A Plain Dealing and Plain Meaning Sermon, Vindication

A Plain Dealing and Plain Meaning Sermon · Vindication

p. 14HEre's my Sermon, now where's my ſin? What's my Charge with which I have been ſo (I cannot ſay whether more) ignorantly or maliciouſly traduced: why its three-fold; I have preacht againſt the King, and the coming in of the King: So ſome, My whole Sermon drives at this; The coming in of the King would bring in prophaneneſſe; ſo others. A third ſort ſay, I am angry. Now to anſwer to theſe diſtinctly. And firſt, I have preacht againſt the King, and his coming in, I ask wherein? how doth that appear? I will come as cloſe and as ſpeedily as I can to my Charge, I mean to that part of my Sermon from whence they might ſuppoſe me criminous. I ſhall therefore paſſe over almoſt one halfe of it, for that was but by way of Explication: And it concern'd others, Iſrael. That troubles not, no preaching at a distance, and ſpeaking of other mens faults, and reproving them, that bites not, as much as you will of that: But this home-preaching, and treading too cloſe upon our heels, This gauls, this vexes this troubles us. Why, what's the matter? what's the matter? Did not you ſay. That becauſe by our ſins we had left God, therefore God had left us? And did you not ſay, That our Kings and our Princes heretofore, and our p. 15Princely Prieſts and Biſhops had been as ſnares upon Mizpah, and as nots upon Tabor (their high places and great offices). And how have they not rag'd and tyranniz'd, &c. And did you not beſeech us, that we ſhould not let the apprehenſions of our preſent greater ſufferings, cauſe us altogether to forget our former iniquities? And did you not adviſe us, that upon that day of our ſolemn Humiliation, wherein we ſought to God for ſettlement, that we ſhould not forget the cauſe and ground of our unſettlement? Here's enough to anſwer at once and together, and I think this is my greateſt charge. And now what of all this? Let me ask you by your cavilling againſt this, Don't you diſcover your ignorance? Is it not plain you are not acquainted with the Scripture? Or that you take no notice, or underſtand not what you read, or hear? That you are meer ſtrangers to the nature and manner of a true Faſt? Is not a faſting day (eſpecially publique, generall, and ſuch ſolemn Faſt dayes) a day wherein to humble our ſoules before the Lord by a hearty, ſincere, and impartiall confeſſion and acknowledgement of all our ſinnes? And being a generall day of Humiliation through the whole Land, to confeſſe and be humbled for the ſins of the whole Land in general. And in ſuch a day are not the ſins both of Princes and People both paſt and preſent to be remembred and acknowledged? And that not onelyonly in generall termes (which is moſtly ſlight and overly) but punctually and particularly, of thoſe ſins they were guilty of, and lay under. This is (if you know not, as it ſeems you do not) for your better information and (as I deſire) Reformation; Do but read the inſtances of the Solemn Faſts recorded in Scripture, and you will be wiſer hereafter. I reſer you for this more particularly to thoſe three moſt Solemn Faſts which are there recorded, Ezra 9. Nehem. 9. and Dan. 9. And ſee and obſerve the manner of the celebration, and whether their particular ſins were not enumerated, confeſſed and bewailed. And had we of this Land and Nation no ſins to be remembred? to be confeſſed? Are you ſo forgetfull? or were you ignorant of them? Are we not unſetled? Are not our foundations of government overturned? Do not the pillars of the Nation tremble? Is it not a Judgement? Do I not ſay ſo much? And what were there no ſins that are the cauſes of it? Do ſuch great, and heavy, and generall judgements befall a Nation (both King, Princes, Prieſts and People) without ſin procuring them? you dare not ſay ſo? And were there no ſins in England but the ſins of the people? What was the Popiſh Match? and the building of Houſes p. 16and Chappels thereupon for Idolatrous and ſuperſtitious worſhip? What was the countenancing and exerciſe of that falſe worſhip, even in the Kings own dwelling? And were not our Communion-Tables turn'd into Altars, with ſuperſtitious cringings and bowings towards them? and in ſome places wax Tapers ſet upon thoſe Altars? and ſecond Service (which the people could not …) there performed? How was the zealous profeſſion of Religion (under the nickname of Puritaniſme) diſcountenanced and diſgraced? How did the Court-Biſhops (eſpecially the Biſhop of Canterbury, Dr. Laud) vex, perplex, and ruine men in their High Commiſſion Court, and Star-Chamber? How would drunken and prophane Miniſters (if but zealous for Ceremonies) give the checke to (and upon the leaſt occaſion) trouble and ſue the beſt Knights and Gentlemen in the Country even for trifles, and be therein upheld and countenanced by thoſe Court-Biſhops; Inſomuch, that when the Knights and Gentlemen were aſſembled in Parliament, and had opportunity to be revenged upon them, they ding'd them quite down without mercy or conſideration.

I need not tell you what courſes were taken that the King might be maintained without Parliaments, and ſo with out the love of his Subjects, and redneſſe of their grievances, I could name much, more; you that liv'd in thoſe times, and were able make obſervation know it. If you don't, others do. And are not theſe grounds of unſettlement? And upon a ſpecial ſolemn Faſt (ſuch a one as this eſpecially) wherein we ſought to God for eſtabliſhment and ſettlement) would it not be proper, that theſe things and ſuch the like might and ſhould have been remembred and mentioned, the more to conſternate our ſpirits, and promote our humiliation: But you ſee I did not, I lightly paſt it over in Generals.

Oh! But you ſaid, ſince thoſe three eminent perſons, profeſſors of thoſe three moſt noble Profeſſions, Divinity, Law, and Phyſicke ſuffered upon the Pillory like Rogues and Cutpurſes in ſuch an opprobrious and diſgraceful manner. That the K. and his party never proſpered, did I ſay ſo? and did I not ſay true? Did not their Cauſe go every day backward? I ſay, their Cauſe, the King and Biſhops, for they I meant, I put them both together. There is a ſaying, In nomine Domini incipit omne malum: And every man that was acquainted with the Tranſactions of thoſe Times, cannot but acknowledge, that that was the ſource of all our miſeries: So dangerous a thing is it for Clergy-men to leave their Calling, and p. 17turn Courtiers. Men whoſe riches lie in their heads, will be alwayes tampering. 'Tis good therefore they be kept to their proper buſineſſe.

For ſay, was it not a pretence of conformity and uniformity in Religion that began all our quarrell? Not that I think an Ʋniformity an evil (what ever others ſay) but rather a good, and by all good wayes to be endeavoured, and I ſuppoſe till then we ſhall not be well ſetled: And ſure the quarrell began there, I could wiſh the ſettlement began there; For upon true judgement I ſpeak it, though it be a ſhame and a matter of ſadneſſe: Moſt of the troubles and combuſtions in Civil States have been either begun or fomented by men of our profeſſion, I mean of the Clergy, and was it not ſo with us? Our firſt War intended, was it not againſt the Scots? and wherefore was it? who began it? Was it not called generally Bellum Epiſcopale, the Biſhops War, I put the King and Biſhops together, with reſpect to this: The Biſhop could not begin a War (I mean arm the people) without a King. And the Biſhop having ſo great a power and influence upon the King, prevail'd with him to raiſe Armes againſt them (the Scots.) And the immediate Prodromus and forerunner of this War, was it not the moſt horrid and reproachful ſtanding of theſe eminent perſons upon the Pillory? I do profeſſe (the perſons, and every thing conſidered) it was the ſaddeſt ſight (next to the Kings beheading) that ever (eſpecially for many generations) was ſeen in England. I ſaw not the latter, but I did the former. And I well remember Mr. Burtons words when upon the Pillory; Marke it (ſays he) little do we know what this dry tree (pointing to the Pillory) may bring forth. And ſpeedily after, the next news from Scotland was; If the Engliſhman looſe his lugg, the Scot would loſe his cragg, meaning againſt the rage and tyranny of the Biſhop: For having dealt thus barbarouſly with theſe three ſo eminent perſons, he then thought the terrour thereof would have daunted and cowed the Scottiſh Nation, when as this did but heighten their indignation, and raiſe greater oppoſition againſt him.

Yea, but were not the Scots too blame in this matter? It may be ſo, but I know it not, for I am not acquainted with the Laws, Rights, and Conſtitutions of their Kingdom, and therfore I ſay no more to it. But I ask this queſtion; Was their not entertaining Epiſcopal Government, and the Service-book a ſufficient ground to embroil two Nations, two Chriſtian Nations in War, to ſhed the blood one of another? And if (for conformities ſake with England) Scotland p. 18muſt have a Service-Book, why could not our own Engliſh Service-Book ſerve the turn? but there muſt be divers alterations, more conform to Romes language, then in our own Liturgie; of which Mr. Prins Book to that purpoſe can give you information. But the Scots abhorrid it as Swines fleſh, and it would not down with them. And no doubt, could they have been beaten into it, to have dined on it, we ſhould have been forced to have ſupt on it with them. But hereupon, on goes the War againſt them. And how well this Holy War was like to ſucceed, you may gueſs by the beginning; for even thoſe rude and ignorant Souldiers, who were led againſt the Scots, to kill them into conformity, in our own Countrey (as they paſt along towards Scotland (in deſpight of their Commanders) broke into divers Churches, pull'd down and burnt the rails about the Communion Table, and tore the Surplices, and the Common-Prayer Books: Theſe things were notorious, & not done in a corner. It would be too much beyond my de ſign to mention all that followed: Plain it was, nothing proſpered after. And is this now ſuch a hainous offence to ſay ſo? Or was it not rather a matter to be acknowledged as a ſin, to be confeſt, and for which deeply to be humbled, and to repent of? I might have mentioned the cruel uſage of Dr. Layfield, who at the inſtigation of the Biſhop, after a long impriſonment in the Fleet, was whipt from thence to Weſtminiſter, where raw (as he was) he ſtood upon the Pillory, his noſtrils ſlit, and burnt in the cheeks or forehead. But did I charge this evil, or any other, upon the King, as the cauſe either of his or our ſuffering? Nay, did I not diſclaim that bold preſumption, in the words even immediately foregoing, ſaying, Whether's ſins were greater (ours, or our Princes) God the Judge beſt knows: For what am I, that I ſhould ſtep into his chair. This I concluded on, and I think none can deny it, If our ſins had not been univerſal, the judgement would not have been ſo general? And I do profeſs, I dare not judge the Kings ſins to be greater then the peoples, becauſe he drank deeper in the judgement: But if I had charged the ſin of the King upon himſelf, or his Father, why ſhould theſe men pretend to be ſo angry? it would not have been to reproach him, or triumph over him, but to have been humbled with him, and for him (as well as for our ſelves) for our pardon, reformation and amendment: So that I hope this is not to ſpeak againſt the King, or his coming in.

And I ſuppoſe, they will not ſhew themſelves (my Reproachers, p. 19I mean) ſo ignorant or ſottiſh as to ſay, That I ſpake againſt the King (or his coming in) by telling them, that their Wickedneſs might be a means to deſtroy both him and them: For which I quoted that place, 1 Sam. 12.19. and ſo on: Much leſs, did I ſpeak againſt the King, in adviſing them to be more careful to bring King Jeſus into their hearts, then King Charls to the Throne; and telling them, That they may be undone with him, yea, and by him, both temporally and eternally: But that King Jeſus will aſſuredly ſave them, if he rule over them. I hope you will not ſay this is a crime? if you do, the Lord make you wiſer. And this I think is all you have to charge me with in this matter; and how wiſely, juſtly, charitably, Chriſtianly, let all wiſe men judge. Confident I am, what I delivered, might have been ſpoken even in the Kings preſence, and he would not have been offended: What would theſe captious hearers have ſaid, had I uſed ſuch plain language as was ſpoken unto him at his Coronation, in the Coronation Sermon? Coronation Sermō preacht at Scoon, Ian. 1651. by Mr. Rob. Douglas. Printed at Aberdeen, 1660.That his Father ſet himſelf in a hoſtile way, to overthrow Religion, Parliaments, Laws, and Liberties; and in page 27. of the ſame Sermon, they charge his Grandfather King James with foul defection; and that he pereſecuted faithful Miniſters, and that he laid the foundation whereupon his Son (our late King (ſays he) did build much miſchief to Religion, all the days of his life. And he tells him, that the guiltineſs of the tranſgreſſion lies upon the Throne and Family; and that is one of the ſins for which he had profeſſed humiliation very lately, and adviſes him to take warning. And in his Exhortation to the King, page 32. he tells him, There is too much iniquity upon the Throne by his Predeceſſors, who framed miſchief by a Law: ſuch Laws as have been deſtructive to Religion, grievous to Gods people. and page 36. he may ſay it freely, That chief cauſe of the judgement upon the Kings Houſe, hath been his Grandfathers breach of Covenant with God; and his Fathers following his ſteps, in oppoſing the work of God, and his Kirk, within theſe Kingdoms. He ſays, They have broken the Covenant with God, and men have broken Covenant with them. Moſt cruelly and perfidiouſly (ſays he) they have invaded the Royal Family, and trodden upon all Princely Dignity: And therefore charges him in Chriſts name, not to break Covenant; if he do, he aſſures him, The Controverſie is not ended between God and his Family, but it will be carried on to further weakning if not to the utter overthrow of it. Here's plain dealing, now what would our men have ſaid to this p. 20matter? Surely never a villain in England would have preached ſuch a Sermon: and yet ſuch fooliſh ſots have we in England, to ſay ſo of a Sermon that hath none of all this (nor any thing like) in it.

But now Sirs, to convince you of your perverſeneſs, and to let you ſee, how like you are to thoſe noxious creatures (the Flies) that flie-blow wholſome meat, ſo are you. It is uſuall with them, if there be any bruiſed place, they are ſure to light upon that firſt, and there to ſucke and feed themſelves: But if there be none, they flie-blow ſo long, till they have made it fit for their purpoſe: So do you flie-blow diſcourſes. For whereas you charge me to be againſt the King, and his coming in, did I not ſay, It was a judgement that we were removed from our ancient foundations? And what could I mean, or did I mean? But the changing our government. And did I not quote that place, Iſay 3. to the end of verſ. 8. as a dreadfull judgement moſt ſadly fallen upon us? And did I not afterwards ſay; That as we had been under that curſe and judgement, ſo we might ſee that bleſſed morning promiſed to Gods people, in the ſame Prophet, Chap. 1. ver. 25, 26, 27. Do but read the places, and let any man ſay what could be thence intended? And did I not pray for the haſtning of that happy morning? And when I quoted that place in 1 Sam. 12.19. to the end, did I not in expreſs words ſay, That that place in all things did not run parallel with our condition? But that in ſomething it was pertinent to my purpoſe; which was in the later part onelyonly, in that the peoples wickedneſs would deſtroy themſelves, the King, and Kingdome? And did I not in plain words ſay, That that portion of Scripture held not parallell in that very particular, in that it was ſaid they ſin'd in deſiring a King? with more to that purpoſe, as you may ſee in the Sermon. And did I not ſay, That if it were the late Kings own ſins, (which I did not, nor dare I determine) that brought that judgment upon him, it was not juſt in them who did it. And when I adviſed you to be more careful to bring King Jeſus into your hearts; then King Charles into the Throne, did I not expreſly, and in theſe ſignificant words ſay; That the one was not oppoſite, contradictory, or deſtructive to the other? But onelyonly that King Jeſus was to be prefer'd before him? And that if he (King Charles) be minded to rule for him, and under him; did I not ſay, If God and the great Council ſee it fit, let him come and welcome? Well, the Lord forgive you, and make you wiſer, and more diſcreet and boneſt. And I cannot p. 21paſſe by, but muſt reprove you for one moſt abominable lie of ſome of you; That I ſhould pray in my Prayer, That as the Lord had delivered us from one Devill, ſo he would deliver us from another; and that hereby I did mean the King. Good Lord! what a lying malicious Devill hath poſſeſt theſe people. No, theſe and ſuch like prophane and ungodly wretches in an humane ſhape are the Devils I prayed againſt. I prayd, That as the Lord had graciouſly in a good meaſure delivered us from the devil of Herſie and blaſphemie, ſo that he would alſo keep us and deliver us from the Devil of prophaneneſſe: And the God to whom I prayed knows, that theſe ungodly wretches are all the Devils I prayed againſt, and no other; not having any thought, apprehenſion, or imagination of the King in this particular. And ſo much to my firſt charge.

2 Now for my ſecond, in which I ſhall be brief. My Sermon, ſay ſome, drove all at this, The bringing in of the King would bring in all prophaneſſe; But did I any where ſay ſo? Truly I needed not, Prophaneſſe is in already in the Nation; nor did I thinke the King would bring it in, and I hope he never will. But this I think, all the ungodly and prophane people in the Nation have a very great and ſtrong deſire of the Kings coming in, as hoping to have as much liberty to be prophane, and to exerciſe it, as they had before. Oh! how hath the Parliament Acts and Ordinances hampered and chained, and fettered theſe beaſts; They cannot ſwear, or be drunk but they muſt pay for't. Taverns, Innes, and Ale-houſe muſt be ſhut on the Lords day, all day long, that they cannot tipple, & be drunk. They muſt not walke in the ſtreets nor in the fields on that day under a penalty, and many of them have been ſued and indicted for it, and the like. And oh! How like wilde Buls in a net, have they fretted, and vext, and raved at it? Oh! that bleſſed book (think they) that moſt excellent book for ſports on the Sabboth; That was a good, a bleſſed, a merry time with us. Theſe people are like thoſe, Jer. 44.16,17,18. As for the word that thou haſt ſpoken unto us in the name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee: But we will certainly do whatſoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incenſe unto the Queen of heaven, and to pour out drink-offerings unto her, as we have done, we and our fathers, our Kings and our princes in the Cities of Iudah, and ſtreets of Ieruſalem: For then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and ſaw no evill. But ſince we left off to burn incenſe to the queen of heaven, &c. we have wanted all things, and have been conſumed by the ſword, and by the famine. p. 22Well ſirs, think as you will; For my part I thinke that accurſed book was none of the leaſt provocations that drew down the judgements of God upon the Nation. And yet how glad would many be of this licentious liberty re-introduced: And oh! for ſome good Court Biſhops to help us in this particular againſt the Round-heads, and theſe puritanical Presbyterians.

Beloved Reader, I charge this upon the Court Biſhops onelyonly; For confident I am, there were many good and godly Biſhops in the Nation who abhorred that execrable thing, and yet this is the thing theſe miſerable wretches look for. And here let me not be miſtaken, or miſ-reported, as if I thought that none but prophane and godleſſe perſons look and long for the Kings coming. No, far be it from my ſoul; For I am aſſured there are many godly and honeſt hearts, ſober and diſcreet perſons who earneſtly deſire it, and would be glad to ſee it, But as for prophane and ungodly perſons, (drunkards ſwearers, whoremongers, Sabboth-breakers, deſpiſers of Religion and godlineſſe in the power of it) upon what good account can they deſire him, I leave it to any reaſonable man to judge. Do they deſire it either for the Kings good, or their own good, certainly no? But they are ſure, if one party (whom they how hate) ſhould prevail, they ſhall ſtill walke in their chains and fetters; but from another they hope (at leaſt) for freedome. And ſhould they be hampered and reſtrained by that other, they would hate both alike. For 'tis not this perſon or that perſon, this party or that, which is the quarrel or offence. But the old enmity of oppoſition and hatred between the two ſeeds of godly and ungodly. And if the King be, as by ſome he is reported, (which God grant) godly, and ſhall ſhew it by his curbing their wickedneſſe, they will not like him long, but would be weary of him. And clearly the obſervation and information of their prophaneſſe the laſt Faſt day, is to me (yea, and to any conſidering perſon) a ſufficient argument of their ungodlineſſe: and theſe onelyonly are the men I ſpoke of, and deſired to conſider the vanity of their expectations. That (if it had been the will of God) I might have been inſtrumental to undeceive but ſome one of them, and ſee how they requite me for my labour! But I ſhall not loſe it.

And truly, although theſe be the perſons I chiefly aym at (as moſt worthy of reprehenſion: Yet ſince I am now diſcharging my conſcience in this way (of writing) which I think not to do again. I would beg leave to adviſe ſome of our more civill and moderate opponents p. 23in one particular. 'Tis too eaſie and familiar with many of you (upon the leaſt provocation, ſometimes without it) to return upon us, with the word Presbyterian by way of reproach as a Nickname, and to inveigh againſt Presbytery: But Sirs, do you underſtand what you do? It's true, the Biſhops have a long time kept the name (and thing) in a kind of ſilence under hatches. But will you (without paſſion and partiality, and as in the preſence of God (for ſo I deſire to deale with you) be informed in the truth? Then I muſt tell you this one thing, the Scripture ſpeaks more of, and for Presbyters then Biſhops Not that I bring this as an argument to prove Presbytery to be more ſacred then Epiſcopacy; For I thinke them both ſo alike, and I intend not to handle that controverſie. My deſigne is, to let you know (if the Scripture may rule you) you may as well ſpeak ſcornfully of Biſhops as Presbyters; and of Epiſcopacy, as of Presbytery; For I tell you again, the Scripture makes oftner mention of Presbyters then Biſhops. Now for your information, and to clear this to you, you muſt know, that the word preſbyter (though we by uſe make it Engliſh) is a Greek word, which we in our Engliſh Bibles have always tranſlated by the word Elder. It comes from foreign, Senex, one that's old. And foreign, is Senior, one that's Elder. And this word is uſed in Scripture ſometimes in a naturall ſenſe, to ſignifie one elder in age: and ſometimes in an eccleſiaſtical ſenſe, for an Officer in the Church of Chriſt. Now it was my purpoſe to have examined all the places in the Greek Teſtament where the word Presbyter is uſed, and to have obſerved how many times it was uſed in an eccleſiastical ſence, ſignifying a Church-Officer: But the day before the writing hereof, there came very happily to my hand a Book lately publiſhed by one, whoſe other workes praiſe him in the gate, and this not a little, ſcil. Mr. George Lawſon, Politica Sacra, which ſaves me ſome labour, which I am willing to embrace at this time for haſt-ſake, eſpecially from ſuch an Author. And he tells me page 139. of that Book, that he finds the word Presbyter in an eccleſiastical ſence and notion about ſixteen times in the New Teſtament. And now as for the word foreign, which is ſometimes tranſlated an Overſeer (as Acts 20.28.) and ſometimes a Biſhop, I could quickly number them, for 'tis but five times uſed: and one of them is ſpoken not of an ordinary Church-officer, but of our Lord Chriſt Jeſus, 1 Pet. 2.25.

So that I ſay the Scripture makes more uſe, and more often mention of the word Presbyter then Biſhop, and therefore not ſo to be p. 24ſlighted and reproached, or to be uſed as a terme of diſgrace to any man, unleſſe you have a mind to diſgrace the Scripture which thus honours Presbyters and Presbyterians above Biſhoips. Yea, but Biſhops are above them; How know you that? They were ſo, and ſo have a long time; that's true. But did the Scripture put them there? Good ſirs let no man be angry with me, if I expreſs my mind freely. I mean not to make a quarrel of it, nor contend with any man about it, for I have better work to do; then nodum in ſcirpo quaerere. But where doth the Scripture put a Biſhop above a Presbyter? Let any man in the world ſhew me the place, Shall I ask you one thing? According to the uſuall apprehenſion, and among us in England, what was the office and buſineſſe of a Biſhop? And what is the office and buſineſs of a Preſbyter? You'l ſay, the office of a Biſhop was to rule and govern, for ſo they did. And the office of a Preſbyter or Elder is to teach and feed the Flock. But now, doth the Scripture thus diſtinguiſh and put a difference? No, but if there be any to be found there, 'tis on the other ſide the leaf, That puts the honour of ruling upon the Preſbyters (the Elders) and the buſineſſe of teaching and feeding upon the Overſeers, the Biſhops. 1 Tim. 5.17. The Elders (foreign, the Presbyters) that rule well are worthy of double honour. And the Apoſtle in Acts 20. puts the buſineſſe of feeding (one part whereof is teaching) upon Biſhops. For verſ. 28. Take heed (ſayes he) unto your ſelves, and to all the flocke over which the holy Ghoſt hath made you (foreign) Biſhops (ſo in the Greek) to feed the Church of God. See here, you are made Biſhops to feed. Elders to rule, and Biſhops to feed. So that by this it ſeems in the Apoſtles times the Biſhop was not the better man. But beloved, are you willing to know the truth? and wil you not kick againſt it, when 'tis laid plainly before you? Why then know, that then (in the Apoſtles time) Preſbyter and Biſhop were all one. And that (as the before-commended Mr. Lawſon hath it) whatſoever ſome of late have ſaid to the contrary, Presbyter and Biſhop were onelyonly two different words, ſignifying the ſame Officer. And for evidence undenyable, do but read the 17. verſe of that Chapter (Acts 20.) and there you ſhall finde who thoſe perſons are whom he calls Biſhops or Overſeers, even the Preſbyters (the Elders) of the Church of Epheſus, put both together, and it runs clearly thus. St. Paul ſaid to the preſbyters (or Elders) of the Church of Epheſus, Feed the flocke of God, over which the holy Ghoſt hath made you Biſhops. I wonder why our laſt Tranſlators of the Bible did not render it (Biſhop) here, but p. 25[Overſeer] which they have not done in any other place where this word is uſed. But I know the myſterie, and I could give you ſome account, as I have been credibly informed.

But to be ſhort, compare 1 Tim. 3.1,2,3, &c. with Titus 1.5,6,7, &c. and you ſhall finde the qualifications of a Biſhop, and of an Elder (or Presbyter) to be the ſame. And in that place to Titus, if you compare in 5. verſe and the 7th. you ſhall finde the Apoſtle uſing Elder and Biſhop as ſynonimous, ſignifying the ſame. This is plain, the Apoſtles themſelves were not the onelyonly Biſhops even in the Apoſtles times.

And to cloſe all in this particular, let that place 1 Pet. 5. beginning be conſidered, where St. Peter writing to the ſeverall Churches (as appears Chap. 1.1.) in that 5th. Chap. he exhorts the Preſbyters (or Eldrs) to a faithfull diſcharge of their duty (which is a diligent feeding their Flock, without lording it over them) much leſſe over their fellow Elders, verſ. 2, 3. of which he profeſſes himſelfe to be one in verſ. 1. The Elders (or Presbyters, foreign) which are among you, I exhort, who am (foreign alſo a Preſbyter (or Elder) a fellow-Presbyter, or a Presbyter together with you Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the overſight thereof, ſo we read it; but in the Greek it is foreign, playing the Biſhops, or doing the work or buſineſſe of Biſhops. So that then, Biſhop and Presbyter, both name and thing, Title and employment was all one, without any domination according to the rule and Canon of their Lord and Maſter, Mar. 10.42. where a requeſt having been made in the behalf of ſome of his Diſciples for domination, he calls them to him, and ſayes, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over Gentiles (or Heathens) exerciſe Lordſhip over them, and their great ones exerciſe authority upon them: But ſo it ſhall not be among you, &c.

Much more might be ſaid, and is ſaid by others in this matter. And if any deſire further information & ſatisfaction herein, let them (without prejudice) read Mr. Baxters five Diſputations of Church-government and worſhip, and there they ſhall finde theſe things plainly and truly ſtated and diſcuſſed.

What then (will ſome ſay) you would have all leveld and equal. And you would have every Miniſter (every Presbyter) a Pope, to domineer and Lord it in his own Pariſh? Friends, be not too haſty, I do not ſay ſo, nor would I have it ſo. I would not have all equall, all are not fit for every thing. I am not of their opinion who ſay, all p. 26things requiſite to government and diſcipline in the Church are fully contained (I mean punctually and particularly) in Scripture. Nor do thoſe who ſay ſo, make it good in their practice, nor can they. And I ſay further; That opinion hath been the mother and nurſe of much ſchiſme and faction, I grant that much here muſt be left to prudence, and that not of ſingle or particular Paſtors, Preſbyters, or Biſhops; but to the conſideration and determination of the moſt godly, learned, grave, and able in the Nation, to which I would have all to conform. If any like it not, they are at their liberty. Ʋnity and order is more precious, then to be deſtroyed for the ſatiſfaction of ſuch as will never be ſatisfied, as not well knowing their owne mindes. And as for Lordly dominion, and Poping it in our Pariſhes, I do profeſſe I do abhor it under every form. I as much adhominate a lording Presbyter, as a lording Biſhop; no name, title, or pretext whatſoever gives us any ſuch authority: And I would begge (as I do deſire) that we might be kept to that which ſhall appear to be our proper buſineſſe; which if thoſe of our profeſſion had been, England had not been in ſo ſad a condition as it is this day. I like not the Scotch Stool of Repentance, nor would I have excommunicate perſons driven into the Church again by the ſecular power: As by Writs de excommunicato capiendo, or the like. It may force men to an hypocritical acknowledgment of ſome kinde of penitence, but it cannot produce true repentance. I would have Church-cenſures, reach no further, nor cut any deeper then their ſpiritual ſword will penetrate. I approve not rigid compulſions by the arme of fleſh, in ſuch things which are the onelyonly work of the ſpirit; as is true and unfeigned repentance. Of which, if people by conſtraint make a feigned profeſſion, it doth but harden them in their ſin, and make them impudent; which (as I have been credibly informed) is too manifeſt in ſome places of the world, notwithſtanding the ſtrictneſſe of their diſcipline. I would have Church affairs (in this reſpect) ſo managed, as if the Civil Magiſtrate were no friend to Religion, farther then that thoſe who profeſſe it, and live peaceably, may be protected by him from outward violence.

No, let the beauty, excellency, benefit and neceſſity of the communion of the Church, with the priviledges thereof be clearly layd open to the people. Let the hazard, danger, and miſchief of juſt excommunication be declared and urged upon them. And let all Chriſtians with draw all countenance and unneceſſary leſſowſhip and ſociety from them, according to the Scriptures. And if the p. 27ſenſe, ſhame, and grief thereof (with other ſuch conſiderations, (ſet on by the ſpirit of God) will not humble them: Let them alone till the Lord cometh.

But then, I would not have thoſe who are by juſt excommunication caſt out of one Church or Congregation, received in into another, for this were the way to make Conventicles of Hereticks, Schiſmaticks, blaſphemers, and all manner of prophane and ungodly ones: And in this I conceive the Civill Magiſtrate is much concern'd (eſpecially being a Chriſtian) For 'tis found too true by ſad experience, that factions in the Church beget fractions in the State. And therefore my ſoul longs for ſuch a happy day, wherein by the favourable aſpect of Chriſtian Magiſtrates, all wayes of faction, ſeparation and diviſion may be fore-cluded: And if men be otherwiſe minded, let them ſit ſtill and be quiet. Or if they will be doing, it were good if they would go and gather Churches among the heathen, and not intrude themſelves into other mens labours.

This which I have now declared, was and is onelyonly to allay the heat of thoſe mens ſtomacks, who (being altogether ignorant of what the Scripture hath and ſaith in the behalf of Preſbyters and Presbyterians) do ſo ſlight and vilifie them, as to make the name and thing a reproach unto them. You may as well call a man prick-eard Chriſtian, as prick-ear'd Presbyterian: And I have done this to give you timely warning, and to prevent your prophaneſſe. If you will not leave it, know, however you ſcorn them, the Scripture honours them; and take heed of kicking againſt the pricks: Your prophaneſſe is that I complain of, and if you will go on, Dominus venit.

And now I have one thing more to ſpeak to, and then manum de tabula; and it is to fore-warn (or rather after-warn you (for it hath been too long practiſed) of another evill: and that is, reproaching zealous, home and plain, down-right preaching, with the odious names of paſſion, anger, and railing. And let me tell you, this is no other then Sathans ſubtlety to render our preaching unto you unprofitable, and ineffectual. We confeſs we are men ſubject to paſſion (yea and ſinfull paſſion) as others are.Iam. 5.17.Jas 5:17 Inſtances might be given from Scripture of the Lords moſt precious Saints and ſervants in this ſad particular. But what then? Is plain and home, and down-right preaching paſſion and railing? Take heed of that. Nay, is it not lawful ſometimes to be angry and in paſſion? Eph. 4.26. Be angry and ſin not. A man may be angry, and not ſin. Nay, 'tis a ſin not to be angry ſometimes. Is not the Lord himſelfe ſaid ſometimes to be p. 28angry? And can he ſin? It's true, St. Paul would not have a Biſhop (or Preſbyter) ſoon angry; Tit. 1.7.Titus 1:7not ſuddenly, lightly, haſtily. But doth that infer he ſhould not be angry at all? Nay rather, doth it not infer the contrary? He may, he muſt be ſometimes angry? Would you be drunke, and ſwear, and curſe, and prophane Gods Sabboths, and hate and ſcorn ſtrict profeſſion of Religion, and openly declare your enmity, and ſhall not (muſt not) we be angry? Muſt we not reprove you ſharply, cuttingly? So the word properly ſignifies (foreign) I'le tell you ſirs, That which you call anger, and paſſion, and railing, is in Scripture call'd zeale.Tit. 1.13.Titus 1:13

I could be large in this particular: but there is ſo much in this kind done to my hand already by a worthy and reverend brother, and that in print, in a little book, called Elias Abatement, or Corruption in the Saints; Being a Sermon preached by Mr. Thomas Caſe at the Funerals of a godly Miniſter, (one Mr. Gualter Roſwel) I ſay this being ſo excellently and fully done to my hand, I ſhall forbear the further proſecution from my own thoughts. OnelyOnly becauſe every one hath not that Book; and ſome may meet with this, who poſſibly may never meet with that: And for that prejudice againſt Miniſters upon this account, is ſo great a miſchief to them, eſpecially to their people (being as I ſaid) a device of Sathan to hinder the entertainment of their Doctrine) I ſhall take ſo much pains as to lay before you ſome of that which that Reverend Author hath to this purpoſe, and which he did in vindication of that deceaſed brother, who it ſeems was changed to be a man paſſionate and cholerick.

In the firſt place he confeſſes; he was a man in whom the black aduſt humour of choler had predominance in his natural conſtitution, (and who can help that?) And he ſayes, that many times gave a tincture to his diſcourſe and actions; which ſtanders by, more cenſorious then candid, interpreted to his unjuſt prejudice. Then he gives him a high commendation for his eminent gifts, parts, and abilities, comparing him (in his meaſure) to Elias, and John the Baptiſt, in many things. Amongſt others he ſays his Miniſtery was a thundring Miniſtery: and I would to God (ſayes he) we had more of them, there is need of them. And becauſe tis ſo good and pertinent, take more. Thunder (ſays he) purgeth the air: And if ſo, we have need of more ſuch ſons of Thunder amongſt us, and not ſuch as will ſing Placentia unto people: Sow pillows under their elbows, and ſing men to Hell with ſweet Lullabies of peace, peace, when there is no peace. Our air is peſtilentiouſly infectious in the ſenſe of our ſpirituall p. 29Phyſitians, and our Climate is mortally infected with the peſts of hereſies and blaſphemies, and with the putrid ſtench of all manner of poyſonous luſts, which is the fatall ſource of all our plagues both in Church and State: and this our precious brother (ſaith he) was deeply ſenſible of: And hence it was that his ſpirit was warmed within him to a more then ordinary degree of zeal in his Miniſtery.

And he ſays his courage was rival with his zeal, he feared not the face of any man, but would boldly reprove (as Elias) even the higheſt. In all the Changes that went over his head, in all the Controverſies of the times, wherein he exerciſed his Miniſtry, he was a moſt ſtrenuous aſſertor of the Truth, and a moſt couragious oppoſer of errour and innoviation: and that even, while ſome higher then others by head and ſhoulders (in their own eyes) did baſely and unworthily betray their cauſe, he feared not the face of man, in the cauſe of Jeſus Chriſt: He durſt tell the greateſt perſon he had to do with of their faults, upon juſt occaſion in the worſt of Times. He was a hammer to beat down error and blaſphemy, where-ever it met him. He could not bear with them that preacht down Paedobaptiſme, the Chriſtian Sabboth, Univerſities, Schools of Learning, Ordination, and other ordinances and inſtitutions of Jeſus Chriſt; 2 Tim. 4.3.2 Tim 4:3as it was propheſied, that ſome would not endure ſound Doctrine, ſo he would not endure unſound Doctrine. He ſayes, he could not bear with ſeducers, nor they with him, ſo that by this means he became a man of contention. And yet he commends him for a man of a tender ſpirit, mortified to the world, free and liberall, much in faſting and prayer.

And yet he ſayes, he had his ſhare in the perſecution of the Times wherein he lived, from his very firſt entrance upon his Miniſtery, according to the propheſie of our Saviour, Mat. 5.11,12. And truly ſays he, It had been a wonder if he ſhould have eſcap't it. For (as our Lord ſubjoyns the reaſon to his prediction of the Apoſtles ſufferings, ver. 13.) his Miniſtry was ſalt. He was ſalt in his life, and ſalt in his doctrine: Not onelyonly ſavoury, but quicke and corroding, ſmart and ſearching, which corrupt times, and ulcer'd conſciences could not bear, 2 Tim. 4.3.

And this ſays he inrag'd & inflam'd the ſpirits of unſound men, and raiſed much trouble and perſecution againſt him, whereſoever he came, which occaſioned him often to flit from one place to another, to avoid the fury of unreaſonable men. And he ſayes, other of Gods ſaithful Miniſters have had their ſhare with him in this kind of perſecution, p. 30Matth. 10.23. The world cannot bear the plain-dealing of Goſpel-Miniſters. None ſo hated as the reprover in the gate, Amos 5.10. They hate him that rebuketh in the gate, and they abhor him that ſpeaketh uprightly.

And now, as to the thing it ſelf (which ſome call anger and paſſion, but indeed is zeal and faithfulneſs) I cannot leave till I give you in, what this Reverend man hath to that purpoſe, and it's hugely conſiderable and advantagious. He aſſerts, That the affection of anger rightely qualified, and managed, is of ſingular uſe and advantage in the life and worke of a Chriſtian, eſpecially of a Miniſter of the Goſpel; which ought in no wiſe to be branded with the uſual ſcandal of choler and paſſion. They are his words all.

I make no queſtion (ſayes he) the falſe prophets, and their ſeduced proſelytes, ſtuck not to blaſt the holy Prophet (he means Elias) in my Text, with the ſame reproach, a furious man, a man of an intemperate and unbridled ſpirit, that valued not mens lives, but in his anger would not ſtick to call downe fire from heaven to deſtroy an hundred men at a time, &c.

But ſaith he, let me mind you of this in the general. The paſſion of anger, with other affections in nature, at what time the perſon in whom they are is regenerate, they do change their nature, & become regenerate too. And being baptized with the blood and ſpirit of Jeſus Chriſt, they receive divine impreſſions, and ſo paſſe into the catalogue of gracious affections and diſpoſitions, and become inſtruments of exceeding honour and ſervice in the hand of Jeſus Chriſt, who is pleaſed to make uſe of them in his own work.

And then inſtances in divers; and among the reſt, Paſſion (ſaith he) born again of water and the ſpirit, becometh the grace of zeale, and holy jealouſie for God, and for the intereſt of Jeſus Chriſt.

Anger ſanctified is that to the affections, which edge is to the inſtrument, which varniſh is to colours, which winde is to the ſails of a Ship. Judgement is the ballaſt, but zeal is the full gale. It is as mettle to the horſe. It is the activity of every grace, every affection red hot for Jeſus Chriſt, which much water cannot quench, neither can the floods drown it.Cant. 8.7.Song 8:7

In a word, Paſſion refined and ſpiritualiz'd, is every faculty of the ſoul, acting to its height for the glory of God.Pſal. 69.9.Ps 69:9 The zeal of thy houſe hath eaten me up. To be ſhort; Sanctified anger in the Saints of God, is not that which the world takes it to be, a ſhort madneſs, but a grace of the ſpirit of God. Yea, it is a compound and p. 31temperament of all graces, acting in ſummo gradu, in the height of intention for the promoting of the concernments of Chriſts Kingdome.

I told you before, that Elias was a uſeful man, though he was ſubject to paſſion. I ſhall tell you more now: He was therefore ſo uſefull, BECAUSE he was ſubject to paſſion. His anger and paſſion being ſanctified, made him ſo abundantly active for God, and the reformation of the publique worſhip, doctrine, and Ordinances in his generation. Had he wanted his paſsion, he had wanted ſome of his zeal for God.

And ſo was it (ſays he) with our worthy brother deceaſed; That which an idle, wanton, looſe, luke-warm generation of Profeſſors, as well as prophane perſons (for the palliating of their own hypocriſie, and Gallio-like indifferency in matters of Religion) called paſsion and choler in him, was indeed and in truth nothing but his zeal and courage, and activity for Jeſus Chriſt, which truly did even conſume him.

Alas! In this apoſtate generation, all things have loſt their proper names. The Devil appears in Samuels mantle, Satan in the form of an Angel of light: And ſin puts on the habit of vertue, that it may deceive the more ſafely.

Thus lukewarmneſs and curſed neutrality in Religion paſſeth abroad for meekneſs and ſweetneſs of ſpirit. Carnal policy for Chriſtian prudence. Curſed compliance with the luſts of men, for moderation, and command of a mans ſpirit, &c.

While zeal and fidelity to the Truth, ordinances and government of Jeſus Chriſt, hear ill in the world, and ſuffer all the odium and ſcandal that a reviling world, and the venemous wit of malice can heap upon it. Truly the earth is not able to bear their words.

Thus this reverend and worthy man, for whoſe pains herein I thank him, and thank God for him, and for his providence that brought this piece to my hand, at a time ſo ſeaſonable; as I do alſo for the work of that worthy and ingenuous Dr. to whom I owe ſo much for my Preface. In matters of this nature, which are of proper concernment, it is better to deal by others words, then our own. For by this it will appear we are not alone in our judgement and manner of procedure, in diſcharge of our duty, nor in ſuffering for it.

There is one exception more which ſome make againſt my diſcourſe, which is, It was unſeaſonable. And to this I briefly anſwer: It's plain, theſe perſons who urge this, are not acquainted with the Topicks, and proper ſeats of arguments, deliberative, or perſwaſive. p. 32I did, and do conceive that if I might be ſo free as to make uſe of the reſpects of the people to the King at any time, and from thence to dehort them from ſin, and to perſwade them to turn to the Lord, that ſo both King and people may be (by Gods bleſſing) ſetled and eſtabliſhed upon ſure foundations; That now was the onelyonly time I will not ſay, but ſurely in all good reaſon it was a very ſeaſonable time: When people are high, and full, & earneſt, and that generally, and it being almoſt the onelyonly talk of bringing in the King; was it not ſeaſonable upon a ſolemn Faſting day, to minde people of being more carefull of bringing King Jeſus into their hearts, then any mortal King unto the Throne? And inaſmuch as ſin (the ſins of the people, (for that way I carried it) had deſtroyd our former King, that therefore they ſhould beware, leſt by their ſinnes they deſtroy the latter. Had I ſaid any thing by way of oppoſition, or had I not very frequently upon all occaſions (and that not in corners onelyonly, but openly) declar'd my judgement for the coming in of the King, it had been ſomething: But ſurely theſe men have ſome prejudice againſt my perſon: But whether they have or no, thus much I tell them (in the fore quoted words of the reverend Dr. in the Preface, and where this exception is in part anſwered) I will no more learn of them how to preach, then they will learn of me to buy and ſell. And ſo I leave them.

And now upon the whole matter, I will draw towards a cloſe with this requeſt to thoſe who may be Auditors hereafter, that they would not, by ignorant or wilfull miſtakes, or if reports, make the reproach of Miniſters a means to repair their decayd and broken fortunes, in taking up, or carrying on, and telling lies to thoſe whom they have a mind to ingratiate themſelves withal, and may (as they hope) lift them up out of their low condition.

I muſt tell you ſirs in few words (for I have gone beyond what I intended already) in thus doing (belying and reproaching the Miniſters of the Goſpel) you do but the Devils buſineſs. Satans greateſt deſign is to hinder the progreſs of the Goſpel: And he well knows, contempt of the Miniſter brings neglict of his Doctrine It is a truth ſo clear in your own experiences, that I need not ſay more to it: And conſider you are hereby injurious not onelyonly unto us (weakning our hands that we cannot reap the deſired fruit of our labours) But you injure both your ſelves and others of our people, who by your evill practice and example in this kind are drawn into the prejudice, ſin and miſchief with you. I ſhut up all with this: If it be an honour, p. 33which brings a great reward with it, to be inſtrumentall in the work of mens ſalvation; what can they expect who in any kind hinder it? Conſider it betimes, and be wiſe for the future.