Theodulia, or, A just defence of hearing the sermons and other teaching of the present ministers of England against a book unjustly entituled (in Greek) A Christian testimony against them that serve the image of the beast, (in English) A Christian and sober testimony against sinful complyance, wherein the unlawfulness of hearing the present ministers of England is pretended to be clearly demonstrated by an author termed by himself Christophilus Antichristomachus / by John Tombes.

CHAP. 10. Fifty Arguments for hearing the present Ministers. (Book 10)

Sect. 1. Christs direction Matth. 23.2, 3. warrants hearing the present Ministers.

HAving hitherto been upon the Confirmation of the truth asserted by us, viz. That 'tis not lawfull for Saints to hear the present Ministers of England, we come now to consider, what is in this matter objected by our d••ssenting Brethren. This is that they say,

Object. 1. Christ commands (or at least permits) his Disciples to hear the Scribes and Pharisees (who were men as corrupt in their doctrine, as vicious in their lives, as the present Ministers of England can be supposed to be) Matth. 23.1, 2. Therefore it is lawfull to hear these.

Answ. This being the main Objection used by our dissenting Bre∣thren in this day (as it was by others in times past) their very Achilles in this controversie, we shall speak the more largely to it. To which I reply, that this is justly urged to prove it lawfull to hear the present Ministers of England preaching▪ the doctrine of Christ, because Christ allowed his Disciples and the multitudes hearing the Scribes and Pharisees teaching the law of Moses, not∣withstanding they were erroneous, vicious, intruders in that busi∣ness, as much or more than are the present Ministers of England in∣to the office, or work of preaching the Gospel. That the force of this reason may be perceived, it is to be noted, that it was the office of the Priest, who were to be of the Tribe of Levi, to instruct the people in the law of Moses, as we find the Prophet Malachi speak∣ing, Mal. 2.7 The Priests lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth, for he was the Messenger of the Lord of Hosts, yet there they are complained of to have departed out of the way, to have caused many to stumble at the law, to have been partial in the law, v. 18, 9. Which occasioned, especi∣ally after the return from the Captivity of Babylon, the rising of

sundry Sects among the Jews, as Sadduces, and Pharisees known by their peculiar tenents and usages, who were not all, nor necessa∣rily of the Tribe of Levi, as it is certain concerning St. Paul, that he was a Pharisee, and the son of a Pharisee Acts 23.6. yet of the Tribe of Benjamin, Philip. 3.5. which therefore had no special function of teaching committed to them by God, having neither extraordinary nor ordinary calling of God, but had betaken them∣selves to that way, as the orders of Friers among the Papists, by their voluntary choice, yet, as the Friers among the Papists, so the Pharisees among the Jews bare the greatest sway with the common people, as having greatest influence upon their Conscien∣ces in matters of Religion, and in process of time greatest power in the government of the State▪ though they were not the ordinary Magistrates. Now to these Pharisees were adjoyned Scribes, who were Writers, Teachers, Expositors, Disputers, Rabbins, Masters, Lawyers, or Doctors of the Law, among whom our Saviour is said to sit at 12 years old in the Temple hearing them, and asking them questions, Luke 2.46. By which it is apparent, that they which were then the Doctors of the law used to sit in the Temple to re∣solve cases about the law; for which reason they were said to sit in the seat of Moses, Matth. 23.2. Concerning whom, though our Lord Christ had charged them with corrupting the law by their traditions Matth. 15.3. Mark. 7.8 and had warned his Disci∣ples to take heed of the leaven of their Doctrine, Matth. 16.6 11.12. yet Matth. 23.1, 2, 3. he spake to the multittude, and to his Disciples, saying, the Scribes and Pharises sit in Moses seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say and do not. Now our Lord Christs appointing them to observe what they bid, shews he allowed or permitted their hearing them; (for otherwise they could not observe what they bid them) yet not absolutely, for then he should have contradicted himself in warning them against their traditions, and the leaven of their Doctrine, but conditionally or respectively, that is what they bid them do according to the law of Moses, in whose seat they sate, that is took upon them to be ex∣pounders of the law of Moses. Whence it is inferred, that while the Ministers of England teach the doctrine of Christ, they may be heard notwithstanding defects in their calling, and their personal evils, as the hearing of the Scribes and Pharisees was allowed by Christ to his Disciples. And the Argument may be formed thus. That hearing of Ministers against which there is no more just ex∣ception than was against the hearing of the Scribes and Pharises sit∣ting

in the seat of Moses in Christs time by his Disciples, is lawful for Christian Saints now: But there is no more just exception against hearing the present Ministers of England, than was against hearing of the Scribes and Pharisees sitting in the seat of Moses in Christs time by his Disciples. Therefore the hearing the present Ministers of England is lawfull to Christian Saints now. The ma∣jor proceeds on this rule, that what in the same case our Lord Christ allowed to his Disciples then, is allowed by him to Christian Saints now, which, if it be not granted, Christs resolutions then are no satisfactions or directions to our Consciences now, which were to make those Scriptures useless, which were blasphemous. The minor is proved by shewing the exceptions against hearing the present Mi∣nisters are not greater nor more just then against the Scribes and Pharisees, and the hearing of them, nor the Christian Saints now any more forbidden to hear the present Ministers, than the Disci∣ples of Christ then to hear the Scribes and Pharisees. Again, we may thus argue, That which warranted Christs Disciples hearing the Scribes and Pharisees in his time notwithstanding other defects warrants the Saints hearing of the present Ministers of England; now notwithstanding other defects which is grounded on such rules of Logick as these De paribus idem est judicium, Of things alike we are to have the like judgement Idem quà idem semper facit idem, the same consequent follows on the same reason as it is the same. But the Scribes and Pharisees preaching or declaring the will of God warranted Christs Disciples hearing the Scribes and Pharisees in his time notwithstanding other defects. There∣fore the present Ministers preaching or declaring the will of God notwithstanding other defects warrants the Saints hearing now the present Ministers of England. The minor is grounded upon that, which is intimated to be the reason of Christs direction Matth. 23.2, 3. that they sate in Moses his chair, that is taught the observa∣tion of Gods Law, and that what they bid them observe according to it they were to hear and do, as on the contrary they were not, when they taught corrupt traditions of men, and other leavened Doctrine. To these things this Author thus answers.

Sect. 2. The Scribes and Pharisees sate in Moses his chair as Teachers, not as Magistrates.

Many things are supposed by the Objecters, and taken for grant∣ed (and must be so by all that judge any weight to be in what is from this supposed command of Christ argued (which they will

never be able to prove; and yet they are the very basis upon which the stress of the Objection lies. As 1. 'Tis supposed that the Scribes and Pharisees here spoken of, were in the Ministerial seat, Teachers and Expounders of the Law, which at first view seems to be a difficult task for any to demonstrate, That some of the Scribes and Pharisees (which were particular Sects among the Jews, as is known) were so, cannot be denied; that these here mentioned by our Saviour are such, is not so evident. They are expresly said to sit in Moses seat (not Aarons) who though he were of the Tribe of Levi, yet was not the Ministerial, but Ma∣gistratical seat committed to him. To the posterity of Aaron did the office of Priesthood appertain (as is known to all that have but in the least turned aside to consider of this affair) nor is it altogether frivolous, that is by some observed, that these Scribes and Pharisees are especially charged with the omission of judgement and mercy; things most nearly relating unto the Office of Magistra∣cy, to whom it doth especially appertain to look thereunto. Nor will it in the least follow, that supposing Christ enjoyned his disci∣ples to attend upon the Scribes and Phariseees, acting as Magi∣strates, and conform to what is justly and righteously prescribed by them as such: That therefore it is lawful to attend upon the present Ministers of England.

I reply, That it is indeed supposed, that the Scribes and Pha∣risees here spoken of, were in the seat of Moses, Teachers and Expounders of the Law: But not that they were Officers about the sacrifices and services belonging to the worship of God at the Templé, as were the Priests and Levites; nor need we so to sup∣pose: It is sufficient for rhe Argument, That they took upon them the expounding of the Law, and to resolve consciences, what they were to do, they did as Casuists or Doctors of Divinity in Schools or Sy∣nagogues, or in the Temple: Which is proved from that which is said, That they did bind heavy burdens, and lay them on mens shoulders, v. 4. which was by their precepts, their affecting to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi, Masters, Fathers, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Leaders, v. 8, 9, 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Doctors, or Teachers, transla∣ted Master in Israel, John 3. but were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Matth. 23.24. blind guides, Matth. 15.14. blind leaders of the blind. And that they were not Priests, appeared by their paying Tythes, Matth. 23 23. Luke 18.12. Nor were they ordinary Magistrates, ex∣cept such as were in their Synedria; the Romans were then the ordinary Magistrates. Nor could they be said to sit in Moses chair, either as Magistrates having the same power he had, or as Law-givers.

For the power and office of Moses, whether as Magi∣strate, Judge, or Prophet, was singular. He was a Prophet to whom there arose none like in Israel, Deut. 34.10. and he was a Judge or Prince under God supreme, who had jurisdiction and Empire supreme, in matters sacred and profane, although the function of doing holy rites was committed to Aaron and his sons, and the Le∣vites, as is proved by Selden, l. 2. de Syned. Ebrae. c. 2. from Exod. 4.16. Deut. 33.5. the address to him in difficult causes his sen∣tences, and other things acknowledged by Writers Jewish and Christian. It is not denied, that the Pharisees and Scribes were many of them Rulers of the Jews, as it is said of Nicodemus, John 3.1. and of the Priests and Levites John 1.19.24. But not as Scribes or Pharisees, who were, as such, onely particular Sects among the Jews, as this Authour truly acknowledgeth: nor as sitting in Moses chair, which onely noted their function of teaching and expounding of the Law, being bred up at the feet of Rabbins or Doctors of the Law, as St. Paul at the feet of Gama∣liel, and after sitting in the School, or auditory of the Temple or Synagogues, where Moses of old time had in every City them that preached him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath-day, Acts 15.21. wherein the Scribes and Pharisees affected and ob∣tained the chief seats, Matth. 23 6. and had much sway with the people, though they taught not with such authority as Christ did, Matth. 7.26. Mark 1.22. now wherein they taught according to Moses Law, or the truth, as about Elias coming Matth 17.10.11. they were to be heard in other things, as in their own tradi∣tions, and the commandments of men their doctrine was to be reje∣cted, Matth. 15.9. It is frivolous which is observed, That be∣cause judgement and mercy, the omission of which is charged on the Scribes and Pharisees, Matth. 23.23. and those nearly relate to the office of Magistracy, to whom it doth especially appertain to look thereunto: that therefore the Scribes and Pharisees, v. 2, 3. are considered as Magistrates. For, as is in the Assembly Annotati∣ons on the place, the judgement, mercy, and faith, are just dealing with all men, mercy in relieving the poor, and faithfulness in co∣venants, promises and contracts, judgement being there taken for right ordering the conversation towards God and men, as Matth. 12.18. which is manifest, in that it is joyned with mercy and faith, or as it is Luke 11.4. The love of God opposed to ravening, ex∣tortion, intemperance or excess, Matth. 23.25. rapine and wick∣edness Luke 11.39. such as was when they devoured widows bouses, making long prayers for a pretence, Matth. 23.14. compas∣sing

sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he was made, making him twofold more the child of hell then themselves, v. 15. No such argument therefore is or needs be made, as this Authour frames as made by his opponent, That supposing Christ to injoyn his disciples to attend upon the Scribes and Pharisees acting as Magistrates; therefore it is lawful to attend upon the present Mi∣nisters of England: For neither do we say that Christ injoyned attendance on them, nor that they acted as Magistrates; but our supposition is, That they acted as Teachers, and his disciples were permitted to hear them, though liable to greater and more ex∣ceptions then the present Ministers. It is added,

Sect. 3. The Pharisees were not Church-officers of Gods ap∣pointment.

But let this be granted. Suppose 2. The Scribes and Pharisees to be the preachers and expounders of the Law in that day, the seat mentioned to be a Ministerial seat: Yet this will not at all help them in the matter in controversie, except it be granted to them, that the Scribes and Pharisees were not a lawful, but a false Ministry that had surreptitiously climbed up into this Ministerial seat (for who sees not the invalidity and nothingness of this argument, 'Twas lawful to hear the Scribes and Pharisees which were the lawful Church-officers of that day, of the appointment of the Lord, acting by vertue of an authority derived from him; therefore 'tis lawful to hear persons that have not any such authority from Christ, but are meer intuders, and Ministers of Antichrist (as the pre∣sent Ministers of England have been proved to be) now this up∣on that supposition, that they were Ministers, we cannot yield, to these reasons. 1. The Pharisees are expresly said to be Priests and Levites, John 1.19. (and this is the record of John, when the Jews sent Priests and Levites from Jeru∣salem, to ask him, Who art thou? v. 24. And they that were sent were of the Pharisees) which were the ordinary lawful Mi∣nisters of that day. 2. These of all others were most apt to que∣stion the authority of such as taught the people: So when John ap∣pears preaching and baptizing, and professes to them, that he was not the Christ, nor Elias, nor Prophet (who was expected by the people of the Jews) they immediately question his authority, John 1.25. Why baptizest thou then? which they could not be supposed to have the face to do, if they themselves of all others had been the greatest intruders. Nay 3. When they question Christ

himself about his authority, he asks not them from whence they had theirs (which doubtless upon that occasion, he would have done, had they not been lawfully seated in the seat they did pos∣sess) but from whence John had his, who was esteemed as a pro∣phet. 4. We have the Lord Jesus many times crying out above all others against the Pharisees, condemning them of pride, hypo∣crisie, avarice, &c. but not the least tittle of the usurpation of Moses seat is by him charged upon them, or in the least intimated, which doubtless would have been, had they been guilty thereof.

I reply, that this grant, that the Scribes and Pharisees were preachers and expounders of the Law in that day, will help the ob∣jectours in the matter in controversie, though it be not granted to them, that the Scribes and Pharisees were not a lawfull, but a false Ministry, that had surrepticiously climbed up into this ministe∣rial seat. For they are assured, that this Author hath not proved, nor can prove the present Ministers of England to be meer intruders and Ministers of Antichrist, and therefore need not this supposition concerning the Scribes and Pharisees, to prove Christs allowing the hearing of the present Ministers. Only this is urged, that there is as much exception and more against the Pharisees teach∣ing, than against the present Ministers, and yet they might be heard, therefore with better reason may the present Ministers be heard. Nevertheless I deny, that the Scribes and Pharisees, which they were to hear, were the lawfull Church Officers of that day, of the appointment of the Lord, acting by vertue of an authority deri∣ved from him, it being certain that, as he saith, they were a par∣ticular Sect among the Jews, no where appointed by God to this office of Priesthood or teaching, but taken up by men, as orders of Friers among the Papists, though some of them were Priests, and some of them Rabbins, or teachers of the law, and educated there∣unto, as teachers of Divinity are in the Schools among us at this day; which, if the Ministers of England had no further ordinati∣on, being the condition of most, or very many of the present Mini∣sters in England might justifie the hearing of them as well as the hearing the Pharisees, who had no better calling to that function. As for the reasons of this Author, the first is not valid. For it proves only that some of the Priests and Levites were Pharisees, not all, St. Paul certainly was not, though a Pharisee; nor that those that sate in Moses chair were Priests, for all were not there be∣ing many thousands of Pharisees, who were not Rabbins. St. Paul was a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee, when he sate at Gamaliels feet, Acts 22.3. yet not a Doctor of the Law sitting in Moses his

chair. Nor, if they were Priests, doth it prove they were the law∣full Ministers of that day. For, to say nothing of Christs Apostles, who were at that day the lawfull Ministers with and under Christ himself, it is certain the Priests of those times got their places, as for instance the High Priest by undue and unlawfull wayes, by bri∣bing the Roman Deputy, as Josephus reports, and therefore if it were proved, they were Priests, yet they are not proved to be lawful Ministers. Yea that which is said of their Ordination, and Education by the most favourable Writers of the Jewes, proves they had some kind of entrance into their profession according to the customs of those times, which were of human invention, but nothing of Gods institution, that they should sit in the chair of Moses. As for the Second reason, there is no marvel they had the impudence to questi∣on Iohns authority, though themselves intruders, when they were puft up with conceits of their authority, though they had none, when they were so proud and impudent as to conceive themselves righteous and despise others, Luke 18.9. and to allege it in prayer to God, though their Consciences might tell them they were cove∣tous and unrighteous, yea to deride Christ, when he told them they could not serve God and Mammon, Luke 16.14. Nor is the Third reason of force, For Christ might question their authority though he did not when they questioned Johns, and he seems after John to have done it in calling them a generation of vipers, blind guides, with sundry other expressions disparaging of them and their tradi∣tions; And his charging them with affectation and ambitious seek∣ing of the chief Seats, and to be called Rabbi, Rabbi, what is it but an evidence, that they did unlawfully climb into Moses his seat, which they did so ambitiously gape after? As for the not in express words charging them with usurpation, it is no marvail it is not re∣lated, sith their instigation of Herod to take away John Baptists life related by Iosephus is not related, as imputed to them, by Christ in any of the Evangelists; Besides how irrational this argu∣ment is, we read not, that Christ charged them with usurpation of Moses seat, therefore he did it not, every puny in Schools knows, who hath learned that rule in Logick, argumentum non valet ab au∣thoritate negativè, an argument from testimony negatively is not of force, especially in matters of fact, it is not related, therefore it was not done; and most of all concerning Christs acts, of which it is noted, that many things are not written, John 21.25.

Sect. 4. Christ allows hearing the Pharisees while they taught the Law of Moses.

Yet again saith this Author, But let this also be granted, that we may hear this Argument, speak its uttermost, The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses seat; this seat is a ministerial seat, and they sit not here by virtue of any lawfull authority, but are meer intruders; what follows from hence? Why this, if it were lawfull to hear the Scribes and Pharisees, persons vicious in their lives, corrupt in their doctrine, having no lawfull call to the place they possessed: then it undeniably follows, that its lawfull to hear the present Ministers of England, though they have no lawfull authority or call to the office they assume. It must it seems, then 3dly, be granted, that when Christ sayes, what they say unto you, do, he is to be interpreted, to command, or at least, to permit an attendance upon their Ministry. But this is that we deny, and dare confidently aver, That it never entred into the heart of Christ to permit, much less to command any to attend upon the Ministry of the Scribes and Pharisees: nor is any such thing in the least intimated in the words under considera∣tion. For first, the words are in the original 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. which may more strictly be rendred, the Scribes and Pharisees have sate in Moses chair, all things there∣fore whatsoever they have said unto you, &c. (i. e. whatever in times past, you have heard delivered by these men, according to the mind of God, do you not now reject because of that hypocrisie, pride, covetousness, &c. you are made to see is predominant in them.

I reply, the Argument is framed not as here by this Authour, but as I before formed it. The command to do what they bid im∣plies a permission to hear, else how could they do as they bid? Though the words v. 2. may be rendered, have sate in Moses chair, yet the words, v. 3. according to the Greek language, and, I think, according to all interpreters must be rendered, whatsoever they shall say unto you, it being a precept concerning their future actions, and the word render'd [sit] being in the first Aorist is best rendered, as noting an indefinite time, and so is to be conceived as signifying a continued time past and present, they have and still do sit. But were it granted, that the bidding were meant of the time past, the argument were of force, they heard, therefore they may hear, Christ not disapproving their former hearing, but giving a reason, which infers a continued permission to hear them, because

they sate in Moses chair, that is, taught the law of Moses, so that he makes this the entire reason of their observing, and consequently of hearing, in that they bid them observe the law of Moses, which while they did, they were to hear them, and observe them, not when they taught for doctrines the precepts of men: which is indeed the genuine reason of his caveat there and elsewhere, especially in the Sermon on the Mount, Matth. 5. & 6. & 7. in which having said, Matth. 5.17. Think not that I am come to destroy the Law or the Prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill, he then adds, that one Jot shall not pass from the law till all were fulfilled, that he would not have the least Commandement broken by practise or Doctrine, yet with monition, that their righteousness must exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, if they would enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, and accordingly clears the law from their false glasses, warns his Disciples of their hypocritical practises, of their corrupt doctrine and traditions, directs persons to observe the rites of the law, while he was on earth, and to acquit himself from being an enemy to the law a little before his death, though he had late experience of their opposition, yet minds his Disciples that they should not neglect their teaching out of the law, though they were not to imitate their practise. Whence may be clearly discern∣ed, that Christ would have them heard teaching out of the law of God, notwithstanding other defects or corruptions, and that the re∣solution of this case is a plain rule to us, that we may lawfully hear such as teach truth, notwithstanding other defects and corruptions in their lives and Ministry: It is added,

Sect. 5. Hearing Pharisees teaching Moses law, not attendance on their Ministry, as Pastors is allowed by Christ.

Let the words be as they are rendered, whatever they bid you ob∣serve and do, that observe and do. Yet 2ly, who that hath but half an eye can chuse but see, that an attendance upon their Ministry is remote enough from being their intendment? We had alwayes thought, that they might have been sufficiently acquainted with, and been in a capacity of hearing and knowing what had been said by these men through their particular occasional meeting and discourse with them, though they had never spent one hour in attending upon their Ministry: which that our Saviour did not enjoyn, no nor so much as permit by that expression, we suppose may be clearly demon∣strated from the ensuing considerations.

1. There are not a generation of men of whom the Lord Iesus doth

speak more contemptuously (and charges with greater enormities) than he doth of that generation of Scribes and Pharisees. In this very Chapter he informs us of their hypocrisie, ver. 5.23.25.27, 28, 29. and pride, ver. 6, 7. and tells us plainly, that they shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men, neither entering in them∣selves, nor suffering those that are entering, to go in, ver. 13. that they make their Proselytes twofold more the Children of Hell than themselves, ver. 15. that they are blinde guides, ver. 16.19.24.26. perverters of the Scripture, such as make void the Commandements of God by their traditions, ver. 16, 17, 18. that they are serpents, a generation of vipers, that cannot escape the damnation of Hell, ver. 33. yea, such as shall kill, crucifie, scourge, persecute the Messengers of the Lord, ver. 34. And can it be imagined, that Christ should have no more tenderness to poor souls, than to direct them to an attendance upon such persons as these for teaching? —Credat Apelles! (Apella likely) Are these likely motives to perswade or enforce a••y thereunto? Yet this is what he immediately subjoyned, having said, whatever they bid you observe, that observe and do.

2. The Doctrines owned by them are known: The tessera of their sect, was, justification by the works of the law, which is diame∣trically opposite to the work Christ was then upon, and the doctrine Preached by him.

3. That they denied Christ to be the Messiah, blasphemed him in his doctrine (as the deceiver of the people) in his life (as a wine∣bibber and gluttonous person) in his miracles (as one that wrought them by the Devil, who are therefore condemned by Christ, as guilty of the very sin of blasphemy against the holy Ghost, Matth. 12.31.) is known, as being what is frequently remarked in the Scripture.

4. We no where find the disciples attending upon the Ministry of the Scribes and Pharisees, notwithstanding this supposed com∣mand or permission of Christ.

Nay, 5 We cannot but think the supposition hereof, not onely in∣consistent with, and opposite to that expression concerning Christ, Mar. 6.34. And Jesus when he saw much people, was moved with compassion towards them, because they were as sheep not having a shepherd (what? without a shepherd, and yet the Scribes and Pharisees, whose feeding they might lawfully attend upon; doth Christ pity them in this desperate state, and not give them one word of direction to wait upon these profound and wor∣thy Doctors?) but also contrary to that solemn command given

forth from the Lord, Acts 2.40. Save your selves from this un∣toward generation; and the practice of the disciples, who continu∣ed in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship, and breaking of bread, and prayer, Acts 2.42.

6. Were that the intendment of Christ, as is suggested (and the argument of our brethren valid) a lawfulness to hear the veriest blasphemer in the world that denies that Christ is the Mes∣siah, affirms that he was a deluder of the people, a gluttonous per∣son, a winebibber, one that did miracles by Belzebub the prince of Devils, that persecutes even to death Christ in his people, might by a like parity of reason be deduced. Christ commanded, or at least permitted his disciples to hear the Pharisees who were such (as hath been proved) therefore 'tis lawful to hear persons with the same characters upon them. But God forbid any such in∣jurious dealing should be offered to Christ, or that any who pretend to fear God (and I hope do so in reality) should stand by a cause which hath no better arguments to defend it, than what may be as righteously every way made use of for the attending upon the Mini∣stry of the greatest blasphemer, or opposer of Christ in the world. Evi∣dent then it is, notwithstanding the great flourish that many make with this Scripture, for the abetting their attendance upon the pre∣sent Ministers of England, that it refuses to admit the least sanctu∣ary thereunto. The Scribes and Pharisees mentioned Matth. 23.1, 2. may for ought we know be Magistrates, not Ministers; if Ministers, they were, as hath been proved, lawfully so: Christ says concerning them, Whatever they bid you observe and do, that observe and do. Therefore 'tis lawful to attend upon the Ministers of England, whose lawful calling to their office cannot be proved; yea, though there is not the least intimation of a command from Christ, or so much as a permission to his disciples to hear the Scribes aad Pha∣risees,—Nugae & tricae siculae! If this be to dispute, a man need not fear but to be able to multiply arguments at an easie rate, for whatever he hath a mind to undertake the defence of: Yet this is supposed by many to be of greatest moment in this controversie.

I reply, If by attendance on the Ministry of the Scribes and Pha∣risees be meant a constant and ordinary hearing of them as their ordinary shepherds (as this Authous words seem to import) doubt∣less neither Christ did command, nor permit his disciples such an attendance, both for the reasons given by this Authour, and spe∣cially because he asserts himself as their onely Master or Doctour, Matth▪ 23.8.10. yet the mention of their sitting in Moses his chair or seat, notes more then their discourse upon particular occa∣sional

meeting, to wit, their ordinary expounding the Law of Mo∣ses in their Schools, where our Lord Christ permitted his disciples and the multitude to hear them with this limitation and proviso, in, and as they taught the Law; which hearing he did not for∣bid them, but allow them with such caveats as are there given in that Chapter. And against such hearing, none of the reasons of this Authour are of force. Not the first: for though such personal evils were sufficient motives to keep back people, either from fol∣lowing their example or private counsels, yet not to keep them back from hearing Gods Law expounded by them The same answer is for the second reason; The permission of Christ is not to hear the Pharisees teach all the Doctrines of their Sect, he had before warned them of receiving their traditions, Matth. 15.14. the leaven of their doctrine, Matth. 16.12. In which no doubt they understood the doctrine about justification by the works of the Law, to be comprehended: But the permission of hearing them is onely as they sate in Moses his seat; that is, as they taught them the duties of Moses his Law, which he said, Matt. 5.17. He came not to destroy, but to fulfil, which is manifest from the illative particle therefore, v. 2. because they sit in Moses seat, and bid you observe what Moses did, you are to observe what they bid you ob∣serve, and consequently may hear them so teaching. The third reason hath the same answer with this overplus, That to prevent any conceit of allowing the hearing of them in their blaphemy, he avoucheth himself to be their Master and Teacher, v. 8.10. To the fourth it is but from a testimony negatively, and so of no force: We read not that they used the Lords Prayer, yet none will say they did not, less that they might not; we read not of their alms, or fasting, yet they might do both. To the fifth, it was but a li∣mited permission of hearing them as they taught Moses Law, not as allowing constant attendance on them as their shepherds. Christ did conceive the people to be without a shepherd, notwithstanding the Pharisees teaching the duties of the Law, because though that doctrine were right, and to be observed, yet it was not sufficient to feed them to eternal life. Acts 2.40. St. Peter did well to exhort his auditors to save themselves from that untoward generation of opposers of Christ, as his Master before would have him and all his disciples do, not doing after their works, nor following their perverse doctrine, and the Church did rightly practice, in continu∣ing in the Apostles Doctrine and fellowship, and breaking of bread, and prayer; yet he neither did, nor was to disswade them from hearing or practising the Pharisees doctrine of the observing the duties of

Moses his Law, which they were obliged to observe. To the sixht, I grant it lawful to hear any man teach truth, which is Gods, and may be heard from the mouth of any man, with whom God al∣lows us converse and communion as they are men; though we are to hold no communion with them in wickedness, nor willingly hear their blasphemies. That the Pharisees as such, were not Ma∣gistrates, nor lawful Ministers, nor considered as such, is shewed before. Neither do we say that Christ permitted attendance on the Ministry of the Scribes and Pharisees as their Pastors, nor need we. It is sufficiene for our purpose, that Christ allowed the hear∣ing them teaching Moses Law, and that proves it lawful to hear the present Ministers while, and so far as they teach truth; which hearing, not constant attending on their Ministry, was to be proved lawful, as the question was stated by this Authour, ch. 1. and all along was his conclusion. And that he hath not proved it unlawful, nor evaded the Arguments from Mat. 23.1, 2. Notwithstanding his irrision of this dispute, I am of the mind the solid reader will say. I think it not amiss to add here the words of Mr. John Nor∣ton Minister of Ipswich in New England, in his answer to Apollo∣nius of Middleburg in Zealand, c. 16. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Scriba∣rum & Pharisaeorum in Mosis Cathedrâ sedentium fuit corruptio al qua in publico D••i cultu absque debitâ reformatione tolera••a: quia Cathedra Mosis, i e. officium docendi publicè in Ecclesiâ le∣gem Mosis, & libros Prophetarum, Sacerdotibus, & Leviti•• ex instituto Dei ordinariò propria erat: eos autem audire, non ab eis separare jubet Christus, Matth. 23.1, 2. Of the Scribes and Pharisees sitting in Moses seat, the embassage without commission, was some corruption in the publick worship of God tolerated with∣out due reformation: because the chair of Moses, that is, the office of teac••ing publickly in the Churches the Law of Moses, and books of the Prophets, was ordinarily proper to the Priests and Levites, by the appointment of God: yet Christ commands to hear them, not to separate from them, Matth. 23.1, 2. It follows,

Sect. 6. Christs and his Apostles going to the Jewish meetings, is opposite to the Separatists opinion and practice.

Object. 2. If it be said, But we find Christ and his Apostles after him, going frequently into the synagogues, where the Scribes and Pharisees Preached. Ans. We answer first, That all that Christ and the Apostles did, is not lawful for Saints to practice, will not be de∣nied: many instances are near at hand for its confirmation, should

it so be. 2▪ That 'tis one thing to go into the synagogues, and another thing to go thither to attend upon the Ministry of such as taught there: This is the present case, which that Christ or the Apostles ever did, cannot be proved. 3. They went thither to op∣pose them in, and confute their innovations and traditions in the worship of God, to take an opportunity to teach and instruct the people in his way and will: which when any have a spirit to do, and are satisfied that they are thereunto called by the Lord, in re∣spect of the present Ministers and worship of England, we shall be so far from condemning them therein, that we shall bless God for them. But this is not to the purpose in hand: the attendance of our brethren upon the Ministers of England, is quite another thing, that requires other arguments for its support, than we have hither∣to met with. —Parvas habet spes Troia si tales habet.

I reply, It is clear from Luke 2.46. that our Lord went to the Temple at Jerusalem, sate in the midst of the Doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. Luke 4.16. That he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath-day, and stood up to read, that he cured persons there, Preached in the synagogues, that Peter and John went up together into the Temple at the hour of prayer the ninth, Acts 3.1. That Paul and Barnabas went into the synagogue on the sabbath-day, and sate down, and did not speak to the people till after the reading of the Law and the Pro∣phets, the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, Acts 13.14, 15. That on the sabbath St. Paul went out of Philippi by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made, and sate down; and that this was his manner, Acts 16, 13. and 17.2. Now neither were these synagogues by any appointment of God that we find, nor their meeting, nor their rulers, nor the order of their reading of the Law and the Prophets, nor their Teachers, nor their worship at the Temple without many corruptions; and yet our Lord and his Apostles were present at them, and joyned with them in hearing them read, and such other services of Religion as were done to God. Which is a good reason, wherefore it should not be counted necessary to separate from the present Assemblies in England, and the publick Ministers, notwithstanding such corruptions in their worship, such defect in their calling, such pullutions in the places of meeting, as are by this Authour and other Separatists urged as a sufficient reason of their separation. The answers hereto are in∣sufficient. For 1. Though all that Christ and his Apostles did ei∣ther out of peculiar power or Commission, or instinct be not law∣full

for us to do, as to••whip buyers and sellers out of the Temple, to sentence persons to death as Peter did Ananias and his wife: yet what they did as men, or part of the Jewish people in the worship and Church of the Jewes, is a warrant to us in the like case to do in the assemblies of the Christians, there being no cogent reason, why we may not in these things do as they did, and if these things may not be used for direction and setling our Consciences▪ they are in vain written by the Spirit. 2. Though Christ and his Apostles did not go into the Synagogues to attend on the Ministry of such as taught there, yet they did there hear the Law and Prophets read, and joyned in prayers, which this Authour will not allow his bre∣thren to do in the Church Assemblies of England. 3. That Christ or his Apostles went into the Synagogues to oppose them in, and con∣fute their innovations, and traditions in the worship of God, is more than I remember to have read: nor do I know that any that have or shall come into the assemblies of the Church of England to such an end, as Quakers and other Separatists heretofore have done, can be judged to do it out of any other spirit than a turbulent and evil spirit, without any true calling by the Lord, which might satisfie their Consciences: And though we should bless God, if li∣berty were granted more than is, and opportunities taken to teach the people, especially where there is want thereof, in the way and will of God, yet we should not rejoyce that mens particular opini∣ons, or such unnecessary truths, as being unseasonably delivered, would tend to division, and not to edification, should be vented, especially in such auditories, as are in the common sort of those assemblies, and most of all where there are able preachers, who constantly and rightly teach the Doctrine of the Gospel of Christ. It is added,

Sect. 7. Pauls rejoycing at the preaching Christ, of contention, warrants hearing the present Ministers.

Object. 3. Paul rejoyceth at the preaching of the Gospel, though 'twas preached out of envy, Phil. 1.15 16. To which briefly;

1. There may be cause of rejoycing in respect of the issue and event of things, by the wise providence of God, though the means used for their production be evil; and not to be abetted or complyed with: In what have Christians greater cause of rejoycing than in the death of Christ? yet had it been utterly unlawfull to have joyn'd in coun∣sel with, or any wayes abetted or encouraged those wicked persons that Crucified and slew him. Should the Pope send some Jesuits

into any remote parts of Africa to preach the Gospel to the poor Indi∣ans there, here were upon some accounts ground of rejoycing yet no ground for Saints to attend upon a Jesuitical Ministry.

But, 2ly, It appears not, that these Paul speaks of, were not true Gospel Ministers, and so it reacheth not the case in hand: This being that, we have proved the Ministers of England guilty of, viz. and acting in the holy things of God without any commission from Christ, which when our dissenting brethren prove they have, we shall easily acknowledge the lawfullness of attending upon their Ministry.

3ly. It follows not in the least, that these the Apostle speaks of, were either not real Saints, or not true Ministers of Christ, because they are said to preach him out of envy; the object whereof was not Christ; (for had they envyed him, they would never have preached him) but Paul, (thinking, sayes he, to add afflictions to my bonds) which is consistent with grace, and a lawfull mission to the preach∣ing of the Gospel.

Yet, 4ly, Here is not in this Scripture the least word requiring Christians to hear them. That because Paul rejoyces at their preach∣ing, therefore 'tis the duty of Saints to attend upon their Ministry, is such a non-sequitur as will never be made good.

I reply, nor needs it, the lawfulness to hear the present Ministers of England, not the duty of the Saints to attend upon their Mini∣sters being the thing in question, and therefore it is sufficient for my purpose if I prove hence the lawfulness of hearing them, though I should not prove it the Saints duty to attend on their Ministry. Which I conceive may be done by this argument. They, in whose preaching of Christ we may rejoyce, though they should not preach Christ sincerely, but in pretence out of envy, not good will, out of contention, thinking to add affliction to other Ministers bonds, may be heard by the Saints lawfully: But the Saints may rejoyce in the present Ministers of England their preaching of Christ, though they should not preach Christ sincerely, but in pretence, out of envy, not good will, out of contention, thinking to add affliction to other Ministers bonds. Therefore the Saints may hear the present Mini∣sters of England lawfully. The major is grounded on this, that the thing we may rejoyce in is good, for which we may thank God, and consequently hear: which is agreeable to that of the Prophets, Esai. 52.7. Nahum. 1.15. applyed by the Apostle Rom. 10.15. to the preaching of the Gospel, who, he supposeth, are to be wel∣comed and heard. The minor is proved from the Apostles example, Phil. 1.15, 16, 17.18. That preaching of Christ that is no other

then St. Paul rejoyced in, and professed he would rejoyce in, the Saints now may rejoyce in, though it be not sincerely, but in pre∣tence, out of envy, not good will, out of contention, to add affliction to other Ministers bonds; But such is the preaching Christ by the present Ministers, ergo, the Saints may rejoyce in it. The major is not to be denyed, unless it be shewed that the Apostle did evil in so re∣joycing. The minor is manifest, in that no other exception is ta∣ken against their preaching, then such as with as great reason might have nullified the joy of St. Paul in that, which moved him to re∣joyce. In a word, though personal defects and miscarriages were in the preaching of Christ, yet the thing it self being good and occa∣sioning the magnifying of Christ, it is, and should be, matter of joy to all that love Christ. To this Argument I find the Author of the Pamphlet intituled prelatical preachers none of Christs teachers, p. 45. answering thus, that preaching of Christ is not to be rejoyced in without limitation, because of these texts, Mark 1.24, 25. Luke 4.34, 35.41. Acts 16.18. Acts 15.1. Gal. 5.2, 4.12. Phil. 3.2, 3. Acts 20.29. Psal. 50.16.18. But he sets not down the limitation he would gather thence; only it may se••m by the texts, that we are not to rejoyce in the confession of Christ or his servants by the Devils, when the necessity of circumcision and keeping the law of Moses for justification is taught, when hypocrites take Gods law into their mouths by professing or declaring of it, but hate to be refor∣med. Which we grant, but say all these texts, and the limitation thence deducible, are impertinent to the present argument, for as much as these do not preach Christ. Nor, saith that Author, in propriety and strictness of speech can Christ be said to be preached by a prelatical Ministry: they justifie them that deny Christ to be the sole law-giver of his Church, and so make him an Idol. Which to be false is shewed in the answer to the 5th. chapter of this trea∣tise. Yet saith that Author, p. 46. In case such a Minister as this that preacheth by the Bishops licence should in his Doctrine or Ser∣mon affirm Jesus Christ to be the sole law-giver unto his Churches, yet in, and by his very act of preaching he should deny it: should the Apostle rejoyce in that preaching of Christ which is a denying him? An horrible speech of monstrous absurdity and impudent malice. I should not say so much of such preaching, though it were by the Popes licence, or the Devils instigation: For though I should not rejoyce in the motive or impulsive cause by which it is done, yet I would not so censure the thing it self as a denying of Christ. But how the receiving of a license from a Protestant Bishop to preach the Gospel within his Diocess, and preaching there by vertue of it

according to the order established by the law of the land should be a denying of Christs legislative power, is to me incomprehensible, and to use that Authors phrasifying, the first born of absurdities. I should rejoyce, and bless God to obtain such power upon justifiable conditions.

But to our Author; His First answer is not to the purpose; For rejoycing in the Ministers preaching of Christ, or those that preach∣ed out of envy, is not a rejoycing in the good event by evil means, but in a good event by good means, the preaching Christ is a good thing, in which the Apostle, and we rejoyce, and the effect is good, although the motive and end of the preachers be evil. The put∣ting of Christ to death was in it self evil, and not to be rejoyced in, though the effect of it be good, and to be rejoyced in, no way was the acting of Pilate, or Herod, or the Jewes, to be abetted, but to be abhorred, though the Counsel of God was to be justified and ex∣tolled, as was done, Acts 4.24. &c. Should the Pope send Je∣suites to preach the Gospel, and they should continue to preach it, and no doctrine antievangelical, I know no reason, why the Saints might not attend on their Ministry.

To the 2d. 3d. and 4th. Answers I reply, That the preaching of Christ in opposition to Paul makes it probable, that they were not real Saints, nor true Ministers in his sence, such motives being contrary to that brotherly love, which is in every real Saint, 1 John 3.14. and that order of the Church by which is a lawfull mission, which me thinks he should not conceive to have been in them that acted in a way of contention against St. Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles. And for the Ministers of England, I like better the words of Mr. Iohn Robinson in his Justification of the Separation, p. 307. then these Authors words: In the general, I confess, there is a pro∣portion, and so in that general and large sence, wherein Mr. Ber∣nard pag. 313. expounds the word sent, or Apostle, I do acknow∣ledge many Ministers in England sent of God: that is, that it comes not to pass without the special providence, and Ordination of God, that such and such men should rise up, and preach such and such truths for the furtherance of the Salvation of Gods elect, in the pla∣ces where they come. They which preached Christ of envy and strife to add more afflictions to the Apostles bonds, were in this respect sent of God, and therefore it was, that the Apostle joyed at their preaching. How much more they that preach of a sincere mind, though through ignorance, or infirmity, both their place and enterance into it be most unwarrantable? And sure, if they may in this sense be said to be sent of God, it follows Saints may hear them, which was to be proved. It is added,

Sect. 8. The truth Ministers teach, warrants the hearing of them.

Object. 4. The Ministers of England preach truth, and is it not lawfull to hear truth preached? We answer, 1. That 'tis lawfull to hear truth preached is readily granted; but this must be done law∣fully, and in the way of Christs appointment. 2. All that preach truth are not to be heard, nor will our discenting brethren say they are. For, 1. There was never yet any Heretical preacher in the world, but he preached some truth; is it lawfull to hear such? This will not be said. 2. The Devil himself preached truth, yet Christ forbids him, and commands that he hold his peace. 3. The Popish Priests preach truth, yet who will say 'tis lawfull to attend upon their Ministry? But, 3. As the present Ministers of England preach truth, so, 1. They preach it but by halves, and dare not for fear of the L. Bishops inhibition, preach any doctrine, though never so clearly revealed in the Scriptures, and owned by them as the truth of Christ, he commands them not to meddle with. 2. The main truths they preach (at least many of them) are contradicted in their practice, They'l tell you that the Lord Jesus is the great Prophet, and King of his Church; but how palpably this is contradicted by them in their practice, conforming to institutions and laws that are not of his prescription who sees not? This we have abundantly de∣monstrated. 3. With the truth they preach, they mingle errours di∣rectly contrary to the Scripture, and the revelation of his will there∣in. Instances of this kind have been already exhibited, to which may be added many more: we shall mention but a few, 1. That the Ministry, Worship, and Government, which Christ hath appointed to his Church, is not to be received or joyned unto, unless the Ma∣gistrates (where they are reputed Christian) do allow it. 2. That the Apocryphal books which have in them errors, (2 Mac. 12.44, 45. & 14.41, 42. Eccles. 46.20. Wisd. 19.11.) untruths (2 Esd. 14.21, 22, 23. 2 Mac. 2.4.8. Tob. 5.11, 12, 13. with 12.15. Judith. 8.33. & 10.9. with v. 12. & 11.6.12, 13, 14, 15. 1 Mac. 9.3.18. with 2 Mac. 1.13. to 17. and 9.1.5.7.9.28.29.) blasphemy (Tobit. 12.12.15. with Rom. 8.34. 1 Tim. 2.5. Rev. 8.3.4.) magick (Tob. 6.6, 7, 8. & 9.2.3. with 3.7, 8. & 11.10, 11, 13. with 2.9, 10.) and contradicti∣on to the Canonical Scriptures, (Judith 9.2, 3, 4. compared with Gen. 49.5, 6, 7. Esther in the Apocrypha chap. 12.5. & 15.9, 10. with Ester Canonical, chap. 6.3. & 5.2. Eccles. 46.20. with

Isa. 57. 2. may be used in the publick worship of God. 3. That the most wicked and their seed, may be compelled, and received to be members of the Church. 4. That Marriage may be forbidden at certain seasons, as in Lent, Advent, Rogation-week, &c. 5. That Baptism is to be administred with a cross in the forehead, and that as a symbolical sign. 6. That though the most notorious, obstinate offenders be partakers of the Lords Supper, yet the people that joyn with them, are not defiled thereby. 7. That there may be Holy days appointed to the Virgin Mary, John Baptist, to the Apostles, all Saints and Angels; together also with Fasts on their Eves, on Ember-days, Fridays, Saturdays (so called heathenishly enough) and Lent. 8. That the Cope, Surplice, Tippit, Rocket, &c. are meet and decent ornaments for the worship of God, and Ministry of the Gospel. 6. That the Book of Common-prayer is the true worship of God. 10. That Christ descended into hell (as if Christ descend∣ed into the place of the damned) as the Papists hold. 11. That Lord Bishops can give the holy Ghost, and power to forgive and re∣tain sins. 12. That Altars, Candles, Organs, &c. are necessary and useful in the Church of God. 13. That all children when baptized, are regenerate, and received by the Lord for his own children by adoption, Common-prayer-book of publick Baptism. Yea, 14. That children being baptized, have all things necessary for their salvation, and shall undoubtedly be saved. So they profess in the Order of Conformation in the Common-prayer-book; with much more that might be offered in this matter.

I reply, 1. The grant, That it is lawfull to hear truth preached, is sufficient to prove it lawful to hear the present Ministers preach truth (which he denies not they do) unless he could prove it were contrary to the way of Christ's appointment to hear the truth from them. 2. All that preach some truth, are not to be heard; yet all that preach the great truths of the Gospel, notwithstanding some er∣rours non-fundamental may be heard, especially if the errours be seldom or never pressed on the hearers, but left to them to examine, and to be approved or disproved. Heretical Preachers are not to be heard, because they preach not the great truths of the Gospel but errours, which overthrow the foundation, so do the Popish Priests; yet it were no sin to hear either of these speak truth. The Devils we are to have no communion with, God having put an ut∣ter enmity between the serpent and the seed of the woman. 3. If the present Ministers of England preach truth but by halves, it is lawful to hear them preach those halfs. The Bishops allow them to preach all truths needful to salvation, all that is contained in the

Creed, Lords Prayer, and Ten Commandments, in the 39 Arti∣cles, the two Tomes of Homilies; nor are men inhibited in Schools, or Convocations, or at some times in books published in Latine, to discover any truths of God, so it be done without di∣sturbance, or other evil consequence. That some truths needful to be known, are not permitted to be published to the vulgar audito∣ries, may have the same reason as Christ had for not acquainting his disciples with many things he had to say to them, because they could not then bear them, John 16.12. Some things may seem very clearly revealed in the Scriptures to some, and be owned by them, which are pernicious, as that the Saints have all right to go∣vernment, that they are to smite the civil powers as part of the fourth Monarchy, that justified persons are not under the command of the moral Law; some disputable, as about the thousand years reign, That God cannot forgive sins without satisfaction to his justice, Church-constitution, Covenant, Government, and many more, which it is agreeable to the Apostles rule, Rom. 14.1. their practice, Acts 15.28. not to vent in all sorts of auditories; and if the Bishops do restrain Preachers, especially those that are young, raw, injudicious, but violent, and apt to cause division, they do, agreeably to the Apostles rule, to the example of all Churches, where Government is not popular (which breeds confusion) yea I think the Separatists have found by experience some restraint ne∣cessary, and that the universal liberty of Conscience, or of prophe∣sying, as it is termed, is intolerable; and if Bishops, who are men, and may be more rigid then they should, hold the reins in too hard, yet there is no reason why the people should refuse to hear that truth which is necessary and sufficient to salvation, because they cannot hear every truth, which perhaps out of faction, or a childish in∣constancy, or having itching ears, they desire to know.

As for what is said about the Ministers contradicting their preaching by their practice, it is answered before in the Answer to the 5th Chapter. And yet were it granted, their personal evils are not sufficient to make the hearing of the truth unlawful to the hear∣ers. As for the errours they are said to mingle with the truths they teach, they are not such as overthrow the foundation, if they were errours, and taught by them; and therefore this is no sufficient reason why they may not be heard preaching necessary truths. Yet to shew the futility of this allegation, I shall consider each of the supposed errours. The first I doubt not they will deny, and re∣quire this Authour to prove it. For the second, it is not, for ought I know, preached by any of the Ministers, That the Apocryphal

books which have in them errours, may be used in the publick wor∣ship of God, nor do I think if they should so do, could it well consist with their subscription to the sixth Article of the Confessi∣on of the Church of England, which excludes them out of the Ca∣non of holy Scriptures, which contain all things necessary to salva∣tion, and saith, The Church (as Hierome saith) doth read them for example of life, and instructions of manners: but yet doth it not apply them to stablish any doctrine. And what Dr. Rainold, the Bishop of Durham that now is, with many of the English Pro∣testant, and conforming Divines have written about the Apocry∣phal Books, is sufficient to clear the present Ministers from suspi∣cion of complying with the Papists, who according to the Decree of the Trent Council ses. quarta, put most of them (though they leave out some of them) into the Catalogue of sacred Books, con∣taining that truth and discipline of the Gospel which is saving, and to be preached to every creature, and receive and venerate them with equal affection of piety and reverence, as other books of holy scripture. And although the passages alleaged by this Authour are liable to exception, nor do I think it fit for me to justifie or ex∣cuse them; yet this I say, to shew there is not a sufficient reason to withdraw from hearing the present Ministers preaching or pray∣ing. 1. Some of the books are not appointed to be read at all. 2. Some of those that are appointed to be read, are capable of an easier censure, and better construction, then is put upon them by this Authour. 3. That those which are not so capable of excuse, yet are appointed to be read on such days, and in such places, as those that alleadge this for a reason of not hearing the present Mi∣nisters, need not be present. 4. That it was once resolved as lawful by Dr. George Abbot, after Archbishop of Canterbury, in his answer to Dr. Hill the Papist, p. 317. from the Preface to the second Tome of the Homilies, for the Minister, instead of the Apocryphal books, to read some other part of the Canonical Scri∣pture of the old Testament. Which things being considered, there seems not for this to be a sufficient reason of not hearing the present Ministers, or char∣ging them,* 1.1 as this Authour doth. The third errour I con∣ceive they will de∣ny to be their te∣nent. But concer∣ning this, and the 4th. 5th. 6••••▪ 8th. 9th. 11th. errours, so much

hath been said before chiefly in the answer to the 5th. 6th. 7th. chapters of this book, that I need not here make a particular answer concerning each of these severally; yet I say,* 1.2 the things are not matters of the Ministers Doctrine, however they be of their pra∣ctice, and therefore cannot be a reason of not hearing their Sermons. And they who make this a sufficient reason not to hear, or to pray, or receive the Lords Supper with a person by reason of some errour he holds or teacheth, or some undue practice on Gods worship, or conversation with other men, go against all rules and examples in holy Scripture, and approved Christians; and such a one must suppose Preachers infallible, every Communicant unblameable, or each Christian to have power to excommunicate, if the person faulty be not amended upon his reproof, that he must know what Tenents his Teacher holds, and what is the conversation of each Communicant, ere he can war∣rantably hear the one, or communicate with the other. Which with sundry other superstitious conceits, or unnecessary scruples, put an intolerable burden upon mens consciences, and will as well prove withdrawing from the Ministers and Churches Congrega∣tional necessary, as from the Conformists. As for the 7th. er∣rour, it will be denied by them to be their Tenent, that there may be Holy days appointed to the Virgin Mary, John Baptist, &c. For though they be termed for distinction sake, St. Peters day, &c. yet saith Archbishop Whitgift in his answer to the second Admoni∣tion, the 3d. reason, The Papists Saints days were appointed for the honouring and worshipping of the Saints by whose names they were called: ours be ordained for the honouring of God, for pub∣lick prayer, and edifying the people by reading the Scriptures and Preaching: neither are they called by the name of any Saint in any other respect, than that the Scriptures which that day are read in the Church, be concerning that Saint, and contain either his calling, preaching, persecution, martyrdom, or such like. The like is al∣leadged by Rainold, conference with Hart, ch. 8. divis. 2. Hooker Eccles. Policy, l. 5. Sect. 71. yea T. C. the defender of the Ad∣monition confesseth that the Church of England meaneth not that in these holy days the Saints should be honoured, and Rivet on Exod. 20. praecept. quartum, acquits the Church of England from Idolatry, by reason of our form of service, and our doctrine of wor∣shipping God onely. Of which more also may be seen in Zanchius,

tom. 4. in praece. quartum loc. 1. q. 2. &c. As for the 10th. errour, That Christ descended into hell, is in the Creed called the Apostles, and is the 3d. Article of the Confession of the Church of England, and is deduced by Augustin, Epist. ad Evodium 99. from Acts 2.26, 27. and how to understand it of other descent then the place of the damn∣ed,* 1.3 or Limbus Patram, which is the Papists tenent, may be seen in Archhi∣shop Vshers answer to the Jesuites chal∣lenge, ch. 5. Dr. Pearson his Exposition of the Creed on that Arti∣cle, and others. The 12th. I think neither the present Ministers, nor any of the Bishops will assert. The two last let them that hold them answer for themselves; I say onely that they are such as hear∣ers are not necessitated to assent to, nor such as can justifie separa∣tion. But it follows,

Sect. 9. Evil persons may be heard as true Ministers.

Object. 5. Judas preached, though a wicked man; and no doubt 'twas lawful, yea the duty of Saints to hear him. To this we say, no doubt it was so. But 1. Judas was not a visible wicked man at the time of his preaching, but so close an hypocrite, that he was not known to be so, no not to the disciples: but some of the present Ministers of England are visibly wicked and profane. 2. Ju∣das was chosen, and called by Christ to be an Apostle, commission∣ed by him to preach: but the present Ministers of England are not so, as hath been proved. So that this is not at all to the business in hand.

I reply, It is confessed that the present Ministers are not cho∣sen and called by Christ to Preach as Iudas was; and it may be also proved concerning the Ministers of the Congregational Churches, whose calling may be questionable as well as theirs, being often by a small company of ignorant persons, many of them women, who challenge power of election without Ordination, or other help, or giving the right hand of fellowship by Elders of other Churches, nor are they all free from visible wickedness and prophaness. And this may be somewhat to the business, by allay∣ing the vehemency of this Authours spirit against others. But the chief use of this objection is to answer one exception of this Au∣thour, ch. 2. That the present Ministers are not to be heard as gift∣ed brethren, because they walk disorderly: For Iudas did walk disorderly, and yet might be heard. 'Tis true, Iudas was not so

apparently a thief as others that are openly vitious; yet Christ knew him to be a thief and a traitour, when he appointed him to preach, and forbade none to hear him preach the Gospel, and therefore allowed hearing of evil men preach truth, which is denyed by the Author of Prelatical preachers none of Christs teachers, p. 43, 44. and is frequently the reason of many peoples not hearing them that preach truth. It is to be added that Christ had given some intimation of Judas his wickedness, John 6.70, 71. He goes on,

Sect. 10. It is a sin not to encourage good men in their Ministry.

Object. 6. But there are some good men amongst them, and such as belong to God, may we not hear good men? To which briefly. Answ. 1. That there are some among the present preachers of this day, that are good men, we shall not stand to deny. Yet, 2. We crave leave to say, That they are all of them such as are sadly pollu∣ted and defiled by their complyance, in respect of their standing in the Ministry Antichristian, whose teachings Saints have no warrant to attend upon. 3. The greater hopes we have of their goodness, the more cautelous should we be of encouraging them in a false way; that they by our relinquishment of them, and separating from them (after we have discharged all other duties we are satisfied are in∣cumbent upon us to perform towards them) may come to see their sin, repent, and do their first works, that God and we may again re∣ceive them. 4. Yet the goodness of any, as to the main, is no war∣rant for any to hold communion with them, or attend upon their teach••ngs: There are brethren that walk disorderly, whom 'tis the duty of Saints to separate from: that the very best of the Mini∣sters of England do so, will not be denyed. The incestuous person, 1 Cor. 5. was, as to the main, for ought I know, a good man: yet were not the Saints at Corinth to hold communion with him, till up∣on his repentance he was again received 2 Cor. 2▪ 6. 5. 'Tis utterly unlawfull to communicate with a devised Ministry upon what pre∣text soever. 6. So is it for any to partake in other mens sins (as hath been proved:) but every usurped Ministry is the sin of him (though never so holy a person) that exerciseth it.

I reply, this objection being an argument ad hominem against this Author, who hath represented all the present Ministers as walk∣ing disorderly, deniers of Christs offices, Antichristian, Idolaters, Scandalous, even the best of them: which what face he can say of them, and yet acknowledge them good men is not easily conceivable,

they seem to me inconsistent speeches. That their Ministry is An∣tichristian, when they minister the word of God is also in my un∣derstanding oppositum in apposito a contradiction; That they stand in that Ministry, which they had by Episcopal ordination, is so far from being their defilement, that it seems to me their vertue and wisdome, it being alwayes judged by me a great sin to renounce that ministry, sith it is no other then of the Doctrine and Sacraments, and the Discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded,* 1.4 and as this Church and Realm hath received the same, according to the Commandements of God; which, for any to disclaim, is to go back from the service of Christ, and if the present Ministers do stand in this Ministry, the Saints are warranted, and engaged to attend upon it. The greater hopes we have of their goodness, the more are all, that love the Lord Jesus, bound to encourage them in this way, as being the the true way of Christ, and to relinquish them, and separate from them, for this cause is very sinfull, sith it is to separate from them for doing their duty: To hold them as excommunicate, to reprove, to urge them to repentance, not to receive them, to conceive of them as brethren walking disorderly, is uncharitableness, and injustice. That the incestuous person was a good man before he repented can∣not be well conceived, sith he committed such a sin as was not na∣med among the Gentiles: it was the sin of the Corinthians that they were puffed up and had not rather mourned, that he that had done that deed might be taken away from among them, it is no sin, that the Saints do not mourn, that the present Ministers, who are con∣fessedly good men, may be taken away from among them, it is their great sin, if they do not bless God for them, and pray for their establishment and good success in their Ministry. That the Ministry is devised by any other than God is not shewed: they that talk and write ignorantly, not ever reading the book of Ordination, which shews what their Ministry is, make invectives against them, and wildly wander from them upon false suggestions often to their perdi∣tion. That to hear them is not to partake with them in sin, is shewed in answer to this Authors 8th. argument, chap. 8th. That their Ministry is usurped, is not proved; if it were, it might be a true Ministry, which if it be, though it were usurped, it is not the sin, but may be the duty of him that exerciseth it. It follows,

Sect. 11. The example of the learned godly Nonconformists is some inducement to hear the present Ministers.

Object. 7. But many learned and good men (and such as in Con∣science could not conform to the Ceremonies of the Church of Eng∣land) have in dayes past (and do now) hear the present Mini∣sters thereof. To which we answer, 1. That the greatest Scholars, and most accomplished for humane wisdom, parts, yea visible holi∣ness, have not been alwayes on the Lords side, following him in paths of his own appointment; but many times have been found the greatest persecutors and opposers of Christ; the most stupendiously ignorant of the will of God, in respect of the truth, and work of their generation, of any persons in the world: witness the Scribes and Pharisees, the learned Rabbies, and profound Doctors of that day, with what virulency did they oppose Christ and the doctrine of the Gospel preached by him? 2. That persons of as great holiness, and renown for learning, and all manner of accomplishments, as learned Ainsworth, Cotton, &c. have been and are of the same ap∣prehension with us in this matter: not to mention the reformed Churches, who generally renounce the Ministry of the Church of Eng∣land, not admitting any by vertue of it to the charge of Souls (as they speak.) But 3. To the Law and to the Testimony, Isa. 8.20. if they speak not according to this rule, though Angels for know∣ledge and holiness, they are not to be received or heeded: one word from the Lord is of more weight to hearts made truly tender, than the example of an hundred professors can be: 'tis possible these may err, be yea and nay; but so cannot the truth of God, which is alwayes the same, and will abide so for ever. 4. The Apostle hath long since determined this case, 1 Cor. 11.1. Be ye followers of me, as I am of Christ: so far as Saints follow Christ, I may and ought to follow them, but no further: so that the learning parts or holiness of any that attend upon the present Ministers of England, is no warrant for me so to do; nor will ever be a satisfactory an∣swer to that enquiry, who hath required these things at your hands?

I reply, It is not denied, that the most learned and zealous of the law, such as St. Paul among the Jews, the most excellent Moralists among the Gentiles, have been great enemies to the Gospel afore their calling to the faith of Christ, but the objection is of learned and good men among Christians, who are never found the greatest persecutors and opposers of Christ. Possibly it may fall out, yea

and it hath fallen out, that among Christians the greatest Scholars, and most ac••omp••••shed for humane parts, wisdoms, yea for visible holiness, have not been alwayes on the Lords side, following him in paths of his own appointment, but have been stupendiously ignorant of the will of God in respect of the truth and work of their genera∣tion; I think ••ardinal Caietan was one of the greatest Scholars of his time, yet saw not what Luther saw, about justification by faith, and Luther, though he did much in that point, yet saw not so much as Calvin in the point of the re••l presence in the Eucharist; and therefore (like well the 3d. and 4••h. answer here, that we should adhere only to the Law and to the Testimony and be followers of the learned as they are of Christ. Yet I conceive, that it is a wicked course, which is taken by some, so to disparage learning, as if it were of no necessity, Universities, as of no use, but rather Seminaries of ungodliness, to say that men that have humane learning are the un∣learned and unstable, which do wrest the Scriptures, 2 Pet. 3.16. as How the Cobler a much followed Preacher a great while ago in Lon∣don vented in print, that learned Scholars do make the Scriptures as a nose of wax, are but Juglers, and deceivers, which are too too often insinuated into the minds of well meaning, but weak minds, whereby they are more addicted to such as How, Tillinghast, and other po∣pular Orators, and their injudicious discourses, if stuffed with fained words and earnest affections, then to the most solid proofs of the most learned, whose interpretations of Scripture, and handling of Controversies, have cleared the truth, and restored purity of Do∣ctrine to the great benefit of the Church of God, which these peo∣ple understand not. But it hapneth according to the saying, Scien∣tia n••minem hab•••• inimicum nisi ignorantem. And sure though I would have no Christian enslave his judgement to any man, it were that Anthropolatria or sin of glorying in men forbidden, 1 Cor. 3.21. against which I printed a little treatise in the the year 1645▪ fore∣seeing it would be the means of dividing Christians into parties; nor would I have that which is propounded by men of none or lesser learning rejected, because it is from them, one Paph••utius may see that truth, which a whole Council, though such as the first N••cene, without him did not discern, it was an evil spirit in Matthaeus Lan∣gius, that made him disdain to be taught by Luther, as is related in the History of th•• Council of ••rent, God doth out of the mouth of Babes and Sucklings perfect praise, as our Saviour Matth. 21.16. allegeth Psal. 8.2. against the Priests and Scribes indignation at the Childrens saying Hosanna: yet I would have such things exa∣mined by the learned, and godly, especially either their own Pastors,

or such as are found or reputed learned and judicious, and that as well what may be said against, as what is said for the thing vented be weighed, lest persons deceive themselves, as too often they do, by their propensity to take all for Oracles, which is said by such as they do affect or magnifie. And surely in doubtful cases, and in points which are above the Sphere of common capacities to deter∣mine, I mean such as require more insight in Languages, History, Arts, and other reading, than they can reach to by reason of defect in their natural abilities, educations, time to study, means of attain∣ing the use of books, health or strength, it is a safe way to rest on the received practice and determination of their learned Guides, whom they have reason to judge faithfull and able, and to be satis∣fied with their resolutions and reasons after a serious and modest ar∣guing of the thing, though every scruple be not removed. As for that which is here said of Ainsworth, Cotton, &c. I think they that knew, and read what Vssher, Ball, Gataker, and such like men were, will not believe it. Mr. Ainsworths differences between him and Johnson, Robinson▪ and Paget, and their writings, especially of this last, shew him to have been much short of what this Author conceived of him. What Mr. Cotton was I do not rely upon Mr. Baylies Dissuasive, but I think Dr. Twisse his answer to him about reprobation, Mr. Cawdrey about the keyes, that I mention no other, shewed him not such, as whose judgement might be safely rested in. And I scarce think either by the reading of his way of the Churches in new England, or his commendation of Mr. Nortons answer to Apollonius he could be of the same apprehension with this Author in this matter. That the Reformed Churches generally re∣nounce the Ministry of the Church of England, I think is a manifest untruth. The passages at the Synod of Dort, Peter Moulin his Letter to Bishop Andrews, with many more of the like evidences of former and later times assure me this Author is deceived. He adds.

Sect. 12. The Magistrates command to hear, the present Mini∣nisters is to be obeyed.

Object. 8. But the Magistrate commands us, and ought we not to obey Magistrates.

Answ. 1. That Magistrates have no power to command in mat∣ters of instituted worship, where Christ is silent, or to govern in his Church is affirmed by many.

2. The commands of Magistrates, when contrary to the will and

way of Christ, are not to be subjected to. This case is long since sta∣ted and resolved by the Apostle (Acts 4.19, 20. and 5.29) and Spirit of the Lord, breathing long before in his renouned witnesses, Dan. 3.16, 17. and 6.10. nor is it denyed by any that are sober, and judicious. Whether the hearing of the present Ministers of England be contrary to the word of God, the will and way of Christ, we leave from what hath been offered, to the considerate reader to judge; And shall only add what was long since asserted by Augustin de verb Domini Serm. 6. in this matter, who was herein fully of the same mind with us; Sed timeo inquies ne offendas majorem, time prorsus ne offendas majorem, & non offendes Deum. Quid enim times ne offendas majorem? Vide ne forsan major sit isto qu••m times offendere. Majorem certe noli offendere—quis est inquies major eo qui me genuit? an ille qui teipsum creavit? — qui enim resistit potestati, Dei ordinationi resistit: sed quid si illud ju∣beat quod non debes facere? — timendo potestatem ipsos humana∣rum rerum gradus advertite: si aliquid jusserit Curator, nonne fa∣ciendum est? Tametsi contra Proconsul jubeat, at non utique con∣temnis potestatem, sed eligis majori servire, nec hinc debet minor irasci, si major praelata est. Rursum si aliquid ipse Proconsul jubeat, & aliud jubeat Imperator, numquid dubitatur in illo contemptu illi esse serviendum? Ergo si aliud Imperator & aliud Deus quid judi∣catis? Solve tributum, est mihi in obsequio recte▪ Sed non in Ido∣lio, in Idolio prohibet, quis prohibet? major potestas. Da veniam! tu carcerem, ille gehennam minatur. He tells us plainly that such as fear to offend their Superiours, should much more fear to offend God, who is greater than all. The Emperours and Monarchs of the world, threaten us with a Prison if we disobey them; the Lord threatens us with Hell upon our disobedience of him.

I reply, The Brownists in their Confession of faith, art. 39. say, Princes and Magistrates by the Ordinance of God are Supreme Go∣vernours under him over all persons, and in all causes within their Realms and Dominions, and that it is their duty to enforce all their Subjects whether Ecclesiastical or Civil to do their duties to God and men, protecting and maintaining the good, punishing and re∣straining the evil, according as God hath commanded, whose Lieu∣tenants they are here on earth; and to prove this many Texts are cited by them, of which confession Mr. Ainsworth said to be of the fame apprehension with this Author in this matter, was a principal composer. In the Apology of the Non-conformists by Irenaeus E••eutherius in the admonition to the Reader, the Kings Supremacy is acknowledged. Which hath been more largely proved before in

this Answer to the 5th. Chapter of this book, Sect. 11, 12, 13, 14. And though it be not yeilded, that Princes should exercise Ecclesi∣astical Jurisdiction, or determine Doctrines of faith, or impose what worship they will on the Subjects, yet it is allowed by all I know ex∣cept Papists, that when the Magistrate commands men to be pre∣sent at the true worship of God, and to hear them that preach truth, he doth what he ought, and is to be obeyed therein. This Author where in this Chapter, p. 86. he supposeth Christ enjoyning his Dis∣ciples to attend upon the Scribes and Pharisees acting as Magi∣strates, and conform to what is justly and righteously prescribed them as such, must yield this, that the Saints are to obey the Magistrate in this, unless he can shew, that it is an unlawfull thing to hear the present Ministers, which he pretends he hath done, but how vain∣ly is shewed by this Answer, and so his Answer here to this Objecti∣on to be insufficient. And indeed it tends to the gratifying of Po∣pish Recusants▪ who alledge, for their not hearing, the non-con∣junction with the Pope and Church of Rome, as this Author, doth the non-election and non-membership of the present Ministers in a Congregational Church, to be in which as the only Instituted Church of Christ, is made necessary, as Papists do to be in Com∣munion with the Church of Rome: And therefore if it be unlawful to hear the present Ministers, the Papists have a just plea for their not coming to Church; which evacuates all the Laws and Go∣vernment requiring it. It is added,

Sect. 13. Conformists Ministry hath been instrumental to Convert Souls.

Object. 9. But the Ministers of England are true Gospel-Mi∣nisters, for they convert Souls; which the Apostle makes the Seal of his Ministry or Apostleship: therefore it is lawful to hear them.

To this we say, 1. That the Ministers of England are true Gos∣pel-Ministers, is absolutely denyed by us; what is offered in this Ob∣jection proves nothing.

1. Paul makes not the Conversion of the Church of Corinth, singly, a sufficient demonstration, or convincing argument of his Apostleship; he only useth it, as what was most likely to win, and work upon their affections, who upon other accounts could not but know that he was an Apostle of the Lord Jesus.

2. Conversion of Souls is no argument, either of a lawfull call to an Apostleship, or Ministry of Christ.

For, 1. Many have converted Souls, that were not Apostles, as ordinary Ministers.

2. The Lord hath used private brethren, women, yea, some re∣markable providences, as instruments in his hand for the conversion of many Souls; yet who will say that private brethren, women, or Divine Providences, are Apostles or Ministers of the Lord Jesus.

But 3. Should it be granted, that conversion of Souls is an argu∣ment of a lawfull Ministry, where are the Churches, nay where are the particular persons converted by them? We have not heard of any, nor will it be an easie task for the Objectors to produce instances in this matter.

I reply, That the Ministers of England, who preach the Gospel truely, are true Gospel Ministers, may be denied absolutely, but not justly, their preaching the Gospel truely being it, which alone is the form denominating a Minister a true Gospel Minister; though more be required to his regularity. Election by a Congregational Church, Ordination by an Eldership, or Bishop, do not make a true Gospel Minister without it, and it doth it notwithstanding some other defects. But conversion of Souls is no certain sign of a true Gospel Minister, or the defect of it an argument against it: nor do I alledge 1 Cor. 9.1, 2. to prove either. Yet when the Gos∣pel of Christ is truly preached, and so blessed an effect follows on their labours, who do so, it is a good motive to the converted to hear them who have been instruments of their conversion, and is an engagement to them to follow their doctrine and conversation, 1 Cor. 4.15, 16. Heb. 13.7.17. 1 Thes. 5.12, 13. And if this Au∣thor, or any other do separate from them, who have been instru∣ments of their conversion, and continue still to preach the Gospel truly, because they abide in their station without renouncing Epis∣copal Ordination, or accepting of an election by a congregational Church, they do it unwarrantably and injuriously. As for the words of the Apostle 1 Cor. 9.1, 2. the Apostles aime is to shew he was as free, and might use his liberty as much as any other Apostle, being as truly an Apostle as any other, which might, besides other evidences, from the effect of his Apostleship on them appear to them; so that it is an argument of his Apostleship, though not singly, not, as this Author conceives, a motive to win upon their affections; yet I think it an argument from and of some thing proper to the Apostle, and the Corinthians, and therefore would not meerly from conversion of Souls, conclude a true Gospel Ministry in all that have been instruments therein. As for the demand, where are the Churches, where are the particular persons converted by them? It may perhaps be as justly demanded of this Author, where are the Churches or particular persons converted by the Ministers of the

congregational Churches in old or new England, or Holland? Mr. Robert Baylie of Scotland in his Dissuasive from the Errors of the time, Mr. Thomas Edwards in his Gangraena tell stories of the fruit of separation, which I will not avow as true: yet so much of truth may be picked out of them, as may stop the mouths of them, that extoll those Ministers, and decry the best of the Conformists; who yet have been, if not of late, yet heretofore Fathers in Christ to the Members of the Congregational Churches, and to the most eminent in the Churches of old or new England. But this disparage∣ment of some, and extolling of others, is an odious course tending to nothing but promoting of faction, and weakning the hands of them that do the work of Christ, and therefore do pray that this spirit of pride and bitterness may be extinguished, than in love we may serve one another, and that nothing be done out of strife and vain-glory, but that in lowliness of mind each may esteem others better than our selves. And I wish none had vented or read such criminations as those in the book entituled Prelatical preachers none of Christs teach∣ers, in which he breaks out thus, p 61. They that were ••oundly right down without any abatement or need of explication, Ministers of a Prelatical Ordination, have amongst them in matters of true Re∣ligion, sound knowledge and piety towards God reduced the genera∣lity of the Nation to a morsel of bread. All those Idolatrous and Superstitious conceits and practises, all the bloody ignorance and prophaeess, all that customary boldness in sinning, that hatred of goodness and good men, which are the nakedness and shame of the land, and render it obnoxious to Divine displeasure, may justly call this generation of men either fathers, or foster fathers, or both, p. 75. he terms their Ministry a Ministry which is no where approved or sanctified by Christ in his word, but obtruded upon Christians with an high hand by those who are confederate both in spirit and in practise with the scarlet coloured beast, and drunken with the blood of the Saints (a description which belyeth not the Prelatical Priest∣hood and Ministry,) and then applies the description Revel. 13.11. to them, and the warning Revel. 14 9. to those who joyn to them, p 76, 77. he makes the Bishops to comply with Antichrist in claim∣ing and exercising a power of imposing on men what they please in matters of Religion, or faith, and worship, under what penalties they please also, makes those ordained and Ministers under them and by them to receive the mark of the beast, p. 52. though God did before the discovery of the evil of Prelacy benefit Souls by them, yet not after. But enough of this; there remains yet that which fol∣lows,

Sect. 14. To the observation of the Lords day, hearing the present Ministers as the case now is, may be requisite.

Object. 10. But our Ministers are removed, and we know not where to go to hear; would you have us sit at home idle? We can∣not so spend the Lords day.

Answ. To which we would humbly offer a few things.

1. That though we are not against any Ordinance of Jesus Christ, yet we are afraid that those poor Souls, that know not how to spend the Lords day without hearing, do too much Idolize that Ordinance of God, and never knew what it was to spend that day with him.

2. You need not sit at home; if you are enquiring after God, and communion with his people, you may soon hear of some one or other of the Assemblies of the Saints, whither you may repair to wait up∣on the Lord with them.

3. But thirdly, were it, or should it be otherwise; yet better be idle, than do worse; better do nothing, than sin against God, encou∣rage others in their evil deeds, pollute and wound thy own Soul, grieve the Saints, stumble and harden the wicked, and cause them to blaspheme his Name, Sanctuary, and such as dwell therein.

But, 4. There is no necessity of being idle, if thou knowest not where to hear on that day, hast thou no work to do save that?

1. Art sure that God, and Christ, and Eternal Glory, are thy por∣tion and inheritance? Thou walkest in the light of assurance, or thou dost not? If thou dost, is one day in seven too much to spend in the solemn admiration of grace, that ever so vile a creature as thou, should be accounted worthy of such unexpressible kindness and glory? What, O what will Eternity be then? If thou dost not, are not these worthy of thy utmost diligence to get assurance of? What, stand idle, and an interest in God, Christ, and Eternal Glory to make sure of!

2. Art thou sufficiently acquainted with thine own heart? Dost know so much of thy self as thou needest to know? Or judgest thou this to be a work that requires not thy utmost diligence and atten∣dance?

3. Hast thou no sin to be mortified, no want to be supplyed, no grace to be quickned and strengthned in thee?

4, Hast thou as much communion with God as thou desirest? Hast heard as often from him by the tea••hings of the Spirit (the in∣comparably and infinitely best teacher) as thou dost wish? Or dost think that God will not manifest himself to, and teach in a corner, a

poor Soul that's there waiting for him alone, because there be no Assemblies of Saints he knows of, to whom he might joyn himself, and he dares not have Communion with Adulterers? If thou have not fellowship with God thou desirest, and teachings from him (as who hath) stir up thy self to lay hold on God, groan and cry after him, till he hath brought thee into his chambers, and afforded thee richer displayes of his glory.

5. Art thou altogether ready trimmed (without more ado) for the coming and Kingdom of Christ Jesus? what should I men∣tion those important duties of reading the Scriptures, meditation on them, &c. hast thou all this to do, and much more that might be added, and yet nothing to do on the Lords day? set about these things in good earnest, and when thou livest in the light of assu∣rance, without the least doubt or clouding, when thou art suffici∣ently acquainted with thine own heart, the will and Scriptures of the Lord; when thou hast as much communion with God in re∣tirement, as thou desirest, and teachings from his Spirit; when thou hast no sin to be mortified, nor grace to be quickened and strengthened; when thou art quite ready for the day of Christ, and needest no further fittings, we shall consider what may be further said to this Objection; but till then, it cannot be pleaded, when souls have all this work to do, that they must sit at home idle, if they go not to hear the Preachers of this day. But thus far of the Objections that are by some made against the assertion of the unlaw∣fulness of attending upon the present Ministers of England; which are all of any moment we have yet met with: what of weight is in them, must be left to the judgement of the Christian Reader to determine. We shall add no more but this, that we have spoken our judgement and conscience herein, as in sincerity, in the sight of God: with what meekness, Christian tenderness, and fear of gi∣ving any just offence to the truly conscientious, he knows. The sole of our aim in the whole is, That Christ may be glorified in the reco∣very of any poor lamb, that is turned aside to the flocks of the com∣panions in this cloudy and dark day; that others that have hitherto kept themselves from Idols, might be further established in the will of God, and strengthened to follow Christ in his temptations, that they may inherit that kingdom and glory, prepared for them before the foundation of the world: May we but in the least contribute, by Divine blessing, hereunto whatever becomes of these papers, or how∣ever they be by others accounted of, we have our end, and shall rest satisfied.

I reply, this objection I find made not onely by some of the com∣mon

sort of professors, but also particulaly by Mr. Crofton, and made by him as an argument, wherefore he did, and ought to joyn in hearing and praying in publick on the Lords day, notwithstand∣ing the defects in the ministerial mode and method of the publick Ministers, the worship of God substantially existing in matter and essential form in their Ministration, and the Lords day being to be observed in publick as well as private, where, and when the Or∣dinances cannot be enjoyed in a purer manner. His second in the book intituled, Jerubbaal justified, doth reduce his plea to this Syllogism. Communion with the Church visible in Gods solemn publick worship, is an essential part of the sanctification of the Sabbath, and indispensable duty. But communion with the English Church, in the worship by her celebrated, is communion with the Church visible in Gods solemn worship. Ergo, Communi∣on with the English Church (having no opportunity with any other) in the worship of her celebrated, is to me an essential part of the sanctification of the Sabbath, and indispensable duty. This Syllogism is defended in that Book, to which I refer the Reader, and consider the objection as here it is urged and answered. The objection proceeds upon suppositions of the Separatists, or Indepen∣dents, in the number of whom he is to be accounted, as appears by his wordes in this Chapter, in answer to the 7th. objection, where he saith, Learned Ainsworth, Cotton, &c. have been and are of the same apprehension with us in this matter. Now in Mr. Cot∣tons way of the Churches of Christ in New England, it is put into the definition of a visible Church, that they are a number that may meet every Lords day for all Ordinances, and in the Declaration of the Elders and Messengers of the Congregational Churches at the Savoy, Oct. 12. 1658. ch. 22. art. 8. The Sabbath is then kept holy to the Lord, when men are taken up the whole time in the pub∣lick and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of ne∣cessity and mercy. Among these art. 5. The reading of the Scri∣ptures, preaching and hearing of the word of God are reckoned, and art. 6. God is to be worshipped as in private families daily, and in secret each one by himself, so more solemnly in the publick assemblies, which are not carelesly nor wilfully to be neglected or forsaken, when God by his word or providence calleth thereunto. Upon which, and other suppositions, it concerns every tender con∣science, which receiveth these principles, to consider how they can acquit themselves from not observing the Lords day in publick assemblies, where God is invocated in the name of Christ, and the word of God truly taught, especially in such places where they may

enjoy these performed by the present Ministers, and are deprived of their former Ministers and communion, and cannot of them∣selves discharge these duties.

That which this Authour answers, doth not solve the doubt: That such persons conceive they cannot spend the Lords day with∣out hearing, is not out of any Idolizing the Ordinances of God; but from those grounds which are by the declaration afore named, and the generality of zealous Preacher, pressed upon Christians, That it is one duty of sanctifying the Lords day, not onely to ab∣stain from labour, which makes onely Sabbatum asinorum, a Sab∣bath that beasts have as well as men; nor onely to exercise them∣selves in reading and prayer at home, for that is every days duty; but also to frequent the publick assemblies where God is worship∣ped, which this Authour conceives injoyned, Heb. 10.25. and is gathered from Exod. 20.8. Acts 20.7. Revel. 1.10. 1 Cor. 16.1.2. John 20.19.26. That many persons cannot in many places find such assemblies of the Saints, as this Authour means, is a thing out of doubt with me. Were publick hearing a sin, I con∣fess it were better to do nothing than do that: But that is not yet proved, and I think it fit to acquaint the Reader, That Mr. Nor∣ton of New England, in that Answer to Apollonius his questions, which is commended by Mr. Cotton, Dr. Thomas Goodwin, Mr. Philip Nye, and Mr. Sidrach Simpson, ch. 13. doth thus determine, Such things being observed as are to be observed, it may be law∣ful to use forms of prayers, administrations of Sacraments, &c. prescribed in the Church, neither are the Churches which use them guilty of superstition, will-worship, and violating the second Commandment; yea, it is lawful to embrace communion with them, where such forms in the publick worship are in use: neither doth it lie as a duty on a believer, that he separate and disjoyn himself from such a Church, unless he would partake in the super∣stitious worship of Images. Communion with a Church, quâ utitur, as it useth worship of it self unlawful, is unlawful; com∣munion with a Church quae utitur, which useth it, to wit, in other lawful worship, is lawful; and separation from it, is unlawfull.

And to shew how evil the counsel of this Authour is to men to spend the Lord's day in a corner idle at home, rather then go to hear in publick. I think good to subjoyn some words of Mr John Paget in his Preface to the Christian Reader, before his Book, Intituled, An Arrow against the separation of the Brownists. Of the Brownists there are sundry sorts: some separate from the Church of England for corruptions; and yet confess both it and

Rome and it also to be a true Church, as the followers of Mr. Johnson, Christian Plea, p. 216, 217. Some renounce the Church of England as a false Church, and yet allow private communion with the godly therein, as Mr. Robinson Justifie. p. 339, 340, 247. and his followers Relig. Com. p. 1. &c. Some renounce all re∣ligious communion both publique and private with any Member of that Church whosoever, as Mr. Ainsworth Counterpoy. pag. 197. and such as hearken unto him, being deepest and stiffest in their Schism. The evil of this separation is great.

First, The minds of many are troubled and distracted hereby; even of such as do not separate, but have some liking thereof; especially if it be true which Mr. Robinson writes of them, Relig. comm. preface; to wit, That they seeing it not to be for their purposes that the world should so esteem of them▪ do undoubtedly strain and wring the neck of their consciences and courses, to look the contrary way▪ &c. What can be more miserable then to have the necks of consciences thus broken by the doctrine of separation?

Secondly, for those that separate, but do not yet joyn unto them, or being joyned▪ do withhold from actual communion, living alone, and hearing the word of God in no Church, as some do; How great is their misery also; Mr. Robinson himself, ibid. p. 36.39. shews it at large, no••ing them to be Idol-members, such as break the commandment of Christ, loose the fruit of his ascension, and fail their own edification and salvation many ways, &c.

Thirdly▪ for those that being enjoyned to them, do also live with them, seeing they have in effect excommunicate themselves from all other Churches of Christ▪ and consequently from the fellow∣ship of Christ Jesus himself, and from the participation of his grace and glory, so far as he reveals the same by dwelling in those Churches: It is therefore no wonder to hear Mr. Johnson treat on Matt. 18. Preface A. 2. complaining of the evils among them, as emulation, debate, and other sins which daily arise and spread themselves to the great dishonour of God, &c.

As for the directions given by this Authour, how to spend at home the Lords day, some of them are such as weak persons; women and novices cannot make use of it, yea, they would be dan∣gerous to them, occasioning them to fall into errours, Enthusiastick conceits, some of them Antinomians count unnecessary, and those that are good; yet by the deprivation of society, and publick teaching, and heavily performed; and they that take such courses, do either very frequently decay in the exercise of godliness, grow barren and liveless in prayer and holy conferences, or turn Seekers,

Quakers, Ranters, Censurers, Scoffers, Libertines: However, were they all used, yet they solve not the doubt arising from those principles, which require publick hearing for hallowing the Lords day; which is to be observed not onely for the benefit of our own edification, but also for the glory of God, and testification of our profession; which is not done by private exercise of Religion. And although some persons may more benefit themselves in know∣ledge by reading at home, yet the example hinders others from the use of the publick Ordinances, whereto we should by our practice encourage them. For these, and other reasons often urged by those, who have been for separation, it is not to be expected that such private exercises should be blessed or accepted of God, when the publick are to be performed. Both certainly should be done in their seasons, not one exclude the other.

I have thus answered all I find in this Authour, and do joyn with him in referring the thing to the Reader, who, if he will not cheat his own soul, must judge impartially, and without preju∣dice, weighing what is said on both sides. As for my aims and spirit in writing this thing, having found so little equity in mens censures of me about former writings, I can the less trust to any sort of mens good or bad of one or other opinion or judgement of me: My care I hope shall be, to approve my self to God, and to sollicite him by prayers for his blessing upon my labours in this thing: To which I shall add as over-measure, these ensuing Ar∣guments for hearing the present Ministers as now the case is.

Sect. 15. An Appendix, containing fourty additional Reasons against denying the lawfulness of hearing the present Mi∣nisters.

First I argue for the lawfulness of hearing them Preach the Do∣ctrine of the Gospel, as it is professed in the Church of England, from the definition of sin, which is a transgression of the Law, 1 John 3.4. whence the Apostle, Rom. 4.13. Where no law is, that is, no law prohibiting that which is done, there is no transgres∣sion. Whence I argue, That is lawful in which is no sin, in the hearing of the present Ministers Preach the doctrine of the Gospel, as it is professed in the Church of England, is no sin, therefore it is lawful. The major is undoubted, that being unlawful onely in which is sin according to the notion of the terms: The minor is proved; because it is no breach of the Law, there being neither any law of nature, nor any written law of the Old or New Testa∣ment, moral or positive, in express terms, or by good consequence

against it. Which is sufficiently proved by the answer to such Arguments as are here brought to prove a prohibition of such hear∣ing, and by requiring those that condemn it as unlawful, to pro∣duce the law which forbids it; which yet is not done that we know. If it be said (as it is by many of the people who scruple the doing of many things used in the publick worship as now it is) that in Gods worship it is not enough, that there is no law against what we do, but there must be also a command to do it, else it is will-worship. Besides what I have answered in the examination of the first Chapter of this Treatise I add 1. That the alleadging of a command is not necessary to prove a thing lawful, but to prove it a necessary duty, it is sufficient to prove my present conclusion, That no Law forbidding the hearing the present Ministers can be produced. 2. That as express command may be shewed for hear∣ing the present Ministers, as for hearing the congregational Mi∣nisters, at least those of them that are Separatist, against whom there are more just exceptions then against the present Conforming Ministers of England, why they should not be heard: Which leads me to a second Argument for the lawfulness of hearing them; which I thus form.

2. Those Ministers may lawfully be heard, against the hearing of whom by no exceptions, but such as are extrinsecal to the duty of hearing, as it is a part of Gods worship. But so it is concern∣ing the hearing of the present Ministers: Therefore they may be heard. The duty of hearing, as it is a part of Gods worship, con∣sists in this, That we apply our selves to learn the mind of God, by which we come to know and obey him: It is extrinsecal to this, that it be delivered to us by a good or a bad man; a man in Church-covenant or not, our proper Pastour chosen by our selves, or imposed upon us; and therefore such personal exceptions against the deliverer, are extrinsecal to the duty of hearing or non••hearing, if he declare Gods mind to us, we may worship God in hearing, though the Preacher sin in his conversation, or entrance on his Mi∣nistery, or be otherwise faulty, if he be faithful in delivering the truth of God to us: though other things make one mans teaching more desirable, or more delightful, or useful to us, yet the defect of them makes not our hearing his teaching unlawful, who teach∣eth the word of God truly, because we may thereby learn Gods mind, in applying our selves whereto is his worship by hearing.

3. This is further proved in that where there are any prohibi∣tions

which restrain us from hearing any Teachers, it is because of their Doctrine: Which is an argument, That in hearing others that teach true Doctrine, or the truth of Gods word, we are at li∣berty to hear them, and consequently the present Ministers sup∣posed to do so. The antecedent is verified by inspection of these, Deut. 13.3. Matt. 7.15. Mark 4.24. and such other Texts as cautionate men from hearing Teachers. Whence may be infer∣red: That's not unlawful for us, from which Gods cautions re∣strain us not; But from hearing the present Ministers supposed to teach the truth of Gods word, Gods cautions restrain us not: therefore it is not unlawful to hear them.

4. It is the character or property of one that is of God, or is a sheep of Christ, to hear Gods word, or Christs voice without li∣miting it to some persons, John 8.47. He that is of God, heareth Gods word, John 10.27. My sheep hear my voice. Whence I argue, That is not unlawful which may be a duty, and a characteri∣stical property of one that is of God or Christs sheep. But to hear the present Ministers, being supposed to teach the word of God, and the voice of Christ, may be a duty, and a characteristical pro∣perty of one that is of God, or Christs sheep. Therefore it is not unlawful to hear them, being supposed to teach the word of God, and the voice of Christ.

5. From the same Scriptures it may be argued thus, That may be unlawful which may be a sign of one that is not of God, nor of Christs sheep; but not to hear the present Ministers, when they teach the word of God, and the voice of Christ may be a sign of one that is not of God: for Christ saith, John 8.47. Ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God, nor a sheep of Christ, who saith, John 10.26. But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. Therefore it may be unlawful not to hear the present Ministers, and consequently lawfull to hear them.

6. To refuse to hear the word of God, though delivered by the present Ministers, is profaneness, such as is condemned in Esau. Heb. 12.16. For it is the rejecting, or neglecting of a holy thing, as it is termed by our Lord Christ, Matth. 7.6. therefore it may be unlawful to shun hearing them, and consequently lawful to hear them.

7. The word of God is a pearl of great price, Matt. 7.6. such as a merchant man should sell all he hath to buy, Matth. 13.46. a great treasure, v. 44. therefore to be heard and received by whomsoever held forth, and consequently it is folly and sin to shun hearing it, because of personal exceptions against the bringer, as it would be folly to refuse a treasure found in a dunghill, or a pearl brought by an unworthy person.

8. If the word of God preached by the present Ministers, may be effectual for that good, which is the end wherefore it is preach∣ed, then it may be lawfully heard from them, or rather ought to be heard according to that precept, James 1.21. Receive with meek∣ness the ingraffed word, which is able to save your souls, 1 Pet. 2.1, 2. Desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby. But the word of God preached by the present Ministers, may be thus effectual: For the efficacy of it comes not from the personal qualifications of the Preacher, but from the verity of it, it's deri∣vation from God, his promise and blessing; and however Sepa∣tists have declaimed against such Ministers, and suggested to their Partisans, as if no good could be gotten by hearing them; yet ex∣perience hath proved the contrary: and therefore they are to be heard. Finis dat mediis ordinem mensuram & amabilitatem. The hearing of them is an ordinary means of hearers edification in the faith and obedience of Christ, and therefore is not unlawful, but to be made use of.

9. That is not unlawfull, the neglect of which may be the occa∣sion and reason of a mans condemnation, it is the condemnation of a person, John 3.20. that he comes not to the light. But the pre∣sent Ministers holding forth the light, mens not hearing them, is not coming to the light, and so much the more dangerous, if by not hearing them, they are deprived of any other to bring the light to them, as it may, and perhaps doth fall out at some times; and in some places: Therefore the neglect of hearing them may be the occasion and reason of a persons condemnation, and so a damnable sin in them that refuse to hear them, and in those that deter others from hearing them.

10. The words of Peter, John, 6.68. Lord to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life, include in them this pro∣position, We may go to them, as to Teachers of us, who have the

words of eternal life▪ But the present Ministers who teach the Gospel of Christ, have the words of eternal life: for it contains his words, and is the power of God to salvation, from the matter of it. Rom. 1.16, 17. Mighty through God to bring into captivity eve∣ry thought to the obedience of Christ, 2 Cor. 10.4, 5. Therefore we may go to the present Ministers, who teach the Gospel of Christ, and hear them as our Teachers.

11. The Apostle Paul, 1 Th••s: 2.13. writes thus: For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not as the words of men, but (as it is in t••••th) the wo••d of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe. Whence I thus ar∣gue, If the word of God be to be heard as his word, and not as the word of men, then it is sufficient for right hearing, that we attend to the preaching of it, without consideration of the personal qualifications of the men that deliver it▪ and consequently we need not decline hearing of Preachers that deliver it, though otherwise liable to exceptions; yea, it is our duty to hear any men preach it without questioning any thing, but whether it be the word of God, and it is evil to refuse to hear it, because of our disaf∣fection and prejudice against the Preachers; and accordingly it is enough to justifie the hearing of the present Ministers, that they preach the word of God, and that we hear them as teaching it. For quatenus ipsum inc••udes de omni, if we may, yea ought to hear the word of God, as Gods word, we may and ought to hear it at any time, from any person; and if we do not hear it under this consi∣deration, we hear amiss, and worship not God in hearing. But the word of God is to be heard as Gods word, as is evident from St. Pauls thanksgiving that the Thessalonians so heard it, and not as the word of men, though Preached by himself, who ascribes the efficacy of it to this consideration in their hearing. Therefore it is sufficient for right hearing▪ that we attend to the Preaching of Gods word, without consideration of the personal qualifications of them that deliver it; and consequently we may rightly hear the present Ministers Preaching Gods word, though without such per∣sonal qualifications as are required of them.

12. The same is further proved by the holy Ghosts approbation of the practice of the Beraeans, neighbours to the Thessalonians, Acts 17.11, 12. These were more noble then those in Thessaloni∣ca,

in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so; therefore many of them believed. Whence I argue, They may be right hearers of the present Ministers, who may hear them as the Beraeans did; which proposition is confirmed, in that the holy Ghost gives them the commendation of right hearers, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether the things taught by St. Paul were agreeable thereto, without examining his commission to Preach, or other qualifications of his person; yea, and this is made the rea∣son of their believing: and therefore the word of God is sufficient to beget faith, because of it's agreeableness to the Scripture, and hath most success when hearers hear it with respect to it's congruity to the holy Scripture, and not because delivered by such men as they approve of. But thus may Christians hear the present Mini∣sters of England, and therefore may be right hearers of the present Ministers; and consequently they that do so, do lawfully hear them; and they that hear their Ministers out of other particular respects, and not in this manner, hear not rightly, nor doth their hearing edifie them in the faith of Christ, but tends to inordinate glorying in men, and to division consequent thereon.

13. From our Lord Christs word: Luke 9.49▪ 50. And John answered and said, Master, we saw one ca••ting out devils in thy name, and we forbade him, beca••se he followe••h not with us. And Jesus said into him, Forbid him not; for he that is not against us, is for us. I gather, That Christ would not have him forbid∣den to Preach, who Preached in his name, though he were not joyned to Christs disciples. For though the acting in Christs name expressed, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 onely using his name to expell devils, yet by using his name there was some Preaching of Christ, and the words Mark 9.39. For there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me, and the occasion both Mark 9.37. and Luke 9.48▪ immediately foregoing, Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me; and Christs reason, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us, is for us, shew that Christs words are at well meant of preaching in his name, as of casting out devils, at least the reason of them is of like force for the not prohibiting of men to Preach in his name, as to cast out devils: Whence I argue, They may be heard

Preach in Christs name, who are not to be forbidden to Preach in Christs name▪ But the present Ministers of England are not to be forbidden to Preach in Christs name; therefore they may be heard Preach in Christs name. The major is of it self evident, there being no reason to be given why they that are allowed to Preach in Christs name, should not be heard by the same allow∣ance, allowance to Preach being vain and frivolous, without al∣lowance for others to hear. The minor is also proved by parity of reason, for allowing them to preach as well as those who cast out De∣vils in Christs name, yet joyned not with the Disciples, sith so do∣ing they did not speak evil of Christ, nor were against him, but for him, nor is there so much reason of prohibiting the Ministers to preach in Christs name, because they are not in a separated Church, nor elected by the Members thereof, as there was of pro∣hibiting them that followed not with the Apostles to cast out Devils in Christs name. If Christ would not have these forbidden to do a miracle in his name, neither would he have the other forbidden to preach in his name, which they do in effect, who make it unlaw∣full to hear them.

14. I shall adjoyn to this, that our Saviour, Matth. 7.22, 23. where he alleageth the plea and expectation of formal hypocrites, he doth not reject them for prophesying in his name, but for their working iniquity, thereby shewing, that he allowed their prophesying in his name as good, though not sufficient without obedience. Whence I argue, if their prophesying in Christs name who were workers of iniquity, then much more their teaching in Christs name, who are only supposed to be defective in outward calling, or faulty in some actions consistent with Christianity, is to be allowed, and if their teaching be allowed, then the hearing of them is by consequence allowed: for these are conjugates.

15. Our Lord Christ saith Luke 10.16. concerning the seventy Disciples, he that heareth you heareth me, and he that despiseth you despiseth me, and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me. The reason hereof is, because they preached the same Doctrine: if if there be an outward mission, and the same Doctrine which Christ taught is not preached, Christ is not heard, but when the same Doctrine is heard which Christ taught, he is heard, and if it be re∣jected, he is despised. Whence I argue, They may be lawfully heard, by hearing of whom we may hear Christ. But by hearing

of the present Ministers who preach the Doctrine of Christ, we hear Christ, therefore we may hear the present Ministers who preach the D••••trine of Christ. The reason of the minor is from that speech 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Christ, John. 7.16. my Doctrine is not mine, but his that sent 〈◊〉〈◊〉, in the preachers Doctrine which he preacheth after Christ, is not his own, but Christs who sent him, as an Embassadours message is his Kings, not his own, and by hearing him deliver it according to his Commission, his Master is heard.

16. This is further confirmed from Rom. 10.15. And how shall they preach except they be sent? As it is written, How beau∣tifull are the feet of them that preach the Gospel of Peace, and bring glad tydings of good things. The citation of these words to prove, that they cannot preach who are not sent, doth presuppose, 1. That they who preach the Gospel of Peace, that bring the glad tydings of good things, are sent to preach, and that by hearing of it comes faith, and that the word of God is heard, else were the citation im∣pertinent, and the inference v. 17. inconsequent. 2. That their feet are beautifull, and that they are to be heard in this respect. But I subsume the present Ministers, who preach the Doctrine they un∣dertake to teach, preach the Gospel of Peace, and bring the glad tydings of good things, therefore are they sent, their feet are beau∣tifull, and are to be heard.

17. In the parable of the talents, Matth. 25.15. or pounds, Luke 19.13. our Saviour saith the Kingdom of Heaven is as when a noble man goes into a farr Country, gives his Servants his money to trade with, and they are to gain more thereby, 1 Cor. 12.7.8. the gifts of the spirit are given to profit withall, in which are reckoned the word of wisdome, of knowledge, teachers v. 28, 29. Ephes. 4.11. for the ed••fying of the body of Christ in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the son of God. Whence it is apparent, 1. That ability to teach the things of Christ, to edifie the body of Christ is a gift of Christ, 2. That they who do use this ability do it unto Christ's advantage according to his design. 3. That not to improve this gift is to disappoint Christ of his end in giving it, 4. For any to hinder this improvement is sinfull. Whence I argue: They that have ability to preach the Gospel have received a Talent from Christ to improve it, their improving is by preaching, this cannot be done unless they be heard, therefore the not hearing them makes voyd the use of that gift. The present Ministers who preach the

Gospel have received this gift, and by preaching do use i••, therefore they are to be heard, and the not hearing them is to d••sable them from improving it, and consequently is a sin against Christs de∣signe.

18 As from the end of Christs gifts, so from the duty of them that have received them we may prove, that the present Ministers are to be heard, 1 Pet. 4 10.11. As every man hath received the gift, even so Minister the same one to another, as good Stewards of the manifold grace of God. If any man speak, let him speak as the Oracles of God. Whence I argue; If the present M••nisters have received a gift to speak the Oracles of God, then are they to Minister the same, and consequently to be heard. This is acknow∣ledged by this Author ch. 2. in these words; That Christ hath ap∣pointed some, as Ministers, by vertue of an office power, to dispense the Ordinances of the Gospel, untill his Second Coming, is granted by all, that 'tis permitted to others, as their liberty; enjoyned them, as their duty (having received gifts and enablements from the Lord thereunto) to improve those gifts in preaching, praying, &c. for the edification of the body of Christ (though not solemnly invested into office) is assented unto, at least by some of those with whom we have to do; whence a lawfulness to hear them as Ministers▪ or as gifted brethren doth necessarily arise. But the present Ministers have received a gift to speak the Oracles of God, as experience shews, and that equally, if not beyond the teachers of the congrega∣tional Churches, and they are to Minister the same, which cannot be done unless they be heard, and therefore are to be heard. When is opposed against this is answered in the examination of the Second Chapter of this book.

19. That the present Ministers may be heard preach the Gos∣pel, is further proved from 1 Cor. 3.22. where it is said to the Co∣rinthians against their addicting themselves to some teachers rather than others, whether Paul or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours. They are said to be theirs, because they had interest in the use of of them, and the use of the teachers was their hearing them, any of them, though not their particular Pastour, and one of them, to wit Apollos his setting a part to that function is not recorded, and however he did teach, and was to be heard Acts 18.24, 25, 26. afore he was ordained to be a preacher, or fully knew the way of

God. Whence I infer, that every Christian hath an interest in every preacher of the Gospel, that no Minister is to be accounted 〈◊〉〈◊〉 peculiar to any party of Christians so as to be impropriated by them, that the ability of every one may be used by any though not their proper Minister, nor perhaps regularly ordained, and therefore the present Ministers of England may be heard by any Saints, while they teach the Gospel, though such irregularities, as are objected against them, were granted to be in them or their Mi∣nistry.

20. From the same Scripture I collect, that the practise of this Author in disclaiming the Ministry of those, who are not either Officers in a gathered Church in the congregational way, or gifted brethren Members in such a Church, though otherwise good men, and able diligent preachers, and adhering only to those of their own Society, is glorying in men forbidden by the Apostle, 1 Cor. 3.21. and contrary to what he saith, 1 Cor. 4.6. And these things brethren, I have in a figure transferred to my self and to Apollos for your sakes, that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another. Wherein the Apostle dissuades from such esteem of some Ministers above others, as to overprize some, elevating some, and disparaging others, following some, and flighting others, though teachers of truth. Which sin I deprehended long ago to be in this land, chiefly in the Capital City thereof, and therefore discovered it in a Sermon in one of the most eminent Auditories thereof many years before; and printed it in the year 1645. with this Title, An∣thopolatria, or the sin of glorying in men, especially in eminent Mi∣nisters of the Gospel, and I wish I had not been too prophetical therein. I do now wish that this Author, and such others as magni∣fie their own teachers, or tie men to them, and draw them off from hearing other Ministers, because Conformists, though teachers of the Gospel, did by scanning these texts see their errour and evil. It is true Chrysostom and Hierom on 1 Cor. 1.12. and many other in∣terpreters conceive a fiction, as if the Apostle Paul had transferred that to the persons of the Apostles, which did agree to the false Apostles, being moved by the words, 1 Cor. 4.6. which it is likely our translators conceived by their reading, I have in a figure trans∣ferred these things to my self. At which Pareus marvai•••• in his Commentarie on 1 Cor. 1.12. And I give reasons against it in my Sermon forenamed Sect. 5. conceiving the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

not to note a Rhetorical figure of speech, but application as the out∣ward habit is to the body, and the things applied are either, as Pa∣reus, what he had said, 1 Cor. 3.7. That he which planteth is no∣thing, and he which watereth is nothing, or, as I rather conceived then, what is said 1 Cor. 4.1. That they were Ministe••s of Christ and Stewards of the mysteries of God, Christian Berman exerci••. Theolog. 12. Intelligit metaphoram ministri, Oeconomi, Villici, & Hortu••an, he m••ans the metaphor of a Minister, Steward, Hus∣bandman, Gardiner: which confirms my argument against the se∣parating principle of those that forbid the hearing of the present Mi∣nisters, though Stewards of the mysteries of God, Planters, Wate∣rers, Builders, and tie men to hear those only who are their elected Ministers or gifted brethren, which is glorying in men, and tends to puff up for one against another.

21. The Apostle, 1 Cor. 4.1. saith, Let a man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ, and Stewards of the mysteries of God. 1 Thess▪ 5.12, ••3. And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in Love for their works sake, and be at peace among your selves. 1 Tim. 5.13. Let the Elde••s that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who la∣bour in the Word and Doctrine. Heb. 13.7. Remember your Ru∣lers or Guides who have spoken to you the Word of God. Wh••ch texts do shew who are to be accounted true Ministers, to wit, such as are Stewards of the mysteries of God, who labour in the Word and Doctrine, who spake unto us the Word of God, what account should be made of them, they are to be esteemed highly, honoured▪ remem∣bred, and for what reason, for their work sake, not for particular respects only, as our election of them, our opinion of their parts, our affection to them as of our party. Now I suppose the present Mini∣sters of England are Stewards of the mysteries of God in dispensing the Gospel truly, that they speak the Word of God to the people, that they labour in the Word and Doctrine, and therefore are to be accounted Ministers▪ and to be esteemed, honoured, remembred for their work sake: and therefore much more are to be heard who are such, for this reason however otherwise defective. The main of this, that they speak the word of God is so manifest that it is not denyed, what is gainsaid is answered before: and therefore: judge the deny∣ing the Saints liberty of giving them audience, and most of all the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 against them are great sins against these Precepts, the

5th. Commandement and other Precepts, as Acts 23.5. St. Paul conceived.

22. The Precept, 1 Thess. 5.13. and be at peace among your selves, a••ded to that of esteeming them in love who admonish them for their wo••k sak••, gives me occasion to annex this further reason, why the present Ministers should be heard: because it tends to peace among Christians, and the not hearing them; especially upon the principles of separation is from disunion, is Schism, or tends to it contrary to that peace, unity, and love which should be among Christians, who have the same God, Lord, Spirit, Faith, Hope, and are, or should be joyned in one body with all Christians, from whom there should be no Schism, 1 Cor. 12 25, 26, 27. The Schism in the Church of Corinth did arise from the affecting of, and addicting themselves to some teachers with relinquishment, if not disclaiming of others, as appears by that which is said 1 Cor. 1.12. Every one of you saith I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ: whereupon there were among them envy∣ing and strife, and division, 1 Cor. 3.3. and they sorted themselves into companies severed from others, as may be gathered from 1 Cor. 11.17, 18. and that about the Lords Supper, v. 21.33. Now the not hearing of the present Ministers and the separation from the Churches that hear them, and adhering only to their own teachers and Churches according to the principles of the Separatists is either the same, or very like the Schism, or division among the Corinthi∣ans, or tends to it, and hath begotten, and is like to beget the same, if not worse, effects among the Christians in England, as were in the Church of Corinth, and therefore it is to be censured to be alike evil, as the Schism among the Corinthians, and is reckon∣ed Gal. 5.20, 21. among the works of the flesh excluding out of the Kingdom of God. What is alledged by this Authour to justifie such separation is answered before. That which Dr. John Owen hath in his book of Schism, tending to acquit such separation from the crime of Schism, or to difference it from that which was the evil among the Corinthians, hath been examined by Mr. Daniel Cawdrey. That notion which is appropriated to the Corinthian Schism, as if it were onely division in the same particular Church, and not separation from others not joyned in the same particular Congregation, or such congregational Church, is not agreeable with what the Apostle de∣livers, 1 Cor. 10.17. and 12.12, 13. Rom. 12.4, 5. Ephes. 4.4. Ephes. 5.30, 31, 32. Ephes. 1.23. Col. 3.11.15. whereby every

Christian believer where-ever is counted of the same body, to which they should be joyned in love, peace, mutual affection, and cor∣respondent endeavours for their good, and if the Apostle 1 Cor. 12.25. expresly count it a Schism in the body when any Christian doth neglect another, and not take care of another, much more is it Schism, when Christians separate wi••hout necessary cause from communion with others, and more specially, when they disclaim them that are teachers of the Word of God, as if Christ were divi∣ded, as St. Paul speaks, 1 Cor. 1.13.23. St. James in his Epi∣stle ch. 2.1. writes thus, My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ the Lord of glory with respect of persons, and he expresseth himself by instance, that they preferred the rich before the poor, in placing them in their Assemblies, and taxeth them there∣fore as partial in themselves, and judges of evil thoughts. Now to hear one that preacheth the faith of Christ because he is of our par∣ticular Society, or by reason of particular interest, or agreement in opinion, or any other then the unity of faith in the Lord Jesus, and to disclaim hearing another, that hath the same faith, preacheth it, and holds communion with them that embrace it, and to separate from such, to despise or oppose such, is to have the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of persons for other reasons then their faith, and therefore is condemned by St. James as evil.

24. St. Paul Rom. 16, 17. writes thus, Now I beseech you bre∣thren, ma••k them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the Doctrine which ye have learned, and avoyd them. But those who teach men not to hear their Ministers, which preach to them the truth of Gods Word, because they are not in a congregational Church, or not elected or ordained according to the rules of such Churches, or because they conform to some things conceived unwar∣rantable (which are made the reasons of unlawfulness to hear the present Ministers who preach the Gospel) do cause offences and di∣visions contrary to the Doctrine, Rom. 12.4.5. Rom. 14.1. &c. Rom. 15.1. &c. therefore their Doctrine is to be avoyded.

25. The Apostle 1 Cor. 14.36. speaks thus, What? came the Word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? Which seems to reprehend the conceits whether schismatical or arrogant, as if the Word of God were from them as the onely right teachers, or confined to them as the only persons, to whom it was com∣municated,

and from whom it might be received, and so con∣demns such supposed inclosures by any Church or company of teachers. But such conceits and inclosures they have and make▪ who deny the present Ministers are to be heard, conceiving the sepa∣rated Churches, and Ministers, the only right Churches and Mi∣nisters to be heard.

26. The Apostle Philip. 3 15, 16. writes thus, Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any th••ng ye be otherwise minded, God sh••ll reveal even this unto you, tha•• is, as many of you as are well instructed in the Christian Doctrine (for so the word is used 1 Cor. 2.6. 1 Co••. 14.20. H••b. 5 14. being opposed to Children and Babes that is w••ak in th•• faith, Rom. 14.1.) L••t them be minded as I am, which he had expressed before in the chapter from v. 4. to v. 15. and if any through weakness ••n faith be otherwise minded, as those Rom. 14 2.5. that thought Mosaical Laws were yet obligatory, God would in time reveal this to be their liberty, whic•• I now judge to be mine▪ Nevertheless, saith he, whereto ye have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same things. Which requires Christian communion without separation notwithst••nding such difference, and consequent∣ly condemns separation from Minister•• or Christians by reason of di∣versity of judgement about Church Government and Liturgy, and different practise about Conformity or Non-conformity to them, which are of less moment than those differences about meats and dayes, and therefore notwithstanding them, there should be walking together in preaching, hearing, praying, and other duties of Chri∣stian communion.

27. The Holy Ghost hath recorded the Prophesie of ••alaam, Numb. 24.3, 4. &c. of Caiaphas John 1••.51, 52. yea the say∣ings of Greek Infidel Idolatrous Poets cited by St. Paul, as the words of Aratus Acts 17.28▪ of Menander 1 Cor. 15.33 of Epim••∣nides, Titus 1.12. which shews the lawfulness of reading, hearing, and making use of true sayings of any though neither true Ministers of Christ, nor believers, but Idolaters and wicked enemies to the faith much more may the books be read, and the Sermons heard of such learned men, or preachers, as clear and deliver the word of God notwithstanding dissent, or disconformity to others about Li∣turgy and Church Discipline.

28. The Apostle 1 Thess. 5.20, 21. requires Christians not to despise prophesyings, but to prove all things: to hold fast that which is good. St. John 1 Epist. chap. 4. Beloved believe not eve∣ry Spirit, but try the Spirits whether they are of God; they make it not sin meerly to hear them that are erroneous if they try them, they may hear pretenders prophesying if they prove it, much more those Ministers who preach the truth; it is each Christians duty to try their doctrine, nor their sin to hear their Sermons.

29. This Authour himself, ch. 2. in the words before cited, al∣owed the hearing of gifted brethren, though not solemnly invested in∣to office; nor do I think he would think it unlawful to hear Pa∣rents or Masters Catechize, or Readers in the University, when they read Divinity Lectures, or dispu••e in Divinity Schools; and therefore by a like reason must allow the hearing of such Ministers, who Preach the Gospel, and are found in the faith, and are regu∣larly ordained according to the discipline of that Church in which they live, and are taken for true Ministers, by the godly and learn∣ed at home, and the most able and pious Pastours and brethren of the Reformed Churches abroad.

30. The reasons of this Authour, and other Separatists, against hearing the present Ministers, may be retorted against themselves. Mr. William Bradshaw having answered Mr. Francis Johnsons Arguments to prove this conclusion [It is not lawful to hear or have any spiritual communion with the present Ministry of the Church-assemblies of England] added Reasons or Arguments tend∣ing to prove, That it is a sin to separate from the publick Ministry of the Church-assemblies of England: directly contrary to Mr. Johnsons own Reasons, and usually in that regard, made in the same mood and figure, which are to be seen in the unreasonableness of the separation, p. 126. &c. Printed 1640. in Mr. Gatakers Rejoynder against the Reply of Mr. John Canne. And as for this Authours 12. Arguments, it were no hard matter to prove [That the Ministers of the separated Churches are not to be heard] by some, if not by all the middle terms he hath used to prove [That the present Ministers of the Church of England are not to be heard.] As for instance, That they come not in by the door, but climb an∣other way, by usurping Ministry without any regular Ordination by other Ministers, That they walk disorderly in separating themselves

from true Churches, they have Antichristian names or titles, in being called Masters, That they deny Christs Offices in submitting to, and imposing Orders or Ordinances about worship, not appoint∣ed by Christ, as Church-covenant, Paedobaptism, &c. That they are false prophets, that deny them to be true Churches of Christ, who hold the faith of Christ, That some commands of the Cere∣monial Law of Moses, are Rules to us Christians, That they are Babylon, and Antichristian in their constitution, and their practice in dividing from other Churches, not submitting to their Teach∣ers, those who have begotten them through the Gospel, without any well setled order among themselves, that they therefore long agree not, but crumble into many small companies, and sometimes take them to be members of their Churches who dwell in remote places; so that their gathered Churches extend as far some times as a Bishops Diocess, that they ascribe the power of the keys to the whole Church, confound Governours and Governed, allow men not set apart to that function, to teach publickly, and that fre∣quently, if not constantly, those to take upon them to prophesie, who are no Prophets, That they scandalize their brethren, their Governours by their invectives, That they partake of the sins of others, in allowing them to usurp that power which Christ hath not committed to them, That they cast contempt upon the ways of Christ, to wit, the Prayers and Preaching of the Ministers of the Church of England; That they go to the places of false worship, as Mr. Iohn Paget in his Arrow against the Separatists proves against Ainsworth, that they cannot expect a blessing from God upon their separation, it having no promise of God, but is against the union that should be among Christians; That it is a step to Apostacy, is a forsaking of the assembly of the Saints; to refuse to hear the present Ministers, and to joyn in Prayers with them, and too much experience hath proved what backsliding, if not to Po∣pery, yet to other errours of Antinomians, Familists, Quakers, Seekers, Ranters, hath been the fruit of Separation. But I for∣bear recrimination, and touching the sore, which I rather desire may be healed, and that our breaches may be made up, and not widened, to which this Authours reasonings tend.

31. The grounds upon which this Authour and other Separa∣tists deny the lawfulness of hearing the present Ministers, are ei∣ther false or doubtful; as, That nothing is to be done in the wor∣ship

of God, and Church-discipline, without a particular instituti∣on; That onely a Congregational Church is of Christs instituti∣on; That a true Ministry cannot be in a false Church; That a prescibed form of prayer by men, is unlawful; That we may not use any thing in Gods worship, which hath been composed by Popes, or used in the Church of Rome, with many more; where∣of many are shewed in this answer to be false, or uncertain, and insufficient for this Authours separation, and the fallacy of them manifested in so▪ many other Treatises of Conformists and non-conformists extant in Print, that I need not add any more in this place.

32. On the other side the Ministers of the Church of England, have so sufficiently proved the truth of their Ministry against Pa∣pists and Separatists, and so firmly by wrirting and otherwise, oppo∣sed Popery, even the Prelates, whom the Separatists do so much cry down as Antichristian, Popish, &c. that were not men resolved never to lay down a calumny they have once taken up, they would lay this down, and forbear pressing separation upon such exceptions, and imputations as this Authour hath gathered together in this his dung-cart, to furnish the inconsiderate, though perhaps otherwise well-minded in matters of Religion, to cast into their faces.

33▪ If it be not lawful to hear the present Ministers, because they are not rightly Elected, Ordained, in and by a Congregati∣onal Church, according to Christs institution (as this Authour con∣ceives) or because they use the Common-prayer-book, are faulty in their lives, or some evil consequences, as offence of some Saints, contempts of some ways of God, by accident ensue thereupon, then it will follow that every hearer, before he hears a Minister; must 1. be able to judge of the validity of these Reasons, whe∣ther they can warrant his not hearing. 2. He must be able to judge every Minister or Preacher he hears, whether he be rightly thus Elected, Ordained, or qualified. 3. He must actually exa∣mine him afore he hears him. 4. He must have power either to silence or withdraw from him, if he be not so qualified, and must use that power. But 1. Such ability is not in every hearer, nor indeed is it as the estate of things in this life is, ordinarily possible it should be. 2. Then Ministers Preaching and Ministry should

be at the will of their Auditors. For, if one may forbear hear∣ing, all may upon the same reason, and so the Minister be silenced or deprived for want of hearers. 3. This would put power in hear∣ers over their Ministers, and overthrow all Church-government. 4. It would introduce greater oppression of Ministers, then either Prelats or their Canons bring upon them. 5. Even the Mini∣sters of Congregational Churches would be in danger of being de∣serted by their members, their maintenance withdrawn, they ex∣posed to penury and other grievances, as well as Conforning Mi∣nisters. Nor do I think, but that many even of them have found the bitter fruits of such popular licentiousness out of such principles of separation, as well as others. 6. Nor can there be any setled order of government in Church or civil State, if the stated Mini∣sters or Magistrates according to the present Laws, though perhaps in some things unjust, yet in the main upholding truth of faith and worship, and the publick good, should be deserted or disobeyed▪ because every hearers or subjects conscience or minde is not satisfied.

34 Such a plea as is made by these men, is made by Papists for their Recusancy, that the Ministers of the Church of England are not rightly called, that they are in a Schism, with other the like ob∣jections; and then if the Plea of the Separatists be allowed, they have this advantage, That they should not be urged to hear the Ministers, nor have the penalties of Recusancy imposed on them. I say not that this reason would reach to the toleration of their Priests and Mass, but onely if such a Plea should be allowed, why the present Ministers should not be heard, the same, or the like ju∣stifies the Papists for not hearing them, and condemns the inflicting penalties for Recusancy, because, if this Authour say true, it is un∣lawful to hear the present Ministers. The same may be said in behalf of Quakers, Seekers, profane persons, ignorant people, they are not to be required to hear the Ministers, if it be unlawfull; and so the Magistrate should sin if he command them to hear, though Mr. Robinson himself in his Justification of Separation, pag. 242. as Printed in the year 1639. writes thus. That godly Magistrates are by compulsion to repress publick and notable Idolatry, as also to provide that the truth of God in his Ordinance, be taught, and published in their Dominions, I make no doubt: It may be also it is not unlawful for them by some penalty or other, to provoke their subjects universally unto hearing, for their instruction, and conver∣sion;

yea to grant they may inflict the same upon them, if after due teaching they offer not themselves unto the Church.

35. That position which takes away a considerable and impor∣tant part of Christians liberty, and puts a yoke on their ne••ks grie∣vous to be born, is not to be received, it being contrary to that which the Apostle chargeth on Christians, that they should stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and not be again intangled with the yoke of bondage. Gal. 5.1. Ye are bought with a price, become ye not the servants of men, 1 Cor. ••.23. But, if we hold it unlawful to hear the truth of Gods word taught by the present Ministers, we let go our liberty of hearing, which Christ hath not debarred us of, and make our selves servants to some whom alone we might hear, to the insharing of us if they err, so as that we may not hear them who may free us: which is no small bondage to a Christian, and tends to the calling Rab∣bines or Masters, forbidden Matt. 23.8, 10 and is an artifice by which Papists and others have still held people from discerning their errours, and kept them in dependence on them, and adherence to their party: Therefore it should not be received by us.

36. There is a negative superstition, when men abstain from some things, under a notion of Religion, or worship of God, which are not forbidden by God, but left free and indifferent: either not forbidden, or, if once they were, now antiquated or outdated: And of this so•••• was that Col 2.21. Touch not, taste not, han∣dle not; which was superstitious negative will-worship, as Mr. Cawdrey in his Treatise of Superstition, Sect 5. writes. This the Apostle v. 20. blames as being dogmatized, or yielding to mens ordinances, as living in the world, not dead with Christ from the elements of the world, though it have a shew of wisdom in will-worship, such was that of the Pharisees in not eating till they had washed their hands, observing the tradition of the elders condemn∣ed by Christ, Mark 7.7. as teaching doctrines the commandments of men; which he counts worshipping God in vain, and it hath these evil effects, 1. That it occasions the neglect of Gods com∣mands. 2. It bege••s unnecessary perplexities in mens spirits. 3. It puffs men up with conceit of more holiness then others. 4. Makes them censorious of those that are not as scrupulous as themselves, as if they were loose and profane. That such is the opinion of the

unlawfulness of hearing the present Ministers, as it is maintained by this Authour, I suppose is manifested by the answer and rea∣sons foregoing; and that it hath the evil effects here named, is too evident, by experience, in the neglect of the publick communion in worship, and other duties of love to them with whom commu∣nion in publick worship is not held, in the doubts and opinions of not observing the present Ministers with any respect, nor paying them dues imposed by Law, in conceiving themselves the Saints, others Antichristian, with many bitter taunts, scoffs, reproaches, revilings, tales of and against them, contrary to the fruits of the spirit of God mentioned, Gal. 5.22. Therefore it is not be to recei∣ved.

37. Hereto is to be added, That upon the same suppositions the opinion of denying the lawfulness of hearing the present Ministers, as it is asserted by this Authour, is an usurpation of Christs regal office, in putting a law on the consciences of men, arrogating that power which is proper to that one Lawgiver who is able to save and destroy, James 4.12. binding heavy burthens and grievous to be born, and laying them on mens shoulders, Matt. 23.4 imitating therein Pharisaical pride, and Papal dominion, and such other practises as they condemn in others. They that condemn those that permit not them to Preach, who will not use Ceremonies, are guil∣ty of the like Imposition, who permit not Christians to hear Preachers of the Gospel, unless they be in a Congregational Church, and be called by them; and while they charge others with adding to the word the inventions of men, are themselves guilty thereof.

38. Nor is it a light matter, but to be well pondered, That by this means the knowledge of the word of God is much hindred, and thereby the furthering of the kingdom of God, the coming of which we are to pray for, is neglected, such as hold the opinion of not hearing the Ministers in publick, thinking it enough if they can teach those of their society; if by conference they instill any truths into others, it is seldom without somewhat that alienates them from others, and engageth them to their own society, with diminution of love to others, if not worse dispositions and practices. Whence many remain in ignorance, profaneness, and errours, being hardned in opposition to the present Ministers; whom I deny not,

may give too much occasion by their loose walking, and negligent Preaching, in which they are not to be excused; yet is not the opinion of not hearing them while they Preach the Gospel thereby justified, but both to be blamed as guilty of hindring the good of mens souls, and Christs kingdom, and so in some sort Antichristian.

39. Nor are the effects of this opinion onely perni∣cious to them who are without; but evil also to them within, whether Ministers or people. To Ministers, in that by the neglect of hearing them, and such esteem as is due to them for their work sake they are disheartened, and by this wrangling, opposition, disquietness they meet with, disabled in a great measure from doing that good which otherwise might be done. Yea, by this opinion, their Ministery, though they Preach the Gospel, is dis∣anulled, and accounted as accursed. So the people, in that they are divided, become unpeaceable, some for not hear∣ing, being unnecessarily cast on the danger of the Laws, de∣prived of Estates and Liberty, in many places growing empty of fruitful knowledge, exposed to the attempts of Se∣ducers, who lie in wait to deceive, filled with bitterness of spirit towards others, though profuse towards those that a∣gree with them; and in a word, there is a sad breach be∣tween Christians of the same profession of faith, which is most contrary to the union which they should have in Christ by the same spirit; and I wish it were not true that it is fulfilled now, which was foretold 2 Tim. 4.3, 4. That men heap to themselves Teachers after their own lusts.

40. The many absurdities which are consequent on the o∣pinion, should disswade us from entertaining it. For if it be true, That it is unlawful to hear the present Ministers, then it is not lawfull for us to invite them to Preach, or to exhort them to it, or to rejoyce in it, or to pray to God that they may, or to praise God for their Preaching: Then it is bet∣ter that Quakerism, Ranting, Barbarism, Rudeness should be

spread among the people, then they be urged to hear the publick Preachers; That Magistrates do ill to command people to go to hear them; That they countenance or maintain them, then it is good at Sermon time to stay at home idle, or to lie in an Ale-house, rather then to go to hear them; the non-preaching Readers are as tolerable as Preach∣ing Ministers; their forbearing to Preach, is avoiding of sin; the less they Preach, and the less they are heard Preach, there is the less sin, their silencing is no evil, not they to be blamed for not Preaching; for it can be no evil for them to forbear Preaching, if it be a sin for others to hear them, they ought rather to forbear Preaching, then to draw others to sin. And yet, so wild is this opi∣nion, that many of them that refuse to hear and con∣demn as this Authour doth, the hearing of them, do yet except against non-preaching Ministers, blame the Mi∣nisters for not Preaching more frequently, and those that hinder their Preaching: Whereas, if the hearing them were unlawful, it were good counsel to perswade men not to hear their Sermons, nor to Preach them; which would introduce Irreligion, or some pernicious Errour, as the state of things now stands in this Na∣tion.

Sect. 16. Some passages in the writings of Mr. John Good∣win opposite to th•• Book Intituled, Prelatical Preachers none of Christs Teachers.

For a conclusion, whereas the Book mentioned in my Epistle to the Reader Intituled [P••elatical Preachers none of Christs Teacher] shewed to me as that, which did make men Se∣paratists, and the book was written not in a Logick form, and therefore not answered by me, yet the Authour being supposed the same with him who Printed in the year 1653. two books against some that about baptism left his Communion, I have here added some passages with animadversions,

which shew how his separation in this latter book crosseth his sayings in the former.

In his 40. Quaeries, Qu. 10. I read thus, When men may separate that which is precious from that which is vile, and enjoy it thus separated and apart without suffering any in∣convenience by that which is vile, is it a point of wis∣dome in them to deprive themselves of the enjoyment of what is precious, because there is somewhat, which they suppose to be vile near to it? Why then doth lie dissuade from hearing the present Ministers; who preach precious Doctrine, because of some things conceived vile in them, yet may be separated from that which is precious?

Qu. 14. The experience of many years in the reformed Churches abroad, and of some years amongst our selves at home, hath abundantly taught and informed us, that the said question hath yielded little other fruit unto those that have set their hearts to it, yea and to others also, but Con∣tention, Strife, Emulations, evil Surmizings, Distractions, Confusions, Alienations of mind, and Affections, amongst Christian Brethren, evill Speakings, Vilifyings, Revilings, needless and wastfull Expence of time, loss of many pre∣cious opportunities for matters of greatest consequence, unpro∣fitable disturbings and turmoylings of weak Consciences, shatte∣rings, scatterings, rendings, and tearings such of Churches and Christian Societies, who, till this root of bitterness sprang up amongst them, walked in love, and with the light of Gods countenance shining on them, holding the Vnity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace, edifying one another in their most holy faith, &c. These things were not the fruit of that question, but of that separation, which was made by occasion of it, and are as true of the separation this Au∣thour maintained in his later book.

Qu. 23. Whether ought not the law of edification [1 Cor. 14.26.] to over-rule all Laws and Precept concerning Spi∣ritual and Church Administrations, as the law of Salus po∣puli

ought to umpire and over-rule all politique laws and constitutions, in their respective executions? If so, the sup∣posed laws of outward calling of Ministers should not be urged, so as to hinder people from hearing Ministers, be∣cause of some defect supposed therein, when they may be heard to edification of the hearers.

In his Water-dipping, Consideration 17. Is it not then pre∣sumption in the highest, and an assuming of an Antichristian power, to impose Laws upon Christian societies, which the Lord Christ never imposed; yea, and to cesure and scanda∣lize them with the odious and reproachful terms of Anti∣christian, and unclean, onely for the transgression of their own Laws? What doth he less, who forbids to hear in his latter Book the present Ministers.

Consideration 22. Whereas Antichrist himself is not more Antichristian, then in claiming and exercising such a domi∣nion over the faiths of his Proselytes and Disciples; by vertue whereof he commandeth them to depend onely up∣on Ministes and Teachers of his own faith and wicked perswasion in matters of Religion, severely prohibiting un∣to them the hearing of Protestant Preachers; we under∣stand that the same high imposing spirit domineers more ge∣nerally in the Churches and Congregations, which solemnly conjure all their Proselytes and Converts not to hear Jesus Christ himself speaking by any other mouth then theirs; thus bearing them in hand, as if a voice from heaven, like unto that which was heard by the people at Christs Baptism, concerning him, had come to them also in refe∣rence to themselves and their Teachers, in this or the like tenor of words, We are the onely true Churches and Mi∣nisters of Christ: Hear us. Yea, there was of late a very great Schism made in one of these Churches, and the greater part aposynagog••ized by the lesser, because of the high misdemeanour of some of the Members, in hear∣ing the words of eternal life from the mouths of such Mi∣nisters, who follow not them in their way. Such principles

and practises as these, we judge to be most notoriously and emphatically Antichristian, and such wherein (as was said in a like case) the very horns and hoofs of the beast may be discerned. Yea, we cannot but judge them to be of most pernicious consequence to the precious souls of men, as depriving them of the best means and opportunities which God most graciously affordeth•• unto them for their recovery out of all such snares, wherein at any time their foot may be taken, Ex ore tuo.— From these words might the Authour of that Book [Prelatical Preachers none of Christs Teachers] have learned not to condemn the hearing of the present Ministers, as if none were to be heard but of his own way.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Dr. Sparks in his book of Uniformity allowed, and printed by command, 1607. c. 1. In the conference at Hampton Court, His Majesties Order was, That none of the Apocryphal books that had any errour, should be read, &c.
• * 1.2

  Dr. Barlow by the pre∣face to the second tome of Homilies, declared it might be lawful by our Church, to read other chapters, and alleadgeth Archbishop Abbot c. 10.
• * 1.3

  Quis ergo nisi infide∣lis negaverit fuisse apud inferos Christum?
• * 1.4

  So are the words in the book of Ordi∣nation.