Friendly Debate with Non-Conformist Part 2, Text (1 of 5)

Friendly Debate with Non-Conformist Part 2 · Text (1 of 5)

p. 1A CONTINUATION of the Friendly Debate.

C.

YOU are well met Neighbor, How do you?

N. C.

Very well, through Mercy. Why do you ſigh?

C.

To ſee you ſo far from mending your Schiſm, that you proceed to make it wider; and divide our very language. Why cannot you ſpeak as the reſt of your Neighbors, and ſay, Well I thank God? Is it a commendable thing to be Singular without any need? and to ſeparate from us even in your words and forms of ſpeech? Or is this a part of the Language of Canaan (ſo much talk't of in the late times) to be learnt of all thoſe, that will be accounted the People of God?

N. C.

Take heed how you ſpeak againſt the Iſrael of God. They are a peculiar people, and muſt not do after the manner of the Nations.

C.

What Nations? Do you take us to be all Heathens? Nay, ſuch Heathens from whom you are not only to ſeparate your ſelves, but utterly to root out?

N. C.

You carry our meaning too far.

p. 2C.

No farther than ſome of your Sect do, whom you have taught in a foonſh and dangerous manner to imitate the Scripture Phraſſe? and to apply all that concerned Iſrael, to Themſelves; and all that concern'd the ſeven accurſed Nations, or Egypt and Babylon, to their Neighbors.

N. C.

I am not one of thoſe; but I and many others, when we are askt about our welfare, dare not ſpeak as you do, leſt we ſhould take Gods name in Vain: of which you know Iſrael was to be very careful.

C.

Is it to no purpoſe then to thank God for our own and our Families health? Or to pray God would be with our Friend when we meet or part with him? Perhaps you think that Boaz took Gods name in vain, when according to the Cuſtome in Iſrael, he ſaid to his Reapers, the Lord be with you: and that they were Offenders for replying, the Lord bleſs thee. I doubt ere long you will refuſe to ſay upon occaſion, GOD SAVE THE KING, for fear of taking Gods name in Vain.

N. C.

Not ſo. We can uſe ſuch words when we are very ſerious, but not commonly.

C.

You made me believe, the laſt time we talk't together, that you were commonly, if not alwayes, Serious. But now it ſeems the world is altered with you.

N. C.

We are afraid you are not Serious; but uſe theſe words ſo careleſly that you break the Third Commandment: upon which account we would teach you to refrain them.

C.

You are excellent Interpreters of Holy Scripture What a rare Comment ſhould we have upon it, if all your Expoſitions were but gathered and put together? As you find words now uſed in common talk, ſo they ſound to your fancy there: And this makes you take it ſo oft into your mouths in vain; I mean beſides its purpoſe and intention. Alas! that you ſhould be no better inſtructed p. 3than generally to entertain this conceit, that a man breaks the third Commandment, if he mention the Name of God, without lifting up his Eyes, clapping his Hand on his Breaſt, or ſome ſignification of Devotion! This abſurd Fancy I have heard ſome alledge as a Reaſon why they would not let their Children ask them Bleſſing; i. e. deſire them to pray to God for them: And others have made this the cauſe why they would not teach them their Catechiſm, nor any Prayers, leſt they ſhould take Gods Name in vain; that is, in their ſenſe, make mention of it, and not mind what they ſay.

N. C.

I do not approve of ſuch Opinions as theſe.

C.

If you did, you would condemn your ſelf many hundred times in a Day. For how oft do you tell us in common diſcourſe, of the People of God, and the things of God, and the Ordinance of God, not minding that you mention his Name. Nay how many times have we heard you ſay in your Prayers, O LORD, O GOD (ſometimes thrice in one ſentence) when we have great reaſon to think you did not know whether you uſed it ſo oft or no. Now, which will you ſay? That you ſinned in this; or that it is ſufficient to have an habitual Reverence toward Almighty God, and never to uſe his Name in an irreverent manner; though we do not alwayes actually attend when we uſe it?

N. C.

I have not conſidered this; but was alway bred in a Belief that we break the Third Commandment when we uſe Gods name in common talk; and that's the Reaſon I did not anſwer you after the uſual manner.

C.

It's well if you be not more careful to keep the Commandment in the Phraſe-ſenſe, than in its proper and Principal meaning.

N. C.

How now? muſt we be beholden to you to invent a new word for us?

C.

It cannot be new to you ſure, who are ſo well verſed p. 4in a Divinity that conſiſts, in a manner, wholly of Phraſes; and ſetting them aſide, hath little or nothing in it, upon which account it may well be called, Phraſe-Divinity.

N. C.

You will never leave your Pleaſantneſs. Pray talk more gravely, and explain your ſelf.

C.

I'le tell you then what I mean. There are many I obſerve, who have been very ſcrupulous about the Third Commandment, and careful to keep it, as the words are vulgarly uſed in our language now a-dayes; who have made no Conſcience at all of it, at leaſt notoriouſly broken it, according to the true import of the Words among the Hebrews. For, as I have been taught, when Moſes ſaid, Thou ſhalt not take the Name of the Lord thy God in vain, &c. His meaning was; that no man ſhould dare to call God to witneſs any thing he ſpoke, and yet utter a falſhood, or not do according to his promiſe. If he were ſo prophane, he aſſures him that God who was Witneſs to what he ſaid, would alſo be his Judg, and by no means acquit him. Now how oft you have broken the Commandment in this, which is the main ſenſe; while you have been very ſtrict to keep it in the other, I need not tell you.

N. C.

You muſt tell me; or elſe I muſt tell you that you are like the Devil, a falſe accuſer of the Brethren.

C.

Your Miniſters can tell you a great deal better than I, who were wont to complain of this as one of the moſt grievous ſins of the times; that ſo many had forſworn themſelves by breaking their Solemn League and Covenant. You covenanted, for inſtance, to extirpate Hereſy and Schiſm; and ſuch great diligence was uſed in this point, that they grew faſter, and to a greater height than ever had been known among us. So Mr. Caſe tells the Parliament in his Thanks-giving Sermon for the taking of Cheſter p. 25. And asks them how it comes to paſs that theſe abound more than ever they did, and that under their Noſes? There is ſuch a numerous increaſe (ſaith he) of p. 5Errors and Hereſies, as I bluſh to repeat what ſome have affirmed, namely, that there are no leſs than an hundred and fourſcore ſeveral Hereſies propagated and ſpred in this Neigboring City. And many of ſuch a Nature, as that I may truly ſay, in CALVIN'S language, the Errors and innovations under which we groaned of late years (He means under the Biſhops) were but tollerable trifles, childrens play, compared with theſe damnable Doctrines, Doctrines of Devils. Nor is he alone in theſe complaints, but Mr. Edwards **Epiſt. Ded. to both Houſes before his Gangraena, 1. part.craves leave to be free with them, and to tell them that Sects had been growing ever ſince the firſt year of their ſitting; and every year increaſed more and more. No ſooner had they put down the Common-Prayer, but down went the Scriptures themſelves together with it, which many among us (ſaith he) ſlight and blaſpheme. The Images of the Trinity, Chriſt, Virgin Mary, and the Apoſtles were ordered to be broken down; and at the next ſtroke there were thoſe that overthrew the Doctrine of the Trinity, oppoſed the Divinity of Chriſt, ſpoke Evil of the Virgin Mary, ſlighted all the Apoſtles. The Parliament caſt out the Ceremonies in the Sacraments, the Croſs and Kneeling; and then the People in many places caſt out the Sacraments themſelves; Baptiſm and the Lords Supper. The one took away Saints dayes, and ſome of the other made nothing of the Lords-day. The ſuperfluous maintenance as he calls it, of Biſhops and Deans being cut off, immediately the neceſſary ſetled maintenance of all Miniſters was cryed down and denyed too. Nay the Biſhops & their Officers being gone, there were many that would have thrown away all Miniſters after them. A great deal more you may find there to the ſame purpoſe if you have a mind; but he ſeems to ſum up all in this; the Fourth Commandment was taken away in the Biſhops dayes (ſo he is pleaſed to calumniate p. 6them) but now we have all ten Commandments taken away at once by the Antinomians; yea all Faith and the Goſpel denyed by the Seekers. He would have inſerted this clauſe ſure, if he durſt; the Third Commandment is now taken away by the Parliament. For I pray you, my good Friend, what remembrance had they of the dreadful name of God, to whom they had lifted up their hands? What a trifle was that ſacred Oath now accounted? That water of life which (as Mr. Caſe fancied**Sermons about the Covenant, p. 66.) had kept all the Nation from giving up the ghoſt, was dead it ſelf; and had not the leaſt ſpirit remaining in it, to quicken theſe Covenanters to extirpate Hereſies. Nor would all the expoſtulations of their Miniſters put any life into them: But as theſe complainers had violated other obligations in taking that Covenant; ſo now their Maſters ſet it at naught, and, to ſerve the ends of State, continued to connive at thoſe things which they promiſed to root out. For a great while after this, I find no leſs than three of your Divines (in their Epiſtle to the Reader before Mr. Pooles book againſt Biddle) renew their Complaints, that the whole body of Socinianiſm which walkt only in the Dark, and in Latin, in the Biſhops time, was now tranſlated into Engliſh. Many bold Factors for thoſe Blaſphemies which in thoſe times durſt not appear, diſſeminating now their Hereſies without fear, both publickly and from houſe to houſe: Which by the way may inſtruct you who are to be charged with a great part of the guilt and miſchief of ſuch Books as the Sandy-Foundation (i. e. the Doctrine of the Trinity) Shaken, and ſeveral others lately publiſhed. In ſhort, this was a thing ſo notorious, that Mr. Caſe moves the Parliament (in that Thankſgiving Sermon p. 30.) that there might be a ſolemn faſt to humble and afflict their Souls for Covenant-violations, and wherein the Covenant might be renewed in a more ſolemn and ſerious manner with God▪

p. 7N. C.

Theſe were hot ſpirits, and might be too forward to charge the Covenanters with taking Gods name in vain when they were not guilty of it.

C.

But you will not ſay that the greateſt part of the London-Miniſters were raſh and heady. Now if you read their Seaſonable exhortation to their reſpective Pariſhes, printed 1660. you will find, they complain of the Odious ſcandals of thoſe that profeſs themſelves the People of God: particularly of their ſelf-ſeeking under pretence of the publick good; and their unparalel'd breach of all civil and ſacred Oaths and Covenants both to God and Men.

N. C.

This I confeſs is a ſad ſtory.

C.

Conſider then I beſeech you; if theſe Leaders and great Profeſſors were ſo guilty, what ſhall we think of the common People, who took the Covenant hand over head (as we ſay) being totally ignorant of ſeveral things to which they ſwore: nay were taught by Mr. Caſe (in his Sermons about the Covenant p. 41.) to take it, though they did not underſtand it?

N. C.

I cannot believe you.

C.

Go to the Book then and believe your own Eyes. There you will find he alledges the Example of Joſiah for it, who renewed the Covenant when he was a Child; and of Nehemiah who made the Women and Children do the like. He was ſenſible indeed, that there is a great difference between that which was Divine, and this which was but the Device of men; and therefore would perſwade them that they were bound no further by this Oath, than they ſhould find the things contained in it to be according to the Word of God. But it is plain, I ſhew'd you the laſt time, the Parliament did not allow any Body to expound the Covenant but themſelves. And beſide this, they ſware without any limitation to preſerve things as they ſtood in the Church of Scotland, where for any thing they knew, there might be as abſolute a p. 8Tyranny, as is exerciſed under the Papacy. Nay, in Scotland it ſelf, there were ſome who argued ſo ſtrongle againſt the Convenant, that a Jolly man I have read of,Mr. Andr. Cant. was driven to ſuch ſtraits at laſt, as he had nothing to ſay but his, That they muſt deny Learning and Reaſon, and help Chriſt as Life. If you will give me leave, I'le tell you ſomething worſe than this.

N. C.

How is it poſſible?

C.

There were ſome that in plain terms pleaded Religion for the breaking of the Covenant: So that (contrary to Mr. Nye's Exhortation I told you of) with them there was Yeas, and Nay. J. Lilbura for inſtance, in his Englands Birth-wirthgt p. 29. ſaith, that the Covenant is impoſſible to be kept, and that the Framers and Makers of it have run into wilful perjury. See Mr. Bellamy's Vindic. of the City Remonstr. 26. May, 1646.Nay, he calls it; This Make-bate, perſecuting, ſould-deſtroying, England-dividing and undoing Covenant. With whom you may joyn Mr. J. Goodwin, who tells us (in his 12. Cautions p. 4.) that to violate an abominable and accurſed Oath (ſpeaking with reference to this Covenant) out of Conſcience to God, is an holy and a bleſſed perjury.

N. C.

Now I hope you have done.

C.

It ought not to be forgot, that this Covenant was contrary to you Solemn Proteſtation, taken firſt by both Houſes of Parliament, wherein they promiſed to defend the true reformed Proteſtant Religion, expreſſed in the Doctrine of the Church of England. Did they not?

N. C.

Yes.

C.

Whey then did your Miniſter perſwade them to enter into this New Oath, which was ſo contrary to ſome Articles of our Churches Doctrine?

N. C.

They explain'd themſelves as I remember, before they Covenanted, and told us what they p. 9meant by the Doctrine of the Church of England.

C.

Very good. And was it not finely done, that after the Members of both Houſes had taken the Proteſtation, ſo as I now ſaid, the Houſe of Commons alone ſhould make a Declaration, that by thoſe words [the Doctrine of the Church of England] was intended only ſo much of it, as was oppoſite to Popery and Popiſh Innovation, and ſhould not be extended to the maintenance of the Diſcipline and Government? And then that under this Explication publiſhed only by the Commons and never aſſented to by the Peers, this Proteſtation was impoſed on the Kingdom, and all that would not take it declared unfit to bear office in Church or Commonwealth? What is there to be ſaid, I beſeech you, to excuſed theſe ſtrange proceedings. Firſt, both Houſes ſwear to plain words. Then one Houſe claps an interpretation on them. And after that, they alone ſo far intrench upon the Peoples Liberties (which they were bound to maintain) as to impoſe this Proteſtation upon them without conſent of Parliament: and that under a heavy penalty on thoſe that ſhould not comply with them. All this is no leſs than a Demonſtration, methinks, that too many of you (for we will not condemn all) have been too forward to take Gods name in vain; at leaſt to ingage your ſelves in Oaths and Vows haſtily and raſhly. And withall it ſhews that you were of that impoſing Spirit which you now complain of; and that Religion was more pretended than truly aim'd at: And laſtly, that you were ſo vainly confident your favour with God, that you could take his name into your mouths backward and forward, and never bluſh; ſo you did but look demurely, and expreſs much reverence to it in common talk. All which I proteſt, is ſpoken to no other purpoſe but to humble you; and to ſhew that you unjuſtly uſurp the name of the moſt Religious People, the moſt conſcientious, p. 10and the moſt fearful of offending God, that are in the Nation: and that you abuſe the ſimple, when you make them believe that you are the Pillars upon which the Kingdoms welfare ſtands; for whoſe ſake alone it is, that we were not made long ago like Sodom and Gomorrah. For it is manifeſt you have involv'd the people in abundance of guilt and made Religion vile in their eyes, and helpt to bring the name of God, which you have taken ſo oft in vain, into great contempt.

N. C.

This is not a place to talk in.

C.

You ſay right: otherwiſe I ſhould have told you of a freſh guilt of this kind. For I am informed ſome have ſet up Schools for the inſtructing Youth in Logick and Philoſophy▪ directly contrary to the Oath they took in the Univerſity. But I am run beſide my intention in this diſcourſe: having told you, I remember, it would be in vain to diſpute any more; and therefore deſired, when we met again, the time might be ſpent to other purpoſed.

N. C.

I have not forgot it. But if you will go in here, we will not wrangle at all, but only talk fairly, as loving Friends, of ſome matters in which you are concerned.

C.

I ſuppoſe it is about our old buſineſs, and then you had better conſider of what I have ſaid already. If that will not move you, I have little hope to do any good upon you.

N. C.

You are a ſtrange man. When I had no great mind to be troubled with your Diſcourſe, then you would never have done. And now that I am earneſt to be ſatisfied in ſome things, you hang back and have nothing to ſay. Methinks you might be willing, at leaſt, to receive an account of my Thoughts concerning our late Debate.

C.

Have you then conſidered what I ſaid, as you promiſed you would?

N. C.

Yeas that I have. And being ſomewhat ſtagger'd p. 11with it, I thought good to conſult with ſome Chriſtian friends, and hear their Opinion, which I prefer before my own.

C.

And what was the iſſue?

N. C.

I perceive they are generally offended at you to a high degree.

C.

So were the Scribes and Phariſees at our Saviour. And for any thing I know both upon the ſame ſcore, becauſe you are plainly told of your faults. This nettles and vexes you at the heart: only to hide and conceal your ſecret anger; you call it by another name, and ſay you are offended.

N. C.

No they are not angry with thoſe who give them a private reproof, but to print a book againſt them, what can it intend, but miſchief?

C.

Now I gueſs at their meaning. Their offence is of the ſame nature with that which Mr. Edwards ſaith the Sectaries took at his Gangraena, * Becauſe it hinders their making Proſelytes, and ſo for want of growing up to ſuch a number as they deſign and hope for, they may miſs of a Toleration, and ſo in the iſſue a Domination, which is ſo much ſought for by them.

N. C.

They mean the ſame that the Apoſtle doth, who requires us to give no offence neither to the Jews, nor to the Greeks, nor to the Church of God. 1 Cor. 10.32.

C.

By your favour Sir, Saint Paul and you have not the ſame meaning: as you might have learnt long ago (if you did not converſe more with your frivolous writers, than thoſe who have ſome ſenſe in them) from your great Champion Mr. Cartwright. He tells you expreſly that by offence the Apoſtle doth not intend, that which diſpleaſeth, or diſcontents, but that whereby occaſion is given to any of tranſgreſſing againſt the Laws of God. For he is treating of eating things offered to Idols even in the Temples of Idols, or in the preſence of ſuch p. 12as were indangered thereby: The Gentiles being hardned in their Idolatry, the Jews provoked againſt Chriſtianity, and ſome Chriſtians drawn by ſuch examples to follow them doubtingly. Take now the Word in this proper ſenſe, and I ſhall be cleared from this imputation; and you your ſelves condemned for looking no better to your feet, that they go not awry.

N. C.

How ſo?

C.

It is the very deſign of my Book to keep you from falling into ſin any more: and to direct you to ſuch a Courſe that you may not break the Laws of God again your ſelves; nor caſt ſuch a ſtumbling-block before others, that they take occaſion to break them too, If any have miſinterpreted my meaning, or out of anger and vexation grown worſe and more audaciouſly violent by my writing, they muſt bear the blame which they would throw upon me. Nay, a far greater blame, for they both take Offence, when none was given, and they notoriouſly give Offence to others, whom I would have kept from offending.

N. C.

They will believe both alike; that you meant to take away Offences, and that they lay any in the peoples way.

C.

That is; they ſeldom believe any good of others, or any ill of themſelves. But I do not beg your belief, for it is manifeſt to any unprejudiced reaſon, that the Book was ſent abroad on no other Errand, than to remove ſtumbling blocks out of every bodies way; eſpecially your Shiſm which is the greateſt of all. And if notwithſtanding, you be ſcandalized, and confidently affirm it were better to forbear ſuch writings, you ſhall be judged out of the mouths of ſome of the old and better Nonconformiſts. Who tell their Brethren of New-England (and I ſay the ſame to you) when they would have had them forbear to read the Common-Prayer becauſe of the p. 13ſcandal it gave to ſome; It is a ſcandal taken and not given; and by forbearing, we ſhall offend you the more, if to confirm men in error be to ſcandalize them; yea we ſhall prejudice the Truth; and it might be an occaſion to beget needleſs ſcruples in others, and draw men ignorantly from the fellowſhip of the Saints and the holy Ordinances of God, and ſtrengthen them who by your own confeſſion, are run too far into Schiſm already.

N. C.

Whoſe words are theſe?

C.

You may find them p. 16. in the Reply made 1640. by many Miniſters in Old-England, to the Anſwer which their N. E. Brethren gave to their enquiry about 9. poſitions in the year 1637. And I would to God your Miniſters would lay them to heart, and no longer continue to harden their Followers in Schiſm, by forbearing the uſe of that which they know is lawful. Remember I beſeech you the famous obſervation of a great Author,**Lord Bacon Eſſay of Unity in Religion. that Hereſies and Schiſms are of all other the greateſt ſcandals, yea, more than the corruption of manners. For as in the natural Body a Wound or Solution of continuity is worſe than a corrupt Humour; ſo it is in the Spiritual. Nothing doth ſo much keep men from the Church, and drive men out of it, as breach of Ʋnity. One of his Reaſons is, becauſe every Sect hath a divers poſture, or cringe by themſelves, which cannot but move deriſion in worldlings and depraved Politicks, who are apt to contemn holy things. It is poſſible you may thinks, for you are very cenſorious, that he was no better than one of thoſe depraved perſons, and ſo take no heed to his words. Let me remember your therefore, that there was a time when the Presbyterians applauded this obſervation, and laboured to ſerve themſelves of it. For I find it cited in a Book call's wholſome Severity reconciled with Chriſtian Liberty, licenſed by Mr. Cranford 1644. where the Author likewiſe ſayes, that p. 14the experience of former times makes us ſo wiſe, as to foreſee that Hereſie and Schiſm tend to the breach of the Civil peace, and to a rupture in the State as well as the Church. Of which he gives many inſtances, eſpecially the Donatists in Africk, and the Anabaptiſts in Germany. But now it ſeems you are grown ſtark blind; and whereas you had a foreſight in times paſt, at preſent you cannot or will not ſee what is before your eyes —

N. C.

I told you I would not enter into long diſputes with you. But I am heartily ſorry that your have ſo much grieved all the Godly.

C.

You ſtill perſiſt in your old Uncharitableneſs, Pride, and high eſteem of your ſelves above all others. Or if you mean, only all the Godly of your way, yet you are guilty of great partiality; in taking a liberty which you will not give. For you ſay what you liſt againſt that way, wherein ſo many good people among us truly ſerve God, and make it ungodlineſs in us to ſay any thing againſt yours. Pray give me a reaſon, when you have duly conſider'd it, of this unequal dealing. You ſpeak and write againſt the Biſhops, Common-Prayer, the Ceremonies; nay many of you openly revile them to the juſt grief of our People, and all this with a reputation of great Godlineſs: But we muſt ſow up our mouths, and not ſay a word againſt you and your devices; or elſe be accounted ungodly and prophane, nay it is well if we eſcape the brand of Atheiſm. What is this, but to imitate thoſe Huckſters, who have double weights and ballances, one for buying, another for ſelling? To have one meaſure for your ſelves, and another for all other folk?

N. C.

I do not approve of this.

C.

But you ſide with thoſe that play theſe tricks. And beſides; you that are ſo loth to be grieved in the vulgar meaning of the words make light of grieving others in p. 15the proper ſenſe of it. For you have ſo ſorely galled and wounded many by your practices, that the Anguiſh hath been ſuch as (according to the Obſervation now named) to thruſt ſome back who were coming to us, and drive others out, who were among us. The Reproaches, I mean, which you have caſt upon our Church, the diviſions you have made, the confuſion you have been Authors of, have been ſuch thorns in ſome mens way, that when they were juſt at the door of our Church they have drawn back their foot and faln back to the Popiſh Religion. Of this I have good evidence; and ſuch as you dare not queſtion of the other; that ſome have taken ſuch diſtaſt at the ſtate of things among us, as to turn aſide out of the right way, into the by-paths of Romiſh Superſtition and Idolatry. Witneſs the Seaſonable Exhortation of a great number of the London-Miniſters; who tell us p. 10. That ſome are faln from the Truth which they ſaw ſo much despiſed, and back ſlidden to Popery, as the only Religion, in their opinion, wherein Vnity and Order is maintained. And a little after, p. 16. they ſay they are afraid leſt too many may be too well conceited of that Religion, finding Rome juſtified by Englands Confuſion, as Sodom was by Iſraels ſin. You may ſay perhaps, according to your uſual manner, that all theſe were wicked. But this is not ſo eaſily proved, as peremptorily ſaid. And there want not good reaſons to make us think, that ſeveral well diſpoſed perſons, by occaſion of this Schiſm and the Scorn caſt upon our Governors and Divine Service, which accompanies it; have forſaken our. Communion, and gone thither where they heard there was more Unity, Order, and reverence to Authority.

N. C.

Our Miniſters are as much againſt thoſe, who revile your Worſhip and Service, or do not reverence Authority, as you can be.

C.

How doth that appear? There is nothing more p. 16frequent with ſuch as Mr. Bridge, than to teach the people that our way of Worſhip and Church Government is Antichriſtian. Read but the 5. of his Ten Sermons p. 370. and you will ſee I do not bely him. Or, for more full ſatisfaction, I refer you to another Book of his called Seaſonable Truths in Evil Times **Newly Princed, 1668., where you may find him inſtructing them too plainly (p. 118.) that ſuch as he have their Orders to preach or propheſy from Jeſus Chriſt himſelf; but Others (by whom he can mean none but our Miniſters) have their Orders and power from Men, from Prelates, from the Beaſt: for theſe are all one in his language. Nay more than this, he teaches the pooreſt, weakeſt man or woman to go to Jeſus Chriſt for a power to Propheſy: remembring them what one Alice Driver ſaid in Queen Mary's daies, I'le ſet my foot againſt the foot of the proudeſt Prelate of them all, in the cauſe of Jeſus Chriſt. And therefore why ſhould you not go to Chriſt, ſays he, and lay your ſelves flat upon the Promiſe, and ſay to him, O Lord, I am a poor weak creature, I fear I ſhall never be able to bear my Teſtimony; but thou haſt ſaid, I will give power to my two witneſſes, and I am one of thy witneſſes: Now then O Lord, give power to me, &c. By which you may judge what he thinks of thoſe Magiſtrates that uphold our Worſhip and Orders, and allow no ſuch weak creatures as his ſilly credulous followers, to commence Prophets and Propheteſſes, when ever they ſhall fancy that Jeſus Chriſt himſelf hath given them Power and Orders to preach, and whether they be the Godly Magiſtrates or no, Gods anointedones, whom he ſpeaks of p. 110.

N. C.

Thoſe that I am acquainted withal diſlike his boldneſs as much as your ſelf.

C.

If the reſt of your Miniſters have ſuch an hearty abhorrence, as I have, of thoſe that caſt dirt even in the face of Authority it ſelf, let them ſhew it by ſome p. 17means or other. Why do they not petition his Majeſty now as ſome of your Churches did the late Protector not many years ago, that he would chaſtiſe ſuch Perſons as theſe?

N. C.

I remember no ſuch thing.

C.

But I do; and you ſhall find it in the addreſs preſented to Richard Cromwel from the County of Northampton: There, after many high commendations of his Father (whom they call the light of their eyes, and the breath of their Noſtrils) and great expreſſions of joy that he had left him to them as a moſt choiſe Legacy, they deſire he would ſhew tenderneſs toward the name of God againſt the bold Blaſphemers of his Magiſtracy, Defamers of his ſacred Ordinances, Seducers from Truth, Corrupters of his Worſhip. And then, that he would exerciſe juſt ſeverity againſt deſpiſers of Dignities, and revilers of Authority, Whoſe unhallowed Tongues (ſet on fire from hell) ſpare not to flaſh out their inſolent reproaches and impious execrations againſt his Fathers Sepulchre, and his own throne. But I conſider that in thoſe daies it was their concernment to have despiſers and revilers puniſht; Now they ſerve the Cauſe, and help to diſgrace the preſent eſtabliſhment: which is the reaſon, I ſuppoſe, that all the Churches are ſo mute in this matter.

N. C.

You take the Liberty to ſay what you liſt; but let me ſay little or nothing: And when you have done, you write a Dialogue between Your ſelf and a Non-conformiſt; in which you make him ſpeak juſt what you think good and no more. Is this fair dealing?

C.

Where did you get the ſole privilege of writing Dialogues? You imagine, perhaps, we have forgot thoſe that you entertain'd the people withal ſome years ago; but our memories are not yet ſo ſlippery. I call to mind, for inſtance, the Dialogue between a Countrey-Gentleman and a miniſter of the Word about the Common-Prayer, anſwered by Authority 1641. And another between a p. 18Loyaliſt, and a Royaliſt, about our Civil Liberties, an. 1644. The firſt of theſe I can ſcarce forget, if I would; the Author of it (Mr. Lowes Hughes) imparting to me, ſuch an extraordinary piece of Learning as this, that Kyrieleeſon is a word compounded of Hebrew and Greek, ſignifying in Engliſh, Lord have mercy upon us. He furniſht me alſo with a memorable reaſon, why the Maſs-Book leaves out the Dexology at the end of the Lords Prayer; becauſe the Pope, ſaies he, will have none of his Church, neither Prieſt nor People, to give ſo much honour and glory to God. Which he was ſo well conceited of, that he repeats it twice within the compaſs of a few leaves. This good man, I ſometimes fancy, would have been a choſen inſtrument, and done marvelous well, to write a RATIONALE of the Directory. In which he might have told us, that RATIONALE was a word compounded of Latin and Engliſh, ſignifying, All Reaſon. And inform'd us, in particular, that the cauſe why the Aſſembly left it to mens liberty, to leave out the whole Lords Prayer if they pleaſed, was only this, that all their Church might give all honour and glory to Jeſus Chriſt. So I ſuppoſe his Affection would have made him ſay; though if he had followed his Reaſon it would have led him to this; that as the Pope left out ſome of it becauſe he would not do our Saviour ſo much honour: ſo they permitted men to leave out all, that every man might do him as little honour as he pleaſed.

N. C.

You cannot for your life forbear to lead me now and then to ſome mirth.

C.

I intended only to repreſent how your Miniſters ſometime abuſe themſelves, more than any of us ever did. As for my ſelf, I am not conſcious of the leaſt abuſe I have put upon you; nor that I have made you ſay any thing but what your people are wont to talk. Certain I am that all the wit your Party hath, ſhall never be able to find any ſuch Abſurdity in my Book, as that Dialogue p. 19againſt the Common-Prayer is guilty of; where the Miniſter makes the Gentleman preſently confeſs it to be full of Popiſh Errors; and to appoint horrible Blaſphemies, and lying Fables to be read to the People. Nay, makes him cry out almoſt, almoſt as ſoon as they had begun their Diſcourſe. O horrible! How have the Biſhops deluded King Edward the Sixth, Queen Elizabeth, King James, and our gracious King Charles, and the whole State; and made them believe there was nothing in the Service-Book that is amiſs, or any way contrary to the Word? God Almighty deliver us from them. I ſhould bluſh to the end of my life, if after our whole debate I had concluded, as this man begun. But this is the way of thoſe Sots that talk as if they were infallible, and would bear all before them by their bare word; nay, take it very ill if you be not converted, as ſoon as they open their mouth. Pythagoras is reviv'd in ſome of you; and Mr. ſuch a one ſaid it, is of as good Authority, as the beſt proof in the world.

N. C.

This was ſome ignorant Zealot, I believe.

C.

So one would think; and yet he had ſo good an opinion of himſelf, that he thought ſuch Works as theſe fit for the eyes of the High Court of Parliament. To whom I find he preſented Certain Grievances an. 1640. of the very ſame import with this goodly Dialogue, but ſo abſurdly ſlanderous, that you cannot but be aſtoniſh't at his brutiſh ſtupidity. For there he tells them (as he doth the Gentleman at the concluſion of their Conference) that the Biſhops have appointed ſome portions of Scripture to be read on certain dayes and omitted others, on purpoſe to pervert the meaning of Chriſt, and to keep weak Chriſtians in blindneſs.

The whole Book of Canticles for inſtance, is never appointed to be read; that the People (as he will have it) may not be able to ſee the ardent Love and affection of Chriſt toward his Spouſe, the Elect: and they thereby be ſtirred p. 20up to love Chriſt, and be truly zealous for his Glory. Nay, if you believe him, the Books of the Kings, (all ſave the 8 firſt chapters) and the Chronicles were forbid, becauſe they ſhew that Godly Kings did ever love Gods true Prophets, and did hearken to them, and were zealous of maintaining true Religion, and ſuppreſſing Idolatry. In which words he diſcovered the very grounds of their quarrel with the King, viz. that he did not take ſuch great Seers as himſelf into his boſom; and ſuffer them to guide his Conſcience, as if they were of the Privy-Council of Heaven. But he diſcovered withal how little eſteem he for his part, merited: Or rather how well he deſerved to be ſtigmatiz'd and branded in the forehead, as one, (to ſpeak in his own language) that was a falſe-Prophet, Propheſying lyes. For was there ever any man before this ſo impudent, as to put a Libel of this Nature againſt his ſpiritual Fathers and Governors, into the hands of the Higheſt Court of the Kingdom? Did any of the Prieſts or Prophets of Baal think you, ever help themſelves and their cauſe by ſuch invectives againſt the Prophets of the Lord? For my part, I am of the mind, that the Devil himſelf would be hard put to't, to invent more bold and malicious Slanders than theſe of this mans forging; who wanted nothing but wit to make him like that Father of Lyes. And yet, I ſuppoſe, he paſſed for a Godly man, a precious Servant of Jeſus Chriſt, a Faithful Miniſter of the Lord: Nay, was cheriſhed and incouraged as one of Gods Prophets; who had told them things that could be known no wayes, but by a Revelation His Book alſo, no doubt, found wonderful acceptance, though it was ſtuft with ſo much Ignorance and railing. The people read it with a blind Devotion, juſt as he was tranſported with ſo blind a Paſſion, as to accuſe our Church of that, which all that had eyes muſt needs acquit it of. For both the Books of the Kings were Appointed to be read intirely in the later end of April, p. 21and in May. As for the Chronicles, they being little more than a Repetition of what was writ before, might well be left to our private Reading; together with ſome other Books, not eaſy to be underſtood without great Labour and long Meditation.

N. C.

I wiſh you would diſmiſs this man, for he hath given us both too much trouble.

C.

Your people would not, when time was, ſo eaſily lay his Book out of their hands, as I am able to prove. But let him go; together with all the Crew of Revilers that were before him. For you muſt know there were Dialogue-writers of the ſame Stamp in the dayes of your Fore-fathers. In one of which Books, called the Dialogue of White Devils, the Author expreſly tells us, that if Princes hinder the bringing in of their Diſciples, they are Tyrants; and may be depoſed by their Subjects. A Doctrine which with all your reading in the Books of the Kings and the Chronicles you will no where find juſtified. For the people were better taught than to go about to depoſe thoſe that did not favour the Lords Prophets. I know you all diſclaim this principle; and I verily believe many of you abhor it: but I mention it to let you ſee what the Maximes of ſome of your Predeceſſors, imboldned ſome of their Poſterity to do. For this purpoſe I could relate ſtrange paſſages out of ſome Books eſteemed by your Party; which would verify the cenſure of the Biſhop of Down and Conner **In his Viſitation ſpeed at Liſnegarvy, 1638. publiſh'd by Authority.upon the Title of the Dialogue now named. Which he ſaith was very fit for ſuch mens Books; for if ever there were White Devils, or Devils transformed into Angels of Light, it is in their perſons who under the pretence of Sanctity, labour to bring in all manner of Diſorder into the Church, and confuſion into the Common wealth. But you have no mind we ſhould remember any thing that is paſt; that ſo you may the p. 22more confidently fill the world with loud clamors, as if there never were ſuch doings, as now. Elſe you might know there was another Dialogue in Queen Elizabeths dayes, between Diotrephes and S. Paul, in which the Diſcipline and its Favourers are magnified as Apoſtolical: but the Biſhops of the Church of England made no better than ſo many proud Diotrephes's; nay ſo many Devils; and he of Canterbury (ſo they ſpeak) is Beelzebub, even the Prince of the Devils.

N. C.

Still you will have all the talk to your ſelf, and I muſt hold my tongue. Pray give me leave to inlarge my ſelf a while, for I am blam'd, I aſſure you, very much for ſaying ſo little in our laſt Conference.

C.

Speak your mind.

N. C.

I muſt ingeniouſly confeſs that we cannot accuſe you of ſuch ſpeeches as theſe; but yet you ſhew your great malignity to us otherwayes. In particular it is very ill taken, that you make our Miniſters guilty of breaking the Oxford Act, and the Act againſt Conventicles. For you make as if they were obliged to keep within that diſtance from this place which the Law preſcribes, if they have not taken the Oath: And if they have; yet not to hold Aſſemblies (without Common-Prayer) eſpecially in time of your Service. Now it is plain to us, that they are not obliged to keep theſe Laws, ſo as you would have them. Mark what I ſay; they do not refuſe to obey them; only they cannot do it in your manner. There are two wayes I have heard them ſay ſometimes, of obeying Laws; either by doing what they Command, or by ſuffering what they inflict. Now our Miniſters are content to endure the penalties; chuſing to ſatisfie the Laws that way, which is moſt convenient for themſelves.

C.

Have you done?

N. C.

Yes.

p. 23C.

Then give me leave to tell you, I do not believe they are ſo well contented as you pretend. But if they be; they are no better obſervers of Laws than a Thief, who is content to be hang'd after he hath rob'd his neighbors. I doubt they are contented both alike, i. e. they hope to eſcape without puniſhment; and when they are laid hold on, they ſubmit becauſe they cannot help it. But when that's done, they are ſtill both alike under ſin; becauſe it is not the thiefs hanging, and your fine and impriſonment, which the Prince intends; but the doing that which he commands. If this be neglected, or you do contrary to his Laws; you offend God as well as your Prince, and are liable to be puniſht by both.

N. C.

There is a wide difference in theſe things. For God you know requires we ſhould not ſteal; but he doth not lay ſuch Commands on us, as your Laws.

C.

He requires you to obey the Magiſtrate; which your Apology plainly confeſſes, while you ſuppoſe he is ſufficiently obeyed if you ſuffer the penalties of his Laws. Which I muſt tell you, is a ridiculous fancie; and makes the Magiſtrate a moſt barbarous Tyrant; who is as well pleaſed, or takes himſelf to be as well obeyed, if his ſubjects be hang'd or broken on the Wheel after they have done a world of Miſchief; as if they had been honeſt and peaceable Members of the Common-wealth. Away with theſe abſurd doctrines: which ſuppoſe all Governors to puniſh the innocent; and all Subjects to obey meerly for wrath and not for Conſcience ſake. You had beſt go and correct St. Paul: or elſe correct your ſelves; believing that you are guilty of a ſin when you do not the things which a Law not contrary to God's, requires, or elſe the Magiſtrate could have no right to puniſh you: and that your Puniſhment alſo is not to free you from the guilt of the Firſt Fault; but to prevent a Second.

N. C.

But this is not all they have to ſay for themſelves. p. 24They are men of a tender Conſcience, whatever you think; and have a great regard to the commands of their Governors; nay think they ought to be obeyed for conſcience ſake —

C.

To what purpoſe then do they uſe the former ſhift?

N. C.

Pray let me go on. They conſeſs I ſay that Laws ſhould be kept; and yet they are are well aſſured they commit no ſin, in not keeping thoſe you ſpeak of —

C.

They are wonderful men.

N. C.

For they are very confident it is his Majeſties pleaſure that they ſhould take this Liberty againſt the Laws.

C.

Good Sir, take heed what you ſay. How come you to know his Majeſties Pleaſure? where did he whiſper it ſo ſoftly, that none could hear it but your ſelves?

N. C.

I was going to tell you, if you would but be patient. We hold that ſince his Laws are not executed; it ſignifies his pleaſure to allow us this Liberty; and we eſteem it a ſufficient warrant for our preſent practice: Nay, a tacit Declaration that he doth not deſire the Laws ſhould be obeyed. And upon this account you are juſtly blamed, who being but a private man have expreſſed greater ſeverity againſt them than the Magiſtrate himſelf: for you have charged them with the guilt of Sin, when the Magiſtrate doth not ſo much as puniſh them. Do you not think the King can diſpenſe with us? and doth he not in effect give us a diſpenſation when his Laws are not executed? Why do you then diſallow, what he approves of? May not his Majeſty do what he thinks good? —

C.

I underſtand you well enough; and therefore theſe Repetitions are needleſs. But I would fain know what warrant they had when they firſt ventur'd to act contrary to thoſe Laws. What aſſurance p. 25had they, that it might be done without danger to themſelves, or diſlike to their Prince?

N. C.

Indeed, I did not think of that.

C.

If you cannot ſatisfie that Queſtion, you muſt acknowledge you have but ſpun a Cobweb in making this Excuſe. And confeſs in plain terms that when they broke the Ice, and firſt took this Boldneſs, they were Sinners: and now they make one ſin the Juſtification of another.

N. C.

How ſo?

C.

They firſt tried whether any notice would be taken of their abiding here, and of their cloſer meetings contrary to Law: and when they found there was none; then they ventured further, and opened their doors more confidently for all comers: and ſtill there being no notice taken of this licenſe they gave themſelves; now they make it an argument to juſtifie what they do, and would perſwade us it is as good, as if they had a licenſe from others for theſe unlawful practices. So I call them: for you muſt know further, that the Non-execution of the Laws, is no proof of his Majeſtie's pleaſure they ſhould not be obſerved. For it may be imputed to the negligence of his Officers and Miniſters in the diſcharge of their Duty. But if to ſerve your turn, you will ſay it is an argument of his will and not of their neglect; you muſt unavoidably ſerve ſome bodies turn beſides your own. In plain Engliſh you muſt affirm it is his pleaſure that the Maſs ſhould be ſaid, and the Papiſts ſhould take the ſame liberty and openneſs in the exerciſe of their Religion, that you do in yours. Nay, I do not ſee why all Drunkards, Swearers, and Blaſphemers may not think themſelves allowed in their crimes; becauſe little or no notice is taken of any of them. To which I may add, that ſeveral p. 26perſons who think the non-Execution of Laws is a warrant to you; yet find very much fault with your meetings in the time of our publick Aſſemblies: Which is void of all ſenſe if your Reaſon be good; for there is no more notice taken of that, than of your meeting at other times. And yet it is demonſtrable that the not puniſhing your meeting in time of Divine Service doth not ſignifie his Majeſtie's pleaſure to allow it; and conſequently your not being puniſhed, can never ſignifie his pleaſure to indulge you in other matters. For if from thence you can gather that he approves of what you do, then ſo may we if we liſt to do the ſame: And upon that ground may meet in little companies where we pleaſe, and leave our Churches quite empty. A thing, without all doubt, which his Majeſty abhors to think of. You your ſelves have declared in times paſt, that it is abſurd to think, that Laws nay Ordinances of Parliament (even in matters of Religion) ſhould not equally oblige all the ſubjects of one Kingdom. If therefore the Laws oblige us, then they oblige you: If they do not oblige you, then they oblige not us neither. We are all alike either bound or free.

But to leave all theſe Conſiderations; there is ſomething more remarkable me thinks in this caſe, that deſerves to be remembred above any thing elſe. And truly I cannot but ſmile ſometimes —

N. C.

Why what is the matter?

C.

I was going to ſay (but the very thought of your odd humour hindred me a little) that I cannot but ſmile to my ſelf when I call to mind, how you ſhift your Principles and change your Maximes, according to your Intereſt. There is no Weathercock more guided by the wind than You are by this. For it was a Fundamental Maxime, heretofore, I well remember, and obſtinately maintained among your party, who now fawn and flatter; That the Law is the Kings Superior: and that he p. 27hath not ſo much power over it as to be its Supream Interpreter: That his Oath tyes him expreſly to obſerve it; and binds him to ſee it executed. Upon which ſcore all the Kingdom was filled with loud complaints about the Non-execution of Laws, and of the Indulgences granted to ſeveral perſons who offended againſt them. For execution, they ſaid, was the Life of the Law, whithout which it became, vain and uſeleſs. This was the bold Doctrine currant not many years ago, and he was held for a Malignant that did not believe it. But now on a ſudden we hear you ſing a new Song in praiſe of his Majeſties gracious Indulgence (for ſo you will call it) and withal you earneſtly deſire the Execution of Laws may ſtill be ſuſpended; that is, ly dead and become vain and uſeleſs. For which alteration, I can find no reaſon but this; that now the Indulgence is to your ſelves and then it was to other folk. Then alſo you thought your ſelves able to make the King bow to you; and now your Weakneſs forces You to worſhip him.

N. C.

Where do you find any ſuch Maximes? For my part I have forgot them.

C.

I can ſend you to ſeveral Books where you may refreſh your memory: particularly to the Medicine for Malignants; which tells you p. 25. That the King hath not power over the Law, but the Law over the King. But for your greater eaſe, I will only refer you to one ſmall Pamphlet called Known Laws: in which you ſhall not fail to meet with more than I have ſaid.

N. C.

Theſe, I believe, were the Maximes of the State-faction.

C.

I know no difference between Them and your Divines in this matter. I am ſure Mr. Will. Bridges (who differs from Mr. Will. Bridge as little as their Names do) makes none at all. In whom I find a paſſage ſo directly oppoſite to your preſent Opinions about the obligation of the Oxford Act, and declaring ſo fully the ſenſe of your p. 28Divines about the Kings Power, that I muſt crave leave to mention it.

N. C.

I am content to hear it. But you muſt remember that theſe were but the Opinions of private perſons.

C.

You are miſtaken. This man made an Anſwer (publiſhed by Authority 1644.) to a Book called the Loyal Convert, in which he tells the converted Gentleman, that he speaks illegally if he ſay the King can protect a Papiſt any way. His reaſon is Univerſal, though his Inſtance be Particular; for whom the Law Protects not, the King either cannot or ought not to protect. No, he ought not, as he tells us, ſo much as to require the help of ſuch perſons to protect him. For they ought only to be Tributaries, and to hold themſelves to their U B I, to their place, Which words I would have you apply to that buſineſs which begat this Diſcourſe. I would fain know of your Divines how his Majeſties Power comes to be ſo variable at their pleaſure? Whence is it that He can diſpenſe with your Reſidence in the Ʋ B I or place to which you are by the Law confined, who could not diſpenſe at all with others, nor releaſe them (no not for his neceſſary aſſiſtance) from that place to which according to your Doctrine they were immoveably chain'd. The Law protects both alike; that is, not at all: what is the cauſe then that he can give you Protection, notwithſtanding the Law; and not them? Miſtake me not; it is the fartheſt thing from my thoughts to call in queſtion the extent of his Majeſties Supream Power. I only queſtion your Principles, who pretend to be no Changelings. Anſwer me this. If the King have a power to give an Indulgence and diſpenſe with the Law, why did you ſo rudely and barbarouſly clamour againſt him heretofore, and ſay the contrary? If he have not, why do you every where ſeek to juſtifie your ſelves in p. 29your illegal Practices, with a meer ſhaddow and fancy of his Indulgence?

N. C.

There is a great diſtance of time between the one and the other, and they have changed their minds upon ſecond thoughts.

C.

Very likely. And you believe alſo, that if Presbytery were in its height and Glory, his Majeſty might diſpence wich the Laws of their making, as well as with his own: Do you not? Alas good man! you ſhall find, I doubt, to your coſt, if things were come to that paſs; that no Authority could remit the Rigour of them. For they have condemned all Diſpenſations and Licenſes, as Antichriſtian. Their Decrees are ſo ſacred, that as there lyes no appeal from their Courts, ſo none may take Authority to relaxate their Laws. For they take themſelves to ſit in Chriſts Tribunal Seat; and ſo their Laws are no more to be diſpenſed with than his.

But why do I inſiſt ſo long upon one thing, ſince there are ſo many inſtances of your windings and turnings as your Intereſt leads you? There was a time I remember, when the Parliament was magnified as the only keepers of the Peoples Liberties. We were told**Obſervator on his Majeſties Anſwers 1642. that we might not ſo much as imagine the Houſes could be injurious; or that a Committee ſhould have any private ends to miſlead them. And therefore they could nor ſit too long, nor prove a burden to the good people. But now you are quite in another ſtrain. There is no greater grievance than a Parliament. No more intollerable miſchief than their long Continuance. For which different judgment there is no reaſon, that I can ſee, but this; that then the Parliament was for you, and now it is againſt you. The time was alſo, as I told you before, when the Commons alone might impoſe a Proteſtation on all the Subjects, under the Pain of being incapable of any Office, if they p. 30refuſed it. But now you will be free from all impoſition of this Nature: And an Oath enjoyn'd by the King and both the Houſes, under no ſeverer penalty than a ſmall Reſtraint, is look't upon as a grievous Oppreſſion. There are thoſe likewiſe that can remember when the Commons alone put out another Order about ſome of the affairs of Religion: But now a Law enacted by the Kings Authority, is thought an high invaſion of Chriſts Prerogative; and he muſt not meddle in matters of his Worſhip. The reaſon is; any thing may be done by any Body to advance your fancies, but nothing againſt them by no creature in the World. Nay, we have not forgotten the time when Mr. Caſe uſed this Argument among others to perſwade the People to take the Covenant,**Sermons about the Covenant, p. 64. becauſe Antichriſt and his faction had proſper'd ſo much by entring into Covenants; therefore the People of God ſhould try what this way will do, which hath been ſo advantageous to the enemy. For God, ſaid he, may make uſe of that Stratagem to ruin their Kingdom, which they uſed to build it. But now if any of us ſay, that the ſame Perſons have maintain'd a great reverence in the people to their Religion, by many Stately Ceremonies, ſplendid Veſtures, and Pompous Rites, and therefore we may hope to keep the Ordinances of God from contempt by a few ſolemn and grave Ceremonies, by decent habits, and ſuch rites and geſtures as may beſeem the dignity of our Religion; preſently you raiſe an out-cry againſt us, and the People are told, that we are Popiſhly affected, of an Antichriſtian ſpirit, and imitate Idolaters. For which I can aſſign no cauſe but this; that then the Argument was for you; and now it makes for us. And you are reſolved to ſerve your ſelves by all means, though it be by approving and anon rejecting the very ſame things.

If a thing like you well, it ſhall go very hard but you p. 31will find ſome Scripture for it. And if none ſpeak plainly, you will torture and draw ſome or other to be on your ſide, and labour to prove that they ſignifie according to your meaning. But if a thing diſlike you, then you ask for plain Scritprue. Nothing will ſatisfie, unleſs we ſhew it you in expreſs terms. It is Superſtition, Will worſhip, any thing, but good, unleſs we produce a text in ſo, many words to confirm it. Of the ſame ſhifting humour was the late Army, as appears by their unparalel'd Story, which in brief is this. On the 20. of April 1653. they turn'd their Maſters, whom they had long ſerved, out of doors, as a company of Self-Seekers, who minded their own private, more than the publick Good. About ſix years after, finding the good Spirit declining, which formerly appeared among them, in carrying on the great work (thoſe are their Canting expreſſions) and the good old Cauſe it ſelf become a reproach: they were led to look back and examine the cauſe of the Lords withdrawing his wonted preſence from them. And among other things they remembred what Injuries they had done to the remnant of the long Parliament, and that they were eminent aſſerters of that Cauſe, and had a ſpecial preſence of God with them, and were ſignally bleſſed in that Work. And therefore invited them by their Declaration of May 6. 1659. (in which you may find theſe things,) to come and ſit again; promiſing to yield their uttermoſt Aſſiſtance for their ſitting in ſafety. Would you not imagine now that they would for ever reverence theſe Eminent, theſe Bleſſed men? and that to oppoſe them in their great work, would be, in their opinion, to fight againſt God, to drive away the good Spirit, and to endeavour to deſtroy the Cauſe of God? And yet it was not long before they were of another mind. They held themſelves, for all this, to be the greater Saints; the Army of the living God; and ſo immutably ſetled in his favour that they ſhould not loſe it, p. 32do they what they would. And therefore as ſoon as ever the Parliament refuſed to act according to their mind, they refuſed to yield their obedience. When they voted ſome of their Commiſſions void, and reſolved to govern the Army by Commiſſioners in ſtead of a Lieutenant General; theſe late penitents could ſee nothing of God any longer among them: The ſpecial Preſence of God vaniſhed and in a moment diſappeared. So that on the 13th. of the next October, they lockt up the doors of the Houſe, ſet themſelves once more above their Maſters; and in an inſolent manner declared **Declara. agreed at Wallingford Houſe, Octob. 27.all their Orders, Acts, pretended Acts, or Declarations (and all proceedings thereupon had or done) on Munday the 10. of that Month, and on Tueſday, and Wedneſday following, null and void to all intents and purpoſes, in as full and ample a manner as if they had been never done. And immediately after, they pact the Men away after theſe Acts and Orders. Nay, this they did, notwithſtanding that they had ſtiled themſelves ſeveral times, but five dayes before this 10. of October, Your faithful Servants the Army; and profeſſed that having diligently inquired into their hearts and wayes, Humble Repreſent and Petit. Octob. 5.they found nothing among them but faithfulneſs and integrity to the Parliament; concluding their addreſs in this manner that notwithſtanding all endeavours to the contrary, they would by the help of God, be found faithful to them. Were not theſe gallant fellows? Wonderful conſtant to their Principles and Profeſſions? Mightily overawed by the preſence of God; Single-hearted, and faithful to their word? Yes, by all means, you muſt needs ſay; for of ſuch as theſe a great part of the Churches of the Saints is now compoſed. And faithful they were to themſelves; and that was enough. Conſtant to this principle, that they were alway in the right; and what would you have p. 33more? They could Cant ſtill in Scripture language, and therefore God was not withdrawn from them. They could faſt and pray ſtill, and had a power to turn even the Lordsday, into a day of Humiliation; and therefore the Good Spirit had not forſaken them. They hated Antichriſt, that is us; and were reſolved to burn the fleſh of the Whore with fire, & ſo ſtill remained the Army of the Lord of Hoſts. For as if they had ſome ſuch work in hand as the Apoſtles had, they call upon all the Godly in the nation to ſay on their behalf, who are ſufficient for theſe things? and to cry aloud for them before the Throne of Grace, that the Lord himſelf would appear, and carry on his work in their hand. And great reaſon there was to expect it; ſince they had once more injur'd thoſe, who aſſerted his cauſe; and done that very thing, for which (as they ſaid,) he had before withdrawn his wonted preſence from them. O the Impudent foreheads of theſe Men! O the Sottiſhneſs of the People, that will be ſtill coſened by ſuch like Canters! Will you never open your eyes and ſee how vain their pretences to the Spirit are? Will you never be convinc'd of their preſumptuous Boaſtings, and empty Confidence? Will you ſtill believe that theſe men are highly illuminated, who call that darkneſs, which a little while ago was light; and then croſs themſelves again, and ſay no; it is but Darkneſs? Are theſe the men whom we muſt all follow; who run, we ſee, in an endleſs round of contradicting their own Profeſſions? or muſt we ſhut our eyes, and give them our hand that they may lead us whither they pleaſe? Muſt we forget all that is paſt, and believe they are now poſſeſt with an infallible Spirit? This is the thing no doubt, they deſire. We muſt reſign our belief to their Declarations. We muſt allow all their Reaſons and Excuſes, whatſoever they be, We muſt, at leaſt, ſuffer them to juſtifie themſelves by thoſe very things which they formerly condemn'd; and ſay nere a p. 34word. And then we love them; then we favour the people of God; then they have ſome hopes of us; and it's poſſible God may have mercy on us, though we be out of the way and do not follow them.

I know you will ſay, that ſuch as you, are none of the Army-Saints: that you condemn their Practices, and hate their leud pretences to Religion as a great ſcandal to it: All which I verily believe. But, let me tell you, the Army had a copy ſet them of unconſtancy and double dealing by thoſe men whom you admired. For there was a time when the Lords and Commons could ſee ſome good in the Liturgy and Government of the Church by Law eſtabliſhed. Nay more than that; they made a Declaration**April 9. 1642., cauſed it to be printed and publiſhed in all Market Towns, That they would take away nothing in the one or the other, but what ſhould be evil and juſtly offenſive, or at leaſt unneceſſary and burdenſome. And yet when they had more power, they were of another mind. Every thing was offenſive, at leaſt unneceſſary and burdenſome; nothing would ſerve but taking away all the Common-Prayer; and plucking up Epiſcopacy by the very roots. The reaſon, I ſuppoſe, was, becauſe this became as neceſſary to promote their Deſigns in proceſs of time; as that Declaration was at the beginning. If they had reſted there, and gone no farther, they had loſt the hearts of the moſt ſpiritual; who would never have ſeen ſuch a glorious anointing upon them from the Lord, Beam of Light by Ch. Feak.as now appeared. Now they very fifth kingdom men, could not but ſee it, and acknowledge it in Print: though it was not long before they alſo chang'd like all the reſt; and had loſt the ſight of this glory, being able to ſpy no Ʋnction any where but upon themſelves. For they helpt to profane the Crown of theſe annointed ones, and caſt out the greateſt part of them, as if they were but ſcum and filth. p. 35But I think it's beſt to trace your windings and turnings no further; for fear they lead us too far out of the way.

N. C.

A good Reſolution. Too much of one thing you know is good for nothing.

C.

True. And I think the firſt thing I ſaid about your pretences of a tacit Indulgence, is ſufficient to ſhew, that you are perfectly like men in danger of drowning, who catch hold indifferently of what comes next to hand; be it a naked Sword or an hot Iron.

N. C.

Pray make an end of this: for you have quite tired me with your Diſcourſe. In which you have largely proved the truth of the common talk, that you are of a barſh, nay a bitter and jeering Spirit, and was in a cholerick mood when you wrote your Book.

C.

Rather, they that ſay ſo, prove what I have been ſaying all this time that they blow hot and cold out of the ſame mouth; and condemn that in others which they allow, nay, praiſe in themſelves. For you ſhall hear them call that Salt and Smartneſs of wit in one whom they love; which is Bitterneſs and jeering in him whom they hate. And that paſſes for innocent Mirth and Pleaſantneſs in one of their party; which is Levity and Frothineſs in one of ours. Nay, it is Zeal for God and his cauſe if you aggravate the faults of other men, or raſhly charge and bring even a falſe Accuſation againſt your Betters: but it is malignity of Spirit, hatred of God and the power of Godlineſs, if we do but tell a plain and true ſtory of your miſcarriages. No man ever oppoſed you reſolutely, but you ſaid he rail'd. No man diſcovered your Partiality and other vices; but you complain'd of his Bitterneſs, and ſaid he was in a rage againſt you. If by this you meant nothing elſe, but that I write with ſome heat and earneſtneſs, I would confeſs it, and ſay it is not to be condemn'd. For who can contend coldly and without affection about thoſe things which he holds dear and precious? A Politick perſon indeed may write from his brain (as my Lord p. 36Bacon I think obſerves) without any touch or ſenſe on his heart; as in a ſpeculation that pertains not to him: But a Feeling Chriſtian will expreſs in his words a Character, either of Zeal or Love; which you know are warm Paſſions. For my part, I think I have expreſſed both, but nothing at all of wrath and bitterneſs. And therefore, as to that cenſure which your Friends paſs on me, I believe he will ſpeak a great deal truer, that affirms the Authors of it were full of choller themſelves. Otherwaies, they could not but have diſcern'd a charitable ſpirit in my writing, and eaſily ſeen, that the Indignation I expreſſed againſt ſome vices, is ſuch as conſiſts with Chriſtian Meekneſs, and ought not to be condemn'd as an unmanly Paſſion. Do you not find that Moſes was very wroth, when Iſrael committed a great ſin? and yet his Meekneſs is commended above all other mens. And what think you of St. Paul when he calls the Galatians a fooliſh ſort of people: and plainly tells the Corinthians that he could as well uſe a Rod, as the Spirit of Meekneſs: and bids Titus, whom a little before he warn'd againſt raſh anger, to rebuke ſome perſons ſharply? Nay what think you of our Saviour himſelf? was not he angry at the hardneſs of the Jews heart? Mark. 3.5. Was he in any fault when he ſaid to his Diſciples, O fools and ſlow of heart to believe? Undoubtedly I may ſincerely and heartily love you when I expreſs a juſt Indignation againſt you; and you may as heartily hate me, when you ſeem very gentle and kindly affected toward me. It is poſſible you may have met with this ſaying out of St. Auſtin, which is ordinarily cited by our Writers, and worth your conſideration. It is ſo far from being true, that every one that is angry with others bates them; that ſometimes he who is not angry, is thereby convinced of bearing the greateſt hatred to them. And this alſo. I am not to account every one my Friend that ſpares and forbears me; p. 37nor every one my enemy that ſeverely corrects and laſhes me. Beſides; there are ſome of ſuch a nature, that nothing but ſharp dealing will do them good. They are like knotty Blocks, which require more Wedges, and harder blows alſo to drive them home. If he that undertakes (ſaith Dr. Corn. Burges **Fire of the Sanct. uncovered., once famous among you) ſhall dally, and not ſtrike home with all his might, he ſhall find the Wedge about his ſhins.

They will rage the more confidently when they ſee he favours them: They will think he fears and ſtands in awe of them, and ſo flie in his face with the greater fury. I have never found any thing truer than this; that to ſpeak ſome men fair, is but to make them have a better opinion of themſelves. They never thank you for your gentle and tender uſage; for they imagine their Merit extorts it from you. Whatſoever Favour you ſhew them, it is not imputed to your kindneſs, but their own deſervings: and they perk up the higher in their own Conceit, becauſe you have ſuch regard to them. That they may know themſelves therefore; they muſt not be ſtroaked, but ſmitten; you muſt not gently jogg, but roughly ſhake them; if you intend to awaken them. If you would not have them ſooth themſelves up in their ſins; you muſt openly detect and diſcover them. If you would have them ſee the greatneſs of their Offences, you muſt boldly reprove them, and tear in pieces all their pretences and excuſes whereby they ſeek to hide them. And as long as you are truly charitable, and allow all that is good in them; they may ſee, if they be not perfectly blinded with a too fond Love of themſelves, that you are a Friend to them, though an enemy to their vices. For (to uſe the words of a famous Writer) as the coldeſt and fierceſt winds are obſerved to grow mild and gentle by paſſing through temperate Regions, ſo do ſevere & ſharp Reproofs pertake of the nature of him that gives them, p. 38and loſe part of their Auſterity when they are managed with Prudence and charity.

It is a very good Old ſaying, Love thy Neighbor, yet pull not down thy hedge. We will be kind to you, but yet make you to know your Bounds. We will not ſuffer you to ingroſs to your party, the name and reputation of Godlineſs. You ſhall not paſs for the only nice and tender Conſcienc'd men, nor be thought more Conſcientious than you are. Nor will we ſuffer you if we can help it, to pull down the Fence that is about our Church; thoſe wiſe and wholſom Laws that are made for its Safety and Security. Too much civility to you, doth but make you preſumptuous. You only take Occaſion to grow more bold and licentious; if in ſome things we commend your ſtrictneſs, but wink at your faults. And therefore we muſt tell you your own (as we commonly ſpeak) and let the deluded people know, how Ignorant, how Superſtitious, how Defective you are in a great number of Chriſtian duties; whilſt you imagine your ſelves the moſt knowing the moſt holy people in the world. If you be angry at this and call it bitterneſs, it is no more than I expected from many of you. For a gall'd horſe, I know, loves not to be curried, and a guilty conſcience loves not to bereproved. Let us go about the one or the other with never ſo much caution, they will be ſure to winch. Though the neceſſity be great and our charity much, it is all one; they have no mind to be touched. Now how neceſſary and ſeaſonable thoſe Inſtructions were that I gave you, I leave others to judge who are impartial. And as for the manner of delivering them; ſhew me any thing in my Book that bites, but only Truth; and I will knock out its teeth: Which if you think I have ſharpned too much; I aſſure you, it was only to give you a quicker ſenſe of your Errors. All the Salt you may fanſie in it, was intended only to ſeaſon you, but not to fret you at all.

p. 39N. C.

You can make ſmooth and handſome Apologies for any thing. But ſtudy as long as you will to blanch the the matter, they will believe your tooth is black: and that your voice indeed may be the voice of Jacob, but your hands the hands of Eſau: as hairie and rough as a Satyre.

C.

You are marvellouſly witty. And as I have heard you commend a ſanctified wit, ſo it ſeems there is a ſanctified ſcurrillity; and one of you may rail with good Approbation, provided he do it in Scripture phraſes.

N. C.

What ailes you to talk in this Faſhion? Have I given you any occaſion?

C.

Since you will not be ſatisfied, but ſtill complain of bitterneſs and Reproaches; It is fit to let you know, that you of all other men ſhould not ſpeak a word of this; which you have been ſo notoriouſly guilty of your ſelves. You are perfectly like the Friar, who declaim'd againſt Stealing, when he had a pudding in his ſleeve —

N. C.

Good Sir, ſay no more; For I ſee the more we ſtir in this buſineſs, the worſe it will be.

C.

You ſpeak modeſtly: But let the iſſue be what it will, you ſhall give me leave, now we have begun; to ſpread before you ſome of the Dung that you have thrown in our Faces. And I ſhall the rather undertake it, becauſe it will ſerve another purpoſe. For it will plainly demonſtrate where your people learnt all their reviling Language; and that your Miniſters have been ſo far from reproving them for it, that in truth they taught them how to blaſpheme, and put thoſe very words into their mouths, which now they belch out againſt us.

N. C.

I had rather believe you upon your word, than be troubled with ſuch ſtuff.

C.

No, I will not be ſo much beholden to you. But ſince you are ſo good natur'd, you ſhall not be troubled with much of it. Let me only intreat you to peruſe two or three of your Authors. Firſt, there is a Book intitled A looking glaſs for Malignants, writ by one of your ancient Miniſters, Mr. Vicars; the famous Author of your Parliamentary Chronicle, called, God in the Mount, In which he treats our Clergy and people with the wonted civilities, that your rude People now beſtow upon us. He begins with the Archb. of Canterbury, whom he calls a Curſt cow, dr rather a rageing fat Bull of Baſhan: whoſe heart, he ſaith, was more hard and Adamantine than a nether Milſtone, and moſt extreamly cauteriz'd, yea ſtigmatiz'd with the hotteſt Iron of moſt deſperate Impenitency. And having thus expreſſed his reſpects and charity to him; then he greets our inferiour Miniſters by the name of Baal-Prieſts, Popiſh ſons of Belial: and makes it an admirable piece of Divine Providence, that the Souldiers who went againſt Scotland (before our Wars) ſhould have their hearts overruled by God, and their Spirits ordered to plunder and terrify thoſe ſcandalous Baal-Prieſts. As for the People that followed the King, he calls them Marble-hearted Malignants, implacable and inveterate haters of Holyneſs; that were for meer formal Proteſt antiſm at large, which is in effect down right Atheiſm. This excellent Treatiſe was licenſed by Mr. John White who was himſelf ſuch another Reviler; and called our Miniſters by the ſame names; nay far worſe: not only Prieſts of Baal, but of Bacchus and Priapus. And though you may imagine he ſpeaks only of thoſe particular men whom he put into his Centuries, He will inform you otherwiſe if you look into his Epiſtle before the firſt of them. Which he put forth, as he tells us, for this end that the World might ſee what manner of perſons our Clergy be. As if there was no difference; but the People were to judge of all the reſt, by thoſe ſtories which were told of ſome. And truly, ſo they did, and ſo they do to this day.

N. C.

I never obſerved theſe things. But you muſt conſider p. 41that this Vicars was old, and ſo might be teſty: For no man well adviſed ſure would approve of that diſorderly action of the Souldiers, much leſs make God the Author of it.

C. I remember indeed Mr. Burroughs **Vindic. againſt Mr. Edw. Gang.wonders that ſo old a Profeſſor of Religion as he ſhould be found jeering and ſcorning at it, (for he caſt ſome reproaches on his way) and can find no excuſe for it, but the infirmities that ſometime attend an old Age. But as for that action of the rude Souldiers, I remember very well, it is applauded by M. Caſe in a Book licenſed by the ſame Mr. White June 27. 1642. call'd Gods waiting to be gracious, &c. Where he makes this one of their Incouragements to expect the fall of Babylon, becauſe God had ſo wonderfully wrought upon the Spirits of men, particularly on thoſe ſouldiers, who went, he ſaith, to fight the Biſhops battles in Scotland; that they pull'd down the Railes, Threatned the Prieſts, and kept ſuch a Viſitation in their progreſs, as the Biſhops hardly ever had done ſince Queen Elizabeths dayes. This he ſaith, p. 119. was the Finger of God, the work of him that created the Spirit of man.

N. C.

You tell me News.

C.

It's very ſtale. But no news at all to us who are well acquainted with their pitiful way of arguing. And I heartily wiſh your Miniſters would ſeriouſly conſider, upon this occaſion, theſe two things. Firſt, how wretchedly they were wont to reaſon, and how they abuſed the poor people by incouraging them to draw the greateſt hopes from the ſlighteſt grounds. For what Connexion is there between theſe two things? The diſorderly Souldiers were uncivil to our Miniſters, and prophaned our Churches as they went into the North, therefore the fall of Babylon is near at hand? It is juſt like the reaſoning of Mr. Henderſon who told the Parliament that the Faſt which they kept on St Johns day**Sermon on 27. Decem. 1643. was a preſage that by the bleſſing of God on theirs and the Aſſemblies p. 42proceedings, the Superſtition of obſerving Chriſtmas ſhould ſhortly expire, and that it was at its laſt gaſp. As if one ſhould ſay, there was a ſolemn Faſt indicted (as they ſpeak) in the Church of Scotland on the ſecond Lords day in Sep. 1642. for the promoting Unity in Religion, and Uniformity in Government:**Direct. anent Malignants by the Commiſ. of Gen. Aſſ. and the Officers of the Army at Wallingford houſe turned that Feſtival again into a day of Humiliation: therefore that ſolemn remembrance of Chriſts Reſurrection ſhall ſhortly ceaſe, and Chriſtianity fall to the ground.

N. C.

I am aſham'd of the incoherence of ſuch Diſcourſes.

C.

So ſhould they be too, and do publick pennance for it. As alſo for their groſs hypocriſy and partiality in aſſuming a power to themſelves, leſs than which they condemn in other men. For they may turn it ſeems a Feſtival of our Lords appointing into a Faſt; but we may not make a Feſtival in honour of him. I would deſire them alſo to conſider in the ſecond place, whether their Connivance at, nay, their Approbation of ſuch things as were done without any Authority; I may add, their praiſing the blind zeal of private men who took upon them to be Reformers; and, more than that, their imputing it to the work of the Spirit and the mighty power of God; did not help to embolden the Army afterward to do thoſe things which they themſelves abhorr'd; with a perſwaſion that they were moved by the Spirit, and had a call from the Lord, though no Authority from men? It is a thing much to be laid to heart, and then honeſtly to be conſeſſed; and publickly bewailed. And when we ſee them ſo humble and ſincere as to take ſhame to themſelves for what they have done; we ſhall all have the better opinion of them.

N. C.

I hope theſe ſpeeches may be imputed to the raſhneſs of a few men; at leaſt they were not approved by any Authority.

p. 43C.

Think you ſo? How came Mr. Wilſons Sermon then before the Parliament to be printed by their Order, 28. Sept. 1642. In which he calls the Clergy about the King, Croaking Frogs that crept into Kings Chambers: Who are known by the gutter (there he thought lay a jeſt) whence they come; out of the mouth of the Dragon, out of the mouth of the Beaſt and the falſe Prophet. They are the ſpirits of Devils which go forth unto the Kings of the Earth to gather them to battle, &c. The Frogs head is like their Caps [Quadrata ranarum Capita] Here is work for the Parliament, that the king may have no more Croakers in his Chambers.

And here (I may add,) is a taſt of your ſanctified wit, or rather, devout Railing; though borrowed, alas! in great part from Paraus on the Revelation.

N. C.

You take things in the worſe part, when you hear or read our Sermons.

C.

You would have ſaid, perhaps, if you had read Mr. Vicars, that to the hearing of the Word there came as well ears of Scorn as ears of Corn. For ſure you could not but have remembred ſuch an admirable piece of wit as this, which you may find in his Epiſtle to the Reader.

N. C.

We do not regard Wit, nor pretend to it.

C.

It is not becauſe you do not love it. For according to the Proverb; John would wipe his Noſe if he had it.

N. C.

There is wit in picking a lock; but it is better to let it alone. And therefore I will not vie Proverbs with you.

C.

You are juſt like the Gentlemen we are ſpeaking of, who do things and know it not: nay then do them, when they ſay they will not. Mr. W. Bridges for inſtance, reproves the Loyal Convert for ill language, and tells him be ſeems in vain to be Religious if he refrain not his tongue: when as he himſelf had, juſt before, let his tongue looſe in a moſt riotous manner againſt us; Telling him that the Cathedrals were a Neſt and Cage of all unclean Birds, p. 44a harbour of dumb Dogs, proud Prebends, and a crew of Aleſwilling Singing men: And that they came daily to offer near the Holy Table, the blind Whelps of an Ignorant Devotion; of which one may ſay, as the Apoſtle, the things which the Heathen offer in Sacrifice to their Idols, they offer them to Devils and not to God. Nay, as if his tongue was ſet on fire of Hell and could not be tamed, immediately after he had given that caution out of St. James, he falls into a rage again; and in a moſt naſty manner compares our Prelates to Swine lying in their Ordure. For he ſaith the Hogſty-Prelatical had been ſwept but twice ſince the Conqueſt, and the Temple of Jeruſalem three times in the 3. years of our Saviours Miniſtry. What office he deſign'd himſelf in this ſweet work I cannot tell; nor how you will excuſe this ſavoury language; unleſs it be ſufficient to ſay, that he railed by Publick Authority.

N. C.

I abominate ſuch Reformers: and think they deſerved to keep Hoggs, rather than feed the Sheep of Chriſt.

C.

I am glad to hear you ſay ſo: And hope you as much abhor Mr. Hughes his Reproaches, who ſayes, the Common-Prayer may be likened fitly to the abomination of Deſolation ſtanding in the holy place.

N. C.

By what you told me before, I could expect no better from him; whom I think worthy to have been preferr'd to the ſame office with the other.

C.

But you would expect better language, would you not? from two ſuch Holy men as Mr. Allin, and Mr. Shepherd, the famous New-England Preachers?

N. C.

They ſure were more Conſcientious than to utter any foul ſpeeches.

C.

Yet they tell you, the Engliſh Service-Book hath stunk above ground twice 40. year, in the noſtrils of the godly, who breathed in the pure air of Scripture. Defence of the 9. poſitions. p. 61.

p. 45N. C.

No more of this Noiſom language, I beſeech you: which is enough to poiſon the Air we breath in.

C.

As it hath done already: and ſo diffuſed its venome among your people, that they are generally infected with this Plague. Nay, they not only do ſuch things themſelves, but take pleaſure in them that do them. Witneſs all the filthy reproaches they beſtow upon our Divine Service, Clergy, and People: and the great ſatisfaction and applauſe wherewith the late Cobler of Gloceſters writings were entertained, even by thoſe whom you eſteem Religious. This ſhews what manner of ſpirit you are of, and that your people are in danger to deprive themſelves of all ſenſe of true Religion: to pave their own hearts, and make them like the high-way; through which all things may paſs without any difference (ſave only a few innocent Ceremonies) even whole Cart-loads of dung and filth. And of the very ſame ſpirit, I muſt tell you, this ſort of Religious people have ever been. For Martin Marprelate, with whoſe Devil this man was poſſeſſed; was received with the like Applauſe, and his Writings ſo thumb'd, that they were even worn out, with continual reading and handling of them. If you will not believe me; yet I hope you will truſt Mr. Brightman whoſe words theſe are; as you may ſee if you look into his Comments on the 3. Rev. 17. p. 49. of the Engliſh Edit. where ſpeaking of the Nakedneſs of Laodicea (i. e. in his opinion, the Church of England) he makes this an Argument of it, that this man had poured ſuch great contempt and ſhameful reproach upon it, which is the meaning of her being Naked. There was one, ſaith he, that called himſelf by the name of Mar-prelate, who ſet forth a Book wherein he dealt ſomewhat roundly with the Angel. How were thoſe bitter jeſts of his favoured among the People? How plauſible were they in a manner to all men? How willingly and greedily; with what great mirth were they every p. 46where entertained? There is none ſo rude and unskilful but pondering that time in his mind, would ſay thus to himſelf, and that not without cauſe; Truly, the Lord hath poured out contempt upon Princes; thoſe that honour him doth he honour, and thoſe that deſpiſe him, ſhall be deſpiſed. He hath made our Prieſts contemptible to the whole People, becauſe they have broken their Covenant. You may read what follows there if you think good: For it is a great Demonſtration, how well thoſe people were inſtructed in the Chriſtian Religion; and what rare deviſes you have been taught to blind your eyes that you may not ſee your ſins. For you may ſpeak evil; and rejoyce in iniquity; and ſport your ſelves in beholding your Fathers Nakedneſs; and fancy all the time that you are fulfilling Propheſies, executing the judgment written; and pouring out Vials, like ſo many Angels.

N. C.

I ſhould think rather this was the Devil with his followers fighting againſt Michael and his Angels.

C.

And a Devil it was, whom when you had once raiſed, you could never conjure down again; nor with all your Prayers and Faſtings diſpoſſeſs him. Nay, this foul Spirit grew in time ſo outragious that he flew at laſt in a foaming manner in your own face. Which is a thing ſo remarkable, that I cannot but put you in mind of it: how you were ſerved in your kind; and felt the tongues of men ſharpned againſt your ſelves, which you had whetted to wound the reputation of others. No ſooner had you pull'd down the Biſhops, whom you had laid low before by ſuch fellows as that Martin-Mar-prelate: but out comes Martins Eccho which return'd all thoſe Reproaches upon Presbytery. Baal, Babylon, Egypt, and all the reſt of thoſe Heatheniſh names were preſſed to war againſt you, which you had made to ſerve againſt us. Presbytery was called a Limb of Antichriſt: a tyrannical Lordly Government; a worſe bondage than that under the Biſhops; a bondage under Taskmaſters, like thoſe over Iſrael in Egypt. p. 47Nay that Very Mouth which reviled our Church, now reviled your intended Reformation. Mr. Burton himſelf, whom your people had ſo much admired, and brought home with ſuch joy and triumph, that you fancied (as I ſhall tell you before we have done) that day to be the Reſurrection of the Witneſſes; beſtowed thoſe cenſures on Presbyterial Government: which he ſaid**Dialogue called Conformity, Deformity. would bring us under perpetual ſlavery, worſe than either Egypt or Babylon.

And in the very ſame terms wherein you had rail'd againſt our Prieſts, we heard the Sectaries railing againſt your Presbyters: whom they called Romiſh bloody Prieſts, Black Coats, Diviners and Soothſayers; Croaking Frogs; the Devils Agents; Penſioners to the accuſer of the Brethren. Nay, the Aſſembly it ſelf we were told had two horns like a Lamb, but a mouth like a Dragon, teaching the Parliament to ſpeak blaſphemy againſt the Saints that dwell in Heaven. Your Ʋniformity alſo was as much diſgraced as ours, and ſtiled the Burden of the Saints, the bondage of the Church, the ſtraightning of the Spirit, the limiting of Chriſt; Edw. Gangr. 1 part. p. 212.and the ecclipſing of the glory of the Father. Nay it is pretty to obſerve, how the very Myſtery of Iniquity, you had ſo long complain'd on, was now found working among you. Ʋniformity, Mr. Saltmarſh ſaid, was a piece of it. And Mr. Dell (in his Epiſtle before his Sermon of Right Reformation, preached before the Parliament) calls Presbytery, a new form of that myſtery of iniquity, which had been ſo long a working. The Beaſt, they held, had only chang'd its ſhape, and taken another name, and ſo they baited it moſt fiercely as you had taught them: And told you in effect, what the Proverb ſays, that Gooſe, and Gander, and Goſling, are three ſounds, but one thing. But they would not part with you thus; for after they had done with this, then they fell upon your darling, the Solemn League and p. 48Covenant. This became a brand of infamy, a Cains mark almoſt (as Mr. Caſe tells us**Thankſg. Serm. for taking of Cheſter. p. 26.) ſo that if they would ſtigmatize a man to purpoſe, they would ſay, He? He is a Covenanter. As you had told us that we made an Idol of the Common-Prayer; ſo Mr. Peters told you publickly in a Sermon at the three Cranes, that you kept ſuch a ſtir about the Covenant, as if you would have the people make an Idol of it. Mr. Feak alſo called it, the great Idol of the two Kingdoms. And ſo fit had this word been found to do ſervice that at laſt one told us, that you had got two Idols for on one. For the Parliament and the Pulpit, ſaid an**Letter to Card. Barber. Outlandiſh Gentleman (imitating the language of the times,) are the two great Idols of the people, the greateſt that ever were. For it's held a kind of blaſphemy to ſpeak againſt the one; and the whole Body of Religion is nail'd to the other. It comes to my mind alſo, how you who joyn'd in the outcryes againſt Malignants, were numbred in concluſion, among them, and ſaid to be grown indeed to a more refined Malignancy; but that there was no greater difference between a Presbyter and a Prelate, than between a half Crown piece, and two ſhillings and ſix pence. And as your good friend Mr. Vicars had told us, that God had made us to be the very drudges and Scul-boyes of his Church and children. So Mr. Peters in good time told you (in a Pamphlet of his) that the Presbyterians were no better than Gibeonites, who might help to hew ſtone and ſquare Timber for a more glorious building.