CHAP. I.

THE English Nation heard little of Mr. Baxter until the begin­ning of the late unnatural War in the Year 1640. when Mr. B. says he conceived a Prejudice against Bishops, and from that time meditated on that History of Bishops which was print­ed Anno 1680. of which History Dr. Maurice says, that it seems to be written to shew how much Mr. B. wanted of being a Christian or a Scholar; for therein, through their sides, he [Page 2]wounds Christianity it self, by imputing all the Mischiefs that had troubled the Christian World to that Sacred Order. As he doth also all the Confusions which for Twenty years to­gether kept the Nation wallowing in Blood, and the Church rent in pieces by divers Se­ctaries, as by so many Evil Spirits, crying, Down with it even to the ground. Yet Mr. B. confidently asserts in several Papers, That the War was begun between the Episcopal Parties, the one adhering to Archbishop Whitgift, and the other to Bishop Laud; and that the Parliament, the Army, and Assembly, consisted generally of such as were (he should have said, such as had been) Conformists. I shall not, to disprove him, repeat what others have said, who refer the rise of it as far back as King James, in whose Reign the Parliaments were divided into Regians and Republicans, as Wilson re­ports; who tells us of many Disputes between Prerogative and Priviledge. There was a Party that perswaded that King and his Son to a War for recovery of the Palatinate; and having engaged them, denied them the assi­stance which was promised, intending to work upon their Necessities. And where o­ther Parliaments left, that of 1640. begun, as Mr. B. says. But Mr. B. brings the Matter ab origine, p. 32. of his Life, thus: Our Refor­mers, in the days of Q. Mary, being fled to Frank­ford, fell into a division, one part were for Diocesans, the English Liturgy and Ceremonies,[Page 3]that they might no more than needed depart from the Papists, nor seem unconstant by departing from what King Edward had done. The other were for Calvin's Discipline and Worship, setting up Parochial Discipline instead of Diocesan; that Queen Elizabeth did countenance and set up the Diocesan Party. The other Party, as Mr. B. elsewhere says, flew in the Faces of the Bishops with bitter Revilings. And he notes, That the Bishops were Jewel, Pelkington, Grindal, Men of great Learning, good Preachers, and of Hol [...] Lives; but the Disciplinarians petitioned against their Establishment till they were by Law suppressed: but this lamentable Breach, Mr. B. saith, was never healed. Here observe that the War was not begun by two Episcopal Par­ties, as Mr. B. often affirms; for this was in truth the Origine of that War, All the Non­conformists were against the Prelates, p. 33. Sometimes he says it was for Reformation, and to recover our Liberties, to relieve the Country, and to punish Delinquents, p. 25. of his Life. And then it was begun by the Par­liaments stirring up Apprentices in great num­bers to Petition with them; and that these went tumultuously to Westminster, and meet­ing with some Bishops, cried out, No Bishops, p. 26, 27. and crying for Justice, drove the King from Whitehall.

Again he says, the War was not founded in Theological Differences, but Law Diffe­rences. Letter to Mr. Hinckley, p. 25. The first[Page 4]open beginning was about the Militia, says Mr. B. And how then did the Bishops begin it? The Commons wrested it from the King, and by one Order after another, seized his Forts and Magazines, the Tower of London, and his Na­vy: Had any of the Bishops a hand in this? They all did, and now do own, That the sole command and disposition of it is, and by the Laws of England ever was the undoubted Right of his Majesty; and that both, or ei­ther of the Houses of Parliament, cannot nor ought to pretend to the same. They were such Conformists who begun the War, as Mr. B. who taught, That the Law that saith the King shall have the Militia, supposeth it to be against E­nemies, and not against the Commonwealth, nor them that have a part in the Soveraignty; and to resist him here, is not to resist Power, but Ʋsurpation and private Will. And where the Soveraignty is divided into several hands, as into King and Parliament, and the King in­vades the other part, they may lawfully defend their own by War, and the Subject lawfully assist them; yea, though the power of the Militia be expresly given to the King, unless it be also ex­pressed that it shall not be in the other. H.C.W. Thes. 363.

Another beginning of the War was a Con­federacy with the Scots, then in the Bowels of the Nation, with whom the King was infor­med that some of the Parliament held Corre­spondence with. The Earls of Essex, of War­wick,[Page 5]Bedford, Clare, Bullingbrook, Mulgrave, Holland, the Lords Say and Brook, and many more, were said to be of this Confederacy, p. 17. of B's Life; with the five Members and Kimbolton; whom the Parliament and City protected from the hands of Justice, and pro­cured and countenanced armed Tumults. Mr. B. makes an Objection, p. 474. of H.C.W. That Tumult at Westminster drove him (i.e. the King) away. Answ. Only by displeasing, not by endangering, or medling with him: though the King tells us otherwise in his Chapter of Tumults, to which I refer; and observe Mr. B's Account, p. 19. of his Life, That too great num­bers of Apprentices and others, emboldned by pro­ceedings of Parliament, not fore-knowing what fire the sparks of their Temerity would kindle, did too triumphingly and disorderly urge the Parlia­ment (as they had done the King) crying, Ju­stice, Justice: the King called these, Tumults; the Parliament called them City Petitioners; which in the end did more than displease the King. So that his Report of an Episcopal War was but a Dream of his own, though he affirms he was as sure of it as of any thing that he saw: yet elsewhere he says, no Man can tell where, and when, and by whom the War was begun. Confessions p. 61.

Mr. B. knows another sort of five Members that begun the War, who were no Episcopal Men; I mean the Smectymnuans, who wrote so insolently and pedantickly against that[Page 6]meek, pious, and learned Bishop Hall: And how Isaac Pennington brought a Petition of 15000 Londonners against Archbishops, Bi­shops, &c. which was seconded by the like from several Counties: And on March 10. 1640. a Bill is read in the House against E­piscopacy, and their Vote in Parliament ta­ken away, and many of them sent to the Tow­er for entring a Protest for their Priviledge. Did any of the Bishops call in the Scots? or promote the Covenant? or sit in the Assem­bly? who were chosen to that very end, that they might stir up the People to assist the Par­liament against the King. Though all these things be left on Record, yet Mr. B. thinks by his bare Authority to perswade the present and succeeding Generations, that the War was be­gun by Bishops, and carried on by a Parlia­ment, an Army, and Assembly of Confor­mists: yet to excuse the Presbyterians, he says p. 26. that the Separatists and Anabaptists be­gan the War.

Mr. B. will not say that Bishop Hall (whom he so frequently commends) had any hand in the beginning of our Wars; nor will he ever be able to perswade others, that what he hath written and publickly delivered, as Matter of Fact, in the beginning of our Troubles, is false. I therefore refer the Reader to that Treatise written with his own hand, May 29. 1647. ha­ving first given you part of a Speech delivered by this excellent Prelate in the House of Lords,[Page 7] p. 425. of his Remains—My Lords, It is a foul and dangerous Insolence which is now com­plained of to you (in the Petitions against Bi­shops) but it is but one of an hundred of those which have of late been done to the Church and Government. The Church of England, as your Lordships cannot but know, hath been and is mi­serably infested on both sides; with Papists on one side and Schismaticks on the other. The Psal­mist hath of old distinguished the Enemies of the Church into wild Boars out of the Wood, and little Foxes out of Burroughs; the one where­of goes about to root up the very Foundation of Religion, the other to crop the Branches, and Blossoms, and Clusters thereof: both of them con­spire the utter ruine and devastation of it. As for the former of them, I do perceive a great deal of good zeal for the remedy and suppression of them; and I do heartily congratulate it, and bless God for it, and beseech him to prosper it. But for the other, give me leave to say, I do not find many that are sensible of the danger of it, which yet in my apprehension is very great and apparent. Alas, my Lords, I beseech you to consider what it is, that there should be in London, and the Suburbs and Liberties, no fewer than fourscore Congregations of several Sectaries, as I have been credibly informed, instructed by Guides fit for them, Coblers, Taylors, Felt-makers, and such like Trash; which all are taught to spit in the face of their Mother the Church of England, and defile and revile her Government. From hence[Page 8]have issued those dangerous assaults of our Church Governours; from hence that inundation of base and scurrilous Libels and Pamphlets wherewith we have been of late over-born, in which Papists and Prelates, like Oxen in a Yoke, are still match­ed together. O, my Lords, I beseech you to be sensible of this great indignity; do but look on these Reverend Persons: Do not your Lordships see here sitting on these Benches, those that have spent their time, their strength, their bodies and lives, in preaching down and writing down Po­pery; and which would be ready, if occasion were offered, to sacrifice all their old blood that remains, to the maintenance of that Truth of God which they have taught and written: And shall we be thus despightfully ranged with them whom we do thus professedly oppose? But alas, this is but one of those many scandalous Aspersi­ons and intolerable Affronts that are daily cast upon us. My Lords, if these Men may with freedom and impunity thus beat down Ecclesiasti­cal Authority, it is to be feared they will not rest there, but will be ready to affront Civil Power too. Your Lordships knows that the Jack Straws, and Cades, and Wat Tylers of former times, did not more cry down Learning than Nobility; and those of your Lordships that ha [...] read the History of Munster, will need no other Item, &c.

Bishop Hall's hard measure, p. 45. Nothing could be more plain, than that upon the Call of this Parliament, and before, there was a general Plot and Resolution of the Faction to alter the Govern­ment,[Page 9]of the Church especially. The Parliament was no sooner sate, than many vehement Speech­es were made against the established Church Go­vernment, and enforcement of extirpation Root and Branch. It was contrived to draw Petiti­ons accusatory from many parts of the Kingdom against Episcopal Government; the Promoters of the Petitions were entertained with great re­spects. The Petitions of the opposite Party, sub­scribed with many thousand hands, were slight­ed and disregarded. The Rabble of London were stirred up to come armed by thousands to the Houses, offering foul Abuses, crying out, No Bishops, no Bishops; and professed they would pull the Bishops in pieces. The House of Lords sent Messages to disperse them; they hold on. The Marquess of Hartford told the Bishops they were in great danger, advising them to continue in the House that night. Messages were sent to the House of Commons, but nothing done for their security. At last the Earl of Manchester under­took the protection of the Archbishop of York and his Company; and the rest, by long stay and se­cret passages, escaped home. This Archbishop perswades the Bishops to petition his Majesty that they might be secured in the performance of their Duties, and to protest against such Acts as should be made during their forced absence. He drew up the Petition and Protestation in our presence, avowing it to be legal, just, and agreeable to for­mer proceedings, and got our Subscriptions: And whereas this Paper was first to have been deliver­ed [Page 10]to his Majesty's Secretary, then to his Maje­sty, and after to the Parliament, by the Lord Keeper; these professed they never perused it; and the Lord Keeper, to ingratiate himself with the House of Commons and the Faction, reads it in the House of Lords, aggravates the matter as highly offensive, and of dangerous consequence, and so sends it to the House of Commons; where Glyn cries it up for High Treason, yea, prefer­ring it to the Powder Plot. The Bishops are cal­led to the Bar on their knees, charged with High Treason, and on Jan. 30. at eight a clock in the Night, in extremity of Frost, voted to the Tow­er. The Citizens entertained the News with Bells and Bonfires. While we were under re­straint, the Faction renew the Bill which had been twice rejected to take away the Bishops Votes in Parliament, and prevail. Their greatest Lawyers were employed to advance our Impeachment to the highest, but found nothing to fasten on us: One of their Oracles professed they might as well accuse us of Adultery as Treason. The House of Com­mons, who first desired we might be brought to a speedy Trial, suffered us to languish: at last, on our Petition we obtain it. Our Impeachments being read, we plead Not guilty modo & for­mâ, and desired speedy Trial. A day is appoint­ed. Wild and Glyn aggravate our pretended Treason; which our Counsel being ready to an­swer, we were put off to another day, which never came. The Circumstances of that days hearing were more grievous than the substance: we were[Page 11]all thronged so miserably in that strait Room be­fore the Bar, sweating, and strugling with a mer­ciless Multitude; and when dismissed, exposed to a new and greater danger: for in the dark we must back to the Tower, and shoot the Bridge with no small peril: There we lye, expecting new Summons; but the Parliament wave their Im­peachment of Treason, and accuse us of High Misdemeanours; and in a Bill preferred against us, desire our Spiritual Means may be taken away. After some Weeks more, finding the Tower to be chargeable, we petition for Liberty on Bail: the Lords grant it, and we were freed; but the Commons hearing of it, expostulate with the Lords for freeing us without their consent; so we are remanded to the Tower. Having tarried there from New-years-eve till Whitsontide, where by turns we preached every Lord's-day to a great Auditory of Citizens, upon our Petition and 5000l. Bonds, with a Clause of Revocation at a short warning, we were dismissed.

From this Relation the indifferent Reader may perceive how far the Bishops were from beginning the War, who suffered most of these Indignities before the War begun; and [...]ow causless and shameless the Clamours of Mr. B. and his Party, concerning their perse­cution by Bishops are, when they openly af­front the known Laws, by keeping up publick Conventicles in the chiefest Cities of the Na­ [...]ion; and those Reverend Bishops were so [...]arbarously treated by their Predecessors, a­gainst [Page 12]all Law and Humanity. And I desire the Reader to observe, whether from the year 1660. to this present time, it hath not been his chief work to pour out the like Contempt, Malice, and Violence, as was begun in 1640. and as Quintilian says, Maledicus à Malefico non distat nisi occasione. From these Injuries to the Bishops, they proceeded to abuse and affront the King, and force from him his two princi­pal Counsellors, whom they by unparallel'd proceedings cut off as their most formidable Enemies. And having driven the King away by Tumults, they endeavour by Remonstran­ces, Declarations and Propositions, to make his Return impossible. In June 42. the Fa­ction sends a Petition with Nineteen Propo­sitions to his Majesty; to which he made ma­ny gracious Concessions, as he was ready to do, even to the one half of his Prerogative, to prevent that Deluge of Blood which he foresaw would follow on the War. Out of these Concessions, saith Mr. B. (and likely he knows by whom) there was framed a Catechism that would justifie the Parliament in all their proceedings against the King. Yet many of those Propositions were such, as his Majesty declared he could neither in Honour nor Con­science consent unto. One was, saith the Roy­al Martyr in his Chapter of the Nineteenth Proposition, To bind my self to a general and implicite consent to whatever they shall desire or propound; which were as if Sampson should have[Page 13]consented not only to bind his own hands, and cut off his hair, but to put out his own eyes, that the Philistins might with the more safety mock and abuse him; which they chose rather to do than quite to destroy him, when he was become so tame an Object and fit Occasion for their Sport and Scorn. This use Mr. B. and the Faction make of all his Majesty's Conde­scensions.P. 37. B's Life. The King's An­swer to the Nineteen Propositi­ons greatly confirmed many, that his declaring that the Legislative Power was in King, Lords, and Commons, and that the Government was mixt, and not Arbitrary; but as soon as the Parliament assumed it, they exercised as Arbi­trarily as ever Tyrant did. But let them take in also his Majesty's Concessions at the Isle of Wight, when his Life was in such apparent danger, and make a second Edition of that Catechism: And I suppose there cannot be a more full Justification of his Majesty's real de­sires of Peace, who granted so much; nor a clearer demonstration of their intentions for War, who would accept of nothing less than an absolute Surrender of the whole Soveraign Power; and having seized that, they could not be secure without his Life also.

This may suffice (there being so many Hi­stories of the rise of our lare Civil Wars, espe­cially that of Mr. Dugdale) to disprove Mr. B's Paradox, That the War was begun by Episco­pal Men; which the very taking and pressing[Page 14]of the Covenant by them that begun the War doth so plainly overthrow, that Mr. Baxter says, None but young Men and Foreigners will believe. Were they Episcopals that Voted down Episcopacy, before the War was began, Root and Branch? Or they who petitioned the King at York for abolishing Episcopacy and Common Prayer? Were the Smectymnians E­piscopal Men? or the Covenanters? or the Assembly? and Directory-men? Yet these begun and continued the War. Let the Rea­der judge what Credit is to be given to Mr. Baxter in other Relations, who asserts a noto­rious Falshood in a Matter of Fact, as well known to himself, as to every Rational Man in the Nation. For this, and several other Reasons, I am tempted to believe that he was as far from approving our Episcopacy at the time of his Ordination, as at the time of his Death: For the Bishop demanded of him these two Questions; Will you maintain and set forward, as much as lyeth in you, quietness, peace, and love among all Christian People, espe­cially among them that are or shall be committed to your charge. Answ. I will so do, the Lord being my helper. Again; Will you reverently obey your Ordinary, and other chief Ministers, to whom the Government and Charge is commit­ted over you, following with a glad mind and will their godly Admonitions, and submitting your self to their godly Judgments? Answ. I will so do, the Lord being my helper. But whe­ther[Page 15]he more industriously performed these Solemn Vows, or perfidiously acted against them, let the impartial Reader judge?

I now apply my self particularly to Mr. Baxter's Actions in relation to that War. That Mr. Baxter hath obtained the Vogue of a nu­merous fry of Sectaries, who though they differ among themselves in many considerable Points, yet agree to own him as their Cham­pion, is no more than what the Anabaptists of Munster did for John of Leyden, or our Eng­lish Sectaries for Cromwel and Hugh Peters. That he still professed a great love to Peace, and zeal for Religion, while under a Form of Godliness he helpt to destroy the Power of it, his own Actions will evince. It is neces­sary indeed, that whoever will set up for an Arch-Heretick, Schismatick, or Rebel, should, besides many plausible Pretences for Reform­ing Errours and Grievances in Church and State, have some stock of Reputation, as well for Knowledge as Purity, to buoy them up in the Opinion of the People, who mostly judge according to appearance. The Devil and his Instruments could never accomplish their ends of disturbing well-established Churches and Kingdoms, if they did not transform them­selves into Angels of Light; and not only guild over their poisonous Pills with a shew of Gold, but mix some savoury Ingredients with them. Mr. Baxter hath in like manner written divers Practical Books with specious[Page 16]Titles, for Peace, Holiness, and Self-denial: and happy it had been for himself and the Na­tion, if he had published them only; but these being laid as Baits in the way of the Vulgar, to make them swallow his Polemical Writings, which are but so many Hooks and Snares to draw them in, and retain them in Rebellion and Schism; our Nation would be less in danger of new Flames, if they were all con­sumed to ashes. Neither Men nor Books, nor any thing else, is properly good, but what is so ex causis integris. And when his own pra­ctice demonstrates that his Writing for Peace and Unity are but so many Pleas for Schism and Division; and like the Egyptian Temples, however beautiful in the Porches and Out­sides, are full of Serpents and Crocodils with­in, which a multitude of People do adore; they do not only need an Index, but an Ignis expurgatorius, to secure the People from them. There needs no other Argument to undeceive the People, as to his Pretences for Peace and Unity in the Church of God, than his furi­ous acting in, and arguing for that most un­natural War against the King. And I dare challenge and Historian that hath observed or read the Tragedies of the late Times, to shew a Parallel in any one Person (I say, not on­ly amongst the Apostate Clergy, but the Lai­ty, and the worst of them) that may equal Mr. Baxter. Who is there among the Living, that entertained more early Prejudices against[Page 17]the Bishops? that left his Calling, as a Mini­ster of Peace, and entred with the first into the War against the King? and for four years space (which was the heat of the War) was an Agent as well as an Eye-witness of most of the terrible Battles that were fought in Eng­land? Who ever boasted of drawing some thousands to that War? Who hath said more to justifie not the War only, but the Death of the Royal Martyr? Who more opposed the Return of our present Soveraign? or hath been as active in making the Government un­easie? or who hath or can do more than Mr. Baxter to renew all our Troubles and Confu­sions? So that I could not devise a better Epi­tome of the late Rebellion and Schism, than this account of Mr. Baxter's Actions and Wri­tings, which is an Abstract of the Rise and Pro­gress of both; in whom they yet both live, and with whom I wish they may both die.

Had any Man published the like Passages as are here related upon his own Credit, they would have been thought a Satyrical Essay, or Romantick Fiction; but being the products of his own Hand and Pen, and the lively Idea of his very Soul and Spirit, it is impossible any Man can represent him a more vile Person, than he hath done himself in that which fol­loweth.

P. 39. of his Third Defence, he says, I was not bred in Wales nor Ireland, but in Shrop­shire, (lest men should suspect he had been a[Page 18]Jesuite or Tory.) In my Childhood I was first bred up under the School and Church-teaching of eight several Men, of whom two only preach­ed once a Month, the rest were but Readers of the Liturgy, and of very scandalous Lives. (In­troduction to the Hist. of Episc.) Mr. Baxter began to be a Censor morum before he was at the age of Ten; but being now above Seven­ty, either Gratitude or Charity should have obliged him to spare the Ashes of them that had been long dead, and to say nothing, or no ill of them: and probably some of them deserved better things; but Ingratum si dixe­ris, &c. His first Master, he says, was a Rea­der never at any University, and preached once a Month: of him (being allied to Mr. Baxter, and because he mended) he says no more, but leaves us to conjecture, by what he says of the rest. From the Age of Six till Ten, I had four School-masters Curates of the place successively, that read Common-Prayer; two ne­ver preached, the other two seldom; but the two more learned drank themselves into beggary, and left us. The like he says of one Mr. Yale B.D. who drank himself, Wife, and Children to stark beggary. After the Age of Ten, he says, p. 58. of his late Apol. he came to live at the habitation of his Ancestors, (but names not the place:) the Curate there was another of his School-masters, who, he says, never preach­ed but once in his time, and then he was drunk in the Pulpit. After that I fell into the hand of[Page 19]a Teacher that studied for Preferment, and revi­led Puritans (it seems his love to these, trans­ported him against all good Manners to speak so ill of his Masters:) at length I was taken in­to the Tuition of a grave and eminent Man of high esteem among great Men, who expected ve­rily to have been a Bishop. He loved me well, but so far frustrated my expectation, that in two years time he neither read to me, nor instructed me one hour, but discoursed usually of the un­learned factious Puritans: in his Study, which was all my help, I remember not one Greek Book but the Testament; nor one Father but Austin de Civitate Dei; nor any of the Councils, but or­dinary English and Neoterick Divines: And he studied little all the year but Bishop Andrew's Sermons. Hitherto, says Mr. Baxter, I had no Non-conformists Principles. N.B. This was be­fore he was Ordain­ed. I know not of what Age Mr. Baxter was then; but at Nine­teen he tells us he had a di­staste against Bishops as Per­secutors (as he had also against his Masters for reviling of Puritans.Pref. to Cathol. Theol. p. 2.)

If any suspect that his Father infused the Principles of Non-conformity, he denies that his Father ever scrupled any Point of Confor­mity, or spake against it, which is a bare Ne­gative; yet he was reviled by the Drunkards and Rabble by the Name of Precisian and Pu­ritan, as bitterly as any Non-conformist now. But whether Mr. Baxter made his Father a Re­bel,[Page 20]or his Father him, he tells us his Father was twice taken Prisoner; and Mr. Baxter's first Adventure was, to seize the Person of a Neighbour, to be an Exchange for his Fa­ther; but quo warranto I find not. You see how early Mr. Baxter's Spirit was fermented with Principles of Faction and Sedition. At Fourteen years of Age he Censures the Reve­rend and Learned Bishop Morton: I went my self (saith he) at Thirteen or Fourteen years to the Worthy (but unworthily dealt with) Bi­shop Morton, with the rest of the School-boys (for Confirmation) without any Certificate, and without any Examination. (But I ask Mr. Bax­ter, Did your Master, who was also a Minister, first Examine you and the rest? And how know you but he certified your Names to the Bishop, who all know was a Man of Piety as well as Learning, though you say) He hastily said, as he passed on, three or four Lines of a Prayer over us, when I knew not what he said. This was Mr. Baxter's fault, not the Bishop's, no more than that he considered not what he Subscribed to at his Ordination: But he was an Aristarchus, a controler of Bishops at Fourteen: and at Nineteen his Palate was so vitiated, that he distasted them altogether as Persecutors.

Now of what University Mr. Baxter was, and where he got that stock of Learning which he hath so prodigiously scattered, to his own, as well as the Nations great trouble, he menti­ons[Page 21]not, nor can I inform my self. His chief Tutors were those (of whom p. 59. of his A­pol.) Three neighbour Ministers, venerable for Age, dying two of them above Eighty, and the third near it, were my most profitable Acquain­tance; these were very worthy godly Conformists, who kept me from the Principles of Non-confor­mity. One of them was a Learned great Dispu­ter for Conformity, and my chief Tutor. But what kind of Conformists they were, Mr. Baxter tells you in a Parenthesis, (Though they had all three much rather been rid of it, (i.e. of Conformity) and so were before they died.) They were some of Mr. Baxter's Passive Con­formists, who waited an opportunity to be Active in ruining the Church. Mr. Baxter now bethinks himself of entring on the Mi­nistry; and (to remove his Scruples which he had entertained so early against Bishops, &c.) his chief Tutor engaged him to read Dr. Burges, Mr. Sprint, Bishop Downam, Hoo­ker, &c. So that I was not at all in doubt of the matter; and with this satisfaction I WAS OR­DAINED, AND DID SƲBSCRIBE. But I verily believe never made Conscience of per­forming what he Subscribed to; for he con­fesseth he had never read any thing on the o­ther side, nor ever read the Book of Ordina­tion, nor exactly weighed what he subscribed to, though at that time I suppose he was about Twenty four. And whether he was made only Deacon then, as is probable, or was [Page 22]ever ordained Presbyter after, I cannot find. Bishop Morton, who Ordained him, acted ve­ry regularly; and to what Order Mr. Baxter was admitted, doth not appear: it was not usual to grant both Orders at once, especial­ly to Persons that never had been at any Uni­versity: For Mr. Baxter, in his Penitent Con­fession, N. 8. reckoneth among his Sins his strong inclination to have setled at the Uni­versity, till he had attained some Eminency of Learning and Degrees; and accounts it a great Mercy that he was hindered and saved from that danger and loss of time. And I ground my Suspicion on what Mr. Baxter says, That he Baptized none in Twenty years, and gave the Lord's Supper to none in Eigh­teen years, p. 62. & 86. of Answ. to the Bp. of Worcester. No serious Presbyter could think but he incurred the Wo for not Administring the Sacraments, as much as for not Preaching the Gospel: For at his Ordination he promi­sed to give faithful diligence so to Minister the Doctrine, Sacraments, and Discipline of Christ as the Lord commanded, and as this Realm, received the same; which he could not do, who renounced Communion with our Church, and omitted the Administration of both Sacraments for Eighteen years. See the Bp. of Worcester's Historical Account of Separation, p. 151. His first setting up was in another Country, among divers private poor Men that were very zealous Non-conformists: Against[Page 23]these he pretends he was a forward Disputer, and by writing against a Minister of theirs a­bout kneeling at the Sacrament, silenced the Opponent: and in his Disputations for Con­formity, he thought he had ever the better. But these Men brought him to resolve to read the Writings of both sides impartially, espe­cially Dr. Ames's Fresh Suit; whereupon he setled in the Judgment which he never since changed, about Liturgy and Ceremonies. Though he had conceived a Preju­dice against them long before as Perse­cutors, viz. when he was 19 years old. But still he was absolutely for Episcopacy as it is with us, till 1640. when the new Canons with the &c. Oath came out; which was the very thing that occasioned such Non-con­formity as he is guilty of.

About this time 1640. Mr. Baxter having no Benefice, as he tells us, See pag. 73. of the Treatise of Episc. and pag. 60. of his Apol. and perhaps for that reason a­mong others being a resolved Non-conformist, betakes him­self to Bridge-North, a Town in Shropshire, consisting of six Parishes, most of them great ones; which were under an Ordinary and Court of their own, exempt from the Bishops Jurisdiction; so that he ne­ver used Cross nor Surplice, (his Subscription notwithstanding) having liberty to forbear them. He had no inclination to a Pastoral Charge (p. 13. of his Life) Subscription, al­most as soon as he made it, he began to judge[Page 24]unlawful, p. 14. and while he was at Bridge-North, he never administred the Sacrament, nor Baptized with the Sign of the Cross, nor wore the Surplice, ibid. p. 14. This place he chose to make the Stage for that Prologue which ushered in the following Tragedy. To ingratiate him with the People, there is a Report spread that it rained Manna at his coming thither. From the Oath mentioned in the Canon, he takes the Plot of his first Scene, which was this: Though every Minister in the Country (saith Mr. Baxter) was for Bi­shops as well as himself, yet they were so startled by the Oath, (or rather by Mr. Baxter, who was resolved to oppose it) that a Meeting is appointed about it; for (N.B.) the Meeting was to be on his Lecture-day, and it was his lot to be the Opponent; which was too much for one Man, to preach the Lecture and manage the Dispute, had not Mr. Baxter been over­zealous. Mr. Baxter, p. 27. of his Life, says overdoing is undoing. To magnifie that days exploit, he says, The Defendant was Mr. Chri­stopher Cartwright, a good Man, and incom­parably beyond him in Learning, the Defender of King Charles the First against the Marquess of Worcester, and the Author of the Rabinical Commentary on Genesis, whose Papers of Justifi­cation, saith he, I since answered. All these Titles he gives Mr. Cartwright, to enhance his own Victory, which he easily obtained: for though my Objections, saith Mr. Baxter, were[Page 25]none of the strongest, yet the Ministers thought that he failed in answering them, so that they broke up more dubious; (i.e.) more dissatisfied as to Episcopal Government than before. And thus the Learning and Reputation of Mr. Cart­wright were made Trophies to adorn Mr. Bax­ter's Victory. The Scotch Covenant (he says) was not the first imposed on us (that would have been swallow'd without chewing, though imposed without Authority:) but this, though required by lawful Authority, he was pre­pared and resolved to oppose. P. 37. of his second Defence against the Bishop of Wor­cester, Mr. Baxter says he was so well ac­quainted forty years ago with many aged Non­conformist Ministers as his familiar Friends, that he knew their minds, (and probably was con­federate with them) which was about the be­ginning of the late War, in which he was so active, that he encouraged some thousands, and by the Loyal Party was lookt on as a dan­gerous Person; for he complains that they of­ten sought his Life by unjust Accusations, though God delivered him, Postscript to true Cath. p. 312. And now if it appear not by his own Narrative of his Education what put the Prin­ciples of Non-conformity into his Head, yet that which follows will plainly evince what Prejudices against Conformity had possest him from his youth, as well against the Govern­ment of the Royal Martyr, as against his Eccle­siastical Superiours; to both which, by many[Page 26]actual Oaths, as well as other Legal Oblations, he was bound to yield obedience, but acted and wrote most violently against them. P. 84. He boasteth of his Success in converting Souls; Before I entred on the Ministry, God blessed my private Conference to the Conversion of some. In the beginning of my Ministry I was wont to num­ber them as Jewels, but since I could not keep a­ny number of them; when (saith he) the Re­verend Instructors of my Youth did labour fifty years together in one place, and could scarcely say they had converted one or two of their Pa­rishes. This is too uncharitable a Censure of Reverend Mens Labours for fifty years toge­ther. Let others judge, whether he thought not too highly of himself. He turned many from the Church to Schism and Faction; and incouraged Thousands, he says, to ingage in the War against the King. If his Converts were such, he had no reason to glory in the num­ber of them.

His Treatise of Diocesan Bishops, he says, was meditated in the year 1640. that is, at the same time he entred into a War against the King, he broached Faction in the Church. His Pen disdained to be less active than his Sword. And it is probable his Church History had its Conception at the same time: for as they were born near together, so no Twins are better like. On these, his Meditations have been more or less employed ever since. In e­very Treatise almost (for he hath written to [Page 27]the number of Eighty) we are told of the Pride, Oppression and Cruelty of the Bishops: and in his five Disputations of Church Go­vernment, we have a Model of this Babel; for the erecting of which, he hath assembled all the Arian Heretical Authours that he could hear of, such as Philostorgus, Sondius, &c. and out of them he quotes only the worst things, omitting what is left on Record concerning the Learning, Piety, Courage, Patience, Cha­rity and Condescensions of those Fathers and Martyrs of whom the world was not worthy: he notes only the Calumnies of their Adversaries, or those Infirmities which their Zeal for Truth against Errour, and their Love of Peace a­gainst Faction, might discover in them. And contrariwise, speaking of their Adversaries, whether Arians, Nestorians, Donatists, Nova­tians, &c. he commends them as good and well-meaning Men, mistaken only in the man­ner of expressing themselves, applauding them for their holy and strict Lives, without any notice of their damnable Errours, though they denied the Lord that bought them. And thus he hath dealt with the Councils and Ancient Fathers, to whose Decrees he imputes all the Troubles which were occasioned in the Church by those Hereticks and Schismaticks that opposed them, not taking any notice how great a Fence those learned and godly Men were to the Church of God, as well against Heathen as Hereticks, whom they resisted e­ven [Page 28]to Blood. So that Mr. Baxter hath not reproached them only, but Christianity it self, and represented the Discipline and Authority of the Church, as not to be submitted to, or tolerated in the World. And this he doth by the whole Order of Church Governours, that he may make ours the more odious. He says, (as in divers places) p. 252. & 253. of Saints Rest, That the first rage of the Prelates in silen­cing as learned able Ministers, and incessantly persecuting as godly Christians as the World en­joyed, was (just before the War begun) in­creased an hundred fold. P. 251. As I am cer­tain by sight and sense, that the extirpation of Piety was the then great design which so far pre­vailed, that very many of the most able Mini­sters were silenced, Lectures and Evening Ser­mons on the Lord's-day suppressed, Christians im­prison'd, dismembred, and banished: (He speaks as if it were done by Heathen, for no other cause but as being Christians:) That it was as much at least as a mans Estate was worth, to hear a Sermon abroad, when he had none (or worse) at home; to meet for Prayer, or any other godly Exercise; and that it was a matter of Credit, and a way to Preferment, to Revile and be Ene­mies to those that were most Conscientious, and every where safer to be a Drunkard or an Adul­terer, than a painful Christian; and that multi­tudes of Humane Ceremonies took place, when the Worship of Christ's Institution was cast out, (besides the slavery that invaded us in Civil re­spects.) [Page 29]So I am most certain, that this was the Work which we took up Arms to resist; and those were the Offenders whom we endeavour to offend. You see Mr. Baxter is armed with Pre­judice and Zeal Cap-a-peé for a War, wherein to resist his Superiours, under a pretence of Reformation, though to that Resistance the Word of God threatens Damnation. Yet Mr. Baxter, p. 271. says, As I cannot yet per­ceive but that we undertook our Defence upon warrantable grounds, so I am most certain, God hath wonderfully appeared through the whole. (Success was the great Argument;) of which p. 250. Having been an Eye-witness of a very great part of the eminent Providences from the first of the War, I have plainly seen something a­bove the common Course of Nature, in almost e­very Fight that I have beheld. The War (saith Mr. Baxter) was begun in our Streets, before the King or Parliament had any Armies, between the Puritans and drunken Rabble that hated the Parliaments Reformation; and so I was forced to be gone before the Wars. And a Man that was more pious and devout than the Multitude, could not live by them in most places, but were forced into Garrisons and Arms to save their Lives, p. 252. of Saints Rest, (i.e.) in plain English, Mr. Baxter, with the other Refor­mers, put themselves into Arms, and seized the King's Forts, making them Garisons against the King.

[Page 30]I desire the Reader to reflect on this part of the Narrative. Mr. Baxter often accuseth the Conforming Clergy with deliberate Lying and Perjury. What was it in Mr. Baxter being pre­judiced against the Bishops at Nineteen, yea against Bishop Morton at Fourteen, being fami­liar with Non-conformist Ministers, and know­ing their Minds, yet to submit to Episcopal Ordination, and Subscribe and Swear to obey the Bishop in licitis & honestis, and presently omit the Cross and Surplice, and dispute o­penly against Bishops, and prosecute and de­fend the War against the King, against the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy; and when his taking of Holy Orders seems to be for no other end but to inable him to do the more mischief: Was not this to be deliberately per­jured? But to go on, (he says in cold blood) His engaging in that War was the greatest out­ward Service that ever he performed to God: That Neutrality had been sinful; and to have been a­gainst the Parliament in that Cause, had been Treachery, p. 481. of H.C.W. And p. 480. If I had known that the Parliament (in that Cause) had been the beginners, and in most fault, yet the ruine of our Trustees is a punishment great­er than any fault of theirs (though it were the cutting off his Head) against a King can de­serve; and that their faults cannot disoblige me from defending the Commonwealth. I knew the King had all his Power for the Common Good, and none against it; and therefore that no Cause [Page 31]can warrant him to make the Commonwealth the Party which he shall exercise Hostility against: and that War against the Parliament, especially by such an Army, in such a Cause, is Hostility a­gainst them, and so against the Commonwealth. All this seemed plain to me, and especially when I knew how things went before, who were the A­gents, how they were minded, and what were their purposes against the People. Would not this Man have made a better Solicitor against the Royal Martyr, than Cooke (who said he was another Solomon for his parts?) Did Crom­wel or Bradshaw ever object such things against him as Mr. Baxter hath done? Who could think that Mr. Baxter, who pretends for so much Peace, was ever a Man of such a Temper? With what heart could he be an Eye-witness of the Humane Butcheries that were made in almost every Fight from the beginning of the War? or with what Face could he say there appeared more of Christ's Interest on the one side than on the other, as in the first occasion, so in the Prosecution? p. 252. of Saints Rest. And again, Whatever the end may prove, I am sure I have seen the Lord in the means, p. 251. And, That as we undertook our Defence on war­rantable grounds, so I am most certain God hath wonderfully appeared through the whole, ibid. He says in the Epistle, he was wonderfully rescued from many dangers in four years Wars; and after many tedious nights and days, and many doleful sights and tidings, he and [Page 32]many of his Kederminsters (whom he, it seems, had led on to the War) were returned in peace; that he was twenty several times delivered when he was near to death. O the sad and heart-piercing Spectacles, says he, p. 115. that mine eyes have seen in four years space! In this Fight a Friend fall down by me, from another a precious Christian brought home wounded or dead, (precious Christians, no doubt, that died in such a horrid Rebellion;) scarce a Month, scarce a Week, without the sight or noise of Blood. Surely there is none of this in Heaven; our eyes shall then be filled no more, nor our hearts pierced with such Fights as at Worcester, Edge-hill, Newbury, Nantwich, Montgomery, Horn-Castle, Naseby, Langport, &c. (it seems he was present in these Fights:) For he adds, Mine eyes shall never more behold the Earth co­vered with the Carcasses of the slain. And he saith, He had travelled over the most part of England (to pursue the War.)

Mr. Baxter says the War began first in their Streets at Kederminster, between those that would have pull'd down Painted-glass and Pictures, and the People that opposed them; which Parties were so violent against each o­other, that he was forc't to fly for his Safety. And having been a while at Bridge-North, [...] Parties of the King's Soldiers frighted[Page 33]him from thence to Coventry; and as soon as he heard of Essex's Army at Worcester, he went and tarried there until Edge-hill Fight; and the next Morning hearing that Essex won the Field, he went to see the Slain, and after that he took up his quarters at Coventry, and staid with the Governour in his House preaching as Chaplain to the Garrison for a whole year, p. 43, 44. of his Life. From thence he went to Wem in Shropshire to settle a Garrison there, and procures Thirty or Forty of his Neigh­bours to enter themselves under Col. Mack­worth to strengthen that Garrison. But Wem being taken, he follows the Parliament Army which marched towards the West, where first he fully describes the Fight at Langport, and says he was next to Major Harrison when the flight of Goring's Army was begun; and Go­ring marching towards the West, Mr. Baxter tarried at the Siege of Bridgwater and Bri­stol. The Siege of Bristol continuing about a Month, he was taken sick of a Fever after the three first days; but being recovered, he came back to Bristol Siege three or four days before it was yielded, p. 55. He was also at Naseby, and went to see the Field two days after the Fight, p. 50. He also followed the Army that went Westward in pursuit of the Lord Go­ring, and says he was three Weeks at the Siege of Exeter, and then returned with Whaley's Regiment, which was sent to streighten the Garrison of Oxford, in order to a Siege; he[Page 34]quarter'd two Months at Banbury and Agmon­desham in Buckinghamshire. N. 1. of his Peni­tent Confessions, he says, While he was at Co­ventry he went out twice with the Army; once to take in Tamworth Castle; and then to be­siege Banbury Castle, whence we were driven home with some loss.

P. 58. When the Siege of Worcester was o­ver, he went to London for his health; though he said the riding in the Army did him most good of any thing, p. 10. And from London he returned to his quarters in Worce­stershire, and from thence to Leicestershire, Staf­fordshire, and Darbyshire; and then back a­gain to Leicestershire, and was three weeks at Nowel's House, and a quarter of a year at the Lady Rouse's in Worcestershire. So that for the space of Seven or Eight years he constantly pursued the Wars, tho he had been very often in danger of his Life. But though he carri­ed on the War with great Zeal and Vigour a­midst many dangers against King Charles the First, yet he is not ashamed to tell the World, p. 68. That when King Charles the Second marched by Kederminster towards Worcester, Col. Graves sent two or three Messengers to him, as from the King, to come to him; and afterwards sent others from Worcester to invite him thither: He refused to go because he had fore Eyes.

T'wice, he says, the Season called him to endeavour for the King; once at the Worcesier [Page 35]Fight, and at Sir George Booth's Rising, but I durst not meddle on either side, because I fore­saw the Divisions, Silencings, Persecutions and Calamities which the Bishops and other revenge­ful Instruments would bring to the Kingdom. It seems his Prejudice against the Bishops, bound him up from doing his Duty to the King, when he was actually sent to by Col. Graves. See his Necessary Vindication, Reply to Accus. 6.

Had not Mr. Baxter told us the contrary, we might have thought he had been born in Ire­land, and nurst up by some ravening Wolf, that could see the Death of so many of his Friends who died in Rebellion, and were like to pe­rish eternally as well as temporally; and so many Loyal Nobles and Gentry perish in their Integrity, some perhaps by his own hand, but many probably by his procurement, without any regret, and please himself with the medi­tation of it; yea, and ascribe all to the emi­nent Providences of God, above the ordina­ry way of God's working. Matth. of West­minster, p. 71. of his History, That Richard the First, in the French Wars, took among other Prisoners Richard Bishop of Beaux near his own City, who was presented to the King in his Armour as he was taken; and being imprisoned, the present Pope wrote to the King an angry Letter, chiding him for impri­soning his dear Son, and requiring him to send his dear Son home to him. The King[Page 36]detains the Bishop, and sends only the Armour in which the Bishop was taken, willing him to consider whether that were his Sons Coat or no.

Reader, you see here a little Man, (David some account him) but in the Armour of Go­liah; and as he, a Man of War from his Youth, defying the whole Israel of God, saying, Give me a Man that we may fight together: his confi­dence in his Armour, which is all of Brass, so close knit with Lies, Contradictions, and Slan­ders, that as the Scales of the Leviathan, you can scarce discern any space between them. Let the Reader take a full view of him, and then tell me whether he be a Child of Peace, or a Man of War. Do these things savour of an Evangelical Spirit? or are these fit Medi­tations for one that was penning the Saints E­verlasting Rest? Well may he talk of it: But such Men as Mr. Baxter, and Brook, (who was actually slain in the Rebellion) Pym, Hamden, and White, &c. who were perpe­tually tormenting themselves and others in an unnatural and bloody War, without timely and serious Repentance, could never enjoy it; though Mr. Baxter place them all there, with many more such precious Christians.

As to Mr. White, this Apostate Presbyter is another of Mr. Baxter's white Saints, who boasted that he and his Fellows had turned out near Eight thousand Ministers out of their Freeholds, contrary to the Magna Charta, [Page 37]the Petition of Right, and the Proclamation of Charles the First against the Oppression of the Clergy by the intrusion of Schismatical Per­sons into their Cures, mentioned in Biblio­theca Regia, p. 324. And when the Parlia­ment had incouraged the Mob to bring in Ar­ticles against their Ministers, he began his in­famous Centuries to blacken the Reputation of the ejected Ministers with those false Imputati­ons with which their factious Parishioners accused them, but never proved against them. We have printed Catalogues of the London Clergy, the Heads of Houses in both Uni­versities, as also of the Bishops and Dignita­ries, &c. then Ejected as Scandalous and In­sufficient. Ministers who were Men of Ex­traordinary Merit, both for their Lives and Learning; such as Bishop Juxton, Morton, Hall, Cosin, Prideaux, Davenant, Brownrigg; and Dr. Sanderson, Hammond, Holdsworth, Hinchman, Sheldon, Morley, Gillingham, Ma­son, Duppa, Howel, Hacket, Westfield, Featly, Walton, &c. of whom the Age was not wor­thy, were forced to forsake their Families and Relations, and to wander up and down, and seek their Bread in unknown Places and Fo­reign Countries. Yet Mr. Baxter approves of these barbarous Actions, and takes it for one of the best things they could do to cast out these, and to put in such as he calls better in their places. See p. 78, 79. of his Apology, where he tells us what sort of Persons were[Page 38]put into the Cures of the Ejected Clergy. In my Opinion, says he, the Sequestring Ministers being mostly young Men in the Ʋniversities, that had nothing of their own, could not else get Bread and Clothing, much less Fire and House­room. Many of these thought it a good work, yea a very good work to cast out those as In­sufficient and Scandalous, and having a law­ful Call to the Work, they thought they had so to the Salary. And when these Sequestra­tors were forced by the approach of the King's Army to leave their Cures to their proper Owners, Mr. Baxter thinks these the Usur­pers before God, and that they were bound, if possible, to make Restitution of the Tithes and Maintenance which they had received, as much as if they had broke mens Houses, or robbed by the High-way. See Dr. Pearce against Baxter, § 26.

Mr. Baxter affirms, That if Bishops, who come in by the King's Nomination, and not by the Majority of the People, shall impose inferiour Pastors on the Parish Churches, and command the Peoples Acceptance and Obedi­ence, the People are not bound to accept and obey them as such, nor is it Schism to Dis­obey, no more than it is Treason to Reject the Usurper of a Kingdom. So that Mr. Baxter pronounceth, as well the King as the Bishops, and all Ministers Presented by them, or other Patrons, to be meer Usurpers. This is, as the Bishop of Worcester says, an excellent[Page 39]Plea for Peace, p. 138, 139. of the History of Separation.

I cannot omit to inform the Reader (be­cause I my self, and some thousand others, yet live to contradict him) how falsly, as well as maliciously, he calumniates the happy and peaceable Reign of the Royal Martyr: for so it was, until the times of Mr. Baxter's unhap­py Reformation. We read, Ezra 3.12. When the Foundation of the second Temple was laid, the People shouted: but the Priests and Levites, and chief of the Fathers, who were ancient Men, that had seen the first House, wept with a loud voice. I cannot, without a fit of Grief and Pain, look back upon those (over-prosperous) times, wherein Peace and Truth did so flou­rish, that we were the Envy of our Neigh­bour Nations; and until groundless Fears and Jealousies distracted us, this Nation was as Jerusalem, a City at unity within it self. Every one sate under his own Vine, and under God's Vine too. There was no decay of Trade, no leading to Captivity, till we began to surfeit of our Plenty, and to grow sick of Peace, and to loath Manna it self; and then God gave us up to the hands of such Physicians as had the skill only to let us Blood, but never the Art to staunch it, till all our Strength and Beauty, all our Liberties, Properties, and Re­ligion were past recovery by the Wit of Man; and God himself did it by a Miracle from Heaven. And yet this Man of Peace (forsooth)[Page 40]to whom (and such as he) we owe the loss of all our Blessings, and all the Damages done to Church and State, is at every turn defaming those happy Times, complaining of Persecu­tion of Christians, and Slavery in Civil Re­spects. See what he says, H.C.W. p. § 7. The Peoples Rights were evidently invaded; many Thousands have suffered, or were forced to remove out of the Land, upon the account of illegal Impositions; (and though he himself observes the contrary, p. 88. of his Apol.) Ministers were ejected and punished for not bow­ing towards the Altar, for preaching Lectures, and twice on the Lord's day; (whereas the Ca­non only required, that they who used that Ceremony, would not despise them that used it not, &c. obliging no Man) and the After­noon Sermon was only to be exchanged for a Ca­techize Lecture. The Preachers that were si­lenced were mostly Brownists and Anabaptists, or such as were prohibited to preach at Nor­wich. One was a Draper, another a Taylor, a third a Weaver, as appears by the Register there. If any Ministers were silenced, they were such, as contrary to their Subscriptions and Solemn Vows, refused Conformity, and preacht up Sedition and Schism, which no Government could endure. Nor were any punished, but for preaching or practising Se­dition and Faction, which was then so strong as to affront the Laws, and within a little while to destroy them and the Government[Page 41]both in Church and State. To dismiss this Book of the Saints Rest, which was his first and his best, as he thought himself: for if Mr. Cressy (saith he) had read no better than my Saints Rest, the Life of Faith, the Divine Life, the Christian Directory, &c. he would ne­ver have gone from the Protestants to Popery, for want of an affectionate Spiritual Devotion.

I would willingly prevail with Mr. Baxter, that as in a later Edition of his Saints Rest, he left out the mention of Brook, Pym, Hamden, &c. as Members of a more knowing, unerring, well-ordered, right aiming, self-denying, una­nimous, honourable, triumphant Senate; so if he liv'd to see another, he would leave out those unsutable Passages which I have menti­oned, and change them for such as this in the Epistle: I shall leave you my best advice for your immortal Souls, as the Legacy of a dying Man; receive it as from one that unfeignedly loves you, as if I offered it on my bended knees, yea, as one that hath received Authority from Christ to command you: I charge you in his Name, as you will answer it when we shall meet at Judg­ment, that you faithfully and constantly practise these Directions, (whereof this is one:) Above all, see that you be followers of Peace and Ʋni­ty, both in the Church, and among your selves. I differ from many in several things of considerable moment; yet if I should zealously press my judg­ment on others, so as to disturb the Peace of the Church, and separate from my Brethren, I should[Page 42]fear lest I should prove a Ferebrand in Hell, for being a Firebrand in the Church. And for all the interest I have in your Judgments and Affections, I here charge you, that if God should give me up to any factious Church-rending course, that you forsake me, and follow me not a step.

No sooner had the Preebyterians excluded the Bishops, and their Directory the Liturgy, but the Lord's Prayer is also exploded as a thing of no use, either for matter or form: for the men of that Age thought it not Spiritual e­nough for such over-grown Christians as they were, being adapted only to the Nonage of the first Disciples: Nor was it sufficient to dis­use it, but they poured out all the Contempt they could upon it, both from their Pulpits and the Press. Dr. O. was so transported with the In-dwelling of the Spirit, that at the same time when he wrote against the Socinians, he wrote also against the use of our Lord's Pray­er. And this Anticristian Practice prevailed so far, that the People generally refused to teach it their Children: Some gave God thanks they had forgotten it; and if any sober Clergy-man did conclude his own Prayer with it, a great part of his Auditory would presently depart out of the Church, as if it were impossible for them to be edified by such a Preacher as had no better Gift of Prayer. And thus to make a thorough Reformation, they first agreed on no more Addresses unto God, before they Voted no more Addresses to[Page 43]the King. The Creed and Commandments suffer the same Indignities, being generally omitted in their Publick Worship; and in many places, especially at their Lectures, scarce a Chapter of the Holy Scripture read to the People; the whole Exercise being made up of Extemporary Prayer and Preaching: the best of their Sermons, if I may account them so that are printed, and were preached in the greatest Congregations on most Solemn Occa­sions, abounding with such Invectives against the King, such Arguments and Motives to Re­bellion and Shedding of Blood, as will be an indelible Reproach to the Presbyterian Party, who so taught others the Doctrine of Resist­ing their Superiours, that they soon felt it to be practised against themselves, who had bro­ken down all the Fences of Government, and opened those wide Breaches by which so ma­ny Heresies and so great Confusion over­flowed the Nation; so that the Pulpit-Drums exceeded those of the Field in doing Mischief, drawing on more Souls to Destruction than the other did Bodies.

Mr. Baxter, p. 43. of his Life, tells us what Chaplains were in Essex's Army: Abundance of famous excellent Divines were Chaplains to his Army, Stephen Marshal and Dr. Burgess to Es­sex's Regiments; Obadiah Sedgwick to Col. Hollis; Calibut Downing to the Lord Roberts; John Sedgwick to the Earl of Stamford; Dr. Spurstow to Hamden's; Mr. Perkins to Col. [Page 44]Goodwin's; Mr. Moore to the Lord Wharton's; Adoniram Bifield to Sir Henry Cholmley's; Mr. Nalton to Col. Grantham's; Mr. Simeon Ash to the Lord Brooks; Mr. Morton of New­castle to Sir Arthur Haslerigge, with many more. These were the first Incendiaries & Boutefew's that first kindled and continued the Wars, and such of the King's Friends as escaped the mouth of the Armies Swords, were sentenc'd to a worse Death by the Sword of these Mens mouths.

In the Year 43. when the Parliaments Army were worsted and weakned by the King, and they thought themselves in danger of being overcome, they intreated help from the Scots, who taking advantage of their straits, brought in the Covenant as the Condition of their help. Thus Mr. Baxter, p. 127. of his first Plea; who confesseth it was contrived as a Stratagem of War to bind the Faction in both Nations in a Confederacy against the King, and strengthen the War against him; for the doing whereof, they pawned their Souls to each other, as his Majesty observes in the Chapter of the Covenant. And if it be considered by how many Solemn Oaths and Protestations the Subjects of both Nations, as well as by the Laws of God and Nature, were obliged to defend his Majesty's Person, and the Laws and Government established; it will appear to be true, as Mr. Philip Nye observed, concern­ing the Covenant, That for Matter, Persons, and other Circumstances, the like hath not been in any[Page 45]Age or Oath we read of in Sacred or Humane Story. But it did the work for which it was designed; it brought in the Scots Armies, by by the promised hopes of dividing the Church Lands upon the Extirpation of Episcopacy; and was as fatal to the King as to the Bishops: For the King's Forces being broken, he with­draws from Oxford, where he was besieged, and commits himself to the Scots Army, who sollicite him to take the Covenant, and sign their Propositions for the Presbyterial Go­vernment. Henderson is sent to dispute the point with the King; and he being baffled, Mr. Cant, Blaire, and Douglas endeavoured the same; but more by railing than reasoning with him. One of them (besides many rude expressions in his Sermon before the King) cal­led for the 52 Psalm; which begins thus: Why dost thou, Tyrant, boast abroad, Thy wick­ed works to praise? Whereupon the King pre­sently stood up, and called for the 56 Psalm, which begins thus: Have mercy Lord on me, I pray; For men would me devour. Which the People readily sung, leaving the other. And the Commissioners of the General Assem­bly resolved, That if the King be excluded from Government in England for not grant­ing the Propositions concerning Religion and the Covenant, it was not lawful for that Kingdom to assist him for the Recovery of the Government. Nay, they threaten to de­liver him up to the Parliament of England, as [Page 46]shortly after they did for 400000l. for the raising of which Sum, an Ordinance is past for Sale of the Bishops Lands at Ten years va­lue, Nov. 16. And by another Ordinance, Febr. 8. none were to bear any Office Civil or Military that refused to take the Covenant. The Parliament having gotten the King in their power, thought themselves very secure; and therefore resolves to disband the whole Army, Horse and Foot, and to send a good part of them for Ireland; which so startled the Army, that they began to take new mea­sures. And first they demand their Arrears for 56 Weeks. Next, that a Declaration a­gainst the Army March 13. might be recalled, and they secured for what had been done in the late Wars: which things at a general Ren­dezvouz they petition the Parliament for; who being under great fears, Vote all that was de­sired. But the Army had a farther design, and by 1000 Horse under Cornet Joyce, seize the King's Person, and detain him in the power of the Army; which was Cromwel's design, who though he sate with the Members at West­minster, and protested there with Execrations against himself and his Family, that he was ig­norant of the Fact, yet he told his Considents, that having got the King into his hands, he had the Parliament in his Pocket. And presently he falls to purging of the House, impeaching Eleven of the chief Presbyterians of High Treason, and secluded them the House; and [Page 47]afterward got the Militia of London into their hands: for the Army being drawn up on Hounslow-heath, marched up to the Parliament House, and gave it a second purge of many more Members; and marching triumphantly through London, did demolish their Works; and never left, till he had setled the Parlia­ment to his own liking.

But to return to Mr. Baxter: Four years, he says, he was a Member of the Army; part of which time (by what follows) will appear to be after that the Independent Party was predominant, and the Army new modelled; yet he tarried with this Army under Cromwel, until the King was murthered, and till Richard the Protector was cast out of the Government by those that had placed him in it. Hear what Mr. Baxter says, p. 14. of his Answer to Bagshaw: Is it possible for any sober Christian in the World to take them to be blameless, or these to be little sins? What? the violating of the King's Person, and the Life of so good a King, and the Change of the Fundamental Government, and The Armies Force upon the Parliament; the set­ting up a Protector, and pulling him down again; the setting up the Remnant of the Commons, and presently pulling them down, to whom (as Mr. Baxter said) they had sworn, and sworn, and sworn again to be faithful to, and defend them; and that they were the best Governours in all the World. If all this was not Rebellion, or Treason, or Murder, there is no such Grime possible to be[Page 48]committed?—If I was guilty of such sins, I do openly confess, that if I lay in Sackcloth, and in Tears, and did lament my sins before the World, which had done such unspeakable wrong to Christ and to Men, I should do no more than the plain Light of Nature assureth me to be my great and needful duty, p. 17.

Now that which Mr. Bagshaw accused Mr. Baxter of, was, That he was guilty of stir­ring up and fomenting that War against Charles the First, which Mr. Baxter had confessed, and that he had drawn some Thousands into it: of this we have him boasting often, but not of his Repentance for it. And N.B. he thinks the pulling down of the Protector, and the Remnant of the Commons, to whom they had often sworn to be faithful, and defend them, and says they were the best Governours in the World, to be as great a Sin as the violating the King's Person and Life, in Mr. Baxter's Opinion.

Mr. Baxter pretends he was sent among the Army by an Assembly of Divines: And I find, that such Divines as attended the Westminster Assembly were ordered (Aug. 28. 1643.) to go into the Country to stir up the People to rise for the defence (as they call it) of the Par­liament; but indeed, to strengthen the Re­bellion against the King: For against this As­sembly, consisting of half Lay and half Cler­gy, but wholly of disaffected Persons, we find the King thus declaring by Proclamation: That[Page 49]many of them were persons who had openly preach­ed Rebellion, and excited the People to take up Arms against him: That the far greater part of them were Men of no Reputation or Learning, and eminently disaffected to the Government of the Church of England; and therefore he forbad their meeting. But Mr. Baxter was of ano­ther judgment: he says, I have not read of ma­ny Assemblies of worthier Men since the Apostles days; Answ. to the Bishop of Worcester, p. 84.

Mr. Baxter, p. 73. of his Life, says of this Assembly, That the Divines there congregate were Men of excellent Learning and Godliness, and Ministerial Abilities and Fidelity; and I speak it in the Face of Malice and Envy, that as far as I am able to judge, the Christian World, since the days of the Apostles, had never a Synod of more excellent Divines than this Synod and the Synod of Dort. To these were added ma­ny Lords and Commons, and six or seven Independents, five proved dissenting Brethren, Nye, Goodwin, Burroughs, Simpson and Bridges, For my part, saith Mr. Baxter, I honour the Men, but am not of their mind as to the Govern­ment they would have set up; and some words in their Catechism I could wish had been more clear: And above all, I could wish that the Par­liament, and their more skilful hand, had done more to heal our Breaches. N.B. The Assem­bly had a skilful hand, the Parliament a more skilful; but Mr. Baxter was Magnus Apollo, that could have healed all our Breaches, by[Page 50]his only way of Concord. But which of these three Parties were more skilful to divide and destroy, we need a greater Oracle than that of this Apollo to determine.

I cannot pretend to know much more of the Learning and Godliness of these Assembly-Divines, than by what I have read in their Sermons preached upon special Occasions: Several of them are named, among the Chap­lains that attended the Earl of Essex's Army, Mr. Marshal was one, who in a Letter of his, p. 19. says, That if the King had been slain (in the Battel at Edge-hill) it had not been the Parliaments fault, for he might have kept himself farther off if he pleased. And in his Sermon, January 8. 1647. The question is now, saith he, whether Christ or Antichrist shall be King. And in another Sermon to the Mayor and Alder­men, 1644. speaking of the King's Party, he saith, These are miserable and accursed Men, Factors for Hell, Satan's Boutefews; and as true Zealots are set on fire from Heaven, so these Mens fire is kindled from Hell, whether also it carrieth them. And in his Sermon Curse ye Meroz, I pray lock on me as one that comes to beat a Drum in your Ears, to see who will come out to follow the Lamb; with much more to the like pur­pose. John Goodman, another of them, saith, That the Doctrine of Resistance was reserved for our times. Mr. Arrowsmith, in a Sermon 1643. We are not a Kingdom divided against it self, but one Kingdom against another; that is, the [Page 51]Kingdom of Christ against Antichrist. So Mr. John Bond told the Parliament, That they fought against Babylon, Dagon, and Antichrist; and exhorted them to pull it down, though, like Samp­son, they died with it. Mr. Case, in a Sermon 1644. says, God would have no Mercy shewed where the quarrel is against Religion, p. 16. Those who would bring in Idolatry and false Wor­ship to depose Christ from his Throne, and set up Antichrist, Christ hath doomed to destruction. St. Luke 19.27. As for these mine Enemies, bring them out and slay them before me; p. 18. Mr. Thomas Palmer said, That God saw it good to bring Christ into his Kingdom by a bloody way. Dr. Downing told the Artillery-men, It was lawful for Defence of Religion to take up Arms against the King: And so did Mr. Calamy; 'Tis commendable to fight for Peace and Reforma­tion against the King's Command. And in a Sermon Decemb. 25. 1644. he calls them the Judas's of England that made their Peace with the King at Oxford. What a sad thing is it, saith Mr. Case, to see our King in the Head of an Army of Babylonians, refusing, as it were, to be called the King of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and choosing rather to be called the King of Babylon; Serm. on Isa. 43.4. 1644. p. 18.

Mr. Herle in a Sermon to the Commons, Nov. 5th. Anno 1644. exhorts them to do Justice to the greatest; Saul's Sons are not spared, nor Agag, or Benhadad, though Kings. Brooks to the Commons, Decemb. 26.48. Set some of[Page 52]these Grand Malefactors in Mourning, that caused the Kingdom to mourn so many Years, in Garments rouled in Blood by the executi­on of Justice. Mr. Love was chosen as the fittest Person to assist at the Treaty at Ʋx­bridge, who in compliance with the sense of his Masters, called Episcopacy and Liturgy, Two Plague Sores, and tells the Commission­ers, That while their Enemies go on in wicked practises, and they keep their Principles, they may as soon make Fire and Water, nay he had almost said, Heaven and Hell to agree; it is the Sword, not Disputes that must end this Con­troversie: Wherefore turn your Plowsheres into Swords, and your Pruninghooks to Spears to fight the Lords Battles, to avenge the Blood of the Saints which hath been spilt: It must be a­venged by us, or upon us. I have prayed that too much pitty in our State Physicians, do not retard the healing of the Land; here are Malig­nant Humours in the Nobles and Gentry to be purged out, before they be healed. O that in this our State Physicians would resemble God, to cut off those from the Land who have distempered it. You may know what he means by his Latin sentence, Melius pereat unus, quam unitas, Men that be under the guilt of much Innocent Blood, are not fit to be at Peace with, till all the guilt of Blood be expiated by the Sword of the Law, or the Law of the Sword.

It is true, saith he at his Execution, I did in my place and calling oppose the Forces of the[Page 53]late King, and were he alive again, and I should live longer, the Cause being as then it was, I should oppose him longer: But the present Power saw it not fit to trust him with a long­er Life. And it is very remarkable, that Pri­deaux the Atturney General repeated most of those passages which Mr. Love had urged a­gainst the King and his Party, to ruine them, to shew that he ought not to have any Mercy shewed him: See the Printed Tryal of Mr. Love. Mr. Baxter, pag. 67. of his Life, says, That the Souldiers, said he was so like to Love, that he would not be right till he was shorter by the head. But Mr. Baxter acted more wari­ly, and as he says, p. 84. of his Life, that af­ter Wars he had Fourteen Years Liberty in such sweet imployment, and that in times of Usurpation when under a Rightful King and Governour, he was laid by as a broken Vessel, suspected and vilified, scarce Tolerated to live privately and quietly in the Land. But if Mr. Baxter had complied but half so much with the rightful Government in things lawful, as he had done with usurped Powers in things unlawful, he might have lived more than twice as long, as quietly and godly as other good Men did. Yet after the clamour of his Sufferings, he thrived in those worst Times (as he accounted them) for he had a stock of Money, out of which he could spare a Thou­sand pound to the Exchequer, intended most of it for pious uses (as he says) p. 89. part 3.[Page 54]But in Seven years he endeavoured a pur­chase of House or Land, but could not find it: So that he perceived the Devils resistance of it, and that there are Devils that keep up a War against Goodness in the World; yet he found the Devil did not hinder his disbursing almost as great a Sum to build a Synagogue for his Conventicle. He did not thrive so well in the Service of the Army; for his Arrears of many hundred pounds were never paid him: Nor was he dealt with as Mr. Love. Ille cru­cem sceleris precium tulit hic diadema. But to return: This, or some other Relick of this Assembly (who themselves ran before they were sent) did send Mr. Baxter to the Army, under Cromwel after the King's death, where he says he accompanied Commissary-General Whaley, a Person who was sometime the King's Jailor, and whom you may find in that black List of his Majesty's Judges; a fit Conductor and great Confident of Mr. Baxter's; to him Mr. Baxter dedicates his Apology, by the Name of The Honourable, &c.

With this Achitophel our Shemei hunts Da­vid from Mountain to Mountain, cursing and railing at him as he goes; the Sword of his Tongue being longer and sharper than his furbished Sword. Curse ye Meroz, and Cursed be he that doth the work of the Lord deceitfully, and Cursed be he that holdeth back his Sword from Blood, were the common Texts of the Army-Chaplains: And the Maxims of his[Page 55] Holy Commonwealth were the Subjects of some of his Sermons.

He says in the Epistle to his first Plea for Peace, My honest Friend, (a Proselyte of his, whom, it seems, he had engaged in the War) when he saw here a Leg, and there an Arm, (was faint-hearted, and) said it was time for him to stop. But the valiant Mr. Baxter, though he had seen many sadder sights, even the Carcas­ses of some Thousands, Streams of Blood, the Ruine of Cities, Towns, Churches, and Ca­stles, goes on as undauntedly as the Horse that rusheth into the Battle. Let the Reader view (if he can without horrour) what Mr. Baxter reports of himself in two Epistles dedicated to two of his Army-Saints. In that to Wha­ley, he saith, Providence did so clear his way (viz. in that War) and draw him on, and sweeten unusual Troubles with unusual Mercies, and issue all in Testimonies of Grace, that he had great mixtures of Comfort with Sorrow in the performance. And that he had more eminent Deliverances and other Mercies in those years and ways of Blood and Dolour, than in most of his Life besides. It seems he was of the mind which our Saviour foretold of some, that should kill his Disciples, and think they did God Ser­vice. He adds: The best is, we now draw no blood, (it seems he had done that sufficiently) they were now as Conquerours to divide the Spoil. And great things did this Champion promise himself, though it appears that he was dis­appointed[Page 56]of his hopes: For in another E­pistle to Colonel Berry, whom (Stilo Novo) he calls Honourable too, as being one of the Council of State, he thus expostulates; Was I not capable of Secular and Military Advance­ment as well as others? (it seems he thought so, but they did not) Did I ever sollicite you as much as for my Arrears, which is many hundred pounds? (it seems he had served them long, and was well promised for his pains; but this Man of Conscience was content with the plea­sing work of drawing Blood gratis:) he scorn'd to open his mouth for the many Hundreds due to him, hoping they would have advan­ced a Man of so generous a Spirit to some emi­nent Military Preferment, whereof (his Mini­stry notwithstanding) he thought himself ca­pable. But this great Warriour, partly through regret at his disappointments, of which he complains p. 2. of his Epistle before his Saints Everlasting Rest, against ungrateful men; and partly through his bodily infirmities (for however willing his Spirit was, his Flesh was grown weak) being exhausted by the Acci­dents of War: For in the same Page he tells us, that being in his Quarters far from home, he was cast into extream languishing by the sudden loss of about a gallon of Blood, (which should have minded him of the many Gallons of Blood whereof he had been the cause of effu­sion) after many years foregoing weakness, by which his Body was ruined beyond hopes of reco­very, [Page 57]the sentence of present death being by the ablest Physicians past upon him; from which he was delivered by a wonder in the midst of his du­ties, (i.e. in the War) and was supported four­teen years in a languishing estate, wherein he had scarce a waking hour free from pain. And thus (though against his will) he is forced to leave the Army. And might not Mr. Baxter justly say (and the Reader believe him in this) as he writes in a Letter to Dr. Hill—I have been in the heat of my Zeal so forward to changes and ways of blood, that I fear God will not let me have a hand in the peaceable building of his Church? And the Judgment of God is emi­nently upon him, who hath been so far from building, that it hath ever since been his great business to destroy the best established Church in the World; which will appear, by taking a view of this mortified Man in his retirement from the War. And we find him sitting down on the sequestred Living of Mr. Dance at Ked­derminster; he had inticed many of that place and neighbourhood to the War, and some few returned with him again. How far he was given to Plunder in the time of War (where­of he hath been accused) I affirm not; but it will draw a shrewd suspicion on him, that he was not afraid to take a Horse or two in time of War, who seized on the Person of a Neigh­bour, to serve as an Exchange for his Father; and possessed himself of the Livelyhood of Mr. Dance, of whom he confessed, as the then Bp. [Page 58]of Worcester's Letter, p. 3. informs, That he was a Man of an unblameable Life and Conversation, though not of such Parts as might qualifie him for the Cure of so great a Congregation. And though Mr. Baxter was not welcomed here by a Mi­racle (as he was at See Mr. Baxter's Relation of this in a Postscript to his True Catholick, p. 294. Bridge­north, where the Report is, that it rained Manna on the Church wherein he was to officiate;) yet he was con­vinced by Providence, (as he says in that E­pistle) That it is the Will of God it should be so: (a strange Argument, from God's permission of an unrighteous Act, that it is his Will it should be so!) For this (saith he) I clearly discerned in my first coming to you, in my former abode with you, and in the time of my forced absence from you. But the truth is, Mr. Baxter had too much adhered to the Presbyterian In­terest, to be advanced by that Army; though he desires them to remember how far he had gone with them in the War, and pleadeth their acknowledgment that a special Presence of God was with the Parliament; and pres­seth on them the Sin of forcing out 140 Mem­bers first, and then 120, and their proclaiming it Treason to say that the Parliament was in be­ing: And then he urgeth those Scriptures to them, which himself had shewn them an ex­ample to contemn, Rom. 13. 1 Pet. 2.13. and that they might know his meaning, he tells them, That the secluded Members were the best [Page 59]Governours in all the World; that they had the Supremacy, and yet had been resisted and deposed in England. It was a Sin with Mr. Baxter to oppose the Usurpers, and a Duty to resist the King and fight against him; which Mr. Baxter did for four years together: And it is to be believed (saith Mr. Baxter) that a man would kill him against whom he fights, p. 423. Holy Com­monwealth.

But Mr. Baxter was not very constant to his own Profession concerning his long beloved Parliament: For in the same place and breath almost, he says, Secondly, I mean the Powers that were last layed by, (viz.) Richard and his Parliament; of whom he says, as to Richard, That he piously, prudently, and faithfully, to his immortal honour, did exercise the Government, how ill soever you have used him. But wherein did all this Piety and Prudence appear? was it that he did inherit from his Father Oliver a tender care of the Cause of Christ? of which you seem to give an instance in the Protestants of Piedmont; when it was notorious, that a great part of the Charity of the Nation for their Relief, was employed in maintaining the War against the King. Was it that at the in­stance of a few of his Officers, he dissolved that Parliament of his? Was it in swearing that he would to the utmost of his power maintain and preserve the just Rights and Pri­viledges of the People, and govern accord­ing to Law? which he could not do. Was[Page 60]it in making a tame Submission to some of his Army, calling them The present Government, from whom he expected Protection, and held himself obliged to live peaceably under them, and to procure to the utmost of his power that others should do so too? These things argue no great stock of Piety, Prudence, or Faithfulness. And as to Richard's Parliament, which had an Upper House consisting mostly of Military, Mechanical, and Fanatick Mem­bers; a Lower House of Men of none or very ill note: Of this Parliament Mr. Baxter says, He never had known a Parliament more inclined to Piety and Peace; (the Long Parliament not excepted) whereof he gives this instance: Because it was their desire to have setled Ele­ctions according to Mr. Baxter's advice, (i.e.) to keep out all whom he calls ungodly, from chusing or being chosen. See the Preface to the Holy Commonwealth. These, and such like, were they of whom Mr. Baxter says, They were the best Governours in all the World, such as they had sworn and sworn to obey again and again; such as might not be imposed on pain of Dam­nation; and that he would with great rejoycing give a thousand thanks to that Man that would acquaint him of one Nation in the World that had better Governours in Soveraign Power, as to Ho­liness and Wisdom conjunct, than these, who yet had been resisted and deposed. It seems Mr. Baxter could have been easily reconciled to a­ny Governours, but those to whom of right the [Page 61]Government did belong. And any Reader conversant in Mr. Baxter's Writings, may ob­serve, that Mr. Baxter never complained so much of Arbitrary Government and Persecu­tion under any of the Revolutions of Usurp­ed Powers, as he hath done since the King and Church were restored; nay, he wrote as in­dustriously for Obedience to some of them, as he hath since to incourage Disobedience to these. And let me desire the Reader to con­sider what ground Mr. Baxter had for his great veneration of the Secluded Members, more than for those who were called the Rump. Did not they agree in that accursed Vote of Non-Ad­dresses to the King before their Seclusion? Did not they upon their re-admission, re­enforce the Engagement to be true and faithful to the Commonwealth, without a King or House of Lords? Did not some of them provide an Oath of Abjuration of the King, to be taken by such as were to sit in the Council of State? Did not some of them send to General Monk to advise him that he must take that Oath, before his admittance into that Council? Did they not offer to settle Hampton-Court on Gene­ral Monk, and desire him to take the Govern­ment on himself, under what Title he pleas­ed? And because they did this, (and might justifie themselves in so doing, upon Mr. Bax­ter's Theses in his Holy Commonwealth) they are (all these things notwithstanding) the Su­pream Powers, the best Governours in all the[Page 62]World, and such as to resist, is to incur Dam­nation.

Mr. Baxter during the time of his abode at Kedderminster, was not employed in writing only, as he did against Dr. Pierce, justifying the Trade of Sequestrations; and against o­thers, representing them as Men that had nei­ther hatred to Sin, nor love to Godliness or common Honesty; because, he says, they published so many, so gross and shameless False­hoods, and over-acted the part of the Accusers of the Brethren, p. 308. of Postscript to the True Catholick. But he was employed also in assist­ing the Commissioners for Sequestrations, p. 297. ibid. Yet he excuseth the matter, and says, He never persecuted or cast out any, or en­deavoured it by word or deed, unless for notorious scandal or insufficiency; and we know that Dr. Pierce, and such as he, were then account­ed such, as not having the Grace of God in them. Upon some such account it was, that Dr. Sanderson and Dr. Pocock were ejected, to the perpetual Infamy of the Ejectors.

How vainly doth Mr. Baxter still plead for Sequestrations, p. 78. of his Apol. First, That the Ministers were ejected by the Secular Power. But were not they animated by the Clergy, who, as Mr. Baxter, had then no Benefices? Secondly, That some of the Parish were the Ac­cusers, Witnesses, and Sollicitors. And such may be still found in most Parishes where there are very good Ministers. But, Thirdly,[Page 63] The People should not be left as Heathen, and therefore 'tis an excusable errour; and when the love of Souls makes them spend themselves for the Peoples good, this should not be thought their unpardonable Crime. And they did think that the Salary was for the Work; and if they had a lawful Call to the Work of the place, they thought they had so to the Salary. Now though Mr. Baxter framed these Reasons for them, he adds, I justifie not their Reasons; but my Opinion is, That being young Men mostly in the Ʋniversities, that had little or nothing of their own, they could not well otherwise have got Bread and Clothing, much less Fire, House-room, &c. Those young Men could better have shifted for their Main­tenance, than by turning so many aged Mini­sters, with Wives and Children, out of all. Of such as say, We may do evil that good may come of it, the Apostle says, Their damnation is just. But Mr. Baxter concludes, p. 79. To say the truth, many of them thought it a good work, yea very good, to cast out those (thousands of them whose Livings were desirable, by false Accusations) as insufficient or vicious.

These are that learned, godly, faithful Clergy, who to requite Mr. Baxter, hath chosen him their Prolocutor, to justifie them in all their Disobedience and Violences, and to accuse the Conformists of Perjury, Persecution, and o­ther heinous Sins, in those Books which he calls his Pleas for Peace.

[Page 64]Because Mr. Baxter thinks himself abused in the account which Mr. Durel and others have given of his Sequestration at Kedderminster, take his own account. In the year 40. the Parliament began to Sequester such Ministers as appeared most Loyal: and so early the Peo­ple of Kedderminster article against their Vi­car: it was worth then about Eightscore pounds per Annum, (now more.) The Vi­car fearing to lose all, is forced to give a Bond of 500l. to pay 60l. yearly to a Lecturer. Mr. Baxter is invited to accept of it, and holds it for a year and half, being driven off by the Wars, which he followed four years, and thinks it a kindness that he did not sue the Vicar for his 60l. per Annum, which he did nothing for. But at his return, the Vicar is sequestred by a Committee, and Mr. Baxter is importuned to take it; which he refuseth to do in his own name, but thus it was contri­ved: I got all the Magistrates and Chief of the Town together, who openly subscribed to give me 100l. per Annum, as their Lecturer; and that no part of this should accrue from the Vicaridge. But mark the Juggle! He said immediately be­fore, I told them, that by an Augmentation which I had procured, making my 60l. an 100l. and a House, I would be their Lecturer as before. This 60l. was to come out of the Vicaridge, not­withstanding that Proviso to the contrary. But the Sequestrators, who gathered the Tythes, gave him no account; nor needed they: if it[Page 65]be true that Mr. Baxter had 80 or 90l. and an Assistant about 60l. more, there was not much left for the Vicar. But Mr. Baxter asked them whether any of the Money they gave him came out of the Tythes? They told him, the 60l. due by Bond, and an Augmentation granted by Parliament, was more than he had; (i.e.) all that he had came out of the Vica­ridge, though it were not full as much as was promised him: for the Bond and Augmenta­tion came to 100l. whereas he received but 80 or 90l. And they used my name (saith Mr. Baxter) in letting the Tythes: for they had pri­vily got an Order to put me in the sequestred Vi­caridge; which when I knew, I consented to, for their indemnity. So that after all his Art to e­vade the guilt of a Sequestrator, it is plain the Vicaridge was sequestred in his name, the Tythes agreed for in his name, the Pay was made out of the Tythes; and to all this, though post factum, Mr. Baxter consented. And this was my taking the Sequestration, p. 81. of Apol. I know that some Persons have minded Mr. Baxter to make Restitution; but he thinks he had a Right to it, and wants but a Secular Power to place him in it again; yea, he thinks himself wrong'd that he hath not the fifth part still payed him: for, p. 85. Eve [...] the Ʋsurpers allowed the Wives of the sequestred Ministers the fifth part; for my part, I never asked you so much. He expected to have it offered him as his due, without asking. But I suppose his[Page 66]many hundred pounds of Arrears from the Army, and his Fifths from Kedderminster, will be payed together.

Mr. Baxter says, the Protector Oliver never had any respect for him: and he would now perswade the World that he had as little for the Protector; although in an Epistle to his Son Richard, before the Key for Catholicks, he thus applauds him: The serious Endeavours of your Renowned Father for the Protestants of Sa­voy, discovered to the World by Mr. Morland, hath won him more esteem in the hearts of many that fear the Lord, than all his Victories in them­selves considered: We pray that you may inherit a tender Care of the Cause of Christ. When Mr. Baxter could not be so great a stranger as to be ignorant how the Charity of the People, which was very large at that time, was abused, and employed to very ill uses; yet with Mr. Baxter, Oliver is as David, and his Son Ri­chard as Solomon.

Mr. Baxter's Key for Catholicks was dedica­ted to Richard Cromwel, where he gives this Character of himself: One that rejoyceth in the present happiness of England, and wisheth ear­nestly that it were but as well with the rest of the World; and that honoureth all the Providences of God by which we have been brought to what we are: One that concurs in the common hopes to these Nations under your Government. And in another Epistle before his Five Disputations of Church-Government, when all Religions were[Page 67]tolerated, except that of the Church of Eng­land, (to prevent the toleration of that) he says, If you give Liberty to all that is called Re­ligion, you will soon be judged of no Religion, and loved accordingly.

How Mr. Baxter and his Party behaved themselves during the Imprisonment of the King, and while he was in the hands of his Murderers, they are not willing to discover. Mr. Baxter for his part says, That he proved in the times of Usurpation, that the Presbyte­rians detested it, that the London Ministers printed their Abhorrence of it to the World, Preface to Second Plea. As for the London-Ministers, I read, that about 59 of them in number pleaded for the King in these words: That the woful Miscarriages of the King him­self, which we cannot but acknowledge to be very many and great in his Government, have cost the three Kingdoms so dear, and cast him down from his Excellency into a horrid Pit of Misery beyond example. This Plea for the King is like their late Pleas for Peace, (i.e. Justificati­ons of Schism and Sedition;) for in it they say enough to excuse the Regicides: We can­not but acknowledge, (i.e. we affirm and bear witness) that the woful Miscarriages of the King himself, not of his evil Counsellors only, but his personal Crimes and fundamental Errours in Go­vernment, too many and great to be here men­tioned, have cost the three Kingdoms so dear, as that all the Bloodshed, and Rapine, and Deva­stations[Page 68]that have been made in England, Scot­land, and Ireland, might be charged on him; and for these he is justly cast down from his Ex­cellency into so horrid a pit of Misery beyond ex­ample; (i.e.) Though the like were never done in the World, he is justly fallen under a Sentence of Condemnation. As to Mr. Baxter's particu­lar abhorrence of that barbarous Fact, and his proving that the Presbyterians detested it, I suppose the place he refers to, is his Key for Catholicks, p. 321, &c. he says in p. 323. That the Case of Murdering our King, differs very much from the Powder Plot, or Papists murder­ing of Kings, and teaching that it is lawful for a private hand to do it. A War, and a treache­rous Murder, are not all one; nor is a part of the Soveraign Power all one with a private hand, p. 324. I have read what John Goodwin and Milton have written in Vindication of that horrid Murder, and do believe that Mr. Baxter hath out-done them both. Let the Reader seriously peruse that part of his Writings (which he quotes to prove the contrary) from p. 323. to p. 326. and I believe he will be of the same opinion: for the design of it is to prove, that, (p. 323.) If the Body of a Commonwealth, or those that have part in the Legislative Power, and so in the Supremacy, should unwillingly be engaged in a War with the Prince, and after many years Blood and Desola­tions, judiciously take away his Life, as guilty of all this Blood, and not to be trusted any more with [Page 69]Government; and all this they do, not as pri­vate Men, but as the remaining Soveraign Pow­er, and say they do according to Laws: un­doubtedly the Case differs very much from Pa­pists murdering of Kings. I speak not this by way of Justification, saith Mr. Baxter, p. 325. whether they were in the right or wrong; I am not the Judge: but surely it was the Judgment of the Parliament upon the Division, (between the King and them) the Power was in them to defend themselves and the Commonwealth, and suppress all Subjects that were in Arms against them; and that those that did resist them, did resist the Higher Powers set over them by God, and therefore were guilty of the Damnation of Resisters. And this they assured the People was a Truth: And so hath Mr. Baxter done too in his Political Aphorisms more at large; but expresly enough in this place, where un­der the name of Grotius, p. 324. he asserts, That the Legislative Power being divided between the Prince and Senate, the Prince invading the Senates Right, may justly be resisted, and lose his Right. And this was well understood by all that engaged in the War against the King from the beginning, that in case they Conquered the King, he was no more to be trusted with the Government: For if it were known before­hand, (saith Mr. Baxter) that if they should purchase a Victory by their Blood, when they have done all, they must be all governed by him, whom they have conquered, and lye at his mercy, they[Page 70]would hardly ever have an Army to defend them. So that the King was never more to be trusted (i.e.) either with Government or Life.

As for Mr. Love, Mr. Baxter in the cited Preface intimates, that he was Beheaded for his Loyalty; which I think he sufficiently de­monstrated, in these two passages: (Not to take notice here of his barbarous insulting o­ver that truly great Prelate when he was brought to the Block, waving his Handker­chief, and crying out, Art thou come, little Will, &c.) the one, in his Sermon at Ʋxbridge: It was the Lord that troubled Achan, and cut him off because he troubled Israel. O that in this our State, Physicians would resemble God, to cut off those from the Land that have distemper­ed it; (and he tells us plainly whom he means) Melius pereat unus quam unitas: Men that lye under the guilt of much Innocent Blood, are not fit persons to be at peace with, till all the guilt of Blood be expiated and avenged, either by the Sword of the Law, or by the Law of the Sword, else the Peace can never be safe or just. The other passage was, in his Speech, Sect. 14. of his Trial; where speaking of his opposing the Tyranny of a King, he says, I did, it is true, in my place and calling, oppose the Forces of the late King; and where he alive again, and should I live longer, the Cause being as then it was, I should oppose him longer; That is, he had lived, and would die a Rebel.

[Page 71]An hundred Instances of such fatal Refle­ctions on that excellent Prince, have been no­ted in the Sermons and other Writings of Men of Mr. Baxter's Perswasion; and yet to shew that he dares do any thing to justifie his Party, he makes a bold Challenge to those whom he calls their Accusers, to shew, if they can, what Body or Party of Men on Earth have more sound and loyal Principles of Go­vernment and Obedience. And yet they have preacht and publisht to the World the same Doctrines which were voted January the 4th, 1648. That the Representative of the People in Parliament have the Supream Power of the Na­tion; and whatever is enacted or declared for Law by the Commons in Parliament, hath the form of a Law; and the People are concluded thereby, though the Consent of King and Peers be not had thereunto. Which Votes were passed in order to the King's Trial.

Were not they the King's most Loyal Sub­jects, that carried on a War against him, until they made him their Prisoner, and then used him as a captiv'd Slave, denying him the li­berty of a Man, the society of Wife, Chil­dren, and any Attendant whom he could trust; and of a Christian, denying him the assistance of his Chaplains; leaving him no Comfort that might make his Life desirable, but perpetually baiting him with the Cove­nant, and such unreasonable Propositions as they knew before-hand the King could not in[Page 72]Honour or Conscience comply with? Being thus bound and chain'd, the Independants take him out of their hands, and put an end to his Sufferings. Salmasius, a great Presbyte­rian himself, truly represents the Case: If a Thief (says he, p. 353. of his Defensio Regia) apprehends a Traveller, disarms him, robs him of his Money, and leaves him naked, and fast bound to some Tree, and some ravenous Beast finding him in that condition, kills and devours him; to whom ought the cause of his Death to be imputed? to the Thief, or to the Beast? And he concludes, Ita justum Regem & sanctum ex­tinxere Presbyteriani. These disarmed him of his Militia, these bought and sold him as a Captive, these covenanted to preserve his Life, with a Condition of his preserving their Reli­gion; which when he should refuse, they thought themselves bound by Covenant to de­sert him. The Army in a Remonstrance from St. Albans, Novemb. 16. say, that Whereas it might be objected that the Covenant obliged them to preserve the King's Person: They say, It was with this restriction, In the preservation of the true Religion. Religion and Publick Interest were to be understood the principal and supream Matters engaged for; the King's Person and Authority were inferiour and subordinate; which being not consistent with the preservation of Reli­gion and Publick Interest, they were by the Cove­nant obliged against it. And what was it less that the Commissioners of the General Assem­bly [Page 73]of the Scots resolved on, viz. That if the King were excluded from Government in Eng­land for not granting the Propositions concerning Religion and the Covenant, it was not lawful for that Kingdom to assist him for the recovery of his Government? (yet this is that Solemn Cove­nant, for the obligation whereof Mr. Baxter so contumaciously pleads, against the Autho­rity of the whole Nation.) And upon these and such like Proposals from Scotland, the Par­liament vote, That no more Addresses be made from them to the King, nor any Letters or Mes­sage received from him: And, That it should be Treason for any person to receive Letters from the King, or deliver any to him, without leave from both Houses. And were not these the King's most Loyal Subjects? Or what Body or Party of Men have in Mr. Baxter's sence more sound or loyal Principles of Government and Obe­dience?

How often and how deeply this incompa­rable King was wounded at the heart by those barbarous Declarations of the Parliament and Presbyterian Incendiaries, as if he were a wit­less, worthless, faithless Person, not to be trusted in his most Solemn Protestations a­gainst his Intentions for Tyranny and Pope­ry, is beyond any Man's expressions but his own? These had often murdered him in his Honour and Reputation before his last Exe­cution. Nor could his last Speech silence those malicious Blasphemies; he was no sooner[Page 74]dead, but he was executed in his [...], and as much as lay in the power of his Adver­saries, rob'd of that immortal Jewel more worth than his Crown, though no Man was so qualified for such pious and excellent Me­ditations as himself. Those two Disputes a­bout Episcopacy against Henderson, and a Jun­to of Presbyterians at Newport, of which his greatest Enemies could not deny him to be the genuine Author, sufficiently shew his great Abilities both for Learning and Acurateness of Stile; of which Debates the Bishop of Worce­ster says, that his Majesty understood the Con­stitution of our Church as well as any Bishop in it, and defended it with as clear and strong Reasons, whereof that Learned Bishop made great use against Mr. Baxter's opposition of Episcopacy, p. 271, & 280. of his History of Separation. Yet from the beginning of the War to the end of the Life of that best of Kings, and I may add to the end of Mr. Bax­ter's Life, no one hath endeavoured to defame him more, and render him odious to Posteri­ty, than Mr. Baxter, by charging him with granting Commissions to those Irish Papists that massacred Two hundred thousand Prote­stants; of which more hereafter.

Though Mr. Baxter was disabled to com­bate any longer with the Sword, yet is he re­solved to do it with the Pen, which he dips not in Gall and Vinegar, but in the very Poy­son of Asps, to keep open the Wounds of[Page 75]the expiring Church: To which end he en­deavours to draw his Neighbour-Ministers in­to an Association, and procures the Worcester­shire Agreement; the design of which you may see in Mr. Baxter's Gildas Salvianus, which was intended as a Humiliation Sermon to those that would enter into the Association; not that they should humble themselves, but the Clergy that yet adhered to the King: For one effect of it was, the promoting a Petition, That notoriously insufficient and scandalous per­sons (and as such, Mr. Baxter represented the Loyal Clergy; though, as himself observes in the same Book, the Synod of Dort called them Stupor Mundi, the Astonishment of the World, by reason of their Eminency) should not be per­mitted to meddle with the Mysteries of Christ, especially the Sacraments. Upon which Petiti­on, as Mr. Baxter hath been told, there issued that rigid Proclamation for Silencing all se­questred Ministers, and forbidding them not only the Exercise of their Ministry, but of keeping any Schools, &c. A design as wit­less as it was wicked; for Mr. Baxter notes in the Preface to that Book, That it had been put to a Vote in Parliament, to take away both Mini­stry and Maintenance, which was carried in the Negative by two Voices only; yet, like another Sampson, he is pulling down the Pillars of that House, whose Ruines would bury him­self and all his Order. A little taste of his Malice at that season, must needs distaste the[Page 76]impartial Reader. One sort that will be of­fended at me (says he) are some of the Divines of the Prelatical way, (as indeed they all justly might) for reproaching not as by hear-say, but from sight and feeling, first, the Silencing of most godly able men, the Persecution even of the peace­able, the discountenance of godliness, and the insulting scorn of the profanest in the Land. And many hundred swearing, drunken, ignorant, scandalous, negligent Ministers are cast out, and we have now many humble, godly, painful Tea­chers in a County. And as for the People, he says in the same Epistle to his Gildas, That most of them wherever he came, did make Religion, and reading the Sacred Scriptures, or speaking of the way to Heaven, the matter of their bitter scorn and reproach. He spares not to Revile the Royal Martyr, as if he intended to justifie his Murder: King Charles (saith he) by the Bi­shops instigation, kept Mr. Pryn long in Prison, and twice cropt his Ears for writing against their Masks and Plays, and the high and hard pro­ceedings of the Prelates; though the Archbishop (whose Head they cut off for less) shewed great­er Crimes, of which he was proved guilty, in his Speech in the Star-Chamber. This was not such a fast as God required, to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burthens, to break every yoak, and to let the oppressed to free. This was the Hypocrite's fast for strife and de­bate, and to smite with the fist of wickedness, and to make their voice to be heard on high, Isai.[Page 77]58.4. in the words of the proud Pharisee, God I thank thee, I am not as other men, nor as this Publican, as will appear to him that reads chap. 4. sect. 1. and p. 154. where he raileth intolerably against the Rulers, as Haters of practical godliness, and of all that would but speak seriously of Heaven, and tell Men of Death and Judgment, and spend the Lord's day in pre­paration thereto; that did but pray in their Fa­milies, or reprove Drunkenness or Swearing. What could any Papist say more to disparage the Church of England? As to the inferi­our Clergy, he says, p. 157. The Churches were pestered with abundance of meer Readers, Drun­ken, Profane, and Debauched Men: and many that had more plausible Tongues, made it their chief business to bring those they called Puritans into disgrace. So that I must needs say, I knew no place in those times (for he speaks of Men and Places within his knowledge) where a Man might not more safely have been drunk eve­ry Week, than to have gone to hear a Sermon if he had none at home. Nor doth he spare those that died long before his memory, p. 143. What Toys and Trifles did the ancient Reverend Fa­thers of the Church pester the Church with? And what useless Stuff are many of their Canons com­posed of? Three lamentable Vices did the Pre­lates of the Church commonly abound in; Pride the Root, and Contention and Vain-glory the Fruit, &c. to p. 149. where he is not ashamed to tell the World what Troubles the first Non­conformists[Page 78]raised at Frankfort against those Reformers and Confessors that were Exiled for maintaining the same Worship and Litur­gy, for the defence of which many Bishops and Ministers were suffering Martyrdom un­der the Papists. No sooner were they (the Non­conformists) called home, saith he, p. 150. but some of them were so intemperate, impatient, and unpeaceable, that some turned to flat Separa­tion, and flew in the faces of the Prelates with reviling. Yet Mr. Baxter doth the same, and accounts the requiring of Uniformity in the same or a better Worship, to be a Persecution. As for his Brethren, he professeth to believe, That England never had so able and faithful a Ministry since it was a Nation as at this day, viz. Decemb. 4. 1655. in the heat of Rebellion; yet he affirms, Sure I am, the change is so great within these Twelve years, that it is one of the greatest joys that ever I had in the World to be­hold it. But for the Prelatical Party, he brings in some, saying, They are all empty, careless, if not scandalous and ungodly men. And may we not conclude, as Mr. Baxter doth, p. 167. This is not a confessing sin, but an applauding those whose sins they pretend to confess? Mr. Baxter calls this Book Gildas Salvianus; but he might have more truly entitled it Excidi­um Britannicum: for that followed on it.

How Mr. Baxter can be excused from the guilt of Schism, in the departing from the Communion of the Church, after his Ordi­nation[Page 79]and Subscription, and Solemn Vows then made, for more than Twenty years be­fore the Impositions and Penalties enjoyned by the Secular Powers, which he pleaded in his justification after the year 63. will be a very difficult, if not an impossible work to him that considers Mr. Baxter's circumstances and actings. I shall therefore only shew the heinous nature of that Sin, as described by Mr. Baxter himself, p. 741. of his Christian Directory.

That Schism is a sin against so many clear and vehement words of the Holy Ghost, that it is ut­terly without excuse; Whoredoms, and Treason, and Perjury are not oftner forbidden in the Go­spel than this. That it is contrary to the very de­sign of Christ in our Redemption, which was to reconcile us all to God. That it is contrary to the design of the Spirit of Grace, and the Na­ture of Christianity; a sin against the nearest bonds of our highest relations; a dividing of Christ, or robbing him of a great part of his In­heritance. That it is accompanied with Self-ignorance, Pride and Ʋnthankfulness to God. That Church-dividers are the most successful Ser­vants of the Devil, and serve him more effectu­ally than open Enemies. That it is a sin which contradicteth all God's Ordinances and Means of Grace; a sin against as great and lamentable Experiences, as almost any sin can be; and this is a heinous aggravation of it, that it is com­monly justified, and not repented of by those that [Page 80]commit it; and the more heinous, that it is com­monly fathered upon God: Therefore remember this, that Schism and making Parties in the Church, is not so small a thing as many take it for.

Yet this pious Man, to keep his Proselytes from ever returning or repenting for Schism, tells them in the Preface to his Plea for Peace, That more like truth hath been said for the law­fulness of Anabaptism, Polygamy, Drunkenness, Stealing and Lying in case of Necessity, than any thing he ever yet read of for a full Conformity, as he their describeth it. Behold here the great Charity of Mr. Baxter, which he extends ra­ther to the Congregations of Schismatical A­nabaptists, and such as live in those detestable sins of Polygamy, Drunkenness, Lying and Stealing, than to the most Solemn Assemblies of Conformists, to which yet he hath often joyned himself in Communion. How great soever his Knowledge was, how strong soever his Faith, yet wanting Charity, the Sacred Scripture assures us, that such a Man is but as sounding Brass or a tinkling Cymbal.

In the year 1658. just Ten years after that the best of Kings suffered by the worst of Men, Mr. Baxter sets forth his Grotian Religion; and through Grotius's sides, strikes at the Head and Members of the Church of Eng­land with one blow: For the Grotian design (i.e. Popery) was carrying on, saith he, in the Church of England; and that this was the [Page 81]cause of all our Wars and Changes in England, p. 105. Another Cause of the War not Epis­copal. where he thus talks concern­ing the Royal Martyr, beyond any thing that his barbarous Judges could accuse him of.—How far the King was inclined to a Reconcilia­tion (with the Church of Rome) I only desire you to judge: 1. By the Articles of the Spanish and French Match sworn to. 2. By his Letter to the Pope written in Spain. 3. By his choice of Agents in Church and State. 4. By the Residence of the Pope's Nuntio here, and the Colledge of the Jesuits, &c. 5. By the illegal Innovations in. Worship so resolvedly gradatim introduced. All which I speak not with the least desire to perswade Men that he was a Papist—but only to shew, that while he as a moderate Protestant (i.e. a Papist in Masquerade, as they are now termed) took hands with the Queen a moderate Papist, the Grotian design had great advantage in England, which he himself boasted of, p. 106. Of this indignity to that Religious Prince, the Learned Bishop Bramhal, p. 617. of his Works, took notice, and vindicated him: of which Mr. Baxter be­ing told by a Book called the Impleader, who said only, that Mr. Baxter gave several inti­mations that the King was Popishly affected; he numbers that among other lies of that Author, p. 100. of his third Defence; and says, Why did not the Man tell where and when; and that he had printed the contrary in times of Ʋsurpa­tion;[Page 82]and that he is a Calumniator unless he prove it? Why did he not cite Bishop Bramhal's proof—and you see that a Calumniator with them is no singular person; they are not ashamed to tell the world that their Archbishops lead them, and are as bad as they. It seems Mr. Baxter was pinched by this Relation, which makes him cry out, I have printed the contrary. See what these sort of Men are come to! What credit is to be given to such Men's Reports! Is this it in which the Authority of Archbishops consists, that they must be followed in slanders, &c. I have saved the Impleader the labour of quoting the place, and desire the Reader to consult it, and see how maliciously and groundless he urged those things against the King at such a time as that. But Mr. Baxter says, he printed the con­trary in times of Ʋsurpation. That time which now he calls a time of Highest Usurpation, was the same which he then lookt on as a bles­sed time, when Richard Cromwel piously, pru­dently, and faithfully, to his immortal honour, exercised the Government, 1659. and to him he dedicated that Book, wherein he says he wrote the contrary, p. 327. where having ac­cused the new Episcopal Party for following Grotius, he adds, As for the King himself, that was their Head, if any conjecture that he was a flat Papist, &c. Mr. Baxter believes him not; but he was the head of the Grotian Papists; and he himself boasted of it (ubi suprà.) Now if any would know how far Grotius was a Pa­pist[Page 83](he says) he was a more arrant Papist than Cassander, and one that owned the Council of Trent; And such I think are flat Papists. And therefore it was no lie in the Impleader, to say Mr. Baxter gave intimations that the King was Popishly affected; but a gross one in Mr. Bax­ter to deny it, and give him the lie, as he doth impudently to others. But Mr. Baxter says, He did not believe it himself, that the King was a flat Papist: Then his iniquity was the great­ter, to give so many instances by way of proof, that others might believe it. Did not Mr. Baxter know that the fear of introducing Po­pery was made one ground of the War against the King? and may he not make it a ground of another War, because the King adheres to his Bishops, whom Mr. Baxter calls Popish Clergy-men? And he says, That the Parliament, whom they were bound to believe, made it their great Argument and Advantage against the King, that he favoured the Papists; and on this suppo­sition (saith he) Thousands came in to fight for their Cause. And they made one Article a­gainst the Archbishop of Canterbury, That he endeavoured to introduce Popery, though he were indeed one of their greatest Adversaries, whose Life on that account they endeavoured to take away. And the Relation of Dr. Du Moulin, That at the Death of the King, a known Papist was heard to say, That now their greatest Enemy was cut off, is very credible. But Mr. Baxter knew that old Maxime, Fortiter Calum­niare,[Page 84]aliquid adhaerebit. It is no honest Man's part, first to break a Man's Head, and then to give him a Plaister; which if it be not too narrow to heal the Sore, or ineffectual to cure it, yet may leave some ugly Scar behind.

Dr. Pierce hath given many more Argu­ments to prove Mr. Baxter a Papist, than he hath given of King Charles the First: And if his actings for Forty years together be well considered, it will appear he hath been made use of as one of the most keen and Catholick Tools that ever the Papacy did employ, whe­ther he knows it or not. It is, I confess, a difficult thing to tell the World what Perswa­sion Mr. Baxter was of as to Church-govern­ment, whether Episcopal, Presbyterian, or In­dependant; he hath been of all, and I think he is now of neither, having a peculiar Mo­del of his own.

In a Book called A Method for Peace, &c. printed 1653. I find him to favour Lay-El­ders, though in other Writings he condemned them as Superstitious; but by a passage in p. 341. he seems reconcileable to them: for thus he saith, Nothing almost is wanting to us to set our Congregations in the Order of Christ, and to the great Work of Reformation, so much as want of Maintenance for a competent number of Ministers or Elders to attend the Work: We have divers godly private Christians capable of helping us as Officers in our Churches; by which I suppose he intends Lay-Elders, al­though [Page 85]I cannot certainly affirm what his Judg­ment is concerning them: for he would wil­lingly set up a new Model of his own, (i.e.) a mixture of Episcopal, Presbyterian, Indepen­dent Government; but declares for neither of them. It is more certain, that he once pro­fessed himself a Conformist, and disputed for Bishops and Liturgy as by Law established; and he thought he had ever the better: yet if it be true that he had a prejudice against them ever since he was Nineteen years old, it was rather to betray than defend them. But in an Assize-Sermon preached 1654. at Worcester, p. 191. he pleads for the Presbyterian Go­vernment, in these words: How long hath England rebelled against his (Christ's) Govern­ment? Mr. Udal told them in the days of Queen Elizabeth, That if they would not set up the Dis­cipline of Christ in the Church, Christ would set it up himself in a way that should make their hearts to ake: I think (saith Mr. Baxter) their hearts have aked by this time; and as they judg­ed him to the Gallows for his Prediction, so hath Christ executed them by Thousands for their Re­bellion against him. Now it is evident what Discipline Ʋdal meant, by his Confederacy with Coppinger, Penry, &c. of which Cambden, p. 420. of his Eliz. Angl. says, Some of those Men who were great Admirers of the Geneva Discipline, thought there was no better way for establishing it in England, than by railing against the English Hierarchy, and stirring up the People[Page 86]to a dislike of Bishops. They therefore set forth scandalous Books against the Government of the Church, and Prelates; as Martin Mar-Prelate, Minerals, Diotrephes, A Demonstrati­on of Discipline, &c. In which Libels they set forth virulent Calumnies, and opprobrious Taunts and Reproaches, in such manner, as the Authours seemed rather Scullions out of the Kitchin, than pious and godly Men: yet the Authours were Penry and Ʋdal, Ministers of the Word. Bishop Bancroft quoteth a Pamphlet of Mr. Ʋdal's, called A Dialogue, where he says, That the Bishops Callings are meer Antichristian, p. 59. of Dangerous Positions; and p. 45. he says, They were very devilish and infamous Dialogues, and that there was a Conspi­racy between Coppinger, Wigginton, &c. by some extraordinary means (such as Ʋdal had prophesied should make their hearts to ake) for releasing of some that stood in danger of their lives; meaning, as I suppose, says the Bishop, Ʋdal, Newman, &c. The dangers threatned by such extraordinary means to disturb the Go­verment, hastned the Trial of Ʋdal, who with three others, took occasion from the intended Invasion in 88, to alarm the Nation at home; as also they did on the Powder Plot, and to this day do, by scattering seditious Pamphlets. Ʋdal was charged with a Book called A De­monstration of Discipline which Christ hath pre­scribed in his Word for the government of his Church, in all times and places to the Worlds end. [Page 87]The Preface was directed To the supposed Go­vernours of the Church of England; to whom he says, Who can deny you, without blushing, to be the cause of all ungodliness, seeing your Go­vernment is that which giveth leave to a Man to be any thing, save a sound Christian? for cer­tainly it's more free in these days to be a Papist, Anabaptist, of the Family of Love, yea, as any most wicked, rather than what we should be: And I could live these Twenty years as well as any such in England, yea, in a Bishop's House it may be, and never be molested for it. So true is that you are charged with in a Dialogue lately come forth, and by you burnt, that you care for nothing but the Maintenance of your Dignities, be it to the damnation of your own Souls, and infinite mil­lions more. The whole Book being like this Preface, he was indicted at the Assizes held at Croyden, and found guilty. He pleaded That he was indicted on the Statute of 23 of Eliz. c. 2. for publishing seditious words against the Queen, but that the Book charged on him, contained no seditious words against the Queen, but the Bi­shops only. But it was answered by the Judges (N.B.) That they who spake against her Maje­sty's Government in Cases Ecclesiastical, her Laws, Proceedings, or Ecclesiastical Officers which ru­led under her, did defame the Queen. And on clear proof that he was the Authour of that Libel, he was found guilty, and received Sen­tence of Death; but by intercession of Arch­bishop Whitgift, was Reprieved. Mr. Baxter's [Page 88]actings have been so like Mr. Ʋdal's, that it is no wonder to find him labouring to justifie him in a Cause wherein himself is so nearly concerned.

In 1659. came forth Mr. Baxter's Key for Catholicks, dedicated To his Highness Richard Lord Protector, p. 323. where he asserts, That if the Body of a Commonwealth, or those that have part in the Legislative Power, and so in the Su­premacy, should be unwillingly engaged in a War with the Prince, (suppose the Long Parliament, or the Commonwealth under Oliver against King Charles the First) and after many years Blood and Desolations, judiciously take away his Life as guilty of all this Blood, and not to be trusted any more with Government, (as the Parliaments Vote for Non-address to the King.) And all this they do, not as Private Men, but as the re­maining Soveraign Power, and say they do it ac­cording to Law; undoubtedly this case doth ve­ry much differ from the Powder Plot, or Papists murdering of Kings. With much more to the same evil purpose. And doubtless the diffe­rence is great; it is more horrid for Subjects to pretend Justice, than for the Pope to at­tempt by secret Plots to destroy a Protestant Prince. In the year 58. he prints his Five Disputations of Church Government; which were designed against restoring the extruded Episcopacy and Liturgy, and to justifie the Presbyterian Ordination, where (as also in his Method for Peace, p. 389.) he saith, We have[Page 89]taken down the superfluous honour of Bishops, (viz. their power over Presbyters.) as Antichri­stian. This disputatious Book (he says) was written against Dr. Hammond, who was then his Neighbour; and he dealt very friendly with him: for he scarce touched one of his Arguments, but the design of the Book was to destroy the whole Order, as Optatus said of a Donatist, Dei Episcopos linguae gladio jugu­lasti, fundens sanguinem non corporis sed hono­ris, Opt. Milevit. l. 2.

And because after No Bishop follows No King, in 1659. he sets forth his Holy Common­wealth; which was no other than a Plot to keep out the King, as the other was to keep out the Bishops: for there being great hopes that upon so many Revolutions of Govern­ment we should settle again on our ancient Foundations, he says, He suited that Book to the demands and doubts of those times. And his endeavour is to prove, That the King being secluded, and his Subjects discharged of their O­bedience, ought not to be readmitted. Thus in the Preface: That a Succession of wise and god­ly Men, may be secured to the Nation in the highest Power, is that I have directed you the way to in this Book. And thus he explains himself: First, as to the higher Powers; Prove, saith he, that the King was the highest Power in the times of Division, and that he had power to make that War that he made, and I will offer my Head to Justice as a Rebel. These[Page 90]confident, Assertions of his were such as brought a far better Head to the Block. But what would Mr. Baxter have? My wish is, saith he, that our Parliaments may be holy, and this ascertained from Generation to Generation, by such a necessary Regulation of Elections, that all those who by wickedness have forfeited their Liberties (i.e. the King and Loyal Party) may neither choose nor be chosen. And the re­ducing Elections to faithful, honest, upright men, such as (he says) were then in Richard Crom­wel's Parliament, is the only, only, only way to a certain and perpetual Peace and Happiness. He commends Richard Cromwel, as one that inhe­rited his Father's Vertue; one that piously, pru­dently, and faithfully, to his immortal Honour, exercised the Government; perswades all men to live in obedience to him; and stiles himself (in the Epistle to his Five Disputations, desi­ring his favourable acceptance of the tendered Service of) a faithful Subject to his Highness, as an Officer of the Ʋniversal King, R.B. Doth not this Man affirm, notwithstanding all the Confusion that had covered the Land, all the Blood that had been shed, and all the Heresies and Blasphemies that had poisoned millions of Souls, that he is one that rejoyceth in the pre­sent happiness of England, and honoureth all the Providences of God by which we have been brought to what we are? Epistle Dedic. to Ri­chard before his Key for Catholiks; and in his Holy Commonwealth, p. 487. Nor can I be so[Page 91]unthankful as to say, for all the sins and miscarria­ges of Men since, that we have not received much mercy from the Lord. And therefore he sets up his Stone of Remembrance, with this In­scription in great Letters: HITHERTO HATH THE LORD HELPED ƲS.

Is it possible, that a Man who hath said and done such barbarous unnatural Deeds, and stirred up many Thousands to do and say the same things with him, should still deceive the meanest Christians? Is it possible he should still persist in the same, and yet retain the o­pinion of a Saint? and be reputed the chiefest Guide of a Godly People? Yet thus it is: He is consulted as the Oracle of the Non-confor­mists; All of them, as a late Encomiast says, do light their Fires at his Torch. And he hath the forehead with the strange Woman, to wipe his mouth, and say, What have I done? You may guess by what he says: I must profess, that if I had taken up Arms in that War against the Parliament, (he says it, p. 488. of Holy Commonwealth) my Conscience tells me I had been a Traytor, and guilty of resisting the High­er Powers. And in his Key for Catholicks, where the Legislative Power and highest Judi­cial Power is divided by Constitution of the Government between the Prince and Senate, (as he determines the English Monarchy to be) he says modestly there, many will think; but he elsewhere delivers it as his own Sentiment, That the Prince invading the Senates Right,[Page 92]may justly be resisted and lose his Right, p. 324. Yet this Man says, Further than I was for the King, I never was one year with the stronger side: As if he had been always Loyal. And p. 489. of Commonw. If any of them (i.e. his Accusers) can prove that I was guilty of hurt to the Person, or destruction to the Power of the King, or of changing the Fundamental Consti­tution of the Commonwealth, (not the Kingdom) taking down the House of Lords without consent of all three Estates that had a part in the Sove­raignty; I will never gain-say them if they call me a most perfidious Rebel, and tell me that I am guilty of far greater sin than Murder, Whore­dom, or Drunkenness. And Anno 1680. he is not ashamed to say in his Preface to the se­cond part of the Nonconformists Plea,—In all the times of Ʋsurpation, and since, I said and wrote that the King's Person is inviolable, and to be judged by none, either Peer or Parlia­ment: And the Book accused (i.e. the Holy Commonw.) goeth on these Principles. So that notwithstanding his pretence of recanting what was there said, he still seems to justifie those Theses, and adds, The Book accused hath not a word meet to tempt a Man in his wits to such accusation: Yet he says, Thes. 352. Though a Nation wrong their King, and so quoad me­ritum Causae they are on the worser side, yet may he not lawfully war against the Common Good, (i.e. the rebellious Party) or on that account; nor any help him in that War. And Thes. 374.[Page 93] If a Prince that hath not the whole Soveraignty (which he says of our King) be conquered by the Senate that hath the other part, and that in a just defensive War, (as he thought the late War to be) the Senate cannot assume the whole Soveraignty, but supposeth that Government in specie to remain: and therefore another King must be chosen. This was pleasing Doctrine in the Protector's time. And Thes. 137. If Pro­vidence (i.e. Success in Rebellion) statedly disable him that was the Soveraign from execu­ting of Laws, protecting the Just, and other ends of Government, it maketh him an uncapable Sub­ject of the Power, and so deposeth him. And being so made uncapable of Government, by Thes. 146. Though he were unjustly dispossest, it is not the duty of his Subjects to seek his Restitu­tion. The Reader hath heard of a famous Roman Saint called Ignatius, who, if compa­red with others of that Church, we may say of him as one doth of Mr. Baxter, That he ex­ceeds them as much as a Flint doth a Freestone, because out of him so many Fires have and may be kindled. If such an Historian as Plu­tarch were now living, how easily might he run a Parallel between these two Generals? Both were famous tam Marte quam Mercurio; but whether of them was the greater Souldier or the better Saint, might occasion some di­spute; the reading whereof would not be al­together so sad, as the restless endeavours of the Disciples of them both; who, however[Page 94]they seem to differ in other things, joyn all their hands to pull down our Church. Impie­ty being grown to such an height, I should think it a thing impossible that it should pro­ceed any farther, the wickedness and shame of it being (notwithstanding any pretence) manifested to all Men: and that upon the joyful tidings of his Majesty's most happy re­turn in peace, by a most miraculous and ad­mirable Providence, the Authours of such O­pinions and Practices should seek where to hide their heads. But we are told, that Rebel­lion is as the sin of Witchcraft, which seldom admits repentance; and though they have power to do hurt, yet they have none to do good. Hence it is that this confident Man ap­pears still with open face, and pursues the same ungodly ends. I know not how it came to pass, but this same Man was admitted to preach a Fast Sermon to the House of Commons when they were consulting of inviting home the King to his Father's Throne; and with great boasting he tells us often, That the King was called home the next day after that Sermon of his, as if it had not been done if he had not preach­ed: whereas it is very observable, that in all the Sermon there was not one word that might be interpreted to promote that noble Design, but many things that were intended to hinder it, or clog it with very dishonourable terms. He intimates the Supream Power to be still in the two Houses. He tells us indeed, that Rom. [Page 95]13. is part of the Rule of his Religion, (and adds) but unhappily there hath been a difference amongst us which is the higher Power. (And be it remembred, that he had offered his Head to Justice as a Rebel, if any could prove that the King was the highest Power in the time of Division.) Whereas he himself confesseth, that a Heathen persecuting Nero must be obeyed; Yet he affirms, That it was not the intent ei­ther of St. Peter or St. Paul, to determine whe­ther the Emperour or Senate was Supream; though St. Peter plainly determines it, when he calls the King Supream; and St. Paul, by appealing not to the Senate, but to Caesar. In that Sermon he magnifies the Loyalty of the Presbyterians; adjures the Commons to an opposition of Episcopacy, though the King in his Message commended it to be as ancient as the Monarchy in this Island. And un­der the Titles of Sound Doctrine and Church Government, pleads for Presbytery; and would (p. 46.) have the Church Revenues setled on them: p. 43. saying, Give first to God the things that are Gods. For these he pleads, under the name of the godly, peaceable, and prudent people of the Land, in opposition to the prophaneness: And to insinuate new fears and jealousies, cries out, O what happy times did we once see! When were those happy times? Not in the peaceable time of King Charles the First; those were days of Profane­ness and Persecution: He must mean either un­der[Page 96]the Long Parliament, when so much Loyal Blood was shed; or under the Protection of Oliver, when the best of Princes was butcher­ed; or under Richard, of whom and his Mock-Parliament he gives such large Enco­miums. But now, Nox una perpetuo mansura, The days of Light and Jubilee are gone: And (as it is with Bats and Owls) when the Sun appears, their Night is come. He was it seems of the same mind with his Brother Jenkins, who said in a Sermon preached Sept. 25. 1656. That the removal of Prelatical Innocations coun­tervailed for the Blood and Treasure shed and spent in the late Distractions; nor would he re­deem all those by the return of the same, if it might be done. For Mr. Baxter speaking of Prelatical Men, who condemn the Ministers and Churches that had not Prelatical Ordina­tion, says, They would surely silence such Mi­nisters, and dissolve such Churches through all the Land, if it were in their power, as it may be (says he) when our sins have ripened us for SO GREAT A PLAGƲE, Postscript to True Cath. p. 335.

CHAP. II.

IF Great Theodosius, as Mr. Baxter says, (Treatise of Bishops, part 1. p. 147.) did cast himself down on the Earth before Ambrose to beg pardon and re-admission with tears, and was not received till some Months continued pe­nance. If Great Mr. Baxter, being so hei­nous a Criminal as he hath under his own hand acknowledged, should, after such a miracu­lous return of the King, humble himself be­fore the King and his Nobles in such manner as he promised once he would do; it was no more than was his duty, and perhaps not e­nough to expiate his Crime. Thus then Mr. Baxter expostulates, p. 14. of his Answer to Bagshaw: Is it possible for any sober Christians in the World to take them to be blameless, or those to be little sins? What, both the violating the Person and the Life of so good a King? and the change of the fundamental Government or Constitution? The setting up the Protector, and pulling him down again? &c. If all this were no Rebellion, Treason, or Murder, is there any such Crimes to be committed? If I was guilty of such sins, (Habemus confitentem Reum) I do openly confess, that if I lay in sackcloth and in [Page 98]tears, and did lament my sins before the World, and beg pardon both of God and Man, and beg all Men to take warning by my fall, which had done such unspeakable wrong both to Christ and Men, I should do no more than the plain Light of Nature assureth me to be my great and needful duty, p. 17.

But he that had the confidence to meet the old King and his Armies in the Field, (now that the Sword is taken out of his hands) wants not confidence to take up his Pen, as dangerous a Weapon, and most maliciously handled, and to affront the then present King before he be well setled on his Throne, in this Military way, as he terms it in his Third Plea, page the last. And though his Fraternity could not be permitted to bring him under Articles before, yet they vigorously attempt it after his return. The first attempt was concerning a Declaration to be extorted from the King a­bout Ecclesiastial Affairs: We offered his Maje­sty and the Bishops, at first, the Archbishop Usher's Model for Concord: Treatise of Episc. Part 2. p. 53. The Bishops would not once take it into consideration, nor so much as vouchsafe to talk of it, or bring it under any delibera­tion. They knew whence it came, not from the Archbishops, but the Presbyterian Forge: Mr. Baxter confesseth, p. 87. second part, They that would have conformed to his Majesty's De­claration (which, as you shall hear anon, they had caused to be drawn according to their[Page 99]Model) went on this Supposition, that the Spe­cies of Prelacy was altered by it: and yet on these terms they would unite with the Prelatists, only so far as to go in a peaceable performance of their Office, p. 116. (just as now they do.) In that 116 p. Mr. Baxter supposeth this Obje­ction against the Declaration; (for I can scarce call it his Majesty's, being by the necessity of times, and the importunity of troublesome Men, extorted from him.) Obj. You did but obtrude on us your own Opinions: for when you had drawn up most of those words, his Majesty was forced to seem for the present to grant them to you, for the quieting of you. Answ. p. 117. If we did offer such things, (for it was in vain to deny it) let the World judge what we sought by them. 2. There is most of that about Rural Deans put in, I suppose, by the Bishops consent, who were to word it after it went FROM ƲS; (a good office indeed, to whet a Sword to cut their own Throats, and be the Presbyterians Journey-men to their own undoing.) For Thirdly, Whoever mentioned or desired it? it appears that the work of Jurisdiction, Excom­munication, Absolution, no nor Ordination, was not thought to be above the Office of a Presbyter; that is, They would have rob­bed the Bishops of all their Power and Au­thority, and taken it to themselves; and then they would go on peaceably in the perfor­mance of their Office: and therefore it is no wonder that the Bishops refused to consider[Page 100]of such a Model, And that very Parliament that had so much manners as to thank his Ma­jesty for that Declaration (which others have not done for the Act of Oblivion) did lay it by, so that it was never done, but other Laws esta­blished which we feel, saith Mr. Baxter.

I cannot pass by that vain-glorious boasting of his so often mentioned, how soon the Arch­bishop of Armagh and he was agreed as to E­piscopacy, &c. in half an hour: and in ano­ther place, in a quarter of an hour: when in­deed the Model which he calls the Arch­bishop's, was published after the beginning of our Wars, to put a stop to that utter Confu­sion then intended by the total Extirpation of Episcopacy, and not as a Pattern for 1660. He says, one Mr. Stanly of Dorchester told him, That Archbishop Usher did profess to him, that he took a Bishop to be Primas Pres­byterorum, of the same Order; and every Presbyter to be a Governour of the Flock: and when he asked him, Why then he would be a Primate? he told him, That he took it not for any part of his Office, but for a collateral Dignity which the King was pleased to bestow on him. And that Bishop Reynolds professed to him his Opinion to be the same when he took the Bishoprick. At Bishop Reynolds I cannot won­der; perhaps he cared not for the Species of Episcopacy, which this Opinion of his de­stroys, but the substantial advantage: His Bishoprick was managed partly by his Wife,[Page 101]who visited the Conventicles, and his Chan­cellor, who, as Mr. Baxter says, p. 184. of Treatise of Episcopacy, had been a Judge-advo­cate in Fairfax's or Cromwel's Army. But that Archbishop Ʋsher, who so long and so lauda­bly exercised the Jurisdiction of an Archbi­shop, should act against his Judgment and Conscience, Mr. Baxter nor Mr. Stanley shall ever make such as knew any thing of that good Man to believe: something he might do in that necessary time, for the reduction of the Church, which was then in a miserable confusi­on, to some order and government; but he ne­ver intended that Model which Mr. Baxter calls his, and which altered the very Species of Episcopacy, for the reduction of Episcopacy. The Bishop's Practice for so many years, is an undeniable Argument of his Judgment for Episcopacy. Dr. Bernard confutes all such Slanders, having recorded the Archbishop's Judgment in these words: Holding as I do that a Bishop hath SƲPERIORITY IN DE­GREE ABOVE A PRESBYTER, you may easily judge that the Ordination made by such Presbyters as have severed themselves from those Bishops unto whom they had sworn Cano­nical Obedience, cannot possibly be excused by me from being Schismatical. But Mr. Baxter hath well observed, That Faction is one of the greatest Lyars (and I may add, the greatest Slan­derers) in the World.

[Page 102]It is usual with Mr. Baxter from the Con­cessions of Men in Cases of Necessity, to frame an Argument against their free and most de­liberate Judgment; as he hath most injuri­ously dealt with his late Majesty in his Con­cessions to the Nineteen Propositions of the Parliament, which he made for Peace sake, wherein he condescended to part with much of his right, but could not be heard. Arch­bishop Ʋsher was translated to Armagh, March 22. 1624. and died March 21. 1655. so that he continued in that See 31 years, and doubt­less did not act against his Conscience all that time. I cannot give you his Judgment in all our controverted Points: One thing is very considerable which he delivered in a Speech at the Castle of Dublin before the Lord Depu­ty and the great Assembly, April the last, 1627. concerning a Supply of Money to be granted the King, p. 80. of Dr. Barnard's Sermon: In this case give me leave as a Divine to tell you plainly, that to supply the King with means for the necessary defence of the Country, is not a thing left to your own discretion either to do or not to do; but a matter of Duty, which in Conscience you stand bound to perform. The Apostle, Romans 13. having affirmed, that we must be subject to the Higher Powers, not only for Wrath, but Conscience sake, adds this as a reason to confirm it; For, for this Cause you pay Tribute also; as if the deny­ing of such payment could not stand with con­scionable[Page 103]Subjection: thereupon he infers this Conclusion, Render therefore to all their due, Tribute to whom Tribute, Custom to whom Custom is due, agreeable to that known Lesson which he had learned of our Saviour, Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, &c. where you may observe, That as to with-hold from God the things which are Gods, Man is said to be a robber of God, whereof he himself com­plains in case of substracting Tythes: so to de­ny a Supply to Caesar of such means as are ne­cessary for support of his Kingdom, can be ac­counted no less than a robbing of him of that which is his due; which I wish you seriously to consider—And in this Mr. Baxter and many of his Perswasion will be Dissenters from the Archbishop, and so they would from his Mo­del also; for why else did they not shew any readiness to accept it when it was first propo­sed? Nothing would please them then, but the Extirpation of Episcopacy Root and Branch. And secondly, the Archbishop's Model pre­serves that Species of Diocesan Bishops, which Mr. Baxter would destroy, and (Thirdly) un­der which Mr. Baxter makes Christ's true Dis­cipline impracticable. Nor will any Govern­ment please Mr. Baxter as long as the Liturgy is established, which he fancieth to abound with many heinous sins, whereof, as long as any one is retained, Conformity is to him im­possible.

[Page 104]Mr. Baxter hath been always opposing the Party that was uppermost. He began with the King and Bishops: then with the Presby­ters, opposing their Doctrine in the Confes­sion of Faith, see p. 20. of Mr. Baxter's Con­fession. And their Discipline by Lay-Elders. And p. 83. of his Apology, When the Presbyteri­ans seemed uppermost, I was looked on as a Dis­senter: When the Rump was uppermost, I was by their order (de jure) Sequestred: With the Ar­my I was out much more: Cromwel was not for me, because I was not for him. And yet he was so much for him, as to leave it on record, That if the Lord Protector had not stept in all the Ministry had been taken down. And whence came it, (says he, p. 321. of his Key for Catholicks) that Sexby and others that have been Souldiers in our Armies, have confederated with Spain to murder the Lord Protector? And whence came their Jesuitical Treasonable Pamphlets, (such as Killing no Murder, whose Author is known to be no Je­suit) provoking Men to take away his Life? Whence is it that Mr. Baxter prays that his Son Richard might inherit a tender care of the Churches of Christ, if he were so much against Oliver? The plain truth is, he was neither for Oliver nor Richard, but so far only as to hinder the return of his Majesty and the Church to their lawful and ancient Rites. In his gracious Declaration concerning Ecclesia­stical Affairs, his Majesty desired the Dissen­ters [Page 105] to read as much of the Common Prayer as they had no just Exceptions against. But though Mr.Baxter and others of his Brethren had pro­fessed that they could use the greatest part of it, we never heard that they gratified his Majesty in the reading so much as one Col­lect; but instead thereof, they petition for a Reformation both of Doctrine and Discipline: and particularly, they petition his Majesty that some Learned, Godly, and Moderate Di­vines of both Perswasions, indifferently chosen, may be employed to compile such a new Form, as they there described, or at least to revise and effectually reform the old, &c. The King de­nies the first part, of making a New Litur­gy; and tells them he had in his Declaration of Octob. 25. expressed his esteem of the Li­turgy of the Church of England: but grants the second, and authorizeth certain Persons to advise upon and review the said Book, com­paring the same with the most ancient Liturgies: And, if reason be, to make such reasonable and necessary alterations, corrections, and amend­ments, as should be thought needful, &c. with this special caution—Avoiding as much as may be, all unnecessary abreviations of the Forms and Liturgy wherewith the People are acquain­ted. And how thankfully was this received? Mr. Baxter tells us, That he drew up another Li­turgy, a Petition for Peace and Concord, and a Reply to the Answer of the Bishops to their Exceptions: This new Liturgy, though he [Page 106]confesseth it had many imperfections, and need­ed to be amended, being the hasty off-spring of eight days; yet he pedantically calls it their more correct Nepenthes, and protests before God and Men against the dose of Opium which was by the Bishops prescribed, (i.e.) the Liturgy which the King recommended to them) as that which plainly tended to cure their Disease by ex­tinguishing of Life, and to unite them in a dead Religion. Dr. Reynolds (he confesseth) bla­med them for offering a new Liturgy instead of additional Forms; but they would have their New (or) nothing: And tells the Bishops, If these be all the abatements and amendments you will admit, you sell your innocency and the Churches peace for nothing; (which is indeed somewhat cheaper than that for which his Brethren sold the King, and those other things to boot.) I have heard it credibly reported by some Reverend persons there present, that that Treaty might have had the desired effect of Concord, had not Mr. Baxter so obstinately re­sisted: Particularly, the Learned Bishop of Chester told Mr. Isaak Walton, that Dr. Sanderson said, There was a certain person there (Mr. Baxter knows whom he meant) that appeared to be so bold, troublesome, and illogical, as forced the meek Doctor to say, with an unusual earnestness, that he never met with a Man of more pertinaci­ous Confidence, and less Abilities, in all his con­versation. And the Reverend Bishop of Wor­cester in his Letter, p. 13. affirms, That Mr. Baxter's[Page 107] furious eagerness to engage in a Disputation to which his Brethren shewed themselves unwilling, did wholly frustrate the way that tended to an a­miable and fair compliance.

His Petition for Peace then, was like his Pleas now, meer threatning and reviling. Take heed (says he, p. 5.) how you drive men by Pe­nalties upon that which they judge doth tend to their Damnation. And p. 14. The denial of their desires would renew all our troubles. p. 18. they tell the Bishops of unmerciful Impositions. Nor did they deal better with the King, whom they desired to leave out of his Declaration these words: We do not in Our Judgements be­lieve the practice of those particular Ceremonies we except against to be in it self unlawful; that is, we account them unlawful. They tell the Bishops in the close of the Second Paper, If they will grant those favours, it would revive their Hearts to daily and earnest Prayer for their prosperity: But p. 12. Should we lose the oppor­tunity of our desired Reconciliation, it astonisheth us to foresee what doleful effects our Divisions would produce; which we will not so much as mention in particular, lest our words should be misunderstood. And p. 117. of their Reply: As Basil said to Valens the Emperour, that would have him pray for the life of his Son, If thou wilt receive the true Faith, thy Son shall live; which when he refused, he said, The will of God be done with thy Son: So we say too, If you will put on Charity, and promote the Churches Peace, God[Page 108]will honour you; but if you will do contrary, the will of the Lord be done with your Honours. Now what greater insolency could they have used, if the King had been as low as his Fa­ther, and the Bishops as obnoxious as Mr. Baxter and his Brethren; And who but Mr. Baxter could have thought by a hasty work of eight days, done in opposition to his Majesty's Commission, and as he confesseth, against the advice of some of his more sober Brethren, to justle out the Liturgy composed by many Mar­tyrs and Confessors, and approved of by the Reformed Churches ever since the Reforma­tion, as his Majesty tells him in that Declara­tion? To which, though they now say they would have submitted, yet could they not then at his Majesties request read any part of the Liturgy; though they confessed they could have used almost the whole: But instead thereof, his Majesty complains in that Decla­ration, of their restless Spirits, who continued their bitterness against the Church, and endea­voured to raise Jealousies against his Majesty; and unseasonably Printed, Published, and Dispersed a Declaration to his Majesties re­proach. Their whole Petition was a Pharisai­cal Remonstrance of their own Godliness and Abilities, and the Profaneness of such as were not of their Perswasion; besides their frequent and fearful outcries of Persecution and Suffer­ings, when themselves had been the Persecu­tors for Twenty Years together, and as yet[Page 109]had suffered nothing but from their own guil­ty Consciences, and just fears.

Well might the Loyal Party have answer­ed those Complaints, as once their Indepen­dent Brethren did: Is there the least shew of Oppression, Sorrow, or cause of Complaint, except it be that you are not suffered to oppress, vex, and gall your Brethren that joyn not with you? Can you feed upon nothing but the Blood of your Bre­thren, that though you are as capable of all Preferments, even Bishopricks and Deanaries, as any of the Loyal Clergy) you complain of Slavery and Oppression, because you cannot en­slave and lead into Captivity? Is this to kill you with the Sword, that you cannot (again) kill your Brethren with the Sword? See more to this purpose in the Pulpit-Incendiary, printed 1648. p. 45. Your Renowned Protector Oliver speaks home to you at the dissolution of the Parlia­ment 1654, in these words: Is it ingenuous to ask Liberty, and not to give it? What greater Hypocrisie, than for those who were oppressed by the Bishops, to become the greatest Oppressors themselves so soon as the Yoak was removed? And his Majesty in the Chapter concerning the Ordinances against Common-Prayer, to this effect: I see that those are the most rigorous ex­actors upon others to conform to their illegal No­velties, who were least disposed to the due obedi­ence of lawful Constitutions: So that I know not whether they sinned more against their Conscien­ces by violently opposing Our established Order, or[Page 110]violently imposing their own. We have one in­stance more of their dutiful behaviour to his Majesty, in a Pamphlet called The due Account and Petition, which was after the Debate; where they say, We must needs believe, that when his Majesty took our consent to a Liturgy to be a Foundation that would infer our Concord, you (i.e. his Majesty) meant not that we should have no Concord but by consenting to this Liturgy without any considerable alterations. Whereby they would cast the Odium of the Rupture on his Majesty, which they themselves notori­ously caused; being resolved before-hand (their Profession in a Liturgy, and accepting his Majesties Commission only to make some reasonable Alterations and Additions, notwith­standing) to have a new, or rather no Litur­gy; but to be left at liberty to use their own Liturgy, or extemporary Effusions in all the most Solemn Administrations. And whether their Hypocrisie or Insolency in dealing thus with his Majesty, to whom they owed their lives, were greater, let the Reader judge.

The Kings Commission dated March 25th in the 13th of his Reign was directed to an e­qual number of Divines, as well on the be­half of the Church Party as of the Dissenters; among these, two, that had been Covenanters, were made Bishops, being esteemed Men of Moderation and Learning (viz.) Dr. Reynolds. and Dr. Gauden: Three others were of the Smectimnian Club (viz.) Edmund Calamy,[Page 111]Matthew Newcomen, and William Spurstow, who wrote several scandalous Pamphlets a­gainst Episcopacy and Liturgy, in Answer to the Right Reverend Bishop Hall, the rest were Persons that had been educated under the Discipline of the Covenant and Directory. Among these we find Mr. Richard Baxter, who had made himself considerable by his Turbulent Spirit and Bitter Zeal against Epis­copacy and Liturgy, ever since the Year 1640, and was become the Head and Protector of divers Factions. And who so fit to be the Disputer and Chief Scribe in this Grand De­bate as Mr. Baxter. It was he that drew up the Petitions and Addresses to the King; It was he that in Eight days time drew up ano­ther Liturgy, or rather a Directory, and in­sisted to have that received as the Rule of Pub­lick Devotion, to the excluding of our Litur­gy, which had been used by the Church of England for more than One Hundred Years, and highly approved of by all the Reformed Churches. It was he that drew up the Excepti­ons against the Liturgy, though not like a Wise Scribe, for he brought nothing new out of his Treasury, but only such old Scruples, as had been long before confuted by the two Arch-Bishops Bancroft and Whitgift, and other Divines. And these with many other such Factious Pamphlets he procures to be Printed and Dispersed through the Nation. And as is if all his Fellow-Commissioners were but [Page 112]Cyphers, and he the only Person that made any Figure, Mr. Baxter undertakes to be the Disputant. At the first Congress of the Com­missioners, there happened some Discourse a­mong the Episcopal Party, how unreasonable, it was to disturb the Peace of the Church, for some inconveniencies in the Liturgy, at the hearing whereof Mr. Baxter says, He wondred at the marvellous Oscitancy of the Bishops, p. 343, as mistaking the matter to be Discoursed of, for Mr. Baxter had found out first Eight, then Ten, afterwards Thirty or Forty Tremen­dous Points, so Unlawful and Sinful, that Men fearing God could not submit to. A­mong these, the first unlawful Imposition which was by Mr. Baxter chosen to be the Subject of the first Disputation, was; That to injoyn all Ministers to deny Communion to all that dare not kneel in the reception of it on the Lords day, is sinful. I shall not transcribe the whole Disputation, which the Reader may find, p. 346, &c. And only observe what Mr. Baxter hath spoken concerning that Ceremony; For he judgeth that posture as law­ful, as for a Person to receive a Pardon from his Prince upon his knees. And Part 3. Of Christ. Direct. That no reason can been given, why a lawful thing should become unlawful; because a lawful Superior doth command it, else (saith he) Superiors might take away all our Christian Liberty, and make all things unlawful to us by commending them. And it is observable, that[Page 113]Mr. Baxter hoped to enforce his Argument, by adding to the Question of Administring the Sacrament, &c. On the Lords day, because kneeling was forbidden to the Primitive Chri­stians, by a temporary injunction on such days in honour of our Saviours Resurrection, but was not intended as a standing Rule, nor practised in after Ages in any Church: The Case of Kneeling, &c. by the London Divines, Answers Mr. Baxter's, and all other Objecti­ons against it. It can't be expected that I should ingage to Answer all the Cavils which Mr. Baxter hath raised against Episcopacy and Liturgy, which makes up well nigh one half of his Life, and indeed of his Conversation; yet I have seen a little Posthumous Book, called Mr. Richard Baxter's last Legacy, &c. out of which sufficient Arguments may be urged, to confute all the Objections which he hath made in this, or any other of his Books, against our Episcopacy, Liturgy, or Confor­mity. So unformable was Mr. Baxter to him­self, as well as to our Church.

Yet I cannot pass by those Scandalous Re­flections, with which he defames those Learn­ed Bishops and other Divines, with whom he treated.

Bishop Morly, says he, Was often there, and with fluent words and much carnestness, was the chief Speaker of all the Bishops, and the greatest Interrupter of us. [This Bishop was a Person well known beyond the Seas, by his Dis­course[Page 114]against Militere and other Papists in defence of our Religion. In his Exile, he best knew Mr. Baxter, and affirms, as is no­ted, p. 13. of a Letter concerning him, That his furious eagerness to engage in a Disputation, to which his Brethren shewed themselves unwil­ling, did wholy frustrate the way, that tended to an amicable and fair compliance; and Mr. Baxter was sensible that he spake too much, and too boldly, and therefore might deserve to be interrupted by his Diocesan.

Bishop Cosins was there constantly, and had a great deal of talk with so little Logick, natural or artificial, that none was moved by any thing he said, but two Virtues he shewed; one that he was excellently well versed in Canons, Councils, and Fathers, which he remembred when we tryed him; the other was, that as he was of a rustick Wit and Carriage, so he would endure more freedom of our discourse, and was more af­fable than the rest, but we took him not for a Magician. [It was no sign of a Rustick wit and carriage, that he could endure freely the Language and Behaviour of Mr. Baxter, with which the rest of the Commissioners were more offended. And his Two excellent Treatises of the Canon of the Sacred Scripture, and Transubstantiation, which were Two such Bones, as brake the Teeth of the Doctors of the Sorbone, and stick in their Throats to this day, nor will they ever be able to digest them, shew that he wanted neither Logick, nor any[Page 117]part of Learning becoming an excellent Di­vine, though he never pretended to be a Magician; or to work such wonders as Mr. Baxter and his Disciples at Kidderminster are reported to have done, p. 80, 81, &c. Of Mr. Baxter's Life.

Bishop Hichman was of the most Grave, Come­ly, Reverend Aspect of any of them, and of a good insight in the Fathers and Councils; he spake calmly and slowly, but was as high in his Principles and Resolutions as any. He was a Person of a Sedate and Christian Temper con­trary to the passionate and furious transports of Mr. Baxter; a Person of serious deliberati­on, and constant resolution, as fit for a Privy Councellor as any of his Order, and this which was his singular Vertue, Mr. Baxter represents as his Crime.

Bishop Sanderson of Lincoln seldom spake, but his great Learning and Worth are known by his Labours, and his aged Peevishness not un­known. Mr. Baxter more than once noted this Bishop for a Partial and Peevish Old Man, but his profound Judgment and Mature Deter­mination of such Subjects as he considered, such as his Tracts De Juramento, De Conscien­tia, his Volume of Sermons, and his occasio­nal Cases of Conscience, are not to be paralel'd by any Ancient or Modern Writer. Nor was he mistaken when he told the Bishop of Chester, as Mr. Isaak Walton affirms, that there was at the Savoy Meeting, one that appeared [Page 116]so bold, troublesome and illogical, as forced this meek Bishop to say with unusual earnest­ness, That he never met a Man of more con­fidence and less abilities in all his Conversa­tion.

Dr. Sterne lookt so honestly, and gravely, and soberly, that I scarce thought such a face could deceive me; but when I talkt of many Dissenters in the Nation, he turn'd to the other Bishops, and said, He will not say in the Kingdom, least he own a King. [This is that Person that is sup­posed to be the Authour of that excellent Book, The whole Duty of Man, and some other Works collected into a Volume in Folio; nor did he fail in his Conjecture, that Mr. Baxter was unwilling to own a King.

Mr. Thorndike spake a few impertinent pas­sionate words. [Such as galled Mr. Baxter; but whatever his Presence seemed to Mr. Bax­ter, his Words and Writings are weighty and full of useful Knowledge and Learning.]

Dr. Sparrow spake but a little; yet with a Spirit enough for the imposing dividing Cause. [That is, he was constant to his Principles; a Vertue wanting in Mr. Baxter.]

Dr. Walton, Bp. of Chester, askt me, Whe­ther I did not say that if our Churches had no more than bare Liberty, as others had, without the compulsion of the Sword, that none but Drunkards would joyn in them. I answered, I only said that as they had been ordered, if they had but equal liberty for Volunteers, they would[Page 117]be like Ale-houses, where many honest men may come, but the number of worse comers is so great, as maketh it dishonourable. [This Man set forth the Polyglot Bible, which for its worth, ex­ceeded the Bibles set forth by the Kings of Spain or France. And what he charged on Mr. Baxter he himself proves to be true, in declaring the Conformists to be guilty of Schism and Perjury, which he says are worse than Drunkards.]

Dr. Pierson and Dr. Gunning did all their work. Dr. Pierson was their true Logician and Disputant, without whom, as far as I could dis­cern, we should have had nothing from them. He disputed accurately, soberly, and calmly, being but once in a passion. He was the strength and ho­nour of that Cause, which we doubted whether he heartily maintained. [i.e.] They thought him to be an Hypocrite or Presbyterian, but his Vindication of Ignatius hath struck Mr. Bax­ter's, and others Discourses against Episcopa­cy, to the very heart, so as noon need to strike again. And his Treatise on the Creed hath done the like to the Cause of the Atheists and Socinians. But the reason why he speaks so well of this Doctor, was to raise his own Trophies in his conceited Victory over him.]

Dr. Gunning was the forwardest and greatest Speaker, understanding well what belonged to a Disputant; a Man of greater study and indu­stry than any of them; well read in Fathers and Councils, and of a ready Tongue, and I hear[Page 118]and believe of a very temperate Life, as to all Carnal Excesses; but so vehement for his high imposing Principles, and so over-zealous for Arminianism and Formality and Church Pomp, and so very eager in his Discourse, that I con­ceived his Prejudice and Passion much perverted his Judgment; and I am sure they made him la­mentably over-run himself in his Discourses. [The University of Cambridge where he long and deservingly possessed and adorned the Chair, give him a better Character, viz. for an accurate Disputant and excellent Divine, as well as for a Person who had a great power over his Passions and Appetite; but all these things made against him; for when some Per­sons of note interceded for him with the Committee that cast him out of his Chair, their Plea of his Learning and Holy Living was silenced by one of the Committee, who said, He was the more like to do hurt.]

On our part, saith Mr. Baxter, Dr. Bates spake very solidly, judiciously and pertinently when he spake. And for my self, I thought the day and Cause commanded me these two things, which were objected as my Crimes, viz. speaking too boldly and too long. [I shall only refer the Reader to p. 90. of the third part of his Life, where to p. 98. he gives transcendent Enco­miums to his Non-conformist Brethren, every one almost hath some extraordinary Praises for Learning and Godliness.]

But, wherever he speaks of the Conforming[Page 119]Clergy, he bestows some of these black Cha­racters on them, That they are proud, world­ly, covetous, domineering, malignant, lazy, the Plague of the World, Troublers of Prin­ces, Dividers of Churches, that will (being Hy­pocrites as to Christianity and Godliness) like Judas, that loved the Bag better than Christ, make themselves a Religion consisting of meer Corps and the dead Image of true Religion. See his Prognostication dated (he says) when by the King's Commission we in vain treated for Concord 1661. p. 12, 13. of his Prognosti­cation, with such Prejudice, it seems, he came to that Conference, which waxed so gross, that he quite lost his Faculty of discerning Light from Darkness, or good from Evil. So that though he was constrained to acknow­ledge the great Learning of the Bishops with whom he contended, yet he thought it suffici­ent to blacken them all, to say that they were for Conformity, (i.e.) in his sense for Perse­cution and Perjury. How unfit Mr. Baxter was to commit to History, either the Relation of our late War against the King, or of this Debate, or of the Primitive or Modern Bi­sops, appears by those Qualifications which he himself requires to the credibility of an Historian, as in his Preface to his Church Hi­story of Bishops, &c. (viz.) That he be impar­tial, a lover of peace, and not ingaged in a fa­ction; a sober, calm, considerate man, not one that is passionately rash, that shews a malignant[Page 120]spirit; one that extenuates or denies all the good that was in his Adversaries, and fastneth on them all the Odium he can without proof; one that is not deeply ingaged in a party; one that is of ma­nifest hon [...] [...] conscience, &c. For want of which qualifications, it is truly observed by Dr. Maurice, that as his Church History was designed to disgrace Diocesan Bishops, so the Preface looks as if it were intended to dis­grace his History. Nor must we believe our Senses, if we must believe that they were E­piscopal men that begun the late War, when the contrary appears, by many other acknow­ledged Proofs and continued visible Effects re­lated by Mr. Baxter himself.

The Parliament having had long and late experience how troublesome and implacable such as Mr. Baxter were, proceeded to the e­stablishment of the Church and publick Worship, excluding none but such as would exclude themselves: And as a signal of his Majesty's impartial favour, he offered Bishopricks to three, Deanries to two or three; more and other Dig­nities were given to several sober Persons that had been of another Perswasion. One Bi­shoprick was accepted; one (which I suppose was Mr. Baxter) refused it. See p. 134. of First Plea. His reason I suppose was the same that he gave for not reading Common Prayer, p. 105. of Sacr. Desert. Should the Ministers that have suffered so long, but use any part of the Liturgy and Scripture Forms, though without[Page 121]any motive but the pleasing of God, and the Churches good, (it seems these Motives would not prevail for this Reason) what muttering and censuring would there be against them? This bold Man was afraid of the People. And in truth he has made it morally impossible for him to accept a Bishoprick, having often declared by word, and published it in print, That the Office of a Bishop, as exercised in the Church of England, was Antichristian. And saith in his Method for peace of Conscience, p. 389. We had taken down the superfluous honour of Bi­shops as Antichristian; upon which (N.B.) the Devil set them to cry down also as Antichristian, Tythes, Maintenance, Priests, and Ministers: And moreover, that the return of such Men would be a great Plague to the Land, in Postser. to the True Catholick, p. 335. And Mr. Baxter knows there is an ancient Canon, That a man that had his hand in blood, might not be a Bishop. See p. 213. of his History. And p. 36. A Go­vernment which gratifieth the Devil and wicked Men.

And now he begins to defame the Laws, as he had formerly done the Liturgy: and not having other means, he discovers his impotent malice in writing a Prognostication, dated when by the King's Commission we in vain treat­ed for Concord, 1661. He observed, p. 40. That the Sectarian Spirit was like Gunpowder, ready to take fire on such injuries: And Mr. Baxter with his Prognostication, like Guy Faux with his[Page 122]Dark Lanthorn, is ready for the Exploit, and sorry only that it is not done. He intimates the Clergy to be proud, worldly, covetous, do­mineering, malignant, lazy, the plague of the world, troublers of Princes, dividers of Churches, that will (being Hypocrites as to Christianity and Godliness) like Judas, that loved the Bag better than Christ, make themselves a Religion consisting of meer Corps, and the dead Image of true Re­ligion. See p. 12, 13. He cries out of New Impositions, Subscriptions, and Oaths, words and Actions which they believe to be against God's Word. Doth not this aim directly at the Laws? P. 14. he says, Their Sufferings will make many otherwise sober Ministers too impatient, and to give their Tongues leave to take down the Ho­nour of the Clergy: And this will stir up the People, and make them pray for the downfal of the Clergy, which they take to be Enemies of God and Godliness; and that to speak easily or chari­tably of such Men, is but to be lukewarm and in­different between GOD AND THE DEVIL, p. 20. Some (of the Non-conformist Ministers) will think these Passions of the People needful to check the sierceness of the Afflictors: Some of the more injudicious hot-brain'd sort (who are the greatest number) will put them on, and make them believe that all Communion with any Conforming Ministers or Parish Churches is unlawful, and that they are all Temporizers, and Betrayers of Truth and Purity, that communicate with them: and carry about among themselves false Reports[Page 123]and Slanders; because they will think that the upholding of their Cause, which they think is God's, doth need the suppression of these mens Cre­dit and Reputations, p. 25, 26. The godly and peaceable Conformists will get the love of the so­ber, by their Doctrine and Lives; but will be despised by the Sectaries, because they conform; and will be separated by the proud and persecu­ting Clergy, as leaning to the Dissenters; and thereupon will be under continual Jealousies and Rebukes: And perhaps new Points of Conformi­ty shall be devised to be imposed on them, which it is known their Consciences are against, that so they also may be forced to be Non-conformists, be­cause secret Enemies are more dangerous than open Foes: and so part of them will turn down­right Non-conformists, and the other part will live in displeasure till they see an opportunity to shew it. And these are the likeliest to cross and weaken the worldly persecuting Clergy. This is such a Prognostication, as that for which Mr. Baxter observes Mr. Ʋdal was condemned in Queen Elizabeth's Reign, in an Assize-Ser­mon on Psal. 2. And it is no otherwise a Prog­nostication than (Astrologers observe of Bla­zing-stars) they do irritate and dispose the Humours and Spirits of Men to disorderly A­ctions; to which the event shews that this Prognostication, and Mr. Baxter's influence on the People, hath had a malign Aspect, not unlike the Prophesie of Nostredamus's Son, That a certain great City should be burnt; and[Page 124]to fulfil his Prophesie, did procure it to be set on fire.

My next Remark is on Mr. Baxter's behavi­our at Kedderminster, where the Bishop of Wor­cester publickly declared, That he made the Peo­ple believe that it was lawful for them to take up Arms against the King, and suffered or made them to scruple at those things which were lawful, which he himself confesseth to be lawful; and that he himself heard him to maintain such a Position as was destructive to the Legislative Power both of both of God and Man; (viz.) That the enjoyn­ing of things lawful by lawful Authority, if they might by accident be the cause of sin, was sinful. This was the chief­est Argument urged against Kneeling, &c. by Mr. Baxter. See the Bishops Letter, p. 4. and 6. Now though the known in­tegrity of the Bishop is e­nough to make all good Men believe this Re­lation, yet the consideration of the Premises puts the truth of it beyond all doubt or ex­ception. Was this behaviour of Mr. Baxter's a token of his Gratitude to those Bishops who gave him license to preach in their Diocess; or to his Subscription to the Bishop of Lon­don (then Shelden) to those terms of peace­ableness which the Bishop accepted, and Mr. Baxter voluntarily subscribed? p. 12. of his late Apology. If ever he did any thing to­ward Publick Peace, he was drawn to it in vitâ Minervâ, and soon retracted it; but to promote Divisions he laboured manibus pedi­busque, with all his strength.

[Page 125]His Book called The Cure of Church Divisi­ons is the only Work of Mr. Baxter that hath any thing of Moderation; and yet as if he were sorry for what he had done, at Mr. Bag­shaw's Exceptions against he, he says, Doth it not speak against Church Tyranny, unjust Imposi­tions, Violence, and taking away Men's Liberties, and Rigour to Dissenters, from end to end? p. 7. of his Defence. It seems it was expected of Mr. Baxter that he should have called the Bi­shops Sacrilegious Silencers of the faithful Mini­stry, Murderers of many hundred thousand Souls, perjurious, proud, tyrannical, covetous, formal Hypocrites, malignant haters of good Men, and then he had not incurred the blame of the People, p. 20. And to regain their good o­pinion of him, he hath since said all this again and again. Another part of Mr. Baxter's Cha­racter appears in what was done about the In­dulgence; which by a Book called The peace­able Design, agreeing well with Mr. Baxter's Plea for Peace, seems to have been procur'd by the joynt Endeavours of the Papists, and those that call themselves Protestant Dissenters; in which Book, p. 71. is this Objection: What shall we say then to the Papists? Answ. The Papist in our account is but one sort of Recusants, and the conscientious and peaceable among them, must be held in the same predicament with those among our selves, that likewise refuse to come to Com­mon Prayer. And p. 72. As for the common Papist, who lives innocently in his way, he is to us[Page 126]as other Separatists, and so comes under the like toleration. So that Herod and Pontius Pilate are confederate against Christ. But Mr. Bax­ter must lead the Chorus here also; for he much exceeds the Author of that Treatise, in his good opinion of the Papists: yet he says, Mr. Humphry is a man of latitude, and tyeth himself to no Party or Opinions of other men; And I (saith Mr. Baxter) so little fear the noise of the Censorious, that even now while the Plot doth render them most odious, say freely, 1. That I would have Papists used like men: And, 2. I would have no man put to death for being a Priest: 3. I would have no Writ de Excommu­nicato capiendo, or any Law compel them to our Communion and Sacraments.

And is not this to open the door for Pa­pists and Fanaticks to enter together? If the Laws, how severe soever, cannot keep them out, would not this Liberty bring them in? See p. 19. of Second Defence. If you will not bring the Papists in, he is resolved, for ought I see, to go to them: for p. 235. of First Plea, he says, It is but reasonable if on such necessity (i.e. the Penalties for Nonconformity) they should accept of favour from any Papist that should save them, &c. By which the Reader may judge, who is a greater Friend to Popery, the old Protestants, who have made Laws to keep it out; or the Dissenters, who would destroy those Laws to let it in.

[Page 127]To put life into the languishing Cause, he inspires it with a Dose called Sacrilegious De­sertion of the Ministry rebuked; and declares, That as they had preached formerly without leave, so they would do it much more now; and says, That though it had cost some excellent men their lives, yet nothing but death, or utter disable­ment, should make them desist. So that his Pleas and his Practice before and since the In­dulgence, shew that he owned the King no great thanks for it: Yet being advised by a moderate hand not to abuse that Indulgence, he rails at him most intolerably; (you shall hear it by and by:) I will only ask Mr. Bax­ter, why the neglect to administer the Holy Sa­craments was not as much Sacrilegious Deser­tion of the Ministry (whereof it is a chief Work) as the omission of preaching? For Mr. Baxter confesseth, That he had not baptized any, nor administred the Lord's Supper, for eigh­teen or nineteen years together; nor adhered to any Sect (no not the Sect of Diocesan Bishops) for twenty five years. See p. 119. of Answ. to Dr. Hinkley: Which to me seems to be not on­ly a Desertion of the Ministry, but of Christia­nity it self. Certainly if he ought to do the one, he ought not to leave the other undone. That he and others are Pastors to no Church, that he never gathered a Church, nor hath he constant­ly joyned in Communion with any Church, Answ. to the Bp. of Worcester's Serm. p. 64. 24. 62. 86. Yet p. 76. of his Book of Concord, he says, I con­stantly[Page 128]joyn with my Parish Church in Liturgy and Sacraments, and hope so to do while I live. But if he thought it his duty to preach, it was his duty to administer the Sacraments also; for preaching was never esteemed the sole Work of the Ministers: And they that omit this Duty, to refuse to hear the Ʋniversal Church of Christ, as well as the Church of England: For by Canon. Apost. the 9th, Whoever of the Faithful enter and hear the Sacred Scriptures, but stay not at Prayers and Communion, ought to be excommunicated as Disturbers of the Church. All Churches in the Primitive times did on every Sunday celebrate this Holy Sacrament; and all the faithful were wont to receive it. It is also very observable, that when our Church was to be setled, that some of the Presbyterians moved to have the Rubrick struck out which obligeth the People to Communicate three times yearly; whereas some modern Churches have found it necessary to declare as the Coun­cil of Agatho did, (which Mr. Baxter accounts one of the best Councils) That those who re­ceive not the Sacrament, ought not to be reputed as Christians. And St. Cyprian saith, This bread we crave every day, lest we who are in Christ, by the interposing of any grievous Crime while re­strained, and not communicating, should be se­parate from the Body of Christ.

And now prepare your ears against that nauseous Billinsgate Language and barbarous Censures, wherewith Mr. B. answers his learn­ed[Page 129]AdversaryDr. Fulwood. in his Sacri­legious Desertion, for want of Arguments, p. 6. Railing Ruf­fian, p. 13. Selfish envious Conformists; the doleful pride and selfishness of the carnal part of the Clergy; a Silencing Diocesan, p. 25. Church­tearers, p. 105. Such Toys, p. 31. A few con­fident and silly Reasonings of Dr. Fulwood and other Pamphleteers; Ʋsurpers, p. 39. Hear it now, for you shall shortly hear it from God, p. 8. I would give all the Money in my Purse to make me understand what the Church of England is, p. 35. Foolish superstitious Priests, p. 44. He talks of Per and Pers, p. 49. but lays his Scene in Ʋtopia, and says, I know this is not our case in England, but if we must follow you into Uto­pia. Lest the Reader should not understand this, he speaks plainer, p. 74. I have been long of the opinion which you (viz. that are of a contrary opinion) will one day pardon, that perjury, perfidiousness, and persecution, proud contending who shall be greatest, and covenanting never in certain points to obey Christ against the world and the flesh, is not the way of God, p. 56, 57. Such confidence upon such insignificant rea­sons, is a great dishonour to the wit and humility of the Authour, p. 59. Our excellent Successours, that do nothing but see the Peoples faces in the Church: You forbid Baptism and the Lord's Sup­per to all that have not as large a Swallow as your selves, p. 60. His want of common sense and mo­desty, p. 65. O with what face, p. 66. He tells [Page 130]us, p. 96. of some of the Nonconformists Prin­ciples and Purposes: They suppose that the Mi­nistry doth not save Men, as Wizards think that Charms do heal Men by their presence, titles, names, or habits, by standing in the Reading-place or Pul­pit, or being called the Parson of the Parish, or saying his set words over them when dead. (As if the Conformists did believe all this.) P. 10. They suppose that a greater number of the confor­mable Priests than they are willing to mention, do preach so ignorantly and dully in the Pulpits, and do so little of their private work besides, that there is great need of a far greater number of Assistants than all the present Non-conformists be. They are not able to confute the People, who tell them that their publick Priests are so defective in their necessary qualifications for their Office, as that they hold it unlawful to own such for true Ministers, and encourage them by their presence, or commit the care of their Souls to such. P. 11. They think that the ejecting (the Non-conformists) from the Temples and Tythes did not degrade nor make them no true Pastors to their Flocks; and that the Magistrates putting another Parish Minister in possession of the Temple and Tythes, did not dissolve the fore­said relation. They think that the ejected Mi­nister, foro Conscientiae & Ecclesiae vere sic dictae, retaineth still his ancient relation to his Flock, and part of them schismatically separate from him, and joyn with another Intruder that never had a lawful Call. P. 14. They think that [Page 131]Conformity would be in them such a composition of heinous crimes, as they forbear to name, for fear of seeming Accusers of others, and unpeace­able. P. 31. Look up man, without blushing; alas for these poor People that cannot try Sence from Nonsence. P. 61. His next hath no bounds, it grieveth me to read it. O Posterity, how will you know what to believe! P. 62. Here is much that would as handsomely serve Celsus, Julian, Porphyry, or Eunapius, p. 72. P. 25. I will not offend the Readers ears by giving them the names I think they deserve, but wish them to read 1 Thess. 2.15. which in words at length he puts in his Title page, They both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own Prophets, and perse­cuted us. And tell them, by what Names or Titles soever they be distinguished, that I, that am a dying man, would be loth to stand in their case before God: And if we were well agreed that there is indeed a God and a Christ, a Hea­ven and a Hell, we should easily be agreed in all the rest; (i.e.) Seeing you are not of Mr. Baxter's mind, you are very Atheists, and in a state of Damnation.) P. 132. I must tell you, that we cannot but think that you need Re­pentance, great Repentance, (that your Souls yet, if possible, may be saved, p. 74.) for sinning more, and that by publick, deliberate, chosen covenanted, ministerial sin, protesting against Repentance. I conclude this Collection of many such great Calumnies which that little Book doth abound with, with his impudent[Page 132]Challenge; Come, and impartially debate the Case with us, who have been the greatest Causes of Protestant Divisions, Conformists or Non­conformists. These putrid, Pestilential Stinks and Corruptions are so unlike the Breathings of a mortified Christian, that the like never proceeded from any dying Man, except such a one as hath been dying Twenty years to­gether, of which this is a shrewd Symptome; and another is as bad, that (as they say of dying Beasts) he bites deadly, Animam (que) in vulnere ponit. I challenge any Man to shew in so little a Book, so great Pride, Malice, and Obloquy, on so slender occasion as the In­dulgence, prepared by the means, and in fa­vour of the Papists as well as the Presbyter. Mr. Baxter knew the Person against whom he wrote to be a Person of Great Learning and Moderation, as he had acknowledged under his own hand in his Book of Conformation, where he often quotes him; he calls him The Learned Mr. Fulwood in the Postscript, but now he is a meer trifler.

But there is yet ultimus conatus naturae. And his restless Spirit grows more brisk and spark­ling, as it is pouring forth from the crazy Vessel. By the great mercy of God, that most execrable. Plot of the Papists to Assassi­nate the King (whom God hath hitherto by a series of Miracles preserved) and the Church of England, against which the Gates of Hell have not, and we hope never shall prevail, [Page 133]was discovered, to the great joy of all true Protestants. And now while they are under­mining the Foundations, Mr. Baxter (though a dying Man) lifts up himself, and gets on the top of the Fabrick, to throw it down with all his might. This Polity he learnt of his Predecessors, who on the intended Inva­sion 88. and the Gunpowder-Treason, when the Papists thought to have swallowed us up quick, took their advantage to thrust us into their Jaws, or at least to devour us themselves, if we should escape our other Adversaries. That he might act with less suspition, and more success, he calls his Engines A Plea for Peace, which, as Bishop Stillingfleet observes, might be better called, A Plea for Discord and Division; And another called, The true and only way of Concord; so full fraught with im­practicable Notions, and dividing Principles, as if his whole design had been to prove, that there is no true way of Concord among the Chur­ches, Bishop Stillingfleet. But of this Book hereafter: Another Book claims precedency, whereof after great labour Mr. Baxter is deli­vered; but it proved a Monster full of Teeth and Claws, which he calls Church-History of the Government of Bishops; but is indeed (though very partial) a History of those Con­fusions which were raised in the Church by such as opposed the Orthodox Bishops. That the sight of this Monstrous Birth may not of­fend, let the Reader fortifie his Eye-sight[Page 134]with what Mr. Baxter himself hath prepared: For, telling us what History is credible, p. 2. n. 4. of that Tract, It ought to be, saith he, of One that is impartial, a lover of Peace and not ingaged by Faction or Interest to one side against the other; a calm and considerate Man, not a passionate hasty Judge; a Man of manifest Ho­nesty, Conscience, and Fear of God; not a Worldly, Wicked, Bloody, Ʋnconscionable Man. Now let the Reader consider whether this Character agree with our Author: And then let the Reader take that other Antidote in the Preface—The Sectaries, saith Mr. Baxter, who rashly separate from some Churches, because of some Forms, Opinions, or Ceremonies, which al­most all Christians on Earth have used in the for­mer purer Ages, and still use, should be more cautelous in examining their grounds, and should hardly venture to separate from any Church, for that which for the same reason would move them to separate from almost all Christians in the whole World, if not unchurch the Church of Christ. And let the Reader satisfie himself, whether Mr. Baxter's Model be not such a Form. And may it not be said of Mr. Baxter, as he says of Dr. Heylin? He is so palpably partial, and of so ma­licious and bloody a strain, representing excellent persons as odious intolerable Rogues, that he is not to be believed? Judge by this one passage, p. 120. If our Neighbours, that commonly these Thirty Years last use the word God dam me, had put but thee instead of me, I should have [Page 135]suspected that the Councils and Bishops had made their Religion. To which add, p. 464. Have not the Ministers themselves been the principal in­struments of taking down the Bishops, &c? And what have they got by it? I doubt not but the Reader will find the whole Collection to be a History of the Confusion and Bloodshed occasioned by discontented and ambitious Presbyters and their party, against the Or­thodox, who suffered under Heathen Arian, and other heretical Emperours, by Popes, Hereticks, and Schismaticks, misapplied all to the Bishops and Councils; and often speaks more favourably of Hereticks, viz. of Arius, the Novatians, and Donatists, who though they were usurping Presbyters, he calls them Bishops; and through their sides strikes at the Sacred Office, p. 276. of his Plea for Peace; It was by Bishops striving who should be Chief, that the Donatists set up: Whereas the Dona­tists were discontented Presbyters. And in the Schisms of those times, the Bishops were almost ever the chief Cause. The Almost will not save it from a Lye. But evident it is, what­ever quarrel there was in all Church-History, wherein a Bishop was concerned, how Inno­cent, how Orthodox soever, Mr. Baxter makes him the cause of the Quarrel, and is his Ad­versary. Hereof I could give many instan­ces, had not Mr. Baxter prevented me, having said and done enough to overthrow the cre­dit of his History. However, I will shew the[Page 136]Reader a Specimen of Mr. Baxter's Candour and Truth in relating Church-History. Doth not Mr. Baxter know (however he dissembles it) that Arius and Aërius, Novatus and No­vatian, Majorinus Chaplain to Lucilla a No­ble Woman, with Botruus, and Silesius, who first opposed Cecilian Bishop of Carthage, and set up for Bishops by the help of Donatus, who succeeded them, and gave name to the Schism, were all Presbyters? Till they dub'd one another Bishops, and then with whole Armies opposed their lawful Bishops, who with great patience and constancy withstood their malice. Read the History of the Do­natists lately set forth, and see how they used St. Augustin himself. Mr. Baxter may as well ascribe all the Rebellion and Outrages, all the Blasphemies and Faction that have been made within Forty Years past, to the Bishops of this Land, whereto (it's well known) the Presbyterians opened the way, and led the dance, as to impute what he doth to the an­cient Bishops; and indeed he is not ashamed to assert both these notorious falshoods. Mr. Baxter asks the Question, p. 429. of his Cure of Divisions; Who brought in the errours of the Arians, Eunomians, &c. And he Answers, They were Bishops or Presbyters: He would be sure to speak one true word. I shall not trouble the Reader with all that Mr. Baxter writes of the Arians, Nestorians, &c. in that voluminous Book, but refer him to what he[Page 137]says more briefly in his other late Works; for he repeats it in many of them. P. 27. of his Plea, He would not have the Arian Emperours made worse than they were, because they were for Toleration of both Parties; nor were the Arians themselves like the Socinians (saith he) be­cause they acknowledged all save the [...] (i.e.) save the Divinity of Christ, which was all then in Controversie. How dangerous­ly (saith he, as if he were pleading for the Arians) did Justine and most of the Ancient Doctors, before the Nicene Council, speak here­about; and how certainly Eusebius and other great Bishops were Arians; and how the Coun­cil at Ariminum laid by the Word [...] endeavouring reconcilation, I need not send you to Philostorgus or Sondeus (Arian Authors) for proof. If the Conformist should have said half so much, he and the whole Church should have smarted for it.

In the Dispute between St. Cyril and Nesto­rius, whether the Virgin Mary might be cal­led the Mother of God, you may see how par­tially he describes both the Persons and Opi­nions, p. 271. of his Plea: Nestorius (saith he) was a Man of Study and Retirement, a poor garb, and a strict life, (i.e. a Presbyterian) abhorring publick Contentions, and loving Qui­etness, till he got to be uppermost; and then he shewed a peevish Zeal against Dissenters, called Hereticks. Then for St. Cyril of Alexandria, whose Works praise him in all the Churches,[Page 138]Mr. Baxter hath scarce a good word for him, because he was the first Bishop that used the Sword, and persecuted the Dissenters: He was a Man (saith he) of great Parts, Spirit, and Power; but the Head of a Turbulent Peo­ple. As to their Opinions, the Errour of the Ne­storians lay in his want of skill in speaking, saith Mr. Baxter, and the Controversie was about words rather than matter. Most of the People were for Nestorius, and most of the Courtiers and Clergy against him; and so was the Emperour, who deposed Nestorius, and restored Cyril: but Nestorius returned to his Monastery, and there lived four Years in Peace and great Reputation; but afterwards was Banished into Foreign Coun­tries, and died. I wonder why after Four Years he should be Banished, if he had lived peaceably and quietly. Did not Mr. Baxter ever read how the Emperour Theodotius con­firming the Decrees of the Third General Council at Ephesus, commanding, That none should dare to keep, read, or transcribe the wick­ed Books of the profane and sacrilegious Nestori­us, but search them out, cause them to be burnt publickly; and that none permit them to have any House or Field to hold private or publick As­semblies; and whoever adhered to Nestorius, should suffer the loss of his Goods? By which Edict (saith the Perfect) our pious Emperour knowing the Orthodox Religion to be the strength of the Empire, hath taken away all the seeds of Impiety. Edictum Theodosii in fine[Page 139]Concilii. I see no reason why Mr. Baxter should speak so favourably of Nestorius, though I have considered all that he writes, but that he might make his Readers think more con­temptible of Cyril, who was so great, learned, and good a Bishop. Vincentius Lyrinensis, an approved Author, who lived near that time, writes thus: Infelix ille Nestorius subito ex Ove conversus in Lupum gregem Christi lacerare cepit; Cum enim hi ipsi qui rodebantur, ex ma­gna adhuc parte Ovem crederent, morsibus ejus magis patebant. Nam quis eum facile errare ar­bitraretur, quem tanto Imperii Judicio electum, tanto Sacerdotum studio prosecutum videret, Qui cum magno Sanctorum amore, Summo populi favo­re celebraretur, quotidie palam divina tractabat eloquia, & noxios quo (que) Judaeorum & Gentilem confutabat errores. This is as much as Mr. Bax­ter could say for him: But what follows? Qui ut uni haeresi suae aditum patefaceret, cunctarum Haeresewn blasphemias insectabatur, cap. 16. and cap. 17. In audito scelere duos vult esse filios Dei; unum Deum, alterum hominem; unum qui ex patre, alterum qui sit generatus ex matre: at (que) ideo asserit Sanctam Mariam non [...] (i.e., sed [...] (i.e. dicendam, quia scilicet ex eâ non ille Christus qui Deus, sed qui homo, erat natus. Quod si quis eum putat in literis unum Christum dicere, & unam Christi personam, non temere cre­dat, hoc enim fraudulentiae causâ, & conceptus sen partus virginei tempore duos Christos fuisse contendit. Who will not believe this Father, [Page 140]that lived in those days, a Man of great Lear­ning and Integrity, before a late prejudiced Person that serves a Party? Another instance of Mr. Baxter's racking Ecclesiastical History, to make it speak his sence against Bishops, is his account of Novatus and Novatian, one of which he calls an ill chosen Bishop of Rome, i.e. Novatian; though indeed they were both ambitious Presbyters: and Novatus and African Priest (saith Mr. Baxter) went to Rome to make Novatian a Bishop, p. 36. when Cornelius was duly elected before: Of which St. Cyprian saith, Agnoscant atque intelligant Episcopo semel facto, & collegarum ac plebis testimonio & judicio com­probato, alium constitui nullo modo posse, Epist. 4. ad Cornel. For indeed Novation was an am­bitious Presbyter that contended against Cor­nelius to thrust him out of his Chair, for ad­mitting those to his Communion who in the time of Persecution under Decius had denied the Faith, supposing that they could not re­pent after such a fall. In opposition to such, he calls his Faction the Cathari (which Mr. Baxter knows how to English.) This pure Presbyter sent for three Rustick Bishops, as my Author calls them, from Italy, to come to him at Rome, under pretence of mediating for him with Cornelius and the other Bishops. Being come he entertains them with plenty of good Chear and Wine (which is still in fashion with that sort of People;) and when they had well drank, some of his Party force the Bi­shops [Page 141]to lay their hands on Novatian, and make him an Ʋtopian Bishop: for it will puz­zle Mr. Baxter to name his Title, though he call him an ill chosen Bishop of Rome; which Title he gives him, only to draw an Odium on the Bishops, though the great troubles brought upon the Church by their Errours and Schisms, were wholly the fruit of their Envy against Cornelius the lawful Bishop of Rome. Of which St. Cyprian also gives a full account, who caused the meeting of some Councils to suppress them. Yet Mr. Baxter (such is his Zeal for Anti-Prelatical Men) thus excuseth the matter: It was Zeal against Errour, which made both the Novatians and the Donatists run into Errour, p. 32. And though that long and sad Schisms did ensue, yet he thus excuseth it: The Rigour of the Novatians was increased by their offence at other mens sinful latitude and tepidity, p. 35.

Chap. 3. Mr. Baxter treats of the Council of Nice, and the Heresie of Arius.

P. 45. Mr. Baxter says, That Athanasius re­fusing to admit Arius to his Communion, caused much Calamities: And p. 46. They that had ga­thered Separate Churches, did communicate with Arius that they might be delivered from the Per­secution of a godly Bishop, (i.e.) from Atha­nasius, whom Mr. Baxter confesseth to be a godly Bishop: but being Bishop, and opposing the Arian Conventicles, he is a Persecutor. That you may see the Partiality of this Historian,[Page 142]I shall give you a brief History of the growth of Arianism. Arius a Presbyter, was con­demned in the first General Council at Nice, for denying the Deity of Christ, making him a Creature; for which he was banished by Constantine, as the cause of great Division and Corruption in the Church. But there was a certain Presbyter who grew into so great fa­miliarity with Constantia the Emperours Sister, as to perswade her that Arius had been abu­sed by the Council, and did not hold the Opi­nions for which he was condemned: Where­upon Constantine recals Arius, and enquires into the truth of that report; and Constantia dying, recommends this Presbyter to the Emperour her Brother, as worthy of his favour; and when Constantine died, this Presbyter carrieth the News to Constantius, that his Father had bequeathed the Eastern Empire to him: Which being what he hoped for, he received the Presbyter into his Favour, and kept him in his Court; where first he infected some of the Eunuchs with that Errour, and by their means the Empress also, and so the Emperour himself. Socrates l. 1.19. and l. 2.2. This revived the Arian Faction: Arius is restored to Alexandria, from whence the multitude of his Followers having conspired the death of Athanasius, Constantine had removed Athana­sius into Gallia, where Constans his Son then lived, who entertained him with some respect; and writes to his Brother Constantius to admit[Page 143]him again to Alexandria, or threatneth him with War, lib. 2. cap. 18. Whereupon A­thanasius is restored, but his life is in perpe­tual danger, the Arians being more in num­ber than the Orthodox. Hosius Bishop of Corduba, a Man of great Age and Learning, and a constant Assertor of the Truth, was shame­fully whipped and tortured by them, lib. 2. cap. 26. And though they were condemned by the Councils of Milain and Ariminum, Con­stantius favours them, and threatneth the Councils. To him succeeded Julian the Apo­state, then Jovianus, who reigned but Seven Months; then Valentian, who admitted Va­lens and Arian to partake of the Empire: All which time the Arians exercised great cruelty not only on the Orthodox Bishops, but a­gainst each other; for under them sprang up the Novatians and Eunomians, lib. 4. cap. 23. and lib. 5. cap. 20. who all agreed in the Arian Heresie, but persecuted one another: So did the Macedonians, lib. 2. cap. 13. and 35. and the Nestorians, who burnt the Arian Church at Constantinople, lib. 7. cap. 20. vexed the Novatians and Macedonians, lib. 7. cap. 31. And all this by the instigation of Anastatius a Presbyter, lib. 7. cap. 32. Yet all these T [...] ­mults are imputed to the Bishops, who all the while suffered from the heretical Presby [...] the true Ancestors of Mr. Baxter.

Chap. 7. Mr. Baxter treats of the Tria Capitula.

The Tria Capitula were three Chapters men­tioned in the Council of Chalcedon, in which the Nestorians, who could not longer defend their Heresie under the Name of its Author, sought to cloke it under the Name and Wri­tings of Theodorus Bishop of Mopsuestia; of Theodoret's Writings against St. Cyril; and an Epistle of Ibas unto Maris. These made the Tria Capitula, for which Pope Vigilius and some of his Party appeared: But the Empe­rour Justinian and the Catholick Bishops ap­peared against them. Many Sectaries who were condemned under the name of the Ace­phali, disclaimed this Council; others preten­ded it had approved of the Tria Capitula. Great Divisions ensued hereupon. Justinian knowing that the Council of Chalcedon had exploded that Heresie, sends forth his Impe­rial Edict, wherein accursing the Authors and Abettors of those Tria Capitula, he summons the Fifth General Council of Constantinople; at which the Pope refused to be present; noluit interesse, saith Bellarmine; and the true reason was, because he favoured that Heresie, and approved not of the Council of Chalcedon, which was held without him, and did deter­mine for the Prerogative of Constantinople a­gainst[Page 145]him. Vigilius, though he came not himself, sent his Decree which maintained that Heresie, and was confuted in the Sixth Collation of the Council of Constans. And they set forth a most holy Confession of their Faith, consonant in all points to that which the Holy Apostles preached; which the four former Councils explained, and the holy Fa­thers with uniform consent maintained.

Now I would desire Mr. Baxter to re­solve me, whether the blame of those Commo­tions which followed on this Dissention, is to be laid on the Emperour and the Catholick Bi­shops who sided with him in defence of the true Faith, against Nestorianism, as Binius and Baronius would have it; or on the Pope and his Italians, who pleaded for that Heresie; and together with the Agnoites, Gainaites, The­odosians, Themistians, and the rest of the Ace­phali, promoted and continued those Broils.

Chap. 9. Consisting of about Sixty Pages, is spent about the Worshipping of Images, whereof he makes the Bishops Patrons: Whereas many, both Emperours and Bishops, suffered very much as Iconoclastes. (i.e.) the destroyers of Images. Bishop Jewel challen­geth the Church of Rome to shew but one Authority, during Six hundred Years of the Church, for worshipping Images, and is not yet answered. The rise of which in brief, was this: The Arcans and Donatists having wa­sted the Church, made way for vast numbers[Page 146]of Infidels to enter in, who brought with them, and superstitiously honoured the Images of their Benefactors; and many ignorant Chri­stians learned their customs: The Pictures of St. Peter and St. Paul we read of in Ancient History; but withal we read they were not permitted to be brought into the Churches. The opposition made against them, may be seen in the Magdeburg. In the year 754 the Bishops disputed against them, and in a Coun­cil at Constantinople, consisting of 338 Bi­shops. How Leo Isauricus and Gregory Bishop of Neocaesaria opposed them, is too large to repeat. It was about the year 787, that I­rene, who was Daughter to a Pagan King of Tartaria, gave publick countenance to Image-worship. She ruling as Empress in the mi­nority of Constantine her Son, promoted this Pagan custom: for, as Mr. Hales observes, Dux femina facti, she was a Woman of so Tyrannous a Spirit, that she caused the eyes of her Son Constantine to be put out; which struck a great awe into the Christians under her. One cause of her Cruelty to her Son, being his op­posing this Image-worship. But finding one Tarasius to be of her mind, she makes him Patriarch of Constantinople, and calls a Coun­cil at Nice consisting of 350 Bishops, most of them Arians; and so about the year 787, they Decreed for Image-worship. But in the year 792, all was reversed by Charles the Great in a Council at Frankfort. One Decree[Page 147]mentioned by Mr. Baxter I shall remind him of; it is p. 213. A man that had his hands in blood, must not be a Bishop.

Another Heresie which makes the Church History to swell, is that of the Monothelites, of which Mr. Baxter speaks, ch. 8. And because he saith nothing of the rise of it, I shall. It was occasioned by one John Philoponus a Pres­byter, who wrote subtilly concerning it, and drew many to his Opinion, Anno 517. but all the time that Justinian was Emperour, they hid themselves, and propagated their Heresie in Conventicles; for it was condem­ned by 175 Bishops, in the fifth Synod of Constantinople, and confuted by the Learned Bishop Gregory Nazianzene, and by 603 Bi­shops in the fourth General Council at Chal­cedon, and in the sixth Synod of Constanti­nople by 170 Bishops. But after the death of Theodosius, Philippicus succeeded, of whose Succession a Monotholite Monk had foretold him; and that if he would rescind the De­crees of the sixth Synod, and favour the Mo­nothelites, he should raign long and happily. This made Philippicus to espouse that Cause; and presently he banisheth Cyrus Patriarch of Constantinople, and many Orthodox Bishops: He maketh one John a Presbyter Patriarch, and filleth up the vacant Bishopricks with Presbyters of that Faction; and then assem­bles them, and confirms that Heresie. But the Bishops of the Western Churches resisted[Page 148]it, and sent thundering Letters against it. And it is no wonder that the Orthodox Bi­shops did hide themselves under this Tyran­ny, or that Philippicus found Presbyters to make Bishops in their room, who defended him and the Faction: For it is well known how many such in our Age adhered to usur­ping Powers, and defended as great both State and Ecclesiastical Heresies, as this of the Monothelites, and would not permit the Bishops to appear. But if these Presbyters had taken the name of Bishops under Crom­wel, as the Monothelites did under Philippicus, you might with as much truth have affirmed, that innumerable Bishops did in the times of our Confusions defend Rebellion and Here­sie, as, that the Bishops who suffered all manner of indignities from the Monothelites, did defend that Errour, or raise those Tu­mults. This Philippicus within a year and half was deprived of the Empire by the same Souldiers that set him up; who put out his Eyes, and left him to die in Prison as a Ty­rant. These instances (for I remember that I am writing a Character of Mr. Baxter, and not of the ancient Hereticks) may suffice to acquaint the Reader of the ingenuity of this Man, who rails intolerably against others as corrupters of History, when it appears he had no other design in this Collection, but to serve his Hypothesis, and implacable ma­lice against the Bishops, and inrage the Peo­ple[Page 149]to set the Nation in a Flame. It is but a small matter for Mr. Baxter to support himself in Church History: He can bid open defiance to the Laws of the Land, which he calls tea­ring Engines, and Enemies to God's publick Worship, and ought to be disobeyed, because it is written, Whether it be better to obey God or Man, judge ye.

He begins with a modest complaint, p. 101. of first Plea; It is not the sence of the Liturgy (in that they seem satisfied) but a Statute of Parliament which we doubt of: it seems insufficient, if not impertinent, to tell us what is taken for the sence of the Church; for the doubt is, what is the sence of the Parlia­ment, which we cannot otherwise know, but by their plain words, till they will otherwise de­clare their meaning: (i.e.) They must de­clare a meaning contrary to their plain words. But Mr. Baxter speaks plain enough, Plea the first, That the Laws required of them such Sub­scriptions, Covenants, Declarations and Practi­ces, as they durst not do, because they feared God. A strange Parliament, to make so many Laws as a Man that feareth God cannot obey! If Mr. Baxter had any Fear or Reverence of Men, he would not thus Reproach the Go­vernours, and Defame their Laws, and all the while cry out of Persecution. But what are those impious Laws? This you find in ano­ther Book called, A search for the English Schis­matick; where he states the Case between the [Page 150] Diocesan Canoneers, and the present meer Non­conformists; and though he determine not (as he says) which of them is the Schismatick, yet he makes the Book to be a pair of Spectacles for the Purblind to discern it, p. 43. This is just as he dealt by his first Plea, where he tells us he will not urge the Case, but men­tion Matters of Fact only: Yet in his Book of Concord, he says, To answer the earnest de­mand of our Reasons (against Conformity) by you the Lord Bishop of Ely, I have published an Historical Narration, &c. How did this answer the Bishop's earnest demand of Rea­sons, if it did not contain them, when Mr. Baxter says that was the end of publishing that Book? Any one that useth Mr. Baxter's Spe­ctacles may see they were his Reasons, though he might well be ashamed to call them so. But as for those Spectacles that will so plainly discover the English Schismaticks, a very skil­ful Artist hath turned into a Looking-glass, which if Mr. Baxter be not afraid to make use of, he may thereby see him whom he pre­tends to search for: it is called, A Discourse about Church Ʋnity, in defence of the Bishop of Worcester. The Laws opposed, are such as were made on mature deliberation, to secure our Peace: The Act for Uniformity and Re­nouncing the Covenant: The Declaration, that it is not lawful on any pretence whatso­ever, &c. The Book last mentioned, shews his Malice to the Parliament, in making false[Page 151]and odious Representations of them to the People, p. 457. It is scarce worth the notice, that he says the Parliament was drawn in by the Convocation to make those Acts: P. 13. of his Search. this is but Scan­dalum Magnatum. He comes near to Blas­phemy, p. 107. of his third Defence, where he pleads for excusing the ignorant People, who, when Divisions fall out between King and Parliament, do doubt which it is that should be obeyed: (He adds) Christ was drawn by Hypocrites to pay Tribute to Caesar, rather than offend; as if our Saviour did what he ne­ver intended, or really approved, to com­ply with Hypocrites. And who can wonder if he that speaks thus of the Master, should not stick to revile his Disciples, making the Con­formists so many deliberately perjured Per­sons; and, which is in his own Language Men­dacium magnum, That about Six thousand Per­sons that had gone the other way, did declare their assent and consent to a Book which they never saw, p. 69. of his second Defence, Mr. Baxter complains,Preface to Dio­cesan Bishops. That at such time as he was turned out of all, he was never in so good a condi­tion as to keep a Man-servant (except when he travelled) nor a Maid-servant, except an old Woman to provide him Necessaries; and lived in some upper Rooms of another Man's House: and yet (he says) he built a Tabernacle in St. Mar­tins to preach in himself, p. 55. of his second [Page 152]and lost One thousand pounds in the Exchequer He hoped, it seems to gain a reputation among the Factious, of being their great Centurion, who loved their Nation, and built them a Syna­gogue. But it is very observable, that if at such time as Mr. Baxter was turned out of all, he was in so low a Condition, that he got well by his Non-conformity, being able to part with a considerable Sum to build Taber­nacles. One Intreague I find darkly deliver­ed, p. 250. of his first Plea: Even Bishops (saith Mr. Baxter) need to be remembred, that while the Wheel is turning, the upper side should not tempt Men to forget what side will be upper­most shortly and for ever. The words are am­biguous, like the old Oracles, and may be interpreted pro captu Lectoris, but whether he means the Revolutions of Providence, as by the turning of the Wheel seems most proper, or the Divine Judgment at last, it savours of equal Pride, Malice, and Uncharitableness. In Mr. Corbet's Funeral Sermon, p. 33. preacht by Mr. Baxter, he speaks more plain: It seems (saith he) there is some great evil to come, when God takes away the best: yea, if it should be a fore-runner of a better state, yet all save two of the old stock that dishonoured God perished: And it was by bloody Wars that Joshua and the new GENERATION were to possess the Land of Promise. But the Oracle is expounded by o­ther Cabalistical Rabbies, who tell us boldly, the time of the Episcopal Persecution is but short: [Page 153]And on that confidence invite those whom Mr. Baxter calls the passive Conformists, to come over to them, promising them a kinder entertainment than they have had from their Brethren of the Conformity: Spes est fore ut Fanatici quos vocant, utamur illis aequioribus, saith the Celeusma, p. 34. There is now good hope that we whom they call Fanaticks, may shew them more favour. Now whether these Men be not engaged in some Plot for the extirpa­tion of the Ecclesiastical Government by Law established, to which end they so importu­nately plead for the Obligation of the Cove­nant, let the Reader judge. Time may disco­ver what an ingenious Man hints in his De­fence of the Bishop of Worcester, p. 68. I will tell Mr. Baxter a Secret which I have heard, but hope he will not put me to prove it, That the Par­liament made good Laws, the Papists out of a pretended reverence to tender Consciences, hin­dred the Execution of them, and some leading Fanaticks had private Encouragement (to say no more) to set up a mighty cry of Persecution, to cast all the odium on a persecuting Church and Diocesan Canoneers. Dr. Owen noses this hint: Some have reported (says he) that some of the Non-conformists at least do receive, or have re­ceived Money from the Papists to act their Af­fairs, and promote their interest; which he (very angrily) calls, a putrid Calumny, a mali­cious Falshood, a frontless Lye: and for him­self, he avows, that never any Person in Autho­rity, [Page 154]Dignity, or Power in the Nation, or any that had any relation to Publick Affairs, nor from them, Papist or Protestant, did once speak one word to him, or advise with him about any Indulgence or Toleration to be granted to the Pa­pists. He says not that he never received any Money to promote a general Toleration, which he (thinking himself particularly re­flected on) might have done in few words. And my Author desires Dr. O. to resolve him, Why a Fast was appointed by a certain Indepen­dent Pastor at that time on the fifth of Novem­ber, which (as he notes) is no Popish Festival. 'Tis a miserable shift which the Doctor useth, speaking at large of the plain, open, uncon­troulable Evidence which the Non-conformists always gave, and continue to give, of their faithful cordial adherence to the Protestant Religion and Interest in the Nation; where­as ever since Forty one, they have notoriously scandalized, and as much as in them lay, ru­ined the Protestant Religion and National Interest.

His dealing with Mr. Cheney is most un­christian; for in the Preface of his third De­fence, he judgeth him a godly serious Man; yet, saith he, his Book is so dismal a piece in its extraordinary privation of common Reason, Truth, Charity, Tenderness, and Modesty, that I am constrained to think that honest Man is diseasedly Melancholy: and reports, that his Book is [...] away as a fardle of dotage and [Page 155]shameless lyes, p. 2. of Second Part. Yet if a sober Reader be admitted to judge, this me­lancholy Man hath so provoked Mr. Baxter's choler, that he seems quite to have lost his Reason, and betakes himself to Railing. One Argument Mr. Cheney may well boast of, which Mr. Baxter calls his Catholicon, concerning a confident Tenet of Mr. Baxter, That the Acts for Ʋniformity and Prefaces are parts of the Book of Common Prayer, to which we are to de­clare our Assent, &c. Now it is said in a Pre­face concerning the Service of the Church, That forasmuch as nothing can be so plainly set forth, but doubts may arise in the use and practice of the same; to appease all such diversity, if any arise, and for the resolution of all doubts con­cerning the manner how to understand, do, and execute the things contained in this Book, the parties that so doubt, or diversly take any thing, (as do now the Conformists and Non-confor­mists; for Mr. Baxter says, they could do and declare as the Conformists do, if they could get the sence of the Acts, &c. to be expounded so as the Conformists understand them) (N.B.) shall al­ways resort to the Bishop of the Diocess, who by his discretion shall take order for the quieting and appeasing of the same; so that the same Order be not contrary to any thing contained in this Book: And if the Bishop of the Diocess be in doubt, then he may send for the Resolution of the Arch­bishop. Mr. Baxter answers, That the words make not the Bishops Expositors of the Law or Book, as[Page 156]Judge, but as a Teacher only. Mr. Cheney re­plies, Any intelligent Man may help the ignorant to understand the things in the Book; but the Bishops are made decisive Judges, to order in what manner to understand, do, and execute all (doubtful) things in the Book, p. 212. And p. 213. he tells Mr. Baxter, The late Covenan­ters had not such Security for their Consciences, in taking that Oath in a sense varying from the pre­cise Letter, as the Conformists have for their Sub­scriptions, &c. And thus the melancholy Man beat the Conjurer out of his Circle, and in his third Defence he takes no notice of it.

As for Mr. Hooker, how contemptibly doth he speak of him, p. 74. saying, That a long tedious Discourse in him hath as much substance as one might put into a Syllogism of six Lines. And in his Preface to the Answer of the Bi­shop of Worcester, I am, says Mr. Baxter, past doubt, that Richard Hooker, Bp. Hall, Bp. Usher, were they now alive, would be Non-conformists.

In the year 1681. comes forth Mr. Baxter's Apology for the Non-conformist Ministers, in ju­stification of their preaching against Law. This he directs to the Right Reverend Bishops of London, Lincoln, Hereford, Carlisle, St. Davids, and Peterborough, and others of their moderati­on, in some hope, though evil Men and Deceivers wax worse and worse. What his hope is, he tells them, If the ancient Christians might pre­sent their Apology in hope to Heathen Emperours, may I not so much more to Christian Bishops? [Page 157]You are more sensible than we, with what deep sense Men will shortly hear, Inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these my Brethren, you did it unto me. See his Charity to those whom he calls our best Bishops! But in p. 233. he thus concludes: And now we humbly lay these Petitions at your feet, and beseech you for the souls of many hundred thousands, that you who call your selves their Pastors, and the Fa­thers of the Church, will not deny them the bread of Life. We beseech you to come out of your Pa­laces a while, and be familiar with the People, and confer with all the Poor of the Parish, and dwell in some Country Village as we have done, (who choose the greatest Cities and Towns) that you may not see many hundred thousands damned by your means, and you have nothing to say when it is to late, but a non putaram: That the Instances of the Obduration of Pharaoh and the Pharisees, make you not afraid, lest wrath come upon you to the utmost, while you please not God, and are contrary to all Men, forbidding Christ's Labourers to preach to the Ignorant and Impenitent, that they may be sa­ved, 1 Thess. 2.15. And O that God would make them sensible how many thousand Persons damnation is like to be charged upon them for what they have already done, for seventeen years hindring so many faithful Ministers! I must profess, if it were the last word that I should speak in the world, that I had rather be the basest Scavenger, yea, and suffer many deaths, than [Page 158]be found at the Judgment Seat of Christ in the place and guilt of those of you who have done what is done against the Gospel and Church of Christ in this Land. Doth not the Reader blush for Mr. Baxter, to read such arrogant Censures from a dying Man concerning his betters? and all this too causelesly, as I shall prove out of his own words. He asks the Question, p. 236. Why I write all this to you, and not to his Maje­sty and the Parliament? I answer, It is not them, nor any of their Laws or Actions, which in all this Book I intend to speak against. (Mend. Mag.) For though he had indeed done it suf­ficiently in other, yet this Book was penned on purpose to justifie the preaching of Non­conformists, though forbidden by Law. P. 102. He raiseth the Objection of preaching in Cities, &c. against Laws. And Answ. Did not the ancient Christians also disobey a lawful [...]er when forbidden? &c. As if Christian Magistrates were to be reputed as the Hea­then Persecutors. But to omit this, p. 104. he says (N.B.) No Bishops have silenced us by Spiritual Government that we know of, but only as Barons by the Secular Laws, to which they gave their Votes, (and he acknowledgeth) all did not. And if any shall read the Pream­bles to those Acts, he may plainly see, the cause of making them was not only the late dreadful Experience which the Nation had of the Confusions caused by the preaching of such Men, but their present endeavours to re­duce [Page 159]us to the like again; which (all those Acts notwithstanding) they are still labour­ing for. This is evident, that Mr. Baxter, though he were Ordained by a Bishop, and sub­scribed, (though as he confesseth, he had not read the Book of Ordination, nor exactly weighed what he subscribed to, p. 59. for it seems, he was a passive Conformist, and one that came into the Church to find a better opportunity to pull it down;) he did partake with Mr. Pryn in an Antipathy against Lordly Prelacy, and glorieth in being stiled the Antisignanus Presbyterorum, p. 11. And p. 6. he tells us of one Fenne, a famous Country Non-conformist, who with a loud voice would say Amen to all the Prayers in the Liturgy, except that for Bishops; to which his silence was accounted a dissent. Doubtless Mr. Baxter is of the same mind; he cannot pray for them, lest it should seem a compliance with Church Tyranny, and a frame of Government destructive of the Churches Ministry, p. 241. and with such Persons as professing themselves Fathers of the Church, are grand Enemies of Christ and Souls, and the Captains in the Army of the De­vil, p. 243. I have heard a late Report of a Rebel in Scotland, who being under Condem­nation, was put in mind of begging Pardon, and to say, God bless the King: but his An­swer was, He would not purchase his life at so dear a rate. Let the Reader judge how near Mr. Baxter approacheth that temper, who will not, and cannot indeed pray for the Bishops as such, but[Page 160]rather suffer many deaths, than be in their case, &c. How amazing a passage is that, p. 135. When you are in the dust, the world will not be afraid of you, but freely tread upon you, Hic Jacet, (Mr. Love did as bad by Arch­bishop Land while he was alive) and cast up your bones to make room for others, and talk of you and your acts as freely as of King Henry the Eighth, Queen Mary, Bishop Bonner and Gard­ner, are now talked of. As if our Bishops were the Successours of those, and not of Cranmer, Latimer, Ridly, Hooper, and other Martyrs of that Age, who died for the Defence of that Reformation, which our Bishops still defend against both Papists and Fanaticks. But E­tiam post mortem invidia: How sollicitous is dying Mr. Baxter to bequeath a double porti­on of his Anti-Prelatical Spirit to the People; who by prophesying what they will be, tells them what he would have them to be; (i.e.) Perpetual and implacable Enemies to the Bishops, p. 187. And in his Prognostick, to which he refers, how often doth he croak over his Cant of Perjury, a sin meet for none but utterly debauched Consciences, and such as threatneth dreadful ruine. Such principles and practices would make us guilty of the perjury and impeni­tence of many hundred thousand persons, p. 154. And p. 219. Aggravated perjury, deliberate ly­ing, rebellious profession of disobedience to God, owning great and publick sins, corrupting holy Worship, &c. P. 221. The sins which we fear [Page 161](viz. in Conformity) be of the greatest sort that Hell suggesteth, perjury, and owning the perjury of thousands, and doing that which is e­quivalent to the preaching of impenitency, and saying, Repent not, for I declare it is no sin, and lying deliberately, and making a publick Mini­sterial profession of Ʋsurpation and Church Cor­ruptions, and of our resolution never to obey God in doing any duty of ours in order to a Reforma­tion, &c. Will any Man believe that Mr. Bax­ter is so grievously persecuted, who hears him thus affronting the Laws, and reviling and provoking Authority? P. 200. It may be your great Patrons may die, or fall, or forsake you; and then your hearts are broken. It may be death (he seemeth to speak of a violent death, as p. 204. One Felton may end the great Duke of Buckingham, p. 205. Or they may meet with such Executioners as Cardinal Beton) may enter into your Families, and make you think what blood-thirstiness doth tend to. And you must consider also, that if blood or destruction be the means you trust to, you must set up a Shambles or Trade of Butchery, and make it the profession of all your lives, &c. which I abhor to relate what he there talks at large. And p. 226, 227. The world already thinks that the Clergy are so covetous, proud, and envious, that like the great Dog that hath got the Carrion, snarls at every little Dog that looketh at them, suspecting they come to take some from him: it is the common opinion, that the Clergy are the Incendiaries.

[Page 162] Troublers of the World; and that the worst Princes left to themselves, are not half so cruel against the faithful preachers and practisers of Christianity, as if they persecuted it (eo nomine) as the proud and covetous Clergy are. Now that it hath been Mr. Baxter's work to effect this temper in the People, he gives us this in­stance, besides what I might mention in Lon­don and Kedderminster, p. 90. I love to instance where I dwell, and see because of certainty. This Market Town of Barnet ten miles from London, was so extreamly addicted to your way, so impati­ent of the Directory and Ministry now cast out, that one who was their Minister in times of Ʋ ­surpation told me, he was fain to leave them, and professed he was really afraid lest they would have put him into the Grave, and buried him alive, for burying a Corps (without Common Pray­er) according to the Directory: And now the Case is so much altered, that though the Town consists so much of Inns and Ale-houses, a pri­vate meeting near the Church is so much crow­ded as the Churches were, and the Church is al­most empty. Egregias vero laudes, & spolia ampla! the Inns and Ale-houses are become Conventicles, by Mr. Baxter's Reformation, and the Church forsaken.

From p. 197, to 210. you have a continu­ed cry of the bloodiness of Bishops, com­paring them to Foxes, Wolves, and Kites, that live on flesh, and devour those that are better than themselves, p. 201. Yet, contrary to all[Page 163]this clamour, he says, p. 104. No Bishops have silenced as by spiritual Government, (i.e. as Bishops) but only as Barons by the Secular Laws to which they gave their Votes, which yet all did not. Yea Mr. Baxter acknowledgeth their favour to himself in particular: For my part, (saith he, ibidem) I have one or two of their Licenses never recalled nor nulled. Are these Men such horrible Persecutors, who did no more than the whole Nation in Parliament have done for Peace sake? yet all their Silencing and Sufferings are charged most invidiously on the Bishops, as if it were done by their sole Authority: for one reason why they cannot give over Preaching is, p. 241. n. 11. It will be an encouraging compli­ance with Church-tyranny, to give over preach­ing as oft as Bishops forbid us, because we will not take their Oaths, and be stigmatiz'd with their PER. The Bishops as Bishops require no more now, than what was required when Mr. Baxter and others subscribed at their Or­dination; and they are most likely to bear the PER, who act contrary, not they who act conformably to their Subscription. The great cry of Perjury is raised in favour of the Covenant: Yet Mr. Baxter, p. 112. of his A­pology, says, I never heard abjuring (the Co­venant) was required of the Ministers: they are only to subscribe, That there is no obliga­tion on them or any other Person to endeavour any change or alteration of Government in the[Page 164]Church. And can this be thought a sufficient reason for Mr. Baxter a Man of 74 years old to cry out as a Child that hath fancied a Bug­bear, till he puts himself into dangerous fits, and afrights all the Neighbourhood?

So bold and bloody are his accusations a­gainst the Bishops and Clergy especially, for Persecution and Perjury, that if a Stranger should read them, he might think them meer Cannibals that lived on Humane flesh, or incarnate fiends that delighted in Sacrifices of Blood; though Mr. Baxter all the while knows them to be very innocent and tame persons. For though he represent them as Lions greedy of prey, yet dares he pluck them by the Beards, and disgorge his filth in their mouths; and after all imaginable provocati­ons, trusts himself between their Teeth and Claws, as he is pleased to phrase it. So great a Master of Discipline is Mr. Baxter. But though he deal thus with the Bishops, yet he should not make so bold with the King and Parlia­ment, and their Tearing Engines of the Laws, as to write whole Volumes in defiance of them.

When the two Cromwels were on the Throne, he taught a Doctrine quite contra­ry to his Apology for their practice then under King Charles. Then he taught us, That God never instituted Churches to be kept up in dis­obedience to those Christian Magistrates which he commands us to obey upon pain of Damnation. [Page 165]p. 352. of his H. Commonwealth. And The­sis 319. That Disobedience to our Rulers, is in Ministers double treason and wickedness. And 240 Thesis, That it is necessary to the Churches peace, that no private Congregations may be gathe­red, or Antichurches erected, without approbation or toleration from the Magistrates: And that if private Assemblies be permitted unlimitedly, then, 1. It will be impossible to restrain Here­sie, Infidelity, or Impiety: Yea, 2. They may meet to plot against the Magistrate. And no Assemblies whatsoever (he means besides those of the Parish-Church) are to be allowed by the Magistrate. And Thes. 263. If Magistrates forbid Ministers to preach or exercise the rest of their Office in their Dominions, they are to be o­beyed; as he instances in David and Solomon taking down and setting up Priests, and or­dering Officers in the House of God. Were the two Cromwels such as David and Solomon, to be intrusted with the House of God? and is King Charles like Jeroboam, whose interest it was to suppress the true Worship of God, and permit Calves to be set up at Dan and Bethel? I would fain see Mr. Baxter's Reasons for the Ʋniformity of the Churches then, more than now; and wherein Oliver and Richard did more Piously, Faithfully, and Prudently ex­ercise the Government, than King Charles. I know it will grate on Mr. Baxter's spirit to have his Theses so often urged, seeing he hath desired the whole Book might be taken as non[Page 166]Scriptus; and that he retracts some things (though he adds) not all, nor tells us any par­ticulars. But, Quid verba audiam, quum fact a videam? To what purpose serves a Protestati­on against plain matter of Fact, and daily pra­ctice whereby Mr. Baxter still vindicates many ill things delivered in that Book? which he doth expresly also in the close of his Preface to the Second Plea, where he affirms, That in all the times of Ʋsurpation he said and wrote, that the Kings Person is inviolable, and to be judged by none, either Peer or Parliament; and that nei­ther the King may destroy nor hurt the Kingdom, nor the Kingdom the King. And then adds, That the very Book accused (viz. The H. Com­monwealth) goeth on such principles, and hath not a word meet to tempt a man in his wits to this accusation. The contrary to which hath been often rehearsed, to Mr. Baxter's great regret. And his Brother Dr. Owen rightly tells him, That they who will take liberty to speak what they please, must be content to hear sometime what will displease. And I would desire him to reconcile the former Theses of the Obedience of Mini­sters under Cromwel, to his late Doctrine of re­solved Disobedience to our present Gover­nours. For p. 226. of his First Plea, he teach­eth, That Pastors preached against the will of Princes for Three hundred years. And p. 26. That God wrought Miracles to justifie such Prea­chers when forbidden by Christian Princes, who spake freely after their Tongues were cut out;[Page 167]That there is a wo unto them if they preach not, and many woes to them that shall forbid them; which is the subject of his Apology.

Can Mr. Baxter wonder that no Man An­swers these Books of his, when the smoak, and flame, and stink of them is so horribly mis­chievous and inaccessible, as if it came forth from the Bottomless-pit? And this is the work of his Fellow-labourers, of whom he says, p. 163. There is not this day on Earth a more conscionable, godly, faithful Party of the Ministers of the Gospel, than those that are now ejected, silenced, Nonconformists in England: And his Testimony (he speaks it of himself) shall be believed when the Defamers and Calum­niators shall not.

These Books and some other, (of which hereafter) he covers over with much combu­stible matter, prepared many years past, a­gainst such false and bloody Plotters (i.e. the Bishops) as would perswade the King and Peo­ple that the Nonconformists are Presbyterians and Fanaticks: That it was such Presbyterians that killed his Father; and that their princi­ples are rebellious, and that they are plotting a Rebellion and his death; and lastly, that this is the Genius of the Parliament. I hope what­ever Mr. Baxter may do, no other Mans Con­science doth accuse him of such horrid crimes. All this we have in the Title-page of his Second Plea for Peace: But as the Learned Doctor observed of the First Plea, it looks[Page 168]as if he had designed these Books on purpose to represent the Clergy of our Church as a compa­ny of notorious lying and perjured Villains. These and divers other Fire-brands he fixeth in the top of the Fabrick, as if that could not be purged but with Fire, pretending it was guilty of many heinous Sins in the Con­stitution of it: And when that Reverend Doctor endeavored to quench those Juniper­coals which had well-nigh set all in a flame, he flies in his face, charging him with plea­ding for Presumption, Profanation, Ʋsurpation, Ʋncharitableness, and Schism, p. 73. of his An­swer to the Dr's Sermon. Again, when the Dr. said, that preaching in opposition to the Laws established, is contrary to the Doctrine of all the Nonconformists of former times; Mr. Baxter re­plies, p. 21. This Assertion is so rash and false in matters of notorious fact, that it weakeneth his reverence of the Doctors judgment in matters of Right, p. 8. So that the Doctor might well say, that he wrote that Book in a continued fit of Anger. And how could it be otherwise, seeing that, as Bishop Burnet relates of the Earl of Rochester, when God gave him a sight of his sins, that he confessed he had been drunk five years together: So Mr. Baxter had been distem­pered with an habit of wrath and rage against the Government of the Church ever since he was Nineteen years old; how could he chuse but write with the spirit of Gall and bitter­nest against such an Adversary as would dissect [Page 169]him alive, and discover all the Distempers of that dying Man? And what could Mr. Baxter do less than call the Doctor's Sermon a Schis­matical Sermon, that would so divide Mr. Baxter that makes Union impossible in any Church but what he himself shall give being and union to? And yet this Man of Wrath is angry with himself, that he was not more angry with the Doctor: For p. 12. of Second Defence, I profess (says he) I felt so little passion in wri­ting that Book, that I think verily I sinned all the while for want of a livelier sense of the sin and hurt which I was detecting by my Confuta­tion. And in his Title-page, dividing the Doctor's Book into Accusations, Reasonings, and History, he pronounceth them all untrue; i.e. (in plain English) You lie, Sir, in all that you have written. Perhaps Mr. Baxter may not account this Passion, but Zeal; And his admirers say, he is a Stranger to Spite and An­ger; but he hath a very quick and earnest tem­per of mind, and his stile is very keen and pungent. Yea, and they think it lawful for him too, to make the Scripture serve his passion, and rail in holy Language; for doubtless his Di­sciples think that in the Title-page, 1 Tim. 6.5,6. well applied to the Doctor, Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and desti­tute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness; from such withdraw thy self; which in plain English is, that the Doctor is one of those Men, and you are bound to have no commu­nion[Page 170]with him: For Mr. Baxter (though un­der another name) represents the Doctor to be a most unskilful, proud, partial, obstinate, cruel impertinent Adversary. Yet Mr. Silvester in his Preface, speaking of the Author (i.e.) Mr. Baxter says, I have heard him great and copious in commendation of several Prelates and Conformists, and that he particularly mention­ed the Reverend Bishops of Worcester and Eli, (i.e.) Bishop Stillingfleet, and Bishop Patrick as Persons greatly admired, and highly valu­ed by him, and of their readiness to serve the Publick interest both Civil and Religious, he doubted not, it was therefore his bitter Zeal that transported him to write such scandalous invectives contrary to his Knowledge and Conscience. But as Mr. H. says, in defence of Mr. Baxter, Some Men have humours and ways of their own. And this, it seems, is the proper humour of that Party; They think with Jonah, they do well to be angry, that God hath spared us so long; and because he suffered their Gourd to spring up and cover their heads for a time, whereof they were exceeding glad, now that he hath suffered a Worm to strike it, and make it wither, and the Wind and the Sun beats on their heads, they are desperate­ly angry for their Gourd, and justifie their anger even against God; they do well to be angry even unto death, Jonah 4.9.

His Treatise of Episcopacy, he says in the Title-page, was meditated 1640. when the &c. [Page 171] Oath was imposed; written 1671. and publi­shed 1680. by the call of Mr. H.D. and the importunity of our Superiours, who demanded the reason of our Nonconformity: The design was, the concord of all the Protestants who can never unite in the present impositions, and for necessary reformation of Parish-Churches, and those abuses which else will keep up in all Ages a succession of Nonconformists; and to give an account why we dare not covenant by Oath or Subscription to endeavour the (amending) alteration of the Church-government, &c. (i.e. in plain English) against an Act of Parlia­ment. P. 140. of his Second Part, we have this pathetical Exclamation: Alas Lord, How long shall Christs enemies (the Bishops) be Pastors of his Flocks? and the seed of the Ser­pent be the great Instrument that must break the Serpents head; and the lovers of sin be they that must be the suppressers of it; and those employed to teach in Knowledge, who themselves will not know; and to preach up Holiness, that will not endure it? And p. 124. The truth is, that is an excellent person to us, who is an odious and contemptible person to the Prelates. If he will make the People believe that Presby­terians are Rebels, and Disciplinarians are se­ditious brain-sick fellows, living in Hypocrisie: And that praying without Book, and much prea­ching, is Fanaticism; and that none are worthy to Preach the Gospel who will not swear to be true to the Prelatical interest: That Drun­kenness[Page 172]in a conformable Man is a tolerable in­firmity; and that their ignorantest Nonsence is fitter to save Souls and edifie the Church, than the Labours of the Holy and Learned Non-con­formists: That Calvin was a Rogue (as Sal­masius said of the Learned Dr. Hammond:) That Cartwright and Amesius were disconten­ted factious Schismaticks, unworthy to preach or be endured; this is a Son of the Church, and an excellent Person. P. 213. of the second Part, Confect. 3. He says, That to Swear, Sub­scribe, &c. That though Millions should swear to endeavour a Reformation of Episcopacy in their Places and Callings by lawful means (which is his addition, there is no obligation lieth on any one of them so to endeavour it) the Lord have mercy on that Land, City, or Soul that is guilty of it. And Consect. 4. All carnal Interest, and all carnal Reason, is on the Diocesans side; and all the lusts of the heart of Man, and consequently all that the Devil can do; and therefore while carnal Christians make a Religion of their Lusts and Interests, and Pride, and Covetousness, and Idleness are more predominant than the fear of God and the love of Souls, no wonder if the Diocesans Cause prevail with such. Consect. 7. Take but from such Prelates the Plumes it hath stollen from Magistrates and Presbyters, and it will be a naked thing and simple name. He says in the Preface, The Sufferers will call the Prelates Per­secutors, Wolves in Sheeps clothing, who are [Page 173]known by their fruits, their teeth and claws. P. 163. part 1. It is the Prelacy that maketh almost all the Sects that be in England this day; (whereas those little Foxes were not heard of until the Wild-boars had broken down the Fences of Episcopacy) and when they see what Ministers, and how many hundred of them are si­lenced, and what Fellows are set up in their stead, they think they can never [...]y far enough from such Prelates: and we that dwell among them do take them that dislike their course and ways, to be ge­nerally the most religious and sober People in the Land, (but I think Mr. Baxter spake in jest, when he adds) excepting always the King and Parliament. And p. 167, 168. That before the Prelates had again ruled seven years, there were seven and seven against them, for one that was so before: Which is a notorious falshood, there being a general Conformity until a Toleration was granted. And p. 161. he proclaims thus: I am one of the eighteen hundred that have been silenced by better Authority than the Prelates a­lone; yet I think I am bound in Conscience to exercise the Ministry which I received, whatever I suffer: and if the Sword straitned me no more than my Conscience of the Bishops prohibition, I should be very little hindred; for that (saith he) is vanished into Air, p. 163. And so it seems is the power of the Sword too with him: for that he means by better Authority, the Laws established by King and Parliament. And yet this Man had taught other Doctrine: for p. 30.[Page 174]of his first Plea, Princes and Rulers may for­bid all that preach Rebellion and Sedition, and punish them if they do it; and may hinder the incorrigible, whose preaching will do more hurt than good, from exercising the Ministry in their Dominions. P. 32. They should see that their Kingdoms be well provided of publick Preachers and Catechists, and may be due means compel the ignorant to hear and learn what Christianity is. Sect. 36. They may, when a Peoples ignorance, faction, or wilfulness make them refuse all that are truly fit for them, urge them to accept the best, and may possess such of the publick Temples and Maintenance, and make it the Peoples duty to consent, as is aforesaid. (No great need then of the Peoples consent, which Mr. Baxter so much contends for.) Sect. 37. They ought to hinder Preachers from uncharitable and unrighteous railing at each other, and unpeaceable controver­sies and contentions. And p. 35. sect. 40. They may make their own Officers circa Sacra to exe­cute their Magistratical Power; and if they au­thorize any particular Bishops or Pastors to ex­ercise any such power as belongs to the Prince to give, not contrary to Christ's Laws, &c. we judge that the Subjects should obey all such even for Conscience sake. P. 117. We deny not (saith he) but if the generality of the Ministry obtain their liberty by some small tolerable sin or errour, and the sounder part be few and unnecessary in that Coun­try, prudence obligeth them to go to some other place that needeth them, and never to exercise[Page 175]their Ministry where in true Reason it is like to do more hurt than good. And of this he ma­keth the Magistrate Judge, p. 265. of his Way of Concord. Yet p. 244. of his Plea, he says, That though the execution of the Laws have cost some excellent Men their lives already, we may know, that no execution short of death or utter disablement, will make the most conscionable for­sake their duty. And p. 249. Why we should not speak openly rather than in secret; and what but a Spirit of Envy or Carnal Interest, cross to the interest of Christ, should grudge at such preach­ing, we cannot tell. Nor can any one recon­cile these Contradictions.

One thing I shall observe from his Church-Historian, mentioned in the Preface, That when Philip Nerius set up his Oratorian Exercises at Rome, it was found necessary (to win the people) to use large, affectionate, extemporate Prayers, Expositions, and Sermons. Yet when the Bi­shop of Worcester says, This practice was brought into England by the Jesuits, to bring the Liturgy into Contempt, in the Preface to his History of Separation; Mr. Baxter replies, p. 12. That this is a sad saying, and that there is no proba­bility that the Jesuits should be the first setters up of this way in England, (though the Bishop gave two instances of it in Matter of Fact.) And says in the Preface to his second Defence, That the Bishops's Book is made up of three parts: 1. Of untrue Accusations: 2. Ʋntrue hi­storical Citations abundance: 3. Fallacious Rea­sonings. [Page 176]As if there were not one true word in the whole Book: though even this imita­ting of Philip Nerius in extemporary Exercises and separate Meetings, is by Mr. Baxter himself parallel'd with ours as the Original and Co­py, p. 22. of Preface to Mr. Baxter's Now or Never: The Meetings of the Oratorians and their Exercises, are so like those now abhorred by many, &c. Then comes forth his first and second Plea for Peace. Of the first, the Bishop of Worcester says, It seems to be designed on pur­pose to represent the Clergy of our Church as a company of notorious, lying, perjured Villains, for conforming to the Laws of the Land, and Or­ders established, with no less than thirty Aggra­vations of the Sin of Conformity. And Mr. Bax­ter in his Answer seems to justifie it: And with a great deal of vain-glory, in the latter end of that Book printeth a complemental Let­ter sent him from Mr. Glanvil in 1661. to shew how he loves the Applause of Men; of which, he says, he had been surfeited with Humane Applause, p. 133. which rather than he would want, he blows a Trumpet himself in another Book called the Only way to Concord, saying in the Preface to Bishop Morley and Bishop Gun­ning, I am fully perswaded that in this Book I have told you a righter way of Christian Concord, more divine, sure, harmless, and comprehensive, fitted by Christ himself to the interest of all good Men, yea of the Church and all the World. He speaks as if he had gotten an infallible Spirit,[Page 177]and had not only the Presbyter, but the Pope in his belly. Whereas that way of Concord will rather prove a means of perpetuating Dis­cord and Divisions in the Church. In that Book he calls the Bishops Thorns and Thistles, the Military Instruments of the Devil, and ac­counts them to be mad Dogs; applying a Welch Proverb to them, Though thy Dog be thy own, trust him not when he is mad; in the Premoni­tion. He rails at the Laws in a Verse of Ovid:

(After the Contents.)

The Bishop of Worcester propounded seve­ral Concessions to be made for the ease of the Dissenters, viz. The use of the Cross, the Sur­plice, Kneeling at the Sacrament, &c. (in the close of his Preface;) which Mr. Baxter re­jects, saying, That the benefit would redound si­bi & suis, (i.e. to the Bishop and his Party) not reaching our necessities, but much better than nothing, p. 21. of his second Defence. Nothing will satisfie him, but the altering the Species of Episcopacy, changing the Liturgy for a Directory, and repealing such Acts of Parlia­ment as were made to secure the Peace of the Nation against such seditious Persons and Pra­ctices as had once destroyed it. And p. 84. of his third Defence, part 2. Mr. Baxter threat­neth another destruction to it: for comparing the Constitution of our Church to a separa­ting Wall, or dividing thorny Hedge, he pro­fesseth,[Page 178] That he (An. 1660.) once made it the most earnest action of his life, to prevent the building of this Wall or Hedge: And adds, I will do the best I can while I live to pull it down. And I believe him: for then he hopes he shall be set up not as a Parochial Bishop, but an Arch­bishop, succeeding the Apostles in the ordina­ry Office of Government; or at least as an Of­ficer of the King. And I have heard of a Proposal, that Dr. Owen and Mr. Baxter may be two of the first Archbishops. P. 66. of the last part of that Book, he says, That which hath been the chief cause and engine of Division, will never become the means or terms of concord: but such are the multitude of unnecessary, uncer­tain, humane Decrees, Laws, and Canons of Faith and Religion, whatever the proud and ig­norant say to the contrary. (Yet Solomon said, In the multitude of Counsellors there is safety.) P. 59. In a word (saith he) Councils of Bishops have been but Church Armies, of which at first the Patriarchs were Generals, and afterward Popes and Emperours, who fought it out for vi­ctory. And p. 71, 72. he condemns the Luthe­ran and Calvinist, the Erastians and Behemists, as well as the Diocesan ways of Concord: And adds, What the Independants have done towards Division and Separation, it is in vain in this Age to recite; and many wise Men think that the Presbyterians over-violent rejecting of all E­piscopacy, setting up unordained Elders, and Na­tional Churches, as headed by National Assem­blies,[Page 179]are divisive and unwarrantable, as their making by the Scotch Covenant the renouncing of the Prelacy to be the Test of National Concord al­so was. What remains then? Nothing but Mr. Baxter's Model is the Only, Only, Only way of Concord: More sure, divine appointed by Christ himself, &c. But where any Person should find that Rule of which Mr. Baxter speaks so confusedly himself, is the great Que­stion; for thus he concludes that Book: 1. Approving the best: 2. Tolerating the tolera­ble: 3. Sacraments free, and not forced: 4. The intolerable restrained, the Test of Toleration be­ing this: 5. Whether such tolerated Worship do more good or hurt: 6. Magistrates keeping all in peace, would heal us. But alas, Magistrates, Laws, and Power, are resisted: Every Faction count themselves more tolerable than others, yea condemn others as intolerable; and judge of men and things at best, by their agreeing with their own perswasions; and so the Only way of Con­cord will leave us still in Confusion. Yet Mr. Baxter fearing the Book would fall into the hands of bad Neighbours, he sends it forth with the highest Commendations. In the Preface to his second Defence, I value it (saith he) above all the rest, being assured that the Churches will never otherwise be healed, than by that impartial, sure, and easie Catholick way, which some have reviled, but none since that I know of confuted; nor need they: for it so confutes it self, that there needs no other con­futation[Page 180]but the reading of it. Here it is that he calls the Clergy Tyrants, p. 37. Thorns and Thistles, grievous Wolves, and the Military In­struments of the Devil. P. 123. Ʋnder the name of Bishops, they are Troublers, Persecutors, and Destroyers. P. 47. Here he says, That to tell them as Mr. Dodwel doth, that no unlaw­ful thing is imposed, will as much satisfie them, as if he had said that lying, perjury, and delibe­rately covenanting against God's Precepts, and for corrupting his sacred Doctrine, Worship, and Dis­cipline, are lawful things. P. 9. of his last part, He accounts all Bishops and Pastors that have not the consent of the People, to be Ʋsur­pers. And infers, p. 10. If the Temple or Tythes be given to a Priest of Bishop not lawfully called or consented to by the Flock, and another be law­fully called (i.e. by the People) whom the Ma­gistrate casteth out of the Temple and Tythes, it is the Peoples duty to adhere to him that is justly called; it is not always a duty to adhere to him whom the Magistrate imposeth: the Churches met against the will of the Magistrates above three hundred years. As if our Magistrates were Heathen Persecutors: for Christian Magistrates (he says, p. 143.) must keep peace among all, both approved and tolerated, and not suffer any un­peaceable Preaching or Disputes which tend to de­stroy Love and Quietness, nor suffer railing Ca­lumnies against each other to be published or printed. Now whether Mr. Baxter's way be the Only way of Concord, or needs any[Page 181]other Confutation, let the Reader judge.

And such as the Way of Concord, such are the Pleas for Peace, (i.e.) Pleas for Schism and Division, and such Trumpets as give no uncertain sound to a War. For he proclaims the terms for Ʋniformity to be to them morally impossible, and is grieved that he must set forth an unarmed Defence. He tells the People of many heinous sins in their Conformity, though he had formerly encouraged it, and conform­ed himself as a Lay-man. But now God-fathers and God-mothers, the Sign of the Cross, and kneeling at Sacrament, reading the Apocry­pha, the Office of Burial, all are offered to the People as sinful; or they are encouraged to think them so: for Mr. Baxter thinks it is a sin in Magistrates to punish them for their Non-conformity. But the great quarrel is a­gainst the Laws for Subscription and Renounce­ing the Covenant, &c. of which he speaks dread­ful things; calls them the tearing Engines of the Law; represents the Magistrates as Perse­cutors, and the Clergy as a company of notori­ous, lying, and perjured Villains. And tells the Magistrates (in the Epistle, for they were the Legislators) It is now seventeen years since near two thousand Ministers of Christ were by Law forbidden the Exercise of their Office, un­less they did conform to Subscriptions, Covenants, Declarations, and Practices which we durst not do, because we feared God. (As if the Magistrates had no fear of God.) The reason of which[Page 182]Impositions, it is God, and not we, must have an account of from the Convocation, &c. By which, &c. he must mean the Law-makers. He says, He had read the Books written for Conformity, and thinks Mr. Tombs had written more for Anabaptistry, a late Hungarian for Po­lygamy, many for Drunkenness, Stealing and Lying in case of Necessity, than they for the terms of Conformity, as the Conformists describe them.

His second Plea is to the same tune: It was published (saith he in the Title Page) to save our lives and the Kingdoms peace from the false and bloody Plotters, who would perswade the King and People that the Non-conformists are Presbyterians and Fanaticks: And next, that it was such Presbyterians that killed his Father: That our Principles are rebellious, &c. and in the Preface makes this Challenge; I desire those that seek our blood and ruine, to tell me, if they can, what Body or Party of Men on Earth have more sound and loyal Principles of Govern­ment and Obedience. He says indeed, p. 109. We are far from designing any abasement of the Clergy; nor do we deny or draw others to deny any due reverence to them; yet he calls the Bi­shops Popish Clergy-men, Thorns and Thistles, and the Military Instruments of the Devil; and com­plains of tearing Engines, Goals, starving, and bloody persecution, ruine, and death.

The very reading of such things are to an[Page 183]ingenuous Person a sufficient Confutation of his Books, which being so many, (for he tells us he hath written Eighty Books, and ma­ny of them in the Plural Number, by a con­sult it seems with the Brotherhood) I am fearful to meddle farther with, lest I should provoke the Legion (as some Learned Men al­ready have) to rent and tear them in pieces. Such a Character as I have begun, if it were drawn by some Person that hath known the Man and his Communication from the begin­ning of our Wars (for I have discovered no more than what he was pleased to tell the World in his Writings) would be more effe­ctual to silence and shame him, than all the Laws of the Land, or all the Arguments of his Learned Adversaries, how cogent soever: for he is resolved as long as he lives to have the last word, and to answer all that shall be said against him with down-right railing Ex­clamations to the People, sophistical Evasions, and rather than fail, with plain Self-contra­dictions. And of late days his wont is to confute his Adversaries as a young Scholar did Bellermine in one word, Mentiris. But if con­tradictio sit oppositionum Maxima, (as Mr. Bax­ter grants) there is not a more common Lyar than he, who hath beyond any other so fre­quently and flatly contradicted himself (for of contradictory Propositions, if the one be true, the other is false, i.e. a lye.) And this being another fit medium to confute many [Page 184]of his Writings, I may, if occasion serve, make up one Volume more of Mr. Baxter's Works, such, as though he be able to split a hair, he shall never be able to recon­cile. Sir Roger L'Estrange hath given an Essay how far Richard differs from Baxter. So did the Reflector on his Sacrilegious Desertion; and though but in a few Particulars, yet it put him to a Nonplus, and set him a whining, saying, I can reconcile my own words, though he cannot: And all is not contradiction which Men that un­derstand not words think so, p. 148. of his third Defence. And p. 151. I never taught Mr. L'Estrange to understand my Writings; but I can reconcile more than he can: as if they un­derstood not the difference between a Nega­tive and Affirmative Proposition. So that considering with what Contumely, instead of Argument, he hath answered the Bishop of Worcester, I think no discreet Man will trou­ble himself to answer his Impertinences. The Impleader of his first and second Plea, answered all that was considerable in those Books, and reflected on his Book of Concord and Progno­stication; who returns scarce any thing but a Mentiris, even sometimes when the Implead­er repeated Mr. Baxter's own words. The Impleader answered that bold Challenge of Mr. Baxter in his second Plea, to shew what Party of Men were of more sound Judgment than the Non-conformists in point of Obedi­ence, p. 72. shews who were Presbyterians, [Page 185]who began the War, who killed the Royal Mar­tyr: on what rebellious Principles they went, and who are plotting a Rebellion: of what dangerous consequence his immoral Progno­stication is like to be. Which things Mr. Bax­ter takes notice of in his third Defence, but in all haste seeks to evade them, and complains p. 146. of his third Defence, that the Implea­der rakes up the actions of the evil Civil War, as if that were any thing to the present Cause; that he heaps up abundance of untruths: that he had fully confuted them before; and then takes up an Exclamation, O miserable World! where the very Preachers of Holiness, Love, and Peace, go on to the Grave and Judg­ment, and Eternity, fighting against Holiness, Love, and Peace. And whether Mr. Baxter be one of that number, let the Reader Judge.

If any shall demand to what purpose I have collected all this? I should not have pre­sumed to give such an Answer as Mr. Baxter hath prompted, p. 151. of his third Defence, To shew whether I be not a giddy, mutable, self-contradicting Fool and Knave. I should only have inferred, that notwithstanding all his Pretences to Piety and Peace, he may proba­bly have some evil Designs against both; for the Things related are mostly Matters of Fact, recorded by his own hand; and therefore I hope his seduced Followers will consider to what manner of Guide they have committed the conduct of their Souls; and what proba­bility[Page 186]there is of gathering Grapes from such Thorns. And because by the mouth of two or three Witnesses every thing is established, I shall conclude with the Testimony of two or three credible Persons of his own Fraternity: The first is Mr. Herle, a noted Presbyterian, who, as Mr. Bagshaw reports, said of Mr. Baxter, That it had been happy for the Church of God if Mr. Baxter's Friends had never sent him to School. The second is Mr. Cawdry, who was of the same Opinion. And he mentions a third Per­son, as knowing in the Mystery of Godliness as either of them, who said, That notwithstand­ing the great noise raised about Mr. Baxter, he would end in flesh and blood. But these Testi­monies are nothing to that whereby the great Judge, before whom he hath so often Sum­moned others, will sentence him ex ore suo.

If any think Mr. Baxter is too severely handled, let him consider it is by a Rod of his own making, though it be smartly applied; and that though he be a thousand times more obnoxious than the worst of those Bishops whom he so Calumniates, yet hath he spoken maliciously and falsly of them; which the Collector hath not done by him. The best is, the words of such a scandalous Person will not be taken as a blot. And I desire my con­forming Brethren not to be troubled at the Railings or Reproaches of this Zealot; and that they would forbear troubling him, who, as he saith, hath been a dying Man almost these [Page 187]forty years. And though I never spake nor thought half so ill of him, as he hath record­ed of himself; yet I shall charitably hope and pray, That if he live to see himself in this his own Glass, he will yet at last repent of those Sins which he cannot but condemn as very heinous and dangerous in the sight of God and Man. I shall be so charitable as to propose a method to ease him from one great fear. Mr. Baxter seems much troubled to think that his Adversaries may have the last word of him. Now I perceive that Mr. Hicringle by opposing the Bishop of Worcester, hath ingratiated himself with Mr. Baxter, Preface to Second De­fence. of whom he doth not come much short in confident boasting of himself. It is a difficult matter to infuse to him the Art of Defining and Distinguishing, by which Mr. Baxter is able to evade any Ar­gument: But this defect may be supplied, if Mr. Baxter bequeath him his Eighty Books, and enjoyn him especially to study his Argu­ments for Separation, and the heinous sins of Conformity, which he shall find often repeat­ed, and to apply them on all occasions. But let him not do as in his Naked Truth, conceal the Name of his Benefactor, but quote him totidem verbis; and so Mr. Baxter may have the last word as long as the Faction continu­eth. But if this fear be thus removed, I que­stion whether a greater will not follow (viz.) of being like Jeroboam, who having set up[Page 188]Calves at Dan and Bethel in opposition to the established Worship, is recorded to have made Israel to sin, not in his life-time only, but long after his death: and how dreadful the final Sentence of such a one may be, I com­mend to Mr. Baxter's most serious Meditations. But if Mr. Baxter, who so solemnly cites o­thers to Judgment, continueth to go on im­penitently to that dreadful day, I shall yet pray for him as he doth for the Conformists, Lord have mercy on him. And because I doubt not but his Friends and Disciples will raise a Mo­nument to perpetuate the Memory of their Master, I shall commend this Characteristical epitaph.