The Sifters Sieve Broken, Title page – Preface to the reader
ΣΙΝΙΟΠΠΑΓΙΑ, THE Sifters Sieve broken. OR, A REPLY To Doctor Boughen's ſifting my Caſe of Conſcience touching the Kings Coronation Oath.
WHEREIN IS cleared,
That Biſhops are not Jure Divino.
That their ſole Government, without the help of Presbyters, is an uſurpation, and an innovation.
That the Kings Oath at Coronation, is not to be extended to preſerve Biſhops, with the ruine of Himſelf and Kingdome.
Secundùm honorum vocabula, quae jam Eccleſiae uſus obtinuit, Epiſcopatus Presbyterio major. Aug. Ep. 19.
Communi Presbyterorum conſilio regebantur Eccleſiae: Hieron. in Tit. 1.
Let the Peace of God rule, and ſway in your hearts; to the which alſo, ye are called in one body, Col. 3.15.
By John Geree, M. A. and Paſtor of St. Faiths under Pauls, in London.
LONDON, Printed for Chriſtopher Meredith, at the ſign of the Crane in Pauls Church-yard, 1648.
TO THE RIGHT VVORSHIPFVL Sir Francis Netherſole, of Netherſole, Knight: Grace and Peace.
Much Honoured Sir,
THough the great reſpect, which you have been pleaſed to vouchſafeme, might be engagement ſufficient to this Scholaſtical gratitude; Yet the ſuitableneſs of the ſubject, added much to my inclination, in this way, to let the world know, that I am in the number of thoſe, who are grateful honourers of your Learning, and Godlineſs. The Book I preſent to you, is Polemical; But the intention of my contention is Irenical. As it is Polemical, your learning renders you able to judg of it. As it is Irenical, your piety (which bears the old ſtamp) will incline you to imbrace it; for all that know you throughly, will give you teſtimony, to be a lover of peace, as it is a thing commanded of God, not as it is popular, and pleaſing to men; And that you have been a perſwader of it; not for private, but publique intereſt; not becauſe it is eaſie, but holy; having had as deep a ſence, as any, of the ſad ſufferings of your dear Countrey, in her honour, ſtrength, wealth, and Religion, by the preſent unnatural War.
Sr, In this Paper-Combat, I have met with ſuch an Adverſary, as makes me need, not onelyonly candor, but ſuccour; yet not againſt his ſubtilties, but calumnies; Neither this, to thoſe that know me, but to ſtrangers: for his perſonal criminations, are ſuch groſs miſtakes, that they will render him ridiculous, to all that underſtand my judgment and carriage in theſe preſent diſtractions. But yet they may make me odious, where I am unknown; as I am to moſt of thoſe of quality, whom this Reply ſhould ſatisfie. Sir, If your name and teſtimony, free my perſon from prejudice with ſuch, that they may ponder the Argument in an equal ballance, I have enough; for I never deſire more from any Reader, then what the weight of unprejudic'd Reaſon inclines him to give. Controverſies are of themſelves troubleſome; eſpecially when they come to Replies, and Rejoynders. Therefore, that I may not add to your trouble, with a long Epiſtle, praying for an increaſe of your graces, and bleſsing on your ſelf, yours, and all your good endeavors, eſpecially thoſe, for an happy Peace; I take leave, and remain
Sir, From my Study in Ivy-Lane, Sept. 18. 1648. Yours to ſerve you in the Lord Jeſus, John Geree.
The Preface to the Reader.
PARAG. I. Detecting the falſe unjuſt, and uncharitable dealing of Doctor Boughen, in his Sifting my Caſe of Conſcience Reſolved. Whereby it may appear, whoſe Sieve he uſed aciviov Graecè cribrum eſt apud Heſychium & foreign cribrare apud eundem. Cam. Myroth. Evang. in luc. 22.31.foreign Cribrari to Sift this Reſolution.
Chriſtian Reader,
I HERE Preſent unto thee a Reply to an Anſwer made to a Book of mine, by a man I know not; and it ſeems I am not known to him. For in it, he chargeth me not onelyonly with error in judgment, which is incident to man, Humanum eſt errare: But alſo imputes to me pravity of intention, both to King and Kingdom, which is Diabolicum, the Character of thoſe, whom Satan poſſeſſes, filling their hearts with ſuch corrupt affections. Now to manifeſt my innocency, and (at the beſt) the Doctors great miſtake in theſe accuſations, I know no better way, then that which Paul took, in a caſe of malitious accuſation before Feſtus, and King Agrippa, Acts 26. verſe 4. To lay open what my manner of carriage hath been, in this preſent National difference; all the irregularities whereof, on one ſide my Opponent layes throughout his Book to my charge. Thou maieſt therefore underſtand; That in theſe late unnatural diſtempers of our Church and Nation, I have been a zealous Studier of Peace, and an hearty mourner, not onelyonly for the ſins, but the hard and irregular ſufferings of either partie. And have been conſcientiouſly tender of that duty, wherein, either by the Word of God, or the legal oaths of this Nation, I ſtood engaged to my Soveraign. Hence have I, both ſuffered for him, and with him. And in my ſympathie, I was pierc'd the deeper, becauſe I could not but look upon his ſufferings, as reflecting ſcandal on our Religion, and Nation. Neither knew I how to excuſe thoſe, whom I was bound in conſcience, in ſo great a degree, to love, and honour in their places (as wel as his Majeſtie;) that not to be able to clear them, was (I truly profeſs) as Davids ſword in my bones. Pſalm. 42.10.This made me reſtleſs in my ſpirit, while there was any thing (within my ſphere) for me to do, whereby any, the leaſt, probability appeared to further accommodation. For I ſtood in dread of a prolonged Civil War, not onelyonly becauſe it would hazzard the Honour, and Weal of King and Parliament, in whoſe Ʋnion and mutual ſafetie, was involved the Glory, Strength, and Liberty of this Nation; But alſo, becauſe I fore-ſaw what ſluces it would ſet wide open to all exceſs of riot. And the further the War proceeded, the more was I confirmed in my ſad prognoſticks of it; For it ſeemed evident, that though the pretences for War were ſpecious, viz. Truth, and Purity: Either of which, is more precious then Peace; yet unleſs, by ſome happie accommodation, War were ſhortned, we were in great danger to be no ſmal loſers, both in Truth and Holyneſs. Hereupon I drew up a Treatiſe of accommodation, preſſing it with Arguments, by mutual condeſcention. Which ſo far had the approbation of ſome peaceable men of quality, that had not ſome croſs accidents prevented, it may be, it might have ſeen the light.
While my thoughts were ſtill buſied about peace, we had intelligence, where I lived, that the King, ſending from Oxford to the Parliament, for a Treaty for Accommodation; had by the Earl of Eſſex, the Lord General, a ſhort anſwer returned, with a Copie of the National Covenant encloſed in it. The Engliſh whereof was interpreted to be, that unleſs the Covenant were taken, no accommodation could be expected; thereupon I took a ſerious view of the Covenant, to ſee what was in it, that might cauſe unanſwerable ſcruple. The reſult of my thoughts was, that except the ſecond Article about Epiſcopacy, (mutatis mutandis, thoſe things being altered, that upon Accommodation muſt have admitted alteration) there was nothing, that might greatly ſcruple, a minde moderate and peaceable. And for that ſecond Article, conſidering the government of the Church by Biſhops, was never determined by our Church to be Jure Divino; And that we acknowledg, as Siſters, thoſe Churches that have admitted Presbytery; And ſith what is Humane, is, upon good and weighty motives, alterable; And what more weightie motive can be to induce a Prince, to conſent to alter what is alterable, then to preſerve three flouriſhing Churches and Kingdoms, from blood and aſhes? The onelyonly difficulty, I apprehended, in reference to his Majeſty, in that Article (ſuppoſing him to be of the ſame judgement, with this moſt learned Father, touching Epiſcopacy, in his Baſilicon Doron) reſted in his oath at Coronation; which I had read urged ſtrongly, but modeſtly, in an Anonymus Book, written on the Royal ſide about this War; and afterward preſt with more violence, in a Treatiſe againſt the Covenant.
On theſe Books, therefore I reſolved to make an aſſay, whether what was objected in that particular, were ſolveable. And on this occaſion was the Caſe Reſolved firſt compiled. Which having finiſh'd, I communicated to one of the Kings Chaplains (as learned, rational, and ſincerely affected to his Majeſtie, as Doctor Boughen, though not ſo froward) who agreed with me in deſiring, and endeavouring accommodation. He preſented it to a Counſellor of State, (a lover of peace, and in good eſteem with his Majeſtie;) What uſe he made of it, I know not. But mine own Copy lay dead in my hands, till the King went from Oxford into the Scots Army; By whom being brought to New-Caſtle, his Majeſtie had divers diſputes with Maſter Hinderſon about this very ſubject; which occaſioned me to re-view my notes, and ſhew them to a learned friend, who judging them not contemptible, told the Scots Miniſters of the Aſſembly, of ſuch a Tract that he had ſeen; whereupon they earneſtly deſired it, either in Print, or in Writing. On this occaſion, after ſome moneths, if not years, it ſaw the light. And ſome Copies being given to the Scots Commiſſioners, they preſented one to the King, who read it, and (if my Intelligencer fail me not) though he received not ſatisfaction by it, yet his cenſure of it, did neither diſcover paſſion, nor contempt, but the contrary.
But Quorſum haec? That the Reader may know, with what an innocent, and upright heart, my Caſe of Conſcience Reſolved was compoſed. The main intention of it being nothing, but a good accommodation, for the honour and ſafety of Sovereign, and Countrey. That thereby, not onelyonly the uncharitableneſs, but the impertinency; falſeneſs, and injuſtice, may appear, of thoſe bitter calumnies, that are every where ſcattered in the Anſwerers Treatiſe, like Ʋlcers in an unſound Body, of which his two Epiſtles are not free, which come firſt to receive Animadverſions.
PARAG. II. ANIMADVERSIONS on Doctor Boughen's two Epiſtles, clearing the Author of the Caſe Reſolved, from imputations of ſleighting Authority, and retorting them on the Accuſer.
DOctor Boughen dedicates his Book to the King, and gives his reaſon, becauſe, It is a Juſtification of his Coronation-oath, of his Crown and Dignity; And the faireſt Flower of it,Spreamacy.
Touching the Oath, we ſhall conſider in the body of the Book it ſelf. But what ſpeaks he of defending the Kings Crown and dignity? As though that were endangered, by the Caſe Reſolved. Whereas the occaſion and intention of that Treatiſe, was, (as the Introduction expreſſeth, and the matter evidenceth) to prevent that great hazzard of both, which ſince they have undergone. And was written by one, as well affected to his Majeſties Crown and dignitie, and, I doubt, more ſincerely then D. B. is. Nor hath he more need to defend the Kings Supreamacy, from any danger that it was in by my Book; For I doubt not, but (when I come to the laſt Chapter of his Book, wherein the point of Supreamacy is handled) to make it evident, that I have detracted nothing of that Supreamacie, which the King doth challenge; Nor, what I had not warrant for, from his Majeſties own Pen; No, nor, but what this Anſwerer himſelf is forced to relinquiſh, while, and where he makes a Mimick ſhew of oppoſition.
There is one paſſage more in this Epiſtle, which I cannot paſs by. Where he hath ſpoken of one, That during the Eclipſe of Heaven, durſt acknowledg our Saviours Kingdom, &c. He interrogates (with reference to the King) and ſhall I be aſhamed to do the like? Give me leave Sir, to anſwer your queſtion. No wiſe men will think you need be aſhamed of Dedicating a book to his Majeſtie, though under an Eclipſe. But they may doubt, whether you may not be aſhamed of making a queſtion of it. 2. And more, whether you may not be aſhamed of repreſenting the Author, you anſwer, as an enemy to the Kings Crown and Dignity; when the Treatiſe it ſelf beſpeaks him quite the contrary. 3. But moſt of all, whether you may not be aſhamed of dedicating a Book, better ſtored with railing then reaſon, to ſo rational a Prince.
In his Epiſtle to the Reader, he tells him, How being moved by a Friend, to conſider of my Caſe of Conſcience, &c. he was willing to undeceive his ſeduced Countrimen; and ſo yeelded to his requeſt, and found the Treatiſe ſmall, but dangerous. It aims at the ruin, both of Church and Kingdom. It perſwades the King, that his oath at Coronation, is a wicked oath, and that he ought to break it; yea, he affirms it to be vinculum iniquitatis, the bond of iniquity. No ſooner read I this, (ſaith the Doctor) but my heart was hot within me; and while I was muſing on this,Pſalm. 39.4. and the like Blaſphemies, the fire kindled within me, and at the laſt, I ſpake with my tongue; Why ſhould this Shimei blaſpheme my Lord the King? &c.
Bloody words; but the Prudent Reader will remember, Si ſatis ſit accuſari, quis erit…innocens? If accuſation be ſufficient proof of a crime, who ſhall be innocent? And I doubt not, but, by a fair Apology, to ſtop the mouth of this Slanderer; 2 Sam. 16.4.6, 7, 8.and prove him to play Ziba's, while I clear my ſelf from acting Shimei's part. For firſt, whereas he ſaith, that 'this Treatiſe aims at the ruine, both of the Church and Kingdom. This is moſt notoriouſly falſe; the ſcope of it being expreſſed in the very entrance of it, to be the preſervation of both, by Union and Accommodation. For want of which, how both have been hazzarded, is evident to every prudent obſerver of things. Again, for that he ſaith, That I tell the "King, that his Coronation-oath is a wicked oath, yea, affirm it to be, vinculum iniquitatis, the bond of iniquity: This is, in part, falſe, in part uncharitable, and crafty wreſting words, to draw blood out of them; For there is no ſuch expreſſion in all my Book, as that the Kings oath at Coronation, is a wicked oath. And though I uſe the tearm, vinculum iniquitatis, yet by the expreſſions annexed, if he had ſet them down, there would have appeard no ſuch vileneſs in it, as he interprets it; the words are thus; [The bond of the Kings oath, may be taken off two wayes, either by clearing the unlawfulneſs of it, that it was vinculum iniquitatis, and ſo void the firſt day, &c.] Now here the Reader may obſerve, that vinculum iniquitatis, was uſed by me, onelyonly to note the unlawfulneſs of the oath in that particular; and its an uſual phraſe, to note the unlawfulneſs of the matter in any oath; yet I did not Engliſh it, becauſe it might ſeem harſher in our Language. Beſides, I did not aſſert, that the Kings oath was unlawful in that point, unleſs it did engage him to maintain Epiſcopacy, as then it ſtood, which the King hath declared it did not, in that he hath offered their regulation by Presbyters. How falſe then is the Doctor in this alſo, in poſitively affirming, that I make the kings oath, vinculum iniquitatis? When I do it, onelyonly upon a ſuppoſition, which the king denies; yea, and which I did imagine the king might deny; and ſo declined that way of invalidating the bond of the kings oath, as appears plainly in my Treatiſe. But whether that argument that I brought, did prove it unlawful, to ſwear to maintain the Biſhops in the power they then executed, will appear, when I come to diſcover the ſillyneſs of the Doctors Anſwer. And if the oath be proved in that ſence unlawful, then I hope tits no offence, but neceſſary in diſpute, ſo to call it; unleſs we be to flatter Superiors in what ever they do; and ſo not honour, but Idolize them, and lay ſnares for their feet.
But with muſing on theſe, and other blaſphemies, fire was kindled in the Doctor. What were theſe other blaſphemies? Thoſe he names not, nor are we ever like to know. But that the fire was kindled, is evident by the fruits of it; but ſuch a fire, that I doubt not, but that the Reader will judge, that he might for it, more pertinently have cited James 3.6. then Pſalm. 39.4.
After, to preſent me more odious, he cites a place out of Doctor Burgeſs's fire of the Sanctuary, touching imprecations, and Seditious raylings againſt the Rulers of the people, and rude, bitter, unſeemly ſpeeches uttered againſt them. Alſo out of Maſter Wards Sermon before the Commons, about ſuffering vile men to blaſpheme, and ſpit in the face of authority. And affirms, all this Maſter Geree hath done undeſervedly. Hath he uſed imprecations, or bitter railings againſt the Prince? Hath he uſed rude, bitter, unſeemly ſpeeches againſt him? Hath he blaſphemed, or ſpit in the face of Authority? Convince all theſe, or any of theſe; and you ſhall finde him ready to repent, and ask God, and his Prince forgiveneſs. But if he hath not done all, no, nor any of theſe, then is Doctor Boughen a malicious Slanderer; and whoſe agent he is, in theſe accuſations, he may eaſily ſee, if he be pleaſed to view, Joh. 8.44. and Revel. 12.10. But hath not Doctor Boughen in truth done that to the Parliament, which he falſely accuſeth me to have done againſt the Prince? And is not the Parliament an Aſſembly of Gods, Pſalm 82.1? And neereſt in honour and Authority to the king? Nay, hath not he done worſe to the king, then any thing that he laies to my charge? For is not perjurie worſe, then through incogitancie to ſwear to ſome thing that ſeems good, but is not lawful? (which is all that can be objected to me to have ſaid in reference to the King.) And doth not Doctor Boughen (while he ſaith, to aboliſh Epiſcopacie is no more againſt the kings oath, then to take away their Votes in the Houſe of Peers, pag. 87. and that he cannot conſent to aboliſh Epiſcopacy without perjurie, pag. 123. charge the king with perjurie, in conſenting to a Bill, for taking away the Biſhops priviledg, of Sitting and Voting in the Houſe of Peers? Then let him conſider, who is neerer Simon Magus, and who hath more need to pray forgiveneſs in this particular. As touching Simon Magus; I am ſure I never profer'd money for any Eccleſiaſtical Gifts, nor Livings, and ſo am free from Simony. And to clear me from being a Magician, I Printed a Book againſt judicial Aſtrologie at the ſame time with the Treatiſe, which the Doctor would Anſwer; which hath nettl'd Lily, and Booker, (no great friends to the king) neer as much, as my Caſe Reſolved, did Doctor Boughen.
He cloſeth with two things. Firſt, He that anſwers a "Book, is bound to confute all, but what he approves. This I deny, unleſs he mean all that is pertinent and weightie: For impertinent triflings and railings (of which the Doctors Book hath too much) deſerve no anſwer, nor the waſte of Paper. The other is, The guides he wiſheth the Reader to "be led by in judging, viz. Reaſon, Scriptures and Authority. And therein, I fully cloſe with him, ſo far as Autority, the third, is guided by the two former, Scriptures and Reaſon: And ſo far onelyonly it deſerves reſpect. And thus far for his Epiſtles.
Reader obſerve, that in this Treatiſe, D. B. ſtands for Doctor Boughen, And D. D. for Doctor in Divinity.