A Just Defense of Hearing the Sermons, Chapter 4 – Chapter 5

A Just Defense of Hearing the Sermons · Chapter 4 – Chapter 5

p. 118CHAP. 4. ARG. 4.

Sect. 1. They that deny not Christs Offices Doctrinally, may be heard

THus it is argued:

Those that oppugn or deny any of the Offices of Jesus Christ, are not to be heard, but separated from: But the present Ministers of England oppugn and deny some of the Offices of Jesus Christ: Therefore. Before we come to clear the several parts of this Argument, we shall crave liberty briefly to premise. 1. That there is a two-fold denying or oppugning of the Offices of Christ, Verbal and Professional. Such was and is that of the Jews, the Papists are not guilty hereof; in words they own, preach up, plead for all the Offices of Christ as much as any: so do all the present Ministers of England: This is not then the denial of the Offices of Christ we implead them as guilty of.

2. Real and actual, when persons do that which enwraps in the Bowels of it, an impugning and denial of the Offices of Christ. This the Romish Synagogue are eminently guilty of: so are the present Ministers of England, as shall (we doubt not) be clearly demonstrated in its proper place.

Secondly, That a verbal professional acknowledgment of the Offices of Christ is nothing, when contradicted in practice: This the Apostle avowedly asserts, in respect of the knowledge of God, Tit. 1.16. They profess they know God, but in works they deny him; and may congruously enough be applyed to the matter in hand. This, as applied to the Combination and Synagogue of Rome, some of themselves have long since ackowledged, whilest they profess Christ to be King, and submit not to the Laws he hath prescribed in his Word, they make him an Idol and put a Scepter of Reed in his hand: so some of their own. But I interrogate, What if a man should with the greatest earnestness profess, and in the height of a confident spirit averr, that he were born again of God, washed, sanctified in the blood of Christ, and by the spirit of the Lord, that he did receive and own Christ as his King and Law-giver, when I see this man at the same time walking in a way of Rebellion against Christ, in open contempt and defiance of his Laws and Government p. 119subjecting to the yoak of other Lords and Law-givers; shall hi… Plea be admitted? Surely no, Quid verba audiam, cum facta videam. 'Tis long since decided by Christ, that false Prophets are to be descried, not by their words (they may speak like, Angels; cry, Hail Master, kiss him, yet be false Prophets, yea, Judasses to him) but by their fruits: Let them profess a thousand times over, that they own all the Offices of Christ, if they are the mean while found in the practice of those things that are inconsistent with the truth of such a profession, they are really deniers and opposers of the Offices of Christ. This is that then we affirm in this matter.

1. That those that do really oppose any of the Offices of Christ, are not to be heard, but separated from: This carrying a brightness along with it, that is sufficient to convince all, except such, whose eyes the God of this World hath blinded: that its original is from God, we shall take for granted will not be denied by a professing enlightned people, though otherwise it were easie to multiply arguments for its demonstration.

1. To oppose Christ in any of his Offices, bespeaks such as are guilty thereof to be Antichrists, 1. Joh. 2.22. and 4.2, 3. 2 Joh. 7. (of the same mind with us herein, is learned Beza upon the forecited Scriptures) and none will surely be so inconsiderate (not to say worse) as to assert, It is lawful to attend upon the Ministry of Antichrist.

2. To hear such, is to strengthen and encourage them in that their denial of, and opposition unto the Offices of Christ; and thereby become partakers with them in their sin:

The thought of which, cannot but be grievous to the poor Lambs of Christ. But this will not be denied.

Answ. 1 I allow the distinction of verbal and real oppugning the Offices of Christ: But it is false, that the Papists are not guilty of a verbal denying of the Offices of Christ, and that in words they own, preach up, and plead for all the Offices of Christ as much as any. For though they do acknowledge Christ to be King, Priest, and Prophet, yet their Doctrine, and not their practice only, doth overthrow all the Offices of Christ. As he that ascribes Kingly power to a subject, doth make another King than the right King, and so doth u…king him; and as he that ascribes to a Creature that which is proper to God, doth set up another God, and so ungod the true God, who can no more be multiplied than the Heavens can bear two Suns; even so it is with the Papists, while they assert, that traditions unwritten are to be received with alike affection p. 120of piety and reverence as the written Gospel, when the Pope ascertains them that he is infallible, that he is judge of Controversies, can determine what is to be held as an Article of Faith unerringly, can make Laws to bind the Conscience by vertue of his Authority, without the case of Scandal and Contempt; can dispense with Gods Laws, lawful oaths, incestuous marriages prohibited by God; by his indulgences can forgive sins authoritatively and absolutely, that ascribe to every Priest a power to offer in the Mass a propitiatory unbloody sacrifice for the quick and dead, to forgive sins in the Sacrament of Penance, to enjoyn laborious works of penance, which shall be satisfactious to God for sins, while they make Saints deceased, and Angels Mediatours between God and Man by their merits and agency with God for us; they ascribe to Creatures the power proper to Christs Offices, and so do make other Prophets and Priests to officiate as Christ; they do verbally deny the Offices of Christ, and not in words own, preach up, and plead for all the Offices of Christ as much as any, as this Author most untruly suggests; but do doctrinally evacuate them all, of which no such thing can be charged on the present Ministers of England, nor is at all demonstrated by this Author.

2. I grant, that a verbal professional acknowledgment of the Offices of Christ, when contradicted by practice is nothing to the salvation of the person so professing, in the sense in which St. Paul saith 1 Cor. 13 2. Though I have the gift of Prophecie, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have no charity, I am nothing, that is, as v. 3. it profiteth me nothing; and no further are to be drawn the words of the Apostle, Tit. 1.16. than that which is expressed in the Text, that to such persons nothing is pure but their minds and consciences are defiled; and so to the Interrogation I answer, such a ones plea shall not be admitted before God, or in an Ecclesiastical censure, or a private judgment, so as that he shall have the approbation or benefit of a real subject to Christ; yet all this doth not prove that his doctrine impugnes the Offices of Christ, or that his doctrine may not be heard to the profit of the Hearers. J. Owen of the duty of Pastors, p. 24. God oftentimes out of his care for his flock, bestows gifts on some, for the benefit of others, on whom he will bestow no graces for the benefit of their own souls. P. 43. People must beware of false Prophets. How shall they do this, but by trying their doctrine by the rule. Nor is it true that Christ hath decided the question as he would have it; as if Christ had said that false Prophets are to be descried by their virtous p. 121life, not by their doctrine: He saith indeed, they are known by their fruits, but that these fruits are only their evil life, he saith not. No where is any one said to be a false Prophet, that doth not take upon him to prophesie; he may be a bad man, that teacheth no false Doctrine, but not a false Prophet. Judas was a wicked man, a Devil, but no where termed a false Prophet; yea he was one of those that Christ sent to preach, and one of those of whom he saith, Mat. 10.40. He that receiveth you, receiveth me; and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me. In the Old Testament, Jer. 5.3. & 23.16, 17, 25, 26. Micah 3.5. false Prophets are said to be such as prophesied Lyes in Gods name and he sent them not; that they taught lying divinations, the Visions of their own heart, they cried peace when there was no peace, they attempted to draw them after other gods, Deut. 13.2. In the New Testament, 2 Pet. 2.1 There were false Prophets among the people, even as there shall be false Teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies denying the Lord that bought them, 1 Joh. 4.1. Many false Prophets are gone out into the World, and they are said to be such as confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, that they speak of the World, v. 3, 5. That is true which Mr. John Ball in his Trial of the grounds of Separation, ch. 13. pag. 312. hath, If we look into the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, we shall never find the Prophets called true or false in respect of their outward calling, (I add, or only their vitious lives) but in respect of their doctrine. Yea, though a man should by his doctrine deny the Offices of Christ only by remote consequence; as, by teaching something as appointed by Christ, which was not; or denying something to be instituted by Christ, which was so appointed; yet should he not be accounted a false Prophet, but an erring man, who while he layes the foundation rightly, yet through ignorance, or inadverrencie builds Hay and Stubble thereon, as the Apostle speaks, 1 Cor. 3.12. And therefore that which this Author doth so confidently pronounce, as if it were as clear as the Sun, and denied by none, but those whose eyes the God of this World hath blinded, [That those that do really (that is in their practice, though not in their preaching) oppose any of the Offices of Christ, are not to be heard (no not when they preach saving Truths of the Gospel) but separated from, (not only in respect of private or Church Communion in the Lords Supper or Prayers, but in attending on the Ministry of the Word delivered by them) which is his major proposition] is so far from being light, that it seems rather to me, some of that smoak of the bottomless pit, wh…ch the God of this World raiseth, to hinder p. 122many poor souls from hearing that Word, wherein the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ the image of God doth shine unto men. Nor were not professing enlightned people, as he calls them, held by prejudice, or guided by affection more than by judgment, could they grant this proposition. For if according to this Authors dictates, he that really, that is, in heart or practice opposeth any of the Offices of Christ, is to be separated from: then every one who disobeys his Commands, believes not his Words, that is an hypocrite; yea, that sins or errs in any thing Christ hath revealed or commanded, is to be separated from, and not to be heard; and so all must turn Seekers or Quakers, if they do not meet with a Teacher who is perfect without sin or errour. As for what this Author saith for demonstration of it, that such are Antichrists, 1 Joh. 2.22. and 4.2, 3. 2 Joh. 7. and that Beza is of the same mind, and that they that hear them strengthen their opposition unto the Offices of Christ, and partake with them in their sin, is false. For neither doth St. John, nor Beza in his Annotations count any for Antichrists there meant, but such as by their doctrine oppugne Christs Nature or Office, which he terms the false Doctrine of the Antichrists; nor is he at all guilty of the sins of the Minister who is evil in his life, by hearing him preach truth; yea, though he preach some errours, and it be probable, that when he hears him, he shall hear some errour preached by him, unless some other way he abet his sin or errour, or omit his duty in seeking to amend him. But let us attend the proof of his minor.

Sect 2. Every not hearkning to Christs Order, is not a denial of his Office.

'Tis the second thing may sound harsh in the ears of some (as did some sayings of Christ, but if truth, where God shall give the seeing eye, and hearing ear, 'twill be received,) viz.

2. That the present Ministers of England do oppose and deny some of the Offices of Christ, viz. His Kingly and Prophetical Office, which we come to the proof of.

Arg. 1. Those that hearken not to the Revelation Christ hath made, and as supreme Lord and Law-giver, hath enjoyned to be observed touching the Orders and Ordinances of his house, deny the Prophetical and Kingly Office of Christ, Deut. 18.18. Acts 3.22. Isa. 9.6. But the present Ministers of England hearken and conform not to the Revelation Christ hath made touching the Orders and Ordinances of his house: Therefore.

p. 123Answ. Though I doubt not but I could retort this Argument upon this Authour, whom by sundry passages in this Book I judge to be one that hearkens not to the Revelation Christ hath made, and as supreme Lord and Law-giver hath enjoyned to be observed touching the Order and Ordinance of his house, even that most express, Mat. 28.19. Mark 16.15, 16. one of the principles of the Doctrine of Christ, and part of the foundation, Heb. 6.1, 2. Yet I shall wave that, and answer directly by denying the major; of which I give these reasons.

1. Because denial, is more than not hearkning to; the one is by positive contradiction, the other may be only by Omission.

2. The not hearkning may be out of ignorance, incapacity to understand, dulness, slothfulness, fearfulness, mistakes, prevalency of temptation without any enmity of heart, habitual stubbornness, or willful gainsaying, which are requisite to a plain denial of the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ.

3. There may be sundry Orders of his House revealed by Christ, which are controverted, whether they be such or no; there may be some acknowledged to be Orders of his House, yet thought not of such moment as that the peace of the Church should be broken by contending for them; or judged not perpetual, but temporary; or not binding the Ministers to observe, till the Magistrate reform; as in the case of putting down Images, or conceiving in cases of necessity, or for avoiding of Scandal, they may not hearken to them; as in Davids eating the Shew-bread, the Apostle Pauls not hearkning to the Order of discontinuing Circumcision, and a Jewish Vow and Offering; in these, and perhaps more cases a person may not hearken to the Revelation Christ hath made, and as supreme Lord and Law-giver hath enjoyned to be observed touching the Orders and Ordinances of his House, and yet be so far from denying the Prophetical and Kingly Office of Christ, that he may be sound in the Faith, and a zealous and faithful maintainer of them, by holding forth the truth of the Gospel unto the death. And therefore I take the major proposition of this Argument to be manifestly false, which he seems by not proving to take for manifest truth.

Sect. 3. It is not proved, that Christs Soveraign Authority is rejected by the present Ministers.

But he goes on thus: 'Tis the minor (or second Proposition) that p. 124in the thoughts of some is capable of a denial, but the verity thereof shines forth as the Sun in its brightness, in the review of the Orders and Ordinances of the House of Christ appointed by himself; and the present frame and deportment of the present Ministers of England with respect thereunto: which of them have they not made void by their Traditions? This is that which Christ hath said, 1. That all power for the Calling, Institution, Order, and Government of his Church, is invested solely in him, as the alone Lord, Soveraign Ruler, and Head thereof, Mat. 28.19. 1 Tim. 6.14, 15. Joh. 3.35. Acts 3.22. and 5.31. 'Tis upon this foot of account that Christ chargeth his Disciples not to be called of men Rabbi, nor to call any Father, (viz. not to impose their authority upon any, or suffer themselves to be imposed upon by any in the matters of their God) Mat. 23.8, 9, 10. because one is their Master and Lord (viz. Christ.) Hence also the Apostles lay the weight of their exhortations upon the Commandment of Christ, 1 Cor. 11.23. and 14.37. Proclaim all to be accursed that preach any other Gospel, Gal. 1.8. (yea though Angels from Heaven, should they live and speak as such) charge those to whom they write not to receive any into their houses that bring any other doctrine, (much more not to receive them as their Teachers) 2 Joh. 10. Yea, the Spirit of the Lord in the close of the last Revelation of his Will, it pleased this great King and Law-giver in such a way to give forth, testifies that if any man shall add unto these things, the Lord shall add unto him the Plagues that are written in his Book, Rev. 22.18. Do the present Ministers of England conform unto this great Institution? in words indeed they do so. But what meaneth the bleating of the Sheep, and lowing of the Oxen in our ears? Do they not own other Lords, Heads, and Governours, that have a Law-making power, and would enforce the Consciences of the free-born Subjects of Christ over his Churches besides him? what doth this less than evidently proclaim their disobedience and rebellion (which is as the sin of Witchcraft) against the King of Kings, and the rejection of his Scepter and Soveraign Authority over them! But of this more hereafter.

Answ. It is no strange thing to find in this Author high Charges backed only with confident assertions, and no proofs; so that men, comparing the one with the other, may think he wrote his Dreams, rather than Meditations. For what are we to think otherwise when we read such passages as these: the verity of his minor proposition shines forth as the Sun in his brightness? Which is no more than is to be said of the first universal indubitable principles of the light of Nature or Reason, which are indisputable; p. 125and yet he saith, in the thoughts of some it is capable of a denial: and when he should prove it so clear, in stead of an Argument, proves all with Interrogations, which if the Reader deny, he is put to a stand. But to shew the vanity of his arguings to his Question, which of the Orders and Ordinances of the house of Christ appointed by himself, have not the present Ministers of England (he means all, even the best of them, as his words, ch▪ 2. and arguings against them indiscriminatim do evince,) have they not made void by their Traditions? I answer by another Question, Which of them have they so made void? Sure the Ordinances of searching the Scriptures, hearing the Word, praying to the Father in the name of Christ, believing on the Son, with many more (which are the chief Orders and Ordinances of the house of Christ, appointed by himself) have not been made void by the Traditions of the Ministers of England that now are, at least not by all or the best of them, that I know or hear of. But he imagines he can prove it by an induction of particulars, of which he names only seven; though to make his induction full (without which it is no good Argument) he should have reckoned seven times seven. But perhaps he thinks if he can make good the charge in these seven, it will be without question his charge is true of the rest. Let us then view each of these in order, and see how well he hath acquitted himself therein.

The first of these Orders or Ordinances of Christ is, that all power for the Calling, Institution, Order and Government of his Church, is invested solely in him as the alone Lord, Soveraign Ruler, and Head thereof. Which I grant as a truth, though I assent not to his Paraphrase on Mat. 23.8, 9, 10. as if Christ did forbid the Apostles to impose their Authority upon any in the matters of their God; which they did, Act 15.25, 28. But how comes this to be an Order, Ordinance, Institution of the house of Christ appointed by himself? Such Orders I took to be Precepts of Christ to us, but this seems to be Gods gift to him, Mat. 28.18. Joh. 3.35. and 5.22, 26, 27. and 17.2. Acts 3.22. and 5.31. Ephes. 1.22. &c. no Precept to us. But let it imply a Precept to us; Do not the present Ministers of England conform to it? He grants, they do so in words, but not in deeds. Why so? They own other Lords that have a Law…making power, and would enforce the Consciences of the Free-born Subjects of Christ over his Churches, besides him; and thereby proclaim their disobedience and rebellion (which is as the sin of Witchcraft) against the King of Kings, and their rejection of his Scepter and Soveraign Authority over them. This is a high charge, p. 126and if true would unchristen them, but I see no proof of it, so that I take this to be only a piece of Oratory, such as Tertullus used against St. Paul, Acts 24. which is so much the more venomous in that it is in generalibus without instancing in particulars, which is the sign of a Diabolical Calumniatour. Yet I shall not let it pass. The Lords he means are either the King or the Bishops. The King is owned by the Ministers in the Oath of Supremacie, the Bishops in the promise at their Ordination, wherein they promise the Lord being their helper, to obey reverently their Ordinary, and other Ministers, unto whom is committed the charge and government over them; following with a glad mind and will their godly admonitions, and submitting themselves to their godly judgements. The Law-making power of the King is with the Parliament, of the Bishops in the Convocation, the enforcing of the Conscience (though it be an uncouth phrase▪ as supposing the Conscience can be enforced by man, which is impossible) is meant of Causative Compulsion, by enjoyning men to act or speak according to such Statutes or Canons as are imposed on them under certain penalties. How many, and which of these Acts or Speeches are rebellion and rejection of Christs Authority, is to be demonstrated; and not persons of place and Authority to be thus criminated after the manner of Railers and Scolds. And sure it is not easie to prove, that though such Acts and Speeches were imagined to be such Rebellion; yet that they are so in them, unless it could be proved they did them presumptuously foreign with a proud heart and an high hand, which, if this Author hath not learned the Maxime Calumniare audacter, aliquid haerebit, methinks he should tremble to attempt. But sith he tells us of this more hereafter, I intend to observe his motion. He goes on.

Sect. 4. Ministers oppose not the Will of Christ by not joyning in the Separation pleaded for.

2. Saith he, This great Prophet and King hath also revealed, and proclaimed, That 'tis his Will, that those whom he hath called by his Word, should separate from the World, walk together in particular Societies and Churches, having given up themselves to the Lord, and one another, according to the Will of God, for their mutual edification and comfort in the Lord. The truth of this soveraign Institution of Christ, he that runs may read in the Scriptures hereunto annexed, 1 Cor. 1.2. and 5.12. 2 Cor. 6.17. Rev. 18.4. Joh. 15.19. and 17.6. Acts 2.40. and 19.9. Phil. 1.5. p. 127Acts 2.41. and 17.4. 2 Cor. 8.5. with many more. In the proof of this we might be copious, but that we study brevity: The diligent Reader knows where to find this Theam at large, treated of by learned Ainsworth, Bartlet, Cotton, Rogers, &c. How do the Ministers of England acquit themselves, in respect of this solemn appointment of the Lord? alass! who sees not that they are, in their practice, at open defiance herewith, have it in derision and contempt, making no difference betwixt the Holy, and Prophane; admitting persons led captive by the Devil at his will, that openly blaspheme the spirit of the Lord, and deride its effectual operation in the Consciences of men into their society? Are any too vile (except such as truly fear God▪ and desire to press after holiness) to be admitted by them into their Communion? Is not their Church-state (so unlike is it to the Institution of Christ) a very Babel, a Den of Dragons, and Hold of unclean Beasts?

Answ. This Crimination proceeds on these suppositions.

1. That Christians should separate from the Parish Assemblies, and joyn together in the Congregational way by Church-Covenant, which they call separating from the World.

2. That Ministers are bound to reject, and not to admit to the Communion those that are profane, and to admit only real Saints in the judgment of Charity, and that by opposing the way of separation, and promiscuous admission to the Communion, they infringe the solemn appointment of the Lord. For my part having read somewhat in Mr. Ainsworths and Mr. Cottons Writings, both concerning the way of the Separatists in the Low-Countries, and the Independents in New-England, I do not either in the Scriptures here alledged find such a solemn appointment of Christ, either that private persons, or Ministers are to make such a Separation, as these Authors do press upon the Consciences of others: nor hath experience either in the Low-Countries, or Old or New-England given such encouragement to sober minded Christians, as to engage them in that way, but rather many divisions, declinings into errour, and other evils, have given too much cause for men to doubt, whether it were ever a Plant of Gods planting. It is granted that it is the will of Christ, that those whom he hath called by his Word should separate from the World; And this they are to do in respect of their Worship, so as not to have Communion with them therein: and this I doubt not may be proved from 2 Cor. 6.17. and some other of the Texts alledged. But then by the World, are meant professed Infidels, such as denied the Lord Jesus and worshipped Idols; or at least such as were professed Unbelievers, as John 15.19. and 17.6. Acts 2.40. and p. 12819.9. the Jews were, and yet the Apostles did not refuse to go to the Temple to pray, nor to go into their Synagogues, or to take a Vow and purifie themselves at the Temple, notwithstanding the corruptions of their Priests, Service, and People, and their open opposition to the Christian Faith. But that ever it was the Will of Christ that Christians should separate from the true Worship of God, and the Professors of true Faith in Christ, because of either known evil in the Coversation of those present, or only suspected, or reported, is without all colour of Precept or Example in the Holy Scripture. It is true, the people of God are invited, Rev. 18.4. to go out of Babylon: But that their going out is by separation from the Service of God not Idolatrous, or from a Church not Heretical, by reason of some supposed or real corruption, or disorder, or defect in Government, Service, Members, or Ministry, is so far from the meaning of the Text, that it needs no other refutation, but the looking into the Text and comparing it with the foregoing Chapter. Of withdrawing from such as walk disorderly, 2 Thess. 3.6. enough hath been said before, ch. 2. sect▪ 6. Nor is it made any where the Ministers Office to make such separation as the Separatists require. 1 Cor. 5.12. is not spoken of Ministers as belonging to their Office to judge them that are within; or if it be, yet the putting away, v. 13. is not made his act; and how it is to be done, is best discerned by v. 2. Christians are to walk together in Societies or Churches, for their mutual edification and comfort in the Lord: and this they are no doubt bound to do, as occasion is, towards all Christians. And so much Phil. 1.5. Acts 2.41. and 17.4. may prove: but that they are to conjoyn in separated Churches by the so termed Church Covenant, as if they were not Members of other Churches, nor to joyn in Prayer, Praise of God, hearing, breaking Bread, but with either that one Church or Company, to which they have associated themselves, or those that are of the same way of Church-order, is neither proved from those Texts, or 2 Cor. 8.5. (which mentions no such Church-Covenant, as it is alledged for) nor any other. And therefore the imputations here used to the Ministers and Churches without distinction, are so unsavoury, and from such an intemperate Spirit, that I had rather cover them, than rake in such a dunghil. And I think respect to the fraternity this Author seems to be of, should have made him wary in charging the Ministers with these things, lest some of his adversaries should throw as much dirt on the face of the separated Churches out of Bayly's Disswasive, Edwards Gangraena, Welds History of Antimonianism, yea, the Preface to their p. 129Declaration, Octob. 12. 1658. Besides what particular persons know by experience, and the relations of the miscarriages of the ancient Separatists would furnish them withal;

Sect. 5. Election and Excommunication by the Church is not Christs Institution.

Yet this Author cannot hold, but on he goes.

3. Saith he, That he hath entrusted them, so called and united together, with Power, and given them Rules for the due and right exerting thereof, for the carrying on the Worship of his house, to chuse Officers over them to act in the holy things of God, for and to them (of which more shall be spoken in its proper place) to admit Members, to excommunicate Offenders, &c. all which we find shining forth in brightness in the ensuing Scriptures, Act. 1.23. and 6.3, 5. and 14.23. 2 Cor. 8.19. Mat. 18.17. 1 Cor. 5.4. Do the present Ministers of England conform unto this Institution of Christ? nothing less: is there any thing like this in the whole Oeconomie invented and practised by them? Do they not to the utmost of their power, labour to break this Bond of Christ asunder, cast away this Cord from them by stirring up the Magistrate to persecute by Fines, Imprisonments, Banishment, &c. the precious people of the Lord, that desire to be found in the practice of this Law of Christ, branding them with the odious names of Phanaticks, Sectaries, Schismaticks, &c.

Answ. The Election, Acts 1.23. was of an Apostle, and that by Lot and contains no Law or Institution of Christ, which we are tied to follow. Of the impertinent allegation of Acts 6.3, 5. and 14.23. enough hath been said before, ch. 2. sect. 3. The Election 2 Cor. 8, 19. was of a person not to be a Pastor to themselves, but to travel with St. Paul about the Contribution for the poor Saints; and though it be a good precedent for the like occasion, yet was but a Fact, not a Precept, Law, or Institution of Christ, necessary to be observed at all times, much less binding as a perpetual rule in Election of Pastors or Teachers. No other Excommunication is expressed, Mat. 18.17. but what is permitted to the injured person, of which more may be seen in the answer to this Authors Preface, Sect. 15. The delivery to Satan 1 Cor. 5.5. is argued by Peter Moulin in his Vates, lib. 2. c. 11. to have been more then our ordinary Excommunication, to wit, the permitting Satan to cruciate the body of the person that sinned; which no Church now hath power to do, nor indeed was the Church then to do it, but the Apostle by his power Apostolical as having power over unclean p. 130spirits, though absent, yet with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ in their presence when gathered together (which being in the Greek in the Genitive Case absolutely put, notes not their acting but presence) the Apostles determined to do it; and therefore contains no Institution of Christ, which Ministers are to practice. What else is charged upon the Ministers, it concerns them who are guilty to answer; I know he cannot justly charge all with it. It follows.

Sect. 6. No contempt of the authority of Christ is in the Church of England by setting up Officers and Offices.

4. That the Officers of his appointment are onelyonly such as these; Pastors, Teachers, Elders, Deacons, Widows, or Helpers: who as they are in one particular Congregation, so they have not any Lordship, or Lordly Authority over each other, being all Brethren, Ephes. 4.11. Rom. 12.7. and 16.1. 1 Cor. 12.28. Phil. 1.1. 1 Pet. 5.1, 2, 3. Act. 6.5. and 15.2. and 20.17. and 28.21, 28. 1 Tim. 3. chap. and 5.9, 10, 17. This Law of Christ so clearly revealed in the Scripture, they are so far from subjecting to, that they have neither the name nor thing required by him therein. See up other Officers and Offices, as if in open contempt and defiance of his Authority; of which it may righteously be said, He did at no time command them, neither did it ever enter into his heart so to do.

Answ. It is true, that those whom he calls Officers, are mentioned in some or other of those Texts he cites, and are some of them termed gifts given by God or Christ, in, or to, or for his Church or Body: But there are also other, as Apostles and Prophets, mentioned in some of the Texts as given also by God; and therefore those whom he reckons are not the only Officers of his appointment, nor all of them to be in one Congregation. Apostles were certainly to go up and down, and though they had not Lordship or Lordly Authority over others, yet had they authority, preeminence, and some kind of superiority over others, and if not in the same measure, yet some superiority is still allotted to Pastors over Deacons, which are acknowledged to be Officers to be still continued in the Church: nor is it unlikely, that those Elders who were worthy of double honour, 1 Tim. 5.17. had some preeminence above the rest; nor doth the relation of Brotherhood hinder, but that though in respect of the common Faith all of them are equal, yet some may have some Power or Office committed to them, which others have not, and so may have authority over them. That some p. 131Offices or Services may be added to those mentioned, may be gathered from 2 Cor. 8.19. whether all the Officers or Offices be rightly ordered in the Church of England, is not our present enquiry. Much hath been said before in answer to the second and third Chapters of this writing, which need not be here repeated. That the present Ministers of England, have neither name nor thing required by Christ in this law, is notoriously false; the names of Pastors, Teachers, or Doctors, Deacons, or Ministers, and the Office of Preaching the Gospel, continues therein, both in the name and thing. That they have set up other Officers and Offices, as if in open contempt and defiance of Christs authority, cannot be said but very unrighteously; nor do the alterations or additions, any more prove it, then the setting up Catechists, or Expositors, or Lecturers in the primitive or later times, proves open defiance and contempt of Christs authority. He goes on in the same vein of crimination thus:

Sect. 7. Election of Ministers by the Common Suffrage of the Church is not proved to be Christs appointment.

5. That these Officers be chosen by the common Suffrage of the Church of Christ, and solemnly set apart by Fasting and Prayer, this is evidently comprised in the ensuing Scriptures▪ Act. 1.15. and 6, 1, 2, 3, 5. and 14.23. and 1.23, 26. and 9.26, 27. In conformity whereunto, we find the Saints for many centuries of years after Christ, in the peaceable possession of this their priviledge and right. Clemens in his Epistle to the Church of Corinth, p, 57. saith, Our Apostles also knew by our Lord Jesus Christ, that Contention will be about the name of Episcopal charge: Therefore for this reason, having received a full predetermination, they constituted such as were forenominated; and in their instructive distribution delivered, that if they were negligent, other approved men should receive their Ministration, being ordained by them, or in the mean time by other choice men, all the Church consenting thereunto. Yea afterwards, let some one among you, Ingenious, Merciful, filled with Love speak; if through me Faction, and Contention, Schisms, I will depart: Of which if you are willing, I return, and will do the things appointed by the multitude. Wherein he fully asserts the priviledge of the Church or People of Christ, we are pleading for: And afterwards during the raign of Antichrist, Christ hath not left himself without p. 132a witness, nor his people without Champions to plead their right in this matter. To instance but in a few: That lively witness of Christ Martin Luther loudly proclaims, That the voice of the People ought not to be severed from the chusing of Ecclesiastical persons. And long before him, Cyprian (who lived about 260 years after Christ) sayes, Plebs obsequens, &c. The people that obey the commands of God, and fear him, ought to separate themselves from a wicked Pastor, seeing the people themselves chiefly, have either power to chuse Pastors that are worthy, or to refuse those that be unworthy, Cypr. Epist. 68. and tells us plainly, That this is bottomed upon the authority of God: That that is a just and lawful Ordination which is tryed by the judgment and voice of all, viz. that fear and obey God. Of the same mind, long after, was Francis Lambard, the Companion of Luther in Germany, in the Preface of his Book, intituled, The sum of Christianity; who sayes, Verily every Parish ought to have his proper Bishop, the which should be chosen by the People, and confirmed by the Commonalty of every Parish, who if they swerve one jot or tittle from the Doctrine of the Gospel of the Kingdom, ought to be deposed by the people, and others more fit, to be elected by them. And in Chap. 5. of the said Book, he professes, That 'tis the most gievous crime, and by no means to be suffered, that many children of Perdition do deprive the people of God of their just right and title, viz. to chuse them a Pastor. Peter Martyr in his common places, refers the chusing and election of Ministers to the People as their undoubted right: To whom we may joyn Mr. Bullinger, who sayes, That the Apostles exercised not tyranny in the Church, in Ordaining Ministers without the consent of the People; Bullin. Decad. 5. Serm. 4. Tit. 1. 1 Tim. 5. Gualter also upon Act. 1.25. saith, That those that profess the Gospel, handle the matter as evil as the Monks and Popish Bishops, in that they restore not again to the Church, the liberty of chusing Ministers, which by tyranny they took from them. Of the same mind is Zanchie, Calvin, Beza, Danaeus, Tilenus. Tyndal (the Martyr) with many others, as Mr. Fox, Cartwright, Mr. Jacob, &c. We cannot omit the famous case of the united Brethren of Bohemia, who concluding the whole Papacy to be purely Antichristian, could not allow of the Ordination of their Ministers by any in communion with it; and yet being perswaded of a necessity of continuing that Ordinance in a way of succession, send some of the Greek and Armenian p. 133Churches, who returning with dissatisfaction, they thereupon commit themselves and their cause to God, and chuse Elders from among themselves, and by Fasting and Prayer, solemnly set them apart to the work of the Preaching of the Gospel. To these many more might be added. The practice pleaded for (as is evident) is as antient as the dayes of the Apostles, and the first election of ordinary New-Testament Officers, continued in the Church till after the dayes of Constantine, when Pride and Tyranny soon brought all things into horrible Confusion, upon the pretext of Decency and Order; yet in the worst of times have the witnesses of Christ born their testimony hereunto. What say our Reverend Fathers and Ministers of the Church of England to these things? Have they not an equal respect to this appointment of Christ, as to those before instanced in? Is there any thing like it almost practised by them, in this great concern of separating persons for the Preaching of the Gospel of Christ? Is not the liberty of the Brethren and Churches of Christ, as much as lies in them, wholly disanulled and broken by them? Have they any such Call to the Ministry? Do they at all value or esteem of it? Are they in the practice of the Primitive Church, or of the Reformed Churches of this day in this matter? Is not the print of the feet of the old Strumpet of Rome, the bloody persecutor of the Saints, the cunning Deviser of a new self-invented and whorish Worship, to be solely found in the paths, they are in this matter traversing? and can such be accounted as the subjects of the Kingdom of Christ, and the real owners of his Authority and Power?

Answ. That Bishops or Presbyters should be chosen by the common Suffrage of the Church of Christ in each City or Parish, or select Congregation, I find not to be the appointment of Christ in the Scriptures alledged, or any other; the impertinency of the Allegations to this purpose is shewed before, Chap. 2. Sect. 3. In this Chap. Sect. 6. besides what is said in answer to the Preface, Sect. 7.22. the only text not before considered, Acts 9.26, 27. and 16.17. (if it were alledged) were altogether impertinent; there being no election of St. Paul but to be an Apostle; and that by Christ, not the Church, on whom Ananias laid hands at the appointment of Christ only, That he might receive his sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost; and to remove the fear of him, and non credence, of his being a Disciple, Barnabas (and no other we read of) took him, and brought him to the Apostles declaring how p. 134Christ had converted him. Which are altogether impertinent to prove election of Ministers by the common Suffrage of the Church, and Ordination thereupon to be the appointment of Christ. It is granted before in the answer to the Preface, Sect. 22. that there are relations in antiquity of the election of Bishops by the people, which could be no other way then in times of Persecution, when the Emperors were Infidels; yet withal, that even then things grew into such heats, that sometimes the Emperor was fain to interpose for quietness; and after, when Wealth and Power by favour of Christian Emperours were added to Bishops, sometimes bloody frayes, and other evils made that Election so turbulent, that it was found necessary to put it into the hands of fewer, until the investiture of Bishops being wrested from the Emperours, the Popes seized on it, leaving the election of the inferior Clergy unto the Bishops or Patrons, that had endowed the Ministers with Estates, except in cases reserved to his Romans. But, where the Reformation is with the consent of Princes, much of the power usurped by Popes is recovered by them, in other places the people either chuse or consent to the election; which being made the whole essence of the Ministerial Call by Congregational men, and by Divine Right, their opinion is opposed by the London Ministers in their Jus Divinum Ministerii Evangelici, Printed 1654. Chap. 8, 9. Nevertheless, the Testimonies produced by this Author, are not fully to his purpose; those out of Clements his Epistle are not home; the former speaks of constituting and appointing Ministers after the Apostles by other famous and discreet men (as it is in Burtons English translation of that Epistle) with the good liking and consent of all the Church, which is less then Election constituting their Call. The other contains only a voluntary offer to prevent breaches, which is nothing to the asserting of a power in them rightly seated; if it were such, it would be more then this Author, I think, would yield, that upon the command of the multitude, a Minister is to relinquish his place. The words of Luther, Bullinger, and perhaps the rest of the Protestants (whose words are not set down) meant no more than the not obtruding Ministers on the Churches of Christ, as the Monks and Popish Bishops did, who put on the People Priests unable to Preach the Gospel, such as fed themselves and not the flock, without choice or consent of the people. Which, if it be any where practised, is unjustifiable; as on the other side, where people are corrupted with Error, or Factiousness, or Carnal Relations, and S…lf aims, or are unskilful to judge of the disposition and abilities p. 135of a Minister, it is unsafe, or rather more dangerous to intrust the Church of Christ, though a gathered Congregation, with the election of their Minister by Common Suffrage without intervention of some discreet and able Ministers to ratifie or disanul it. What Cyprian saith, upon the occasion of the lapse of Basilides and Martialis Bishops in Spain, of their rejection and the election of Sabinus, and Felix, was agreeable to the Canons then in use, and to the state of those times: what he saith of Divine Authority, is not rightly proved. The Scriptures of the New Testament and Old, prove no Divine Institution of a certain way of electing or rejecting Ministers, so as that there may not be variation from what he saith was in his time: yet it is meet, that according to the sayings of Cyprian, Lambard, Gualter, or others, respect be had to people, that they be heard what they can say for, or against their Minister; and that he, who is criminous or insufficient, be not imposed on them to their souls hurt. What our Reverend Fathers and Ministers of the Church of England say to these things, may be seen in Whitgift's Answer to the first Admonition and Defence of the Answer, Tr. 3. p. 170. Bilson of the perpetual Government of Christs Church, Chap. 15. Andrews respons. ad Bellarm. Apolog. Chap. 13. p. 313. after, King James his Premonition: Hooker Eccles. Pol. l. 5. sect. 80. Field of the Church, l. 5. c. 54. If the Prelates do any thing unjustly therein, they must give an account to God; the Ministers, who consent not thereto, are not chargeable; both may be accounted as Subjects of the Kingdom of Christ, and the real owners of his Authority and Power, notwithstanding what is objected against them; especially if the evil be either from the defect or iniquity of Laws, Canons, and Customs, whereby that redress of Grievances in this kind, which even the Prelates have complained of, is stopped. I confess, that the continuance in force of so much of the Popes Canon Law, or our Common Law, as hinders a godly and able Ministry in every Parish, hath been deplored, and much endeavour hath been to amend things: But the experience that hath been of the difficulty therein, even when Congregational men have been most industrious to rectifie things, should methinks abate the censures of this Author, and rather cause men quietly to wait for a remedy, using the benefit of the Ministry we have, than by separation, and popular election in gathered Congregations make things worse than they are.

p. 136Sect. 8. Prophesying is not opposed by the Ministers.

But this Author hath not yet done, but tells us, To these, many other institutions of Christ may be added, which they subject not to. What should I mention,

6. That Royal Command of our Soveraign King and Lawgiver (which the profound, self-philosophically wise, but indeed foolish and unlearned Doctors of this day, wrest, to the countenancing of the disorders and confusion of Antichrist (darkness so gross that it may be felt) that all things be done decently and in Order, 1 Cor. 14.40. viz. that the Saints may Prophesie one by one, and ought to admonish, exhort, and build up one another in their most holy faith, Rom. 8.26. and 12.6. 1 Cor. 4.17. and 5.4. and 11.23. Ephes. 4.7, 11, 12. 1 Tim. 2.1. and 3.15. Jude 20. 1 Cor. 12.7, 11. Mat. 25.24. 1 Pet. 4.10, 11. 1 Cor. 12.15. and 14.12, 24. Ephes. 4.3, 7, 15, 16. Acts 2.42. Rom. 15.14. Ephes. 5.19. Col. 3.16. 1 Thess. 5.14. 2 Thess. 3.15. Heb. 3.13. to which might be added the frequent examples of the Saints in the Old and New Testament, 2 Chron. 17.7, 8, 9. Job 2.11. Mal. 3.16. Luke 4.16. Acts 13.15. 1 Cor. 14.24. to 34. and the practice of the Primitive Church, as witness Origen (in his Epistle to Celsum) Terrullian (in his Apologie) Justin Martyr (in his Apologie) and many others.

Answ. The censures of the Doctors of this day, and their wresting 1 Cor. 14.40. are too general, and not to be answered, save to tell the Author, that it is good for a man not to be wise in his own conceit, nor to be too free in censuring others, lest he fall into Diogenes his evil, when he trampled on Plato's pride with greater pride. But to the rest of the charge I say, That I know none of the Ministers of England, that forbid the Saints to Prophesie one by one: nor do I know of any at this day, that have the gift of Prophesie, which I gather from 1 Cor. 12.28, 29. and 13.2, 8, 9, 10. and other places to have been an extraordinary gift, by immediate revelation of the Spirit, whereby some hidden thing is discovered. (See Lysord's Apologie for the Ministery, pag. 27, 28.) If there were any that could Prophesie indeed, neither Prelates, nor others, may or can hinder them. But when persons mistakingly call all speaking to men to Edification, Exhortation and Comfort, from 1 Cor. 14.3. Prophesying (as if these terms were reciprocal) and under pres…n…e thereof, vent many p. 137mistakes and fancies, the restraint or regulating of such exercise… may be no transgression of Christs command. And, though the performing of the duties in the Texts alledged, ought to be cherished and furthered; and such Meetings, as do really tend thereto, should be countenanced: sith there may be abuses, which are to be prevented by Governours, though sometimes there be injustice, and liberty too much restrained, and complaints made to God in secret; yet should not invectives be used to alienate the minds of people from their Teachers or Rulers, nor any unlawful practice used tending to Sedition, or disturbance; but by patience and quietness we should possess our souls, expecting help from God in due time, as did the Primitive Christians with happy success. Yet once more, saith this Author:

Sect 9. Ministers service may be Divine and Spiritual, in the use of the Liturgy.

Yea, 7. What should I mention that grand Institution of this Soveraign Lord and Lawgiver, that nothing be offered up to the Father, but what is of his own prescription (Divine and Spiritual, without affectation of Legal shadows (John 4.24.) of worldly pomp or carnal excellency, 2 Cor. 1.12. and 2.17. 1 Cor. 2.12. and 6.13.) 1 Cor. 12.28. Isa. 33.22. Jam. 4.12. Matth. 15.6, 9. Heb. 8.5. 1 King. 13.33. & 12, 13. Jer. 7.31. Numb. 15.39. Deut. 12.1, 4, 31. It's evident, the present Ministers of England conform not to the Orders and Ordinances, Christ as the great Prophet and Lawgiver to his people, hath appointed them to walk by; and therefore really disown the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ.

Answ. It is true, no Prayers, or Praises, or other Religious exercises should be offered to the Father; but, what is of his own prescription in respect of the service it self, matter, or manner, which he hath prescribed: But when he hath left it free to use a prescript Form of words, or to pray without such a stinted Form, where he forbids not the use of Musick in praysing of God, and no Idolatry or Superstition is used or furthered by Ordinances and Utensils for the celebration of Gods Ordinances; notwithstanding these, the service of God may be Divine and Spiritual without affectation of Legal shadows of worldly pomp, or carnal excellency, contrary to the texts p. 138alledged. If any be faulty in that way, it is to be imputed to the persons, not either to others not guilty, nor to the Liturgy prescribed; much less such Ministers as offer up Prayers and Prayses to the Father in the name of Christ for things agreeable to the Will of God, and use the Lords Supper without Idolatry, are to be charged to disown really the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ.

Sect. 10. Things objected against the Ministers, are not such as justifie Separation.

This Author addes. But perhaps to these things, some may say, These are but small matters, good men differ among themselves herein.

To which we answer,

1. That they are part of the Instituted Worship of God; the Orders he hath left his children to conform to, hath already been proved: to say, That any part of the Instituted Worship of Christ, is a small matter; is no small derogation to the wisdom of the Lawgiver, that gave it forth.

2. What if it should appear, that as small as these things seem to be, they are the grounds of the late Controversies of God, pleaded with fire and sword in most of the Europaean Kingdoms? This may perhaps a little stay sober persons from so rash a conclusion, that these are small matters: A serious review of the late Contests of God in the Nations, with the consideration of the grounds and rise of them; will, to persons of sobriety, sufficiently evince the truth of the suggestion.

3. As small matters as these, have been severely punished by the Lord: He is a jealous God, and stands upon punctilio's (if I may so call them) in his Worship: hence is that expression, Ye cannot serve the Lord, for he is a jealous God, Josh. 24.19. What should I mention the case of Uzziah, 2 Chron 26.16. of Corah, Dathan and Abiram, Numb. 16. of Uzzah, whose sin lay meerly in, whose judgment was singly upon this foot of account; his not seeking the Lord after the due order, 1 Chron. 15.13. God commands that when the Ark was removed, it should be covered by the Priests, that no hand touch it, that it be carryed on p. 139mens shoulders, Numb. 4.11, 15. which Order was violated, when they brought it from the house of Abinadab, 'twas uncovered, and upon a Cart, after the manner of the Egyptians, 1 Sam. 8.7. for which breach of Order Uzzah is struck dead.

4. As small matters as these, when once commanded by the Lord, are of that force, as not only to deface the well-being, but to overturn the true being of the Worship of God. Take one pregnant instance herein. The Lord commanded the Israelites by Moses, to bring their Sacrifices to the place that he should chuse, and offer them there; which in it self was but a circumstance of place; yet all the Sacrifices offered elsewhere, were a stink in the nostrills of God, and not accounted by him as any Worship performed unto him.

5. But the Objection is altogether impertinent: we are not debating the greatness of the sin, but the truth of what is charged upon the present Ministers of England: what we have mentioned, are either the appointments of Christ, or they are not; if they are (as hath been proved) the present Ministers conform to them, or they do not; if they do not (as nothing more sure) they conform not to the Orders and Ordinances Christ hath left his people to walk by (which is the thing in debate) and therefore really deny his Kingly and Prophetical Office.

Answ. By whom this Objection is made I know not, I think it of use to abate the rigour of the separation, and the sharpness of the Censure that this Author passeth on the present Ministers of England. For sure if these matters excepted against, be small matters, and good men differ therein, they are not fundamentals of Faith or Practice; but that notwithstanding defects, errours, or differences about them, Churches, their Members, and Ministers, may be true Churches, Christians, and Ministers; nor should there be separation for these things, but mutual toleration of one another, according to the doctrine of St. Paul, Rom. 14.1, 3, 10. and 15.1, 2. Philip. 3.15, 16. nor Ministers disclaimed, while they hold the foundation, much less so heavily judged, as this Author doth, contrary to St. Pauls Doctrine, 1 Cor. 3.15. nor should there be such rents and breaches in the Church of God for them as there are. Though nothing commanded by God is small, yet some are comparatively small, Mat. 23.23. that they are part of Gods Instituted Worship, appointments of Christ, which he chargeth the Ministers of England to oppose, needs better proof than is yet made; that they overturn the true worship of God, is not demonstrated; nor that they are the grounds of the late controversies of God, or p. 140that therein the Ministers sin, as Uzziah, Corah, Dathan, Abiram, Uzzah; and therefore the judgments of God which fell on them, may be rashly threatened to the Ministers, especially considering that many of them if they sin, may be charitably deemed to sin out of ignorance, not affected, or such weakness as is incident to one truly godly; which how far he grants, may be perceived by that which follows.

As for what is added, that good men differ among themselves in this matter, it's of no more weight than what went before.

For, 1. 'Tis not at all to the business in hand.

2. 'Tis possible good men may for a while, do that which really enwraps in the bowels of it a denial of the Offices of Christ. We shall not deny but some of the Ministers of England may be so in the account of God.

3. That good men differ, is an argument of their ignorance and darkness, which though in some cases it excuses à tanto, yet not à toto; it may alter the degree, never the nature of the sin.

4. 'Tis false, that good men, pressing after reformation, and the rest…tution of the Worship of God according to the Primitive pattern, do differ touching the substance of the things instanced in: were but the pride and passion of mens spirits a little more allaid, and they disentangled more from their selfish interests, a greater harmony would appear amongst them in these matters. But,

5. As was said, The particulars instanced in, are commanded by Christ, or they are not; if they are (as hath been proved) doth it in the least discharge persons that conform not to them, from the charge they are impleaded as guilty, viz Non-conformity to the Laws of Christ; that good men differ in these matters (i. e. some good men transgress the Laws of Christ, which is sure no part of their goodness, nor any warrant to justifie me in the doing of what may strengthen their hands in such a Non-conformity.)

Answ. 1. How far this branch of the Objection is to the business in hand, is before shewed.

2. That good men may do that which may be by consequence a denial of Christs Office, is granted, it being no more than that they may err and sin. That he grants some of the Ministers of England may be good men in the account of God, should have made him afraid to censure them so deeply as he doth, and to disswade men from hearing them, or joyning with them in Gods Worship, as being such as walk disorderly, even the best of them, as symbolizing with Antichrist, really denying Christs Kingly and Prophetical Office,

p. 1413. If there be darkness in others that dissent from this Author, so there may be in this Author; and considering the many learned Non-conformists, who have opposed the separation, such as Bradshaw, Hildersham, Ames, Paget, Ball, and others; there is as much reason that this Author should ascribe darkness to himself as to them.

4. If the difference among the good men pressing after Reformation, be not in the substance of the things instanced in, but in circumstances; the more to blame is this Author for widening the Breach, and urging separation by reason of them. Pride, passion, self-interests we may more safely charge our selves with, than others; especially such as it cannot be denied, but that they may be in Gods account good men.

5. 'Tis true, the main matter to be discussed, is the thing it self, whether it be sin or no: which I have therefore endeavoured to examine impartially, and do conclude, that in this Chapter it is not proved unlawful to hear the present Ministers of England. Let us consider the rest of his Arguments.

p. 142CHAP. 5.