A Just Defense of Certain Passages, Part 1 – Part 2

A Just Defense of Certain Passages · Part 1 – Part 2

p. 1THE FIRST PART. M^r. BALMFORDS PREFACE, WITH ANSWER TO IT.

To the Christian Reader, being none of I. B.those men, who (according to S. Pauls Prophecie) aa2 Tim. 3. 4.2 Tim 3:4louelove pleasures more than God.

To the same Christian Reader, beingT. G. none of those men, who (contrary to S. Iames his Rule) bbIam. 2. 1.Jas 2:1hold the Faith of Christ, or the Truth of God, with respect of persons.

I Could hauehave wished, good Reader, that M^r. B. had obserued those two Rules sometime prescribed their Orators at Athens, that they should speake when they spake, ccforeign. Lucian. de gynmas.without preface, or passion. For if any ddforeign. Plato de rep. l. 4. Nimis …diosa pempa res Circensibus. Sē. praefat. controvers.Preface whatsoeuer, p. 2as Plato saith, seeme long to those that desire to come to the maine matter; much more must a prolix and impertinent Preface, needs be no other than a meere Purgatorie to the studious Reader, either diuerting or with-holding him from that that most he desireth. And for passion and affection, it is apparent, that Ab ipsa veri contemplatione … abducunt. Quintil. inflit. l. 6. c. 3. Ratio id iudicari vult quod aequum est▪ iraid aequū videri vult quod iudicauit. Ratio nihil praeter ipsum de quo agitur, spectat: ira vanis & extra causam oberrantibus commovetur. Saepe infesta patrono reum damnat: & si ingeritur oculis veritas, amat & tuetur errorem: coargui nō vult; & in malè coeptis honestior illi pertinacia, quàm poenitentia (aut palnodia) videtur. Sen. de ira, l. 1. c. 15.they doe not onelyonly not helpe or further ought, but hinder much the discouerie either of truth or of right. But Mr. B. it seemeth, liked not to be tied to either of those Lawes: for he beginneth his Booke with a long Proeme, and his Proeme with much passion. Which course since he hath taken, and there is a necessitie of examining what he here saith, I must intreat thee to blame him (who hath giuen the occasion) and not me, if thou be kept longer than is fit, from that which thou hastn…st vntounto, and that should hauehave beene our principall aime in this worke.

SOme yeeres are past since Mr. G. tooke occasion,I. B. from casting of Lots to finde out for whose sake a dangerous storme was, to iustifie playing with Dice, Cards, &c. and to confute me by Name in open Pulpit.

It hath beene euer deemed that ffPri…ipus omen inesse …. foreign. Eurip. Aeol. Rarus principi…est exi…us bonus mal…. Principi… qu… sunt incho…a …alo, vix est …t bon… per…gantur exi…. Leo ad M…ur. Ep. apud Gr…. caus. 1. q. 1. Vbi tamē Gl…a paulò seve…ius, Vix …. n…quam. Malum principium …alus finis sequitur. Petr. …ns r…g. i…r. …iv. Hinc Cic. ad Attic. l. 10. ep. 20. Malè p…suimus initia; sic caetera sequentur.Beginnings T. G.are ominous: and such matter as men meet with at the first entrance of a worke, they are p. 3wont commonly to looke for and expect in the processe. If this worke of Mr. B. should by this rule be iudged of, it would receiue no small preiudice; sithence it beginneth at the first entrance with a flat vntruth, to wit, that I confuted him by name in open Pulpit.

True it is, that handling the first of ggIona. 1. ….Jonah 1Ionas, I tooke occasion, by the Lot there cast, to entreat at large of the Vse of Lots in generall, the rather for sundry doubts and scruples that by diuers had beene moued vntounto me concerning the Vse of them: And that among other things I defended the Vse of a Lot generally vsed in disport, either for combination of the sporters onelyonly, or for prosecution and determination of the sport; and consequently did iustifie the Lot vsed in Cards and Dice &c. rather than the Games themselues simply, or any otherwise, considered. For my maine question concerning lusorious Lots is, whether the light Vse of a Lot be a thing vtterly vnlawfull, as Mr. B. and some others auouch it to be; and so whether that make such games among others to be vnwarrantable, not whether in other respects they be vnwarrantable or no.

But that by name in open Pulpit I confuted Mr. B. or that in propounding of any Argument in this Argument by me refuted, I did in Pulpit once name any Author thereof, is a thing altogether vntrue; concerning which I hauehave cleared my selfe by solemne protestation to Mr. B. himselfe, as shall hhPost-script to his Preface.after by his owne confession in p. 4part also appeare: And many also that heard me and tooke notes of what was deliuered, can yet testifie as much.

I hearing thereof by many sent him this message; I. B.If it would please him to send the substance of the Confutation (for I dare not relie vponupon report) I would either reply or change mine opinion with thanks to God for him; though for the present I thought he failed in Iudgement, Discretion, and Charitie.

By whom M^r. B. heard this I know not. IfT. G. they told him ought that was vntrue, the fault was not mine but iiExod. 23. 1. Levit. 19. 16. Falson' an vero laudent, culpent, quem velint, Non floccifaciunt; dum illud quod lubeat sciant. Plaut. Trinum. 1. 2.Exod 23:1Lev 19:16theirs; peraduenture kkAtque egomet me adeò cum illis unâ ibidem traho, Qui illorum verbis falsis acceptor fui. Ibid. Multum enim derogatio praevalet, quando deroganti fides habetur. Foelix 2. ad Athan. c. 10. Detrabere an detrabentem libenter audire, utrum sit damnabillus non facilè dixerim. Bern. de consid. lib. 3. Pari reatu de…rabentes & audientes detinentur. Idem medit. cap. 42. Similiter culpabilis est is qui detra…it, & qui detrabentem audit. Idem mod. viv. c. 33. Itaque sci…e Hier. ad Nep…t. Cave ne aut ling… aut aures prurientes habeas, i. ne aut ipse alijs detra…as, aut detrabentes audias. Nemo invito … … ▪ Dis…at detractor, d…te videt non libenter audire, non facilè detra…ere.his also, in being ouer-credulous in that which the party, whom he made vse of betweene himselfe and me, could hauehave informed him to be otherwise. And I cannot but wonder by the way, that M^r. B. who here telleth his Reader that he dareth not relie vponupon reports, yet hath not doubted vponupon bare report, (if any such were) especially hauing since the same beene bettet informed, to auow peremptorily in print, that I confuted him by Name in open Pulpit. llforeignThese things sure doe not agree well together. If he durst not relie vponupon report then, how dare he p. 5now so far forth relie vponupon it, as to auerre that in print, which he could not hauehave but by report? vnlesse his iudgement be altred since concerning that point.

But hearing indeed, it seemeth, that among other Arguments answer was giuen to those also contained in his Dialogue; He shewed himselfe, as I was informed, therewith to be much offended, and sent me word, that if I would let him hauehave in writing what I had deliuered, it should be answered. Whereupon I sent him so much of it as concerned his Dialogue extracted out of the rest. Which he promised to consider of, and returne answer vntounto.

Yea, but in this businesse, M^r. G. in M^r. B. his opinion, hath failed much many waies. If he had then either told me so meeting me, as he did many times, or had sent me such word, I might then hauehave giuen him some satisfaction therein. But let vsus now at length heare, and others determine, wherein.

1. In Iudgement: Because that Doctrine was I. B.not drawne from his Text; Except this be a iudicious deduction.

Gentiles cast Lots in a most serious matter: Therefore Christians may vse Lotterie in Dicing, Carding, &c.

I perceiue if M^r. B. might hauehave the framingT. G. of M^r. G^•s. Arguments, there would be very iudicious deductions in them indeed. But if without p. 6any such iniudicious deduction, the Question of the Vse of Lots in generall might well by occasion of that Text be discussed, then is Mr. B. his deduction nothing iudicious, from thence taxing Mr. G. as failing in Iudgement, for taking occasion thereby to discusse that Question. But herein Mr. B. dealeth with me as he doth with Peter Martyr in his Dialogue; where, because mmPetr. Martyr in Iud. cap. 14.Judg 14Peter Martyr relateth in his discourse entreating of Dice-play, how nnforeign Plat. de repub. l. 10. & apud Plut. de tranquill. & consol. ad Apollon. Sed & Socrates apud Stob. c. 123. foreign.Plato compareth the Life of Man thereunto, he denieth, yea and seriously consuteth this Consequence, implying the same to be Peter Martyrs;

Plato compareth mans life to Table-play,

Therefore Table-play is lawfull.

I will not here stand vponupon the Ordinarie plea, that it is ooMagnos bonestus error est sequi duces. Quintil. instit. l. 1.n… great disgrace for a man (a meane man, as my selfe especially) to goe astray with great Guides, before he be informed (as my selfe neuer was till now) of their error. Nor will I say, as one sometime did (it was no warrantable saying) ppMalo ego cū Platone errare, quàm cum istis vera sentire. Cic. Tascul. l. 1. Verum hoc est Platonem Deum sacere: prout ipse alibi de eodem; Deus ille noster Plato. Cic. ad Attic. l. 4. ep. 15. Melius sanctiusque Aristot. ethic. l. 1. c. 6. foreign Vnde & illud eiusdem sertur; Amicus Plato: sed magis amica veritas. Sed & Plin. ep. 8. l. 5. Honestissimum maiorum vestigia sequi, si mo…ò recto itmere processerint.I will chuse rather to erre with such, than to goe the right way with any other: as if it were safe, as some qqCùm Pastor ordinarius & a…quis …lius qui praedicat non voca…us contraria docent, debet omninò populus Pastorem suum potius sequi quàm illum alterum qui non est Pastor, etiam si fortè contingeret, vt Pastor erraret. Bellarm. de Cleric. l. 1. c. 8. Quasi cum Cic. pro Balb… diceret, Vti…us bonesti…sque illo duce errare, quàm hoc magistr… erudi…i.Papists auow, to erre at all with any. But yet, considering the ordinarie p. 7practise of some rrPeter Martyr, Dr. Whitakers, Mr. Perkins, and others. An ego verear ne me non satis deceat, quod illos decuit? Plin. ep. 3. l. 5.principal Diuines of our times, and such as Mr. B. himselfe (I am sure) esteemeth for iudicious; as also treading in the track of ssThe now Lord Archbishop of Canterbury; and the late L. Bishop of London.two Reuerend Prelates (besides others) in this very particular, who take occasion vponupon the same Text (though not so largely as I doe) to consider of Lots in more generall manner than concerneth the particular Lot in the Text mentioned, and to speak the ttB. King on Ion. lect. 9.one of them somewhat of the Lusorie Lot also now questioned; I shall craue leaue of Mr. B. to incline to their Iudgements herein rather than his, till he bring better Reasons for his Opinion than as yet he hath brought. Nor will Mr. B. euer be able to proue that eueryevery by-point handled by occasion of a Text, must of necessitie be necessarily deduced euer from the words of the Text. Howsoeuer it be, it mattereth not much, since it neither mendeth Mr. B. his cause, nor yet marreth mine in the Point betweene vsus controuerted.

2. In Discretion. Because that Doctrine (though I. B.occasioned by his Text, yet) so insisted vponupon, incourageth Gamesters in their sinfull course, and buildeth vp those Abuses, which the Lawes of our Land would pull downe.

The Charge, you see, riseth, From a grosseT. G. failing in Iudgement to a fouler faulting in Discretion, if all that Mr. B. here auerreth, be true. But whether my discourse doth, either incourage Gamesters vntounto any sinfull course; (vnlesse to vse p. 8any Lot in Game be a sinfull course, which M^r. B. must not yet take for granted) or build vp such Abuses as our Lawes would pull downe; I appeale to the Booke it selfe; let M^r. B. either shew so much out of it, or else his uuCalumniatur, qui quod defert, non probat. Reg. Iur.Charge here is but a meere Calumnie.

But of this more hereafter.

3. In Charitie: Because he confuteth me by I. B.Name (as I was certified) not hauing had any conference with me either by speech, or by writing, though I be his Neighbour Minister.

The heauiest Charge commeth last. A breachT. G. of Charitie at least. To faile in Iudgement or Discretion, may argue some weaknesse of braine; to faile in Charitie argueth xxIdeò imperitiam confiteri solemus, ut malitiae suspicionem vitemus. Hieron. adv. error. Ioan. Hierosol.much more, an euill minde. But let M^r. B^s. words here and else-where be well weighed, and peraduenture they will giuegive ouer-much ground of suspition of some want of that in him, that he chargeth me here to hauehave failed in. M^r. G. saith he, failed in Charitie, because he confuteth me by Name, as I was certified, hauing had no conference with me by speech or writing, though I be his neighbour Minister. Not to insist much on by-matters; that M^r. B. is my neighbour Minister, is more than euer I heard before: that he is yyA divisis ad conjuncta nulla est consecutio. Aristot. soph. elench. l. 2. c. 3.my neighbour and a Minister, it may well be; yet it is more than I knew, when I dealt in this point; nor doe I yet know, where his place of abode is, saue that himselfe of late hath told me, that I p. 9goe oft by his doore; and so he may be termed my neighbour, yet in no very strict sense, as any other Inhabitant in the Borough of Southwarke may. But to let that passe, if M^r. B. his meaning be that I confuted him by name in the Pulpit, as he charged me at first, and which I vtterly denie; how will it stand with Charitie or Conscience vponupon a bare report, which he saith else-where he dareth not relie on, and that a…ter better information acknowledged to hauehave beene giuen him, yet still so oft, and so peremptorily to charge me therewith, and with breach of Charitie therein? If his meaning be that I hauehave since that confuted, and doe (the zzVox audita perit: litera scripta manet.letter of my Booke still abiding) by name confute him, not in the Pulpit, but in print, because he saith in the present tense, he confuteth me by name, I denie it not, nor doe I hold it any breach of Charitie so to doe. His Booke is abroad vnderunder his Name, as well as mine is vnderunder mine: Nor is it any more a breach of Charitie for me by Name so to confute him in the one, than it was in him by Name to controll and oppose Peter Martyr in the other. But neither could this be any ground for M^r. B. then to iudge me guilty of vncharitablenesse, when as yet it was not; nor could any certifie him then of it, vnlesse they knew more of my minde then, than I my selfe did; nor was it done before I had dealt with M^r. B. by writing, as himselfe in the next passage freely acknowledgeth. M^r. B^s. words therefore hang but vnhandsomly together, when he p. 10saith, he thought I failed in Charitie, because I confute him by Name, as he was certified, &c. His minde and his pen, or both, and the knowne truth, it may be feared, aaIllic mihi aliud dictabat animus, aliud scribebat calamus. Erasm epist. ad Ludov. Viv. lib. 19.had some strugling together, when he wrote thus.

Well; Mr. G. sent me his Answer to my Dialogue.I. B. I acknowledge it with hearty thanks. But why hauehave I not replied in so many yeeres? I answer: Sat citò, si sat benè. To speake freely; I thinke I should neuer hauehave replied, in hope that the Question would hauehave died, had not M^r. G. confuted my Dialogue in Print. But now, the rather, being prouoked by many learned Ministers and other. who tell me, that seeing of all those whom M^r. G. confuteth, viz. Peter Martyr, Zwinglius, Cartwright, Danaeus, Perkins, Fenner, &c. I onelyonly liue, I ought to reply, lest my silence should giuegive way to impious iniquitie; I am ready to performe my promise in replying. Which indeed I could not hauehave done so conueniently before, because the answer, which M^r. G. sent me, had not the positiue grounds of his Opinion, which the printed booke hath.

True it is, I was not daintie to deliuer M^r. B.T. G. an Answer to the whole Substance of his Dialogue, but vponupon promise returned me first from M^r. B. that in defence of his owne Arguments he would reply thereupon. Which himselfe also, after long delay, being vrged either to doe or tredeliuer it, did by word of mouth to my p. 11selfe againe oblige himselfe either to doe or to yeeld the truth; for so his words both times were. But after a yeere or twoes stay longer, when nothing would be returned, and I was by diuers informed, how I was in meetings oft traduced and backbited, mine intentions scanned, my positions taxed, some as senslesse, some as impious, diuers assertions fastned on me, that I neuer deliuered, diuers of those bb- nihil est, Quin malè narrando possit depravarier. T…r. Phorm. 4. 4.depraued that were deliuered, and that M^r. B. himselfe among others was not sparing herein: I condescended at length to the importunitie of those (yet hauing had the whole worke viewed and reviewed first by diuers, as well religious as iudicious Diuines, and hauing by writing dealt with diuers others of contrary Iudgement,) that had pressed me to the printing of it.

Now why M^r. B. did not all that while reply vponupon mine Answer, which he was so instant to hauehave, he rendreth two Reasons; in my minde very weake ones.

1. He hoped, it would hauehave died. And how was that likely, when his Challenge had reuiued it; and that bruited abroad, a Replie was expected. But his former Dialogue belike was enough to dash all that either had beene or could be said without further Reply.

2. The writing I sent him, had not my positiue grounds. As if his owne Arguments, had they beene effectuall, could not without them hauehave beene sufficiently defended.

Why now at length he doth it, he hath two p. 12Grounds likewise, but those suggested to him from others, as the former were from himselfe.

1. Because he onelyonly liueth of all those whom Mr. G. refuteth. Where in the Catalogue of those whom he saith I refute, he reckoneth some, as Zwinglius, whom I refute not at all, as not knowing certainly what they held, some that himselfe refuteth as well as I doe, and that allow Cards and Tables as not simply vnlawfull, as Peter Martyr, Danaeus, and Perkins; that so both I might seeme vtterly to dissent from them concerning the lawfulnes of those Games, whereas ccMr. G. maintaineth no more cōcerning Cards and Tables, than Peter Martyr, Danaeus, and Perkins doe.I maintaine no more concerning the lawfulnesse of them in themselues than they doe, (though in our grounds, I confesse, wee differ) and that himselfe might seeme, as the last man aliue amongst them, to stand vp in the defence of them, when as indeed he opposeth and impugneth them, and these Games, by them not vtterly disallowed.

2. Lest by his silence he should giuegive way to impious iniquitie. Here is againe terrible imputations. They were before in the priuatiue; Want of Iudgement, want of Discretion, want of Charitie; in the manner of my dealing. They come now in the positiue: Impious Iniquitie; Not Iniquitie alone, but Impietie and Iniquitie, the breach of both Tables, combined in one: where, thinke we, but in the matter of my discourse? Surely, if such impious Iniquitie be maintained by me in this Argument, I beshrew M^r. B. for p. 13sparing his pen, when he might by discouerie of it in his reply hauehave preuented the printing of it: And little cause I hauehave to thanke those my friends before spoken of, that hauing had many the view of it before it came forth, would not any of them doe me the fauour to aduertise me thereof. But ddforeign. Plato apud Plut. de adul. & de util. ex inim. Amantium coeca sunt judicia. Hieron. ad Ioan. Hierosol. foreign. Greg. Naz. ep. 13. & 27. & erat. de Eccl. Naz. Fallit affectus. Plin. ep. 44. l. 4.affection peraduenture might ouersway iudgement in them. And eeforeign. Plut. de util. inim. foreign. Ibid.an Aduersarie many times is sharper-sighted then a Friend. Meane while remember, I pray thee, good Reader, that there is ffSi accusasse sufficiet, quis innocens erit? Iulianus Delphidio apud Ammianum hist. l. 18.nothing easier than to charge and accuse: all the skill is, which M^r. B. must looke to, to make good.

Before I proceed, I protest before God, that II. B. esteeme M^r. G. as a learned, painfull, and faithfull Minister, and a right honest man; and therefore pray thee (Christian Reader) that whatsoeuer I write may be considered as concerning the Question betweene vsus, and not in any wise applied to the least preiudice of so reuerend a Brother, or to any of his excellent parts.

If M^r. B^s. purpose were to deale onelyonlyT. G. with the Question in controuersie, why runneth he out into ggforeign. Aristot. rhet. l. 1. c. 1.such by-matters, as make nothing at all thereunto? Why doth he labour so much to cast such aspersions, to procure p. 14hhforeign. Arist. ib.preiudice, as well vponupon my manner of my dealing, as on the matter that I deale in? Or what is this but as if one should cast filth and durt openly in a mans face, and yet beare the standers by in hand, that he did it not to disgrace him? But proceed we.

So excellent that I wonder what moued him to I. B.publish his Opinion in print; and the more because of many passages in his Booke.

Me thinks I heare some of those here, thatT. G. iiVideas praemitti alta suspiria, sicque quadam cum gravitate & tarditate moesto vultu, demissis supercilijs, & voce plangentiegredi maledictionem, & quidem tanto plausibiliorē, quanto creditur ab his qui audiunt, corde invito & condolentis affectu proferri. Doleo, inquit, vehementer de eo, quia diligo illum satis. Grande damnum: nam-alias quidem in pluribus valet: caeterū in hac parte excusari non potest. Bern. in Cant. 24.Bernard speaketh of, who when they desire most to disgrace a man, begin first to tell of his good parts, and how much it grieueth them that one otherwise so well qualified, should be so far ouer-seene. But to let that passe.

M^r. B. here wondreth what should moue me to put mine opinion (not relating what it is) in print. As if some new opinion were now broached by me that either had neuer beene heard of, or neuer published before. Whereas he cannot be ignorant, that both the Opinion held by me concerning the lawfulnesse of a lusorious Lot in generall, is, and hath euer beene (for ought that can be shewed to the contrary) more generally receiued than that that he holdeth, and hath beene in print maintained by others before me; yea concerning Cards and Tables, (which I deale with principally, in regard of the Lot in them, defending them onelyonly as not in that regard vnlawfull) that they were in print defended by p. 15kkPeter Martyr, at least; if not Danaeus too.some of those that himselfe mentioneth, before I was borne, or he either.

I might wonder rather that M^r. B. should thinke either himselfe or any other now adayes so priuiledged, that they might take libertie to themselues to publish new conceits in Print, contrary to what is and hath beene generally receiued, and yet thinke much that any other in Print should oppose them.

But many passages in my Booke shew that I ought not so to hauehave done.

First, He taketh knowledge of many enormiousI. B. Crimes, which accompanie Dice, Cards, &c. p. 193. and in the quotations.

Secondly, He giueth this Rule, That that, which is no necessarie dutie, but a thing indifferent onelyonly otherwise, may not be done, where is strong presumption vponupon good ground, that it shall spiritually endanger a mans selfe, or others, by giuing occasion of sin vntounto the one or the other, p. 107, 108, 109.

If many and grieuous sins attend Dice, Cards, &c. If those games be too too commonly abused, as he confesseth, p. 194. and if an indifferent thing may not be done which giueth occasion of sinne: I wonder why M^r. G. writeth in defence of Dice, &c. And the more, because he granteth, that where the vse and abuse of a thing are so enwrapped and entangled together, that they cannot easily be seuered the one from the other, then the vse of the thing it selfe (if it be vnnecessarie otherwise) would be wholly abandoned, p. 262, 263.

p. 16Here is the summe of M^r. B^s. Argument.T. G. Mr. G. taketh notice that many enormious Crimes oft (for so I say onelyonly) accompanie Cards and Dice: and they are by many too commonly abused: and he granteth further, that things indifferent may not be done when they giuegive occasion of euill: and that where the vse of a thing and the abuse of it are so entangled together, that they cannot easily be seuered, the thing being vnnecessarie, would wholly be abandoned. Therefore Mr. G. ought not to hauehave deliuered his Opinion, that a Lot vsed in game is not simply vnlawfull; and that it is not the Lot either in these games or in any other (for it is vsed in many besides these) but such abuses attending them, when they are not, or cannot well be seuered from them, that makes them euill or vnlawfull. For this is my maine opinion giuen of them. Or rather, if you will hauehave the truth of it; Therefore Mr. G. ought not to hauehave contradicted M. B. his opinion, that no Lot in game is lawfull.

Hee might hauehave added, what llTu id quod boni est, excerpis, dicis quod mali est. Ter. Phorm. 4. 4.I adde, that those euils attend other Games wherein no Lot is, as well as those wherein it is: And that it is not the Lot therefore from whence they arise: and that the vse and the abuse may easily be seuered by those that be well affected, as well in these Games as in any other. And I might adde, that Martyr, Danaus, yea and mmIstiusmodi ludi nō ita prorsus damnarentur à nobis, si in eorum usu, quod licet, locum haberet. Calvin. epist. 374.Caluin himself, though they saw all that he saith I say, yet durst not passe such a sentence on them as M^r. B. hath done. But what force is in the Consequence, let any indifferent man iudge.

p. 17Thirdly, He sheweth in many pages, how seuerely I. B.Tables, but especially Dice, be condemned by Lawes Ciuill, Canonicall, and Municipall, that is, our English Statutes, as he sheweth at large, Lib. 8. §. 5. 8. He wisheth the Lawes were yet more seuere, and put in better execution, p. 206. He saith, that our common dicers may be marshalled among the flocke of the Deuils followers, p. 217. He affirmeth most rifelings and Lotteries to be little better than vnlawfull Games, p. 120. And he teacheth that by these Games we must not giuegive offence to the Lawes vnderunder which we liue, p. 251. Now I wonder that so good a man is not afraid to offend our Law by allowing forbidden Games, euen Dice, as well as Cards &c. which consist not only of Lotterie.T. G.

To all this, that is indeed nothing but a deale of dust and smoke raised to dasle mens eyes, that they may not discerne what the point in Controuersie is, I hauehave already in my Discourse of Lots nnOf Lots, chap. 8. sect. 8.answered at large. And it is a friuolous course for M^r. B. to produce it here, passing dry-foot by the Answer that is thereunto there giuen.

Thither therefore I might iustly send M^r. B. for an answer. But I answer here againe in few words.

1. Our Lawes doe not simply or generally condemne or forbid Cards or Dice, but to some onelyonly, vsed in some manner, and at some times.

p. 182. It is not in regard of any such superstitious conceit of the vnlawfulnesse of a Lot in them, as M^r. B. maintaineth, that either ours or any other Lawes condemne or inhibite them.

3. It is a grosse falshood that I offend our Lawes by allowing any Games that are thereby forbidden, so far forth as the Law forbiddeth them. Mine owne words by M^r. B. himselfe produced cleare me thereof: And it is too palpable a Calumnie to charge me therewith. If a man should defend the lawfulnesse in themselues of bowling, coiting and logeting against some fantasticall spirit that should question the same, (as ooNihil tam absurdum est, quod non ab aliquo etiam Philosophorum dictum sit. Postremo nemo aegrotus quicquam somniat Tam infandum, quod non aliquis dicat Philosophus. Varro Eumenid. Anaxagoras nivem esse nigram dixit. Xenophanes Lunam habitari, eamque terram esse multarum urbium & montium. Cic. Lucull. Terram moveri, coelum consistere, Philolaus, Cleanthes, alij. Laert. Philol. Plut. Num. Cic. Lucul. Sen. nat. quaest. l. 7. c. 2. Iam Haeretici quorū illi Patriarchae, ut scitè Tertull. pr…siript. quae portenta dogmatū protulerunt? Nec nuptias contra…ere, …ec corpus vestire Ad…mitae; n…c vinū gustare, Severiani & Encratitae; nec carnibus vesci, Saturniani, & Ebionitae; nec panem frangere, aut olus scindere Manichaei; nec judicia exercere Tertullianistae; nec gladio uti, bellare, jurare, magistratum gerere, porcina, sangu…e, suffocato vesci Anabaptistae; nec nisi precibus. duntaxat vacare Mesaliani, &ç. licitum cense. bant. V. dendi Epiphan. Aug. Theodor. Danae. de Haeres. Iudaeuli verò quam in hoc genere foecundi? nec quo spinā è pede evellat, nummūve lapsum attollat, corā imagine incurvare se licitum; nec potandi causasimulacro labia admovere, cujus per os aqua profluat; nec ornamenti causa humanā effigiem, Solisve aut Lunae imaginē sculptā habere; nec mulieri et…icae obstreticari; nec per sabbatum super herbam ambulare, nec pomū assare, nec manus lavare, nec lucernam extinguere, nec supellectilem incendio subtra…ere, &c. Vide Pr…cept. Mos. negat.there is nothing almost so absurd but some or other hauehave held) would any man, thinke we, be either so malitious or so senslesse, as to tax him for the same as offending our Lawes, because in the same Lawes these are also prohibited, though there be no Lot in them, euen as strictly as those other are? Or were he a iustifier therefore of the abuses accompanying the same, that should defend them as in themselues not vnlawfull?

p. 194. I will not answer M^r. B. here as the Philosopher did one, that telling idle stories, was still asking, ppforeignIs it not a wonder? qqforeign. Aristot. apud Plut. de garrul.It is a wonder, quoth he, rather that any man can endure to heare thee thus trifle. But I wonder that M^r. B. since he deemeth it so fearefull a thing to be faulty herein, is not afraid himselfe to offend our Lawes, I might say, by fastning vponupon them or the makers of them such superstitious conceits concerning the vse of a Lot, as I verily thinke M^r. B. himselfe cannot imagine, euer entred into their braines; as supposing that these Lawes were framed vponupon such Grounds as his Booke is built vponupon: but I say rather, by condemning that that they allow and approue of, and that not in the meaner sort, but in those of best fashion, that should be examples vntounto others, and I might adde, at such times, when, if at one time more than other, they ought to be most religious of any. M^r. B. therefore if he doe well remember himselfe, may turne his wonderment here from me to himselfe.

Lastly, though I grant that common Dicers may well be ranked among the Deuils followers, yet followeth it not that all vse of a Die is therefore to be condemned; no more than it will follow that because Tauerne-haunters may well goe in the same ranke with such, therefore all resort to any Tauerne on any occasion whatsoeuer is to be vtterly disallowed.

Here I hauehave occasion to thinke, that I may hauehaveI. B. p. 20some more comfort in mine opinion, than M^r. G. can hauehave in his. For he nameth famous, learned and godly men concurring with me in Opinion. …ut in the multitude of his quotations, I finde none approuing Dice in play. And whereas some learned Diuines, in some sort, allow Games consisting of Lot and wit, but altogether condemne Dice, M^r. G. defendeth mine Opinion, disapprouing a mixt, as well as a meere Lot, because, as he saith, a true Lot is in either, p. 126. and he deemeth them to be amisse, who allow Lots in Game, and y…t adde for a Caution, that religiousnesse be vsed in the action, in regard that holy things must be done in holy manner.

1. How any man may hauehave sound comfortT. G. in any error, be it what it will, is more than I am aware of: since that eueryevery error is vnsound and contrary to truth: nor can I see therefore how that should minister any sound or true comfort, that hath no soundnesse nor truth it selfe. Some **Hin… Plin. ep. 5. l. 3. Ab illis, quibus notum est, quos quantosque autores sequar, facilè impetrari posse confido, ut errare me cum illis ferant.excuse there may be for it, but small comfort in it, when a man together with some great ones goeth out of the way. M^r. B. therefore must first be assured of the truth of what he holdeth, before he can from his company hauehave any true comfort of it. The rather since that by his owne confession, qqM^r. B. dedicat. epist to Dialog.he ought not to teach a… vntruth, though it were to Gods glory: and what comfort can he hauehave of doing that, that ought not by him to be done?

2. The Reason produced by him (supposing p. 21all he saith) is a very weake one, and such as I doubt not but he himselfe would hauehave waiued, had he beene of the first that had questioned some things yet in controuersie with vsus.

3. Many famous, learned and godly concurring with M^r. B. I name not, because I know not many; howbeit indeed all I know, I name. And for those that concurre with me in the iustification of a Lot vsed in Game; I made no speciall or particular relation of them, not because none such were, for there are diuers, but because I was not so much to deale with them that concurred, as with those that either did indeed, or might seeme to oppose. Of which number I was religious not to misse or omit any one that I could light vponupon, whom I found ought in to that effect.

4. Albeit it be not much materiall what humane Authorities are on either side: since that neither the ssIam. 2. 1. Nec personarum, sed rerum pondere vnumquodque iudicandū est. Hieron. ad Pamm. & Ocean.Jas 2:1Faith of Christ, nor the Truth of God are to be held with respect of persons: Yet since that M^r. B. would seeme herein at least to relie somewhat thereupon, and would make what I maintaine odious, or suspitious at least, by the nakednesse of it, and the want of famous, learned and godly concurring in it, such as he glorieth here to hauehave concurring with him: let me a little, good Reader, intreat thy patience, which M^r. B. enforceth me, I might well say, to abuse, I must needs say, to detaine with impertinent discourse all this while much against mine owne will, while, to remoue this imputation, p. 22I runne out a little further in relating the Opinions of others on either side, and in clearing the state of the Question in Controuersie, which M^r. B. to procure the more distaste to his opponents, (as the manner is of those that maintaine a weake cause, ttforeign. Greg. Naz. de pace 3.willing rather to fasten vponupon any by-matter, that may breed some iealousie of the aduerse partie, than to keepe close to the point it selfe) propoundeth still in hypothesi, in one particular that he knoweth to be much abused, when the Question indeed is a great deale more generall.

The Question therefore is not betweene M^r. B. and me, whether Dice-play, which so oft he hath vp, that he might traduce mee as a maintainer of it, as it is ouer-frequently vsed or abused rather, is allowable or no; but whether any Lot at all in the largest sense taken, vsed in game, or to speake as himselfe doth in the very Title of his Booke, whether any Game at all consisting in chance, be allowable. So that Mr. B. if hee please, may put the Question as well of Euen and Od, or of Best by trust, or of Heads and Points, or of Crosse and Pile, as of Dice; and of Shuffling of Arrowes blind-fold or behind a mans backe, or of Casting Bowles together out of some one mans lap or armes to decide or sort who shall side, as of Cards & Tables, which come here into disquisition only, in regard that a Lot either is, or is deemed to be in them. And I maruell why M^r. B. as he peremptorily cōdemneth Cards & Tables, & requireth an vtter necessary abolition of them, p. 23doth not withall also very seriously and seuerely enioine all Parents to restraine and vtterly inhibit their Children from playing at Cockall, and Crosse and Pile, and Euen and Od, and Heads & Points, considering that these are Lotteries likewise or Games consisting of chance as well as those are; and there is impious iniquity therefore (to vse M^r. B^s. tragicall tearmes) by his Grounds, as well in the one as in the other. But it would peraduenture hauehave beene somewhat too ridiculous if he should so hauehave done.

But to leaue that, in their iudgement concerning such Games, there is the more seeming difference among Diuines and others, because aaSee my booke of Lots. ch. 6. sect. 3. p. 126.they doe not generally agree about the Definition of a Lot, in regard whereof also it is ofttimes vncertaine whether they doe allow a Lot in Game or no, taken in that large extent of signification that M^r. B. and I vnderstand it.

Whereas therefore the Games controuerted are of two sorts, some depending wholly vponupon Casualty, and some but in part onelyonly; bbFennor of recreat. cap. 4. Bamford Dialog.some hold a Lot in both, and therefore vtterly condemne either; ccDanae. de ludo aleae. Babington on Decalog. Perkins Cases of Conscience. lib. 3. cap. 4.some hold a Lot in the former, but not in the latter, and therefore allow those, but disallow these, some ddIacob. Rex foreign. lib. 3.hold a Lot in neither, and therefore allow either; eeB. King in Ion. lect. 9.some hold a Lot in both, and yet allow either. Now in the generall Conclusion thus laid downe, it is true that M^r. B. goeth with the first, and I with the last; but in application of the Iudgements of the middle sort to the Games in question, I concurre p. 24in part with the former, wholly and fully with the latter, whereas M. B. dissenteth wholly and fully from both.

There concurre therefore with me in allowance of the Games of both sorts, First. Our most high and mightie Soueraigne himselfe ffIacob. Rex vbi sup.King Iames, for his singular learning and iudgement admired as well abroad as at home, and whose voice therefore may well in a far greater controuersie beare weight. Secondly, the right Reuerend the late ggB. King on Ion.Lord Bishop of London: yea and thirdly hhCaluin. ep. 374.M. Caluine himselfe, who would not he saith, vtterly condemne Cards and Dice, were it not for the ordinary abuse of them.

In allowance of the latter there concurre againe with me, iiBabingt. on Command 8.Bishop Babington, kkP. Martir. on Iudg. 14.Judg 14Peter Martyr, llDanaeus de ludo aleae. c. 6.Danaeus, mmPerk. Cases of Conscience, l. 3. c. 4. S. 3. q. 2.Perkins. All whom, as well the latter as the former, yea the latter more specially, M^r. B. opposeth: M^r. Fenner only, M^r. B^r. teacher, (for so nnM^r. B. answer to Argum. 5. and defence of Arg. 4.himselfe acknowledgeth him) for ought I know, (nor doe I name any other, howsoeuer M. B. say I name famous, learned and godly men, concurring with him in opinion) therein cleerely or directly passing sentence on his side.

Nor helpeth it M^r. B. that I grant, willing ingenuously to imbrace and acknowledge ooVndecunque esfulserit Lux neuliquam spernenda veritatis est.whatsoeuer light of truth I can from any side discerne to discouer it selfe, that the grounds that some of them hauehave laid being duly considered, fight as well against the one sort of Games, which yet they defend, as against the other, p. 25which they disallow. For their Iudgement is to be framed by what they conceiued and apprehended, and doe themselues directly declare and deliuer vntounto vsus, not by what may be by vsus deduced, though neuer so necessarily it follow (being more than they saw or were aware of,) from any other position or conclusion of theirs.

Schoolemen or other such writers of former times I name not now, though I might many, and hauehave done some obiter in my ppChap. 3. sect. 1, 2.Booke; because M^r. B. would peraduenture except against them. As for the Ancients indeed little is to be found of this Controuersie in them; because the exception taken against them for the dependance vponupon casualtie is in truth but a new conceit, neuer heard of till of late. And for Diuines among vsus, I doubt not but a far greater number of our Reuerend Brethren in the Ministerie abiding here about the Citie, to goe no further abroad, yea euen of those that M^r. B. himselfe cannot but esteeme reuerently of, doe dissent from M^r. B. than concurre in Iudgement with him, in the condemning of all Lotterie whatsoeuer vsed in disport; or, because some of them may vnderstand Lotterie otherwise than he and I doe, in condemning all light and lusorious actions that either meerely or mixtly depend vponupon Casualty.

Fourthly, He granteth that Prayer specially applied I. B.to the Lot may be conceiued, where the matter is more weighty, and the euent of some consequence, p. 26p. 91. And yet he holdeth, that the lesse weighty the matter is, wherein a Lot is vsed, the lawfuller the Lot is, p. 111. The reason why I wonder at this passage, shall be giuen in my Reply.

M^r. B. should hauehave done well then to hauehaveT. G. forborne to trouble both himselfe and vsus with telling vsus of this his wonderment, till he meant to giuegive vsus a reason of it. For I suppose hardly any man liuing beside himselfe can guesse what the, And yet, here should intimate, till he further explaine himselfe.

The last passage now to be obserued as matter I. B.of my wondring, is this. Notwithstanding, he confidently affirmeth that we may not doe ought without warrant, p. 301. sufficiently confirmeth the same; because such an act is not done of Faith, and therefore not free from sinne, Rom. 14. 23. but is a meere presumption, and tempting of God, pag. 313. & quot. ^a. & ^b. and earnestly reproueth one kinde of Lotterie (why not all against which the same reason is of like validitie?) because not found reuealed in any word of God, but brought in either by Satan, or by some of his Instruments, who are addicted to vanitie, p. 315. & 316. and yet he auoucheth, That it is a sufficient warrant for the vse of Lots; in that the oppugners, being learned, can say nothing against them, but what hath beene, or may be sufficiently answered, pag. 235. May I not wonder that so iudicious a Scholler doth not obserue this discrepance? Lottery is vnlawfull, if not p. 27warranted by the word; which position supposeth the word to be perfect, as is the Author thereof; and secondly Lotterie is lawfull, if learned men can say nothing out of the word against it. Which position supposeth two things, viz. that the word is like the Lawes of Men, that is, imperfect, as be the Authors thereof: and, that learned men cannot so faile in diligence of reading, clearenesse of vnderstanding, and firmnesse of memorie, but that, if there were in the word any thing aginst Lotterie, they could not but see it.

1. I feare there will not want those that willT. G. qqIudex bonus esse nemo potest, qui suspicione certa non movetur. Ci…. in Verr. 5.strongly suspect that some speeches of M^r. Bs. here proceed rather from spleane and gall against M^r. G. than from louelove to any truth supposed to be opposed by him; and that with much better colour, than M^r. B. can deduce that which he here chargeth me with from any words of mine here alledged. For what one title of all that M^r. B. alledgeth here out of my Booke, intimateth any such thing as is here by M^r. B. thence deduced, to wit, that the word of God is imperfect. As if that which there is nothing in Gods word against it, were not warranted by the word: or the word must needs be imperfect if this be held sufficient warrant for an action, that there is nothing in Gods word against it. For thence must this hainous Charge be inferred, if from any part of my Position at all. Which Position, or whatsoeuer else M^r. B. pleaseth to stile it, (for it is propounded by me only, as matter p. 28of consideration, not as a peremptory position,) he should hauehave done well to hauehave related all out in mine owne words, which are these; It may be thought a sufficient warrant for the vse of th…se Lots, in that the oppugners of them being m…n so learned, and so well read in Gods word, can say nothing against them, but what either hath beene or may be sufficiently answered by others. Which words are there spoken, not as presupposing that learned men cannot fail… in reading, vnderstanding, and remembrance, but as very probably presuming that men learned & well read in the word, bending their mindes and studies that way, might and should at length finde out such a speciall institution and consecration of Lotterie in generall to be a diuine sentence and an holy Oracle, that might not lightly therefore be dealt with, if it were any where to be found. And that the contrary issue of their diligent search and industrious opposition producing nothing but what had beene or might easily be answered, might seeme sufficient to produce such a morall certainty as in ci…ill Actions the Casuists doe ordinarily require. But I referre my selfe and M^r. B^s. dealing herein to the iudgement of any vnpartiall par…ie vponupon due view of the place it selfe.

2. Howbeit to stay M^r. B^• ▪ wonderment somewhat; that he may not make me an Owle sitting alone … … by my selfe: at least to set him vp another to wonder at as well as my sel…; (one that it se… … he would not, for p. 29else he could not but see, when he found him sitting together in the same bush with mee. M^r. Bradshaw (a man well knowne to M. B. while he liued, and one that it would be no disparagement to M^r. B. I suppose, if I should say he were as iudicious a man as himselfe,) in his Answer to Iohnson the Separatist, vseth these words, **W. Bradshaw vnreasonablenesse of the Separation, Reas. 3. ans. 1.This is a sufficient iustification of our Ministerie, that such malitious Aouersaries thereof, who would seeme so expert in the Scripture, are no better able by Scripture to proue their vnchristian accusation. Here is ssQuod ille pronunciat, ego dubitot quod ille definit, ego sciscitor. Hierō. apolog. pro lib. adv. Iovin.a more peremptorie assertion than mine is by much, and that in a matter, I wisse, of much more weight. It is sufficient, saith he; it may be thought so, say I: that men that would seeme so expert in the Scripture, saith he; that men so well read in Gods word, say I. Now I will request M^r. B. to looke a while off me, and turning his speech to him tell him▪ that he wondreth that M^r. B^r. though he doe confidently auow (as he need not doubt but hee would hauehave done) that wee may not doe ought without warrant; yet doth withall auouch, that this is sufficient iustification of our Ministerie, that men so expert in Scripture cannot make good ought against it: and that so iudicious a Scholler doth not obserue this discrepance; and how hereby Gods law is made, like humane lawes, imperfect. And let him imagine but what Mr. Br. would in all likelihood hauehave answered him, or Mr. Iohnson, if he should in that manner hauehave replied vponupon him. Meane while he need not wonder, that p. 30I see not this discrepance, when one far more iudicious than my selfe could not see it, either in my worke, (for he had the viewing of it ere it came out, and was a chiefe instigator of me to the setting of it out,) or in his owne.

2. What by the way he alledgeth out of my booke by me there produced against Diuinatorie Lots, though mangled in citation, as the former, after his manner, that therefore they are to be condemned, because ttOf Lots, chap. 11. sect. 7.they are not found reuealed in any word of God, nor were euer deliuered by any Prophet of God, nor are grounded on any principles of reason and nature, or were learned by any course of naturall and ordinarie obseruation; but were brought in either directly by Satan, or by some lims and instruments of Satan, &c. persons addicted wholly to vanitie and to vngodly curiositie. And hereupon asketh, Why, if this reason be good against one kinde of Lotterie, it should not be of like validitie against all. I make no doubt but the consequence is firme and good. It remaineth for him to proue all kinde of Lotterie to be such, and he shall hauehave my suffrage for the condemning of all. Meane while I desire a little more faire dealing at M^r. B^s. hands in allegation of mine assertions.

Well: it may be seene shortly, how M^r. G^s. diligence,I. B. vnderstanding and memorie hauehave serued him in defending lusorious Lots.

It is very likely, that they hauehave all oft timesT. G. p. 31failed mee. uuforeign. Greg. Naz. de pac. 1. foreign. Idem de plag. grand.There is no man but they may; my selfe much more the meanest of so many.

In the meane while sufficiencie of his answering I. B.is but vponupon the Triall, and not yet adiudged.

And of M^r. Bs. reply the like.T. G.

All these passages well reuiewed by M^r. G. II. B. should thinke he cannot wonder that a man of 64 yeeres compleat (and therefore his wits may faile) doth wonder, that so godly, wise and learned a man, the faculties of whose minde are at the best, did not say to himselfe before he preached, much more before he penned this lusorious Doctrine, aaIudg. 6. 31, 3….Judg 6:31Judg 6:3Let Baal plead for himselfe; and, These gamesters shall without any incouragement from me, bbEsai. 5. 18.Isa 5:18draw on their iniquitie with their cords of vanitie; and the rather, because he acknowledgeth that accompt is to be giuen vntounto God of gaming, p. 261. If of the act, much more of iustifying it. From which accompt good Lord deliuer me. For I feare that in iustifying lusorious Lots, I should put false spectacles on a gamesters nose, whereby the bridge seemeth broader than it is, and so he falleth in without feare; to use M^r. G_s. similitude, p. 264.

Surely either M^r. G. is a wonderfull strange T. G.man, or else M^r. B. is very prone to wonder at p. 32things that are not very wonderfull. For here is nothing with him but wondering, and wonder vponupon wonder. He telleth his Reader againe and againe that he doth wonder: he demandeth of him whether he may not wonder: he would not hauehave me, nay he thinketh, I cannot wonder, that he doth thus wonder. Some Heathen wisemen hauehave held it ccforeign. Zeno apud Laert. Nil admirari prope res est una, Numici, Sola que quae possit facere & servare beatum. Horat. epist. 6.a point of the highest wisdome for a man to wonder at nothing. I am not of their mindes. Yet as another saith, that ddV…rum que vitium est, & omnibus & nulli credere; sed alterum honestius, alterum tutius. Sen. epist. 3. foreign. Hesiod.it is as well reproueable in a man for him eeProv. 14. 15. inde foreign fatuus dicitur. Sirac. 19. 4. foreign. Epicharm.Prov 14:15to trust eueryevery one, as ffButleri Contabr. epigraphe, Be faithfull to all, but trust no man liuing.not to trust any: so I hold it an vnwise part in any man, as well ggVt pavere, sic Mirari cuncta infantile, insanum nihil.to wonder at eueryevery thing, as to wonder at nothing; as well to wonder where iust cause of such wonderment is not, as not to wonder where it is. Now all that hath by M^r. B. beene said being well considered, I leaue it to others to iudge what iust cause of so much wonderment he hath produced hitherto out of my writings.

2. But let vsus heare what further matter M^r. B. hath here found, for this his wondring humor to worke vponupon: for the former passages hauehave already beene examined. That a man of 64. yeeres complete should see more than one some fourteene or fifteene yeeres younger than himselfe, as M^r. B. perswadeth himselfe that hee doth, it is no wonder. hhforeign. Plut. paedag. foreign. Eurip. Phoeniss. foreign. Idem Beller…ph. - non omnia grandi…r aetas. Quae fugiamus habet: seris venit usus ab annis. Ovid. met. l. 6. foreign. Sophocl. Oedip.Knowledge gathered by experience and continuance of studie, is p. 33wont to grow together with yeeres in iiSenectus eorū qui adolescentiam suam honestis artibus instruxerunt, aetate fit doctior, usu tritior, processis temporis sapientior. Hieron. ad Nepot. Talis Solen, qui se quotidiè aliquid addiscentem senem fieri gloriabatur. Cic. senect. foreign. Solon.those that be industrious, as I beleeue M^r. B. to be: It is not that therefore, I presume, that M^r. B. so much wondreth at. But that which he wondreth at, and I must not wonder that hee doth wonder at, is this, that so godly, wise, and learned a man, &c. (I would intreat M^r. B. kkGenus inimicorū pessimum est laudantium. Tacit. Agric. Callidum nocendi artificium accusatoriam dir…atē laudum titulis peragere. Mamert. panegyr.no more thus to commend me: I like not his manner of commendation. I obserue it to be euer but a foile to what here followeth, to be but a shooing horne still, the more smoothly to draw on some disgracefull aspersion or other, and to make my supposed failing therein the fouler; as before, so here:) that such an one, forsooth, should plead for Baal, and giuegive incouragement to gamesters: for that is apparantly implied. Which whether I be guilty of, I appeale to my Booke, and to all that will vouchsafe the reading of it. Must he needs be held to plead for Baal, that should maintaine that the trees growing in Baals groue, which llIudg. 6. 28.Judg 6:28Gedeon cut downe, were naturall trees indeed as others are, and not enchanted mmQuales Heliadas fabulantur in arbores versas exclamasse, -nostrum laceratur in arbore corpus. Ovid. met. l. 2.Fairies in the likenesse of trees, against some fantastique that were possest with some such senslesse conceit: or that should hauehave defended the lawfulnesse of vsing the wood of them either for sewell or fence, contrary to the nnIn quo genere adeò superstitiosi Iudaeuli, ut si arbor prope Idolum consita sit, nefas ducant sub umbra ejus considere, vel etiam per umbram ejus transire, nisi alia nulla via patu…rit, in quo casu cursu incitatissimo transire praecipiunt. Praecept. Mosaic. affirm. 45. Commodum nullum ab idolis, aut eorum supellectili percipiendum. Ibid.fancie of some superstitious Iewes, notwithstanding that superstitiously they had before beene abused, p. 34being consecrated vntounto Baal? Or doe they plead for Baal, ooPaget against Ainsworth, and others.that maintaine against the Separatists, that our Churches are not now Idol-Temples, being rid of those abominations, that before they were defiled with? What incouragement I giuegive Gamesters, M^r. B. himselfe hath in part before shewed, and my Booke it selfe may further shew.

3. Account if I should not looke to giuegive to God for whatsoeuer I teach, it were strange indeed, when I teach that ppTam otij quàm negotij reddendam rationē: tam silentij quàm sermonis.account is to be giuen euen of our lightest imployments. But let M^r. B. remember also, that account must be giuen of qqPsal. 50. 20, 21.Ps 50:20Ps 50:21wrongfull charging and rrMatth. 7. 1.Matt 7:1groundlesse censuring of our brethren; and that an heauy one too, if ssIam. 3. 1.Jas 3:1S. Iames be beleeued.

4. As he feareth, which I hope not, that I hauehave failed one way; so let him take heed lest he faile the other way in the same place spoken of: Remembring that as well it is a sinne ttDeut. 4. 2. & 12. 32. Prov. 30. 6. foreign. Greg. Naz. de eutax.Deut 4:2Deut 12:32Prov 30:6to adde to Gods word, as to detract from it, and uuApoc. 22. 18, 19. Vae tam adjicientibus quàm detra…entibus destinatū. Tertull. contr. Hermog.Rev 22:18Rev 22:19as heauy a iudgement denounced against the one as the other: And that, as one saith well, though I remember not well who, xxM. Edgerton, if I mistake not.We must not …ick Gods measure an inch to some, because others will thereupon take an ell more than they should.

But M^r. G. beleeueth that he hath written theI. B. truth, (Preface to the Reader) and is confident that truth is to be knowne, especially concerning matters of common practise, p. 263. and giueth foure reasons by which he was moued to defend lusorious Lots, p. 264.

p. 35The first is to draw men from superstition, in restraining themselues, when God doth not restraine them. This beggeth the Question, as, I hope, will appeare in the Reply.

These words are not mine. Neither are theyT. G. found in the place quoted; nor would I hauehave spoken in that manner. Yet that I there imply a superstitious conceit in the contrary Opinion, it is true. Neither is it to be taxed as a begging of the Question, being not produced there as any proofe of the point in controuersie, but as my Iudgement of them, whereupon I was induced the rather to deale with them. As for the thing it selfe, let it appeare in the Reply; and it will come yet time enough.

A second Motiue is, because Arguments againstI. B. lusorious Lots hauehave made many stagger in the necessarie Vse of serious Ciuill Lots. It may be so, some failing in their Iudgement. But it may be also, that many moe will be made to stagger by reading M^r. G^s. exceptions against Arguments for, & Cautions in those serious Ciuill Lots, cap. 5. and by his Maxime, The lesse weighty the matter is, wherein a Lot is vsed, the lawfuller the Lot is, p. 111.

1. My second motiue M^r. B. here omitteth,T. G. and so also doe I therefore. This that he saith is part of the third; part, I say; because I say more than so, and yet no more than I can make good neither, that those Arguments, the chiefe p. 36of them, that are brought against the one kinde, will, if they be sound, necessarily ouerthrow also the other.

2. What mine Exceptions may chance to doe, is a matter meerely contingent; and aaforeign. Isocr. ad Demon. De futuris contingentibus non est determinata veritas. Aristot. de interpret. c. 10.there is of it therefore no certainty. But of the other that they hauehave made many stagger, I am very certaine; nor see I which way M^r. B. keeping to his owne grounds will euer be able to settle them. If my Exceptions be such, as is here implied, it had beene a good worke to hauehave remoued them, for their sakes, that might chance else to stumble at them.

3. That Maxime, as M^r. B. termeth it, was once before nibbled at. But the time of the triall of it, belike, is not as yet. What staggering it should cause in the vse of a Lot, vnlesse to those that wilfully put themselues vponupon hazard of apparent inconuenience, I cannot as yet conceiue.

A third Motiue is to take away much heartburning;I. B. Nay rather this iustifying lusorious Lots, will not only cause more heart-burning; but incourage also Gamesters to ouer-crow such as are scrupulous. For, if many well-affected hauehave beene constrained, in regard of scruple in this kinde to straine themselues to some inconueniences by refusall of those games, when by those, whom they had dependance vponupon or familiaritie withall, they hauehave beene vrged occasionally thereunto: (which to preuent hereafter is a fourth cause of his writing,) How p. 37will these supporters, and familiars insult vponupon the scrupulous, now they hauehave so learned a patron of their gaming? Some hauehave strained themselues to some inconueniences for not pledging drunken Healths, being drinke-offerings to Bacchus. To preuent which hereafter should M^r. G. doe well vntounto edification to preach and write in iustification of these Healths?

1. M^r. B. snappeth still at many things; butT. G. dealeth not entirely with any. One short shred he snatcheth out of my fourth Motiue, or as he stileth it, the third; and another somewhat longer out of the second, which he here calleth the fourth; letting the rest goe; for what reasons himselfe best knoweth. But if the inconueniences there mentioned, many more than M^r. B. here relateth, may (as it is no question but that they may, if the truth be found and cleared to be on this side) be thereby remedied, it is an effect of some consequence, and such as may well recompence the trauell therein taken.

2. But it will rather proue cleane contrary, if M^r. B. may be beleeued. For it will incourage Gamesters to ouer-crow such as are scrupulous; (and how can it doe so, if those scrupulous ones shall hauehave receiued satisfaction, and so shall hauehave deposed their scruple?) hauing gotten so learned a patron of their gaming? A pretty nip; of the same stampe with some other before: as if others more than one or two, whose learning I doubt not but M^r. B. deemeth deseruedly p. 38mine to come farre short of, had not before mee in Print defended the vse of a Lot in disport.

3. For drunken healths, if M^r. B. can shew that a lusorie Lot and they are of the like nature, hee saith somewhat: till that, his instance may stand by for a stale. But suppose that in detestation of these drunken healths, M^r. B. should publish a Booke, endeuouring therein by diuers Arguments to proue that it is vtterly vnlawfull for one friend to drinke to, or to pledge, another at Table, and much more to drinke at Table to, or to pledge (as we say) any that are then absent; and many weake ones should thereupon make scruple of such common curtesies; and both they and the profession of pietie should thereby be exposed to derision, and iust imputation of superstition, I thinke it would not be deemed labour amisse bestowed (for those weake ones sake at least) for some learned man to take paines to confute such a conceit. And this instance, if M^r. B. please to apply to the present controuersie, I suppose that it will proue somewhat more pertinent than that he produceth; it will in part at least cleare the meaning of one of my motiues.

The Summe of his Causes (as he expresseth himselfeI. B. in his Preface to the Reader) is, To set at libertie the intangled Consciences of Godly-disposed persons. Indeed; If any Consciences, simply for playing with Lots, should seeke his satisfaction in p. 39priuate, then if M^r. G. quieted him by his grounds (supposed true) it were not amisse. But is eueryevery Doctrine, though true, to be insisted vponupon both by Preaching and Printing, and that affirming matter in Question, and of no necessarie vse?

Here is the Summe indeed, it seemeth, ofT. G. that that M^r. B. would hauehave. He must hauehave libertie, (by what rule I know not) to preach and print (for aaEpistle dedicatorie before his Dialogue.what he hath printed, he saith himselfe that he had preached) what he will; but his doctrine must not be contradicted either in Pulpit or by Presse. He may insnare and intangle Christian Consciences in publike; but M^r. G. must not quiet them againe but in priuate. Especially so long as his doctrine runneth in the Negatiue, bbColoss. 2. 21.Col 2:21Touch not, taste not, handle not: (it is a Text not vnfitly ccM. Yates Modell of Diuinitie, edit. 2. cap. 16. quaest. 1. error. 4.applied to the present purpose, by one sometime of another iudgement, but vponupon better consideration now concurring in iustification of the lusorie Lot:) as if ddRom. 14. 14, 17. 1 Cor. 6. 12. & 7. 1, 2, 9, 28, 36, 39. & 10. 23, 25.Rom 14:14Rom 14:171 Cor 6:121 Cor 7:11 Cor 7:21 Cor 7:91 Cor 7:281 Cor 7:361 Cor 7:391 Cor 10:231 Cor 10:25the Apostles had neuer affirmatiuely preached Christian liberty, or eeGal. 2. 4, 5. & 5. 1, 10. Col. 2. 20, 21.Gal 2:4Gal 2:5Gal 5:1Gal 5:10Col 2:20Col 2:21opposed publikely the courses of those that sought to limit and restraine it, and that in things ffRom. 14. 2, 6. 1 Cor. 10. 27, 28.Rom 14:2Rom 14:61 Cor 10:271 Cor 10:28not absolutely necessary neither, but such as might well hauehave beene forborne.

That is therefore to little purpose, that M^r. B. addeth;

I say, Affirming, remembring the holy wisdome I. B.of the Apostles and Elders, who decreed touching p. 40Act. 15. 28, 29.Acts 15:28Acts 15:29offensiue things (yet some of them lawfull, if conueniently vsed) onelyonly negatiuely; and deemeth it not necessarie to decree affirmatiuely things that were then, and might be in vse for a time.

For neither is it equall that some one particular T. G.act should for all circumstances be a generall rule to all others: the practise of the Apostles themselues, and by name of ggSee the places aboue cited.S. Paul being at other times in points of the very same kinde to the contrary that M^r. B. here vrgeth: hhSee Calvin. institut. lib. 3. cap. 19. sect. 10, 15, 16.Neither is there the same reason of Dogmaticall Diuinitie, by grounds of faith informing the Conscience concerning the true Nature of the things themselues, and of Ecclesiasticall Discipline by Canons and Constitutions restraining not Christian Libertie▪ but the outward Vse of it for Order sake, and the benefit of our Brethren.

It is as if one should thus Reason. ii1 Cor. 9. 14, 15. 2 Cor. 11. 8, 9.1 Cor 9:141 Cor 9:152 Cor 11:82 Cor 11:9The Apostle tooke no stipend of the Church of Corinth: therefore no Minister of the Gospell may take stipend of his people. Or, kkAct. 18. 3. & 20. 34. 1 Thess. 2. 9. 2 Thess. 3. 8.Acts 18:3Acts 20:341 Thess 2:92 Thess 3:8S. Paul wrought with his hands for his liuing: Therefore all Ministers of the Gospell ought so also to doe. For such is M^r. B^s. Argument, or else it is none at all; The Apostles and Elders determined negatiuely only of some things offensiue: therefore no man may presume to deale in the affirmatiue of such.

Many (I feare, too many) learned Diuines approue I. B.Vsurie in their Iudgement, though condemned by Law. Yet none that I know euer insisted p. 41vponupon the iustification thereof by Preaching and Printing.

Whether Many Diuines among vsus be of thatT. G. minde or no, is more than I know. Nor list I to take notice what hath beene either preached or published of that Argument by any. This I am sure of, that llThose very Lawes allow Cards and Tables.our Law, though it condemneth Vsurie, it alloweth Lotterie; and therefore the instance is not euen in that regard as it ought, and is intended here to be.

Againe, Was there euer any so troubled with I. B.playing with Lots? I doubt it. But without doubt thousands will now more boldly vse Lusorious Lots, without regard of the Cautions, in these licentious times. As Vsurers regard not the Cautions which Diuines set downe. For it is enough to them that some godly Diuines affirme Vsurie to be lawfull.T. G.

1. What M^r. B. meaneth by so troubled with Lots, I know not: But that many are by meanes of the Doctrine by M^r. B. and others maintained, superstitiously conceited of them, I am sure; and that diuers so conceited hauehave thereupon sometime strained to sinne against conscience, as themselues hauehave confessed, to their disquiet afterward, and sometime hauehave beene constrained to vndergoe no small inconuenience for the auoiding of the like againe.

2. But thousands now, saith M^r. B. (as if the p. 42vse of such Lots had neuer beene defended, or were neuer heard of till now) will now more boldly vse Lusorious Lots without regard of the Cautions. M^r. B. speaketh very peremptorily; and yet I take him for no Prophet; and his prediction therefore yet may faile. But if any be emboldned by my Booke vponupon better information to vse a Lusorie Lot in due manner, where it is otherwise not vnlawfull, I hauehave no cause to be sorry for it. If any be emboldned to abuse it, not regarding the Cautions, it will be their owne fault, not mine, who deliuer nothing that tendeth to the emboldning of them thereunto. Not to adde, that the Cautions concerne not a Lot vsed in sport as it is a Lot, but Game rather and Recreation in generall: which neither M^r. B. nor any other sound Diuine disalloweth, **Aug. de Music. l. 2. citante Martyre. Petr. Mart. in Iud. 14. Thom. Aquin sum▪ part. 2 2ae q. 168. Perkins Cases of Cons…. l. 3. c. 4. q. 3. Fennor of recreat. &c.Judg 14many by writing defend, and yet doe they not thereby giuegive incouragement to any to vse Game or Recreation in vndue manner: nor are they held guilty therefore of the sinne of those that regarding not the Cautions by them annexed to the Doctrine of it, vse it otherwise than they ought.

Oh that M^r. G. had considered what he writeth,I. B. p. 107. before cited; and what he writeth, p. 103. & 104. viz. Where inconueniences, that shall necessarily, or in good probabilitie appeare to accompanie the thing questioned, or ensue vponupon the doing thereof, shall be such, and so great as the Conueniences, which stand on the other side, shall not be able to counteruaile; there that action is p. 43worthily disallowed as inconuenient, and a Lot consequently vnlawfull: what he writeth in his Spirituall Watch, p. 27. viz. The rifer any euill is in those places, or ages we liue in, the more carefull should we be to shun and auoid such a sinne. No doubt he would hauehave taken heed how by writing he make way to the sinne of, or by Lusorious Lots.

1. I am much beholden to M^r. B. for hisT. G. good wishes. The Considerations that he wisheth I had taken into thought, are indeed good and needfull; but vnlesse he can assume, and make good his Assumption, that the penning and publishing of my Discourse is such and so inconuentent as is therin specified, he hath little reason to perswade himselfe, that it must needs doubtlesle hauehave preuailed with me to the staying and suppressing of my Booke. Which yet had it appeared in probabilitie and likelihood to hauehave beene, I should not hauehave failed to be as chary of the publishing of it, as M^r. B. himselfe would hauehave had me to be.

2. Nor doe I doubt, but as I writ, that mmEphes. 5. 15, 16. foreign. Plut. de laud. sui.Eph 5:15Eph 5:16euils the rifer they are, the more carefull wee should be to shun and auoid them. But that by defending of the lawfulnesse of a Lusorious Lot in it selfe, I make way to sinne in the vse, or rather in the abuse of it, I denie; and my deniall standeth good, vntill the point it selfe be disproued. I doe no more make way to the one by defending the other: than some of the Ancient nnEpiphan. de haeres. & August. de morib. Manich. l. 2. c. 16.Fathers made way to the abuse of p. 44Wine either by Drunkennesse or otherwise, when they defended against the ooVinum fel principis tenebrarū dicebant.Manichees, Tatiani, Encratitae, and others, that Wine was Gods good Creature, and men might lawfully drinke of it. Or than so many of our ppCalvin. Martyr. Bucer. Aretius. Bucan. Piscat. Perkins, &c.late writers, as defend the lawfulnesse of an Oath lawfully vsed, against the Anabaptists, that vtterly condemne all vse of it, doe thereby make way for the iustification of that ordinarie vaine swearing, that is qqQuis estoro, praeter paucos, qui non ad hoc semper Christi nomen in ore habeat ut pejeret? In id penitus deducta est res, vt Christi nomen jam non sacramentum esse videatur sed sermo. Plures que invenias qui saepius perjurent, quàm qui omninò non jurent. Salvian. de provid. l. 4. c. 10.as rife, yea far rifer, than any abuse of Dice or Lot-play either is or can be.

Many Diuines and intelligent men, though ofI. B. Opinion that lusorious mixed Lots may be vsed lawfully, yet wish that M^r. G. had neuer published his Booke. For a running Horse, say they, needeth no spurring.

And many Diuines and intelligent men pressedT. G. the publishing of it, and that more of them, and with more importunitie many of them than is fit for me here to relate: I may truly adde, that some euen of contrary iudgement aduised it.

Nor doe I spurre any running Horse in my Booke: but endeuour only to vngirt some, that M^r. B. and some others had girt in more than was meet, or than they had any good warrant so to girt in out of Gods word: and to ease such as might thereby be not girt onelyonly, but galled too.

p. 45For my part, I wish, that M^r. G. had beene affectedI. B. in writing, as he professeth himselfe to be in the vse of lusorious Lots, p. 266.

Nor can I blame M^r. B. (though his wishesT. G. be vnequall) that he wisheth so oft that I had not by writing contradicted the subiect matter of his Dialogisticall Discourse; which yet hee himselfe by a peremptorie Challenge incited me first vntounto; and by his after-demeanure (in a manner) inforced me further to publish.

But me thinks, if M^r. B. were so desirous to be informed if he erre herein, as **My desire is either informatiō, if I erre, &c. But whether I erre or no; which yet I would gladly vnderstand; for I ought not to teach an vntruth though to Gods glory. M. B. epist. dedicat. before Dialog.else-where he professeth, and to hauehave ss1 Thess. 5. 21. Try all things, &c. In the Frontispice.1 Thess 5:21the Truth tried and cleared, as he would seeme else-where also to intimate; yea, or if he were not loth to hauehave his opinion herein scanned or discussed, or were not somewhat suspitious of it that it would not endure light, he should not be so vnwilling to hauehave it dealt with by others, he should not take it so euill as he doth, that he is contradicted in it; nor would he cast so much impertinent bymatter here in the way, that may rather hinder than further the pursuit of the truth with that Christian affection that in such cases ought to be held; but proceed rather directly to the making good of his owne Arguments, as in my writing giuen him, I came to the Answer of them directly. If hee would gladly vnderstand from others whether he be in an error, why excepteth he so much against me for doing no more than himselfe saith he would gladly hauehave done? If p. 46he mislike that it is by writing and publikely done, he may well blame himselfe for either; nor see I with what equitie he can require to be refuted onelyonly in priuate, when his errors are in Print abroad. But let vsus heare him yet once further, and so an end with his Preface.

Well, whatsoeuer M^r. G. writeth dogmatically,I. B. he wisheth thee, good Reader, to imitate him in his practise, to wit, that albeit in iudgement thou art rightly informed of the truth concerning the lawfulnesse of these Games in themselues; yet in godly discretion thou wouldest rather abandon them, considering the too too common and ordinarie abuse of them; and that many, it may be, among whom thou liuest, may remaine vnresolued and vnsatisfied touching the lawfulnesse of them, p. 267.

I desire the same, and therewith a suspending thy iudgement vntill thou hauehave well considered my Dialogue, M^r. G^s. Answers, and my Reply, together with mine Answer to his positiue grounds.

Here I promise (with M^r. G. p. 128.) to raze what I hauehave reared, if my Reply and Answers be proued insufficient, and so ttAct. 20. 32.Acts 20:32commend thee to God, and to the word of his Grace, which is able to build further. OnelyOnly, uu2 Tim. 2. 7.2 Tim 2:7consider what I say, and the Lord giuegive thee vnderstanding in all things.

I wish indeed, as M^r. B. saith; but without T. G.preiudice to any that vse those games no otherwise than they ought: as xx1 Cor. 7. 7, 8, 9, 27, 28.1 Cor 7:71 Cor 7:81 Cor 7:91 Cor 7:271 Cor 7:28the Apostle wished others p. 47in another kinde as himselfe; yet withall acknowledging the libertie that Gods word and Spirit had giuen in that point, and not censuring others that therein did not as he did.

For the rest; I require of thee, good Reader, the same for this my Reioinder, that M^r. B. doth for his Reply; and of M^r. B. the performance only of what here he promiseth: And so requesting Gods grace for vsus all, that both in this and in all other points in these queasie times controuersed, we may without all partialitie and by-respects bend our selues to the discouery of the Truth, and without pertinacitie, and endeuour by silly shifts to elude it, yeeld our selues to it where it is discouered vntounto vsus, not considering yyN…n quis dicat, attendendum; sed quid dicatur. Ne verum fiat quod v…lgo dicitur, Idem duo cum faciunt, non est idem. Ter. Ad…lph. 5. 3. Et i…tandum Areopag…tas, foreign. Lucian. de sectis.by whom it is either deliuered or discouered, but by what force and strength of Argument we are conuinced of it; I proceed in the next place, after one rub more remoued, from this tedious, needlesse and impertinent Preface, to the maine body of M^r. B^s. Booke.

p. 48ANSWER TO M^r. B^s. POST-SCRIPT.

After the PREFACE is this Post-script added.

TO THE READER.I. B.

THAT I may doe M^r. G. no wrong, I am to let thee know, that the 14. of March 1622. Stil. Ang. M^r. G. denied naming me, when he confuted mine Arguments in Pulpit: yet confessing that hee named me in Pulpit with others diuersly dissenting from him in Iudgement touching Lusorious Lots, when he entred into the Question of playing with Lots.

And that thou maist, good Reader, vnderstandT. G. the full truth; Be pleased, I pray thee, to spend yet a little more idle time with vsus, while I relate, as briefly as I well may, as well vponupon what occasion, as what it was, that I spake to M^r. B. at that time that here he mentioneth. Being informed that it was giuen out by some of M^r. B^s. acquaintance; that (vponupon the offering of this his Discourse to be licenced for the Presse, and complaint made by him of supposed wrong that I had done him in confuting him p. 49in open Pulpit by Name) it was by that Reuerend Doctor that licenced my Booke, acknowledged that I had indeed done M^r. B. wrong, and that I should therefore giuegive him satisfaction in priuate, but that M^r. B. would not therewith be satisfied, but would hauehave it done in publike, since the wrong was such; and that the same Reuerend Doctor should say▪ that if my Treatise of Lots were againe to be licenced, he would not hauehave licenced it: (all which was vtterly vntrue) and supposing that this could come from none but M^r. B. himselfe, I desired meeting him neere Pauls Church, to hauehave a few words with him. Which granted, I related vntounto him, what I had heard, & named the party said to hauehave made such report; demanded of him whether either any such report came frō him, or the things reported themselues were true. M^r B. denying both to be the Author of the report, and the truth of the things reported; for that I there rested. But I further told him, that I vnderstood that he had offered a Discourse for the Presse against part of my Booke, which I wished with all mine heart might come forth; aaEx mutuo conflictu, velut ignis è silice, veritas elicitur & emicat.the truth, I hoped, would thereby the better be cleared, and I should willingly be informed of ought that I erred in; to which purpose I told him, that I had also dealt earnestly as well with D^r Westfield, (who I know well, will testifie as much) when it was tendred to him some three yeeres agoe; as also since with D^r Featly, the party before mentioned, (which M^r. B. also acknowledged to hauehave vnderstood from him) p. 50that they would be pleased at my request to allow it for the Presse. Which why they refused to doe, is needlesse here to relate. I told him further, that I was informed of two things in it; the one, that I was accused therein to hauehave confuted him in the Pulpit by name; the other, (which much more neerely touched me) that I was charged to maintaine in that my Treatise some Assertions that were blasphemous. The former he affirmed that he had heard by many. I told him, those many (if there were such) were very much to blame: And withall by solemne protestation, as in Gods presence, denied that I had by name in Pulpit refuted either him or any other that I dealt with in this Argument. How I named him or his Booke rather, and so him with it, I told him: to wit, that hauing propounded the Question concerning the light vse of a Lot, I recited those Authors that had written of this Subiect, viz. B. King vponupon Ionas, B. Babington on the Decalogue, Peter Martyr on Iudges, Danaeus of Lot-play, Perkins Cases of Conscience, Fennor of lawfull Recreations, Easty historie of the Gospell, Bamford Dialogue of Games consisting in Chance: whereof some were of one minde, some of another; and if I should dissent in decision of the Question from any of them, I desired it might be without offence, adding that bbforeign. Aristot. ethic. lib. 1. cap. 6. Pijque ac prudentis cujusque illud est, foreign. Lucian. asino.promise that M^r. B. hath before related. After which hauing deliuered mine owne Iudgement, & propounded and prosecuted the Reasons that I had for it; I then answered the Obiectōs on the other p. 51side, reduced to some heads, and according to those heads handling them, taking sometime also some part of one and the same Obiection from one, and some part of it from another, who had somewhat further pursued it; but not naming (as those may testifie that hauehave my notes yet in their hands) any one of those whom then I dealt with. VponUpon relation of this, or the effect of it, with such protestation, M^r. B. affirmed that he was therein satisfied, and beleeued it to be so as I said. And now iudge, I pray thee, what (I say not Charitie or Conscience, but) candor and ingenuitie at least M^r. B. hath shewed, in charging me peremptorily, and that more than once (after this my protestation and his owne acknowledgment of the truth) publikely in Print with confuting him by Name in open Pulpit, and breach of Charitie in so doing. If M^r. B. were so chary of doing M^r. G. wrong, that to preuent, or at least, auoid the same, hee added this Post-script, ccNae tu, inquit ille, homo imprudens es, qui culpam maluisti deprecari, cùm posses praecavere. Nam tu quod caver… possis, stultum est admittere. Ter. Eunuch. 4. 6. Seráque nimis & praepostera oratio, quae peractum castigat, cui occurri potuerat. Plin. ep. 6. l. 6.why doth he wilfully wrong him in that very point, wherein hee would seeme here to salue his credit? Or what is this but ddFacere est facilius quàm sanare vulnera. Quintil. institut. l. 5. c. 13. Hinc Medius ille foreign. Plut. de adulat. Cùm vulnus sanatum est, manet cicatrix. Sen. de ira, l. 1. c. 16.first to wound a man, and then clap on a fig-leafe that may in part couer rather than cure the gash that he hath giuen?

For the other Accusation, I told M^r. B. that if, as Hierome said, eeNolo in suspicione haereseos quenquam esse patientem. Hieron. adv. error. Ioan. Hieros.in case of Heresie, then of blasphemie much more, a Christian man ought not to be, I say not with him, patient, but at least silent, hauing any good ground and opportunitie to cleare himselfe therein. I signified therefore p. 52vntounto him, that if he would doe but as much for me, as I had before done for him, (and I supposed in way of requitall I might hauehave required it) to deliuer me his Discourse or a Copie of it, I would vndertake within short time either to returne it with due answer, or to make publike acknowledgment of mine error, if I were thereby conuinced thereof. Or if he would none of that, (as he would in no wise heare of it) that he would yet informe me what those blasphemous assertions were that in my Booke I had broached, and shew me (which I as yet saw not) wherein they were such. That which in Charitie I held him bound vntounto; ffExod. 23. 4. Deut. 22. 1. Nedum fratrem ipsum errantem despicias. Tertull. ad Marc. l. 4. Quid enim tam malignum, quàm nolle prodesse, cùm possis. Ibid. l. 1.Exod 23:4Deut 22:1seeing me to wander so fouly out of the way, to lend mee his hand and helpe, especially crauing the same so instantly, for the bringing of me backe againe. But other answer to this request of mine from M^r. B. I could hauehave none, but that he had put that terme of blasphemie now out of his Booke. I replied againe hereunto: that that was but a silly satisfaction, hauing charged his Brother and fellow-Minister with blasphemie to more than a few, to say that he had now put that word out of his Booke. I might in his owne words hauehave told him, had I then beene acquainted with them; that I held he failed in Charitie, in that not hauing had any conference with me either by speech or by writing, though I be (as he saith) his neighbour Minister; he offered to accuse me of Blasphemie by Name publikely in Print. But I required him, as he would answer one day for the neglect of p. 53such a duty, to shew me mine error, that I might not continue in so foule and dangerous an offence; or to referre it to any one or more of our Reuerend Brethren of the Ministery about the City, such as himselfe should make choise of, whether that which I required of him were equall and reasonable, and whether he in Charitie might refuse it. But ggSurdo cecini, ut Ter. heaut. 2. 1. vel vanis auribus, ut Liv. hist. l. 40.I sung to a deafe man. I could get from M^r. B. no other answer but this, that He would be iudged by none but by the whole Church of God. And so wee parted. Now, since M^r. B. will so hauehave it, Let the whole Church of God iudge, or so many at least, to whose hands this Discourse shall come, on whose side the breach of Charitie (if any be) hath beene. And this is more by much than I would euer hauehave troubled my Reader withall, had it not beene for M^r. B^s. Post-script.

p. 54THE SECOND PART. M^r. BALMFORDS Answer to M^r GATAKERS Arguments for the lawfulnesse of a Lusorious Lot. Together with M^r. G^s. Reply in defence of his owne Arguments, which are word for word also here related.