A Third Defense of Peace, Part 3

A Third Defense of Peace · Part 3

p. 77There is a Law againſt Lying, To which we muſt Conform: OR Truth pleaded for Peace, Againſt The many Falſhoods of an un-named Impleader; who pretendeth to Anſwer ſeveral Writings of the Author Richard Baxter.

CHAP. I. PREFATORY. Our Accuſer's Advantages.

§ 1. I Know when I wrote for Chriſtianity, the Souls Immortality, againſt Popery, Perjury, Lying, Covenanting againſt Reformation; and when I wrote againſt Antinomianiſm, Anabaptiſm, Schiſm, that all that I had ſo written was eaſily anſwered by Male or Female, at Age or under Age, Learned or Unleaned: For Nature and Parents teach Mankinde to talk betimes, and we have many Schools to teach them to read and write: p. 78And I hear by my Neighbours when they fall out about Intereſt or Words, that without a School or Univerſity, they can attain to copious fluent pungent Oratory, to deſcribe each other as all that is nought; and prove all ſo undeniably by vehement aſſeveration or Oath, that he ſhall paſs for Criminal that will not take their words for demonſtration. And what an advantage and improvement would it be to this natural promptitude and fluencie, if one were but hired or engaged to the work by an Hundred or a Thouſand pound a year; yea, and alſo by the ſtream and intereſt of the Army or Sect, in which he is liſted by Heart and Hand, and by ſuch neceſſitating intereſt of Reputation (contrived by the Liſters) as that accuſing others ſhall ſeem a neceſſary diverſion of the Charge from himſelf and of his Conſcience from diſquieting him, like her that is called A continual dropping? But yet if Academical Education ſhould train men up to the degree of Maſters or Doctors of the talking and contending Trade, what an elevation of the faculty would it be? And yet all this is little to the pondus of an inbred enmity to the thing firſt, and conſequently to the perſons, whom they are to make and prove intolerable. And there i… one that, unſeen, can prompt and furniſh them with materials of all ſorts; yea, and help their Subtlety, Vehemency, and moſt fearleſs Aſſeve rations. I have heard of a Cambridge Doctor … the Chair, that was called, The certain infallible Doctor, that was ſo far from ſeeming to know what Doubting was, that he took him for intolerable that was not of his opinion. And it's like p. 79Bonner and Gardiner were ſuch, and that it is much of the Roman-Catholick Infallibility: for ſure they durſt not wrack, burn, and maſſacre, and ruine all ſorts, for that which they did not think themſelves certain of; yea, and certainly neceſſary to the noble ends of Unity, Government, and Peace.

§ 2. To talk it out to the laſt with theſe infallible Talkers, is a task for one that hath as many Tongues as all they, and is as ready a Linguiſt, and that is like to overlive them, and that hath no better work to do, and that thinketh that they will read or hear him without the ferment of tumifying impatient Pride: Or elſe that it is neceſſary to ſave the endangered people from ſeduction, to overtalk the ſeducers in length and number of words, and that Souls are ſtill unſafe and looſe to the truth, as long as there are any to talk againſt it. I confeſs, that if you will hive the Swarm aright, it is uſually neceſſary that with a lowder noiſe you drown the Voice of the Miſleader. But I have no ſuch ſounding Voice: I am not for the Celeuſma, Cannons and Guns, with the ſhouts of the multitude; and that on the higher ground can eaſily ſilence me, or drown my Voice. Reaſon ſpeaketh not ſo lowd as theſe.

§ 3. I was lately where it was made a queſtion, Whether Mr. Kettleby and ſuch other Bookſellers, be not Enemies to their own Trade, by Printing ſuch Books as the Impleaders, Mr. Hinkley's, Mr. Cheyney's, &c. The Affirmer ſaid, It would make Books as contemptible as Ballads, and no body would regard and buy them. As when p. 80News-books were weighty and credible, moſt bought them; but when beggarly Forgers took up the Trade, you may hear the Hawkers cry a Book, a Book, a Book; News, great News, and no body regard them: This therefore will break the Book-ſellers at laſt. The Opponent anſwered, [Set but the Suppoſition right, and you will ſee how you confute your ſelf. You ſuppoſe moſt men to be wiſe, than which nothing is more falſe. If you hear not Chriſt and Paul, hear Seneca's ſaying, [A wiſe man muſt be content of few approvers.] It is the gainfulleſt way that the Book-ſellers could have taken: What Books ſell better than Play-books, Ballads, and Romances, and Books of Tales, and Complement, and Jeaſts? What Book-ſellers break faſter than thoſe that confine their Trade to rare Pieces of Antiquity, Learning, Reaſon, and ſerious Piety? Do not men pay dearer for a place in a Play-houſe, than in the Church? And I have oft heard ſome gentile Sons of the Church of England ſay, that they can profit more by a Play than by a Sermon. You think that ſuch Books will make the Book-ſellers-ſhops, like the Toy-ſhops: And what if they do? Will there not be Children and indulgent Parents while the world laſteth? What Shops have more trading, or ſeldomer break, than Toy-ſhops, that ſell Babies, and Puppets, and Hobby-horſes, and Pipes? &c. and thoſe that ſell Perriwigs, Pide-ſilks and Ribbons? You think that the Book-ſellers Shops will grow like Ale-houſes and Taverns which ſober men will rarely viſit. And what p. 81if they do? Let thoſe ſober men paſs by; Do ſuch Houſes want cuſtome? The Throat will be the Throat ſtill, and Mirth will be Mirth; and the lighteſt Heads ſhall be the greateſt number.] And this prevailed.

§ 4. I muſt ſeriouſly profeſs, that I finde in our preſent Controverſie, that my Opponents and Accuſers have a great advantage of me, and ſuch as I ſee no great probability to overcome. I mean in the quality as well as the number of their Hearers and Readers. 1. Can I expect that men of great Wealth, and Power, and Honour, and who would ſtill fain be greater, ſhould be as willing to believe that thoſe are in the way of Truth and Righteouſneſs who are by Law judged what we are judged, and adjudged to ſuch Reproach and Puniſhment; and that go under the Cenſures, Suſpitions, and Contempt, as we have here long done, and are hunted and laid in Jayls with Rogues? 2. Can I expect that men that never were ſtudious or bookiſh, eſpecially in matters of Divinity and Holineſs, but have been bred up in fulneſs and pleaſure, in courtſhip and converſe with ſuch as themſelves, who will take him for a Fanatick that doth but talk much and ſeriouſly of Heaven, or Scripture, or things Divine, that ſcarce ever heard what a Nonconformiſt hath to ſay for himſelf, nor ever ſeriouſly examined the cauſe, or read a Book which openeth their caſe in all their lives. I ſay, can I expect that ſuch ſhould be able or willing to underſtand us? I mean, not as if All were ſuch; but it hath been my hard hap to meet with few perſons, even of Gentile p. 82Education, who ask me, Why do you not Conform? that do not preſently ſhew me in Conference, that they are quite out of their Element when they meddle with ſuch matters, and talk of things which they never ſtudied or underſtood; and indeed do not think it belongeth to them, but to the Church: And that is, to thoſe Church-men that the King and the Patron pleaſe to chuſe; which maketh the Papiſts ſay the Laity of the Church of England cry down our believing as the Church believeth, when they do the ſame by their own Church-men. The Queſtion is but whether it be our Church-men or theirs that are to be believed? And when Kings were on out ſide, it was our Church-men that were to be believed: and when they are on their ſide, it is theirs. And Mr. Hutchinſon, alias Berry, ſpake harſhly when he ſaid in Print, that there was ſo little of conſcionable Religion in the people of the Church of England, that if one were but toucht with the Conſcience of Religion, he turned Puritan o… Papiſt. I ſhewed him the injury of his Speech; but I would he had much leſs occaſion for it. Dr. Stillingfleet told me, that there was ſcarce an… of his Hearers or Readers, how mean ſoever ther… capacities were, but could diſcern the weakneſs of no Evaſions. I dwell near the Verge of his Pariſh. I have talkt with ſome of his Auditors, and enquired of many others; and I think verily he is more in the right than I at firſt believed: For I finde that abundance of his Auditors hear him ſome once, ſome twice, ſome thrice a year, and ſome of them know not whether Chriſt be God or man, or both; or whether he had a humane p. 83Soul, or what a man differs from a Beaſt; nor what is the true ſence of many (if any) Articles of the Creed. And I am perſwaded theſe whom he calleth of the meaneſt capacity, are the likelieſt men to diſcern the weakneſs of My Arguments, I have talked alſo with divers of his Readers, and I found that they underſtood this much, that Dr. Stillingfleet wrote his Sermon againſt the Nonconformiſts; and that he is a Dean, and may be greater; and is a man that can talk with any of us. It may be ſome that I have not met with know more, as being of a higher Form; and ſome few I have met with that indeed know more, and thoſe lament the Doctor's undertaking; and when they have read my Anſwer or Account, confeſs that they cannot juſtifie his Charge. Could I but tell how to get moſt of the Church of England to know what Religion is, and to be ſeriouſly of any Religion, and to underſtand Baptiſm, and the Lords Supper, the Creed, Lords Prayer, and Ten Commandments; how boldly ſhould I expect their Chriſtian ſenſe and candour in our Cauſe? But till then, I confeſs that the Accuſers have the advantage of us, and their Books unread will do more than ours.

§ 5. And it is a great advantage which they have got by the Oxford-Act of baniſhing above five Miles from Cities and Corporations all that ſwear not as is there required. For though the King's Wiſdome and Clemency have let down he Floud-gates, and ſomewhat ſtopt the impetus of the Clergy-ſtream, yet it was many years before Nonconformiſts durſt be openly ſeen in Cities p. 84or Corporations, much leſs at Court, or among great Men; and modeſty and prudence yet obligeth them to abſtain from the preſence of their Superiours, where the Law forbids it; ſo that the Ears of Country-Nobles, and moſt of our Rulers, hear but what our Accuſers ſay, and have no knowledge of our Cauſe, but as deſcribed by them, whoſe deſcriptions are many of them no more credible than if they ſaid that we are Turks.

§ 6. And their Art hath got us to ſuch a ſtraight, that whether we ſpeak or are ſilent, we are guilty; and whatever we do except ſwearing, ſaying, and doing as they require, it ſhall turn to our Accuſation. For inſtance, Do ſome think that Dr. Stillingfleet is in the right, that pronouneeth Damnation without Repentance againſt them that prefer not the pureſt Church, and thereupon come not to the Pariſh-Aſſemblies? Againſt ſuch they cry out [Separatiſts, Schiſmaticks, preparing for Rebellion; away with them, execute the Laws.] But if others do as I do, who daily joyn with the Pariſh-Church in all their Worſhip, and Communicate in their Sacrament, and oppoſe Separation;] Some ſay [Such are like Ap… that are the uglieſt Creatures, though likeſt unto men while they are not men.] And others ſay, [We know not what to make of Mr. B. he is neither Flo… nor Fiſh: He is like one that will go one ſtep on one ſide the Hedge, and another on the other ſide, to avoid Uniformity.] And the men are not altogether miſtaken: I profeſs that I once made it the moſt earneſt action of my life to have prevented the building of a ſeparating Wall, or a dividing p. 85Thorny-hedge in the midſt of this part of the Vineyard of Chriſt, to ſeparate one part of the faithful Miniſters and people from the reſt: And that I earneſtly deſire to ſee that Wall or Hedge pull'd down, that Chriſt's Flock among us may be one: And I will do the beſt I can whilſt I live to get it down, that there may be no ſuch ſeparation. And ſeeing this is a work above my power, I will go ſometime on both ſides the Hedge, though by ſo doing I be ſcratcht, and a Thorn in the Fleſh by a buffetting Meſſenger of Satan reprehend me. But reverend Doctors hear my Reaſons: It is not to avoid Uniformity, but Separation. I am a Catholick, and not a Sectary: I am for Communion with the Univerſal Church: If you will hedge in one corner, and the Anabaptiſts another, and the Separatiſts another; and ſo other Sects that muſt have their peculiars, and turn Chriſt's houſe into your ſeveral Chambers, and his Commonfield into your little Incloſures; and then ſay, Keep onelyonly in our Room, and go into no other; Keep onelyonly in our Encloſure, and go not on the other ſide of the Hedge: I ſhall tell you, that I abhor your ſeparation. I have buſineſs on both ſides: I believe the holy Catholick Church and the Communion of Saints, and not onelyonly your Encloſure, and the Communion of your Conformiſts: I have ſome buſineſs on your ſide the Hedge, the Law and your own expectation will tell you part of it: I ſee ſome of my Fathers Family with you. I have buſineſ, on the other ſide the Hedge: There are as good as you; and ſuch as I am neerly related to, and commanded p. 86to love as my ſelf, and to receive as Chriſt received us; and not to doubtful diſputations, (to prove or approve all your Juriſdictions, Aſſumptions, Oaths, Covenants, Subſcriptions, Reordinations, Formalities and Ceremonies.) Your thorn-hedge hath encloſed but one corner of Chriſts Vineyard, and I have buſineſs in the reſt: It hath ſeparated Parents from Children, Husbands from Wives, as to Church-communion, Maſters and Servants, Brethren from Brethren, Neighbours from Neighbours: If they that made the hedge can juſtifie it, let them do it, it will be tryed before a jealous God ere long! if thoſe of you that in learned Books and Sermons exhort us (with ſomewhat hiſſing Rhetorick) to ſeparate from thoſe on the other ſide the hedge, can prove that themſelves are all Chriſts Church, and that God would have us ſeparate from all ſave them, and give over Preaching and all publick Worſhip of God, till we can conſcionably conform to all their Impoſitions: I ſay, if all theſe ſilencing Preachers can make good their accuſation of the Brethren, and their concluſions, let them that undertake it ſpeed as they perform it: but for my part, I will not ſeparate from Father, Mother, Brother, Friend, and all good Chriſtians ſave a domineering Sect, becauſe that Sect will elſe call me Separatiſt. I was wont to draw the Map of the Church Univerſal as one Body or Field, or Vineyard of Chriſt, hedged in indeed round about from Infidels, and diſtributed into thouſands of particular Churches, as Streets and Families in one City: But if any will ſay, Hold Communion p. 87with one Street or Family, and ſeparate from the reſt, and then ſay that you are a Schiſmatick for not being for that odious Schiſm; I will hear ſuch, as I do the people that talk through the windows on the weſt ſide of Moor-fields, when they ſay that all are mad or Schiſmatical, that are not in their Cubs and Chains. Mr. Cheney was never there I think, and yet it was (per album an atrum neſcio) revealed to him that I am downright for an Independant Covenant, which hath twenty Arguments extant to batter it, and prove it guilty of irreligiouſneſs, or ſomewhat worſe: And they ſay (for I am not acquainted much with their practice) that the Independent bind their flock to hold Communion with none but their own Sect, nor to depart without leave from their particular Churches. I am apt to believe that they are ſlandered (for whoever falls ſick, I will firſt fear the moſt epidemical or common diſeaſe:) but if it be no ſlander, I profeſs that I will never be of a particular Church, which claims to be the univerſal, and will forbid me Communion with all ſave them. And if in this the Prelatiſts agree with the Independents, I am againſt the ſeparating, Sectarian, Schiſmatical preſumption of them both. I take the Kitching and Cole-houſe to be parts of the houſe, and I have ſometimes buſineſs in them both. But I am moſt in my Study and Chamber, and I will take both Chamber and Colehouſe for Schiſmticks, if ever I hear either of them ſay, I am all the houſe, or [it is lawful to be in no other room.] Lord pull up the ſeparating Schiſmatical Thorn-hedge, which hath curſedly divided thy family and flock.

p. 88CHAP. II. The Impleaders Truth examined.

§ 1. CHriſt ſaith, that the Devil is the Father of Lies; and doubtleſs he hath ſubtilty to excuſe them and improve them: and it is a great advantage to them, that they are ſo diſowned by humane nature, that it is taken for an injury to humanity, to charge any man to be a Lyar; and a Ruffian will ſay it deſerveth a challenge or a ſtab. You will think it a paradox, that natural diſlike ſhould be turned to the advantage of a ſin. But it is but natural light convincing the underſtanding, not changing or fortifying the will againſt it. And therefore it is but pride of reputation and impenitency, that is indeed the fortreſs of the ſin.

§ 2. Accordingly it hath many times been my hard hap, to have ſuch Books written againſt me, (and that by men whoſe Reputation is not undervalued by themſelves or their followers) as were to be anſwered chiefly by a Mentiris from end to end, if it would not ſeem by cuſtom to be uncivil. And to tire the Reader by turning a Mintiris into a civil long Parentheſis, and this as frequently as groſs falſhoods are openly ſaid or intimated, is tedious, even when neceſſary. With one I was put to uſe my Arithmetick, and to anſwer him by numbring the untruths aſſerted: p. 89But I have forborn it with others far more guilty, leſt their reverence and power ſhould make truth intolerable, whoſe paſſion or intereſt, or errour, had made groſs Lies ſeem true and neceſſary.

§ 3. This Impleader hath been taught too much by the ſame. Maſter; and had he not ſpent part of his Book on Doctrinals, where his Errata are but mendae, but been all Hiſtorical where there are too many Mendacia, I might have been put to the way of anſwering before-mentioned: But be they Mendae or Mendacia, they need aniendment, and the Reader may need an antidote againſt them.

§ 4. Some beginning we have on the Titlepage, [pretending to ſhew the Reaſons of the ſinfulneſs of Conformity.] Mend. 1. I pretend in my Plea to ſhew but the matter of Nonconformity, and Hiſtorical Narrative of our judgment and matters of fact, paſſing by the Reaſons or Arguments that muſt prove the things unlawful; though Reaſon may be gathered by the Reader, from the matter or Hiſtory itſelf.

§ 5. The ſame is repeated p. 1. [He pretends to give Reaſons for the ſinfulneſs of Conformity, M. 2.] And he overpaſſeth the chief part of my Book, in which I ſtate the caſe of Government and Separation, on pretence that it is [a dark and dirty way in which I have loſt my ſelf. M. 3. And a little will ſatisfie him, that regards ſuch an eaſie, dark and dirty anſwer.

§ 6. He gueſſeth that kneeling at the Sacrament [for that was then diſcourſt of] was one and the chief of thoſe many heinous ſins of Conformity: p. 90Mend. 4. It ſeems the man was preſent. Reader, look to thy belief when thou art among ſuch men. 1. There was not a word ſpoken then againſt the lawfulneſs of Kneeling at the Sacrament. 2. I openly declared that I held it lawful, and none of my Brethren contradicted. 3. The thing which we proved unlawful then was, [Caſting thoſe faithful Chriſtians out of the Church-Communion in that Sacrament, who dare not take it kneeling, for the reaſons which cauſe them to think it ſinful.]

§ 7. Impl. [He will not urge the caſe, but barely mention matters of fact … much leſs do we here give the reaſons of our Cauſe.] He dare not be ſo bold yet as to venture to diſpleaſe us. But this Hypocriſie is ſo thin, that the weakeſt eye may look through it.] Mend. 5.

Anſw. 1. The Printer put [urge] inſtead of [argue] which he was told in the Errata. And he maketh the errour his own, by feigning the words to be mine. 2. If I have diſputed the Caſe by Reaſons, Why did he not cite them, and tell where? 3. He alloweth the Reader to take him for a Calumniator, who will judge the heart which he knoweth not, and bring no proof of the hypocriſie, which he ſaith the weakeſt eye may ſee.—Indeed the weakeſt is liker than the ſtrongeſt to ſee as he doth. 4. I will ſhew him three Reaſons, why it is not like to be Hypocriſie. 1. Becauſe there are ſevere Laws againſt all that ſhall deprave the Common-Prayer Book, or accuſe Conformity of being ſinful, which is Excommunication ipſo facto, &c. And alſo Printing ſuch a charge, p. 91might have coſt both Printer and Writer dear: And the Book was written divers years (as many can witneſs) before the Act that reſtrained the Preſs expired. And is it not credible that every man loveth himſelf, and is unwilling to be ruined? I knew how eaſily you are diſpleaſed, and I felt a little what you can do when you are diſpleaſed, and others felt more. And is it hypocriſie then to ſay, I feared to diſpleaſe you? And verily, I was afraid by it of occaſioning your wrath and contentious Writings againſt many others, and making the breach wider, which I deſired to heal.

2. When it's viſible in the Book that I avoid Argumentation, doth not that prove that I ſaid true?

3. The third Proof, if God will, is yet to come: when you ſee my Arguments added to the Hiſtory, you will confeſs that it was not Hypocriſie to tell you, that I uſed them not before.

§ 8. Impl. [For whereas the Right Reverend and Learned Biſhop of Eli had told Mr. B. as he confeſſeth—That he would petition Authority, that they might be compelled to give their Reaſons, he there ſaith, [To anſwer the earneſt demand of our Reaſons by you, the Lord Biſhop of Eli, I have publiſhed an Hiſtorical Narrative of our Caſe and Judgment.]

Anſw. Had he not mentioned weak Eyes, you might wonder that he ſaw not how he here confuteth his own falſhood: when in the words cited I profeſs to give but the Hiſtorical Narrative of our Caſe and Judgment, and not the Arguments or Reaſons for it: But he thinketh, [If the Hiſtory be given in anſwer to him that demanded the p. 92Reaſons, then the Hiſtory containeth thoſe Reaſons;] Negatur Sequela: The matter of Fact muſt go firſt. The Biſhop demanded of me an account of our Non-conformity. This is the beginning of an Anſwer. The Reaſons may come next.

§ 9. Impl. [And if he may be believed, they are not only Mr. Baxter's Reaſons, (m. 6.) but of many others (m. 7.) for p. 3. it is ſaid [We that publiſh this here, give an account of our own judgment, how far we hold it lawful or unlawful to gather or ſeparate from Churches, or to differ from what is eſtabliſhed by Authority.

Anſw. The man knoweth not the difference between giving an account of our judgment in Theſi, and in Hypotheſi. If I tell you in what caſes I hold it lawful or unlawful to ſeparate from Churches, or how far humane Power may go (as I have done in the ſecond Plea) is that to tell what I take for ſin in our Conformity, and the Reaſons of it? What if I ſhew how far Lying is unlawful? Doth that ſay that Conformity is Lying, &c.

§ 10. Impl. [Where is that allowance from Authority, which he pretends to have ſo long waited for, and begg'd on his knees (m. 8.) And where is that care not to diſpleaſe or provoke the Conformiſts, by ſhewing the many heinous ſins in their Conformity (m. 9.) When without leave of God (m. 10.) or man, he not only endeavours to diſpleaſe (m. 11.) but to ruine us. (m. 12.) If any thing may be, this is worſe than his hypocriſie, it is mere diſtraction and rage (m. 13.) When our common Adverſaries the Papiſts, &c.

Anſw. 1. It was leave that I deſired, but I p. 93never ſaid, I begg'd it on my knees: but that I would gladly do it, could that prevail.

2. I never ſhewed the heinous ſins of the Conformiſts, but over and over profeſſed that I accuſed not them, nor meddled with their caſe; but only ſaid, How heinous a ſin it would be to us to Conform, till we knew more reaſon for it than we do!

3. That it is without leave of God, that we give a reaſon of our not conforming, I take for falſe, while our Superiours ſo long and earneſtly commanded it, and it is ſo neceſſary to abate the dividing odium raiſed againſt us, Rom. 12. 18. If it be poſſible, as much as in you lyeth, live peaceably with all men.] And if we are taken for intollerable Malefactors, is not undeceiving our Accuſers and Haters a neceſſary means of Peace?

4. It's falſe that an endeavour to undeceive the offended, is an endeavour to diſpleaſe them.

5. And it is more palpably falſe, that [I endeavour their ruine.]

6. How falſe is it then, that [this is diſtraction and rage?] And what more neceſſary to unite us againſt the common Adverſaries? What Phyſicians hath this poor Nation, that know no way to unite us, but laying us in Jails with Rogues, till we can believe all to be lawful which they impoſe?

Reader, Pitty the caſe of this poor Land! What hands are we fallen into? What falſe Doctrine is charged on us? What is the Crime that we have committed? We are forbidden to Preach Chriſt's Goſpel, though we were ſolemnly devoted to it by Ordination, under the p. 94Penalties of great Mulcts, and Impriſonments, and ruine, till we will do that which after our beſt enquiry we verily judge would be our heinous ſin. We forbear many years to tell them ſo much as what it is which we dare not to do; till at laſt, the Biſhops themſelves tell us, They will petition Authority to conſtrein us to it: And Parliament-men long askt us, What is that you ſtick at? And when after about ſeventeen or eighteen years Silence, I do but tell them what it is, the Clergy-men are ſo diſpleaſed, that they tell me, that It is diſtraction, and rage, and an endeavour to ruine them. When I never moved to put one Prieſt of them out of his Benefice, nor Biſhop, Dean, Archdeacon, Canon, Prebend, out of a Farthing of his maintenance, nor one Biſhop from their Lordſhips, or Parliament-Power; much leſs did I ever motion the ſilencing of any one of them, or making them pay Fourty Pound a Sermon, or laying them in …ayl, as we are uſed; and yet they cry out, that we endeavour to ruine them. The Lord pity his poor Flock! What a caſe are we in, when our Paſtors ſeem to think, that they are ruined, if we be but ſuffered to Preach Chriſt's Goſpel, and to live out of a Jayl: and think that if we offer to refel the Slanders that render us odious to them, and do but ſpeak for our Miniſtry and Liberties, as every Malefactor is allowed by the Judges to ſpeak for himſelf, we ſeek the ruine of our Clergy-Accuſers? Do not Heathens abhor ſuch Injuſtice as this?

My Purſe is leſs to me than my Miniſtry; and all that any man can take from me, will be p. 95much leſs than Fourty Pound a Sermon: And yet if any men on the High-way, or in my Houſe, ſhould not only take away all that I had, but afterward prefer a Bill againſt me, as ſeeking their ruine, becauſe by Reaſon I intreated them to forbear, and that in vain, it would be one of the oddeſt Caſes that hath come into Weſtminſter-Hall. I was once neighbour to a valiant Knight, who yet was ſo gentle, that when the Hookers in a Moonſhine-night were hooking his Cloaths and Goods through the window, and he lay in Bed and ſaw them, he lay ſtill, and mildly told them, Gentlemen, This is not well done, Theſe things are not yours; If you are taken, you may be hanged for it. And by that time his Sermon to them was done, they had got what they came for, and were gone. But I never heard that they entred a Suit againſt him, for ſeeking to ruine their Trade by his reprehenſion. But if any of you have ſuch a trade, as will not endure the Plea of innocent Sufferers for Peace or Mercy, without your ruine, I would ſome one that you have more regard for, would perſwade you quickly to lay by that trade, leſt when Chriſt is Judge, and ſaith, Inaſmuch as you did it to one of the leaſt of theſe, you did it to me, your Clergy will not ſave you from his Sentence; were it but the devouring of Widows houſes, it is not the longeſt Liturgy that will excuſe you by a Legit; nor will you eſcape with Burning in the Hand, unleſs Repentance now prevent it. The evil Servant that ſtuffs his guts, and beats his Fellows, preſuming on his Lords delay, you know is threatned with a ſharper penalty.

p. 96§ 11. Impl. p. 4. No perſon of any Note, that I have heard of, in all that Party who were in places of Truſt and Publick Employment, did on the late Teſt refuſe to communicate with the Church of England.

Anſw. 1. How far doth your hearing reach? 2. How many of that Party have you known in ſuch places of Truſt? I ſuppoſe you know, when the Teſt in the Corporation-Act was impoſed, that Party were then turned out of all Corporation-power? In ſome places not two of the old ſtaid in: And is it any wonder then, if none of that Party be in ſuch Power? 3. And is Communicating in the Lords Supper all the Conformity that is ſcrupled? And what's all this to our Controverſie?

§ 12. Impl. [When all our United ſtrength is too little to withſtand the attempts of our common Adverſaries; it is a wonder to me, with what Confidence and what Deſigne he ſhould not only proclaim Conformity on the Miniſters part to be impoſſible, but endeavour alſo with all his might to withdraw the Laity from our Communion.] m. 14.

Anſw. 1. Is it a Truth, that one that holdeth Communion with your Church, and ſpeaketh and writeth for it, and diſſwadeth none from it, doth endeavour with all his might to withdraw the Laity from it? Can you not forbear this ill cuſtome a few Lines together?

2. Ex ore tuo: See, Reader, the man confeſſes the need of our United ſtrength. Hold him to that word: And I repeat, If he and the reſt of that Tribe do believe, that it was morally poſſible that the two Thouſand Silenc'd Miniſters, and p. 97all that came after them, ſhould believe all the things which I named in my Plea for Peace, and all the reſt which many ſcruple, are lawful for them to do; I wonder not at any Confuſion, Calamity or Corruption that ſhall befal a Church that is conducted by ſuch men! Who would have thought that there had been ſuch men among Chriſtians, and Paſtors of a Reformed Church? But I do not believe that there are many ſuch, that think it morally poſſible that we ſhould all believe all Conformity lawful; they would never elſe have truſted ſo much to Mulcts and Jails, as to think their Church undone without thoſe Helps. They are not ſuch ſtrangers to Sence and Conſcience: It is the wearing out of the preſent Generation of Non-Conformiſts, and alluring or affrighting Youth from following them, which the men of any Brains have truſted to.

Judge by theſe Evidences of this mans Wit and wondering. 1. By the great number of the things which we judge ſinful: They might diſpute men into their Opinion in ſome few differences, that cannot in ſo many. 2. The Sins feared are ſo heynous, as that Conſcience will not quickly univerſally ſwallow them. 3. The number of the Diſſenters: To diſpute a few men out of their Judgments in difficult caſes proveth hard, much more many hundreds or thouſands. 4. Conſider the quality of the ſilenced Miniſters: Could they think that ſuch men as Anthony Burges, Sam. Hilderſham, Mr. Hughes, Dr. Manton, Dr. Seaman, &c. did not conſider what they did, neither in their Health, nor before their Death? p. 98Did they never read or hear what might be ſaid for the New-Conformity? Had they not Learning or Wit enough to underſtand it? Or had they no Conſcience living or dying? So many hundreds that after their beſt enquiries, and hearing all, remain Non-Conformiſts, are unlike to be all brought to Conform. 5. Judge by old experience: Were old Hilderſham, Ames, Dod, and hundreds like them, brought to Conformity heretofore? Mr. Sprint, Dr. Burges and ſome others were, but more were not. Did not even the Weſtminſter-Aſſembly of old Conformiſts forſake it aſſoon as they could? 6. Judge by the change of the Caſe, and the Writings even of the old Conformiſts: Such things are put into the New-Conformity, as Bilſon, Hooker, Uſher, and other old Conformiſts have written againſt. And would they alſo repent and change their minds, if they were alive? I again profeſs, that I am bound in Charity and Reaſon fully to conclude, that had Uſher, Bilſon, Hooker, Jewel, Preſton, Sibbes, Whately, Bolton, and all ſuch, yea Dr. Jo. Burges, Sprint, and ſuch others of their minde that writ for the old Conformity bin alive, they would all have bin Nonconformiſts to our new Impoſitions. 7. Judge by the means that are uſed to convince us: Is there any thing ſaid that hath ſuch cogent Evidence as to convert ſo many hundred men to your Opinions? Did ſuch men as Dr. Twiſſe, Mr. Herle, Mr. Gataker, Mr. Vines, &c. want the Inſtruction of our preſent Lords, to make them wiſe enough to Conform? When I know none of the Conformiſts writings that have ſo much as named ſome p. 99of the things that we think worſt of. 8. Judge by preſent Experience: Why is it not done, if it be morally poſſible? Have you not had near twenty years Trial, by your Reaſonings, Preachings, Writings, Reproaches, Allurements, Threatnings, Canons, Fines, Jails, Informers, crying out for execution of the Laws, &c. and is it yet done? Have there not ſince more (of the Laity) turned from you, than have turned to you? Will not Experience convince you? 9. Judge by the great diverſity of mens conditions and capacities, which I have elſewhere opened. Will ever men of ſuch different Capacities, Educations, &c. agree in ſuch and ſo many things? 10. Judge by the requiſites to ſuch a Concord. It muſt be by bringing all the Miniſtry to a higher degree of Knowledge, or Conſcience and Honeſty than all the Nonconformiſts. For it can be nothing that you think keeps us from Conforming, but Ignorance or Badneſs. (Dr. Aſheton undertaketh, as going to the bar of God, to prove that it is Pride and Covetouſneſs) And how can you hope to make us all ſo much Wiſer and Better than we are? Do you believe that the ſeven Thouſand that had Conformed to the Directory, and ſtaid in by Conforming to your Law, 1662. were ſo much Wiſer and Better than the two thouſand that were caſt out? Or that the greater part of your Countrey-Prieſts now (if the lamenting people wrong them not) do Conform, becauſe they know more, or are Better men than we? If it be ſo, he is unworthy to be a Paſtor, that knoweth not how hard a matter it is to make all the Miniſters of a Nation ſo much p. 100wiſer and better. He is blinde that ſeeth not that it is Fines, Jails and Death, that our Proſecutors truſt to. And will true Conſcience be convinced by ſuch Arguments? Would you your ſelves change your minds in Religion, if you were but Fined and Impriſoned? If ſo, you are men of no true Religion: If not, why expect you it from us?

§ 13. But what am I doing? Will it not more tire than profit the Reader, if I ſhould number abundance more of his Untruths? I will ſtep to his concluding Farewel to me, and then ſee how he juſtifieth the trade, by pleading for Equivocation, Pag. 128. [You gave ſeveral intimations that the King was Popiſhly affected, as Biſhop Bramhal affirms,] Mend. 15.

Anſw. Why did not the man tell where and when? I have Printed the contrary in the time of higheſt Uſurpation, that the King was no Papiſt. Is he not a Calumniator, unleſs he prove it? But he ſaith [Biſhop Bramhal affirms it.] Anſw. A man that never ſaw me: why did he not cite Biſhop Brambal's proof? But ſee what this ſort of men are come to! Do they think it enough to warrant their ſlanders of us, becauſe one of their Archbiſhops hath ſlandered us before them? What Credit then is to be given to ſuch mens Hiſtory or Reports? Is this it in which the Authority of Archbiſhops conſiſteth, that they muſt be followed in ſlanders? No: It is not their Obedience to Archbiſhops, but their Conformity to a calumniating Spirit: For Brambal's Predeceſſor, Arch-Biſhop Uſher (a man honoured by all good men that knew him, p. 101for Learning, Piety, and Honeſty) was of no ſuch Authority with them; but we are ſcorned for conforming to his Judgment. But you ſee that a Calumniator with you is no ſingular perſon. They are not aſhamed to tell the world, that their Archbiſhops lead them, and are as bad as they.

§ 14. Impl. p. 128. [You applauded the grand Regicide, as one that prudently, piouſly and faithfully, to his immortal Honour, did exerciſe the Government.] Mend. magn. 16.

Anſw. Reader, Do not wrong this man ſo much, as to think he is the Father of this. He taketh it up but in Conformity to his Fathers and Brethren that have oft printed it before him: and he muſt keep company and be Conformable. Alas! It is not one or two ſuch men as are the Guides of Souls in England: But what? Had he no pretence for it? Yes, more than for many of the reſt. He that undertook to be a Lying Spirit in the mouth of all Ahab's Prophets, never undertook to deceive them without any pretence. I have ſomewhat elſe to do than to write the Hiſtory of my actions in thoſe Times, as oft as any ſuch man will tell ſuch a Story as this.

In ſhort, I thought then that both ſides were faulty for beginning the War; but I thought the Bonum Publicum, or Salus Populi, made it my Duty to be for the Parliament, as Defenſive againſt Delinquents, and as they profeſt to be only for King, Law and Kingdom: When at the New Moddle they left out [for the King] and changed their Cauſe, I changed from them, and was p. 102ſent by two Aſſemblies of Divines to do my beſt though to my utmoſt labour and hazard, to diſſwade them. Cromwel having notice of it, would never let me once come near him or the Head-Quarters. I continued on all occaſions publickly and privately to declare my judgment againſt him as a rebellious Uſurper till he died. But being at London a year or two before he died, the Lord Broghil (ſince Earl of Orery) would needs bring me to him; where I dealt ſo plainly with him, in demanding by what Right, againſt the Will of almoſt all the Kingdom, he pull'd down our lawful Engliſh Monarchy that we were ſworn to, and the Parliament, as caſt him into ſuch Paſſion, as broke out in reviling many of the worthieſt Parliament-men, that he knew me to be familiar with. The laſt time the Earl of Orery ſaw me, he told me, he had told the King of that Conference, and that he ſhould love me the better while he lived, for my Faithfulneſs. He and Lambert and Thurloe were (ſilently) preſent. A Twelvemonth after, Sir Francis Netherſole would needs diſpute me into Repentance for being for the Parliaments Cauſe, by way of Writing: I told him, that the ſad effects were enough to make us all ſuſpicious; but I would give him thoſe Reaſons that had moved me, with a true deſire to know the full truth, that if I had erred, I might not remain through Ignorance without Repentance: He wrote to me, that in the mean time, ſeeing I was ſatisfied againſt Cromwels Uſurpation, I ſhould go to London to ſet it upon his Conſcience to perſwade him to reſtore our preſent King: I ſent him p. 103word, that as he took me for his Adverſary, ſo his Conſcience was not ſo eaſily perſwaded to give up ſuch a prey; and that this was not now to do; I had been lately with him, and I and others had tried ſuch perſwaſions, or the like, in vain. While I was preparing my Papers for Sir Francis Netherſole, cometh out Mr. Harrington's Oceana, contriving the Settlement of a Democracy, which they called a Commonwealth; and Sir H. Vane was about another Model: I wrote ſomewhat againſt them, and Mr. Harrington printed a Paper of Gibberiſh, ſcorning at my Ignorance in Politicks: Againſt him I wrote my Political Aphoriſms, called A Holy Commonwealth, in the beginning pleading for the Divine Univerſal Soveraignty, and next for Monarchy as under God; and next (ſeeing they were all on New Modelling) I told them, how Piety might be ſecured and promoted by Monarchy; and to get Sir Francis Netherſoles Anſwer for my fuller ſatisfaction, I added as to him, as I promiſed, the reaſons that had moved me to be for the Parliament. While I had purpoſed the later part firſt, Oliver died, and his Son Richard was ſet up while I was writing the Book: Before I had finiſh'd it, the Army had pull'd down firſt his Parliament, and next Richard himſelf; I never had known a Parliament more enclined to Piety and Peace. My deep diſpleaſure againſt the Madneſs of the Army, that had rebelliouſly pull'd down all Power, King, Parliaments, and at laſt him whom they ſet up themſelves, drew me firſt to write the ſad Meditations in the end, and then a ſharp Preface to the Army againſt p. 104their Rebellions: In which I aggravated their Crime in the laſt inſtance among the reſt, in putting down ſuddenly Richard their Protector, whom they had lately Courted and Set up: and I uſed theſe words, [It was written while the Lord Protector (prudently, piouſly, faithfully, to his immortal Honour, how ill ſoever you have uſed him) did exerciſe the Government,] &c. Now ſo congruous are theſe mens Principles and Practice, that they fear not to tell the world in Print, and that ſucceſſively from one another, that I [ſaid this of the grand Regicide] Oliver, whom I ſo openly and ſo deerly oppoſed: And a putarem, or a non putarem, will excuſe a Volume of ſuch tricks, if the cheat or falſchood be diſcovered. They might eaſily have ſeen by the whole ſcope of that Preface, that it was Richard, and not Oliver, that I ſpake of. It was not Oliver that they miſuſed and pulled down. And I praiſed him, to ſhew the evil of their Rebellious Proceedings. It was not Taking the Government, which he had no Right to, which I praiſed; but his ſhort Exerciſe: And I thought him praiſe-worthy on many accounts.

1. He never meddled in any War againſt the King, notwithſtanding all his Fathers Intereſt and Power, but was ſuſpected to be for the King. 2. We never heard that he ſought or expected the Government, but it was thruſt upon him. 3. When he was offered help preſently to apprehend them that ſuppreſt him; he refuſed it, and renounced the Government at a word, reſolving not to ſhed a drop of blood to keep that which was ſo thruſt upon him. p. 1054. He ſet himſelf by a Parliament of pious peaceable men, to have ſuppreſt Hereſie and Confuſion, and to have reſtored Order, and Equity, and Peace. 5. The Kings chief Friends about us told me, that Richard was for the King, and that ſome were Treating with him to Reſtore him: Though I confeſs, I hardly believed that his Self-denial was ſo great. I thought all this had ſo much laudable, as to aggravate the madneſs of that Army, who when they had deſtroved the King, and pulled down the Parliament, did alſo put down him whom they had Set up and Sworn Fidelity to themſelves. His want of Right did not juſtifie their Perfidiouſneſs. Thus the Conformiſt grounds his Accuſation.

§ 15. Impl. p. 128. He repeateth a Leaf of my own words to Mr. Bagshaw, againſt the Armies Rebellion againſt King and Parliament, and ſetting up the Protector, and the reſt of their Injuries; not ſeeing that he confuteth his own Calumny, while to prove that I am for thoſe actions, he proveth that I have condemned them as heinous ſin: See here how ſtrongly theſe men argue!

§ 16. Impl. p. 131. [His applauding the firſt Boutefeus, as glorious Saints in Heaven, his vindicating the Authority and War of the Parliament againſt the King, his pertinacious adhering to the Covenant, crying down the Royal Martyr as a Papiſt, after he had ſealed the ſincerity of his heart to the Reformed Religion with his Blood; and the crying up his Murtherer for a prudent, pious and faithful Governour: His Principles in his Holy p. 106Commonwealth, and his preſent practices in defending Schiſm, and ſo ſowing Sedition, &c. Cry aloud for Repentance and Retraction, &c.]

Anſw. Here are his Doctrinal Principles exemplified: He hath now got the art of linking and condenſing falſhoods ſo cloſe, that I muſt ceaſe numbring them, while one is made up o… ſo many.

1. The firſt Accuſation went before, p. 88, 89. where he mentions Brooke, Pym, Hampde…, and White, &c. ſaying, [What if they are gone to another place?—You were aſhamed to continue them in your (Book) being left out in your later Editions.

Anſw. 1. I left them out, becauſe the Book could not be Licenſed elſe: And ſhould I not rather leave out a few Names, than caſt away the whole Book? Had I done it in Repentance or to pleaſe ſuch as you, you tell me how it would have been taken.

2. I never ſpake with one of them; but I have heard ſo credible teſtimony of their converſation, eſpecially of Hampden and White, that I am far more confident that they are in Heaven than that ſuch as you will ever come thither. Impartial men of both ſides honoured them; I heard an antient grave Gentleman, that was no Phanatick, nor accounted a Puritan, but a ſober honeſt man, ſay, 1644. [If I might chooſe what perſon in all the world I would be, I would be John Hampden.]

3. It is not only Biſhop Jer. Tailor, but Politicians commonly that acknowledge, that It hath not pleaſed God to make Politick Caſes of the degrees p. 107and forms of Power ſo eaſie to us, as that all good Chriſtians can decide the Controverſies about them. It's commonly agreed, that God hath not forbidden Monarchy, Ariſtocracy, Democracy, or Mixt Government; nor made only one of theſe to be lawful. And it is paſt Controverſie then, that it is National Fundamental conſtituting Contracts, Laws or Cuſtoms, and not any expreſs Scripture, that muſt tell us de facto & jure, what is the Species of each Countreys Government. It is not in the Creed, Lords-Prayer, Decalogue, or Sacraments: Therefore the knowledge of it is not of abſolute Neceſſity to Salvation: I finde it not in the condition of the Covenant of Grace. Methinks they that ſay Heathens may be ſaved, ſhould grant it of Chriſtians that know not when a ſinful diviſion falls out between King and Parliament (and that with many difficult circumſtances) which it is that ſhould be then obeyed or defended. Chriſt was drawn by Hypocrites to pay Tribute to Caeſar, rather than offend; but he would not be drawn to juſtifie his Dominion over the Jews. Paul commands Obedience to the Higher Powers as of God, and as watching for our good: But he would not be drawn to declare, Whether it was Caeſar or the Senate which was the Higher Power, when they came to be divided in their Commands.

4. I have produced too large Teſtimony from Antiquity, how ordinarily the Biſhops of Eaſt and Weſt too quickly owned and praiſed the Uſurpers of the Empire, when once in poſſeſſion: Not only the Synods in Martius time that owned Maximus, but Ambroſe and Theopl. Alexand. p. 108to Eugenius, and Gregory the firſt, and many Weſtern Biſhops, and ordinarily far moſt of the Eaſtern Biſhops preſently owned Uſurpers, that came into the Empire by the Murder or Depoſition of their Predeceſſors. And are all theſe Fathers and Chriſtians damn'd?

5. The Liturgie requires that when ſuch are Buried, they are openly pronounced ſaved; that is, That God of his great Mercy hath taken to himſelf their Souls out of the miſeries of this Life, and that we hope to be with them: We muſt be Silenced and Impriſoned if we will not ſay this, and ſubſcribe to it, and reproached if we do: This is the Conformity which they would have us yield.

6. Do you not tremble your ſelf, when you queſtion whether they be not gone to a worſe place and revile us for the hopes of their Salvation? Doth not your Conſcience ask, If ſuch men be not ſaved, what will become of me, that deliberately write ſuch Volumes of Falſhoods againſt God's true Servants, and their preſent ſerving him, as if they muſt ceaſe Preaching and all Church-worſhip, till they dare Conform to all impoſed? O why will you condemn your ſelf in others!

7. I finde many of your ſelves honouring Biſhop Jewel, Biſhop Bilſon, and Mr. Hooker, and ſuch others that held the Principles which thoſe men went upon; and you never yet, that I heard of, reviled any man for hoping that they were ſaved: No nor Grotius, nor Barclay, nor the common ſort of Lawyers, and Politick-Writers, that have ſaid more of the Caſes in which Kings p. 109may be Reſiſted and Depoſed, than they did, or than I ever ſaid. If ſuch Principles may ſtand with the Salvation of Grotius, Hooker, Bilſon, Althuſius, Alſtedius, Willius, &c. Why not of theirs that I have mentioned?

8. You know, I ſuppoſe, that it was moſtly Epiſcopal men that began the War; Lords, Commons, and Souldiers on both ſides. (If you will not know, and can be ignorant when you liſt, your Will hath a freedom which mine hath not.) And are you ſure that your Conformiſts alſo are damned?

9. You hereby teach them that are confident that the Laudian Clergie were the chief Cauſers of the War, to conclude therefore that they are damned. And ſo our Clergy on both ſides will be like Gregory the Seventh's and the Emperour's in Germany, firſt exciting and encouraging the Princes and People of the two ſides, and then taking Oaths againſt each other, and laſtly damning one another; till a Reverend Council of Biſhops Decreed, that all the Biſhops on the Emperours ſide ſhould be Depoſed, and the Dead digg'd out of their Graves and burnt.

10. You will open the eyes of the people to ſee what manner of Spirit you are of, and that it is no wonder if you cannot endure us to Preach and Live by you; who take us for Criminal for hoping that men are ſaved, who otherwiſe were of moſt exemplary Lives; but being in point of Politiques on the Parliaments ſide, and doing accordingly, while they profeſſed to arm only againſt Subjects, holding the perſon of the King to be inviolable. I finde not that even in the p. 110Barons Wars, or the Wars between the Houſes of Lancaſter and York, no nor King Stephens, the Cenſures were ſo high. Anſelme Archbiſhop of Canterbury is Sainted, that was againſt his King.

§ 17. The ſecond Charge is, my Vindicating the Parliaments War againſt the King]

Anſw. 1. I believed then that it was not againſt him, when their Commiſſions were for him. 2. I propoſed my Reaſons upon a Learned Knights demand, requeſting ſatisfaction by an Anſwer: And had you or any of you ever ſince confuted them, it had been more charity than only to Recite them and Condemn them. But I have over and over publickly declared my revocation of that whole Book, (though not of all that's in it) and wiſht that I had never written it, for more Reaſons than I will now name to you. 3. My Judgment about the King's Power, and our Obedience, I have fully declared in The Second Plea for Peace.

§ 18. The third Accuſation is, [His pertinacious adhering to the Covenant.]

Anſw. 1. The man knoweth that I own not the impoſing it, ſpecially as a Teſt for the Nations Concord, it being an engine of Diviſion ſo impoſed. 2. That I own not the taking it ſo impoſed. 3. That I deny that it obligeth me to any thing that is evil, yea or from any Obedience to the King in things lawful, nor to any thing but what I have a former obligation to from God himſelf. 4. But I confeſs that I dare not ſay, that it obligeth no man to repent of his Sin, nor to be againſt Popery, Prophaneneſs or p. 111Schiſm, nor to endeavour any amendment of Church-Government. And I will not deny, but that I take Perjury to be no indifferent thing; which of theſe is the Crime of Adherence, he tells me not.

19. The next Accuſation is, [Crying down the Royal Martyr as a Papiſt.]

Anſw. I have ſaid, Till he tell me where, and how he proveth it, I muſt take him for a groſs Calumniator, and wonder not that he Conformeth. In my Key for Catholicks he may ſee where I prove the contrary, that the King was no Papiſt. I will confeſs that which he knoweth not: 1662, and 1663. when the Kings Letter in Spain to the Pope was Printed out of Mr. de Cheſne by Prynne, I was ſtruck a while with doubt and ſuſpicion; But I ſoon conſidered, 1. That the words promiſed but Endeavours for Unity. 2. And that it was written in the Spaniards power, in a ſtreight.

§ 20. The next is, [Crying up his Murderer.]

Anſw. A repeated malicious falſhood.

§ 21. The next Accuſation is, [His Principles in his Holy Commonwealth.]

Anſw. 1. I oft told you, The Book is revoked long ago. 2. The Principles which I own I have publiſhed as aforeſaid in the Third Plea: and he doth not confute them. 3. Of the Wars I ſpake before: What other doth he name? Biſhop Morley recited many of them; and the firſt as I remember was, that I ſay, [That pretence to unlimited Monarchy is unlawful, or Tyranny, becauſe God hath Limited all Humane Power.] If this be Hereſie or Diſloyalty, I hold it ſtill: I miſtake much, if p. 112any Kings have Power from God to command all their Subjects to blaſpheme or deny God or Chriſt, or to renounce his hope of Heaven, or to worſhip the Devil, and ſell his Soul to him, nor to murder Father, Mother, Wife or Children. I will venture to diſpute this with any Conformiſt. But as to the harder queſtion, Whether Kings may kill any or all their Senators or innocent Subjects for nothing, or burn all their Cities, or take all their Wives, Children and Eſtates, I will leave it to Stateſmen to debate. I am ſorry that ever I wrote ſo much about their matters.

§ 22. The next charge is, [His preſent practices in defending Schiſm.]

Anſw. Prove it, or number it with your Slanders. What is the Schiſm? Is it Schiſm to ſay, That it is unlawful like Atheiſts to ceaſe all Publick Worſhip of God, till Conſcience can finde it lawful to Conform? Others think that the contrary is both Schiſmatical and Atheiſtical. Can you prove that I am for Silencing faithful Miniſters, and making partition ſeparating hedges in the Vineyard of Chriſt? My Rule is, to go no further from any Chriſtian than he goeth from Chriſt, or would force me to ſin for his Communion.

§ 23. The next charge is, Sedition; that is, not giving over God's Worſhip, till I can ſwear, ſay and do all that is impoſed. Where is the proof of all theſe Accuſations? But their method of Juſtice is, firſt to do execution (caſting out 2000) and next to juſtifie it by an Accuſation behinde our backs, and next to bring p. 113their Witneſſes, when we are dead or forbidden to ſpeak; and they are one anothers Witneſſes. This mans proof is, that Biſhop Bramhall of Ireland ſaid it: The next mans may be, that This man ſaid it: Dr. Aſhetons proof was, that the Debate-maker ſaid it; and who ſaid it to him I know not.

And p. 100. This man hath an infallible witneſs, Biſhop Morley then of Worceſter. And what ſaith he? Why firſt, That I did what I could to make the King odious to his people. But where's his proof? It's enough; The Biſhop ſaid it. 2. I ſowed the ſeeds of Sedition at Kederminſter: The proof is the ſame; the Biſhop ſaid it. 3. The Biſhop taught him to adde, [I my ſelf have heard him, in a Conference in the Savoy, maintain ſuch a Poſition, as was deſtructive to the Legiſlative Power of God and man.] But what if the Biſhop ſpake as falſely, as if he had ſaid that I pleaded for Mahomet? Where is your proof then? I after Printed the words with the Diſpute of the Dr's, to which they were an Anſwer: And I have in my Second Plea, in a Diſputation of Scandal, vindicated them. Let any man of brains read both, and believe the Biſhop and you if he can. But, Reader, if ſuch mens renewed Accuſations cauſe me yet to Print that Anſwer to the Biſhop's Letter, which for peace I caſt away; blame not me, but them that force me to it: I am for peace, but they are for War.

§ 24. But what good will it do the Reader, to have this mans Falſhoods detected and numbred? p. 114They are ſo many and ſo groſs, that it is a troubleſome work; as p. 107. [Your Principles which aſſert, that the King may be Depoſed.]

Anſw. Burn any Book of mine with ſcorn, where I ever aſſerted any ſuch thing: But if it be a Forgery, believe ſuch men accordingly.

So p. 112. [Refuſing the Teſts of Obedience, which require only the diſclaiming of Rebellious Principles and Practices.] Anſw. See my Profeſſion and Renunciation, ſecond Plea, Chap. 3, 4 and my Confutation of Hooker, Chr. Direct. Par. 4.

Pag. 112, 113. He joyns with thoſe that would bring us into the Plot, and fathers his Accuſation on the Acts of Parliament againſt us.

Pag. 113. He ſaith, I have [a better opinion of the Papiſts, than of the Conformiſts,] becauſe I ſay, I had rather be ſaved from the Gallows by a Papiſt, than hang'd by a Conformiſt.

So p. 132. [To withdraw your avowed Communion] Anſw. A Fiction: witneſs the Pariſh-Aſſembly.

Pag. 133. Your Practice continueth and encourageth Separation from our Communion.] Falſe.

Ibid. Cartwright, after he had written as much as he could againſt Conformity, repented and Conformed at laſt.]

Anſw. A Fiction: No more than I Conform. Many a time have I been in Warwick, where he laſt lived Maſter of the Hoſpital, and the antient people there and at Coventry knew the contrary. If to joyn in the Liturgy and Sacrament (and p. 115perhaps rather than be Silenced, to wear the Surplice) be Conforming, you abuſe many whom you reproach and ſilence as Nonconformiſts.

Pag. 134. He mentions my Poſitive oppoſing and hindering their Communion. The Book is much made up of ſuch untruths in matter of Fact.

§ 25. His Poſtſcript is his Ingenuous Conjectures, if not Proofs, that I am a Liar and an Hypocrite, in the dating of my Prognoſtication; and that it was written 1680. Anſw. Should I abuſe the Reader by a particular Anſwer to them? That it was not written 1680, many perſons that ſaw them can witneſs. Will his Reaſonings make me ignorant of ſuch a matter of my own fact? All that I know of it is this, 1. As far as I can remember, it was ſhortly after the Savoy-Conference, that the firſt Copy was written; but juſt the Month I do not remember. 2. Finding this Copy among my rude neglected Papers, I wrote it fair in 1671. And my Memory is not ſo ſtrong, as to be ſure that I altered not a word: For I caſt away the firſt rude Copy. 3. After that, I thought it had been loſt, not ſeeing it ſome years: Till Mr. Matthew Silveſter told me, that I had long ago lent it him to read: I did not think it worth the Publiſhing. But one of judgment that he ſhewed it to, thinking otherwiſe, I added a few Lines in the End: This is the Truth, and if it be the Impleaders intereſt to believe it to be falſe, let him uſe his Intellect and Pen accordingly, I'le no more ſtrive againſt him.

p. 116CHAP. III. His Anſwer to the first Plea for Peace Examined.

§ 1. BEcauſe the great Charge againſt th… Non-Conformiſts is, 1. Their Not Conforming. 2. And that till they can Conform they ceaſe not Preaching and all publick Worſhip o… God (which is to live like Atheiſts, and chuſ… Damnation.) The firſt thing that I did in the Firſt, Plea, was to Declare our Judgment about Churches, Miniſtry, Church-Communion and Seperation, (in what Caſes we hold it ſinful or lawful.) To my great wonder, almoſt all this i… paſt over by all my Accuſing Anſwerers that … have ſeen, as if it had bin little to them. And they go on to take it for granted, that we are guilty of Schiſm and ſinful Separation, or in wondering that we do not grant it. 2. And as to the ſecond part of our Charge, I have ſeen none yet but Mr. Cheney and this Impleader that pretend to bring proof of the Lawfulneſs of the… Points of Conformity which we avoid. And to Mr. Cheney I gave a Reply, which I judged ſatisfactory; and this man where they agree repeateth the ſame things, as if I had not Replied; and therefore I refer him to that Reply, rather than write the ſame over again. But in ſome things they as much differ from each other as from me.

p. 117§ 2. Pag. 4. He premiſeth, 1. What are the Parts of the Book to which we are to declare our Aſſent and Conſent? Anſw. All things contained and preſcribed in and by it. Are not theſe words plain? We are not for Equivocation: What he ſaith of this, is anſwered to Mr. Ch.

2. Pag. 9. He ſaith, [It is granted by the Non-Conformiſts, that the Common-Prayer Book, as it is now amended and abſtracted from the Declarations and Subſcriptions required by the Act of Uniformity, is better to be aſſented to, than as it ſtood before.

Anſw. 1. I know none of thoſe Non-conformiſts: It's better in ſome things (as the Tranſlation of the Epiſtles and Goſpels) and worſe to them in other. 2. But what's this to the Caſe?

3. Pag. 11. He ſaith, [Non-Conformiſts grant, that it is better to ſubmit to the practice of a doubtful ſmall evil, than to forbear a neceſſary great Duty.]

Anſw. This I anſwered to Mr. Ch. I know one of them that grant it. They ſuppoſe that a doubtful Evil] is really evil; and the Doubt will not make it Lawful (or Better,) but Leſs Evil than a greater: And that no Duty ſhould …e forborn, while Duty, nor Evil done. But …e muſt not forbear Duty till we can do it without adherent evil: But we muſt do our beſt to …rbear all-evil.

Ibid. He ſpeaketh againſt over-ſtrict Interpre…tions of Impoſitions. Anſw. I ſtand to Biſhop …anderſon's Solutions, whom he citeth, which …e in the end of The Firſt Plea for Peace.

Pag. 12. 4. He ſaith, [Practice is the beſt Ezounder p. 118of the Law: many Laws are worded for terrorem iniquum petere, ut quod aequum eſt ferant; Lex non curat minima. Neither the Lan of God or Man is ſollicitous about Circumſtances and the leſſer Punctilios.]

Anſw. 1. When they either comprehend the Leaſt in Generals, or name them particularly, we think they extend to them: And that he that breaketh one of the Leaſt, and teacheth … all be called Leaſt in the Kingdome of … Mat. 5. 2. The ſeven thouſand Miniſters (and more) that Conformed to the new-made Law 1662, did not ſtay till Practice expounded it. 3. And whoſe practice muſt it be that is the Expoſition? When your practices much much differ? 4. I think you abuſe the Law and Lawgivers, by making them firſt injuſt, iniquum petendo, and next unintelligible, and laſtly opening a door for diſobedience.

Pag. 13. 5. He noteth that we are not agreed what is unlawful in Conformity.

Anſw. 1. Nor are we agreed of all forbidden in Gods Laws; Muſt we therefore forbear no ſin? 2. We are agreed (as far as I know) of all the many particulars enumerated in the Plea: Deliver us from what we are agreed againſt. 3. The Biſhops of England are not agreed in how many things we muſt differ from the Papiſts: All are not for ſo much of theirs as the Greeks, or as Grotius, or Biſhop Bromhal, or Mr. Thorndike, or Will. Forbes of Edenborough were for. And what of that? Muſt not Popery be renounced till you are all herein agreed?

53. Pag. 14. He noteth what I ſaid of the p. 119root of the firſt difference between the old Nonconformiſts and Conformiſts, One part cleaving to the Scripture, and the other being for reteining all that came in before 600, and common to them with the Greeks, [which (ſaith he) doubtleſs was the ſounder Opinion; ſo that the Foundation of Nonconformity was laid on a falſe Principle, and they that built thereon frequently raiſed Sedition, &c.]

Anſw. 1. They that thought each mutable circumſtance of Worſhip muſt have a particular Command in Scripture, erred; but there were few ſuch, at leaſt of any Learning: But thoſe that took the Law of God in Nature and Scripture, for the only and perfect univerſal Law, did not erre.

2. So many Corruptions in Doctrine, Worſhip and Diſcipline came in before 600, and are reteined by the Greek Church, that we cannot make that the meaſure of our Reformation: If you are for all [that is common to the Papiſts and Greeks] How prove you that you may Silence and Impriſon all that are not?

3. And if this be the Rule, you are yet ill reformed. It is more than three and three Ceremonies and Additions which you yet want, which the Papiſts have: I could name ſuch a Catalogue as might make Engliſh-men better underſtand what your Conforming Principles are, and what muſt be further expected when you are able. And the Council of Florence will tell us, when once England is of the Greek Religion, how poſſible it is to ſtep over to the Pope. But why doth not the Church of England conform to the Greek Church now, if it be ſo great p. 120a Duty, as will warrant the Silencing and Impriſoning of Refuſers? I hear but of few that grow in love with their Worſhip, ſince the Greeks had a Church in London; eſpecially Scholars that underſtand them.

4. But what if the firſt Non-Conformiſts erred? What's that to us any more than to you? We reverence the Primitive Example more than theirs; and never took them for the Maſters of our Faith.

5. Your Charge of their Sedition is much more ſharply laid on the Proteſtants in general by Pateſon, the Image of both Churches, and by Philanax Anglicus, and many others, than you lay it on the old Non-conformiſts: and all parties can talk at that rate againſt others, as Pryn doth of Prelates Treaſons.

§ 4. Pag. 15. Of Aſſent and Conſent to all things, and Subſcription that nothing is contrary to the Word of God. 1. He tells us, What men have ſubſcribed. 2. That we muſt allow it a juſt and favourable Conſtruction.

Anſw. I grant that worthy men have ſubſcribed, and that as favourable a conſtruction muſt be made, as will ſtand with Truth and Juſtice. But this doth us no good.

§ 5. Pag. 16. Impl. [All Lawgivers do leave to the Judges and Magiſtrates a Power to interpret the doubtful Letter of the Law, and to mitigate the rigour of its execution, in order to the publick good.]

Anſw. 1. I have anſwered this to Mr. Cheney: There is an Interpretation which giveth us the general obliging ſence of the Law; which Conſcience p. 121muſt judge by, if we will ſubſcribe: and this belongeth only to the Lawgivers, as I have proved. And there is an Interpretation which only directs the Judicial Sentence, in this or that mans particular Caſe, as whether he ſhall be puniſhed as guilty or not; and this is it that belongeth to the Judges: If the Judges will put a falſe ſence on the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy, I may not take them in that ſence. Their Expoſitory Power muſt direct their own Sentence, and that the Execution; but if I be put to Swear or ſubſcribe my ſelf to any impoſed words, no Judge can Abſolve me from taking them in the uſual ſence, unleſs the Lawgivers give another. This is our Rule, and we dare not Equivocate.

2. As to your confuſed talk, that [Magiſtrates can diſpenſe with the leſſer parts of the Law,] it is uſeleſs to me: The Lawgivers can expound, ſuſpend and change the Law: The Executive Magiſtrate can ſuſpend his own Sentence and Execution in ſome caſes; but not the ſence of the Law, nor allow my Conſcience to change the ſence.

§ 6. Impl. [All that is required by the Act, is unfeignedly to Aſſent and Conſent that there is ſuch a meaſure of Truth and Goodneſs in the Book of Common Prayer, as qualifies it for the publick worſhip of God.]

Anſw. 1. Gratis dictum. Who authorized you to ſay that [Aſſenting and Conſenting to all things contained and preſcribed] meaneth not as it ſaith? but only an uſeable meaſure of Truth and Goodneſs? Is this the uſual ſence of [All things, &c.] p. 122If not, where have the Law givers given us another? If you can think ſo, why muſt all be ſilenced that think otherwiſe, and dare not be ſo bold?

§ 7 Impl. [The title of the Act is the Key—If Uniformity be obſerved, the Act is ſatisfied.]

Anſw. … is not de fine only, but de medio, to ſecure Uniformity, by profeſt Aſſent, &c. All Lawyers know that Laws have uſually more in the Body than is in the Title.

§ 8. Impl. [They ſay, 1. Aſſent implies the Truth, and Conſent the Goodneſs. 2. All things they ſay, meaneth all words and expreſſions. 3. By [to the uſe] is meant thoſe things that come not into uſe. 4. When it's ſaid, in ſenſu compoſito, conteined and preſcribed in and by, &c. they extend it to all things that are conteined as well as preſcribed.]

Anſw. I ſee that Wit is uſeful to many ends: Here are ſo many and rare Expoſitory Evaſions, as Eſcohar or Bauny could not have excelled in them.

1. If Aſſent ſignifie not Judging all to be true, it hath lately got a new ſignification: Conſent indeed ſignifieth oft an object practicable and exiſtent for ſome good motive of Conſent.

2. If the [all things] in the Books, mean not [all the words] but [things] diſtinct from [words] I would we could know what they are: Sure it is not the Paper and Ink that the Parliament mean. Prayers and Forms are words. Actions or Ceremonies that are not words, are but little of the Book, or rather none of it, being but the matters commanded by it.

p. 1233. There is no word or part of the Book that was not made for ſome uſe. If not, how ſhall we know which words are uſeleſs?

4. I do not think that there was a man in the Parliament when the Act was made, that ever thought of this ſubtle Expoſition, that any man would take [all conteined and preſcribed] only in ſenſu compoſito? And ſo that we profeſs Aſſent to nothing contained in the Book, but that which is preſcribed alſo. If ſo, is not [conteined] an idle word when all men know that all that is preſcribed is conteined? And yet by that time preſcribed Doctrines, Calendars, Rules, Forms, &c. are taken in, they will prove more than my Aſſent and Conſent will reach to.

§. 9. Whereas the Commons brought the Lords to agree with them, for not limiting the ſenſe of the Declaration of Aſſent and Conſent to the Uſe of all; he anſwereth, 1. That the Biſhops then were more our friends than the Commons: As if the Biſhops always went with the major Vote of the Lords.

2. He giveth Reaſons, why it is meet that men Approve as well as Uſe what they do. And what elſe is it that we ſay, but the Uſing without Approving, ſatisfieth not the impoſition?

§ 10. He citeth my words, That we may take an Oath, whoſe words in the plain and proper ſenſe are lawful. But the Queſtion is, Whether theſe be ſuch?

§ 11. II. pag. 21. He defends the words, [Eaſter-day on which the reſt depend, is always the firſt Sunday after the firſt Full-Moon, which happens next after the 21 of March.] Which being p. 124oft falſe, he ſaith, 1. Being a General Rule, it may be allowed to have ſome exception. Anſw. And ſo they ſay [Always] and they mean not always, but ſometimes.

2. He proceedeth: [The Rubrick doth not ſay, [a Rule! but [Rules] in the Plural: and where the firſt Rule fails, the defect is ſupplied in the ſecond.] Anſw. What may not ſuch a Wit prove true and lawful, if the man be willing? 1. The Rules contained in that Section under that Title, are only this, and one for Advent and other Sundays, and none for Eaſter but this. 2. To ſay, This is always ſo, and after to ſay the contrary, is but to ſay, One is true, and the other falſe. Always excludeth your acknowledged Falſhood ſometimes.

3. He ſaith, The Defect never cometh into practice. Anſw. It's an uſeable Rule, and ſo you covenant to practice it, if the Uſe of all things be intended: and ſo you muſt keep two Eaſter-days.

Object. 4. [Mr. B. might as well have objected againſt the Almanack, which ſaith February hath 28 days.] Anſw. So I ſhould if it had ſaid [always] and [only 28.]

§ 12. III. Impl. p. 22. defendeth theſe words, [We are fully perſwaded in our judgments, and we here profeſs it to the world, that the Book as it ſtood before eſtabliſhed by Law, doth not contain any thing contrary to the Word of God.] And 1. he blameth me for omitting the condition of a juſt and favourable Conſtruction, &c. Anſw. I undertook not to tranſcribe the whole Book, which is in ſo many hands: A juſt conſtruction is p. 125ſtill ſuppoſed, and as favourable as will ſtand with Truth. I have oft enough told him the Rule by which we Interpret words, viz. The ordinary ſence in which they are underſtood by men of the profeſſion which they belong to, unleſs the Speakers otherwiſe expound them. If he thought this Rule to be falſe, he ſhould have diſputed that. If on pretence of [favourable Interpretations] you reſolve to put a good meaning on any words which your Intereſt perſwadeth you to take, nobis non licet, we cannot do ſo: elſe we could take any Oath in the world, while all words have divers ſences, and are arbitrary ſigns, which we can put what ſence upon that pleaſes us.

§ 13. Impl. p. 22, 23. [He well knows our Aſſent to the words there mentioned is not required, nor could be intended. Anſw. Utterly falſe: I know it not, but verily believe the contrary.

Impl. For it is only a profeſſion of our Superiours that were then in being, what their judgment and belief was, &c.] Anſw. So the Rubrick and the 39 Articless were the judgment of your Superiours: But are not they, and that Preface, parts of the Book? If not, tell us how we ſhall know what are parts of it, and to what we muſt conſent? And muſt you not Aſſent and Conſent to all things in it? I like not thoſe Equivocations, which will make Oaths and Promiſes to be but what the Speaker pleaſe.

§ 14. Impl. [Mr. B. doth very ill to recount thoſe miſtranſlations in the old Book, which are amended in the new, &c.—which Mr. B. knows to be falſe, (viz. that Aſſent to them is required.)

Anſw. 1. How did this bold man know my p. 126thoughts? I know theſe words to be a deliberate Printed Falſhood, and this man to have ſo many ſuch, as that to me he is incredible.

2. When the New Book juſtifieth the old, as having nothing contrary to the word of God, and you muſt Aſſent to all things in the new one, I think you aſſent to that juſtification. If you mean otherwiſe, tell men your own thoughts; but if you would any more be believed, ſpeak not falſly of other men, whom you never knew.

3. The old Tranſlation of the Pſalms is ſtill uſed, unreformed. Do you not Aſſent to that neither?

§ 15. He tells us that [Pſal. 105. 28. the two Tranſlations are not contradictory, They were not obedient to his word, and they Rebelled not againſt his word: Becauſe ſome Tranſlaters underſtood it of the Egyptians, and others otherwiſe.]

Anſw. And had the Text thoſe contrary ſenſes? If not, is not one of them contrary to the Text?

§ 16. Impl. p. 24. [The ſame Anſwer will ſerve the exception againſt the Collects of the old Book, which for divers days together uſed the word [This day.] Anſw. And the ſame Reply will ſerve: You dare not ſay that on Chriſtmas-day, Whitſunday, &c. [This day] ſignifieth not the very particular Day, but the Week or Time of the Year. And hath not the ſame Collect the ſame ſenſe on the next days? Are your words like Cyphers, that change their power by ſuch additions?

§ 17. Impl. [Little reaſon have they to object againſt any words or phraſes in the Liturgy, who p. 127are ſtill fond of ſinging Pſalms according to the Tranſlation of Strenhold and Hopkins, &c.]

Anſw. Little reaſon hath any man to be forward to believe your Affirmations, that are ſo uſed to falſhood. I finde none ſo willing to uſe other Verſions as they that you ſay are fond of this: many uſe the Scot's Verſion, many Barton's, ſome Rous's, and ſome Mr. Patrike: And the reaſon why they no more forſake the old one, is not becauſe they are fond of it, but leſt they too much diſpleaſe the Church of England, which hath allowed no other, and thoſe that are apt to turn all Reformations and Varieties into reproach.

§ 18. IV. To what he ſaith of the Apocrypha, I anſwered already to Mr. Cheney, and will not now repeat. The Objections againſt the Fictions in Tobit are Biſhop Barlow's, now of Lincoln, in a Learned M. S. written to ſatisfie Mr. Dodwell.

§ 19. V. Our great doubt about the abuſe of Godfathers, and excluding Parents from their proper Office, he ſaith nothing to that needs any reply; but what is in the Book which he anſwers, and in the Reply to Mr. Cheny, he anſwers as if he underſtood not the queſtion: and feigns the Liturgy to lay that on the Parents which it doth not, but excludes them from it, and laies it on uncapable perſons.

§ 20. Impl. p. 30. [Mr. B. excepts againſt the Rubrick, which ſaith, It is certain by Gods Word, that Children, which are baptized, dying before they commit actual Sin, are undoubtedly ſaved.] This being a Rubrick, and never coming to Uſe in the p. 128Publick Worſhip, it cannot reaſonably be thought to be impoſed as an Article of Faith on others, but only as the judgement of our Superiours.

Anſw. I perceive the Parliaments Act and Declaration is to you a mere Noſe of Wax; It meaneth what you will, or none can tell what. 1. Are Rubricks of no uſe? Yea thoſe that determine of Doctrines, which are not only de Fide, but matters of Salvation, certain undoubted Salvation of all baptized Infants? What is of Uſe if theſe be not? 2. Are ſuch Doctrines of certain Faith no parts of the Book? nor contained in it? Is not your Superiour's judgment impoſed on you to Aſſent to? What then is impoſed to be believed?

§ 21. But p. 31. he citeth Texts as proving the truth of the Article.

Anſw. Not a word to the purpoſe. He ſeems not to underſtand that it is not of the Salvation of true Believers Infants that we doubt: But whetherthis be true of all without exception that have ſuch Godfathers as ours, that take not the Children for their own; even the Children of Atheiſts, Infidels, Heathens, Mahometans, &c. all which the Miniſter is bound by the Canon to Baptize, if offered.

§ 22. VII. Impl. 31. [Mr. B. is the firſt that hath accuſed the Church of England of inſtituting a ſecond Covenant of Grace.]

Anſw. Still more untruths. I have no ſuch Accuſation: It is but for making and impoſing on pain of Rejection, &c. another Sacrament, or a Sign too much Sacramental, of the ſame Covenant of Grace, which Baptiſm is the Sacrament of. 2. And p. 129of this he cannot truely ſay that I am the firſt.

I proved from the impoſed words and ends, that it is appointed to the uſes of a Sacrament, but indeed not by Chriſt, and therefore is but a humane Sacrament; And I anſwered his Objections to Mr. Che. which he taketh no notice of.

He cites me as ſaying, that Parents may offer their Children to Baptiſm, though they cannot have it without the Croſs, it being the Miniſters ſin, and not theirs. And what then? Is it therefore none of the Miniſters ſin, 1. To conſent to it. 2. To uſe it. 3. To refuſe to Chriſten Children whoſe Parents dare not ſubmit to it. 4. Nor the Biſhops to ſilence Miniſters that refuſe ſuch Conformity?

§ 23. p. 34, 35. He would explain the Rubrick by Art. 27. Thoſe that rightly received Baptiſine, &c. and Chriſtian Proprietors may offer their Children, &c.

Anſw. 1. The Canon forbiddeth the Miniſter to refuſe any as aforeſaid; What's this then to the reſt? 2. Right coram Eccleſiâ giveth the Church Power to receive them: But it muſt be Right coram Deo to Remiſſion, &c. that muſt aſſure their Salvation: which we cannot prove that the Children of Atheiſts, Sadduces, or Infidels have. 3. The Conformiſts are here themſelves divided: One part of them give that certain Salvation only to all baptized Infants, which the other give to all in the world, baptized or unbaptized. See Mr. Che. and the Anſwer.

§ 24. VIII. About our Refuſing Children, p. 130whoſe Parents refuſe the foreſaid Croſſing, and abuſe of Godfathers, he ſaith, p. 36. [1. That in private Baptiſme, and conſequently in other caſes of Neceſſity, the Church alloweth the omiſſion of Croſs and Godfathers. 2. That they have a low eſteem of the Sacrament, that for this withdraw.]

Anſw. 1. Your Conſequence is contrary to the Canon: And 'tis known that the Church allows not Miniſters to forbear them on pretence of ſuch Conſequences.

2. Much leſs do they allow the refuſal of Diſſenters for ſuch a Neceſſity.

3. And it may be no contempt of the Sacrament, when men are afraid of a ſinful uſe of it though they miſtake.

4. Nor is it ſuch a fault of the Receiver or Parent, that will warrant a Miniſter to deny them Chriſtendome, or a Sacrament by your ſelves judged ſo neceſſary to Salvation.

§ 25. p. 36. He returneth to the caſe of Croſſing, as a tranſient Image in worſhip, &c. I think few will judge his Anſwer worthy of a Reply.

§ 26. p. 37. IX. The next is, [That no man ſhould come to the Sacrament without a full truſt i… God's Mercy and a quiet Conſcience.] I would make nothing worſe than it is: I do not think the Impoſers meant that all men ſhould ſtay away till they had a full truſt and quiet Conſcience. But that's the plain importance of the words: Here therefore it is more ill words than ill meaning, which I do deny Aſſent and Conſent to.

p. 131§ 27. X. Pag. 38. About compelling each Communicant to receive thrice a year, he ſaith, 1. It is the Statute, not the Miniſter. 2. It is only the duely qualified.

Anſw. 1. The Biſhops are Statute-makers. 2. Nothing more common with the Canoneers, than to call to Magiſtrates to execute ſuch Laws. 3. The Canons and Liturgy require it. 4. It is not true, that it's only the duely qualified: It is all that are not Naturally, but Morally unfit, that is, that are at Age, and have Reaſon and Health. If the Prieſt ſhould put away any as unfit, he muſt accuſe them to the Chancellor, and they muſt be Excommunicate and lie in Jayl while they live, unleſs they Communicate. So that here is a plain Expoſition. 4. There are multitudes unfit to Communicate, whom the Miniſter cannot put away, that were they not conſtrained, would keep away themſelves; as ſecret Atheiſts, Infidels, Sadduces, Socinians, Arians, Seekers, ſecret Fornicators, Thieves, Drunkards, &c. that are conſcious of their Sin and Impenitence: But rather than lie in Jayl, will all Communicate.

§ 28. Impl. [What deplorable times are we fallen into, that our higheſt Priviledge ſhould be counted a great grievance, &c.]

Anſw. Still deceit. 1. Is it our higheſt Priviledge to have unfit men conſtreined to prophane holy things, and profeſs themſelves what they are not; and the dogs forced in, that ſhould lie without? Is Chriſt's Diſcipline againſt our higheſt Priviledges? 2. Who knoweth not that Infidels, Sadduces and wicked men do account p. 132theſe Priviledges to be none: Cure them of their Contempt, and you need not force them by a Jayl. Till then, is it the Paſtors that refuſe ſuch till they voluntary ſeek it, or the Contemners of theſe Priviledges, that are to be reproved? Chriſt giveth pardon and life to none but deſirous Conſenters; and if you will ſeal and deliver the promiſe of it to thoſe that will but prefer it to a Jayl, and make up your Churches on ſuch terms, we dare not imitate you. The Church-Keys exerciſed are, as Tertullian ſpeaketh, Praejudicium futuri judicii, and ſhould intimate to men, who they be that ſhall be let into Heaven, or ſhut out: And to ſay, Come all and take Chriſt, Pardon and Life, who will rather take the Sacrament than lye in a Jayl, is like another Goſpel.

§ 29. XI. The pronouncing Salvation to all that they bury, ſave the three excepted ſorts, (Unbaptized, Excommunicate, and Self-murderers) is the next. And 1. he will not have the words to ſignifie Salvation. The words are [Foraſmuch as it hath pleaſed Almighty God, of his great Mercy, to take to himſelf the Soul of our dear Brother here departed.] And [we give thee hearty thanks, for that it hath pleaſed thee to deliver this our brother out of the miſeries of this ſinful world.] And [That we may reſt in Him (Chriſt) as our hope is this our brother doth.] If all this ſignifie not Salvation in your judgment, it doth in ours: We accuſe not you of deceiving Souls, at a time when it will take the deepeſt impreſſion; but we only tell you, we dare not Aſſent and Conſent to that, which to us would be falſe Equivocation, p. 133and that in ſo ſerious a thing: And if the difference be but Grammatical, doth it deſerve our Silencing and ruine, to believe that thoſe words import Salvation?

§ 30. But 2. he ſaith, [Chriſtian Charity teacheth us to hope the beſt of all that die in the Communion of the Church.]

Anſw. It is not Chriſtian Charity which is contrary to the Chriſtian Verity and Covenant: Nor that which tendeth to undo the living by falſe hopes: Hobbes and ſuch others as oppoſe Fundamentals, deride Chriſtianity, or the Immortality of the Soul, ſome by Writing, ſome by common Talk, do die in the Church of England: I have heard Preachers lament their Numbers, Impudence and Increaſe; but never heard one of them Excommunicate, nor brought to publick Repentance. All die in the Church, that Communicate rather than lie in Jayl and be ruined; yea thouſands that will not Communicate, notwithſtanding ſuch Severities; When in a Pariſh of 8000 or 10000 Communicants, no more (even on a Whitſunday) than about 100 Communitate, though the Miniſter be one of the beſt; yet the reſt are ſtill in your Church. We deſire the higheſt degree of Charity. But ſuch a judgment of mens future ſtate, though called Charitable, ſeemeth to us ſo fearfully uncharitable, that it is one of the greateſt things in which we ſeem to differ: And I will not ſhew the riſe, and the import and tendency of it, leſt Dr. Fullwood, and the Reflecter on Sacril. Deſert. ſay again, that I gather too hard Conſequences from our Difference. But nobis non licet, Muſt we p. 134be Silenced and ruined for want of ſuch Charity?

§ 31. XII. Silencing ſuch as think the Surplice unlawful, is the next, pag. 42. And he ſaith, [If any man, againſt ſuch Authority and Arguments, ſhould think the Surplice unlawful, it is better he ſhould be Silenced, than that the Churches Peace and Order be diſturbed, or antient Laws abrogated.]

Anſw. You have owned it: If it be well done, you may partake of the Reward; If ill, of the Puniſhment. Qu. Whether conſenting ſo to Silence 2000 (and 9000 if they had not Conformed) will not make your Reward greater, than if you had conſented and ſubſcribed to the Silencing but of one? His blood be on us and on our Children, were the words of Factious Zeal, that eſcaped not without puniſhment. Paul that conſented to the death of Stephen, and hunted others, ſaith, He was mad, yea exceeding mad againſt them. Chriſt never laid the Order and Peace of the Church, nor the Preaching of the Goſpel on ſuch things; nor ever encouraged any to do it. Of which ſee Biſhop Jer. Tailor in the words largely cited in my Second Plea.

§ 32. XIII. Though Athanaſius Creed as to the damnatory part was that which Mr. Dodwell ſcrupled, I will not anſwer this mans equivocating Expoſition of it, leſt I be thought to tempt others to blame the Creed itſelf, which I honour. Where he ſaith, p. 43. [I frequently and falſely accuſe the Conformiſts of Socinian or Antitrinitarian Doctrine: Let him tell us where, or p. 135elſe I accuſe him as a falſe Accuſer. But it's his mode.

§ 33. XIV. Whereas all muſt Aſſent and Conſent to read the Common-Prayer every day of the year, (if not ſpecially hindred) he tells us what reaſon there is for it: But 1. will it not neceſſitate the omiſſion in many places of more neceſſary works? 2. What encouragement have we to embody with that Tribe, who all Conſent to this, and not one of multitudes of them do it? Is ſuch Conformity tolerable, and our Preaching intolerable without it?

§ 34. XV. Pag. 46. He calls it a Calumny that I ſay the Liturgy is defective and Diſorderly.

Anſw. I did in 1660. draw up a Catalogue of the mere defects and diſorders, but never offered it, to avoid offending them.

He tells us, 1. of the diſorders of the Directory. (And had he proved it, is that a juſtification of the Liturgy?) 2. And alſo he tells us of the defects and confuſions which were in Mr Baxter's eight days exploit, (our Additionals, or Reformed Liturgy, 1661.) when as neither this Accuſer, nor any of the Biſhops or Diſſenters then ſaid one word of particular accuſation againſt it, nor any other that ever I knew of to this day, ſave an impertinent quarrel of Mr. Roger le Strange, that we uſed not more impoſing words, and ſuch trifles.

§ 35. XVI. Next comes the Profeſſion of the Antiquity of Three Orders in the Preface of the Book of Ordination and elſewhere, p. 47. And he citeth me, Chriſt. Direct. p. 127. as againſt my ſelf; falſly intimating, that I aſſert three p. 136Orders, becauſe I am uncertain whether there be not divers Degrees in one Order. I cited out of Spelnian the Canons of Aelfrike, ſhewing that the Church of England, even in times of Popery, took Biſhops and Presbyters to be the ſame Order, as many Papiſts-Schoolmen do. And the man ſhould have known, that it is not the Biſhops of a particular Church that I mentioned in my Direct. but only ſuch as have the care of many Biſhops Churches.

§ 36. XVII. He next defends the Scenical Call to the people, to [come forth and ſhew reaſon, why the perſon may not be Ordained.] As if he knew not, that it is not the ſence of the words that is queſtioned; but that this inſignificant Ceremony ſhould be ſet in the place of the ancient demand of their free conſent over whom the Miniſter is ſet, to ſeem as if they had ſtill that liberty, when it is no ſuch matter; nor do the people, whoſe Souls he is to have the charge of, know any thing uſually of his Ordination; nor at his Inſtitution, which ſets him over them, have they any Call. Nor are ſo much as theſe Shews uſed at the Ordination of Biſhops, which by the old Canons was void without the Peoples Conſent.

§ 37. XVIII. Of the words, Receive the Holy Ghoſt, &c. he ſaith leſs than Mr. Cheny, whom I have anſwered.

§ 38. XIX. So have I there anſwered (p. 11, 12.) what he ſaith for the Oaths of Obedience to Archbiſhops, Biſhops, Chancellors, &c. 1. It's one thing to Obey them, and another to Aſſent to the Oath of Obedience. 2. And it's one p. 137thing to ſwear Obedience to them, as exerci…ing the power of Magiſtrates under the King; and another thing as Laymen exerciſing the power of the Church-Keys, &c. And I have elſewhere cited divers old Canons, that condemn ſuch Oaths as dangerous.

§ 39. XX. In the 20th Chap. to Mr. Cheny I have abundantly anſwered what he ſaith here about keeping men from the Sacrament, and informing the Ordinary.

Theſe be [the Number] of our Exceptions which the Impleader could finde, though the reſt were as plainly written.

§ 40. XXI. As for our Objections againſt the Declarations and Oaths required by Act of Parliament, becauſe it is not the ſence of the Liturgie, but of an Act of Parliament that we doubt of, he refers us to the Executioners of the Law for our Inſtruction, (their natural way of ſatisfaction:) the Juſtice and Jailor I ſuppoſe. Did theſe ſatisfie him to Conform herein? Doth he take ſuch Arguments for unanſwerable? Why did he pretend to defend the reſt, which are impoſed in the ſame Act? Theſe are greater matters than the Ceremonies, and need as clear a Juſtification.

§ 41. But that you may ſee the meaſure of his Knowledge, he can tell you, that our miſtake is wilful, and an act of pure malice and revenge.

Anſw. Our Rule oft mentioned is agreed on by Caſuiſts, viz. To take ſuch Oaths, Promiſes and Profeſſions, in the ſenſe of the impoſing makers of them, (if they are our Rulers) and unleſs they give us another ſenſe, we muſt take the ordinary ſenſe that thoſe words are uſed in to be theirs. Therefore p. 138we take [on any pretence whatſoever] and [thoſe Commiſſioned by him] and [any alteration of Government in the Church] and [not at any time endeavour] and [no obligation on any other perſon] as well as [Aſſenting and Conſenting to all things conteined and preſcribed] to have that meaning, which not only our Parents that taught us to ſpeak, and our Maſters and Dictionaries, and the uſe of ſuch as we hear talk, hath taught us to take ſuch words in; but alſo in the ſenſe of the Lawyers and Law-books which we are acquainted with, unleſs any odde perſons differ from the reſt. And this ſagacious man hath found, that this Expoſition is a wilful miſtake, in malice and revenge. Juſt as others of them can prove before God, that it is through Covetouſneſs that we Conform not; viz. Two thouſand Miniſters (England knoweth of what ſort, though the Accuſers do not) have forſaken all Church-maintenance, and their Rulers countenance, and put themſelves under a Law that mulcts them 40 l. a Sermon, baniſheth them from Cities and Corporations, lays them in Jayl, &c. reproacheth them as ſeditious; and all this in Covetouſneſs, Malice, and Revenge. I have ſeen a Child throw away his meat in revenge, but he returned to it in leſs time than 18 years: I have heard of a woman that cut her throat, and another that drowned herſelf and Children, in a revengeful paſſion againſt her drunken cruel Huſband: but ſure, if ſhe had 18 years deliberated, it would have calm'd her paſſion: But that 2000 ſuch Miniſters ſhould chuſe ruining Fines, and Poverty, and Jails, and wilfully damn their p. 139own Souls by ſin, and all to be revenged on Parliament or Prelates, is ſomewhat ſtrange! Eſpecially when it is that which that Parliament and Prelates themſelves are pleaſed with, who choſe the terms. What kinde of Revenge hath our Malice found out, which deſtroyeth ourſelves and pleaſeth our Afflicters!

§ 42. And here p. 55. he falls with ſcorn on my Book of Concord; and that his Book may be Conformable to itſelf, deſcribeth my terms of Concord by downright fiction and falſhood; as if he had thought none would ever open the book to ſhame his Calumny. He tells you, that the reſult of all is, That every Paſtor be independent, free from any ſuperiour to controul him, and have an arbitrary Power, and arbitrarily exerciſe the power of the Keys without Appeal; to have the power of Ordaining who they will, the power of altering the Laws in Church and State, &c. All which I have expreſly written againſt at large.

Beſides what I have written, 1. For Biſhops in each Church. 2. For Archbiſhops or general Overſeers. 3. For Synods. 4. Had it been no more than what I have written for the Magiſtrates Governing of all Paſtors and Churches, it would prove the falſhood of this mans Aſſertion.

Yet that you may ſee that his Charity and his Veracity are proportionable, he hence inferrs, p. 57. [Did ever any Biſhop aſpire to ſuch Tyranny as this, the Pope only excepted? Is not the King and whole Nation greatly culpable not to truſt themſelves with the ingenuity of this people, &c.]

Anſw. Reader, which is liker to be guilty of Tyranny, 1. We that deſire no power but to p. 140plead God's Law to mens Conſciences. 2. And that but with one Congregation. And 3. with no conſtrained unwilling perſons, but only voluntary Conſenters. 4. And to rule over none of our Fellow-Miniſters. 5. And only to be but Freemen, as Schoolmaſters and Philoſophers be in their Schools of Volunteers, that we may not againſt our Conſciences be the Paſtors of the unwilling, or ſuch as we judge uncapable according to God's Laws, but to uſe the Keys of Admiſſion and Excluſion as to that particular Church. 6. And to do all under the Government of the Magiſtrate, who may puniſh us as he may do Phyſicians, Schoolmaſters, or others, for proved maladminiſtration, and drive us (not from, but) to our Duty. 7. And to be ready to give an account of our Actions to any Synod, or Brethren that demand it, and to hear their Admonitions and Advice. Yea, and to live in peaceable ſubmiſſion where Archbiſhops or General-Viſitors are ſet over us; and upon any Appeals or Complaints, to hear and obey them in any lawful thing belonging to their Truſt and Power. 9. And if we be judged to have worngfully denied our Miniſterial help and Communion to any, we pretend to no power to hinder any other Church or Paſtor from receiving him. 10. And if we be by Magiſtrates caſt out or afficted for our Duty, we ſhall quietly give up the Temples and publick Church-maintenance, of which the Magiſtrate may diſpoſe, and without reſiſting or diſhonouring him, endure what he ſhall inflict upon us, for our obedience to God. This is our odious Tyranny.

p. 1412. On the other ſide, our Accuſers, 1. Some of them are for power in themſelves to force men by the Sword, that is, by Mulcts and corporal Penalties, to be ſubject to them, or be of their Church and Communion. 2. Others are for the Magiſtrate thus forcing them, when the Biſhop Excommunicates them. 3. They thus make the Church like a priſon, when no man knoweth whether the people be willing Members, or only ſeem ſo, to eſcape the Jail. 4. They would be ſuch forcing Rulers over many ſcore or hundred Pariſhes. 5. They would have power to Rule, Suſpend and Silence the Paſtors of all theſe Pariſhes, when they think meet. 6. They hinder the Paſtors of the Pariſh-Churches from that exerciſe of the Keys aforeſaid in their own Pariſh-Churches, which belongs to the Paſtors Office. 7. They would compel the Pariſh-Miniſters to Admit, Abſolve, or Excommunicate (at leaſt as declaring other mens Sentences) when it is againſt their Conſciences. 8. They would make Miniſters ſwear Obedience to them, and Biſhops ſwear Obedience to Archbiſhops. 9. Some of them are for their power to Excommunicate Princes and greateſt Magiſtrates, though contrary to the fifth Commandment, it diſhonour them. 10. Some of them ſay, that if the King command one Church-Order, or Form, or Ceremony, and the Biſhop another, the Biſhop is to be obeyed before the King: As alſo if the King bid us Preach, and the Biſhop forbid us, 11. And they ſay, that their Cenſures, even Clave errante, muſt be obeyed. 12. And that he whom a Biſhop cuts off from p. 142one Church, is thereby cut off from all, and none may receive him. 13. And that it is lawful to ſet up Patriarchs, Metropolitans, &c. to rule the Church, according to the ſtate and diſtribution of Civil Government. Look over theſe two Caſes, and judge which party is liker to Church-Tyrants; and then judge what Credit is due to ſuch Accuſers of the Non-Conformiſts in this Age.

§ 43. II. As to Reordination, I have anſwer'd to Mr. Cheny what he ſaith: He deceitfully avoideth determining the firſt Queſtion, whether they intend a Reordination or not: Whereas I have proved, 1. That the Church of England is againſt twice Ordaining. 2. That they call it and take it for a true Ordination which is to be received from them, by ſuch as Presbyters had Ordained. 3. And therefore that they ſuppoſe the former Null. 4. And this is much of the reaſon of mens doubting whether they ſhould receive the ſecond, which is given on ſuch a Suppoſition. But this man is little concerned in the true ſtating of the caſe.

§ 44. III. What he ſaith of the Miniſters power for Diſcipline, is anſwered already to Mr. Cheney that hath the ſame.

§ 45. About the Covenant, 1. he falſly makes me ſay, that the King took it: Whereas (whether he did or not) I only ſay, that he was injuriouſly and unlawfully drawn to ſeem to owne it and declare for it.

2. Next he aggravates this Injury: And who contradicteth him?

3. He pleadeth, That the King is not obliged p. 143by it to make any alteration in the Government of the Church.

Anſw. I will not examine your Reaſons: The King never made me his Confeſſor, nor put the queſtion to me; Why then ſhould I make my ſelf a Judge of it? And why muſt my Miniſtry lie on a thing beyond my knowledge? But am I ſure that no Parliament-man that took that Vow is bound there in his place to endeavour a Reforming Alteration, when I am paſt doubt that much is needful?

He would 1. make it doubtful, Whether it was a Vow to God? I think it not worth the labour to prove it to him that doubteth of it after deliberate reading it.

2. He ſaith, [Any lawful endeavours are not denied.] Anſw. But the Obligation to lawful endeavours are denied. Are not the words univerſal?

3. He ſaith, [The Covenant condemned as unlawful, cannot lay an Obligation.]

Anſw. A Vow to God unlawfully impoſed and taken, may binde to a Lawful Act.

4. He calls it [unneceſſary alterations againſt the Law of the Land.]

Anſw. I ſuppoſe I ſhall prove ſome reforming alteration neceſſary; And it is not againſt Law for a Subject to petition for it, or a Parliament-man to ſpeak for it. Yet when the man ſeems to me to be pleading Conſcience out of the Land, he ſaith, [Would not this cauſe the Chriſtian Religion in a ſhort time to be exploded out of all Kingdoms?] Alas poor people! what uncertain Guides have you?

5. He concludes, that the power of Reforming p. 144being in the King, the Vow was null. Anſw. The Regal Power of Reforming is only in the King: To change Laws without him, is Uſurpation. But Parliament-men may ſpeak for it, and Subjects petition, and on juſt cauſes write and ſpeak for needful Reformation: And I ſpeak for no other.

§ 45. IV. About not taking Arms againſt thoſe Commiſſioned by the King; He plainly profeſſeth that we muſt not diſtinguiſh where the Law doth not. And if it be an unlimited Univerſal Negative, it will quite go beyond Mainwaring or Sibthorpe: And for all his talk, my ignorance of the Law ſhall ſuſpend my Subſcription. 1. King John gave up his Kingdom to the Pope: I cannot ſay it had been unlawful for the Kingdom to reſiſt ſuch as he ſhould have Commiſſioned to execute it. 2. Nor ſuch as ſhould be Commiſſioned to diſpoſſeſs the right Heir, and ſettle it on a Stranger, or an Enemy. 3. Nor ſuch as ſhould be Commiſſioned to ſeize on all the Subjects Eſtates or Lives, yea or lay Taxes contrary to Law, in caſes where the Law enableth the Sheriff by the Poſſe Comitatus to reſiſt. 4. Nor if any get the Broad-Seal to Commiſſions to ſeize on the King's Garriſons, Forts, Navies, Treaſures, Guards, whereby a traiterous Lord-Keeper might at any time Depoſe the King. I have told you, that old Parliaments Popiſh and Proteſtant, and Archbiſhop Abbot, and Biſhop Bilſon, &c. were as much Nonconformiſts in this as I am.

And ſo much to the Impleaders Accuſations of the Nonconformiſts, and his Reaſons for the p. 145juſtifying of their Silencing and ruine, and the Lawfulneſs of ſome of the things which they judge to them unlawful: Let the impartial Reader try and judge. The reſt of my Book, which is the far greater part, he anſwereth by contempt and ſilence.

CHAP. IV. Of his dealing with the Second Plea for Peace.

WHile we hear men, that ſhould be our Brethren, go on to call to Magiſtrates for Execution of the Laws (which they have got) againſt us, and for want of matter of Accuſation againſt thoſe that they proſecute, raking up odious Criminations from the late Wars, which few of the now Silenced Miniſters had any hand in; and never ceaſing to tell men, that the Beginners of that War were guilty of the King's Death. After 17 or 18 years Silence, 1. I told them, That two parties of the Epiſcopal Conformiſts being the beginners, in England, it's wonder'd that they ſee not how they accuſe themſelves: And why do they not profeſs Repentance firſt? 2. I fully told them what are our Principles of Government and Obedience, and intreated them to ſhew me, wherein they are diſloyal or culpable. And this man is the firſt p. 146that I finde pretending to aſſault it, and ſhame leſsly paſſeth over the Book itſelf, and by his ſilence ſeemeth to juſtifie our Doctrine. And yet to ſhew his Will, he taketh occaſion again to take up the foreſaid actions of the evil Civil War, as if that were any thing to the preſent Cauſe; or as if he were calling the dead to Judgment: (For we have oft offered them thanks, if they will Silence only thoſe that had a hand in thoſe Wars.) 2. He taketh on him to anſwer my Hiſtorical Preface; and therein heapeth abundance of untruths, part of which I mentioned in the ſecond Chapter, and the reſt I have ſo fully confuted in my Anſwer to Mr. Hinkley, and in an Hiſtorical Index of thoſe affairs, that I will not waſte my own and the Readers time, by ſaying the ſame things here again. And his Accuſations of my Concord and Moral Prognoſtication, I have anſwered before. It is the manner of the man to name Books, and take occaſion from ſomewhat in them, to pour out that which he moſt abounds with; and to try, whether men will take this for a Confutation. O miſerable world! Where the very Preachers of Holineſs, Love and Peace, go on to the Grave, and Judgment, and Eternity, fighting againſt Holineſs, Love and Peace; forbidding others to worſhip God, (that cannot ſwallow all their Inventions) and not enduring their Brethren to live in Peace among them. But 'tis Letter in the World of Holy Love and Peace.