[portrait of Edward Dering]

A Collection of Speeches MADE BY Sir EDWARD DERING KNIGHT and BARONET, in matter of RELIGION. Some formerly printed, and divers more now added: All of them revised, For the VINDICATION Of His NAME, From weake and wilfull calumnie: And by the same Sir EDWARD DERING now subjected to publike VIEW and CENSURE, Upon the urgent importunity of many, both Gentlemen and Divines.


Dat veniam Corvis, vexat censura Columbas.

Aristoph. in Avib.


LONDON, Printed by E. G. for F. Eglesfield, and Jo. Stafford. 1642.

To the Reader.

LET them who are in a fault ran­som themselves with excusatory defences. I have no such worke in hand. A short Narration will be my just Vindication.

Apologies are ever read with Jealousie: and they are indeed but after-games at Reputation. These sheets doe not weare that livery: I have no need to Apologize.

Nothing in my selfe hath moved me to open these Papers abroad; and what need I regard the empty opinion of such as doe either weakely or wilfully traduce? But they doe traduce! it is said that I doe [...] yet none can justly say, where, when, to whom, or what, I ever said that I doe since recede from.

Reader, if thou either be a Scholler or a Gentle­man [Page] read and censure freely, I feare no blot from thy hand: if thou be neither, cast what dirt thou wilt, none will sticke on me. And indeed I had rather (if thou be such) beare the scourge of thy tongue, then have the kisses of thy lips: The latter would make me suspect my selfe; the former would beget a hope of some merit in me.

A well-fare to my Reader if, hee be, either of birth or breeding: A farewell to the rest.

Edward Dering.

Section I.

WHy am I thus unhappily, and thus publickly engaged? If my head and my heart have alway gone even pace toge­ther, if my conscience and my tongue have ever kept one tune, how is it that I heare my selfe chan­ged? If any thing I have said or done be con­trariant, nay if dissonant or retardant to a most severe Reformation, (the utmost of my constant wish and profession) nay if upon any occasion I have therein been remisse and tepid, if upon all occasions I have not given my active and my hearty endeavours there­unto, some good friend be a true glasse unto me, and reflect that by-past errour to my sight againe. I will owne the fault (if it be mine) and thanke him.

[Page 2] But if some passengers (in I know not what Ship) saile by, untill their owne heads be giddy, they may as well say, that the Hils and Trees upon the shoare, as that I am moved. Whilst they are floating, I stand steady, won­dring to what coast they are bound.

The question is, whether ever I professed my selfe for Root and Branch: that is the Shib­boleth whereby some try whether you are for Ruine or for Reforming. Every one is not cate­chized in plain tearmes as I was,Iosh. 5. 13 Mr. F. Art thou for us, or for our adversaries? So said one of the usuall blacke walkers in Westminster Hall.T. C. Another of our Parliament-pressing Ministers, after I had delivered my sence upon Episcopacy in the House, came to me and told me plainely, That my conscience was not so good as in the beginning of the Parliament. Yet I may (and doe) challenge him, or any man, to instance where, when, and what I have said to deserve this opinion of change.

I presse not this, as fondly glorying in a per­tinacy. No, I professe my selfe ready and wil­ling, at any time to imbrace a corrected under­standing, let any of them (who hath temper, discretion and charity) come and try me. I [Page 3] have no end, no ayme to lead me, but faire truth, I have no byas but a conscience warmed with zeale, and therefore when I change, (if I change) it shall be the conquest and victory of truth upon me. And I then shall never be a­shamed of being wonne, but will glory in the change.

But I delivered in the Bill for abolition of Episcopacy.S A. H. True, my friend (then next me) urged me with importunacy that I would re­ceive it, and plainly said it should goe in how ever: and so (I am assured) it had, but not with so faint commendations as I bestowed on it, which (I dare say) gave no weight unto the worke. The Bill was then lesse then two sheets of Paper, and by subjoyning two more might have given us the old originall Episcopacy, even with the same hand that abrogated the present. Beside, the chiefe end then was to expedite the progresse of another Bill against the secular jurisdiction of the Bishops (at that very time) labouring in the House of Lords. So that this Bill did in my sence iniquum Petere, ut aequum ferret.

Little did I (or any man there) imagine, that those two sheetes should be multiplied [Page 4] with addition of above forty more, and yet unfinished.

The onely colour, or rather shadow where­upon some thought me as fierce for ruine as themselves, was my fortune or misfortune, to strike first, (and shortly after, secondly) at the tallest Cedar on the Churches Lebanon. Tis true I did so, and am nothing sorry for the blow. His crimes were many: the complaints were fresh with me, and my selfe (entrusted by that County where his Diocese is seated) as fit as any to strike that stroke.

This was at that time received and applau­ded as an act of justice, but by the same men of late traduced, as relishing of personall malig­nity. Non sic didici Christum. I thanke God, my heart hath never yet knowne the swelling of a personall malice. And for the Bishop, I pro­fesse, I did (and doe) beare a good degree of personall love unto him, a love unto some parts and qualities, which I thinke him master of.

His intent of publike uniformity was a good purpose, though in the way of his pur­suit there of he was extreamely faulty.

His booke lately set forth (especially for [Page 5] the latter halfe thereof) hath muzled the Jesuite, and shall strike the Papists under the fifth ribbe when he is dead and gone. And be­ing dead, wheresoever his grave shall be, Paul's will be his perpetuall monument, and his owne booke his lasting Epitaph.

It is true, the roughnesse of his uncourtly nature sent most men discontented from him: yet would he often (of himselfe) finde waies and meanes to sweeten many of them againe, when they least looked for it.

Lastly, he was alway one and the same man, begin with him at Oxford, and so goe on to Canterbury, he is un-mov'd, unchanged: he ne­ver complied with the times, but kept his own stand, untill the times came up to him.

Hee is not now in a condition to be flat­tered, nor was I ever so low, to use it. I did not accuse him for these. I strucke another string, and that of so right a tune to them that are stung with the Tarantula, that I was instantly voyced, more as they would have me, then I was. For (the truth is) I did not dreame, at that time of extirpation and abolition of any more then his Archiepiscopacy: our professed rooters themselves (many of them) at that [Page 6] houre had I perswade my selfe, more mode­rate hopes then since are entertained. A severe reformation was a sweet song then. I am and ever was for that, and for no more.

It is objected that I goe counter to what I have publikly asserted in the House:Dr. W. have pa­tience, and take a copy of what I have spoken in matter of Religion.

Section II.

Novemb. 10. 1640.
Mr. Speaker,

YEsterday the great affaires of this House did borrow all the time allotted to the great Committee for Religion. I am sorry that having but halfe a day in a whole week, we have lost that.

Mr. Speaker, It hath pleased God to put into the heart of his Majesty (for the Kings heart is in the hand of the Lord) once more to asseble us into a Senate, to consult upon the unhappy distractions, the sad dangers, and the much feared ruins of this late flourishing Church and Kingdome. God be praised both for his goodnesse, and for his severity where­by he hath impelled this meeting; and hum­ble [Page 7] thanks unto his Majesty, whose parentall care of us his Subjects, is willing to relieve us.

The sufferances that we have undergone are reducible to two heads. The first concer­ning the Church: the second belonging to the Common-wealth. The first of these must have the first fruits of this Parliament, as be­ing the first in weight and worth, and more immediate to the honour of God and his glory, every dramme whereof is worth the whole weight of a Kingdome.

The Common-wealth (it is true) is full of apparent dangers. The sword is come home unto us, and the two twin-Nations united together under one royall head, brethren together in the bowels and the bosome of the same Island, and which is above all, im­banded together with the same Religion (I say the same Religion) by a devillish machi­nation, like to be fatally imbrued in each o­thers blood, ready to dig each others grave, Quantillum ab [...]uit!

For other grievances also, the poore dis­heartned subject, sadly groanes, not able to distinguish betwixt Power and Law. And with a weeping heart (no question) hath [Page 8] prayed for this hower, in hope to be relie­ved, and to know hereafter, whether any thing he hath, besides his poore part and portion of the Common ayre he breathes, may be truly called his own.

These (Mr. Speaker) and many other doe deserve and must shortly have our deep re­gard, but Suo gradu, not in the first place: There is a unum necessarium above all our worldly sufferances and dangers, Religion, the immediate service due unto the honour of Almighty God. And herein let us all be confident, that all our consultations will prove unprosperous, if we put any determi­nation before that of Religion.

For my part, Let the Sword reach from the North to the South, and a generall per­dition of all our remaining right and safety, threaten us in open view, it shall be so farre from making me to decline the first setling of Religion, that I shall ever argue, and ra­ther conclude it thus. The more great, the more imminent our perils of this world are, the stronger and quicker ought our care to be for the glory of God and the pure Law of our soules.

[Page 9] If then (M. Speaker) it may passe with full allowance, that all our cares may give way unto the treaty of Religion, I will reduce that also to be considered under two heads: first of Ecclesiasticke persons, then of Eccle­siasticke causes. Let no man start or be af­frighted at the imagined length of this con­sultation, it will not, it cannot take up so much time as it is worth.—This, it is God and the King; this, is God and the Kingdom, nay, this, is God and the two Kingdomes cause.

And therefore (M. Speaker) my humble motion is, that we may all of us seriously, speedily, and heartily enter upon this, the best, the greatest, the most important cause we can treat of.

Now (M. Speaker) in pursuit of my own motion, and to make a little enterance into this great affaire, I will present unto you the petition of a poore oppressed Minister in the County of Kent: A man Orthodox in his doctrine, conformable in his life, labo­rious in the Ministery as any we have, or I doe know.

He is now a sufferer (as all good men are) [Page 10] under the generall obloquy of a Puritan; (as with other things was excellently delivered by that silver trumpet at the Barre.)Sir Ben. Rudyer. The Pursivant watches his doore, and divides him and his Cure asunder, to both their griefes: For it is not with him as (perhaps) with some that set the Pursivant at worke, gladded of an excuse to be out of their pulpit, It is his delight to Preach.

About a week since I went over to Lam­beth, to move that great Bishop (too great indeed) to take this danger off from this Minister, and to recall the Pursivant. And withall I did undertake for Master Wilson (for so your Petitioner is called) that he should answer his accusers in any of the Kings Courts at Westminster.

The Bishop made me answer (as neere as I can remember) in haec verba, I am sure that he wil not be absent from his Cure a twelve-moneth together, and then (I doubt not) but once in a yeere we shall have him.

This was all I could obtaine, but I hope, (by the help of this house) before this yeere of threats run round, His Grace will either have more Grace, or no Grace at all. For our [Page 11] manifold griefes doe fill a mighty and a vast circumference, yet so that from every part our lines of sorrow, doe lead unto him, and point at him the Center, from whence our miseries in this Church, and many of them in the Common-wealth do flow.

Let the Petition be read, and let us enter upon the worke.

WHat is here for Root and Branch? I can not find a line that I can wish unsaid: nor do I read a letter, that I would go lesse in. It is replied, that the petitioner M. Wilson, is a man for Root and Branch; if he be, that was no part of his petition; nor indeed any part of my knowledge then: I am no more obliged to answer herein, then I am bound to own and defend M. Wilson, if he should hereafter cast aside the cōmon prayer, what were that to me, or to what I then did say? sure I am, that I was well assured, that he did not allow of separati­on then: and that he had been a powerfull per­swader of others, not to withdraw from our publike Service. And I thinke so well of his goodnesse, temper and conscience, that he will not easily be led away to these mistaking excesses.

Section III.

THE next is that which I spake in the grand Committee of the whole House for Religion, M. White holding that Chaire: whereof this is a copy.

23. Novem. 1640.
M. White,

YOu have many private Petitions, give me leave (by word of mouth) to in­terpose one more generall, which thus you may receive.

Gods true Religion is violently invaded by two seeming enemies: but indeed they are (like Herod and Pilate) fast friends for the destruction of truth. I meane the Papists for one party, and our Prelating faction for the other. Betweene these two in their seve­rall progresse, I observe the concurrence of some few Parallels, fit (as I conceive) to be represented to this Honourable House.

First with the Papists, there is a severe In­quisition: and with us (as it is used) there is a bitter high Commission; both these (contra fas & jus) are Judges in their own cause: yet [Page 13] herein their Inquisitors are better then our High Commissioners—They (for ought I ever heard) do not saevire in suos) punish for de­linquents and offenders, such as professe and practice, according to the Religion established by the Lawes of the Land where they live.

But with us how many poore distressed Mi­nisters? nay how many scores of them, in a few yeeres past, have been suspended, degraded, de­prived, excommunicated, not guilty of the breach of any our established Lawes. The pe­titions of many are here with us, more are comming: all their prayers are in Heaven for redresse.

Secondly, with the Papists, there is a My­sterious artifice, I mean their Index expurgato­rius whereby they clip the tongues of such witnesses, whose evidence they do not like.— To this I parallell our late Imprimatur's: Li­cences for the Presse: so handled that Truth is supprest, and popish pamphlets fly abroad cum privilegio: witnesse the audacious and Li­belling Pamphlets against true Religion, writ­ten by Pocklington, Heylin, Dow, Cosins, Shelford, Swan, Reeves, Yates, Hausted, Studley, Sparow, Brown, Roberts.—Many more: I name no Bi­shops, but I adde, &c.

[Page 14] Nay they are already grown so bold in this new trade, that the most learned labours of our ancient and best Divines, must be now corrected and defaced with a Deleatur by the supercilious pen of my Lords yong Chaplain; (fit perhaps) for the technicall arts, but unfit to hold the Chaire for Divinity.

But herein the Roman Index is better then are our English Licences: They thereby do preserve the current of their own established doctrine: a point of wisdome. But with us our Innovators by this artifice do alter our setled Doctrines; Nay they do subinduce points re­pugnant and contrariant. And this I dare assume upon my selfe to prove.

One Parallel more I have, and that is this. Among the Papists, there is one acknowledged supreme Pope, supreme in honour, in order, and in power: from whose judgement there is no appeale.—I confesse (M. Speaker) I can­not altogether match a Pope with a Pope: (yet one of the ancient titles of our English Primate was Alterius orbis Papa.) But thus far I can go, Ex ore suo. It is in Print,—He pleads faire for a Patriarchate: And for such an one, whose judgement, he (before-hand) professeth ought to be finall: and then (I am sure) it ought to be un-erring.

[Page 15] Put these together, and you shall find that the finall determination of a Patriarch will want very little of a Pope,—and then we may say

—Mutato nomine de te
Fabula narratur—

He pleads Popeship under the name of a Patriarch. And I much feare least the end and top of his Patriarchall plea may be as that of Cardinall Pole (his predecessor) who would have two heads, one Caput Regale, another Caput Sacerdotale: a proud parallell, to set up the Mi­ter as high as the Crown.

But herein I shall be free and cleare, if one there must be (be it a Pope, be it a Patriarch; this I resolve upon for my owne choyce (Pro­cul a Iove procul a fulnime.) I had rather serve one as far off as Tyber, then to have him come so neere me as the Thames. A Pope at Rome will do me lesse hurt then a Patriarch may do at Lambeth.

I have done, and for this third Parallel I submit it to the wisdome and consideration of this grand Committee for Religion, in the mean time I do ground my motion, upon the former two, and it is this in brief.

That you would please to select a subcom­mittee [Page 16] of a few, and to impower them for the discovery of the numbers of oppresse Ministers under the Bishops tyranny for these ten yeers last past. We have the complaint of some, but more are silent: some are patient and will not complaine, others are fearefull and dare not, many are beyond Sea and cannot complaine.

And in the second place, that the sub-Com­mittee may examine the Printers what books by bad Licences have been corruptly issued forth: and what good books have been (like good Ministers) silenced, clipped or cropped.

The worke I conceive will not be difficult, but will quickly returne into your hand full of weight.

And this is my motion.

What is here for Root and Branch? But I must search farther, although for that, which (I am sure) cannot be found.

Section IV.

I Come now the likeliest tryall wherein to find my self guilty. A petition was brought un­to me out of Kent in terminis terminantibus, as that [Page 17] from many Citizens of London) which is in print.My L. G. D. This indeed if it were not the Spawne of the Lon­don petition, yet finding it a Parrat taught to speake the syllables of that, and by roate calling for Root and Branch, I dealt with the presenters thereof, and with other parties thereunto, untill (with their consents) I reduced it to lesse then a quarter of it former length, and taught it a new and more modest language. Upon delivery of this petition thus I prefaced.

January 13. 1640.
M. Speaker,

YEsterday we did regulate the most im­portant businesse before us, and gave them motion, so that our weighty affaires, are now on their feet in their progresse, journying on towards their severall periods, where some I hope will shortly find their latest home.

Yet among all these I observe one, a very main one, to sleep sine die: give me leave to awaken it; It is a businesse of an immense weight, and worth; such as deserves our best care, and most severe circumspection. I mean the Grand Petition long since given in by [Page 18] many thousand Citizens against the dominee­ring of the Cleargy.

Wherein (for my part) although I cannot approve of all that is presented unto you, yet I do clearely professe, that a great part of it, nay the greatest part thereof, is so well groun­ded, that my heart goes cheerfully along therewith.

It seems that my Country (for which I have the honour to serve) is of the same mind, and least that you should think that all faults are included within the walls of Troy, they will shew you ‘Iliacos intra muros peccatur & extra.’

The same grievances which the City groans under, are provincial unto us, and I much feare they are nationall among us all.

The Pride, the Avarice, the Ambition and oppression, by our ill ruling Clergy is Epide­micall, it hath infected them all. There is not any, or scarce any of them, who is not practi­call in their own great cause in hand, which they impiously doe mis-call, the piety of the times, but in truth, so wrong a Piety that I am bold to say, ‘In facinus jurasse putes.—’

Here in this Petition is the Disease re­presented, [Page 19] here is the Cure intreated.

The number of your Petitioners is conside­rable, being above five and twenty hundred names, and would have been foure times as many, if that were thought materiall.

The matter in the Petition is of high im­port: but your Petitioners themselves are all of them quiet and silent at their own houses, humbly expecting and praying the resolution of this great Senate, upon these their earnest and their hearty desires.

Here is no noyse, no numbers at your door: they will be neither your trouble nor your jealousie; for I do not know of any one of them this day in the Town: So much they do affie in the goodnesse of their petition, and in the justice of this House.

If now you want any of them here, to make avowance of their Petition, I am their servant. I do appeare for them and for my selfe, and am ready to avow this petition, in their names, and in my own.

Nothing doubting, but fully confident, that I may justly say of the present usage of the Hierarchy in the Church of England, as once the Pope (Pope Adrian as I remember) said of the Clergy in his time: A vertice capitis ad [Page 20] plantam pedis, nihil est sanum in toto ordine ecclesia­stico.

I beseech you read the Petition, regard us, and relieve us.

The petition it selfe speaks thus:

To the Honourable the Commons House of Parliament.
The humble Petition of many the Inhabitants within His Majesties County of Kent,

MOst humbly shewing, That by sad experience we doe daily finde the government in the Church of England, by Archbishops, Lord­bishops, Deanes, & Archdeacons, with their Courts, Jurisdictions, and Administrations, by them and their inferiour Officers, to be very dangerous, both to Church and Common-wealth, and to be the occasion of manifold grievances unto his Majesties Subjects, in their consciences, liberties, and estates, And likely to be fatall unto us in the continuance thereof. The dange­rous effects of which Lordly power in them, have ap­peared in these particulars following

1. They doe with a hard hand over-rule all [Page 21] other Ministers, subjecting them to their cruell authority.

2. They do suspend, punish, and deprive many god­ly, religious, and painfull Ministers, upon slight and upon no grounds: whilst in the mean time, few of them doe preach the Word of God themselves, and that but seldome. But they doe restraine the painfull preaching of others, both for Lectures, and for afternoon Sermons on the Sabbath day.

3. They do countenance and have of late encoura­ged Papists, Priests, and Arminian both Bookes and persons.

4. They hinder good and godly books to be printed: yet they do licence to be published, many popish, Ar­minian, and other dangerous tenents.

5. They have deformed our Churches, with popish pictures, and suited them with Romish Altars.

6. They have of late extolled and commended much the Church of Rome, denying the Pope to be Anti­christ: affirming the Church of Rome to be a true Church in fundamentals.

7. They have practised and inforced antiquated and obsolete ceremonies, as standing at the Hymnes at Gloria patri, and turning to the East at severall parts of the Divine Service, bowing to the Altar, which they tearm the place of Gods residence upon earth: the reading of a second service at the Altar, [Page 22] and denying the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist to such as have not come up to a new set Rayle before the Altar.

8. They have made and contrived illegall Canons and Constitutions, and framed a most pernitious and desperate oath: an oath of covenant and confederacy for their owne Hierarchicall greatnesse beside many other dangerous and pernicious passages in the said Canons.

9. They doe dispence with plurality of Benefices: they do both prohibite and grant marriages, neither of them by the rule of Law or conscience, but do prohi­bite that they may grant, and grant that they may have money.

10. They have procured a licencious liberty for the Lords day, but have pressed the strict observation of Saints holidaies, and do punish, suspend, degrade, deprive godly Ministers for not publishing a Book for liberty of sports on the Sabbath day.

11. They doe generally abuse the great ordinance of excommunication, making sometimes a gaine of it, to the great discomfort of many poore soules, who for want of money can get no absolution.

12. They claime their Office and jurisdiction to be jure divino, and do exercise the same (contrary to law) in their own names, and under their own Seales.

13. They receive and take upon them temporall ho­nours, [Page 23] dignities, places, and offices in the Comonwealth, as if it were lawfull for them to use both Swords.

14. They take cognisance in their Courts and else­where of matters determinable at the Common law.

15. They put Ministers upon Parishes, without the patron, and without the peoples consent.

16. They do yeerly impose oaths upon Churchwar­dens, to the most apparent danger of filling the Land with perjury.

17. They do exercise oathes ex officio in the na­ture of an Inquisition even into the thoughts of men.

18. They have apprehended men by Pursivants, without citation or missives first sent: they break up mens houses and studies taking away what they please.

19. They do awe the Iudges of the Land with their greatnesse, to the inhibiting of prohibitions, and hin­dring of habeas Corpus when it is due.

20. They are strongly suspected to be confederate with the Roman party in this Land, and with them to be authors, contrivers or consenters to the present com­motions in the North, & the rather because of a contri­bution by the Clergy, and by the Papists in the last yeer, 1639. and because of an ill named benevolence of six Subsidies granted or intended to be granted this present yeare 1640. thereby and with these moneys to engage (as much as in them lay) the two Nations into blood.

[Page 24] It is therefore humbly and earnestly prayed, that this Hierarchicall power may be totally abrogated, if the wisdome of this Honourable House, shall find that it cannot be maintained by Gods Word, and to his glory.

And we your Petitioners shall ever pray, &c.

Section V.

Upon occasion of what I said of the late Canons, I might easily have pressed the a­bolition of the founders, and of the whole order of prelacy: And surely, if it had been my wish, I would (as others) have so exprest my selfe. Here followes my argument against these Canons, and that chiefly aymed against the founders of them: yet nothing of Root and Branch therein.

14. Decemb. 1640.
M. Speaker,

THat the late Canons are invalidous, it will easily appeare, and that they are so ori­ginally in the foundation, or rather in the founders of them, I will assume upon my selfe [Page 25] to demonstrate, having first intimated my sense by way of preparative.

The Pope (as they say) hath a triple Crown, answerable thereunto, and to support that, he pretends to have a threefold Law. The first is, jus divinum, Episcopacy by divine right; and this he would have you thinke to be the Coronet next his head, that which doth circle and se­cure his power. Our Bishops have (in an un­lucky time) entred their plea and preten­ded title to this Crown, Episcopacy by Divine right.

The second is Jus huntanum, Constantins do­nation, the gift of indulgent Princes; tempo­rall power. This Law belongs to his second, or his middle Crown; already also pleaded for by our Prelates in print.

These two Crowns being obtained, he (the Pope) doth frame and make his third Crowne himselfe, and sets that upmost, upon the top— This Crown also hath its Law, and that is Jus canonicum, the Canon law, of more use unto his Popeship then both the other—Just so our Prelates from the pretended divinity of their Episcopacy, and from the temporall power granted by our Princes they would now ob­trude a new Canon Law upon us.

[Page 26] They have charged their Canons at us to the full, and never fearing that ever they would recoyle back into a Parliament they have ram­med a prodigious ungodly oath into them.

The illegality and invalidity of these Ca­nons (as I conceive) is easily discoverable by one short question, viz. what do you call the meeting wherein they were made? give it a name to know it by: who can frame his argu­ment aright, unlesse he can first tell against what he is to argue? would you confute the Convocation? they were a holy Synod: would you argue against the Synod? why they were Commissioners: would you dispute the Commis­sion? they will mingle all powers together, and answer that they were some fourth thing, that we neither know nor imagine.

Quo teneam nodo mutantem Protea? unlesse they will unriddle themselves, and owne what they were, we may prosecute, but hardly with concludent arguments. Yet I venture.

I have conferred with some of the founders of these new Canons, but I professe clearly, that I could never yet meet with any one of that assembly, who could (in behalfe of their meeting) well answer me the first question in the Catechisme, what is your name? Alas, they [Page 27] are parted before they know what they were when they were together.

The sum of the severall answers, that I have received, doth amount to this. They were a Convocationall—Synodicall—Assembly of Commissio­ners, indeed a threefold Chimaera, a monster to our Lawes, a Cerberus to our Religion.

A strange Commission wherein no one Com­missioners name is to be found. A strange Con­vocation that lived when the Parliament was dead: A strange Holy Synod where one part never saw, never conferred with the other.— But indeed what use or need of conference, if that be true of these Canons, which I read of the former ones,Parker Polit. Notum est Canones formari Lam­bethae, priusquàm in Synodo ventilentur.

Thus far preparatory; I proceed to my ar­gument, whereby to manifest the invalidity of these Canons, not borrowing but avoyding what hath formerly been instanded by others.

I will neither inveigh upon them as unna­med Commissioners, nor infirme them as the work of a dead Convocation; But will take them in the capacity of their own affected title of a Synod. Such they bragged themselves to be whilest they sate: such they stile themselves in the Title-page of these (never to be Canoni­zed) [Page 28] Canons—The words are—Canons treated upon in Convocation—agreed upon in Synod.

This treating in one capacity and agreeing in another; is a new mould to cast Canons in, never used before. Canons bred in a Con­vocation, born in a Synod. Thus although we find not one good father, here are yet two mothers to one illfavoured child; never known before, nor imagined but of Bacchus, whom the Poets cals among other attributes ‘—Solúmque bimatrem.’

I proceed: if their meeting be a Synod, ei­ther it is so by Donation, by Election, or only by Ʋsurpation.

Donation from the King: is this title and authority, indulged to them by his Majesty? Look through all his Highnesse Letters Pa­tent, and they are not once saluted with the ambitious title of a Synod. Yet in the Canons they have assumed it seventeen times, it is their own pride, their own presumption.

The King hath not done it, (pardon me) no Prince ever did it or can do it; no power Re­gall, Imperiall, or Papall did ever attempt it, to ordaine that William, and Richard, Matthew and Iohn, &c. and I know not who more, being met and assembled upon other summons shall [Page 29] by a Commission be on a sudden translated from what they were, into an unthought-of Natio­nall Synod, without voyce or choise of any man to be concerned: this never was done, this never can be well done.

As for due election for such meetings, this indeed is or ought to be of the true esse to a Legitimate Synod. But due election made up by voyces is so much a stranger to this Synod, that their fatherhoods will confesse that they were never trusted to this Synod, as a Synod by any, either of the Clergie or of the Laity.

Concerning the choise of a few of them, and but a few (about 50. as I guesse) chosen to the Convocation house, that choice wil never ren­der them a lawfull Synod, untill they can prove metamorphosis and Transubstantiation.—For the votes of all their choosers upon expiration of the Convocation house returned backe home to every mans bosome from whence they breathed. So that if you will en-live the same men to be now Synodall, who were before but Convocationall, you must renew the old Py­thagorean Transmigration, for they want the breath and life of an election. A new one you have not, and the old one is not to be had but by [...].

[Page 30] Besides I do affirm and shall approve, that the electors to a Convocation and to a Synod are not all one. The Clergy only do, and of right one­ly ought to choose unto the Convocation house. The reason; we of the Laity (so they will call us) have our House of Commons where our Trustees by vertue of our voyces do sit at the same time. But in the choice unto a Synod; we who must be bound by the determi­nations of the Synod, ought also to be interested in the parties determining. This is clear enough in reason, and will be better oleared presently.

Of Synods I find five severall sorts, first a ge­nerall or universall Synod; secondly, Patriar­chicall; thirdly, Nationall; fourthly, Provinci­all; fiftly, a Diocesan Synod. I passe by the two first and last, as not pertinent to this time and affaire. Concerning Provinciall and Nationall Synods a word or two; if I know which to call their late meeting. They run on riddles: and I want an Oedipus at every turn.

These Canons, were they forged in one Sy­nod Nationall, or in two Provinciall? were they two Provinciall Synods? how then come their Acts and Canons to be imbodyed toge­ther? how comes it to passe that all the Ca­nons speak in the singular number? The [Page 31] Synod; The holy Synod; The sacred Synod. Sacred will now be hardly granted, unlesse as the Poet doth,—Auri sacra fames.

Was it then but one? was it a Nationall Sy­nod? why the Provinces (we all know) never did convene, they never met together. Look on the representative body of the Commons of this whole Land: every one within the same walls hearing every ones argument, and there­upon mending, altering, and (as occasion is) correcting his own judgment, and afterwards ( [...]) joyning in unanimous consent. And if the able members of the North beyond Trent were divided from the rest, there would be quickly found a want of their worth and weight, nor could their sitting at the same time at Yorke, make the rest a House of Com­mons here, for the whole Kingdome must be represented entire.

But as we have done the Title Synod, so let us give them the attribute Nationall, a Natio­nall Synod, and yet see how inconsistent and in­validous they are!

The very esse of every Synod doth subsist in a double foundation. Fundamentum materiale and fundamentum formale.—The due ma­terials of a Synod are the interiour qualities [Page 32] and indowments of the persons whereof the Synod consisteth, not their externall dignities and promotions. And therefore every man thus qualified is as capable to be of the Synod, as any Deane or Archdeacon of them all.

The fundamentum formale, is Delegatio ab ec­clesia & debita electio. A due choice to be made by all that are or shall be concerned in the de­terminations of the Synod: and this trust of choyce may fall upon another man, as well and as soon as upon Dean or Archdeacon.

I will not quarell the want of able parts in any members of that late doubtfull dangerous meeting: I grant them the materials of a true Synod, but will insist only upon the second, want of form, want of due election: which if they want, the most virtuall and most obliging tie, and the most binding part is wanting.

That they had no such election, we need not go forth to prove; No one man in the King­dom can say that he gave a voice to the electi­on of any one Dean or Archdeacon to sit for him in that Synod, nor were the Clarks chosen by all who were to be bound. So then there remaineth only to be proved this: That such election of persons, by all persons to be con­cerned in the Decrees, and Canons, is necessary [Page 33] to the constituting of a lawfull Synod; which is all one as to say, that the elections to a Synod ought to be, both by the Clergy and the Laity.

M. Speaker, I will trouble you but with one reason, and a very few instances, all briefly.

The Acts and Canons of every Lawfull Na­tionall Councell or Synod, ought to bind the whole Nation, both Laity and Clergy: But this cannot be reasonable and just, if the Laity be excluded both from consultation and from choice of consulters. The reason is plain. It is a ground in nature, and so confessed upon this very case by D. Feild, who hath it out of Occam —quod omnes tangit, ab omnibus tractari debet. And this is so cleare a maxim, that in this very sence also; for the Laity to be present at Councels, this very Aphorisme is used by the Pope in his own glosse upon the Canonist Gratian. Quod omnes tangit, ab omnibus tractari debet. Surely our Clergy are much too high, if herein they would outgo the very Canons of the Papall Synods, and conclude that which shall bind all, where all are not admitted to treat, neither by themselves nor by proxy.

Now the benefit of this Law of nature and of reason (as Dr. Feild calleth it) we claim. The present Canons do concerne us. I may be a [Page 34] Church-warden, my sonne may be a Master of Art; then must I present upon their yet un­born articles, and he must sweare their oath of Covenant—well, they were never trusted by us unto a Synod; & therefore ought not to tie us up un-heard, it is against Nature and Reason.

To second this Argument by instance in proofe of practice, I shall produce a few, and but a few of many examples and authorities: the originals I cannot now command, but must be content to name a few extracts, which by way of transcript do walke along with my vade mecum.

The point that I would establish is this, that in Synods and Councels where Lay men are concerned in the Decrees, there the Laity may be present to consult, if not also to decide the conclusions. I will but point, I will not enlarge to the vouching every place ver­batim; Dr. Feild, Dr. Fulke, Goulartius, are cleare and positive in this point.

Our Statutes for correcting and gathering together the former Canons into a new body, do clearely evidence this unto us; in all which there is an equall proportion mixed, sixteen of the Cleargy, and as many of the Laity.

The Authour of the History of Trent is fre­quent [Page 35] in this point, adding this for a reason, that in a generall Councell, the universall Church cannot be represented, if the Laity be exclu­ded. So by the rule a paribus, The reason hol­deth the same, a Nationall Councell cannot repre­sent a Nation, if but one degree of men, men of one quality and capacity be only present, and the rest altogether excluded.

Gratian, the Canonist, doth allow the Laity to be present, especially in such Councels as do treat of faith, and for proofe doth vouch Pope Nicholas.

I will omit many proofs of many Emperors being personally present and president in ma­ny Councels, by themselves and sometimes by their Vicegerents, as Marcellinus, Candidianus, Martianus, &c. yet even this is argumentative for us, and a preservative of our right, for the Laity to be present.

The Greek Historians are so plentifull, that I will onely name them.

  • Theodoret.—l. 5. c. 9.
  • Eusebius de vita Constantin.—l. 3. c. 9. & 10.
  • Sozomen.—l. 1. c. 16. & 17.
  • Niceph. Callistus.—l. 8. c. 15.
  • Socrates.—l. 1. c. 5. & l. 6. c. 2.
  • Euagrius Scholast.—l. 2. c. 4. c. 27.

[Page 36] Among the Latine Fathers Cyprian is very plentifull.

As for Councels, looke,

Nice. 1. vouched by Eusebius de vita Constan­tini— 4. conc. Carthag. cited by Gratian.— The Councell of Eliberis in Spaine. Councell of Constantinople in Theodoret.— Councell of Constance; And the second of Nice.— where it is said of the Imperiall Lady the famous Pul­cheria Augusta, that ipsa per semetipsam in sancta quarta Synodo sedit: which fourth Synod was with Martianus the Emperour.

To these I adde the very Ordo celebrandi con­cilia written by Isidor, and like unto the Modus tenendi Parliamentum.

Thus much for humane testimony. I have done with my hasty notes, only I adde this, and I beseech you to intend it.

Whilest we of the Laity had our power and voices to choose our own Ministers, and our own Bishops, (which was our ancient right, constantly allowed and practised in the best Primitive times, whereof the proofs are yet evident enough) so long (I say) we might trust them in a Synod, whom we first had trusted to direct and guide our soules in all the mini­steriall function.—But to conclude us up [Page 37] now, and shut us our contrary to the Law of Nature and Reason, contrary to ancient u­sages: not to admit us to determination, nay to exclude us from consultation, and after all to take from us all assent both in choyce and in refusall of Pastors to be set over us, and yet to bind us by decrees so made, may prove (I feare) no lesse then soule-tyranny. I do not presse the deserved right of our choyce of Pastors: but one thing more, lend me pati­ence to adde as a supreme Coronis to all that I have said for right of Laity in Synods.

Looke I beseech you in the first Synod that ever was held in the Christian Church, and that for so great and singular a cause, as never was occasion for the like in the world before or since: you have it in the first of the Acts of the holy Apostles, and it is for the choice of a new Apostle. There were in this Synod and of this Synod, the eleven Apostles, Act. 1. 13. With the brethren of the Lord, vers. 14. There were the Disciples, there was Turba [...] a multitude, of about a 120 names, vers. 15. Saint Peter tels them that out of that number one must be ordained to be a witnesse of the resurrection of our Saviour; thereupon what doth the multitude of Disci­ples there present? [...] vers. 23. they place [Page 38] or set two before the Apostles: And the same men viz. all the Disciples vers. 26. [...] they give forth their lots, and thereupon, the lot falling upon Matthias, he was numbred (saith our translation) with the eleven Apostles; but the Originall is more, [...] communibus calcu­lis annumeratus est, he was by common assent or by common voyces reckoned with the eleven. Now who were these common voyces? who were these 120. men? Evangelists, Bishops, Deacons, and Presbyters or Elders, as yet there was not one in all the world, the Apo­stles were but eleven, perhaps not numbred in this 120. The Disciples if you will say, that they were there, yet they were but 70. So that here is no evasion: the Laity were present, and not passive only, they were active in this originall, so weighty a Synod.

My second instance in this kind, is out of the second Councell that ever we read was held, and this is Acts 6. where the Apostles call a Councell for the choyce of seven Deacons. Then the twelve called the multitude of the Disci­ples to them, Vers. 2. [...]. They being assembled do not say, we have decreed, we have ordered and ordained, and injoyned, but [Page 39] their language is Vers. 3. [...], brethren looke ye out, the word is the same as [...], both from [...] to oversee, do you oversee among you, seven men of honest report. And the say­ing (as it is verse 5.) pleased [...] the whole multitude, there is a consent of theirs; more plain in [...] they the multitude chose seven, Steven and Philip, &c. [...], whom they (still the multitude [...]) vers. 6. did set or place before the Apostles.

The third and the last shall be the [...] the great and generall Councell held by the Apostles upon the dissention of the Church in point of Circumcision (and that is Acts 15.) there you shall again finde present, [...], Verse 12. All the multitude: but you will say and object that the next word is [...] the multitude kept silence. True, ergo what? Therefore they speak not at all in this Councell? nothing lesse. But ergo they had spoken before: for it is plain by the word, THEN, Then all the multitude kept silence. If they had nothing there to do but to be alwaies silent, this particle of time, Then, might well have been spared. This may per­haps be objected, and therefore ought to be prevented, for the further clearing whereof, observe (I pray) the next vers. 13. where in [Page 40] like manner, it is said of Paul and Barnabas [...]. And after they held their peace, Ergo they had spoken. And therefore the Fryer who collected together a body of Councels (Peter Crabbe the German) doth even from this place infer a consent of the people saying, Tacuit omnis multitudo Consentiens Petro.

But if you would have this more clearely evidenced beyond all exceptions, I pray take notice of the resolution of this Synod, vers. 22. Then pleased it the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church. With the whole Church, what is that? The blessed Apostles and their fellow-labourers did not engrosse, and (as our Church-men affect to do) usurp and monopolize the word Church, as proper only to Church-men.— No you shall finde it even in the Epigraphe of the Canons and Decrees of this true, holy, and facted Synod, that the despised Laity are in these Canons conjoyned with the blessed A­postles, although Pope and Patriarch, Primate and Metropolitan, Archbishop and Bishops, yea even down to Dean and Archdeacon, (I have heard it) do despise the thought of ad­mitting the Laity: I do not say to decision, but even to Consultation, nay to the very choyce of consulters in Religion: nay lower even so [Page 41] much as to have a negative power, when a man of inability, and of ill life is obtruded upon them; I proceed, for I would not orare, but probare, looke vers. 23. They that were present had voyce, they who voyced the Canons, joy­ned in the decree, and sending the decree unto Antioch. The words are thus, The Apostles, and Elders, and Brethren send greeting to the Brethren which are in Antioch, &c. Here the Brethren at Hierusalem are (with the Apostles and the El­ders) actors in, and authors of the Canons in this Councell agreed. There is no evasion, no elusion to be had, unlesse you can prove that all the Brethren in Antioch to whom these Brethren in Hierusalem did write, were only Clergymen.

Which if you should affirm, our Clergy will hardly be pleased with you, for they must then be of the multitude (not a speciall lot) for Bar­nabas and Paul did deliver this Epistle (being the decree of this Synod) to the multitude [...] as it is found in the 30 verse. And when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the Epistle.

Thus much in way of pursuit for this one argument, that no Canons can bind the Laity where we have no voyce of our own, nor [Page 42] choyce of the Clergy persons who do found them, nor assent in the susception of them after they are framed. Quod omnes tangit, ab omnibus tractari debet.

M. Speaker, It remaines as a wish, that every member of that meeting, who voted these ex­orbitant Canons, should come severally to the Bar of the Parliament House, with a Canon book in his hand, and there unlesse he can an­swer his Catechisme (as I called it) & shew what is the name of their meeting, and (unlesse he can manifest that the Laity are no part of the Church) Conceptis verbis in such expresse terms as that House should think fit, to abjure his own ill-begotten issue, or else be commanded to give fire to his own Canons.

Section VI.

UPon my motion November 23. it pleased the grand Committee for Religion, to ap­point a Subcommittee, to receive complaints from oppressed Ministers, which Subcommittee was shortly after made a Committee by order of the House. It pleased the Gentlemen of this Committee to put the honour and the burden of the chaire upon me: from hence severall Re­ports [Page 43] have been delivered in, I shall only trouble the Reader with the first of them.

18 Decemb. 1640.
Mr. White,

This grand Committee for Religion did au­thorize a Sub-committee (among other things) to take into consideration, the unjust sufferings of good Ministers oppressed by the cruell-used authority of Hierarchicall Rulers.

In this (and in other points) we have entred upon many particulars, we have matured and perfected but one. If we had lesse worke, you should (before this time) have had more: but complaints crowd in so fast upon us, that the very plenty of them retards their issue.

The present Report which I am to make unto you is concerning M. Wilkinson, a Batchellor in Divinity, and a man in whose character do con­cur, Learning, Piety, Industry, Modesty.

Two hardships have been put upon him: one at the time when he presented himselfe to re­ceive Orders: and that was thus.

The Bishop of Oxfords Chaplen (M Fulham) being the examiner (for Bishops now do scorne to do Bishops work:B. Ban­croft. it belongs to himselfe) he propoundeth foure questions to M. Wilkinson, not taken out of the depth of Divinity, but fitly [Page 44] chosen to discover how affections do stand to be novellized by the mutability of the present times.

The questions were these.
  • 1. Whether hath the Church authority in matters of faith?
  • 2. May the Kings booke of sports,(so some impi­ous Bishops have abused our pious King, to call their contrivance His Majesties book)may this be read in the Church without offence?
  • 3. Is bowing to or before the Altar lawfull?
  • 4. Is bowing at the Name of Jesus lawfull?

The doctrine of the first affirmed, will bring a dangerous influence upon our beliefe by subje­cting our faith to humane resolutions. The other three are disciplinarian in the present way of Novellisme.

As soon as M. Wilkinson heard these questions, Lupum auribus, he had a Wolfe by the eares. And because unto these captious interrogatories, he could not make a peremptory answer, M. Fulham would not present your petitioner to the Bi­shop for ordination.

Thus you see (Mr. White) a new way of Si­mony: Imposition of hands is to be sold, if not for money, yet to make a side, a party, a faction. They will not confer Orders, but upon such as [Page 45] will come in and make party with them in their new practices, as is evident by these questions. Take this, in this kind, as a leading case, a first complaint, more are comming: and M. Wilkinson shall have the poore common comfort ‘Solamen miseris socios habuisse.—’

I proceed to his second sufferance, which was by the Vice-chancellor of Oxford, for a Sermon preached in his course at S. Marys in Oxford. Short to make, he preached better, then they were willing to heare: the Sermon fell into the eares of a captious Auditour. For this Sermon, he stands now suspended by the Vice-chancellor from all the spirituall promotion that he had, which was only the reading of a Divinity lecture in Magdalen-hall.

The Committee required the Vice-chancel­lor to send unto us the Sermon with his excep­tions in writing. They were brought, and being received, they are three in number: great, and weighty in the accusation: none at all in proof. Nay (M. White) there is nothing presented unto us, wherein to finde a colour or a shadow, where­by to make the accusation semblable, and con­sequently the suspension just. Ecquis innocens erit, si accusare suffecerit?

The particulars insisted upon, pickt and cho­sen [Page 46] out of that Sermon by the Vice-chancellor are three: every one a hainous charge, and the first sounding little lesse then treason. Give me leave to read them, as Mr. Vicechancellor hath sent them in writing.

  • 1. Our religious Soveraigne, and his pious govern­ment, is seditiously defamed, as if his Majesty were little better then the old pagan persecutors or then Queen Mary.
  • 2. The government of the Church and Ʋniversity is unjustly traduced.
  • 3. Men of learning and piety, conformable to the publicke government, are uncharitably slandered.

The least of these being duly proved, will make him worthy of suspension: but if M. Wil­kinson be guilty of the first, he is not worthy to live. The truth is, the Vice-chancellor hath lear­ned audacter criminare: and fayling in proofe; hath only fowled himselfe. Your Subcommittee, upon due consideration of the cause and circum­stance, have hereupon unanimously voted, that M. Wilkinson is free from all and every of these exceptions, made against his Sermon by the Vice­chancellor. We are all of opinion that there is nothing therein, that deserves Notam censoris, ne­dum lituram judicis.

If (M. White) there be in a Sermon (as there [Page 47] ought to be) aliquid mordacis veritatis, shall the Preacher be for this suspended? His mouth shut up for preaching truth boldly? It is contrary to their commission, for (Sir) they have a great charter to speak freely: it is warranted unto them Jure divino. Saint Paul doth own it, in his instruction of Timothy. 2 Tim. 4. 1, 2, 3. The words are, I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, preach the word, be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort—For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine. Here is our case ex­actly. Here was reproofe; here was exhortation: here was preaching out of season, to unwilling or to unprepared hearers: and yet in season, the Theame was necessary and fitted to their want of zeale: But the only fault was, that the time is come when sound doctrine will not be endured.

Thus the Committee found it: thus have I faithfully, but imperfectly, reported it, and do now subjoyn the opinion and request of your trustees, to this grand Committee.

Mr. Wilkinson is innocent and free from this accusation. He had just cause to petition. The Vice-chancellor hath been without cause, nay against cause rigid and oppressive. The Sermon deserved thanks. The preacher received injuries. His suspension to be taken of: The retracting [Page 48] and dissolving whereof ought to be as publike as was the inflicting thereof.

One word more I ask leave to adde, and I hope I shall not therein erre from the sence of the Committee, though indeed I received it not in command to be joyned to the Report. This bu­sinesse (M. White) is spread into a wide and ample notice. Two great Primats have appeared in it, and that with different, perhaps contrariant sences, sences as distant as Lambeth and Armagh. The Vice-chancellor saith, that the Preacher was censured by the most Reverend Lord Primate of Ire­land, who heard him, to be a bold or rash fellow for it. Hereupon I attended that learned, pious, and painefull Primate, and did read these words of the Vice-chancellour unto him. His answer was, that he takes it as an Aspersion upon him. He re­members the Sermon, and commends it.

This is an additionall to the Report, and with this I leave M. Vice-chancellor, and the Bishops Chaplen (Fulham) to the wisdome and conside­ration of this grand Committee.

Section VII.

MY next walk was in a hazardous way: and although it was not so lodged in my me­mory, [Page 49] as that in due season I could make use of it (as I intended) publikely in the House; yet being since gone forth without my appoint­ment into print, I do now own it for my sence, untill I be better instructed,Mr. D. of C. as I was promised long since, by a Cathedrall friend of mine, but do now despaire to see performed.

The Theam is, that secular jurisdiction ought not to be held by such as are of the Clergy fun­ction. Hos. 8. 4. [...], &c. They raigned to themselves (saith the Lord) and not by me: they have beene Princes, and I knew it not.

The words of that short passage were these:

OUR Lord and Saviour (blessed for ever being indeed a King, Pilate (his Judge) seemeth to start, and be in feare at that great title: Although our Saviour had told him say­ing, Ioh. 18. 36. My Kingdome is not of this world: Pilate (still in feare)Joh. 19. 12. sought to release him, but more in feare of Caesar (the King at that time of this world) he adjudged the Lord of life to death, yet honou­rably writeth his Title,Mat. 27. 37. This is Jesus the King of the Jewes. This title he then was crowned with­all, when life and death divided his soule and body asunder; that in a manner it may be said, he never was King indeed, untill he was out of this world.

[Page 50] If he who was ourJoh. 13. 13. Lord and Master, had not this worlds royalty, whence commeth that the Pope is Crowned? and his Cardinals in Purple? whence have our Bishops their Lordships? and as themselves call itB. Hall. Episcop. part 2. p. 106. Jura regalia, their royalty and rites of Baronage?

It may prove a disquisition deep and dange­rous, yet I desire (without envy to their pomp or persons) to wade so farre as may satisfie a mind that loves truth, and desires to be led by it: and this with all possible brevity. There hath been a happy and blessed reformation of our Church, God send a better, and a more severe reformation of our Church-men, or else our Church is now in danger to be defor­med again.

The state of this inquiry may be this, viz. whether the Ministers of Christs Kingdome may receive worldly titles, and execute world­ly Offices and powers? or more generally thus: Whether a Clergy-man may semel & simul, be both a Clergy-man and a Lay-man, in power, office and authority over other men in both kinds?

Goe we to the fountain head,Luk. 22 24. There was a strife among them (the Apostles) which of them should be accounted the greatest; which of the [Page 51] twelve soever began this emulation of power. Certaine it is, that the two sonnes of Zebedee, Mat. 20 20. James and John with their mother, first presu­med to come and aske the highest places of honour (next to the very Throne) in the King­dome of Christ; which Kingdome was concei­ted by them shortly after to be raised in the splendour of this world: This is genuinely ga­thered from this very story, generally confes­sed, and clearly confirmed in the History of the Acts, where the Apostles do aske our Sa­viour, even after his resurrection, saying,Act. 1. 6 Lord wilt thou at this time restore again the Kingdome to Israel? Therefore to these two brethren and their mother, so much mistaken in the nature of his Kingdome he maketh answer,Mat. 20 22. Ye know not what you aske. He presently sheweth the entertainment of his Kingdome, A cup to drinke of, that many were like to pray might passe from them; but they answer they are able to drinke thereof. This their answer as it proved true in all the twelve Apostles, so by the pro­vidence of God, one of these two brothers, Act. 12. 2. James was the first of the rest (as some do ga­ther) who drank the cup of martyrdome, and as some think, John was the last of the Apostles.

Equals look awry on the ambition of their [Page 52] fellows. These two were vaine in their high request, and the other ten murmured at their presumption,Mat. 20. 24. They were moved with indigna­tion, saith Saint Matthew. Mar. 10 41. They began to be much displeased, saith Saint Marke. But by this happy error of these two Apostles, our Saviour takes occasion to instruct them, and the other ten, and in them all other Ministers belonging un­to him, how far different the pastorall care of his Church, is from the power which governeth in Common-wealths.

Hereupon the Sonne of God calleth unto him all the twelve Apostles, saying, Mat. 20 25. Ye know that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion, &c.Mar. 10. 24. Yet know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles, exercise Lordships, &c.Luke 22 25. The Kings of the Gentiles exercise Lordships, &c. [...]. But it shall not be so among you. This is a statute not to be repealed. This is spoken authoritative & definitivè, it is the determinate Law of a just authority. A Canon ordained and irrevocably fixed by the wisdome of God. Confirmed by an example above all argu­ment. Mat. 20 28. Mark 10 45. For the sonne of man came not to be ministred unto, but to Minister.Luke 22. 22. I am among you as he that ser­veth. And before this he had taught them, that the Mark 10. 24. Disciple is not above his Master.Joh. 13. 15, 16. I have given [Page 53] you an example, that you shall do as I have done to you, verily, verily, the servant is not greater then the Lord.

This ministery being thus performed in hu­mility, and without worldly titles, The Mini­sters shall be then exalted. Our blessed Saviour in expresse words following, saith unto them, Luc. 22 29. I appoint unto you a Kingdome (but addeth) as my Father hath appointed me. Now his owne Kingdome is spirituall, or as himselfe said unto Pilate, not of this world. Let them then renounce temporall, and they shall have spirituall ho­nour. But some of the Clergy would (it seems) confound both Kingdomes, being ambitious to inherit Glory in the Kingdome of Grace. I feare that there are some Bishops do not know how sublime a vertue Christian humility is; how full of Honour.

Every [...] must be [...],Luc. 22. 26. Let the greatest be as the youngest, that is the way to be a right Elder, he must be [...],Luc. 22. 27. as he that ser­veth, that is the way to be ministred unto. He must be [...] Mat. 20 27. Mark. 10 44. a servant, that he may be [...] a prime or chiefe. He must be [...] Mat. 20 26. a Minister, that he may be [...] a great one. These antitheses our Saviour hath placed in the text upon the former occasion.

[Page 54] From hence, may well be argued as a Corol­lary, to these undoubted premisses, that no Minister of the Gospell can lawfully assume, hold, or exercise that power which by the Lord of the Gospell is inhibited to his Mini­sters. But our Saviour Jesus Christ (Lord and onely head of his Church) hath inhibited all temporall Lordship, Magistracy and Domi­nion unto his servants, in the lot of his Clergy. Therefore no Minister of this Gospell may hold or exercise temporall Lordship or Do­minion.

These words [...], &c. It shall not be so a­mong you, doe so streighten the Bishops Miters, that they sit uneasie on their heads: to soften and as it were to line them for their ease; the Bishops that are and would be all the papall, and some of the Protestant doe quilt a gentler sence into these words then can beare analogy with the text. They search the originall and pretend to finde another sence in our Saviours sentence.

The Text saies that the Lords of the Gentiles are called gracious Lords and [...] (not tyrants but) benefactors, a title fit for the best Princes. And yet this Text (say they) forbids not unto Clergy men, the use and exercise of worldly [Page 55] titles, power, offices, dignities, Cōmands, domi­nion Lordships, &c. but the abuse of them: do­mineering & tyrannizing with them, not exer­cising and holding. This they pretend to make firme out of the Greeke word [...]; which they would have taken in the worst sence of exorbitant power, even for Tyrannizing. So then, they would teach us, that, Lord it they may, and Lord it they may not: Lord it they may with all pompe, state, power; Lord it they may not, with pride, vanity, and oppression. But I shall easily prove this interpretation to be inconstant with the scope and analogy of the Context.

Will they frame their argument from the verbe [...] to be a Lord, or to rule? or from the preposition [...], added and united there­unto? neither will serve. And if the pompe of our Prelates cannot avoyd the power of this text, they are downe for ever. Let me therefore scan it to the full.

First, [...] to be a Lord, or to have rule or Lordship, is never properly taken in that ill sence which they would here create, as having unjust, and oppressive power. It is derived from the usuall and most frequent title of our Lord and Saviour, whom the holy Scripture so of­ten [Page 56] saluteth [...] Lord. Here is no shadow for Tyranny.

The true sence of [...] is authoritatem habens one that hath authority: being derived from [...] authority which is known to be approved and ordained by God himselfe from whom all lawfull authority is derived. Marke how well this word is sensed through all Authours: De­mosthenes calleth the heads and chiefe of the City [...]. A law in force and princi­pall authority is called by Aeschines [...]. Galen calleth the chiefe and principall mem­bers of a mans body [...] yet one member doth not tyrannize over ano­ther.Gal. de usu par­tium. Aristotle hathEthi. l. 6 [...] propria virtus, (that is) a vertue properly or principally so called. [...] is one that is Lord or master of himselfe, not one that domineers over him­selfe. [...] Apoc. 1. 10. The Lords day. [...] The Lords Supper. 1 Cor. 11. 21. Saint Paul saith thatRo. 1. 7 The law hath dominion over a man so long as he liveth, he doth not meane that the Law is a Tyrant, yet the word is [...] Rom. 14. 9. Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he mightRom. 14. 9. be Lord both of the living and the dead: [...]. From [...] Lord, commeth [...] Lordship, foure times mentioned by the holy Apostles, [Page 57] but never taxed as a power tending to Tyran­ny, but to be obeyed in them who duly are therewith invested, as may be seen. (Eph. 1. 21. Coloss. 1. 16. 2 Pet. 2. 10. and Jude 8.) Clearely then in [...] there is no print of usurpation or of oppressive and tyrannicall power. If there be, we are then well warned to beware of our Bishops, who not onely owne the title [...], but expressely plead for it, as the Part 2. p. 104. Bishop of Exeter in his late Episcopacy.

Secondly, [...] the very word (used by Saint Matthew and Saint Marke, in these before alledged Texts) whereby our Saviour forbid­deth his Apostles, to exercise Dominion or Lordship is a compounded word of two, [...] and [...]. That is, to rule as one that hath autho­rity. I may render it to be, or to behave ones selfe ( [...] juxta, Secundum) according as one that hath authority.

This preposition in words compounded hath sometimes a signification of his owne, some­times none at all, as in [...], &c. clearely it hath no speciall signification in this [...], much lesse a force so exegeticall as to draw the lawfull power of [...] into the exorbitancy of a Tyranny. That it hath no force here, is by this apparent, for that the speech of our Savi­our [Page 58] recorded by the holy Ghost in S. Matthew and S. Marke by [...] and by [...] are rendered by the same spirit in Saint Luke, [...] and [...] So that plainely you must not pretend tyrannizing to be meant in the sence of one place, except you can finde it also in both, unlesse you will come to this, that he forbiddeth tyranny in one place, and worldly power in the other, which if you do, you grant the question.

This is enough alone: yet for a further inter­pretation of [...], looke in Genesis 1. 28. where God giveth unto man in the time of mans innocency, the rule and dominion over all his creatures, even whilest they all were Gen. 1. 31. very good. The name and word of power in that great Charter granted is [...]. Now the time of this power granted, the person to whom it is granted, the creatures all good on whom it was to be exercised, and above all the goodnesse of Amighty God who granted it, do exclude all imagination of a Tyrannicall power, and admit onely of a fatherly master­ship over the new creatures of God.

The same word is used againe (Psalm. 110. 2.) and there applyed to our blessed Saviour [...]. Rule thou in the middest [Page 59] of thine enemies. Aquila hath [...] Invalesce, prevaile over thine enemies. Symmachus, [...], do thou correct or instruct thine enemies.

If then the frequent and constant sence of both [...] and [...], be onely to have power and authority, civill, temporall, and ordinary dominion, and that all such authority is forbidden them, how poore and weake is that evasion for our Bishops, who would have this speech of our Saviour taken in a forced sence different from all these other places? and would forge a new meaning, as if our Saviour did not here forbid [...] but onely [...], not a commanding Lordlinesse, but a Tyrannous use of it; when as it is hereby evident, that Christ having ordained the Ari­stocracy of twelve, did therein and in his re­prehension here take away those severall ben­ches of honour, and that proud imparity of temporall power which our Bishops doe swell withall.

That the former speeches of our Saviour, do destroy the Lordlinesse of our Prelates, let us confirme it with a farther consideration, which is thus. Our Saviour Christ being1 Cor. 1. 24. the wisdome of God, must be thought to fit and suit his answer to the question and request made [Page 60] unto him by the two Apostles. But what Bi­shop in defence of his usurped power, dares affirme that two such admirableGal. 2. 9 Pillars, as James and John, should aske of such a Master iniquam dominationem, a cruell dominion over their fellowes, as if the meaning of their re­quest were thus. Master, give us two leave to tyrannize over the other ten! He had taught them before,Mat. 5. 5. Blessed are the meeke, andMat. 11. 29. Learne of me, for I am meeke and lowly in heart: Can it then be thought that the beloved Disciple and his brother, shall aske of the master of all hu­mility, a Tyrannicall power to oppresse their partners? No man hath such a heart of Lead to thinke, yet there have not wanted foreheads of Brasse to affirme so: Certainly, in that King­dome of Christ, by them as then supposed to be temporall, they desired the honour to shine in civill dignity, and eminency of power and authority, which (no question) they in­tended to have exercised with all brotherly moderation, yet are they (and I wish our Bi­shops also were) answered with his reprehen­sion, firstMat. 20 22. Ye know not what ye aske, next with his absolute denyall and forbiddance, [...], &c. It shall not be so among you.

Will the practice of Saint Paul, and the [Page 61] counsell of S. Peter serve for comment to this text? Saint Paul saith [...],2 Cor. 1. 2, 4. We Lord it not. S. Peter himselfe an Elder to other Elders, ex­horteth them to feed the flocke, [...] overseeing it: and that not by constraint, [...], 1 Pet. 5. nor as being Lords.

Therefore my resolution stands cleare upon this vote; That it may be declared that true and right Episcopacy is incompatible and in­constant with the authority of a secular ju­risdiction.

They who give in their names to be labou­rers in Gods Vineyard must not goe out of the doore, and thinke to returne at pleasure: their whole time they have vowed to the great Ma­ster of the Vineyard, and I finde no wages pro­mised but to them who enter and continue there to the last houre.Luke 9. 62. No man putting his hand to the plough and looking backe, is fit for the King­dome of God.

Let therefore this inhibitory Statute against ‘Bishops holding the secular jurisdiction of temporall Lordships, stand (as it must stand, irrepealeable [...]. It shall not be so among you.

Thus by vouching a divine Statute that Bi­shops [Page 62] should not be Lords, I do plainely involve my selfe in this conclusion, that Bishops are and ought to be. Such is, such ever was my sense, so far am I from the Rooters.

God forbid that we should destroy the fun­ction of Episcopacy, but God grant we may (with his Majesties leave) un-Lord them from a domineering power:P. 347. For to my sence, Synesius doth very well deliver himselfe, [...]. To conjoyne the prin­cipality with the Priesthood, is to close together things inconsistent. Ep. 57. And againe, [...]. Why doe you endeavour to joyne those things that are separated by God?

In this opinion I may receive as little thanks from the Prelates, as I find full satisfaction in my own bosome.

Section VIII.

UPon thursday May 21. I subjected my selfe to the obloquy I suffer. The Bill for Abolition of our present Episcopacy was pressed into my hand by S. A. H. (being then brought unto him by S. H. V. and O. C.)

[Page 63] He told me he was resolved that it should goe in, but was earnestly urgent that I would pre­sent it. The Bill did hardly stay in my hand so long as to make a hasty perusall. Whilst I was overviewing it, Sir Edward Aiscough delivered in a Petition out of Lincolnshire, which was seconded by M. Strode in such a sort as that I had a faire in­vitement to issue forth the Bill then in my hand. Hereupon I stood up and said this, which imme­diately after I reduced into writing.

Mr. Speaker,

THe Gentleman that spake last taking notice of the multitude of complaints and complaynants against the present govern­ment of the Church, doth somewhat seeme to wonder that we have no more pursuit ready against the persons offending. Sir, the time is present, and the work is ready, perhaps beyond his expectation.

Sir, I am now the instrument, to present unto you, a very short (but a very sharpe) Bill: such as these times and their sad necessities have brought forth. It speakes a free language, and makes a bold request. It is a purging Bill.

I give it you, as I take Physick, not for delight, but for a cure. A cure now, the last and onely [Page 64] cure, if (as I hope) all other remedies have first been tried. Then—Immedicabile vulnus, &c. But Cuncta prius tentanda—

I never was for Ruine, so long as I could hold any hope of Reforming. My hopes that way, are even almost withered.

This Bill is entituled:An Act for the utter abolishing and taking away of all Archbishops, Bi­shops, their Chancellors, and Commissaries, Deanes, Deans and Chapters, Arch-deacons, Prebendaries, Chanters, and Chanons, and all other their under-Officers.

Sir, you see, their demerits have exposed them Publici odii piaculares victimas. I am sorry they are so ill, I am more sorry that they will not be content to be bettered, which I did hope would have beene effected by our last Bill.

When this Bill is perfected, I shall give a sad I unto it. And at the delivery in thereof, I doe now professe before hand, that if my former hopes of a full Reformation may yet revive and prosper; I will againe divide my sence upon this Bill, and yeeld my shoulders to underprop the primitive, lawfull, and just Episcopacy: yet so, as that I will never be wanting with my utmost paines and prayers to Roote out all the [Page 65] undue adjuncts to it, and superstructures on it.

I beseech you read the Bill, and weigh well the worke.

This is the neerest Act that ever I have done for Abolition: and if I suffer for this, it is [...] alto­gether undeservedly: [...] my profession here is to Root out all undue adjuncts and superstructures, but to underprop the Primitive Episcopacy. And (as before I said) a little addition to this Bill might have given us a good Reformation: Take away the present Dioceses, but state forth the future, in the same Bill. The heads of which forme shall anon be presented to you.

Section IX.

THe next passage of this nature was upon the same Bill, whilest it stood (as yet it stands) in Commitment to the whole House, Mr. Hide excellent well discharging that Chaire. And this was the first which was distasted abroad. Many have importuned me for copies, but I have yet issued none out of my hand, though it were spoken above seven moneths since.

21. Jun. 1641.
M. Hide,

YOu have here a Bill, but such a one as is likely to be short-liv'd and not to grow into a perfect Act, unlesse you please to adde therunto some very important, very significant proviso's, such wherein we may have, or where­by we may be assured in another Bill to have, a future government, in roome of this that goes out. I am confident the Lords will otherwise debate and dispute your Bil quite out of doors.

Sir, we are all bound unto the goodnesse of his sacred Majesty (God preserve him and his for it) none of all our Bils, none of our peti­tions (this Parliament) have miscarried in his royall hand, but have beene all compleated with the Royall assent.

But the Ambition of some of our Prelates, will not let them see how incompatible two se­verall contradistinguished functions are in one & the same person: And therefore there is left you neither Root nor Branch of that so good, so necessary a Bill, which lately we did send up; and consequently no hope of such a Reforma­tion, as we all do aime at.

What sparke of hope can we then have, that this Bill, which strikes at Root and Branch, [Page 67] both of their Seats of Justice there, and of their Episcopall Chaires in the Church will passe (as it is, and without tender of some other go­vernment in lieu of this) since the voyces are still the same, which outed your former Bill.

Truly (I professe) my hopes are sad in this: never had one Parliament so many great af­faires, never had any Parliament any affaire so great as this which we call the Bill of Episcopacy. Certaine (Sir,) it is the great Hope, or the ex­ceeding Feare of every man here, and of all men abroad.

Many a time this Parliament I have heard (and not unjustly) that the businesse then in hand was of as great consequence as any had been agitated within these walls.

But in truth, (Sir,) to my apprehension, neither Star-Chamber, nor High Commission, nor Shipmoney, nor Straffords death, nor Can­terburies life, are (with me) equivalent, to the setling or unsetling of the whole nationall Church of this Kingdome.

We cannot answer to God or man, if we doe not use our best and most vigorous endea­vours for the peace of the Church we live in.

I should thinke this a happy day, if we could so temper this Bill, that it might walke fairely on through the house of Lords unto the King.

[Page 68] To this end, (and that we may not lose all, by asking more then all,) I will be bold to offer to your consideration, a provisionall ad­dition or two. Such as (I hope) may both satis­fie us and secure our Bill, by fit amendments.

Here was a little interception, and then a long additionall to the Bill presented in writing, for putting all Church-government into the hands of Commissioners in every Diocesse. I proceeded.

Sir,This was so at first, though afterward it was re­solved that no Clergy man but onely Lay men should be Commis­sioners. there is now offered unto you, a large addition to your Bill, longer (indeed) by far, then the Bill it selfe. It seemes to desire, that a proportionall number of Clergy and Laity, may be commissionated together, for all ec­clesiasticke jurisdiction, untill a future govern­ment be resolved on.

I must confesse, I am not satisfied with this way of Commissioners; it would joy me much, and satisfie me more, if as one government goes out, I could see another come in, and that without an Inter-regnum of Commissioners.

We are resolved that the present way of government is unsufferable, let it goe, but let us have another. This I conceive to be feisible, and that in fewer lines, fewer words, then this additionall increment now offered to your [Page 69] Bill; which in truth will make me like your Bill worse then I did before.

To this purpose, I doe lay this ground: A Church government we must have. This is (within these walls for ought I heare) on all hands agreed upon: and then (by unavoydable necessity) this government must be distributed into parts, into certaine limits, circuits and divisions of places, wherein it is to be exer­cised.

Unto this being granted, I do subjoyn three propositions, and they are these:

First, our present Dioceses are (for the most part) much too large, too vast; I desire there­fore, that the circuit for future Church govern­ment, may be reduced to the common bounda­ries and limits of our severall shires. The dis­proportion from thence objected shall be ea­sily answered.

2. Next, in every of these divisions, I desire that some choice, able, grave Divines (twelve or more in a shire) may be by the Parliament ap­pointed, to be in the nature of an old primitive constant Presbytery among us.

Thirdly, and lastly, because all meetings of many must be disorderly, and the rule of many cannot be without confusion, unlesse there be one to guid and to direct the rest. I shall desire [Page 70] that in every shire, over every Presbytery, we may establish one President.

A President (I say) more to satisfie others then my selfe. The name of Bishop disturbs not me; let him be a Bishop, or an Over-seer, or a President, or a Moderator, or a Super-intendent, or a Ruling-elder; call him what you will, so as you provide me one in every shire, over every Pres­bytery, to guid and to direct the rest.

The different sence (to be easily observed) and I hope not past our strength to be recon­ciled, in this House, concerning our present Church-government is two-fold. One is for Ruine thereof, the other for Reforming: both are neerer together in heart (I perswade my selfe) then we are yet aware of. The neerer the better, and more easie composure both of our owne selves here, and of the Churches peace throughout the Land abroad. God send that we may find the way to peace.

If the right forme of primitive Episcopacy were truly stated forth unto us, it would (que­stionlesse) take and lead our judgements a­long therewith.

This Bishop was not so much a Lord as a Father over his charge, ruling with love and tender bowels: whosoever did institute this Episcopacy, sure I am this Bishop hath and [Page 71] ever had, a precedency before, and a presiden­cy over others of his owne order.

He was one man chosen out among the rest, and by the rest put into a severall degree (not into a distinct superiour Order) above the rest: [...] ad Episcopandum to oversee the rest: and this onely in matters spirituall, nothing at all in affaires temporall, or secular imployments.

If this Bishop were not of Apostolicall institu­tion yet it is undeniable that he was of Apo­stolicall permission. For, of and in the Apostolicall times all stories, all Fathers, all ages have a greed, that such Bishops there were.

His rule indeed was with consent of his Se­nate, his Presbytery: Direction was his, Coercion was still their owne.

He had [...], yea and [...], both the first place of sitting, and the chiefest part of power: I say the chiefest part, I doe not say, the greatest part of power. The power, it was more eminent in him, but it was virtually residing and domesticant in the plurality of his As­sessors.

These Assessors were the Presbyters, the Elders of the Church, of whom holy Ignatius (a Father so primitive, that he was Disciple to Saint John the Apostle, and by some thought [Page 72] to be that very child (whilst he was a child) whom our blessed Saviour tooke and set be­fore his disciples, whereof you read in three of the Evangelists.Mat. 18. 2. This Ignatius (I say) in his Epistle to the Trallians doth call these Elders,Mar. 9. 26 [...],Luk. 9. 27 The Counsellors and co­assessors of the Bishop.

Here was in this age (and yet this father died a Bishop and a martyr before the last Apostle went to Heaven) here was a fellowship,If Simon Zelotes were the last as some af­firme. yet such a fellowship as destroyed not presidency: and in another Epistle (that to the Magnesians) you have such a presidency as doth admit also of a fellowship. The words are, [...]. The Bishop being President (the very name and office there) as in the place of God, and the Pres­byters as a Senate of Apostles.

I forbeare to dilate upon this Episcopacy. But I will be bold Ponere ab oculos to set him before your eyes. I will give him you, even by way of demonstration.

M. Hide, your selfe are now in this great Committee, M. Speaker is in the house, The Bi­shop of our Congregation.

You are in your selves but fellow-members of the same house with us, returned hither (as we also are) to sit on these benches with us: [Page 73] untill by our election and by common suffrage you are Incathedrated: then you have (and it is fit and necessary that you should have) a pre­cedency before us, and a Presidency over us.

Notwithstanding this, you are not diversifi­ed into a severall distinct order from us (you must not swell with that conceit) you are still the same member of the same house you were, though raised to a painfull and a carefull de­gree among us, and above us.

This Bishop had (as your selfe have here) potestatem directivam, but not Correctivam. Cor­rection in our house doth dwell in the Gene­rall Vote.

You know the power you have is limitted, and circumscribed by them who gave it; you are no Dictator to prescribe us our Lawes; but must gather our Votes: and then your pro­nouncing doth fixe our (not your own single) Orders.

Neither you here, (nor Mr. Speaker in the House) can Degrade any one of us from these Seates, nor can you silence us in the due liber­tie of our Speech.

Truly (Sir) as yet advised, I do heartily wish we had in every Shire of England, a Bishop such and so regulated for Church-government within that Spheare, as Mr. Speaker is boun­ded [Page 74] in and limitted, by the rules and cancels of this House.

That were (indeed) a well tempered and a blessed Reformation, whereby our times might be approximant, and conformant to the Apo­stolicall and pure primitive Church.

But this (I feare) is magis optandum quàm spe­randum: yet it being the cause of God, who can then despaire?

This happinesse (I meane living under Epis­copall Presidency, not under a domineering Pre­lacy) this is too high above our reach, yet strong prayers, and hearty endeavours may pull the blessing down upon us: In the mean time wo is our Churches portion, for our Bi­shop President is lost, and grown a stranger to us, and in his roome is crept in and stept up a Lordly Prelate made proud with pomp and ease, who neglecting the best part of his office in Gods Vineyard, instead of supporting the weake, and binding up the broken, forrageth the Vines, and drives away other labourers. The Vines indeed have both Grapes and Leaves, and Religious acts both substance and circum­stance, but the Gardener is much too blame, who gives more charge to the workmen of the leaves then of the fruit.

This rough enforcement (of late) to that [Page 75] which is not the better part: is an Episcopacy that turnes all our melody into a Threnody: This makes many poore, pious, Christian soules to sing the songs of Sion in a strange Land. Ps. 137. 3. & 4. [...]

This Bishop will have no Assessors (or if any, so formally admitted, and so awed, as good have none) no Senate, no Consultation, no Presbytery or common Suffrage: but elates himselfe up into usurped titles, and incompati­ble power, and sublimes ti selfe by assuming a soleship both in Orders and in Censures.

Religion and reason, and Primitive example are all loud against this Episcopacy.

This too elate subliming of one can not stand without a too meane demission (I may say debasing) of many other of the same order. Nay this Bishop not content with Ecclesiastick pride alone, will swell also, with ambition and Offices secular.

Truly (Sir) you have done exceeding well to Vote away this Bishop; for of this Bishop (and of this alone) I must understand the Vote you have passed, untill I be better instructed: for your Vote is against the present Episcopacy, and for the present: you can hardly finde any other Episcopacy but this: an authority how ever by some of them better exercised, yet too solely entrusted to them all.

[Page 76] Away then with this Lordly domineerer who plays the Monarch (perhaps the Tyrant) in a Diocesse: of him it is of whom I read, Epis­copalis dignitas papalem fastum redolet. This kind of Episcopacy it smels ranke of the Papacy: nor shall you ever be able, utterly and abso­lutely to extirpate Popery, unlesse you root out this soleship of Episcopacy.

To conclude in short and plaine English, I am for abolishing of our present Episcopacy. Both Diocesses and Diocesan as now they are. But I am withall (at the same time) for restau­ration of the pure Primitive Episcopall Presi­dency. Cut off the usurped adjuncts of our pre­sent Episcopacy, reduce the ancient Episcopa­cy, such as it was, in puris spiritualibus. Both may be done with the same hand, and I thinke in a shorter Bill then is offered now by way of ad­dition.

Downe then with our Prelaticall Hierarchy, or Hierarchicall Prelacy (such as now we have) most of it consisting in temporall adjuncts onely; the Diana and the Idoll of proud and lazy Church-men. This doe, but eâ lege, on this condition, that with the same hand, in the same Bill, we doe gently raise againe (even from under the ruines of that Ba­bel) such an Episcopacy, such a Presidency, as [Page 77] is venerable in its antiquity and purity, and most behoovefull for the peace of our Chri­stendome.

This is the way of Reforming: and thus by yeelding to the present storme, and throwing that over-board which is adventitious, bor­rowed, and undue; Peace may be brought home unto our Church againe, the best of that building and the truth of ancient Episcopacy may be preserved: otherwise we hazard all.

This would be glorious for us and for our Religion: and the glory thereof will be the greater, because it redounds unto the God of glory.

My motion is, that those sheets last presen­ted to you, may be laid by, and that we may proceed to reduce againe the old originall Episcopacy.

This being thus delivered, and upon report being mis-resented abroad, a stranger came to me the next day, and with much shew of love and sorrow, told me, that I had lost (by this speech) the prayers of thousands in the City. Very many others have since beene with me to try my temper, but I have found in them all (all that are absolutely Anti-Episcopall) so much more of entreaty then of argument, that indeed [Page 78] they have proved themselves as Bishops unto me, for I have received Confirmation from them.

Section X.

SInce the late Recesse, some endeavours of mine have beene reported more distastive then before: insomuch as that, a lying genera­tion gave it forth, some that I was expelled the house, others that I was in the Tower, for what I had spoken.

The first passage was next morning after our meeting, upon occasion then offered by way of complaint, for not obeying the late Order of the 8 of September. The complaint came from some Parishioners of Criplegate. And thus I did on the sudden then deliver my selfe, which presently I reduced into writing.

21 Octob. 1641.
M. Speaker,

It is very true (as is instanced unto you) that your late order and declaration of the 8 and 9 of September, are much debated and disputed abroad: perhaps it may be a good occasion for us to re-dispute them here.

The intent of your Order, to me, seemes doubtfull, and therfore I am bold, for my owne [Page 79] instruction, humbly to propound two quaeres.

1. How farre an Order of this House is binding?

2. Whether this particular Order be continuant or expired?

Your Orders (I am out of doubt) are po­werfull, if they be grounded upon the lawes of the Land. Upon that warranty, we may by an Order, enforce any thing that is undoub­tedly so grounded: and by the same rule we may abrogate whatsoever is introduced con­trary to the undoubted foundation of our Lawes.

But Sir, this Order is of another nature, a­nother temper: especially in one part of it. Of which (in particular) at some other time.

Sir, There want not some abroad, men of birth, quality, and Fortunes; such as know the strength of our Votes here as well as some of us (I speake my owne infirmities) men of the best worth, and of good affyance in us, and no way obnoxious to us: They know they sent us hither as their Trustees, to make and un­make Lawes. They know they did not send us hither to rule and governe them by arbi­trary, revocable and disputable Orders: espe­cially in Religion: No time is fit for that: and this time as unfit as any. I desire to be instru­cted herein.

[Page 80] M. Speaker, in the second place, there is a question whether this Order (whereupon your present complaint is grounded) be permanent and binding, or else expired, and by our selves deserted.

I observe, that your Order being made 8.September, in hope then of concurrence there­in by the Lords; that fayling, you did issue forth your last resolution by way of declara­tion9. September, wherein thus you expresse your selfe.—That it may well be hoped, when both Houses shall meet againe, that the good propositions and preparations in the House of Commons, for pre­venting the like grievances, and reforming the dis­orders and abuses in matter of Religion, may be brought to perfection: wherefore you doe expect that the commons of this Realme doe in the meane time—(what? obey and performe your Order made the day before? no such thing: but in the meane time)—quietly attend the Reforma­tion intended.

These are your words, and this my doubt upon them: whether by these words you have not superseded your owne Order. Sure I am, the words doe beare this sence, and good men may thinke and hope it was your meaning.

My humble motion therfore is this: I beseech you to declare, that upon this our Re-conven­tion, [Page 81] your order of the eighth of September is out of date: And that the Cōmons of England must (as you say) quietly attend the Reformation intended, which certainly is intended to be perfected up into Acts of Parliament. And in the meane time that they must patiently en­dure the present Lawes, untill you can make new, or mend the old.

Section XI.

THe promise made (in my last) hath not beene performed in the House, nor is now like to be. The reason is, there is now no pro­bability that we shall debate the validity of our order of the eighth of September. A day indeed (Saterday the sixth of November) was by order fixed for that theame, but other affaires diver­ted it. To discharge my promise aforesaid, I was then ready with freedome to have unboso­med my selfe, as in this following discourse: but that order being expired and not revived, though moved for; I aske pardon if I do inter­pose here that which was prepared for that day. Excuse me Reader if I be willing fully to expose my selfe to the utmost: The truth of my heart desires some friendly helpe to set me right, if I [Page 82] be in any error. I am sorry that I am prevented of publishing this in the house.

Master Speaker.

ME thinks I am now going to walke up­on the ridge of a house, a dangerous praecipice on either hand. On the one side I must take heed that I speak neither more nor lesse then the inward dictate of my owne con­science: on the other hand I shall be afraid to presume above your better judgements. My path is narrow: I must looke to my footing: Dixi custodiam vias meas, Psa. 38. 1. &c. I said I will looke to my wayes that I offend not in my tongue. Thus I preface, because I foreknow that I shall speak to the dislike of some worthy members of this honourable House.

Sir: Two questions are before us: First in generall, how farre an order of this House is binding deforis, not upon our owne members here, but upon the people, the Kings subject abroad. Secondly, the validity and invalidi­ty of your particular order of the eighth, and declaration of the ninth of September last.

For the first I am clear in this opinion, that we may enforce any thing that is undoubted­ly grounded upon the law of the land: Shew me that foundation, and I will concurre with [Page 83] you in any resolution. We may also declare against any thing that is introduced contrary to our lawes. Farther then this I know no way, unlesse it be by Bill: and then I know no limitation, no bound. Thus in briefe for the generall, I come now to your particular order.

Master Speaker, I shall be afraid to arraigne your orders: I have already beene control­led, (not for doing so, but as if I had done so) yet (Sir) I have often heard it in this House, that we are masters of our owne orders: and then (I thinke) we may in this place arraigne them, that is, question them, try them, approve, al­ter, reject, or condemne them. Was not our Protestation more sacred then an Order? yet that was revised, and (to stop some objecti­ons) new senced by us. And I take it lawfull in this place to arraigne (if that be the word) even an act of Parliament, and then (a fortio­ri) an order of this House.

Surely (Sir) I shall speake reverently of all your Orders when I am abroad: I have done so of this. I am resolved that my obedience shall therein be found good, although my par­ticular reason be rebellant to your conclusi­ons. This is my duty abroad: but here in this House, within these walles, freedome is my in­heritance, [Page 84] and give me leave (I pray) at this time to use a part of my birth-right.

The seasonablenesse, and the equity of your order, both are controverted. You all know this is a dangerous time to make any deter­minations in matter of Religion: whether it be in the doctrinall, or in the practicall part of Gods worship. Men are (now a dayes) many of them more wise, and some of them more wilfull then in former times. The use and caution is this: Let us take care that what we do, we do with due and full authority, I would have nothing new (in this kinde) but by au­thority of the three Estates: and even then let us be wary that we suit the times with appli­cations proper and seasonable.

Hear me with patience, and refute me with reason. Your command is, that all corporall bowing at the Name Iesus—be henceforth for­borne.

I have often wished that we might decline these dogmaticall resolutions in Divinity: I say it againe and againe, that we are not Idonei & competentes judices in doctrinall determina­tions: The theame we are now upon is a sad point, I pray consider severely on it.

You know there isActs 4. 12. no other Name under heaven given among men whereby we must be sa­ved. [Page 85] You know that this isPhil. 2. 9. a Name above every name. Cantic. 1. 3 Oleum effusum nomen ejus, it is the Carroll of his own Spouse. This Name is by a Father sti­led Mel in ore, melos in aure, jubilum in corde. This, it is the sweetest and the fullest of comfort of all the Names and Attributes of God, God my Saviour. If Christ were not our JESUS, Heaven were then our envy, which is now our blessed hope.

And must I Sir, hereafter doe no exterior reverence, none at all, to God my Saviour, at the mention of his saving Name Jesus? why Sir, not to do it, to omit it, and to leave it un­done, it is questionable; it is controvertible: it is at least a moote point in divinity. But to deny it, to forbid it to be done: take heed (sir) God will never owne you, if you forbid his honour. Truly (Sir) it horrors me to thinke of this.

For my part, I do humbly aske pardon of this House, and thereupon I take leave and li­berty to give you my resolute resolution. I may, I must, I will doe bodily reverence unto my Saviour, and that upon occasion taken at the mention of his saving Name JESƲS. And if I should doe it also as oft as the Name of God, or Jehovah, or Christ is named in our solemne devotions, I doe not know [Page 86] any argument in Divinity to controll me.

M. Speaker, I shall never be frighted from this, with that fond, shallow argument: Oh you make an Idoll of a Name. I beseech you Sir, paint me a voyce, make a sound visible if you can: when you have taught mine eares to see, and mine eyes to heare, I may then perhaps understand this subtile argument. In the mean time reduce this dainty species of new Idola­try, under its proper head, (the second Com­mandement) if you can. And if I find it there, I will fly from it ultra Sauromatas any whither with you.

The words are there, Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any graven Image, or any likenesse of any thing (ullius rei) that is in Heaven—or in Earth— Can you here find the Name of God in this description of Idolizing? Surely sir, my Saviour is neither [...] nor [...] of any thing there forbidden, nor [...] neither Sculptile, nor Si­mulachrum, nor Idolum. All these are here, and none but these, and every of these doth signify Spectrum aliquod some visible object. And must do so, for to speake properly, an Idoll invisi­ble, is but imaginary Non sence. When you can bring the object of one sence, to fall under the notion and dishinguishment of another sence; so that the eye may as well see a Name, [Page 87] or sound, as the eare can heare it: then a name may be the object of Idolatry: till then this argument will be too sublime for my under­standing.

God was neither in the strong and mighty Wind, 1 Kin. 19 12. nor in the Earthquake: yet these hardly (if possibly) can be figured, but a still small voyce, this certainly is beyond the curious Art of man to expresse, and consequently free from all possible perill of Idolatry. And therefore thus in Deuteronomy God doth cha­racter himselfe.Deut. 4. 12. Yee heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude, onely ye heard a voyce. As if he should say, I know you prone unto Idola­try: but now commit Idolatry to a voyce, to a sound, to a name if you can.

I am grieved to see that wretched, unlear­ned, and ungodly Pamphlet ascribed to Ma­ster Burton, with that daring impious title Jesu-worship confuted: where by way of a Scorn­full Sarcasme, he is not afraid (as with a nick­name) to call Christians Jesu-worshippers.

I returne (M. Speaker) this (as I said) is a sad point in Divinity, to forbid exterior wor­ship unto God. Was it ever heard before, that any men of any Religion, in any age, did ever cut short and abridge any worship, upon any occasion to their God? Take heed sir, and let [Page 88] us all take heed whither we are going. If Christ be JESUS, if JESUS be God, all reve­rence (exterior as well as interior) is too little for him. I hope we are not going up the back­staires to Socinianisme.

In a word, certainly sir, I shall never obey your Order, so long as I have a hand to lift up to Heaven, so long as I have an eye to lift up to Heaven. For these are corporall bowings, and my Saviour shall have them at his Name JESUS.

Yet sir, before I end, give me leave (I beseech you) to take off that, which, by mistake may else sticke still upon me. I never liked the Bi­shoply injuctions in the late novell practices, nor the severe Inquisition upon the bare o­mission of this posture. The Bishops did rigo­rously exact it: upon their owne heads the crime of that enforcement lies. But (I beseech you) let not us be guilty in the other extream. Truly to my sence it will savour lesse of Piety, and more of Tyranny.

In the last place, consider (I pray) that it is a point dogmaticall, not yet fully resolved by Divines; let us then be wary in it. And let this (with many other points) be referred to a National Synod. For one we must have, or else we shall breake our Religion into a thousand pieces.

[Page 89] For this present, my motion is (as former­ly) that this Order be superseded, by declaring to the Commons (as your words in the Order are) that they doe quietly attend the Reformation intended, and that in the meane time they doe (as they ought) obey the Lawes that are.

Section XII.

ON Friday the 22 Octob. some debate there was upon a new short Bill for taking away the Bishops Votes in Parliament. It was langua­ged that they ought not to intromit themselves into secular jurisdictions; which I received wil­lingly. For if it be found inexpedient, certainely they ought not: if it be made unlawfull de futuro, they ought not: if it be inconsistent with their Function, still they ought not; as was then ar­gued by a worthy member of the House.M. S. S.

But when it was presently urged by a Gentle­man my neighbour there, that unto the words ought not, should be subjoyned, and that it is in­consistent with their function, which was pressed and urged by a generall voucher of Scripture, Fathers, and Councels: Yet I know that Gentle­man will not in matter of opinion, scarce in an Historicall point, allow me proofe of what I [Page 90] can prove out of the two latter. Occasionally then, I thus expressed my selfe.

M. Speaker,

HOwever I am resolved in my private opi­nion of the inexpediency and unlawful­nesse for Clergy men to hold secular jurisdi­ction (Duo gladii non sunt in unum conflandi & conferruminandi) yet sir, my inward resolution doth not presently make me a Judge in a Dog­maticall point, nor doe I know that this place doth enable me with that capacity: if it be my private opinion, yet I desire not to bind the judgement of the Land herein by an act of Parliament, although determining to my own sence.

Certainely sir, this point of inconsistency will lead this house (much more that of the Lords, where the Bishops are) into a debate which may more safely and more prudently be avoy­ded. I have formerly, and againe I pray you, that we may not engage our selves into the de­termination of doctrinall points in Divinity, perhaps it is not proper for us; and for my part, I doe think we are not herein Idonei & compe­t [...]ntes judices.

Was it ever heard or seen, that a set of Lay­men, Gentlemen, Souldiers, Lawyers, Mer­chants; [Page 91] all professions admitted, but the profession of professions for this worke, Di­vines alone excluded, that we should deter­mine upon doctrinall points in Divinity? The­ology is not so low, so facile a trade. Let us maintaine the doctrines that are established; to declare new, is not fit for our assembly. And for my part, I do think I have found daily cause to wish these resolutions recommended unto other resolvers.

M. Speaker, Divines are herein (in dogmatick resolutions of Religion) concerned as much, as well as we: They are a considerable party, and ought not to be bound up un-heard. It was a prevailing argument with me against the late Canons, that they could not bind us of the Laity, being a distinct severall body, no way involved in their Votes. Our plea was that we neither had a decisive voyce to deter­mine with them; not a deliberative voyce to consult with them: nor an elective voyce, in choyce of their persons, to make them our Trustees to determine for us. Nor lastly, (as at least we should have) a susceptive voyce, in a body of our own to receive their resolutions, and of our selves to submit unto them. These things are of a nature fit to be discussed by grave Divines, in a free Synod of Divines, to be [Page 92] chosen by Divines. In the mean time, let not us be guilty of the same which we have condem­ned in them: we ought not to pay injury with wrong. They cannot be bound where they are no way parties: For it is a rule in Nature, Reason, and Religion, Quod omnes tangit, ab omnibus tractari debet. I am so good a friend to your Bill, that for the better expediting there­of, I desire the word Inconsistant may not stand therein.

Section XIII.

HAvind before professed that we are incom­petent resolvers of doubtfull points in do­ctrine; and finding how much of our pretious time, every motion, petition, and occasionall passage in Religion did take up, I thought it not inconvenient, next day to renew my motion for a Synod.

Saturday 23 October.
Mr. Speaker.

YOu have entred an Order, that nothing be treated of but affaires of generall con­cernement: I will present you one as generall, as universall as any can be.

The sad miseries of our distracted Church, [Page 93] and consequently the hazard of Gods true Religion with us, doth even cut my very heart with griefe and feare.

If we let forth the government into a loose liberty for all religions, we shall have none. Libertinisme will beget Atheisme. And truly (Sir) at present betweene Papisme on the one hand, and Brownisme on the other, Narrow is the way, and few there be do finde it, to right good Protestantisme.

Many mournfull sad complaints I have of late received from Ministers the ablest, and e­very way the worthiest that I know. I could willingly name you two,Mr. Rea­ding. one at Dover, the o­ther at Cranebroke in Kent:Mr. Ab­bot: Men upon whose merit, let my credit stand or fall in this house. He that hath preached least of these, hath preached severall thousands of excellent Ser­mons to his people.

These are in no better condition then ma­ny other deserving men, who doe generally complaine with griefe of hearts, to see their now infected sheepe, after long pastorall vi­gilancy, and faithfull ministery, to runne and straggle from them more in these last ten mo­neths, then in twenty yeares before.

Give us (I beseech you, give us) a remedy, a speedy remedy to this growing evill: or else [Page 94] our schollers are like to turne Papist, Armini­an, or Socinian: and all the ignorant party will either turne Atheist, or else (which is the next degree) make to themselves a Religion of their own, as themselves best please.

Sir: we may sit here (for ought I see) and debate our selves, and the world abroad into more and more distances of opinion: we are not likely to worke our selves (much lesse o­thers) into unity.

What is then to be thought on? (Sir) the usuall, ancient, the best, and (I think) the on­ly way of cure is by a Councell. A free, lear­ned, grave, religious Synod.

There is in some hand of this House (and long hath beene) a Bill for a Nationall Synod ready drawne.S. R. H. With it we are curable; with­out it, I look for no peace.

My humble motion is this in a word. If you love the peace of our Ierusalem; command forth that Bill to be forthwith read: or if that Bill be not to be had, appoint a Committee to draw up another.

This is my motion, and it is founded in a hope of piety and peace.

Section XIV.

UPon occasion of a Remonstrance 19 No­vemb. wherein divers passages then were, concerning Religion and the Church-govern­ment, and some in particular (as I conceived) very aspersive to our Religion in the solemne practice of it by our publick Liturgy:This charge (upon this oc­casion) was af­terward expun­ged the Declara­tion. charging it (in hypothesi) with vaine repetition, and with savour of Superstition: I did humbly move, that some of that Committee who framed up that Remonstrance for us, would please to assigne what those vaine Repetitions are in our Liturgy, and what passages of Superstition.

Nothing was at all said (as I remember) to that point of Superstition. But at length a Gen­tleman did adventure, to name that which he seemed to think to be vaine Repetition.

He said that the Lords Prayer is eight, nine or tenne times repeated. I did (with leave of the House) reply that such repetition toties quoties, how oft soever was (if heart and words did go together) farre from vaine. That (in my book) the Lords Prayer was but twice in the whole morning Service, unlesse the additionals of Bap­tisme, Churching, Communion, Buriall, &c. [Page 96] did occurre. That then in every severall act of Divine Service it was once, and but once repea­ted, as the high compleature of all devout ex­pressions: That this repetition in it selfe was warrantable, as by our Saviours example, who (although he had not the Spirit by measure) yet in the Garden he prayed three times using the same words. Jo. 3. 34. The further debate of this was ofted to the next day,Mat. 26. 44. and then it did grow toward a que­stion, whether all exceptions against the Liturgy should be totally laid by, or further debated. I did not hold our selves the proper determina­tors of this point. I did thinke that from hence occasion might againe be taken inductive to re­new my motion for a free Nationall Synod; which I desired to enforce the best I could: especially there being now obtained a generall promise of a Synod in this very part of that Declaration or Remonstrance.

Hereupon thus I adventured. A coppy where­of being stolne from me issued lately forth, both unknown to me and misprinted also: which hath beene entertained abroad both with Applause and Exception.

Saturday. Novemb. 20.
M. Speaker,

THe question is whether these clauses, con­cerning some pretended erroneous passa­ges [Page 97] in our Liturgy shall be laid by or not. I am of opinion to decline them here: but not to bury them in a perpetuall silence.

In this very period you give us (in generall tearmes) a promise of a Nationall Synod: I doe still wish the presency thereof: it being (to my understanding) the onely proper cure and remedy for all our Church-distractions: and may be proved (if proofe be needfull) to have been practised in the booke of God.Acts 1.

This promised Synod is too farre off:Acts 6. let me have better assurance then a promise,Acts 15. which that I may obtaine, I will be bold to give you some reasons to induce that assembly, and to speed it also.

M. Speaker, Much hath been said, and some­thing attempted to be done to regulate the exteriour part of our Religion: but Sir, we bleed inwardly. Much endeavour hath been to amend the deformed forms we were in, and to new govern the government.

Yet Sir, this is but the Leaves of good Reli­gion, fit (I confesse) notwithstanding, to be taken care of, for beauty and for ornament. Nay some Leaves are fit and necessary to be preserved for shadow and for shelter to the blossomes and the fruit.

The fruit of all is good life: which you [Page 98] must never expect to see, unlesse the blossomes be pure and good, that is, unlesse your doctrines be sound and true.

Sir, sir, I speake it with full griefe of heart, whilst we are thus long proyning and compo­sing of the leaves, or rather whilst some would pluck all leaves away, our blossomes are blast­ed. And whilst we sit here in cure of govern­ment and ceremonials, we are poysoned in our doctrinals. And at whose doore will the guilt and sin of all this lie?

Qui non vetat peccare,
cùm potest, jubet.

It is true, that this mischiefe growes not by our consent: and yet I know not by what un­happy fate, there is at present, such an all-da­ring liberty, such a leud licentiousnesse, for all mens venting their severall sences (sencelesse sences) in matter of Religion, as never was in any age, in any Nation, untill this Parliament was met together.

Sir, It belongs to us, to take heed that our countenance (the countenance of this honou­rable House) be not prostituted to sinister ends by bold offenders. If it be in our power to give a remedy, a timely and a seasonable reme­dy to these great and growing evils, and that we (being also put in mind) shall neglect to do [Page 99] it, we then doe pluck then sins upon our own heads, ‘Alienum qui fert scelus,Sen. facit suum.’

Shall I be bold to give you a very few instan­ces? one for a hundred, wherewith our Pulpits, and our Presses do groan?

M. Speaker, There is a certaine, new-born,I un-seen, ignorant, dangerous, desperate way of Independency; Are we Sir, for this indepen­dent way? Nay (Sir) are we for the elder bro­ther of it, the Presbyteriall form? I have not yet heard any one Gentleman within these walls stand up and assert his thoughts here for either of these waies: and yet (Sir) we are made the Patrons, and Protectors of these so different, so repugnant Innovations: witnesse the severall dedications to us.

Nay both these waies, together with the E­piscopall, come all rushing in upon us, every one pretending a fore-head of Divinity.

1. Episcopacy says it is by divine right; and certainly Sir, it comes much neerer to its claym then any other.

2. Presbytery, that says it is by Divine right.

3. Nay, this illegitimate thing: this new-born Independency, that dares to say it is by Divine right also.

Thus the Church of England (not long since [Page 100] the glory of the Reformed Religion) is mise­rably torne and distracted. You can hardly now say, which is the Church of England. Whi­ther shall we turn for cure?

II Another instance. If I would deale with a Papist, to reduce him; He answers (I have been answered so already) To what Religion would you perswade me? what is the Religion you professe? Your nine and thirty Articles they are contested against: your publique solemne Liturgy that is detested:Protesta­tion pro­tested de­nies the Church of Eng­land to have the 3. marks of a true Church. And which is more then both these, the three essentiall, proper, and onely Markes of a true Church, they are protested against: what Religion would you perswade me to? where may I find, and know, and see, and read the Religion you professe? I beseech you (Sir) helpe me an answer to the Papist.

Nay Sir, the Papist herein hath assistance even among ourselves, & doth get the tongue of some men whose hearts are farre from him. For at one of your Committées, I heard it pub­liquely asserted, by one of that Committée, that some of our Articles, do containe some things contrary to holy Scripture.

III M. Speaker, Sunday is a Sabbath: Sunday is no Sabbath: Both true, both untrue, in severall acceptation, and the knot (I think) too hard [Page 101] for our Teeth. Shall I give you an easier in­stance?

IV Some say it is lawfull to kneele at receiving the Elements of our holy Communion: o­thers plead it as expedient: Some do presse it as necessary: and there want not others who abhorre it as Idolatrous. And Sir, I am confi­dent you cannot so state this easie question to passe among us, but that there will be many contradicentes.

V The second Epistle of S. Peter is now newly denied to be the Apostles. Our Creed, the holy Apostles Creed, is now disputed, denyed, in­verted and exploded,The Ministers in their Remonstrance doe complaine that the Creed is often rehearsed; but they blotted out (what they had put in) that it is over-short, and (in one place) dan­gerously obscure. by some who would be thought the best Christian among us. I started with wonder, and with anger to heare a bold Mecha­nike tell me that my Creed is not my Creed. He wondred at my wonder and said, I hope, your worship is too wise to beleeve that which you call your Creed.

O Deus bone in quae tempora reservasti nos! Polycar. Thus [...].Arist. One ab­surdity leads in a thousand, and when you are down the Hill of errour, there is no bottom, but in Hell, and that is bottomlesse too.

VI Shall I be bold to give you one (and but one) instance more? much clamor now there is [Page 102] against our publike Liturgy, though hallowed with the blood of some of the first composers thereof. And surely Sir, some parts of it may be very well corrected. But the clamors now go very high. Impudence or ignorance is now grown so frontlesse, that it is loudly expected by many that you should ut­terly abrogate all formes of publique worship;As for them who admit a forme to be lawfull, yet do declaime against authority for commanding and impo­sing the use of it, it is to me a wonder and absurdity, that a just authority may not bind that to be done by a law, which is (as they confesse) lawfull in it selfe both to have and use. and at least if you have a short form, yet not to impose the use of it. Ex­tirpation of Episcopacy, that hope is already swallowed, and now the same men are as gree­dy for abolition of the Liturgy: that so the Church of England in her publique prayers,In the false copy abroad, instead of may hereafter, the silly Transcriber put in Nay, h [...]r offerture, which hath been some displeasure to me. may hereafter turne a babler at all adventure. A brainlesse, stupid, and an ignorant conceit of some.

M. Speaker, The wisdome of this House will (I am confident) never sinke so low: never fall into such a deliquium of judgment and of piety. When you do, I shall humbly submit my selfe:—unto the stake and fagot (I mean) for certainly (Sir) I shall then be a Parliament heretick.

Thus much, for a taste of that, whereof there is too much abroad,Judg. 5. 15. For the divisions of [Page 103] Ruben, there are great thoughts of heart abroad.

(Sir) Thus are we engaged into sad points of Divinity, and with the favour of that Gen­tleman, who did last time disgust it, I must a­gaine propound my doubtfull quaere, to be re­solved by the wisdome of this House: whether we be Idonei & competentes judices in doctrinall resolutions?

In my opinion we are not. Let us main­taine the Doctrine established in the Church of England, it will be neither safety nor wis­dome, for us to determine new.

(Sir) I do againe repeat and avow my for­mer words: And do confidently affirme, that it was never seene, nor knowne in any age, in any Nation throughout the whole world, that a set of Laymen, Gentlemen, Souldiers, Law­yers of both gownes, Physitians, Merchants, Citizens, all professions admitted, or at least admittable, but the professors of Religion a­lone excluded, that we should determine upon doctrines in Divinity.

Shall the Clergy hold different doctrines from us? or shall our determinations binde them also? They are a considerable body in this Kingdome; they are (herein surely) con­cerned as much as we: and ought not to be bound up unheard, and unpartied.

[Page 104] Farther (Sir) if Clergy men, among us be thought fit for no other then for spirituall imployment; How shall we answer it to God and to a good conscience, if we shut them out from that which we our selves pretend to bee their only and their proper work?

Mr. Speaker, We cannot brag of an uner­ring spirit: infallibility is no more tyed to your Chaire, then it is unto the Popes. And if I may speake Truth, as I love truth with clearnesse, and with plainnesse, I do here in­genuously professe unto you, that I shall not acquiesse, and sit downe upon the doctrinall resolutions of this House: unlesse it be where my own Genius doth leade and prompt me to the same conclusions.

Mr. Speaker, We are here convened by his Majesties Writ to treat Super arduis negotiis regni & Ecclesiae, I beseech you let us not turn negotia Ecclesiae into dogmata fidei. There is a great difference in objecto betweene the A­gends and the Credends of a Christian. Let us so take care to settle the government, that we do not unsettle the doctrines.

The Short close of all with a motion is but this: we are poisoned in many points of do­ctrine: And I know no Antidote, no Recipe for cure but one: a well chosen and well tem­per'd [Page 105] Nationall Synod, and Gods blessing there­on: this may cure us: without this (in my poor opinion) England is like to turne it selfe into a great Amsterdam. And unlesse this Councell be very speedy, the disease will be above the cure.

Therefore, that we may have a full fruition of what is here but promised: I doe humbly move that you will command forth the Bill for a Nationall Synod, to be read the next mor­ning. I saw the Bill above five moneths since in the hand of a worthy member of this House. If that Bill be not to be had, then my humble motion is (as formerly) that you would name a Committee to draw up ano­ther.

This being once resolved, I would then de­sire that all motions of Religion, (this about the Liturgy especially) may be transferred thither, and you will finde it to be the way of peace and unity among us here.

I might have added in due place above, a mention of (1) frequent schismaticall conven­ticles. (2) That Taylers, Shoomakers, Brazi­ers, Feltmakers, do climbe our publick Pulpits. (3) That several odde irregular fasts have been held, for partiall venting of private flatteries of some; slanders of other members of this [Page 106] House. (4) That the distinction of Clergy and Laity is popish and Antichristian, and ought no longer to remaine. (5) That the Lords Pray­er was not taught us to be used. (6) That no Nationall Church can be a true Church of God. (7) That the visible Church of Anti­christ did make the King Head of the Church. (8) That supreme power in Church affaires, is in every severall Congregation. (9) That a Presbytery without a Bishop was in the world before it was at Geneva. (10) That it is a hey­nous sinne to be present when prayers are read out of a booke. (11) That to communicate in presence of a prophane person, is to partake of his prophanenesse. (12) That Christs king­dome hath beene a Candle under a bushell, whilest Antichrist hath out-raigned him for 1600 yeares together.

Many, many more instances at little leisure I can gather, which together have begotten a ge­nerall increase of open Libertinisme, secret A­theisme, bold Arminianisme, desperate Socinia­nisme, stupid Anabaptisme, and with these the new Chiliastes, and the wilfulnesse of Papists strangely and strongly confirmed by these di­stractions.

Good God! looke downe and direct our consultations. The best issue whereof (I think) [Page 107] would be to debate the whole debate of Relgi­on out of our doores: by putting it into a free Synod, whereupon I doubt not but we should grow unanimous in all our other works.

Section XV.

THe Remonstrance or great Declaration went out of the House much better then it came in. When it was engrossed and presen­ted to the last vote with us, I gave in my excep­tions thus.

22 Novemb. 1641.
Mr. Speaker,

THis Remonstrance is now in progresse upon its last foot in this House: I must give a vote unto it, one way or other: my con­science bids me not to dare to be affirmative: So sings the bird in my breast, and I do cheer­fully believe the tune to be good.

This Remonstrance whensoever it passeth, will make such an impression and leave such a character behinde, both of his Majesty, the People, the Parliament, and of this present Church and State, as no Time shall ever eat it out, whilest Histories are written, and men have eyes to read them.—How curious then [Page 108] ought we to be, both in the matter and the forme? Herein is a severe point of conscience to be tryed: Let us be sure that every particu­lar substance be a Truth: and let us cloathe that Truth with a free language, yet a modest and a sober language.

Mr. Speaker, This Remonstrance is in some kinde greater and more extensive then an act of Parliament: that reacheth only to England and Wales; but in this the three Kingdomes will be your immediate supervisors: and the greatest part of Christendome will quickly borrow the glasse to see our deformities ther­in. They will scanne this worke at leisure, which (I hope) we shall not shut up in haste.

Some pieces here are of excellent use and worth: but what is that to me, if I may not have them, without other parts that are both doubtfull and dangerous.

The matter, forme, and finall end of this Re­monstrance, all of them doe argue with me, not to remonstrate thus.

The end: to what end doe we decline thus to them that looke not for it? Wherefore is this descension from a Parliament to a Peo­ple? they looke not up for this so extraordi­nary courtesie? The better sort think best of us: And why are we told that the people are expectant for a Declaration?

[Page 109] I did never looke for it of my predecessors in this place, nor shall do from my successors. I do here professe that I do not know any one soul in all that Country (for which I have the honour to serve) who lookes for this at your hands. They do humbly and heartily thanke you for many good lawes and statutes already enacted, and pray for more. That is the lan­guage best understood of them, and most wel­come to them. They do not expect to heare any other stories of what you have done, much lesse promises of what you will do.

Mr. Speaker. When I first heard of a Re­monstrance, I presently imagined that like faithfull Counsellors, we should hold up a glasse unto his Majesty: I thought to repre­sent unto the King the wicked counsels of per­nicious Counsellors: The restlesse turbulen­cy of practicall Papists. The treachery of salse Judges: The bold innovations and some su­perstition brought in by some pragmaticall BB: and the rotten part of the Clergy.

I did not dream that we should remonstrate downeward, tell stories to the people, and talke of the King as of a third person.

The use and end of such Remonstrance I un­derstand not: at least, I hope, I do not.

Mr. Speaker, In the forme of this Remon­strance, [Page 110] if it were presented to you from a full Committee, yet I am bold to make this Quae­re, whether that Committee have presented to us any heads in this Remonstrance which were not first agitated here, and recommen­ded to them from this House: if they have, there wanteth then (for so much) the formall pow­er that should actuate and enlive the worke so brought unto us: as may be well obser­ved by perusing the order (now above a twelvemoneth old) for constituting that Committee.10 No­vemb. 1640.

In the matter of this Remonstrance I except against severall particulars, but upon the tran­sient reading of it, (not having any view ther­of) I will gather up two instances only, very obvious, very easie to be observed.

First,Lo. Vis­count Falkland (as was also observed by a learned Noble Lord who spake last) here is a charge of a high crime against all the BB. in the land, and that above all proof that yet I have heard.

Your words are.Idolatry introduced by com­mand of the BB.

What? plain, flat, formall Idolatry? name the species of this idolatry, that is introduced by the BB. that is (for indefinite propositions are aequipollent to universall) by all the BB. and by a command of theirs.

[Page 111] Certainly Sir, Idolatry (in the practice of it) is a very visible sin; and the command of the Bi­shops was either legible or audible. Who hath read this command? who hath heard this com­mand? who hath seen this all-commanded I­dolatry? and can assigne wherein it is?

Some superstition in doctrines, and in pra­ctices, by some Bishops; this is not the question: But the odious apostacy of Idolatry. Give me leave to say.

No man in this House can charge and prove all the Bishops, no nor halfe of them, I dare say, not any three among them: perhaps (and truly I think so) not one among them all, to have issued forth any one command for Idolatry. If any man can, let him speak and convince me, I love to be reformed. In the mean time I de­sire to offer you some particulars in bar, and by way of opposall to this charge.

The learned,D. Mor­ton. pious, and painfull B. of Dur­ham hath fought in front against Roman su­perstition and Idolatry.

The B. of Lincolne was the first of note,D. Wil­liams. that gave check unto our Papall misleaders and Al­tarian innovators. He stood in gap of that in­undation, and was a sufferer for us.

The B.D. Hall, of Exeter (however mistaken in the Divinity of Episcopacy) hath ever had the re­pute [Page 112] both of a good man, and a good Bishop. He hath not only held and maintained his sta­tion, but advanced also, and made good im­pression upon the Idolaters of Rome.

M. Speaker, This hath been a very accusative age: yet have I not heard any superstition (much lesse Idolatry) charged (much lesse proved) upon the severall Bishops of London, D. Iux­ton. Winchester, D. Curle. Chester, Carlile, Chichester.

Parcite paucorum crimen diffundere in omnes.
D. Bridg­man.

Not for love unto the persons of these Bishops,D. Pot­ter. but for honour to our Religion,D. Duppa although the times of late have been somewhat darke­ned; yet, let not us make the day blacker in report then it is in truth.

In the last place I observe a promise in ge­nerall words, that Learning shall be rather ad­vanced then discouraged: Sed quid verba audio, cum facta videam?

Great rewards do beget great endeavours: and certainly (Sir) when the great Bason and Ewer are taken out of the Lottery, you shall have few adventurers for small Plate and Spoons onely.

If any man could cut the Moon out all into little Stars: although we might still have the same Moon or as much in small pieces; yet we shall want both light and influence.

[Page 113] To hold out the Golden ball of Honour and of profit, is both policy and honesty; and will be operative upon the best natures, and the most pious minds.

But (M. Speaker) if I observe aright, lear­ning (I mean Religious learning) in this Re­monstrance is for one halfe thereof utterly un­thought on. And because I heare often speech of one halfe, but seldome mention of the o­ther, give me leave (I beseech you) in this Theam a little to enlarge my selfe: if your Remonstrance once passe, it will be too late (I feare) to enter this plea.

It is I dare say, the unanimous wish, the con­current sence, of this whole House, to go such a-way, as may best settle and secure an able, learned, and fully sufficient ministery among us. This ability, this sufficiency must be of two severall sorts.

It is one thing to be able to preach and to fill the Pulpit well; it is another ability to con­sute the perverse adversaries of Truth, and to stand in that breach. The first of these, gives you the wholsome food of sound Doctrine; Tit. 1. 9. the other maintaines it for you, and defends it from such Harpys as would devoure or else pollute it. Both of these are supremely neces­sary for us, and for our Religion.

[Page 114] Both are of divine institution. The holy Apo­stle requireth both. Both [...] and [...]. First to preach,1 Tit. 9. 10. That he be able with sound Doctrine to exhort: Vers. 11. and then, [...], and to convince the gainsayers. For (saith he) there are many deceivers whose mouthes must be stopt.

Now Sir, to my purpose: these double abilities, these severall sufficiencies, may per­haps sometime meet together in one and the same man. but seldome, very seldom, so sel­dome that you scarce can find a very few a­mong thousands rightly qualified in both.

Nor is this so much the infelicity of our, or any times, as it is generally the incapacity of man, who can not easily raise himselfe up to double excellencies.

Knowledge in Religion doth extend it self into so large, so vast a Sphere, that many (for hast) do cut crosse the diameter, and find weight enough in halfe their worke: very few do or can travell the whole circle round.

Some one in an age (perhaps) may be found, who as Sir Francis Darke about the terrestriall Globe, may have travelled the celestiall Orbe of Theologicall learning, both for controver­sall, and for instructive Divinity.

The incomparable Primate of Ireland de­serves first to be named. Bishop Morton (whom [Page 115] I mentioned before) is another reverend wor­thy, and hath highly deserved of our Church in both capacities. Jewel (of pious memory) another Bishop never to be forgotten.As Mr. Reading. Some few others I could name, able and active both for Pulpet and the Pen.M. Abbot But Sir, these be Rarae­aves, there are very few of them.

The reason is evident. For whilst one man doth chiefly intend the Pulpit exercises, he is thereby disabled for Polemick discourses: and whilst another indulgeth to himselfe the fa­culty of his Pen, he thereby renders himselfe the weaker for the Pulpit. Some men ayming at eminency in both have proved but mean proficients in either. For it is a rule and a sure one, ‘Pluribus intentus minor est ad singula—’

Now Sir, such a way, such a temper of Church-government and of Church-revenue, I must wish, as may best secure unto us both: both for preaching to us at home, and for convin­cing such as are abroad.

Let me be alway sure of some Champions in our Israel, such as may be ready and able to fight the Lords battell against the Philistims of Rome, the Socinians of the North, the Armini­ans and Semi-Pelagians of the West: and ge­nerally against hereticks and Atheists every [Page 116] where. God encrease the number of his labou­rers within his Vineyard: such as may plentifully and powerfully preach fayth and good life among us. But never let us want some of these watchmen also about our Israel, such as may from the everlasting hills (so the Scriptures are called) watch for us, and descry the common enemy, which way soever he shall approach. Let us maintain both Pen and Pulpit.1 Sam. 2. Let no Ammonite perswade the Gileadite, to foole out his right eye, unlesse we be willing to make a league with destruction; and to wink at ruine whilst it comes upon us.

Learning (Sir) it is invaluable: the losse of learning, it is not in one age recoverable. You may have observed, that there hath been a continuall spring, a perpetuall growth of lear­ning ever since it pleased God, first to light Luthers Candle: I might have said Wicklifes, and justly so I do: for even from that time unto this day, and night and houre, this light hath increased: and all this while our better cause hath gained by this light: which doth convince our Miso-musists, and doth evict that Learning and Religion, by their mutuall support, are like Hippocrates twins, they laugh and mourn together.

But Sir, notwithstanding all this so long [Page 117] encrease [...] learning, there is a Terra incognita, a great Land of learning not yet discovered: our adversaries are daily trading, and we must not sit down and give over, but must encourage and maintain, and encrease the number of our painfull adventurers for the Golden fleece: and except the fleece be of Gold, you shall have no adventurers.

Sir, we all do look that our cause should be defended: if the fee be poore, the plea will be but faint. Our cause is good, our defence is just: let us take care that it be strong; which for my part, I do clearly and ingenuously professe, I cannot expect should be performed by the Pa­rish Minister, no not so well as hitherto it hath been. For from whom the more you do now expect of the Pulpit, the lesse (I am sure) you must look for of the Pen.

How shall he with one hundred pound, (perhaps two hundred pound) per annum, with a family, and with constant preaching, be able, either in purse for charge, or in leisure for time, or in Art for skill, to this so chargeable, so dif­ferent, so difficult a work? I speak it (M. Spea­ker) and pardon my want of modesty if I say, I speak it not unknowingly: Six hundred pound is but a mean expence in books, and will ad­vance but a moderate Library. Paines and lear­ning [Page 118] must have a reward of Ho [...] and Profit proportionall: and so long as our adversaries will contend, we must maintain the charge, or else lay down the cause.

In conclusion, I do beseech you all with the fervor of an earnest heart; a heart almost divi­ded between hopes and feares: never to suffer diversion or diminution of the rents we have for Learning and Religion: but beside the Pul­pit, let us be sure to maintain [...] an universall Militia of Theology, whereby we may be alway ready and able (even by strength of our own, within our own happy Island at home) [...] to stop the mouth of all errors and heresies that can arise.

Never Sir, never let it be said that sacred Learning (for such is that I plead for) shall in one essentiall halfe thereof, be quite unprovi­ded for in England. Sir, I have reason to be ear­nest in this, I see, I know great designes draw­ing another way: and my feares are increased, not cured by this declaration.

Thus I have done: and because I shall want champions for true Religion. Because I neither look for cure of our complaints from the common people, nor do desire to be cured by them. Because this house (as under favour I conceive) hath not recommended all the heads [Page 119] of this Remonstrance to the Committee which brought it in: Because it is not true that the Bishops have commanded Idolatry. Because I do not know any necessary good end & use of this declaration, but do feare a bad one. And because we passe his Majesty and do Remon­strate to the People. I do here discharge my Vote with a cleare conscience and must say NO to this strange Remonstrance.

Section XVI.

THus far I go cleare the same man unchan­ged: and that I may fully expose my selfe unto a right Character, and a true esteem, beside the laying open how I have already expressed my selfe in matter of Religion, I shall now be bold to give you a composure fitted and framed for the House, on the same subject, and ready to have been presented above halfe a yeere since.

The Bill for Root and Branch (commonly cal­led the Bishops Bill) having long been agitated, and in the Commitment grown from two sheets to above forty; I did think it would at least have been brought to question for the engrossing: This that follows was ready to have been inter­posed upon that question. The Bill is since laid [Page 120] down (I hope) to its perpetuall rest. This was prepared as an endeavour to lay that asleepe: And because it doth most fully represent my ut­most end and aime for Reformation, I am willing to subjoyne it here unto the rest.


Mr. Speaker.

THis Bill is now in question for its further progresse: I must give a vote unto it one way or other. The inward dictate of my con­science will not suffer me to be affirmative. We may now debate this Bill super totam materiam, and I will then (with your leave and patience) give you some account why I am so fixed nega­tive. This I shall doe as briefly as this cause can beare.

You had from my hand a very short Bill,

—Non hos quaesitum munus in usus.

I am willing (with many more) to abrogate that which is: provided that I may at that very time, in the same Bill know and constitute what shall be; such an addition to this Bill I did at first expect: Such an addition I shall anon be bold to present, but it will not now suit this Bil, as it is now mistemper'd to that purpose.

This Bill when it was but a short one, it did containe a great summe, An Act for the utter abo­lishing of all Arch-bishops, Bishops, Deanes, Deanes [Page 121] and Chapters, Archdeacons, Prebendaries, Chaunters, Chanons, and all other their under-officers. These may be Legion for ought I know, they are so many, and many of them instruments and offi­cers of vexation only.Ep. l. 4. c. 92. Pope Gregory the first gave a true prediction when he said, that Anti­christ should come Cum exercitu Sacerdotum, with an army of Priests; it hath proved so. True on the other side, where the numberlesse numbers of Monks, Fryers, and Secular Priests, with his Janizary Jesuits, doe match the greatest army that ever the Grand Signior hath led. True in proportion with us, if the under-officers among us do reach neere the thousands they have been (of late) computed at. But letting passe the ar­my of all their under officers, the substance and body of our present worke is reducible to two heads.

  • 1 Episcopall Governement.
  • 2 Cathedrall Societies.

All the rest are unto these, but Phaleratae nugae, their idle trappings and additionall imperti­nencies.

In the discussion and resolution of all this (I am confident) if we be but candid, temperate, and respectfull hearers of one another: we shall finde that (all this while) we are farther of, in words, in language and expressions, then we [Page 122] are in matter, in truth, and in purposes.

In the first place therefore, lest we should beat the aire in a mistaken sence of words, I will be bold in a word or two, to give you the diffe­rent sense of the word Episcopacy.

Sir, It will be maintained upon good ground that Episcopacy is of divine right: it will be maintained upon grounds as good, that Episco­pacy is not of divine right. The ambiguity lyes in the word Episcopacy, and it must be put into a certainty, or else we shall runne our selves into a certaine Labyrinth of words, & lose the matter.

Three sorts of Episcopacy I have observed, & no more: pardon me if I use expressions which you have received before: They were his, they are mine, and Beza taught us both: who gives them thus,

  • 1 Episcopatus Divinus.
  • 2 Episcopatus Humanus.
  • 3 Episcopatus Satanicus.

Others in milder language do keepe the same sence: So you may please to say there is,

  • 1 Episcopus Pastor.
  • 2 Episcopus Praeses.
  • 3 Episcopus Princeps.

1 The first of these we all do reverence: it is the ordinance of God. You may safely write a No­li me tangere upon that: you have the holy [Page 123] text to warrant you.Psa. 105. 15. Noli tangere Christos meos.

2 The second also (in its degree) I doe highly honour, it is of right venerable antiquity: And for my part, if I can find such Episcopacy among us, I shall willingly submit thereto, though it should prove but the ordinance of man. Kings are no more themselves. Yet being once inve­sted, obedience is due unto them by Divine right.1 Pet. 2. 13. You have another Text for this also. Sub­mit your selves to every ordinance of man for the Lords sake. So then the first is the ordinance of God, to be obeyed for God: The second, al­though the ordinance of man, yet (whilest it stands so ordained) is to be obeyed for God also.

3 The third Episcopacy hath too much of the Principality. This I detest, this I abhorre. This is originally and really Antichristian. Away with this if you please, both Root and Branch.

If you will give me leave and patience, I will (as briefly as I can) touch them over and explain my selfe.

1 First Episcopus Pastor. This I say is of divine right. Every Spirituall Shepherd is to have a flock: and every congregation must have a Pa­stor to oversee that flock. This is originall, and of no lesse then Divine institution. I need not prove this Bishop. If there be any doubt of this [Page 124] Episcopacy,Vers. 28. look S. Paul in the twentieth of the Acts, there he gives this charge. Take heed (saith he) to the flock over which the holy Ghost hath made you Bishops. I know well that this text is by some Expositors construed of other Bishops. But how ever here are Bishops by divine right. And (mark you!) the holy Ghost (God for ever to be bles­sed) he first made Bishops. The Originall is plain [...]

S. Peter speakes by the same spirit.1 Pet. 5. 2 Feed the flock of God (saith he) which is among you: taking the Bishoprick thereof. Our english reading is the oversight thereof, both the same. Overseers and Bishops differ no more then a Greeke name and an English: severall sounds, but the same sense. The originall is [...] being Bishops thereof, nothing can be more plaine.

Now (Sir) this Episcopacy, we shall not, we must not, we dare not remove. This is that Bi­shop of whom the most ancient Ignatius, Ep. ad T [...]al. thus, Episcopo subjecti estote, velut Domino, ipse enim vi­gilat pro animabus vestris.

Away then with their impertinent objecti­on, who say, that there is a malady in the very name of Bishop: that the name is odious: you see the holy Ghost hath honoured this name and title, with approbation. Nay this name and title must never sinke into obloquy, it being one [Page 125] of the attributes of our blessed Saviour. He is the Bishop of our soules. 1 Pet. 2. 25.

2 The second is Episcopus praeses. If this be but Humanus Episcopatus (for I doe not determine the point already warme betweene a reverend and worthy Bishop and his Anti-pent-agonists) if it be not founded upon Divine institution, yet certainly it stands on good grounds, and pleads its own right by a good title, and that either ju­re Apostolico, or jure Ecclestastico: or jure civili & constitutivo: or jure rationis & convenientiae. All or any of these do entitle it jure bono. And that by so good, so approved a right, that Mr. Spea­ker) I am bold to stand up, and to forbid any man from this houre for 1600 yeares upward, to name any one age, nay any one yeare, where­in this Episcopacy was out of date in the best part of Christendome. By the word Bishop I do here understand, a man of the Clergy eminent in honour and power, by vertue of a superiour degree, above other men both Ministers and people within a certaine circuit or territory al­lotted and subjected to his particular care and survey in matters spirituall and affaires Ecclesi­asticall.

I will not trouble you to repeat the character of this Bishop: I have formerly been bold with you in that kind. He had a precedency. He had [Page 126] a presidency: He had a power, potestatem dire­ctivam, it cannot be denied. I gave you an in­stance, very accommodate to my sence: (Master Speaker) your selfe are our Bishop, we are your Presbyters.

It is true, that we have made you our Bishop, our Overseer, our President: and now it is as true, that neither we without you, nor you with­out us, can establish any one order. Not you without us, we must be your Assistants. So Igna­tius of old,Epist. ad Tral. The Presbyters are (saith he) [...], as the Senate of God, and the band of Apostles. Nor we without you, for so the same Ignatius (give me leave to presse his vene­rable authority, although Ignorance and Arro­gance have of late decryed both him and all Antiquity.)Epist. ad Magnes. They (saith he) who doe all things [...] without a Bishop, to such men Christ will say—Why doe you call me Lord, Lord, and doe not the workes I bid you? Such men doe seeme to me [...] not to be of good conscience, but to be coun­terfeiters and dissemblers. Mark his judgement on such as would do all things without a Bishop.

Of this Bishop, the Bishop President (and I plead for no other) it must be meant, which I read in the same Ignatius (I will not trouble you with any yonger, or any weaker authority, and I will hold my selfe within those Epistles that are [Page 127] indubiously his) the words are these,Epist. ad Tral. [...] [...]. It is necessary (necessary he says) that you do nothing without the Bishop.

Clearely then, the Bishop President in the best and purest age, was of the Quorum in all Eccle­siasticall affaires. And for this last age, Reve­rend Calvin, Beza, Bucer, Zanchy, Danaeus, lear­ned Chamier, all admit, none reject this kind of Episcopacy.

They who deny that ever any such Bishops were in the best, the purest times, I intreat some one of them (if any such be here) to stand up, and to shew me, teach me, how I may prove, that ever there was an Alexander of Macedon, or a Julius Caesar, or a William the Conqueror in the world. For Sir, to me as playn, as evident it is, that Bi­shops President, have been the constant, perma­nent and perpetuall governors, and moderators of the Church of God in all ages. And this being matter of fact, I do hope that historicall proofe will be sufficient adequate proofe in that which in its fact is matter of History. But proofes herein are so manifold and so cleare,Sir Tho, Aston, review of Episco­pacy, p. 1▪ that I borrow the free and true assertion of a worthy and a lear­ned Gentleman: It may be thought want of will ra­ther then want of light, which makes men deny the antiquity of Bishops in the Primitive times.

Therefore answer not me, but answer Ignatius, [Page 128] answer Clemens, Tertullian and Irenaeus. Nay, an­swer the whole indisputed concurrence of the Asian, the Europaean, and the African Churches, All ages, All places, All persons: Answer (I say) all these or (do as I do) yeild to the sufficient evidence of a truth. ‘Deque fide certâ, sit tibi certa fides.’ But do not think to bring me into a dream of a new born, or new to be born Church-govern­ment, never known, never seen in Christendome before this Age.

As for them, who say that all Episcopacy is Antichristian: Truly Sir, they may (if they please) with as sound reason, and with as much know­ledge say that all Church-government is Anti­christian, and I doubt there are some abroad ripe for such a sence.

Sir, Let us be wiser than to cosen our selves with words, and through a mistaken Logoma­chy run our selves into a Church Anarchy. If you talke with a Papist, in point of Religion, pre­sently he is up with the word Catholike; Catholike he tels you he is, of the Catholike Roman Church. This go's off Ore rotundo: but require him to speak playn English—The Ʋniversall Roman Church, and then you may laugh him into silence. Just so: some cry, away with Bishops, no Bishops: no, not of any kind. I desire one of that sence to [Page 129] stand up, and tell me sadly, would you have an Overseer in the Church or not?

Ancient S. Clement (whom S. Paul calleth his Fellow-workman) in his undoubted Epistle to the Corinthians,Phil. 4. 3. doth foretell that a time should come, when there would be [...] Contention about the very name of Bishop. I think the time is now. For my part, I will not make that my contention: But for the government by an Episcopall presidency, shew me any thing more agreeable to the holy word: Shew me any thing more honoured by the holy Martyrs of the first and the latter times: Shew me any more rationall and prudentiall way of government, and I yeild unto you.

Some against all Episcopacy do plead unto us, the fresh example, and late practice of our neighbour Churches. But I beseech you Sir, are not we herein as fit to give them our, as to take their example? I am ashamed to heare yester­days example pressed as an argument by some, and the all-seeing providence through all ages to the contrary turned aside, by the same men, as not worth an answer. Or if an answer you get, it is but this dead one, wherein (as in a mare mortuum) they would drown all reply. Oh (say they) the mystery of Iniquity began to work in the Apostles time. Ergo, what? Therefore (say [Page 130] they) this Episcopacy is that mystery of iniquity: And so they do desperately conclude with them­selves, that Christ did never support his Church with a good government till Farell and Frumen­tius did drive their Bishop out of Geneva: or since then, untill Presbytery begat independency. But their Syllogisme is as true Logick and as Conse­quentiall, as our Kentish Proverb, that Tenterden Steeple is the cause of Goodwin sands. Both Argu­ments are in one and the same mood and figure. But I return and proceed.

I have not asserted this kind of Episcopacy as Divine, yet I professe that it soares aloft, ‘—Et caput inter nubila condit.’

It hath been strongly received, that Presby­ters succeed to the seventy Disciples, and Bishops to the Apostles. S. Peter honours Episcopacy, by entitling the holy Apostles thereunto, for Mat­thias is chosen to take a Bishoprick (the very word there) which Judas lost by going to his owne place. Act. 1. 20

S. Paul tels you,1 Tim. 3. 1. This is a faythfull saying, [...], If any man desire a Bishopricke, he desi­reth a good worke. And this S. Paul, writes not at large in an Epistle to the body of a whole Church, as to Rome or Corinth, but this is in directed unto Timothy, then designed to be the particular Bishop, that is the President and Over­seer of Ephesus.

[Page 131] Two things are (or may be) here objected. First, that neither of these Texts, nor any other can be found, expresly mandatory, requiring the Office of Episcopacy in the Church. Next that the name of Bishop is in some places plainly given unto Presbyters. I answer.

If you put me upon this, that you will not yeild unto Episcopacy▪ untill you have a Text expresly positive therein, consider if by the same rule you do not let loose many other points as well as this. Shew me an expresse for the Lords day to be weekly celebrated. It will be hard to find divers Articles of our Creed in the holy Scripture terminis terminantibus. What have you there for Paedo-bap­tisme? What precept or example have you frō our Saviour, that women shal receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper? Why should women be bapti­sed, since the covenant (to wch baptisme doth suc­ceed) Circumcision, was a seale between God and men onely? what have you there expresse, why I may not beleeve the Trinity to be three Almigh­ties, as well as three persons, & but one Almighty?

But Sir, the golden rule of Vincentius Lirinen­sis, is an unfailing guide. Quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus, look what among Christians, hath been every where at all times, by all men univer­sally received, Atque id quidem verè est Catholicum, and there you may rest secured. So (I say) that for [Page 132] right sence of these Texts, and for warrant of this Episcopacy, the universall practice of the whole Church of God, especially in the Apostles times, and immediately succeeding the Apostles, is a most undeniable cōmentary to cleare unto us, that this kind of Episcopacy is and was of Apostolicall allow­ance, if not of Apostolicall institution. And thus in other points doth Tertullian argue against Marcion, and S. Augustine against the Donatists.

The second exception is thus. These Bishops may well be thought to be but Presbyters, for (say they) the name of Bishop is given to Presbyters also in holy writ. Ergo, Episcopacy is not a severall degree from Presbytery.

Surely Sir, if this argument be a sound one, then Apostleship it selfe, was not a severall order and degree from the 70. Disciples, and from Presby­ters, and then it had been a vaine thing to take Matthias from a Disciple into the lot and fellowship of an Apostolate. S. Peter doth not degrade him­selfe of his Apostleship, when he entitleth himself [...] a fellow Presbyter. 1 Pet. 5. 1. That very Office which is called a Bishopricke, Act. 1. 20. 25 is within 4. or 5. verses following, called the Ministery of an Apostleship. And if you will argue from community of names to identity of Office (so is done in the titles of Bishop and Presbyter) surely then we shall find, many more Apostles then they who saw the Lord [Page 133] in the flesh. Act. 9. 27 So Barnabas is called an Apostle. 2 Cor. 5. 16. So An­dronicus and Junius are among the Apostles. S. Paul cals Epaphroditus, The Apostle of the Philippians, Acts 14. 14. [...]. Rom. 16 7. So speaking to Titus and others, they are stiled [...], The Apostles of the Churches. Shal I conclude that all these who are thus called A­postles, Phi. 2. 25 were indeed, and in proper acceptation very Apostles? No man will say so.

By the same argument, (from community of name to identity of Office, which argument by Antiprelatical men, is much enforced) I may prove an Apostle and a Deacon to be the same Office. S. Paul calleth his Apostleship but a Deaconry, [...] And againe,Acts 20. 24. [...], I was made a Deacon. Eph. 3. 7. I conclude, that if Apostles be cal­led Deacons,Col. 1. 23 and Deacons be called Apostles, and yet the Offices are, and are reputed to be distinct and severall: So may the same men be called some­time Bishops, sometime Elders or Presbyters, and yet the two different degrees remain different and unconfounded. Take heed of enforcing such argument, to prove a parity in degree by the com­munity of Appellation, since you may read of our blessed Saviour himselfe, that he is aRo. 15. 8. Deacon, an Esa. 41. 27. Evangelist, anHeb. 3. 1. Apostle, a1 Pet. 2 25. Bishop. But forbea­ring this, I proceed.

M. Speaker, I come now in briefe to my third Episcopacy, Episcopus Princeps. This, this third 3 [Page 134] age, is the burden of our song, ‘—De duro est ultima ferro.’ Gold was the first: the second was bright and gli­stering, a silver age at least. But this, this where we now are, it is Iron, I and rusty too.

This is that Clergy Monarch whom we would avoyd. This ambition of a sole power, it is a very old sin, it began in Diotrephes, of whō the Apostle complaines that he was [...], Primatum dilexit, he loved to be a Primate, the first, the sole in au­thority. He (Diotrephes alone) did cast the brethren out of the Church: and therefore the Apostle doth threaten that when he comes,3 Jo. 9. He will bring the deeds of Diotrephes to remembrance.

This dangerous soleship is a fault in our Church indeed; and this I take to be Pestilentia Cathedrae, the very pest and poyson of Episcopacy; this is that which must away, and this being gone, I shall not feare their tyranny.

If it were not for this, they could neither op­presse good Ministers, nor preferre dull droanes, scandalous persons, nor pragmaticall innovators. If they had not been so sole in power, our many severall chaires for Religion had not groned with such number & weight of complaints. But by this, they have bin able to do mischiefe above beliefe.

Et ipse miror,
vixque jam facto malo
Potuisse fieri credo.—

[Page 135] The exemplar piety, the ardent love, and sweet humility of holy Bishops in the first foure centu­ries, did worke so farre upon the credulous hopes of both Clergie and Laity, that presuming to find in the same Chaire a succession of the same good­nesse, they became guilty of a desperate submissi­on to a sole power of one man, before they knew what changes, and what consequences they should feele.

Ignatius the great Bishop of Antioch, doth dis­criminate his own Episcopacy, from an Apostle­ship, even by this, that he had not a soleship of power and authority as they, and therefore hee sayes, [...], I do not command you as an Apostle.

This Bishop keepes a dangerous distance be­tweene his own Pharisaicall worship, and the Ple­beian Clergy, who yet are, all in order as good, & many of them in merit better then his Lordship.

To draw this to a point: The first Episcopa­cy we all are vow'd unto. The second, none will dissent from, but a lover of Novellisme: The third, none can submit unto, but such as are con­tent to be passive in a Tyranny. Away then with that, and with that alone, and then away with their needlesse question who say: shew us ano­ther government, before you take this away.

Away with that interregnum of Lay-Commissi­oners, [Page 136] the high roade way, or the next degree to Anarchy. Renovation is not Innovation, to Re­forme is not to bring in a new forme, but to purge the present forme, by reducing it unto the old. Quaerite antiquas semitas, Jer. 6. & state super eas. State▪ stay there: we may keepe our places, though we change our postures. Away with our present Epis­copacy, but give us the ancient Presidency. Both may be done at once.

Mr. Speaker, This way of Commissioners, where­in five Lay men shall have the controll of all that is or was of Clergy cognisance and function: mira­bile dictu, I want words.—I much fear that this may prove, a dangerous new way, to let in other new wayes hereafter. In the meane time what view, what shew, what face of a Church shall poor England have? England of late the glory and the pride of Christendome reformed! My heart akes to think, that when Christendome was ready to come over unto us, we are now ready to run away from our selves: And to see that we labour so much for Ruine & Eradication, that we are like to lose (by a not seasonable laying hold thereon) the most glorious hopes of a full and blessed Reforma­tion that ever lay before a Parliament. The issue will be, if we will have Ruine, we shall have Ruine. If at present we have that active Ruine so much pursued, we shall shortly have a passive Ruine un­desired. [Page 137] Let us not be fond of this ill sounding Proverbe:Mal. 4. 1. Take away both Root and Branch: it is threatned as a curse, I never read it any whereas the language of a blessing.

But (Sir) Vsquequo? How long shall we be in this wildernesse of Anarchy? No time, no bound set, no period fixed to our confusion of governe­ment? How dare we thus discompose, disfigure, and deforme the beauty of our Church? will your commissionated Church be comely as the tents of Ke­dar, Cant. 1. 4 and as the curtaines of Solomon? Where is that Acies ordinata, the Church that was prophesied to be terrible as an army with banners?

In the Prophet Zachary the Lord doth threa­ten it as a curse,Zach. 11. to breake both his Staves: both that of Beauty (which is interpreted the beautifull order of government) and that of Bands (which is construed brotherly unity:) and surely I thinke order and unity, if one be broken, neither is firme. Let this then happen to other nations, to our e­nemies, but wth us let the hands of unity, & the beau­ty of order be our double support: otherwise we shall have cause to bemoan our selves in the words of the same Prophet,Zach. 11. 2. Howle ye firre trees, for the Ce­dar is fallen: Because all the mighty are destroyed— for the defenced forrest is cut downe. There is the voice of howling of Shepheards, for their glory is destroyed.

For my part, I do here freely and heartily pro­fesse, [Page 138] that I am none of those men, that 1600 yea after my Saviour came to plant his Church, wil consent to give a new rule, a new invented go­vernment to his Church never known untill this age. I dare not thinke (who can thinke it salva pietate?) that the Sonne of God, the wisdome of the Father, came downe from Heaven, to plant a Church, to erect a Kingdome, and that he did erect this kingdome, that he did plant this Church, ma­ny hundred yeares since, and this with the deare price of his precious blood but either never would or never could [...] government, till we were [...] of such assertions that [...] conse­quences [...] impiety, and may leade on a new path to Atheisme. Believe it (Sir) be­lieve this:Col. 2. 3. The Wisdome of the Wisdome of God, can­not be guilty (I speake with zeale and reverence) of such an improvidence, to erect his kingdome then, and to give it his rule but now. Joyne with me (I beseech you Sir) in this Faith, that our bles­sed Saviour on whose shoulder the government did rest, Esay 9. 6 did not immediately, and for so many ages after forsake his Church, and abandon it to Antichristi­anisme, Mat. 28. 20. with whom at first he promised to be al­way unto the end of the world.

In a word (Sir) we are all quick sented, we are all on fire to heare of an arbitrary rule in the civill [Page 139] State: I beseech you, let us all be equally or more zealous for the Lord of Hosts: Let us not be guil­ty of bringing in an arbitrary rule into his House. Take heed (Sir) let us all take heed of such a dan­gerous parity, as some would bring in among us: & the rather because they presume to set the stampe of divine authority upon that counterfeit mettal.

Parity of degrees in Church-government hath no foundation in holy Scripture, & is as absonous to reason, as parity in a State or family. Indeed it is a fancy, a dream, a meer non entity, it neither hath nor ever had a being. If it be any thing, it is abso­lute Anarchisme, and that is nothing, for privati­on of government is not a government.

But on the contrary imparity is from Divine au­thority: our Saviour did plant it, & then I am sure it is a plant that should grow and continue. By the way I presse you not wth instances of Gods Church under the law, thogh that, & this under the Gospel were both planted by the same All-knowing wis­dome. From the equity of which law there, & from the imparity of governors therein, a most solid and unfailing argument may be deduced for the law­fulnesse of an imparity also under the Gospell. For that which is good in it selfe, is ever so. And with­out all peradventure, if Church imparity did (in its own being) lye crosse unto the will of God, or to the law of his Church, God never would, never could have commanded it. But that our Saviour al­so [Page 140] so in the Evangelicall Church did plant imparity is most cleare. First, he chose hisLu. 6. 13 12. Apostles. After­ward he appointedLuk. 10 1. 70. Disciples: yet no man can affirm that these were all of the same Order, Dig­nity, and Degree. If they had been so, what needed so curiousActs [...]. supplement when once the number was reduced to eleven? After our Saviours ascen­sion, the holy Apostles did ordaine another impa­rity, and that was ofAct. 6. 6 Deacons.

Phil. 3. 17. S. Paul biddeth some [...] to watch and observe; He commendeth others if they desire1 Tim. 3. 1. [...] to Oversee. So are there1 Thes. 5. 12. 1 Tim. 5. 17. [...] labourers in the word, and you know who was [...] 1 Cor. 3. 10. a wise master­builder, which is more then others were, though all be called [...] and [...] Rom. 16 3. 21. Phi. 2. 25 Philem. 24. fellow-workmen, fellow-labourers in the spirituall building. Farther Sir, as you read2 Tim. 2. 3. [...] souldiers, andPhil. 2. 25. Philem. 1. 2. [...] fel­low-souldiers: so you may read also that there were [...] Heb. 13 17, 24. Leaders and Governors, such as had over­sight and must be obeyed. The Elder or Presbyter is frequent in the Apostolicall Epistles, and there are in power and honour above these (not as our novellists do fondly construe under these)1 Tim. 5. 17. [...], the ruling Presbyters. One of which number S. Paul doth callRom. 12. 8. [...], The Ruler. As in ad Tral. Ignatius there are [...], The Leaders or Rulers of Churches.

Is there no imparity in all this? Then the Ru­lers and the ruled are the same in Logick. But for [Page 141] my part, I am cleare and confident in this that im­parity in power among persons officed in the Church, is both lawfull and expedient, and ought to be preserved, if order, decency, Necessity, Uni­versall practice, Apostolicall example, and Divine authority can altogether make but one conclu­dent argument.

M. Speaker, I do humbly and earnestly entreat, & beg of every member of this House, seriously and sadly to examine his own soule (never more cause then in this present vote) what end and what ulti­mate ayme he hath in this dreadfull Bill. What is the government his heart doth wish for? Three ways of Church-government I have heard of, and no more; the Episcopall, the Presbyteriall, and that new born bastard Independency: Non datur quartum. The last of these is nothing but a confounding A­taxy, rent upon rent, and a schisme of schismes, un­till all Church community be torn into Atomes, every three men, (As may be colle­cted by Spensers wretch­ed Pam­phlet. nay every three women) disso­ciating themselves into an [...], a wilworship of their own devising, which fondly & madly they would call a Church. Where and in what corner of the world hath this aery Independency been a­sleep untill these daies? Quo consule? under what Kings raigne was it born? where may I heare that it hath a being? where may I read (below the world in the Moone) that ever it had a being? I will be bold to brand it with the name of a new-minted [Page 142] Seminary for all self-pride, heresie, schisme, sediti­on, and for all libertinisme, except an outward seeming saintship. A pestilence to all government, a traiterous and a clouted Anarchy. If this way have any favourers in this House, let them owne their Religion and speake for it.

The next is the Presbyteriall way, a more or­derly, and a better tempered novelty then the other, but a novelty, and indeed but elder brother to Independency: upon this you had my sence at midsomer last. It is enough for me that I can point out when it began: since my father was born, or I am sure at most in my grandfathers days: and it is my fixed resolution that since (by Gods blessing) I am of the oldest Religion, I will never consent to any but to the oldest government.

The third way is Episcopall: the originall whereof is high, and beyond my search to define: yet this I am bold to affirme: it had a Being, and that an allowed Being in the best, the first, the pu­rest age, and (as I said before) if it be not of Apo­stolicall institution, yet cleare enough it is of Aposto­licall permission. It will be said that our Bishops are nothing such: yet (Sir, I pray you) may not they be easier made such, then the Dutch or Scottish Presbytery, or a new-England Independency can be? what is our work but to reforme? I would the question were put whether our Episcopacy shall be reformed or not.

[Page 143] But (Mr. Speaker) it is true, there are degrees in Episcopacie it self: and to this point also, give mee leave to expresse my self, and it may be neces­sary for me so to doe, although I am confident, you are herein prae-resolved as I wish. Sir, the stairs are so easie, and ambition (that first made Divels) is so apt to climbe, that so long as the ladder is not taken away; The (1) Priest would be a (2) rurall Deane. He an (3) Archdeacon. Then (4) a Bishop. An (5) Archbishop. A (6) Metropolitan. A (7) Primate. The Pri­mate would be a (8) Patriarch (his owne book breathed that hope) and once a Patriarch, why not a (9) Pope? Thus have you nine degrees of a terrestriall Hierarchy, sutable to the inven­ted nine orders of a Coelestiall Hierarchy among the Angels. It was a fond fancy to invent them in the world above, and it will prove a dange­rous folly in us to suffer these in the world below. One of the links of this chaine is almost burst a­sunder: There was then but one Arch-Bishop and he im­peached for his life. never let that be sodered again. Sir, In uno Syllâ multi Marii: Cut off but one Archi­episcopacie, and you shall at once destroy with it, both Metropolitan, Primate and Patriarch, and in time the Pope also. Archiepiscopie! why, who ever voted that to be divine? nay, who can give a good morall and prudentiall reason for the subsistence of Archiepiscopie? This indeed [Page 144] is a Prince among the Lordly Prelates, and they all doe swear Canonicall fealty and allegeance to his soveraigne Miter. But I forbear, being con­fident there is a concurrency enough in this House to vote the Abolition of that needlesse and that dangerous degree.

So then my sence is thus in briefe. Away with Archiepiscopacy both root and branch. Away with my Lord Bishop both root and branch. Touch not our Pastor Bishop. Reform, reduce, replant our Bishop President, and with him his Presby­tery. Give him his ancient, due, and proper power. Let him ordain & censure, but with due as­sistancie, and not otherwise. Reason and necessi­ty, and all exemplar government require this E­piscopacy: Shew me a Colledge without a Ma­ster: A Citie without a Governour: A ship with­out a Pylot: An Army without a Generall: Doe the States thrive without an Excellency? or doth Venice prosper without a Duke? or can you secure our own House in order without a Speaker?

But Sir, I have heard some among us say, if then we must have a Bishop, let him be like a Py­lot, onely for a voyage: let him be like your self, a Speaker onely for a Parliament. I answer, if but so, yet is it better then any other way that I see yet propounded to you; far better then the ha­zardous way of Commissioners, that shall begin [Page 145] now, and end no man knows when. But Sir, I come in againe upon my own ground, and doe affirme that ab initio non fuit sic; your Bishop of old was not occasionall pro re natâ, and immedi­ately degraded, nothing so: but continued a fixed constant, perpetuall moderator and president for life, unlesse outed for his own demerits. I am for the old way, Reason and Religion have allowed it, and the constant practise of the best and most ancient times hath honoured it.

Take this also farther to approve it. If your Bishop President be not constant, the encourage­ment to Pietie and Learning will not be so con­stant. Let desert in the Church have in its own sphaere (as desert in the civil State hath) a con­stant reward of Honour and of Profit. For Sir, Honour and Profit must invite forth Learning and industry, or you shall have none.

Thus have you (with my imperfections) my sense upon Episcopall government, the first part of your Bill, I passe in brief unto their Cathedrall Covents, my second distribution. Mr. Speaker. I have beene diligent and attentive to the whole procedure of all debates of this nature, yet am I, just where I ever was, nothing moved, not at all changed, unlesse this be a change; that by hearing my owne sense better argued for by others, then I could doe for my self, it is now deeper fortifyed within me.

[Page 146] One main exception to the quite voting away our Cathedrals, ever was and doth yet remaine with me. That which sticks with me is this: what certainty, what security shall I have that Learning and Religion shall have a perpetuall maintenance, and a sure reward of Honour and of Profit propor­tionall you will say, that your Vote already passed will secure me; nothing so: You have indeed voted that all the Lands of the Deans and Chapters shall be employed to the advancement of Learning and Pietie. But in the mean time what becomes of the Bishops Lands? They are Ca­thedrall also: if you take away the present pro­prietor, what shall become of the Land? we shall not rifle for it; Shall we make a gift of what is none of our own? or shall we cure the Common­wealth at the cost of the Church? I heare little said in the house, I hear too much in private.

But I proceed. This Vote (I say) doth not secure mee: It is too generall. My reason why I am not herewith satisfied is this, because for ought this Vote expresseth, you may give all the Land to any one use onely, and performe your Vote; as for instance, if all the wealth of Deane­ries be distributed among the Parish Ministers onely, your Vote is fulfilled; But all the Learning and the Pietie, that we are bound to take care of, is not thereby provided for.

[Page 147] This (I say) doth therefore stick with me, and notwithstanding your generall Vote so inward­ly, that untill I doe see and know, how and in what manner the use and the particular disposall of this great revenue (both Episcopall and con­ventuall) shall be, I cannot concurre to vote a­way the present possessours thereof: No, nor the future successours thereunto. Our Deans and Pre­bends as now they stand, or rather, as they have of late abused themselves, are both burdensome and scandalous to us, and to our Religion. Yet I must looke upon their revenue, as the great re­ward, and powerfull encouragement of Religion and of Learning.

Some would alter and amend these cloysters, others would root them out; some would trans­ferre their wealth, but doe not tell me whether. Some would annexe all to the Crown, to enlarge the royall revenue; Some reputing them incen­diaries, would out of their forfeited estates, pay our debt of promise to the Scots; Some would distribute all that wealth among Parish Ministers onely; Others have mixt and different designes. And there want not some who upon all these Lands doe write,Coloss. 2. 21. Touch not, tast not, handle not; you know it was urged by a worthy learned Dr.Dr. Hacket. at the barre,Rom. 2. 22. that of Saint Paul, Thou that abhorrest Idols, committest thou sacriledge? This theame I [Page 148] shall decline, and whatsoever my opinion be, whether man can give unto God a speciall pro­perty in a peece of Land or not; yet am I fully resolved never to alienate any of these revenues, but to mend the uses in the way of pietie, so that this supposed danger of being sacrilegious shall be certainly out of my doores.

In the next place, my humble and my earnest desire is, that you will maintain the Pen as well as the Pulpit; Polemie as well as persuasive learning. If our Cathedrals were rightly temper'd, wee might hope for admirable fruit of their revenues. Yong Students in Divinity wander for want of manuduction. Poore Christians among us want a godly, sober, plain and pithy english Paraphrase upon the whole Bible. Our Nation, our Religi­on, and all Christendome want the just volumns of a large Latine Commentary. The body of Di­vinity should be reduced into a solid Catechisme. Every heresie might be choked in its first breath. All the Fathers might be revised and briefly ani­madversed. I cannot think of half the happinesse we might hope for, so long as the rewards of Wisedome are held forth to invite and encourage Industry.Prov. 8. 18. Riches and honour are with me, saith Wis­dome, that knew how to invite. Take then none of the reward away, either of Profit, or of Ho­nour; So much reward as you abate, so much [Page 149] industry you loose. Who ever went unto the Hesperides onely to fight with the Dragon? onely for that? for victory, and for nothing else? No, Sir, but there was the fruit of Gold (Profit as well as Honour) to be gained, to be atchieved, and for that the Dragon shall be fought withall.

—Quis enim doctrinam amplectitur ipsam,
Praemia si tollas?—

The Lawyer, the Physician, the Merchant, through cheaper pains do usually arrive at richer fortunes; And but that it pleaseth God to worke inwardly, I should wonder that so many able heads, ingenious spirits, and industrious souls, should joy in the continuall life long pains, and care of a Parish cure, about 100. l. per annum sti­pend for life, when with easier brows, fewer watchings, and lesser charge, they might in ano­ther profession (as every day we see it done) fast­en a steady inheritance to them and their Chil­dren, of a farre larger income.

In this place there was composure of that which was (on a like occasion) spoken 22. Novemb. and is entred pag. And this place is half imper­fect for want of those lines here.

Let me here by way of anticipation, prevent that which will else come in objectively upon me. The Vniversities (it will be said) are amply fur­nished with able disputants: what need other care, other provision?

[Page 150] Truly Mr. Speaker, excepting some of our pub­like Professours there, and some few of the heads of our houses there, who hath descended into this Areopagus? There is indeed good training, good preparatory exercisings of raw souldiers there; and much valour in counterfeit skirmish­es among them: But for perfect Polemy in letters, you may guesse what our Vniversities can yeeld, by observing our trayned bands at common mu­sters: Your graduate in the schoole of warre will tell you, that good Artillery men, though quick at a dry muster, and nimble with false fires, are not immediately compleated into true and full souldiers: So every Syllogizer is not presently a match to cope with Bellarmine, Baronius, Staple­ton, &c. Mr. Speaker, you see my heart; I move not, I plead not for the Deans, nor for the Pre­bends. If they will not prove, if they cannot be turned to be champions in this holy warfare; then the rich revenue detur digniori: Let it be given to them that will bring forth better fruit. But if there may be had such a reduction of them, such a retrenching of them, nay, such a new forming of them, that we may be alway sure in all Pole­micke learning, to have some men of valour, to goe in and out before us: Surely Sir, let them be so reduced, so retrenched, so new formed; if not, if this cannot bee, then let others have the [Page 151] wealth, that will doe the worke.

After all this (I beseech you) let me not bee misconstrued, as if I intended an Apologie for these Cathedrall societies: it is neither in my wish nor power. These Covents are still the same with me they ever were: and the short character of a Cathedrall Corporation (as now it stands abu­sed) is still the same it was. A nest of non-resi­dents. An Epicurean Colledge of riot and volup­tuousnesse. A schoole for complements in Religi­on: but a scourge upon the life and practise thereof. They have been the Asylum for super­stition: but the Scalae Gemoniae for true Piety. Of late they have been the shame of our Clergy: and are now almost become the scorne of our Laity. Yet Sir, for all this (all this so bad, so true) I am still where I was. Though the Channell be foule and muddy, where these waters (I meane their wealth) doth run, yet I cannot wish it dried up; but rather purged and cleansed, or else a new channel cut, wherein the current of all their wealth may run on, pure and clean to the holy uses of Religion and of Learning. Sir, many great and excellent uses (all for Pietie and Learning) may be presented to you: I beseech you let us consider sadly on it. For if this wealth be but once like wa­ter powred abroad, no time, no age to come will ever give us such a stock againe. And thus I [Page 152] end the second of my two generall heads.

To summe up all; you see I am for the old ori­ginall Episcopacie, with Presbyteries subjoyned thereunto: and I am for an explicite disposall of all manner of Church revenues: your bill denies me both. It denies me my strong wishes, and for­ceth upon me the terror of confusion. This Bill indeed doth seem to me an uncouth wildernesse, a dismall vastnesse, and a solitude wherein to wander, and to loose our selves and our Church, never to be found againe; me thinks we are come to the brink of a fatall praecipice, and here wee stand ready to dare one another, who shall first leape down. And that which encreaseth my hor­ror and amazement to the height, is to hear men confidently affirme, that we goe safe upon an even ground, and that all this while the govern­ment is not changed. Surely Sir, either my head is giddy, or else I see in this Bill our English Church turn round, or rather tost upside down.

Perswade the King to commit all his Regall authority into nine Commissioners, and tell him, that he is still a Monarch. Beside the change of governors, doe you not give us new rules? doe you not take away the old? and is the govern­ment still the same? I will instance in one. What is become of the divine Ordinance of Excom­munication? must there be none? there is none [Page 153] in all your Bill. Five Lay-men shall require five Ministers to ordain: is not this new? was this go­vernment with us? nay was it ever in the world before? Five Lay-Commissioners must judge and pronounce in matter of heresie: yet still our Church government is unchanged. I know not what to say in so dull, so flat a cause. Truly Sir, for my part I doe look upon this Bill as upon the gasping period of all good order: it will prove the mother of absolute Anarchisme: it is with me as the passing bell to toll on the funerall of our Religion, which when it goes will leave this dis­mall shreek behind.

When Religion dyes, let the world be made a bonefire.

In short Sir, this Bill hath so little of my Hopes, so nothing of my Reason, so all of my Fears, that if it must passe, I doe most humbly pray, and doe earnestly beseech this Honourable House to grant me this favour, that I may be admitted to my Protestation against this Bill, and so recor­ded. And (although some worthy members of this House are troubled, as they have cause, to have their names set on a poast) yet it is my am­bition that I may as negative to this bill, be poast­ed up from Westminster to the Tower, and from Dover to Barwick, as one that dares not hazard a whole Nationall Church at blind man buffe.

[Page 154] To conclude all: so great a varietie of mat­ter: so totall a mutation, of so vast and so hazar­dous a consequence: it doth amaze me and di­stract me so, that although I must say No to your Bill, yet I hardly know with what motion to con­clude. But thus I adventure.

Let the intent and scope of Reformation be divided into two Bills.

Let the subject of the first be Church govern­ment.

Let the subject of the second be the disposall of Church revenues.

Let both these bills goe pari passu, hand in hand together.

And because I cannot so well by word of mouth and memory present them, I doe humbly beg leave either to read unto you such heads, for the first of these bills, as I conceive will well stand both with our Religion, and with the present Lawes of the Commonwealth: Or else that you will please to take in a new Bill ready formed to that sense, and I doubt not, but you will quick­ly find it the best and nearest way to Pietie, Peace, the honour of our Religion, and the glory of God.

Church-Government. Reduced into a few heads, fit (as I conceive) to be formed into a Bill to be presented to the Commons House in Parliament.
Memorandum, An imperfect Copie of these, with­out my knowledge or consent hath been three times printed before.



EVery severall Shire of England to be a severall Circuit or Diocesse for Ecclesiasticke jurisdiction: excep­ting the little Country of Rutland, which may be joyned to Lecester. And Yorkshire which may be well divided into three.


The Dioceses in Wales to remaine in Circuit as at present.


Twelve learned Divines of irreproveable life and Doctrine, to be selected in every Diocesse, as a constant Presbytery, and they to give necessary assistance to the Bishop.


A pious, and painfull Divine of exemplar life and Learning to be established the Bishop and constant President over this Presbytery, and throughout the severall Diocesses aforesaid re­spectively.


This Bishop in each Diocesse to ordain, su­spend, deprive, degrade, excommunicate, by and with consent and assistance of seven Divines of his Presbytery then present, and not otherwise.


This Bishop to actuate and performe all those services and employments trusted unto, and ex­pected from the present Bishops of the Land, by vertue of the present Lawes of the Land.


The times of Ordination throughout the Land to be foure times every yeere, viz. the first Sun­day in every month of May, August, November and February yeerely.


Every Bishop constantly to reside within his [Page 157] Diocesse, and to keep his especiall residence in some one prime or chief Citie or town within his Diocesse: as in particular the Bishop of Kent at Canterbury. The Bp. of Sussex at Chichester, &c.


Every Bishop to have one especiall particular Congregation within his cure, the most conve­nient for neernesse to his chief residence, and the richest in value that may be had, where he shall duly preach, unlesse he be lawfully hindred, and then shall take care that his cure be well supplyed by another.


No Bishop shall remove, or be translated from the Bishoprick which he shall first undertake; un­lesse it be done by the King, with consent of a Na­tionall Synod, or consent of Parliament.


Vpon death or other avoydance of a Bishop, the King to grant a Conge d'eslier to the whole Clergy of that Diocesse, and they to present three of the Presbyters aforesaid, and the King to ap­point which of the three his Majestie shall please.


The first Presbyters in every Diocesse to be named in this present Parliament.


Vpon the death or any other avoydance of a [Page 158] Presbyter, the Ministers of that Diocesse to pre­sent three: and the Bishop with the rest of the Presbyters to make election out of that three: and if votes be equall, then the Bishops vote to sway the Election.


The Conge d'eslier for election of a Bishop shall issue forth within two months after the death, or other avoydance of a Bishop. The choice of an­other Presbyter to be within one month after the death or avoidance of a former Presbyter.


No Bishop or other Clergy man to have the constant manage of any Temporall office, or se­cular jurisdiction, but onely for the present to hold and keep the probate of Wills in the usuall places, untill the Parliament shall otherwise re­solve. Yet I conceive it fit that twelve Bishops, (by the rest of the Bishops to be chosen) be eve­ry Parliament called to sit there assistant, to give advice in matter of Religion, and in cases of Con­science, when the House of Lords shall please to require it of them.


Parochiall Ministers to be entrusted and en­dued with more power then formerly: the man­ner and extent whereof to be determined in the next Nationall Synod:


The Parish Minister to hold weekly Vestries there with the Parishioners, to consider and take notice of all manner of scandal within the Parish.


The Parish Ministers to meet in every rurall Deanerie once every quarter, there to prepare, and make up (by joynt assent) such presentments of scandal, as may be fit to be transmitted to the Bishop and Presbytery.


The Bishop once a yeare (at Midsummer) to summon a Diocesan Synod, there to hear, and by general vote to determine all such matter of scan­dal in life & doctrine as shal be presented to them.


Every three years (at the same day the trien­niall Parliament shall begin) a Nationall Synod to be (whereby there will be no need of Arch-Bi­shops) which Synod shall for persons consist of all the Bishops in the Land, and of two Presby­ters to be chosen by the rest out of each Presby­tery: and of two Clarks to be chosen out of eve­ry Diocesse by the Clergy thereof.


At the first day of their convention the Bishops out of their own number to chuse a moderator or President of the Synod.


From the Vestry, appeale may be to the rurall Deanery, from thence to the Diocesan Synod, and from the Diocesan to the Nationall Synod.


This Nationall Synod to make and ordain Ca­nons for the government of the Church, but they not to bind, until confirmed by the King in Parliament.


Every Bishop to have over and above the Benefice aforesaid, a convenient dwelling in the chief Town of his residence, a certain profit of a constant rent allowed and allotted proportionall to the Diocesse wherein he is to officiate.


That certain choice Benefices of the best va­lue, and most convenient situation, that can be had, may be allotted to the Presbyters, one to each, and that they also may have each of them a constant yearly profit over and above his Bene­fice.


As for the Revenue of the Bishops, Deanes, Chapters, &c. a strict survay to be taken of all their rents and profits, by choice Commissioners in every severall County, and the same at an ap­pointed time to be represented to the Parlia­ment, [Page 161] and in the mean time no timber to be fel­led. Afterward some of the profits may be laid by to make a stock, wherewith to purchase in the first fruits and Tenths, by ascertaining a more steady rent to the Crown. Impropriations may be bought in. Ministers Widows and Orphans may not with husband and father loose all sup­port. Libraries (at the publique charge) to be provided for every Bishop. And some Colledges erected, and by degrees endowed for Divines therein to exercise themselves, through all the latitude of Theology.


THus have you a faithfull & a clear exposure of my self in matter of Religion, both in what I have said, and what I wish may be done. Let the candid and ingenuous Reader judge me. Such of the Prelaticke party as are in love with present pomp and power will be averse unto me, because I pare so deep: The Rooters, the Antiprelaticke party declaim against me, because I will not take all away. At last Midsummer a new Moon did take these men, I did begin to find a different greeting, a change of salutation. Some expostu­late: others condemne: some advise: others would seeme to condole: all upon occasion of my [Page 162] speech 21. June; although I find not there (or in any thing else that I have said) any cause to make me the object either of their anger, their councell, or their pitty.

The plain truth (as I touched before) is that immediately upon my approach unto this Parlia­ment, some circumstances did concurre to leade my language on upon the Archbishop, not any personall passages (God and my soul doe witnesse for me, I have not such a temper) But being servi­tor for that Shire, and in that Diocesse where some of his hardship then fresh and new was brought by complaint unto me; The accident of present­ing that complaint did beget me almost as many new friends as he had old enemies: and I know not what misconception did thereupon (untruly) entitle me an enemy to the very function of Epi­scopacie. I never gave my name in to take away both root and branch. I love not the sound of a curse so well. If by the Rooters I have been so mis­taken, their credulity is not my crime. And their foule language shall neither be my shame nor sor­row, I will repeat some of their salutations,

A. G. One tells me that I would onely have new Bi­shops in room of old ones: Cuius contrarium verum est. W. P. Another that I have a Pope in my belly. S. W. B. A third that he was never more sorry for any speech in the House, meaning that 21. Jun. M. S. Another that [Page 163] strange things were said of me. W. C. A fifth andMr. S. S sixth that I goe the way to spoile all their work, so I hope I doe.Dr. B. from others. A seventh that it is said I am fallen from Grace: so some men seem desperately to look into the Arke of God.Dr. W. An eighth that I have contra­ried all that I said before: let the Dr. shew me that now.R. L. B. A ninth is told that I am apostated; I doubt his Religion (in quantum it differs from that of the Church of England) is an Apostacy.Mr. F. A tenth that I am gone over to their adversaries. S. A. H. An eleventh and T. W.twelfth that the Primate of Ireland, and Dr. Brownrig have infected me, I dare drinke their poyson.G. H. That the two learned and pain­full equals without match, Mr. Reading, and Mr. Abbot, abusing my trust in them, and good opini­on of them doe misleade me; a slander upon three at once.S. E. P. That Dr. Burges and I have conferred notes; I wish we had.Mr. K. That I am for Bishops, for crosses and for Images; true and false.I. K. That if I had held where I was, there had not been a Bishop in the Land before August last; a false wizard, I did hold where I was, and yet the Bishops are where they were.Civis ignōtus. That I have lost the prayers of many thousands.T. C. That I have lost the honour I had, and that my conscience is not so good as it was in the beginning of this Parliament. Good (Mr. C.) you who would have Bishops out of their chairs, come you out of the chair of the scornfull. You [Page 165] are one of them who jog our elbowes, and boare our Parliament ears with Babylon, Antichrist, and the mystery of Iniquity, which I dare say is grossely misunderstood by your self and many others of your rooting Tribe.

Before this Parliament was convened, you would have joyed upon that day, when the sting of ill executed Episcopie (the high Commission) had been taken away; and (the pest of the chair) soleship of power retrenched. One is done, and both had been effected, if you and such as you had not overheated a furnace that was burning hot before; and with pressing for Ruine have betray­ed the time of a blessed Reforming. Take it unto you, for upon you, and the blind ignorant wil­fulnesse of such as you, I doe here charge the sad account of the losse of such a glorious Reforma­tion, as being the revived image of the best and purest ages, would with its Beauty and Piety have drawn the eye and heart of all Christendome unto us.Pro. 30. 15. The Horse-leaches daughters doe cry, Give, give. And you that might have had enough, doe still cry more, more. The greedy Vulture of an insati­ate appetite is incurable. To reform Episcopacy it is in your esteem too faint, too cold a work, it is labour ill bestowed and unthankfully accepted, nay one of you (said in my hearing) it is a sinne to labour in the dressing and proining of that plant,Mr. F. [Page 164] which (say you) is not of God, and must be digged up. And with Episcopacy, away with the burden of our Liturgy.S. M. If you take not off this burden also, it will be girded upon us closer and stronger then ever. Away with the thought of a Nationall Church also, Protesta­tion prote­sted. p. 20. It hath no pattern in the Scripture. Mich. Qnintin. p. 4. It is impossible for a Nationall Church to be the true Church of Christ. Let us have no Church but Congregations,Eatons sermon vouched by Sir Th. As­ton. p. 4. and let them be without all superintendency: as much to say, as let every family be a Church, and have Religion as they please. A way with allAssertion of Scottish government p. 3. & 5. distinction of Clergy and Laity, it is popish and Antichristian. Let us then banish from us such popish names, and send them home to Rome. Quintin. p. 9. The Church is a body of parity, whose members are all Kings and Priests. Sp [...]n [...]rs Pamphlet. And every man must exercise his gifts in common. So also the learned (but herein absurd and grosse)thought to be Salma­sius against Petavius p. 397. 398. Walo Messalinus, Omnes olim Presbyterierant Latci; and againe, Waldensis & Lutherus crediderunt tustos ac fideles Laicos posse omnes, quae in Ecclesiâ Dei agi ne­cesse est, agere, & omnibus muneribus Ecclesiasticis de­fungi. These things thus pressed, and pursued, I doe not see but on that rise of the Kingship and Priestship of every particular man, the wicked sweetnesse of a popular parity may hereafter la­bour to bring the Kingdown to be but as the first among the Lords, and then if (as a Gentleman of the House professed his desire to me) we can but [Page 166] bring the Lords down into our House among us again, [...]. All's done. No rather, all's undone, by breaking asunder that well ordered chain of government, which from the chair of Jupiter reacheth down by severall golden links, even to the protection of the poorest creature that now lives among us.

What will the issue be, when hopes grow still on hopes? and one aime still riseth upon another, as one wave follows another? I cannot divine. In the mean time you of that party have made the work of Reformation farre more difficult then it was at the day of our meeting, and the vulgar mind now fond with imaginary hopes, is more greedy of new atchievements then thankfull for what they have received. Satisfaction will not now be satisfactory. They and you are just inDe Benef. l. 2. c. 27. Se­neca's description. Non patitur aviditas quenquam esse gratum. Nunquam enim improbae spei, quod da­tur, satis est. Eo maiora cupimus, quo maiora venerunt.—Aequè ambitio non patitur quenquam in eâ mensu­râ conquiescere, quae quondam fuit ejus impudens vo­tum.—Ʋltra se cupiditas porrigit, & foelicitatem suam non intelligit. Learn moderation (Mr. C.) unlesse (asJ. H. H. M. some of you Rooters doe seem to hold) you doe think moderation it self a vice. The Sto­ick was in that point more pious then such Christ­ians: Epictetus. his Motto was, and your lesson is, [...].


This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.