcopal dignity from the very cradle of the Church, I condemned Aerius, I affirmed that St. James was Bishop of Hierusalem, from whom the succession of the Bishops of that City was derived by a long row of Bishops.

Mr. Blondel in his needless Apology for St. Hierome made a very necessary Apology for himself, and sent it; to Mr. Rivet to be added as an Appendix to his Book in the Impression of it, by whose neglect it was omitted. And now having mentioned Doctor Rivet, I shall make bold to add, that he him∣self did intreat a Noble Earl, yet living, to procure him a dignity or Prebend in England, as his Brother Mouline and Vossius had. The Earl answered, that he could not hold any such place in England without subscribing to Epis∣copacy,

and the Doctrine and Disci∣pline of the English Church. And he replied, that he was most ready to subscribe to them both with his hand and heart.

I conclude that all Divines through∣out the Christian World, who main∣tain a necessity of Holy Orders, ever were and still are Episcopal Divines: except some weaker and wilful Bre∣thren, who for their Antiquity are but of Yesterday, and for their Universa∣lity come much short of the very Do∣natists in Africk, condemned by all moderate and rational persons of their own Communion. And therefore Mr. Baxter might have done better to have given his pretended Designers, a lower and more distinctive name than that of Episcopal Divines.

It will not help him at all which he saith, pag. 21. It is not all Episcopal Divines which I suspected of a compli∣ance with Grotius and Cassander, no not all of the later strein, &c. I ex∣tended it to none of the new Episcopal Party, but such as I there described.

His distinction of Episcopal Divines into Old and New, is but a Chimera of his own brain, without any ground; neither doth he bring one grain of rea∣son to make it good. And by his plain Confession here, it appeareth that this great design is but his own suspicion. To accuse men of a design to introduce the Pope into England, meerly upon suspicion, is a liberty, or rather license, to be abhorred of all conscionable Christians.

Yet of the old Episcopal Divines he nameth many, Bishop Jewel, Pilkinson, Hall, Carlton, Davenant, Morton, Abbot, Usher, Potter, Downham, Grin∣dal, Parker, Hooper, Farrar, Cranmer, Latimer, Ridley, and forty more Bi∣shops here. p. 103. as if so many names blended together confusedly in an heap as an hotchpotch, were able like a Medu∣sas head to transform reasonable men into stocks and stones. If he had made his forty up an hundred, he might have found instances enough to have made it good, and sundry of them no way infe∣riour to any whom he nameth, and su∣periour

to many. In commemorating some, and pretermitting others, he sheweth sometimes want of judgement, always respect of persons. What his description was of New Episcopal Di∣vines, I do not know, (having never seen any Treatise of his, but this of the Grotian Religion; neither should I have meddled with that, if he had not brought me publickly upon the Stage,) neither do I much regard. But how∣soever he describeth them he instanceth in no man but my self, either because he is not able to name any, or because he thinks it easiest to leap over the hedge where it is lowest. Have I not great reason to thank him for being so mindful of me in my absence.

As for my part I profess ingeniously before God and Man, I never knew of any such design, I am confident there never was any such design, and I am certain that I neither had nor could have an hand in any such design, either for Italian Popery, or French Po∣pery. or any Popery, unless he call the Doctrine and Discipline of the Primi∣tive

Church Popery, unless our Holy Orders and Liturgy and Articles be Popery. Other Popery he shall never be able to prove against me, nor I hope against any true Episcopal Divines. His design, like the Phoenix, is much talked of by himself, but never was seen.

I know as little of any such distin∣ction between Old and New Episcopal Divines. All the World seeth evi∣dently, that all the material differences which we have with them, are about those Holy Orders, and that Liturgy, and those Articles, and those Rites, which we received from those Old Epi∣scopal Divines.

Non tellus cimbam, tellurem cim••a reliquit.

We have not left our Predecessors, but They have left both us and our Pre∣decessors, and the Church of England. And it fareth with Mr. Baxter as it doth with new Sailers, who by the de∣ception of their sight, suppose that the

Land leaveth them, terraeque, urbes∣que recedunt, when in truth it is they themselves that leave the Land. In a word, his supposed design and his pre∣tended distinction, are meer fansies, which never had any being in the na∣ture of things. Where did these de∣signers ever meet together to contrive their Plot? They are never likely to do any great actions, who want sinews to knit them together. When or where had ever any of them any intercourse or correspondence with Rome, or any that belonged to Rome, by word or writing? It was a sensless silly Plot to design the Introduction of the Pope into England without his own know∣ledge or consent, upon terms never ac∣corded, never so much as treated upon. Thus have we seen melancholick per∣sons out of a strong fantasie, imagine that they see Ships and Minotaures in the Clouds. The proofs of such accusati∣ons as this is, ought to have been clearer than the Noon-day light, not ungroun∣ded or ill grounded jealousies and suspi∣cions of credulous and partial persons.

CHAP. V.

This Plot was as weakly fathered upon the Bishop of Derry.

ANd as he erred in fathering his imaginary Plot upon Episcopal Divines in general, so he made an ill choice of me the meanest of those Epi∣scopal Divines for his only instance, who have only read so much of Grotius, as to enable me to judge that Mr. Bax∣ter doth him wrong, I hope unwittingly. If ever I should attempt the reconciling of Controversies among Christians, it must be in another way then Grotius taketh, I mean more Scholastical.

I will confess that freely which Mr. Baxter neither doth know, nor ever could know but by me, that a∣bout thirty years since, when my body was stronger, and my wits fresher, when I had some Books and Notes of mine own, and could have had what supply soever I desired, and op∣portunity to confer with whomsoever I pleased, I had then a design indeed

to do my weak endeavour to disabuse the Christian World, by the right sta∣ting and distinguishing of Controver∣sies between the Church of Rome and us. And to shew:

First, How many of them are meer Logomachies, or contentions about words without any just ground.

Secondly, How many of them are Scholastical subtleties, whereof ordina∣ry Christians are not capable, and con∣sequently no points of Faith.

Thirdly, How many of them are not the Controversies of the Churches, but of particular Persons or Parties in those Churches, as well Protestants against Protestants, and Roman Catholicks a∣gainst Roman Catholicks, as Protestants against Roman Catholicks. Those Con∣troversies which each Church doth tole∣rate within it self, ought not to be any cause of Schism between the Churches.

Fourthly, How many of our Con∣troversies are about Rites and Cere∣monies, and things indifferent in their own nature, in the use of which every particular Church under the Univer∣sal

Church hath free liberty in it self, and dominion over its own Sons.

When all these empty Names and Titles of Controversies are wiped out of the Roll, the true Controversies be∣tween us may be quickly mustered, and will not be found, upon a serious en∣quiry, to be either so exclusive of sal∣vation to those who err invincibly, and hold the truth implicitely in the pre∣paration of their minds, nor altoge∣ther so irreconcileable as some persons have imagined. The two dangerous extremes are to clip away something from saving Truth, whereof I do not find the Church of Rome to have been guilty; and to obtrude erroneous or (at the best) probable opinions for Ar∣ticles of Faith, whereof I find many in the Church of Rome to have been most guilty.

Next to these are the practical abuses of the Court of Rome. These were my thoughts in my younger days, which age and experience hath rather confirmed and radicated in me, than altered; which if they had been known, I de∣served

rather to have been cherished and encouraged, than to be branded by any man as a Factor for the Pope.

Truly Mr. Baxter could hardly have fixed upon a Subject more improper for such a charge. When I was command∣ed to preach to our Northern Synod, where every one designed to discharge that duty, chuseth some controversie between the Church of Rome and us, my Subject was the Popes unlawful Usurpation of Jurisdiction over the Britannick Churches. When I dis∣puted in Cambridge for the Degree of Doctor, my Thesis was taken out of Nilus, that the Papacy (as it was chal∣lenged and usurped in many places, and as it had been sometimes usurped in our Native Country,) was either the pro∣creant or conservant cause, or both pro∣creant and conservant cause of all the greater Ecclesiastical Controversies in the Christian World. When our late King Charles (of blessed memory) was in Spain, and Religion in England seemed to our Country people (though without any ground) to be placed in

aequilibrio, or reduced to a measuring cast; I adventured with more zeal than discretion, to give two of their Roman Champions in our Northern parts, Mr. Hungate a Jesuite, and Mr. Hough∣ton a secular Priest, one after another, two meetings at North-Allerton, and came off without any dishonour to the Church of England, and stopped the Carrier of the Romish Emislaries at that time in those parts.

When I was last in Ireland and the Romanists had wrested some part of the power of the Sword into their hands, they prosecuted no English Pro∣testant more than my self, and never left untill they had thrust me out of the Kingdom, as conceiving me to be a great impediment to them in their ma∣king of Proselytes. It was but an ill requital, if I had been one of their Fa∣ctors. Since I came into exile these sixteen years, where have my weak en∣deavours ever been wanting to the Church of England? who hath had more Disputes with their Seculars and Regulars of all sorts, French, Italian,

Dutch, English, in Word, in Writing, to maintain the honour of the English Church? And after all this am I tra∣duced as a Factor for Popery, because I am not a Protestant out of my wits; or because my assertions of known Truth are not agreeable to the gust of Innovators? Blessed are we when men revile us and persecute us, and say all manner of evil against us falsly for Christs sake, for great is our reward in heaven.

But doth he think in earnest, that my way of reconciliation is the ready way to introduce the Papal tyranny in∣to England? Nay, directly on the con∣trary, it is the ready way to exclude the Papal tyranny out of England for ever; and to acquit us for evermore from all the Extortions and Usurpa∣tions of the Roman Court, and to free us from all their Emissaries who now make a prey of such as are unsetled a∣mong us; by the means of doubtful, and (give me leave to speak my mind freely) impertinent Disputations. And this I am ready to make good against

any Innovator of either side who shall oppose it.

This is hard measure to be offered to me, from him who professeth himself to be so great a lover of the Unity of the Church, p. 6. which is but his duty if it be true, as I hope it is. But let him take heed that his love of Unity prove not to be self-love, which insi∣nuateth it self strangely into the most holy actions and designs. All men could be contented to have others united to themselves, and to chop off or stretch out the Religion of their Brethren, as Procrustes did his Guests, according to the measure of his own Bed. I doubt not but he would be well plea∣sed to have Independency stretched up to an ordained Ministery, (as he cal∣leth it,) and Episcopacy let down to a Presbyterian parity, or rather to an empty shew of equality. For I never yet observed but one or two single po∣pular Presbyters ruled the whole Con∣sistory; and had more absolute Arbi∣trary power than ever any Bishop pre∣tended unto. If this be all his love

and desire of Unity, to have Antiquity, Universality, and the perpetual Regi∣ment of the Church to be levelled and moduled according to private fantasies, it is meer self-love, no love of Unity. But I hope better, though I sear worse.

If he dare refer all differences be∣tween us to be tried by the publick Standard, we shall quickly see whether he or I follow Peace and Unity with swifter paces. I offer him two Stan∣dards to be tried by.

First, the Doctrine of the Church of England, set down by those old Episco∣pal Divines whom he pretendeth to be more propitious to him than to me. If he submit to this Standard, all diffe∣rences between him and me are at an end. And then to what purpose hath so much plundering, and so much effu∣sion of Christian blood been? unless it be to shake the dregs to the top of the Urinal.

But if he like not this Standard (as I much fear he will not) I offer him another; that is, the Pattern of the Primitive Church, both for Doctrine

and Discipline. But it may be he will dislike this more, and when all is done admit no Standard but the Scripture. I am ready to joyn with him in this al∣so. But if he and I differ about the sense of the Scripture, (all men acknow∣ledge that the Scripture consisteth not in the words but in the sense,) how shall we be tried what is the sense, by the judgement of the Church of Eng∣land, that is the Standard of the place, or by the pattern of the primitive Church, that is the original Standard according to which the local Standard was made? If he refuse both these, let him not say that he will be tryed by the Scripture, but he will be tryed by himself, that is to say, he himself will and can judge better what is the true sense of the Scripture, than either his na∣tional Church, or the primitive and uni∣versal Church. This is just as if a man who brings his commodities to a market to be sold, should refuse to have them weighed or measured by any Standard local or original, and desire to be tried by the Law of the Land, according to

the judgement of the by-standers. Not that the Law of the Land is any thing more favourable to him than the Stan∣dard, but only to decline a present sen∣tence, and out of hope to advantage himself by the simplicity of his Judges.

Yet Mr. Baxter acquits me, that I am no Papist in his judgement, though he dare not follow me, pag. 22. What soever I am, this is sure enough he hath no authority to be my Judge, or to publish his ill grounded jealousies and suspicions to the world in Print to my prejudice. Although he did condemn me: yet I praise God my conscience doth acquit me, and I am able to vin∣dicate my self. But if he take me to be no Papist, why doth he make me to be one of the Popes Factors or stalking horses, and to have an express design to introduce him into England. He him∣self and an hundred more of his con∣fraternity, are more likely to turn the Popes Factors than I am. I have giv∣en good proof that I am no reed shaken with the wind. My conscience would not give me leave to serve the times as

many others did. They have had their reward.

He bringeth four reasons in favour of me why he taketh me to be no Pa∣pist. I could add fourscore reasons more if it were needful. First, because I disown the fellowship of that party more than Grotius did. pag. 23.

It is well that he will give me leave to know mine own heart better than him∣self. Secondly, because I give them no more than some reconcileable mem∣bers of the Greek Church would give them. And why some members? I know no members of the Greek Church that give them either more or less than I do. But my ground is not the autho∣rity of the Greek Church, but the Au∣thority of the Primitive Fathers and general Councils, which are the re∣presentative Body of the Universal Church. Thirdly, because I disown their Council of Trent, and their last 400. years determinations. Is not this enough in his judgement to acquit me from all suspicion of Popery? Er∣roneous opinions whilst they are not

publickly determined, nor a necessity of compliance imposed upon other men, are no necessary causes of Schisme. To wane their last 400. years de∣terminations is implicitely to renounce all the necessary causes of this great Schisme. And to rest satisfied with their old Patriarchal power and dig∣nity and Primacy of order, (which is another part of my proposition,) is to quit the Modern Papacy both name and thing. And when that is done I do not make these the terms of Peace and Unity, as he doth tax me injuriously enough, (It is not for private Persons to prescribe terms of publick accommodations,) but on∣ly an introduction and way to an accommodation. My words are expresly these in the conclusion of my answer to Monsieur Militiere, If you could be contented to wave your last 4••0. years determinations, or if you liked them for your selves, yet not to obtrude them upon other Churches; If you could rest satisfied with your old Patriarchal power and your Principium unitatis,

a primacy of order, much good might be expected from free Councils and conferences of moderate Persons. What is here more than is confessed by him∣self, that if the Papists will reform what the Bishop requires them to re∣form, it will undoubtely make way for nearer Concord. p. 28. I would know where my Papistry lieth in these words more than his. They may be guilty of other errours which I disown as well as their last 400. years determina∣tions; and yet those errours before they were obtruded upon other Churches, be no sufficient cause of a separation. But what I own or disown, he must learn from my self, not suppose it, or suspect it upon his own head.

His last reason why he forbeareth to censure me as a Papist is my two knocking arguments as he stileth them against the Papal Church. But if he had weighed those two arguments as he ought, he should have forborn to censure me as he doth, for one that had a design to reconcile the Church of England to the Pope. But I will help

Mr. Baxter to understand my meaning better. I meddle not with the recon∣ciliation of opinions in any place by him cited, but only with the reconci∣liation of Persons, that Christians might joyn together in the same pub∣lick devotions and service of Christ. And the terms which I proposed were not these, nor positively defined or determined, but only represented by way of query to all moderate Christians, in the conclusion of my just Vindica∣tion, in these words, I determine no∣thing but only crave leave to propose a question to all moderate Christians who love the peace of the Church, and long for the reunion thereof. In the first place if the Bishop of Rome were re∣duced from his universality of Sove∣raign Iurisdiction jure Divino, to his principium unitatis, and his Court regulated by the Canons of the Fathers, which was the sense of the Councils of Constance and Basile, and is desired by many Roman Catholicks as well as we. Secondly if the Creed or necessary points of faith were reduced

to what they were in the time of the four first Oecumenical Councils, accor∣ding to the decree of the third general Council. (Who dare say that the faith of the primitive Fathers was insuffi∣cient?) Admitting no additional Ar∣ticles, but only necessary explications; And those to be made by the Authority of a general Council or one so general as can be convocated. And lastly suppo∣sing that some things from whence offen∣ces have either been given or taken, which whether right or wrong do not weigh half so much as the unity of Christians, were put out of the Divine offices, which would not be refused if animosities were taken away and cha∣rity restored; I say in case these three things were accorded, which seem very reasonable demands, whether Chri∣stians might not live in an holy Com∣munion, and come in the same publick worship of God, free from all Schisma∣tical separation of themselves one from another, notwithstanding diversities of opinions, which prevail even among the members of the same particular

Churches, both with them and us.

Yet now though I cannot grant it, yet I am willing to suppose that I in∣tended not only a reconciliation of mens minds, but of their opinions also; and that those conditions which he mentioned had been my only terms of peace and concord, let us see what exceptions Mr. Baxter is able to bring against them.

CHAP. VI.

Mr. Baxters exceptions answered.

HE saith, he cannot consent that these which I grant should be made the terms of union. pag. 25. What then? Suppose I did name improper terms of pacification, not only in Mr. Baxters judgement, which I ought not altogether to depend upon, but in very deed. Is there no remedy but I must needs be the Popes Stalking Horse

presently, and have a design to re∣concile England to him. This is over severe. My design is rather to reconcile the Pope and his party to the Church of England, than the Church of Eng∣land to the Pope. He may make use of my way if it like him. Much good may it do him. If not he ought to thank me for my good will, and propose a better expedient himself if he can. But I must tell him before hand that if it be a general one, like those which he hath hitherto proposed, it will sig∣nify nothing. Observe Reader how he is every way mistaken; I make de∣mands and he calls them grants or con∣cessions; I propose some terms as pre∣paratory to a treaty and he calls them terms of peace. He saith he cannot consent to these terms, and yet he hath consented to them already, that if they would reform what the Bishop requires them to reform, it will undoubtely make way for nearer con∣cord. To make them adaequate terms, or conclusive Articles of Peace was ne∣ver any part of my meaning.

All the exceptions which he bringeth against my way, are taken out of my answer to Monsieur Militier. I have seen some silly exceptions against it from a Jesuit, and have answered them, but he is the first Protestant that I have met with, who doth disapprove it. If the efficacy or influence of it upon him be different from what it is upon others, I cannot help it. Books have their success according to the prejudice or qualifications of their Readers. On this side the seas it hath been more happy, to confirm many, to convert some, (and particularly the Transcriber of the Copy which was brought to the Press, who was then one of their Pro∣selytes,) to irritate no Man but the common Adversaries, who vented their splene against it weekly in their Pulpits, as thinking that the easiest way of confutation. Thus one sucks honey, and another poison out of the same flower. He pretendeth that the old Episcopal Divines are of his par∣tie, some of them have approved it, and thanked me for it. If they be not

of his party, I hope he will not suspect them at Geneva as Factors for Popery. They have allowed it, and translated it into French, and Printed it, with∣out any fear of introducing Popery in∣to their City by it. God forbid that we should esteem the practice of the Primitive times to be Popish. They who admit that for a conclusion need not wonder if the more rational per∣sons turn Apostates. But it has ever been the trade of this proud and envious race of men to fasten an hated name upon every thing they understand not. And it is to be feared this great Divine may in time write a Book to prove Greek the Language of the Beast; and he may as reasonably do it, as charge me with Popery only because I pretend to more knowledge in Antiquity than he knows himself to be guilty of. His first particular Exception is this, If when he excludeth Universality of Iurisdiction by Christs institution he intend to grant them (which yet I know not) an Universality of Iurisdiction by humane institution as agreement, then

it would be but to set up an humane Popery instead of a pretended Divine. But this I charge not on him as his judgement, though some will think it intimated. p. 25. If he do not charge it on me, then why doth he publish his own or other mens thoughts in Print to my disadvantage. I know not how to acquit the Printing of groundless jea∣lousies and suspicions of innocent Per∣sons from downright calumny. Espe∣cially suspicions of such things which the Persons suspected had publickly dis∣claimed in Print, long before any such suspicion was broached. These are my very words in my replication to the Bishop of Chalcedon, p. 249. It were a hard condition to put me to prove against my conscience, that the Univer∣sal Regency of the Pope is of humane right, who do absolutely deny both his Divine right and humane right; And in my Schisme garded, p. 15 I have made it evident that the Popes Authority which he did sometime exer∣cise in England before the Reformation, when they permitted him, and which

he would have exercised always de fu∣turo, if he could have had his own will, was a meer usurpation and innovation. If I deny both the Popes divine right and humane right to Soveraign Juris∣diction, and regulate his powers by the Canons of the Church; If I make the Papacy a meer usurpation and in∣novation, he hath no need to fear my setting up of an humane Popery: But I have just cause to require reparation of him. So his first exception is a false groundless suspicion.

But doth he make no difference in∣deed between a Divine Papacy and an Humane Papacy? So it seemeth by his words. If the Pope do hold a Sove∣raign power in the Church by divine institution, then whatsoever he doth though he draw millions of Souls to Hell after him, yet it is not in the power of a general council to call him to an account, or to depose him, or to re∣form him. But if his right be only humane all this may justly be done and hath been done. If he have a Soveraign∣ty by divine right he may give his non

obstantes to the Canons of the Fa∣thers at his pleasure; then all power in the Church is derived from him: But if he hold the Papacy not from Heaven but from men, then other Bishops do not derive their power from him singlely, but he from them jointly, then he is stinted and limitted by their Canons, and cannot dispense with them, further than the Church is plea∣sed to confer a dispensative power upon him, within the bounds of his own Patriarchate. Against divine right there is no prescription, but against humane right men may lawfully chal∣lenge their ancient liberties, and im∣munities by prescription. A Papacy by divine right is unchangeable, but a Papacy by humane right is alterable, both for person and place and power. So an humane Papacy if it grow bur∣thensom is remediable; But a pretend∣ed divine Papacy when and where and whilst it is acknowledged, is irremedi∣able. So much a pretended divine Papacy is worse than an humane.

His second exception follows, But that St. Peter hath a certain fixed Chair, to which a primacy of order is annexed, and an headship of unity, is not a truth, and therefore not a principle necessary to heal the Church. Whether it be a truth or no, is not much material. We have no Con∣troversie with the Church of Rome about a Primacy of order, but about a Supremacy of Power. I shall declare my sense in four conclusions. First that St. Peter had a fixed Chair at An∣tioch, and after that at Rome, is a truth which no man, who giveth any credit to the ancient Fathers and councils and Historiographers of the Church, can either deny or well doubt of.

Secondly, that St. Peter had a Pri∣macy of order among the Apostles, is the unanimous voice of the primitive Church, not to be contradicted by me, which the Church of England and those old Episcopal Divines, whom he pretendeth to honour so much, did ne∣ver oppose.—The learned Bishop of Winchester acknowledgeth as much,

not only in his own name, but in the name of the Church and King of Eng∣land, both King and Church knowing it, and approving it. Resp. ad Apol. Bellar. cap. 1. Neither is it questioned among us whether St. Peter had a Pri∣macy, but what that Primacy was, and and whether it were such an one as the Pope doth now challenge to himself, and you challenge to the Pope. But the King doth not deny Peter to have been the prime and Prince of the Apo∣stles. He who should trouble himself and others to oppugn such a received innocent truth, seemeth to me to have more leisure than judgement. But on the other side it is as undoubtedly true, and confessed by the prime Romanists themselves, that St. Peter had no su∣premacy or superiority of power and single Jurisdiction over any other Apostle. To this purpose I have laid down these four grounds in my Book of Schisme Garded, pag. 27. First, that each Apostle had the same power by virtue of Christs Commission. Secondly, that St. Peter never exer∣cised

a single Jurisdiction over the rest of the Apostles. Thirdly, that St. Peter had not his Commission granted to him and his Successours as any ordinary Pastor, and the rest of the Apostles as Delegates for term of life. Fourthly, that during the History of the Acts of the Apostles, the Soveraignty of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction rested not in any single Apostle, but in the Aposto∣lical Colledge. Hitherto there is no cause of controversie between him and me, or between any persons of judge∣ment and ingenuity.

My third assertion is that some Fa∣thers and Schoolmen, who were no sworn vassals to the Roman Bishop do affirm, that this Primacy of order is fix∣ed to the Chair of St. Peter, and his Successours for ever. As for instance Gerson for a Schoolman that learned Chancellour of Paris, who sided with the council against the Pope, and left his enmity to the innovations of the Court of Rome as an hereditary legacy to the School of Sorbone. Auferibi∣lis non est usque ad consummationem

saeculi vicarius sponsus Ecclesiae. The vicarial Spouse of the Church (this was the language of that Age, whereby he meaneth not the person of any par∣ticular Pope, but the Office of the Papacy,) ought not to be taken away untill the end of the World. And among the Fathers I instance in St. Cy∣prian, whose publick opposition to Pope Stephen is well known, who seemeth not to dissent from it; In his Epistle to Antonianus he calls the See of Rome the place and Chair of Peter. Ep. 52. And in his 55. Epistle to Cor∣nelius, They dare sail and carry Let∣ters from Schismatical and profane persons to the Chair of Peter, and the principal Church from whence Sa∣cerdotal unity did spring. And in his De unitate Ecclesiae, Although he give equal power to all his Apostles after his Resurrection, &c. Yet to manifest an unity he eonstituted one Chair, and by his own authority disposed the ori∣ginal of that unity beginning from one. And a little after, The Primacy is given to Peter, to demonstrate one Church of Christ and one Chair.

Every one is free for me to take what exceptions he pleaseth, to the va∣rious lections of any of these places, or to interpret the words as he pleaseth. Always there seemeth to be enough to me in St. Cyprian to declare his own mind, without taking any advantage from any suppositious passages. Whe∣ther it be a truth or an error, it con∣cerneth not me, I am sure it is none of mine error, if it be one, who nei∣ther maintain nor grant such a Pri∣macy of order to be due to the Chair of St. Peter and his Successours, by the institution of Christ. But only dis∣pute upon suppositions, that although there were such a beginning of unity, (which Calvin and Beza require in all Societies by the Law of Nature,) And although the Bishop of Rome had such a Primacy of order either by di∣vine right, or humane right, yet it would not prejudice us, nor advantage them at all. Neither in truth is it worth contending about, or to be bal∣lanced with the peace of the Church, and of the Christian World. They who

undervalue the Fathers, may stile their sayings untruths when they please. I have weighed my grounds over serious∣ly to stumble at a Straw.

My fourth and last conclusion, is, that supposing still but not granting that any such Primacy of order or be∣ginning of unity, (about which, we have no Controversie) was due to the Chair of St. Peter by divine right, or much rather by humane right, yet this supposed Chair of St. Peter is not fixed to Rome. As for divine right we have the plain consession of Bellarmine, it is not to be sound either in Scripture or Tradition, that the Apostolick See is so fixed to Rome, that it cannot be re∣moved, Bell. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 4. And for humane right there needeth no proof. For whatsoever is consti∣tuted by humane right. may be repeal∣ed by humane right. This is my con∣stant way everywhere. I do altoge∣ther deny a supremacy of Power and Jurisdiction over us in the exteriour Court, which only is in controversie between us and the Pope. And what∣soever

Jurisdiction he hath elsewhere, I regulate by the Canons of the Fathers. I suppose a Primacy of order, but grant it not farther than it hath been grant∣ed by the Canons of the Catholick Church. And as it was acquired by humane right, so it may be taken away by humane right. To confound a Pri∣macy of order with a Supremacy of Power, divine right with humane right, a legislative Power with an executive Power, is proper to blunderers. So in his two first Exceptions I suffer two palpable injuries. In the first Excep∣tion he chargeth me upon suspicion, directly contrary to my assertion. In the second Exception he confoundeth a Primacy and a Supremacy, order and power, and maketh me to fix that to the See of Rome, which I maintain to be unfixed.

His third Exception is this, That the Pope should hold to himself and his Church his last 400. years determi∣nations, and so continue, as the Bishop here concludes, to be no Apostolical, Orthodox, Catholick Church, nor to

have true Faith, is an unlikely thing to stand with the unity and concord which he mentioneth. We shall cement but sorrily with such a body as this. It is no wonder if Grotius suffer wrong by him, when my words are (at the best) so grosly mistaken, who live to interpret my self. First I give no leave to the Pope and Church of Rome to hold to themselves their last 400. years determinations. But if they will hold them I have no power to help it, or hinder it. My words are these, If you could be contented to wave your last 400. years determinations, or if you liked them for your selves, yet not to obtrude them upon other Churches. As if one should say, If Ieroboam will forbear to commit Idolatry himself, or if he will not, yet if he will forbear to compell others to commit Idolatry, I may come to live in Israel, no mode∣rate man will say, that he giveth leave to Ieroboam to commit Idolatry. Se∣condly, he pretends most untruly that I make these to be the terms or

conditions of a peace which I mention only as preparatives. My words are not then, we may unite and cement our selves together, but then much good might be expected from free Councils and conferences of moderate persons. He himself saith as much as I say. Thirdly, if they do not obtrude their last 400. years determinations upon other Churches, then they wave their ligislative power, and take away from their Canons the nature of Laws, then they make them no longer points of Faith, but probable opinions. It was not the erroneous opinions of the Church of Rome, but the obtruding them by Laws upon other Churches which warranted a separation. He who will have no communion with a Church which hath different or erro∣neous opinions in it, so long as they are not obtruded must provide a ladder to climb up to Heaven by himself. And this is that which I said expresly in that very place cited by him, We might yet live in hope to see an union, if not in all opinions, yet in Charity

and all necessary points of saving truth. Let the Church of Rome do that which I require, that is the Apo∣stolical Discipline, and Apostolical Creed without addition, and it shall become an Apostolical, and Catholick Church, and have true Faith.

His fourth Exception is this, That the Pope should hold his Patriarchal power, is a meer innovation, and hu∣mane institution, as is his Primacy of order and such priviledges. The Coun∣cil of Chalcedon avers it. And there∣fore it is no necessary thing to be con∣ceded for the Churches peace. That the Patriarchal dignity is an humane institution, all men who understand themselves do acknowledge. That it is a meer innovation, all men who un∣derstand themselves do deny. How should that be a meer innovation which was not first constituted, but confirm∣ed as an ancient Ecclesiastical custom in the first general Council of Nice, and approved by all the general succeeding Councils of the Church, and particular∣ly by the Council of Chalcedon which

he mentioneth, which equalled the Pa∣triarch of Constantinople, to the Patri∣arch of Rome? This form of Govern∣ment is allowed by the Canons of the Apostles, as I have shewed elsewhere. This Patriarchal Government Calvin himself did not only allow, but assert it to be such a Form as God hath pre∣scribed in his Word. Cal. Iust. l. 4. c. 4. S. 4. What wonder is it if they lose ground daily to the Romanists, who have the confidence to affirm that Pa∣triarchal power is an innovation, and cite the great Council of Chalcedon for it.

He proceedeth to his fifth exception, Multitudes that live in the western Na∣tions of the World will still dissent both from the Popes Patriarchal power, and more from his way of exercising it. And so will be forced to fall under the reproach of Schismaticks by these t••rms, and that for obeying the Laws of Christ. If the Pope as Patriarch of the West should impose on us only and not on the East, the Doctrines and worship, and Ceremonies which he now imposeth on

the Papists, (except the excepted be∣fore,) doth any man of reason think that the Reformed Churches would ever yield to them, or ought to do it? We will unite on Christs terms, and that will be a more sure and general Union, and not on such humane devises as these. Let those that made the Pope our Patriarch maintain his power, for Christ did not. Still weaker and weaker. Multitudes that live in the Western parts of the World will not only dislike the Popes Patriarchal pow∣er, but his Presbyterian Discipline, and his holy orders, the Creed, the Lords Prayer, the Sacraments, &c. must a man therefore quit his just right because some dislike it? Their di∣slike is but scandal taken, but the quitting of that which is right for their satisfaction should be scandal given. Whether is the worse?

By the way I desire him to consider two things; First, how they are for∣ced to fall under the reproach of Schis∣maticks? If they be forced any way, it is by their own wilful humours or

erroneous conscience. Other force here is none. If there be any force it is they which force themselves. Se∣condly, I would have him to consider, whether is the worse and more dan∣gerous condition, for Christians to fall under the reproach of Schismaticks, which hath no sin in it, but is a means many times to reduce men into the fold of the Catholick Church, or for Christians to fall into Schisme it self. Whosoever shall oppose the just power of a Lawful Patriarch, lawfully pro∣ceeding, is a material Schismatick at least, and if his errour be vincible, such as he might conquer and come unto the knowledge of the truth if he did his endeavour, he is a formal Schismatick.

His reasons of their falling under the reproach of Schismaticks for obeying the Laws of Christ, I confess I do not understand. Doth he think that Pa∣triachal power is contrary to the Laws of Christ, and that all the Primitive Churches and Councils and Christians did transgress the Laws of Christ in

this particular? Surely he cannot think it. Or is it his Zeal to ad∣mit nothing in the Church grounded upon prudence and experience and the Law of nature, but only that which in commanded by Christ in Holy Scri∣pture? If that be it I refer him to Doctor Sanderson in his Preface be∣fore his 20. Sermons, to whom he professeth very great reverence. I had rather suspect that I understand him not, than Imagine him to be guilty of such an absurd conclusion.

To his question if the Pope as Pa∣triarch of the West should impose upon us which he imposeth upon the Papists, should the reformed Churches yield to them? I answer God forbid, but his whole discourse is grounded upon a Cluster of mistakes. First the Pope hath no right to the Patriarchate of all the West. Particularly he is not our Patriarch. Other Churches in the West might find out Primates or Pa∣triarchs of their own as well as we, if they sought diligently for them. Se∣condly a single Patriarch hath not le∣gislative

power to impose Laws in his own Partriarchate, nor power to in∣novate any thing without the consent of his Bishops. Thirdly my former exceptions as he stileth them, or ra∣ther my preparatory conditions, do virtually comprehend all the gross er∣rours of the Roman Church, both in Discipline and Doctrine, leaving no difference in necessary points of faith, but only in opinions. So if my con∣ditions be observed, there is no place left for any such supposition. Lastly, I observe what an unsound kind of ar∣guing this is, to deny a man his just right, as Patriarchal power was the Bishop of Romes just right, for fear lest he may abuse it. All factions use to miscal their own terms, Christs terms; to cancel all humane right under the notion of humane devises, is both inconsistent with the Law of Christ, and the welfare of all Societies. They who made the Bishop of Rome a Patriarch were the Primitive Fa∣thers, not excluding the Apostles, and Christian Emperours, and Oecu∣menical

Councils. What Laws they made in this case, we are bound to obey for conscience sake, (until they be repealed Lawfully,) by virtue of the Law of Christ. A fairer plea than I know any for their own Con∣sistory, where Lay-men usurp the pow∣er of the keys contrary to the Law of Christ.

His sixth exception is the same with the fifth, only there it is proposed hy∣pothetically [If the Pope as Patriarch of the West should impose,] And here it is repealed categorically, ma∣ny things in Doctrine and worship which on these terms would be im∣posed both on East and West, and pre∣vail in most of the Churches at this day, are sins against God, and there∣fore how small so ever they may be, are not to be consented unto for unity. If there be any grain of truth in this proof, it is so indefinite, so conjectu∣ral, and so accidental, that it re∣quireth no answer. How should a man either affirm or deny or distin∣guish of many things, without speci∣fying

any one thing in particular? I assent thus far in general that no man can be obliged to do a sin against God, and that whatsoever humane Ordinance doth necessarily and essentially pro∣duce sin, is unlawful. But until he tell us in particular what these many things are, or at least some one of them, and prove evidently that it is a sin against God, indeed, and not in his opinion only; and that it is infallibly true that it would be imposed, which would be an hard task to undertake without the gift of Prophesy; and lastly that the imposition of some such sinful thing or things, is not an arbi∣trary or accidental abuse of that Law∣ful power which I admit, but floweth naturally or essentially from it; I say until he do all this, all that he doth say signifieth nothing; and so I leave his many things as just nothing,

And come unto his seventh exce∣ption, The Aethiopian and other Churches that were still without the verge of the Roman Empire, will never alknowledge thus much to the Pope,

seeing that even those humane Consti∣tutions which gave him his Primacy of Order, determined of no more than the Roman World, and had nothing to do beyond Euphrates. How did the Popes lay any claim or meddle any fur∣ther. And abundance among the Ea∣stern Churches will deny this Primay. This exception was made in the dark, and therefore the errours that abound in it may more easily be pardoned, as proceeding from the not knowing of the true State of the Aethiopick and other Eastern Churches. Both the Aethiopick and all other Eastern Churches do unanimously admit this form of Government by Patriarchs, which I acknowledge. The Aethio∣pians have a Patriarch of their own, and so have all the other Eastern Churches. And particularly the Al∣buna or Patriarch of Aethiopia is under the Partriarch of Alexandria, named by him, and ordained by him from time to time. So untrue it is that the Oecumenical Constitutions of general Councils extended not beyond Euphra∣tes.

The Aethiopick and all other Eastern Churches do submit to the Council of Nice, and other Oecume∣nical Councils, by which Patriarchal Government was confirmed. They all acknowledge the Patriarch of Rome to be the chief Patriarch, whilst he behaveth himself well, and to have a Primacy of order among the Patriarchs. They know no points of faith but those which are contained in the ancient Creed, as we find at large in the Histori∣cal Description of Aethiopia by Francis Alvares. They all deny the Popes Supre∣macy of power, as we do. And when the Pope songht to introduce it into Aethio∣pia, by the mediation of the King of Portugal, Claudius then Emperour of Aethiopia returned this answer, Se qui∣dem fraterna in Lusitanum Regem voluntate esse ac fore, caeterum nihil sibi minus in mentem venisse, quam ut ideirco à Majorum institutis ac tot saeculorum spatio corroborata religione deficeret, That he ought all good will to the King of Portugal as his Brother, but it was the least part of his thought

therefore to Apostate, from the orders and Religion of his Ancestors, re∣ceived and radicated in Aethiopia throughout so many ages. Pet. Maffei Hist. Jud. l. 16. p. 749.

His eighth Exception is, There is no hope of uniting the Churches on any terms but what are necessary and di∣vine; for its vain to think that things humane and unnecessary, should be con∣sented to by all. Much less things sinful. In the name of God, why is it not po∣ssible that the Churches should be united upon some humane or pruden∣tial terms? Are there not common principles of natural equity, which rea∣son dictateth to all mankind? That is one mistake. Secondly, the Law of Nature is a divine Law. And though Patriarchal Regiment be no express principle of the Law of Nature, yet it is very agreeable to it, and ground∣ed upon it. Thirdly, though no hu∣mane ordinances be absolutely necessary to salvation, as those supernatural truths which are revealed in holy Scripture are, yet they may be respectively ne∣cessary

to the well-being of Religion. Lastly, in his conclusion much less things sinful, he disputes upon that which is not granted, nay more which is abso∣lutely denyed. Mr. Baxter will never be able to prove that any thing which is sinful, is contemned in my reconci∣liatory Propositions.

His ninth Exception signifieth as little as the rest, There is no union to be had but upon the terms on which the Churches have sometimes been united. For a new way of union is not to be expected attempted. But never was the Church united on such concessions as these, and therefore never will be. I Deny his assumpsion altogether. And if I were to chuse a reason, or medium whereby to demonstrate my way of reconciliation to be good, I could not fix upon a better than this. The Ca∣tholick Church hath been united on these same principles which I suppose, the same Faith without any addition, the same Ecclesiastical Discipline with∣out any variation, the same Form of serving God publickly; And since the

dispersion of the Church, all over the World, it never was united upon any other principles but these, nor can be united upon any other principles but these.

I am come to his tenth and last Ex∣ception, It would be an exceeding dis∣honour to God, and injury to the Souls of many millions of men, if but under the Popes Patriarchal Iurisdiction in the West, the Papists way of Worship were set up, and their Government exercised as now. The good will of Rome, or the name of peace would not recompense the loss of so many thou∣sand Souls, as some one of the Papal abuses might procure; for instance their driving the people from the Scri∣ptures, and other means of knowledge. All along he buildeth upon a wrong Foundation. It is one thing to set up, or to approve the setting up of a false way of Worship, which I do not justif••e, And another thing to tolerate it when and where it is not in our pow∣er to hinder it, as both he and I must do whether we will or no. I do not

only give no consent to the setting up of any unlawful Form of Worship where it is not, but I wish it taken away where it is set up already. But if it be without the sphere of my acti∣vity I must let it alone perforce. If a Shepherd when it is past his skill to cure his rotten Sheep, shall do his ut∣termost to preserve that part of his Flock which is sound from infection, he deserveth to be commended for those he saved, not to be accused as the cause why so many perished, that were past his skill and power to cure. In a g••eat Scathfire it is wisdom not only to suffer those Houses to burn down which are past quenching, but sometimes to pull down some few Houses wherein the fire is not yet kindled, to free all the rest of the City from danger. If the Pope within his own territories, or other Christian Princes by his means within their territories, will maintain a way of Worship which I do not ap∣prove, must I therefore, nay may I therefore, make War upon them to com∣pell them to be of my Religion? So

we shall never have any peace in the World whilst there are different Reli∣gions in the world, for every one takes his own Religion to be best.

But what certainty hath he that so many thousands, yea millions of Souls are lost, because they live in such places as are subject to the Pope. God is a merciful God, and looks upon his poor Creatures, with all their prejudices. Or how doth this agree with what he saith elsewhere, that the French mode∣ration is acceptable to all good men, And that Nation is an honourable part of the Church of Christ in his esteem. It is no very honourable part of the Church of Christ, if so many milli∣ons of Souls run such extream hazard in it, p. 10. His marginal note of their streams of blood and Massacres might have been spared, for fear of putting some of them upon a parallel between theirs and ours. And for his instance of driving the people from the Scrip∣tures, he escapeth fairly if none of them cast it in his teeth, that the pro∣miscu••us licence which they give to all

sorts of people, qualified or unqualifi∣ed, not only to read, but to interpret the Scriptures according to their pri∣vate spirits or particular fancies, with∣out any regard either to the analogy of Faith, which they understand not, or to the interpretation of the Doctors of former Ages, is more prejudicial, I might better say pernicious, both to particular Christians, and to whole So∣cities than the over rigorous restraint of the Romanists. Whereof a man need require no farther proof but only to behold the present face of the English Church. Truth commonly remaineth in the modest. And so I have shewed him how little weight there is in his ten Exceptions.

At the conclusion of his Exceptions he hath this clause, Besides most of the evils that I charged before on the Gro∣tian way (as censures, persecutions &c.) would follow upon this way. It may follow in his erroneous opinion, but in truth and really no inconveniency at all doth follow upon what I say. The third cause of his dislike of the Grotian

way was, Because it is uncharitable and censorious; cutting off from the Catholick united Society, the reform∣ed Churches that yield not to his terms, and will not be reconciled to the Pope of Rome. Let them take heed that they cut not off themselves, for I neither cut them off, nor declare them to be cut off. If they will not be re∣conciled to the Pope of Rome, upon warrantable and just terms, such as were approved by the Primitive Church, such as those are which I propose, for any thing he doth say, or can say to the contrary, it is his own uncha••itableness not mine. Some men would call it Schismatical obstinacy. But this reason hath been fully answer∣ed before.

The fourth reason of his dislike of this design is, Because it is a trap to tempt and engage the Souls of milli∣ons into the same uncharitable, cen∣sorious, and reproachful way. When a false Center of the Churches unity is set up, and impossible, or unlawful terms of concord are pretended thus

to be the only terms, they that believe this will uncharitably censure all those for Schismaticks, or Hereticks that close not with them on these terms. His first office should have been to have proved that my way is uncharitable, censorious, or reproachful, and that my terms are impossible and unlawful, which he neither doth, nor attempt∣eth to do, nor ever will be able to do. And until he do it, or go about it, all his reasons are a pure begging of the question, and no better, and conse∣quently deserve no answer.

The fifth reason of his dislike is, because it tendeth to engage the Princes of Christendom in a persecution of their Subjects, that cannot comply with these unwarrantable terms. And that is likely to be no small number, nor the worser part, but the soundest, and wisest, and holiest men. For if Princes be once perswaded that these be the only terms, and so that the dissenters are factious, Schismatical and unpeaceable men, no wonder if they silence the Ministers, and perse∣cute

the people. It is an easier thing to call them unlawful, and unwarran∣table terms twenty times, than to make it good once. It is a fault in Rheto∣rick, and in Logick also to use com∣mon reasons, such as may be retorted against our selves by an Adversary. Such a reason is this, and may be urged with as much shew of reason against all Writers of Controversies whatsoever, and against Mr. Baxter himself in particular, with as much colour of truth as he urgeth it against Grotius or me. That if Princes be once perswaded that those terms which he proposeth be true, and the contra∣ry errours, no wonder if they silence the Ministers, and persecute the Peo∣ple. Or if they be once perswaded by him, that his new Discipline is the Scepter of Christ prescribed in the Gospel, then the Episcopal Divines, and the Independents are sure to suffer. This srivolous pretense will fit all causes whatsoever, though they be never so Diametrally opposite one to another.

Secondly, I answer that there is not one grain of clear distinct necessary truth in this whole Discourse, but uncertain suspicions, groundless per∣swasions, confused generalities, and beggings of the question. That the terms are unlawful and unwarrantable, that he and his party are the soundest, and wisest, and holiest of Christians, is groundless presumption and begging of the question. That the Princes of Christendom will be perswaded them∣selves, and thereupon condemn the dis∣senters, and silence the Ministers, and persecute the People, are all uncertain conjectures, and accidental events. What Princes of Christendom he doth intend or can intend, who are those dissenters whom he calleth the sound∣est, and wisest, and holiest of men; what Ministers he meaneth ordained or unordained, or both; And what Flocks such as they had a legal title to, or such as they have usurped, are all confused indefinite generalities, and ought to have been set forth more distinctly.

In a word mutato nomine de se Fa∣bula narratur. Whatsoever he fain∣eth of imaginary Grotians, is really true of his own Party. They have prevailed with persons of power and Authority, and perswaded them to silence and persecute, and to chase away from their Flocks the right Pa∣stors, and have usurped their Benefices and Charges themselves. And all this while pretended (shameless men,) that they are doing God good service. He is not able to charge any of his imaginary Grotians with any such thing. This is to bite and whine, as the Proverb hath it, to do wrong and to complain of suffering wrong. Popular Persecutions of all others are ever most groundless, and most vio∣lent.

The more moderate that mens judge∣ments are, as Grotius his judgement was, and mine is, the farther off they are from engaging Princes to perse∣cute their Subjects. Cowards ordina∣rily are most cruel. So weak and willful persons are most apt to pro∣mote

Persecutions, knowing that to be their only defence against those whom they are unable to answer with reason. There are seditious princi∣ples and practices enough in the World to irritate Princes, without any other bad offices, which have been intro∣duced into the Church under a pre∣text of Religion, such as no man living can justifie, such as are incon∣sistent with all humane Societies. Such as if God be pleased once to restore men perfectly to their right Wits, they must be sure in the first place to cast out of the World, if they do ever mean to preserve Peace and Tranquility among themselves. It were much more politickly done of him to leave this subject, which the more it is stirred in, the worse it will smell to some body.

In the conclusion of this Objection he complaineth thus, This is the un∣happy issue of the attempts of Pride. When men have such high thoughts of their own imaginations, and de∣vices, &c. Which is most true in

general if he can let it rest there. But if he proceed any farther to ex∣amine on what side this Pride doth lie, whether among the Grotian Party, as Cassander, and Wicelius, and Gro∣tius, or among his own Party, if it were fit to name them, he will quick∣ly find who they are that do calcare fastum majore fastu, tread down Pride with greater Pride, through the holes of whose coats vain glory doth discover it self. That ever Presbyte∣rians should complain of Pride!

CHAP. VII.

Of Mr. Baxters one was of re∣conciliation.

THus having in his own Imagina∣tion battered down that frame of an Union, which he thought I had proposed, though in truth all his rea∣sons have scarcely force to shake an Aspin leaf. Yet for our comfort he telleth us that he will not leave the bu∣siness thus, lest whilst he pulls down all and offers nothing instead thereof, he might he thought an Enemy to peace. It is all the reason in the World that if peace be so desirable as he maketh it, and he shew his dislike of our ways to procure it, he should propose a better expedient of his own, that other men may have the liberty to try if they can say more against his way, than he hath hitherto been able to say against theirs: but I have my jealousies and fears as well as he, and better founded,

that he will never prove a good Ar∣chitect in this kind, because I never found any man yet who was given to innovation, but his genius was ten times apter for pulling down than for building up.

But let us view his own way or terms of peace without prejudice. In general therefore I say, that the terms of an Universal concord or peace must be purely Divine and not humane, necessary and not things unnecessary, ancient according to the Primitive sim∣plicity; and neither new nor yet too numerous, curious, or abstruse. These are Generals indeed, and if they were all consented unto, the peace would not be much nearer than it is. I think such general terms or Articles of peace were never seen before in our days. From what hopes am I fallen? I ex∣pected that having rejected our ways of reconciliatioxn, he would have chalked us a new ready way of his own, free from all exceptions. And he only telleth us that a way must be short and streight beaten and smooth,

and so leaveth us to find out such a way for our selves where we can. This is just take nothing and hold it fast. Such general ways are commonly the ways of Bunglers or Deceivers. One of Mercuries Statues though it were dumb could have given better dire∣ctions for a way than this. But he who will be a Reconciler of Controver∣sies must be more particular.

Yet let us take a particular view of his general directions. The terms of an Universal peace must be purely Di∣vine not humane. How purely di∣vine not humane? That is impossible. That which is purely divine hath no mixture of humane in it; but these terms of peace must be made and con∣trived by men, between man and man, for the use of men, and after an hu∣mane manner; not by immediate in∣spiration. So these terms cannot be purely divine. But perhaps his mea∣ning is no more than this, that in an accommodation no humane Constitu∣tions ought to be imposed upon the Churches. Then down goes his Pres∣byterian

Discipline, for that is both humane and new. When Calvin first proposed it to the Helvetian Divines for their approbation, he desired no more of them but to testify that it was not disagreeable to the word of God, or came near to the word of God. It is meet and just that no humane Consti∣tutions should be imposed as Divine ordinances, but it doth not follow thence that all humane right and law must be thrust out for rotten.

Humane right is grounded upon Di∣vine right, that is the Law of nature, and the positive Laws of God, and can∣not be violated without the violation of the Divine Law, and ought to be observed for Conscience sake, out of a respect to the Divine Law, which commandeth every soul to be subject to the higher Powers. Is not this like to prove a fair accommodation? wherein the first Article must be to renounce the light of natural reason, and the ex∣perience of so many ages since Christs time, and the prudential Constitutions of all our primitive Guides. These

are such terms of peace as can please no body but Sequestrators, and such as live like Moths in other mens garments. Neither would his pre∣tented Divine terms be more favoura∣ble to innovations than humane terms, but only that this way affordeth wran∣glers a longer time to prevaricate, before Controversies can be maturely determined. If ever there were an Universal reconciliation of all Chri∣stians, the first act which they ought to do after their Union, is to cast out all such pernicious principles as this form among them, before they thrust out all reason and humane right out of the World.

His second rule is the terms of peace must be things necessary not unnecessa∣ry. We are beholden to King Iames not to him for this prudent direction. But by setting it down so imperfectly he makes it his own. There are two sorts of necessary things. Somethings are absolutely necessary to the being of the Church. Some other things are re∣spectively necessary to the well-being

of the Church. The terms of peace ought to extend to both these, to the former ever more, to the later as far as it may be. Or yet more distinctly. Some things are necessary necessitate medii, as necessary means of salvation, without which no Church can consist. Concerning these there is little or no need of reconciliation, where there is no difference. Secondly, Some other things are necessary necessitate precepti, as commanded by God or by the Church of God. Both these are ne∣cessary in their several degrees, and both of them ought to be taken in con∣sideration in a reconciliation, but espe∣cially the former, yet not excluding the later. Every thing ought to be loosed by the same Authority by which it was bound. Thirdly, There are other things which though they be neither necessary means of salvation, nor necessarily Comman∣ded by God or man, yet they are necessary by a necessity of convenience, out of pious and prudential considera∣tions, Huic, hîc, nunc, to this or that

Church, at this or that time, in this or that place. The greatest conside∣ration that ought to be had of these things, is to leave every Church free to determine their own necessities or conveniences, yet with a regard to unity and uniformity.

His Third rule is, the terms of peace must be ancient according to the pri∣mitive simplicity, and neither new nor yet too numerous, curious, or abstruse. His first rule doth virtually comprehend both his later rules, and renders them superfluous. For if no∣thing be admitted into the terms of peace but Divine truths, they can neither be unnecessary, nor new, nor too numerous, curious, or abstruse. And this way of his rightly expressed and understood is the same in effect with my way which he pretendeth to impugn. He admitteth no truths but Divine, and excludeth all humane rights which is more than he ought to do. I distinguish divine right from humane right, and give unto the Law of God both written and unwritten,

and to the Laws of the Church, and to the Laws of Caesar, their respective dues. He admitteth none but necessa∣ry truths; I admit no truths in point of Faith, but these which the blessed Apostles judged to be necessary and comprehended in the Creed. I reject all new coined Articles of saith, all usurpations in point of Discipline, all innorations in point of worship. He proposeth for a Pattern of union the simplicity of the ancient and primitive Church; So do I, before the faith was adulterated by the addition of new Ar∣ticles, or the Discipline translated into a new Monarchical way, or the publick worship of God was corrupted by the injunction of sinful or supernumerary rites

I wish he had expressed himself more clearly what he means by the pri∣mitive simplicity. I hope it is not his intention that either the house of God or the publick service of God should be fordid and contemptible. He can∣not be ignorant, that so far as the per∣sent condition of times, and places, and

Persons and affairs will bear it there ought to be some porportion between that great God whom we serve, and that service which we perform unto him. God was acceptably served by the Pri∣mitive Christians both in their Cells, & Vaults, & homely Oratories in times of persecution, and likewise in stately and magnificent Temples and Cathe∣drals when God had given peace and plenty to his Church. Wisdom is ju∣stified of her Children. Yet even in those times of persecutions a man would wonder at that external splendour wherewith those devouter souls served God, where they had means and op∣portunity.

Neither do I perfectly understand what his aim is, where he would not have the terms of peace to be curious or abstruse. I conjecture it reflecteth upon the School-men. And if his meaning only be, that he would not have our Catechisms or accommodations to be pestered and perplexed with the obscure terms and endless disputations of the Schools, I do readily assent. But

if he think that in the work of recon∣ciliation there is no need of a Scho∣lastick Plain to take away the crabbed knots, and to smooth the present Controversies of the Christian World, I must dissent from him. We find by daily experience that the greatest diffe∣rences and such as made the most Noise, and the deepest breach in the Chri∣stian World, being rightly and Scho∣lastically stated do both become easy and intelligible, and now appear to have been meer mistakes one of ano∣ther. And when many other questions are rightly handled after the same man∣ner, I presume they will find the like end. When I was a young Student in Theology Doctor Ward declared his mind to me, to this purpose, that it was impossible that the present Controver∣sies of the Church should be rightly de∣termined or reconciled without a deep insight into the Doctrine of the Pri∣mitive Fathers, and a competent skill in School Theology. The former affor∣deth us a right pattern, and the second smootheth it over and plaineth away the knots.

Though he himself do deal only in Generals: yet he telleth us that Mr. Chillingworth hath already particular∣ly told the World a way of unity. It is well if he have, but if it prove as general as his own way, it will not conduce much to the Peace of Chri∣stendom. What hath Mr. Chilling∣worth told us, or where hath he told it? Had it not been worthy of his la∣bour to have repeated the words, or cited the place? What a deal of va∣nity is it to write whole Treatises in confutation of others, to no purpose, and when he comes to the main busi∣ness, or to the only necessary and sa∣tisfactory point to be mute. It is long since I read over Mr. Chillingworth, but I remember no such particular re∣conciliatory way told by him to all the World, but only some general inti∣mations or directions. All that I do remember or meet with I shall pro∣duce.

The first place is in the Frontispiece of his Book. Neither is that his own judgement, but the judgement of King

Iames, related by Mr. Casaubon in his Epistle to Cardinal Peron, in these words, The King judgeth that the num∣ber of things absolutely necessary to salvation is not great. Wherefore his Majesty thinks there is no more com∣pendious way to Peace, than to distin∣guish diligently, things necessary, from things not necessary, and to endeavour to procure an agreement about necessa∣ry things, and that place may be given to Christian liberty in things not ne∣cessary. The King calleth those things simply necessary, which either the Word of God commmandeth expresly to be beloved or done, or which the anci∣ent Church did draw out of the Word of God by necessary consequence. If this distinction were used to decide the present Controversies, and divine right were ingeniously distinguished from positive or Ecclesiastical right, it seemeth not that the contention would be long, or sharp between pious and moderate men, about things absolutely necessary. For they are both f•••• as we said even now, and are for the

most part approved by all, who desire to be called Christians. And his most renowned Majesty thinketh this di∣stinction to be of so great moment, to diminish the Controversies which trouble the Church so much at this day, that he judgeth it the duty of all who are studious of Peace, to ex∣plain it diligently, and teach it, and urge it. This is an excellent way in∣deed, but it is a general way, not a particular way; It was King Iames his way, not Mr. Chillingworths. What King Iames pointed at in general, I pursue in particular. But that prudent Prince was far enough from dreaming, that there could be no reconciliation of Christendom, except all humane right were destroyed or taken away. This is Mr. Baxters own unbeaten way.

I find a second passage to this purpose in Mr. Chillingworths answer to the Preface nu. 23. Notwithstanding all your errours, we do not renounce your communion totally, and absolute∣ly, but only leave communicating with you in the practice and profession of

your errours. The trial whereof will be to propose some Form of Worship∣ping God, taken wholly out of Scripture. And herein if we refuse to join with you, then and not till then, may you justly say we have utterly and abso∣lutely abandoned your communion. This might serve for a coverfew to hide the flame of our contentions from breaking out whilst we are at out de∣votions. But it hath nothing of re∣conciliation in it, and hath as little probability of a pacification. We de∣sire not half so much as this of them to change their whole Liturgy, but only to leave out some of their own latter additions, which never were in any of the Primitive Liturgies. By being taken wholly out of the Scripture, ei∣ther it is intended that it shall be all in the words and phrase of Scripture, That will weigh little. I have never observed any thing more repugnant to the true sense of Scripture, than some things which have been expressed alto∣gether in the phrase of Scripture. Or it is intended that the matter of the Li∣turgy

shall be taken wholly out of the Scripture. But this hath so little of an expedient in it, that it will leave the Controversie where it is. Both Parties do already contend that their respective Forms are taken out of the Scriptures.

He hath another passage much to the same purpose in his answer to the third Chapter, part 1. n. 11. If you would at this time propose a Form of Litur∣gy, which both sides hold Lawful, and then they [Protestants] would not join with you in this Liturgy, you might have some colour to say that they renounced your communion ab∣solutely. First, remedy regardeth only a communion in Publick Worship, without any respect to an union in Faith and Discipline. Secondly, even in the point of Publick Worship it leaves the difference where it was, what is a Law∣ful Form. Those things which the Romanists hold to be necessary the Pro∣testants shun as superstitious excesses. And that Form which the Protestants would allow, the Romanists cry out on as defective in necessary dutys, and

particularly wanting five of their Sa∣craments. Nay certainly to call the whole frame of the Liturgy into dis∣pute, offers too large a field for con∣tention. And is nothing so likely a way of Peace as either for us to accept of their Form, abating some such parts of it as are confessed, to have been added since the Primitive times, and are acknowledged not to be simply necessary, but such as charitable Chri∣stians ought to give up and Sacrifice to an Universal Peace, and would do it readily enough, if it were not for mu∣tual animosities of both Parties, and the particular Interests of some persons. Or if they should say to us as Father Paul Harvis (a Romanist violent enough) hath often said to me, that if we had retained the Liturgy used in Edward the sixths time, he would not have forborn to come to our communi∣on. To procure peace, there must be condescension on both sides.

I find a third place, part 1. cap. 4. n. ••9. To reduce Christians to unity of Communion, there are but two ways

that may be conceived probable. The one by taking away diversity of opi∣nions touching matters of Religion. The other by shewing that the diver∣sity of opinions, which is among the several Sects of Christians, ought to be no hinderance to their unity in com∣munion. The former of these is not to be hoped for without a Miracle. Then what remains but that Christi∣ans be taught that their agreement in the high points of Faith and obedi∣ence, ought to be more effectual to win them in one communion, than their difference in things of less moment to divide them. I must crave leave to dissent from Mr. Chillingworth in his former conclusion, That diversity of opinions among Christians touching matters of Religion cannot be taken away without a Miracle. A great ma∣ny of those Controversies which raised the highest animosities among Christi∣ans at the first Reformation, are laid aside already by moderate and judicious persons of both Partys, without any Miracle, and are only kept on foot

by some blunderers, who follow the old Mode when the Fashion is grown out of date, either out of prejudice, or pride, or want of judgement, or altogether.

And as many Controversies of the greatest magnitude are already as good as reconciled, So more may be. There is no opposition to be made against evident truth. I hope Mr. Bax∣ter will be of my mind, who confesseth that He is grown to a great deal of con∣fidence, that most of our contentions about [Arminian] Points, are more about Words than Matter. And doubteth whether there be any difference at all in the point of Free-will. praef. sect. 5. And affirmeth that the diffe∣rence between Protestants and many Pa∣pists about certainty of Salvation, (ex∣cept the point of perseverance) is next to none. And with some Papists in the point of perseverance also, Sect. 64.

The second conclusion was borrow∣ed by Mr. Chillingworth from my Lord Primate. That our agreement in the high and necessary Points of Faith and

obedience, ought to be more effectual to unite us than one difference in opinions to divide us. Concerning which there is no need of my suff∣rage, for it is just mine own way. My second demand in my proposition of Peace was this. That the Creed or necessary points of Faith might be re∣duced to what they were in the time of the four first Oecumenical Concils, according to the decree of the third General Council. (Who dare say that the faith of the Primitive Fathers was insufficient, &c.) I do profess to all the World that the transforming of indiffe∣rent opinions into necessary Articles of Faith, hath been that insana laurus, or cursed Bay-tree, the cause of all our brawling and contention. Judge, Reader, indifferently, what reason Mr. Baxter had to disallow my terms of Peace, (as he is pleased to call them) and allow Mr. Chillingworths, when my terms are the very same which Mr. Chillingworth pro∣poseth, and my Lord Primate before him, and King Iames before them both.

CHAP. VIII.

The true reasons of the Bishops abate∣ment of the last 400. years Deter∣minations.

IN his one and fortieth Section; he hath these words, He will not with Bishop Bramhall abate us the determi∣nations of the last 400. years, though if he did, it would prove but a pitiful patch for the torn condition of the Church. When I made that proposi∣tion that the Papists would wave their last 400. years determinations, I did it with more serious deliberation, than he bestowed upon his whole Grotian Religion. Begun April 9. 1658. And finished April 14. 1658. My reason was to controul a common er∣rour received by many, that those er∣rours and usurpations of the Church of Rome, which made the breach be∣tween them and us, were much more ancient than in truth they were. What

those errours and usurpations were can∣not be judged better than by our Laws and Statutes, which were made and pro∣vided as remedies for them. I know they had begun some of their gross errours and usurpations long before that time, and some others not long before, but the most of them, and especially those which necessitated a separation, after that time.

Those errours and usurpations which were begun before that time, if they be rightly considered, were but the sinful and unjust actions of particular Popes and Persons, and could not warrant a publick separation from the Church of Rome. I deny not but that erroneous opinions in inferiour points, rather concerning faith than of faith, and some sinful and unwarrantable practices, both in point of Discipline and devotion, had crept into the Church of Rome before that time. But erroneous opinions may be, and must be tolerated among Christians, so they be not opposite to the ancient Creed of the Church, nor

obtruded upon others as necessary points of saving faith.

Neither is any man bound or ne∣cessitated to join with other men in sinful and unwarrantable opinions or practices, until they be established and imposed necessarily upon all others by Law. Whilst it was free for any man to give a fair interpretation of an harsh expression or action without incurring any danger, there was no necessity of separation. But when these tyranni∣cal usurpations were justified by the decrees of Councils, and imposed up∣on Christians under pain of Excom∣munication, when these erroneous opinions were made necessary Articles of saving faith, extra quam non est salus, without which there is no sal∣vation, when these sinful and unwar∣rantable practices were injoined to all Christians, and when all these unjust usurpations, erroneous opinions, and sinful and unwarrantable practices, were made necessary conditions of Commu∣nion with the Church of Rome, so that no man could Communicate with the

Roman Church but he that would sub∣mit to all these usurpations, believe all these erroneous opinions, and obey all their sinful injunctions, then there was an absolute necessity of separation.

Then if any man inquire when and how this necessity was imposed upon Christians, I answer, all this was rati∣fied and done altogether, or in a manner altogether, by these last 400. years De∣terminations, beginning with the Council of Lateran in the days of Innocent the third, after the twelve hundreth year of Christ, when Tran∣substantiation was first defined, and ending with the Council of Trent. So though these were not my terms of peace, but preparatory demands, yet if these demands be granted our con∣cord would not only be nearer, (which he acknowledgeth) but the peace all∣most as good as made, and Christians were freed from their unjust Canons, and left to their former liberty. When they had granted so much, it were a shame for them to stick at a small re∣mainder.

CHAP. IX.

An Answer to sundry aspersions east by Mr. Baxter upon the Church of England.

I Have done with all that concer∣neth my self in Mr. Baxters Gro∣tian Religion. But I find a bitter and groundless invective in him to∣wards the conclusion of his treatise, wherein he laboureth to cast dirt upon his spiritual Mother the Church of England, which out of my just and common duty I cannot pass over in silence. He saith, p. 75. That this Grotian design in England was de∣structive to Godliness and the prospe∣rity of the Churches. What Churches doth he mean? By the Laws of England Civil and Ecclesiastical we ought to have but one Church. It was never well with England since we had so many Churches and so many Faiths. I am afraid those which he calls Churches were Conventicles.

He proceedeth, that it animated the impious haters of piety and com∣mon civility. First he ought to have proved that there was such a design in England which he neither hath done nor ever will be able to do. That which never had any being but in his Imagination, never had any efficacy but in his Imagination. He addeth that men were hated for Godliness sake. That is (to exprest his sense truly) were restrained in their seditious and Schismatical courses, which he stileth Godliness.

Fallit enim vitium specie virtutis & umbra.

And troubled and suspended and driven out of the Land, though most of them twenty for one were conformists. How, Conformist and yet persecuted? If this be not a contradiction yet it is incredible, that so many men should be silenced and suspended every where without Law. Certainly there was a Law pretended. Certainly there was

a Law indeed, and that Law made be∣fore they were either punished or or∣dained. I will put the right case fairly to Mr. Baxter, if he have any mind to determine it. Let him tell us who is to be blamed, he that undertaketh an office of his own accord, which he can∣not or will not discharge as the Law injoineth, or he that executeth the Law upon such as had voluntarily con∣firmed it by their own oaths or sub∣scriptions, or both.

He proceedeth, that it was safer in all places that ever he knew, for men to live in swearing, cursing, drunkenness, than to have instructed a Mans family, and restrained Children and Servants from dancing on the Lords-day, and to have gone to the next Parish to hear a Sermon, when there was none at home.

Quicquid ostendat mihi sic incre∣dulus odi.

I am sory to find so much gall where so much piety is professed. Who did

ever forbid a man to instruct his own family? Let him bu•• name one instance for his credits sake, or command any Person to dance ••p••n the Lords day, or restrain a man fr om going to the next Parish to hear a Sermon, if there was no more in it then he pretendeth? Here are I know not how many fallacies heaped together. No cause is put for a cause, and that which is respectively true for that which is absolutely true. No man was ever punished for instru∣cting his own family, but it may be for holding unlawful Conventicles, or for instructing them in seditious schis∣matical or heretical principles. Nor for going to the next Parish to hear a Sermon. Thousands did it daily and never suffered for it. But it may be for neglecting or deserting his own Parish Church, and gadding up and down after non-conformists, or after Persons justly suspended or deprived for heterodox Doctrine, or labouring to introduce foraign Discipline, without Law against Law, and strange un∣known forms of serving God, and ad∣ministering

his holy Sacraments accor∣ding to their own private phantasies. Nor for restraining their Children or Servants from dancing on the Lords day, but it may be for taking upon them as busy Bodies, and pragmatically con∣trolling the Acts of their Soveraign Prince and lawful superiours; which the Laws of God and Man, nature and nations, Church and Kingdom did allow, and for restraining the liberty of their fellow subjects, and seeking to introduce new Law without a calling or beyond their calling, which the Church of God, and Kingdom of England never knew. If Mr. Baxter think that no recreations of the body at all are lawful or may be permitted upon the Lords day, he may call him∣self a Catholick if he please, but he will find very few Churches of any Communion whatsoever, old or new, reformed or unreformed to bear him company.

No no, even among the Churches of his own Communion which he call∣eth the holiest Parts of the Church upon

Earth, he will find none at all to join with him, except the Churches of New England, and Old England, and Scotland, whereinto this opinion hath been creeping by degrees, this last half Century of years or somewhat more. Before that time even our greatest Dis∣ciplinarians in England abhorred not private recreations, so they could practise them without scandal. And Calvin himself disdained not to coun∣tenance and encourage the Burgers of Geneva, by his own presence and ex∣ample at their publick recreations, as Bowling and Shooting upon the Lords Day, after their devotions at Church were ended. In Germany, Switzer∣land, France, and the Low Countrys, all the Churches of his own Commu∣nion, do enjoy their recreations. And in sundry of them their Prayers and Sermons on the afternoon of the Lords Day, are but lately introduced, where∣as formerly not the vulgar only, but the most eminent persons did use to be∣stow the whole afternoon upon their recreations.

But it may be his pick is not against recreations in general, but against danc∣ing in particular. Indeed dancing was disliked at Geneva, not only upon the Lords Days, but upon the other days of the week. And if their man∣ner of Dancing there, or any where else was so obscene, as hath been in use in former Ages, in some places, not undeservedly. No man can be so ab∣surd as to affirm all sorts of Dancing to be unlawful, as Miriams Dance, and that of the Virgins of Shilo, and Iephtha's Daughter, and David. There is no time for any thing that is absolute∣ly unlawful; But there is a time to Dance, Eccles. 3. 4. On the other side it is as great an extream to affirm that all sorts of Dances are unlawful. Not only consciencious Christians, but even modest Heathens have disliked some sorts of Dances. And as there are some sorts of Dances unlawful, so there may be great danger of abuse in the use of Lawful Dances. But where there is no lawful, or direct prohibition ther of God or man, we may advise a

Brother or a Friend to beware of dan∣ger, but we have no Authority to re∣strain him except he will of his own accord. As for the publick Dances of our Youth on Country Greens, up∣on Sundays after the Dutys of the Day were done, I see nothing in them but innocent, and agreeable to that under sort of people. But if any man out of prudence, or conscience, or scrupulosi∣ty, do disaffect them, either because they were sometimes used promiscu∣ously, or for any other reasons, I think it easier to regulate those recreations which should be allowed, than to brawl about them perpetually until the end of the World.

Among all the imputations and as∣persions, which were cast upon the Go∣vernmentt of our late dread Soveraign King Iames, and King Charles, there was none that had more colour of truth, or found more applause among some sorts of persons, whose Zeal exceeded their discretion, than their Proclama∣tions to tolerate publick recreations up∣on the Lords Day, though there was

no Law of God or man to prohibit them. The very truth is this, King Iames making his Progress through Lancashire, about forty years since or more, (a Country at that time abound∣ing with Papists, and Non-Conformists,) the Country People preferred a Petition to his Majesty, that whereas after their hard weekly labours ended, they had evermore for time immemorial injoyed the liberty to recreat themselves upon Sundays, of late some scrupulous Mi∣nisters upon their own heads, without any Law or Lawful Authority did re∣strain them; Therefore they humbly besought his Majesty to restore them to their ancient Liberty. His Majesty prudently weighing what advantage might be raised to the Protestant Reli∣gion in those superstitious parts, by his favourable condescension, Granted their request upon two conditions. First, That no such recreations should be used in time of Divine Service or Sermon, either forenoon or afternoon,. Second∣ly, That none should enjoy that liberty but those that had been actually twice

at the Church that Day, both at morn∣ing and evening Prayers. And by this prudent condescension he gained the People from Popery, to the Protestant Religion. The very making this Objection the principal accusation against those two pious Princes, is an evident proof of the innocency of their Reigns

He proceedeth, In some places it was much more dangerous for a Minister to Preach a Lecture once or twice on the Lords Day, or to expound the Ca∣techism, than never to Preach at all. He must excuse us if we can not give credit to what he saith. Never any man suffered any where in the Church of England simply for Preaching, but it may be for Preaching seditious Ser∣mons, or Schismatical Sermons, or Heretical Sermons, or for intruding him∣self into the Sacred Office of a Preach∣er without Lawful calling, or for some Abuse of his function. Even so the Buyers and Sellers might have pleaded that they (innocent People) were whipped by Christ, for furnishing

Gods People with Sacrifices. And Uzza might have pleaded much better, that he lost his life for seeking to sup∣port the Ark of God from falling. Doth he think that we are such silly Birds to be catched with such empty chaff as this is? Or not to be able to distinguish between an action, and the the obliquity of it? The Pharisees Prayer,, the Harlots Vow, the Trai∣tors Kiss, were commendable actions in general as well as his Preaching of Lectures. But either the incapacity of the person, or a sinister intention, or a defective manner, or a contempt of lawful authority, might render, and did render all these actions sinful and punishable. Apollos watering is ne∣cessary, as well as Pauls planting, espe∣cially until the plants have taken good root. But after whole Nations have been long radicated in Christianity, and have framed to themselves Liturgies, and other Books of devotion for the publick and private Worship of God, And Catechisms which comprehend all necessary and essential points of Faith,

and all the parts of new obedience, to phantasie that without weekly Sermons all Religion is extinct, is as much as to perswade us that no man can possi∣bly write, except he have his Master perpetually by him to hold his hand, or that a Field cannot yield a good crop, except it be sowen over and over again every month: of the two, a private guide seemeth to be more ne∣cessary to a grounded Christian, than a publick Preacher.

But if Preachers shall not content themselves to sow the Wheat over again, but shall sow Tares above the Wheat, If they shall seek to introduce new Do∣ctrines, new Disciplines, and new Forms of Worship, by popular Ser∣mons, different from and destructive to those which are established by Law, who can blame the Magistrates Politi∣cal, and Ecclesiastical if they begin to look about them. A seditious Oratour is dangerous every where, but no where more than in the Pulpit. Then blame not Magistrates if they punish seditious or Schismatical Preachers, more than

one who is no Preacher. All Laws, and all prudent Magistrates regard pub∣lick dangers, more than particular de∣fects. Yet farther, supposing them to be both faulty, the fault of a Reader is purae negationis, a meer omission of duty, extenuated many times by invin∣cible necessity, but the fault of a sedi∣tious Preacher is purae dispositionis, a fault of a perverse disposition. Then he may cease to wonder why Preachers are sometimes punished more for Preaching ill, than for being silent, and recall to his mind the practice of that prudent Schoolmaster, who exact∣ed but a single salary from such of his Scholars as had never been taught, but a double salary from those who had been mistaught, because he must use double diligence with them, first to unteach them what they had learned amiss, and then to teach them.

I have much more respect for those poor Readers whom he mentioneth eve∣ry where with contempt. I hope they may do, and many of them do God good and acceptable service in his

Church, and co-operate to the Salva∣tion of many Christian Souls, by read∣ing the Holy Scriptures, and the Li∣turgy and Homilies of the Church, and administring the Holy Sacraments. And I have heard wise men acknow∣ledge, that if it had not been for these very Readers, in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign, when Preach∣ing was very rare, England had hard∣ly been preserved, as it was, both from Popery, and from Atheism. Their very Reading is a kind of Preaching, Act. 15. 21. Moses of old time hath in every City them that Preach him, being read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day. And their reading of Homilies doth yet approach nearer to formal Preaching. Or if it come short of Preaching in point of efficacy, it hath the advantage of Preaching in point of security. The private conceits of new fangled Preachers, by being vented publickly as the Word of God, have done much hurt, which the reading of publick Homiles never did. Let not this Apology for Readers occasion him

or any other man presently to condemn me for a Loiterer in my calling; Those who have known me will acquit me. Let this be considered and acknow∣ledged that as Readers Talents are mean, so are their Benefices. And this is the great comfort that they have, that they are below a Sequestration. The fire of Zeal which driveth able Scholars out of their great Churches, never lights upon their little Chappels. So the great Flyes are catched in their publick Nets, whilst the lesser pass through and through them without any danger or fear of being entangled.

Nondum sinitus orestes. His in∣vective is not yet done. Hundreds of Congregations had Ministers that never Preached, and such as were common Drunkards, and openly ungodly, &c. I know not how it comes to pass that in this last Age the Pastors of Churches have got the name of Ministers, that is Servants or Deacons, and they that are Ministers or Deacons indeed have got the name of ruling Elders. Those whom he accounteth for no Freachers,

were Preachers in an inferiour degree. And our Canons provideth that the meanest Churches or Chappels throughout England, which had cure of Souls should have formal Sermons at least four times in every year. If some common Drunkards or ungodly persons were crept into the English Church it is no wonder. Among the twelve Apostles there was one Iudas. What may be expected among twelve thousand? This is just the manner of Flies to leave the whole Body which is sound, and dwell continually upon one little sore. I have seldom observed that ever any man who had a good cause, which would bear out it self, did make such impertinent objections as this, or sling dirt in the face of an Ad∣versary in the stead of weapons. He saith no more of the English Church, than God by his holy Prophets hath said of his own Church, no more than may be justly retorted and said of any Church in the world, even upon his Presbyterian Churches in particular, with as much and much more truth as

it could ever be objected against the Church of England.

He addeth, when yet the most learned, Godly, powerful, painful, peaceable men, that durst not use the old Ceremonies or the new, must be cast aside or driven way, &c. Com∣parisons are odious. But such su∣perlatives are incredible, and argue nothing but the Writers pride and partiality, and little regard to what he writeth. Let Mr. Baxter sum up into one Catalogue all the non-con∣formists throughout the Kingdom of England, ever since the beginning of the resormation, who have been cast aside or driven away at any time, be∣cause they durst not use the old Cere∣monies or the new, or rather be∣cause they found it advantagious to them to disuse them, (I dare abate him all the rest of the Kingdom,) and only exhibite the martyrologies of London and the two Universities, or a list of those who in these late in∣testine Wars have been haled away to prisons, or chased away into ba∣nishment

by his own party, in these three places alone, or left to the mer∣ciless world to beg their bread, for no other crime then loyalty, and be∣cause they stood affected to the an∣cient rites and ceremonies of the Church of England, and they shall double them for number, and for learning, piety, industry, and the love of peace, exceed them incompara∣bly. So as his party which he glorieth so much in will scarcely deserve to be named the same day. And if he com∣pare their persecutions, the sufferings of his supposed Confessors will appear to be but flea bitings in comparison of theirs.

But after all this the greatest dispa∣rity remaineth yet untouched, that is in the cause of their sufferings. The one suffered for saith and the other for faction. If he had contented himself to have rested in positive expressions, of learned and pious and peaceable, &c. he had had no answer to this particu∣lar from me but silence. It is the duty of a Controvertist to examine the

merits of the cause, not of the persons. But his superlative expressions did draw me unwillingly to do this right to the Orthodox and Genuine Sons of the Church of England. I will add but one word more, that we have seen but little fruits of their peaceable disposi∣tions hitherto, but the contrary that they have made all places to become shambles of Christians. God grant that we may find them more peaceable for the future.

FINIS.