Reply to a Book, Reply · Part 6
The anſwer to the ſixth Section examined.
This Section might hauehave paſſed without being examined by me,P. 33. had not the Anſwerer, in the cloſe of it, brought me in as one fighting againſt him, in like manner as the Complainants, which is, according to an Engliſh proverbe, to ſlander him with a matter of trueth. But, becauſe, he ſayth, the anſwer before given to the Complainants, may alſo ſerve for anſwer to me, I am compelled to examine the wholl Section, to find out the anſwer given to me, in theyres. His wholl anſwer tendeth to charge them with ſlander, in 8 particulars, to which I will anſwer ſeverally and breifly.
To the firſt.] That they charge him with preſſing others upon the Congregation. In anſwer Anſ. whereunto he ſayth. I doe not clayme any more to my ſelfe, then one voyce.
Nor doe they charge him to arrogate 2 voyces. But who knoweth not, that ſome one voyce may drowne many voyces? Reply. As appeareth in ſundry paſſages, in theyr Conſiſtory.
Anſ. To the ſecond.] That he abuſeth his intereſt in the Magiſtrates, and Claſſis, he anſwereth, Reply. not by denying it, but by calling for witneſſes, whereas, what need witneſſes, when the fact it ſelfe proveth it? As the examination of the former Sect: evinceth.
Anſ. To the third.] That he ſayth, Reply. they involve the Magiſtrates in the ſame guilt with him. 1. Theyr owne wordes ſhew that theyr complaint is againſt him, not the Magiſtrate, and ſo the imputation of ſlander may be retorted upon himſelfe. This will be more fully cleared in the reply to the 6. anſwer, where the difference betweene the Magiſtrates requiring of this, and his preſſing of it, will appeare. 2. Nor is it ſo rare a caſe, as is pretended, that mens intereſt in good Magiſtrates may be abuſed. Was not the Emperour Conſtantius abuſed by the Arrians, under theyr ſhew of gravity, to ſide with them againſt the Orthodox, though the greater number, by farr, in the Synod at Ariminum.
Anſ. To the fourth.] That they extend this complaint to the Claſſis alſo. What offence is there in this? he addeth, as if they were generally ſo blind and corrupt as to ſuffer themſelves to be abuſed by me. Reply. As though learned and godly men may not be abuſed by theyr good perſwaſion of anothers good intentions, to take part with him againſt thoſe that are godly, without cauſe.Sozom. 8.14. Socrat. 6.9 Did not Theophilus of Alexandria, by his policy, prevayle with Epiphanius, a man of much integrity, to take his part againſt Chryſoſtom, whereby he prevayled to procure his baniſhment out of Conſtantinople, to the great greife of the godly, which alſo cauſed much calamity in the Church and civill State?
Anſ. To the fifth.] that he ſayth, theyr reproach ſerveth to the clearing of him, and that, thoſe that are unpartiall, and wiſe in heart, may conceive hereby, that he hath obtayned this intereſt in them, not by abuſing and corrupting them, but by walking uprightly before them.
Reply. The Complainants doe not ſay that he got his intereſt, either in Magiſtrates, or Miniſters of the Claſſis, by abuſing & corrupting them, but, that he abuſeth the intereſt which he hath gotten in them, to the injury of the Church. 2. Nor is an intereſt in wiſe and godly men, an infallible ſigne of upright walking. Indeed intereſt in God is a ſigne of uprightnes, as in Noah, Abraham, Iob, Moſes, Samuell, David &c. Becauſe the Lord ſearcheth the heart, and knoweth our thoughts afarre off: but it is not ſo in mens acceptance, who, judging by the outward appearance, are often deceived and may be deluded by falſe pretences. Was not David a wiſe King? And yet Ziba abuſed his intereſt in him, and, by miſinforming him, cauſed him to doe an iniury to Mephiboſeth. The Church, to whom Iohn the Divine wrote, was not deſtitute of wiſe men, and of men able to judge: yet Diotrephes ſo farr abuſed his intereſt in them, as the Apoſtle deſcribeth,3. Iohn. 9.10. ſaying. I wrote unto the Church, but Diotrephes that loveth to have the preheminence amongſt them, received us not, wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds, which he doeth, prating againſt us with malicious words, and not content therewith, neither doeth he himſelfe receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and caſteth them out of the Church. Boath thoſe had an intereſt: the one in the Magiſtrate, the other in the Church, which they abuſed. But I produce theſe examples, not to compare the Anſwerer with them, but only to ſhew, that an intereſt may be gotten with wiſe and good men, without upright walking, and therefore this is no neceſſary conſequence.
To the ſixth and ſeventh,] where he ſheweth what order the Magiſtrates ſet downe, about having one that can ſpeake Dutch.
The ſtory which here he relateth, cleareth three points.
1. That it is no ſlander, when they ſay, that none of our Nation, that come immediatly from England, though never ſo fit and able, ſhall be admitted, but they muſt be forced to take one that can ſpeake Dutch. Himſelfe in relating the ſtory, confeſſeth this to be no ſlander, but a trueth.
2. That it is no ſlander, when they complaine of him as guilty of this injury. For, beſides what he hath done towards the procuring of this, it is evident, that he was ſo farr from pleading, or ſtirring up the Elders to joyne with him, in petition for the altering of this order, as that he pleadeth for it, though, they ſay, it is to the unſpeakeakle injury and greife of the Church.
3. That it is no ſlander, that they complaine of the Anſwerer for this, and not of the Magiſtrate, ſeing he urgeth it more vehemently then they ſeeme to doe. For they propound it as a matter only, in ſome reſpects, convenient, that the Engliſh preacher ſpeake Dutch, but he preſſeth it as neceſſary. The former appeareth three wayes. 1. in that caution which they give [If it were poſſible] wherein I ſuppoſe, they meane, with the conſent and approbation of the Church: for otherwiſe, if they would obtrude one upom them, they need not put in that proviſo. 2. In the reaſons, which they give for that theyre deſire, which doe imply only an expediency, viz, that he may debate matters with the Claſſis, and treate with the Magiſtrate, on the Churches behalfe, as occaſion ſhall require, which a man may doe, by learning the language after he is ſetled, though he have no Dutch before. 3. Jn theyre indulgence to me, which the Anſwerer acknowledgeth, in ſayng, that they were content to diſpenſe with my want of the Dutch language, which ſheweth that they accounted it but an expediency, with which they would diſpenſe, in a caſe of neceſſity. The latter (viz,P. 31.6. that the Anſwerer preſſeth it as a matter neceſſary) appeareth in his owne words, when he ſayth, that a miniſter called to this place which can not ſpeake Dutch, is, in great meaſure, no better then a Dumbe Miniſter, in reſpect of one ſpeciall worke of his calling, which is to give adviſe &c. In the Claſſis. If, to ſit in the Dutch Claſſis &c. Be one ſpeciall worke of the Engliſh Miniſters calling, then indeed his ability to ſpeake Dutch, is a neceſſary requiſite, without which he is but a dumb miniſter. But how will this be proved? For 1. Paul in his Epiſtles to Timothy and Titus and in the reſt of his Epiſtles, ſpeaketh nothing of this property or duety, nor is it any where elſe in Scripture revealed to be neceſſary, how then is it a ſpeciall worke of his calling? 2. The Magiſtrates doe not preſſe this ſitting in the Dutch Claſſis, upon the Engliſh preachers in other townes in Holland. How commeth it to be ſo ſpeciall a worke of a Miniſters calling in Amſterdam? 3. This is not urged as a ſpeciall worke of a miniſters calling to the French & walloon Churches in that Citty; How comes it to be ſo to the Engliſh? 4. The Anſwerer did not account it a ſpeciall worke of his calling to ſit in the Dutch Claſſis, a good while after his comming to Amſterdam, when he laboured to ſet up an Engliſh Claſſis; though afterwards he oppoſed the ſame thing, when it tooke effect by Mr. Forbes his labour. How comes it now to be a ſpeciall worke of his calling, which then was not? 5. The Anſwerer hath bene heard to ſay, that he commeth ſometimes from the Claſſis greived & troubled in his mind, becauſe, when weighty matters are debated, he cannot ſufficiently expreſſe his mind in Dutch. And well may it greive him to ſupply the place of a Paſtor there, if he find him ſelfe unable to performe one ſpeciall worke of his calling. To wind up all. Seing the Anſwerer maketh that an eſpeciall worke of the Miniſters calling to his Church in Amſterdam, which God doeth not make ſo, in any place of Scripture, nor the Magiſtrates doe make ſo, neither there, to other Nations, nor, in other Cityes, to other Engliſh Churches, and ſeing, by that pretence, they are deprived of many worthy men, which they might have injoyed (had not this bene ſo inſiſted upon by him) and ſeing the Anſwerer doth urge it more ſtrictly, then the Magiſtrates (they propounding it, but as a matter of conveniency, but he preſſing it, as a matter of neceſſity) hauehave not the members juſt cauſe to complaine of this as a greivance? Nor will this free him from blame, that he is but one, and claymeth but one voyce, ſeing he hindreth, that what agreeth not with his mind, can not be ended in the Church, but is carryed to the Claſſis, where he can ſtrengthen himſelfe, by helpe of thoſe whom he gayneth to his party, by rayſing cauſeles ſuſpitions of ſome factions, or Shyſmaticall intentions in his people, or in the Conſiſtory, which they receive from him, and report to the Magiſtrates, who, at theyre intreaty, interpoſe to prevent ſome imagined diſtractions, which may fall in the Engliſh Church: whereas, if they had rightly bene informed of the wholl truth, they would have ſeene the requeſt of the Church to be reaſonable, and juſt, and the oppoſition made againſt it to be injurious, and blameworthy.
Anſ. To the eighth.] To that which they ſay concerning the Lords fighting againſt his courſe hitherto by the great unfitnes of thoſe &c. who hauehave preached hitherto by his nomination or conſent in ſending for, he anſwereth 2 things; 1. That they are guilty of raſh judgement, and of taking Gods name in vayne, or reproaching the Lord, and laying iniquity upon the Lord, and of making him a partaker with them, for maintenance of theyre ſinne. 2. For the men to whoſe ſending for he hath given conſent; that they are not unfit, but learned and worthy men: one of them he nameth, the other 2 he concealeth. This paſſage ſhall be breifly examined, and replyed upon.
To the firſt,] Reply. I am ſo farr from juſtifying any thing done or ſpoken amiſſe, even by my freinds, that this Anſwerer intimateth it to be a juſt reward of Mr. B. inordinate affection to me, that I cenſure the printing of that pamphlet to be an injury. That which I did in the ſimplicity, and uprightnes of my heart, not knowing that Mr. B. was the publiſher, in way of witnes bearing to the truth, and in favour of him, he wreſteth and perverteth to contrary ends. This dealing of his, in that particular, may make me wary of uttering my thoughts, in a like caſe, when another lyeth to watch and catch all advantages againſt me and them. Therefore what I account amiſſe in this expreſſion, on theyr part, I will conceale, and alſo paſſe by the diſtemper of his ſpirit, which, upon this occaſion, venteth it ſelfe. The comparing of the reply to the former Section and this, will giuegive ſome light, whereby the Reader may diſcerne, 1. whether that which they have diſliked, and complained of, be not a juſt greivance, 2. whether, in that caſe, ſuch an expreſſion deſerve ſo heavy a cenſure. Here he inſtanceth in three perſons ſent for by him, and nameth but one of them, viz Mr. Balmford, whom he mentioneth in the firſt place. In the paſſages concerning him I noate three things.
1. VponUpon a third and fourth review,A defence of Mr. Balmford, I wondred why ſo litle was ſayd by the Anſwerer in the juſt acknowledgment of Mr, B. ſufficiency, eſpecially ſeing the next, whoſe name he concealeth, is honoured by him with the prayſe of ſpeciall gifts of learning, piety, and utterance, & the third, whoſe name he alſo ſuppreſſeth, is ſtiled a man of ſpeciall noate for his learning, and labours in the Church of God. But, when I conſider the men, (him, upon knowledge, and them by geſſe, and report of others) I ſeeme to apprehend the cauſe of it, which was, not that Mr. Balmford was inferiour to either of thoſe men, in the deſart of ſuch attributiōs but that, if he had freely done him right, in ſo publick a declaration thereof, it might have reflected more honour upon him then he can be cōtent ſhould be devolved upon one, whoſe judgment did at all differ from his, and agree with his oppoſites, as, he accounteth them, in the point controverted betweene us.
2. Yet, when it may ſerve for a ſtaffe, wherewith to beate the Complainants, he addeth thus much. His great unfitnes is theyre great ſlander, that avouch it, unles they could prove it.] Neither himſelfe nor they will be ever able to prove Mr. B. unfit for that Church, but both he and they might have bleſſed God, with much thanckfullnes, for ſuch a mercy, if they had injoyed him. And certainely it will be found worthy to be called a great ſlander, if any ſhall impute great unfitnes to him. The place where he hath diverſe yeares executed his paſtorall function, conſtantly, painfully, proffitably and with good acceptance, is incomparably before Amſterdam, both in the eminency of the Auditours, and in theyre ability to judge of his ſufficiency: the deſerved approbation of him, and affection to him ſo frequently expreſſed, on all fitting occaſions, by all ſorts of hearers, both reſorting thither, and reſiding there, are in ſtead of letters of recommondation, to ſtop the mouths of any that ſhall muſſitate or whiſper any ſuch diſparadging intimations, and to convince them of great ſlander. But now the queſtion will be, at whoſe dore the ſlander muſt be layd? For the Complainants refuſe to father it, and doe retort the accuſation of a great ſlander upon the Anſwerer himſelfe, and profeſſe the great unfitnes, which they meant, was intended by them concerning others, partly, in reſpect of the language, and they name ſeverall men againſt whom they except in that reſpect, whom they could not wel underſtand, through ſome defect of the Engliſh tongue, or theyre manner of pronouncing it▪ partly; in reſpect of yeares, or experience for ſuch a worke, whereof ſome other inſtances are alleadged by them. But of boath theſe inſufficiencyes they acquit Mr. Balmford, and blame the Anſwerer that he hath ſo needleſly brought him, by name, upon the ſtage, whileſt he coneealeth the names of the other two, and wholly hideth others, whom they can name. Alſo, they ſay, ſome were deſired by him, whom they could not thinck fit for them, in reſpect of theyre relations, and ingagements to other Churches, which would ſuffer much by the loſſe of them, though, in other reſpects, they accounted them fit.
3. To that which he addeth, concerning the fighting of ſome of theſe Complainants againſt his calling, they anſwer and profeſſe, that the fighting, which he meaneth, was not, out of diſeſteeme of, or diſaffection to Mr. Balmford, but for the defence and maintenance of theyre right, in which caſe, they would have oppoſed any other. For, ſeing how unjuſtly they were deprived of Mr. Hooker, whom they generally deſired, and having heard, that ſome of the Dutch Miniſters had ſayd, that, if they had knowne ſo much before, concerning him, as they had then heard matters ſhould not have bene carryed againſt him as they were: whereupon they conceyved hopes that they might yet injoy Mr. Hooker. Hence came theyre oppoſition to Mr. B. calling, whom they thought the Anſwerer more forward to bring in, that he might deprive them of the other. But, ſince that time, finding theyre expectation and hope fruſtrate, they have wiſhed that Mr. B. had bene ſetled amongſt them.
Concerning the other two, ſeing the Anſwerer concealeth theyre names, I will be ſilent, and am ſorry that he concludeth that paſſage with perſiſting in his former fault of miſſappiying (& ſo abuſing) the Scripture, which he alleadgeth for his owne purpoſe.
Thus long I have bene excerciſed in a moſt unpleaſing worke of raking in a kennel of reproaches to find out my anſwer, which he directed me to ſeeke in theyres. And, in ſearching, I find no ſuch anſwer to them, as I looked for, viz, a diſproofe of this ſecond proofe of the juſtnes of theyre complaint, concerning his depriving the Church of the free choyſe of theyre Paſtor. For what free choyſe have they, when they may not have one of theyre owne Nation, immediately from England, but one that can ſpeake Dutch: and that one muſt be ſo and ſo principled, and framed to the bent of the Anſwerers ſpirit, as hath bene declared, in the former Section? why is this required more of the Engliſh then of other Nations? Why doeth the Anſwerer preſſe this as a thing neceſſary, when the Magiſtrates only propound it as a thing convenient? Who ſeeth not, that, till he ſhewed his diſlike, both the Magiſtrates and Claſſis have approved of theſe very men, whom afterwards, upon his ſuggeſtions againſt them, they have refuſed? How then can it be accounted a ſlander, that they complaine of him, for this cauſe? If he have no better anſwer for me, J ſhall remaine unanſwered, as they are, notwithſtanding any thing pretended by him to the contrary.
Pag. 32. Anſ.He chargeth me with overlaſhing more then they, and myne aſſertion with more untrueth then theyres, becauſe J uſed the word Allwayes. Reply. 1. For them: theyre aſſertion hath bene examined, and, found true, and I doubt not, upon examination, myne will be found true alſo, and that, in both, he will be found guilty of ſlander. For. 1. in my wrighting, theſe words following will be found added to the former, and hath hitherto oppoſed diverſe worthy men, that have come immediately from England, which addition ſerveth to reſtraine the word allwayes, to thoſe that came immediately from England; as if I ſhould ſay, Allwayes, when men have come immediately from England (which was the caſe of Mr. H. Mr. P. and my ſelfe) he hath oppoſed them, and ſhewed himſelfe deſirous of one that had lived ſome time in this country, rather. So that I make the oppoſition of thoſe that have come immediately from England, a reall proofe of his deſire of having one that lived in theſe countryes; which deſire when it worketh ſo ſtrongly, as that thoſe that come immediately from England are more narrowly ſifted, and more violently oppoſed, then others, who, having lived in theſe parts, conſent with them in judgment; this I call urging. So that, ſuppoſe, this have not bene publickly urged by him allwayes, from the firſt day of his being called to that Church: yet if allwayes, whenſoever men have come immediately from England, and have bene much deſired by the Church (for ſuch I meane) he hath found one pretence or other to oppoſe theyre calling, when he hath not bene ſo ſtrict with others, my aſſertion appeareth to be true.
Secondly, I am ſo farr from overlaſhing more then they, that I r…ſtraine my ſelfe much more, in limiting my ſpeech, to thoſe that have come immediately from England, whereas they complaine of his oppoſing, not only thoſe, but even ſuch alſo as had abode ſometimes in theſe Countryes, as Mr. Parker, Dr. Ames, Mr. Forbes, who could ſpeake Dutch, and yet were oppoſed & refuſed by him. Now, where is my overlaſhing? where is the untrueth of my aſſertion? It becommeth him to be very carefull that he ſhew foorth trueth in his accuſation, who will charge another with untrueth, and to be found wary and moderate in his expreſſions, who will accuſe another of overlaſhing. I doubt not, the Reader ſeeth how eaſily I may retort this chalenge upon him, and more juſtly. But I ſpare him, and haſten to examine the following Sections.