IN the first page of your Answer Mr. D. on the 77. page, as it stands in the end of your novellish booke not to reply to e­very word or saying of yours unmateriall. I charge you with falshood in this, that you say I complained first against you; where­as I complained not first to go to law in the High-Commission Court which you would seem to inferre, and make people beleeve, but only in way of request to have things heard in peace and ended without law; And this was after you had scandalized and reviled me by name in your Pulpits, and that I had sought unto you often, and you would by no means be spoken with according as I have declared in my defence. And to the Archbishop you prevented me, and got letters Missive granted to sue me in the Court, all which you know very well to be true. Let the Reader now judge who is here to be blamed for false speaking, and evill doing you or I.

And in the second page of your Answer, in that you say you might have required of me costs of sute, but did not; you tell the Reader a manifest untruth, for you did move the Court for costs of suite the same time that I was discharged, and were checkt and reproved by some of the Court for the same, and bid hold your peace, as can be proved by sufficient witnesse if need be; therefore let the Reader consider how you favou­red me as you say.

[Page] And whereas in the same page, you deny that you sought after, or thirsted for my bloud; besides the report of a Mini­ster, on Master Ward, that told it me when I was in prison, as a thing that he heard from your own mouth. Your Woolfe Sermon as you preached it at the Crosse, did discover your de­sires in that respect, to many that then heard you, and so jud­ged. And in your booke of that Sermon, though it be much altered and refined of many hatefull and bloud-thirsty words you then uttered; yet there is still enough therin that proves the same: And in that you deny you said of me by name, Whe­ther he be dead or alive, with God, or the devill, I cannot tell, &c. There is witnesse sufficient to prove that you did so speak in your Pulpit at Creechurch, and that you were my cheife accuser, except the chiefest wicked one, it is well enough known to many. And concerning the Depositions of your witnesses, whom you stile honest men, Ministers, and Profes­sours, no knights of the Post, &c. Let the Reader but consider their depositions, which neither they nor you can deny to be their own words, and my defence also; and he shall see if he be judicious, and not partiall, what honest professours they are. Men may professe strictnesse in Religion, as the Pharisees did, and yet be no better then they that bare false witnesse against Christ, and persecuted him.

And whereas in the third page, you blame me so greatly for that in my defence, Mr. Robrowgh is set down Curate, if he had wrong done him therein, let the Reader blame the Re­gister, or Robrowgh himselfe; for so I found it in his deposi­tion Recorded, which I have yet under the Registers hand to shew, and whatsoever he is now, he might be so then for ought I know; and to have the care of, or be a curer of souls, need be no disparedgement to him; nay rather it would be happie for him if he were so.

And for your wondring that I so charge Sir Henry Martine whom you so greatly extoll, in the same third page, which you say I durst not have done if he had been alive. Whereas it is well known I did it at least ten years before openly to the Court, and in his own hearing and sight, and he was li­ving [Page]after my defence was published in print, though you (ca­ring not to publish lies) say the contrary. But Master Do­ctor, you have great reason to set forth the praise of Sir Henry Martin, and to extoll him, because he holpe you so well out of the mire, wherein you had so unadvisedly befowled your selfe, not only in this your evill and unchristian-like dealing against me; but also in respect of your other businesse at Cree-Church, concerning some of the chiefe of your Parish, for which the Archbishop and Court displaced you, and especi­ally that of the women for whch that Knight got you a pur­gation granted by the Court, that you might thereby clense your selfe therefrom without any Repentance or Remi­tion.

These are some of your sure signes that Sir Henry Martin was a righteous Judge, and for which hee suffered blame by some great men, as the Archbishop and some other of the Bi­shops the same time as you know.

Your saying in your fourth page, and your glorying in the presentation and dedication of your booke to the King, I refer to the consideration of the Reader that hath or shall reademy defence, and request him also to reade and consider well your Epistle Dedicatorie (of your Wolfes booke) to the King, and see how you play the Sycophant and Colloguer especially with the High Commission Court, and Bishops of Canterbury and London, Abbot and Mountney.

And in your fifth page, where you say I pretend I could never obtaine to speake with you, &c. and tell of Master Clea­ver, Robrowgh, Stephens, &c. and then say that I know you have met me divers times in the streets of London, and said un­to me Iohn Hetherington, I pray let me speake with you, &c. This tale of yours is a very untruth, for untill I complained of you to the Bishop of London, all the while that you scada­lized and reviled me by name in your Pupits, which was the time wherein I say, and you know I often sought, and could never obtaine to speake with you. And within three dayes after we had beene before the Bishop of London, you entred your suit and got Letters Missive out against me.

[Page] It is true, after you had gotten sentence passed against me, and that I had enduted three years imprisonment, and being dis­charged and at liberty, I met with you at the end of Cornhill by the Stocks; and I spake to you, and requested that I might now speake with you once after all my troubles; and your answer or words first were, I am glad thou hast renounced thy errors; and I answered you, nay, not so, but I disclaimed be­fore the Court those false and evill things which you, and your witnesses had charged me with, I renounce nothing that I held; and so we went together up Cornhill, and into the Ex­change, where I told you of your false and evill dealing to­ward me, and of your false and wicked Sermon, full of bitter­neste, malice, and lies, which you had published and preached against me; and you tooke me up short I confesse, and re­proved me for my boldnesse, saying; Dost thou speak thus to a Doctor. And upon some words of reproofe that I used unto you for your wicked dealing; you told me, Thou hast not the keyes, I have the keyes &c. and then after other words you slung away in a fury threatning me.

It is true also, that I have met with you, and you with me oftentimes since? when you have given me very currish and threatning words as I passed by you, once in Thames-street neere Queen-hive, when you said, Hetherington, I hear you keep Conventicles still, I must have you up agaiue, And ano­ther time in Cornhill by the Conduit, when your foule matter concerning the women was in suit in the Court? where you said to me I heare thou hast a hand in my businesse, and threat­ning me with something you would do if I had, your consci­ence as it seems accusing you; whereas I had no hand in that businesse at all from the begining thereof, to the end. And once I confesse about two yeers ago, since your businesse with the women was past, I met you in the street behind the Exchange, and you called to me saying, (not as you say I pray let me speak with you; but Iohn Hetherington I would speake with thee, and these were the fauell words that ever you spake to me, and this was but once not often, as you say. And I an­swered you, speake with me, to what end, and so I passed by [Page]you; but as for grinding at you with my teeth; or saying I scorn it, is a meere lie, I never used any such gesture or words to you, or any man else. So that in all this, you have shewed your selfe to be both foolishly proud, to use your own phrase, and a false canning equivocator in deed and word.

As touching your 6, 7, and 8, pages, I need not say any thing more then what is in my defence.

And in the ninth page, where you mention sundry books, as an Epistle to the Church of Rome the tree of Regeneration, T. L. upon some part of the Revelation. And my booke a­gainst Anabaptists; I advise the Reader not to beleeve your bare report, but to read and consider the bookes, and then judge as he findes.

And concerning the Sabbath, and the observation of the first day of the weeke, I have declared my minde in my de­fence, and else-where; which I request the judicious Reader to thinke of and judge as he seeth cause, and not let D. D. be the judge.

And in the tenth page you say that I vilifie the Sacraments, particularly that of Baptisme; in that I say it doth not con­vey grace, nor consume it to the heart of any man, no more then circumcision did. Let the Christian Reader that is not Arminiamish nor Popish, but truly Orthodoxall, judge if this be a vilifying of Baptisme, or if it be a holding of no baptisme, but that of Repentance and Regeneration, or a point of Fami­lisme as you speake.

And to say that Caesar may command a place for the pub­lique worship of God, so he forbid none in private, and ex­plaining my indening as I have done in my [...]ence; if this be equivocation, or a familisticall wicke, or that of yours M. Doctor, in your Wolvish-Sermon booke, page 44. where you quote a page of my booke against Anabaptists; where these words Caesar may command a place for the publique, &c. are, and [...]: out two of my words and put in one of your own in­stead of them, as your reverend witnesse Henry Robrough hath also done affirming them upon his oath to be my words.

I pray you Master Doctor, why do you not answer this, and [Page]cleere your selfe and your witnesse of this equivocation, false­hood, and false-witnesse-bearing, but smother it over with this new trick of your old lying and scandalous speaking as before in your Pulpits and Sermons, so now here in your an­swer to my defence.

And I pray you Sir, why do you not mention the words of those factious books of mine (as you call them) that do con­demne all Reformers? I own no such books, or words. These are but your old scandalous and false affirmations; In my de­fence it may be seen by my words what I meane concerning the Church of England.

And whereas in page 11. you affirme, that because I say the true Church of Christ consisteth of true regenerate servants of God, sanctified by faith in Christ: therefore I hereby de­nie the Church of England to be a true Church of Christ. It is manifest by this affirmation of yours, that your selfe do deny the Church or England, to be a true Church of Christ; for if you denie it to be of that holy universall Church which con­sisteth of Saints regenerate (as by necessarie consequence from your words) you do; then it is you that do it, and not I.

I say the Church of England as it is, and may be called a true Church of Christ, is and must needs be a part of that holy universall; although in the outward estate thereof, there are, and may be many in it that are not sanctified (and so not of it. And it is not your often clamour, and scandalous termes of fa­milisme, &c. that can make your matter good, or cleere your witnesse Henry Robrowgh (that deposeth this very thing a­gainst me upon the same ground) whereby he himselfe denies the Church of England to be a true Church of Christ, nor prove any thing against me. Let the Reader consider and judge of these things.

And in that you say, and your witnesses sweare that I charge the Church of England with teaching false doctrine, because I have charged you, and some such as you are, there­with, as if the Church of England consisted of them, and you; Nay, Sir, that is not so, neither will it so follow, though your false witnesse hath sworn it.

[Page] The Doctrine that I except against both in you, and them I will mention some part. And first this of yours.

That the fourth Commandement touching the Sabbath was alwaies, and in every part mortall, and in no part Cere­moniall; affirming for proofe thereof, and saying, It was command in Paradise, before any Ceremonie was hatcht.

2 That Christ between his resurrection and ascention did alter the Commandement from the seventh day; to the first; and informed his Apostles thereof.

3 That Christians are now bound by the same fourth Com­mandement, to as strict an observation of the first day of the weeke, as the Jews were of the seventh.

4 That Christ when he bid the man that was healed on the Sabbath day, take up his bed and walk, He commanded the the breach of a mortall precept.

All this he said in his inveying against me by name in his Pulpits; and because I had once (many years before) done some small worke upon a needfull occasion on the first day of thee weeke, which he had heard of, he brake out a­gainst me vehemently affirming that I could not be of God; and saying for proofe thereof (using the words of the Pharisees against Christ) We know (as it is written) this man is not of God, because he keepeth not the Sabbath day, Iohn 9.16.

5 That; ustifying faith is before repentance, and affirming that it is a damnable error, to hold that repentance doth ne­cessarily go before justification from our sins by faith, or justi­fying faith.

6 That when God to prove Abraham, commanded him to offer his Son for a sacrifice; he commanded him to murder him, and to break the sixth Commandement.

7 That the Isralitas in taking such things of the Egiptians. as they in favour let them have, did steal from them and break the eighth Commandement, and that God did approve of the breach thereof.

8 That God is not only a spectator, but a powerfull agent in sinne.

9 That God did preordaine that Adam should fall and break his commandement.

[Page] 10 That the Prophet Elisha in saying to Naaman the As­syrian, Go in peace; did say as much, as get thou gone thou hypocrite, get thee hence.

11 That Christ may yet personally descend from heaven to the earth before the day of judgement, for any Scripture there is to the contrary, and that although it be said the hea­vens shall receive Christ untill the times of the restitution of all things, Yet it is not said they shall contain him till then.

These are part of Stephen Denisons doctrine which he deli­vered in his Sermons preached at Creechurch, and great Al­hallowes, while he was reviling and scandalizing of me, all which doctrine I account false.

And by some others whom I will not now name, but shall hereafter if occasion require. It hath been taught, that the Jewes should be delivered (every one of them remainig alive) out of all Countries to the land of Canaan, and be converted all of them to be true christians, and dwell in the land in great glory, with a great King of their own stocke (either Christ himselfe, or some other in his stead) for a thousand yeares be­fore the end of the world.

And by others, that Christ shall indeed come personally and raise up all the Saints that have suffered) or as some of them teach) all the Saints in generall that are asleepe, and raigne with them on earth a thousand years before the end of the world, and resurrection of the unjust; which doctrine of these. I also account false and contrary to the Scriptures.

And concerning Robrowghs false doctrine, I have in part spoken in my defence, and I hope hereafter things shall be manifested more fully concerning that passage betweene him and me.

And whereas in the end of your eleventh page you affirme of me that I sticke not to say, that I hold the Sabbath to be in force, and that the last day of the weeke is to be observed. I pray Mr. Doctor, when, or where have I spoken or writ these words, that the last day of the weeke is to be observed, who juggles and equivocates now?

And in your twelfe page, how you have answered my de­fence, [Page]I refer to the judicious Reader, that hath, or shall reade both, to consider. Your foule tearms with those that are wise, will worke nothing against me.

And for your false clamours in the thirteenth page, that I will have no duties pressed on the Lords-Day, neither prayers, nor preaching, nor comming to the Sacraments; but christi­ans left to do what they list. I hope the Reader will discerne you in this, because he may see in my defence it is otherwise, and that you utter out false words of your own inventing, ha­ving no respect at all unto truth, or a good conscience.

And for those Authors which I have quoated in my defence, whom you say I have notoriously abused, I refer the Reader to their own Records; to see if I have abused them or no.

And as touching the two last books of Esdras, I have decla­red my minde already in my defence; only this I say further, that it is manifest by the account of the Generalogie, and other passages in Ezra the 7. compared with 1 Esdras 8. they are one and the same; and therfore in sundry former bibles these two last books are numbred the 3, and 4, of Esdras. And for those words or names of distinction, Canonicall and Apocry­phall, I take them to intend nothing but this; That the one part of Scripture being found written in the Hebrew tongue, and being for that cause, and sundry other more manifest, and certain proofs concluded in the first times of the Church to be the Word of the Lord certainly, was therefore called canoni­call. The other part not so found, nor as yet for that present so evidently proved and manifested to the Church, to be so certainly the word of the Lord, as the other was left as Scrip­tures, yet secret and hidden; and therefore called Apocry­phall; not but that it might (at least some part thereof, be found and proved certainly to be the Word of the Lord, as well as the other, and so concluded and received by the church of God; though it be not, nor hath any need to be called ca­nonicall, nor is ever the worse in it selfe, for the name Apo­cryphall; nor unto such as understand in their heart, and be­leeve the truth thereof.

And in the 14. page, or 90. as it stands in the end of your [Page]wolvish sermon-book, were you speake of private meetings by the lawes prohibited, and poisonfull doctrines, &c. what you please there to speak. As touching the first part, I referre the Reader to my defence against your last Article.

But as concerning the other part which you call the seventh thing culpable; where you say I affirm, and that most pestilently, that outward baptisme doth neither confer nor confirme grace to the heart of any man, no more then circumcision did &c.

I pray sir, are you a Papist, or an Arminian, or an Anabap­tist, for belike you hold it doth, as they teach. I confesse I hold that it doth not no more then circumcision in the flesh did, according as the right Protestants hold; neither is this a most pestilent thing, as you blasphemously speak, but the very truth in this point. Grace is confer'd and confirmed to the heart of a christian by a more supernaturall power, then is or can be in the outward act of baptisme, even by the power and Spirit of God. Outward baptiseme, I hold to be an outward seal of Gods faithfulnesse; in, and as touching his covenant to the faithfull, and their seed; as circumcision in the flesh was to faithfull Abraham, and his seed. And that it is an outward signe shewing that we must be circumcised, or cleansed in heart by the grace and Spirit of God, through faith in Christ, if ever we be heirs with Abraham. And so I hold outward baptisme to be in force unto christians, as circumcision was to the Jews, contrary to your lying words, that say I deny it. Neither is this a familisticall trick as you so scandalously speak, according to your old customes in your wolvish booke, and in your for­mer invective Sermons.

And although there be now no High-Commission Court, as you tell me; implying that you would complain against me again there, if there were; yet let me tell you sir, there are o­ther Courts as high and as good as that, and lawes also as just, and good to judge of these matters, unto which you may com­plain if you please.

And whereas in your 91 page, otherwise the 15, you say I have a fling at the Lords Supper (a fine phrase for a Doctor) And that under colour of speaking against the carnall eating [Page]and drinking the body and bloud of Christ in that Sacrament. You say I condemne also the opinion of spirituall eating; for say you, these are my words; Neither do we by the actions of eating the bread, and drinking the wine of the Sacrament, eat or drink the grace of God purchased by the body and bloud of Christ. I confesse these are my words in my defence.

Now I pray sir, do I in these words deny, or condemne the opinion as you speak, of spirituall eating and drinking the bo­die and bloud of Christ, or the spirituall enjoyment of the grace and love of God through faith in Christ, which that Sacra­ment of the Supper doth shew forth unto all true christians. Nay, let the judicious christian Reader judge and consider what is further exprest in my defence.

But you Mr. Doctor, your opinion and doctrine belike is, that Christians by the very acts of eating the bread, and drin­king the wine of the Sacrament, eate and drinke the grace of God. Is this your orthodoxall doctrine sir,, is this your opi­nion of spirituall eating? a fit man sure, are you not, to preach the Lecture of preparation to the Sacrament, as you are admit­ted to do at Buttolphs without Algate, and well are the people taught there the while, are they not, let the orthodoxall Rea­der judge.

That religious gentlewoman (as I suppose she truly was, which gave you that legacie to performe that work) had done far better if she had given it to the poore widdow and father­lesse, or have left the same to such over-seers as should have disposed it to some one that could and would have performed the worke better, and more found them so.

Now to make some use of your owne phrase, M. Doctor, who doth grosly abuse divinitie, who is the proud ignorant sott, who is meet to be censured to stand at Pauls-Crosse with a paper on his breast expressing his grosly abusing divinitie, and venting false doctrine poisoning of others, with a thousand eies looking upon him, Doctor Denison, or who, let the ju­dicious reader judge?

It is true, M. Doctor, that through you, and your false wit­nesses Henry Robrostgh, and Iohn Okeie, and by their false [Page]depositions; false I say, as the Reader by my defence may plainly see. One Bishop said in passing sentence, according as you in your answer at the end of your wolvish booke have set it down; which I had my selfe written in a coppie of my de­fence, which you had unjustly gotten, and kept among you from me, otherwise I suppose you could not so readily have mentioned them; but it is no matter, I have suffered a great deale more then that, by your false and wicked dealing, and the rest of your false witnesses, Rowland Thomson, Thomas Ro­gers, George Dun, Peter Worcester, Christopher Nicholson, and the rest; as I have in my defence in some part declared.

And now M. Doctor, let me propound a matter or two unto you. You may see, and so may others by this and by my de­fence especiall; how plainly and openly I have declared and published the things by you charged, by your witnesses depo­sed, and by the High-Commission Court passed in sentence a­gainst me, and what in part I have suffered, and do still suffer through the same. And you may see how I refer all to the ju­dicious christian Reader, to consider of, and judge.

You know sir that after this cause of yours against me, there was (as I have a little remembred you of before) a Cause or two commenced against your selfe in the same High Comis­sion Court, concerning some of the chiefe of your Porish of Creechurch, and some severall women, whom you were char­ged to have abused. They of your Parish publiquely in your Pulpit, and the women secretly in your chamber; I will not here name the particular abuses, they were plainly enough spoken and read in the Court; the foulenesse whereof being such, as caused all, or the most part of the people there present, hearing the same, to hang down their heads greatly ashamed thereat, when you stood holding up your head boldly in the face of the Court, not seeming to be ashamed at all, which ma­ny did wonder at to behold; and one Bishop observing you, and having heard the foule matters that were deposed against you by so many witnesss (as you know) not knight of the post sir, any more then as you tell me they were not, that de­posed your Cause against me; but such, as if the Reader please [Page]he may inquire of as you speak. This Bishop as you may re­member, reproved you very sharply; and said, do you see how boldly he stands here before us, facing us, he hath a fore­head of brasse.

Now sir, if your Cause be so good, and your selfe so honest and innocent as you would have all men think (which yet they do not) wright done all what your accusers have charged you with, and what hath been deposed against you, and by what manner of persons, every thing in their own plain words, and what the sentence of the Court was, and publish the same o­penly in print, with your defence unto every particular charge and deposition, as you see I have done that of yours against me. Do this I say if your cause be good, and cleane, and your selfe honest, and upright, (it will be no greater chage I suppose then the new re-printing of your wolfe-sermon; that so all men may see plainly, and judge of the cause, and you accord­ingly. But otherwise, if it be naught and foule, and your self justly charged, as you in your owne conscience know best; then let it alone except in the way of humble confession of your sins unto God in true repentance, if it be possible.

Another thing that I propound unto you is, concerning my selfe, and you, and your witnesses; seeing my defence will not silent you, nor all that I have unjustly suffered by your meanes, satisfie you; that you, and they will be willing with me, to have all matters between us heard and considered of anew in a faire way, either before the Bishop of London, and some other Ministers chosen on both sides, or else by some Committee of the Parliament, if it may be obiained, that so the blame may be laid rightlie where it ought.

And as touching your Pauls-Crosse wolvish-sermon, that master-peece of yours, which you in the conclusion of your an­swer to my defence; say you have for this Cause caused to be new printed, that so the Reader may see whether I have answered what concerns me in it, or no, telling in print, of purpose, a ma­nifest lie, it being not in any part new printed, but only the rem under of an old impression, printed in Anno 1627. foure­teen years agoe, to which you have put a new title page, da­ted [Page]1641. and added your answer to the end, numbering the pages thereof, according to your old booke, as if indeed all were printed anew together according to your saying; so to delude the Reader, as your usuall custome and manner in all your matters is and hath been to do, with cunning equivoca­tions, falshood, and lies, whereof that wolvish-sermon book of yours is full, agreeable to your Articles against me in the Court, and to your witnesses depositions, for like master, like schollers and servants, like accuser, like witnesses. And for your booke, I say no more of it at this time, but this, let it re­maine among the rest of your deeds, as it hitherto hath beene a monument to the world of your wickednesse and folly. And so I leave you, and your witnesses together a while, to consider of all what you have done, and of my propositions; though I have not any beliefe that you will regard my motion, or have a thought in your heart to do either the one, or the other.