SECT. II. The Reply.

THis is your charge you have brought against our matter, and you have loaded it with all the aggravations you could think of. It brings to my minde a bill exhibited against me in Chancery about thirty years since, being the first and last that I was ever troubled withal, and upon no ground, for ought I know, except for paying another mans debt; when it was brought to my hand, I began to read, and farre I had not past, but I found my selfe charg'd with foul crimes, of which I was no way guilty. This put me into some choler; I champed on the b [...]t, and vowed to be righted on that man that had so falsely slandered me, and cast such foul aspersions upon my cre­dit and reputation. All this while my Atturney stood by, and smiled; I guessing what the truth was that he laughed at me, fumed and fretted the more; at which he let go the sleider of his sides, and burst into an open laughter; this set me on fire to know what the cause should be; but his im­moderate bounds and curvets of laughing made such stops and jumps in his words, that as yet I could perfectly understand nothing. These delayes were so many spurres in my sides, so that I was all this while upon thornes; I could have burst for anger that my eares were put off from a having a pre­sent hearing. But at last, this mountain brought forth its mouse; for the man composing his countenance, gravely told me, that such words were u­sual in these bills, and that the Clerks commonly used to do so pro form [...], that they might fill up their sheets, and that my good name was no way impaired by it; which for the present g [...]ve me satisfaction.

Had I not been used to read from your party such a bill as this against the Church, I should have been as much moved at your charge, as I was at my Chancery bill; but I am now satisfied, 'tis pro formâ, it must be done, and so let it passe for this time. Though because I know the particulars in it, you will expect an answer, I promise you to receive it in its due place.

To the whole, I say, you have not drawn up your bill aright; for suppo­sing the corruptions and deformities you mention, they stole not in upon the Church by those degrees you have thought of. It was not the Parish that was first corrupted, then the Cathedral, after the Province, lastly the Na­tion; [Page 51] as for the Oecumenical Church I know none,, except the Represen­tative in a General Council, which whether it may be corrupted or no, is a dispute of a high nature. Now. I shall set you right, that against you frame your bill next, you may proceed by a better method. The first Church in respect of Discipline was Cathedral, the next Parochial, the third Dio­cesan, the fourth Provincial, and the last National; out of all these you may if you please, frame the Oecumenical. Now if you will fancie unto your self corruptions, which I shall not deny you in Paradise, but altogether in the constitution, which is the true question, you must proceed by these de­grees, and not by the former.

Now that this was the first constitution of the Church, even common reason shall informe and convince you. The Cathedral must needs be first, yea suppose it had been but only Congregational. (That you mistake me not, do not think I speak of a fabrick or a stately building, that came in after; for I speak onely of some set place, City, or Town, or house if you will, where the people of God were gathered to worship him; put case Jerusalem, Antioch, &c.) This I say must needs be first; and because the A­postles in these greater Cities first gathered Christians, and were in them for some time resident, therefore these Cities had from thence their Appel­lations, and were called Cathedra Petri, Cathera Jacobi, Cathedra Pauli, Cathedra Marci, &c. which is no other than the place where any Apostle, or Apostolical man seated himself, and in that Sede, seat or place exercised Apostolical or Episcopal jurisdiction. Tertull. to this purpose, Apostoli pri­mo contestata fide in Jesum Christum per Judaeam, & Ecclesiis institutis: deinde in orbem profecti, eandem doctrinam ejusdem fidei nationibus pro­mulgarunt, & proinde Ecclesias apud unamquamque Civitatem condiderunt, à quibus traducem fidei & semina doctrinae caetetae exinde Ecclesiae mutuatae sunt, & quotidie mutuantur ut Ecclesiae fiant, &c. Tertull. de praesc [...]ipt. cap. 20. & paulo post cap. 26. [...]. Euseb. l. 3. c. 21. cap. 4. c. 11. cap. 31. lib. 5. c. 7. cap. 3. c. 28. cap. 22, 23, 27. Apud ha [...] adhuc Cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis praesidentur.

2. That which we can in reason next reflect upon is the [...], which is properly the franchises of that city; for it is a foul mistake and abuse of the word to suppose that [...] imports a Countrey Village, Hamlet or Township. For Parochia in the prime sense of the word, and in Church Records containes the Citizens of any great City, with all such borderers and strangers as dwelt near, and repaired to any chief Church or City. Eu­sebius calls Alexandria, Corinth, Jerusalem, Ephesus, Athens, Lions, Carthage, Antioch, &c. by the name of [...], and that must needs be more than Villages are with us. The very same is to be seene in the be­ginning of Clemens first Epistle to the Romans. Now tell me in reason what can be easilier conceiv'd, than that the Pastor, who had his seate in the Ci­ty, would imploy his endeavour next to bring to the faith those who were his next neighbours, and liv'd in the [...], the Franchises, the Suburbs, and neighbourhood. This Parochial Church then must be second.

3. These being converted, no question the chief Pastour did extend his charity, and by all possible means sought to win those who were further off [Page 52] dispersed in Towns, lesser Cities, Vilages and Hamlets; what he could not do by himself, being to attend the flock in the City, out of doubt he en­deavoured to effect by those he sent, Gods blessing being upon their labours, it fell out as at Samaria by Philips preaching,Acts 8. that many were converted to the faith, and by reason of the number that beleeved, they needed a Mini­ster of the Word and Sacraments to be resident among them, and were able and willing to maintain one; To whom could they repair more fitly, than to the Bishop of the next City, and desire a fit man to serve their necessity? and he appointed them their Pastour and Minister, and he and they became subject to the Pastour of the chief City. This is evident to me, Acts 8. in the conversion of Samaria, Socrat. Schol. lib. 1. cap. 19. and in that story of Adesius and Frumentius that converted the Indians. And now the whole, viz. the City, the [...], and these Villages, Towns, &c. thus converted being under the regiment of this Bishop, were call'd [...], that Bishops Diocesse, which was the Original of a Diocesan Church.

4. But the charity of the first planters of Christianity staid not here; they never thought they could bring fish enough into Christs net. As they were fishers of men,The Romane Provinces as I take it, were under Au­gustus Casar. 22. After Ma­rius thus con­quered Syria, Germany, Brit­tanny, &c. so they fished still to catch more, untill they gain'd whole Provinces. (Now a province was a large territory conquer'd by the Romanes, which they put under the government of a Proconsul or Propretor.) Such a tract being converted by the foresaid endeavours, was put under the government of the foresaid Bishop, [...]nd so of a Diocesan, his Church had the name of Provincial; and because the City where he was resident was the Metropolis o [...] Mother-City to that whole Province, and under that many lesse Cities with their [...], and Towns and Villages, so that Pr [...]vince being so large, that it was not possible or not convenient for the Bishop of the first seat to over-see all as he ought, the [...]efore prudence taught the Church to appoint Bishops in lesser Cities, and to assigne them their Diocesses, o­ver which yet the Bishop of the chief Cities should have a supervision, whom they call'd a Metropolitane, after a Primate, and in some Churches a Patri­arch, and all the subordinate Bishops under him Diocesan.

5. And again if this Church consisted of Converts of a whole Nation in which there were divers Provinces, as it fell out in Africk two, and Spain three, then the Church had the name of a National Church: and there might be divers Metropolitans in it, and more Primates, of which yet one was chief, and under these the foresaid Diocesan Bishops with their Clergy.

These are steppes in the judgment of reason by which the Church ar­riv'd to its em [...]nency; and therefore if it decay and rot by degrees, as you will have it, the corruption must begin in the Cathed [...]al, desc [...]nd to Paro­chial, and thence spread to the Diocesan, Provincial and National, and settle in the Oecumenical, if such a local Church can be found.

Besides that great reason, the propagation of the Gospel, why the Church was at the first thus setled, one was, the exercise of government, and the more convenient administration of the discipline thereof. For being thus disposed, the power of the Keys both in Ordination and Jurisdiction might be more easily and prudently turn'd.

[Page 53]The great Masters of Policy could never yet acquaint us with any more than three kinds of government, Monarchy, Aristocracy, Democracy▪ Monarchy, when the supreme power is in one. Aristocracy, when it is in more, but those the noblest, the best, the wisest, the prudentest. Democra­cy, when the people have the power and rule, which if it be in many of them they call Polyarchy, if in a few onely, they terme it Oligarchy. The two first of these the learned teach us, proceeds a jure divino gratios [...]; for our gracious God having all dominion and power in his hands, is pleased out of meer grace to impart of it to one, or some choice men, that they may use his power, and rule us for our good. But the last they inform us, pro­ceeds a jure divin [...] vindicativo, from an angry and revengeful God, that puts such power in the hand of the many, or few, to make use of it for our punishment. This is the worst of the three, and if any man doubt of it, let him call to minde the answer that Lycurgus gave to the Lacedemonian, that importun'd him for an erection of a Democratical government in that Common-Wealth; go saith he,Plutarch. [...], and do thou make a trial of that kinde of government in thine own family, and if thou finde it advantageous to make thy servants Masters in thy family, then renew this suit, and I will hear it. This is absurd in na­ture, in policy. In nature any body with two heads is monstrous, and in policy a Ship govern'd by two Pilots, or an Army sway'd by two Gene­rals with an equal power, hath not been reade of to have good suc­cesse.

To apply this to my purpose. The Church of God is a society, and then it must be govern'd one of these wayes. Either by one, or by the best, o [...] the most. If either of the first two wayes, then it is a Deo propitio; if the last, a Deo irato; for I could evidently prove to you if I list, that De­mocracy is a consequent of Gods anger. Now for the government of the Church there are who strain the pinne too high, there are who let it down too low; bewixt both lies the medium.

1. Those of Rome that they may advance that man of sinne, and make him an oecumenical Bishop, contend hotly for a Monarchy. The Bi­shop forsooth of Rome must be accounted the sole Monarch of the whole Church, and be put into the definition of it, so that no Pope, no Church. But we acknowledge no such Monarchy, nor no such Monarch. Christ Jesus alone is the sole head of this body, as it comprehends the Church Militant and Triumphant.

Neither are Bellarmines arguments of any validity for Papal Monar­chy. In a Kingdome saith he, is but one King; but Christs Church is a Kingdome; therefore. There be in this syllogisme foure termes; for King­dome in the major is taken for an earthly Kingdome, in the minor for a heavenly, whence it will not follow that because in an earthly Kingdome there must be but one King or Monarch, therefore in Christs heavenly K [...]ngdome there must be but one also. Then besides there is a great dispari­ty betwixt earthly Kingdomes and the Church of Christ. For the Church Militant remaining one is spread in many earthly Kingdomes and cannot [Page 54] well be ordered like one particular Kingdome, and therefore it follows not though in one particular Kingdome there be many visible Judges and one supreme, that in the Universal visible Church there must be one su­preme.

To that his other popular Argument, that Monarchical government is the best, and therefore that undoubtedly, which Christ instituted for his Church, 'tis sufficient to answer, that a Monarchy is the best forme of go­vernment in one City or Country; but it follows not, it is best in respect of the whole world, where the parts are so remote, and the dispositions of men so various; The Courtiers of Rome go too high.

Arist. Ethic. lib. 8. c. 10.2. On the contrary side all the Combinational Churches fall too low, who plead stifly for the peoples right to govern; the administration of discipline say these must be Democratical. The Papalins are not more hot for one, than they are zealous and contentious for the many-headed multi­tude. But say in good sooth, whether this can be likely. Even the very Heathen Polititians have branded this kinde of government. Plato Aristotle, Lycurgus, professe it is of the three the very worst, and experience convin­ceth us it is the worst: and shall any man imagine that Christ who so loved his Church, that he bought it with his own blood, would institute in it the worst kinde of government? A discipline he left to it; that's confessed; and would he leave the rod in the hands of the bellua multorum capitum? credat Judaeus Apella, non ego. Besides popular government proceeds from vindi­cative justice; 'tis absurd in nature, 'tis absurd in policy. But Christ was not angry when he gave the Keys, then he was pleas'd, then he was recon­cil'd to the world; he could not when he was thus affected with love, give them to the people in anger. The end he gave them was to purge his Church, to keep out scandals, to keep out Schismes, Errours, Heresies out of his Church; but being in the peoples hands, by this means they are let in, and that not thinly, but in whole swarms. Deny if you can since the peo­ple have griped the Keyes, whether Arianisme, Atheisme, Antinomia­nisme, Montanisme, Euthusiasme, Anabaptisme, Familisme, Quake­risme, Chiliasme, Socinianisme, I want breath to reckon the rest, hath not polluted, and to use your own word, rottened the Church? shall we say this government is from Christ which hath brought forth such effects? The children betray the mother.

And now they are brought forth, the Key you so much boast of in the peoples hand, hath no power to shut them out of the Church; out of your particular Church you perhaps may (though I have good ground to doubt of that too, especially if they grow nume [...]o is as they do of all Sects.) How I pray was it Arnhem Rotterdam, Amsterdam, New England? what is this to purging of the whole Church? I had thought the Keyes had been given for the benefit of the whole, and not for the cleansing onely of one single Congregation. Well, keep your own as clean as you can, without spot, with­out wrinkle, and let many of your sister-Combinationals remain defiled as they do, then you may admonish, councel, grieve for them, lament over, presse your non-communion to them. They'll do as much for you, as you [Page 55] do for them, but power nor means you have none to mend them, nor they you, and so Christs Church by commssiion of the Keys unto single Congre­gations becomes remedilesse. If a corrupt or negligent Presbytery do not censure their own Members, all the Assemblies of the world may not attempt to censure any of them,Bayly pag. 112. though most apparently they did corrupt a whole Nation with the grossest heresies or most scandalous vices.

What can make the house of God worse than a denne of thieves, if this do not? Well, you may perhaps reply, which is indeed all you can say for your selves, This may be the conseqent, but not the cause: Be it so, which for present I shall give you, but never grant you; even this, were there no more, should rouze you to look about, whether your tenure of your Keyes be good, and your claim and possession justifiable by clear evidence of Scripture. Shew me the words there written, to [...]idem syllabis, and I will yield. Shew such an evidence as others can, sicut ne misi [...] pater, sic mitto­vos, and I will never question the peoples right any more. Nay, I will go lower, shew me but one example of the peoples practice in this matter, and I have done. Mr. Cotton saw the inconvenience, and with fine distin­ctions strugled what he could to withdraw the power from the people, and I hope in good time, God will open your eyes to see this errour, and leave the Keyes in their hands to whom Christ bequeathed them.

3. There is but one way left by which the Church can be govern'd, and that is Aristocracy. Which is no sooner named, but all parties strive, and eagerly contend that their title is good to it, as the two women did for the childe. The Presbyters put in for their right, the Independents will have it in their Congregations; but the Prelates will not suffer themselves to be so cheated out of their old inheritance, but stoutly maintain their Church, and that it is alone to be found among them. With the first I am not to skirmish at this time; were I, then I should tell them, that Aristocracy is not like to be found in their Country-Presbyteries. The second are the men, whose claim and title I am to shew invalid; and though I have done it in part before, yet I will more clear it here by an evident and demonstrative ar­gument. The first we know, that opposed holy societies were Anabaptists; the next who followed was John M [...]rell, who stood up for popular govern­ment of and in Independent Congregations, whose opinion when we object to the Combinational brethren, their common assertion is that they are far from Democracy, and ready to forsake their tenet, if that can be demon­strated. Democracy then even in these mens eyes is no lovely and beautiful childe, that at the very name they startle and fly from it, tanquam pedibu [...] qui presserat anguem. And now you shall see, how I can make it appear, that it is no false imputation, and I beleeve I shall be able to do it. Let us only cast our eyes upon the birth of this childe the Combinational Church; and denyed it will not be, that three, seven, twenty, thirty, more or lesse joyn'd together in a holy Covenant made this Church (for the greatest number I have here named were at first ample Congregations.) These as Democritus his atoms which were onely similar parts, falling together made up this body; but by their own confession all this wh [...]le it was homogeneou [...], [Page 56] one part, equal, every way like to another, it was inorganiz'd, having no distinction of parts, nor head, nor eyes, nor hands. Methinks I be­hold Aristotles materia prima, nec quid, nec quale, nec quantum. When they saw themselves Chaos like, they thought it not good to remain thus mishapen, and therefore they cast about how they might lick themselves in­to some form. An Heterogeneo [...]s body they thought it necessary to be, and to have Organs by which they might work; and at last their fancies suggest­ed how they might clap a head to this body, and supply it with eyes and hands. They agreed that actu primo they had power sufficient and autho­rity in themselves, viz. the power of the Keyes, and therefore they might organize their own body at their pleasure; upon this thus set to work, they e­lected, they ordain'd, they chose a Pastour for their head, and Elders for their eyes, and other Church Officers for their hands, and so out of a lump they became a man; of a Homogeneous and Inorganical, an heter­ogeneous and organical body. At first they were but [...] a people, but this [...] had [...], power and authority in themselves; for why else did they all this! And if this be not an act of Democracy, I must professe I understand not the name, nor definition of the word; I shall take it kindly that any man will informe my ignorance. Yea, but it may be said, that now in organizato corpore this Democracy is at an end; for now it is a well shaped creature, it hath a head, it hath eyes, it hath hands, and all o­ther parts in a goodly symmetry (though I could ask, what kind of Church was that of Mr. Canns at Amsterdam, which for a time had no Pastour, that liv'd a long time without Officers or Eldership, yet I spare you.) Not so neither;Answer to the thirty two Questions. pag. 48. pag. 44. for the people for ought I can see, as they had authority in actu primo to elect and ordain, so they have authority in actu secundo to depose and excommunicate their Pastour and Elders, and so to reduce themselves to what they were in puris naturalibus, from an heterogeneous body to make themselves homogeneous; from an organiz'd body, to make themselves in­organiz'd; and either to remain so if they please, or to choose again. And for ought I conceive,Cottons Keyes. Mr. Cotton intends no other by his new-coyned and applauded distinction of power and authority, and power of liberty; for whatever authority he gives to the Eldership, he makes it vain and frusta­neous without the consent of the people; and notwithstanding all the obe­dience and subjection he puts upon the people, yet he gives to them such a power of liberty, that their concurrence with the Eldership in every act of power is not onely necessary, but authoritativè. In a word, if the peo­ple have [...] authority of institution and destitution, as your parties say, if you should tell me a thousand times over, I shall never beleeve otherwise but your Combinational Church is governed by a De­mocracy.

I hope I have proved sufficiently what I undertook; and now I returne to my purpose, for I leave the destructive part, and come to build. And here I shall lay that in the foundation, which none but Papists for ought I perceive will deny; That our Saviour Christ left the Church Militant in the hands of the Apostles, and their Successours, and an Aristocratical [Page 57] government, which I shall illustrate unto you by an induction of parti­culars.

1. The first constitute Christian Church we read of in the world,Isa. 2.3. was that of Jerusalem; for the Law was to come out of Zion, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem. There the Apostles and Disciples first preached; so that Eve was not more properly term'd the Mother of all li­ving, then this Church by Theodoret, [...],Theodoret. the Mother of all believing Churches. From thence, the Apostle being to depart, for that they might execute our Saviors command to preach unto all Nations, left the government of that Church unto James the brother of our Lord, not the Apostle; and ordained him then the first Bishop.Euseb. lib. 2.1, & l. 1.19. Jerom Hegesip. Ambr. Euseb. 3.11. Hegesip. 4.22. Jerom. in Isa. 3. Ambr. in 1 Tim. Ignat. ad Trall. Acts 21.18. Acts 15. Et post Martyrium Jacobi — traditur; saith Eusebius, Apostolos commune concilium habuisse, quem oporteret dignum successione Jacobi judicari, om­nes (que) uno concilio, & uno consensu Simeonem Cleophae filium decrevisse, ut Episcopatus sedem susciperet. And if I list, I could give you in the Cata­logue of the succeeding Bishops, for the first six hundred years.

To him I doubt not but there was joyn'd a Presbytery, which Jerome calls Senatus Ecclesiae; some Collegium Presbyterorum, Ignatius, [...], which he thus describes, [...], and they were those Elders present with James their Bishop, to whom Saint Paul went in. And if I shall name Judas and Silas for two of them, I am partly assured, that I am not mistaken, be­cause the Decree made by the Synod at Hierusalem was sent by them. The government here then was Aristocratical.

2.Acts 11.22, 26, 27, 28. cap. 13.1. Origen in Luc. Hom. 6. Euseb. 3. cap. 35 Ignat. ad An­tiochen. The next instance I shall give you for a constitute Church is at Antioch. And in this City being the Metropolis of Syria, Barnabas, Paul, and other Prophets and Teachers, Simeon, Lucius, Man [...]en were sound: and hither also Peter came, Gal. 2.11. Of this Church, Origen, Jerome, and Ignatius who best knew it, for he conversed with the A­postles, Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 8. make Saint Peter the first Bishop, that E­vodius succeeded is the testimony of Ignatius. He, saith he, [...]; Ignatius was the next himself, from whom I can give you a clear succession to the terme I mention'd.

And those I mentioned, Barnabas, Simeon, Lucius, &c. I shall not doubt to call the Presbytery, of which almost in every Epistle, Ignatius makes expresse mention, as Counsellours, Assistants, and Co-assessours of the Bishop. At Antioch then was an Aristocracy also.

3. At Ephesus we meet again with a constituted Church, where Ti­mothy was made Bishop by Saint Paul. The subscription of the second E­pistle shews that he was the first Bishop there,Euseb. lib. 3. c. 4. and Eusebius who saw the Re­cords of the Primitive Church affirmes the same. That he was ordained by Saint Paul by the hands of the Presbytery, Calvin conceives is beyond question. Now if it be demand [...]d when Timothy was made Bishop? it is most probable, when Paul was at Miletum.

When the Apostles departed from any Church which they had planted, [Page 58] in that then they appointed a Bishop. For while they remain'd in or near the place, there was no such need, the Apostles supplying the wants of those Churches with their presence, letters or messengers, as the cause re­quired. But when they were finally to forgo those parts, then they began to provide for the necessity and security of that Church, by setling Episco­pal; power; which in all probability was the reason, that they so soon pro­vided a Bishop for the Church of Jerusalem. Saint Paul at this time was to take his leave of the Churches at Asia; he saith it plainly in that Chapter,Acts 20.25. that they should see his face no more; most probable then it is, that at this time he left Timothy to supply his place of Ephesus: yea, and that the six other Angels of the Churches were then by him ordain'd. Think of these seven Angels of the Churches what you please; I shall not doubt to esteem them single persons and Bishops, and that upon stronger evi­dence then any can be brought to the contrary. But that's no discourse for this place. I suppose, that it is very probable, that they were ordain'd at this meeting at Miletum; except you judge that Saint John the Apostle setled them in those Churches before his banishment to Patmos; for in those Churches they had the power, when he wrote the Revela­tion.

Howbe [...]t it will serve my turn well enough, if they were onely Pastours with a Presbytery; for this will prove the government then of the Church to be Aristocratical.

4. If we come to Rome, there we finde Paul an Apostle; and as all Church Records assure us, Peter. Bishop there needed none where they lived.Rom. 16. Presbyters there were then many, Junius, Clemens, Cle [...]us, An­dronicus, Urbane, Tripheus, Perses. Of these, Cletus and Clemens were Bishops after the Apostles Martytdome, and their Succesours so appa­rent, that I need not recite them.

Euseb. lib. 2. cap. 24. Hieron. ad Evagr. Origen. Ambrose.5. What should I speak that Mark was Bishop of Alexandria, who died six years before Peter, in whose Church there was a Presbytery? of Titus appointed Bishop by Saint Paul, and left to ordain in the Island Presbyters, and to have jurisdiction? Of Dionysius the Areopagite, the first Bishop of Athens? Of Archippus at Colosse? Of Onesimus at Philippi? Of Gaius at Thessalonica? The Records were infinite that I could produce in this kinde. You see I have not instanced in any but such who were Bishops, viventibus & videntibus & approbantibus Apostolis, that so the truth may be apparent. I shall not therefore doubt to affirme that the government of the Apostolical Churches was by Bishops, as such who had the chief power, and that it was Aristocratical.

Neither can all the Arguments of the Presbyterians any whit enervate this; for you see I grant and prove a Presbytery; in these two onely lies the difference betwixt them and us. First, that they would have a Presby­tery established by the Apostles without a Bishop, which I shall never grant, and I know they can never prove. Secondly, that the power of this Pres­bytery without a Bishop, should be the most supreme in the Church, and that to it, without a Bishop the Keyes were delivered.

[Page 59]For this is it which I affirme, that originally the whole power was in the Apostles, and by them exercised where they setled no Bishop. But to him, where they fixed a Bishop, they committed their power; yet so, that so long as they liv'd it was but in subordination and dependency on them; for out of question they might have govern'd alone; when therefore they gave any power to others, it was onely delegated, and they lost not any of their own in giving orders. What therefore Bishops were to the Apostles, that must needs all Presbyters ordain'd by the Bishops be to them; voluntari­ly assumed they were in partem sollicitudinis & reginimis, and had their power by delegation to assist in acts deliberative and consiliary. But by ver­tue of their order, they had no jurisdiction in causes criminal. For in the Scri­pture there is not any commission extant to meer Presbyters; there is no in­stitution of any power of Regiment in the Presbytery; no constitution A­postolical, that meer Presbyters should alone, or without Bishops govern; no example in Scripture of any censure inflicted by any meer Presbyters; no specification of any power they had so to do. But the contrary to this may well be collected, because to Churches where Colledges of Presbyters were resident, Bishops were sent by Apostolical ordination; as Titus to Crete, Timothy to Ephesus, the seven Angels to the seven Churches, with power of ordination, excommunication, and taking cognizance of causes and persons, even of Presbyters themselves, as is apparent in th Epistles to Timothy and Titus, and in the Revelation. And a more evident example cannot be given then in the Churches of Corinth and Thessalonica, in both which were Presbyteries; but as then no constituted Bishop: In one of which was an incestuous person, in the other disorderly persons; why did not these Presbyters then cast them out? It was for want of coercive power; the Apostle as yet kept that power in his own hand, and therefore advi­seth the Thessalonians, that if any man obey not his words, 2 Thes. 3.14, 15 that they signifie that man by an Epistle to him; they in the mean time should for­bear his company, and admonish, but not count him as an enemy; that is, eject him by Church censure: that they should leave to him in whose hand as yet the power was. But at Corinth upon signification, he gives order to the Presbytery to execute his sentence. For I verily absent in body but present in spirit, that is, by my Apostolical power,1 Cor. 5.3, 4. [...] have already judged or determined; the judgment you see was his, the decretory sentence his, as though I were present conce ning him that hath done this deed; In the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, and my spirit, that is, my power with you, with the power of our Lord Jesus [...]hrist, that is, which power the Lo d Je­sus Christ hath committed unto me, that then you prono nce my sen­tence, and deliver such a one to Satan. This shewes clearly where the power was setled, in the Apostle first; In them secondly; In him it was primative; from him to them it was derivative. All was to be done by his spirit.

And that this was so, viz. that the Presbyters power was not abso­lute, but dependent; not prime, but delegate, there be two testimonies; [Page 60] the one in Ignatius, the other in Cyprian, which seems to me to evince it. Ignatius writes to his Church of Antiochia, being then in prison in Rome; and he gives his Presbyters there this advice, that they rule the flock of Christ,Ignat. ad An­tioch. untill God should declare who should be their Pastour. His words are, [...]. The Presbyters were to feed or rule the flock, [...] untill God should shew and designe him, qui principatum habi­turus sit, as Varlonius renders it, who to be their chief Pastour. Their government there was to last till then; but when God had once designed him,Cyprian Ep. 21. their [...] was at an end. The other testimony is that in Cyprian, in the case of Candida, Numeria and Etecusa, women that were accused to have fallen in the persecution, and offered incense to Idols. Of these the Presbyters in the exile of Cyprian the Bishop took the cognizance, and were ready to passe a sentence upon them; Cyprian interposeth, and upon it, causa audita, perceperunt propositi eas tantisper sic esse, to remain in the state they were, Donec Episcopus constituatur, untill the Bishop should be appointed. Here again, we see the verdict suspended till there were a Bishop, intimating that the prime power of jurisdiction and censure was in him, and that without him it might not be lawfully laid on. Nor do I see what can be answered to these two fathers.

Hitherto I have kept my self within the bounds of the Scriptures, and out of them clearly demonstrated as I suppose, that the first government of the Church was Aristocratical. It was in the Apostles and the Bishops which they setled with their Presbyteries.

Now should I descend lower, and shew the practice of the Church, especially for the first three hundred years, I should fill a volume; here I could tell you of those famous Presbyteries of Alexandria, in which Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, Euseb. lib. 6. Euseb. l. 6. c. 43. Cypr. lib. 3. Ep. 6.10, 14, 17, 18 19, 21, 22, 24. Pantenus, Hieroclas, were the Presbyters of Rome; in which under Cornelius and Stephen, there were forty six Presbyters with many other Officers: Of Carthage in which under Cyprian, as appeares, in many of his Epistles which he writ to them in his exile, there were many Presbyters. Of Smyrna, Antioch, Philippi, Magnesia, Trullis and Ephe­sus, all whose Presbyteries are remembred by Ignatius in the Epistles he writ to those Churches. This is so clear, that it is written as it were with a Sunne beam, and it were ignorance and impudence to deny it. To which, if those who so hotly contend for their Presbytery, would adde but these two things, which are as evident in Records, as is the Presbytery it self; First, that none of these Presbyters were Lay-Elders; and secondly, that after the Apostles dayes, there never was any Presbytery without a Bishop, the contest were at an end.

One thing onely more I shall adde about these Presbyteries, that they never were erected but in the greater Cities, where the Patriarch, Pri­mate, Metropolitane, or Diocesan Bishop had their seats, (pardon me if I speak in the language of those Ancient times) and therefore to distin­guish them from the Presbyters dispersed in the lesse Villages and Towns,Conc. Ancyr. Can. 13. Can. A­pollon. Can. 37. they were call'd [...], and sometime [...]; the Pres­byters [Page 61] of the City or Metropolis: and their institution was to help the Bi­shop in sacred actions, and to advise him in all judicial and Ecclesiastical proceedings. In ordination what they were to do,4. Concil. Car­thag. cap. 3. is set out by the fourth Council of Carthage, cap. 3. Presbyter cum ordinatur, Episcopo eum bene­dicente, manum super caput ejus tenete, etiam omnis Presbyteri qui prae­sentes sunt, manus suas juxta manum Episcopi super caput illius teneant. 1. Concil Arel. Can. 19. Apollon. Canon. Can 35. Concil. Antioch. Can. 9. A custome which was continued in our Church. And for their jurisdiction, that was limited by another Canon, Presbyteri, sine consensu Episcoporum nihil faciant. The Ancyran Councel was before the Nicene, and that of Arles under Constantine. So ancient were these provisions about the Presbyters and their power.

But methinks it were worth enquiry, how these Presbyteries that so long continued in the Church, became in difuse; for I will not say they were ever abolish'd, in that I finde them in many Churches after the three hundredth year of Christ. I shall deliver what I conceive to be most probable; and I conjecture these to be the causes of it.

1. Upon the general prevailing of Christianity, Synods began to assemble, and the Pastours of divers Churches in these meetings conferr'd and agreed upon such rules, as they thought needful to be observed in all their Churches, which they committed to the over-sight of the Bishops in their Diocesses; and in case they were negligent, the especial supervision and execution was laid upon the Metropolitane; and if he were slack in doing what was enjoyn'd, an appeal was permitted to the Patriarch. This was the first occasion that gave Presbyteries leave to play, by reason provincial Synods undertook the debating and resolving those doubts, and ordered those difficulties which before troubled the Presbyteries. And rea­son it was, that the consultation and determination of Synods should be pre­ferred before that of Presbyteries, as Courts of greater Judgment, higher power, better experience, and more indifferency.

2. Another reason may be, that when Emperours became Christi­an, all those civil cases betwixt man and man, which were (to avoid the scandal that might arise by Law-suits among Christians if tryed under Hea­then Judges) debated and ended in these Presbyteries, fell to be decided and adjudged in the Imperial Courts, and men had reason to repair to that seat of justice which had a sword and power compulsory to force obstinatemen to do right to any injur'd party, which the Church Court had not. When the cau­ses grew lesse, the lesse respect was had to the Court and now the Presbytery having less to do, weakned & mouldred away by little and little of themselves.

3. And yet I shall venture at a third reason. Upon the great peace which the Church enjoy'd, with the priviledges, immunities, and ample endowments granted by Christian Emperours, Magnificent Temples, and goodly fabriques were erected for the publick service of God; some there were before, but not so many, nor yet so beautiful. These commonly were built where the Bishops had their Seas, and were therefore after call'd Ca­thedral Churches. In them the Bishop at first with his Presbyters of the Ci­ty made his residence, and to his Court there kept the greater matters of [Page 62] the whole Diocesse or Province referr'd. Found it was that in this Presby­tery it was too easie a matter for the Bishop to bear so great a sway, that matters were ended often, as the man was by him friended. The dignities in that Church were in his donation, the dignified were his creatures, were subject to him, and many wayes might be displeased by him, if he would seek revenge. This being perceived, brought a great neglect and contempt upon the Presbyters. And the Bishop taking his advantage thereby made use of his power, more than was fit. And if you shall say, that by this dore corruption entred into the Church, I shall not deny it. But then I shall rejoyn, that it was not the institution; not in that the Church became Cathedral, Dio­cesan, or Provincial; not in that it was govern'd either by a Bishop, a Metropolitane, a Primate, or a Patriarch with a Presbytery, and so was A­ristocratical; but in that this just and regulated power was ill used. It was not the constitution of the Church that was corrupt, but the Church­men; and then lay the load upon the right horse, and fly not violently in the face of your Mother.

Cant. 6.4.For the constitution was holy, good and wise. God himself in the Can­ticles gives this testimony of his Church, that she is terrible as an Army with Banners; if an Army, then she must be ordinata; and the order in an Army is, that there be a General, a Major General, Collonels, Cap­tains and Under-Officers. Wisdome then taught the Church to order her self; and yet she sate up no other orders then God had appointed. viz. Bishops and Presbyters, Deacons; these onely she prudently marshall'd; some she thought good to place in more eminent degree. Will you then ask me, what are Metropolitans, Primates, Patriarchs? I readily answer, gradus in Episcopatu, all set in the chief places of the Army, for the safe guard of the whole, and for the better advantage to fight against the enemy. Yea, but who set them there? Prudence, and 'tis nere the more to be disliked for that it was prudentially done; for I must tell you that prudence is to bear a great sway in Church-Discipline. The substance it may not alter, neither hath it; but in the circumstantials it hath a power; and if Saints Pauls rule be observed,1 Cor. 14.40. Let all things be done decently and in order, all's well. What more decent among Church-governours, then that some be superi­ours, some subordinate; how can order be better observed, then making the Church like an Army? Even among the twelve were there not chief A­postles? They were all equal Apostolatu, all equal in power, yet some pri­ority and precedency might be among them. For Peter, James and John are call'd P [...]llars;Gal. 2. Chrysost. in loc. Victor. Anti­och. in Mar. cap. 9. Hieron. ad E­vagr. Cyprian de simplicitate Praelatorum. hi tres tanquam Coriphaei, prímas inter Apostolos ob­tinebant: Thus is it with their Successours the Bishops; they are all pares potestate, in the power: he at Eugubium, is as great as he at Rome; he at Tanais, equal with him of Alexandria; for he is ejusdem meriti, e­jusdem sacerdotii; that rule of Cyprian being undoubtedly true, Episcopatus unus est, cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur. But yet for all this, one Bishop may be set in a higher degree then another, and one set over ano­ther; and I shall make little doubt to make m words good out of the Scri­ptures; for what was Titus and Timothy? were they not more than ordina­ry [Page 63] Bishops? Titus had the charge over the whole Isle of Crete, Miraeus lib. 4. de Notitia E­pisc. pag. 181. Chrysost. H [...]m. 1. in Titum. in which there were seven Bishops besides. This was Pauls companion, saith Chry­sostome, that was approved; otherwise Paul would not have committed unto him all whole Island, and the trial and judgment of so many Bishops. To Timothy, if we beleeve Theodoret and other Ancients, was committed all Asia the lesse; in which were questionlesse instituted by the Apostles many Bishops. Of the last example there may be some scruple; of the first there can be no doubt to any one that lists not to be contentious: but the Ancient, evident, and constant course in the Primitive Church to admit of these degrees in Episcopacy; and to have Primates and Metropolitanes for the calling and guiding of Synods in every Province, is to me a preg­nant proof, that this order was either delivered or allowed by the Apostles and their Scholars: o [...] found so needful in the first government of the Church, that the whole Christian world, till some of late fell from it, ever since received and continued the same.

If you suppose it came from Rome, you are much mistaken; for it bore sway in all the Eastern Churches, before the Romane Bishop was of any great note, power or reputation, or at least had any more precedency then any of the Eastern Patriarchs. Socrates relates that the first Councel of Constantinople, [...], ordain'd Patriarchs;Socrat. lib. 5.8. may be the title was then given to those who were onely call'd Primates or Metro­politans before, and bounds set to their jurisdictions, which any man will judge, that considerately reads that place in Socrates.

The truth is this. The name of Patriarch I finde taken in a double sense; largely or strictly. Largely, for a Primate of any Province that was under the chief Patriarch; and so there are man [...] at this day,Brexwoods en­quiry of Reli­gion and Lan­guages. as the Aban­nah the Patriarch of the Aethiopians; or the Primate of Mosco, who is the Patriarch of all Christians under the Muscovites Empire: The Primates of Sic and Sebasha, who are the Patriarchs of the Armenians. The Pri­mate of the Jacobites, who hath his Patriarchal Church in the Monastery of Saphran, near the City Merdin in Mesopotami [...]. The Primate of the Maronites, who resides in Mount Libanu [...]. The Patriarch of the Nestori­ans, who hath his residence in Muzal or Mosal. I could give in a list of many more of this kinde, as well in Europe as in the Eastern Churches; by which it appears, that in a large sense the Prime Bishops set over one or more Provinces may be called Patriarchs.Spalat. lib. 3. c. 10. Sect. 43.44 And it is the judgment of a learn­ed, but unhappy man, that were there more of this kinde erected in Europe, who should have no dependence on Rome, that it would be a ready way to restore peace and unity to the distracted Church, and to shut out the con­fusion we groan under. All which are under one or other of those Patriarchs of the Church, as their jurisdictions were limited in the fi [...]st erection; for that is the strict acception of the word.

2. And three they were onely at first. The fi [...]st at Rome, the second at Alexandria, the third at Antioch; the first had the power in Europe, and in the West; the second in Africa and in the South; the third in Asia, and over the East. Neither were their seats there placed, as Baronius would [Page 64] perswade us, because that the Apostles founded those Churches (for were this reason good, we should have more Patriarchates than these three, there being more Churches planted by the Apostles than these; neither were all the Churches they founded Patriarchates,Hegesipp. de ex­cid. Urb. Hie­ros. lib. 3. c. 5. not Corinth, not Ephesius, not Phi­lippi, Smyrna) the reason then is that which Hegesippus the younger hath given, because these three Cities were the three Metropolies of the Empire, and so the Church in the institution for the seats of their Patriarchs followed the secular power of the Roman Empire. The dignity of the Cities gave them the dignity and priority of their Seas. And it should seeme the erection of these three was very ancient, in that when the Alexandrian Patriarch be­gan to incroach upon his neighbours,Concil. Nic. can. 6. the Nicene Council made this Decree, Mos antiquus perduret in Aegypto, Lybia, Pentapoli, ut Alexandrinus Episcopus horum omnium habeat potestatem, quoniam quidem & Episcopo Romano parilis mos est, similitèr autem & apud Antiochiam. [...], saith the Canon; it seemes even then 'twas an old cu­stome; and the Council of Antioch in the like case, though it names not the Churches,Concil. Anti­och. c. 9. yet provides to secure the rights, [...], secundum antiquam consuetudinem à patribus nostris constitutam. And again upon the unjust claime of the Patriarchs of Antioch over the Bi­shops of Cyprus the Ephesine Council decreed, ut singulis provinciis pura & inviolata manerent quae [...],Ephes. Conc. cap. 8. from the beginning upward they had [...], according to old prevailing custome. You see I do not exspatiate beyond the bounds of the first three Oecume­nical Councils, all which confesse that these Metropolitans, afterward Pa­triarchs, were no late nor new device; first authorized by the Council of Nice, but their right and preheminence was even then an ancient usage and Canon of the Church, even from the beginning. Now if I may take li­berty to conjecture, I may strongly presume, that the fathers of these three Councils had an eye to the constitution extant in the Apostolical Canons; The Bishops of every Nation must know [...], the chief­est, the first,Apost. Can. can. 35. the Primate, and willeth him to be [...], as head among the Bishops of that Province: who in the Africane Council is called [...].

These three were the three first and most ancient of the Patriarchs. To whom the fi st Council of Constantinople erected that Bishop into a Patri­arch, and for the honour of that City, being now called Nova Roma, gave the Bishop the second place, next after old Rome, who remains a great Patriarch to this day; and thus there became four. As for the fifth, it was of Jerusalem, and it obtained the priviledge of a Patriarchate in the fifth general Council.1. Concil. Con­stantinop. can. 5. G. Tyrius de bello sacro. l. 14. c. 12. Nic. coue. can. 7 Thus the case stood, Jerusalem being destroyed by Vespa­sian, Caesarea was made the Metropolis, and so is acknowledged in the Nicene Council, and the Bishop Primate, even to [...]erusalem. A great honour they are content should be yielded to the Jerusalem Bishop, or Aeliae, as he is there called, according to the old custome, yet manente metropolitanae civitatis propria dignitate, meaning Caesarea. In the Council of Chalcedon there was a trial past betwixt the Bishop of Antioch, and Juvenal Bishop of Jeru­salem [Page 65] about jurisdiction, in which it was decreed that the Phaenicia's and A­rabia should be given to the Patriarch of Antioch, and all Palestina, Concil. Chalced. Act. 7. jure Metropolitico should be under Jerusalem, and so Caesaria lost the Metropoli­tical right, and Jerusalem was preferr'd, which afterward in the fifth Gene­ral Council as I said, was advanc'd into the first Patriarchate.

And now if you shall aske me why I have so enlarged my self to disco­ver the rise, the antiquity, the institution of these Patriarchs, it was, that you may see how the Church was govern'd at first. There was no Monar­chy in it, no Democracy, but an admirable Aristocracy; it was like a well marshall'd army indeed; it had the Primates after call'd Patriarchs, as it were the Generals; the Metropolitans as Major General, the Bishops as Colonels. The Bishops again with their Presbyteries as a Council of warre, The Pres­byters of the C [...]ty and Countrey as Captaines and under-officers, the peo­ple as the souldiers under obedience, but without command. Never tell me this was a corruption; for thus it was ab incunabulis Ecclesiae, if credit may be given to all Church stories, to Acts of Councils, to Records, to Fathers; and thus it was not in one, but in all Churches throughout the four quarters of the world. And if you shall yet demand upon what ground of Scripture this Hierarchy was taken up, Saint Paul shall informe you, where he com­mands, Let all things be done decently, and in order.

Calvin being to set down the forme, this very forme of government in the Primitive Church, in the beginning premiseth these words:Calvin. instit. cap. 8. Sect. 51, 52, 53, 54. Tametsi multos Canones ediderunt illorum temporum Episcopi, quibus plus viderentur ex­primere, quam sacris litter [...]s expressum erat, ea tamen cautione totam suam oeconomiam composuerunt ad unicam illam Dei normam, ut facilè videas, ni­hil ferè in hac parte habuisse à Dei verbo alienum. And again, Sect. 54. Quod autem singulae provinciae unum habebant inter Episcopos Archiepisco­pum, quod item in Synodo Nicaena constituti sunt Patriarchae, qui essent & ordine & dignitate Archiepiscopis superiores, id ad disciplinae conservatio­nem pertinebat. By this means all inferiour Clergy were better kept in or­der, informed in their duty, contentions were composed, which to use his words, ex aequalitate nascerentur, confusion was avoided; & dissentio­num semina tollerentu [...], cum ad unum omnis sollicitude est delata, which he hath out of Jerome; Hieron. ad E­vagrium. and if antiquity of the institution may satis­fie, Jerom derives it from the Evangelist Saint Mark. This form of Govern­ment, the ancients call'd the Church Hierarchy; and it is true, that Calvin conceives the name improper; but then I pray mark how with in four lines he shuts up his discourse, Verum si omisso vocabulo, rem intuemur, repe­riemu [...] veteres episcopos non aliam regendae Ecclesiae forman voluisse fingere, ab ea, quam dominus verbo suo praescripsit, and he means that which I have set down. Men are much mistaken,Calvin. Epist. ad regem Polon. pag. 140, 141. edit. Genev. an. 1576. who conceive Calvin to have been an enemy to this ancient Church-government; let them but reade his Epistle that he writes to the King of Poland about the Reformation of the Kingdome, and they will tell me another tale; for he there sets down to the King the order of the Primitive Church for a patterne, where, saith he, there were Patriarchs and Primates, and subordinate Bishops to tye the [Page 66] whole body together with the bond of concord; And adviseth the King to establish Bishops in every Province, and over them an Arch-Bishop and Primate of that Kingdome;Calvin. Instit. lib. 4. c. 12. ar­tic. 6. and if the Popish Bishops were true Bishops, he would allow them some authority, not as much as they challenge, but as much as he thinks would serve for the right governing of the Church. Not so much as they challenge; good reason for that, for this would set up regnum in regno. Independent for soo [...]h then they must be of any but the Pope, which Princes have no reason to take well; but if they shall be con­tent to move within their proper Orbe of Church-government, he is not a­gainst it.

Now with Calvin agrees that learned and judicious Zanchy; his words are, Non improbamus patres, quod juxta variam tum verbi dispensandi, tum regendae Ecclesiae rationem, Zanch. de relig. Christ. cap. 25. Sect. 10, 11. varios quoque ministrorum ordines multiplica­rint, quando iis liberum fuit, sicut & nobis, & quando constat, id ab illis factum honestis de causis, ad Ordinem, ad Decorum & ad aedifica­tionem Ecclesia, pro eo tempore, pertinentibus. And thus he begins the next paragraph, Novimus enim Deum nostrum Deum esse Ordinis non confusionis, & Ecclesiam servari Ordine, perdi autem [...], quo de cau­sâ non solum in Israele, verum postea in Ecclesia ex Judeis & gentibus collectâ, multos etiam & diversos ministrorum ordines instituit; and a­bout twenty lines after addes these words, Hac sone ratione, quae etiam de Episcopis, imo & de quatuor Patriarchis, ante ipsum etiam Concilium Ni­caenum creatis, constituta suerunt, excusari, defendique posse sentimus.

And that this learned man may give more light and strength to what he delivers in these two paragraphs, in his observations upon these paragraphs he inserts a very sober and clear discourse out of Master Bucer de disciplina Clericali, which is very well worth your reading. The summe of it is, what I have already set down, and Bucers conclusion is, Quia omnino necesse est, ut singuli Clerici suos habeant proprios custodes & cu­ratores, instauranda est, ut Episcoporum, ita & Archidiaconorum, alio­rumque omnium, quibuscunque censentur nominibus, quibus portio aliqua commissa est custodiendi gubernandique Cleri authoritas, potestas: sed & vigilantia, & animadversio, ne quis omnino in hoc ordine sit [...]. This is the close of Bucers discourse, not onely reciting, but praysing and commending the constitution and custome of the old Church, in the vari­ous distribution of the Ecclesiastical functions and degrees.

I have many years since heard a wise man affirme, that a little insight into Natural Philosophy is apt to make a man an Atheist, as a litttle know­ledge in Physick creates an Emperick, a little sight in the Law a petty fog­ger; for it prides men with the confidence of knowledge, and makes them pragmatical: whereas a deep search in any art humbles the man, brings him to the sight of his own mistakes, and makes him sensible, that truth, as Plato was wont to say, lay in the bottome of a deep well, and without la­bour and a long rope it was not to be fetcht from thence. Was it not so with Aristotle, with Plato &c? whereas others upon the slight search of nature became Atheistical, the last of these by his depth of enquiry, became to ac­knowledge [Page 67] the prime cause of all things to be [...], very little differing from that ineffable name, by which God was made known to Moses [...].Justin. Martyr. Paraenetic. ad Hellenas. Exod. 3.14. I am that I am. And the other, not being able to search, why the Euri­pus should ebbe and flow seven times a day, cryed out, O eus entium. This shews what a little skill in any science, and what a profound know­ledge will do. The one will raise strange confidences, and Chimeras in the brain, the other will allay and settle them.

He who would be quieted and satisfied about Church-government, I could advise him to search this point to the depth; for otherwise he may be transported with strange fancies. His little knowledge may swell him too much, and make him over-confident to practise upon the Church, and make experiences before he is throughly skilful. Whereas if he will stay his pace, and not venture and vent his drugges, till he hath consulted the Ancients, and seen what judgment his fore-fathers, and those that liv'd nea­rest the Apostolical times gave of them, I beleeve he will not be over-hasty to prescribe any new dose; especially when he shall finde, that the old was held safe and sufficient to preserve the health of the Church, and to pre­vent incroaching diseases.

This course if you disdain and dislike, you condemn the whole Church of Christ from the first encreasing and spreading thereof to this present age; and preferre your own wisdome before all the Martyrs, Confessours, Fathers, Princes, Bishops that have lived, dyed, governed in the Church of God since the Apostles times. How well the height of your conceits can endure to blemish and reproach so many religious and famous lights of Chri­stendom, I know not. What? all the old Fathers, all the zealous first Reformers, all blinde, in comparison of your selves? for my part, I wish the Church of God in our dayes may have the grace for piety and prudence to follow their steps; and not to make the world believe, that all the servants of Christ before we liv'd, favoured and furthered the pride of Anti-Christ, till now in the fagge end of the world, when the faith of most men, and their love and charity are quench'd and decay'd; some new lights arose to restore the Church to that perfection of discipline, which the Apostles never mentio­ned, the Ancient fathers and Councils never remembred, the Universal Church of Christ before us never conceived, nor our chief Reformers never imagined: for they have as you have heard, delineated and commended the old way of discipline.

But here befo [...]e I end my general answer, I must remove one block which some have cast in my way. For I have heard it objected that these Patriarchs were Independents, which I confesse in some sense is true, because one Patriarch was not to intermeddle in the jurisdiction of another; the Ca­nons of the Church having set out the extent of their Provinces, and limited their power. But this will make nothing for the present Independency of Combinational Churches; for they had Churches, many Metropolitan sees, many Diocesses under their power and over-sight. But these have but one single Congregation. Those could call Synods through their whole Pro­vince, and punish any Bishop or Church-man or other under them: An In­dependent [Page 68] dependent Church can call no Synod, nor punish nor reforme any member that is not of their own society or Combination. Those were not so abso­lute neither, but they were bound upon their elections to informe their fel­low Patriarchs, and by theit communicatory letters to give accompt of it, and of their faith: The Pastours of the Combinational Churches are not accomptable to any sister-Church. Lastly, put case, as it sometimes fell out, that Factions, that Schismes, that Heresies arose in their Patriarchates, the Church was not left remedilesse; for the Patriarch or Church being not able to quell, compose, or extirpate them, a General Council was call'd to which they were all inferiour, and to whose verdict they were bound to stand, as is evident in the case of Nestorius, Dioscorus, &c. who were depos'd by general Councils, and their Heresies condemned; and the like may be said of Arrius and Eutiches, condemn'd in general Councils; which shews that the general Council was the supreme judicature, and that the Patriarchs had their dependence on it, and so were not absolute Inde­pendents. Now for the calling of these and other Councils, they had their warrant and pattern from the Apostles, Acts 15. who to redresse a con­tention then arose in the Church, call'd that Synod to Jerusalem, and com­posed it.

And indeed were there no other argument against Independent or Con­gregational Churches,Rutherford peace, plea. c. 7. Concl. 4. Bayly c. 10. (as there be very many and very strong, as you may read in Rutherford and Bayly out of him) yet this one drawn from this A­postolike Synod, I suppose were unanswerable. No Synod can impose De­crees upon any Combinational Church; That's your own Maxime. But this Synod did impose her Decrees upon those Churches which you say were Combinational: This proposition is evident in the Scripture, Acts 15. and verse 22, and 35. Therefore now if this Church of Antioch were subject to the authority of Synods, what Church might plead a freedome from the like subjection? and consequently none is Independent.

Thus have I as it were in a Table, presented you with the plain face of Truth, and sent it you bare and naked as Truth should be; If the visage seem old, the better; 'tis as I intended it; that hinders not, but she may be comely, venerable, amiable; for he that will reverence and love truth, he must do it, because she is an Ancient Matron. For Quod primum, verum, sed enim in omnibus veritas imaginem aniccedit, p [...]stremo similitudo sucoe­dit. Tertull. Praes. c. 29. cap. 31. Ex ipso ordine manifestatur, id esse Dominicum & verum, quod sit prius tradijtum; id autem extraneum & falsum, quod sit posteriùs immissum. A rule which that learned father often inculcates, but nowhere more clearly then in this fourth book against Marcion, where he hath these words by aggra­vation:Tertull. l. 4. ad­versus Marcion. c. 5. In summa si constat, id verius quod prius, id prius quod est ab i­nitio, ab initio quod ab Apostolis, pariter utique constabit id ab Apostolis traditum, quod apud Ecclesias Apostolicas fuerit sacrosanctum; which Chap­ter is worth your reading, for there the learned man refers the Original of Bishops to the Apostles; intimates their succession, which in many Church­es he doth more clearly in the thirty second Chapter of his pre­scriptions.

[Page 69]This prime Truth I have here represented with her Ancient Officers a­bout her, the Bishops with a Presbytery; of which in wisdome she thought fit to raise some higher, not in Office, but in Degree; ne quid detrimenti Ecclesia capiat. And this advancement was no new device neither, for we read of Metropolitans, and Primates, before the Nicene Council, as I have prov'd after of Patriarchs. Yet all this while, the Church remain'd a pure Virgin; Thebulis being the fi [...]st that corrupted the Church,Hegesipp. apud Euseb. l. 4 c. 21. Tertull. because he could not be a Bishop, as did afterwards Valentinus and Marcion upon the same occasion: and I had almost said Tertullian himself. This cer­tainly shewes that the Office of a Bishop even then was no contemptible dig­nity. For certainly the rejection of such men from the over-sight of a Con­gregational Church, could never work such men to so great discontent; Of such parties they were the chief, even after they had failed of their expected hopes. No question they were of Diotrephes minde,John Epi. 3.10 they were [...], they desired to be [...], Primates (so old is that word) in the Church; to which because they could not be admitted, they corrupted it with their doctrines. Ambition is by Charron call'd the shirt of the soul,Charron of wis­dome. being the first garment that it puts on, and the last that it puts off! for men while there be men, will be of aspiring minds.

Even a beggar will strive to be chief of his company, and a tradesman to be Master over those of his own profession; this cannot nor ever will be avoided. Such thoughts have alwayes tickled Church-men. Now to satis­fie this desire, God hath appointed higher places in his Church, and so they be desired in a fair way, and to lawful ends, it is commendable.1 Tim. 3.1. ver. 31. Conc. Afric. Chalced. Sardic. Naz. in Atha­nasij vitâ. This is a true saying, saith the Apostle, If a man desire the office of a Bishop, he desires a good work; and again in the same Chapter, they that have u­sed the office of a Deacon well, purchase unto themselves [...], a faire step to ascend to a higher degree;) as first to a Presbyter, then to a Bishop. And it is written of Athanasius that he ascended by all these steps, till he became Patriarch of Alexandria; then he was set upon the highest step: and yet this advancement of his, or any other, cannot hinder the go­vernment of the Church for being Aristocratical, but confirms it rather; since in this eminence he was to guide the Church, not according to his own pleasure, but according to the prescribed Canons of Synods and Councils; from which if he erred, he was liable to answer to the supreme Court of an Oecumenical Assemblie.

I have you see laid the foundation of the Churches government in Ari­stocracy, of which Monarchy and Democracy are the extremes. If you can shew me any Church that hath deviated from the middle way, I shall con­fesse it to be corrupt. And for the first it is easie to instance; viz. the Ro­mane Church, whose Patriarch affects a Monarchy, and his Courtiers and [Page 70] learned Rabbies the Jesuites plead stifly for it. But then you must not take that way you do to prove it; for the erection of Cathedral, Parochial, Dio­cesan, Provincial and National Churches through his Patriarchate will ne­ver do it; Since these were from the beginning in other Patriarchates, and in his too, when no Monarchy was ever dream'd of or challeng'd. That his challenge I acknowledge to be a corruption.

And if any Church shall affect Democracy, I shall say it is corrupted also; in that it observes not that Apostolical rule of government and disci­pline which was then used, as I have demonstrated. It is then a great mi­stake in you, to make the Presbyterial or Combinational Church to be the sole pure and Apostolical Church; and that all Churches that are fallen off from that government are corrupted. This if you can confirme fairely and firmly by unanswerable arguments as you make shew of, then you have reason to fasten your degeneration and corruption on Cathedrals, Parishes, Diocesses, Provinces and Nations; but if this can never be done, as I am assured it cannot, then I shall affirme, that the casting the Church into Cathedrals, Parishes, &c. was not errour, since by that the discipline of the Church might be better administred, and the Aristocratical government far advanced and furthered.

And so having express'd unto you my thoughts in the general, I now come to examine what you lay to the Churches charge in particular; in the dis­cussion of which I hope you will give me leave to prosecute my own method; and I shall begin with the Cathedral, which you say was the second degree, but I conceive it the first. Of this your words are.

Reply.

That I may return you a full answer, I must take asunder into propositi­ons what you here deliver. You say,

• 1. The Combinational Churches corruption was the Cathedral Church­es generation.
• 2. The corruption was by changing the places and appellations of Teachers, &c. into the titles of Lord Bishop, Dean, Chancel­lour, Arch-Deacon.
• 3. That they ventured to usurp the power of excommunication in their Synods and Councils.
• 4. That this was contrary to the Orthodox pattern, Acts 15.
• 5. Authority to censure any mans person is the expresse priviledge of the Presbyterial Church, 1 Cor. 5.4, 5. 2 Thes. 3.15.
• 6. Alexander ab Alexandria, began this against Arrius and Eusebius of Nicomedia, so that it was an usurpation, and a new age in the Church.

The Reply.

That my answer may be the clearer to what you here propose, I shall cast your words into this method. For first I will consider of,

• 1. The constitution and description you give us here of your Presbyterial Church, and the proofs you bring for it, out of both Testaments.
• 2. Whether the rottening of this Church, was the falling of it, from a poor pure Presbyterial Church, into an impure unpolish'd Parochi­al Church?
• 3. Whether your assertion be true, that when it ceased to elect or ordain either a Teacher, a Pastour, a Ruler, a Deacon, Deaconesse or Widow in conformity to the Canon, Rom. 12.15, 16. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. [Page 91] 1.5. but admitted of a Parson, Vicar, &c. that then it was corrupted, and became an Apostatizing Parish.
• 4. Whether the beginning and breeding of this Apostacy and corruption began in Polycarps and Iraeneus dayes.

These four points being examined, the weaknesse of your aspersion will very evidently appear. And first to the first.

Reply.

Sect. 5.YOu so promiscuously use these termes Presbyterial, and Combinatio­nal, that I know not readily how to shape my answer; for were I to deale with the Presbyterians, I should reply one way; but to you I must re­turne another answer. You say here, that the third degree of corruption was when it degenerated into the Provincial Church. But this is not like­ly,; for when the Church became Cathedral and Parochial, your Combi­national Church vanished, it was no more; now what hath no existence, cannot by degrees degenerate: since degrees belong to qualities which have, must have some subject to exist in. Had you then said the Church by these degrees rottened, it had been sense, but to say that that which long before this, was not, did rot and degenerate, is not intelligible. But to omit this, I shall now consider in what you place this Degeneration.

• 1. This was when it climed to be stiled a Provincial Church.
• [Page 99]2. When the Pastour was not afraid nor ashamed to assume the name and office of Arch-bishop and Metropolitane.
• 3. When he left the servile and subservient names or titles of Prebend, Surrogate, and Vicar-General to inferiour Officers.
• 4. That of this proud and prophane Pest-house, Austin sent from Gregory was the father and founder in this our Land.

This is the summe of what you deliver. To which I returne you this an­swer with what brevity I can.

The Reply.

SIr, that affection which I have alwayes borne you as a friend, and that duty which I owe you as a Christian, moves me in plain words to tell you, that the indulgence you bear to the Combinational Church, hath in this Paragraph transported you beyond the bounds of moderation and truth. For to omit your common Sophisme, petitio principii, which is the foulest in all Logick; that there was at first a Combinational Church, and that this did precede a National; which is as if you should say, the parts are before the whole, when the contraty in nature hath hitherto been received for truth, that omne totum sive universale sive integrale est pri­us partibus. But to omit this, you over-load your assertion with many un­necessary Epithets, and those sometimes unapt; whereas attributes are or­naments, and where they are not decently affixed, they become our speech no more, than a fair gold lace doth a coarse garment, or a rich jewel fast­ned to a straw hat. Thirdly, the five frivolous customes and traditions you reckon up, are no proper accidents of the National Church, but were com­mon to the Provincial, Cathedral and Parochial, and so no distinct notes to know that the National Church was corrupted more than they; should I yield them to be corruptions. Lastly, you say they were brought in by a Jewish imitation, which if granted, it would not at all help your cause; as I will after make appear. These are your undertakings in this Section, and I shall not need to analyse it, as I have done before; because you have me­thodiz'd it to my hand, for which I thank you. The first thing then I shall prove unto you, is that there is such a thing as a National Church, and that it was before your Combinational, so that it cannot be true which you affirme; that the fourth degree of the Combinational Churches defection, was its notably naughty enlarging it self into a National Church.

The Reply.

My reply to this Paragraph shall be very short, since it concerns not us of the Church of England. I had thought at first to have said something of an Oecumenical Church, which you know we call usually a general Council; but since you otherwise interpret your self, that by it you mean the Romane Catholick, I will not meddle with it. For we no lesse then you are against all Papal usurpations.Jun. de Eccl. Rom. cap. 17. I shall onely return you the judgment of Junius about this matter. Ecclesia Romana, quod divina habet omnia, à [Page 148] Deo est: quod corrupta habet omnia, [...]ib ipsa est: quod divi [...]a habet om­nia, Ecclesia est: quod eadem habet corrupta omnia, Ecclesia corrupta est: Ecclesia non tollitur corruptione nisi rotati, quam vocant interitum. Eccle­sia non tollit partialis corruptio, sed infirmat: Ecclesia Romana omnia ha­bet corrupta, sed non omnino, haet non interitus est, fed partialis corrup­tio ejus disendu est. And therefore to your accusation it is fit for them to answer, not for me, who maintain none of their corruptions.

God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ grant by his eternal Spi­rit that Spirit of eternal Truth, that all the deceits and fallacies of Sa­tan being laid asidet, we may daily grow up in Christ and his Church, and in the truth of Christ and his Church, and that we may confirme and e­stablish one another more and more by unfeigned Charity, and the bonds of peace to his glory, and the common salvation of our selves and all Christi­ans, Amen.

The Reply.

To what you say of the vile virulent head the Pope, I assent, and so did and do all Orthodox Divines of our English Church; holding his claim to be Universal Bishop to be Anti-Christian, profane, proud, foolish, blasphemous, by vertue whereof he doth ingrosse to himself full power and authority over all Christians in the world, both Ecclesiastical and saecular; the principal actions whereof are. 1. To frame and set out for all Chri­stians the rule of faith and good manners; to point out the books of Cano­nical Scriptures, and the traditionary word, and to deliver the sense and interpretation thereof; and to determine all controversies in religion with an unerring sentence. 2. To prescribe and enact laws for the whole Church equally obliging the conscience to obedience with the divine Law. 3. To exercise external power of directing and commanding, and also of censure and correction of all Christians. 4. To grant dispensations, indulgences, absolution from oaths and vows. 5. To canonize Saints, institute religious orders, to deliver from Purgatory. 6. To call and confirm general Councels. 7. To dethrone, and conculcate Kings, &c.

All this we disclaim as well as you, and you needed not have said, that it begun in this Island and Ireland, as if it begun with you: for it begun more then one hundred years since; assume not therefore that to your selves, which was done to your hands; to take down this head was the work of the National Church you so slight, and had it not been done to your hands, I doubt whether all the power you could make, had ever been able to have done it. And for this, that head being of a revengeful nature, hath ever since been plotting which way it might unroot us that unrooted it; For the proof of this I shall acquaint you, with what a friend acquainted me and others about five years since. A good Protestant he is now, but about 30. years before, was as he confess'd, reconciled to Rome, by one Meredith an ancient and learned Jesuite (for he was one of those that Dr. Featly had to deal with in France.) This man told him that in England they had been long and industrious about their work of conversion; but it went on slowly, and so would till they took a wiser course. Two things there were that must be done before they should bring their businesse to a full effect. They must first find a way to remove the Bishops and Ministers, in whose room they must bring it so about, that all should have liberty to preach. Then se­condly they must get down the Common Prayer book, and suffer every man to use what prayer he list. Thus much the man offer'd to make good upon his Oath before any Magistrate he should be call'd. And now I pray tell me out of what shop do you think your work comes? That generation are a sly subtle people; as the devil, they can transform themselves into an An­gel of light. If many printed books lye not, there have been many among you, and they know to insinuate their poyson under guilded pills. Po­sitions they have many like your's, and beware least when you think you suck in the Truth, you drink not poyson. Verbum sat Sapienti. They owe [Page 155] us a splene for casting off their head; and they will never give over to seek a revenge.

We were the men that cut it off, and take heed least unwittingly you set it not on again. 'Tis too true; I speak it with grief; they have won to their side in the time of our dissentions more proselites then they did in di­vers years before. The Laws are now silent, and any man may be now any thing, so he be not an old Protestant of the Church of England; that if he professe, then there will be a quick eye upon him; An Ordinance shall be sure to reach him, which for ought I heard is but brutum fulmen to a Pa­pist. Boast not then of your taking down that same vile and virulent head the Pope, when it is permitted to stand in more favour then a Protestant, whose work hath been to take down that abominable beast with his ten horns as you call him.

The Reply.

That Christ hath hid his face from, and bent his face against this Na­tional Church, you have reason to lament and grieve, and not to stand by and clap your hands at it; Rather take up the Lamentation of David for Saul and Jonathan. The beauty of Israel is slain upon the high places; how are the mighty fallen! 2 Sam. 1.19.20 Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Ash­kelon, least the daughters of the Philistims rejoyce, least the daughters of the uncircumcised Triumph, &c. Posterity will have cause to mourn, when you and they shall be invaded and set upon by those uncircumcised Philistims of Rome, who will smile at the armour wherein you trust; and the speares [Page 156] you brandish against them as a dart of a bulrush. 'Tis not your Sophisms that will prevail with them, nor your popular arguments that they will re­gard; and they as smoke being vanished, set upon you they will with armour of proof, and so inviron you, that you will wish again for those worthies of the National Church to fight your battles. These were the men that stood up in the gap, these have bore the burden and heat of the day, these have beaten these Philistims at their own weapons; from the blood of the slain, from the fat of the mighty, the bow of Jonathan turned not back, and the Sword of Saul returned not empty. Verse 22. Rejoyce not therefore at their fall, since after ages may have occasion to say, if we had been in the dayes of our fa­thers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the Pro­phets. Matth. 23.31.

2. Yea, but you say Christ hath bent his brow against this National Church, as being next in naughtinesse.] Next? to what? to the Ro­mane Church. That's to be proved. And 'tis more than ever you shall be able to make good, that quâ National, or quâ a Church in her con­stitution she was naught. It was the acknowledgment of that great and learned Casaubons then whom there was none more skilful in all the Records of antiquity, that there was not any Church in the Christian world, that came nearer in her Doctrine and Discipline to the Primitive, than this of England. His words in his Epistle Dedicatory to King James are these, before his exercitations to the Annals of Baronius. Casaub. Ep. de die. ad Annales. Tuum est, proprie tu­um pro veteris Ecclesiae disciplina pugnantes regii clypei, quem pro sincere pietatis defensione gestas, umbone propugnare. Qui Ecclesiam habeas in tuis regnis, partim jam olim ita institutam, partim magnis tuis laboribus ita instauratum, ut ad florentis quondam Ecclesiae formam nulla hodiè propiùs accedat, quam tua, inter vel excessu, vel defectu peccantes mediam viam sequita. This man lived in and was brought up in the Reformed Church in France, and might be therefore thought to encline to a Presbyterial Disci­pline, and yet after he came into England, and took notice of the consti­tution, you hear what he attests, that was no question able to judge, that had seen and read so much. And in this point he stands not single, nor a­lone, for from Alexandria we have like approbation, from Cyril the Pa­triarch, there in his Letter sent to my sometimes Lord George Abbot Arch­Bishop of Canterbury. Cyril. Litt. ab Aegypto missae. 1616. Fix not then this naughty terme upon the Church of England, because National. The naughtinesse that was in her I have confessed, and for which we justly suffer under the hand of a just God, and for which when you come to be as naught as we, think not you shall escape. 'Tis not your Combination shall priviledge you from the Cup of Gods wrath. Think you that those Galileans on whom the Tower of Siloam fell, were greater sinners then all that dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you nay, but except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

3. You go on to the British King. Placida compostus pace quiescat. Soyle not his ashes. Invincible he was not, nor any man ever thought him so. For thine, O Lord is the greatnesse, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, [...] Chr. 29.11. and the Majesty, for all that is in the heaven and earth [Page 157] is thine; thine is the Kingdom O Lord, and thou art exalted as head above all. But whereas you say that he was a violent head, & was therefore less victorious, and more vincible, you are a little too quick with your ergo. More can never be in the conclusion, than is in the premises, and say he had been a violent head, which I shall by and by prove he was not, yet it will never necessarily follow, that thence he should be lesse victorious. For how many violent heads in your sense, meaning National Churches, have their bene, who yet have obtained victories? Sometimes God punisheth a people for the trans­gression of a King, sometimes a King for the transgression of his people. Israel is smitten with the pestilence for Davids sinne, and Eli is cast off, and the Ark taken for the sinne of his sons. Where therefore there may be divers causes of a discomfiture, is overmuch rashnesse to fix upon one, nay, to imagine that to be the cause, which was not, viz. because he was.

4. A violent head.] For what I pray? is it a sinne for a Prince to be the head, that is, the governour of a National Church? so you seem to af­firme. Beware, look about you, and consider with whom at unawares you joyne, for the Jesuite will make you a low Congee, and thank you that you shall assert their rebellious position, that Princes and supreme Magistrates have nothing to do in the Church; in temporal things supreme, and Lords they are, but in spiritual matters they may not meddle. The difference lies onely in this, that they would draw the Supremacy to one, even, that man of sinne, and advance him to the head-ship. You draw the Supremacy to the Pastours and Elders in every Combinational Congregation, and so there should be as many supremacies and heads, as there be of these Churches.

For which his Highnesse the Lord Protectour hath little reason to thank you; for of what Church will you make him a governour? Not of the National, that was the Kings sinne; a violent head he was, and God forbid that according to your tenet any should come into that place a­gain. His headship and government can extend no farther than the Com­binational, that very Combinational, of which he is a member, & in which he must act not as Protectour, or the Supreme in the Nation, but as an Elder only. In all other Combinationals he hath nothing at all to do, for they have a su­premacy among themselves. He may not then order National Fasts, nor dayes of Thanksgiving; he may not make Ordinances to eject scandalous and ignorant Ministers; he may not set up Approvers of Ministers for the whole Nation; he may not punish Papists, imprison Blasphemers, ask any man out of his Combination, why he doth so or so, if your position be true. 'Tis violence, 'tis usurpation, 'tis tyranny. Supreme he is now in the Na­tion, and by the power of the supremacy all these things are done, and you and I, or any body else would be smiled at, if not frowned upon, that for this should call him a violent head. And what did the British King more than this?

It may be thought, that I have put in this plea in favour of the British King; he needs it not, for he hath long ago answered for his violence, if there were any. I tell you plainly I plead for his Highnesse, and for as ma­ny, [Page 158] who are supreme in any Nation, be they Potentates, Princes or gover­nours over any Christian Church. For the cause is alike in all, and they have external government of the Church in charge; and to say the contrary, is to open a sluce to the over-flowings of impiety. I shall put you a case. Sup­pose the Jew should be admitted into a Nation, and shall fall to their old work of crucifying children to the scorn and disgrace of our Saviour; say that a Heathen should be enfranchized, and worship the Sunne and the Moon, and all the host of heaven, yea, and make their children passe through the fire to Moloch; Be it that one should say he were God, ano­ther the Devil; a third acknowledge not God nor Devil; say there arise false Christs and false Prophets, one who will blaspheme and say he is the Mes­sias, and rejoyceth to hear Hosanna cryed before him; If there be no su­preme over a National Church, I wonder what order could be taken with a­ny of these? suffered they must be to go on, and blaspheme still, for any power you have to restrain them. Convent them before your Congregation, they appear not. Cast them out, if they be of your Combination, they regard it not. The gangrene goes on, the blasphemy increaseth, and will increase, except you admit of one supreme head in a Nation, who may have so much power over the body, that he may cut off that part from the body, which is like to infect and poyson the whole. The mischief that may ensue upon a Church by the admission of this your paradox is unconceivable. I can never enough admire the wisdome both of God and man, who hath appointed a supreme power in all Nations, for the suppression of all incon­veniences. With their Civil power I am not at this time to meddle; I shall only insist upon that which is Ecclesiastical; and that you may the better go along with me, I shall reduce what is to be said to certain heads.

1. The first work of the supremacy is to call Assemblies. For, for men to assemble together, without leave of the supreme power, and consult of Religion, is to make a Rout. In Israel God commands Moses to make two Trumpets, Numb. 10.12. and to keep them for that end to call the Congregation. Moses had no other right but that of the chief Magistrate. In that right he received his Trumpets, and in that right he had the property of both. Aaron, verse 10. had the use, but the use only, never the right. May be if we call flesh and blood to counsel, it will be thought more convenient, that God delivered one Trumpet to one, and the other to the other, and so have power to call; but God saith peremptorily to Moses, erunt tibi, they shall be and remain in thy hands: and so, no man hath power to remove the Camp, to assemble the Congregation, to found to the Celebration of the solemn Feasts, but Moses and his Successours.

By vertue of this power, Joshua assembles all the Tribes, Levi and all to Sichem. Joshua 24. 1 Chr. 15.4. & 23.2, 3, 6. 2 Chr. 15. & 20.3. & 24.5 & 34.29. David calls together the Priests and other Ecclesiastical persons; and for what matters? for secular? nay, meer Church-work; first, when the Ark was to be removed; again, when the offices of the Temple were to be set in order: things meerly pertaining to Religion. Asa, Jehosaphat, Joas, Josias, gave a solemn call in matters of Religion. But the fact of Hezeki­ah is of all most memorable. He gave forth a precept for the Priests, and all [Page 159] their brethren to assemble; 2 Chr. 29. Verse 12, &c. Verse 15. and to what end? ad res Jehovae. There be four­teen men, chief men of the Priests set down there by name, that by vertue of that Writ came together, they and their brethren all ex praecepto regis ad res Je­hovae, for matters meerly of the Church.

Thus it was while there was a King in Israel. But after, when the Scepter was departed, how was it then? how, when the fulnesse of the Gentiles was come in? who then called the Assemblies? A time there was after Christ, when Kings were Infidels, and the Church under persecution. As the Jews at Babylon, being under pressures, they must meet, and did, as they could; and yet divers such meetings in Synods we finde recorded, as I have instanced before, which for the present were called by their Pa­triarchs.

But no sooner did God raise up Constantine to be a nursing father to the Church, but he resumed the right of Moses; and his Successours lay claim to them at this day; the four general Councils, the great Nicene a­gainst Arrius; the second of Constantinople against Macedonius; the third of Ephesus against Nestorius; the fourth of Calchedon against Eutichus, were all called by several Emperours. And by the same power all other National and Provincial Synods have been accustomed to be assembled till this our age.

2. And the Church being assembled by this Warrant, had power to e­stablish Laws for the Discipline of the Church, so they be consonant to the Word of God, tend to edification, decency and order; So that if there be no errour of man concerning their determination, the determining of them is to be accompted as if it were divine. Though then he who is the chief in any State, hath not power to determine judicio definitivo, what is sound and to be received in the worship of God; yet judicio executivo, Synod at Cam­bridge in New Engl. cap. 2. he may and ought when the Church hath determined, command the profession there­of in his Territories; and from this I do not see that your Synod held at Cambridge doth much dissent. Cap. 17. Sect. 7, 8, 9.

I have hitherto opened unto you what the supreme power may do. I shall now shew you by what right he may do it, which is indeed by all right, jure naturae, jure divino, & positivo.

First, they deceive and are deceived, who go about to perswade that the supremacy in Church matters is derived unto any superiour by municipal Laws; for this is a right with which he is invested by God himself. Decla­red it may be, and made known to the world, written more at large, and expressed more clearly in Acts and Statute Laws;Cook de jure. reg. & Ecclesi­ae. pag. 8. but this jurisdiction was from above, whence the Fathers of the Law have thus delivered this truth to us, that the Act past concerning Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, non novam le­gem introduxit, sed antiquam declaravit.

Ask the Fathers and they shall tell you, the grey haires and they shall de­clare unto you. In the Law of nature, it can be no question but causes Ci­vil and Ecclesiastical belonged to one man, since the King and Priest was u­nited in one man; The eldest ordinarily of the Family being chief Magi­strate and Priest; And after the partition was made, yet the chief power [Page 160] remained in the Superiour. Such Religion as the Heathen had, was yet ordered by the Princes directions, which gave Aristotle reason to say, Quae ad Deorum cultum pertinent, Aris. Pol. lib. 3. cap. 10.11. commissa sunt regibus; and again, Imperator est Rex & Judex rerum (que) divinarum ei cura commissa est.

A Law there was made by Solon, that all Assemblies [...],Plutarch in So­lone. were unlawful, that the highest authority did not cause to meet. Among the Heathen Nebuchadnezzar makes a Law, Darius a De­cree, the King of Nineveh sends forth a Proclamation for a Fast, for a Re­ligious service, which certainly they had never done, had it not been re­ceived, that they were empowred. And among the Romans there was no sooner an Emperour, but he took upon him potestatem pontificiam. In the Acts we read that the City of the Ephesians was [...], which Mr. Selden teacheth us, was an Office to take care of the whole worship and Temple of Diana. Seld. not. in Marmor. Arun­del. Now this could not be done by any warrant from Scripture, evident therefore it is, that even by the light of nature seen it was, that the supreme power is invested with anthority in Religious duties. Care they ought to take, that God be served, as well as the people gover­ned, since they have been hitherto taken to be Custodes utrius (que) Tabulae.

2. Thus it was, while reason bare the sway. But now let us look into the Scripture. How is it written in the Law, how read you? There it was ordained, that the King should have a book of the Law, written by the Priests, and the end was,Deut. 17.18, 19, 20. that he might fear the Lord, and keep it. And in this Law there be many precepts that concern him as a man, many as a Prince; for as Austin Rex servit Deo, aliter qua homo, aliter qua Rex, as a man by a holy Conversation, as a Prince by making and executing holy constituti­ons.Austin Ep. 50. As he is the Superiour, he is there made the Guardian of Gods Law, and the whole Law is committed to his charge. By vertue of which Com­mission, when the Kingdome and Priesthood were divided, Moses the Ci­vil Magistrate made use of his power over Aaron, and reproved him for the golden Calf. Joshua a Prince, no Priest, by the same authority circumcised the sonnes of Israel, erected an Altar of stone, caused the people to put away their strange gods, and renewed the Covenant betwixt God and the people. And what other Kings did, you have heard before. These Acts of these fa­mous Kings performed in Ecclesiastical causes, shews clearly what power Kings had under Moses Law. And one thing more let me put you in mind of, that when there was no King in Israel, that was a supreme power, for it was no more, every man did that which was good in his own eyes, and that good was extream bad, as the story shews.

3. Yea, but it may be said, that thus it was, while the Judicials of Moses were in force; but why so now? Now the Superiours authority is confined to Civil Lawes: Now the Kingdome is Christs, and he must rule. Indeed could we finde in the Gospel any restriction, or ra­ther revocation of what power had formerly belonged to Superiours, this plea were considerable, but since the rule is true, that Evangelium non tollit precep­ta naturae & legis, sed perficit. The Commission once granted to the Supe­riour, by nature, and the Moral Law must be good.

[Page 161]And be it that the Kingdome is Christs, and all power in his hands; yet this will be no impediment to what I contend for neither. That Christ wants no Vicar on earth, but as head of his Church doth govern it, is a truth beyond exception. But this is to be understood of the spiritual inter­nal government; not of that which is external; because he must be serv'd with the body, as well as with the Spirit, in an outward forme of worship, as well as an inward; therefore he hath left superiours to look to that. Their power extends not, their accompt shall not be given for what is done within; for they cannot see, nor cannot judge what is done in that dark cell; they have nothing to do with the secret affections of the heart, with the sacred gifts of the Spirit, with the stedfast trust of future things. They are only to moderate and direct the outward actions of godlinesse and honesty, and what may externally advance Christs Kingdome. So that the question is not here of the internal, and properly Spiritual; but of the external govern­ment, order, and discipline of the Church; which when the supreme pow­er administers as it ought, it sets up, and no way pulls down the Kingdome of Christ. These two are then well enough compatible, that the Kingdome is Christs, and yet the Superiour way make use of his power in Christs King­dome.

A Prophesie there was, that under the Gospel Kings should be nursing fathers, and Queens nursing mothers to the Church. Isa. 49.23. Nourishment then they must give; that ordain'd for babes; that for men, the Word and Sacra­ments they cannot give; no more then Uzziah could burn incense, or Saul burn Sacrifice; no, nor yet ordain any to do it: The sustenance then which Christians are to receive from them, must be that of external disci­pline and government. Those that gave such food were call'd nursing fa­thers; those that denyed it, tyrants and persecutors; without the favour and execution of this duty, Christian Religion had never been so highly ad­vanc'd; and therefore the Apostle ordains, that Christians pray for those in authority, that we may live a quiet and a peaceable life in all godlinesse, 1 Tim. 2. and honesty. Godlinesse comprehends all duties of the first Table; Hone­sty all duties of the second; and where those who are in authority are care­ful, both will be observed, both shall be preserved, because they know they have a charge of both. Thus you see reason, Law and Gospel have given a supremacy to those in power, non solum in ijs quae pertinent ad humanam societatem, verum etiam in ijs quae attinent ad religio­nem divinam.

I have enlarg'd my self on this subject beyond my intention, least you should split upon that dangerous rock of Jesuitisme, while out of a dislike of the British King, you make him a violent head of the National Church; for what you say of him, is as true of all others; and what is denyed of him, is denyed of all others, in that their claim and right is all alike; and in case it be not just, their violence and usurpation is all alike, which to affirm is perfect Jesuitisme; And wheresoever this doctrin is turn'd into practice, it sets up regnum in regno: and if it should be brought into this Common­wealth, would reduce again what Henry the eight cast out, though under [Page 162] another notion; for every Eldership of a Combinational Church would be perfect Papacy, absolute, independent, answerable to none, to be gui­ded by none in Church matters, punishable by none but themselves; to which if you will give a right name, it is meere Popish power.

This is it which Superiours have wisely disclaimed, and not admitted themselves like children to be cheated out of their native rights and inheri­tantes, as they must if you deny a National Church; for that power is in vain which hath no subject to work upon; on the Church National it can­not, because in your opinion it is not; on the Combinational it may nor, because that is absolute, and to be order'd and disciplin'd by its own Elders; non datur tertium; and so the supremacy which all Superiours challenge is frustrated.

To this the British King did never yield nor would; and I beleeve his Highnesse will be as little perswaded by you. For this you make him lesse victorious and more vincible; but you cast up your accompt too soon; for had you said, for the male administration of his supreme power this had fallen upon him, that might have carried some colour of sense with it, (which will also happen to any that shall not use it as they ought) but to affirme, that the claim to the power, and exercise of that power was the cause of his fall, is rash, false, inconsiderate, dangerous. But you go on, and endeavour to make it good by two reasons.

The Reply.

Two of your heads I have considered already, and now out of your own shop you present me with three more; for I never heard any one of them call'd heads before. And the first of these is the Arch-bishop, about whom you are pleased to open your purse, and very liberally to bestow your bene­volence; presenting him unto me, for a haughty, a horrible, an absurd, and a bold head. He is haughty, that is, puff'd up with pride; horrible, that a man cannot without some amazement approach; absurd, that acts a­gainst reason; bold, that will attempt any thing. I will not deny, that it is possible to meet with such an Arch-bishop; but then blame the man, fly not upon the Office. Only before you be over hasty to do it, look at home: And perhaps you may find that true, which hath been observ'd, That there hath been more haughtinesse, horrour, absurdity, boldnesse found in some of your Pastours; then you can exemplifie in any Arch-bishop. If a­mong you or us any Prelate were guilty of these foul enormities; I excuse him not, only object not these faults of particular persons, till you be free.

[Page 171]But how do you prove your aspersion? by a demonstrative reason no que­stion. It was say you in daring out of base and blasphemous blindnesse, to take up and ascribe to its self such a stile and title as is not communicable to any creature, &c. To this I have given you your answer before, and I list not to repeat it.

The rest of this Section I understand not well, not your interrogation; who is that Minister? what was his name? where doth he dwell? &c. To the Arch-Bishop sure they belong not, for none that I know, that was e­ver in that place, did conceive himself in a capacity to be accounted such a superlative counsellour or comforter, that was endued either with ability or authority, as to conferre a spiritual Crown on any one of the sincere Elders of the Church. Among us there never was, nor never will be any such man; if you can finde him in the society of your Combinationals, you should do well to name him; for to us he is a non ens. These words therefore I passe by, as I would the noise of a sounding brasse, or a tinkling Cymbal, that make a great disturbance in the eare, but signifie just no­thing.

The Reply.

We are ready to acknowledge more than you can say, that Christs hand hath fallen heavy upon us, that the vengeance is just & visible, Rev. 16.5, 7.and with the An­gel of the Waters at the pouring forth the third Vial, we are ready to praise him saying, Thou art righteous O Lord, which art and wast, and shall be, because thou hast judged thus; and to eccho unto you those words, from the other An­gel out of the Sanctuary, even so Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments. Verse 10.11. For whereas that Antichristian train under the Throne of the [Page 172] Beast, blasphemed the God of heaven, for their pains, and for their sores, and repented not of their works; we under the Crosse blesse God, and are hear­tily sorry for our misdoings. For this is a true difference betwixt the servants of God, and Vassals of Antichrist, that under Gods severe hand the one blesseth,Jer. 5.3. 1 Tim. 3.13. Bernard in Cant. 26. Serm. the other blasphemeth, the one rejoyceth, the other rageth, the one repents, and amends, the other goes on, and growes worse and worse. Stellae nocte splendent, quae die non videntur. And we have hope in this our sorrow and amendment, that God may yet stay his hand, and not make us drink the dregs of the Cup. For remember that this plague was poured out of a Vial, which is a certain measure, and more or lesse he can dispense of it,Jonah. 3.9. as he pleaseth. Insult not then over us in our misery. For who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger that we perish not.

2. But whereas you say this Vial was poured out on the Cathedral, 'tis true, but you must prove that it was poured out upon it, quatenus or because it was Cathedral, or else your censure is uncharitable and rash. For many enormities and misdemeanours there might be in the Cathedral, which I excuse not, that might cause God in his fierce wrath thus to proceed against her, and yet she no way guilty, quatenus Cathedral. God punisheth his servant David, the sword shall not depart from his house, for the matter of Vriah; but was this heavy judgment inflicted on him, because he was King of Israel? The punishment overtook him for his sin, not for his regality; his power was justifiable, not his wickednesse, and God shewed his anger a­gainst his sinne, not his Crown. The case is the same, the Cathedral I grant was sinful, and for that God proceeded against it, but not in that No­tion as Cathedral, for that was justifiable, as I have before proved unto you. It is then a great shortnesse of discourse in you, to conclude, that as Cathe­dral it was punished, which if you conclude not, you conclude nothing: since this vengeance proceeded against the sin of the Cathedral, not the Church.

3. Of this Cathedral, you joy that the lordly Diocesan was not so much an idle, as an addle head.] I little doubt but you pleased your self with this paranomasia, as much as the Mathematician did with his Dia­gramme, for the invention of which he offered to Jupiter a whole Heca­tombe. But what now, were these qualities proper or common to the Dio­cesan? if common, then it is possible that the Pastour of a Combinatio­nal Church may be an idle and an addle head as well as the Diocesan; because common accidents are communicable to subjects of divers kinds: if proper, then it must agree omni, to every Diocesan, and so every Dio­cesan an idle and an addle head. Cranmer, Ridly, Latimer, Hooper, idle and addle heads; Jewel, Armagh, Andrews, Morton, White, Montague, Bilson, both the Abbots; all those eminent and learned Bishops of our Church, that have stood up in the gap, and fought the battels of the Lord, against that Goliah of Rome, idle and addle heads. Do you not blush at these obloquies, by which you impute idlenesse to them, who wore out their bodies in continual study and labour in defence of the Truth; and addleness, [Page 173] such as in a rotten egge, to such, whose names, say you what you please, will be venerable to posterity for their wisdome and constancy. You usually call all yours, painful Preachers, and yet what is their pains more then that of the lungs? since by your own principles they may not take pains for what to deliver, but must rely upon that ill applyed promise, It shall be given you in that [...]: Which yet no man, but he that hath an addle head will trust too; and so your itinerants may be idle and addle heads also, Nobis non licet esse tam disertis. Most of our Bishops were laborious, wise, discreet men; if all were not so, let not the whole order be branded with that black coal of reproach, for somes sake. I know you would be loth to have the same mea­sure meated out to you.

4. But you have reason for what you say, and then very good reason you should be heard. Reason the strongest that may be given, even out of our Saviours mouth and his Apostle Saint Peter. There must be no lordly Diocesan; so say I to, that is no domineering and tyrannical Superiour in the Church; and yet they may be called Lords for all that; neither are these words of Christ or Peter any prohibition against it, as I have shewed you before, when I gave you the true intent of those Scriptures, whether for the meaning I now refer you.

And yet one thing more I shall be bound to tell you, that if you look heedfully into the Text, the word Lord is not in the Original; for thus the words are, they that bear rule, are called [...], Benefactours; or Ptolomy in Aegypt, [...], but with you it shall not be so. The simple then may be deluded by you, but the Learned know 'tis a glosse be­sides the Text; your illation, no translation of the words. There is no more prohibition for being called Lord, then for Rabbi, or Master, or Doctor,Mat. 23. v. 9.10. or father, as is evident in the Gospel, and may not then a man be called Master or father? Let an answer be thought upon for these appellations, and it will serve for the other without any sensible errour. Lord and servant are oppo­site terms, and not Lord and sonnes or brethren; now the flock are no ser­vants, but brethren, and the Pastours no Lords over Gods inheritance, but fathers to the faithful; what marvail therefore if Christ prohibited a Lord­ly authority to his Apostles, since they were to entreat them kindly, as fa­thers do their children, as one brother should do to his brother, and not think to command and compell them as their Vassals; for this is [...] [...], which Saint Peter forbids. Such an usurpation, tyranny, domi­neering as this, would have made your words good, and testifyed them to have been lofty Lords, and Lordlesse Out-Laws, to have been illegal and irregular livers; which I shall not yield you true of that Diocesan you speak, much lesse that because they were called Lords, that this was the cause that their unhallowed dwellings were destined and appointed for hedg-hogs to house and harbour in; yea, for Iim and Ohim to dance in, and for Owls and Vultures to dung on: had there been no greater transgression then this, I beleeve they might have kept their dwellings still.

But what now, are those that house and harbour in their dwellings, be­come hedg-hogs, and hob-goblings, and Satyrs? good words I pray, lest [Page 174] this prove scandalum magnatum; should I say so much, I fear I should have swords about my ears; for consider who they be that have taken possession, and dwell in these houses. They be Saints I hope; not Devils; the meek that are to possesse the earth, and not prickly hedg-hogs, the chast, no wan­ton Satyrs, and they'l have a care no doubt to keep their houses clean, so that no Vulture nor Owle shall dare to a light and dung there, for they have power enough to drive them away. Or if by these houses you mean the Cathedrals themselves, pray consider again, who hath the use of them, who preach in them? and are these also hedg-hogs, and foul spirits, unclean Satyrs, Vultures and Owls? do these defile these places with their dung? should they do so, 'twere your grief, that no man dare drive them away. What Phineas birds suffered to defile Gods Temple? Deus meliora.

Yea, but so it must be, for so it was prophesied of old; how could that terrible threat be performed and fulfilled? at length it came to this, witness the Prophet, Isa. 13.19, &c. For so much you shall evidently confesse, if you look but on the first verse of that Chapter, where you shall read o­nus Babylonis, The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the sonne of Amos did see; and this Prophesie was never fulfilled till England became Babel. And so much again, if you read but this 19. And Babylon the glory of King­domes, the beauty of the Caldees excellency shall be as when God overthrew So­dome and Gomorrah.

Your luck is very ill in alledging of Scripture; this I am certain which makes so little to your purpose. Had you inferred from hence, let Tyrants beware how they oppose the people of God, as the Babylonians did the Is­raelites, before they were overthrown by the Medes; let them take heed that they commit not Idolatry, and serve not Devils in their Temples, as did the Caldeans, upon whom the words you alledge were fulfilled; then you had hit the Prophets meaning; for what he foretold came so to passe; but to tell us, that thus it should be done to our Cathedrals, that this terrible threat might be performed and fulfilled at length, and that this was prophesied of old, and to call the Prophet Isaiah for a witnesse, it must be so, is to take Gods Name in vain, no lesse then if you should take a vain or a false oath. I am loth to say it, but your impertinent allegation hath forced it from me.

The Reply.

Hitherto you coupled your heads together, the virulent and the vio­lent, the haughty or horrible, and the idle and the addle, and now you have one odde, which I think you so call it, because it is the fifth, five being an odde number; For other reason I can guesse at none. This is the poor Pa­rish Parson, who might have escaped your fingers sure, for any injury that I know he hath done you, but that you are resolved to break every head that comes in your way. 'Tis enough that you will have him the head of a Pa­rochial Church, which he never was, nor never took upon him, and upon that you take up your quarrel against him. His sin if any was, his submissi­on and obedience unto his superiours in those indifferent things that they had power to command him, and therefore you for charity sake might have past him by. No, no, that may not be, to his trial he must come too, for be­ing an odde, an old, nay, the eldest evil head. Pity him for his gray haires sake, if it be but because he is an Elder, a Presbyter, though not odde, nor yet eldest as you may suppose. For there was an Elder before him, old Polycarp an Elder of Smyrna, and his Cathedral, before this his Parochial, as I have proved unto you.

But against him and his Church you say, Christ hath proceeded, kick't at, and cast contempt, and that not a little upon them both. Easie it is for men to cast what they do maliciously upon God.Isa. 36.10. Am I come up now without the Lord against this Land to destroy it, said Rabshekah? Many things God permits to be done, of which he is not the doer; it is therefore over hastily [Page 176] said, that Christs own foot hath kick't at the Parochial Church, had you said only, that he hath suffered you in justice for our sinnes to kick at it, and cast it into contempt, I would not gain-say; but do not attribute the action to Christ, before you have better warrant for it. God hath nothing to do in the malice of men, except it be to restrain it, that it break out no farther then he is pleased. I will put a hook into his nostrils, &c. except it be to order objects and means in such sort, that they may be by way of occasion incentives to provoke the wicked to exercise that maliciousnesse which is in them, and from themselves, where, when and how God will have it so break out, for punishment, correction, example, trial. Your censure was here over-rash.

2. But those following scorns and insultations you bestow upon the Pa­rish Churches, those ill-favoured and condemned Churches yet standing, (which it seems you grieve at) that yet are remarkably reeling and ready to fall, (which I suspect you joy in) I read not I say, these words without pas­sion and compassion; without a deep passion of sorrow in respect of them, without the bowels of compassion in respect of you. When our Saviour be­held Jerusalem, foresaw that one stone of the Temple with the City, should not be left upon another, he wept: when Gods people remembred Sion, it pitied them to see her in the dust: When David heard Gods adversaries roar in the midst of the Congregations,Psal. 74., 56, 7, 8, 9. Psal. 84.1.and set up their Banners for signes; when he saw them break down all the carved work thereof with Axes and Hammers; then his heart was moved within him, sadnesse and astonishment surprized him, and he prays, Lord how long shall the adversary do Thee this dishonour? He that loves God, will love his Sanctuary, it is an amiable dwelling; you must pardon me therefore if you finde me in a melting affection, when I finde them in that reeling tottering condition ready to fall; For I am as much affected to the Cathedrals and Parish Churches, as ever Jew was to their Temple and Synagogues; for there is an equal reason, both erected by pru­dence, not command, (what I say I will justifie, if you doubt of it) both equally the houses of prayer, both of equal holinesse; for not one nor other capable of inherent holinesse, but holy only as applyed to holy uses; lastly a promise of audience to both. Blame me not then if I be strook into much sadnesse, heavinesse and sorrow to see the stones of these lie in the dust. You have the cause of my passion; sit down and mock on, which if you do, it matters not, I am resolved to mourn still. And next I shall give you the reason of my compassion; that is for you, for my bowels yearn within me; that any man who bears the name of a Christian, should call that ill-favou­red, which God will call the beauty of holinesse; that should be glad, that that is condemned, which Christianity through the whole World hath hi­therto approved; that should stand by and clap his hands, that those sacred buildings are reeling and ready to fall, which the piety and bounty of our forefathers hath erected to the service of God; [...] is a proud sinne, but to rejoyce and in this, is a superlative degree of it, a sin out of measure sinful. The charity therefore that I owe you, stirs my very inwards to be compassionate toward you, and to sollicite the Almighty for you, that [Page 177] you may repent of this wickednesse, and pray to God, Acts 8.22, 23. if perhaps the thoughts of your heart may be forgiven you, for I perceive you are in the gall of bitter­nesse, and the bond of iniquity: for else your gall had never so overflowed a­gainst the houses of God. And I pray yet satisfie me in one thing more; if they be such abominable places, such unhallowed buildings, how comes it to passe that you, I had almost said solely, make use of them? Two or three years since, Sheer Halls, Market Houses, private Conventicles were the on­ly lawful meeting houses; but now these are of no esteem, none now to the old Fabricks; these you frequent, these you invade; in these you preach, censure and break bread. So that it seems now, that the Parish Parson be­ing turned out of dores, all the ill-favourednesse and unholinesse went out with him.

3. Against this poor Parson you are very bitter; arraigned he must be, brought to the Bar to take his trial. And him you endite for luke-warm­nesse; like he is to the Angel of Laodicea, not hot, nor cold, and there­fore condemned he is to lye under the lash, and take his correction kindly.

'Tis manifest indeed, that all luke-warme, hypocritical Professours, shall be spued out of Christs mouth; for vomitum faciunt Deo. To him they are as luke-warme water to the stomach that procures a vomit; and if so, 'tis good counsel you give him, or any other in his case, to receive what ever correction shall be as a cordial of love administred unto him, for pre­venting of what may follow.

But here I must put you to it, to prove your enditement, the punish­ment he is under will never do it;

This will prove him culpable and guilty, and so I admit he was; but whether he were hot or cold, an hypocrite or otherwise, is more than you can ever know. For zeal and sincerity in Religion are qualities that lye ve­ry much inward; and he that is cold in it, may seem to be very zealous, as did Jehu; and he whose heart is not upright, may pretend to be very sin­cere, as did the Pharisees; Now how can you passe your judgment in such a case? And it seems you cannot, for you confesse there may be hypocrites, luke-warme men, even in your Combinational Churches, which if you knew, you would cast out from among you; and so would we do, spue them out after Gods example. Forbear therefore hereafter these harsh and uncharitable censures, especially against a whole order of men. For they must [...]and and fall to their own Master.

Were they ignorant and scandalous? so were these. But now I remem­ber it, this is no signe of luke-warmnesse in the Parish Parson, since they who were truly ignorant and scandal [...], were for the most part kept in; and those who were knowing and blamelesse, were cast out.

1. But now I pray tell me in what sense it is that you accuse them; is it for being Parsons, or for preaching, or for preaching Parsons? Take [Page 178] it in what qualification you will, beware upon whom this blow will light, and what a company of precious ones you will presently endite to be like the luke-warme Angel of Laodicea. For how many of your Preachers are now become Parsons? you know they have the fattest Benefices of this whole Country. If plurality were an argument of the Parish Parsons luke-warm­nesse, it is theirs. If non-residence an argument, they are guilty of it. If handling the flesh-hook too much, none more guilty. If neglect of Ca­techizing, they cannot be excused. If frequent preaching, they exceed. If forbearance of Sacramental administrations, this by them is seldome done. That I say not, that in life and example they are no whit better. In Gods name therefore, since in luke-warmnesse they are so like the old odde head, the Parish Parson; let them lye down under the lash with him, and with shame and confusion of face to themselves, receive a sharp correction, that they may prevent the spuing of their names out of Christs mouth, as it is manifest by what is foretold, Revel. 3.19. One thing onely I may not for­get, that whereas the old odde head you mention did least harme, this last Parish Parson you have imposed upon us does all the mischief.

4. In your conclusion; yet God be thanked, you shew more charity to the Parish, than to the Parson; of it you say, that the whole half-blind political body doth yet appear not to be utterly uncurable. You do so load your sentences with strong words, that they passe my capacity. I know not what to make of this political body of a Parish; for I never understood they were under any other policy then that of the Common-wealth or Church in which they lived; nor that they were any Corporation at all. I profess, I understand not what you mean, if you intend any thing besides this. But whatsoever you intend by it, this I finde that you affirme, the whole was half-blind; they have not yet then lost their sight altogether; that little light they have, may in good time make them see how they have been delu­ded, and so free them from all the fallacies that have been put upon them; which when it happens, both you and I are in hope of their cure. But that you say must not be expected, so long as they remain in their present condi­tion. For in respect of its present posture and numerous abominations, it is altogether unapprovable, and I say the same too; and upon the very self same ground, because it rejects the Commandments of God, that it may ob­serve the traditions of men.

For what is the whole constitution of your Church, but the tradition of men? whats your plea all this while, but a tradition of men? That a company collected under a Covenant, without either Pastours or Elders is a true Church, is a tradition of men; That they may create, elect, ordain their Pastours and Elders, is another tradition of men; That the power of the Keys subjectively and authoritatively to invest and devest, is in them: is a third tradition of men. That there must be Lay-Presbyters, which must be Ruling Elders in the Church, is a fourth tradition of men. That the erection of the Cathedral, Parochial, Provincial, National Church was the corruption of the Combinational, is another tradition of men. That the Supreme power in any Nation is a violent head; the Arch-Bishop a [Page 179] haughty horrible head; the Diocesan an idle and addle head; the Parish Parson an odde head, is another of your traditions. That there may be no set forms of prayer used in the Church, no singing of Psalms in mixt Con­gregations. That the Scripture may not be read in the Church, except expounded. That those Rites which you call but falsly Romish and Hu­mane, may not be used in the Church. That Godfathers and Godmothers may not be used in Baptisme, nor the children of those who are out of your Combinational Church baptized. That those whom you usually call profane, ignorant, scandalous persons, may not be admitted to the Sacrament: That there must be an upper seat erected for the Elders, to sit in their ranks, as Aldermen upon the Bench in the Church. That there must be Tables set up for the maintenance of the Ruling Elders. All these are the traditions of men, and doctrines of men; and therefore I give this counsel to the whole half-blinde political body of the Parishes, where you have prevai­led most, that while they are curable they tender their health; and to be­ware of the Scribes and Pharisees, who in vain worship God, teaching for doctrines the Commandments of men; and to beware lest any man spoile them through Philosophy, or vain deceit through the tradition of men, &c. This is a holy watch-word, and a wholesome warning, and I desire it may be heedfully hearkned unto by such as are your Church Officers, for then I doubt not, but that they who have so much power, and have such an in­fluence on the multitude, might be excellent instruments in this cure, and quickly be able to bring back the multitude of Church hearers, from those many above-named observations and aberrations, into which they have been cunningly, and in simplicity of heart drawn, as those poor Israelites were to follow Absolon.

That it be speedily amended, I wish with all my heart; but say it be not, but these poor simple souls seduced by and through Philosophy, do not amend so timely as is desired, my charity will not permit me to damne them eternally; and that they shall partake of the judgment of those who worship the Beast; that they shall drink of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the Cup of his indignation, and that they shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy Angels, and in the presence of the Lamb, and that the smoke of their torment shall ascend for ever and ever, as you threaten out of Revel. 14.9, &c. This is a harsh sentence; and though it may af­fright and terrifie those, who for doctrines teach the commandments of men, and make the Word of God of none effect through their traditions, which is a wilfull, obstinate, presumptuous sinne; yet I have great reason to hope that those who have simply, and ignorantly, and weakly, followed such Teachers, may finde mercy, especially if they shall call to God with David, Who can understand his errours. Cleanse thou me from my secret faults? Psal. 19.12, 13. keep back thy servant al­so from presumptuous sinnes, let them not have dominion over me. Then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great offence.

[Page 180]But because this danger lies as you say, in the observation of Traditi­ons, it will not be amisse to set down that about this point,Dr. Whites Or­thodox. cap. 4. p. 3. Sect. 1.2. which may sa­tisfie any sober man, which because I am not able to do better then Dr. Frauncis White hath done, I shall transcribe the Summe of what he de­livers.

The word Tradition in general signifies any doctrin or observation deli­ver'd from one to another, either by word or writing, Acts 6.14. 2 Thess. 2.15. & cap. 3.6. 1 Cor. 15.3.4.

The Protestants simply do not deny Tradition; but first we distinguish of Traditions, and then according to some acceptions of the name we admit thereof, with a subordination to holy Scripture.

1. First, the Romanists maintain there be doctrinal Traditions, or Traditions that contain Articles of Faith, and substantial matters of divine worship and religion,Decret. prim. 4. Sess. Syn. Tri­dent. not found in the holy Scripture; and that these are pari pietatis affectu ac reverentia sucipiendae, ac venerandae with Scripture, and to be believ'd no lesse then the prime Articles; such are Purgatory, Transubstantiation, Invocation of Saints, the Popes infallibility, &c. These, and all other such Traditions, containing new parts and additions to religion, the Protestants simply condemn and renounce.

2. But secondly, the name of Tradition in the writings of the Primi­tive Doctours and Fathers is taken in three other senses.

First, for external Rights and Ceremonies of decency, order, and outward profession of religion not found expressely in the holy Scripture, but used as things adiaphorous, being not of the substance of divine worship; but only accessary, as the sign of the Crosse; and many of those, you in your following words mention; and these we say may be used, or disused according to the Laws of every Church, as they serve for aedification, or o­therwise.

Secondly, The report of the Primitive Church concerning matter of fact, and concerning the practice of the Apostles is another Tradition; as that the Apostles did baptize infants; that they admitted none to the Lords Supper, but those who were of years to examine themselves; that they or­dain'd such and such in several Churches to be Bishops; That, that very Canon of Scripture which we now maintain, was the Canon at that time with many other, which can be best prov'd by Tradition. And therefore we willingly admit of these Traditions also deliver'd unto us by the Histories and Records of the Church, because such reports explicate the meaning, or confirm the doctrin of the Scripture.

Thirdly, The summe of Christian faith, as the Creed, and the ex­plication of Christian doctrin in many principal parts thereof, concern­ing the Trinity, Incarnation, descent of Christ into hell, &c. is often­times call'd Tradition, being receiv'd from hand to hand, as the Apo­stles lively teaching; and such Tradition found unanimously in the Fa­thers we admit also, because it gives light to the doctrine found in Scri­pture.

But in the admittance of these we require two Cautions.

[Page 181]1. That the holy Scripture be the rule of all Traditions whatsoever thus far, that they be [...], up on examination conformable to the Scriptures, and every way subservient to the same.

2. That they have the Testimony of the primitive Church in the prime age thereof, and descend to our days from the same, by the stream of succes­sion through ages following, and were received as Apostolick in the Catho­lick Church.

The Question of Traditions being thus stated unto you, easie it will be to answer to your two alleag'd Texts of Tradition, Mark 7. Col. 2. For they make as much to your purpose, as Ecce duo gladij doth to confirme the Popes claim to the Temporal and Spiritual power; or Pasce oves, to uphold his Supremacy; Or God made two great lights, to prove the Popes power to be above the Emperours, as much as the Sun exceeds the Moon; or that Parson who would undertake to prove the Parish must pave the Church, and not he, because it was written in the Prophet, paveant illi, ego non pave­am.

For how doth that place of Mark 7.7.9. pertain to the spiritual, hi­storical, or interpretative Traditions of the Christian Church. It was of the Scribes and Pharisees of whom our Saviour there spoke, and of their Traditions; of washing of pots and cups, and many such other like things of their Corban. And in their washings they placed not decency and civili­ty, but made a matter of Religion of it; and by their Corban they took away the duty of the fifth Commandment. Look into the place you urge, and tell me whether I say not truth; and this it seems you saw, and that made you skip over the 8. verse, and never mention the 11. which if you had done, and weigh'd, you would not for shame have equall'd our Traditi­ons with theirs; or judged us as superstitious for observing our Traditions, as they were for theirs. We have a command for the institution of our Ce­remonies; let all be done decently, in order, and to edification; we have good authority that our Traditions are Apostolical, we observe them in obe­dience to the Command, Honour thy father and mother, who have authority in indifferent things. And therefore your imputation is rash; for we reject no Commandment of God, by receiving the commands of men. Besides, you know we never maintain'd these as [...] Doctrins, which was the Pharisees superstition; but only as Rites and Ceremonies, not placing Religi­on, but the decency of Religion in them.

That other place in the Colossians you understand not; it is a difficult place; I shall labour to give some light to it.Good. Ant. lib. 1. c. 12. Some conceive the Apostle in this chapter intends the Essens, who were a strict Sect among the Jewes; and in many passages the Apostle seems directly to point at them.vers. 16. Let no man condemn you in meat and drink. Let no man bear rule over you through humblenesse of mind, and worshipping of Angels; why, [...],vers. 18. why are you subject to such Ordinances? ver. 20. The Apostle useth the word [...], which the Essens applyed to note their Ordinances, Aphorisms, Constitutions. In the 21. vers. he gives an instance of some, touch not, taste not, handle not: Now the Junior company of Essens might not touch [Page 182] their Seniours; and in their diet, their taste was limited to bread, salt, water, and hysop; which Ordinances they undertook [...], saith Philo, a love of wisdome; but the Apostle concludes, that the obser­vation of this had only [...] a shew of wisdome; this their doctrine was, as Philo saith, [...], a kind of Philosophy receiv'd from their Fathers by tradition; and therefore St. Paul bids Christians beware of it; Beware, least any man spoile you through Philoso­phy.

Some other refer these words to some Philosophers who mingled their saecular Philosophy with the Religion of the Jewes; deliver'd at that time many false dictates,Estius in loc. of God, of Angels, of the Son of God, of the eter­nity of the World, of purgation of souls, which were partly receiv'd from the Platonicks, partly invented out of their own brains. Of which kind was Simon Magus, from whom descended the Sect of the Gnosticks. Touch­ing this Philosophy, and these Traditions the Apostle gives his caveat, Be­ware least, &c.

Zanchy, Areti­us, Daven. in loc.Others, without reflecting upon either Essens, or Gnosticks, more sim­ply expound the words as a Caveat given against all Sophistical Philoso­phy, Pharisaical traditions, and all Mosaical Ceremonial Rites. Philoso­phy the Apostle here condemns not, as all note upon the place, but as it had vanity and deceitfulnesse added to it; for a man may condemn the sophi­stry and knavery of any art, that likes the art well enough. The Traditions of men he utterly dislikes, such as were accompanied with superstition and folly; as were those of the Pharisees disliked by our Saviour, mentioned be­fore. And so also the Mosaical ceremonies, which may well be call'd Ele­menta mundi, as they are Gal. 4.3. and also vers. 9. weak and beggarly ru­diments. Elements, such as A. B. C. for children to begin with, but now by Christ being utterly abolish'd, Now if any man say, Touch not that man, he is unclean; taste not that meat, it is forbidden; handle not that cup, it is defiled; beleeve him not.

Tertul.Here then the Apostle gives us a Caveat against three sorts of men, or rather against their [...], their doctrins, the Philosophers, the Pha­risees, the Jews. The Philosophers were Patriarchae haereticorum; and he means the Gnosticks; vain and deceitful arguments they bring, beware you be not spoil'd by them. The Pharisees are a sort of superstitious hypocrites; they have Traditions taken up by themselves, which Moses never deliver'd; beware of them. The Jews walk not after Christ; their dictates are, that you yet are bound to keep Moses Law; hearken not unto them when they say unto you, Touch not, taste not, handle not; subject not your selves to their Ordinances, after the commandments and doctrines of men, &c.

This is the true intent, scope and sense of St. Pauls words, as the wise and judicious Interpreters have taught me. And that therefore the word Traditions, that you here catch at, is but a shadow, in laying hold of it to serve your turn; you put upon the unlearned a vain parologism, a di­cto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter; the Pharisaical Traditions are for­bidden, [Page 183] therefore all Traditions; the doctrines of those men, therefore all other doctrines that the Church shall teach; for which there is not a mani­fest and expresse text in particular.

For let the Question then be proposed, whether it can be proved from these places, that all Traditions and external Rites brought into the Church by men, ought to be exploded, ejected, condemn'd? And I answer, No; partly for that these texts aim at another matter, partly, because there must be power granted to the Governours of the Church, to institute rites for order and decency; the Apostle himself being the Authour of it, Let all things be done decently and in order, 1 Cor. 14.40. Heb. 13.17. and partly, because we are bound to o­bey them in all things that are honest. Austin hath left us a good rule about Rites and Ceremonies, which were it observed,Austin ad Ja­nuarium Epist. 118. cap. 22. would settle much unity and peace in the Church. In his nulla melior disciplina prudenti Christiano, quam ut eo modo agat quo agit Ecclesia, ad quamcun (que) devenerit: quod enim nec contra fidem, nec contra bonos mores injungitar, indifferenter est habendum. But here three Cautions are to be observed.

1. That no man prescribe external Rites with that mind, to hope for justification by them, or remission of sinne. For this is Jew­ish.

2. That these adiaphorous rites be not impos'd, as if they laid alike obligation upon the conscience with the Laws of God: so that a damnable guilt should be incurr'd upon the breach of them, although it happen with­out contempt of those who are in authority and command, or without the scandal of others.

3. Heed must be taken that they be significative,Dr. Ham. tract. of superstition à. Sect. 35. ad 43. few, wholesome; significant, that they be not empty. Few, that they impose no yoke up­on the Disciples necks; and wholesome, that they edifie. In obeying and observing such Ceremonies impos'd upon me by a lawful power, I shall never fear to be damned for rejecting the Commandments of God, and ob­serving the doctrines of men: nor to incur that [...] with our Saviour out of the Prophet Isaiah, in the Chapter cited by you fastens upon those Pharisaical hypocrites,Mark 7.5. This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.