Penitent Confession and Vindication in Answer to a Book, Chapter 3

Penitent Confession and Vindication in Answer to a Book · Chapter 3

p. 29Chap. III. The Reaſons why I cannot without known groſs Lying, profeſs ſuch Repentance as Dr. Stillingfleet's Anonymus Second, and many ſuch others call for, or expect.

§ 1. AS it is no leſs ſin to Murder ones ſelf, than to Murder another, ſo it is no leſs to belie ones ſelf than to belie another. Yea it is the greater in that it is like to be more againſt knowledge, we being better acquainted with our own thoughts and deeds than with other Mens: And it would be the greater ſin in me, becauſe that the Father of Lies purpoſely deſigneth his calumnies, to cauſe hatred in many, and to fruſtrate all my Writings both to the Church and to particular Souls.

§ 2. Why I cannot Repent of my Writings againſt the Sadduers or Brutiſts, the Antitrinitarians, the Somatiſts, the Quakers, the Anabaptiſts, the Antinominians, the Papiſts, the Separating Dividers, and the reſt before-mentioned, the Books that I have written againſt them expreſs my Reaſons. But no Men call me to it by ſuch an agreeing number of voices as the late Proteſtant Conformiſts of that fiercer ſort who appropriate to themſelves the Name of the Epiſcopal Church of England, eſpecially thoſe that are for a Forreign or Univerſal Eccleſiaſtical Juriſdiction. And no Man hath done it with ſuch virulent malice as the Anonymus Author of the Book called, The Second part of the Unreaſonableneſs of Separation as ſeconding Dr. Stillingfleet. Whoſe Libel I ſhall now peruſe, and return the Reaſons why I cannot Repent of all that he reciteth by way of Accuſation.

§ 3. I. In his Preface, That my Opinions and Practices have been condemned by the generality of Chriſtians from the moſt Primitive and Pureſt Times of the Church. Anſ. To which I appeal, and can get no anſwer.

§ 4. II. I muſt firſt tell the Reader that ſhould I ſtay to confute all the falſification of my words which he pretendeth to recite, it would make an unſavoury, tedious, unprofitable Volume. A word put in, or left out, or altered, will ſerve our grand Accuſer to do much of his Works with the Sons of Ignorance and Malice.

He ſeemeth to expect that I ſhould Repent of ſaying that our Civil War between King and Parliament was begun in England between two Parties of Epiſcopal Proteſtants: And muſt I repent that I lived in England? And that I know what it was naturally impoſſible for me not to know? Why doth he not alſo make me a Liar for ſaying that I then dwelt in England; and both ſides were Engliſh Men, and ſpake Engliſh? Had I been a Muſhroom ſprung up as lately as our fiery Tories, p. 30… had Malice enough to make me mad, I might have needed none of his impoſed Repentance. I have in another writing named the Commanders of the Army, and the Parliaments Lords Lieutenants, and all the Major Generals, beſides the Chaplains, and Challenged them to find among all theſe one Presbyterian or two Independants for ten, if not twenty Epiſcopal Proteſtants. A Wiſe and Credible Parliament Man yet living, hath oft told me that when the War begun he knew but One Presbyterian in all the Houſe of Commons, (which was worthy Mr. Tate of Northampton) it being not then known among them. The Earl of Warwick who commanded at Sea I knew to be for Communion with the Patiſh and Epiſcopal Churches. In the Army let them enquire of the Communion and Religion of the General and all his Commanders, and I believe they will find among all the Colonels but two Independants (the Lord Say and the Lord Brooke) and one moderate Puritane yet living (the Lord Wharton) and that all the reſt were moderate Epiſcopal Conformiſts (what the old Scots Souldiers Browne and Urrey that turn'd to the King were I know not, ſuppoſing their pay was their Religion.) We knew this to be true of the Earl of Eſſex General; the Earl of Bedford General of the Horſe is yet living and well known: Sir John Merrike Major General, Colonel Dolbiere, the Earl of Peterborough General of the Ordnance, Lionell Copley Scout-Maſter, the Earl of Stampford, the Lord Roberts lately Preſident of the Kings Privy Council; the Lord Hollis, the Lord Kimbolton, (after Earl of Mancheſter and Lord Chamberlain that choſe the Kings Preachers, and conſtantly heard them, the Lord Haſtings (Earl of Huntington) the Lord Rochford (after Earl of Dover) the Lord Fielding (after Earl of Denbigh) the Lord St. John Son to the Earl of Bullingbrook kill'd at Edghill) Col. Goodwin, Col. Lſſex, Col. Grantham, Col. Sir Henry Cholmley, Col. Bampfield, Sir William Conſtable, (after turn'd Independant) yea Col. Hampden was no Separatiſt from the Pariſh Churches; but a ſober Proteſtant. I have named the reſt elſewhere. I heard enough of Col. Sandyes before he was mortally wounded to tell me that he was no Puritane.

And as for the Major Generals of the ſeveral Counties, the Lord Ferdinando Fairfax, the Lord Willoughby of Parham, the Earl of Stampford, Sir John Gell, Sir Tho. Middleton, Col. Mitton, Col. Morgan, Col. Maſſey, Sir William Waller, the Earl of Denbigh, Col. Langhorne, and Col. Poyer, were all conformable to Epiſcopacy and Parochial Worſhip; and ſome of them ſo Zealous for the Liturgy and Dioceſanes that they would not hear a Man as a Miniſter that had not Epiſcopal Ordination. The Archbiſhop of York Williams was one of them, and was not he for Epiſcopacy?

§ 5. But the Accuſer confuteth all this by telling us, that it began in King James days between the Regians and the Republicans, between p. 31Prerogative and Priviledge, by a Party that would have perſwaded the King, to War for the Palatinate, &c.

And why began he it not in Queen Elizabeth's Reign, who more overtopt Parliaments than King James did? I perceive by this Man, that none muſt paſs for Conformable and Epiſcopal, that are not of Sibthorp and Mainwaring's Mind, and renounce not Parliamentary Priviledges, and give not up Property and Liberty to the meer will of the King called Prerogative. And ſo all our Parliaments till the Dividing and Tearing Long one, were not of the Church of England: And what then was that Church? Was it a Chriſtian Kingdom, and yet was the Kingdom Repreſentative no part of it? Are none but Leeches, Sangutſugi's, Men of Blood, (that muſt have all lye and die in Goals among Rogues, that will not Swear, and Subſcribe, and Declare and Covenant, and Practiſe, all that they impoſe) of the Church of England? What a Reproach is this to ſuch a Church?

If I muſt Repent that I take not all the old Parliaments, and all the Biſhops in Queen Elizabeths days to be no Church Proteſtants; if I muſt Repent for taking Jewel, Biſhop Bilſon, Ri. Hooker, and his Friend Sir Edwin Sandyes for Church Proteſtants, and Repent for believing all Ruſhworth's Collections, all Whitlock's Memoirs, all Sir Simon Dewes, and Dr. Fuller's Church Hiſtory, and the Volumes of M. S. Parliament Speeches, if I muſt take this King and Parliament, and all the Biſhops and Clergy that Conform to them, to be no Proteſtants of the Church of England, becauſe they have made a Law declaring it to be the Rights and Liberties of the people, to be governed by Law, and not by Arbitrary Prerogative, and have aſſerted what the old Parliaments claimed, I muſt then heinouſly diſhonour the Church of England, and Repent that I am a Man.

§ 6. He falſly feigneth me to ſay that the Biſhops began the War, becauſe I ſaid it began between the two Epiſcopal Parties, thoſe that were of Archbiſhop Abbot's and the old Reformers way, and thoſe that were for Land's Innovations and Perſecutions: And I ſhould juſtly be noted for vain and tedious if I would ſtand to anſwer all his talk about the Provocations: He that will read Whitlock may have full ſatisfaction; and particularly find that the Parliament voted a Dioceſane in every County, when they began to reform: And were they not then for Epiſcopacy?

§ 7. Page 10. He ſaith, [From the year 1660 it hath been my chief work to pour out the like contempt, malice, and violence, as was begun 1640.]

Anſ. Not a word proved or true; till I was ſilenced 1662, Aug. 24. I was never accuſed for any word then preached, writ and publiſhed. Which was not for want of Enemies or Power. Of many years after I neither preach'd nor printed. And what I printed ſince the world may be judge of.

p. 32§ 8. Page 12. He ſaith that the numerous fry of Sectaries agree to own me as their Champion.]

Anſ. When the Grand Accuſer can hope to make ſuch ſtuff as this believed, and that in a Land, City and Time; where the clean contrary is more commonly known than I am, what can be deviſed ſo impudently falſe which he may not by his ſtamp make current as truth. Are not above Sixty Books of Sectaries written (more or leſs) againſt me; an evidence to prove that they take me not for their Champion? Are not above Sixſcore Books of my own writing, (many at large, and all in part) againſt Sectaries and Errors, a viſible Evidence of this Mans falſhood? Is not the common Cry of City and Countrey a ſufficient witneſs that the Sectaries take me not for their Champion, but their Adverſary. Indeed they have ſhewed it but by words; it being but the two Maſter Sects, Papiſts and Tory Prelatiſts, that ſhew it by Fining, Silencing, Priſon, and taking all for their prey.

§ 9. The Accuſer tells me, that it is no new thing for Hereticks to have many admirers, and to pretend to purity that they may deceive.

Anſ. Which is very true, and I will add, that which is far worſe: It is no new thing even for them that do not ſo much as ſeem to have either Purity, Conſcience or common Honeſty, no nor to ſcruple the groſſeſt Lying and Perjury, to have more Followers than Chriſt himſelf had while he was on Earth, notwithſtanding his Purity and all his Miracles: Such Men find corrupted nature, as diſpoſed to believe and follow them, as a Dunghil to breed Weeds, or a Carcaſe Maggots: Even thoſe that openly militate under Satan as deadly Enemies to ſerious Godlineſs, if they will but cloak their malignity with the Name of a Sacred Function, and call Piety and Conſcience by their own Titles (Hypocriſie and Schiſm) ſhall convert more Souls to Diaboliſm in a little time, than all the Preachers that they ſilence could have converted to Piety, and ſerious Chriſtianity: And the French Prelacy and Dragoon Diſcipline, will cleanſe a Nation quickly, from Proteſtant Hereſie and Schiſm. We hope not for the honour of having more Followers than ſuch Men.

This Man and his Sect would comfort me if I were in fear of that threatening of Chriſt, Mat. 5. Woe to you when all Men ſpeak well of you.

§ 10. Ibid. He ſaith, That under a form of Godlineſs I would deſtroy the power of it.]

Anſ. Hem! What is the Power of Godlineſs with this Sect of Men! If it be the Power of Silencing the moſt Godly, and Practical, and Blameleſs Preachers, and of Beggering, and Murdering by long Impriſonment in common Goals both Preachers and Hearers that will not give over all publick Worſhip of God like Atheiſts, till they dare venture to Lie and be Perjured, and own all that ſuch Men bid them ſay p. 33is faultleſs: If it be the power of Godlineſs to have an ignorant, worldly, ſcandalous Prieſt, who driveth Men from him by his naughtineſs, to hate, threaten and ruine them if they will hear any but him, or uſe any truſtier Paſtor for their Souls, and that would turn Churches into Priſons, and Sacraments into forced Drenches, to be given by him that can get a Patent for the Trade (which ſome Patrons and Prelates choſen by a Papiſt King can eaſily help him to) then I am againſt the power of Godlineſs. Where Gain is Godlineſs I have long been againſt the power of it.

§ 11. Page 13. He ſaith, [Our Nation would be leſs in danger of new Flames if all (my Books Practical and Polemical) were conſumed to Aſhes.]

Anſ. How came I to eſcape till now my ſelf? Not at all by your Clemency: Your Patron Judge Jeffreys on the Bench ſaid, He was ſorry that the Act of Indempnity diſabled him from Hanging me: And your Mouth Roger Le Strange foretold the Reaſon: Never was ſo wicked a Book written as my Paraphraſe on the New Teſtament. Were I at his Ear I would whiſper to him, Do you not take the New Teſtament it ſelf to be far worſe? But what is the deadly evil? Why I ſay with Paul, That if an Angel from Heaven preach another Goſpel let him be accurſed? But did I make thoſe words? Or find them made: The Judge by the help of our Great Clergy-men and their Curates, found out eight Paraphraſes that deſerved this Death. The ſum of which was that I accuſe the Phariſees, and Herodians, and Prieſts, for malicious hating and murdering Chriſt, for doing good and working Miracles; and for urging Men to be Informers againſt him, and for forbidding the Apoſtles to Preach: And they ſaid that by an Innuendo I meant all this of the Church of England. And when a Famous (but exaſperated Dr.) gathered ſome paſſages as Seditious againſt Government to have hanged me, even our Judges and proſecutors ſearching the Books, and particularly on Rom. 13. caſt by thoſe accuſations, and never mentioned them. And when they burnt my Political Aphoriſms, and I wrote my Judgment thereof to the Vice-Chancellor, I had not a word of contradiction.

But there are deeper Reaſons that cauſe both Papiſts and Cainites to wiſh that all that I have written were burnt to Aſhes. And they tell me what to expect from them, if God reſtrain them not, for then I believe that it is more than my writings, and than the Nonconformiſts that they will burn. They that cannot now endure that any but they ſhould be heard, will not endure that they be read.

§ 12. Page 13. He adds, [That neither Men nor Books are properly good that are not ſo ex cauſis integris.]

Anſ. So none is Good but God only, and the perfect. I confeſs that I am not ſo good: If I ſay that I have no ſin, or that I ever did any thing that is ſinleſs and omnimodo bonum and might not have been done p. 34better, I am a Liar. And is this the Expoſition of the Declaration for want of which we are (if we preach) uſed like Rogues in Goals, viz. That we aſſent and conſent to all things contained in and preſcribed by, the Book of Common Prayer, Ordination and Articles, and that there is nothing in it contrary to the Word of God? Is it Integrally perfect: Or muſt I wiſh it burnt elſe? I am not for ſo hard uſage of it, though I cannot juſtifie the preſcribing two Eaſter days in it, and far worſe matters. But what is the fault that deſerveth burning?

§ 13. Ibid. [His own Practice demonſtrates that his Writings for Peace and Unity are but ſo many Pleas for Schiſm and Diviſion. They need an Ignis Expurgatorius.

Anſ. An eaſie Purgatory! Your Excommunication ipſo facto, of all that affirm any thing in your Ceremonies. Ordinations, Liturgies or Church Government to be contrary to the Word of God, threateneth Hell which is worſe than Purgatory.

But Reader, ſeeing all my Books muſt be burnt as a Sacrifice to the Accuſers of my Converſation as for Schiſm and Diviſion, I owe the World a particular account of ſuch an accuſed practice.

1. When I firſt forbore practical Conformity it was but in a ſcrupled part: I read moſt of the Common Prayer, and I received the Sacrament Kneeling.

2. I never diſobeyed my Ordinary's command, but got me to a place where the Ordinary thought as I did.

3. I ever diſſwaded people from Separation, and reprehended thoſe Nonconformiſts that inclined towards it.

4. It was I confeſs a Dividing practice that I took the Scots Covenant before I foreſaw it would be uſed to Diviſion. But I quickly repented, and kept my Flock and Thouſands from taking it.

5. I had not the laſt or leaſt hand in ſuppreſſing the promoters of Schiſm where I lived.

6. I purpoſely hazarded my Life, and ſpent Time and Labour a year and half in Fairfax's Army, in hope (too late) to have healed and prevented the foreſeen Eccleſiaſtical and Civil Diviſions.

7. I got the Miniſters of Worceſterſhire and the Neighbour Counties, Epiſcopal, Presbyterians and moderate Independants to ſubſcribe an Agreement in practice ſo far as they agreed in Principles: Which Dr. Warmſtree and Dr. Good conſented to till Dr. Guning drew them off again. And Weſtmoreland, Cumberland, Dorſetſhire, Wiltſhire, Hampſhire, Eſſex, and Dublin all imitated us, ſo that we were ready to have had a common Concord.

8. By Letters I treated for Union with Dr. Hammond, Biſhop Brownrig, Archbiſhop Uſher, and ſuch others, before King Charles the Second's Return.

9. I preach'd for peace to the Parliament and City in publick Sermons.

p. 3510. I got divers Meetings before the King came in, with many peaceable Drs. (Dr. Gauden, Dr. Bernard, Dr. Allen, Dr. Gulſton, &c.) with whom Dr. Morley would be one that he might fruſtrate all) who ſeemed to be all for Unity.

11. I was the firſt (with Mr. Calamy, Dr. Reynolds, and Mr. Aſh) that ſought to the King to help us to this deſired Unity by his Commiſſion; who ſeemed forward to it, and promiſed that he would draw them to meet us half way.

12. We never offered any form of Church Government, but Archbiſhop Uſher's Primitive Epiſcopacy, and gave publick thanks for a ſeeming Grant of much leſs; never once ſpeaking againſt the Biſhops Parliament Powers, Baronies, Revenues or Pomp.

13. When Chancellor Hide as from the King offered me a Biſhoprick I refuſed it on terms (in a Letter) that pleaſed him, viz. That if the King continued what he had granted in his Declaration, I ſhould take it for my great Duty to do all that I could by writing and preaching to perſwade all to Conformity and Unity; and therefore would not be a Biſhop, leſt I ſhould fruſtrate that labour by making Men think that I did it for my ſelf. But if no ſuch liberty was intended to be continued (which I eaſily foreſaw) why ſhould I be a Biſhop to be quickly caſt out?

14. Had my Life lain on it I could have done no more to have prevented our Diviſions and foreſeen Confuſions, that I did in the Treaties at Worceſter-Houſe, and at the Savoy, by reaſon, and by earneſt and humble petition and true prediction. But all did but enrage, and inſtead of Abatements according to the Kings Commiſſion, far more was after impoſed than before.

15. I went voluntarily to Biſhop Sheldon for his Licenſe, when I could have had it by the Kings Declaration without any Subſcription, and I Subſcribed what might ſhew that I was for peace, that I would not preach againſt the Liturgy or Ceremonies, but live peaceably.

16. When Biſhop Morley forbad me preaching in his Dioceſs, I asked him leave but to preach to ſome ſmall Village among the ignorant where there was no Maintenance for a Miniſter: And he old me, They were better have none than me. Mr. Baldwin yet living was preſent.

17. When Lying ſame accuſed me for almoſt every Sermon that I preached in London after, Biſhop Sheldon told me plainly that he had ſome to hear me, and could they have got any thing againſt me I had ſoon heard from him.

18. When we were all ſilenced on Aug. 24. 1662. I forbore both preaching and privater Meetings, till after the great Plague 1665. to ſee whether our obedience would mollifie Mens exaſperated Minds: All that while and after conſtantly I went to my Pariſh Church Morning p. 36and Evening, and ſtaid from the beginning of Common Prayer to the end, and after the Plague I only taught ſuch Neighbours as came into my Houſe between the publick Exerciſes, and led all the people into the Church to Common Prayer. In ſo much that my Excellent Neighbour Judge Hale countenanced me therein by his Carriage, and thought I did great Service to the Church of England. I remember not two of all that heard me that went not with me to the publick Church: And that One that would not, refuſed, becauſe the Dr. (Rieves) would Swear in his common talk: But I told her that he did not Swear in the Pulpit.

19. When in his Sermon he told them that It was becauſe we could not be Biſhops that we Conformed not, the people look'd at me, as a confutation: But I forbore not ever the more to hear him.

20. When he was no longer able to bear the peoples coming to my Houſe, (though he converſt with me placidly, and never ſpake to me againſt it) he went to the King and got his Order to the Biſhop Hinchman, and by him to Juſtice Roſſe and Auditor Philips for my Impriſonment. And when theſe Juſtices at Brainford Examined me, they ſhut the Doors againſt all Witneſſes, and would let none in but their Clerk, though Alderman Aſhhurſt, Captain Yarrington, and many others at the Door claimed open audience as a Legal Priviledge: And after they raiſed falſe reports of my words to them, when I was allowed no one Witneſs.

21. I lay quietly in New Priſon, though kept waking by the conſtant noiſe of rude Priſoners, and knocking under me at the Gate. And upon my Habeas Corpus all the four Judges of the Common Pleas were for my Deliverance.

22. When I was delivered the Parliament making a new Act againſt Conventicles added three new clauſes which drove me to dwell in another County: Where alſo I went conſtantly Morning and Evening to the publick Church and Common Prayer, and gave 2 l. per Annum to increaſe the Miniſters Maintenance.

23. When Miniſters had ſome time forborn publick Sacraments in the Pariſh Churches, I got many of the moſt Eminent in London together, and in writing gave them ſo many reaſons for ſuch Communion as they approved. But the Oxford Parliament having by an Act Baniſhed us five Miles from all Corporations, forc'd them from the London Churches when in Conſcience they durſt not leave London Service; when 100000 had died of the Plague, and the Miniſters fled and left the dying without their help, many Nonconformiſts ventured their lives among them, beg'd Money for them, and relieved them, and found the dying Perſons ſo much inclined to hear, repent and pray, that this brake the Bonds of the Acts of Uniformity and Baniſhment, ſo that they reſolved rather to die than to ceaſe preaching while they were out p. 37of Priſon and could ſpeak. And the City being burnt the next year, confirmed their reſolution, the Conformiſts ceaſing to preach long for want of Churches. But all this time, had a Nonconformiſt Miniſter been ſeen in a Pariſh Church, he muſt for Six Months have lain in Goal with Rogues: So that the ſum of their impoſed Obedience was, [Either inhumanely deſert the deſerted City after Plagues and Flames left deſolate; or go to the Pariſh Miniſters when they return and Communicate with them, and go Six Months to Goal; or elſe be Excommunicate and lye in Goal for not Communicating with them.] Of theſe three they had their choice.

But in all this time I was driven far off and kept conſtantly to the publick Church (at Toteridge.)

24. I never became the Paſtor of any Church ſince I was expelled from Kiderminſter: I offered when I refuſed a Biſhoprick to preach there for nothing under the ignorant Reader that was Vicar: But the Lord Chancellor Hyde wrote to Sir Ralph Clare that his Majeſty thought himſelf not well dealt with that Mr. Baxter that had deſerved ſo well of him had not the Vicaridge, and he promiſed to pay the Vicar the worth of it by his own Steward Mr. Clutterbuke, out of his own Rents: But durſt not give a Prebend much leſs a Paſtoral Charge to the Vicar, leſt it diſgrace the Miniſtry: I was not ſo ignorant as not to know what the King and Chancellor meant by all this (and by the Gracious Declaration.) But he gave me unſealed the Copy of his Letter to ſend: And the Vicar anſwered as he was taught that he would not quit his place for an uncertainty (nor would Biſhop Morley let me preach for nothing under him.)

25. When the King ſent out his Declaration that gave us leave to preach, I returned to London, and choſe only St. Martins Pariſh to preach in, becauſe there were ſaid to be above Sixty Thouſand Souls more than could hear in the Church; and hiring a room over the Market-houſe at St. James's (where we were all delivered by almoſt a Miracle from a crack in the Floor) I publiſhed to the Hearers (and left to them in writing) that I came not thither to gather or preach to any new Church, or as ſeparating from the Pariſh Church, but (being Vowed to the Miniſtry) in neceſſary compaſſion pro tempore to help part of the many thouſands that could not come into the Pariſh Church: For which ſome Separatiſts cenſured me: And we uſed the Scripture, part of the Liturgy and more.

26. Being driven from that Room by the breach of the Main-beam, I built a Room and Leaſed the Ground at too dear rates in Oxendenſtreet near. But had preached but one Sermon, but Secretary Henry Coventree with two Juſtices more came with a Warrant to apprehend me, and I being twenty Miles diſtant, they ſeized on Mr. Sedden a ſtranger that preached for me: And though he had by the Cromwellians p. 38ſuffered Impriſonment for ſeeking to bring in King Charles the Second, they ſent him to the Goal, where it coſt me twenty pound for his Charges, but my Wiſeſt and moſt Over-valuing Friend Judge Hale proved the Mittimus void, and releaſed him by the Sentence of all the Court.

27. When I could not be ſuffered there I hired a Room to preach in for nothing in Swallow-ſtreet, and ask'd the Biſhops leave, who gave ſome hope of his favour: But after a few days many Conſtables, Churchwardens, and other Officers were ſet at the Door to take me had I come, and ſo continued about three Months, till another came.

28. I then (that the people might not be untaught) offered Dr. William Loyd now Biſhop of St. Aſaph my Chappel for the Pariſh uſe; And, I thank him he accepted it, and it is ſo uſed by Dr. Tenniſon to this day.

29. In the Country I Preach'd in Rickaurſworth, Chaferne, Amerſham, Cheſham, Langley, Surra… in the Pariſh Churches to ſhew that I was not for Separation, and went to the beginning of Common-Prayer.

30. I was in Law-ſence no Nonconformiſt I think) but only in Conſcience: For I had the Biſhop of London's Licenſe and I was in no Benefice or Lecture after May 1. 1662. And hereupon Sir Edmond Sanders Lord Chief Juſtice, and Sir Henry Polixfen, now Lord Chief Juſtice, gave it me under their hands that my Licenſe was ſtill valid, and gave me Authority to Preach occaſional Sermons in London Dioceſs. Yet did I never uſe that Power in any Pariſh here, to avoid offence.

31. I ſent my Licenſe with theſe Lawyers Judgment, to the preſent Biſhop Dr. Compton, craving his conſent to uſe it in the Country. Of which he being unwilling, I forbore, though the Law allowed it.

32. An Iriſh Informer (Keting a Gold-worker) thought to ſet up that Trade for Gain: But was croſs'd, and long waited at my Door to ask me forgiveneſs; And I being loth to truſt him, he wrote to me his Repentance, and ſhortly after being Impriſoned for Debt (ſaying that God never after proſpered him) I got him ſome Money and help'd him out.

33. Three or Four more Informers ſetting up the Trade accuſed me to Sir Tho Davis Lord Mayor: I could not make him believe that he was Judge of my faults, but that the Informers were the Judges, and that he muſt execute what they ſware againſt me: Nor could I prevail with him to let me ſee any one of them, nor hear their Accuſations, nor examine or conſute them: And when I was fined unheard, ſhortly after the chief of the Informers met me in the Street, confeſt his Fault, askt me Forgiveneſs, and left his Trade.

34. Dr. Manton and I were invited by the Lord Keeper Bridgman (with Dr. Bates after) to accept the Kings offer for a Comprehenſion for us, and a Toleration for others: Dr. Wilkins and Dr. Hez. Burton were appointed to treat with us of the terms: we came to an Agreement p. 39to a word: we gave it Judge Hale to draw up in form of an Act to be offered to the Parliament. And was that like to be ſo wicked an Agreement as to be worſe than all our Diviſions, which ſuch Wiſe and Excellent Men as Judge Hale and Biſhop Wilkins, and Dr. Burton approved: But we refuſed to meddle with the Toleration, leaving his own work to the King and the concerned: And ſo the Parliament was taught to reject all.

35. After this at another Seſſion, many being ſet on our Concord, Dr. Tillotſon and Dr. Stillingfleet were moved by Morley and ſome Lords to treat with us for Union: I got many excellent peaceable Miniſters together, and we drew in one Sheet a form of Concord: The two Drs. ſeemed to conſent, ſo be it the Biſhops liked it: But Morley purpoſely ſeemed to be for the End, that he might fruſtrate the means, and ſo we never heard more of it.

36. All this while to this day, I never gathered a Church, nor was Paſtor or Teacher of a Church, nor took any Salary, but preach'd without pay as an occaſional helper to another, leſt I ſhould ſeem to be for Separation: I thank God that left me not to Neceſſities.

37. I perſwaded the people to hear the Pariſh Miniſters and Communicate with them, and not to come to us without the want of needful helps at home; and I gave the Sacrament to none of them, till lately to a few in my own Houſe for a ſhort time, which the Liturgy alloweth.

38. I was ſuddenly aſſaulted by violence on my Doors, by two or three Informers (Hilton and Bucke) and Rutland a Vintner Conſtable, and other Officers, by a Warrant from Sir James Butler ſent him by Sir James Smith, to be Executed, who had judged me to be diſtrained on for 90 l. (or more) for five Sermons as preached by me againſt Law; and I never to this day was ſummon'd to anſwer, nor heard who were my Accuſers or Witneſſes, or what proof. But they ſeized on all my Goods, Bed, Cloaths, Library, and praiſed it, and ſold it, (I got a Friend to buy it and paid him.) When had I been heard I had ſhewed them Sir Edm. Sa…rs Hand that they ought not to Impriſon me unſummoned and unheard; and I had ſhewed them my valid Licence, and proved that I did nothing contrary to Law. And that I was twenty Miles off at the pretended time of one of the Sermons. But I never ſought remedy nor noiſed any Accuſation againſt theſe Juſtices.

39. At the ſame time they brought a Warrant from Juſtice Parry and Lame Philips to have ſent me Six Months to Goal for dwelling in London: But as I was going towards them, ſome ſtopt me till the King ſuſpended it, and ſaid, Let him die in his Bed.

40. Upon this to avoid this Impriſonment I was forced to abſcond in poor ſtrange Houſes (in languor and conſtant pain) while I paid alſo great Rent for my own empty Houſe: Which I bore without complaining noiſe.

p. 4041. The Independants and Separatiſts ſaid that I was juſtly uſed, and had drawn more to the publick Churches than all the Miniſters in London: And ſome of them ſaid I had done more harm by it than ever I did good.

42. I wrote many Books againſt Schiſm and Separation (againſt Bagſhaw, Danvers, Mr. Lob, and many others) to prove the Lay Communion Lawful.

43. Roger Le Strange traduced me in his Obſervations moſt bitterly and cauſleſly (to foretel me what was purpoſed againſt me:) Even my Book of Patience▪ and my Paraphraſe he virulently reviled.

44. When I was deſigned for the Goal (before King Charles died) the Duke of York foretold it: And to ſecure me till they could find matter of Accuſation, they bound me to the good behaviour under deep Bonds of me and my Sureties. Openly declaring, That they took me for innocent, and had nothing againſt me, and did it not as a penalty, but for prevention; intimating that the Court required it (or Jefferies.)

45. When they were prepared Jefferies accuſed my Paraphraſe as aforeſaid; and ſent me to Priſon. Coming out by a Habeas Corpus I was fain to abſcond in the Countrey (in conſtant pain) till the Term. Then my oft waitings at the Bar (when I could not ſtand) and there to be ragingly reviled by Jefferies and Withins, and called Rogue and Knave, and not ſuffered to ſpeak one word of anſwer for my ſelf, and my Council reviled that offered to ſpeak for me, was far harder than my Impriſonment. And when (going from the Bar) I only ſaid, That his Predeceſſor thought otherwiſe of me.] He ſaid, There was not an honeſt Man in England that took me not for a Knave;] not excepting the King that had given me another teſtimony (in words.)

46. Thence I went quietly to a coſtly Priſon, where I continued in pain and languor near two years: Enjoying more quietneſs in that Confinement than I had done of many years before: Becauſe they had no further to hunt me. And God there healed my Bloody Urine that had continued two years.

47. Being Fined 500 Marks, and to give Bond for the Behaviour, when they ſaw that I did neither pay the Fine nor Petition, the King and Papiſts, who all this while did their work by Men called Proteſtants, reſolved to have the thanks for my Releaſe; and offered me deliverance by the Marqueſs of Powis his endeavour: But they would not abate my Bonds to the Behaviour.

48. When I was releaſed the Proteſtant Juſtices at the Seſſions that declared they had nothing againſt me, would not take up my former Bonds, but made me long wait with Counſel at Hicks Hall, and I know not that they have given up my Bonds to this day: But Patience is my remedy.

p. 4149. Before while I lived in St. Giles's Pariſh I went Morning and Evening to the Pariſh Church to Common Prayer and Sermon: And I Communicated kneeling at the Rails. But I firſt told Dr Sharp now Dean of Canterbury, that I am ipſo facto Excommunicate by Canon 7, 8, 9. and left it to his conſideration: But after Conſultation he admitted me, becauſe the Canon bound him not before proſecution or declaration.

50. In Priſon and ſince my Releaſe I have written divers Books for Communion with the publick Churches: And one of Government, and one againſt Schiſm, and others pacificatory that are not printed. And I have continued to preach only as a helper to another, not related to any gathered Church as their Teacher, though Licenſed by Law to have gathered ſuch a Church as well as others.

51. The reaſon why I have not theſe four years gone to any Pariſh Church, is becauſe Priſons and utter diſability of Body hindered me, being ſcarce able to creep once a day to our Aſſembly but the fourth Door from my Houſe.

52. To conclude, Whoever after reading my many great and ſmall Writings for Concord and Peace, and for the Church, eſpecially my Cure of Church Diviſions, my Treatiſe of the way of Unity, my Catholick Theology, my Chriſtian Directory, my Methodus Theologiae, and the numerous Volumes of Controverſie, written all to end Controverſies, and ſhall know that it hath been my chief ſtudy and labour theſe forty four years to promote Unity, Peace, and Concord, and what I have ſuffered for it, and yet will accuſe my Heart and Life, as quite contrary to all this, muſt bring to any ſober impartial Man, very clear evidence to prove me ſo mad and deadly an Enemy to ſo long and painful Labours.

§ 14. I am next therefore further to enquire what this Evidence is.

But his words do ſeem to forbid an anſwer, for they are capable of none but what will ſound harſhly, even to name them as they are Moſt Impudent Lies, meer forgeries, or the moſt unqueſtionable Duties made moſt odious ſins; and moſt of the pretence fetcht from ſome words of my Writings and Confeſſions depraved and impudently falſified.

The General Accuſation is page 14. [I dare challenge any Hiſtorian that hath obſerved or read the Tragedies of the late times, to ſhew a parallel in any one perſon (I ſay not only among the Apoſtate Clergy, but the Laity, and the worſt of them) that may equal Mr. B.

Accuſ. I. Particularly: Who is there among the Living that entertained more early Prejudices againſt the Biſhops?] Anſ. Mendac. I. I thought them to be of Divine Inſtitution, till after I was Ordained. And ſince then I have proved it of the Primitive Epiſcopacy: And oppoſed none but that ſort of Dioceſans who put down all the Biſhops and Churches p. 42that ſhould be under them, and will be the ſole Biſhops of many hundred or ſcore Pariſhes, making true Epiſcopal Diſcipline impoſſible, and ſubſtituting a deluſion.

§ 15. Accuſ. II. [That left his Calling as a Minister of Peace, and entred with the firſt into a War againſt the King.]

Mendac. II. I never left my Calling, nor ever took Command or Office, or ſo much as a Chaplains relation to any Souldiers, nor pay for it: Save that when Naſeby Fight almoſt ended the War, I went a Chaplain to have tryed to ſave the Land from Rebellion.

I always was for King and Parliament, and never againſt the Kings Perſon, Power or Prerogative, but only for his return to his Parliament, and againſt his Will and Inſtruments: When Hen. VI. was carried about by his Enemies, his Friends fought for him that fought againſt the Army where his Perſon was.

I was ſo far from going into a War with the firſt, that I only fled to Coventry for a private Refuge, when I was forced from Home (of which enough before.)

§ 16. Accuſ. III. [And for four years ſpace, which was the heat of the Wars, was an Agent as well as an Eye-witneſs of moſt of the terrible Battles that were fought in England.]

Mendac. IV. I never ſo much as ſaw one of thoſe terrible Battles. The firſt that ever I ſaw was that at Langport, when the Field War ended: And there I ſaw not the killing of one Man. Becauſe I ſaid that I ſaw ſome Fields and Dead, he forgeth me to have ſeen the Fights. I never ſaw the Fight at Edgehill, but being at Alcester, I went to ſee the Ground and ſome unburied Bodies the following day. I never ſaw either of the two Newberry Fights, nor the Countrey; I never ſaw the Fight at Horncastle, at Allford, or any in the Eaſt, South, Weſt, or North. I never ſaw the greateſt Fight at York, nor ever was in or near the County: I ſaw not that at Mongomery, nor that at Nampwich, nor any Fight in England, ſave that aforeſaid at Langport, and the flight of our Coventry Men from Banbury: And I went to ſee the Ground at Naſeby when the Armies were gone a day or two before: And I once ſaw at a diſtance about thirty Men of a ſide Fight between Linſell and Longford, where one was kill'd. Some Sieges I was not far off, while I was with the Armies on the Accounts at large before recited.

§ 17. Accuſ. IV. Who ever boasted of drawing thouſands to that War?]

Anſ. He falſly calleth a Confeſſion, a Boasting. To convince Cromwell's Soulders that pull'd down the Government, I that had drawn thouſands into the Parliaments defenſive War, could not have denied the heinouſneſs of my Crime, if I had done as they did, or been againſt King and Parliament united, or for the changing of the Government. I ſaid by aggravation that I had drawn in thouſands, becauſe at Coventry and Wem I had publickly preach'd againſt the accuſations of the Cauſe that I then thought juſt.

p. 43§ 18. Accuſ. V. Who hath ſaid more to justifie, not the War only, but the Death of the Royal Martyr?]

Anſ. Mendac. V. What can a Reader ſay of ſuch Men, that ſhall find, 1. That I never wrote a word to juſtifie his Death; but only once told the Papiſts that they were unmeet Accuſers, as being guilty of more? 2. I preach'd againſt it. 3. I wrote againſt it, over and over. 4. It coſt me the dear Labour and Sufferings of almoſt two years in the Army, to have kept them in Loyal Obedience. 4. I called them oft and long to Repentance. Whence then did this Man find matter or occaſion for ſuch a ſhameleſs forgery? As for the Notion of Martyrdom, I leave Canonizing to the Righteous Judge.

§ 19. Accuſ. VI. Who more oppoſed the Return of our preſent Soveraign?]

Anſ. Mendac. VI. 1. Ask for his proof of this. 2. The King teſtified the contrary. 3. See my Sermon before the Parliament the day before he was Voted Home. 4. And my Sermon to the City on their Thankſgiving called, Right Rejoicing. 5. Would the King have made ſuch an Enemy his Chaplain and a Biſhop?

The Truth is this, There were two Seaſons that called to me for my Endeavours for the King. The firſt was at Worcester Fight, and at Sir George Booth's Fight: At that time I openly declared the Army to be in a ſtate of Rebellion, in which none ſhould own them: But I durſt not meddle on either ſide: Not for the Cromwellians, their Cauſe being ſinful: Not to reſtore the King, becauſe I foreſaw all the Diviſions, Silencings, Perſecutions and Calamity to the Kingdom which his Biſhops and other revengeful Inſtruments would bring in: Nor was I deceived in expecting moſt that hath befallen us of twenty nine years ſince, ſave that I thought that Popery and Cruelty would have made a ſpeedier progreſs than they did: Not knowing by what methods God would ſtop them. And I durſt not haſten Gods Judgments on the Land, till I knew that he required it.

2. But afterward when I ſaw that the Army caſt all into utter confuſion, and that Gods Providence had reſolved the doubt, how much I did towards a due ſubjection to the King, is not a thing that wanteth evidence. I cannot Repent that I was not one that brought into England that Tribe of Revengeful deſtructive Prelates and their Agents, that corrupted and divided the Church of England.

§ 20. Accuſ. VII. [Or hath been as active in making the Government uneaſie.]

Anſ. 1. Uneaſie? To whom? To the King? I have his Teſtimony to the contrary: He ſent D. Lauderdale to me purpoſely to invite me to receive the Teſtification of his Favour and Acceptance? Read his Character of us in his Gracious Declaration. Read Mr. Gaches Letter to me for the King, tranſlated and publiſhed by the means of Duke p. 44Lauderdale. I know nothing that I did to make his Government uneaſie, unleſs all my labour to have united his Subjects made it uneaſie: Or unleſs his Confeſſor Huddleston was in the right, that he was before for the Roman Religion, and it was uneaſie to him to be ſtopt in promoting it: Of which confeſs I was oft guilty.

But if he mean the Prelates Government, I believe I did much to make it uneaſie to them. I laboured by ſuch reaſons to have prevented their ejecting 2000 Godly Miniſters at once, and all the Cruelties and Miſeries that have followed, that it muſt needs be uneaſie to their Conſciences and Credit, while they could make no anſwer to the proof of their iniquity. I gave ſuch reaſons againſt their Lay Excommunicaters, and their Curſing Canons, and their cauſleſs and obſtinate dividing of the National Church by their frivolous, tearing Impoſitions, as muſt make Cruelty the more uneaſie. But (if I be not blind and mad) the Government of Church and State had been more eaſie, if they would have heard our pacificatory Requeſts.

§ 21. Accuſ. VIII. [Or who hath or can do more than Mr. B. to renew all our troubles and confuſions?]

Anſ. By what? By ſtudying, praying, preaching, writing, and ſpeaking, and exemplary living for Unity and Peace; which God knoweth hath been my chief or ſecond ſtudy and labour theſe Forty four years; valuing the ſupernal Wiſdom, which is firſt Pure and then Peaceable. But methinks I hear the Legion that are his Army who was a Liar and Murderer from the beginning, ſay, What have we to do with thee? Art thou come to torment us before the time? But they have had leave to enter into the Swine: And O that their ſuffocation in the Sea of confuſion, occaſion not Chriſt to be driven out of our Coaſts, by them that love their Swine better than Chriſt.

§ 22. Accuſ. IX. [So that I could not deviſe to give a better Epitome of the late Rebellion and Schiſm, than this account of Mr. B's Actions and Writings, which is an Abſtract of the riſe and progreſs of both in whom they yet both live, and with whom I wiſh they may both die.]

Anſ. To the ſame purpoſe ſaith Morley of me, Ex uno diſce omnes. And though I unfeignedly think my ſelf worſe than the moſt Nonconforming Miniſters that I know, yet I intreat all Forreigners and Natives of future Ages to think no worſe of the Parliament and Nonconformiſts, than this Accuſation alloweth them to do. They were at leaſt no worſe than I; which I ſay becauſe the Accuſers ſeem to allow you this much: And all the reſt have not wrote above Sixſcore Books to make themſelves known, as I have done; and ſo by me you may know the worſt of them ex uno omnes.

The Sum of my wickedneſs is the Wars. But, 1. What's this to all the reſt of the Ejected Silenced Miniſters, of whom I think there is not living one of fifty or a hundred that ever medled with the Wars? p. 45(though one Archbiſhop did, and many that Conform.) And why would they never grant my earneſt requeſt that they would Silence only me, and all others that had any hand in the War (except the Conformiſts) and no more?

2. I thought I had been a Rebel, if I had been againſt the Parliament, the Repreſentative Kingdom, and the ſalus populi, or bonum publicum; and I thought the Legiſlative power was the Supream, and that this power was in King and Parliament conjunct, and that neither of them had power againſt the other, but that their Union was the conſtituted ſumma poteſtas, which I was bound to endeavour, and their diviſion was the diſſolution of the Government: And I thought that all Subjects were under the Law, and that the King might not protect them from his Courts of Judicature.

3. I knew that Points of Humane Policy and Laws, are not in our Creed, nor ſuch Controverſies ſo clearly decided in Scripture, as that Salvation ſhould lye on them. Though Rich. Hooker's Opinion was for more popular power than mine, I find not that our Clergy place him in Hell for it or call him the moſt Bloody Inſtrument of Rebellion.

4. I have elſewhere ſhewed, that the chief ſtream of the Writers of Policy, Laws, Hiſtory, Heathens, and Chriſtians, Papiſts and Proteſtants, Lawyers and Divines, doth give ſo much more power to the people than I do that I have been put oft to confute them. Yet how is Hooker extolled by them? while I that have confuted his popular Principles am a Rebel: King Charles II. verbally by a Declaration diſo ned his Fathers Wars; he honoured many Generals, and Colonels of the Parliaments Army with the higheſt Offices; One of them General Monk by a Parliament Presbyterian Army reſtored him; yet I that never was a Commander or Soldier, nor ever ſtroke or hurt Man, or drew a drop of Blood in War, am the great inſtance of the Rebellion: Who did what I did to avoid the guilt of Rebellion; and to ſave England from being made like Ireland; where I thought it was Rebellion that Murdered two hundred thouſand: And we were then ſo ignorant of War, that we commonly thought that one Battel would have ended all, and ſetled peace.

As for the Charge of Schiſm, I verily think that the Iriſh may as modeſtly transfer on the Proteſtants the charge of Rebellion, as King Charles II. his Prelates can lay on ſuch as I the charge of Schiſm, which they have ſo powerfully cauſed, and continued: He that will read my Search for the Schiſmatick, needeth no further proof: And he that will not, may keep his beloved Errour.

§ 23. Accuſ. X. Anſwered: I ſaid that I was bred up under eight Reading School maſters, of whom divers were beggar'd by drinking.

Muſt I repent of that? Or of diſliking ſuch Churchmen? O I ſhould have ſaid nothing ill of the dead! No nor of their living Succeſſors; for p. 46hence is the rage: O how intolerable to theſe Men is reproof and repentance in compariſon of Sin!

I muſt repent for telling, that one of my Reading Maſters, (that only officiated in the Church) never preach'd but once, and that with the notorious ſigns of being Drunk in Eyes and Tongue, on that terrible Text, Mat. 25. Go ye curſed, &c. What enmity to the Church is it to complain of ſuch Men? But we were ſo often whipt when he came in Drunk, that made us as weary of him as the Fined and Impriſoned Miniſters are of the Perſecuting Biſhops.

§ 24 Page 17. Accuſ. XI. [At Nineteen years of Age he had a diſtaſte againſt Biſhops as Perſecutors.]

Anſ. But not as Biſhops; I cannot repent of diſtaſting Perſecutors: It was Born in me, and New born: May not one be a Chriſtian that loveth not Perſecution?

§ 25. Accuſ XII [Whether Mr. B. made his Father a Rebel, or his Father him, he tells us his Father was twice a Priſoner.]

Anſ. By this proof all the Impriſoned Nonconformiſts are Rebels: How eaſily can ſuch Prelates and their Agents make thouſands of Rebels: My Father lived in the Kings Quarters, and never was Nonconformiſt, nor medled with Wars: But being plundered, was made Collector of the Kings Taxes, and brought in all that was paid, but would not diſtrain, and for that was Impriſoned. And at laſt fled for ſafety to Worceſter, a Garriſon of the Kings. Who can eſcape the charge of Rebellion from ſuch Accuſers?

§ 26. Accuſ. XIII. [His firſt adventure was to Seize the Perſon of a Neighbour in exchange for his Father; but Quo Warranto I find not.]

Anſ. By the Law of God in Nature and the Fifth Commandment, and …ege Talionis, the Party being obnoxious and ſuffering no hurt nor loſs by it.

Yet from theſe falſe Conjectures about my Father he ſaith, [You ſee how early Mr. B's Spirit was fermented with Principles of Faction and Sedition.

Anſ. Readers, you ſee what Faction and Sedition ſignifie in this Mans Mouth.

§ 27. Accuſ. XIV. Here accuſing me for telling how Biſhop Morton Confirmed me and many more, (ſaying a ſhort Collect without a word of Examination or Inſtruction) he heapeth up divers falſhoods. 1. That my Maſter was a Miniſter (I think) is falſe. 2. He querieth, Did not your Master Examine you? Anſ. He was the beſt of all my Maſters, and heard us ſay the Catechiſm, but never told us any thing of the ſence, nor ever examined whether we underſtood any of it. 3. He asketh, How know you but your Master certified of you? Anſ. If he certified that I underſtood what Baptiſmal Covenantings or Confirmation was, or much of the reſt, or what Conſent I gave to that Covenant, I doubt he certified p. 47too much: And I being the Head Scholar, all the reſt were liker to be ignorant than I: (Except Richard Alleſtree, who though two or three years younger, had been diligently Catechized by a Nonconforming Miniſter.)

He ſaith, [This was Mr. B's fault, not the Biſhops.] Anſ. I confeſs I was faulty in not underſtanding as much at Fourteen years, as I underſtood many years after. I cannot ſay that a Child of Seven years old is ſinleſs in not underſtanding all the Articles of Faith. But though it be the fault of the Ordained, if they ſeek it unqualified in groſs Ignorance or Wickedneſs, the Ordainers will not long believe ſuch Deceivers, that it is not their fault to Ordain ſuch. He that believeth Dr. Hammond and Mr. Eldersfield (two the Learnedſt Conformiſts of this Age) of the grand importance of the ſolemn underſtanding and ſerious owning of the Baptiſmal Covenant in Confirmation, when young Men paſs into the rank of Communicants, ſhould ſhed ſtreams of Tears, to think how contrary common practice is hereto, and how this Ordinance is not only fruſtrate, but turned to a deluding Ceremony.

§ 28. Accuſ. XV. [He was a Controuler of Biſhops at Fourteen.]

Anſ. A meer Forgery: I liked the ſport: It was too long after that I diſliked it.

§ 29. Accuſ. XVI. Page 19. I am reproached that the Grave Neighbour Conforming Miniſters, that kept me from Nonconformity, were ſuch as had rather have had the Church rid of ſuch dividing Things] whence he ſlanderouſly concludeth that [they waited an opportunity to be active in Ruining the Church. Becauſe when Conformity was forbidden by the Parliament, they forſook not their Flock: What can eſcape Satanical reproach when a great part of the County had ſcarce any able and pious Miniſters but four or five ſuch as theſe, and they ſhall be falſly branded by ſuch as never knew them.

§ 30. Accuſ. XVII. (His charge of my ignorant Subſcribing at my Ordination, I confeſs and lament; and beg of God to forgive.)

But the report of raining Manna at Bridgnorth, at my coming thither, is the Forgery of his Trade: A Grain like dryed Rie rained there almoſt a year before my coming thither, (which I kept ſome of long, and the like at Shrewsbury about two years ago.) And he forgeth that there were ſix Pariſhes at Bridgnorth, becauſe I ſaid there were ſix under the Ordinaries Power.

§ 31. Accuſ. XVIII. He accuſeth me for being againſt the Et caetera Oath, and Canons, and yet ſaith not a word to prove it lawful, but through me condemneth not only the Parliament that condemned it before the Diviſion, but even the long Parliament that made all their cruel Laws, that never would own that Oath, or authorize thoſe Canons; nor any Parliament to this day.

p. 48§ 32. Accuſ. XIX. [He was acquainted Forty years ago with many Aged Nonconforming Miniſters, (and probably Confederate with them, &c.]

Anſ. Yes; in the Baptiſmal Covenant, renouncing the World, the Fleſh, and the Devil: I repent not of that: Nor take it for a ſin to have known them.

§ 33. Accuſ. XX. Prejudices againſt Conformity poſſeſt him from his Youth.]

Anſ. Not unleſs Cainiſm be Conformity, or twenty four years old be my Youth, ſuch as your Writings, and Doings, are an ill cure of prejudice.

§ 34. Accuſ. XXI. Is, that I broke my Oaths to the King and Eccleſiaſtical Superiors whom I was bound to obey]

Anſ. I thought verily that I broke neither, I Swore not to obey the Convocation, much leſs againſt the Parliament, in unlawful Canons and impoſed Oaths, never yet Authorized: I took the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, and thought that defending the Land againſt Armed Delinquents, and Iriſh, and Papiſts Inſurrections, had been no breach of it. If I was miſtaken the Lord convince me and forgive me: But your way is unapt to it.

Let the Reader peruſe but Sir Edward Deering's Speeches in Parliament, proving that this Et caetera Oath was ſinfully impoſed without Authority, by them that were neither a Convocation, a Synod or Commiſſioners; the ſame Man that ſpake ſo much for Liturgy and Epiſcopacy, againſt Presbytery and Independency: And I doubt not but it was flat Perjury that by it we were required to Swear, viz. [That the deſcribed Et caetera Government of the Church ought ſo to ſtand.]

And was I perjured for refuſing Perjury?

As a ſummary Confutation of a multitude of his Lies, I at once tell the Reader, that I neither was nor am for the way called Presbytery, Independency, or the Engliſh Dioceſane way: But for the mixture deſcribed excellently by Grotius de Imper. Sum. Pot. and Biſhop Uſher, and Sir Edward Deering, whoſe Counſel I wiſh'd that the Parliament had followed. And that I was and am far from defending the irregular Actions of the Parliament, or any Members of it: Tho' they thought that the Delinquents had put a neceſſity on them to overgo their own Judgments to pleaſe the Scots, and the Indiſcreet and Schiſmatical part of the Nonconformiſts, I doubt not but they did ill herein, and ſhould have truſted God in the uſe of none but lawful means: I believe that a few Men by Craft and unwearied Induſtry over-reach'd many that knew not what they did: Sir Edward Deering nameth ſome of them, eſpecially Sir H. V. Sir A. H. and O. C. that over-reach'd his own upholders and all the reſt: I believe they did ill to excite and encourage diſorder and tumults on pretence of Petitioning, and of ſcurrilous defamations p. 49of ſuch Men as the Lord Falkland, the Lord Digby, Sir Edward Dering, and ſome other worthy Men, and ſo many good Biſhops as they abuſed. And yet that I durſt not for theſe miſcarriages, conſent to give up the Kingdoms Parliamentary Security for its preſent and future Safety and Liberties, I ſtill think is conſonant to the moſt common Principles of Lawyers, Politick Writers, Hiſtorians, Divines, Proteſtants, Papiſts and Heathens.

Even the late great Lord Chancellor Hide ſat Chairman of the Committee of Parliament that received the Petitions againſt Epiſcopacy, Root and Branch, and made ſuch Speeches againſt the Delinquents as I dare not juſtifie. But he forſook them when they quite over-went him.

If the King of England had a War with the French, and I knew that his Cauſe were bad, I would not defend his bad Cauſe, but I would in his Army defend the Kingdom, againſt thoſe that would Captivate it by Conqueſt: For the Kingdom doth not forfeit its ſafety by the Kings miſdoing: And if any ſay, [Then the King ſhall be defended in all his injuries how bad ſoever,] I would anſwer, [That is by accident, it is the Kingdom that I defend, and Him as a means to defend the Kingdom, and not to juſtifie his ſin: I leave that to God: What a caſe is a Kingdom in if it muſt Fight againſt it ſelf, and its repreſenting ſecurity, as oft as its Repreſentatives miſcarry by any ſiniſter means? And that all that are to be judged by the chief Judicature, ſhall Fight to Conquer them, if the King do but bid them? If the ſafety of this Kingdom be once put into the Truſt of the King alone, the Conſtitution is changed, and all Enſlaved.

§ 35. Accuſ. XXII. He ſaith that [in 1640. I entred into a War againſt the King.]

Anſ. Whereas the War in England began not till 1642. And I never medled in War but as aforementioned long after.

§ 36. Accuſ. XXIII. He ſaith by [the Treatiſe of Dioceſane Epiſcopacy meditated 1640. I broached Faction in the Church, my Pen diſdaining to be leſs active than my Sword.]

Anſ. 1. I never ſtruck with a Sword in War or Peace. 2. Did Meditating broach a Book that was not publiſhed nor written till thirty years after? 3. Is it Faction to give reaſons why I Swore not to Faction, even that Antiepiſcopal ſort of Dioceſanes that put down many hundred Churches and Biſhops to ſet up the Name and Image of one? 4. Why is not that Book anſwered to this day, when ſo many Nonconformiſts have Challenged, Called and Beg'd for an Anſwer to it? Will a Lying Scorn ſatisfie any Conſcionable Nonconformiſt? 5. That Book owneth ſo much of Biſhops, and Dioceſanes, and Archbiſhops, (which Sir Edward Dering condemned) that theſe Men now ſhew that it is not ſuch as I only, but ſuch as Grotius, Spalatenſis, Uſher, p. 50Hall, yea moſt of the great Writers for Epiſcopacy (of whoſe Judgment I have there given a particular account) whom he condemneth for Faction and Enmity to the Church. I have written againſt the Pope too: And is not that as bad? I am ſure many Papiſts write more againſt Epiſcopacy than I.

§ 37. Accuſ. XXIV. [It's probable his Church Hiſtory had its conception at the ſame time.]

Anſ About Forty years after 1640. Forty years breaks no ſquare with this ſort of Men: I would this lort of Hiſtory were not too common with them.

§ 38. Accuſ. XXV. Page 23 [He feigneth me in my Church Hiſtory to commend all the Hereticks, and omit what is good of the Fathers and Martyrs, and write only their faults.]

Anſ. It ſeems he thought that without reading the Book that diſproveth him, his Faction would take his word that he ſaith true.

§ 39 Accuſ. XXVI The like he ſaith of my reproaching Councils, becauſe I ſhew the miſcarriages of many, and our Biſhops that plead for a Forreign Juriſdiction, dare yet own but ſix or eight General Councils.

§ 40. Accuſ. XXVII Page 25. He reciteth my mention of the former courſes, of undoing Men for hearing a Sermon (of a Godly Conformiſt) at the next Pariſh when they had none at home, (and for Faſting and Praying, &c.) And he taketh it for my crime, to call theſe ungodly Perſecutions crimes: So that he that is not for them, while they are tearing the Church, and extirpating ſerious Piety, is againſt them. So do the Papiſts accuſe them that blame their Murders and Inquiſitions.

§ 41. Accuſ. XXVIII. Becauſe I ſaid, The War was begun in our Streets by the ungodly drunken Rabble, ſeeking our Lives, he ſaith, [In plain Engliſh Mr. B. with other Reformers put themſelves into Arms, ſeizing on the Kings Forts, and making them Garriſons againſt the King, (and this before King or Parliament had any Armies.]

Anſ. In plain Engliſh this Lie is ſhameleſs. Unleſs a poor hired Chamber was the Kings Fort, I ſeized on none. The firſt time the drunken Rabble roſe up againſt me, was for preaching Original Sin: They ſaid that I ſlandered their Children. The next was for Reading the Parliaments Order to deface the Pictures of the Trinity: The third was by bringing in Souldiers, that drove me away. And it was long after this ere I had a private Lodging in Coventry.

§ 42. Accuſ. XXIX. Page 26. He maketh the repetition of his Forgery a proof that I was guilty of Perjury. 1. Becauſe I was prejudiced againſt the Biſhops at Nineteen, and yet at Ordination took the Oath (to obey my Ordinary in Licitis & Honeſtis.) Anſ. 1. I did not Swear an approbation of Perſecution. I was not then prejudiced againſt p. 51Epiſcopacy, but againſt the ſin of Biſhops. May not a Man diſown ſuch ſhameleſs Liars as ſome Miniſters are, without diſowning the Miniſtry? 2. (I was prejudiced againſt Biſhop Morton at Fourteen.) Anſ. Utterly falſe: I honoured him to his death. But when I came to better underſtanding I diſliked turning Confirmation to a meer Ceremony. (For the right uſe of which I have written a Treatiſe agreeing to Dr. Hammond.)

3. He nameth [my omitting the Croſs and Surplice.] Anſ. I never Sware nor Promiſed to uſe them; being in no ſtation that obliged me to it: And was under an Ordinary that required it not. And I have confeſt my ſin in rath ſubſcribing to their lawfulneſs.

§ 43. Accuſ. XXX. Page 27. He tragically reciteth the reaſons I alledged why I was for the Parliament: But his confutation is only by an Exclamation how bad I was, as worſe than Cook and Bradſhaw, as if I had been for the death of the King. When he knoweth that the Parliament was broken up by Cromwell for being for the Kings Reſtoration and their Union: And that a Faction called the Rump did this as Cromwell's Confederates. I believe I did more againſt that Faction than many ſuch as he.

§ 44. Accuſ. XXXI. Page 27, 28. [With what Heart could he be an Eye-witneſs of the Inhumane Butcheries that had been made in almoſt every Fight from the beginning of the Wars?

Anſ. A Lie ſo groſs that it feigneth me to ſee far off where I never was. I have anſwered it before: I was an Eye-witneſs of many of Gods provident diſpoſals, and an Ear-witneſs of more. I ſaw the Field where they fought near Worceſter, and Edgehill, and Nantwich, and I ſaw many Garriſons (Wem, Leiceſter, Shrewsbury, Exeter, Sherburne, Briſtol, Winchester,) that had been taken: But I ſaw not the Fights at any one of theſe: But that at Langport that ended the Field War I ſaw afar off, but ſaw none kill'd, for they fled I think before a Man was kill'd.

§ 45. Accuſ. XXXII. I repent not of ſaying that I was reſcued from many dangers: Nor that I had many tedious Nights and Days, (in that Army which after Naſeby Fight I hazarded my Life and ſpent my Labour to have undeceived) [and had many doleful ſights and tidings.] I ſaw the Graves and ſome of the Corps in Ditches near Edgehill, of the Parliaments Souldiers there kill'd, and many that lay unburied: When after I lived in peace at Coventry, how oft were Souldiers of that Garriſon brought home Mortally wounded, and many ſlain: Few Weeks paſt in which we heard not of Fights in Fields or Garriſons: Which I thought it lawful to call doleful tidings.

§ 46. Accuſ. XXXIII. Becauſe I named the doleful Fights at Worcester, Edgehill. Newberry, Nantwich, Montgomery, Horncastle, Naſeby, (York,) Langport, &c. he addeth, [It ſeems he was preſent in theſe Fights.]

p. 52Anſ. Not at any one of them▪ ſave Langport. I ſaid, [My Eyes ſhalt no more ſee the Earth covered with the Carkaſſes of the ſlain.] Which was at Edgehill the next day after, where I had no more to do than any other that would ſee the place.

§ 47. Accuſ. XXXIV. [He had travelled over the moſt of England (to purſue the War.] Anſ. It was [much] and not [moſt] and it was to have prevented the Change of Government, and not to purſue the War that I went

§ 48. Accuſ XXXV. Page 29. He feigneth me accordingly to ſee many Noble Lords and Gentry periſh in their integrity, ſome perhaps by his own Hand.]

Anſ. All meer Forgery: I never ſaw any ſuch hurt, nor ever hurt any: But at Coventrey I did encourage the Garriſon, and at Wem.

§ 49. Accuſ. XXXVI. His next is a common Accuſation of me by his Party, that I ſpeak of Brook, Prin, Hambden and White as of Men in Heaven.]

Anſ. I think ſo ſtill: Prin and White were never Souldiers: Our Creed containeth not any Article that decideth Controverſies about the various forms of Government: Chriſt never told us how much of the Supremacy was in Caeſar, and how much in the Senate and People, and which of them had the Legiſlative Power: Nor whether England be an Abſolute or a Limited Monarchy; nor whether the Parliament have part of the Legiſlative and Self-defending Power. And thoſe that beſt knew theſe Men (eſpecially Hambden and White] took them for Men in all other reſpects of Great Wiſdom, Piety and Honeſty: If among the old Romans all the Civil Wars between the Senate and the Emperors, and one Emperor and another, (when of Forty ſcarce Ten died a Natural Death, but were Murdered) had inferred the Deſtruction and Damnation of all that were againſt the Cenſuring ſide, how few would have eſcaped? When ſetting up Emperors and killing them was ſo common, that Souldiers ſet the Crown to Sale. I never heard that Brutus, or Cato, or Cicero, or Seneca, or Lucan and ſuch others might not have their Virtues praiſed, and that above their Enemies, though they died as eſteemed Rebels. I am ſure theſe Men that reproach me for this Charity, have a Law to turn me and all Nonconformiſts out of the Miniſtry, if we were to bury ſuch a Man and would not profeſs our Hope of his Salvation: For they bind us to do it of every individual perſon buried in the Land, except the Unbaptized, Excommunicate and Self-Murderers. And exceptio firmat regulam in non exceptis.

And becauſe the Sum of his Accuſations is the War, the War, I will once more give him a Summary Anſwer.

If he mean the War before the new modelled Army, and new Commiſſion which left out [for the King] after Naſeby Fight, I did more p. 53againſt that new Cauſe and War than he, and perhaps many ſuch as he: If he mean the firſt War ſtated by the Parliament Commiſſions [for the King and Parliament] I was in it and for it: Becauſe,

1. He that is for the Higheſt Power in a Civil War, is of the righter ſide (caeteris paribus) than he that is againſt it; but they that were for King and Parliament were for the Higheſt Power in our Civil War.

Proved: They that were for them that have the Legiſlative Power, were for them that had the Higheſt Power (as Morley confeſſeth and almoſt all others.) But they that were for King and Parliament were for them that had the Legiſlative Power. Ergo, &c.

Obj. What Hypocriſie is it to ſhoot at the King and ſay you fight for him?

Anſ. 1. The King proteſted to be for the Parilament (as his Shrewſbury Half Crowns ſhew) while he fought againſt their Armies and Perſons: Ergo the Parliament might more clearly be for the King while they fought againſt his Army and not his Perſon, though in the Field.

2. They knew that the King had diſcretion enough to keep his Perſon out of the reach of Danger: And ſo he did: At Edgehill he ſtood on the Hill (as I heard) and look'd down on the Fight in the Field. At Naſeby where he was neareſt he was ſafe (but that was after the firſt Cauſe and War.) I never heard elſe that he came near.

3. Elſe any Traytor, that could poſſeſs the Kings Perſon, and carry him about (as they did Henry VI.) ſhould be for the King and all againſt him that would reſcue him.

Obj. He was willingly with his Army.] Anſ. He may fight for the King that doth it againſt his Will, while he doth it not to hurt his Perſon, Prerogative or Rights. We Sware not to be for all the Will of the King. If in a Paſſion he would kill Himſelf, his Son, his Lords, his Parliament, yea, or would but Raviſh a Woman, he may be held and reſiſted.

Arg. 2. They that were to bring King and Parliament again to Union, fought for the King and Kingdom, and the Higheſt Power; (for it is the Conſtitution. But the firſt Wars Commiſſions were to bring the King and Parliament to Unity. Ergo, &c.

Arg. 3. They that were really for the Common Safety, and Salus Populi and the very Conſtituted Form of Government in a caſe of notorious danger, and only againſt an Army of Subjects that fled from the Juſtice of the Supream Judicature, were righter than thoſe that were againſt their Wars. But, &c. Ergo, &c.

Arg. 4. They that were for a Defenſive War according to Law and Conſtitution, were righter than they that raiſed War againſt them contrary to Law and Conſtitution—But, &c. Ergo, &c.

p. 54The Parliament to the laſt were againſt all violence to the Perſon of the King, and were caſt out by Cromwell for Voting to receive him.

As it was eaſie for Bradſhaw and …ook to Charge all the Bloodſhed on the King, ſo is it fo… … Accuſer to Charge it according to his Judgment. But all of us muſt be willing of Conviction, and deep Repentance, ſo far as we ſhall be proved guilty.

Arg 5. The preſent King and Parliament have by Practice and by Law declared the right of more than Arming and Reſiſting a King in ſeveral Caſes.

Arg. 6. In a doubtful Caſe under God there is no Judge that hath a deciding power above the Supream Judicature.

§ 50. Accuſ. XXXVII. He next accuſeth me as falſly Charging the peaceable Reign of King Charles the Firſt with Perſecution, wherein there was no ſuch thing, but Peace, ſave againſt the Seditious: And he appealeth to the Canons.

Anſ. 1. See the Preface to my Book called Cain and Abel for an anſwer to this. 2. We appeal to the Canons too, and to the Biſhops Viſitation Articles, and to the experience of all England, that delight not in the Deſtruction of the true Servants of Chriſt. 3. But alas how far are Leeches from feeling the ſmart of the Perſons whoſe Blood they feaſt upon? The Papiſts ſay none were puniſhed in Queen Mary's days but the Hereticks and Seditious. So ſaith the King of France. And ſo ſaid the Iriſh when they Murdered 200000.

4. Q. 1. Was there nothing but Amiable Peace, when Laud and others wrote for a Forreign Juriſdiction, under the Name of our obeying the Pretorian Power of Forreign Councils?

Q. 2. Was it Sedition not to Read the Book for Sunday Sports and Dancing, which exempted Children and Servants from the Government of their Parents, and Maſters? For which many Miniſters ſuffered.

Q. 3. Was it Sedition for Religious people to go hear a Conformable Preacher at the next Pariſh, when they had no Preaching at Home?

Q. 4. Was it Sedition for Religious people to pray with their Sick Friends, and Faſt and Humble themſelves to God, without Travelling to the Biſhop for a Licenſe?

Q. 5. Was it Sedition for a Man Vowed to the Miniſtry by Epiſcopal Ordination, to Preach or Expound any matter in the Church or elſewhere, without a new Licenſe from the Biſhop?

Q. 6. Was it Sedition for any Man, Noble or Ignoble to affirm that any thing was repugnant to the Word of God, in the Ceremonies, Liturgy, Ordinations, or the Et caetera Government of the Church?

Q. 7. Was it Sedition to refuſe the falſe Et caetera Oath of 1640?

p. 55Q. 8. Was it Sedition to ſay that other Societies in England were true Churches beſides the Epiſcopal Churches? At leaſt the French and Dutch?

Q. 9 Was it for Sedition that Men were puniſhed for not Receiving the Sacrament, when the Conſcience of their ignorance and unfitneſs deterred them?

Q. 10. Were the many thouſand Families that were put to fly the Land to Holland and America puniſhed for nothing but Sedition? Were New England and Barmudas planted without any Perſecution? Or was it no puniſhment to be driven from Houſe, Land, Goods, Kindred and Native Countrey into an unplanted Wilderneſs among VVoods and wild Men and Beaſts?

Q. 11. Was it no Perſecution to be Excommunicate ipſo facto by Canons 6, 7, 8, &c. without being admoniſhed or heard?

Q. 12. Was it nothing but Amiable Peace, that laid all the Ten ſorts of the Excommunicate named in the Statute, in the common Goal during Life, depriving them there of their Eſtates, unleſs they Lied by a feigned Repentance?

Q. 13. Yea, was it only harmleſs that made Seriouſneſs in Religion ſuch a common Scorn, as the word Puritane then ſignified, if Mr. Robert Bolton, Biſhop Abbot, Biſhop Downame, and other Conformiſts may be believed?

But ſay theſe Accuſers, All this was but juſtice, and was well done. But the caſting out of two hundred accuſed on Oath for groſs ſcandal, and utter inſufficiency, by the Parliament, was Perſecution and was not well done.

§ 51. Accuſ. XXXVIII. Next I am accuſed becauſe other Men exploded the Lords Prayer.

Anſ. 1. And what is that to me, that conſtantly uſed it? 2. And who may not ſee that the uſe of it was preſcribed in the Directory? 3. And the Presbyterian (and Epiſcopal Nonconformiſts that now are) commonly uſed it. But he hath found out one Independent Dr. John Owen, who when he was Vice-Chancellor at Oxford was againſt the common uſe of it as neceſſary.

§ 52. Accuſ. XXXIX. He feigneth alſo that the Creed and Ten Commandments were alſo caſt out, and ſcarce a Chapter read in many Churches.

Anſ. 1. Was he that hated them, more oft in their Churches than I? I knew not one ſuch Presbyterian Congregation in England. 2. Read the Directory whether it were for them or againſt them, and judge of this Mans words.

§ 53. Accuſ. XL. His Exclamation againſt the Scots Covenant and Cromwell's doings, I before ſhewed to be juſt: And I think I oppoſed both more than he did.

§ 54. Accuſ. XLI. Page 39. Whereas I before ſaid how I went into p. 56the Army after Naſeby Fight by the Conſent of an Aſſembly of Loyal Miniſters in Coventry, to try whether there was any hope to ſave the Church and State from the Corrupted Army: He feigneth that this was the Weſtminſter Aſſembly, or ſome Rebellious Branch of them: All falſly as the reſt.

§ 55. Accuſ. XLII. That I went to Col. Whalley.] Anſ. Who then profeſt himſelf a Lamenter of the Armies Corruption, and a Deſirer of their Reformation, and ſo continued while I was with him: But was after overcome by his Kinſman Cromwell and worldly Intereſt, to hold on with them for his preferment.

§ 56. Accuſ. XLIII. His Page 41. is made of meer forged Lies. As, 1. That I promiſed my ſelf great things, (much what as I did from King Charles the Second, when inſtead of a Biſhoprick I craved leave (in vain) to have been for nothing the Curate of an ignorant Reading Vicar.) 2. That I was diſappointed of my hopes. (By whom? And how? And for what?) 3. That I thought my ſelf capable of advancement, but They did not: As if I ſought that which I refuſed. 4. That I was well promiſed for my pains.] Who never ask'd them any thing, nor was promiſed any thing. 5. That I was content with the pleaſing work of drawing Blood gratis.] Becauſe I that never drew a drop of any Mans Blood, did labour to prevent the Papiſts, and malignant other Leeches from burſting with the Blood of King, Parliament and Kingdom. 6. That I hoped they would have advanced me to ſome Military Preferment.] Who never was ſo much as a Souldier, and could have had Military Preferment long before Thus the Mans Brain (from what cauſe let others judge) breeds Lies as a Carkaſs breedeth Maggots: They ſwarm by heaps. Is this the Credit of our Church Hiſtory?

§ 57. Accuſ. XLIV. Page 42. [Againſt his Will he is forced to leave the Army.]

Anſ. Yes; juſt the day that they conſulted at Nottingham to Rebel, and I had elſe at Triploe-Heath ventured my Life againſt them: But it had been in vain, as it was to thoſe that drew off about 5000 from them; whoſe places they fill'd up with King Charles the Firſt's Souldiers that had come to them, and with Fanaticks that would be true to their Intereſt.

§ 58. Accuſ. XLV. [That ever ſince it hath been my buſineſs to deſtroy the beſt Eſtabliſhed Church in the World. Anſ. By deſiring them not to ſet up a Forreign Juriſdiction which the Kingdom is Sworn againſt. And by humble Petitioning them not to ſilence all the Miniſters of England conditionally, and two thouſand of the moſt Faithful actually in one day: By ſtriving for Concord as for Life, upon terms once granted by the King in his Gracious Declaration, and after on lower terms conſented to by Biſhop Wilkins, Dr. Burton, Judge Hale, and I think by Dr. Tillotſon, and Dr. Stillingfleet: I never motioned p. 57the alienation of one Farthing of the Revenues of the Biſhops or Deans; nor ſpake againſt their Baronies, Parliament Place and Power, … nor againſt their vaſt Dioceſſes, ſo they would not put down the Inferiour Paſtoral Office and Churches, and make Lay Civilians Uſurpers of the Keys: Thus I ſought to deſtroy the beſt Church in the World. Locuſts are famiſhed if they may not deſtroy our Trees and Fruit, and Pikes if they may not devour all the leſſer Fiſh: All Human's Wealth and Honour is nothing to him if Mordecai be not hanged. This Envy conſumeth them, if we lye not ſtill with Rogues in Goals.

§ 59. Accuſ. XLVI. [He will not affirm that I was given to plunder: But it is a ſuſpicious ſign when I would take up a Man to exchange for my Father.] Anſ. This hath a little modeſty; though even natural Affection be a Crime with Tories, even when exerciſed without hurting any. Here alſo he repeateth his Forgery of raining Manna.

§ 60. Accuſ. XLVII. Page 43 [That I ſate down on the Sequeſtred Living of Mr. Dance at Kiderminſter.] Anſ. This is cautelouſly ſaid: Not that I had a hand in Sequeſtring him, not that I took his living: But that I ſate down on it: And Biſhop Morley ſaith, [That he was a Man of an unblameable life.] But, I. He ſhall not hereby draw me to recite the Articles Sworn againſt him by as credible Men as any of his Neighbours. 2. I think that it is not a blameleſs life to undertake the Paſtoral Care of Souls, and neither preach to them, nor be able to Expound the Creed; and to keep one as ignorant but much more vicious (Turner at Mitton) under him.

3. I yet believe that ſuch a Mans Poſſeſſion, doth not oblige the people to venture their Souls upon his Paſtoral Care; and own him for their Teacher, and ſeek no other: Nor make it a ſin for any other to Teach them? No more than the King's Ships or Armies muſt wilfully caſt away Ships and Lives, for want of Conduct, becauſe a Man that hath no tolerable skill is in Poſſeſſion. How cheap are Souls, or how contemptible is Miniſterial Knowledge and Preaching with theſe Men. You ſee here what is the beſt Church in the World in their account, and what it is to deſtroy it.

4. Almoſt two years before the Wars, the Vicar conſcious of his obnoxiouſneſs, entred into Bond with the chief Magiſtrates and others of the Town and Pariſh, to pay 60 l. per Annum to a Lecturer of their choice, he keeping his Vicaridge and officiating as Reader: And ſo he put out Mr. Jo. Dide his Preaching Curate, in whoſe place I came, being before in another County: Which Mr. Dide though more offenſive before than the Vicar to the Religious people, being after on my Teſtimony for him, received into a Benefice of his own, was ſo reconciled to the people of Kiderminſter that he Bequeathed much of his Eſtate to them.

5. In my abſence ſome years Mr. Dance by Bond owed me about p. 58120 l. of which I never deſired or ask'd for a Penny: And if Mr. Dance when forced out had right to his Benefice I that was forced away had right to my Salary: Which yet I think was no good Title in him or me. But he was ſequeſtred when I was in another Countrey not like to live: And the Sequeſtration put into the hands of divers of the Inhabitants to maintain one to Officiate. They offered it me, and I refuſed it: And told them that I would take neither Sequeſtration nor Paſtoral Cure, but my former Lecture; but if they would get a competent Paſtor, let them take care to pay him: For I would have out of the Vicaridge but the 60 l. that the Vicar was bound to pay: And becauſe I refuſed a Living of 400 l. or 500 l. to be with them I would try other ways to make my Stipend 100 l. by getting for Mitton Chappel, which had but ten pound a year, an Augmentation of forty pound from the Parliament aliunde; and in ſum while I was there, the maintenance of the Vicaridge was thus paid; viz. forty pound a year to Mr. Dance, about twenty pound to the Crown and Poor, and Taxes; ten pound to the old Curate of Mitton, which was all he had before: ſixty pound to me, and the reſt to a truly faithful Miniſter that preached once a day at Kiderminſter and once at Mitton, and did the reſt of the Offices. And the Augmentation added from the Parliament made up my ſixty pound to be eighty pound, and the Rent of a few Rooms in the top of another Mans old Houſe. And I had no more: Nor did ever ſet my foot in the Vicaridge Houſe, much leſs offer to put out Mr. Dance; nor had we any diſagreement. And when he was reſtored, he freely gave me a full diſcharge for all between him and me.

But the Sequeſtrators had notice that another was like to be put in againſt their will if I were not: And thereupon without me they got the Committee to paſs an Order as to me; and they kept this Order for their own indempnity, till King Charles the Second's Army came to Worceſter, and then they brought it me, and deſired me if I were put to it, not to diſclaim it.

And to make all ſure when I came to them after my return from the Army, I got all the Magiſtrates and chief of the Town, to Subſcribe their Names, that they received me only as their Lecturer, that refuſed the Paſtoral Charge and Sequeſtration.

§ 61. Accuſ. XLVIII. To aggravate the Rebellion of Cromwell's Army, I wrote that [they had pull'd down the beſt Governours that they could name in the World, and therefore to pretend their faults for their Rebellion, was to profeſs that they would be ſubject to none.

Here he ſaith I meant the Parliament.

I anſwer, It was both King and Parliament that they put down: And he hath nothing but my own words to accuſe me of. 2. Why did he not venture to Name better than they put down? I know not what Nation p. 59then had better; notwithſtanding all that both Cromwell and this Accuſer hath ſaid againſt them.

§ 62. Accuſ. XLIX He next accuſeth me for praiſing Richard Cromwell's Government.] Anſ. I ſpake nothing but Truth. He was never in any War: The Royaliſts reported that he would reſtore the King. He was not for Sectaries, but for uniting pious Counſels: He preſently gave up his Government, becauſe it ſhould coſt no Mans Blood. And this was enough to aggravate their ſin that had ſet him up when he ſought it not, and then caſt him out (to their own deſtruction.)

§ 63. Accuſ. L. He ſaith, That I never ſo much complained of Arbitrary Government and Perſecution as ſince the King and Church were reſtored.

Anſ. Notoriouſly falſe: My Political Aphoriſms witneſs my complaints then, and let him tell if he can, where or when I complained of Arbitrary Government ſince King Charles the Second came in. I knew he did what was done againſt us by Parliaments. I knew the Biſhops got Laws for their purpoſe. But if I complain more of Perſecution, it is becauſe I think it no ſin to feel, nor a Duty to love the Silencing of Faithful Miniſters, and laying them in Goals for nothing but preaching the Goſpel, nor was I of the mind that undoing thouſands of ſincere godly Chriſtians was no Perſecution, I dare not rail at Chriſt's Judgment, Matth. 25. that reckoneth that as done for or againſt him that is done for or againſt the leaſt of thoſe whom he calleth Brethren while Phariſees call them Accurſed. Till Cruel Perſecution be Sanctity, it will be no ſin to hate it.

§ 64. Accuſ. LI. But that which followeth is a moſt notorious outfacing the moſt publick notice of the Land, Page 47. Did not the Secluded Members upon their readmiſſion reinforce the Engagement to be true and faithful to the Common-wealth without a King or Houſe or Lords.]

Anſ. So far were they from this, that they were caſt out immediately for Voting the ſatisfactorineſs of the Kings Commiſſions, and his return to London: And upon their readmiſſion they voted their own diſſolution that a free Parliament might be called, and were never for the Engagement, but abhorred it, though the Royaliſts at their Compoſitions ordinarily took it (when I wrote againſt it.)

But he asketh, [Did not ſome of them provide an Oath of Abjuration, &c.] Anſ. We can better tell what Parliaments do, than what [ſome of them do.] How know I what odd or ſecret Act of any particular Perſons this Man might know of? But I ſuſpect this [ſome] was ſome one or more of the excluded Rump. But had he no pretence for this notorious Lie againſt the Secluded Members? None viſible but that which hath filled his Book with falſhood; wrath and blind prejudice, and inconſiderate haſte: That which was done by the reſtored Rump he falſly p. 60ſaith was done by the Secluded Members, when it was done before their reſtoring. But they juſtified their firſt War againſt the Delinquent Army You may find him punctually confuted in Whitlock's Memorials. When things ſo notoriouſly falſe are thus confidently vented, which the publick notice of the Kingdom confuteth, what credit doth his Accuſation deſerve of me and my unknown actions, and my thoughts, whom I ſuppoſe he never ſaw, if the Author be Long of Exeter, as fame reporteth.

Indeed when Cromwell's proud rebellious Army came and maſtered Parliament and City, and about 150 of their Members forbore coming to the Houſe, they paſt divers ſlaviſh Votes, among which was that of [No more Addreſſes to the King,] when he refuſed their four Acts: But they recalled that Vote, and were caſt out for recalling it, and Voting Conſent to the Kings Conceſſion. And when after Richard's Government the Army had confounded themſelves, they were forced to call the Excluded Members of the Long Parliament again: But what Members were they? Only the Rump or Party that cut off the King, and put down the Houſe of Lords, expreſly confining it to them that ſtaid in till April 20. 1653. the day that Cromwell caſt out the laſt. So that the firſt Excluded Members were never reſtored till Monk and his Presbyterian Army reſtored them. They abhorr'd the Commonwealth Engagement: And ſo did all the Miniſters of my Acquaintance ſave Independants

§ 65. Accuſ. LII. Page 47. [Having told what a few Rumpers ſaid to Monk he ſaith, [And becauſe they did this, and might juſtifie it by Mr. B's Theſes in his Holy Commonwealth, they are the Supream Power the beſt Governours in all the World.

Anſ. How pregnant is malice of falſhood? 1. It is falſe that the Parliament in queſtion did what he ſaith; which was done by their Adverſaries: Such as Scot, Robinſon and Haſeldrigge that flattered Monk till he had them in his Net. 2. It is falſe that my Th…ſes juſtifie them, which are written againſt them. 3 It is falſe that it was for this that I call them the Supream Power or the beſt Governours: It's King and Parliament that I call Supream: It was King, Parliament, the Rump and Richard that the Men whom I wrote againſt pull'd down: And I only tell them that if the Errours of all theſe Rulers will juſtifie an Army for Depoſing them, there is no Power on Earth that might not be ſo Depoſed, there being none better than all theſe Depoſed by them.

§ 66. Once more, I tell this Accuſer and the World, that I am ſo far from juſtifying King or Parliament, from the beginning, progreſs, or ending of this War, that I think both ſides deeply guilty of very heinous ſin: And I cannot tell whether I know a Man living that hateth War more than I hate it: While I medled in it, it was far a more ſad p. 61and hateful Life to me, than my abode in Priſon was when the Church Defenders laid me there with an unſolvable Fine. The truth is, both ſides began they knew not what: I knew not a Man but Sir Francis Netherſole that knew what War was, or foreſaw what was like to come of it. Both ſides thought it would be prevented by the Countreys forſaking the other ſide, or that one Fight would end it. And no Man can tell juſt where, and when, and by whom it was begun: No more than juſt when a Chronical Diſeaſe begins in Man. Only I am ſure that Virtually and Diſpoſitively it began in that diviſion of Minds, Hearts and Lives, which is common in the World between them that Love a Life of Serious Godlineſs, and cannot Love Wickedneſs, and them that Hate a Godly Life becauſe it's againſt their Luſt and Carnal Intereſt. Not that every Adverſary to the Parliament was a Cainite, but that through the Land an Enmity between the Seriouſly Godly, and the Prophane encouraged by Phariſaical Ceremonious Formaliſts, was a War in our Bowels, ready to break forth upon the firſt advantages. And the Religious Party (as in all former Ages) had many young ignorant Novices, that by Pride ran into Extreams, being ſelf-conceited, and unruly, and ready by Schiſm or petulant Cenſoriouſneſs to vilifie all that be not of their Sects, and to pretend Fanatick Inſpirations for their Errours. As the contrary Party was prone to be ſo Jealous of their beloved Dominion, Wealth, and Eaſe, and Honour, as to take ſuch for intolerable Enemies that flattered them not in their Worldly Pomp.

Long did heart-burnings continue between theſe diſcordant Parties, one ſide blaming, and the other ſide ruining thoſe that were againſt them: Till Laud's attempts for Innovation, ſtirred up ſuch oppoſition in Scotland, and diſtaſte in England, as I cannot juſtifie. The Parliament encouraged by the Scots went higher in provoking the King than they ought: And the King too much occaſioned their Jealouſie that he intended to have Invaded Property and Liberty, and to ſubdue them by force if they reſtrained or puniſhed the Executioners of his Illegal Will. But this brake out by ſuch degrees, that no Man can name the beginning. As a ſmall breach in a Pond of Water groweth wider till it let out the whole: And as Perſonal Duels begin in a word, or a ſuſpicion, and proceed to wrath, and then to reproach, and thence to revenge. When Diviſion was the Death of the Conſtituted Form of Government, both ſides ſhould have hated and feared it more than either did. But the Parliament thought the King would ſoon return as deſerted: And the Devil among us all was as if he had caſt among Boys red hot pieces of Braſs or Iron, and they ſcrambled for it, thinking by the Colour that it was Gold, till it ſtuck to their Fingers and burnt them to the Bone. And the dread of 200000 Murdered in Ireland put ſuch a pannick fear in the Antipapiſts in England, as darkened their Wits. p. 62And yet if the Captain and Mariners fall out by folly, the Ship may be preſerved by the innocent. If the Citizens could not agree about quenching the Fire in 1666. the Inhabitants may endeavour it, and pull down Houſes to that end without the guilt of injury to the Owners. I think that King and Parliament grievouſly ſinned (but not equally) in doing ſo much to cauſe and no more to prevent a Civil War: I would they had hearkened to Whitlock's Speech, and other Mens healing motions 1641. But who in the beginning fore-knows the end? And when once the breach is made, uſually there is no hope left of any better end than one of the two Parties ruin. True is the old ſaying, He that draweth his Sword againſt his King muſt throw away the Scabbard. When all mutual Truſt is gone, all hope of Reconciliation is gone.

The preſent ſtate of England is a lively Expoſition of the beginning of that miſerable War. We were thus in fear of Popery and Slavery here of late. The Murder of 200000 in Ireland, and the Papiſts coming in to the King in England was as loud an Alarm, as King James his Liberty of Conſcience here. The Archbiſhop and Biſhops, and the Lay Church Lords and Patrons here had Sworn or Promiſed against taking Arms againſt the King on any pretence what ſoever. They did not☞ all own King William's Title to the Crown: Yet they thought it lawful to save the Kingdom from a miſgoverning King, and the Kings own Kindred, Lords, Army and Clergy forſook him, and joyned with him that came in againſt him: They meant it not as owning then the Invaders Right to the Crown, nor as diſowning King James, but to ſave the Kingdom; and it proved contrary to their expectation that without Blood the turn of the Nation turned the Government.

Juſt ſo the firſt beginners of the reſiſtance of King Charles the Firſt his Army intended no change of the Government, and they thought that the War would have been as ſoon almoſt ended as begun, as King William's was here; but when it was once begun reconciliation became impoſſible: And one or others muſt be ruined: Yet we that owned not the miſcarriages of either ſide, but thought King and Parliament greatly ſinful, thought it an abſolute Duty to do our beſt to ſave the Kingdom, from the moſt threatning danger. And we thought that the Maſſacre of Ireland, the Papiſts in England, the malignity of moſt of the Kings Adherents, and the proſpect of ſuch an Army of Delinquents Conquering a Parliament, and putting all the Land into the Sole power of the King, who was himſelf in the power of Papiſts and Delinquents, did clearly tell us where the preſent danger of the Kingdom lay. But future Changes we could not foreſee.

… part, I was a young Novice, and knew not what War was; … conſiderable intereſt in any, to have prevented it: But … that I more repent of than that I feared it ſo little, and p. 63that I did not ſpeak more earneſtly for the preventing of it by mutual pacificatory means, and that I ſaid any thing towards unpeaceable irritations. Who could have forethought that all thoſe doleful Events would follow, which make up Whitlock's impartial Memorials?

§ 67. Yet I muſt truely ſay (though it diſpleaſe the guilty) that the effects were quite different on the Land, from what the Malignants commonly report: They would falſly perſwade the World, that all ancient Piety was deſpiſed, the Creed, Lords Prayer and Decalogue, and all ſober Miniſters caſt out, and Tub preachers ſet up to vent their Nonſence. The truth is, among 10000 of the Clergy about 300 or more were turn'd out as Ignorant and Scandalous, and with them unjuſtly ſome for being for the King againſt the Parliament: The number I know not, but conjecture that there might be an hundred ſuch at leaſt. In the places of theſe the moſt ſeriouſly Religious young Men that the Univerſities would afford, with ſome few old Nonconformiſts, and but few) ſuch as the Pariſhioners choſe were ſet up: Moſt of theſe young Men were ſuch as had no hand in the Wars, but were Lads or young Students while the War continued. It pleaſed God, that very many of them, became ſuch fervent, able Preachers, that a great change followed among their Hearers, and multitudes of the Ignorant, Debauch'd and Worldlings became Serious, Godly, Chriſtians. And the younger ſort grew up accordingly.

For inſtance, in the County of Worceſter where I lived, where before there was one Family that minded Piety, or the Life to come, or Prayed, or Read the Scripture, there were many after that did it. In the Town where I lived, where there was before one or two Houſes in a Street that worſhipped God by Prayer in their Families, and avoided Profaneneſs, and minded the Concerns of their Souls, at laſt there was ſcarce more than two Houſes on a Street-ſide, that did not learn the Catechiſm read the Scripture, pray and live ſoberly, and this in great love and peace, and humility towards others; commonly diſowning the Cromwellians, and Sectarians Diſloyalties, Rebellions and Schiſins.

But indeed when the Sectaries got dominion, many Anabaptiſts and Self conceited Novices ſet up themſelves for Preachers where they could get Hearers; but the ſober godly people kept ſo much Concord and Integrity, that theſe others were but here and there, and that as a diſgraced broken Sect, as the Quakers be among us now. But Harriſon took the advantage of the ignorance and badneſs of the Pariſh Miniſters in Wales, to ſet up Itinerant Anabaptiſts and Separatiſts in many places.

This is the truth of the Conſequents about Religion: And it fell out that the Cromwellians and Anabaptiſts profeſſing more Zeal for Godlineſs than ordinary, did much of their work by ſuppreſſing ſin and profaneneſs, p. 64and countenancing Godlineſs: Which hath taught us to wiſh that of two Evils, rather Hypocriſie than Malignity may be in power. It's better Godlineſs be promoted for evil Ends, than hated and perſecuted.

68. Whereas therefore the Dioceſane Church of England excluſive of all Nonconformiſts, and ſuch as theſe Men accuſe, is ſo oft called, The beſt Church in the World: It muſt mean that it is beſt in Conſtitution and Laws, or in the Men that are Miniſters and Members. If the firſt be their meaning, 1. The beſt Laws without the beſt Men never make the beſt Church. 2. Is one ſole Biſhop over a Thouſand or many Hundred Pariſhes without any Biſhop or Paſtoral Church under him a better Form of Government, than the contrary that was continued for many hundred years? **See Mr. Clarkſons proofs.and deſcribed by Archbiſhop Uſher and others. 2. Is a Church Governed by Lay Civilians decretive uſe of the Keys ſo much better than that which is Governed by the Keys in the hands of the Clergy only? 3. Is a Church Governed by Canons that ipſo facto Excommunicate all that affirm any of their Offices, Ceremonies or Forms, to have any thing ſinful, better than thoſe that unite in things neceſſary, and bear with ſuch as theſe? 4. Are Biſhops and Deans choſen by Kings (perhaps Papiſts) and Incumbents choſen by any that can buy a Preſentation, better than thoſe that are choſen by the Clergy and People, and Inveſted by the Prince and Patron. 5. Is a Church where the ignorant, ſinful and unwilling are forced to Communicate, unleſs they will lye Beggar'd in Goals, better than thoſe that receive none to Communion but the Deſirers?

2. But if it be the beſt Church in the World for Men, they ſhould let others praiſe them rather than their own Mouths. Are they ſo much better Men than the Nonconformiſts? Do their Lives ſhew it? Doth credible fame ſpeak it? Though Mr. White was blamed for publiſhing the Names of ſuch as by credible Oaths were ejected for Drunkenneſs, or other Scandal, this was no proof that they were the beſt Men in the World? Nor yet that of 10000 that Conformed 8000 of them had Conformed before to the Directory, and Declared their Aſſent and Conſent to the altered Common Prayer Book before ever they ſaw it (as I have proved)

Whereas I remember not that ever I heard of one Nonconformiſt theſe twenty eight years that was accuſed and puniſhed for any ſuch crime, unleſs preaching Chriſts Goſpel be a crime, even when Power and Malice watcht for advantages againſt them, and crouded them into Goals for preaching and praying. Nor do I remember more than two ſingle inſtances of Im norality by credible accuſations of fame, (which was of Fornication lamented) in all theſe years. But alas how different is the common fame of too many of the publick Clergy! And are theſe the beſt Men in all the World?

p. 65§ 69. You may partly judge by their Works, their Writings and their Lives. Compare the Writings and Miniſterial Labours of the Conformiſts and Nonconformiſts, theſe thirty years, or ſince the New Impoſitions. Some pious Conformiſts have done extraordinarily well: Eſpecially Dr. Barrow. Dr. Tillotſon, Dr. Patrick, Dr. Stillingfleet, Dr. Tenniſon, &c. And is there not the ſame Spirit of Wiſdom, Piety and Peace in the Writings of Anthony Burgeſſe, Mr. Charnock, Dr. Manton, Dr. Bates, Mr H…w, Richard Alleine, Joſeph Alleine, Tho. Gouge, Mr. Swinnock, Dr G…lpin, many Volumes of the Morning Lectures, Mr. Flavel's, Mr. Steel's, Mr. Ambroſe's, and many more ſuch.

This Man ſingleth out me for one of the worſt Men living, and Biſhop Morley bid Men judge of all the reſt by me; [ab uno diſce omnes.] And he was accounted one of the moſt Eminent of the Clergy for Parts and Orthodoxneſs: One Book againſt me called his Letter, is moſt ſhameleſs for untruths in publick matters of Fact: His laſt and greateſt is to prove againſt me that the Parliament hath no part in Legiſlative Power, nor the whole Kingdoms any right of ſelf defence againſt any Commiſſioned by the King on any pretence whatſoever. This Accuſer is an Eminent Member of the beſt Church in the World: Is this bundle of his groſs untruths a proof that he is one of the beſt Men in the World. He ſaith that the Good that I wrote was for miſchievous Ends. And what ſhould move a Man in pain and expectation of ſpeedy death to write above Sixſcore Books great and ſmall, that are contrary to the bent of his own Heart? And for that which he miſchievouſly would overthrow? To ſpend his Life againſt his own Affections?

§ 70. Accuſ. LIII. His next charge is that [I was employed in aſſiſting the Commiſſioners for Sequeſtration.]

Ans. A downright Lie: I never had any thing to do for them or with them. Another ſort called Commiſſioners for Approbation that were to judge of Men for Inſtitution upon Preſentations, would have had me to aſſiſt them, and I utterly refuſed it: But at laſt they got a trick, that when a Man was preſented that they would not approve, and yet would not incur the blame of rejecting him, they named three Countrey Miniſters near him, and ſaid, If thoſe approved him they would accept him: Three or four times they named me, and I refuſed to meddle in it: Till three Miniſters that were Epiſcopal and Royaliſts, againſt the Parliament told me, They ſhould loſe their Livings if I refuſed them; and only for them did I deny my ſelf to do this Office. And now this Man makes it my crime to help his Party to Benefices: I never put out or rejected one of his Party. He dealeth with me juſt as Dr. Pearce did: When I deſired to reconcile the Religious ſort to the Ignorant multitude whom the Conformiſts had made their Church, I was ſtill met with the objection, (that they had nothing but the name p. 66and accidents of Chriſtians; that they ſcarce ever ſpake of God, or Chriſt, or the Life to come, unleſs in jeſt, or at the ſaying of their Service; that they never prayed in their Families; that multitudes of them were common Swearers, Lyars, Drunkards, &c. To keep them from cenſuring the Conformiſts and their Churches over-much, and ſeparating groundleſly. I told them how ſome foul Sins that have got advantage by Cuſtom may ſtand with ſome degrees of Grace. And what doth this Doctor but turn this to my own reproach, as if I was for vicious Looſeneſs, and had deſcribed not theirs, but my own Communicants; whenas, without this charitable Lenitive, I doubt it is above half the Conformable Laity that we muſt have turned from the Sacrament, and ſo have maimed the Church of England.

Juſt ſo doth this Man accuſe me for keeping in three Prelatiſts.

§ 71. Accuſ. LIV. He maketh a long Accuſation again, of my taking the Sequeſtration; full of groſs Falſhoods: Principally, That the Augmentation came out of the Tythes of the Vicaridge. A Lye merely forged by him, without the leaſt appearance of Proof. It was granted aliunde, I know not whence, by the Parliament, and paid by them.

2. That the Vicar then had little, and he talks of deſolate Wives and Children: Whereas the Vicar had no Child, and had 40 l. a Year for doing nothing. His debauch'd, ſottiſh Curate at Mitton had all his old Pay, without any Abatement; and was connived at by us to read Common Prayer once a day, and the other half of the day they had a worthy Preacher.

3. And as for the 60 l. before and after paid me as Lecturer, the Vicar's Bond for it was procured by his own Friends importunity before the Wars. Oh What a rate do theſe Accuſers ſet on Souls, that would leave ſo many to two ſuch Men, whom many Plow-men and Weavers in that Congregation farther excelled in Knowledge, and the Exerciſe of it, than I will now expreſs.

§ 72. Accuſ. LV. He ſaith that I think my ſelf wronged that I had not the fifth part ſtill paid me, and expected to have it offered as my due.]

Anſ. A mere Lye: 'Tis capable of no better Name and Anſwer.

§ 73. Accuſ. LVI. Becauſe I ſaid that the Papiſts Doctrine of depoſing and deſtroying Kings was worſe, or had leſs excuſe, than their act that here had fought againſt him,] while I publiſhed my abhorrence of both ſorts of Regicides, he feigneth me to plead for them, and that more than others.

§ 74. Accuſ. LVII. Pag. 57. He ſaith It is Men of my perſuaſion that ſay, that the Repreſentatives of the People in Parliament have the ſupream Power; and whatever is enacted and declared for Law by the Commons in Parliament, hath the form of a Law.]

Anſ. Impudently falſe: Whereas in my Chriſtian Directory I have fully confuted this, and ſuch like, in Ri. Hooker, the Man of their perſuaſion that they boaſt of. Had he ſaid that I hold that they have part of the Supream Legiſlative Power, he had ſaid true.

p. 67§ 75. Accuſ. LVIII. After a deal of impertinent talk of the Army's ill uſage of the King (which 'tis like I did more againſt, than many ſuch as he,) he ſaith, [That I plead for the Obligation of the Solemn Covenant contumaciouſly, againſt the Authority of the whole Nation.]

Anſ. If the Reader will find truth in this Man's Writings, he muſt firſt ſeparate it from all the Chaff of Untruths that covereth it. I diſtinguiſh between 1. The Impoſing of that Covenant. 2. And the Taking of it. 3. And the Keeping of the unlawful parts of it. 4. And the Keeping of the lawful and neceſſary parts. The three firſt I ſpeak againſt; the fourth is all the matter of our diſpute. That Covenant is alſo a Vow to God: Therein Men vowed to be againſt Popery, Profaneneſs, Hereſie and Schiſm, and all that is againſt ſound Doctrine and Godlineſs; and to repent of Sin, and amend; and to defend the Perſon and Rights of the King. King Charles the Second took this Covenant, and ſo did his Lords and Knights, and others, at their Compoſition; and many that impoſed and took it were then, and ſome are yet alive. The Queſtion is Whether I. and all England, can and muſt be certain that this Vow bindeth neither King, Parliament-men, or any one living, to renounce Popery, Schiſm and Profaneneſs, and to repent of Sin, and to defend the King. All the Corporations of England are conſtituted by a new Oath, that there is NO OBLIGATION from this Covenant, on ME OR ANY OTHER PERSON.] I gave the Reaſons why I durſt not ſwear this, leaving other Men's Conſciences to their Judge.

Now either there is ſome ſuch Obligation, or there is not. If there is, and I ſhould venture, by an Oath, or a Subſcription, to juſtifie King, Parliament, and all the Corporations in England, in publick, national Perjury, What greater Wickedneſs could I commit? Would this be a Character of the beſt Church in the World, to have ſuch Miniſters?

But if there be no Obligation from that Vow, to the things aforeſaid, 1. Dr. Sanderſon, and moſt ſober Caſuiſts are miſtaken: who ſay, That though a Vow be unlawfully impoſed, and unlawfully taken, and part of the Matter be unlawful to be kept, it bindeth us nevertheleſs to keep the neceſſary part. And what am I, that I ſhould ſwear or ſay that I am wiſer than all theſe Doctors, and ſure that they are miſtaken?

2 And then I muſt ſwear or ſay, that neither King, nor Lords, nor any one took it in a lawful ſenſe; which elſe would oblige them. And muſt I become a Voucher for Thouſands whom I never knew?

3 And then I muſt ſwear or ſay, that the King was brought in by Errour and Deceit. Monk's Presbyterian Army, and the Presbyterian Gentry and Miniſtry of England brought in the King, as bound to it by this Covenant, (as they declared:) And muſt I ſay, it did not bind them to it?

p. 68But our Accuſers are no Self-accuſers; but God will difference between him that ſweareth, and him that feareth an Oath, and dare not take God's Name in vain.

§ 76 Accuſ. LIX. He dipped his Pen, not in Gall and Vinegar, but in the very poyſon of Aſps, to keep open the wounds of the expiring Church: To which end, he endeavours to draw his Neighbour-Miniſters into an Aſſociation, and procures the Worceſterſhire-Agreement; the deſign of which you may ſee in his Gildas Salvianus]

Anſ. I have here ſome help to underſtand Chriſt, [They that kill you, ſhall think they do God ſervice.] What Duty ſo great, that ſome will not ſay is a Crime that deſerveth death? The Agreement accuſed is printed in a Book called Chriſtian Concord: The terms of it were, that Epiſcopal, and Presbyterians and Independents, ſhould agree in the practice of ſo much of the Miniſtry and Church-Diſcipline as they were agreed about in their Judgments or Principles, and be left in the reſt to their ſeveral Liberties. Was this a Crime? Is an Attempt of voluntary Concord and Peace the poyſon of Aſps? Or is not the poyſon of Aſps under their lips, that are haters of it, and have not known the way of peace? I have had thanks from Helvetia, and other parts of Germany, for that Gildas Salvianus, and that pacificatory Attempt; which is to theſe Men the poyſon of Aſps.

§ 77. Accuſ. LX. [But there was then a Petition, that ſcandalous and inſufficient Miniſters might not adminiſter Sacraments; on which, the Loyal Party were reſtrained.]

Anſ. And is it a Crime to be againſt a ſcandalous, inſufficient Miniſtry, and a Duty to be for them, that we may be the beſt Church in the World? Reader, the truth is this; There was a Petition by ſome, that thoſe, of what ſide ſoever, for King or Parliament, whoſe Inſufficiency and Scandal was ſo great, as to render them utterly uncapable of Miniſtry, might not be allowed it: And I petitioned withal, that no Man might be caſt out, or reſtrained, for being for the King, againſt the Parliament, and their Cauſe. Is this ſo poyſonous?

Doth not this Man more diſgrace his Church than me, that taketh it for the poyſon of Aſps to caſt out only the uncapable, and keep in the reſt?

§ 78. Accuſ. LXI. He accuſeth me for telling the World truly how the Engliſh Prelates had encouraged the Enemies of ſerious Godlineſs in the Land, and at how much cheaper a rate a Man might be a Swearer, a Drunkard, a Whoremonger, an open Scorner of Godlineſs, than to faſt and pray, or to hear a Conformiſt in the next Pariſh, when there was no Sermon at home.

Anſ. What doth the Man mean by rendering this odious? If he mean that all this was well done; and that, as in Armies, he hath moſt Honour that killeth moſt; ſo in their Church, he is the beſt Man that p. 69doth moſt againſt ſerious Piety; this is to profeſs themſelves the Devil's Militia. But if he mean that I miſ-report the matter of fact, and this was not ſo, he may as well perſuade us that we lived not then in England, or that we knew not our Neighbours, or that Men ſpake not Engliſh. Can we chuſe but know that which every Corner in all the Land did ſpeak? Doth he ſay a word to confute all this? And it was a meritorious work to ſilence and impriſon with Rogues all that obeyed not their ungodly Canons; but it muſt go for a heinous Crime to feel their Malice, or blame their Cruelty.

§ 79. Accuſ. LXII. Pag 66, &c. He accuſeth me, as accuſing King Charles the Firſt of too much favouring the Grotian deſign of Union with the Papiſts. But, 1. Doth he ſay a word ſo much as to deny his Letter to the Pope, to venture Crown and all for Union? 2. Or to deny his ſworn Articles for Toleration, mentioned in Ruſhworth's Collections, and others? 3. Or to deny the Papiſts Murders in Ireland, and their power in the King's Armies in England? 4. Or that he ſet up ſuch Biſhops as Laud, Bromhall, and others? But if accuſing theſe Men be my Crime, (when I would have ſaved England from them,) Reader, peruſe but a full Treatiſe, which I have long ago written, and hope to get ſpeedily printed, with the very words of Laud, Bromhall, Gunning, Saywell, Thorndike, Heylin, Pierce, Parker, Sparrow, Beveridge, &c. for our Subjection to a Foreign Juriſdiction, (which the Kingdom is ſworn againſt,) and then judge whether I accuſe them wrongfully. Muſt we be brought under Ariſtocratical Popery, or French Church-Government, merely by ſaying It is not Popery? And muſt the Land ſo tamely be perjured and enſlaved?

§ 80 Accuſ. LXIII. Pag. 67. [He hath been made uſe of as one of the moſt keen and Catholick Tools, that ever the Papacy did employ.]

Anſ. 1. 'Tis an unrighteous Honour to Popery to call it Catholick, while they are a Sect contrary to Catholiciſm. But why then do not theſe Men love and cheriſh me, while they are ſtriving for a Foreign Juriſdiction, if I be ſo much for them?

§ 81. Accuſ. LXIV. Pag. 68. [That I am for a mixture of Epiſcopal, Presbyterian and Independent Government.]

Anſ. And what harm is that? I am for that which is good in all, and for the Faults of none: But theſe Men muſt needs be faultleſs, and curſe all others, that they may bleſs themſelves. But am I Epiſcopal, and yet the greateſt Enemy to Epiſcopacy? Are they for Epiſcopacy that put down hundreds, to ſet up one in their ſtead?

§ 82. Accuſ. LXV. The next Accuſation is, That my five Diſputations of Church-Government came out to keep out Epiſcopacy, and juſtifie our Ordination.]

Anſ. 1. It was to bring in a threefold Epiſcopacy, which our Dioceſans kept out, viz. Epiſcopos Gregis, Epiſcopos Praeſides, and Archbiſhops over theſe.

p. 702. Chancellor Hide and Morley produced that Book before the King, Lords and Biſhops, at the great Meeting at Worceſter-houſe; and Morley ſaid, No Man hath written better than Mr. B. of theſe things. And now it is all intolerable.

3. That Diſputation of Ordination was never yet anſwered, (that I could hear of,) and yet Men were forced to be re-ordained. I never had a hand in ordaining any one.

§ 83. Accuſ. LXVI. His Accuſations of my holy Commonwealth are ſo ſlippery and trifling, that they call not for an Anſwer, unleſs it be that he taketh it for criminal, 1. That I told Cromwell's Army, that it was Treaſon to take Arms againſt the higheſt Power, as they did; and that if the higheſt Legiſlative Power was in the King alone, and not in King and Parliament conjunct, I muſt confeſs that I was guilty of death. 2. Or that I ſaid, I honoured all the Providences of God that made our Changes, though I abhorred the Deeds of Men that were guilty. And is it a Crime to honour God, and his Works? 3. Or that I deſired Richard Cromwell to govern well, and called my ſelf his Subject, though I never owned his Right to the Government; thinking that Chriſt directed me ſo far to ſubmit to the Poſſeſſor, when he paid Tribute to Caeſar, and ſent Lepers, and others,See Dr. Sherlock's Defence. to the High Prieſts, that were Uſurpers. AndHath not Biſhop Stillingfleet himſelf taken K. William's Oath. this very Man, and his beſt Church in the World (except ſeven or eight Biſhops) do now practiſe that which he ſo condemned me for; yea, and much more, while they ſwear Obedience to the preſent King William, publiſhing that it is as to a King de facto only.

§ 84. Accuſ LXVII. is, That I ſay, I had been a Traytor had I taken Arms againſt the Parliament.]

Anſ. Yes, or the King either, if the Legiſlative Power be in them conjunct. The King proteſted that he took not Arms againſt the Parliament, and the Parliament proteſted that they took not Arms againſt the King. This Man makes Mr. Udal guilty of Sedition againſt the Queen, becauſe it was againſt the Biſhops, her Miniſters: And is it not as criminal to be againſt the Parliament? Are they ſo much lower than the Biſhops?

Here he wonders that any Chriſtian can ſtill take me for a Saint, and the Guide of the Party; and recites ſome applauding words of Mr. John Humfreys, (no Sectary.) But I take my ſelf for a very great Sinner, and know no Party that take me for their Guide; and am ſo conſcious of my Ignorance, that I know it to be far greater than my Knowledge, and yet my Affections come ſhort of what I know.

The reſt of his Invectives, to the end of his firſt Chapter, are nothing but a rabble of intimated, congeſted Lyes, upon the occaſion of the Wars, and perverted Words, unworthy of a Confutation. They are p. 71all built on the ſuppoſition that all that they did againſt the Parliament and Kingdom was not only juſt, but neceſſary; and all the Ignorance, Drunkenneſs, Ungodlineſs and Cainiſm of the vicious part of their Clergy were not to be blamed; but the reproof of them, and endeavours to reform them was heinous wickedneſs.

What a Charm is the name of the Dioceſan Clergy, that can turn the moſt ſcandalous Treachery into Sanctity, and make the beſt Church in the World of the Haters of ferious Godlineſs, and make a deſire of their Reformation to be the badge of intolerable Rebels?

§ 85. Accuſ. LXVIII. He begins his ſecond Chapter with a recital of my Profeſſion, that 'tis Treaſon to fight againſt the King; and with this oft repeated Lye, that [I had the confidence to meet the Old King and his Armies in the Field.] This is his Dioceſan Hiſtory. I never met the King in the Field, nor ever ſaw an Army where he was, nor ever ſaw one of his Armies, till that of Goring's at Langport-Fight, where the Field War ended. Indeed, I came into the Quarters where they had gone before me, and I was ſo guilty of oppoſing them, as to be aſhamed of the fame they left behind them. At South-…ederton the Gentleman where I quartered told me, that in his Houſe they prick'd their Fingers, and made the Blood run into the Cup, and drunk a Health to the Devil. At the Catherine-Wheel in Salisbury, the Neighbours reported, that ſome of them drinking a Health to the Devil, one of them was carried away, and never ſeen more: I went into the Room, and ſaw a new Standard and Glaſs where the Window was broken; but the Woman ſaid, ſhe was not in the Room, and knew not how it was done, whatever the Neighbours ſaid of it, from the Soldiers that were frighted. But 'tis none of my purpoſe to intimate that they were all ſuch, or moſt.

§ 86. Accuſ. LXIX. His next Accuſation is, [Our offering our Conſent to Archbiſhop Uſher's Reduction of the Primitive Epiſcopacy, as a means of Concord.]

Againſt this he ſaith, The Biſhops knew whence it came; not from the Archbiſhop, but from the Presbyterian Forge.

Anſ. Still this is English Church-Hiſtory: The Archbiſhop Uſher owned it to his death, as his Chaplains. Dr. Bernard and Dr. Parre teſtifie: He owned it to me himſelf, and told me, King Charles the Firſt refuſed it at firſt, but after would have accepted it.

But he exclaimeth againſt it, as that which would have pulled down the Biſhops, or cut their Throats. So that if one Biſhop may not be ſaid to govern many hundred Churches, when a Lay-Chancellor doth it, without any ſubordinate Biſhop or Presbyters, their Throats are cut. And even the two Agents of our Miſery, Sheldon and Morley; (who were intruſted by the King to word this Declaration,) are by this Man p. 72made their own Cut-throats, by granting ſome part of Paſtoral Power to the Rural Deans and Synods. This is the Church that muſt not be amended.

He ſaith, that by this Model [They would have robbed the Biſhops of all their power, and taken it to themſelves.] And was Archbiſhop Uſher ſuch a Robber of himſelf, and all the Biſhops? Did he motion any thing but the Primitive Epiſcopacy, with the edditions of their large Dioceſs, Wealth and Honour? What was the power that they would have taken to themſelves? Was it to be Dioceſans, to rule a Dioceſs as the ſmalleſt Church that had none under it? Would each Man have had this Dioceſan Power, or only all, as one Political Body? If each Man, ſure England had not Dioceſſes enough for ſo many Thouſands: If all, as an Ariſtocracy, could they deſire more than Convocations have? Or did they deſire ſo much to all the Miniſters of a Dioceſs, in Conjunction with the Biſhop, as his Councils, as every ſingle Lay-Chancellor hath without the Biſhop? This is juſt like the Papiſts Accuſation of Pariſh-Paſtors, that every Man would be a Pope in his own Pariſh: And their ſaying of Maſters that are for governing their Families, that every one would be a Pope to his own Houſe: And againſt Self-governing [of our Words and Actions.] that every one would be a Pope to himſelf: And Idiots perceive not the Contradiction. To be a Pope is to be one that claimeth the Government of all the World, (or Church.) And is governing a Family, or my ſelf, governing all the World? And is governing a Pariſh-Church under an Archbiſhop, the governing of many hundred Pariſhes that are no Churches, but parts of a Dioceſan Church?

I mentioned Mr. Stanley Gower's words to me of Archbiſhop Uſher, that he told him, that a Biſhop and Presbyter differed not Ordine, but Gradu; and that he took his Primacy and Lordſhip, not as his Church-Office, but as a Collateral Dignity given by the King:] (and one would think no Man that believes the Scripture ſhould think otherwiſe.)

But this Accuſer ſaith, that he will not believe Mr. Stanley (as he calls him) or me: (But muſt we therefore both disbelieve our own Ears?) For he thinks the Biſhop ſhould then act againſt his Judgment and Conſcience. (What Act may that be?) And he citeth Dr. Bernard's Teſtimony, as againſt my Report; whereas the very cited words of Dr. Bernard ſay the ſame, that a Biſhop hath Superiority in Degree above a Presbyter.] And the Accuſer putteth theſe words that are againſt himſelf in Capital Letters, it ſeemeth, not knowing what he did, or what Ordo and Gradus ſignifie.

§ 87. Accuſ. LXX. He ſaith, I injuriouſly mention King Charles the First his Anſwer to the Nineteen Propoſitions, becauſe he there gave away his Right for Peace.]

Anſ. I mention only his own deſcription of the Conſtitution by King, Lords and Commons, and their ſeveral Powers: And would he perſuade p. 73Men that the King falſly deſcribed it, or that his Hiſtorical Deſcription was his Guilt.

And he falſly ſaith, that I am a Diſſenter from Biſhop Uſher's Judgment about the King's Tribute in Ireland. His Uuntruths come ſo thick, that I am weary of naming them.

As, pag. 88. 1. That I was for the Extirpation of Epiſcopacy, Root and Branch.

2. And yet, that the Archbiſhop's Model (which we deſired) preſerveth that Species of Dioceſan Biſhops, which Mr. B. would deſtroy. Would we deſtroy that which we deſired?

3. And [That under which Mr. B. maketh Chriſt's true Diſcipline unpraecticable.] Anſ. Palpably falſe: For, therefore we deſired it, becauſe it maketh that Diſcipline practicable by the help of Pariſh-Paſtors, which without them is impoſſible.

4. That no Government will pleaſe me, as long as the Liturgy is eſtabliſhed: When he ſhould have ſaid, that profeſſing Aſſent and Conſent to all in it will not pleaſe me, till I can do it without lying.

5. He ſaith, [Conformity is to me impoſſible, as long as any of thoſe which I account heinous Sins, are retained.] Anſ. Yes, if Lying be Conformity, to me one Lye is unlawful.

6. That I was always oppoſing the Party that was uppermoſt. Anſ. If that were true, it ſeemeth I ſought not for Preferment.

7. That I would have the new Liturgy, or nothing. Anſ. And yet we offered to uſe the Old, if amended, ſo we might not profeſs it leſs liable to Exception, than our Tranſlation of the Scripture it ſelf; and left it to the Biſhops to joyn ſo much of the Additional Forms as they ſaw good; but the Book was never debated by them.

§ 88. Accuſ. LXXI. [I have heard it credibly reported by ſome Reverend Perſons there preſent that that Treaty might have had the deſired effect of Concord had not Mr. B. ſo obſtinately reſiſted.] Anſ. That is, either thoſe Reverend Perſons would have amended their Impoſitions, if I had not Petitioned them to do it, and told them the neceſſity of it; or elſe that all the reſt of the Commiſſioned Nonconformiſts would have Conformed to all the old faults which they proteſted that they judged ſinful, and to all the worſe that ſhould after be added, if I had not been againſt it. Theſe Reverend Perſons were as Credible and Reverend as you are; as our preſent ſtate in England tells us.

Then he tells us what the Biſhop of Cheſter told Mr. Walton (Morley's Steward) what Biſhop Sanderſon ſaid againſt me,] which is half falſe: Biſhop Sanderſon taking the Chair. I being by a multitude of Arguments from the words of the Text, proving againſt Dr. Gunning that Paul in Rom. 14, and 15. requireth us to receive to Communion ſuch as differed in as great matters as thoſe do that ſcruple kneeling at the Sacrament (which I told them I ſcruple not.) I once told Dr. Gunning p. 74that he did petere principium in a caſe wherein Dr. Sanderſon ſaid that word was not in the common Logical ſence applicable to his words: And the old Learned peeviſh Man added that I was perverſe for ſaying it: And this was the heavy Charge.

And he addeth what Biſhop Morley ſaid of my eagerneſs to diſpute, when my Prethren were unwilling.] Anſ. Biſhop Morley's words of me were much what as credible as yours or Roger Le Strange's. Why then did they conſent if they were unwilling? And if neither Reaſoning nor Petitioning them might be uſed, what were we Commiſſioned for? The truth is, many of our Brethren, when the Biſhops told them they would ſay nothing to us, till we brought in writing to them all the faults that we found with the Liturgy, and alſo all the Forms in terminis, which we deſired as amendments or additions, did ſay, [It was not this, but an amicable conſulation that the King Commiſſioned us for; and ſeeing that this was a meer fraudulent pretence for our fruſtration, they motioned our departing, as being denied all that we were called to:] But I told them, that the Biſhops would report behind our Backs where we could not be heard, that we had nothing to ſay againſt their Impoſitions, nor any other terms to offer, (thinking we would never have agreed on any other.) Therefore I ſatisfied divers of them that though we were prejudged, it were better let the World ſee our Cauſe ſtated in Writing, than leave them to accuſe us ſo, when we ſhould never have leave to declare the truth, and deny their miſreports.

§ 89. Accuſ. LXXII. Page 91. He ſaith [His Petition for Peace then was like his Pleas now, meer Threatening and Reviling: Take heed (ſaith he) how you drive Men by penalties on that which they judge would tend to their Damnation: The denial of theſe Deſires would renew all our Troubles.

Anſ. And indeed is both Damnation and the renewing of our Troubles and Diviſions a matter of jest? or ſo indifferent, as that it is threatening and reviling humbly to petition Drs to take heed of them? They rejected this Reviling Petition: And hath England or Hell gained more by their rejection? Doth it not tend to Mens Damnation to Swear, Subſcribe, Profeſs or Practiſe all thoſe words and things as good and lawful, which they think ſinful, and the Impoſers only call Indifferent. Have not the Diviſions been theſe thirty years a trouble to this Land, which theſe Men might have prevented and coſt them nothing?

He addeth, [They tell the Biſhops of unmerciful Impoſitions.] Anſ. And is it Mercy to drive Men to Sin and Hell, or a crime to beg for ſo cheap Mercy for the Souls of Men, even of Biſhops? He that doubteth is condemned if he eat, ſaith Paul. England yet feeleth ſuch Mens Mercy. There is, I think, but one of their Commiſſioners now ſurviving (nor on our ſide but few,) even Dr. Tho. Pierce Dean of Saliſbury: And he moved for leave by Diſputation there to prove, that it is p. 75a work of mercy to all that think it unlawful to receive the Sacrament kneeling, to deny it them, and the Communion of the Church, (though the prohibition of all kneeling in Adoration on any Lords Day, was one of the Ancient Ceremonies of the Church, ſetled alſo at the great Council of Nice, and continued near a Thouſand years, ſaith Dr. Heylin.) But Morley had the wit to take him off that diſpute.

§ 90. Accuſ. LXXIII. Page 96. After other Harangues he alledgeth falſe Cauſes of my refuſing a Biſhoprick: I ſatisfied the Lord Chancellor Hide by a Letter, with truer Reaſons, too long here to repeat.

§ 91. Accuſ. LXXIV. He next accuſeth my Moral Prognoſtication. Anſ. Let it anſwer for it ſelf to the Impartial Reader.

§ 92. Accuſ. LXXV. He threateneth me for blaming the Laws.

Anſ. And do not many Biſhops now blame the Laws? If Laws be made engines of Schiſm and Perſecution, let them juſtifie them that can, and that love them. David ſaith, Shall the Throne of Iniquity have Fellowſhip with thee that frameth miſchief by a Law? How many German Divines blamed the Interim impoſed by the Emperor as for Peace?

§ 93. Accuſ. LXXVI. He next reciteth Biſhop Morley's Accuſations in his printed Letter. Anſ. Which I have proved to abound with falſhood, in a full Anſwer, which for want of printing hath lain by me theſe ſix and twenty years. Mr. Baldwin is yet living who was preſent when he forbad me to preach. And Dr. William Bates is yet living who joyned with me in the Savoy Diſputation which he miſreported.

§ 94. Accuſ. LXXVII. He accuſeth my Book called, The Cure of Church Diviſions, and yet ſaith, It is the only Book that Mr. B. hath written that hath any thing of moderation.

Anſ. Muſt the World have a confutation of ſo groſs a Liar, after the viſibility of above Sixſcore Books that are an evidence againſt him; and after the teſtimony that the Lord Chancellor Hide and Morley gave of me (producing one of theſe Books) before the King, Lords and Drs. at Worceſter-Houſe: If I underſtand them, above a hundred Books have been written by me, with a ſpecial deſign for Moderation, Unity and Concord.

§ 95. Accuſ. LXXVIII. Page 101. [He is not aſhamed to be a procurer of the Indulgence for Popery▪ 1. Becauſe I ſaid, [I would have Papiſts uſed like Men. 2. I would have no Man put to death for being a Prieſt. 3. I would have no writ de Excommunicato capiendo, or any Law to compel them to our Communion and Sacraments.]

Anſ. This Man is for Moderation: Do you think he or I is more for Popery, or hath written more againſt it? Would he not have them uſed like Men? nor ſuffered to live? And muſt they be caſt out of a Church that they were never in: It ſeems he would receive them all to his Sacramental Communion, if they will but chuſe his Church before the Goal.

p. 76§ 96. Accuſ. LXXIX. Page 102. Becauſe I hold that If a Biſhop or their Church Party would lay us in Goal, for our Duty to God, it is lawful to accept deliverance from a Papiſt that is in Authority.] He feigneth that, If they will not come to us, I would go to them.

And if a Proteſtant did Hang this Man himſelf, would he take it for Popery or Sin, to conſent that a Papiſt cut the Rope? You ſee what kind of crimes we Nonconformiſts are guilty of: A willingneſs to live out of Goals, againſt the Churchmens will? Nay it is yet more, our Crime is that we will not damn our ſelves, by Subſcribing or Swearing falſly, and breaking our Ordination Vow, by giving over our Miniſtry.

The proof that theſe Men are againſt Popery is, that they would have the Nonconformiſts die in Goals, and have no Papiſt ſeek to deliver them.

§ 97. Accuſ. LXXX. Accuſing my Book againſt Sacrilegious Deſertion of the Miniſtry, he asketh me, Why I Baptize not, nor Adminiſter the Lords Supper, and ſo ſeem to deſert Chriſtianity?

Anſ. Becauſe I was called to preach, and not to Baptize, and Adminiſter the Lords Supper; by the Neceſſities of the people where I lived: There were in Martins Pariſh about 60000 more than could come into the Church to hear: But they had Curates enough to Baptize, and they were compelled to the Lords Supper, or might have come, and neither Miniſter nor People deſired my help. And if theſe Men believe it not, I do, That we may and muſt preach to many that yet are not capable of Sacraments: And to many whoſe Paſtors and Judges herein we are not. Shall every Miniſter that preacheth occaſionally for him, preſume to Congregate his Flock, and give them the Sacrament? Or is he diſpleaſed that I gathered not a ſeparated Church?

§ 98. Accuſ. LXXXI. As to his Accuſation of the Book, I leave it to the Readers Judgment that will impartially peruſe it: But I am not yet convinced by him that it is a Crime to name the heinous ſins that have torn this poor Nation, and no Crime to commit them. Moſt of his Accuſations are that I tell them of their ſin, and perſwade them to repent.

§ 99. Accuſ. LXXXII. He accuſeth my Plea for Peace, and my Book called, The true and only way of the Churches Concord, as being utterly againſt Peace. Anſ. Read them and Judge.

§ 100. Accuſ. LXXXIII. He accuſeth my Hiſtory of turbulent Biſhops and Councils and their Anathematizing, as if it were falſe, and almoſt all was done by Presbyters, Anſ. Let him that hath read it, and the proof I cite, freely judge who is the falſifier.

As to his talk about Neſtorius, had he read David Derodon and what I have ſaid in my Reply to the Defender of Dr. Stillingfleet (Mr. Morrice) it might have acquainted him with more than he ſeemeth p. 77to know, about the Neſtorians, Eutychians and Monothelites.

As to his talk againſt the Arrians, I am as much againſt them as he, but not ſo much againſt Peace; Dr. Henry More a Learned Conformiſt, ſaith that thoſe after the Council of Nice, were to be numbered with the Catholicks, and not with the Antichriſtians. Though a Presbyter began their Sect, it was Biſhops and Perſecuting Emperors that upheld it. As to my words of many Writers miſtakes therein before the Council of Nice, he may find them with abundance more in Petavius de Trinitate.

As to his words of the Controverſies and Councils de tribus Capitulis, he that excuſes the ſaid Councils and Biſhops as faultleſs as to all the doleful Diviſions that followed, hath not a due love to peace and prudence.

The ſame I ſay of the Monothelites.

§ 101. Accuſ. LXXXIV. His great Accuſation, Page 126. is that [If I had any fear of God, or reverence of Man, I would not reproach the Government and defame their Laws, as if they were a strange Parliament that made ſo many Laws, that a Man fearing God cannot obey.]

Anſ. 1. And muſt we go on ſuch ſuppoſitions that our Law-makers muſt not be ſaid to make ſinful Laws? Where and in what Ages doth this Principle hold? Not in Jeroboam's days, nor in Ahab's, nor in any Age after Chriſt, till Constantine, and Athanaſius had exceptions then. Not in the days of Constantius or of Valens, no nor of Theodoſius the Second, Zeno, Baſiliſcus, Anastaſius, Philippicus, or of few Chriſtian Emperors. Nor now in Rome, Spain, France, Poland, Portugal, Germany, &c. The Lutherans under Calviniſts believe it not, nor the Calviniſts under Lutherans; nor the Prelatiſts under Presbyterians: Nor thoſe Engliſh Biſhops and Clergy that now here refuſe the Oath to King William impoſed by the Parliament.

If this Man think that we have not fully ſhamed that worſe than brutiſh conceit that we must not plead Conſcience against Mens Laws (though as good men as any Rulers we know) he ſhould have ſaid more to confute us, than that [we fear not God] becauſe we fear him more than man.

This eaſie Diſputant confuteth my many Volumes of Reaſons againſt obeying their Impoſitions of Oaths, Subſcriptions, Profeſſions and Practices, by telling men that [I may be aſhamed to call them Reaſons.] A ſhort and cheap Confutation: Cannot the French ſay as much for Dragooning the Proteſtants: And that [the Laws were made upon deliberation, and for our peace.] That is, for the peaceable ſucceſs of Silencers, and Perſecutors of Gods Faithful Servants: And were not the Six Articles in Henry the Eighth's days made on deliberation? And the French Edicts againſt the Proteſtants?

He referreth us to a Book of Church Unity written in Defence of p. 78Dr. Stillingfleet: And I refer him to my Anſwer to that Book, which was never anſwered, and confuteth much of this Mans charge.

As to his talk, [That Men of Blood may be no Biſhops.] I anſwer, 1. I never drew a drop of Blood. 2. I refuſed their Biſhoprick. 3. I preach'd for the defence of Kings and the Nation againſt Men of Blood, Iriſh, Papiſts and Delinquents. 4. Were not the Military Clergy Men of Blood who complain of the Parliament for ejecting them, for promoting the War againſt them? Was not Dr. Mew now Biſhop of Wincheſter, Dr. Crofts now Biſhop of Hereford, Dr. Compton now Biſhop of London, Men of War when they went as Chaplains or Officers in the Kings Army? and yet are Biſhops.

§ 102. Page 127. He nameth [The Act for Uniformity.] As if naming it were a Defence of it for Silencing 2000 Miniſters for not Lying and Sinning.

He nameth [Renouncing the Covenant.] And is that a Juſtification againſt Perjury, to them that own not the Impoſing or Taking it, nor obligation to keep any but the Moral Neceſſary parts?

He nameth the [Declaration that it is not lawful on any pretence whatſoever, (to take Arms againſt any Commiſſioned by the King.) And is that a Confutation of Bilſon, and other Biſhops; and doth he not make his own Church and Party now perjured, who have taken Arms againſt King James, or thoſe that were Commiſſioned by him; and have ſet up another King? If King James Commiſſion a French and Iriſh Army to Invade England, are all bound not to reſiſt them?

§ 103. Accuſ. LXXXV. He chargeth me with a Scandalum Magnatum, for ſaying, [The Parliament was drawn by the Clergy to make thoſe Acts.]

Anſ. And did any Man doubt of it, that then lived with his Reaſon awake? If it were not good, why did they do it, and why do you juſtifie it? If it were good, why is it a Scandalum magnatum to ſay you did it? Is your Merit and Praiſe a Scandal?

§ 104. Accuſ. LXXXVI. Becauſe I tell how Hypocrites tempted Chriſt about paying Tribute to Caeſar,] he feigneth that I make Chriſt [do what he never intended, or really approved, and complied with Hypocrites;] and ſaith, It is near to Blaſphemy.

Anſ. I find too little in this Accuſer that is near to Truth. How eaſily▪ by ſuch Fictions, may he turn much of the Goſpel into Blaſphemies?

§ 105. Accuſ. LXXXVII. He addeth, [And who can wonder, if he that ſpeaks thus of the Maſter, ſhould not ſtick to revile his Diſciples; making the Conformiſts ſo many deliberately perjured Perſons?]

Anſ. 1. Muſt we not refuſe Perjury, for fear of your ſuppoſition that we accuſe you? We profeſſed not to accuſe you, but to prove that it would be Perjury in us.

p. 792. But if you are guilty, is not that more to be feared by you, than our ſaying why we dare not imitate you?

§ 106. Accuſ. LXXXVIII. He addeth, [And which is—Mendacium magnum, that about Six Thouſand Perſons that had gone the other way, did declare their Aſſent and Conſent to a Book which they never ſaw.]

Anſ. Oh, what a mortal Wound do this ſort of Men give to the Credit of all Hiſtory of the proud, factious, worldly part of the Clergy! when this Man dare call this a Lye, in the ſame Land and Age in which, 1. It is known that there are near Ten Thouſand Pariſh-Churches, beſides Hundreds of Chapels and Curacies, and Chaplains. 2. The Land knoweth that theſe were in poſſeſſion, 1662. 3. The Land knoweth that the Generality of them that were in 1659. conformed to the Directory; or elſe the Prelatiſts belye the Uſurpers, that, they ſay, turned out all that did not. 4. The Land knoweth (or at leaſt it is here commonly known) that the new altered Liturgy came not out of the Preſs, till about Bartholomew▪ Even. 5. The Land knoweth that all were, by the Law, to be turned out, that declared not Aſſent and Conſent to all things contained in, and preſcribed by that Book, by Bartholomew▪ Day. 6. The World knoweth, that all over England, the Books could not be ſent down and ſeen in a Day. 7. The Conformiſts confeſs the Matter of fact, ſave to a few in London, that could go to the Preſs. 8. The Land knoweth, that it was but about Two Thouſand that conformed not: Muſt there not be then far more than Six Thouſand that declared Aſſent, &c. to the Book that they ſaw not?

Some of them now ſay, that in Univerſities, and the Chaplains and all ſet together, there are about Thirty Thouſand Ordained Miniſters in England: And what are Two Thouſand to ſuch a Clergy?

§ 107. Accuſ. LXXXIX. He noteth, that I ſay, that before I was turned out, I could keep no Man-Servant, nor any but one old Woman, in a hired Room; and yet, in St. Martin's, I could build a Tabernacle for Worſhip. From whence he gathereth, 1. That I hoped to gain the Centurion's Reputation among the Factious. 2. That I had got well by Nonconformity, that could lay out ſo much.]

Anſ. Is there any thing pious or charitable, that theſe Men cannot turn into odious Crimes, by malignant Calumny? 1. Was it Faction to offer to teach freely in a Pariſh, where were Fifty Thouſand that could not come within the Church? 2. Did he know my Heart, that I did it for Reputation? And may he not ſay the like by any Man that doth good? 3. Did I gain by Nonconformity, that from the Day that I was ſilenced, had never taken a Groat for Preaching, nor ever had a Church to maintain me, and had commonly refuſed even Friends Gratuities (ſave 10l from one Man, that I could not refuſe) for many Years after this, and ſave from few to this day? Who by refuſing a p. 80Biſhoprick, and other Emoluments, have loſt, I think, above Twenty Thouſand Pounds by Nonconformity? What Anſwer do theſe Men deſerve? **So Dr. Aſhton proſeſſed, as before God, that it is … Covetouſneſs that we conform not.And I preached but one Sermon in that Chapel, When I had built it to have preached freely. And when they perſecuted me away, I reſigned it to the Pariſh-Miniſter, for their publick Worſhip, which is uſed there to this Day, (near Sixteen Years.)

But muſt I tell this Man, how I got the Money that did it? How much others gave towards it, and how much I borrowed, or elſe be ſo guilty as this Spirit maketh me. If it were a Crime to be rich, Fame reporteth him extraordinarily guilty: But if it be Building Chapels that is the Crime, I never heard of his Guilt.

§ 108. Accuſ. XC. He ſaith, I am guilty of Pride, Malice and Uncharitableneſs, for telling Men that the Wheel is turning, and bidding them remember which ſide will be down at laſt; whether I mean of a Change by Providence, or of the Day of Judgment.]

Anſ. Alas, poor Men! How ſoon will you know, that ſuch Counſel once ſignified better than Pride, Malice and Uncharitableneſs, (unleſs all Preaching be ſuch)

§ 109. Accuſ. XCI. He accuſeth me for ſaying, in Mr. Corbet's Funeral-Sermon, How ſad a Prognoſtick the Death of ſuch Men was.

Anſ. Had this Man known the great Wiſdom, ſincere Piety, eminent Charity and Peaceableneſs of that excellent Man, as well as I did, or as Gloceſter, Chicheſter and London did, and his Writings teſtifie, he would not have turned my Lamentation into a Reproach, nor ſeemed to intimate his contrary Diſpoſition.

§ 110. Accuſ. XCII. Becauſe ſome other Men ſay, that the Time of the Epiſcopal Perſecution will be but ſhort,] he gathers, that [we are engaged in ſome Plot againſt the Government.]

Anſ. Who he meaneth, I know not; but if the time of Life, and this World be ſhort, certainly Perſecution will be ſhort. Every one that ſaith, Your Life is ſhort, is not in a Plot to murder you. All, ſave one Man, that were commiſſioned as againſt us in 1661. have found already by Death, that their time of Revenge and Wrath was ſhort.

His talk of Dr. Owen, and his ſurmizing that ſome would have had a Toleration for Popery, is like the reſt; when our main fears have been leſt this ſort of Men were ſtudying, from the time of Laud, a Coalition with the French Papiſts, and ſo many of them have written for a Foreign Juriſdiction: But if we would not be ruined, ſilenced, and dye in Goals by them, they will ſay we are for Popery.

§ 111. Accuſ. XCIII. He accuſeth me as moſt unchriſtian, in my Anſwer to Mr. Cheyny, for what I ſay of his Books, and accounting him melancholy.

p. 81Mr. Cheyny is a Man better known to me, than to him; and I think, much better loved by me. He calls himſelf a Nonconforming Conformiſt, and a Conforming Nonconformiſt. I have motioned him to Friends, for publick Employment, for his ſerious Piety: But theſe Men that ſeem now to be for him, have depreſſed him, and driven him up and down, and diſown his Books, I think, more than I do: But any one that will allow them to uſe his Name for them, ſhall be ſo far praiſed, while they cannot well endure him.

But he glorieth of Mr. Cheyny's Succeſs in pleading the Direction, in ſome dubious Caſes to go to the Biſhop for Reſolution, (in the Preface to the Liturgy.) And I wonder not at their valuing of that Clauſe, for it is worth to many ſome Hundreds a Year; and 'tis hard to imagine what elſe could quiet many Men's Conſciences. But if I ſhould ſay, This is a frivolous …alliate, though I prove it, he will ſay I am criminal, or confuted, by ſo denominating it. But, 1. The Words limit the Deciſion of the Biſhop only to that which is not contrary to any thing in the Book; and I am very tractable in ſuch a Caſe: But it is none of the Caſes that I am concerned in. 2. If it were in the Biſhop's power to put what Senſe he pleaſe on all the Words, he were the Law maker; for the Senſe is the Law. 3. I have gone to divers Biſhops, and asked their Senſe, and found it as unſatisfactory as the Book it ſelf. For inſtance, I asked the Biſhops at the Savoy-Debate, [If I have two in my Pariſh that declare they believe not in Chriſt, but are Deiſts; and yet will ſend their Child to be baptized, with Godfathers and Godmothers of their own Fraternity, who declare that, whatever they ſay, they never mean to own or educate the Child,] what Right that Child hath both to Baptiſm, and certain Salvation? And Dr. Sanderſon (in the Chair) anſwered That as long as he brought ſuch Godfathers as the Church of England requireth, I muſt not doubt of his Right. I long after asked Biſhop Cunning, What proof he had from God's Word, of the certain, undoubted Salvation of all ſuch baptized Infants, if the Parents were Heathens or Jews, or Atheiſts, and reſolved to educate their own Children? And he anſwered, that As any one had Right to take up an expoſed Child in the Street, and take him in Charity into his Houſe, ſo any one had power, as an Act of Charity, to take up any Heathen's or Infidel's Child, and being him to Baptiſm; and then it was certain (by the Word of God) that he was in a preſent State of Salvation. Theſe Biſhops Judgments are not that undoubted Word of God which they boaſt of, but will not ſhew us. And other Biſhops think otherwiſe. And ſo under ſeveral Biſhops, we muſt be of ſeveral Religions.

§ 112. Accuſ. XCIV. He accuſeth me for ſpeaking of the Tediouſneſs of Mr. R. Hooker's Argumentation, (when their Biſhop Sam. Parler ſpeaketh much more) and the Caſe is undeniable.) And that I ſay, [If Hooker, Bilſon and Uſher were alive, they would be Nonconformiſes.]

p. 82Anſ. Have I not fully proved it? They were honeſt Men, and would not ſubſcribe and practiſe contrary to their own Writings; but their Writings are downright againſt much of Conformity. How large is Hooker for the Popular Legiſlative Power; and that the King uſeth not Power, but Uſurpation, when he uſeth more than the Law giveth him? How large is biſhop Bilſon for Reſiſting the King in divers Caſes? Doth not Conformity renounce and forſwear this? Mark the renowned Bilſon in this: Honeſt Men would not go againſt their Judgments.

§ 113. Accuſ. XCV. Pag. 134, 135. He maketh it my ſhameful heinous Sin, to beg of the Biſhops not to be guilty of one of the moſt heinous Sins in the World, even the Silencing faithful Miniſters cauſleſly, and famiſhing many Thouſand Souls, and laying them in Goals that have Charity to relieve them. Saith he, [Doth not the Reader bluſh for Mr. B. to read ſuch arrogant Cenſures of a dying Man, concerning his Betters?]

Anſ. Were I not a dying Man, the World might more powerfully have tempted me to be like you; and to call Evil Good, and Good Evil; and to regard as little the Intereſt of Souls, and of ſerious Godlineſs. And are my Betters better than he that bid us pray the Lord of the Harveſt to ſend forth more Labourers; and that ſaid of ſuch as offend one of his Little Ones, it had been better for them that a Millſtone had been hanged about their Necks, and they caſt into the Sea? Were they better than he that told James and John, that they knew not what manner of Spirit they were of, when they ſhewed their natural Inclination to that Prelacy which is now your Glory? 1. By deſiring to be greateſt, and to ſit at his Right Hand and Left. 2. By ſilencing a Man that uſed Chriſt's Name againſt Devils, becauſe he followed not with them. 3. By deſiring a fiery Puniſhment upon thoſe that received not Chriſt and them.

Are my Betters better than Peter and the Apoſtles, that were for obeying God before Men? Or than Paul, that charged Timothy ſo dreadfully, as before God and Chriſt, to preach the Word, and be inſtant, in Seaſon, and out of Seaſon? &c. Are my Betters ſo good at Alchimy, that they can transform the moſt heinous Crimes into ſacred Vertues, and the greateſt Duties into odious Sins?

Reader; Oh, Who governeth that part of the World, where the greater the Sin is, the more heinous is his Crime that blameth it? And where Repentance, and Perſuading Men to repent, goeth for the moſt intolerable Evil? Were it not that fleſhly and worldly Intereſt were againſt it, I ſhould fear that at laſt Murderers, Thieves, Traytors, Adulterers, Perjured, and all ſuch, ſhould accuſe all thoſe that either accuſe them, or diſſent from them; and demand againſt them the ſame Puniſhment for calling them faulty, that their own Crimes deſerve? But though thoſe that have died in Goals for Preaching (nothing p. 83but the Goſpel) are out of the reach of theſe that would kill them again, if they did but ſay, You killed us; yet One that is better than theſe perſecuting Betters, will ſay, In as much as you did it to one of theſe, you did it to me. And to accuſe us as the Prieſts and Sadduces did the Apoſtles, [You would bring this Man's Blood in us,] will not transferr the Guilt or Puniſhment, from the Blood-guilty, to the Reprover.

§ 114. Accuſ. XCVI. Becauſe I ſay that ancient Chriſtians diſobeyed lawful Magiſtrates, in Preaching and Worſhip, he ſaith, [As if Chriſtian Magiſtrates were to be reputed as Heathen Perſecuters.]

Anſ. I. And indeed, Were (not only Conſtantius and Valens, but alſo) Theodoſius II. Arcadius, Zeno, Baſiliſcus, Anaſtaſius, and many ſuch, Heathen Perſecutors? And did not the Biſhops of Alexandria, Antioch, Jeruſalem, Rome, Conſtantinople, and many hundred other Biſhops, diſobey them, and many by Arms reſiſt them? And is it not as bad to reſiſt Chriſtian Emperors, as Heathens? I think it was not well done.

What Hiſtorical Proof can convince this ſort of Men?

2. But ſee what their Obedience amounteth to. Who is to be Judge whether their Rulers be ſo bad, as that the Biſhops and People may diſobey them? Muſt the Rulers themſelves be Judges, or every Subject for himſelf? They dare not anſwer it without Fraud and Confuſion.

But he ſaith, [If one read the Preamble to the late Acts, you may ſee that the Cauſe of making them, was not only the late dreadful Experience that the Nation had of the Confuſions cauſed by the preaching of ſuch Men, but their preſent Endeavours to reduce us to the like again]

Anſ. 1. He doth not tell you how fully I have anſwered this, in the Apology which he accuſeth. And every Boy and Woman cannot diſprove him.

2. Who is to be Judge who the Preachers were that cauſed our Confuſions? The old Parliament ſaid, it was ſuch as Laud, Sibth…rp, Mainwaring, and thoſe that drew the King from his Parliament. If I knew this Man to be wiſer or greater than the Parliament, I might prefer his Judgment, and prefer the Hundreds caſt out for Scandal, before thoſe that are impriſoned for preaching.

3. Why would they never grant our frequent Petitions, to ſilence only thoſe that never medled with War, or had no Accuſation againſt them for any ſuch Confuſions, and ſpare not thoſe that had been guilty? Were all the Thouſands guilty of the Wars, that were Children or School-boys?

4. Why were not the Eight Thouſand that after conformed, guilty of thoſe Confuſions as much as the reſt? Yea, many of them had been in Arms againſt the King's Army.

5. Was Declaring Aſſent and Conſent to all things contained and preſcribed in your Books a Means to prevent Wars or Confuſions, when ſuch p. 84Impoſitions cauſed them? Is ſilencing, ruining, and keeping in Goals all that own not ſo much of your Infallibility, the Means to avoid Confuſions?

6. What were the preſent Endeavours to reduce you to the like? Was it the Presbyterians bringing home the King, who they doubted not would ſet up the revengeful Clergy? Why were they not accuſed for falſe or ſeditious Doctrine, if they were guilty, or forbidden only to preach ſuch, but forbidden to preach at all, and accuſed meerly for preaching?

His long Invective, to pag. 148. is partly a falſe Report of my Words, and partly a Juſtification of all their Perſecutions, and an Outcry againſt a Perſuaſive to Repentance. Let the Reader but peruſe the Books accuſed, and I deſire him but to judge as he ſeeth cauſe.

§ 115. Accuſ. XCVII. If the Reader will himſelf read my Treatiſe of Epiſcopacy, which he accuſeth, I will make no other Defence of it than what it maketh for it ſelf. But his Words convince me not, that Reproving Perſecutors is worſe than Perſecuting.

§ 116. Accuſ XCVIII. He maketh it my Pride to print Mr. Glanvile's Letter to me, though I diſowned harſhly his exceſſive Praiſe,) while Dr. Stillingfleet had called me to it, by printing Foreigners Letters againſt us. And I muſt be yet more proud, for telling Biſhop Morley and Gunning, that I offered them a Way if Chriſtian Concord, more ſure and harmleſs than that which they had tried, becauſe it was more divine, being only to unite in what Chriſt hath inſtituted.]

Anſ. 1. It is no pride to ſay, that Chriſt is greater and wiſer than thoſe Biſhops; and that to unite in his own inſtituted Terms of Union, isſurer than the Terms of their Canons, or Act of Uniformity. Is it pride in all the Proteſtants, that to the Papiſts prefer Scripture-ſufficiency to their Canons.

§ 117. Accuſ. XCIX. He falſly alledgeth the reaſon of my unſatisfiedneſs with Dr. Stillingfleet's Conceſſions. One of the chief was, that he would have Parents diſabled to chuſe Schools and Tutors for their own Children. But whether ſuch Men as this were not far more againſt Dr. Stillingfleet's Conceſſions than I was, let my old Friend, Mr. Samuel Thomas, now of Chard, his Invective againſt Dr. Whitby and Dr. Stillingfleet, be Judge; and Dr. Stillingfleet himſelf, who ſeemed once to yield to Terms of Concord, which many of us offered to him and others. And judge of the peaceableneſs of that Tribe of Clergy-men, by the Univerſity of Oxford's burning Dr. Whitby, a Conformiſt's excellent Book, called The Reconciler, and his being forced to ſeem to retract it.

§ 118. Accuſ. C. His Intimations, pag. 156. of my deſiring to be a Pariſh Biſhop, and alſo motioned with Dr. Owen to be an Archbiſhop, are meerly impudent: When I never was either Pariſh-Biſhop, or ſought it at leaſt, ſince caſt out of the Miniſtry, 1662. nor ſo much as the p. 85Paſtor of any Church, and have refuſed a Dioceſan Biſhoprick many Years before any one now in England was a Biſhop. How can a Man be n nocent before ſuch impudent Accuſers and Judges?

§ 119. Accuſ. CI. As to his Accuſation of my Self-Contradictions, and L'Eſtrange's Proof, I think no diſtinguiſhing Reader will need a Confutation of ſo falſe a Charge, which confuſed Heads do feign, that underſtand not things that differ.

And for his Charge againſt my Third Plea for Peace, about the Principles of Government, I only refer the Reader to the Book.

§ 120. I have not thought his mere general Clamours worthy of a particular Anſwer, leſt I tire the Reader, as I have tired my ſelf with ſo unſavoury an Employment. But I will here tell the Reader, how I that theſe eight Years have never thought this Accuſer worthy of an Anſwer, have been brought to change my Judgment and to be at this unpleaſing Labour, when other Thoughts are more ſuitable to my Condition.

I. A Letter from ſome ancient Conformiſt, that calls himſelf Cantianus De Minimis, (of my Age, Seventy five,) ſo earneſtly calleth me to Repentance and Retractation before I dye, referring me to this Book for the notice of my Sins, that I thought not meet to reſiſt his Importunity.

II. I read ſo much of the horrid Reports of many Papiſts, of the Crimes and Deaths of Luther, Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, Calvin, Bucer, Phagius, Beza, and many ſuch, and how confidently they are commonly believed in the Roman Church, and how greatly it hardeneth many againſt the Reformation, that I was loth to contribute to their Deceit.

And I find that the ſame Sect accuſeth the Generality of Diſſenters, that do but affirm that there is AND THING in their Books of Liturgy or Articles, or in their Ceremonies or Ordination, or in their Government by Archbiſhops, Biſhops, Deans, Archdeacons, AND THE REST that bear Office therein, unlawful or repugnant to the Word of God,) who are my Accuſers, and cry, as Morley, Ex uno diſce omnes; and when they have render'd me as one of the worſt on Earth, they make the reſt as bad; when I take them to be (for the moſt) the beſt Miniſtry that I ever knew. And no wonder that their Writers and Preachers thus report them, when their Canons ipſo facto excommunicate them (unheard,) not excepting Lords, Knights, Miniſters, or any. And Lying is now grown ſo common a Sin in England, (confeſſed by all,) that few know what Reports to believe, or to reject: So that to betray my own Cauſe to theſe Accuſers and Canoneers, is to betray the Innocency of many Thouſands.

III. I have long thought it my duty to call this ſinful, divided, ſelftearing, bleeding Nation to Repentance, in a Treatiſe called, REPENT O ENGLAND, (Bradford's dying Words,) though Experience telleth me, that ſuch Men as this will take the Motion for a greater Crime, than all the Sins that I call them to repent of; ſo odious a thing is Repentance p. 86and Confeſſion to the Proud and Impenitent. And before I call others to Repentance, (ſeveral ſorts,) I take it for my firſt Duty to exerciſe my own: To which end, I unfeignedly reſolved to confeſs what I could by any means find to be my Sin; and being referred to this Accuſer for my Conviction, I found the Falſhoods and Calumnies ſo many, and ſo groſs, that I took it for my Duty not to ſeem by Silence to give Credit to them; but having confeſſed what Sins I found, to do my part to ſave others from the Temptations to Hatred, and Lying, and Perſecution, which ſuch Men lay before them.

IV. And having laboured moſt of Forty two Years, by Writing to profit Poſterity, as well as the preſent Age; and written above a hundred and twenty Books to that End, and God having proſpered them far beyond my expectation, (in Germany, and other Foreign Lands, as well as in Britain,) I thought it Treachery to ſuffer the Devil and his Agents to blaſt them all, (with thoſe that know me not,) without any Contradiction and Confutation of the Slanderers. Sure if they were worth ſo many Years Labour, 'tis worth a little to take them out of the Fire or Water where Diaboliſm caſteth them: Which I am the more moved to, becauſe while I have the Thanks of Thouſands that have read them, common Fame, and Mr. Cantianus, that called me to this Work▪ and others, do tell me, that the Generality now known by the Name of Tories (or malignant Haters of ſerious Piety) in England, eſpecially among the Univerſities and Clergy, do ſo much hate my Name, that they will read no Book which they ſee my Name prefixed to, (unleſs as the Adverſary againſt whom it is written.) And as I have ſmall hope of curing that malignant Prejudice, (which is more the hurt of the Envious than of me,) ſo I muſt not by Sloth or Silence contribute to its Increſe, and Men's Guilt.

§ 121. I will conclude with theſe three farther Notices to all Readers, for the true underſtanding of all theſe Controverſies with the Men who ſo implacably hate and accuſe me.

I. That they groſly cheat their ſequacious Believers with this great Lye, that I am againſt Biſhops; whereas I am for a Divine Right of three ſorts of Biſhops, (two by direct Inſtitution, and the other by Conſequence,) viz. I. General Biſhops, (call them Archbiſhops, or Dioceſans, or Apoſtolicks, or Evangeliſts,) that in every Nation are over many Churches.

II. Epiſcopi Gregis, or Ruling Paſtors of ſingle Churches, which are all true Presbyters.

III. Epiſcopi Praeſides, or Pro-eſtotes, which are the Preſidents of the Presbyters in particular Churches. And that I am of the Judgment of Grotius, De Imperio ſummarum poteſtatum circa ſacra, and highly value Biſhop Overall's Convocation-Book in the main, but abhor all Foreign Juriſdiction, yet deſiring the moſt extenſive Foreign Communion.

§ 122. II. That they groſly cheat their Believers, in telling them that I am againſt Forms and Liturgies, when they know that we offered to uſe p. 87theirs, upon the Amendment of ſome Faults, and ſevere cruel Impoſitions; and by their Demand were put to draw up Additional Forms, which we did in the very Words of Scripture: And though ſome called it The Reformed Liturgy, becauſe it ſeemeth an entire Frame, yet it is falſely ſaid, that we would have that or none;] for we only offered it to the Biſhop's Examination, which they would never do: And even this Accuſer hath nothing that I find againſt it, but that I confeſs it was haſtily drawn up in eight Days, and therefore muſt needs be imperfect, and deſerve a Review. And ſo it is our Crime, that we take not their three Books to be all ſuch Effects of Infallibility, as to have no one Fault contrary to God's Word; and yet to confeſs our own (though in the Words of Scripture) to be the Work of defectible, imperfect Men, and therefore needing a perfecting Review. Humility, and not Subſcribing to an Arrogant Claim of their Indefectibility, is our great Crime.

§ 123. III. They yet more dangerouſly deceive their Believers, perſuading them, That we appropriate Godlineſs and ſerious Religion to our Extemporate Praying, and to the Oppoſition to Biſhops, Liturgy, and Conformity; and that we falſely diſhonour their Church, by repreſenting their Candidates and Clergy to be more unable Preachers, or more ungodly Livers, than the Nonconforming Miniſters and Candidates; and their Pariſh-Flocks to be more unqualified for Church-Communion, and a more irregular Church, than ſuch as we have deſired in our Motions for Reforming-Concord: Whereas (ſay they) we have the beſt Clergy and Church in all the World.

To which I ſay, 1. That we have largely enough, in Folio, oft told the World what it is we account and call Godlineſs, even the making and keeping the Baptiſmal Covenant; Believing, willing and living according to the Creed, Lord's Prayer, and Law of Chriſt. We offered them a Liturgy; we owned all that was good in theirs: We know that Prayers from a Book, as from a Habit, are accepted, if they come from a penitent, believing and obedient Soul; and that the Prayers of ungodly Hypocrites are unacceptable to God, whether with a Book, or without.

2. And we love and honour Conformable Miniſters and People that are Chriſtians indeed, and ſhew it by ſerious practice of Chriſtianity: And we are very thankful to God, that England hath had ſo many ſuch, that were conformable long ago; and we doubt not, hath many ſuch yet, even under the new (and much worſe) Conformity. We know not that Nation that hath more excellent Men than many of the Biſhops were in Queen Elizabeth's Time, and than many Divines ſince have been; ſuch as Robert Bolton, Dr. Preſion, Dr. Sibs, Mr. Scudder, Mr. Wheatley, Mr. Dyke, Dr. Taylor, Mr. Downham, Dr. Stoughton, Dr. Gouge, Mr. Gataker, Dr Willet, Dr. Whitaker, Dr. Field, Archbiſhop Uſher, Biſhop Downam, Biſhop Beadle, &c. Oh, how many of ſuch excellent Men hath this Land been bleſſed with! (And the pious Nonconformiſts were of the ſame Spirit, though not in all things of the ſame Opinions.

I have lately told you in a ſmall Book, called CAN and ABEL, what are the things that make the difference, which hath my chief Regard. But ſuch Conformiſts as I have named have, ſince Laud's …ays, with many gone under the name of Conformable Puritans, and by this Accuſer are reproached by the Name of [Paſſive Conformiſts,] becauſe they had rather the Ceremonies and needleſs Subſcriptions were forborn, than able, faithful Preachers ſilenced.

The Prejudice that he ſaith I had from my Youth againſt the Biſhops and Clergy, was only againſt Ungodlineſs and Malignity. Is it like that I was againſt the pious Conformiſts, when I was tutored by them, heard them, and was of their Judgment?

But can we not, even among Conformiſts, diſtinguiſh the Malicious, Ungodly, Worldly, from holy Men of Love and Peace?

§ 124. If Poſterity and Strangers muſt be deluded by ſuch falſe Hiſtorians as this, that tell them the ſerious Godly Miniſters and People were Schiſmaticks and Rogues, and the Haters of ſerious Religion were the moſt Religious, who can help it? They talk ſo now to thoſe that live among both Parties. And the debauched, ſenſual Youth, and the covetous and ambitious Worldlings, ſeem (partly) to believe them: But ſo do not the ſober Sort, that daily ſee the Confutation of their Malice.

§ 125. For my own part, I will conclude, That if I had not known that ſort of ſerious Godly Men, whom the preſent Malignants now render odious by their Calumnies, I fear I ſhould not have ſincerely believed in Jeſus Chriſt, and that his Goſpel is true.

For the reſt, both Miniſters and Laity, whom I ever knew, ſhewed no ſerious …elief of that Chriſtian Faith which they profeſſed. Here and there there was a civil Perſon by Temper and Education; but commonly, not a ſerious Word could I hear from their Mouths about God, or our Redeemer, and the Spirit's ſanctifying Works; or of Death and Judgment, and the Life to come, (ſave in the Pulpit;) nor did they love to hear any ſuch from others, but their Talk and whole Converſation was about the World, or common worldly Things, and (as Mr. Bolton largely deſcribeth them) any Godly ſerious Diſcourſe did but diſguſt them, and marr their Mirth, and make them revile the Speakers as Puritaus, Hypocrites, or ſome ſuch Names. Few did I know of them that excelled Cicero, Sencca; or equalled Ant…nine, Epictetus, Plutarch. And if Chriſt made Chriſtians no better than the Philoſophers, how could I think better of him, than of them? Or truſt that Phyſician that cureth none? I thank God that I have found more of the Effects of his Saving Grace than the ordinary ſort, and Members of the deſcribed Church-Party, which theſe Men extol, did ever ſhew me.

Note, The Words in the Epiſtle, and pag. 84. about School. Maſters, are thſe, and no otherwiſe to be underſtood; [That no indulged Perſons, p. 89under ſevere Penalties, to breed up Scholars, or to teach Gentlemen's Sons Univerſity-Learning; becauſe this may be juſtly looked on as a Deſign to propagate Schiſm to Poſterity, and to lay a Foundation for the Diſturbance of future Generations.] Dr. Stillingfleet's Unreaſonableneſs of Separation, Preface, pag. 88.

How many excellent Preachers hath God raiſed by this Way, which he would have hinder'd by ſevere Penalties? And how many Souls converted and confirmed by them?