COme now, and let us reason together (saith the Lord himself to his people, Esa. 1. 18.) If the learned Gentleman, the Author of the mentioned Ob­servations, would vouchsafe that courtesie to himself and me, that we might reason together the points in difference between us, without ei­ther undue aspersing one the other, or wresting the sayings one of another, or exasperating those that stand by to behold the encounter, against one another; he were a man with whom I could willingly live and die; yea and could make treasure of the least interest that should be vouchsafed unto me in his ac­quaintance. For my part, I trust, that thorough his Grace who hath commanded me, not to be overcome of evill, but to overcome evill with good, I shall be able to carry along my Answer without any of those miscarriages: but whether my Antagonist hath steer'd the course of this Christian equitie and fairnesse in his Observations, the first part of this Answer shall informe: In the latter, the strength of his reasonings shall have a faire and Christian Triall.

[Page 2] To begin with that, wherewith he ends, (which yet was the beginning of the whole systeme of this discourse against me; for that which is ultimum in executione, is still primum in intentione. Whereas he incenseth the Parliament against me, as one that hath presumptuously undermined the undoubted priviledges thereof by the very roots; and with all chargeth me with severall Anti-Parliamentary passa­ges, diametrally contrary to my Nationall Vow and Covenant; yea and (that which is the first-born of all his bitter and bloudy insinua­tious against me) preacheth this Doctrine to the Parliament, that they cannot without highest perjury permit any wilfully thus to violate their Priviledges in the most publique manner; I answer,

1. That I have no wayes undermined (least of all, done any such thing presumptuously) any undoubted priviledge of Parliament, but have from the first to the last, with all uprightnesse and singlenesse of heart, as in the presence of God, with all my might, and all my strength, by Preaching, Writing, Conference, and otherwise, en­devoured to assert and vindicate the Authoritie, power, and pri­viledges of Parliament, to the utmost height, I was able by the most diligent and unpartiall contemplation to discerne their elevation. If I have not been, or yet am not so quick-sighted, or so able of discerning to take their true altitude and height, as some others, I trust this weaknesse and incapacitie in my judgement and under­standing, may be atoned with a more gentle sacrifice, then to be arraigned as a presumptuous underminer of the undoubted priviledges of Parliament, or to suffer after the insupportable rate of such a charge. If I have denied the least dram or scruple of that Power, which is truly Parliamentary and consistent with the word of the great and glorious God (of which misdemeanor I am not in the least measure conscions to my self as yet) I most seriously and so­lemnly professe in the presence of this God (my conscience bear­ing me witnesse in the Holy Ghost, that I lie not) that I did it out of a loving, tender, and affectionate jealousie over the Parliament, lest possibly they might dash their foot against that Stone, by which all Rule, and all Authoritie and power, will one day be broken in pieces. So that if either my tongue or pen have in the least miscarried upon that point, I may truly say that it was, Error amoris, not amor erroris, which caused that miscarriage. I confesse I am in the habituall and standing frame of my heart and spirit, [Page 3] tender and jealous over all the world, and much more over those who are deare unto me, but most of all over those who being deare unto me, are likewise more exposed then others unto the tentation and danger of the sin; extreamly jealous and tender (I say) I am over such, lest they should touch with any title or claime the most sacred and incommunicable royalties and priviledges of Heaven, and so count it no robbery to make themselves equall to God; knowing most assuredly, that this is a high provocation in the eyes of the most High, and if continued in, will kindle a fire in the brest of him whose Name is Jealous, which will consume and devoure.

But. 2. positively to determine and judge, That I should trans­gresse the transgression charged upon me, presumptuously, is little lesse then to claime part and fellowship with God himselfe in the incommunicable property and priviledge of his Omniscience, or heart-searching. It is to the heighth of the line of the grea­test and wisest of men, positively to determine and conclude that to be a sin, which men of excellent and singular endow­ments as well of grace and Holiness, as of Learning, Judgment, and Understanding, (and these not a few) have not only demurr'd up­on, whether it be a sin, or no; but (many of them) upon grounds and reasons of very noble and considerable importance, determi­ned the case in oppositum, concluding the fact in Question to be no sin: but to determine and conclude further, that hee that hath done such a thing, hath not only sinn'd, but sinn'd with such or such a frame of heart, or upon such and such terms as are secret, and discernible only by God (as wilfulness and presumpti­on in sinning, for the most part are) is to magnifie a mans selfe above all that is called man, and to set himself down in Gods Throne.

3. In case it could be prov'd that I have either said or written any thing derogatory to the undoubted priviledges of Parliament, yet that I should do either, wilfully or spresumptuously, (as the tenour of my endictment runs from the fore-named pen) is such a charge which men, whose ungrounded zeal hath not eaten out the heart of their charity, cannot lightly but re-charge with unreason­ablenesse, and utter unlikelihood of truth; and that upon these two grounds, (besides many others:)

I. Because the uninterrupted and constant tenour of my de­portment [...] [Page 2] [...] [Page 3] [Page 4] and carriage from the beginning of this Parliament, un­till this hour, hath been fully Parliamentary. If I should boast, that to my power, I have not been behinde the very greatest of those, that have built up the Parliamentary cause with the highest hand, and with the loyallest heart; I know that I should not be ashamed in this behalf. Some of my Adversaries themselves in place, have given a large testimony of my faithfulnesse and diligence in this kind. Now, as the Poet saith, Nemo repentè fuit turpissimus: It is the most unreasonable and incredible thing under Heaven, that a man on the sudden, within the space of a day, and lesse, without any cause or provocation given, should of a friend deeply ingaged, and firmly resolved for the Parliament, be transformed into a pre­sumptuous and wilfull underminer of their undoubted Priviledges.

II. The Grounds and Reasons which I have given in by way of account for that opinion, which is the great strife-maker be­tween the Gentlemans pen and mine (together with many others ingaged in the same warfare, and which are in every mans hand; particularly the ten Reason propounded and argued in a Treatise not long since published, called M. S. to A. S. p. 56, 57, &c. which have not been answered hitherto, no, not so much as with Answer so called; and which the Gentleman could not lightly think, but that I should have seen) being of that weight, and wor­thy that consideration which many sober and knowing men ac­knowledge, cannot but in the thoughts and apprehensions of all reasonable men, justifie me, at least from any presumptuous or wil­full undermining the undoubted Priviledges of Parliament thereby.

4. How can the Gentleman call that a good pen (as hee doth mine, p. 23. l. 4.) which is a presumptuous and wilfull underminer of the undoubted Priviledges of Parliament? is not his pen of the conspira­cy, and made an accessary, by giving such a testimony to the principall?

5. Whereas he chargeth me, with I know not how many Anti-Parliamentary passages, diametrally opposite to the nationall Vow and Covenant, but instanceth in none, save only that, wherein himself was touch'd, and that (God knoweth) very gently, and with far more honour then censure, I answer; that certainly no part or passage of the Covenant, did intend Omnis lex obligat secun­dum rectam voluntatem legislator is obligantis. that any man should obliege himself by oath or otherwise, either unto God orman, to maintain [Page 5] either such a Power or such Priviledges, as the Power and Privi­ledges of Parliament, which he sees no sufficient ground or reason to call or judge such, at least, that he should maintain them for such, during this state and posture of his judgement & conscience; because this had been to require of men, Surely the Divines and Commissio­ners of the Kingdome of Scotland, who were accessa­ries, if not principalls in the first pen­ning of the Co­venant, must needs be pre­sum'd to know the in­tent & mean­ing of it, aswell as any other: and yet they publikely, and in print, pro­fess and main­tain the same doctrine (for substance, as will presently appear) for w ^ch I am cast at the barre of M ^r. Prinne's tribunall, as one of the greatest de­linquents throughout the whole kingdome. that they would ingage themselves by Oath and Covenant to sin; which intention, if any such had been in those that imposed the Covenant, had been dia­metrally opposite to the end of the Covenant it self, which was the safety, benefit and blessing of God upon the three kingdomes; yea, that supreme Authority it self, from which the Covenant issued with an injunction to have it generally taken, gave liberty of interpretation thereof, both unto the Ministers, who were to explain it unto, as well as to presse it upon the people; and likewise unto those who were respectively required to take it. Without which liberty of interpretation, evident it is to those that converse with men, that many thousands would have refused it, who have now submitted themselves and their consciences unto it. So that the Gentleman doth but beat the aire in this charge of Anti-Par­liamentary passages diametrally contrary to the Nationall Vow and Cove­nant: He hath not as yet proved any one passage of mine to be so much as Anti-Parliamentary; much lesse any diametrally contrary to that Vow and Covenant.

6. (And lastly, for those lines mentioned) whereas he seeks to baptize the Parliament into a spirit of much severity against mee, by suggesting to them, that they cannot without highest perjury permit any thus wilfully to violate their Priviledges, &c. I answer, and sub­scribe to him with both my hands; they cannot indeed without sin permit any wilfull violation of their undoubted priviledges: nor do I desire, nor have I any need or occasion to desire of them, that they should dispence with so sacred an obligation upon them for my sake. Let either M ^r Prynne, or any other, evict me of any wilfull violation of these Priviledges, and no man shall be more ready then I, to crave their pardon, or else to undergo their justice; nay, if I shall be convinced of any violation at all of those Priviledges, wil­full or unwilfull, (and I shall be as willing as willingnesse it self can make me, to further such a conviction all that may be) I shall repent my self, and abhorre mine error in dust and ashes. I should be the maddest worme under heaven, to give offence to that foot [Page 6] which is so able to crush me, if I had not full consideration for the hazard I run thereby in mine own soul.

But as concerning that Opinion or Doctrine, which M ^r. Prynne burthens with Anti-Parliamentarisme, and whereby I am charged presumptuously to undermine the undoubted priviledges of Parliament by the very roots; I desire both him and all the world, to consider, whether it hath not a great concurrence, of the judgements and consciences of men of greatest worth and learning; yea, of whole Nationall Churches in their authorized writings; yea, whether the substance and import of it to the full, yea, and more in this kinde then I have ever said, or printed, or think safe or fitting to say, hath not been publikely, and in print delivered amongst us, by persons no wayes suspected of Anti-Parliamentarinesse in any kinde; yea, and in such bookes, for which the Author (if hee mistakes not in casting up the accompt of his own thanks and praises) hath had large considerations in both from many Par­liament men.

I begin at home; and appeal to any man of unpartiall thoughts, whether these ensuing passages faithfully transcribed out of that much admired piece, intituled, Antapologia, set forth by M ^r. Th. Edwards, do not contain, and that secundum sub & suprà (as the Schoolmen speake) the heighth and depth of that Doctrine, for which I must not be innocent, except the Parliament means to be guilty of perjury, and that of the highest.

Pag. 163. He affirmes, that Junius, Zanchius, Amesius, &c. make the subject matter of Politicall administration to be, res humanae, hu­mane things and matters; but of Ecclesiasticall, Divine, and Sacred, &c.

Again, p. 166. of this same Discourse, hee hath this passage: Or, 3. Is it that you do give a power to the Magistrate in Ecclesiasticall things, of the ultimate determination of matters purely Ecclesiasticall, which the Presbyterians principles do not, as in matters of Doctrine, Scandall, &c.

Yet again, p. 168. When the Question is of Church matter, and matters of conscience, and of the inner-man, and of the Kingdome of Christ, the remedies and meanes appointed for these are Spirituall and Eccesiasticall, viz. spirituall punishments; Christ saith, My Kingdome is not of this world, &c. and the Apostle, 2 Cor. 10. 3, 4, 5. The weapons of our warfare are not carnall, &c. Spirituall remedies and [Page 7] means must be used in the Kingdome of Christ, and by them Christ doth his work. And hence in Ecclesiasticall Discipline, and those scan­dalls in the Church, which are the point in hand; punishments in the body, or in the purse, which can be by the power of the Magi­strate, have no place.

Again, p. 170. First, there be many sins and errors, which the Chri­stian Magistrate meddles not with, are not matters of his cognizance, if you would have recourse unto him: Or, if the sentence of non-com­munion be pronounced against a Church, because of impenitency in them, he hath nothing to do to assist or back it, &c. According to the tenor of this Doctrine, the civill Magistrate hath nothing to do, to forti­fie or back any sentence, determination, or decree of the Church:

Yet again, p. 174. of the same Treatise: Hath not the wis­dome of Christ provided remedies in the Church, for all the internall necessities of the Church, and constituted it a perfect body within it self?

Again, p. 256. Hee speaketh plainly, and speaketh no Pa­rable; that the Parliament interposeth no Authority to determine what Government shall be; therefore his opinion appeares to be either that the Parliament hath no Authority, or at least intends not to make use of it in determining a Government.

Page 74. of the same Discourse, he presents Cameron allowing the Church a power to ordain and appoint Rites, &c. but with this caution and proviso: dum tamen nihil officiant aut sinceritati doctri­nae, aut libertati conscientiae; cui propriè leges praescribit non nisi Deus, i. upon condition that they neither prejudice the soundnesse of Doctrine, nor the liberty of mens consciences; unto which God himselfe alone properly is the Law-giver.

Page 170. He cites this testimony in the margine out of Zanchy, and that with full approbation of the contents of it Adhaec, multa etiam sunt scelera, in quae ne Magistratus quidem Chri­stianus ani­madvertere solet, aut te­netur ex le­gibus suis, ve­luti sunt pri­vatae in imici­tiae, simulta­tes, participa­tio cūldolola­tris in aliquo impio cultu, dissimulatio verae Religio­nis: denique multi mali mores, tum domestici tum publici, qui non turbant aut pacem publicam, aut honesta­tem, & com­modum publi­cum Ecclesia ne ista qui­dem ferre de­bet, sed corri­gere juxta Christi insti­tutum. Zanch. de Discip Ec­clesiast. Moreover, there are many evills which the Christian Magistrate is not wont to meddle with by way of punishment, nor yet is bound by his Lawes to do it, as private quarrells, and heart-burnings between man and man, partaking with Idolaters in an impious or unlawfull worship, dissem­bling the true Religion; and to conclude, there are many evill car­riages, both private and publike, which do not trouble or disturb ei­ther the publike peace, or honesty, and the publike profit. The Church indeed ought not to suffer these, but to reforme them according to Christs institution, &c.

[Page 8] But lastly for this Domestique Author, whose judgement and abilities for the cause he undertakes, I finde so much magnified, he hath a saying, pag. 169. of the fore-mentioned Treatise, disho­nourable indeed (in my apprehension) to the Civill Magistrate, and wherein I can at no hand subscribe unto him. The power of the Magistrate (saith he) by which he punisheth sin, doth not subserve to the Kingdome of Christ the Mediator. I conceive farre otherwise of this power, and that the maine end and most excellent use of it, consists in a subserviency to the Kingdome of Christ the Mediator. The most noble exercise and imployment of civill power, is (doubtlesse) to provide for the immunitie and peace of the Saints within their jurisdictions, to protect them against all injuries and violence of men, by Edicts, Statutes, and Lawes, with the due administration and execution of them, 1 Tim. 2. 2. to provide that such may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godlinesse and honestie (as the Apostle speaketh) that the Gospel may run freely, and without interruption, (and be glorified, if God shall vouchsafe to prosper the ministery of it ac­cordingly) thoroughout their dominions. In a word, whatsoe­ver maketh for the benefit, safetie, and honour of the whole Com­munitie and Societie of persons fearing God within the limits of their jurisdiction, without the pressure or just grievance of others, the Civill Magistrate (I conceive) hath not onely a power, but a necessitie by way of dutie lying upon him, to interpose for the pro­curing and establishing of such things. Of this nature were all those ingagements, Statutes, and Decrees, of Cyrus, Artaxerxes, Da­rius, and other heathen Princes and Magistrates, for the building of Gods Temple, and advancement of his worship, which M ^r. Prinne insists upon, p. 23. but quite besides the point in difference between him and me. For these Princes and Magistrates did not by any of their Statutes or Decrees, impose any thing upon the people of God in point of worship under mulcts and penalties, much lesse did they so impose any thing upon the generalitie of them, which was con­troversiall, and matter of conscience between them, by means of which imposition the one half of them should have been gratified, and the other half ruin'd and oppressed. But those Statutes and Decrees equally respected the common and publique good of them all, and contained nothing oppressive to the judgements or con­sciences of any, nor any new determination of any thing ap­pertaining [Page 9] to the worship and service of God, under mulcts and penalties.

But concerning the point which is made matter of such high accusation against me, besides the judgement of M ^r. Edwards, so significantly and expresly, and that over and over, concurring therein, there are other Authors of our owne, who have every whit in as publique a manner as I held forth the same unto the world, and that without the least check or controulement by any, that ever I (or I think any man else) heard of. All the chiefe Writers of our age (saith M ^r. Hayward Haywarad in his answer to R. Dolman, dedicated to King James, cap. 9.) are now reduced to the former opinion, affirming with Arnobius that Religion is of power suffi­cient for it self: with Tertullian, Lactantius, Cassiodorus, Josephus, Bernard, and others, that Religion must be perswaded, not inforced. And that is most remarkable in this testimony, that the Author therein affirms, that this opinion against the inforcing of Religion, was both the ancient opinion in the Church of God, and is now againe become the generall opinion of the best Writers in our age. The same Author in the same Chapter (somewhat before the words last cited) lays downe these as Maximes or common rules; That it is foolish to adde externall stay, to that which is sufficient to sup­sort it self; That it is senslesse to attempt that by force, which no force is able to effect; That that which hath a proper rule, must not be directed by any other.

Bishop Jewel, in his Answer to Hardings Confutation, pag. 432. hath this saying to him; As for our part, we were never yet guiltie to one drop of your bloud: we seek no aid at fire or sword. Let this Text be truly interpreted, and it will afford the same doctrine with mine.

The Divines of the Church of Scotland, Discipl. lib. 2. p. 89. write thus: The Nationall assemblies ought alwayes to be received in their own liberty and have their own place—And all men, as well Magi­strate as inferiours, to be subject to the judgement of the same in Ecclesi­asticall causes without any reclamation or appellation to any Judge, Civill or Ecclesiasticall, within the Realme.

And again, p. 71. of the same Book; The Magistrate neither ought to preach, minister the Sacraments, nor execute the censures of the Kirk, nor yet prescribe any rule how it should be done, [Page 10] but command the Ministers to observe the rule commanded in the Word, and punish transgressors by civill means.—The Magistrate OUGHT to assist, maintaine, and fortifie the Jurisdiction of the Kirk: the Mi­nisters SHOULD assist their Princes.

The same Divines in another book of theirs, called A Dispute against the English Popish Ceremonies obtruded upon the Church of Scot­land; p. 146. write thus: Now therefore, wee firmly hold, that the Prince may not innovate any Custome or Rite of the Church, nor pub­lish any Ecclesiasticall Law, without the free assent of the Clergie, &c. yea, further, that so far as is possible, the consent of the whole Church ought to be had, whensoever any change is to be made of some Order or Custome in the Church. A few lines after, p. 147. they cite this saying (with approbation) out of Baldus De Cas. Consc. l. 4. c. 11. Cas. 2. They who were Orthodox did ever withstand such a Magistrate as would have by his commandments tied the Church to that which was burthensome to their consciences. And yet again in the same page: It belongeth to the Synod (the Clergie having the chiefe place therein to give direction and advice) not to receive and approve the definition of the Prince in things which cocerne the worship of God, but it selfe to define and determine what Orders and Customes are fittest to be observed, &c.

Again, p. 149. The Prince may command a Synod of the Church to judge of Ecclesiasticall things and actions, and to define what Order and Policy is most convenient to be observed in divine worship; yet hee may not by himself define and direct such matters, nor make any Lawes there anent.

Again, p. 148. having cited much out of Junius, concerning the difference between the Civill and Ecclesiasticall Administrati­on, in respect of the subject matter of either, the close of this long citation they make thus. But humane things, wee call such duties as touch the life, the body, goods, and good name, as they are expounded in the second table of the Decalogue: for these are the things in which the whole Civill administration standeth. Yet again, p. 150. It fol­loweth that Christ hath committed the power of judging, defining, and making Lawes about those matters, ( viz. which concern the worship of God, not to Magistrates, but to the Ministers of the Church.

[Page 11] Again, p. 150. Surely, if it belong to Princes to define and ordain what Order and Policy should be observed in the Church, for the orderly and right managing of the exercises of Gods worship—then must Princes take also upon them a great part of that charge of Pastors, to watch for the soules of men. Learned M ^r. Rutherford, one of the Commissioners for the Church of Scotland, in his late Booke, intituled, The due Rights of Presbyteries, part. 2. p. 403. writeth thus: The King as King, hath not a nomothetick or Le­gislative power to make Laws in matters Eccle­siastique in a constitute Church, nor hath hee a definitive sentence as a Judge. Another passage hee hath to the same effect, p. 389. yea, hee professedly handles, and maintaines this conclusion, that the ordinary power of the Magistrate is not to make Church-Lawes, from page 404. of the second part of that work, to page 423. inclusively.

Master Fox, Act. & Mon. p. 1338. ( of the ancient impression) records this passage out of a book, written (as is affirmed) by that worthy Martyr, Master Tyndall, and censured by the Popish Bishops of those times, as hereticall: The new Testament of Christ will not suffer any Law of compulsion, but only of counsell and ex­hortation. And again, p. 1337. All things necessary are declared in the new Testament: but no man is compelled, but according to their own will.

Calvin Institut. Nam cum Ec­clesia cogendi non habeat potestatem, ne (que) expetere debeat (de ci­vili coercitio­ne loquor) piorum Re­gum ac Prin­cipum partes sunt legibus, edictis, judi­clis Religioné sustentate. l. 4. c. 11. § 16. denies the Church to have any compulsive power in it; yea, and denies it to be lawfull for the Church to seek for any such power, at the hand of the civill Magistrate: only affirming, that it is the duty of Religious Kings and Princes to support Religion, by Lawes, Edicts and Judicatories, ( viz.) of that kinde and nature, of which the Lawes, and Statutes of Cyrus, Artaxerxes, and Darius, before mentioned were.

Beza likewise in his Tractate De Haereticis, à magistr. puniendis, p. 93. hath these words: Condendarum enim conscientiae legum potesta­tem Deus nulli hominum fecit: ne (que) ferre potest quenquam hominum animis praeter se unum dominari; that is, God hath not given power unto any man whatsoever, to make Lawes for the consciences of men: nor can hee indure that any but himself should beare rule over the mindes of men.

[Page 12] Jacobus Acontius, a man of much piety and worth, who fled for his Conscience, took Sanctuary at this Kingdome, in his book intituled, Stratagem ita Sathanae, dedicated to Queen Elizabeth, reprinted at Oxford 1631. pag. 166. writeth to this effect; Ut verorū Dei servorum saluti consu­let [...]t, negavit [Christus] pi­i [...] ac pruden­tibꝰ magistra­tibus in vero, hareticos animadvertendi potestatem, ne eorum exemplo impii at (que) impruden­tes in pios abuterentur Dei servos. That be (meaning Christ, in the parable of the tares) might provide for the safety of the true servants of God, denied all power, even to pious and prudent Magistrates themselves, of punishing Heretiques, lest those that are impious and unwise, should make an evill use of their example against the good servants of God.

Againe, pag. 164. thus; Dominus profectò defi­nitè declara­vit, Magistra­tus non esse idoneos dogmatum Judices, interdixít (que) illis talis jurisdictionis usu omni, &c. The Lord verily definitively declared that Magistrates are not competent Judges of opinions [ in matter of Re­ligion,] but prohibited all such jurisdiction unto them.

Yet againe the same Author in the same Discourse, pag. 165. Haec quidē judiciorū ge­nera ad Magi­stratum non pertinent, sed ad solum Dei filium, qui in novissimo die per Angelos separaturus sit à tritico zizania. These kinds of judgements appertaine not to the Magistrate, but one­ly to the Son of God, who in the last day will separate the tares from the wheat by his Angels. Besides much more to the same purpose.

Junius, Controvers. 3. lib. 3. cap. 26. sect. 12. hath these words; Cum res aliae sunt con­sciētiae, ad fo­rum coeli (ut cū Canonistis loquamur) pertinentes, aliae sunt hu­manae at (que) [...], ad forum soli; in rebus sacris, divinis, ecclesiasticis nunquam judicium Magistratui Civili, ac ne Imperatori quidem delatum est legitimè: quia res sacrae sunt regni & cognitionis alterius. Whereas some things are matters of conscience, and (to speak with the Canonists) belong to the judicatory of Heaven; others, humane and tem­porall, appertaining to an earthly judicatory; the judicature of things that are sacred, divine, and ecclesiastique, was never lawfully consign'd or given to the Civill Magistrate, no not to the Empèrour himselfe; because holy things are of another kingdome and cognizance.

P. Martyr. Loc. Com. Clas. 4. loc. 4. sect. 1. As he is ci­ted by Apollo­nius, Jus Ma­jestatis circa sacra. part. 2. p. 261. Hinc Martyr scribit tantùm spiritualibus rerum divinarum judicia de­ferri oportere. affirms, that the ju­dicature or judgement of spirituall things, ought onely to be granted unto spirituall men.

[Page 13] Gulielmus Apollonius, a learned Minister in Zealand, and yet li­ving, in his writings intituled, Jus Majestatis circa sacra, is full of the Doctrine contained in the former testimonies. In the former part of the said book, he begins his fift Chapter thus; Conscien­tiae hominum in rebus, purè spiritualibus, non subjacent Imperio ho­minum: pote­state coactivâ armatâ, non imperantur res conscientiae, quae secundum naturam regni Christi, quod voluntarium maximè populum deposcit, procurandae sunt. The consciences of men, in things purely spirituall, are not subject to the commands of men: matters of conscience are not commanded by a coactive armed power, but to be promoted according to the nature of Christs kingdome, which mainly requires a willing people. And a few lines after adds, that Solo Christo sibi Imperium & legislationem in Ec­clesiam reservante. Christ a­lone reserves unto himselfe, the command and legislative power over his Church.

Againe, pag. 260. Potestas igitur Magi­stratus coacti­va est, & invo lūtario etiam imperat, juxta Apostolum, Rom. 13. Mu­neris igitur Authoritate judicia Reli­gionis, quae suasoria sunt, & tantum vo­lūtario impe­rant, non ad­ministrat, quà Princeps. Therefore the power of the Magistrate is coactive, and commands even him that is unwilling, according to the Apostle, Rom. 13. Therefore by the Authoritie of his place, and as a Prince, he doth not interpose or rule in judgements concerning Religion, which are suasive, and beare rule onely over him that is willing. It were easie, if necessary, out of the writings of men of the most approved judgements, and greatest abilities and worth in every kind, since the Reformation, to make the pile of testimonies, for the confirmation of the premi­ses, far greater. To which also, if I intended any large discourse, divers Authorities out of the ancient Fathers might be added; But I shall conclude with that of Hierome in Esa. who expresseth himself thus; Utinamsi­lios heretico­rum & omni­um qui decep­ti sunt, spiri­tualibꝰ inter­ficiamꝰ sagit­tis, i. testimo­niis Scriptu­rarum. I wish we would kill or slay the sons of heretiques, and of all those that are deceived, with spirituall arrowes, I meane texts and testimonies of the Scriptures.

I shall not for the present make any further breach upon my Readers patience, by any further accumulation of Authors or Te­stimonies. I trust it fully appeares by those already presented, that I have neither said nor written any thing, but what for the substance, scope, and import of it, runs parallel with the judge­ments and writings of the most orthodox and approved Writers of all ages, both ancient and moderne, as well domestique as fo­rein. In which respect I have a pregnant ground of much confi­dence, that I have not any wayes (especially not wilfully, not pre­sumptuously) violated the least of the many and great undoubted privi­ledges [Page 14] of Parliament, having kept my selfe so close to the so gene­rally received and professed principles of mine owne profession. The least glimmering of that light, which should discover such an impious and unchristian miscarriage in me as this, would be as the shadow of death unto me.

But besides that grand and bloudy suggestion against me, that I should presumptuously and wilfully undermine the undoubted Priviled­ges of Parliament by the very roots, (a crime which my soul from the very root abhorreth) there are others of like nature, though not degree, wherewith the Gentleman hath stain'd his paper here and there, which will prove dead flies in his own box, not in mine. Hee chargeth mee, p. 21. that in stead of my Parishioners, I have gathered an Independent Congregation to my self, out of divers Parishes, and mine own; that I prescribe a Covenant to them before they be ad­mitted members of it: that I neglect my Parishioners, preaching but sel­dome unto them, though I receive their tithes. If these things (or al­most any one of them) be true, let M ^r. Prynne keep his honour and place at the barre, and let me be hoysted; but if otherwise, con­trariorum contraria sint consequentia. But let me answer.

1. I am, and ever have been so far from neglecting my Parishi­oners in preaching seldome to them, that it will be acknowledged (I verily believe) by some hundreds of them, that scarce any Mini­ster in or about the City, or throughout the whole kingdome, have been more diligent, laborious, frequent or constant, in the work of the Ministery, then I have been amongst them from my first coming unto them, unto this day: For severall yeers toge­ther (without some speciall hinderance) I preached constantly thrice, often four times; sometimes five or six times in a week un­to them. And whereas their Covenant and agreement with mee was (under the hands of some of them in writing) upon my condescending to their request, of preaching two expository lectures weekly unto them, to finde me an assistant to preach once on the Lords Day, this assistant, after some short continuance, de­parting to a place of better accommodation, whilest I was able, I both continued my two weekly Lectures, and besides preached twice unto them on the Lords Day by my self, when I was able; by the ablest I could procure, when I was not able my self, notwith­standing, I never received so much as a penny (to my knowledge) [Page 15] from any of them, for a whole yeares labour in preaching those two weekly Lectures; nor did I receive above 12. 1. 10. s. a yeere for them at any time. Since I was necessitated to discontinue these two weekly Lectures (for which, as I have said, I received nothing for a whole yeare together, nor was likely to receive any thing any more; though this was the least ground or reason of their discon­tinuance) I have upon the request of some of them, and that with­out either promise or hope of any pecuniary consideration at all from any man, ingaged my self (and performed hitherto, and that with advantage) to expound some part of the Scripture before Sermon on the Lords day, as oft as I should have libertie and op­portunitie to preach my self. Nor did I ever diminish my Pari­shioners portion in my ministeriall labours or attendance in the least, for that Congregations sake, which the Gentleman is plea­sed to baptize by the name of Independent; nor did I ever preach to this Congregation apart from my Parishioners. Sometimes (I con­fesse) I prayed with them, and now and then debated a question in mine own house, but ever with my doore open, and libertie gi­ven to any of the Parishioners to come and partake in those exer­cises; which severall of them have from time to time accepted of, and been present with us. The reason why I preach not to some of them as oft as I was wont to doe, is onely because they doe not come so oft to heare me, as they were wont, yea my innocency in respect of this part of my charge, was fully attested under the hands of 45. of my Parishioners (the greatest part, if not the whole number of them, being of the best affected both to Parliament and Religion in the whole Parish) in a Petition tendered unto the Honourable Committee, before which I was called, for my con­tinuance with them.

2. Whereas I am charged with receiving their tiths; my answer is, The Parson­age is impro­priate in the Parishioners hands: the vicarage one­ly endowed with 11. l. per Annum. that I demand no tiths of any of them; nor have I, or ever had I any right to doe it; Nor have I ever received any thing from them in the nature of tiths, but as their voluntary Contribution; For this last half yeere I have received very little above 20. l. (ex­cepting onely the one half of the yeerly rent of a small house, let sometimes but for 12, never for above 14. l. a yeer.) Out of which summe, 12. l. 10. s. being deducted for the rent of my house, the remainder is of as low a proportion, as envie her selfe lightly can [Page 16] desire for the maintenance of a Minister, his wife, and 7 children, (most of them very small) in such an expensive place as this City is. But if Mr. Prynne knew how small a proportion of subsistence it is that I now receive, and what my labour & pains are amongst my Parishioners notwithstanding, I verily beleeve, that in stead of upbraiding me with receiving Tithes, he would pity me that I receive no more. It is well knowne that there are many Mini­sters in and about the Citie, that receive more for preaching once a week; yea divers for preaching but once a fortnight, then I doe for preaching twice weekly, besides my labour in expounding, not much short of that in preaching; and yet I think there is no man that judgeth their consideration greater then their work. But as for those who found themselves aggrieved, and appeared petitioners against me, I understand by the Church-warden, who gathereth that slender allowance w ^ch my Parishioners amongst them think me worthy of, that they have made a very provi­dent use of their exceptions against me, and have sav'd their pur­ses harmlesse for a long time.

3. Whereas he chargeth me to have gathered an Indepen­dent Congregation to my selfe out of divers Parishes and mine own, I answer:

1. That I know not what he means by gathering. If his meaning be, that I have gone about from place to place (as gathering, espe­cially of severall things into one band or bundle, imports) to de­sire or perswade any man, man or woman, rich or poore, young or old, to be of my Congregation, or to the way wherein my Congregation walketh, I utterly deny the truth of this charge. I I never opened my mouth to any person whatsoever to any such purpose, save only what I have publickly preached in the course of my Ministery in the face of my Parochiall Congregation. And what I have here said in this kind, there are many hundreds, if not some thousands to testifie. If by gathering such a Congrega­tion as he speakes of, he means the receiving of persons upon their Christian requests and desires in a Church relation, and so as to become a Pastor unto them, in this sense (which is yet very unproperly called a gathering) I confesse this part of the charge (or commendation rather) to be in part true; I have with the consent of my Parishioners in a publick Vestry, received some [Page 17] out of other Parishes in such a way; who yet have liberty upon request at any time (yea and without request, if they thinke not good to make it) to withdraw themselves to any other Pastor or Congregation, for their better accommodation in their spirituall affaires. Of what I have done in this, I am ready to give an ac­count with meeknesse, unto any man that shall require it of me. But

2. Whereas I am further charged to prescribe a covenant to them before they are admitted, I answer, let them all be called be­fore a Magistrate, and (if it be thought meet) examined upon oath, (though I beleeve there be very few of them but will speak the truth without any such ingagement) I doe not think there is any one of them that can say that there ever was any other cove­nant prescribed to them in reference to their admission, but onely their consent of walking with us, and that testified by them­selves (without any prescription or injunction by me or others) in their own free desire and request of comming in to us. As for those agreements that were drawn in writing in a Parish Vestry, & which were brought in by me to the Committee before which I was called, besides that I had no more an hand then divers o­thers in the draught or forming of them, they were never urged nor pressed upon any for their admission; but whosoever ex­pressed any desire of comming in unto us, and joyning with us, if there were any Christian ground to judge them meet for such a relation, they were without any further covenanting entertained by us.

3. (And lastly to the charge in hand) whereas hee calls this Congregation of mine, Independent, by way of opposition to the Parishionall Congregation; my answer is, that I cannot un­derstand, why or wherefore the one should be termed Indepen­dent, more then the other. I verily beleeve, that that which is called Independent, depends every whit as much upon God, upon the Scriptures, upon Principles of reason and equity, as the other, and claimes as little exemption from the authority or jurisdicti­on of any of these, as the other. And the truth is, that dependency upon these, is as much (for matter of dependencie) as can with reason or good conscience bee required or expected from any man. Dependencie upon man, is pronounced accursed by God. [Page 18] Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, Jer. 17. 5. Or if by Independent, he means, that which will not sub­mit in the government of it, to that which shall be recommen­ded or imposed upon i [...] by an Ecclesiastique authority superior to it selfe; I answer, 1. That that which beares the heat and burthen of the name, cannot as yet (however) be called so, more then the other; because there is nothing at all yet either recom­mended unto, or imposed upon either, by any such authority 2. Though haply it likes not Imposition so cordially altogether as the other, yet let that which shall be imposed, be according to the will of God, and mind of Christ, if God will please to give eyes unto it, whereby to see it, confident I am, (and doe hereby engage my selfe for it as farre as my interest reacheth) that it will and shall submit as willingly, as cheerfully thereunto, as the other. If he therefore asperseth it with the name of Inde­pendent, because it will not say, God speed to him that bringeth the Doctrine of blind obedience unto it; I trust it will (I am sure it may) sit down by the reproach, as by its glory. I am all thoughts made with the fullest assurance, that (for the generality of them) as well the Persons as Congregations in the land sir-named (but far out of the propriety of the word) Independent, will as soon submit to be led by a young child (as the Prophet speaks) in a way of reason and truth discovered unto them (much more by men of wisdome and place) as any other either Persons or Congregati­ons whatsoever in the land.

Whereas my learned Accuser further taxeth me, as having re­fused to baptize some children, and to administer the Sacrament to my Parish for some months; I answer,

1. That for the latter, I have done nothing in it, but what hath been done by very many godly Ministers in and about the Citie, (as is known to thousands) yea most of them (if not all) of a different judgment from mine in the point of Church govern­ment, yea some of them (if my memory deales faithfully with me) of the Assembly it selfe.

2. I proffered unto that honorable Committee before whom was called, that if either themselves, or any other would please to assigne me a rule by which I might safely walk in that admini­stration, I should be willing to take up again what I had laid [Page 19] down for a season, and to accommodate with my Parishioners in that ordinance. For as for the rule prescribed by the Rubrick in the book of Common prayer, themselves seemed not so well sa­tisfied with it.

3. For some of those, who out of the smart of this soare peti­tioned against me, I beleeve they are so farre disadvantaged by an incapacity of this ordinance, that the largest charity of a con­scientious Minister (of what judgment soever for Church­government) would not redeem them.

4. Whereas severall Ministers in and about the Citie, yea some of good report and esteeme; nor should I mistake for mat­ter of truth (whatever I may doe in point of good manners) if I should say, some very neer related unto the Assembly it selfe, have demanded and had pretty considerable summes, some twen­ty pound, thirty pound, yea some fourty pound a yeare of their Parishioners onely for their consent and leave that the Gospell might be preached unto them out of their Pulpits, by such a Mi­nister or Lecturer as they should chuse; I have been so far from tying my Parishioners to this appletree, that I not only gave my consent freely unto them to chuse what Minister they pleased, either to preach or to deliver the Sacrament unto them, but further offered them twenty, thirty, yea, if it were fourty pound a year out of mine own allowance (in case they would stil continue it to their former proportion; for otherwise I could not be able) toward the making up a valuable consideration unto him for his pains whom they should chuse in such a way.

5. (And lastly) for the latter; I confesse, that since my first comming to the place and people with whom I yet am (which wants but a little of eleven yeares compleat) I have refused the baptizing of two or three children of my Parish; but upon such grounds, the opening whereof (if it were meet to publish them) would (I verily beleeve) make all contestation and com­plaint against me in this behalfe ashamed. I feare, I have made my selfe a farre greater transgressor, by not refusing, then by re­fusing in this kind. And besides, if my intelligence will beare the weight of that confidence which I lay upon it (as I think it will) in case such omissions or refusals as these, be just matter of offence, the Assembly it self wil not in all the Presbyterian mem­bers thereof be found innocent.

[Page 20] The third and last grievance of which I complain in my over­offended adversary, and petition the wits and charity of men in all their conjunctions throughout the world for reliefe; is his extraction of so many crooked conclusions of his own out of my streight premises. It is somewhat an hard case, when one man shall beget children, and another be made to keep them. Because I say in my Epistle, that there is cause to feare, lest the truth, which onely is able to make us free, should by being rejected and opposed by us, increase our bondage and misery: And because I onely cite that say­ing of Nazianzene, p. 44. that he never saw good end, or desirable successe of any Councell, or that they procured any decrease, but rather increase of evils, with some few other as innnocent and well meant sayings as these, he chargeth me (p. 18. l. 1.) with tacitly reflect­ing upon the present religious Parliament and Assembly, raising need­lesse feares and jealousies of them both in matters of Religion and Church government, as if they really intended to increase our misery and bondage, by rejecting and oppressing Truth. Surely the worst di­gestion that ever was, never made such gall of such hony in any mans stomach. I wonder what Logicall sympathy, or Symboli­call property there is between my foundations, and Mr. Prynnes superstructions? They have not so much as a quartile aspect the one upon the other. Because I say, There is cause to feare, lest the truth being rejected and opposed, should increase our bondage and mise­ry, (which is nothing else but what the Scriptures themselves will abundantly justifie and warrant) doth it therefore follow, that I reflect, or raise needlesse feares and jealousies, either of Parliament, or Assembly? When the Apostle Paul wrote thus to the whole Church of Corinth: Know yee not that the unrighteous shall not in­herit the Kingdome of God? Be not deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor theeves, &c. shall inherit the Kingdome of God; did he reflect upon the chiefe persons amongst them, or raise needlesse feares and jealousies of them in the mindes of the rest, as if he suspected them more then others for the practice of such sins? Was it not a serious admonition, a cautionary do­ctrine that equally respected them all, without the least accusa­tion of any? I doe not say, that there is cause to feare lest the truth should be rejected or oppressed by any, or any sort or rank of per­sons amongst us; I onely professe my feare, that in case it shall [Page 21] be no better intreated by us, it will increase our bondage and mi­sery, from what rank or sort of men soever amongst us it shall suf­fer in that kind. Such dealings as these with a mans harmlesse and in offensive sayings, are a temptation of like tendency and danger, with that which David encountred, when he reasoned thus with himself; Verily I have cleansed my heart in vain, and washed my hands in innocency. If a man had the least mind to pick a quarrell against all faire and faultlesse speaking, and to speak nothing but swords, and spears, and hot burning coals for the time to come, such con­structions as these are, are proper nourishment for such an incli­nation to feed fat upon; yea enough to set the smoaking flax into a lightsome flame. But that God, whose Grace hath been shield and buckler unto mine innocency in this kinde hitherto, will (I trust) protect it by the same hand, in the midst of these and all o­ther provocations whatsoever, untill the day of its coronation. Jesus Christ did not give over his gracious occupation of casting out Devils, because some charged him that through Beelzebub he cast them out. Malè audire, cùm benè feceris, Regium est. Some o­ther impeachments there are of like nature with this, managed against me in that paper, which hath interrupted my peace and studies hitherto; but it is the fate of ungrounded imputations, Spreta exolescunt, they soone wax old and vanish away, if they be neglected.

Thus have I fairly, and (I trust) fully acquitted my selfe in all things charged upon me, by way of demerit, and crime, in M ^r. Prynnes Observations. What further is charg'd herein upon me by way of weaknesse, and insufficiency, in point of argument and rea­son; I must crave a few dayes respit, and I doubt not but I shall bring in a faire account of this charge also. As for that emptie Pamphlet, called Faces about; the Author of it, what face or faces soever he had (for it may be he carries two in a hood) it seemes he dares shew none. He feares his Name would have suffered, if it had been seen in the company of such a piece. Yet the truth is, that the paper is a glasse, and there is the face of a man (such as it is) to be seene in it. The man that looks out from behind the lattises of the lines of it, is ignorant that the Lord of glory was numbred amongst transgressors, and crucified between two [Page 22] theeves: or else he would never have thought to disparage me, by putting me into the same account with Socinians and Armini­ans. It is the saying of a Roman Historian: Post Carthaginem, vin­ci neminem puduit; After Carthage was taken by the Romans, no Citie or Nation thought it any discredit to be overcome by them. Jesus Christ being crucified with malefactors, hath spoyl'd their market, that desire to sell mens reputations under disgrace, by coupling them with names or persons of any infamous resentment whatsoever.