Five Disputations of Church Government, Preface – Postscript

Five Disputations of Church Government · Preface – Postscript

p. 1A PREFACE to those of the Nobility, Gentry, and Commons of this Land, that adhere to PRELACY.

Honourable, Worshipful, and Beloved Country-men.

IT being much for your sakes that I have published the following Disputations, it behoveth me here to address my self to you, in a few preparatory words. What distance there hath long been, and still continueth between you and your Brethren (for so they are) is too much known to friends and foes, at home and abroad, and too much daily manifested by each side. Shall it still continue, or would you have it healed? If it must continue, tell us how long, and tell us why? Would you have it go with us to Eternity? and will you not be reconciled, nor dwell with us in Heaven? It is not in your Power to shut us out; And will you not be there, if we be there? Or do you think there will be any Discord where Love is Perfected, and we are One in God? If you can be content to be saved with us, and believe that all of both Opinions, that truly love and fear the Lord, shall live there in dearest p. 2Love for ever; how can you chuse, when you forethink of this, but Love them now, that you must for ever Love? and long to be reconciled to them, with whom you must there so harmoniously accord? You know that Earth is our preparation for Heaven: and such as men would be there, they must begin to be here: As they must be Holy here, that ever will there see the Lord in Holiness; so must they here be Loving and Peaceable, that ever will live in that perfect heavenly Love and Peace. And why is it that the distance must be so great? Are we not all the Children of one Father? Have we not all the same God, the same Redeemer, the same Spirit in us? (if we are Christians indeed, Rom. 8.9.) Are we not in the same Baptismal Covenant with God? Have we not the same holy Scripture for our Rule? and are we not in the same universal Church, and of the same Religion? some of you say, No; to the grief of your friends, and the shame of your own understandings, and uncharitableness. I beseech you bear it, if I touch the sore: For my work is Healing; and therefore though it Must be touch't, it shall be as gently as the case will bear. If I may judge by such as I have had any opportunity to know, I must say, that the distance on your part is continued in some by confused apprehensions of the case, and not distinguishing things that differ; In some by discontents of mind, and too deep a sense of worldly losses, and the things that you take as injuries from others: In some by the advantage of a co-interest and consociation with those Divines that are of your way, and so by a Willingness to think them in the right, and those in the wrong that you take for adversaries: In some by a stiffness and stout…ess of disposition, that cals it Constancy to hold your own, and Manliness not to stoop to others, and takes it as dishonourable to seek for Peace, even in Religion with your supposed adversaries; or to yield to it, at least without much p. 3importunity: With too many (miserable souls!) it is meer ungodliness, and enmity to that way of Piety, that in many that you differ from, appears: And in the best of you it is a Remissness of Charity, and want of Zeal for the Churches Peace, and the Love and Vnity of Brethren. To confute the reasonings of all these sorts, would draw out this Preface to too great a length. The first sort my experience hath caused me to observe. Oft have I faln into company with men that pour forth bitter odious words against Presbyterie: and I ask them what that Presbyterie is that they speak of with so much abomination? Is it the Name or the Thing, which they so abhor? If the Name, is it not a term of Scripture used by the Holy Ghost? 1 Tim. 4.14. Are not the Pastors of the Church most frequently called the Presbyters, or Elders? Tit. 1.5. Act. 14.23. & 15.2, 4, 6, 22, 23. 1 Tim. 5.17. Act. 20.17. James 5.14. 1 Pet. 5.1, &c. It must needs then be the Thing, and not the Name which they abominate. And what is that Thing? most of them cannot tell me. Some presently talk of the disuse of the Common Prayer; as if that were a part of Presbyterie; and Government, and the form of worship were all one. Some presently run to Scotland, and talk of forcing men to Confession of sin, and of their secular enforcement of their Excommunications. But 1. If this be odious, why was it used by the Bishops? Is it good in them, and bad in others? 2. And why plead you for Discipline, and against Toleration, if you so loath the things you plead for? 3. But will you not, when its known so openly, distinguish the Ministerial Power from the secular? Its known by their Laws and constant Practice, that all the Power that was exercised by Violence, on Body or Estate, by the Assemblies, was derived from the Magistrate, whose Commissioners also sate among them. And the Bishops in England were seconded by the Sword, as p. 4much as they. Its known that the Presbyterians commonly maintain in their Writings, that Pastors have no Coercive or Secular Power, but only the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, to exercise on the Conscience, committed to them by Christ. 4. And the writings and practice of those in England, openly manifest it: and its them with whom you have most to do. Some tell me that Presbyterie is the Government of the Church without Bishops: And is it only the Negation of your Prelacy that is the odious thing? Is there nothing Positive odious in Presbyterie? Thus our Belief is condemned by the Papists, even because we Believe not so much as they; when in the Positives of our Faith there is nothing that they can blame. Some make it the odious thing that they have Lay-Elders; But 1. The Presbyterians account them not Lay, but Ecclesiasticks. 2. And what is the Odious harm that these men do among them? They are present, and Consent to the admonishing and censuring of offendors. And what great harm doth that to the Church? Is it because they do not Preach? No sure; in that your Readers are much like them. What work can you Name that these Elders are appointed to, that by your Confession is not to be done? It is not the Work then, that you blame, but that these men do it. 3. But what is this to all that are in this point of your mind, and think that unordained Elders wanting Power to preach, or administer the Sacraments, are not Officers in the Church of Gods appointment? As far as I can understand, the greater part, if not three for one of the English Ministers that you stand at a distance from, are of this mind, and so far against Lay-Elders as well as you; of whom I confess my self to be One. (and that M^r Vines was One, I have shewed you in the End.) Surely then all we are none of the odious Presbyterians in your eyes. Why then is there such a distance? And are Lay-Elders as bad as Lay-Chancellors?

p. 5So also when some have been hotly condemning us as being against Bishops, I ask them what a Bishop is? and what sort of Bishops it is that they mean? And most of them are unable to give me a rational answer to either of the Questions? But some that are wiser, though they know no more sorts of Bishops but one, yet they can say, that by a Bishop they mean an Ecclesiastick Governour of Presbyters and the people. And if so, then why do they vilifie Bishops under the name of Presbyters? I have here shewed you that if this be all, then every Parish hath a Bishop where there is a Pastor that hath Chappels, and Curates under him: Or any two Ministers that will subject themselves to a third, do make a Bishop. You delude your selves and others, while you plead only in general for Bishops: We are all for B…shops as well as you. All the Question is, What sort of Bishops they must be? Whether only Episcopi gregis, or also Episcopi Episcoporum gregis? and if so, Whether they must be Bishops of single Churches, as our Parishes are, or a multitude of Churches, as Diocess…s are? And if the last were granted, Whether these be not properly Archbishops? In all other parts of the Controversie I find, that the followers of each party go much in the dark, and take much upon trust from the Teachers whom they value, and little understand the true state of our differences: So that it is more by that common providence, commonly called Good luck, that some of them are Protestants or Christians, then from any saving grace within them. Had Papists or Mahometans but as much interest in them, as the Bishops, it is like they would have been as much for them.

As for those of you that know your own Opinions, and the Reasons of them, you must needs kn…w that the Divines called Episcopal in England, are of two sorts, that very much differ from one another: And therefore supposing you p. 6to be the followers of these differing Divines, I shall accordingly furthe… speak to you as you are.

I. The Bishops of England, and their followers from the first Reformation, begun by King Edward the sixt, and revived by Queen Elizabeth, were s…und in Doctrine, adhering to the Augustinian Method, expressed now in the Articles and Homilies: They differed not in any considerable points from those whom they called Puritans: But it was in the form of Government, and Liturgy, and Ceremonies that the difference lay.

II. But of late years a new strain of Bishops were introduced, differing much from the old, & yet pretending to adhere to the Articles and Homilies, and to be Fathers of the same Church of England as the rest. I know of none before B ^p Mountague of their way, and but few that followed him, till many years after. And at the demolishing of the Prelacy, they were existent of both sorts. Would you know the difference? If you have read the writings of B ^p Jewel, Pilkington, Alley, Parry, Babbington, Baily, Abbot, Carlton, Morton, Usher, Hall, Davenant, with such like on one side; and the writings of the New Episcopal Divines that are now most followed, on the other side, I need not tell you the difference. And if you will not be at the labour to know it by their writings, its like that you will not believe it if I tell you. For if you will take all on trust, I must suspect that you will put your trust in them to whom you are addicted.

The New party of Episcopal Divines are also subdivided: some of them are (if their Defence of Grotius, and Grotius his own Profession may be believed) of Grotius his Religion, that is, Papists: Others of them, though they draw as neer the Grotians as Protestants may do, yet own not Popery it self. So that we have three notable parties of Episcopal Divines among us. 1. The old Orthodox p. 7Protestant Bishops and their followers. 2. The New Reconciling Protestant party. 3. The New Reconciling Papists, or Grotians. A brief taste of the difference I will give you.

1. The Old Episcopal party, as I said, in Doctrine agreed with the Non-conformist, and held that Doctrine that now we find in the Articles, and Homilies, and in the Synod of Dort, where B ^p Carlton, B ^p Hall, B ^p Davenant, and three more Divines of this Nation were, and had a great hand in the framing of those Canons, and by consenting, did as much to make them obligatory to us in England, as commonly is done in General Councils by the Delegates of most Nations.

But the New Episcopal Divines, both Protestants and Papists, do renounce the Synod of Dort, and the Doctrine of our Articles and Homilies, so far as it is conform thereto, in the points of Predestination, Redemption, Freewill, Effectual Grace, Perseverance, and Assurance of Salvation: following that Doctrine which is commonly maintained by the Iesuites and Arminians in these points.

2. The Old Episcopal Divines did renounce the Pope as Antichrist, and thought it the duty of the Transmarine Churches to renounce him, and avoid communion with his Church, as leprous and unfit for their communion. But the New Episcopal Divines do not only hold that the Pope is not Antichrist, but one part of them (the Protestants) hold that he may be obeyed by the Transmarine Western Churches as the Patriarch of the West, and be taken by us all to be the Principium unitatis to the Catholick Church, and the Roman Determinations still may stand, except those of the last four hundred years, and those, if they obtrude them not on others. So B ^p Bramhall, and many more: And M ^r Dow, and others tell us that the Canon Law is still in force in England, except some parts of it which p. 8the Laws af the Land have cast out. And the Grotians teach, that the Church of Rome is the Mistris of other Churches, and the Pope to stand as the Head of the Vniversal Church, and to Govern it according to the Canons and Decrees of Councils: and they receive the Trent-Creed and Council, and all other Councils which the Pope receives, excepting only against some School-points, and abuse of manners among the Papists, which their Canons and Decrees condemn.

3. The old Episcopal Divines did take Episcopacy to be better then Presbyterian Equality, but not nec…ssary to the Being of a Church, but to the Better being where it may be had. But the New Prelatical Divines of both sorts, unchurch those Churches that are not Prelatical.

4. The Old Episcopal Divines thought that Ordination by Presbyters without Prelates was valid, and not to be done again, though irregular. But the New ones take it to be No Ordination, nor those so ordained to be any Ministers, but Lay-men.

5. And accordingly the Old Episcopal Divines did hold the Forrein Protestant Churches, of France, Savoy, Holland, Geneva, Helvetia, &c. that had no Prelates, as true Churches, and their Pastors as true Ministers of Christ, and highly valued and honoured them as Brethren. But the New sort do disown them all as no true Churches, though they acknowledge the Church of Rome to be a true Church, and their Ordination valid.

6. The Old Episcopal Divines thought it lawful to joyn in actual Communion with the Pastors and Churches that were not Prelatical. But the New ones separate from their communion, and teach the people to do so, supposing Sacramental administrations to be there performed by men that are no Ministers, and have no authority.

7. The Old Episcopal Divines thought it meet to suspend, p. 9silence, imprison, or undo those Godly Divines that did not bow towards the Altar, or publish to their People Declarations or Instructions for Dancing on the Lords Day, or that did preach twice a day. But many of the New ones practically told us, that this was their judgement.

Of these differences I have given you some proof hereafter: and would do here in the express words of the Authors on both sides, were it not that I should be needlesly tedious, and that I should unnecessarily offend the particular Divines of the New party who are among us, by reciting their words. More of the differences I pass by.

I. And now I would know of those of you that follow the Ancient Episcopal Divines, what hindereth you from a charitable, peaceable Communion with those Orthodox Ministers now in England, that some of you stand at a distance from? Doctrinal differences (at least, requiring such a distance) you cannot pretend. B ^p Hall tels you in his Peace-maker (after cited) that there is none between you and the Forrein (Presbyterian) Churches. And as for the matter of Episcopacy, if you will insist upon the late English Frame as necessary, viz. [That there be but One Bishop over many hundred Churches, and that he have the sole power of Excommunication, and that he rule by a Lay…Chancellor, &c. and be a Lord, and seconded with a forcing power, &c.] then you will forsake the Iudgement of your Leaders: For they will tell you that some of these are but separable appurtenances, some of them corruptions and blemishes, and some not Necessary. What need we any more ado? You see in the published Iudgements of B ^p Hall, B ^p Usher, D ^r Holdsworth, Forbes, and others, (after cited) that they would have all Presbyters to be Governors of the Churches, one of them having a stated Presidency or Moderatorship, and this will content them. And are we not then agreed? I am confident most of the Ministers in p. 10England would be content to yield you this: But what if there be some that are not of your mind concerning the stated Presidency which you desire? will you therefore uncharitably refuse communion with them? so would not your Leaders! In this therefore you will forsake them, and forsake many holy Churches of Christ, and forsake charity, and Christ himself that teacheth you another lesson. Will it not content you that you have freedom your selves to do that which seemeth best in your own eyes, unless all others be of your opinion?

But perhaps you will say that you have not Liberty your selves to practise according to this your judgement. To which I answer, 1. Your Brethren of the Ministery have not the power of the Sword, and therefore do neither deny you Liberty, nor can give it you: It is the Magistrates work. And will you separate from us for other mens doings? For that you have no rational pretence. If you know of any that perswade Magistrates to restrain your Liberty, thats nothing to others: Censure none but those that you know to be guilty. 2. I never knew that you were deprived of the Liberty of exercising such an Episcopacy as the forementioned Bishops do desire. I do not believe you could be hindered, and we that are your neighbours never hear of it. I know not of either Law or Execution against you. If you think that the clause in the Covenant, or the Ordinance against Prelacy, or the late Advice that excepts Prelacy from Liberty, are any restraint to you, I think you are much mistaken. It is only the late frame of Prelacy as it stood by Law, exercised by Archbishops, Bishops, Deans, Chancellors, &c. and that by force upon dissenters, that is taken down. You have not Liberty to force any by corporal punishment to your obedience. But you have full Liberty (for ought that ever I heard) to exercise the meer Episcopacy desired by Hall, Usher, and such like, on all that are p. 11of your judgement, and will submit to it. That we may hold constant Assemblies of Pastors we find by experience: And in these Assemblies if you will choose one for your stated President, who will hinder you? No one I am confident; Tell us whoever suffered for so doing? or was prohibited, or any way hindered from it by any force? Nay more, if you will give this President a Negative vote, in Ordination and Iurisdiction, who will hinder you? yea who can? If twenty Ministers shall resolve that they will never Ordain, or Excommunicate any without the consent (yea or Command if you must have it so) of such a man whom they take for their President, who can or will compell them to the contrary? And all the People that are of your mind, have Liberty to joyn themselves with such Pastors on such terms, and submit themselves to you, if they will.

But you will say, that this is no setting up of Episcopacy, while every one that is unwilling to obey us, may refuse it. I answer, This is all that the Nature of Episcopacy requireth: And this is all that the Church saw practised (even Rome it self) for above three hundred years after Christ. And is not that now tolerable for your Communion with us, which served then for the Communion of all the Churches on earth? Is the Primitive pattern of purity and simplicity become so vile in your eyes, as to be inconsistent with Christian Communion? Let not such principles be heard from your mouths, or seen in your practises. Whether the Magistrate ought to compell us all to be of your mind or way, I will not now meddle with: but if he will not, will you therefore separate from your Brethren? Or will you not exercise the Primitive Episcopacy on Consenters▪ because you have not the sword to force Dissenters? And are you denied your Liberty, because you are not backed by the Sword? This concerneth other mens Liberties, and not yours. You have the Liberty of p. 12Episcopal Government, (though not of smiting others with the Magistrates Sword) and as much Liberty for ought I know as Presbyterians or Independents have (though not so much countenance) And how comes it to pass that the other modes of Government are commonly exercised upon meer Liberty, and yours is not? Is it because you have no confidence in any Arm but flesh? If your Episcopal Power be of Divine appointment, why may you not trust to a Divine assistance as well as others, that you think are not of God? If it can do nothing without the Sword, let the Sword do all without it, and retain its proper honour. If it can do less on voluntary Subjects, then other ways of Church-government can do, say so, and confess it most infirm, and give place to them. But if yours have most Authority from Christ, and spiritual force upon the Conscience, exercise it, and let us see it by experience; or else expect not that any should believe you, or take you to be resolute servants of Christ, and true to your Ministry.

But perhaps you will say, that you cannot have Communion with us, because we are schismaticks: For so much B ^p Usher himself doth seem to charge us with.] To which I answer, 1. B ^p Usher chargeth none with Schism, but those that cast off Bishops to whom they had sworn obedience. But if I may judge of other Counties by this, there are so few of those, that they can afford you no pretence of scruple against the Communion of our Assemblies. I know not (to my remembrance) of one Minister in this County liable to this charge: but most never swore to them, and the rest had no hand in their exclusion. 2. Whoever among us did either swear to, or disobey such Bishops as Bishop Usher there assureth us were the Bishops of the antient Churches? If they set up another (intolerable) sort in stead of the Bishops which he himself requireth, judge whether it were a greater sin to swear to them, or to disobey them. 3. And p. 13the schism which he mentioneth is not such in his own judgement as makes men uncaple of your Communion. This pretence therefore is frivolous.

Especially considering that most of us have no Prelates that so much as claim a Government over us. In this County since B ^p Prideaux died (who was one of the ancient moderate sort) we know of none that ever made a pretence to the place. And are we schismaticks for not obeying a Bishop when we have none? And surely none can justly lay a claim to such a superiority, even according to the ancient Canons, unless he be first chosen by our selves, yea and the people, as a Reverend Bishop (I hope yet living) of the ancient sort hath told you, Morton Apolog. Cathol. Part. 1. cap. 85. p. 257. Bellarmine himself confessing that ut Clerus & populus Episcopumeligeret, hic modus fuit in usu tempore Chrysostomi, Ambrosii, Augustini, Leonis, Gregorii. Bellarm. l. 1. de Clericis cap. 9. And other of our Bishops say the same.

I conclude therefore that we are not only of one faith and Church w…th you, but differ so little in our opinions about lower things, that you can thence have no pretence for an alienation: And therefore with those of you that are godly and peaceable, I take it for granted that we are actually agreed. But if any will sacrifice the Churches Peace▪ their Charity, their souls to their parties, or passions and discontents, I leave them to God, and to the reading of other kind of Books, that tend to change an unrenewed mind.

II. And to those of you that follow the newer strain of Prelatical Divines, I shall adventure a few words, how small soever the probability is of their success. And 1. To those of you that are not departed from the Communion of all Protestants; nor gone with Grotius over to the Romanists. I beseech you, as before the Lord, proceed not in your bitterness, uncharitableness, or separation from your p. 14Brethren, nor your hindering the work of God in their ministration, till you are able to produce such solid grounds for what you do, as you dare stand to at last, before the Iudgement-seat of Christ. 1. Some of you charge us with no less then Heresie, as following Aerius in the rejecting of Bishops, or equalizing Presbyters with them: and can you hold communion with Hereticks? I answer, 1. All is not heresie that every angry man hath called so, no not of the venerable Ancients. Do you indeed take your Dignity and preheminence to be an Article of our Faith? Why then was it never in the Creed? 2. Many among us are for Episcopacy, that are not for your sort of Prelacy. It is that species that our Controversie is about. 3. I shall answer you in the words of our Reverend Morton (a Prelate, though not of the New strain) Apolog. Cathol. Par. 1. cap. 33. pag. 96, 97. who answereth the Papists that use against us the same objection [Non de differentia omni, sed de differentia Ordinis, seu Potestate Ordinandi (NB) quaestio est instituenda. Adversar. Aerius haereticus ordinis differentiam negabat esse jure divino; idem Protestantes: Resp. Quod idem forte sanctus Hieronymus, nec aliud Patres alii asseverarunt: hoc scholae vestrae Doctor primarius non ita pridem facile largiebatur: Mich. Medina, lib. 1. de sac. orig. affirmat, non modo S. Hieronymum idem in hoc cum Aerianis haereticis sensisse, verum etiam Ambrosium, Augustinum, Sedulium, Primasium, Chrysostomum, Theodoretum, Oecumenium, Theophylactum. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Eccles. milit. c. 9. Ita, (inquit Valent. Jesuit. Tom. 4. disp. 9. qu. 1. punct. 2.) isti viri alioqui sanctissimi & orthodoxi— At (inquit id. ibid.) non est tolerabilis haec responsio. Probabo vero hoc non modo ferendum, sed etiam omnibus aliis responsis praeferendum esse. Advocatus. Erasmus Annot. in 1 Tim. 4. [Antiquitas inter Praesbyterum & Episcopum p. 15nihil intererat, ut testatur Hieronymus: Sed post propter schisma à multis delectus est Episcopus, & quotquot Presbyteri, totidem erant Episcopi.] Tua, Erasme, apud Jesuitas sordet authoritas (but not with you that I write to) — Advocat. Alphonsus à Castro advers. haeres. tit. Episcop. [Hieronymus in ea opinione fuit, ut crederet Episcopum & Presbyterum ejusdem esse ordinis & authoritatis] Ecce etiam alterum: Bellarm. lib. 1. de Rom. Pontif. c. 8. [Videtur REVERA Hieronymus in ea opinione fuisse.] An ille solus? [Anselmus & Sedulius opinionem suam ad Hieronymi sententiam accommodarunt.] Quam eandem sententiam Medina vester Patribus pariter omnibus tribuit — Quid ex his, inquies? ostendam; si cognovissent Patres hanc in Aereo haeresin damnatam esse, tantum abest ut ei errori verbis suffragari viderentur; ut potius in contrarium errorem abriperentur: si non cognoverunt hanc opinionem in Aereo damnatam, cur vos eam hoc nomine in Protestantibus damnandam esse contenditis? Cassander lib. consult. art. 14. [An Episcopatus inter Ordines Ecclesiasticos ponendus sit, inter Theologos & Canonistas non convenit: convenit autem inter OMNES in Apostolorum aetate inter Episcopos & Presbyteros NULLUM DISCRIMEN fuisse; sed postmodum Schismatis evitandi Causa Episcopum Presbyteris fuisse praepositum, cui Chirotonia▪ id est Ordinandi potestas concessa est] If you will not keep company with Reverend Morton, I pray you go not beyond these Moderate Papists.

2. But you say, that at least we are Schismaticks, and you must not hold Communion with schism. And how are we proved Schismaticks? Why, [1. Because we have cast off Bishops. 2. Because we now obey them not.] I p. 16have answered this already; to which I add:] 1. Its a fine world, when men will separate themselves from the Churches of Christ to avoid schism, and they that are against separation, and offer Communion to the Separatists, must be taken to be the Schismaticks themselves. It is schism that we detest, and would draw you from, or else what need we say so much for Concord and Communion? 2. I have told you already, that it is not one Minister of a Multitude in our Communion that did cast off the Prelates; half of them did nothing to it, and the other half were Ordained since. 3. Nor can you truly say, that now they refuse obedience to Bishops, where there are none to obey, or none that command them. 4. Again I tell you, it is not Episcopacy, but only the sinful species of Prelacy, which the Parliament, and Assembly, and Covenanters did cast off. And what if you think this species best? must all think so, or else be Schismaticks? And why not all Schismaticks then that are against the Papacy, which is thought by others the best form? I have here given you some Arguments to prove your Prelacy which was cast off, to be against the will of Christ, and the welfare of the Churches. And I shall not believe that its schism to be against sin and the Churches ruine. And I cannot but admire to read in your writings, that Discipline and Piety are pretended by you, as the things which you promote, and we destroy, when I am most certain that the destruction of Piety and Discipline are the very things by which you have so much offended your Brethren; and we would heartily come as near you as we can, so that Piety and Discipline may not be destroyed. Had we not known that the able faithful Preachers whom you called Puritans (conformable and not conformable) that laboured in the word and doctrine, were fitter to promote piety then the ignorant, drunken, worldly Readers, and lazy Preachers, that once a day would p. 17preach against doing too much to be saved; and had we not known, that Piety was better promoted by Learning the will of God, and praying, and meditating on the Lords Day, then by dancing; and by cherishing men truly fearing God, then by scorning, imprisoning, persecuting and expelling them; we would never have been so much against your doings as we have been. But mens salvation is not so contemptible a thing, as to be given away to humour the proud, that cannot live in Communion with any, unless they may drive them to destruction. We will not sell mens souls to you at such rates, nor buy your Communion, nor stop the reproachful mouths of any by such horrid cruelties. We talk not now to you of matters that are known by hearsay only: we see which way promoteth Piety, and which destroyeth it: we see that most of the ungodly in the land, are the forwardest for your wayes. You may have almost all the Drunkards, Blasphemers, and Ignorant haters of godliness in the Country, to vote for you, and if they durst, again to fight for you at any time. I cannot be so humble as to say, I am blind, and see not what indeed I see, because another tells me, that his eyesight is better then mine, and that he seeth things to be other then I see them to be. I doubt not but there are some Pious persons among you: I censure you no further then experience constraineth me. But I know that the common sense of most that are serious in practical Christianity, is against your formal wayes of worship, and against the course that you have taken in this land; and the spirit of prophaneness complyeth with you, and doteth on you, in all places that ever I was acquainted in. Bear with plain truth: it is in a cause of everlasting consequence. There is somewhat in a gracious soul, like health in the body▪ that disposeth it to relish wholesom food, and perceive more difference between it, and meer air, or toyish kickshaws, then it can easily express. In abundance of p. 18your most applauded Preachers, the things of God were spoken with so little life and seriousness, as if they had not been believed by the speaker, or came not from the heart; yea Godliness and Diligence for Heaven, was the thing that they ordinarily preached against under the name of preciseness, and being righteous overmuch. And the Puritans were the men that Pulpits rendered most odious to the people, and your Preachers exercised their wit and zeal against; while almost all their hearers through the Land did take a Puritan to be one that was seriously Religious. Many a place have I lived in, where there was not a man that ever spoke a word against Bishops or Ceremonies; but a few there were (alas, a few) that would sometime read a Chapter in the Bible, and pray with their Families, and speak of the life to come, and the way to it, and for this they were commonly called Puritans. If a man had but mildly askt a swearer why he swore, or a drunkard why he would be drunk, or had once named Scripture, or the life to come, unless prophanely, the first word he should hear, was, [O you are one of the holy Brethren! you would not drink or swear, but you will do worse in secret! It was never a good world since there was so much talk of Scripture and Religion: but the King and the Bishops will take an order with you, and all the Puritans and Precisians in the Land] I profess upon my common sad experience, that this was the common language of the people that were ignorant and prophane in all parts of England that ever I came in (which were not a few;) and these were the men that they called Puritans, and on such accounts. And what could the Prelates and Preachers of the Land have done more to mens damnation, then to preach them into an hatred of Puritanism, when it was known by all that lived among them, that Piety was Puritanism in their account, and no man was so free from it, p. 19as he that would scorn at the very name of Holiness, and drink and swear, as if he had defyed God. This is true, and England knows it: and if you will after this think that you have wiped your mouths clean, by saying as M ^r Pierce, that by Puritans, he means none but [men of blood, sedition, violence, despisers of dominion, painted sepulchres, Protestants frightened out of their wits, &c.] the righteous God that loveth righteousness, and hath said, Be ye holy for I am holy, will make you know to your penitent or tormenting sorrow, that the thing which commonly was reputed Puritanism in England, was no such thing as you describe: And that its none of your wisdom to …ick against the pricks, and play with the apple of Gods eye, and bring men to hate the members of Christ, and then tell them you meant the members of the Devil, and to thrust men into Hell in jest: I have heard before the King many a Sermon against Puritans, which I judged impious, but yet had this excuse, that much of the auditory partly understood, that it was not Piety as such, that was directly reviled: And so perhaps it might be in the Vniversities, and some few intelligent auditories: but so it was not among the common people through the Land. A Puritan with them was of the same signification as a serious Christian is with me. And if you bring the Land to an hatred of such as are called Christians, and then say that by Christians you meant none but mad men, seditious, bloody, &c. you shall answer in earnest for spitting in the face of Christ in jest; and that before him that will not take your jears or jingles, or adding reproach unto reproach for a sufficient excuse.

I know also that the casting out of the Ministers of your way, i… much that offendeth you: concerning which I shall only say, that I meet with none, or very few that profess not their willingness that all men of your mind that truly fear God, and are able and diligent, should be kept in. p. 20And if you be angry for the casting out of the ignorant, insufficient, negligent or scandalous, there's no remedy. But be ashamed to reproach us for casting out such from the service of Christ, as Julian the Apostate would have cast out from the Priesthood of his Idols: and let us crave your leave to expect as much Devotion in the servants of Christ, as he expected in his enemies. Vid. Iulian. Oper. pag. 549, 550, 551, &c. fragment. [Facessant itaque procul à nobis illeberales joci, ac petulans omne colloquium — In his occupanda sunt studia, & cum privatim, tum publice Diis sa…pe supplicandum est; maxime quidem ter de die: sin minus, saltem diluculo ac sub vesperam. Neque enim Sacerdotem decet, diem ullum ac noctem sine sacrificio transigere. Est autem ut initium diei diluculum, ita noctis vespera. Itaque rationi consentaneum est, ut amborum intervallorum, velut primitiae quaedam Diis consecrentur— Equidem sic statuo, sacerdotem oportere noctes atque dies puru… se ab omnibus & integrum servantem — p. 555. Non enim mediocriter adversus Deos delinquimus cum sacras vestes ostentamus, & omnium oculis tanquam miru… aliquid objicimus. Ex quo id accidit, ut cum multi ad nos impuri homines accedant, sacra illa Deorum symbola contaminentur. At vero nos sacerdotali uti veste, nisi ut sacerdotibus dignum est vitam instituamus, id ipsum noxas omnes criminum, ac Deorum maxime contemptum in sese continet. — Ad obscaena illa theatrorum spectacula nullus omnino sacerdos accedat —neque cum histrione ullo vel auriga, vel saltatore sit amicitia conjunctus, ad eorumve foras accedat.—Placeat eos ex omnibus constitui qui in Civitatibus optimi sunt, & imprimis quidem Dei, deinde vero hominum amantissimos quosque, sive pauperes sint, sive divites. —p. 557. Duobus p. 21hisce praeditus sit ornamentis, Religione erga Deum, & in homines benignitate — Et Epist. 49. p. 203. [Sed velim omnes nostros sacerdotes omnino, qui Galatiam incolunt, vel minis impellas, vel ratione persuadeas, ut sint honesti; vel sacerdotali ministerio abdices, si non una cum uxoribus, liberis, & famulis Diis colendis sedulo animos attendant— Deinde sacerdotem quemque hortare ne accedat ad spectacula, neve in taberna bibat, neu' artem aliquam aut opificium turpe in …ameve exerceat. Et qui tibi in his rebus morem gerunt, eis honorem tribuito: qui autem resistunt expellito.] Leg. & fragm. Epist. 62. We crave your leave to use the Presbyters as strictly as Julian did these Priests, and to expect as much piety and sobriety in them; and that you will not condemn all those for Puritanism, that will not be worse then this Apostate Pagan.

And for Discipline, could we have any from your Episcopacy worth the naming, we should be the more reconcilable to it: But it hath not been, nor it cannot be. Common drunkards that were for twenty or thirty years together drunk usually once or twice a week, and abundance as prophane in other kinds, were the stated members of this Parish Church where now I live, in the Bishops dayes; and were safer from any trouble then the Puritans among them that would not imitate them. Let me here mind you of two of the following Arguments, which perswade us that your Prelacy is not of God, because it is destructive of Discipline.

1. When Episcopacy was first known in the Church, every Presbyterie, or Consessus Presbyterorum had a Bishop; and every Presbyter had right to be a member of some such Presbyterie. And seriously would you have all the Presbyters in a Diocess to be a Presbyterie, where your Bishop must preside for the ordinary Government of the p. 22Diocess as one Church? Are you strangers in England? Or do you not know what abundance we have that in one Parish are every week scandalous, by drunkenness, cursing, swearing, railing, or such like? And can all the Pastors travail so far to the Presbyterie so frequently without neglecting their Pastoral work? Or can all these people be perswaded without the Magistrates sword to travail so far to answer for their impiety? Will they not tell us, we have somewhat else to do? Are we not like to make them wait seven years and seven, before the most of them can have a tolerable tryal, when so many hundred Parishes, of which some one may have hundreds of obstinate scandalous persons, must all go so far, and have but one Iudicature?

2. I beseech you give me leave but from Scripture, and from Dr. Hammonds Paraphrase, to lay before you the work of a Bishop, and then tell me whether one man, or ten, or an hundred can do this work for one of our ordinary Diocess, any more then one man can build a City?

1. A Bishop must be the publick Teacher of all the flock which he is to Oversee. And can one man undertake this for many score or hundred Churches?

2. A Bishop must personally oversee and take care of all the flock, as Ignatius speaks, enquiring of each one by Name; and can a Bishop know and personally instruct so many hundred Parishes? These two parts of his Office I prove together: Act. 20.20. [I taught you publickly, and from house to house. 28. Take heed therefore to your selves and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers, to feed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood. 31. Therefore watch, and remember that by the space of three years, I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears. See Dr. Hammond on the Text, who tells you that it is spoke to Bishops.

p. 231 Pet. 5.1, 2, 3. The Elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an Elder— Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly, not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; neither as being Lords over Gods Heritage, but as ensamples to the flock] See Dr. Hammond expounding it as spoken to Bishops, q. d. [The Bishops of your several Churches I exhort— take care of your several Churches, and govern them, not as secular Rulers by force (NB) but as Pastors do their sheep, by calling and going before them, that so they may follow of their own accord.]

Heb. 13.7. Remember them that have the Rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God] Dr. Hammond Paraphr. [Set before your eyes the Bishops and Governors that have been in your Church, and preached the Gospel to you —] O all you Inhabitants of Yorkshire, Lincolnshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, Middlesex, Kent, Worcestershire, &c. how many of your Parishes did ever hear a Bishop preach the Gospel to them?

Vers. 17. Obey them that have the Rule over you, and submit your selves, for they watch for your souls as they that must give account] D. H. [Obey those that are set to Rule you in your several Churches, the Bishops, whose whole care is spent among you, as being to give account of your proficiency in the Gospel.] O dreadful account, for him that must give it for so many thousands whose faces he never saw, and whose names he never heard, much less did ever speak a word to them!

1 Tim. 5.17. Let the Elders that Rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they p. 24who labour in the word and doctrine] see Dr. H. expounding it of Bishops.

1 Thes. 5.12. And we beseech you Brethren to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love for their works sake] Dr. H. [Pay all due respects to the Bishops of your several Churches—] Tell us ye Parishes of England, what labours have Bishops bestowed among you? or how many of you have they admonished? and which of them are you hence obliged to honour for their works sake? and is it them, or is it the Presbyters? I mention none of this as blaming Bishops for negligence; but as blaming them that will plead for, and undertake an impossible task; and after all with an hardened forehead will defend it with violence and separation from dissenters, when so many ages have told the world to their faces, that the undertaken task was never done.

3. It is the work of Bishops to confirm the Baptized: and is now made peculiar to them. D. H. [on Heb. 13. a. To teach, exhort, confirm, and impose hands, were all the Bishops office in that place] And if so, then the examining all the persons in a Diocess, till they have just satisfaction that they are fit to be confirmed, and the actuall Confirmation of them all, will be a considerable task of it self.

4. It is the Bishops work to exercise Discipline in the Church, by admonishing the unruly and disorderly, and hearing the case when the Church is told of those that have continued impenitent, and openly to rebuke them, and to cast them out by Excommunication, if they remain impenitent and unreformed. Dr. H. on Tit. 3.10. [It is thy office and duty toward such an one, first to admonish him once or twice, and if that will not work upon p. 25him or reduce him, then to set a mark upon him, to inflict the censures on him, and to appoint all men to break off familiar converse with him.] And O what abundance of work is this in the several parts, even in one Parish, much more in a Diocess, see Dr. H. on Mat. 18.17, 18.

5. It is the Bishops work to take the principal care of the poor, and their stock, or the contributions for them, which contributions were made at every Assembly. See Dr. H. on 1 Cor. 12.28. e. [The supream trust and charge was reserved to the Apostles and Bishops of the Church. So in the 41. Canon of the Apostles: A Bishop must have the care of the monies, so that by his Power all be dispensed to the poor by the Presbyters and Deacons; and we command that he have in his Power the goods of the Church. So Iustin Martyr Apol. 2. That which is gathered is deposited with the Prefect or Bishop, and he helps, relieves the Orphans and Widdows, and becomes the Curator or Guardian to all absolutely (NB) that are in want. So Ignatius to Polycarp; After the Lord thou shalt be the Curator of the Widdows. And Polycarp himself speaking of the Elders or Bishops, They visit and take care of all that are sick, not neglecting the Widdow, the Orphan, or the poor.] So Dr. H. read him further. Remember this, all you that are for our English Prelacy. See that the Bishop be at once in every Parish in his Diocess to receive the contributions. Or see that you put all into his hands and custody: see that he take care of all the poor, and widdows, and orphans, in all your Country, and that all their monies be disbursed by him, or his special appointment, and be the common Overseer of the poor for his Diocess. And when you and he have tryed this one seven years, come then and tell us, whether he will be p. 26any longer a Prelate, or you will any longer be for Prelacy. In the mean time judge in your Consciences by these passages of Antiquity cited by D. H. whether the antient Bishops had one Congregation, or many score or hundred to be their Pastoral charge?

6. Also it is a part of the Bishops work to visit the sick, and pray with them, and for them, Iam. 5.14. Is any sick among you? let him call for the Elders of the Church, and let them pray over him] see Dr. H. that by Elders is meant the Bishops▪ e. [Because there is no Evidence whereby these (inferiour Presbyters) may appear to have been brought into the Chur…h so early, and because foreign in the plural, doth no way conclude that there were more of these Elders then one in each particular Church (any more then that the sick man was bound to call for more then one) and because foreign Elders of the Church was both in the Scripture stile, and in the first writers the title of Bishops: and lastly, because the visiting of the sick is anciently mentioned as one branch of the Office of Bishops; therefore it may very reasonably be resolved, that the Bishops of the Church, one in each particular Church, but many in the Universal, are here meant] so far Dr. H. Remember all you that are all for Prelacy, to send for the Bishop when you are sick, every person in the Diocess, according to this express command: And if he would do his work by a Deputy, remember, that in all that Diocess which was the Bishops charge in the Scripture-times, there was no Presbyter existent but himself, as is here confessed. So in the following words the same Learned Dr. further proveth from Antiquity, [that one part of the Bishops office is set down, that they are foreign, those that visit all the sick] Let us have such Bishops as can and will do this, and our Controversie will soon be at an end about Episcopacy.

p. 27Were it not that I have spoken of these things afterwards, and fear being tedious, I should have shewed, that 7. Baptizing, 8. Congregating the Assemblies, 9. Administring the Lords Supper, 10. Guiding the Assembly in the whole publick worship, 11. Blessing the people at the dismission, and 12. Absolving the penitent; and more then all these were the works of the ancient Episcopal function. And now I leave it to the Conscience of any man that hath a grain of Conscience left him, whether one man be able, were he never so willing, to do any one of all these duties, much less to do all of them for many hundred Parishes? Can a Bishop teach them all, and Catechise …nd confer with all, and counsail, and comfort, and admonish all, and Govern all, and try all cases of every scandalous impenitent person of so many thousand, and Censure, and Absolve, and Confirm, and Try them for Confirmation, and receive all the Churches stock, and be the Overseer of all the poor, and take care of all the Orphans and Widdows, and visit, counsail, and pray with all the sick, and guide every Congregation in publick worship, and give the Sacrament to all, and pronounce the Blessing in every Assembly, &c. and this for a whole County or more? O wonderful, that ever this should become a Controversie among men, that vilifie others as unlearned and unwise in comparison of them? I must lay by respect to man so far, as plainly to profess, that I take these for such errors as must need proceed from want of Piety and Conscience, and practice of the duties that are pleaded for. If these men did not talk of Governing a Church, as those talk of Governing a Navy, an Army, or a Commonwealth, that never set their hand to the work, it is not possible sure that they should thus err. O how many Bishops never tryed what it is to Govern the Church, or faithfully perform any one of all these works! I solemnly profess, that with p. 28the help of three more fellow Presbyters, and three or four Deacons, besides the greater help of abundance of Godly people here in their places, I am not able to do all this as it should be done, for this one Parish. And y…t the greatest part of our trouble is taken off, by the refusal of the multitude of the ungodly to come under Discipline, or be members of our Pastoral charge. Sirs, these are not scholastick speculations! The everlasting Ioy or Torment of our people lyeth upon the successful performance of these works (as we that are Christians verily believe) And therefore to Dispute, whether One man should do all this for a Diocess, is all one as to Dispute, whether it shall all be undone or no? and that is, whether we shall give up our Countries to the Dev…l or no? And shall the Prelatical Controversie come to this? You have no way to avoid it, but by Delegating your power to others, and casting your work upon them. But you confess that this was never done in Scripture-times, there being then no Subject Pesbyters to whom it might be committed. And by what authority then can you do it? Can Episcopacy be transferred by Deputation to another? This is long ago confuted by many writers, Popish and Protestant. Do the work by another, and you shall have your wages by another. And what is your Office, but your Authority and Obligation to do your work? He therefore that you commit this to is a Bishop. So that this is but to make us Deputy Bishops: And if so, let us call them Bishops.

I have read many of your writers of late, that say we have no Government, and saith one of them, the Presbyterian Government was never yet set up in any one Parish in England] These are strange things to be reported to English men. Perswade the world next that no man in England hath a nose on his face. Is it not known that the Presbyterian Government hath been exercised in London, p. 29in Lancashire, and in many Counties, these many years? And what Government is it that you think we want? The people are guided in the matters of God by their several Pastors. The Pastors live in Concord by Associations in many Countries. Both Pastors and People are Governed by the Magistrate: And what need we more? Look into this County where I live, and you shall find a faithful, humble, laborious Ministry, Associated and walking in as great unity as ever I read of since the Apostles daies. No difference, no quarrels, but sweet and amicable Correspondency, and Communion, that I can hear of. Was there such a Ministry, or such love and concord, or such a godly people under them in the Prelates reign? There was not: I lived where I do: and therefore I am able to say, there was not. Through the great mercy of God, where we had ten drunken Readers then, we have not one now: and where we had one able godly Preacher then, we have many now: and in my own charge, where there was one that then made any shew of the fear of God, I hope there is twenty now: And the Families that were wont to scorn at holiness, and live in open impiety, are now devoted to the worship and obedience of the …ord. This is our loss and misery in these times which you so lament.

3. But perhaps you will refuse Communion with us, because of our differences from you in doctrine about the Controversies called Arminian. But the fierceness of many of you hereabouts doth serve but to discover your ignorance and uncharitableness. The Papists that differ among themselves about these points, can yet hold Communion in one Church: and cannot you with us? Will you be fiercer against us then the Iesuites against the Dominicans? Nay we go not neer so far as they. We cleave to Augustine, and the Synod of Dort, who own not Physical Predetermination, p. 30and meddle not with Reprobation antecedent to foresight of sin, and who confess a sufficiency in Christs satisfaction for all. And yet must we have those impotent clamors, with which the writings of Mr. Pierce and other such abound? Why then do you pretend to follow the Church of England, which Mr. Hickman hath shewed you plainly that you desert? Many of the highest meer Arminians are charitable peaceable men, that hate separation from their Dissenting Brethren. Curcellaus is one of the most eminent men living of that way. And how charitable and peaceable an Epistle hath he writ before D. Blondels book de Papissa Joanna? And I hear that Mr. Hoard, the Author of the Book called Gods Love to mankind, lives in peaceable Communion with the Neighbour Ministers in Essex. And I have had Letters from many of that way with whom I Correspond, full of Christian Love and Piety, and hatred of calumny and separations. But verily I must tell you, that when we find any of you in your writings and Sermons making it your work to vilifie the Ministry, and with the Quakers to make them odious to the people, and making your jeers, and railing, and uncharitableness the life of your Sermons, we cannot but suspect that you are Popish Emissaries, while we find you in their work, or else that you are Malignant Enemies, and of the s…pentine brood, whose heads shall shortly be bruised by the Lord.

4. And if it be the disuse of your Common Prayer that you separate from us for, I would know of you, wh…ther you would have denyed Communion with all that lived before it had a being. If this be your Religion, I may ask you, where was your Religion before Luther? before King Edwards daies? If you say in the Mass book (and what else can you say?) I ask you then, where was it before the Mass book had a being? Would you have denyed Communion p. 31to the Apostles and all the Primitive Church for some hundreds of years, that never used your Book of Common Prayer? will you still make things indifferent, necessary?

2. One word to those of you that follow Grotius: I have shewed that he professeth himself a Papist, even in that Discussion which M ^r Pierce so magnifieth as excellent. I hear Mr. Thorndike and others defend him: and some think I injure him by calling him a Papist. Wonderful! what will not be a Controversie among learned men? Are we faln among such that deny him to be a Papist, that professeth expresly to be satisfied, if evil manners be but corrected, (and school-opinions not imposed) which are contrary to Tradition and all Councils? and that professeth to own the Creed and Council of Trent, and all the Popish Councils whatsoever, and the Mistriship of Rome, and the Catholick Mastership of the Pope governing the Catholick Church according to these Councils? What is a Papist if this be none? I refer you to my Evidence in the Discovery of the Grotian Religion, and the first Chap. of the second Part of my Catholick Key, replying to Mr. Pierce. Confute it rationally if you can. I shall now only desire you when you have read Rivet, to read a Book called Grotius Papizans, and to hearken to the testimony of an honest, learned Senator of Paris, that admired Grotius, and tells you what he is from his own mouth: and that is, Claud. Sarravius, who saith in his Epistol. pag. 52, 53. ad Gronov. [De ejus libro & libello postremis interrogatus, respondit plane Milleterio Consona, Romanam fidem esse veram & sinceram, solosq…e Clericorum mores degeneres schismati dedisse locum; adferebatque plura in hanc sententiam. Quid dicam? Merito quod falso olim Paulo Agrippa foreign. — Deploro veris lachrymis tantam jacturam] Here you have a credible witness, that from p. 32his own mouth reporteth it, that our Reformation was to Grotius a schism, and nothing but the ill manners of the Clergy gave us the opportunity. And pag. 190. Epist. ad Salmas. [Vis ergo me exerte dicere quid sentiam de postremo Grotii libro? & an omnia mihi in eo probentur? Rem rogas non magnam, nec adeo difficilem, quemque expedire promptum est. Tantum abest ut omnia probem, ut vix aliquid in eo reperiam, cui sine conditione calculum apponam meum. Verissime dixit ille qui primus dixit, Grotium Papizare. Vix tamen in isto scripto aliquid legi quod mirarer, quodve foreign occurreret. Nunquid enim omnes istiusmodi ejusdem authoris lucubrationes erga Papistarum errores perpetuam foreign & foreign, erga Jesuitas amorem, erga nos plus quam Vatinianum odium produnt & clamant: In Voto quod ejus nomen praeferebat, an veritus est haec foreign profiteri?]

Had none of you owned Grotius his Popery, I would never have charged it on you. But when Grotius himself glorieth of his adherents in England, and so many of you plainly defend him, and profess your owning of those books, and those doctrines in which his Popery is contained, (if ever Popery were known in the world) I must then crave your pardon, if I think somewhat the worse of Popery, because they that hold it are ashamed of it. For I abhor that Religion which a man hath cause to be ashamed of, and will not save him from being a loser by it, that owneth it, and standeth to it to the last. And I think that man hath no Religion, who hath none which he will openly profess and stand to.

I have at this time but these few requests to make to you, which I beseech you to answer without partiality. 1. That you will seriously consider, whether it be truly Catholick, to unchurch us, and so many Churches of Christ p. 33as are of our mind, as your partakers do? Because Catholicism is your pretense, consider whether you be not further from it then most people in the world?

2. Because I conceive this Book is not suited to your great objections, I desire your perusal of another that comes out with it, called A Key for Catholicks, especially the second Part, and if you cannot answer them, take heed how you continue Papists.

3. While you hold us for no Ministers or Churches, or Capable of your Communion, it is in vain for us to hope for Communion with you: but we desire that you will consider of those terms of a more distant sort of Communion, which there I have propounded in the End of the first and second Part: and deny us not that much.

4. At least we beseech you, that while you are Papists, you will deal openly, and no worse with us then sober Papists that speak according to their Consciences use to do. Do not let it (as the Lord Falkland speaks) be in the Power of so much per annum (nor of your factious interest) to keep you from professing your selves to be what you are; and do not make the Protestant name a meer cloak to secure you in the opposing of the Protestant Cause, and follow not the example of Spalatensis, and the Counsel of Campian and Parsons, in feigning a sort of Doctrinal Puritans, and railing at Protestants under that name. Deal with us but as sober Papists do, and we shall take it thankfully. How highly doth Bodin a Learned Papist extol the Presbyterian Discipline at Genevah from its effects, when among many of you it hath as odious titles as if it were some blasphemous damning thing. What sober Papist would talk as Mr. Pierce doth [p. 30. of the great abomination of the Presbyterian Directory,] and not be able to name one thing in it that is abominable. Is it a great abomination to exhort and direct men to preach, and pray, and p. 34praise God, &? If it be the Omission of his forms and Ceremonies, that is no Part of the book; and if it be some Directions that are against them, they that revile the Common Prayer book, as most Papists have done, or they that count such Ceremonies and Forms indifferent things, as others have done, have little reason to account that so great an abomination that directeth men to omit them. What abominable thing is imposed by the Directory? Tell us if you can. What excellent things doth Thuanus speak of the Presbyterians or Calvinists? and how highly doth he extol the most of their Leaders or Teachers whom he mentioneth? But to Mr. Pierce; what a bloody perfidious sort of men are they, unfit to live in a Commonwealth? And to Grotius; the Protestants are not only of bad lives, but by the Power of their Doctrine they are such. I have shewed you in my Key for Catholicks how great the praises of Calvin are in the mouth of Papir. Massonius, and other sober Papists: and the same may be said of others of our Divines, who are mentioned by you with most calumniating odious words. Even Maldonate the Jesuite, when he is rail…ng at the Calvinists, confesseth of them, (in Matth. 7.15.) that [Nothing was in their mouths but, the Lord, and our heavenly Father, and Christ, and Faith; an Oath was not heard: nothing appeared in their deeds, but Alms-deeds, and Temperance, and Modesty] Is this like your language of them? Nay, if Satan had dictated to him, how could he have uttered more falshood and detestable calumniation then Mr. Pierce hath done, p. 73. when he saith [were Hacket, Lancaster, Arthington and others hanged for Non-conformity? or was it nothing but Ceremonial which Coppinger, &c. designed against the lives of the whole privy Council, and against the person of the Queen? were not Cartwright, and Travers, and Wentworth, and p. 35Egerton, and other Presbyterian Ministers privy to the plot?] The Lord will rebuke this slanderous tongue. Did ever Cochlaeus, or Bolseck go beyond this man? How fully is it known that Hacket and his Companions were Grundl…tonians or Familists, just such as James Nailor, and the Quakers, (who are far nearer the Papists then the Puritans or Presbyterians) and that they madly came into London, Coppinger and Arthington, as his two Prophets, proclaiming Hacket to be Iesus Christ; and that for obstinate insisting on this Blasphemy, Hacket was hanged, and dyed blaspheming, and Arthington upon his Repentance published the whole Story of the begining and progress of the business, as you may see it in the Book called Arthingtons Seduction. In which their madness, blasphemy, or any Treason of theirs or others, this man might as honestly have said, that Augustine, or Luther, or Cranmer had an hand, or were privy to the plot, as Cartwright, Travers, and such Presbyterian Ministers. What he hath read in Bancroft, I know not, nor much regard, till Bancroft himself be better cleared of what he is by writers charged with, concerning Ficlerus, Dolman, &c. and while he was known to be the most violent persecutor of the Puritans. But I see as the Papists will take it for a currant truth, that Luther was fetcht away by the Devil, and that Calvin was stigmatized for Sodomy, and dyed blaspheming, &c. if they can but say, that one Cochlaeus or Bolseck of their own hath spoke it; so such men among us dare tell the world the most odious falshoods of Cartwright, Travers, and the Presbyterian Ministers, if they can but say, that Bancroft said it before them. And now the rest may take it as unquestionable, when Mr. Pierce hath said it. Do these men believe that there is a day of Iudgement? If they do, they make but lamentable preparation for it. And his assertion pag. 77. p. 36that [Excommunicating Kings and killing them is the doctrine of the Presbyterians] and much more of his writing is of the same kind. To this I have given him an Answer in my Key for Catholicks, where he shall see whether Papists or Protestants are for King-killing? Had you not gone so far beyond such moderate Papists as Cassander, Hospitalius, Massonius, Bodin, Thuanus, &c. in your enmity and bitterness against the Protestants, as clearly to contradict them, and to speak blood and venom, when they speak charitably, and honourably, we might have had more peaceable neighbours of you, though none of your Communion.

And I suppose that those who separate from us, as having no true Ministry or Churches, would have all these Ministers that they take for none, to be silenced and cast out. I do not think you will deny this to be your desire, and your purpose, if ever you should have power? And if so, what men are you? and what a case would you bring this Nation in? To your Objections I have answered in this book, and said somewhat more to you in another Preface. And upon the whole matter am forced now to conclude, that it is an Enmity to holiness in unsanctified hearts that is the principal cause of our distance and divisions; and that the way to convince such men, as too many are that we deal with, is not Disputing, but praying to the Lord to change their hearts: And that if we could once perswade them but to the Love of God and Holiness, and to a serious practice of Christian Religion, and (if they be Bishops) to a faithful practice of those works of a Bishop which they confess are his duty, and to try Church-Government before they plead for what was never tryed by them, our Controversies would then be ended▪ they would never more plead for such a Prelacy that destroyeth Piety, and Discipline, nor never revile the Servants of the Lord: p. 37nor never desire so much to promote the work of Hell, as the casting out all that they account no Ministers, and the casting off of all that they account no Ordinances or valid Administrations, would be. Farewel Disputing with such men, in order to their Conviction, and an healing peace.

Hoc non est artis, sed pietatis opus.

POSTSCRIPT.

WHat the Publisher of Dr. Stewards Sermon doth mean by his Commmending it to my Consideration, when there is not a word in it that I am concerned in more then he, I understand not. If he thereby intimate, that I charged Dr. Steward to be of Grotius's Religion, or any other that disowneth it, he egregiously abuseth his Reader and himself. If he intend to argue that none of the Prelatical Party were Grotians, because Dr. Steward was not: Let him prove his Consequence; I disprove it, 1. From the testimony of Grotius himself. 2. From the mouths and books of those that have owned Grotius among us, even since they were acquainted with his judgement, and have owned his Votum & Discussio in particular. If his meaning p. 38be that [Dr. Steward was a Grotian, and yet no Papist: therefore Grotians are no Papists] one branch of his antecedent is false: Either he was no Grotian, or he was a Papist. Again I profess, that it is far from the desire of my soul, to raise so much as the least suspicion on any that own not the Doctrine and Design of Grotius. Disclaim it, and we are satisfied. Dr. Heylin was taken for as hot an antipuritan as most in England: and yet (in a moderate Letter to me) he disclaimeth Grotianism: which I mention, partly lest any, by my naming him on another occasion in that Book, misconceive me to have accused him of this, and principally to discourage the defenders of Grotius, when such men as Dr. Heylin and Dr. Steward are against them.