Reply to Observations and Anti-Queries 2, Part 1

Reply to Observations and Anti-Queries 2 · Part 1

A FVLL REPLY To certaine briefe Observations and Anti-Queries ON Master PRYNNES twelve Questions, about Church-Government: Wherein the Frivolousnesse, Falsenesse, and grosse Mistakes of this Anonymous Answerer (ashamed of his Name) and his weak grounds for Independency, and Separation, are modestly discovered, refelled.

Together with certaine briefe Animadversions on Mr. Iohn Goodwins Theomachia, in justification of Independency examined, and of the Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction and Rights of Parliament, which he fights against.

By William Prynne of Lincolnes Inne, Esquire.

Socrates Scholasticus Eccles. Hist. l. 5. c. 20.

Ecclesia cum semel esset divisa, non una divisione acquievit, sed homines ab se mutuò aversi, alter ab altero denuò scesserunt; atque adeò EXIGVAM LEVICVLAMQVE OCCASIONEM nacti, mutuae communionis consociationisque vincula disruperunt.

Have salt in your selves, and have peace one with another.

Mark 2. 50.

To this end was I born, and for this cause come I into the world, that I should beare witnesse unto the truth.

Ioh. 18, 37.

Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?

Gal. 4. 16.

Imprimatur. October 14. 1644

Iohn White.

The second Edition some what inlarged, with materiall Additions.

London, Printed by F. L. for Michael Sparke Senior, and are to be sold at the Blew-Bible in Green-Arbour. 1644.

p. 2OF all the vanities and vexations of spirit, enumerated by the royall Preacher, this is one of the principall, [a] That for all travell, and every right works, a man is envied (yea, many times hated, oppugned) by his neighbour. This hath been alwayes my condition Eccles. 4. 4.Eccl 4:4heretofore and now; my best actions and publike services for the common good, have been misconstrued, traduced, nay censured in an high degree, as …vill, by many; though (blessed be God) approved, yea gratefully accepted by the best-affected to the Church and State.

The importunity of some Reverend friends, lamenting the deplorable distractions of our Church, which threaten disunion, and so ruine to us, in these unhappy times of intestine warres, prevailed so farre as to induce me to compile and publish Twelve considerable serious questions touching Church-government; out of a córdial desire (as much as in me lay) to close up, not widen our divisions. Which though they have given ample satisfaction to many truely religious, of all ranks and qualities, who have returned me speciall thanks; yet they have found very harsh entertainment from others, who of Friends bbGal. 4. 16.Gal 4:16are become my professed Antagonists (if not enemies) in print, because I have told them the truth: to whom I should have returned no Reply but silence (there being nought in these Observations worthy answer) but only to rectisie some mistakes therin and shew the opposite party those common errours wherby they deceive themselves and others.

The first thing this namelesse Respondent quarrels with, is ccPage 1. 2.For my writing by way of Quere; To which I answer, that I had both Presidents and Reasons for it.

Presidents, from our Saviour himselfe, who both instructed, refuted, convinced his opposites and auditors by demanding **Luk. 2. 46, 47. Mat. 11. 1 to 20. c. 12. 3: to 13. 26, 27, 29. c. 21. 23, to 43. c. 22. 18, to 23. c. 16. 26.Luke 2:46Luke 2:47Matt 11:1–20Questions only. Presidents from Philosophers, Fathers, School-men, and all sorts of Writers, ancient, modern, overtedious to recite.

Reasons: 1. I conceived the Questions touching church-government were not rightly stated by most; and that the right stating of them by way of Question, would be the best and speediest meanes to decide them. 2. The Independent party had neither then, nor since (to my knowledg) dogmatically resolved or discovered in print, what that church-government is they so eagerly contend for, and pretend to be so plainly set downe in the Word of God (being not y…t all agreed what they hold, or should desire, except it be this, to be left at free libertie to doe what they please) and therefore I conjectured such Queries to be the only means to discover and refute their concealed Platform. 3. The controversies concerning church-government, were then and now in agitation in the Synod and high Court of Parliament, the properest Iudges of them; therefore I thought it better became me in point of modesty and good manners, to expresse my opinion of them by way of Question, then Decision. Finally, I found all Independents guilty of Petitio principii, in their Writings, Sermons, Discourses, peremptorily concluding their form of church-government, to ddThe Apologeticall Narration, Mr. Sympson. A Reply of two of the Brethren, with others.be the onelyonly Government instituted by Christ, the onelyonly way of God, which hath more of God and Christ in it then any other; the Kingdom, Scepter, and Throne of Christ himself, and no other way beside it; eeA Reply of two of the Brethren to …, S. p. 111.That by the beauty and perfect consonancy of this Government with the Word of God, it may very reasonably (yea and upon higher terms then of reason) be thought, that in time it cannot but overthrow all … of Ecclesiasticall government (and I fear civill too by the self-same reason, & stand up it self in their stead, which they closeup with a Faxit Deus & festinet…: and, that writi…g or p. 3disputing against this Government, or opposing it in any kind, yea in thought, is no lesse then ffMaster Iohn Goodwins foreign.A FIGHTING AGAINST GOD, which will bring certain ruine on our Realme in generall, and all private, open opposers of it: yet not one of them (nor this Respondent) hath hitherto fully discovered to us, what this WAY or Government is; nor produced any one Scripture or Reason to warrant these superlative Encomiums of it, but we must take all they say as Gospel, upon their own bare words, without examination or dispute: And therefore I proposed these, with 12 other subsequent Questions to them, to induce them to make good these transcendent (that I say not arrogant) Positions touching their Way; since I seriously professe before God, Angels, and men, that I could never yet discover the least footsteps of it in Scripture, or Antiquity, nor descry this their Patern in the Mount, which no age till ours had ever the happiness to behold, if it be worth the viewing, when unvailed by them to us.

Having thus given this Respondent the true grounds of my writing by way of Question, I shall briefly answer all his materiall Observations and Anti-queries upon my twelve Questions, pretermitting his Impertinencies.

1. To the first Question the Respondent gives no Answer at all to the things demanded, but only misrecites the Question, without my limitations; and then seemes to refute, what himselfe propounds, not I: He should have demonstrated by direct Scriptures, That Christ hath prescribed one set immutable forme of Government to all Christian Nations, Churches in the World, from which none must vary in the least degree, without sinne, schisme, or being no true Churches of Christ, with whom good Christians may with safe conscience communicat; and that nothing herein is, or can be left free to humane prudence, (though themselves most stifly plead, that Christ hath prescribed no **It seemes to me a kinde of contradiction, to assert one unalterable setforme of Church-government, and yet to condemne all set formes of Common Prayer or Preaching: Prayer and Preaching being more essentiall to a Church, then meere Government or Discipline.set form of praying or preaching to Ministers, people, but left all men free to use their liberty and severall gifts in both; on which grounds they condemne all set forms of publike (if not private) prayers, (and some of them the use of the Lords owne prayer) together with there ading of set Homilies; upon which very grounds they must also deny all set formes of church-government, as well as of Prayer and Preaching:) And then have positively delineated, exactly proved the modell of this pretended Government, Discipline, in every particle thereof, by Gospel-Texts, so far as to satisfie mens erronious judgments, consciences herein, that so they might either submit thereto without dispute, or propound their objections against the same. But in this maine point (whereon the hinge of the controversie turnes) the Respondent is wholly silent, and I shall expect his answer ad Graecas Calendas. Only lest he might seem to say nothing, he endevours to prove, that there is a set forme of Church-government prescribed by Christ in the Gospel, not by direct Texts, but from pretended absurdities of his owne fancying, (for which he can produce no Text nor Reason) wherein he hath prevaricated, and shewes himselfe absurd.

First, (writes he) if this were granted (that there is no such set form of Church-government prescribed to all) the Gospell would be **He should say freer, where the government is left arbitrary.straiter then the Law, Christ more unfaithfull then Moses. If we deny these absurd consequences, you shall have these sound proofes of both subjoined; God set a patterne to * Moses of a carnal Temple, (you mistake good Sir, it was a Tabernacle, and that not carnall) which he charged him not to vary from in a tittle: (well, I grant it, because you produce **Exod. 25. 40 Heb, 8 5.Exod 25:40two full Scriptures for it) Ergo, he hath prescribed a set pattern of Church-government and Discipline to all Christian Nations, Churches in the new Testament, from which p. 4they must not vary in one tittle. If he (or any other) can shew me such a pattern as he contends for, so clearly delineated to us in the new Testament, as that pattern of the Tabernacle God shewed Moses was in the old, and then produce as direct precepts enjoyning all Christians, Republikes, Churches, not to vary from it in one tittle, as Moses had not to vary from his, I shall beleeve his sequell; till then I shall deeme it a true Independent argument, and as grosse a Non-sequitur as this, which necessarily followes upon the concession of it.

God shewed and prescribed to Moses the expresse pattern or fashion of Aarons and his Sons garments, ornaments, under the Law, Exod. 28. Ergo he hath likewise shewed and prescribed the expresse pattern, fashion, and colour, of all Bishops, Presbyters, Ministers garments, ornaments under the Gospel, (most likely in the Roman Ceremoniall and Pontificall.) If the one consequence be ridiculous, the other must needs be so.

But to quell this your principall Argument, First, the patterne in the mount was meant onelyonly of the materials, forme, vessels and utensils of the Tabernacle, not of the Government and Discipline of the Iewish church; therfore very impe…tinent to prove a setled Church-government, Discipline, under the Gospel. Secondly, it was shewed only to Moses, the temporall Magistrate and chief Ruler of the Israelites; not to Aaron, or any private Independent Priest or Synagogue of the Iewes; yea Moses (not they) was to make, or s…e all things ††I hope you wil… not argue, Carpenters, Masons, Goldsmiths, and other Artificers, not Priests or Ministers, under the Law built the Tabernacle and material Temple, Ergo, the… onelyonly, not … nisters, ought now und…r the Gospell to build the Church and spirituall Temple: this would be but had Logick, and worse Divinity.made according to the pattern in the mount; Ergo (if there be any consequence from this patterne) not the Independent Minister or congregation, but Kings, chief temporall Magistrates, and Parliaments (the supreme civill Powers, Councels, …e likewise (under the Gospell) to prescribe and set up such a church-government as is agreeable to Gods Word: as Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon, Hezekiah, Joshiah, Nehemiah, and other godly Princes, Governours, with their Parliaments or generall Assemblies did under the Law: And then what becomes of your Independent Ministers, Congregations claimes to this Soveraigne temporall jurisdiction, (a part of Christs Kingly office, delegated onelyonly to Kings, and highest temporall powers) which was never conferred on them? In fine, if there be any such expresse unalterable divine patterne of church-government under the Gospel, I pray informe me, why it was not as punctually, as particularly described in the new Testament, as the forme of the Tabernacle, of its materialls with all the services, ornaments, appurtenances of it, and of the Temple were under the Law? Nay, why was the Tabernacle altered into a **2 Chron. c. 8. to 2.2 Chr 8Temple, different from it? and why did the second **Exod 24. 7. Deut. 31. 11. …osh. 8. 34. 2 Kings 23. 2. 2 Chro. 34. 30 Neh. 8 …, …, &c c. …. 3. c. 13. 1. …. 36. 6. to 24 Luke 4. 16. Act. 13. 15, 27 c. 15. 21, 31. Col. 4. 16 1 Thes: 5. 27.Exod 24:7Deut 31:112 Kgs 23:22 Chr 34:30Neh 8Luke 4:16Acts 13:15Acts 13:27Col 4:16Temple vary from the first, and that in the self † Ezra 3. 10. 12. Hag. 2. 3. to 10.Ezra 3:10Ezra 3:12Hag 2:3–10same Church and Nation? If these were patterns of the church-government under the Gospel, and yet varied, altered successively in this manner; then by consequence the Government, Discipline under the Gospel is variable, alterable too, and so not fixed, nor immutable.

His second Argument. That Christ should neither be faithfull as a husband, head, nor King of his Church, if he should give others power to order it as they pleased to their owne civill Government not setting downe his owne Lawes for them to walke by, is both a fallacy & absurdity. There is no man doubts but that Christ in the Scriptures (which some of you refuse to heare read in our Churches, though * publike reading of them be Gods owne ordinance) hath prescribed to us all necessary Rules Lawes both for our faith lives either in a general or special manner which a…l must pursue. But that he hath punctually or particularly set down any exact p. 5unalterable form of church-government, for all Christian Nations, Churches to follow, under pain of being unfaithfull in all the former respects; and that the Independens Modell alone is that very patterne (the onelyonly point in question) remains on your part to make good. A man may be a faithfull husband, King, Master, Father, though he prescribe not distinct particular Lawes, to regulate each particular action of his Wife, Subjects, Servants, Children: **1 Cor. 14. 401 Cor 14:40Let all things be done decently and in order, (a generall rule for church-government) is sufficient to excuse Christ from these your presumptuous reproaches, and regulate all particulars, though left indefinite, as well as this generall Rule for our Christian conversation, Phil. 1. 27. Let your conversation be as becommeth the Gospel of Christ: and this other for our speech, Eph. 4. 29. Let no corrupt communication come out of your mo…, but that which is good to the use of edifying. You may as well charge Christ with unfaithfulnesse, for not prescribing to us a generall Liturgy, or every particular action we should doe, every word we should speak, or Ministers preach upon any occasion, as for not prescribing a particular forme of church-government.

His third Argument, that Rev. 11. 1, 2. we read of a ††Belike the Reed by which he measured. it was Independency.measuring of the Temple; and Rev. 21. 1, 2. of the new Jerusalem comming downe from God out of heaven prepared as a bride adorned for her husband; Ergo there is a setled divine church-government universally prescribed to all Christians in the new Testament; is no better a proofe of this assertion, then the Angel of the Church of Ephesus, is of our Prelats Lordly hierarchy jure divino. He might as well, yea more properly have concluded thence, That the Altar was measured as well as the Temple, Rev. 11. 1. (referring only to the **Ezech. 40. & 41.Ezek 40Jewish not christian Church, which hath no **Rev. 21. 22. 1 Cor. 9. 13, 14. Heb. 7. 13.Rev 21:221 Cor 9:131 Cor 9:14Heb 7:13Temple nor Altar:) Ergo we ought to have an Altar, yea one divine set form of Altars in all christian Churches under the Gospel: which I hope you dare not aver.

After these three Independent Arguments, he pretends my third Quere contradicts the first, because I suppose a church-government may be consonant to Gods Word in the generall, which is not particularly prescribed in it: A pretty fancy! As if nothing could be consonant to Gods Word, which is not particularized or verbally enjoyned in it: Are not our materiall churches, garments, temporall Magistrates, Majors, Corporations, Parliaments, Courts of justice, Laws of all sorts, yea Festivals, Covenants, monthly Fasts, &c. agreeable to Gods Word, because not literally prescribed in it? Are your private church-covenants, unmixt Communions (as you phrase them,) erections of Independent congregations without the licence of temporall Magistrates, not consonant to the Word in your owne opinions, though no where extant in it? If not, then all your divine pretences for them vanish, and you yeeld your cause: If yea, you must then recant this pretence of a contradiction, till you are able to prove … better then yet you have done.

Having played the Logicians and contradictors part so well, he next betakes himself to his Anti-queries to prove a set church-modell: which are three.

1. If no prescript forme (of church-government) in the Word, why not Episcopacy (especially regulated and moderated) as well as Presbytery?

I answere, if you meane it of Lordly Episcopacy, there are abundant pregnant Texts against it, to prove it opposite to Gods Word. If of moderated or regulated Episcopacy, the same with Presbytery: if the Parliament by the Synod… advice unanimously establish it, as most consonant to the Scriptures, and most agreeable to the civill Government, I shall readily submit unto it without opposition, p. 6and why not you and all others?

2. If church-government be suited to States, whether Politicians are not more fit to consult about establishing it? Why is an Assembly of Divines called to search the Word about it?

I answer, that my position is, That every church-government ought to be suitable to Gods Word, as likewise to the civill State; Therefore Politicians and States-men are fit to be consulted with, to suit it best to the civill State; and an Assembly of Divines, to square it likewise by and to the Word: the true reason why in this our Realme, and all other Christian States (as I can abundantly manifest if need be) Ecclesiasticall Lawe… and formes of government have ever been setled by Parliaments, with the advice of Synods, Councells, wherein States-men and Church-men have jointly concurred in their deliberations and votes, using both the Bible and the Law to settle it, and not throwing either of them aside, as incompatible, as ignorant or lawlesse persons deeme them, but joyning both together: True civill or ecclesiasticall Policy, skill in Government, Arts, wholsome Lawes, boing ††2 Chron. 1. 10, 11, 122 Chr 1:102 Chr 1:112 Chr 1:12Gods gift, as well as spirituall graces.

To his third Anti-quere I answer, That it is more reasonable the **1 Kin. 3 5. to 15 Exod. 35: 30 to 35. c. 36. 1, to 5. c. 31. 3, to 7. Deut. 1. 17 c. 2. 21, 22, 23. But very unreasonable that Christ, the Church, State, Synod, Parliament, should be subject to your dictates, not you to theirs.1 Kgs 3:5–15Exod 35:30–35Deut 1:17State should be subject to Christs rule, then Christ to its direction: But this Quere is quite besides the Question, till you prove infallibly, That Christ hath prescribed a set unalterable divine government, to which all churches, Nations, States, must necessarily conform; and clearly manifest what this Government is in all its particulars. Till this be done the sole question is, Whether christian Princes, Parliaments, States, Synods, under the Gospel, have not a lawfull power to prescribe Ecclesiasticall Lawes and forms of Government, not repugnant to the Word, not (to Christ himself, as you pretend, who is ††1 Tim. 6. 15 Rev. 17. 14 c. 19. 16.1 Tim 6:15Rev 17:14King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, above the reach or command of humane power) but to all particular Christian churches, congregations, subjects under their respective jurisdictions? and whether the whole representative Church and State of England in Parliament, have not sufficient authority by Gods law to over-rule and bind all, or any particular members or congregatious of it, as well as the major part of an Independent congregation, power to **This Rule holds firm in all Churchassemblies, Synods, Parliaments, elections by suffrages whatsoever. See 3. H. 8. c. 27.over-vote and rule the lesser part, and to order, yea bind any of their particular members? A truth so clear, that no rationall man, good Christian or Subject can deny it: Your prime argument then, wherewith you deceive poore silly people, That Kings, Parliaments, cannot prescribe Lawes and Canons to Christ himselfe, the Soveraigne Lord and King of his Church; Ergo, they cannot prescrib them to their Christian subjects and Churches, who by Christs owne ordinance are subject to their lawfull soveraigne authority, is pure Independent Non-sence; much like this; A Master, Father, cannot prescribe Laws, Rules to the King or Parliament, who are paramount him: Ergo not to his servants, children, who are subject to him. As for the latter part of this Querie, That the Saints thinke CHRIST is King alone over his Churches, and hath not left them to substitutes, and the politicke considerations of men to bee governed by; If hee meanes it onelyonly of matters of Faith, or of meere internall government over the soules of men, it may passe as tolerable; but if hee intends it of externall Ecclesiasticall Government, Discipline, or order in the Church, or State as Christian, hee must renounce his Oath of Allegeance, his late Protestation, Nationall Vow and Covenant, and make Rom. 13. 1, to 6. 1. Pet. 2. 13, 14. Tit. 3. 1. 1 Tim. 2. 1, 2, 3. to be Apocryphall; the Confessions of all Protestant Churches heterodox; and deny christian Kings, Magistrates, p. 7highest civill powers, to be Christs substitutes, Vicars, in point of Government, (to whom Christ hath delegated his **2 Chro. 9 8 2 Sam. 23. 3 Deut. 1. 17 2 Sam. 5. 2 Rom. 13. 1, 2, 4, 6.2 Chr 9:82 Sam 23:3Deut 1:172 Sam 5:2Rom 13:1Rom 13:2Rom 13:4Rom 13:6Kingly power) as truely as Ministers are his deputies in point of instruction, admonition, to whom he hath bequeathed his Propheticall office.

2. In his answer to my second Quere, he first wilfully misrecites it, then infers ††Your party are most guilty of it, who without discovery or proof of your Newway, will have us blindly to submit unto it as the onelyonly way of Christ.a blind obedience from it to all superiours commands, be they never so unjust or contrary to Gods Word; whereas my Question speaks onelyonly of lawfull decrees, &c. 2.consonant to Gods Word, and to the civill Lawes, Government, and manners of the people; to which every Christian in point of conscience is bound to submit, (without any danger of blinde obedience) by the expresse resolution of Rom. 13. 1, to 6. 1 Pet. 2. 14, 15. Tit. 3. 1. Ezra 7. 26. Josh. 1. 16, 17, 18. Heb. 13. 17. If any man deny this verity, he must renounce not onelyonly his Christianity, but his Allegeance and Humanity too. But suppose (saith he) the whole Parliament and Synode should erre in commanding a Government that is erronious or untrue, must we then submit unto it? I answer, first, such an oversight is not to be presumed before it be actually committed; and it is neither **1 Cor. 13. 5, 7.1 Cor 13:51 Cor 13:7christian, charitable, nor any way of Christ, thus to prejudge their resolutions. Secondly, if the Decrees or Government they establish be not directly against Gods Word, nor pernicious to our soules, though not altogether such as we could wish, yet we ought contentedly to submit unto it without opposition: If contrary to the Word, we must then … submit thereto for the present, and expect a redresse in Gods due time. But if it be such a Government and Discipline under which we may freely enjoy the sincere and powerfull preaching of the Word, the due administration of the Sacraments, and all other Ordinances of God necessary for our salvation and edification, (as we may doubtlesse do under a Presbytery, and that government our pious Parliament intends to settle) we ought cordially and cheerfully to submit thereto; yea thankfully to embrace and blesse God for it, and can neither waiwardly oppugne nor refuse submission to it, without arrogancy, contumacy, and apparent schisme. As for his question concerning my owne and follow-brethrens sufferings, (which we deeme our Honour, not our Shame) I answer, that none of us suffered for opposing, writing, or speaking against the Bishops legall authority, or any ceremonies established in our Church by Act of Parliament; but onelyonly against their pretended divine right to their Episcopall Lordly power, diametrally contrary to Scripture, Fathers, Councels, the best Protestant and Popish Authors, the **37 H. S. c. 17 1 E. 6. c. 1. 1 Eliz c. 1. See my Breviate against Bishops Encroachments, &c. The Vnbishoping of Timothy and Titus. The Catalogue of authors in all ages concerning the parity and identity of Bishops and Presbyters. The antipathy of the English Lordly prelacy. The Q…nchcoale, &c.Statutes of our Realm; and against their Innovations in doctrine, discipline, ceremonies, canons, &c. contrary to the Lawes of the land, Articles, and Homilies of our Church (as the Parliament hath resolved them) as all our Books demonstrate, and Dr Bastwicke in direct termes, in the Preface of his Flagellum: And therefore it could be neither pride, arrogance, nor schisme, but meer conscience and duty in us, to oppose them in these their usurpations and innovations only contrary to the Laws of God and the Realme: If he and his would containe themselves within these our bounds, our Church should enjoy more peace, their persons more honour, then now they are likely to gaine, by opposing prejudicating both the Parliaments and Synods proceedings, though never so pious, consciencious, religious.

3. His pretended contradiction of the third Quere to the first is formerly answered; I shall onelyonly adde, that things may be consonant to the **Phil. 4 8. 1 Thes. 5. 2…, 22Phil 4:81 Thess 5:21 Thess 5:22generall Rules of Gods Word, though not precisely, prescribed in it: All Independent Ladies Gentlewomen, (and you I hope) will grant, that their different fashions, habits, p. 8colours, attires, are all agreeable to Gods Word, (if modest) and warranted by this generall precept 1 Tim. 2. 9. Let women adorn themselves in modest apparel, though not particularized in the Text: So may a church-government or Dresse be consonant to Scripture, though not precisely delineated or enjoyned by it.

4. To the fourth he gives no answer at all, but bids me prove it; which I have done already in my Independency examined, till it be disproved.

5. To the fifth, he grants that Independency will overthrow all Nationall Churches and Synods; and the two Independent Brethren assure us in their Reply to A. S p. 111 Nota.that in time it cannot but overthrow all other sorts of Ecclesiasticall governments: Is it not then a turbulent, dangerous, schismaticall, unquiet (that I say not insufferable) Government, by your owne confessions, which will admit no equall nor corrivall; nor yet any Nationall Church, Synod, Parliament, Prince, or temporall Magistrate, to exercise any Ecclesiasticall, Legislative, or Magisteriall authority over any of their Conventicles, members, persons, liberties, estates, much lesse over their consciences, as they are Christians? Will any Parliament, State, or Nation, (think you) suffer such a Government to take root among them, which will un-King, un-Parliament, un-church, un-Nation them altogether, and make each severall congregation an absolute Monarchy, Church, Republick, Nation, within it selfe, depending on, subordinate wholly to it selfe, as if it and they were no part or members of the publike? The Lord preserve us from such a dividing and overturning Government. As for his invectives against the Formality, Tyranny, and enslaving of mens judgments in the Presbyteriall way, as inconsistent with spirituall liberty and State priviledges; they are meere groundlesse calumnies, to draw an odium on it, (some of your male-contented party professing they would rather set up Lordly Episcopacy, which they have abjured, then it) whereas these aspersions suit better with your independent modell, which is more rigid, uncharitable, unsociable, Papall, tyrannicall, Anti-monarchicall, Anti-synodicall, yea Anti-parliamentall, (as I have elsewhere manifested) then any other church-government whatsoever. For my pretended bitter expressions, they are so suitable to the effects and reall consequences of this New way, (as you stile it) that I could not expresse my self in other language, without injury to the truth: and if any of my best Friends, who stood by me in my sufferings, deem themselves injured or reproached by them, (as you pretend, though none of them have yet complained to me) it is (I hope) onelyonly scandalum acceptum, non datum; and I presume my Friends are so ingenuous, as not to be offended with me for **Lev. 19. 17 Gal. 4. 16. c. 2. 11. 14. Tit. 1. 13, 14. Rev. 3. 13. will justifie me herein.Lev 19:17Gal 4:16Titus 1:13Titus 1:14Rev 3:13reproving only their errors with ingenuous freedom, in which I manifest my self their greatest Friend, because I neither spare nor flatter them in their mistakes: However, though I really honour all my Christian Friends, as well Independent as Presbyteriall (whom you most scandalously traduce as Episcopall and time-servers heretofore) yet I preferre the **Pro. 23. 23. Maximè amic… veritas.Prov 23:23truth of God, the peace and safety of my Native, bleeding, dying Church and Countrey, (now much endangered by our unhappy divisions) before all Friends or earthly comforts whatsoever. As for your pretended unsubjection of Presbyterian Synods and Churches to the Parliament in setling Ecclesiasticall matters, I neither know nor plead for any such; and our present Assembly being both appointed, directed by, and submitting all their determinations wholly to the Parliament, (as they are obliged both by Orders, Protestation, Covenant, and professe they ought to doe) armes me sufficiently against any such improbable untrue surmise.

p. 96. To the sixth Quere he returnes no answer, but plainly yeelds, that there was never any Independent Church in any age or Nation whatsoever, totally converted to the christian faith, till this present; nor any one Author that maintained it, till Mr Ainsworth (a Separarist) from whom the Apologists professe their dissent in some things. As for any reverend godly persons, who now contend for this new Modell (whose piety, eminecy make their errors not lesse false but farre more dangerous, & infectious) though I reverence their persons, yea judgments: too in other things, yet I cannot subscrib to them in this new dangerous Bypath, w^ch is not yet so beaten as to deserve the name of Christs Road-way. For the new supposed light, discovered in these dayes, touching church-government, if you meane it onelyonly of your Independency, (which you borrowed from the Brownists, or Low-countrey Anabaptists, the first inventors of this Government) I doubt when brought out to the light, and examined by the word of light, it will for the most part prove but twilight, **If therefore the light that is in you be Darkenesse, how great is that Darkeness Mat. 6. 23.Matt 6:23if not darknesse: If you meane it of any other light, that is truely such, we blesse God for it, and desire to walke brotherly and unanimously in it.

In the seventh he grants, that the Law of Nature, which instructs men to unite themselves into one Nationall State, or civill Government, doth likewise teach them to joine themselves into, subject themselves unto one Nationall Church, and to Nationall Synods, Parliaments, in point of church-government; in which every particular man hath his Vote though not in proper person (which hee objects is necessarie, but I deny, since all cannot possibly assemble) yet in their deputies, Knights, Burgesses, or selected Commissioners: and though it bee t…ue, that Christ hath not given Magistrates such absolute authority over mens consciences as bodies, (as you object) yet hee hath enjoyned us to bee **Rom. 13. 5. 1 Pet. 2. 14.Rom 13:51 Pet 2:14subject to the higher powers, and to every lawfull ordinance of man (not repugnant to his Word) EVEN FOR CONSCIENCE SAKE, and THE LORDS SAKE too. For my passage, That there is no example of gathering independent Congregations, not of Infidels but of men already converted to, and setled in the Christian Faith, unlesse derived from the private conventicles of Arrians, Novatians, Donatists, and other Hereticks, who yet w…re not independent among themthemselves; it is not a bitter speech, (as you phrase it) but a true one and onelyonly bitter to you because undeniable: For as it was the **Iustinian Codicis. l. 1. ti. 8. Socrates scholast. Eccl. hist. l 7. c. 5. l. 5 c. 4, 5, 15, 20, 21 23. l. 4. c. 12, 13. l. 2. c. 33.common practice of those seducing Hereticks, Sectaries to gather private Conventicles of their own, and labour to * Sec 35. Eliz c. 1.draw other orthodox Christians from their proper Ministers to incorporate themselves into their private separated congregations, as Historians informe us: So no such practice of alluring and stealing away other Pastors sheep from their proper Shepheard who first coverted them to, and edified them in the faith and grace of Christ can be produced, but only in these Hereticks and Sectaries whose practice your Independents imitate. As for those private conventicles (as he phraseth them) for which he saith I may blesse God, that I was remembred in them with tears, when others durst not name me; as I do really blesse God for them and those who remembred me effectually in them, so I dare not stile them Conventicles in an ill sense, since not ††See 35. Eliz. c. 1. None are Conventicler but Hereticks or Schismatickes, who wholy seperate themselves from our publique Assemblies established by Law. Justin Codicis l. 1. Tit. 8.such by Law, being only lawfull Assemblies of private Christians to seek unto God by prayer & fasting upon extraordinary occasions, which all good Christians cannot but approve: But all these meetings were farre from being then stiled, reputed Independent Churches, or having any affinity with them; so as they make nothing for his cause.

p. 108. To the eighth Quere he gives a negative Answer, First in generall next in particular to some instances. First he grants, that there was a Nationall Church (yea Nationall assemblies, Parliaments, determining church-affaires) of the Jewes, but these (saith he) cannot be a pattern for us now, because the covenant of the Gospell is not made with any one particular Nation, as with the Jewes, but to all Nations that embrace the Gospel, and beleeve in Christ; you have no promise nor prophesie of any Nation to be holy to God but the Jewes Nation, when they shall bee called againe.

To which I reply, first, That Independents have not the least precept or example for any solemne Covenant made betwixt God and men, to walke in the wayes of God, &c. but onelyonly **2 Chro. 15. 8, to 16. c. 34. 29, to 33. 8. 29 …10. Ezra 10. 3. Neh. 9. 38. c. 10. 1. &c.2 Chr 15:8–16Ezra 10:3Neh 9:38in the old Testament, and Church of the Israelites, and that no private congregationall, but publ…ke Nationall covenant, prescribed by the supreme temporall Magistrate and Assembly, not by the Priests or private Synagogues; yea the principall precepts, presidents for publike or private fasts, sanctifying the Sabbath, &c. you likewise derive from the old Testament and that Church; why then should not their Nationall Church be a pattern for us, and you to imitate, as well as their Nationall covenant, fasting, sabbath-keeping; the Church of God being all one, (as it is a Church) both under the old Testastament and new; and the pattern of it under the Law a better pesident for the Church under the Gospel, (of which it was a type and fore-runner) then the pattern of the Tabernacle shewed in the Mount (so frequent in your Lips and Books) a president for your Independent Modell, to which it hath no analogy. 2. This reason is most absurd and false, the Covenant of the Gospel extending not onelyonly to particular persons, but to **Psal. 2. 8, 9. Psal. 72. 8, to 18. Ps. 82. 8. Ps 86. 9 Ps. 65 2. Ps. 67. …, 3. 4 5. …a 2, 3. …. 9. …2, 23. c. 11. 9, to 16. c. 54. 1, 2, 3. c. 60. 3. to 22. Mich. 4. 1. to 5 Mal. 1 11. Zach. 8. 22. Act. 13. 46, 47 48. Matth. 28. 19, 20. Mar. 14. 15. Rom. 10. 18, 20 c. 11. 4. Isa. 62. to the end. 1 Pet. 2. 9. 18.Ps 2:8Ps 2:9Ps 72:8–18Ps 82:8Ps 86:9Ps 65:2Ps 67Mic 4:1–5Mal 1:11Zech 8:22Acts 13:46Acts 13:47Matt 28:19Matt 28:20Mark 14:15Rom 10:18Rom 10:20Isa 621 Pet 2:91 Pet 2:18all Nations and people whatsoever, who are both prophesied and promised to become Christs own inheritance, possession, people, spouse, church and to be an HOLY NATION, A PECVLIAR PEOPLE &c. to the Lord, in infinite Texts both of the old and new Testament, which I wonder the Respondent should either not see, or forget, being ten thousand fold more cleare and visible then his Independent platforme, which few or none can yet espy in Scripture, History, or Politiques.

2. He addes, that I cannot sh…w any Nation, every member whereof is qualified sufficiently to make up a church, which is Christs body, unlesse I will take in Drunkards, Whore-masters &c. to be members of a church, whereas the Word saith, they must be visible Saints, and this cannot be avoided in a Nationall church.

I answer, that I dare not be wiser then my Master Christ, who informes me, that there will, and must be alwayes in the visible church on earth (be it Nationall, parochiall, presbyteriall, or congregationall) **Matth. 3. 12 c. 13. 24. to 52 c. 25. 32 33.Matt 3:12goats among the sheep, chaffe among the wheat (which must grow together …ill the harvest, at the end of the world, to wit the day of judgment; & good fish mixed with the bad in the churches Net. 2. I finde a aaJoh. 6. 70, 71John 6:70John 6:71Judas, a Devill, among the Apostles, many bbSee Iudges, Samuel, Kings Chronicles, Nehemiah, Ezra, and all the Prophets.grosse sinners, idolaters, and corruptions in the Jewish church; many abuses, Epicures, Drunkards, Wh…re-masters, L bertines, unclean… persons, and false Teachers, in the churches of Galatla, Ephesus, Colosse, Pergamus, Smyrna, Thyatira and Laodicea; yet the Scripture expresly stiles them ccSee Pauls. and Johns, yea Christs Epistles to them, Rev. 2, & 3. I. Cor. 11. 13 … 34. c. 12, … 27.Rev 21 Cor 11:13the body and churches of Christ, and reputes such, members (though corrupt ones) of those Churches; who doe not actually cease to be members when excommunicated or suspended for a season, after they are baptized, and professe the Christian faith: nor did any separate from these churches, though they had some corruptions and evill members. For you therefore to separate p. 11from, and unchurch such Nationall or Parochial churches, which have some such members in them, is to unchurch all churches both in the old, the new Testament, and world it self, yea your own churches too. 3. The Scripture is expresse, ddMat. 24. 14. 15. c. 26. 16. Luk. 14. 23, &c. c. 13. 23, 24.Matt 24:14Matt 24:15Luke 14:23that many are called, but few chosen and saved; that all must be compelled to come into the church, though they want the wedding-garment: There never was, nor shall be here on earth, any one visible church compacted wholly of reall elected Saints, without any mixture of Reprobates,; such a church we shall meet with onelyonly in heaven, I am sure you can gather none such on earth. 4. Are there no corrupt or drunken members in your independent churches, but onelyonly reall visible Saints? are there no usurers, oppressors, corrupt dealers, covetous, proud, malicious, uncharitable, censorious persons; no apparent hypocrites or dissemblers? yea, are there not many sinnes and corruptions in the best, the choicest of all your members; (who cannot depart away, or quite separate themselves from their **Rom. 7. 15. to 25. Jam. 3. 2. Act. 14. 15Rom 7:15–25Jas 3:2Acts 14:15own bosome corruptions,) as there is and will be in the best of men during their mortality? If your Independent congregations consist of such members as these, of men subject to like passions, sinnes, infirmities as others in Presbyteriall churches, what then is become of this your reason and principall ground of Independency, or rather, Separation, or Brownism, its ancient proper title? you may lay it up in Lavander for another world, but can make no use of it in this, where you cannot so much as dream of a church of reall Saints, without any mixture of corruption: And therefore rather then separate, or leave us in a P…lt, because you cannot have your wills in all things, you should with blessed Paul (as tender-conscienced no doubt as any of you, and a lawfull pattern for your imitation, **1 Cor: 19 to 24to the Iew become as Iewes that you might gain the Iewes, to them that are under the Law, as under the Law, that you might gaine them that are under the Law: to them that are without Law, as being not without Law to God, but under the Law to Christ, that you might gaine them who are without law. To the weake you should become as weake, that you might gain the weak: yea be made all things to all men, that you might by all meanes gaine some. Which how farre you in your new way are from, let all men Judge.

3. For his answers to that of Acts 15. all ages, churches, till this present, have held it both an expresse warrant and president for the lawfulnesse, usefulness of Nationall and Provinciall Synods to determine differences in Religion, (which particular churches, persons cannot decide) and making necessary Canons for church-affaires; neither can all his shifts elude it: To his first and second reasons or rather evasions I answer, it is clear by Act. 15. 2. that the church of Antioch it selfe could not decide the question, nor Paul nor Barnabas satisfactorily determine it, so farre as to quiet all parties; and therefore they sent Delegates to the Apostles and Elders at Hierusalem, there to decide it: None is so ignorant but knowes, that there are many controversies now on foot concerning doctrine, discipline, and church-government, which no particular congregations, (nay hardly an whole Synod and Parliament together) are sufficient to settle and determine; therefore there is a kinde of necessity of Nationall Synods as well as of Parliaments, whence all ages, churches, have used them. To his third reason I reply, that it is evident by expresse words vers. 2. 5. 6. 7. 10. 19. 20. 24. that the principall end why the Apostles went up to Hierusalem, and why this Synod ass…mbled, was not to prove the false Apostles lyars, (as he affirmeth) but to debate and consider THIS QVESTION AND MATTER, wheth…r …he p. 12Gen…les ought …o bec…rcumci s…d? To his fourth, I say, that though this meeting was occasional, yet it i… a sufficient warrant for generall meetings, which are usua…ly called, only upon speciall occasions of moment: In it there was a generall assembling of all the Apostles, Elders, and Brethren at Hierusalem, (where there were then divers particular congregations, as our Assembly long since resolved from Acts 2. 6. 41, 42 46, 47. c. 4. 4. c. 5. 14 15, 16, 42. c. 6. 1. to 9. c. 8. 2, 3, 4. c. 11. 1, 2. c. 12. 12, 13. c. 21. 17, 18 23, 22. which if Independents deny, then they must prove, that all the Apostles and Elders at Hierusalem were Pastors but of oneand the self-same individuall congregation; and then what becomes of their Independent churches; which have no Apostle, and onelyonly one Pastor, but scarce any Elders in them) who upon this speciall and some other publike occasions met all together, and that not to advise onelyonly but determine and resolve, as is evident by vers. 6. to 32. c. 16. 4. c. 21. 25. which compared with the Texts of the old Testament in the Margin of my Quere,, where we finde frequent Nationall generall Assemblies, Synods, or Parliaments (if I may so stile them) among the Israelites (prescribed, appointed by God, and no wayes contradicted, revoked under the Gospel) determining ††1 Chro. 13. 1, to 14. c. 28, & 29. 2 Chro. 5. 2, &c. c. 6, & 7. c. 15. 9, to 29 c. 17. 7, 8, &c. c. 20. 3, 4. 5. c. 24. 4, to 16. c. 29. 3, to 36. c. 30. v. 31. c. 34. 29, to the end. c. 35. 1, … 19. Ezra & Neh. throughout. …. 9. 17. to 32.1 Chr 13:1–142 Chr 5:2all Ecclesiasticall controversies setling, ordering all churchaffaires, matters concerning the Arke, Temple, Sacrifices, Passeover, Priests, Nationall covenants, Fasting-dayes, Festivalls, suppressions of Idolatry, false-Worship, Reliques of Idolatry, and the like; are an impregnable evidence of the lawfulnesse of Nationall Synods, Parliaments, Assemblies, in all Christian Kingdomes, Republikes, upon the like occasions, and that they are endued with equivalent authority; there being no one Text in the old or new Testament, nor any shadow of reason, (but mee… shifts or obs…inacy of spirit against publike govetment, order, and authority) to controll it. If any pretend they doe it onelyonly out of consci…nce, if they will but seriously gage their owne deceitfull hearts, I feare their conscience will prove but wilfulnesse, having neithe… precept pre…dent, nor right reason to direct it: So as I may truely … his own calumny against me on him and his, that his and their own name, will, or opinion, is their onelyonly argument against this shining truth, which all ages, Churches, have acknowledged, ratified, practised, without the least dispute.

9. To my ninth Quere, and arguments in it he returnes nothing worthy Reply, but upon this Petitio principii, or begging of the thing disputed; that the Scripture and Apostles have prescribed a set forme of Government in all after …ges for the Churches of Christ, which he neither can, nor endevours to prove; and that Churches in the Apostles dayes were Independent though doubtlesse all Churches were then subject to the Apostles Lawes Orde…s, Edicts, Decisions, though no immediate Ministers or Pastors of them. (as appeares by their Epistles to them) therefore not Independent: so as my arguments hold firme, and his answers weak. As for his retorted argument: That the Scriptures were writ in the infancy of the Church: Therefore wiser and better Scriptures may be writ now; it is a blasphemous and absurd conclusion they being all writ by the spirit and inspiration of God himselfe the very **Da. 7 9. 13.A…cient of dayes, who hath neither infancy nor imperfection, as the Church hath. To his second objection that I would needs mak a Nationall Church, State, more perfect, understanding, and wise, then a congregationall: I f…are are not to averre it… since warranted by **Ephes. 4. 11. 12. 13. 2 Cor 13. 9. Heb. 6. 1. Pet 5. 10. Phil. 3. 12 15 Heb. 13. 21. James 1. 4.Eph 4:11Eph 4:12Eph 4:132 Cor 13:9Heb 61 Pet 5:10Phil 3:12Heb 13:21Jas 1:4direct Scriptu…e and since your selves must grant, that the Church under the Law was more perfect then that before it; the Church under the Gospell more perfect then under the Law; p. 13and the Churches under the Gospel, at the end of the Apostles dayes, when furnished with more divine knowledge, Scriptures, Gospels, Officers, and rules of Faith, Manners, Discipline, more compleat and perfect then at their beginning to pre…: No man doubts, that though a **1 Cor. 13, 11, 12. c. 14. 20. c. 3. 1. 1 Pet. 2. 2. Heb. 5. 12, 13, 14. 1 Ioh. 2. 11. to 15. Ephes. 4. 15. 161 Cor 13:111 Cor 13:121 Pet 2:2Heb 5:12Heb 5:13Heb 5:141 John 2:11–15Eph 4:15Eph 4:16new-born infant and Christian have all the parts and members of a man and Saint, yet they have not so much perfection, understanding, knowledg, judgment, strength of grace, or spirituall wisdome, as grown men and Christians. An aged, experienced, growne Minister, Christian, is more compleat and perfect then a new converted ††1 Tim. 3 6.1 Tim 3:6Novice, or Babe in grace; Ergo a growne and Nationall Church, then one but in the Embryo. Your Independent Churches, in their primitive infancy, when they had but two or three members onelyonly in them, and wanted both Elders, Deacons, and other necessary church-officers (as Mr Sympsons church first did) I am certain in your own opinion were not so complete and mature as you intended to make them afterwards by degrees: a Village is not so complete a Republike or Corporation as a City, nor a City as a ††Ezek. 16. 13.Ezek 16:13Kingdom, not a Family as a County, not a Consistory as a Synod, nor a cou…t of Aldermen as a common-cou…cell, not that as a Parliament: Therefore an Independent singular congregation not so complete as a Nationall church, being oft enforced to pray in the aid of other churches for advice, assistance &c. (as your selves confesse) which an whole Nationall Church need not to doe. In … himselfe confesseth, that the Apostles made new rules for government and discipline as occasion served; and that as God fitted occasions, so he made knowne new rules successively by degrees, not at once; and added new Officers, as Evangelicall B…shops, Elders, Deacons, Widowes, Evangelists, Doctors, Pastors, Teachers (which some distinguish from Presbyters, and d…fine to be severall offices:) Therefore the infant Church in the Apostles dayes was not so compleat, perfect in all parts as the multiplied and growne churches afterwards.

10. My tenth Q…re he wil…ully misrecites as he doth the rest, else he had not the least shadow of exception against it, a… propounded it, and then … an answer by way of dilemma to it: To which I reply, That if the Parliament and Synod shall by publike consent establish a Presbyteriall church-government, as most consonant to Gods Word, the Lawes and Reiglement of this Kingdome, Independents and all others are bound in conscience to submit unto it under paine of obstinacy, singularity, &c. in case they cannot really prove it diametrally contrary to the Scriptures, and simply unlawfull in point of conscience, not by fancies, or remote inconsequences, but by direct Texts and precepts (which they can never doe;) and that because it is thus commanded; established by the higher powers, to which in all lawfull or indifferent things wee are bound to render all …eatfull obedience, without resistance, even for conscience sake, by expresse Gospel Texts, Rom. 13. 1, to 7. Tit. 3. 1. 1 Pet. 2 14, 15. which I wish you would p…actise better, and make make more conscience of then now you doe. As for his crosse Interrogatories, I answer, 1. That if the Popes Councels command lawfull things to those who a…e subject to their power, they are as well to be obeyed as the commands of **Rom. 13. 1, to 7. 1 Tim 2 1, 2, 3. Tit 3. 1 1 Pet. 1. 2. to 24 c. 3. 1. 1 Cor. 7. 1, to 18. Eph. 5. 22 23. c. 6. 1. to 10. Col. 3. 18, to 25.Rom 13:1–71 Tim 2:11 Tim 2:21 Tim 2:3Titus 3:11 Pet 1:2–241 Cor 7:1–18Eph 5:22Col 3:18–25heathen Emperours, Magistrates, Parents, Husbands, by Christian Subjects, Wives, Servants, living under them, are. 2. That there is a great difference between matters of opinion onelyonly, and of practise; That his instanced points, Whether Lo… Episcopacy be jure divino; or their making out Processe under their owne Names and Seales be agreeable to the Law of the Land are matters onelyonly of opinion simply in themselves; and if a Synod and Parliament should have determined the p. 14first, and the Iudges resolved the last, affirmatively, their resolutions could not binde my judgement absolutely, so farre as to subscribe their opinions as undoubted truths, unlesse they could satisfie my arguments and authorities to the contrary; but yet they should & ought to bind me for the present so far as to submit to their authority & Processe in their own names in things within their legall cognisance: So if the Parliament and Assembly shall establish any Church-government, as most agreeable to the Scriptures and our Lawes, though this binds not all Independents to be simply of their opinion, unlesse the reasons and arguments produced for it be sufficient to convince their judgments, yet it binds them in point of practise and obedience, outwardly to submit thereto, and not to separate from it, under pain of arrogancy, faction, schisme, unlesse they can clearly manifest it to be absolutely unlawfull and repugnant to the Scripture. As for my own objected challenge to the Bishops & Iudges, about the jus divinum of Lordly Prelacy and Bishops Processein their own names; when I made it, I was certain I had both ††See my Catalogue, &c. The unbishoping of Timothy and Titus. A Breviate and Antipathy of the English Lordly Prelacy.Scripture, Fathers, Councels, Acts of Parliament, the suffrages of all forraigne Reformed Churches, Writers, and our owne learnedest Bishops, Authors in all times against the first; and direct Acts, Resolutions of Parliament, Patents, unanswerable Law-authorities, and Reasons against the latter: Therefore a few Lordly Prelates opinions in their owne case, or the subitane, forced, extra judiciall resolution of the Iudges (not then published) could no more conclude my judgment, nor make me guilty of arrogancy, obstinacy, or schism then, than their forced judgments for the lawfulnesse of Loanes and Ship-money, against expresse Acts and judgments of Parliament, oblige me or others, then or now, not to deeme that taxe illegall: and when you can produce as many good authorities, Reasons from Scripture, Antiquity, Acts of Parliament, Writers of all sorts, against the lawfulnesse of Presbytery, as I have done against Lordly Episcopacy by divine right, Bishops making out Processe under their own Names, Seals, and ††See my humble Remonstrance against Shipmoney.Ship-mony, neither of which were ever setled by any former Parliament, and have all bin expresly voted against in this; I shall then excuse you from arrogancy and schisme, but till this be done, (as I presume it will never be) the guilt of both these wil stick fast upon you, if you readily conforme not in outward practice to that Government the Parliament shall establish. If they should settle Independency, I am certaine you would then write and preach for universall obedience to it, (which you now publikely call for so eagerly without authority or proof of its Divinity) because thus setled, without dispute: therefore by like reason you ought to submit to a Presbytery, or such other Government as shall be resolved on by those intrusted with this care; notwithstanding any thing you have said, or this New Independent sencelesse argument of **In his Sermon on Feb. 25Mr I. G. which some of your partie much rely on: The Saints shall judg the world (at the day of Judgment) 1 Cor. 6. 2. Ergo, the Parliament (chosen by the rifraffe of the World) and the Synod, may not make any Lawes in matters of Discipline, Worship, or Government, to regulate or oblige Saints now: They might better have concluded, Ergo the Parliament, or any secular Magistrate, cannot judge them now for any secular matter; since the Apostle useth this expression onelyonly to blame them for going to Law before Heathen (not Christian) Iudges, for secular matters, vers. 1. 6, 7. Such Independent arguments will but ill support your Independent fabrick.

11 To my 11. Quere he gives only a negative answer, and then declaims against p. 15Presbytery without ground or reason: But because I have proved the truth of what he denies in my Independency examined, and in some following pages, I shal not trouble you with any further proof, except these two particulars: 1. That Independency is in reality meer Separation and Brownism, lately christened with this new title, to take off its odium: and if so, I doubt not but it is a nursery of schisms, Sectaries, &c. 2. That we finde by wofull experience, what bloudy divisions, warres schisms, the toleration but of one Religion and Sect in our Realms contrary to that established, (to wit Popery and Papists) hath produced in all our Dominions, to their imminent danger, and almost utter ruine; what then will the free permission of many Independent different forms of Churches, Sectaries do? will it not produce many more troubles, dangers, wars, schisms, then we have hitherto felt? Yea, if every man ought to have freedom of conscience, to vent what opinions, & set up what Governments he deems most conformable to the Word in his own private fancie, you must indulge Papists this liberty as well as others: and then how soone will they over-run us for the future, how justly can we take up armes to suppresse them for the present? Consider seriously of these and other publike mischiefes of your way, and that liberty of conscience you so much contest for, (which in truth is nothing but meere lawlesnesse, or licentiousnesse, to do **Deut. 12. 8. Judges …. 6. r. 21. 25.Deut 12:8what seemes good in your owne eyes, as if there was no King in Israel, without respect to the publike peace, weale, or glory of God) and then happily you may in time discerne, recant your errour.

12 To my twelfth Quere he onelyonly answers, that I fall a jeering of my brethren, (a palpable untruth) and that I put a nick-name on them, to make them odious; to wit, the title of Independents, which they disclaime; not answering one syllable to the substance of the Question. To which I reply: First, that the title of Independency (of which you are now ashamed) was at first assumed, approved by your selves, and many of your party doe still owne, though some disclaim it, of purpose to evade the titles of Separatists and Brownists, with whom you really concurre in practice: Besides, you very well know that this title was imposed on, and owned by you long before I writ; therefore I could not father this brat upon you: But if you be offended with this name, I desire you in your next Pamphlet to discover to us your owne Christian name, with the true title of your party, and the government you plead for as the only way of Christs institution, (all which you have hitherto concealed) and then (God willing) I shall give you a further answer to this cavill, or retract this title; till then, I must informe you, that it most proper for your party, who will have every one of your owne private congregations, a complete absolute corporation, exempred from, unsubjected to, independent on any other, be it a Nationall, Synodall, Provinciall, Parochiall assembly, Parliament or Kings themselves in any Church-affaires: You must therefore still retaine this Title, whiles you maintaine such Paradoxes both in opinion, practice, (and that by meere Independent inferences) as justly appropriated to you; Conveniunt rebus nomina saepe suis, being never more exactly verified then in this your suitable name.

But you object, first, That you are accountable for your actions to every neighbour Church, that shall in the name of Christ require it. Secondly, That you stand not independent from, but hold communion with all other Churches, both in the Ordinances, and in asking counsell and advice mutually.

To the first I answer, 1. That if you are accountable for your actions to every p. 16particular neighbour Church, t…n why not much more to a Synod or Parliament, whose ecclesiasticall jurisdiction over you or your Churches is denied by you? Secondly, if you are thus accountable to every neighbour Church, doe you intend it of Parochiall. Episcopall, or Presbyteriall Churches, as well as Independent; or of Independent onelyonly? If of Independent onelyonly, as I suppose you doe, then you appeale onelyonly to Churches of your owne partie, frame, judgment, and make one of them subordinate, accountable to another, but not to any other Church; which is an apparent schisme, separation from all other Churches, and contradicts your second objection: If of all other sorts of Churches as well as Independent, you must either grant them true Churches of Christ, and then you have no ground to sever from them; or if false, or no true Churches of Christ, (as you in truth repute them) then by your own principles they are no competent Iudges of Ecclesiasticall affaires, nor you accountable to them. Thirdly, How (I pray) doe you hold your selves accountable to every neighbour Church? by way of subordination, correction or just appeal? that I am certain you will deny: or only by way of voluntary information and satisfaction, when required, which I conceive you mean? If so only, then this is properly no account at all, or but arbitrary at most, which you may deny if you please; and if you erre, or prove faulty, or refractory, this neighbour Church can but admonish, not enforce you to correct your errours or injustice: and so this will prove but a meere mockery in stead of an account.

To the second I answer, That if you stand not Independent from other Churches, but hold communion with them in Ordinances, and in mutuall counsell and advice, Then 1. why doe you separate from them as no true Churches, and oppose their way of Government with so much bitternesse? Secondly, why doe you refuse to administer Baptisme and the Lords Supper to those who are their members, in your Churches, unlesse they be professed members of some Independent Congregation? Thirdly, why do you not follow their advice counsell, or the Parliaments Synods admonition, and submit therto; who now earnestly perswade you from your way of separation, division, in these distracted times? the end of demanding good counsell and advice being but to follow, not reject it, where there is humility, ingenuity, or sincerity in those who ask it. You must therefore either disclaime these objected concessions, or become more tractable for the future. 4. You tell us in the next succeeding lines, That neither I; nor Synods, nor this Synod, are infallible, but as subject to errours as others; and that never ††Yea, never more dangerous errours ref…ted, suppressed, then in the 4. first general Councels, and some Synods since, as that of Dort, and other Protestant Synods See the Harmony of confession…s: Where therefore they determine rightly, you must submit unto them; where they confirm apparent dangerous errours, there you may vary from them when proved such.more dangerous errours have been confirmed then by Synods: and therfore men are not bound in conscience to their decrees upon penaltie of sinne, arrogancy, &c. But pray Sir may not you and your Independent Ministers, Churches erre as well as others? Is infallibility annexed onelyonly to your private Chaires, conventicles? If not, then why may not your new-minted Way be a meere erronious By-path, and no way of Christ as well as other waies, and you erre herein as well as Synods in other things? Why will you have the major vote in your congregationall decisions to over-rule and bind the rest to obedience, (as your practice and opinions intimate) since the major part may possibly be mistaken, as well as the lesse dissenting? Shall nothing binde in any Churches, but what is unanimously voted nemine contradicente? or shall one or two dissenting voices over-rule the rest or not be bound by the most? or where all consent, may not all yet be in an errour, and not discerne it, through selfe-love to their p. 17owne wayes and opinions, till others of contrary judgements discover and convince them of their errour? Away then with this fond argument and evasion; Synods and Parliaments may erre in some things, Ergo they must binde us in no thing: Is this good Logicke or Divinity? Good Ministers may and doe erre sometimes in some points of Divinitie, Ergo wee will beleeve them in none, no not in those things in which they doe not erre. Will you throw away all the Apple because one part of it only is rotten? or reject Communion with the best of men because they have some infirmities? Deal then with the Ecclesiasticall decrees of Synods and Parliaments as in wisdome, in conscience you are bound to doe: Where they are just, equall, not opposite to the word, embrace, submit unto them; when erronious or contrariant to the expresse word (not to your own sa…s, inferences or opinions) you may differ from them in judgment, but you must patiently suffer under them in point of practise & obedience (if meerly practicall) till a further season, and not disturb the Churches peace by opposition or schism: which is as good, as seasonable Christian advice, as that you conclude with unto me, which I heartily wish your selfe had first followed, who have more defamed the ways of Christ and used more personall unchristian bitternesse then I am guilty of. You wish indeed, O that a spirit of love wore maintained among those that are brethren: though they differ in judgment, must they needs differ in affection? I say the same. But O then why seperate you from us, yea passe uncharitable censures on us as if we were not your Brethren? One Kingdom, one City, House, doth now, on… heaven shall heareafter contain us both: why not then one church, government, one Church Militant, as well as one Triumphant? If you deem not your **These are the true grounds of all s…rations. Esa 65. 5. Luk. 18. 10, to 16. lude 18. 19. witnesses the Novatians, Dunatists, of old: The severall orders of Monks, Nuns, Erem…s, Anchorites, in the Church of Rome, and their new order of Jesuits, each of them pre…nding more sanctity and strictnesse then another, and so severing in their different orders, habits, Mon…, rules, covenants, one from another.Isa 65:5Luke 18:10–16selves more holy then your brethren, or be not swelled up with spirituall pride (as your stiling your selves ††Mr Goodwins Theomachia p 24, 25. The Reply of two of the Brethren pas….Men of rich anoynting from God, the most religiously affected, and best conscienced people of the land, the most precious men, &c. with your separation from us, and harsh censures of us, make most men suspect) then why resuse you to close with us now, as you have done heretofore? Could our Ministers, Churches, when more corrupt, convert, regenerate, edifie, save you, and yet not now so much as hold you, when more refined and reformed? If yea, then let us both shake hands without any more encounters; if nay, then fairely chalke out your yet concealed independent way and platforme in all its severall lineaments, and beautifull native colours; produce your severall punctuall Scriptures, Arguments, to maintain it, (there being none of them extant in these your Observations for ought I can find) that so I may see the frame and grounds of this new Fabricke, in as large or narrow a Modell as you please: and then doubt not but an Answer shall be given to what ever you modestly set forth, (if worthy answer) in case it be not satisfactorie; or else a friendly embrace thereof, if agreeable to the Spirit and Word of truth, by him who hath learned Pauls peremptorie resolution, 2 Cor. 13. 8. We can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth; in which resolution (God assisting) I resolve to live and die.