A Mild and Just Defense of Certain Arguments, Tract · Part 2 – Part 3
A REPLY TO THE FVRTHER ANSWER OF the preface to the Arguments.
G. PowelSome hauehave fooliſhly made a breach and diviſion amongſt us about croſſe and ſurplice etc.
Wiſedome conſiſteth in underſtanding what the will of the Lord is, Ephe. 5.17. And in a conſcience of keeping Gods commaundements and obſerving his word. AnſwerDeut. 4.6. The which to reject is the greateſt folly Ierem. 8.9. We hauehave made no breach or diviſion at all: But as Ioſeph for telling his divine dreames, was hated of his brethren, and at the laſt ſold a way to ſtrangers by themſelues: and as the blinde man Iohn 9. for confesſing Chriſt, and ſtoutly ſtanding in that confesſion, was throwne out of the Iewiſh Synagogue by the Phariſes, ſo (to uſe the words of this anſwerer) we are violently and unjuſtly broken of and divided, and thruſt out of the miniſtery by other, and yet charged that we hauehave made a foliſh breach and diviſion.
G. PowelAnd therefore I cannot allow the opinion of ſuch as giuegive out,Anſwer.Yet we doe all as hartily and faithfully louelove and affect our Prince and King (yea of whatſoever religion) and are as ready and willing to defend his perſon & honor, againſt all adverſaryes etc. that theſe our factious brethren are as dangerous enimyes vntounto the ſtate as the papiſts etc.
Neither you nor any other, hauehave ever yet had, or ever (I hope) ſhall hauehave cauſe juſtly to ſpeake, write, or thinke otherwiſe concernyng either our louelove & loyalty towards our Soveraigne, or our duety to any of his governors: yea though we ſhould cunningly be ſolicited to ſome vndutifull practiſes, as ſome not many yeares ſince were, in the dayes of late Q. Elizab. of moſt Honorable memory, who were ſo farr from enterteyning any ſuch motions, as that moſt dutifully, they diſcovered the ſame to other in higher authority. Though (I ſay) we ſhould be cunningly ſolicited to any undutifull practiſes or to the approbation of any ſuch practiſe, yet I truſt that never any of vsus ſhall be found ſo to offend againſt his Majeſties meaneſt and loweſt officers.
G. PowelD. Elmer late B. of London gravely ſayd, If I were in the company but of one Papiſt, I might juſtly feare the loſſe of my life, but being amongſt ten thouſand Preciſians, well might I be afrayd of my Biſhopricke, but never of my throate: the one would cut my coate, and the other my throate.
The Preciſians (as it pleaſeth B. Elmer to call them) never deſired the Biſhopprickes of any of their adverſaryes,Anſwer but onelyonly that they would giuegive glory to him that ſitteth vponupon the Throne, and caſt their miters at the feete of the Lambe, acknowledging him worthy of all rule and Dominion, & contenting themſelues with the places and Honors commended in the ſcriptures: according to an other apothegmaticall exhortation of the ſayd Biſhop, both made openly at Paules croſſe, and alſo printed (before himſelfe was ſo advanced in the world) viz. that Biſhops and other Prelats should come downe from their thowſands, and content themſelues with an hundred, vntill which abaſing of themſelues, and reſignyng that which uniuſtly they hold, reigning as Lords & Kings over the Lords inheritance, neither the Church of God in generall, neither our Soveraigne in speciall, shall hauehave ſo much ſervice, and good by their ſervice, neither themſelues ſo much peace and comforte of conſcience, as otherwiſe would be.
G. PowelThough they be free from ſuſpition of treaſon and rebellion, yet it cannot be denyed, but that preſumptuouſly and willfully, they contend with the Magiſtrat, impugning his authority in things indifferēt.
Cannot that be denyed, which never was, neither ever can be proved againſt us?Anſwer. 1 We deny that it is the Magiſtrats meere pleaſure that we ſhould conforme, otherwiſe then by miſ information of our adverſaryes againſt us, as David upon the like miſ information of Ziba againſt Mephibosheth, gaue all to Ziba that had been Mephibosheths 2 Sam. 16.2. Yea, they doe not only giuegive all the miſ informations them-ſelues againſt us which they can jmagine, or wherwith they are informed by other, but alſo they labour what they can to keep the Magiſtrats from all right information in our behalfe by any other: yea they indeavour their vtmoſt to keep both Parliament and all other, from mediation for us. 2 Though we yeeld not in all thinges required of us, yet it is not preſumptuouſly and wilfully, but in all humility & modeſty: we contend not by the ſword nor any violence, but onelyonly by word, yea, pleading the word of God for our cauſe. Our contentiō alſo is in a patient ſuffering, with a duetifull cleering of our innocency againſt the falſe imputations wherewith we are burdened. The things in queſtion hauehave been ſaid, but never ſubſtantially proved to be indifferent in ſuch ſorte, and to ſuch vſes as now they are urged. Our adverſaries hauehave ſo long ſtrivē to maintayne the things (which they call indifferent) for ſuch uſes as to which they are not indifferent, that they hauehave made religion it ſelfe an in different thing to many men. In things truely indifferent, it is already juſtified, and ſhalbe further juſtified (if neede requyer) that we attribute no leſſe to the magiſtrat, then our adverſaryes doe. Let them name in what ſenſe and degree the Papiſts deny the Soveraignty of Princes in any thinge, and I doubt not, but that it may be proved that themſelues (holding their owne principles) doe deny the ſame, in the ſame ſenſe and degree.
G. PowelAll of them make a faction and ſchiſme in the Church for carnall reſpects: ſome becauſe they know not otherwiſe how to be mainteyned: ſome to gratifie their benefactors and Patrons and to pleaſe their frends: ſome for diſcontentment and want of preferment: ſome for giddines of innovation etc.
What? all M. Powell? How doe you forget your ſelfe?Anſwer. You ſhould hauehave left this generall judgment of all, to the generall judge of all. There is none of theſe of whom you ſpeake, but for the world and outward things they might liue better conformyng then not cōforming themſelues. What benefit hauehave any by gratifying their Patrons? Will their Patrons giuegive them better mayntenance otherwiſe? Nay ſome Patrons are their adverſaryes, and are gratified by them that put ſuch Miniſters out, that ſo they may preſent againe etc. Some ſo diſpleaſe their frends heerby that by their diſpleaſure they looſe more in one day then they get all their life by any Eccleſiaſticall living. Some alſo by diſpleaſing their frends doe not only loſe temporall benefits for them and theirs, but doe alſo hinder themſelues of as great Eccleſiaſticall promotion, as many or the moſt of the conformable ſort doe ateyne unto. Some by their troubles for this cauſe, having had good patrimonyes: hauehave conſumed & waſted them ſo, that in their age (when they need moſt comfort) they liue in penury and want, and at their death leaue not ſo much to their wiues & many children, as was left to themſelues alone. Some by want for this cauſe, are forced to take their children of very great hope and forwardnes for learnyng frō the ſchoole, and to make them apprentiſes to their owne great greife, and in time to the detriment of the Church. Agayne, this imputation of carnall reſpects unto us (ſuch as you reckon) is contrary to your often imputation of ſuperſtition unto vsus. For what is ſuperſtition, but to make that ſinne that is not ſinne; and ſo to feare ſinnyng againſt God, as that we doe not that which lawfully we may do: or one the contrary to make that good, holy, and neceſſary, that is nether good, holy, nor neceſſary, and ſo to think himſelfe bound to doe that, which well he might leaue undone? If then we be ſuperſtitious, and doe that which we doe in fearing to ſinne againſt God, how can ſuch carnall reſpects as before are particularized, be imputed vntounto us? But the truth is, that theſe carnall reſpects doe belong rather to conformiry, for which many will doe any thing rather then they will looſe their livyngs. Of how many alſo of them may it be ſayd that they ſeeke their owne, and not that which is Ieſus Chriſts? Philip. 2.21. Yea, that their belly is their God, their glory their ſhame, and that they mind earthly things? Philip. 3.19. that alſo with Diotrephes, that louelove to hauehave the preheminence? 3. Ioh. 9. How many of that ſide hauehave receaved 500. or 600. pounds from their people, ſince their laſt Sermon, yea, ſince their laſt preſence amongſt them? Yea, are their not ſome that buy & ſell benefices, as men buye and ſell horſes? Truely there are ſōe that being not old mē hauehave in their dayes paſſed through many benefices, and thoſe of very good worth. To whō then doth this imputation of carnall reſpectes belong. Ceaſe therefore, ceaſe M. Powell to charge us with that againſt which there are ſo many reaſons. Yea, wherein all the world can convince you.
G. PowelThey hauehave altered the ſtate of the queſtion. For the queſtion being about ſubſcription, Ceremonyes, Conformitie etc. (which are but thinges indifferent and of ſmall moment) they make it the cauſe of God, the miniſtery of the goſpell, the ſalvation of the people, the mayne cauſe of the land.
How doe we alter the ſtate of the qveſtion? Doe we mince that which ſomtyme we held?Anſwer Doe we goe from any thing which before we maynteyned? What ever was in controverſie betwixt you and us, that is not comprehended under ſubſcription, or ſome other of the particulars by you here mencioned? It is meere folly ſo often to repeate the indifferency of theſe thinges, that hath never been neither can be proved by you. For as much alſo as for not ſubſcribyng, and for not conforming to Ceremonyes etc. Many more are thruſt out of the miniſtery then for any other matter of ten tymes greater moment, may it not be truely called the cauſe of God? Eſpecially it being in ſo many bookes proved that they are unlawfull & contrary to the word of God? Yea, ſith for theſe thinges the word is reſtrayned, may we not ſay that the ſalvation of the people dependeth therevpon? And conſequently that it is the mayne cauſe of the land? What is greater then ſalvation? Your ſelfe grant that we are Miniſters of Chriſt, in grace and favour with God. It followeth therefore that our cauſe is the cauſe of God. Luc. 10.16. Yea, of the land alſo, becauſe beſids ſalvation many other benefits doe depend upon the miniſtery of the word, and many evills vponupon the reſtraint thereof. Prov. 29.18. For this cauſe the Apoſtle joyneth theſe two togeather in the Iewes, that they were contrary (or adverſaryes) to all men, and forbad them to preach to the Gentles. 1. Theſſalonians 2. ver. 15.16. Touching your often objection of our ſuſpenſion and deprivation for not conformyng our ſelues, conſider this one thing M. Powell, and conſider it ſeriouſly, viz. that whē as Iohn and ſome other Diſciples tooke upon them to forbid one caſting out Devills, (that had before done it in the name of Chriſt) and that only becauſe he would not joyne with them and follow them to Chriſt: and that afterward whē they made relation unto Chriſt, of that which they had done, and of the reaſon why they had done it (as though they had done ſome great ſervice, as many thinke they doe now great ſervice in forbidding us to preach) conſider (I ſay agayne) that our Saviour was ſo far from approving that which they had done, that he rather reproved it ſaying, Forbid him not. Mar. 9.38.39. Whether was a juſter cauſe of ſuſpention, not to joyne with ſuch worthy Diſciples of our Saviour, and that in following them, and goeing with them to our Saviour himſelfe, or not to joyne with the Biſhops, & to conforme our ſelues unto them in thoſe things, wherein we are perſwaded we ſhould ſinne againſt Chriſt, and in parte goe away from him? For we follow not Chriſt, neither walke with him any longer, then we doe obſerue his word. Further alſo conſider whether is a greater, or at the leaſt a better and more neceſſary worke, to caſt out Devills from their poſſesſion which they had of the bodyes of men, or to caſt them out from the ſpirituall poſſesſion they hauehave of the ſoul of men, which eiection is wrought by the preaching the goſpell Acts 26.18.
G. PowelThey make this ſuch a cauſe, as if all religion depended on refuſing of a croſe and furplice etc.
No, no.Anſwer. All religion and piety doth not depend on theſe thinges. Yet religion is the leſſe, and doth the more decay, the more that the preaching of the goſpell, for thes thinges is reſtrayned. The increaſe of ſinne and iniquity in thoſe places already where ſuch Miniſters are put out, doth too much teſtifie this thing. Heere againe is his former fallacy, as eo quod eſt ſecundum quid, ad id quod eſt ſimpliciter. We ſay, that ſome religion dependeth on refuſſing of a croſſe, ſurplice ete. Hence he concludeth, that all religion dependeth etc. Further, whether we make all religion to depend on refusſing a croſſe, ſurplice etc. or no, it ſemeth that the Biſhops make all religion (or the moſt) to depend on croſſe, ſurplice, etc. For if a man yeeld to theſe things, he may paſſe away with any other matter vncontrolled: but if he ſtands in theſe things, then he is unworthy the miniſtery, whatſoever guiftes he hauehave, how godly ſoever he be, and what good ſo ever he hauehave done, or might doe by his continuance. Is it not ſo?
G. PowelThey boldly, preſumptuouſly, and unduetifully cenſure his Majeſtie for coldnes in religion, for loſing his firſt louelove, deepe diſſembling, ſeeming to pretend one thing and to intend another as if he had been trayned up in the Ieſuits ſchooles to equivocat: which fault I would ſome of their faction did ſo litle practiſe, as his Majeſtie abhorres it.
Wheris there any ſuch cenſure of his Majeſtie for coldnes Anſwer.in religion, for loſing his firſt louelove, and for deepe diſſembling? Nay, doth not the author expreſly labour the quit contrary, profesſing that he wrote that which he did to this very end, that men might not iudge Chriſtian Princes vponupon outward apperences, yea adding ſuppoſed apparences? Yea, wiſhyng alſo leſſe cenſuring of them, and were praying for them? Is there not by all authors a difference made betwixt Simulare and di…ſimulare, that the one may be uſed in godly policy and chriſtian wiſdome, but that the other is alwayes of the fleſh fleſhly? In allegation of examples, every particular is not nicely and ſtrictly to be reſpected, but that poynt onelyonly is to be conſidered for which they are produced, and wherto they be applyed. Otherwiſe, from the application of Davids eating of the ſhewe bread, vntounto the Diſciples plucking the eares of corne to eat. Math. 12.3. A mā may gather that becauſe David uſed lying as a meanes to obtayne the ſheew bread at the Preiſts handes, therefore alſo it is lawfull for us by lying to obteyne ſome thing in our necesſity. By the ſame reaſon alſo, becauſe the midwiues of Egypt are commended to feare the Lord etc. and to hauehave ſpared the male children of the Iſraelits, the ſame fault of lying may be juſtified, becauſe they being examined by Pharoh of that their doeing, excuſed themſelues by a lye. The like may be ſaide of Rahab, commended for her faith in ſavyng the Iſraelits ſpyes, Heb. 11.31. Though ſhe defended her ſelfe from the inquiſitors of the King of Iericho by a lye. Ioſ. 2.4.
If the example of Conſtantius and Iehu, may for ſome things be excepted againſt, yet it might hauehave been conſidred, that the author to expreſſe his generall meanyng the better, did mention alſo the example of Ioſeph, and of our Saviour Chriſt Ieſus, againſt whom there can be no exception. And now to clere his meanyng the better, let the example of Salomon in that wherein he is ſo highly commended, be alſo remembred: who to try whither of the two weomen were the mother of the living child, commaunded the lyving child to be divided in twane, and the one halfe to be given to the one woman, the other halfe to the other woman. 1 Kings 3.25. Here is a manifeſt pretenſe of that which was not intēded. Let the anſwerer therfore learne, that there is great difference betwixt pretending onelyonly for triall of the affections of other, and deepe diſſembling or Ieſuitecall equivocating, for the hiding or maynteyning of ſome impiety and wickednes. I doubt not therefore, but I may juſtifie the author from all ſuch thinges, as by allegation of the examples of Conſtantius & Iehu, are moſt uncharitably imputed unto him: yea, that alſo I may truely affirme his meanyng in them to hauehave been, onelyonly to ſhew that he conceaved of his Majeſties meanyng, that which he was perſwaded to be beſt. Therfore farr was he from all undutifull conceits againſt his Majeſtie.
It is alſo to be obſerved, that he doth not abſolutly ſay this or that to be his Majeſties meanyng, but onelyonly that it might be like to the meanyng of Conſtantius, Iehu, Ioſeph, and our Saviour: for ought that any man elſe did knowe. If it be otherwiſe, Gods will be done: and I hope that whatſoever ſome doe imagine of ſuch as are ſilenced and deprived, that upon ſight of his Majeſties full reſolution for the countenancyng and authorizyng of the Biſhops to hold on their courſe againſt us, then many will yeeld etc. yet it ſhall well appere that we hauehave not depended upon any other then upon God alone: and that that which we hauehave done, is not done vponupon any vayne hope or expectation, but in conſcience of that word which is our onelyonly rule and canon whereby to liue, and whereby to dy. Touching the anſwerers wiſh that ſome of our faction (as he unbrotherly ſpeaketh) did ſo litle practiſe equiuocating as his Maieſty abhorres it, either let him name ſuch (if he know any) and let them beare their iniquity, or elſe let him ſpare ſuch wiſhes, as whereby he implieth a ſecret accuſation.
G. PowelWhereas his Highnes heart is evidently diſcerned to be fully ſeaſoned with true piety etc.
AnſwerThough flatery be odious, and the wages therof fearfull, yet if his Majeſtie or any other doe well conſider the beſt fruites of a true heart, our louelove and loyalty towards his Majeſtie ſhould be ſound as good, as the beſt Prelate in the land.
G. PowelIt ſufficeth me to hauehave detected the licence of their raving pēnes, the reſtraint of which fury, ſpecially belongeth to your Honorable & judicious Court.
Anſwer.O M. Powell you doe to much forget modeſty. Whither pen raveth moſt, yours or the authors, or whither he or you, (I will not ſay yee though you write by authoritie of ſome other) be in moſt fury, let that Honorable and judicious Court judge. Yea, if it might pleaſe his Majeſtie to vouchſafe the reading of the wrightings, and in his Princely wiſedome to conſider the dealing on both ſides, we would not feare his Royall judgment concerning our cauſe or our ſelues. We feare the judgment of one Lordly Biſhop ten times more, then the judgment of ten ſuch religious Princes. For we aſſure our ſelues of more equitie from his Majeſtie, then we doe from all Lordly Biſhops in the land.
G. Powel.Which your Honors will the rather performe, conſidering what unchriſtian conceits they hauehave of this Honorable aſſembly, and of all other his Majeſties loving ſubjectes, who loyally obey him and ſerue God, according to the religion eſtabliſhed: reſembling them to Conſtantius his Nobles. Who became Idolaters and Atheiſtes upon his commaundement.
As before we hauehave ſeene how untruely the anſwerer maketh this note vponupon the authors concluſion,Anſwer. with the letter e an vniuſt calumni pag 77. in as much as he hath accuſed the author before of bold, preſumptuous, and unduetifull cenſuring of his Maieſtie etc. thereby to provoke his Majeſties heavie indignation againſt us all,Contrariety ſo now contrary to the ſame note, he accuſeth us alſo before the Nobles, yea, before all the ſtates of the whole kingdome. Doeht this man ſpare us, as he profeſſeth to doe in his ſecond note upon the 4 argument? Touching the matter here objected, it is partly anſwered before. The authors intent and purpoſe was only to perſwade all his Majeſties chriſtian ſubjectes to thinke Honorably of his Highnes, and not to judge him by outward ſuppoſed apparences. Therwas nothing to inſinuate any ſuch unchriſtian cenſure of this Honorable aſſembly and of other loving ſubjectes as this wranglinge anſwerer would wreſt from the authors words. The matters in queſtion concerne onelyonly or ſpecially the miniſters of the word. The things alſo commaunded by his Majeſtie are nothing like to the thinges commaunded by Conſtantius. How injurous therefore it is, to conclude the ſame ſinne to be of them that obey his Majeſtie in the thinges now commaunded, that was in thoſe that obeyed Conſtantius, I leaue to the judgment of all reaſonable men. The fallacies of this collection, in reſpect of the difference both of thinges and alſo of perſons commaunded, I leaue to the ſentence of them that are as skilfull in Ariſtotle his Elenchs, as M. Powell ſeemeth to be. The childiſh accuſation of the author from the 8 Argument (heere inſerted either of mallice, or to encreaſe his volume) ſhall be diſcovered in the defence of that 8 Argument.
Concernyng the Arguments themſelues, may it pleaſe the Chriſtian reader firſt of all to take a generall veiwe of the generall fraudes of the anſwerer in his anſwer vntounto them.
His firſt generall fraude is, that he ſetteth upon theſe Arguments, as though in them the mayne cauſe betwixt, the Prelats and vsus were handled. Whereas the purpoſe of the author was not to informe the mindes and judgmēts of the Parliament, but, taking that to be already done by other books written in that behalfe, & the rather becauſe he did already ſee them to deale in the cauſe; he labored altogether, to quicken their affections, and to whet and encreaſe their zeale to be the more earneſt in that cauſe, of the equity and ſinceritie whereof, by former bookes touching their iudgments they were abundantlie informed and perſwaded. And heerin he had the more reaſon to provoke their godlie zeale, in reſpect of the manifold & mightie adverſaries the cauſe had, and becauſe he knew that the ſayd adverſaryes wovld make ſtrong oppoſition therevnto and labor what they might to hinder the ſame. 2 Becauſe the mayne controverſie betwixt the Prelats and vsus is not handled in theſe Arguments, therefore he inſulteth mightily, and often (almoſt in every page) he objecteth petitionem principii & begging of the queſtion vntounto us, as though becauſe the controverſie were not handled in the ſayd arguments, therefore it were not handled elſe where. But ſith it is handled by other whoſe books & reaſons are not yet anſwered, neither ever will be ſubſtantially, therefore this is but a vayne boaſting.
His thyrd generall fraud is, that himſelfe committeth the ſame fault in all his anſwer, that he objecteth to the author of the arguments. For whereas the ſaid author vponupon ſufficient proofe made of the cauſe by other bookes, doeth make this the generall concluſion of all the arguments, that it would pleaſe the whole State graciouſly to releeue the miniſters oppreſſed for that cauſe etc: this anſwerer maketh this his concluſion, that it would pleaſe the State to releeue the refractary and ſchiſmaticall Miniſters. So never prooving us, neither any other having ever proved us to be refractary, ſchiſmaticall etc. (except every Biſhop be a Pythagoras, and doe alwayes ſpeake oracles, which they ſeeldome doe) yet he taketh it for granted that we are ſuch. Huic arenoſo fundamento tota ſtrues et moles ſequentis Praelatici reſponſi innititur. VponUpon this ſandie foundation the whole frame and lumpe of all the Prelaticall anſwer following doth relye.
M. POWEL TO THE TITLE OF THE Arguments.
G. PowelAll the Arguments following be common (excepting one or two) and may be urged for popery or any other hereſy etc.
Are Popiſh or other herericall Preiſts, miniſters of Chriſt, Anſwer.in grace and favor with Chriſt etc. Doe the Angels ſo long after, and reioyce in their Miniſtery as in ours? Doe they as truely interprete the myſteries of God to eternall life, as Ioſeph interpreted dreames for this life? May they as truely be commē ded for the ſpirituall deliverance of many ſoules, as Ionathan did worke the bodily deliverance of the Iſraelits? etc. The like may be ſayd of the other arguments. How then are they ſo common as the anſwerer chargeth them to be? This beginnyng ſheweth, what we are to looke for in the reſt of the anſwer.