The true non-conformist in answere to the modest and free conference betwixt a conformist and a non-conformist about the present distempers of Scotland / by a lover of truth ...

The third DIALOGUE Answered. (Book 3)

SIR, you cause your N. C. begin this con∣ference with so just an animadversion upon your ••eeming pretenses to some extraordinary sublime thing and reall deficiencies, not only in being guilty o•• our common evils, but also in ••ou•• want o•• these good things, which you acknow∣ledge were amongst us, that I cannot but wi••h you had reserved as much ingenuity to your self in your an∣swere, as you make, and acknowledge him to speak truth in his alledgance. But in place of considering his challenge, of the ev••ls of your Way, and the sad and strange alteration it hath procured, in this poor Church, you subti••ly labour to evade, by telling, That you are not so engaged, as blindly to desend any in∣terest: you are so far Episcopal, as to love the Order, and submit to it, but you have not sworn fealtie to any Sect: your prayer is, that all distinguishing names were buried: you do not patronize, but mourn in Secret, for the sins, that are amongst you, adding That Non-con∣formists are guiltier of the present loos••••sse then perhaps they think. And thus, after that in your second Dia∣logue, you have not only riped up, mis-construed, and exaggerated to the hight, the infirmities of the Men o•• our side; but imployed all the invention of calumny, to render them odious, and then charged

all these things directly upon our Way; when you see a retortion appear, you instantly decline it, by insi∣nuating the evils to be the faults of men, and no way∣es chargeable upon your cause. I will not complain of this unequall measure, neither shall I take notice, that, when you apprehend a stress, for all your inveighing against the one, and love to the other, you can for a shift alleviate both Prelacie and Presbytrie to Emptie names, & shreud your self in the Sanctuary of ease the convenience of your new divised latitude.

But I must remember you, that as the thing we contend for is an Ordinance of Jesus Christ, both in∣stitute for, and greatly commended by the effectual propagation of the Gospel, and conspicuous advance∣ment of holinesse; so the ignorance and licentiousness, which (as the shadow doth the body) do attend the prevailing of your Order, are not more the impu∣tation of men, then the bitter and corrupt fruits, that undeniably demonstrate the corruptnes of that plant of Prelacie, not planted by God, whereby they are pro∣duced. ye shal know them by their fruits is a Test for Cour∣ses, as well as Persones, and that a good tree bringeth forth good fruit, but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit, is no lesse applicable to, and clearly verified in, the one then in the other. The pure ordinances of a Gos∣pel Ministrie, and Church-Government, according to our Lords appointment; as they have his warrant and promise; so they may expect his blessing; but Lordly Prelacie the unwarrantable invention of man, accomodate to a politique or worse designe, and car∣ried on by palpable avarice, pride and falshood, for the reducing of the just liberty of preaching, and due respect to Conscience, unto a subserviencie to mens lusts, and secular interests, cannot be more atten∣ded, with the evil effects of ignorance, profanitie, and irreligion; then it hath a peculiar influence,

directly productive thereof: and therefore Sir, as you say that you are so far Episcopal as to love the order (I suppose because it is Ordered) and submit to it, be∣cause you see that rest is good; so •• intreat you to be so far Rational, as to consider that Presbytery and Prelacie are not meere distinguishing names; but such realities as have even in our experience produced most Im∣portant and different effects, and then I question not, but the sad and woful consequences of that aboun∣ding Sin, and Profanenesse, which from your Pro∣phets are gone forth into all the land, will render you so far Christian as to know by such fruits, the cor∣ruptnes of your Episcopacie, that hath brought them forth•• and without adjuring you to any Sect, turne you not only to be a mou••ner for the sins of your parti•• but a serious supplicant, that the accursed cause there∣of may be removed,

But you say that Non-conformists are guiltie of the pre∣sent loosnesse who. 1. By making Religion a cloak to so many State-designes, make too many suspect Religion to be but a designe o•• it self. 2. by driving people to an outward compliance in formes, cause them to nauseat at all Religion: but. 3. and mostly, by their waxing cold in love, to which our Saviour plainly knits the abounding of iniquitie. Sir, as to your two first reasons, If I should as lightly deny them, as you do affirme them, you should be fully answered; but this your accustomed confidence of objecting to Non-conformists these things, where∣of their Adversaries are mostly, if not only, guilty, obliges me to a further reflection: That Religion may be made a cloak to State-designes, nay, to the grea∣test villanies, is certainly one of the most grievous of these offences, because of which a wo is pronounced to the world; but that this hath not been so much the accidentall practice of any Person of our way, as the

very substance of your whole course, is obvious to the meanest Consideration. How austerly our first Refor∣mers were denied to all Worldly advantages, and how faithfull to the Crown, and then infant King, I leave it to the candid and impartiall consideration of all sober Men, not preferring the vain pretenses, made for perverted, yea profaned Authority in Odium of Truth, to the most convincing evidences, of all impotencie and wickednesse, that can be instanced from any His∣tory: The next passage that occurres of these who on our part in a most stedfast simplicity, did assert, and establish Presbytrie, untill the year 1596. & of others, who on your part, by Fraud, Perjury and Violence, did, in compliance with King Iames, his design of Complementing the English Clergie, on the one hand, and attaining to a greater freedom, of indul∣ging and gratifying the Popish partie, on the other (both supposed necessaire for assuring, the then much courted Succession) endeavour, the overthrow of Presbytrie, as being too straight for such crooked courses, is an instance against your first reason, which I am bound in Charity to think, you did not call to minde: sure I am, that which you object, of our aiming at State-designes, change but State, into Court, and you will finde it was so far from being our guilt, that it was King Iames his regret, on our behalf, that honest Men would not be thereby tempted. But it is like, the times you hint at, are these of our late Trou∣bles: Wherein, though I acknowledge, that the feigned concurse, and corrupt designes of some, did in their occasion discover themselves; Yet, it cannot be denied, that such was, and is, the truth of the work of God, and stedfastnesse of its faithfull Adhe∣rers, that even unto this day, through all the various temptations of Malignancie, on the one hand, and

Sectarianisme on the other, both it, and they, do retain their integrity. Really Sir, when I consider, that neither the tempting terrour of the prevailing Malig∣nant interest in the Years 1645. and 48. nor the suc∣ceeding victory, usurpation and very plausible and insinuating offers of the Sectarians, with all these strange revolutions that have since happened, have moved the Lords faithfull remnant in the Land, from that well tempered, and justly ballanced fear of God, and honour to the King, which from the beginning they professed, and do hold forth in the Covenant, and all their Publick actings, Your accusation of the work of God, as a State design, appears to me a very palpable inconsistencie, and ridiculous calumny; to design State changes or advantages, and yet, to omit and slight all the probable, yea and possible op∣portunities, of compassing them, are things, which Malice it self cannot affirme to be compatible. As for these, who not being upright, nor stable in the Lords Covenant, have, according to the impulse of their own worldly designes, turned and figured themselves, unto every sort of compliance, they are now so unexpectedly, and wholly almost, become of your way, that there needs no other evidence, of the eàsie accommodation, that all self••seekers, and time-servers do finde in it: but wherefore do I seek to retort? Can there be any thing more certain, then that as corrupt Court designes, have only imposed this heavy Yoke of Prelacie, upon the Lords Church, and People amongst us; so such have been, and are the wicked and ungodly practices of its Lords, and their dependents, & the vast dissonancie of their lives, even from their own Canons and profession; that I do not so much wonder at your impudence, in objecting against our course; The tempting of many to suspect Re∣ligion

to be but a design of it self, as that the monstrous∣nesse of your Hierarchy hath not scandalized the whole world to account all Religion but a cheat. 2. You say by driving of people to an outward compliance in forms, we have caused them to Nauseat at all Religion. Who would think that this were the accusation of Non-conformists, who from the very beginning of Re∣formation, have been continually vexed, by your im∣positions; and not rather conceive, the objection to be made by them, against your violent pressing of Crosse, Surplice, Service-book, Book of Canons, and other ••rash, wherewith the Lords people have been unces∣santly urged, as the main, yea only things of Reli∣gion? But I cannot stand upon every one of your ca∣lumnies, the Lord deliver you from this perverse spirit: Only if by the driving objected, you do understand our causing the people of the Land to stand stedfast, and adhere to the Lords Covenant, whereby they were for∣merly obliged, it is already fully answered.

But, that which you say is of greatest weight, is, that we are guilty of the waxing cold in Love, to which our Saviour knits the abounding of Iniquity: And this challenge you qualify, by our judging you in Matters which are doubtful disputations, spreading tattles•• of you, as you call them, carrying sowrly toward you, and casting odious aspersions upon you, as Apostates and the like, with petulant railings, and this you adde, is a greater persecution, then any little suffering of ours in the World. Sir, though I cannot sooth you as you do your felf, by the mouth of your N. C. (whose tongue you teach to speak lyes) in your smooth words of deceit, by telling you, that too much of what you speak is true; Yet I heartily wish, there were more Charity on all sides; but where you ac∣cuse us, of waxing cold in Love, and thence would

inferre our accession, to the present abounding ini∣quity, I would first have you to read the text aright, which runeth thus, And because iniquity shall abo••nd, the love of many shall wax cold, which is a plain in∣version of your causality. 2. Admitting your ground to be good, I seriously wish, without vanity, that the waxing cold in love, both toward God and your Neighbour, were not more your sin, then ours; then had we not been scorched into a blacknesse, and con∣sumed almost into ashes, by these fiery trials, kind∣led, blown and kept into a flame, by the Grandees of your way (pourtrey them as you please) whose heat speaks them to be set on fire, against the Work, People, and Interests of God. 3. To call the causes of our Differences matters which are doubtfull Dispu∣tations, when both by Scripture, Reason, and So∣lemne Engagements, and many sad experiences, they are so fully determined, is indeed, to put false glosses upon things; and to pretend to be a good Christian, and to acclaime the charity and kindnesse of others, in an avoued persistence, in open Perjury, Opposition to the Cause of God, and persecution of his People, is it not to wipe your mouth, and say you have done no wickednesse?

But you say it is from the spirit of the Devil to fasten the brand of Apostasie upon the leaving of a par∣tie, and that to grow wiser is not to play the changling, nor is a consciencious obedience to standing Laws time-serving. Sir, as I love neither to irritate, nor preju∣dicate by hard words; so I approve not either your or your N. C. tattles; but if to leave God, and not a Partie, be Apostasie? if to forsake the way, and Truth of God, be to play the changling? and if to obey, and conforme to mischief, framed by a Law, be time-serving? I am sadly apprehensive, that, what

you account to be, but the Malice of the spirit of the Devil, shall one day be found, the Verdict of the Spi∣rit of God; Whether it be thus or not, in our con∣troverted differences, let the things themselves, and the issue of our discourse declare? What you tell us of the primitive application, of the word Apostasie, is no restriction of its proper acceptation: And for your other petty conceits, in this place, with your mock-complaint, of the persecution of a just, but disdained censure, they are not of that moment, to stop my procedour, to that part of your conference, which concerns Episcopacie.

This head you say falls asunder in two, the one a ge∣neral consideration of that Government, the other, suppo∣sing it were amisse, how far it ought to be separated from: And for the Government, in place of all these weighty and unanswerable objections, viz. the want of our Lords Warrant. 2. Repugnancie to his, and his Apostles Precepts and practice of restless labour, simplicity, equality, humility and contempt of the world, &c. 3. Disconformity to the first, and purer times of the Primitive Church. 4. The pride, ava∣rice, usurpation, and cruelty, to which, it naturally tends, and hath been depraved: And lastly, these evil and bitter fruits, of profanity, ignorance, and su∣perstition, that it hath ever in its prevalencie produc∣ed, which have been charged upon, and made out against it, by many of the Lords faithfull Witnesses; you make your N. C. faintly and poorly to aledge, I cannot think that Church-men should be called Lords, and be great Persons; that this is a desingenuous prevari∣cation, is obviously manifest. Yet such is the weak∣nesse of your cause, that the meanest argument, you could put in your N. C. mouth, is stronger then your answere, wherein you tell us, That this belongs not to

the thing it self; but is an addition of the Christian Ma∣gistrat. But I must remember you first, that Church-men and Ministers, are not capable of every addition: Civil offices, and administrations, are very lawfully bestowed by the Magistrat, upon fit Recipients: but as for Ministers, they are not only an intolerable dis∣traction, many degrees above that charitable imploy∣ment which the Apostles could not bear, but so in∣consistent with the nature, manner, and end of their Ministrie, that, even our Lord, while in this capaci∣tie, doth bruskly decline, to be so much as an ami∣cable trister: And therefore to justify Bishops titles, from this ground, that they are extrinsick additions, or from their civil place, and voice in Parliament, is no wayes concludent. 2. Though this were not; yet, I am confident, that who ever considers, the received use, and import of this title of Lord amongst us, will find it an addition, as full of fastuous vanity, for Ministers, as the title of Rabbi, (even admitting that its excess did lye another way) therefore ex∣cepted against, and prohibited by our Lord, was un∣lawfull for the Apostles: but 3. This title is not an addition flowing from the Christian Magistrat, as you pretend; but the very product, of that pride, and usurpation, that at first exalted Prelacie, which, as as first, it was assumed by the connivence of, if not, rather forced from the Civil Magistrat; so now, by the Bishops, it is only derived from him, in conse∣quence of that Supremacie, which both falsly against our Lord Jesus Christ, and traiterously to the Pope, in this respect their proper head, they have, for their own conveniencie, transferred upon him.

But you add, that we consider not that, Sir, and Lord, Gentleman and Nobleman, differ but in degree: since therefore, a Minister by Office, ••hes the temporall

••onour of a Gentleman, why may not the temporall honour of a Lord, be as well put upon a Bishop? Sir, if you were as innocent of the vanity, as you seem to be ig∣norant of the Nature of these titles, Our controver∣sie were at an end: a Faithfull Minister, truely mind∣ing his work, values not himself upon points of He∣rauldri••; to acquit himself as becometh an Embassa∣dour, for the Glory of Christ, is all his ambition, and truly honourable, beyond the accession of all tem∣porall dignity, If it were not so, I could further in∣form you, that a Gentleman and Nobleman, do not only gradually differ, but are prorsus disparata wholly different. The King, wee say, can make the one, but cannot make the other. I grant the privileges of a Gentleman, are commonly supposed to belong to Ministers, and decent civility may respect them, as of that ranck, but really, there appears to me such a disparity, betwixt these things, and a Bishops re∣ceiving, let be the usurping, of the temporall, and more eminent honour or Lord specially as above his Brethren, that if a Minister as such, should but te∣naciously lay claime to the title of a Gentleman, I would think it not only very misbecoming his Pro∣fession, but a plain forfeiture of the pretended pri∣vilege.

But, your N. C. urges to better purpose, that Bi∣shops should not Lord it over Gods heritage: And you for Answere, tell us, That by Lording, is meant a tyrannicall domination, and not a tittle. Next, That Gods Heritage, applyed by us to the Clergie, is not in the Text, bearing only not Lording over their Lots or Divi∣sions, to which you adde That Whatever argument we use to put down Bishops from being as Noble-men, will also prove Ministers not born such, not to be Gentlemen. Sir, to put this foolish trifling about titles, first by

hand, Bishops neither are Noblemen, nor ought to be esteemed quasi Noblemen: because 1. The thing is altogether incompetent, and the title without the thing is a vanity. 2. Either title or thing, as it ex∣alts them above their Brethren, is sinful, and the very reverse of our Lords Command: Whosoever will be chief among you let him be your Servant not your Lord. He that is chief, let him be as he that Serveth not as a Nobleman: How then can ye acclaime either thing or title? 3. The title of Lord in its Ecclesiastick usur∣pation, hath been, and is so grossly abused by Church-men, above all that our Lord reprehends, in the pride of the Pharisees, not only to the pretending to the uppermost roomes at feasts, and the chiefe seats in the Synagogues; but the chief places in States, and the first banches in Parliaments, not only to Greet∣ings in the Merca••s, and to be called of men Rabbi, Rabbi, but to ride next to the Honours, and be called Grace, Grace, that, seriously I marveil how you or any Christian, regarding our Lords express words, can justify it? That these reasons do not mi∣litate against the civil, and ordinary respect common∣ly payed to all Ministers, and men of any fashion, without either a vain usurpation in the receivers, or any other thing, then that courteous mutua••l prefe∣rence, commended by the Apostle in the givers, & which without falling into the ravings of the Quak∣ers, their austerity, you cannot from our Lords words redargue, I think it needlesse to resume. Now you say that by Lording, prohibite to Church-men, a Tyrannical domination is only meant, why do you thus offer to impose, contraire both to the import of the word, and tenour of the Scripture? the word used by Peter is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the very same used by our Lord Math. 20. Whence Peter himself learned the

Prohibition, that it signifies not to Tyrannize, bu•• simply authoritative Dominari, to rule with Authoritie, all Lexica attest; Neither doth the proposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 joyned to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 import more of force, then what doth more expressively denote, and distinguish the dominion of Empire and Authority, from that of propriety: As for the tenour of Scripture, that it repugnes to your exposition is manifest 1. Because that where Math. in this passage useth the compound 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Luke doth indifferently use the simple 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as of the same import to the present pur∣pose, by which your gloss, of a tyrannicall domina∣tion is deprived of all shadow of ground. 2. Because our Lord by both words, doth only prohibite such a domination, and authority amongst his Disciples, as was exercised amongst the Gentiles by their Princes, and which they who were called their Benefactors did use over them, but certain it is, that neither was the dominion of the Princes of the Gentiles, allow∣edly or commonly tyrannick; nor is it our Lords purpose in this place, to brand them with such a cha∣racter. 3. The positive Command plainly set down, and enforced by our Lords own example, is too evi∣dent, to leave any man hesitant, as to the Prohibition: But it shall not be so among you, but whosoever will be great among you•• truely great in virtue and reward, let him be your Minister: Let him exercise the Ministery committed to him, by way of humble and painfull service, denyed to all worldly advantages, and nei∣ther affect, nor assume the Grandour, and Authority of Civil Governours. Even as the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to Ministere, and to give his life, &c. and made himself of no reputation (contemning his Gen∣tility, and not valuing his Nobilitie) but took upon him the form of a Servant: Sir, do we indeed beleeve

that this is commanded, and proposed for a pattern to Gospel Ministers? And yet it is not only most cer∣tainly so, but also undeniable, that if there were in Ministers and Church-men, that same Spirit of Obe∣dience to God, and love to Souls, which was in him, who accounted it his meat and drink to do the will of him that sent him, and to finish his work, and if they had the same eye, and regard, to the joy set before them, which he had, who is the Author and ••inisher of our Faith, it could not be other wayes. For my part, I think a serious reflection on these things, is not only enough to confound for ever, the ease, vanity, and pomp of aspiring Prelats, but to make the best of Ministers ashamed, to appear so much above their Master, even in their indulged honesties, and con∣veniencies. But 4. Because the place that you touch is taken from Peter, see how it also agrees with that of Math. Feed the flock of God &c. Not as being Lords or Lording, over Gods heritage, but as being Ensamples: where it is evident, that the adversative, doth not only reject your Gloss, of a tyrannick do∣mination; But by commanding rather to lead and instruct by example, then to rule by Authority, hold furth the same humble and simple Ministerie, to be en∣joined here, which by our Lord was before recom∣mended. The next thing you answere, is, that Gods heritage applied by us to the Clergie, is not in the Text, Pray you Sir, how came this in your head, that we apply the title of Gods heritage to the Clergie, or own them under this name? Know you not, that the usurping of this prerogative, both by your, and the Popish Church-men, hath been alwayes esteemed by us, an high arrogance? As for your pretending to correct our Translation, Pray Sir, be sober, and remember the respect which you bear to the Authors.

2. I grant the Greek Verbatim ••••ndered seemeth to sound, neither as exercising Lordly authority over the Lots by which as your interpretation of a tyrannical domi∣nation is disproved, so, even your pretended exact∣nesse (Your being wanting•• is exceeded. 3. Since the Lords People are certainly here meant, whether you understand them to be termed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lots, in or∣der to their respective Pastors, who••e ••ortitions, and divisions they are, or as being Gods heritage, accor∣ding to the usuall signification of the singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 heritage•• and the clear Synonymous import of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the following part of the verse, but being Ensamples to the flock it matters nothing, as to our present business, but plainly shews your imper∣tinent curiosity. However, I wish you to consider, that as we condemn the worldly, and pompous usur∣pations of Prelats, above their own degree, and over their Brethren, so, we most of all condemn their spi∣ritual Tyranny, in Lording over the Consciences of Gods People, whom they cease not now, as alwayes, to vex with their Pharisaick imposing, and exacting of implicite obedience to vain Traditions and humane inventions, more then obedience to the Command∣ments of God, as will afterward appear.

Your N. C. proceeds to say that his chief quarrell against Bishops, is, that they are a function of mans devising, and no where instituted by God. To this you think fit to answere, by way of retortion, telling us of our great, but vain pretenses, to a jus divinum in se∣verall things: As first, in the matter of Lay Elders, thus Sir you deall wittily, when you can do no better•• seing you cannot confirme your own opinion, you endeavour at lest to subvert your adversarie; but be∣fore I enter with you upon particulars, I must tell you first, that Presbyterians in pleading for a jus di∣vinum,

do not pret••nd to a posi••tive, and expresse prescription from Scripture, of all the smaller points and circumstances, either of decencie or order, re∣quisite to their Government and Discipline, in as much, as, the regulation of these, being abundantly provided for, by the general rules revealed, and the things themselves, and their use, such as ingenuous persons cannot probably mistake, the want of express warrants, in all or any such particulars, cannot be justly cavilled at as a defect: 2. That it had better become the sobriety, that you require of your N. C. for you to have answered, what many worthy Men have written, for the jus divinum of Presbyterie, then to have passed all with the empty censure of your own airy character of big talking, and minding it as little, as any could, to the effect, you may amuse your poor N. C. with a fear of your conceited quibl∣ings; but leaving these things with as confident an estimation, as your undervaluing is vain, and ground∣lesse, to the impartial perusal of judicious Readers, I do only here premise, that, whoever abstractly and seriously considers, the clear light, and obvious project of the Gospel, will of necessity finde. 1. That our Lord Jesus by vertue of that Kingdom, and All Power given to him, in Heaven and in Earth, did, for the carrying on, and prospering of his pleasure, the Salvation of sinners, appoint, in the Persons of his Apostles, a perpetual Ministrie in his Church, the summe of whose charge, is both severally & jointly, to take heed, to oversee, and feed the Church of God, and the chief part and dutie of which office, is, to Preach and Teach, and consequently to reprove, rebuke, exhort, remit and retain, bind and loose &c. in which things, the heads of Doctrine, and Disci∣pline, with their immediate power, and warrant from

Jesus Christ, and their connex••on, and dependence betuixt themselves, do certainly consist, and are clear∣ly held out. 2: As the Apostles were all the Mini∣sters (waving the matter of the Seventie, whose missi∣on and imployment was only locall, and preparatorie, unto every Citie, and place, whether he himself would come, and to say the Kingdom of God is come nigh unto you, and de facto, ended at their returne, Luk 10. 1. 9. & 17.) appointed by Christ, and in them, the order, office, and full pattern of the Gospel Ministrie established, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 even unto the end of the world, so they are by our Lord ves∣ted with such equall power, so expresly prohibited the aspiring to, or usurping these degrees, lawfull and allowed in secular dignities, and so enixely comman∣ded the lowliest humility and submission conceivable, not only in their personall conversation, but in their Ministrie, that to introduce an imparity, either of Power, Dignity, or stated Preheminence, amongst Gospel Ministers, is plainly to reject, and deny our Lords institution, and ordinance. 3. That although the Apostles were singular above their successors, in many respects, such as an infallible assistance in the dis∣charge of their Ministrie, eminencie of Gifts, an unconfined exercise, an universall oversight, and the privilege, not only of our Lords peculiar and chos∣en Witnesses, but of being the spirituall Fathers, and Authors of conversion, to almost the whole Chris∣tian Church; yet were these prerogatives only tem∣porary, and necessarily requisite, and suited to, or depending upon the particular exigence of the Gospels first propagation, and so far from changing, or in∣novating that equality, parity and lowlinesse of Mi∣nisters, most manifest from our Lords command and appointment, that on the contraire, these other ad∣vantages,

hindered not the Apostles, to respect and acknowledge the Pastors of particular Churches, as partakers with them of the same Ministeriall power, their fellow-labourers, Brethren (not in the bare name, as your Prelats scorne their Curates, and the Pope in his pretended sevus servorum Dei, the whole Roman Church) Compresbyters, and in the Pastoral charge, altogether their equals. 4. As the power of Government, consisting in the Authoritative decid∣ing of Controversies, according to the word of God, the due application of Ecclesiastick Discipline, and Censures, and the right regulation of all other things, pertaining to the Ministeriall function, is clearly im∣ported in the Command of Feeding, and Over-seeing, beside its naturall inseparability from the conduct of every rational, let be Christian, institution and So∣ciety, and consequently only assistent, and secondarie to the other offices of the Ministerie; so, the Lords command of that most lowly submission, and sim∣plicity, incapable of the very notion of imparity, which he opposeth even to that lawfull Authority, and dignity allowed in civils, doth in such a peculiar manner, regard the exercise of this Governing Power, that whether it be more absurd, to introduce a stated degree of Superiority and Dignity among Ministers, in the point of Government, or to separate and exalt Government, from and above the office of Preaching, to which it is subservient, and to appropriate it to cer∣tain Ministri-prelati, above others, can hardly be determined, I need not here caution concerning ru∣ling Elders, seeing the more full description of Eccle∣siastick Government, is here given, in order to Mi∣nisters, in which these Elders being only partiall sha∣rers, it is not more agreeable to their warrant, then suitable to this position, 5. As the grounds of the e∣quality

and parity of Ministers by us asserted, are by these truths plainly held out; so that superiority of Power, though still Ministerial, competent to the meetings of the Brethren, as well over the severall constituent members, as over the Church according to their warrant hereafter declared, is thereto very consistent, and thereby mostly established: whether these things, all evident in the Doctrine, and prac∣tice of Christ and his Apostles, do not fairely exhi∣bite, the principles and platform of a Presbyterian Ministerie and its Ministerial parity, Let men judge.

Really Sir, when I consider Preaching, to be the main office, even our Lords own commission, & great erand into the world, Discipline to be dependent upon it, and wholly referable to its end, and a sim∣ple Ministerial Government, only allowed for the regulation and advancement of both, and when I do remember, that neither the glorious excellencie of the Lord Jesus, hindered him to be amongst his Disci∣ples, as he who served; nor did the many advantages of the Apostles, and others extraordinarily gifted, and accordingly imployed and sent out, as their assistents, requisite in the Churches infancie, make them assume to themselves, or endeavour to settle in the Church, any superior Order, above the degree of preaching Elders, and Overseers, whom they all∣wayes respected as their equals, in the work of the Gospel: And thirdly when I call to minde, that wherever a Church came to be gathered, the A∣postles did either by themselves, as at Lystra, Ico∣nium and Antioch, or by their fellow labourers (as Timothy at Ephesus, and Titus in Crete; there left and appointed by Paul for the work, and charged to leave the place when called) therein ordain Elders, without any imparity, or higher order, and that Paul

after, having testified that he had keep back nothing profitable, nor shuned to declare all the Counsel of God; but shewed them all things, did commit to the Elders of Ephesus, the full charge and oversight of the Church of God, without appointing any An∣gel. Prelat over them: And lastly when I reflect how that in the beginnings of the Gospel at Ierusalem, all things almost were acted by Common counsel: that where, and when, the Christian name did first take place, there and at the same time, we finde a Pres∣byterie of Prophets and teachers assembled, and ac∣ting jointly, and by the Command of the Holy Ghost, sending out even the greatest of the Apostles, as sub∣ject to them, that Paul imposeth hands with the Pres∣byterie, & termeth it their deed, & Peter exhorts El∣ders, as his fellows & their Compresbyter; when I say I ponder these things•• they do make me assuredly con∣clude, the Ministrie & Government of the Church in the way of Presbyterie, to be as much Iuris Divini, as it is opposite to, and removed from your Hierarchie. Having thus discovered the foundation, and traced the undeniable lineaments of Presbyterie in the Word of God, I may not insi••t upon the inconsonant defor∣mities of Prelacie, only this I must say, that though Prelacie were not attended, with many and great cor∣ruptions, and in its exaltation (mark it lest you think me injurious to good men) had not been alwayes ene∣my to Religion, and Godliness; Yet a superiour Order of Church-men, usurping from the Pastors of the flock of God, the Ministerial Power of Iuris∣diction, and the only right of Ordination, and ac∣claiming to themselves the sole management of Go∣vernment, as their proper work, with dignity and authority over their Brethren, hath neither warrant, nor vestige in the Scripture of the New Testament: but is so palpably the invention of man, that, it is

not a greater wonder, that the Devil should have im∣proved it to all that pride, avarice, wickednesse and villany, which it hath produced, then it is a mysterie, how the world should have been thereby imposed u∣pon, and have endured, all its rapine, sacrilege and usurpation, under the pretext of Religion, to which it is so repugnant.

I come now to try how you impugne the jus divi∣num, which we assert for Lay elders, and other mat∣ters condescend••d up on by you, and therefore hither∣to by me not touched: You say Lay-Elders are founded on no Scripture, as the most judicious amongst us ac∣knowledge; And you wonder, that when we urge from the Apostles giving rules only for Bishops, and Deacons, that Diocesans must be shu••fled out, how we do not also see, that ruling Elders, are not there. Who these most ju∣dicious amongst us in Scotland, may be, who deny Lay or rather Ruling Elders, to have any Scripture warrant, seeing your own N. C. is none of the Num∣ber, I cannot apprehend; but for your wonder, I think it may be easily satisfied, if you will but consider, that it is not from the simple omission of Diocesans, in this Text, that we exclude them from the Church: but since it is manifest from the Epistles to Timothy and Titus that the true Apostolick Bishop was no other, either in name or office, then a Presbyter: Nay, that by the rules to him set down, your Diocesans is plainly cast, and rejected, like as both in Acts Chap. 20. and Titus the names of Bishop and Presbyter are pro∣miscuously used, is it not clearly concludent, that your Diocesan hath no Scripture warrant, whereas the ruling Elder, as he is not in these places confound∣ed, and made the same with the preaching Elder, but may justly enough share both in the general names of Elder, and Over-seer, and also in their rules without

any incosistence; so his liquid warrant, as a distinct officer, is elswhere obviously extant.

In the next place you add, that the Brethren in the Council at Ierusalem prove too much, viz. That our Elders are judges o•• Doctrine•• but if their concurrence, both in the me••ting and in the decree, may be fairly under∣stood of an assisting and approving suff••age, without attributing to all unanimous assenters, the same power and Authority of deciding, as is very casible, in a∣ny other heterogeneous Assembly, whether our argument conclude from the Brethren, as distin∣guished from the Apostles, and preaching Elders, and therefore to be taken for ruling Elders, or from the Elders there mentioned, as including both the preaching and ruling Elders, your ab••u••dity doth not follow, and our argument is nothing convelled: But you say, it is absurd to think, that, that was a Church judicature: Pray Sir, not so fast, you would say, that, that meeting was not a General Synod; for that it was a Church judicature its decree doth evince: As to the Arguments taken for ruling Elders from the exhorta∣tion to rule with diligence, and the enumeration of Helps, and Governments, amongst other Gifts bestow∣ed on the Church, seeing they are not adduced as by themselves, so convincingly concludent, but as accessory to these other places, whereby the distinct office being proved, the promise and gift agreeable, cannot but add a considerable light: Your terming them Sandie foundations is as foolish, as your calling Helps, and Governments, extraordinary gi••ts, is groundlesse.

But both your N. C. and I inquire what you say to that Scripture let the Elders that rule well, be counted worthy of double honour, Especially they who labour in the word and doctrine, That here both the Preaching

and ruling Elder are included, in the word Elder, as I hinted before, and that a distinction is made, of him who both Preaches, and Rules, from him that only Rules, is manifest, from the words; and you are so far thereby convinced, that you acknowledge the office controverted to be spoken of, but you say the Text supposeth its bei••g, but doth not bear its institu∣tion, this is truely exact and strict; it seems you re∣member not, that although all that was ever pleaded in behalf of your Bishops, and the faire likelikood for them, which you would draw from the Angels of the Churches, proceeds only upon a supposition, of the thing in being; Yet none of our side, do redargue your arguing, from that place only, for want of an express institution: Consider therefore Sir, that, if the being of our Elders office, be in this Scripture supponed, and commended, its institution is also thereby supponed, and commended, and this nice∣ty of yours, is no evasion; but adding that there are five or six glosses put on these words, which you protest (without any reason) to be better then ours, you give us your own, thus: [Let such among you, as are fixed to rule particular charges, be doubly honoured; but spe∣cially these Evangelists, who medle not in rule, but labour in word and doctrine.] Sir, I am sorry that having plenty, you have made choise of one, so many wayes peccant, as importing, first, that at the time of the writing of this Epistle, there were Elders fixed to particular charges or Parishes within Ephesus, where∣of the contraire is most commonly and probably held, 2. That either there were at the same time, beside your fixed Elders unfixed Evangelists, belonging pro∣perly to Ephesus; or that the Apostle speaks here of these Catholick Evangelists, who belonged not to Timothie's inspection, but which is worst of all, your

Gloss plainly destroyes the Text, for whereas Paul doth first deliver a General, that all well-ruling Elders be doubly honoured, and addes a speciall ampliation, d•• Natura regulae of the Nature of a Rule, in favours of these, who also Preach, you expresly say, that these Preachers medled not with rule, and flatly deny them to be of the number of these well-ruling Elders, which are to be honoured: Next, where the Text makes labour∣ing in the word, an additament to well ruling, and therefore deserving a special allowance, you preferre the sole merit of Preaching to the double deserving, of both Preaching and well-ruling: but I pursue your raveries too far, the words are plain, well-ruling El∣ders, Preachers or not Preachers, are to be doubly honoured; but such who do both Preach and rule well, have the preheminence: Now whether or not you have shown, our Elders to be ill grounded I leave it to your second thoughts.

But you proceed to surprize your N. C. with a how want you Deacons? and then you tell him, That we had indeed somewhat called Deacons, but they were not Scripture-deacons; for such were not Lay-persons but Ec∣clesiastick, separate by imposition of hands, for the fun∣ction, and so were to continow, whereas we yearly altered our Elders, and Deacons. Sir, though in this point you represent our Leaders as Deceivers, Yet really, I should be sorry, that you were aswell known to be a calumniator, as the Deacons used in our Churches, are clearly found in our Bibles: Their institution Acts 6. is plain, specially vers 3. Wherefore Brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the holy Ghost and Wisdom, whom we may appoint over this businesse viz. the dayly ministration, and serving of tables: From which Scripture, our Practice of chos∣ing honest, approved men, for the Ministration of

Charity, there meant, and the serving of tables, is so exactly copyed out, that I cannot but admire your confidence: But you say, that Scripture Deacons were not Lay-persons, but separate by imposition of hands: If by separation you mean the solemn appointment and designation of Deacons, and hold the same suffi∣cient to make them Ecclesiastick, our Deacons as well as these in the Text, are indeed Ecclesiastick; but if by separation you understand a totall and perpetual sequestration, from secular medling, as you cannot be ignorant, that it was and is the wish of many wor∣thies amongst us, that the Church could have been served with such Elders and Deacons; so, seing in∣evitable nece••••••tie, through the want of an al••mony, hath forced both our Church, & other reformed Chur∣ches, which observe the same practice with ours, to make use of such as they can get, it is no commenda∣ble practice in you, who are such a pretender to mo∣destie and civility, to cast up this lamented de••ect, as our unpardonable blemish; since it had become you rather, who would be accounted a kindly child of the Church of Scotland, to have overtured a way how the Church Patrimony (whereby these Officers of the Church might have lived) may be recovered from the Harpyes who devoure it now without remorse: neither hath the after abuse of Deacons, unto a preach∣ing order, used in the Roman Church, any Scrip∣ture warrant, as is clear from the Text, and the rules therein expressed: I grant we finde in Scripture Phi∣lip chosen a Deacon in the 6. chap, and Preaching chap 8. vers 5. Acts, and that it is probable, that this and the like practices, were there after made the occasion, and colour, of the formentioned abuse, but if you suppose that the first Deacons did Preach by vertue of their institution, you have no just ground for it in the

word: And Philips Preaching, is so plainly annexed to an extraordinary dispensation, or tacite mission to him and to many others, upon the dispersion after Stephens Ma••tyrdom, insinu••te in the 4. vers of the 8. chap. that I doubt not, but a second reading will con∣vince you.

Next you add, that Scripture Deacons, were separate by imposition of hands, for the ••unction. I grant, that was the manner of their first solemn d••signation; but if the Chuch, by reason of the Posterior abuse, of which, in probability, the mistaking of this forme hath not been the lest cause, or because of the reason formerly hinted viz. that because of the want of a competent maintai∣nance, they could not get such as would be totally and perpetually separa••ed fo•• that work, hath thought fit, notwithstanding that they do warrantably retain it in the ordination of Ministers, yet prudently to disus•••••• in that of Deacons, will you therefore conclude that we disown the thing it self? But you tell us, That Scripture Deacons were to continow, whereas we alter ours every year: You said first, that we took away from them their Church-office, without a fault; but remembring that our annual change, is not a deposing from the office, only used by us in the case of demerit, but a relieving from the exercise, you did well to phrase your charge better, in the terme of altering: In answere where∣unto, I deny that the Scripture doth repugne to our custome, nor can yow show any Text in the con∣traire: Nay I question not, but he vvho considers the end, for which Deacons were first institute, vvill easily grant, that vvhen Philip became an Evangelist, he ceased from the exercise of his Diaconat, and that though the then particular condition, and commu∣nion of Goods, in use amongst the first Believers at Ierusalem, did not require this reliefe to be expresly

provided for; yet the after state of things, both there and in other Churches, not permitting their constant attendance, nor providing for them any stipend, might have induced it.

Having thus weakly objected against our Deacons you ask in the next place, Why want you Diaconesses, whose Order, Qualifications, Age and Imployment, are particularly set down in Scripture? To which you cause your N. C. very poorly answere, that he hath heard many of our Ministers say, the want of them was a fault: But seing I am not of his opinion, I make this reply to your demand, that we want Diaconesses 1. be∣cause the appointment of the office hath no clear Scrip∣ture Testimony; its true, that passage. 1 Tim. 5. 9. is commonly understood of your Diaconesse, and by these better seen in Antiquity of these feminine 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 quae faeminarum mores formabant, who did teach the women good manners and differed as much from the Diaconesse, whose office it was, faeminas pauperes, aut aegrotas pecuniâ aut operâ sublevare, to help the poor, or sick women with money or service. as our Elders do from our Deacons; yet if a man should interprete that whole Text, to be meant of such, who were to be received unto a more special manner of the Churches charity, seeing their by-past deservings only, and not their future imployment, appear there to be noted, and the command subjoined Ver. 16. to believers to re∣leive their own widows, doth insinuat no less, I could not accuse him of any straining: and as for that other Scripture, Rom. 16. ver. 1. where we finde Phebe termed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Servant of the Church, it may be so properly, and easily under∣stood of Her occasional services, without making her an officer, that it signifies nothing in the con∣traire. But 2. admitting that the primitive Church

among the Grecians, whose women did live under a more severe rule, and were not so accessible, as among the Jews, as Interpreters doth note, had therefore both 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and Diaconissas, aswel as Presbyteros and Diaconos, whereas the Jews did only use the latter, it may possibly inferre that women in case of an urgent necessity, are not incapable of these offices; but doth no wayes conclude either distinct offices institute in the Primitive Church•• and unknown among us, or that we who enjoy and prac∣tise a more free converse, like unto that of the Jews, ought to imitate the practice of the Grecian austerity, and weaknes: and therefore since our Deacons are sufficient to perform the duties apper∣taining to the office, and are not by our customes excluded from a due and decent Administration to both sexes, your objection of our want of Diaconis∣ses, is but an emptie inadvertent cavil: I could further tell you, that a form or constitution, ob∣serving all things that are of divine Precept, though using other things of no necessary nature, only ac∣cording to their exigence, may neverthelesse be per∣fect and of divine right, but the former answeres do fully cleare the matter.

The third defect you challenge is, why wanted you Evangelists? and because your N. C. answeres, that, that was ane extraordinary thing, you think you picque him wittily, when you say, any thing in Scripture that makes f••r you, call it ordinary; and what doth not please, is extraordinary: And yet in the very preceeding page, in answere to the argument for ruling Elders, from Helps and Governments, you tells us more bluntly, that by these are meant some ex∣traordinary Gi••ts; but not to detain you in this mat∣ter, that Evangelists are only proper, and profitable

in the penurie o•• ••e••••ed ••astors, not only their first use, but both the order and edification, that clearly appears, in a distinct affixing of Ministers to their respective flocks, doth abundantly evidence: As to what you say of the peculiar Eminencie, of some Pastors, and the imp••ssibility of such a Mini••••erie for a whole Ch••rch, as wer•• to be d••sir••d, As it doth not a little impinge upon the dispensations of the most High, so, it is more vain, then to counterballance the inconveniencies, which would follow on your conclusion; but if you will ref••ect how in the begin∣nings of our Reformation, both Superintendants and others were sent out by our Church, upon the like imployment, having Provinces, and not Parishes committed to their oversight, you must of necessity acknowledge, our due esteem, and seasonable use∣making of this excellent Gift in that exigent of ne∣cessity; and if you account these to have been Evan∣gelists (though you shall have many who shall dissent from you in this, upon many accounts, ye••) ••ou will be constrained to acknowledge, that we do not construe it to be so extraordinary, as to restrict it wholly to the primitive times.

You object in the nex•• place, where do you read in Scripture, your classical Subordination of Sessions to Pres∣byteries, &c? Before I make use of your N. C. An∣swere, let me first imp••ove ••our own acknowledge∣ment: You say•• this is indeed rational, and orderly, and thence I inferre, in Opposition to your assertion, that therefore it is founded on a divine right: I am not so captio••s, as to build this consequence, upon that Na••ural Divine right, which is the undoubted impr••ss, and light of Reason, Na••, but taking Di∣vine right•• for a divine right positive, as they speak, my conclusion proceeds thus: The Church of Christ,

by express divine appointm••••t•• is constitute in one Society being made one Body, gathered into one; and from the beginning, the more pur••, the more joint, and unite in all counsels and prac••ices: therefore what ever is the natural, and rational right and privilege of a Society, must also appertain to it, by vertue of the same right, whereon its constitution subsists; the reason is, because, in every concession, the things natural and proper to that which is conceded, are cer∣tainly understood, to be imported: Now that union in Counsel, and Power in the whole, over the parts, and the subordination of the parts unto the whole, in matters pertaining and relating to the body, and con∣cerning its end, are the inseparable propri••ties, and privilege of a Society, is evident a••ove exception: which argument is the more confirmed, that in the acts of the Apostles, we finde the Church assembling, and by Common Counsel managing its affaires, and determining differences, not by any speciall and ex∣presse warrant or command, but meerly in the exer∣cise of this intrinsick power, compet••nt to the Church as gathered, and erected in one Society: This right then and power of meetings being undeniable to the whole by the same reason & precedent they are con∣firmed to the parts, the Subordination whereof to the whole, cannot be drawn in doubt: Thus you see, how your own grant, affirmeth what you d••ny: but your N. C. answeres further That they at Antioch send up to them at Jerusalem; And are not the Spirits of the Prophets sub∣ject to the Prophets. To these Scriptures you reply, be∣ginning with the last, That it is clear, that in that place the Apostle is speaking of P••r••chial Churches, which sub∣jection none deny: But Sir, is not that which you call in question, the Subordination of Sessions to Presby∣teries: Now if the Apostle tell us, That the Spirit

of the Prophets, who in the dayes o•• the Apostles, had many of them charge pro indiviso jointly, over the same Church, but now a dayes, have their distinct charges over Parochial Churches, are subject to the Prophets, gathered in one assembly, may not the Subordina∣tion questioned, be sufficiently thence concluded, espe∣cially seing I can hardly suppose you so Anti-episco∣pal, as to be Independant, and still to doubt, after the many irrefragable demonstrations given by the Presbyterians, whether this Church of Corinth was a Presbyterial, and not a meer Congregational or Paro∣chial Church. As for what else may be in your return I confesse I reach it not, seeing that at the time of the Apostles writing, we finde no divided Parishes, and to fancie that the subjection spoken of, wa•• of the Prophets, in one Parochial Church, such as at that time there was properly none, and not rather of the many Prophets, having the charge pro indiviso jointly, over the whole company of the Beleevers, in that Citie, in which many parishes were virtually includ∣ed, is groundless and absurd. To the first instance you say, It is ridiculous to urge it, seing they of Antioch sent not up to Jerusalem, either as to a Church superior, or as to an Oecumenick Councel, but to men there who were im∣mediatly inspired. That they sent not up as to an Oecu∣menick Councel, I cannot dissent from you, seing I finde in the Text no suitable concurse for, or vestige of such an Assembly; but that they sent not up as to a Church superior is by you ill asserted and worse proved, seing 1. The phrases in the letter sent from that meeting, that certain which went out from us, and it seemed good &c. to lay upon you, and that the same letter is termed a Decree, do clearly prove a superior Authority in the writers. 2. Because the example which ye adduce from the jews their high

Priest for confirming your Gloss, doth plainly redar∣gue you, in as much as the Jews consulted not the high Priest, his Urim and Thummim without regard to his Authority; but consulted him as the high Priest, and the Person to whom God had therefore commit∣ted them, Deut. 17. v. 10. 11. & 12. putting them in the breast-plate termed of judgement, and not of Res∣ponses: But you may say, supposing the matter was thus carried, what makes it for your Assemblies? I Answere, yes very much: for it sheweth 1. That, if the Apostles, who all of them severally were im∣mediatly inspired, and so might have determined this controversie, did notwithstanding join with other ordinary Elders or Church••officers, and by common counsel give out their Decrees, that common Coun∣cels & their authority in the Church, are juris Divini. 2. That as the Church of Antioch, in which the Apostle Paul, Barnabas, and several other Prophets were•• and the other Churches in Asia, received and submitted to the decrees, so, it evidently intimats a subordination of these, making as it were one Pro∣vincial Church, to that great Assembly of the Apostles & Elders conveened at Ierusalem.

You subjoin in this place, That if that meeting at Jerusalem was a Councel, then all Councels may speak in their stile, it seems good to the Holy Ghost, &c. It's an∣swered 1. The connexion o•• your proposition, con∣taineth an obvious non sequitur, in as much, as it is not from their being a Councel, but from the cer∣tainty of these Scripture evidences whereupon their determination proceeds, that their prefacing of the minde and sentenc•• of the holy Ghost doth flow. 2. That, that meeting was a Councel of the Apostles, and Elders at Ierusalem, a conveened in one to Con∣sulte, Reason and exercise Authority, which severally

was not so satisfying ••or the very Apostles to do, not∣withstanding of their immedi••••e assistance, is plain from the Text, & especially Pauls deference to them. 3. If you imagine that Ecclesiastick Councels cannot be of Divine right unlesse they have the Spirits abso∣lute and infallible assistance, you erre as grossly, as he who for want of this infallibility, should deny to the Church a standing Min••strie, by Divine institution. 4. Though the infallible guidance of the Holy Ghost given to the Apostles, a••d being to them in stead of the rule, was indeed singular and extraordinary; Yet as the Lord to all his Ordinances, hath annexed the pro∣mise of an agreeable presence, which doth not fail the sincere and faithfull improvers, so, Church Assemblies in matters of Faith to them committed, and follow∣ing the rule thereto prescribed are also thereby countenanced, and in sound beleeving and upright walking, may both attain to, and profess their assu∣rance of the Holy Ghosts assistance. 5•• Seing that all Councel-acts and Canons, anent matters of Faith, ought to be guided by the Spirit, and conform to the word of God, and enacted and emitted in this per∣suasion, these Meetings that truly keeping the rule, and sincerely laying hold on the promise, do proceed in their determinations, may therein warrantably use the Apostles words; and such as do otherwayes, are only culpable in the presumptuous usurpation, because they have not rightly followed, and in effect attained unto the rule of the Word, and the conduct of the Spirit, which ought indeed to be their warrant. 6. Having on these clear grounds declared the Authori∣ty of Ecclesiastick Meetings in Matters of Faith, I freely grant that in other things, which may be inci∣dent to their cognition, and are not of Faith nor de∣fined in Scripture, they have neither the like warrant,

nor may they use the like expressions; and there∣fore as in this case, they cannot found upon the Lords Commandments, so they are only to be respected as such, who are intrusted to give their judgement, and have obtained mercie of the Lord to be faithfull. 7. The con∣tradiction which you alledge it is for fallible men to say, it seems good to the Holy Ghost, is abundantly salv∣ed, both by the infallible rule of the word, to which they are astricted, and by the never-failing promise of him who is the Truth, and will be with his own to the end of the world: And your lapse in this objec∣tion, is but the same with your former against Mini∣sters, their calling their Preaching the Word of God, which I have already fully confuted: And thus I hope all impartial Men may see that the jus divinum, being in this matter our rule, the Independants have not the better of us, as you groundlesly give out.

Next you proceed to challenge our Discipline, and what warrant we have for it? but, seing as to the substance you are satisfyed by your N. C. Answere, from the Excommunicating the Incestuous Person, and the noteing these that walk disorderly, togeth∣er with his & caetera (which you may finde very clearly amplifyed by many able Men) and do only fall a nibling at the circumstances of publick Repen∣tance, Why so many dayes? (which might be questi∣oned of any number) And why in a place of repentance? And Why sometimes the use of Sack-cloath? all well enough answered by your N. C. his telling you of the power of order in external Circumstances, given to the Church for Edification, I come to weigh, the stollen advantage, that you flatter your self to have gained, over your poor Adversarie, which you carry on•• with the like questions: As 1. Why may the Church impose such days of penitence, and not as well

order to all, for the sins of the year, the penitence, of Lent. 2. Why is a part separate for Penitents, and not for communicating? and thirdly Why may not a Church-man officiat in a Surplice as-well as a penitent put on Sack-cloth? and that the simple may fancie a pungencie in these empty conceits, you make your N. C. con∣fess a surprisall, and refuge himself in a childish im∣plicite belief of his Ministers ability above his own: whereupon you so vainly triumphe, that I am asham∣ed to represent such a mean piece of pageantrie, but to the matter, dayes are assigned to Penitents, be∣cause time being a necessary requisite, and its length∣ening or shortening, very conducible for the end of publick Penitence, the edification of the Church the deterring of others, and the through convincing and gaining of the person, according to either the qua∣lity of the offence, or condition of the Offender, its prudent regulation, as of a matter therefore left undefined, can no more be denyed to the Church, then the exacting of Penitence it self; but as for your expiatory quarantam of Lent, as it bears no parity to the reason by me adduced, so, it imports such a de∣lay of repentance, hardening in sin, encrease of Superstition, and relaxing again to Licentiousness, that it is hard to say, whether its appointment be more groundless, or its effects pernicious? If you, object its first rise, and occasion, from the wel-mean∣ing observance of pious Men, I will not tell you, that the samine flowed from their mistake, of our Lords total and Miraculous abstinence by the space of 40 dayes, neither by himself repeated, nor by his Apostles imitated: Nor what a superstructure of vanity, may be built on such foundations: but when you consider its great depravation, and bad fruits, I hope you will easily incline to say What is the chaff

to the wheat? The invention of Man, to the Ordi∣nance of God? 2. A place is separate for Penitents that they may be Noted, Rebuked and Ashamed, that others may fear; but to separate a place for Communicating, more then is done by us, in the time of the Administration, what shadow of reason can be adduced for it? Specially after the Idolatrous superstition, whereunto it hath been abus∣ed, and from which unto this day, mens mindes are not throughly purged: Witnes these Superstitious Bowings, Cringins, and Kneelings, which your English Prelatick-Church doth still retain. As to the third point, I will not say, that where the Sur∣plice in t••ken of Innocencie is most used, the Sack-cloth of Penitence would be more agreeable: Nor may I stand to shew you the Usurpation, and evils of Mens imposing Significant Ceremonies, others have done this already unanswerably, but the Disparity which I finde in your inference, is that Sack-cloth in Peni∣tence for Grosser sins, was by us appointed (though not universally and constantly practised) not as pro∣perly Significant, either of the Penitents guilt, or remorse, seeing it hath to neither any suitable report; but as that, which being at first the squallid neglect flowing from, and thence becoming the customable effect of deep and bitter mourning, might be both a humbli••ng badge to the delinquent, and a mean of fear to others; whereas your Surplice, is arbitrarily institute, and imposed to signify Innocencie, without either reall foundation, or sufficient warrant, wherein, whether you do more usurp against God's Prerogative, to appoint Sacred and mysterious Signes, and that simplicitie, in which he hath set forth his Gospel, or be more grosly mistaken in the event, and fruit of your application, is a great question? I grant, that Neces∣sity

or Decence, have introduced many things cir∣cumstan••ial, that are rational, and consequently upon some real antec••dent ground, expressive of their use and end: as grave apparel in Pastors, a becoming covering of Pulpits, Tables in sacred use, regulation of time, postures, gestures, and the like, without which, wo••ship cannot be performed; but to ascribe a liberty to the Church, of appointing Ceremonies, having for reason of their signification, the will of the Instituter, and their use only in the representation, is so manifest an impingement upon Divine Authori∣ty, and the Sacraments thereby o••dained, and hath already produced such a mass of Superstitious super∣fluity, in the Romish-Church, that I much admire to finde a serious Person, pleading for such fopperies; specially seing, that this once granted, and common Resemblances sustained for good warrants, not only all Christians might be put to year•• at least to assem∣ble alwayes in their whites, but all the All••gories in Scripture, as the drinking in of the sincere milk of the word, stand therefor•• having your loins girt, &c. And hundreds more, may be turned unto such vain shows, yea all Imagerie more probably allowed: where you say that both Surplice and sack-cloth were equally practised under the Law, I must by the wa•• tell you, that I finde not Sack-cloth therein commanded as a solemn significant Ceremonie, I say commanded as a solemne Ceremonie, for that you finde it, not only mention••d, as the ordinary concomitant of more grievous mour∣nings, nay by the Prophets even literally commanded, as also baldnes, sitting in the dust, ••owling and wallow∣ing in ashes, the better to express that serious mourning, whereunto the Lo••d did call, is plainly obvious, and can only inferre, that therefore, and after this man∣ner, it is the more capable to be still contained. And

for the Surplice, or rather the white linen and the Ephods, beside their expr••ss Warrant, the main thing of this Controversie, they had such an agreeable con∣veniencie, and de••encie to the service of Sacrificing, then in use, and might probably in the Priests, to whom they appertained, have had such a prefigu∣ing respect to the immaculate innocencie of Jesus Christ, our great Priest and Sacri••••ce, and yet did so little appear in the more solemne Garments of th•• high Priest, that the example adduced doth rather redargue, then confirme your continuance of this, now idle Rite: I might further tell you, that the use of Sack cloth among us was not offended at; and if it had, would probably have been forborne; And also adde to these clear disparities, your rigid impos∣ing and exacting of these your Doctrines, more then the Commandments of God, both in prejudice of Christian Liberty, and to the slighting of true godli∣ness; but whether the disparities above mentioned be subtile shifts as you are pleased to judge, before you hear, or solid differences, these who are less prejudi∣cate will easily discerne.

In the next place, you returne, to show us our difformity, with the Scripture-pattern, in demand∣ing Why we do not observe the decree of the first Councel at Ierusalem? to which I answere; that we observe it, except in so far as it was designed to be temporarie, and framed to bury the Synagogue with honour viz. in the matters of Bloud and things strangled: And as for meats offered to Idols, the Apostle Paul did thereaf∣ter declare that point, so that in these particulars, the Decree doth not reach us: This answere as to your re∣ply differeth nothing from your Non-conformists. And therefore I proceed, and really Sir, I finde in your return such pitiful inadvertencies, as to the Text

of Scripture, that I cannot but premise my wish, that in the study of it you may become more serious. 1. You say that to alledge that the exceptions in the decree were made to please the jews, is a divised phansie against expresse Scripture, and yet the Text beareth, Iames first propounding the thing, and plainly adding, this reason Act. 15. 21. For Moses in old time hath in every City them that Preach him, &c. Whereupon it follows, then pleased it the Apostles, pray Sir, consider the Text, and what this then can els import? 2. You say St Paul wrote his Epistle before he went to Jerusalem and yet James tells him these things were still observed there; whence you infer that commands in externals may be both local and temporarie: What indistinctnesse, and bad logick have we here? If you mean that Paul wrote his Epistle, that I mean anent meats offered to Idols, before he went up to Ierusalem, from the Church of Antioch, to that Councel of the Apostles, and Elders, the Scripture is contraire, showing that his travels unto Greece, and all his dealing with the Corinthians, yea and almost all his Epistles, were there∣after; but if you mean that he wrote befor his going up thereafter mentioned Act. 21. it may be so indeed, as to his Epistles to the Corinthians, and some other, but then the Apostle Iames, only tells him, that the beleeving Jews were still zealous of the Law, and that they were offended, that he taught the Iews a∣mong the Gentiles to forsake Moses, which is so far from concerning the Decree under consideration, or the proving your point, that a thing may be obligatory in one place, and not in another, that as Iames ad∣viseth Paul to purge himself of that calumny, anent the Jews, so v. 25 he expresly resumeth, and seclud∣eth the case of the Gentiles, before determined: As to your other inference, that Commands in externals, are not intended ••or lasting obligations, I grant this De∣cree,

or any other having a temporary reason, is there∣by determinable; but if your meaning agree to your too visible design, to resolve the E••durance of these things, which are absolutely setled, into the Arbi∣triment of the Church, or rather of the Civil Powers (for it is evident, that, though in all your discourse, you pretend the Church, yet you take your measures from the Civil Authority) it is not only groundless, from the matter of the Apostles th••ir Decree, but of dan∣gerous consequence, to the shaking loose of all Reli∣gion: for proof whereof, see how upon the back of this discourse, you boldly attempt to make even the very Sacraments Arbitrarie, by asking why we••••se not washing of feet, since there is no Sacrament set down more punctually in Scripture? And when your N. C. retorts, that you are under the same obligation (which retortion may be pertinently made to most of your objections) you tell him, that you have a clear answere, that in these ex∣ternals, God intended no perpetual obligation; and there∣fore in them you follow the practice of the Catholick Church: O unhappy Bohemians, and you other Christians, who suffered so much, and so grievously, for the retainning of the Cup, in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper; If this new Doctor, who with his New Light, can penetrate unto the secrets of God, and measure the duration of his intentions, had lived in your dayes, he could have told you, that the Cup is but an externall thing, under no perpetual obligation, and by his Doctrine of Conve••••encie, led you to a safe and peacefull Accommodation to the practice of the Catholick Church: but Sir, they are at rest: As for this your Laxe acceptation of a professed indifferency in externals, what part of the Christian Religion or Worship, may it not corrupt, or subvert? and seing it doth tolerate and allow, the not practising of the

washing of feet, to you, as well founded In Scripture, as either of the Sacraments, would it not in a just parity of reason, dispense with, and forego these also? This is indeed doctrine so damnable, that I hope it shall ne∣ver need an Antidote, and therefore I returne to ex∣amine your third or eight Sacrament (I know not which, for all are but externall) of washing of feet, And you say, That it hath in Scripture of Element, Water, the Action, washing the feet, the Institution, as I have done so do ye, And ye ought to wash one ano∣thers feet; and the spiritual use of it, Humility: Whence you conclude. Why do ye not there ore use this rite? To which last point, it is, that waving any further discourse an••nt the Nature, and requisites of a Sa∣crament, whereof, notwithstanding your parrallel description of this washing, yet I perceive you are loath to apply the name, I shall direct my answere viz. that this washing is not to be used, because, though our Lord did practise this lowly act of Conde∣scendence, as eminently expressive of that humility, whereunto he would have his Disciples instructed; yet, neither is it in it self, of the Nature of a Sacra∣mental signe, whereof all the significancie is from the institution, and vertue in the exhibition of the thing signified, which you cuningly omit to mention; Nor doth Christ perform it by way of Institution, for Repetition; but by way of example, for Imitation, as is manifest from the Text, Iohn, 13. 4. &c. where we finde, that our Lord doth first wash his Disciples feet, before he told them what he was a doing, and then having done the act not simply significant by his appointment; but of it self as the effect expressing the greatest humility as its cause, he teaches them not a ••o••emne reiteration, but the use in these words, If I your Lord and Master have washed your feet, ye also

ought to wash on anothers feet: If I have been among you as he that serveth, so ought ye to serve one another; for I have given you an example that ye should do as I have done to you. I have not shewed you humility in a figure, to be repeated for your remembrance, but by a solid practice taught you, the like performance: so that to turne this pattern unto a rite, is in effect as far from our Lords purpose, as the instruction of plai•• exam∣ples, is preferable to that of Mystick representations: which exposition is so true, and sound, that as this phansie of yours, was never owned by the Church of Christ, so, it is most certain, that wh••re it hath been followed, (I mean by the Pope) and this action hath been used, as a rite, it hath only been made a colour to the most prodigious, and superlative pride, that ever the sun beheld: and thus I hope all men may see that the not using of this washing, never again us∣ed, for any thing we read, by way of Sacrament, or Ceremony, either by our Lord, or his Apostles, and Churches; is neither a difformity in us, from the Scripture, nor an argument for your irreligious laxe∣nesse in things you call externals.

As for your Demand, why in your Worship do you not Kiss one another with a holy Kiss? seing it is no where commanded in worship, as you seem boldly and igno∣rantly to suppose, and the Christian manner of the thing, in customary civility, is only recommended by the Apostle, as an allay of chastity, and kindnesse in Civil rencounters, the question is, but a petulant extravagancie of your vain imagination.

Next you Enquire why do you not anoint the sick with oyl? I answere though you addresse this demand to a N. C. yet it is evident, that your conclusion of diffor∣mity to the Scripture pattern thence inferred, is equal∣ly levelled, against the whole Protestant Church,

wherein this Ceremony is univer••a••ly di••used, and that not from your vain warrant of the Churches Au∣thority in and over things expressly commanded, as you judge this rite to be; No, this is a presumption so high, and laxe, that even the grossest Papists, are unwilling to avouch it; but the ••ound answere of all the Churches is, that as the custome of Anointing might have been occasioned, from an observance then in use in these parts, where Anointings were much more ordinary then in our parts of the world; so, it is mentioned in the Scripture by the Apostle Iames, not by way of Command, but as the accustomed Sym∣bole, adhibite in the exercise of the Gift of healing, which being then Ordinary in the Church, is com∣manded to be applyed by the prayer of Faith, where∣unto the effect is solely re••erred, and only with the formality of Anointing, as being then customary in the like cases, seing then that the Text runs clearly thus, is any sick? let him call the Elders, and let them pray over him anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord, and the prayer of saith shall save the sick; And that the application of the extraordinary Gift of heal∣ing by prayer, with the then us••all circumstance of Anointing•• is here only enjoyned, how can you make this Text binding as to the manner and circumstance? when you cannot but acknowledge, that the substan∣ce viz. the power of healing is ceased. But having made your N. C. say That the Apostle promises reco∣very upon the anointing, you turne to fight with your own shadow, and tell him There is no such matter; that the recovery is promised to prayer, and also forgivenesse; and seing we pray by all for their raising up, and that they may be forgiven, why do we not aswel anoint? But, what Logick can make out this consequence in as much as Anointing being there only spoken of as the conco∣mitant

rite used in the application of the Gift of heal∣ing, it is manifest that without the existence and exer∣cise of the Gift it self, it is not now to be repeated; and therefore though prayer be principally comman∣ded as the speciall mean, by which even the Gift of Miracles was actuate and made effectuall, and to this day doth remain as the great one by which all the pro∣mises either for raising up or remission are drawen out unto effect; yet thence to inferre that Anointing, a peculiar solemnity in the Gift of healing, should still continow, notwitstanding the Gift it self be ceased, is, very absurd: Now that Anointing was an Ordi∣nary observance in the exercise of the Gift of healing you may read it clearly in the Disciples practice Mark 6. 13. And they Anointed with oil ma•• that ••••re sick and healed them. This being then the just and true ac∣count, not only of our practice, but also of that of the whole reformed Churches, how vain and ridicu∣lous are you to tell us, that our pretense of Scripture is but to impose on women and simple people, and all our persuasion, grave nods and bigwords: but leaving you to puff petulantly where you can prove nothing,

I proceed to your next demand, who taught us the change of the Sabbath? and you say we will read the Bible long ••re we finde it there; which you think sufficiently proved, when you tell us That the Churches meeting recorded to have been on the first day of the week, saveth not that they antiquated the Saturnday, (as you are plea∣sed very cours••y to speak) and that of the Lords day, sayeth yet less: Sir, for answere, let me only tell you, that by this your conceited slighting of Arguments, which you cannot answere, with your vain arguings, against these things which you cannot disprove, you have discovered to me the deep wisdom of Solomons contradictory-like advice, answere a fool•• and answere

him not, Prov. 26. 4 and 5. in so sa••••s••••ying a recon∣ciliation, that remitting you for answere, lest you be wise in your own conceit, to the labou••s of these who have cleared this point above cavillation, I ••orbear to make any further answere lest I should be like unto you; Only I think it worth the observing how like the progresse of your dangerous Libertinisme is to that verdict of the Apostles, 2. Tim. 3. 13. Your first sally was only against ruling Elders and Deacons, the next attacques the very Discipline of Church, your third endeavours to introduce the Superstition of Lent, the Table Altar-wise, & the Surplice, & to corrupt the worship, your fourth resolves the necessity of Baptis∣me and the Lords supper, into the Churches arbitri∣ment, your fifth pleads for Extreame Unction, or els a liberty and power to the Church above the Scrip∣ture, and your sext to compleat the carier of your de∣lusions. Notwithstanding that the cl••arest light both of Reason and Religion, do exact a definite con∣stant portion of time, for a rest, and this rest to be holy unto the Lord, that the Law of God in recom∣mending the celebration of the old Sabbath, doth found it upon a perpetual determination of the seventh part of time, grounded on Divine Authority, and example, and lastly, that the Scripture in the anti∣quating of the service and observation of the Jewish Sabbath, doth evidently translate the keeping of the perpetual holy rest unto the Lords day, the first of the week, Notwithstanding, I say, of these firme grounds your sext attempt darres to unfix this grand Ordinance, the reverence or contempt whereof, hath in all ages of the Church, by experience been found of great mo∣ment, and unquestionable influence, either as to the promoving or decay of true Piety and Godlinesse: how justly may it be said of you and your Compli∣••es, who endeavour to make void the Divine in∣stitution

of this day, which your predecessours so grosly and wickedly profaned, ye be witnesses there ore unto your selves, that you are their Children, fill ye up the measure of your Fathers: But O ••ear lest you do not es∣cape the damnation of Hell: I will not take Notice of your own or your Non-conformist's meen reflec∣tion on these things, That they may prove our Church was not perf••ct, but will not justify you, your answere to that, which follows viz. do you mean to lay aside the Scripture? 〈◊〉〈◊〉 rather to be considered, wherein leav∣ing the retortion of ••ou•• objected insolence, and big pretending, to the impartiall examiner of what you have alledged and I replied •• come ••o your summe of the whole matter, which you say, is, That the Scrip∣tures were designed b•• God, for the purifying of the hearts and conversations of Men; Most true: And therefore it was not necessaire they should contain direct rules for the Church-policie, which being a half Civill matter, needs not Divine warrants, a strange inference, whereof al∣most every word is a ridle: for first you grant that the Scripture doth contain Rules though not Direct rules for the Church-policie, and yet you adde almost im∣mediatly, that it needs no divine warrant: Then what mean you by Direct rules, if you mean Particular as the subjoined Antithesis of Common doth give us to understand, let these Scripture rules Common or not be observed, and particular determinations thereto duely squared, and it is all we contend for: Search therefore the Scriptures and whatever latitude may be left therein, as to the regulation of necessary and com∣mon circumstances, according to decencie and order, for Edification; Yet I am confident, that as to the substance and main of the Officers, Discipline, and Government of the Church (the matters in contro∣versie betuixt us) both you shall be found thereby

clearly condemned, and we justified: but if by deny∣ing the Scripture, to contain direct rules, for the Church-policie, you understand, that it only hold∣eth out indirect, unstraight and ambiguous rules, ap∣plicable to any forme, as may best sute & serve the in∣terests, and lusts of vain Men, this indeed is agreeable to your scope; but as far from Scripture, as it is dis∣sonant to the truth of God, and Great ends of the Gos∣pel: 2. What do you understand by the Church policie? its Officers, Discipline and Government are the things which we contend for, If you think these half Civil, I would gladly learn what a Church as such can have more Ecclesiastick; certainly if a distinct Head, Jesus Christ; a distinct Authority, flowing from that all Power given to him; a distinck manner, nothing like but wholly opposite to the way of Civil rule; dis∣tinct effects and ends, as Holinesse and eternall perfec∣tion, are from external justice, and temporal peace; and lastly a distinct subsistence of the Church, and its Policie, not only when disowned, but mortally per∣secute by the Civil Powers, may prove the Policie Ecclesiastick to differ from the Civil, there can be nothing more clearly disterminat; but if by Policie you only mean the externall protection, and assistance, which the Civil Magistrat may, and ought to give to the Church, it is not only half, but wholly Civil, as to its rise and cause; and therefore the ac∣knowledgement thereof we render, under God, heartily and entirely, to the Powers, which he set∣teth up: I might further question what you call half Civil? and how you come to deny that Divine war∣rant which at first you half grant? but I shall con∣tent my self, to declare the falshood of your inference, understood of the Discipline and Government of Gods house, the subject of our debate, by shewing you

that its plain contradictory is a Scripture truth: viz. The Scriptures were designed by God for the Purifying of the hearts, and conversations of men, and therefore it was necessary they should & they do contain direct rules for the Churches Policie, wholly Ecclesiastick, & appoint∣ed by Jesus Christ: The reason of the consequence is clear, not only because the Church Policie, viz. its Officers, Discipline and Government, are expresly and directly ordained by our Lord, for our Sanctification & Salvation as I have formerly shewen, & therefore their necessity such as cannot without the highest presump∣tion be called in question: but also, because their use∣fulnesse, in order to these ends, is by diverse Scriptures undeniably held forth: And he (who as the Son was faithful over his own house) gave some Apostles and some Prophets. &c. yea and all the Gifts, Power, Au∣thority, and Directions to be found in Scripture, concerning them, for the work of the Ministrie, the Edifying of the body of Christ, and perfecting of the Saints Is a truth so evident, that I marvail, how you could adventure on this Architectonick reasoning, and of∣fer to lay down the end and project of the Gospel, and then frame and Modell its institutions, and mid∣ses according to your own imagination, and not ra∣ther humbly endeavour, in the recognisance of his wonderfull love, and fidelity to, and care of his Church, his own body, with all sobriety, to pur∣sue the knowledge, and practice of what things-so∣ever he hath ordained for its edification? I might further remember you, that the rebuke, and all the Censures of discipline are for Edification, the Saving of the soul, making sound in the faith, and Causing o∣thers to fear: and that we finde the exercise of the Churches Authority, and Government, in that Meeting and Decree made at Ierusalem, attended

with The consolation and establishment of the Churches, But if your own concessions be but a little pressed, they will easily exhibite the inconsistencie of your va∣nity: you say then, That the common rules are in Scrip∣ture 1. That there should be Church Officers, and are not their Power, Degrees and Ministerial Autho∣rity, as certainly therein defined. 2 That these should be separate for that function, Ought not then the best among them, give themselves continually and wholly to Prayer, and to the Ministerie of the word, with∣out usurping a stated superior Order of Governing, as their special work, let be immixing themselves by privilege in secular Courts and affaires? 3. That they should be obeyed: is this their power for discipline and Government set down in Scripture, & not also its rules & limites? Were the Apostles more then Ministers of Christ, and Stewards of the Mysteries of God? was not the sure word of Prophecie their great war∣rant? When the Apostle Paul is about to set order in the Church of Coriath, hear his Preface by ye fol∣lowers of me even as I also am of Christ: And as in the ordinance of the Lords Supper, he only delivers what he had received of the Lord, so, even as to that smallest of matters, the Length and Fashion of the hair, doth he use any other Authority, then what he seconds with rational persuasion? How far was he then from that dominion over our Faith, which you ascribe to the Church, not only of appointing significant in∣structing Ceremonies, but of abrogating things as ex∣presly ordained, in your opinion, as the true Sacra∣ments. 4, You say, That things should be done to Or∣der, Edification and Peace, keep within these bounds, and invert not this Method, and we are agreed; but if you subsist not in the regulation of the manner, but wil impose New things, which the Lord requireth not,

nay, which he abhorreth even your own inventions, framed to your own lusts and interests, or produced by your delusions, & then make peace your Argument, be∣cause ye will not allow it to such, as in Conscience can∣not conforme; the Lord, who hath founded Zion & Reigns in it, & who hath builded his House & rules o∣ver it, will one day judge: Thus you see how these your everlasting obligations, do fully conclude, all the truths that we assert: Where you adde that the other Rules are now altered with the alterable state of things whereunto they were accommodate, if you understand it soundly, of these things only which are indeed ceased, it is a very certain and allowable truth; but you remember not that in the very Page preceeding, you impute this alteration so grosly•• to the bare Practice of the Catho∣lick Church, (a very doubtfull terme) and thereby not only unsetle Scripture foundations, as to the Sacra∣ments, but endeavour to introduce such an arbitrary authority in the Church, that in place of establishing true Christian Liberty, which you seem here to assert, it is evident, that you go about plainly to set up; an absolute Spiritual tyranny, over the Church of God, and so to load it with the Ceremonies, and innova∣tions, a bondage more severe then the old dispensa∣tion, from which we are liberate; but blessed be our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath delivered us, not only from that old Law of Ordinances, but hath made us free, that we should be no more the Servants of Men, nor liable to be judged in meat or drink, or in respect of an holy Day, or of the new Moon, or of the Sabbath; and having blotted out the hand writting of God's Ordinances, that was against us, hath put no new blank in Mens hands for their own devices, and superstitions: To conclude then, in your own words, these things are so rationall and also so clearly de∣duced

from your own concessions, that I see nothing either to be excepted against our Conformity to the Scripture pattern and the true Christian liberty, both in opinion, and practice, which we maintain; or to be alleaged for your pretended liberty, consisting in a Licentious absurd imposing on such, whom you acknowledge to be free.

But in order to this last point, viz. your attempt to remove a Scripture rule, easie in it self, and im∣parting true Libertie to its observers, and to set up an unwarrantable Yoke of Church Authority in its place, I conceive it is, that here you go about, to represent your N. C. as a vain and clamorous boaster, of the Crown, Throne and Kingdome of our Lord, on purpose, to prejudicate against our just complaint of your invasion and Robbery; but waving your Calum∣nious Methods, I shal only endeavour to speak ••urth the words of truth and sobernesse. I shall not here discourse of the Kingdom of Christ in all its parts, whereunto we finde in Scripture both the outward Protection of the Church, vengeance upon Adversa∣ries, and all judgement, even the great and last ascriv∣ed; but, in order to our present purpose, I affirme plainly, that our Lord Jesus as the Redeemer, is in a peculiar manner exalted to be Head and King in and over his Church, by vertue of which Kingdome, he sendeth forth, and Authorizeth his Ministers, hath defined their Order and Power, determined Cen∣sures, and given and declared Laws to be observed in his house, and that in such a manner, and in that per∣fection, that in all things properly thereto relating, he hath only left to the Officers by himself appointed, a Ministerial power of administration; so, that there is neither place left, nor power given, to diminish from, or adde to the Officers, Laws, Censures,

and Orders, which he hath therein established that these things are so, cannot be better cleared, then by remitting you to our larger Catechisme, where, as you will finde satisfying Scripture proof for their confirmation, so really I cannot but, by the way, recommend to you its more serious study, for the curing of that loosenesse in Principles, which al∣most in every thing you discover: My part at present shall be to consider your strange discourse on this sub∣ject; You say then, Christ's throne, Crown and King∣dom are inward and spirituall not of the World, nor as the Kindoms of the World. Sir, though I ac∣knowledge the Scripture phrase, in this matter to be Metaphoricall; Yet I wish you had better observed it, and forborn the hard and unused expression of an Inward Crown: But to the question, Christs King∣dom is indeed in its power, and effects (the restric∣tion a little above premised being remembred) inter∣nall and Spirituall, but doth it therefore follow, that its administration is not externall and visible, when the Lord declared all power to be given unto him, and by vertue thereof sent forth his Apostles and Mi∣nisters, and gathered Churches, having peculiar Rul∣ers, Laws, and Ordinances; was not this both visi∣ble, and audible? Are not all the acts of Discipline and Government, properly thereto referable, of the same Nature? Our Lords Kingdom is truely not of the World, nor as the Kingdomes thereof, is it therefore not in the World? What doth this arguing conclude? You proceed, a great part of his Kingdom is the li∣berty whereto he hath called us, and I grant, that as li∣berty, and deliverance from Sin and Satan, are among its choise benefites, and therefore the exultation of Zachariah his thanksgiving, so our liberation from the yoke of Jewish Ceremonies, and all such bondage,

is that which we readily acknowledge, in opposition to you•• unwarrantable exactions: but what would you thence inferre? because Christ hes liberate us from the former slavery, and Pedagogie, hath he there∣fore left us to the worse Tyranny of mens pretended, and corrupted power, and deluded imagination? God forbid; but as the hath set us free for ever, so he hath only laid on us, his own easie ••••oke, and light bur∣then, of Pure and Evangelick ordinances, by which our Liberty is so far from being intringed, that it is thereby both preserved and enlarged.

In the next place you say Since no Allegorie holds, it is ridiculous to argue, because offices in a Kingdom are named by the King, therefor it must be so in the Church. It's answered 1. do you then think that our Lords Kingdom is only Allegorick? Or because the sym∣boles and badges, usuall in Earthly Kingdoms, are, in a figure, thereto transferred, is it therefore wholly a figure? but God hath set his King upon his holy Hill of Zion, and Know you assuredly that God hath exalted him to be both Lord and Christ, b••wis•• therefore and be in∣structed Kiss the Son lest he be angr••, and learn to ack∣nowledge his Kingdom, in all the parts and privileg∣es thereof, by him declared: Next it is most evi∣dent, that not only Christs Kingdom, in and over his Church, is reall and certain, and that Officers truely such, vested with his Authority, and there∣fore depending on Christ as King, are held forth by the Scripture, and to be really found therein; but seing he himself hath in the Gospel so expressly foun∣ded their mission, upon that All power, given unto him, and Paul so plainly referres the giving of Apos∣tles &c, unto his Ascension and exaltation, are you not ashamed to alledge these things, to be only by us concluded from the vain appearance of an Allegory

And thus to make your self ridiculous, in that scorne you intended for others? But poor wretch, you adde, That we may as wel say, that there must be coin stamped by Christ, as Officers appointed by him in his Church: (for this is the runing of your words) Lord deliver you from this profane Spirit: thinkest thou, that the Kingdom of Christ, hath need of money, as it hath indeed need of Officers? Or, because money is cur∣rent and symony a frequent practice in your Church, hes it therefore any place in Christs true Church? Sir, your profane scoffing at the Kingdome of Christ is one passage, amongst many, that give me Confidence to say, arise O God plead thine own cause, remember how the foolish man reproacheth thee dayly. But I professe I am confounded in my self, when I think of my own provocations, and on the iniquitie of his Sons and Daughters; for if the abuse of the Glorious Gospel, shineing amongst us in so much puritie, had not been great, he would not have given up the dearly belov∣ed of his Soul into the hand of such persecuting adver∣saries, and such scoffers at him, who justifie these malicious mockers in Cajaphas Hall, with an over-plus of wickednesse. O if he would returne, he would quicklie emptie Pulpits, and Chairs in Universities of such, who bend their tongues for lies, and make the world see, because they have rejected knowledge, he hath also rejected them that they shall be no Priests to him.

The next thing you subjoin is, what King will think his prerogative lessened, by constituting a Corporation, to whom he shall leave a liberty to cast themselves into what mould they please, providing they obey the General Laws, and hold that liberty of him. Thus you will alwayes aspire to enter into the Counsel of God: if your vote had been here asked, it is very like you would have

bestowed large privileges upon that Church, where you might have been a sharer; But we bless him to whom the Church is committed, and on whom the Government is laid, who hath provided better, and given unto his Church complete Officers, perfect Ordinances, true Laws, and good Statutes; and or∣dered his house in all things: and therefore as we are not to enquire, what the Lord might have done but humbly and thankfully to acknowledge what he hath done, so, in these things for men to disown his Au∣thority, and deny his bounty, and usurp to them∣selves a power of altering, what he hath established, and fashioning the worship and Government of Gods house, according to the device of their own heart, is no doubt no lawful liberty, but a licentious inva∣sion of Christ's prerogative, and a jealousie-provoking sin of Laese Majestie Divine. That thus it stands, be∣tuixt you and us, the preceeding passages do plainly witness, and the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, as a Son over his own house, so expresly commend∣ed, and preferred before the faithfulnesse of Moses, is an argument, which you will never dissolve: You say his faithfulnesse consisted in his discharging the Com∣mission given him by his Father: Most certain; but you ask who told us that it (I suppose you mean the appoint∣ing the Officers Ordinances and Government of the house of God) was in the Fathers Commission? Herein is a marvellous thing. You know that Jesus Christ whrist was sent by the Father, to redeem, gather, feed, guid and Govern his Church; and you see, that as the things in question are thereto necessarie, so in discharge hereof, he sends out Apostles, and Mini∣sters, Ordains Officers, vests them with power and Authority, instructs them to a Ministerial, and low∣ly administration and deportment, defines Censures,

appoints his Ordinances, and Laws, liberats the Worship of God from the shadows, and types of the Jewish Pedagogie, and cleares its true and spiritual exercise and liberty, and finally acquits himself faith∣fully in all his house: do you then question, if he did these things, or doubt you that he did them by Com∣mission? it is a hard Dilemma which you will never evade: but you adde that if we argue from Moses it will inferre that all particulars must be determined: where∣upon you urge, that as Moses determines the dayes of Separation for a legal uncleannesse, why doth not the Gospel the like for spirituall uncleannesse? It's answer∣ed, if you had taken up the Argument aright and con∣sidered the faithfulnesse of Christ and Moses, not in order to the same; but with relation to their respective Commissions, You had not fallen into this mistake; but the Scripture parallel, is clear, Moses as a servant did faithfully & completely order Gods house, there∣fore Our Lord much more as a Son, hath thus or∣dered the Church, his own house: Whence as it doth no wayes follow, that whatsoever things were institute by Moses, ought to have been in like manner imitate by our Lord; so this is most concludent, that as Moses, as a Servant, did diligently and exactly execute his Commission, in order to the Tabernacle, its service, Ministers, and all its appurtinents, so Christ, both by reason of a command received and of his interest and power, hath exceeded the faithful∣nesse of Moses, in the Ordering and appointment of things appertaining to his Church: But for the better confirming our Reasoning, and the removing of your Mistake, I do only recommend to you this obvious truth, viz. that the Commendation of our Lord held out by the Apostle in this comparison, institute betuixt him and Moses, regardeth the Manner, but

not the subject, of their administrations: Not what was the Nature of extent of Moses his trust, but what was his diligence, and faithfulnes in the discharge; is the light and argument of the parallel: suppose two intrusted in imployments, wholly diverse, and ina∣dequate, and the exact fidelity of the one trustie, to be notourly known, may not the faithfulness of the other, be thence very properly commended? And wil not this commendation very evidently inferre, that as the first was punctually observant of all things committed, so, the second did equall his exactness, without giving the least ground to conclude, that therefore either the second must have done the same or like things, with the first, or yet that the first ad∣ministration was as extensive, as that entrusted to the second: this being duely perpended, and it being certain, that not the establishing of an universall, and perpetual order to all and every of the concerns of the jewish Church, as appeares from the alteration and addition made thereafter, by David, and Solomon; but only the setting up of the Tabernacle, its Sacri∣fices, and service, according to the command, ac∣commodate to the then state of that People, was to Moses (and that only by peremptory prescript, as to a servant) enjoined; whereas unto our Lord, as a Son over his own house was freely committed the unchangeable establishment of his Church, in all its requisits unto his coming again: then if our Lords faithfulnesse be indeed equall to that of Moses, his appointing of Officers, Ordinances, and Laws, necessare and convenient to his Church, with all requisite exactnesse, though neither after the pattern, nor in that particular and peremptory strict∣nesse, of Moses his prescriptions, can neither be de∣nied nor declined: If you yet cavill, that this sayes

too much viz. that all particulars must be now as of old determined, It's answered, the determining of Particulars under the Law, was from the expresse ••e∣nour of Moses his Commission, and therein did con∣sist much of the Pedagogie, and rigour of that shadow∣ing dispensation, from which God having now relieved us, and given us the clear light of the Gos∣pel, and these things necessare and convenient to its holy ends, in simplicity, parity and liberty, it is evident, that as our Lords faithfulnesse under this Gospel administration, did oblige him to provide the Church, in all things necessary and convenient, and liberate us from all further burthen of Antiquate rites and Ceremonies, beyond the necessary exigences of decencie and order, so, he hath fully acquit him∣self, in this his own house, as Moses in his house, and by this his faithfulnes, for ever excluded all your superinduced humane inventions, whether in Church-Officers, Government or Worship: in a word, so ill grounded is the absurdity, wherewith you would urge us; and the faithfulnesse of Christ, compared to that of Moses, is so farre from saying too much, viz. that all particulars must be in the Gospel determined, that it inferres the direct contraire, viz, that seing God having committed to Moses a Law, descending to a most strict prescription of Particulars, and Ceremonial observances, he was therein faith∣full; therefore our Lord more faithful having a dispen∣sation entrusted to him only of Gospel Ordinances, with a becoming liberty, hath in his fidell discharge, both fully defined the former, and established the latter, free from all humane, either General or Par∣ticular inventions, and impositions: But you go on and tell us, That Moses instituted no Church-Govern∣ment in the way we use it, and that Synagogues their Ru∣lers

& chief Rulers were not appointed by Moses, & yet no unlawful thing, since countenanced by Christ & his Apost∣les: Whence you conclude, That either what they did, was founded on Divine tradition, (which no Christian will grant) or that a form of Government was devised by men; and if the Iews had that Libertie, certainly the Chris∣tian Church is more free, as to these externals. Sir, not to detain you in a curious enquiry into the special composition, gradual advance and necessarie altera∣tions of the jewish Policie, It's answered, 1. I have just now told you, that Granting Moses did not insti∣tute any Church-Government as used by us, because neither given him in commission, not at that time needfull, and agreeable to the condition of a wander∣ing people, and the dispensation they were then un∣der; Yet the Scripture Argument from our Lords faithfulnesse, preferred to that of Moses, being con∣clusive of the same, yea of a greater care of all things necessarie, and requisite for his Church, to the end of the World, then that which Moses did adhibite, even in the setting up of the Tabernacle, and its com∣manded service; must of necessity inferre, both that our Lord did de facto provide for the Ministerie, and Government requisite in his own house, and that the Ministerie and Government, which we finde descriv∣ed in the Scriptures of the New Testament, are of his appointment, and such as may not be altered. 2. Not to mention the evident necessity of Synagogues, up and down the Land, for the end of teaching the people, a most certain dutie, which could hardly other∣wayes be performed, the dispersion of Levi among the Tribes, Moses blessing, designing him to teach Iacob judgements, and Israel Gods Law, Davids appointing 4400. of the Hebronites, 1 Chron. 26. 30. 31. 32. thorow all Israel, in all businesse of the

Lord, and for every matter pertaining to God, as well as affaires of the King, and Asaphs regret, for the burning up of all the Synagogues of God in the Land (not to mention the coincidence often hinted at in the Old Testament, of Judges and Teachers of the Law, in every City, and their appointment out of the Tribe of Levi) are grounds, more then probable of the Divine institution of Synagogues, and their Rulers; and that they were no humane invention, 3. The evident Testimonies that we have in the Word of God, not only of the Lords special appointing of the Tabernacle, its whole service and Ordinances, framed and suited to the then State and Posture of that people; but also, how that he Reformation, and establishment made in Davids dayes, together with the building of the Temple, its Officers and Porters, were particularly directed by the Spirit of God, in Samuel, David, and the Seers of these times, instru∣mental in that work, 1 Chrom. 9. 22. and 28. 11. may sufficiently evince to any rational discerner, that the Synagogues, more material, then many of these circumstantial things expresly commanded, were also ordained by the Lord, and likewise instruct all to a most tender, and precise adherence to the ex∣press Will of God, in all Matters relating to his house and Worship: And here, upon the mention∣ing of David, I cannot omit to remember, how that in all the Scripture, we finde not a parallel and type, more frequent then that of our Lords King∣dome, in and over his Church, to that of David over Israel: seeing then, that these ••igures have their certain grounds of resemblance, and there is not a more conspicuous typifying Character, in the person of David; then, that of his Royall ordering, and establishing the house, and Church of God, where∣unto

he was raised up, and particularly inspired, and commanded, though the faithfulness of Christ, pre∣ferred to that of Moses, should not, Yet his succes∣sion in the Throne of David to reigne over the house of Jacob for ever, doth undeniably conclude both the Government and complete setlement of the Church, by us contended for: 4. If you would reflect upon the Lords singular Providence over his People Israel, first, in that Theocratie, whereby in a peculiar man∣ner he Governed them, unto the dayes of Saul, 2. in their Urim and Thummim, and the holy Oracles of God, which they constantly enjoyed, 3. In the continuall assistance, which they had almost in all times, of Prophets immediatly inspired, you cannot lightly suppose, that either Synagogues, or any other Lawfull institution, concerning their Law and wor∣ship, were a meer humane invention; but though the evidences of their appointment, remaining with us upon record, were more obscure, these passa∣ges alone, do render it more then probable, that their Authority and rise was Divine. 5 The comparing of the Church of Christ, to that of the Old-Testament is so unfavourable to your cause, and there are such manifest disparities in that parallel, that it rather mak∣eth against you then for you; for as the Ordinances of that dispensation, were such, as were to be done away and abolished; and therefore were appointed by God (who in times past spake unto the Fathers by the Prophets at Sundry times and in divers manners) in a va∣riant and mutable forme, So, the Lord having in these last dayes, and now in the end of the World, spoken unto us by his son, to whom he sayeth, thy Throne O God is for ever and ever, the Anointing of the most Holy, attended by the sealing up the Vision, and Prophecie, and the setting up of his everlasting

Dominion, do infallibly conclude, the introducing of a more excellent Ministerie, and the full and im∣mutable establishment of all Ordinances, requisite to the ingathering, and perfecting of the Saints: Sir, if these things were considered by you, and that our Lord hath now at last, by himself, given and order∣ed, for us, a complete and perfect ap••ointment, of all means necessary in his Church, you should finde more Soul-satisfaction in walking at true liberty in the observing of his precepts; then in the Lascivient fan∣cies of your own vain Imagination, which not con∣tent to rest in the blessed change that our Lord hath made, of the first Covenant, not faultles, unto this New one and better ordered, under the specious aspiring to a liberty, equal to that of the Jewish Church, doth plainly charge, the Christian Church, with the imperfections of that, which is decayed, and vanished. Having thus examined and answer∣ed the strain and scope of your discourse, I shall briefly go over what remains: You say Our Saviour and his Apostles countenanced the Synagogues and their Rulers, and why not? seing not only their first insti∣tution appears to have been such, as I have declared; but also other occasions, noted in the Gospel where∣in you have no advantage, did clearly thereto invite: Next you say That this their practice was either founded on divine Tradition (which no Christian will grant) or that a form of Government not unlawful was devised by Men: I answere 1. I have exhibited already war∣rants for their practice, beside tradition. 2. Might not the positive manner of the institution of Syna∣gogues, have been then more clear, while the thing was in observance, then now it is, after its abolition, and the revolution of so many Ages? 3. If I were concerned in your parenthesis, against Divine Tradi∣tion,

I would ask you, why do you thus without distinction, make the admitting of it in the Jewish Church so great an absurdity? That there were Di∣vine Traditions before the Word was committed to writing, and that under the dark, imperfect, and progressive dispensation of the Old Testament, as∣sisted nevertheless by a more immediate presence, un∣written traditions might both have been more usuall, and were less fallible, may be probabely enough held, by these who yet, now, after the full and perfect revelation of the Gospel by our Lord Jesus Christ, do upon solid grounds, very justly reject unwritten Tra∣ditions, in the Christian Church; By which reasons, you may perceive, that the one member of your Dilemma, labouring so sadly of untruth, both in its supposition and the absurdity thence inferred, it can no wayes be cogent to enforce the other, of the li∣berty of Mans devising in the point of Church-Go∣vernment, even in the Jewish Church, let be in the Christian, so many wayes more excellent: But in the close you insinuate That the greater liberty you plead for to the Christian Church is in externals: That this Ge∣neral ambiguous objection is only intended for a con∣venient retreat, is apparent from all the preceeding discourse, seeing, if by Externals, you understand things in their own nature extrinsick to the constitu∣tion of the Church, and which in the New Testament have no further use allowed, then is conducible to decencie, and order, we willingly grant, that the Christian Church (being in effect absolutely liberate from the old burthen of Ceremonies, and not (as you vainly conceit) endowed with a greater, and more arbitrarie power of imposing) is indeed herein more free then the Iewish was: But if by externals you mean, as alas the instances premised do too plainly speak, all the visible Ordinances of the

Church, specially that of Government at least, what ever is in it visible, the liberty that you would intro∣duce, is not more contraire to the Scripture, both of the Old and New Testament, as I have shown, then most licentious and irreligious.

Your last cavill against the exercise of our Lords Kingdom, in ordering the visible administration of his Church, is, That if this were inferred by his head∣ship over the Church, his being also the head of the World, should argue the same determination in the order of the World, as well as in that of the Church. And having made your N. C. seemingly and poorly check you by saying, that Christs Church is dearer to him then all the World: Then you restrict the absurd••••y, which you press, unto the civil Matters of the Church, and proceed in such a rambling discourse, that I am at a stand, how to medle with it: But waving the cen∣sure of your impertinencies, I answere 1. That the Mediatory Kingdom of Our Lord over his Church, and his Natural (so to speak) Soveraignity over the World, are so grosly here by you confounded, that I can only intreat you to be more serious in reading, and searching what the Scripture doth very distinctly hold forth: 1. Of their different rise, the one given, the other not given. 2. Of their different objects and ends, the one having & proposing the World & men in order to a regular and peaceable being in it, the other the Church and men therein called unto spiritual du∣ties and eternal life: And lastly of their different ad∣ministrations, the one grounded on the dictats of reason, and using external Magisterial authority and power, and sensible rewards and pains, the other proceeding on divine revelation, and carried on by no such externals, save a simple Ministerie, and the power internal and spiritual; and then I doubt not but

you will of your self rectify such aberrations, 2. The parallel of Gods Government over the World, with the Kingdom of Christ over his Church, is, so far from concluding, that Arbitrary or Architectonick power, which you endeavour to set up in Ecclesias∣ticks, equall to that in Civils, that the contraire may from thence be sufficiently evinced, thus, therefore God hath not determined the order of Civil matters, either in the World or in his Church; because an Ar∣chitectonick and free disposing Government, limited with general rules, necessare to its ends, was most suitable to that almost absolute right and power, which he hath given unto man, in and over the things about which it is conversant: but so it is that the things of the Church, about which our Lord Je∣sus his Kingdom is exercised, being wholly Spiritual, are neither committed to our power, nor left unto our arbitriment; And plainly such, whereof, the Lord in all times, hath reserved to himself, the sole determination: and therefore it was clearly ne∣cessare, that all the Ordinances, Ministerie, and Government thereto pertaining, should be also by him alone, ordered, and appointed; which dispa∣rity, doth not only reject but unanswerably retort your Argument from this pretense. 3. Your great error, and greater presumption in this question is, that apprehending our Argument for the Determi∣ned Ordinances and Government of Gods house, to be taken from the simple position of his Kingdom, and the consequences, that by allusion to the King∣doms of the Earth may be thence deduced, you re∣member not that the Scripture not only holds out his Kingdom, and the nature thereof, very distinctly; but also doth particularly exhibite, all the Ordinan∣ces necessare unto its ends, and appointed to be there∣in

observed; So that our reasoning being wholly Scriptural, both in its ground and superstructure, your redargution from imaginary reason, opposed to the clear and positive Counsel of God, is plainly irrational: if in the dayes of old, Israel had changed the Law, and Ordinances given, and therein disowned Gods particular Kingdom and Government over them, and notwithstanding thereof pretended to the liberty of the Nations about, seing this their liberty was no wayes determined by, but very consistent with, the Lord's high Soveraignity, under which all do bow, had this poor reasoning, justifyed their re∣bellion? certainly not: how much less then, can it conclude the exemption of the Church from Christs Kingdom, in these Ordinances therein by him esta∣blished, of which the Lords peculiar Kingdom over Israel was but a slight adumbration.

But you say, Seing justice is a part of Gods Law, as well as devotion, why doth not the Lord determine how his Church should be governed, in Civils. It's answered, Jus∣tice is indeed a part of Gods Law, and he hath there∣in determined, as particularly as the right, which God hath given to man in Civils, doth permit; or the ends thereof do require; but as this your Arith∣metical equalizing of Mans liberty, in matters of devotion, to that power he hath in things Civil, doth sadly discover the woful vanity of an unserious Spirit; So the Geometrical analogie of Gods determining, anent our Devotion, wholly dependent upon his prescript, unto his general appointment in matters of outward justice, accommodate to that power and liberty he hath therein left us, in place of inferring an equal power to Man in both, doth, on the contraire, evidently demonstrate, that the Lords determination, in matters of Religion, is as much more particular,

then his Commandments are in the things of justice, as our Liberty in the former, is more restricted, then our Liberty in the latter: if you had but considered, th•• th•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 hath given the Earth unto the Children of Men, and that, the things thereof being put under his feet, an agreeable power of Government therea∣nent is certainly given unto his hand; whereas our Lords Church and People are his peculiar people, his chosen Nation, redeemed and bought with his pre∣cious bloud, and not their own; let be to have the things, concerning their Souls redemption, in their power, how happily had you been delivered from this strange confounding of things, Sacred and pro∣phane; And how clearly might you have perceived, that Gods Dominion over the World, consisting in General Laws, suited to its object, and swayed by his Soveraign Providence, in order to his holy ends, doth bear but little likenesse, to our Lord Jesus his Rule, and Government in his Church, as a Son over his own house, and also its Ordinances. But to in∣force your point you adde, that you hope we will grant that the Civil Peace is more necessary to the very being of the Church, then is Order in Discipline: Whence you insinuate that the former as well as the latter, re∣quires Chri••••s particular determination: Not to Scan∣dalize you by frustrating your hope; Sir, you know so well, that a thing though more necessary; Yet if such only by a mediate and consequential necessity, may therefore fall under a quite diverse disposition, from that, which though less necessary, by this me∣diate and extrinsick necessity, to the being of the Church, then the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, do the former therefore, aswell and in the same manner with the latter, belong to Christs Kingdom? As to what you adde, That it was for this reason that the

things of Civil peace were determined in the Old Law: This did so certainly flow from Gods peculiar inte∣rest in that People, as a Kingdom, as well as a Church, that I make no answere; That which you subjoin, for evincing, that either the Lords Kingdom over the Earth doth extend to the appointing of Civil Of∣ficers, or els his Kingdom over his Church imports no such thing; is so manifestly, repugnant to the very nature of the things, and the Lords declared pleasure (the best decision) Nay this whole discourse doth so foolishly, and laxely cast, and weigh things Re∣ligious and Profane in the same ballance of vain con∣jecture, that I almost repent my noticeing of it so much; but see the flatterie of delusion, having made your N. C. childishly to decline all Reason, as Car∣nal, and, in the fright forsooth of your strong rea∣sons, retreat to his Ministers and the Bible, you ridiculously triumph over him, and think, your self so much Master of the field of Reason, that insinuat∣ing your own praise, in the description of Sound rea∣son, you puff at other mens, as pitiful niblings: thus being first in your own cause•• you would seem just, how I have Searched you let others judge: for Scrip∣ture, you tell us. That to qu••te it, is not to build sure upon it, the Devil did that, and so do all Sects: do you therefore mean, that it should be laid aside, as an in∣sufficient Judge, or that we use it no better then the Devil did? I desire you may explain your self, if not for our concernment, at least for the Scriptures vin∣dication: In the mean time, I am heartily willing that both what you and what I have said be rightly pondered, and whether the Church in matters of Government be lest to rove in your pretended liberty, or more excellently established by the infinite wis∣dom, unspeakable love, and most tender care of its

only Lord and Head, let Scripture and Reason im∣partially decide: But to conclude all, you tell us with a preface, That the Angels of the Churches afford us fairer likely hoods for Bishops, then ever we shall finde in the Bible for Presbyterie It's answered, seing you your self do acknowledge, that nothing in it (whether you mean in this place, or in the whole Scripture, the words are ambiguous) amounts to a demonstration; I remit the matter to the Scriptures by me adduced, whereby I am confident all your Likelihoods are more then counterballanced: He who is further desi••ous to have them removed, may consult M. Durham upon the Text; for my own part, since ever I had the understanding to consider, that the R••velation was made in a Mystick phrase, that the Seven starres who are the Angels, do certainly signifie the many teachers that were in every one of these Churches, that in the Candle-sticks, as in the Starres, we finde the same oneness, and number, and lastly that though to the Angel be the inscription for address; yet we finde the body of all the Epistles written directly to the whole Churches, these things I say occurring I protest I could never discerne more reason in this argument, for subjecting these Churches unto seven superior sin∣gle Prelates; then for making the same Prelats really Angels, or turning every Church into a Candle stick; Or if I may adduce another instance, not absimilare to your Faire Likelihoods, for interpreting the two Witnesses, to be the two Arch-Bishops of St. Andrews and Glasgow.

When you have spent your endeavours upon the Authority of Episcopacie, you think to seconde it in the next place with its Antiquity derived you say, from the times next to the Apostles, whereupon you conclude in these words That how this excrescing

power, should have crept into the whole Church, and no mention when it came in, no Prince or Universal Council to introduce, it, in the times of persecution when the Church usually is purest, and most free of pride, no Secular consideration to flatter, but the first brunt of the persecution alwayes against it, and how none op∣posed it, if this was not introduced by Apostles, or Apostolicall men, passeth my Divination: And really Sir, as to its particular Methods, and increase, so doth it mine: And so much more then it doth yours, that I am perswaded from clear Scripture, that it was not only not introduced, but plainly reprobate by our Lord and his Apostles; Yet am I so little thereby stumbled, that the more dark and obscure I finde its rise and progresse, I am the more confirmed, that it is the very Mysterie of iniquity, and do so much the more admire the incorruptible and eternall Truth of the Gospel, which as in the beginning it foretold the coming, and took very early Notice of the first motions of this prodigie of wickednesse; So hath it, through the many ages of its exaltation, preserved it self against, and now in the latter dayes overcomes its Malice; But to review your discourse more par∣ticularly, I have already shewed, that the Ministe∣ry and Government institute by our Lord, and con∣firmed and practised by the Apostles, was plainly Presbyterian; if so, what place for further inquirie? Is your alledged traditional subsequent humane insti∣tution of Prelacie of greater moment? 2. That even in the Primitive times, and for 140. years after our Saviour, no vestige of Prelacie appears upon record, is the consentient opinion of the best Searchers, both on your, and our part. 3. This plea of Antiquity hath already been so fully handled, and improved both by yours, and ours, specially Hamond on your

part, and Blondel, Salmasius, and other Learned ser∣vants of Christ on ours, that there needs nothing be added: and where the advantage is, the Ingenuous may easily discerne: He that desires a solid and short accompt of the matter, may read the appendix to the jus Divinum Ministerii Evangelici: But you proceed to give in some poor scrapes of pretended Antiquity, which not only the most sure, and clear, and farre more ancient Scriptures of Truth, but even the con∣vincing answeres which they have often receaved might well have made you to forbear: And first you say That Ignatius his Epistles are plain language: And so they are indeed, but too plain for you to have cited, as the following passages, compared with the Scrip∣tures subjoined may evince: In the Epistle to the Tralliani, we have [what is a Bishop, but he, that is possest of all Principality, and Authority beyond all, as much as is possible for men? Reverence the Bishop as ye do'Christ, as the holy Apostles have Commanded, &c. As the Lord Christ doth nothing without his Father, so, must ye do nothing without your Bishop, Let nothing seem right or equall to you, that is contra to his judge∣ment.] In the Epistle to the Philad. [Let the Princes obey the Emperours, the Souldiers the Princes, the Dea∣cons and the rest of the Clergie, with all the People, and the Souldiers, and the Princes, and the Emperour, let them obey the Bishop] (no doubt the Bishop of Rome) In the Epistle to the Smyrnenses; [The Scripture saith honour God and the King, but I say, honour God as the Author and Lord of all things, and the Bishop as the Prince of Priests, resembling the image of God, of God for his principality, of Christ for his Priesthood, &c. There is none greater then the Bishop in the Church, who is consecrated for the Salvation of the whole World, &c. Let all men follow the Bishop as Christ the Father, &c.

It is not Lawfull without the Bishop to baptize, or offer, &c. He that doth any thing without consulting the Bi∣shop Worshippeth the Devil: Now on the other hand let us hear what the Scripture saith to this purpose, Who then is Paul who Apollo but Ministers by whom ye beleeve? Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ; for we preach not our selves, but Christ Iesus the Lord, and our selves your Servants for Iesus sake: Not that we have dominion over your faith, but are hel∣pers of your joy: for by faith ye stand. But so shall it not be among you, whosoever will be great among you shall be your Minister, and whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be Servant of all: to these adde the practices, and other professions of the Apostles concerning themselves, and their fellow-Labourers, and really Sir, when you shall make these things found in Igna∣tius, consistent even with the strain of pure Religion, and the truth of the Gospel, let be to the Orthodo∣xie, and Piety of Ignatius, and the simplicity of his times; then shall I cede to the Authority of these Letters: Only in the mean time let me tell you, that for all the pains that Hamond hath taken, to assert their Faith, the words above cited, do savour so strongly of most gross and corrupt interpolation; that not only I reject their Testimony, as to the matter of Prelacie; but do esteem even the passages that may be therein found for Presbyterie, as to the Trallians, be sub∣ject to the Presbyterie, as to the Apostles of Iesus Christ, The Presbyters are the Council of God, and joint, Assembly of the Apostl••s, and such like of little or no value. 2. You mention Cyprians time, but hold, I preceive your second Edition mends your first, and this your practice like to that of your more innocent friend Mr. Coluin, in his verses, of giving us second Editions, bearing additions, without ad∣vertissment,

had indeed abused me, If by accident I had not fallen in the review of my papers, to make use of your second Copie, and in this you tell us, in the next place of the Apostolicall Canons, a work of very venerable Antiquitie, at least the first fiftie of them, though perhaps none of the Apostles: But first why say you Perhaps, in a matter beyond all perad∣venture. 2. Not to trouble you with Criticisms, he who would be resolved anent the Authority of these Canons, let him only read them: And as I am confident, he will be farre from thinking either the first 50, or the rest of them Apostolicall, So I am certain the mention made in the 3. Can. of Sacrifi∣cium, Altare, Oleum in Candelabrum, & Incensum oblationis tempore, a Sacrifice, Altar, oyl in the lamp, and incense in the time of offering, the 17. Can, qui vi∣duam duxit, Episcopus aut Presbyter aut Diaconus esse non potest, he who hath married a widow, cannot be a Bishop, or a Presbyter, or a Deacon, the 25. Can. Ex his qui caelibes in Clerum pervenerunt, jubemus ut Lecto∣res tantum, & cantores, si velint, nuptias contrahant, Of Bachelors who hath entered into orders, Readers only and Singers if they will, may marrie, the great and constant distinction therein, made, inter Clericum, & Laicum, and the many other vanities therein to be found, specially in the last part of them, will easily render their venerable Antiquity of no moment, in our present Controversie: so that neither your 40 but in effect the 38. Canon, though it were more positive, and expresse for your Prelatick preheminence, nor your Synodicall injunction, to the same purpose, both posterior to the first Primitive purity, are of any regard: but 3. so wretched is the cause that you de∣fend, that even in your clearest evidences, your par∣tiality and hypocrisie is manifest: You alledge the

Apostolicall Canons in defence of your Prelatick Or∣der, and yet you consider not, that the same Canons, do not only condemn your Prelates; But subvert their present constitution. I shall not insist upon the 24. Canon Episcopus aut Presbyter in fornicatione, aut per∣jurio deprehensus deponitor: Let a Bishop or a Presbyter guilty ofsornication or perjury, be deposed: the 20. Episco∣pum aut Presbyterum qui fideles delinquentes (quid ergo si Innocentes) percutit, & terrorem ipsis hoc modo in∣cutit, deponi praecipimus. We command that the Bishop or Presbyter who smiteth delinquents, and so becometh a terrour unto them, be deposed, what then, if they smite the innocent: the 28•• 41. 53. 57 & 75. which I am most assured, if observed would remove all the pre∣sent Bishops and Curats in Scotland: but the Canons I offer are the 4. Omnium aliorum Pomorum Primitiae E∣piscopo & Presbyteris domum mittuntor, Manifestum au∣tem est quod Episcopus et Presbyteri inter Diaconos & re∣liquos Clericos eas dividunt, Let the first ••ruits of all others aples be sent home to the Bishop and Presbyters, for it is Manifest that the Bishop and Presbyters, divide them among the Deacons, and the rest of the Clergie, 33. Cu∣jusque gentis Episcopos oportet scire quinam inter ipsos primus sit, neque sine illius voluntate quicquam agere inso∣litum, illa autem quemque prosetract••re, quae ad Paro∣chiam ejus & loca ipsi subdita attinent; sed neque ille citra omnium voluntatem aliquid facito. 36. Bis in Anno Epis∣coporum celebrator Synodus, & pietatis inter se dogmata in disquistionem vocanto. and 80. Dicimus quod non opor∣teat Episcopum aut Presbyterum publicis se admini••••ratio∣nibus immiscere, sed v••care & commodum se exhibere usi∣bus Ecclesiasticis, animum igitur inducito hoc non facere, aut deponitor: together with the obvious strain of the whole plainly insinuating, the Bishop to be the per∣son, to whom the flock is principally and immediatly

committed, and who as the Primus Presbyter, the first Presbyter, ought chiefly to minde the charge, In which Canons although I grant that their appears a precedencie of Order, given to the Bishop, over the Presbyters, (who in these times were many Mi∣nisters, living in one City and Society; having the charge in common among themselves, and with and under their 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 over the Church, and Flock in their bounds) and also to the first Bishop of a Provin∣ce, over his Coëpiscopi; Yet I am sure your Prelatick power, and Superiority, acclaiming the sole power of Ordination, and Jurisdiction is no where thereby approved; but rather condemned: Your third Tes∣timony you bring from Cyprian, in whose time you say That the power of Bishops was well regulate and Setled, and here knowing that he professeth That he would do nothing without the Clergie, that he could do nothing without them, nor take upon him alone: Whereby the antient Prostasia; and not your Prelacie, is plainly and only held forth: You insinuate as much, as if he had afterward retracted this opinion, and this you prove very pitifully, 1. From his answere to one Rogatian a Bishop, that he by his Episcopall vigour, and Authority had power presently to punish a Dea∣con, for an affront received, which yet doth not at all seclude the Presbyters, according to the Rule of the Canon Law Episcopus non potest judicare Presbyte∣rum vel Diaconum sine Synodo, & Senioribus, The Bishop cannot judge a Presbyter or a Deacon without the Synod, and Elders•• 2. From this Censure of He∣reticks and Schismaticks, for proud contempt of their then Bishops, which we do as little allow as you do. 3. From a letter written by the Presbyters and Deacons of Rome, after the Death of Fabian, wherein they complain of the want of one to Mode∣rate,

and with Authority and advice to take accompt of Matters, whence you say, that surely they thought little of Persbyters being equal in power to Bishops, who write so, where the Episcopal power seemed to be devolved upon them: but pray Sir, If a society consisting of Members all equal in power, but having a Head or President for order, and good Rule, do regret his loss, during the vacancie, in these very termes, wherein lyeth the inconsistence? How foolish then is that stricture of your vanity, which you here sub∣join? viz. but. I believe, few of you know these writ∣ings; whereas to be plain with you, in my thought, neither you nor I have given any great Specimen of this knowledge, or said so much, as the half of what is obviously to be found, in almost any printed debate anent this matter.

Sir, I must tell you further, if I my selfe were alone concerned in this reflection•• I would scarce look upon it as a reproach worth the wipeing off, to be as great a stranger to these things as ye take me to be, nor would I think many cubits were added to my stature to be as knowing in them as your self; yet it is known that I tell the world no news, when I say, that there have been (and to this day are) not a few great men of our way who have given such proof of their knowledge in these ancillarie and minutious things, whereof you represente us as ignorant; as have made your greatest Rabbies finde, that wherein they gloried they were not short of them; and if ye know not this, yet seem to have lost your silly self in the Laby∣rinth of Antiquitie, and by this means are fallen under the shameful reproach of being peregrinus Domi: and if ye know it, and yet so superciliously assert the contraire, what Apologie can ye make for speaking so great an untruth, that will either satisfie the world or

your own Conscience. But Sir, ingenously I professe, I pitie you for your Vanitie and folly; for it seems ye think this the only expedient to make the world beleeve the pregnancie of your pate, and Pronounce you worthie of the Chair: but Sir, it will onely make the more serious weep to remember who did once fill it, and should have filled it still, when they consider how it is become the seat of a scorner; and the lesse serious will laugh at your prodigious folly. I have only one overture to propose unto you, that your vanity may be with some handsomeness hereafter coutch∣ed, and the world may let pass what you say with∣out quarrelling at it, as a known falshood: And it is this, in your after comparings and measurings of your abilities, that you may be taken notice of for a Non∣such, be so wise as to compare your self with your Fellow-Curats, if ye hope to bear the bell, but when ye insinuate a comparison, with so many burning and shining lights, and then, in your Juvenile pride and self-conceit, arrogate a preference to these, ye do only force men to take notice of, and enquire into, your shame and short-coming: And, if I mistake not, fall upon the most certain method of making your self ••••ink above ground. Sir, if, in these two or three lines, I have digressed contrary to my inclination, the occasion will justifie it, and charity persuades to it. But, 3. You tell us, that in the Council of Nice, Speaking of the power of Metropolitans; the Canon sayes, let the ancient customes be in force: It's answered 1. We finde that Council did conveen in the year. 325. Now admit, that certain Customes concerning Metropo∣litans, as well as Bishops, were b••ought into the Church about 165. years, before the Councel; which is the highest period from whence they can be cal∣culat, These customes in this respect, might will

therein be termed Antient, without the least contra∣riety to my assertion. 2. It's evident enough from many suffrages, that as the primitive Episcopacie, which succeeded to Presbyterie, the Government first institute by our Lord and his Apostles, and exer∣cised in the Christian Church, did only import the humane invention of a Prostasia, for Order; So the custome of Metropolitans, in these times, did differ nothing from it, as may appear from the 33. Canon of these called Apostolical already cited, wherein he is only termed Primus Gentis Episcopus, and tyed to the advice of his Coëpiscopi: In the next place, you tell us, that nothing can be alledged against your Epis∣copal power, but Some few or disjointed places of some Authors, which at most Prove, that they judged not the origen of Bishops to be divine, and none save Aerius, re∣pute an Heretick, did ever speak against the difference, betuixt Bishops and Presbyters: Sir, if you did not here acknowledge, almost all that I desire, I could easily shew you, that not only the Scriptures of the New Testament, and the agreeable practice of the Apostl∣es, and their Immediate successors are against your Prelatick excrescent power; but that even for several ages thereafter, while both Bishops and Metropoli∣tans did exercise their Prostasian, your Diocesan Prelat, having the sole power of Ordination and ju∣risdiction, was unknown, yea expresly reprobate: but because the appendix whereunto I have already referred, and Smectymnus, do plainly make out this point, I shall not detain you: As for A••rius, it's true, he held that a Bishop and a Presbyter do not differ, and that Augustin cals this proprium ejus dog∣ma, his proper Opinion, and Epiphanius, dogma furi∣osum et stolidum, a furious and foolish opinion, and that both of them do ranck him among Hereticks; but

seing they also accuse him of Arr••anisme, and withal do also taxe him for error in some points which are cl••ar truth, viz. that it is not lawful to pray and offer for the dead, their censure is as little to be noticed, as his Testimony; specially seing many Learned men do plainly assert, that not only Hierom, but even Au∣gustin himself, Chrisostom and many others of the Fathers, were of the same opinion with Aërius as to the matter of this difference: but for Ierom you go about to alleviat his Testimonye, viz. Idem ergo est Presbyter qui Episcopus. Therefore a Presbyter is one and the same with a Bishop, & noverint Episcopi se magis con∣suetudine quan dispositionis dominicae veritate Presbyter is esse majores, &c. And let the Bishops know that they are above Preebyters more through custome then any divine warrant. Because he himself was but a Presbyter. Pray Sir, who were they whom your men cite so fast for Bishops, were not they themselves Bishops, and yet the truth is, there were Bishops also at that time of his Opinion. 2. You say that his fervent if not sirie Spirit drives him along in every things to an excess. Good Sir, where is now your veneration for Antiquity and the holy fathers? For us, seing we do not found on mans Authority, this your brusk character, disco∣vering more of your partiality then of Ieroms infir∣mity, doth not offend: Only this I must say, that whatever be his fervor in his other writtings; yet I am sure that both in his Commentarie upon Titus and in his Epistle ad Evagrium, he confirms his assertion above set down, with Scripture Arguments, most calmly, solidly and unanswerably. 3. You alledge, that Notwithstanding that he make the Bishop and Pres∣byter to differ in degree only, and not in office, and that by Ecclesiastick and not Divine Authority, yet he con∣fesseth that Presbyters did not ordain, and that the origen

of the exercising power was in the dayes of the Apostles to prevent schismes, &c. It's answered he saith indeed, quid enim facit, exceptâ ordinatione, Episcopus quod Presbyter non facit; But as he is there pointing only at the custome, then in use, so, this doth nothing derogate from that equality, yea identitie of power, which he attributeth to both from Scripture: what you mean by the origen of the exercising power, &c. Is not so clear. It's true he affirmeth that at Alexan∣dria from Mark the Evangelist to Heraclas, and Dio∣nysius Bishops, the Presbyters did always name one, chosen of themselves, and placed in higher degree, Bishop; but what says this more then that in all that time for orders sake, they had successive Presidents at first, it's like moveable, and thereafter fixed dur∣ing life: And we have already both acknowledged, and regreted the grievous abuse, occasioned by that latter practice: You adde that he compares, the Bi∣shops, Presbyters, and Deacons in the Church, ••to the high Priest, Priests and Levites in the Temple: and since there was at that time, from Ecclesiastick custome then allowed (which according to his use, and as he useth to speak promiscuously, writing of Lent, he here indifferently termeth an Apostolick Tra∣dition) a ground of resemblance, why might he not use the similitude, without stretching it either to evert, what he had said, or countenance your Pre∣lacie? Lastly you alledge that he sayes, that it was de∣creed through the whole World that a Presbyter should be over the rest, to roote out the seede of difference: It's an∣swered that this in toto orbe decretum est, may, and is, to be understood, not of an express Decree, which doth no where appeare; but of a General consentient custome, taking place every where: both the truth of the thing, and Hieroms after Paulatim ad unum

omnis Solicitudo est delata, by little and little all the care is devolved upon one, do abundantly cleare, How ever this may be warrantably said, that as this custome did with time universally obtain, and in Ieroms dayes, not having much exceeded the limits of a simple Pro∣stasia, was by him also approved, as the remedy of dissention, so, he holding it to be not of Divine dis∣position, no doubt if he had these other holy men, were this day to see the hundred part of these sad, and fearful effects, that it hath produced, nothing could be able to breake their astonishment, at the surprizing sight of such prodigious consequences of this Mystery of iniquity, but sorrow and Lamentation, together with deep regrete, that they did not better forsee, and more timously resist, the first tendencies and begin∣nings of this evil: Now whether or not Antiquity be on your side, and if our grounds from Scripture against your Episcopall Authority, be not much confirm∣ed, both by Ierom and the other passages here handl∣ed, I willingly submit it to all the lovers of truth: but lest you think that by the representation I have made in the beginning of my answere to your alled∣geance from Antiquity, of the early and strange rise and grouth of Episcopacie, I do thereby derogate from that light and purity, which with you I acknow∣ledge in these Primitive times, I must note, first, That pride as it was the first sin and corrupter of Mans integrity, from which the felicities of Paradise could not exempt him; So is it of all sins the most inward, rooted, and subtile, attending a man in all condi∣tions, finding Matter in all occasions, and immixing it self even in our fairest and purest actions. 2. That the Disciples of our Lord, notwithstanding of his own presence, holy instruction, and humble example were not free of the motions of this evil, the History

of the Gospel doth plainly testify. 3. I note that the times of the Apostles, the most pure and powerfull that ever the Church enjoyed, were many wayes in∣fested with this plague, I mention not the conten∣tions betuixt Paul and Barnabas, which no doubt sprung from this latent corruption; but he who con∣sidereth the great number•• and many wicked practic∣es of false Apostles, Hereticks and Schismaticks, in these days boasting against, and despising even Paul himself, with the affected Preheminence of Diotre∣phes, and the then begun working of the mystery of iniquity, toward the exalting of the Son of perdition, in place of denying, must of necessity marveil, how this Devil of pride could in so gracious and short a time, destitute of all Earthly encouragements, so greatly prevail, and plainly perceive, that this active Spirit, would not be wanting, to imbrace and im∣prove all occasions and opportunities offered; 4, That as order did no doubt at first in all meetings require a President, whom I also easily grant to have been, as any occasion did require, rather recommended by de∣sert, no evil consequence being then apprehended, then presented by a constant and compleat Rotation; So it is very probable, and confirmed by Hieroms suf∣frage, that contentions did first both fixe the presi∣dencie or prostasia, and exalt it to any notable emi∣nencie; but whether by way of remedy, or by way of victory, to the increase of the Maladie, is indeed the most observable points, and, as I apprehend, that whereupon we will divide: and therefore I note 5. That although the Authority of able and holy men at first, advanced to a fixed Presidencie, might then appeare, as in these dayes of great simplicity and hu∣mility, in it self very innocent, and in the event also effectuall to concord; Yet without all question at best

it was but an humane invention, copied from the pa∣tern of the manner of the then Civil Government of the Empire, to which our Lord expresly commanded his Disciples not to conforme. 6. That seing affected preheminence and the contentions thence arising, did clearly occasion the introducing of this Prostasia, though in many, yea most places, the prevailing number of good men, might thereto advance worthy and deserving persons, studying more the prospering of the Gospel, and unity of the Church then adver∣ting to the bad consequences, that thence might ensue; Yet it is not only most certain, that this promotion was that, whereunto these strivings did every where directly aspire; but also most probable, that even in the first beginnings, many ambitious pretenders, wanting a just opposition, did carry their design, and were preferred. 7. That by plain dealing I may satisfy all pretenses, I observe, that al∣beit power and Authority, unite in the Prostasia of one amongst many, may be thereby rendered more strong, and effectual; Yet seing the benefits of this union, and advancement, doth only flow from the accidental worth, and ability of the person that hap∣pens to be promoted, and that the order or institu∣tion it self, destitute of divine warrant, and promise, and clearly occasioned by evil contention and intro∣duced into the house of God by humane invention, could not at first have any thing in it recommendable, and hath since produced most corrupt ••ruits; Neither the existence of Many excellent and great men in this degree, nor the laudable, yea extraordinary advan∣tages, that the Church hath received from them in the concret, can now justify, and maintain the Order it self in the abstract: If this arguing were good, able and well qualifyed men vested with such a power, or

placed in such a condition, have proven and may prove notable instruments of Good: therefore it is reason∣able and expedient, that such a constant order should be erected, we might not only have Bishops, but most of the Monastick Orders of the Roman Church: We finde Peter with the singular benefite of the Church, exercing a power of Life and Death, and that given him from above, and not assumed; could therefore an order of Church-men, pretending to the like Authority, be rationally thence maintained in the Church? No wayes: Accidental advantages do not commend unwarranted institutions, much less can they justle out our Lords express constitution: But it is he, the perfect orderer of his own house, who hath positively defined, and blessed its Officers, and their power, and not left the matter Arbitrarie, to the probable contrivances of apparent benefite, farre less to the dissembling pretenses, of mens Lusts, and corrupt Interest. 8. It is to be noted, that although the great measure of Grace, given to the Primitive Church, and the hard and frequent persecutions, wherewith it was exercised, did for a time hinder that strange depravation and incredible ••ruption of wickedness, whereunto the setting up of the Ancient Prostasia, the rudiment of your Prelacie, did from its first beginnings, secretly and covertly bend; Yet this is most evident, that so soon as the Church of God obtained the countenance, and was favoured by the more fond in many things (such as excessive Do••ations and Grants of privileges) then prudently pious benevolence of Secular Princes, this Prelatick order, which in its depression had been indeed ho∣noured, with many shining lights and Glorious Mar∣tyres, attaining then to its ascendent, did not only debauch the Lords Ministers, for the most part unto

idleness, avarice and luxurie; but continually climb up according to its proper Genius of Ambition, until the Devils design in its rise, and progress, was fully discovered, and consummate, in the revelation of the Son of perdition: 9. This being the rise, progress and product of Prelacie in the first Churches, as may be clearly gathered from the writtings of these times, how it was introduced in other Churches, thereafter gathered and brought in, may be found in their Hi∣stories: Only this is certain, that as in almost no Church it can be shewed, to have been coëvous with Christianity, and in all the western Churches where it obtained place, was ever a sprig of Romes Hierar∣chie, propagate by her ambition and deceit, and the like practices; So the Church of Scotland in special, was in the beginning, and for some centuries there∣after, instructed and guided by Monks, without Bishops until palladius from Rome, did set up Pre∣lacie among us, as many Authors witness; Nay, we may finde it on Record, that even in the 816. year a Synod in England did prohibite the Scots any function in their Church, because they gave no honour to Me∣tropolitans and other Bishops.

By these observations, having in some sort deli∣neate the mysterious and crooked windings, of this excrescing Power, in its first motions, and setting forth: and very clearly and naturally traced its pro∣gressions, and thence deduced that most prodigious production of the Antichristian Papacie, as any con∣siderate man may thereby easily perceive, not only how it might, but how de facto it hath crept into the whole Church, without an Apostolicall introduction, notwithstanding of all your contrarie insinuations, so I am confident, that what ever other advantages, these primitive times had above our latter dayes; yet

our discovery, made after so full a revelation, com∣pared to the obscure appearances of this wickedness, in the first ages of the Church, cannot be thereby rationally disproved: and your scurrile disparaging of the latter times of reformation, as the fagg end o•• sex∣teen hundred years, doth with little less success, plead for the Pope and Antichrist, then for your An••i∣christian Prelacie.

As for the rest of your discourse, wherein you tell your N. C. that though the ancient Bishops were better men, then either Bishops or Presbyters alive; Yet, in Presbyteries, Specially in the matter of Ordination, they were sine quibus non, and what ever be the present abuse of the Episcopall power; Yet it is a rational and most necessary thing, that the more approven and gifted, be pe∣culiarly incharged with the inspection of the Clergie, an order of men ne••ding much to be regulate; and seing all humane things, and Presbytery also, are liable to be abus∣ed, the common maxime remains to be applied, remove the abuse of Bishops, but retain their use. In answere hereto, I need not inlarge, he who knows Church History best, will easily grant, that as for the first Centurie and an half, we have no vestige upon re∣cord, of your Prelatick power; So when 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 had place, their concurrence in Presbyteries, was only for order, as being the Mod••rators, a conside∣ration of the same exigence and effect, whether they be fixed, or unfixed, and not from any peculiar power, proper to them as a superior order; A thing so certainly disowned by the primitive Church, that, even after the Bishops thought themselves well stated in their Prelacie, and were beginning to contend among themselves, for the Papacie, Hierom doth plainly deny them any such prerogative above Pres∣byters, and was not therefore contradicted by any:

How much more then doth this condemn that sole power, both of Ordination and Jurisdiction, where∣unto your Bishops do pretend. As for your alledged reason, and necessity of promoting the better gifted over the unruly Cl••rgie, whatever application it may have to that naughty Company of your insufficient and profane Curats, or Conformity to the Court; yea, the worlds prejudice against our Lord Jesus, his Ministers, and all his followers; Yet these two things are most evident. 1. That as that lowely and ministe∣rial Government, appointed by Christ in his own house, admitting no superiority or inequality of power among Ministers, is not subjected to, and alterable at the arbitriment of humane reason; so, the advantage of Gifts, whereupon you would found it, doth so little favour your conclusion, that the di∣rect contrarie is recommended by our Lord, as its best evidence and fruit, he that will be chief among you let him be your Servant; and that not only as to the grace of humility, but in plain opposition to that supe∣rior Authority exercised in Secular Rule, whereof the imitation in this place, is expresty prohibite to Go∣spel Ministers: but the ground of your mistake is, that Notwithstanding our Lord hath said of himself and his Ministers, that one is your Master; and all you are Brethren and fellow-servants, among whom an inequality of gifts, may well consist with an equality of condition; Yet restess and most sub∣tile Ambition, for grati••ying its evil lust, will, even in a plain opposition commanded, alleage the affecta∣tion, and not the thing it self to be discharged; and in the low liest state of Service, devise superior and inferior degrees. The second thing is, that though I be ••arre from denying humane infirmities incident to Ministers, as well as others, and do heartily wish, that the of ••nces by them occasioned, may be alwayes,

as the most hurtful to the Gospel, most seriously pre∣cautioned and regreted; Yet I am sure, that, without regard to our Lords most gracious gifting, and most wise ordering of his Ministery for the feeding and ruling of his people, to affirme that neverthelesse there is no order of men needs so much to be regulated, is a presumptuous and vain imputation, against Je∣sus Christ, the Head and King of the Church, and his Oeconomie: Hath our Lord taken so great paines to Separate, Instruct, Sanctify, and send forth Mi∣nisters, and promised them so special a presence and assistance, for the oversight and conduct of Believers, and darre any Christian say, that even the order it self (for alas I grant the men are but earthen vessels) needs more then any other, the contrivance of mans invention for its regulation? But let none that ho∣noureth Jesus Christ, or remembreth the former Beautie, Order and Successe of his Ministrie and Courts amongst us, be offended; this reflection pro∣ceeds from the same Spirit, that accused our great Master, as a Rebell and Usurper, and his Apostles as the Troublers and Subverters of the World. As to your conclusion, when you have disproved the Di∣vine warrant of Presbytrie, and shewed both its oc∣casion, rise, tendencie, and proper fruits to be only evil, as I have done in the matter of Prelacie, then you may equiparat them in the point of abuse: but seing the abuse of Presbytrie is only accidental, from humane infirmity, and that of Prelacie, its most native Genius and Product; Na••, seing Presbytrie is indeed the right use of the Churches Government, and Prelacie its manifest depravation, the maxime which you adduce, in its just application, doth most clearly say, remove the abuse of Prelacie, and let the use of Presbyterie be re••ained.