I [...] State [...] Nation: Now [...], all o [...] [...]: whence you [...] the [...] o [...] [...]o [...]: Nay, I [...]o [...] con [...]tion thin [...] [Page 3] th [...]ir ay [...] at Reformation in Doctrine and Worship cannot be bla­med but by erroneous and licen [...]ous persons; howsoever it is not [...]o much their cause as that of God: and therefore, I make no doubt but that h [...] will appear for [...]t at the last. [...], I am con [...]i [...]tent that as there is a God, so his work will be done in his doe [...]ne, and if men be blockt in his way he will remove them. In th [...] [...]ontrover­sie secular persons al [...]o a e engaged: [...]ne, because Epis [...]p [...] i [...] an [...], and therefore good of b [...]d they must have it; saying fur­ther, it doth be [...] fit the temper of the generality of people, which i [...] not ab [...]olutely true, the Pre [...]byter [...]n party being very considerable. And suppose i [...] were so, must we fi [...] the wayes of God to mans hu­mours: St. Paul is of another min [...], E se [...]k saith he, [...] please men, then am I not the servant of Christ. Others will have Epi [...]pa [...] (even Noblemen, not all, for many prefer conscience to interest) because their younger sonnes may thereby become spiritual Lords. Others as ignorant wid have it, for hereby they are kept and flattered in their ignorance. And others as licentious, because they are not restrained from evil Courses, but are suffered to go on in them.

But perhaps I may satisfie you the more, if I do shew when these D [...]visions did first spring up: In the dayes of that good King J [...]siah [...] like Edward the sixth, whose chief study was to work Reformation, as he did in a good measure, considering how God was pleased to call him out of this life in the sixteenth year of his age; Then there were th [...]se who knowing God to be a spirit, they knew also he would be worshiped in spirit and in truth, John 4. And also, that Religion doth not consist in outward apparel, for it is not to be defiled with the attire of the Harlot: But it doth consist in the inward man, and therefore their desire was to see Excrements of Popery removed of purged. But blo [...]dy Queen Mary his Successor, bringing in again Popery through persecution, all this good work was at a stand till God was pleased to call to the Throne that unparalleled Princesse Queen Elizabeth, who did a great work in reforming Doctrine: but as to outward things, as Ceremonies, being thought but circumstantial, they were not all taken away, either because they were thought indiffe­r [...]nt, or else because it was not thou [...]ht safe to alter all at once; o [...] else, that God would not have one person to work a tho [...] Refor­mation, unlesse the glo y due to him alone were in any way trans­ [...]ed on h [...] s [...]vants and labourers in his Vineyard. Yet those reli­ [...] [...] [...]oken of in K [...]n [...] [...]a [...]s tim [...], began to [...] of a fur­the Reformation which they called Purity, whence came to them the [Page 4] name [...] but [...] t [...]e th ngs were in a ballance till [...]ing [...] them to a conformity, though with no success: [...] against them we [...]e in the [...]me of [...] A [...]-B [...]hop of [...], who joyned the [...] to the [...] Ministers of State and Patriark, if not [...] and a p [...] Bishop he was, [...], hee tumult in violence [...] by introducing an [...]n [...]ry [...] and [...] in all probability, [...] to have followed: [...]o [...], i [...] [...] [...]an [...]e of Reli [...]n, he [...] begin [...] they [...] one further▪ for, [...], as it wil [...] appear afterwards: [...] as [...]er Primate of Ire­ [...] [...] M [...]rion, [...], a any [...], wherein were many Po­ [...] [...], that the [...]e were [...]nt to p [...]t [...], as D [...] Man [...]gu [...] accused of [...] cen [...]red by the [...]in, yet he was [...], whi [...]e [...]othe [...] was a Pap [...]: [...], Parliament, [...] the Kin [...] [...]avour [...], as to be [...]ent to the [...] designs of others, [...] P [...]ts and J [...]uit [...] being [...] and active [...] to [...]in [...] [...] in [...]luded) to pre [...]erve the [...] in Religion: but this [...] well known, I will come to present [...].

[...] the whole King [...]o [...] of S [...]land, are [...] part of [...] prote [...] [...] to [...]y, almost hi [...] [...] the Nation, [...] [...]ng th [...]e Truth, which is pro­ [...] [...] even by many P [...] es of the [...] many new Lord [...] have been created: [...] and really Divine [...] Defenders of that [...] in the maintaining of it, specially under [...] to [...]we them their dye, they are ge­ [...] [...] of the glory of God: [...] cannot be given [...] their Adve [...], [...] pride [...] and Honours, ma­ [...] [...] to that super­flu [...]tie [Page 5] to be seen in Princes Courts? Where, I beseech you, doth the pride be either in those that are for Equalitie, or in them who con­tend for Superioritie; And for my part, I think that there are these three kinds of persons stiff for Episcopacy: First, the Learned, who be­ing eminent above the common, are in hopes of this great prefer­ment, secondly, ignorant, and thirdly, prophane, whose evil works a [...]e tolerated: Many of your Episcopal men as I know by conversa­tion with them, a [...]e of a most revengeful nature, and I believe, if their power were extended as far as their desires, their cruelty would be in the height; they talk of nothing but how such hath deserved to dye, another ought to be turned out of his Living: how unbe­coming is it in the month of those professing to be Ministers of Christ, if they speak of Presbyterian Ministers: to give them the names of Fellow, Dog, Knave, Rascal, Rogue and such others, which ought to be the language of the Devil more then of men? yet, this I have heard with mine own ears: where is Charity in this! is not there a spirit of wrath, hatred, pride? In a word, the spirit of the Devil: but their iniquity shall reprove them, Jerem. 2.

Being then of this temper, it may clearly be perceived what they aym at, and indeed their actions do declare it; for afore they act in the height if they be permitted, they will weaken their Ad­versares party; To this end they turn out, of banish the most Emi­nent of the Independents, whose miscarriages I profess I do con­demn, and much more if they have any thing of Errour; but the truth is, they are able and stiffe opposers of Episcopacy, although we confess the goodness of the Presbyterians cause wants no such Defenders, and if it did, they may find them amongst themselves: (when it will be the Presbyterians turn God knoweth.) The other side it is sure, the Episcopal part have thought it policy to procure the prosering of Bishopricks to two of the most Eminent of their Adversaries, thinking to bribe them thereby to the betraying of their trust and Cause, who, I hope will prefer the keeping of a good conscience to all those worldly preferments: Now, if they did not mistrust the Goodness and justice of their Cause, would they make use of such proceedings, and perhaps of worse, which in time may be discovered.

However, we know what they aym at, to bring all to the old way, and that which from it is to be expected you will hear, they will leave things necessary, as if they were indifferent: such is the ob­servation of the Lords Day, the prophanation thereof in Banquet­tings, [Page 6] Revellings, dan [...]ngs, &c. was [...]n [...]t [...]ed specially about M [...] ­po [...], which are occasion of many Oathes sworn, of [...]un [...]nne [...]s, [...] co [...]mitted there [...] besides the propinnation of the Day, to that it was wittily [...] thy [...]e son of a Nobleman, there were [...] C [...]an [...] the P [...]pists had taken off the second, and Canterbury the [...] Now [...] [...]ing should be suffere [...], and a Pa [...] [...] by a bishop [...] wh [...]eby they will r st [...]a [...]n the Gospel [...]ithin the [...]leeve [...] of a B [...], who upon some Pointe [...]er [...], if a [...] be n [...]t asked for p [...]ing in his Diocese, [...] will call in question a M [...]nut [...] in Ch [...]t [...] to preach. This, and many other than [...] the [...] natu e which I am a [...]hamed to spe [...] [...] they have the [...]a [...]e to do them; This I say it the [...].

[...] not [...]tisfied with this, they went another extremity to pre [...] ­ [...]ing [...] that are indifferent as necessary including them as a b [...]the [...] to me [...] con [...]cien [...]es: these are superstitious outward R [...]tes and Ce­ [...]e [...], [...] Min [...]sters to preach once a fo [...]night, and this with [...] to baptize with the si [...]n of the Cross, to bow at the Name of Je [...], to stoop before the Altar when there is no need of Altar, to an [...]n Procession hal [...] a [...] and more out of a Town, to [...] a Cross, that is nothing but that which a Papist can and well [...] Shall a Prayer- [...]ok [...]afed with [...] of Saints be forced to be read, when there cann [...] but be superstition and I­dolatry, de [...]o [...]ting to Christs Intercession, as if I expected to be heard the better because of such a Saint▪ Must I have a Gospel, a Collect, an Epistle and a prayer, for all this, it is I [...]olatry to pray to Saints, and to pray by we [...] of Saints, and of this shall I read the [...] the people th [...] 2d. I the 3d. the people, the 4th, &c. What, confesion in the House of the [...] Shall upon the 1, 2, 3, 4. &c. Sondayes in Lent read such and su [...]h things? [...] I upon Goodfriday be [...]ed to a Letany and th ngs of such na­ [...]e, (even it being uncertain whither [...]uch a Day b [...] the day of the Passion) which I find to be translated [...] o [...] the mi [...]al? Shall I neglect the [...] of prayer that is [...], and to grieve the Holie Ghost, and shall we a wayes [...] and helps, and ever be children in Prayer? Shall [...]mitate the Spirit so as to be bound by things of a [...] institution, i [...] not [...]nvention? O, shall I be sufficiently qualified to be a Min ste [...] b [...]cause I can find and read my Lessons in such a common Prayer-book, which is o [...] ­casion [Page 7] of [...]ilenesse? Or shall my conscience be obliged to that book, of the which one of them, the Primate of Ireland, hath said, There are things that ought to be taken off, others added, and others to be altered.

No [...], I hold that Ceremonies ought wholly to be taken away: se [...] Mar [...], I [...]. C [...] [...]ap 4 [...] 51. sect. 21. First, because contrary [...] the purity of Go [...]s Wo [...]ship, who will be worshiped in spirit and truth, [...] is the Gospel a ceremonial Law.) But here he is wo [...]shipped in outward Apparel instead of an inward frame of spirit; and can that worship be said to be in truth when there is not the least shadow of it in Scriptures. But they will tell me, if things are to be abolished because abused, then meat and drink shall be taken away because there are Gluttons and Drunkards, but this is not to the purpose: I confess in things substantial, essential and necessary, the [...]e is not to be taken away th [...]ugh it be prophaned by Papists. Thus of bread and drink because necessary for a mans life: but for those things that are circumstantial and indifferent, if abused, they ought to be taken off, Such are the things now in question: that they are not necessary, they must confess it, there being not the least shadow or sign for it in Sc ipture as of Surplice sign of the Cross, &c. If therefore it be indifferent, why pressed upon a ten­der conscience, if thought necessary, then herein lies the superstiti­on. Now any one of these being come to be superstitious, it is no more indifferent, but to be taken off altogether: as Ezec [...]iah, to his great commendation broke the B [...]azen Serpent, for the which there was more to plead, then for these sottish Garments, for it was Erect­ed by Gods command, but the other thin [...] not so.

I wish every one that is so forward for Ceremonies, to perus [...] a Preface in the Comm Prayer-Book, wherein it is said, That be­cause Ceremonies were grown numerous, super fluous, superstitious, and a yoke unto [...]uls, therefore some were taken away: By virtue of the same reasons, we may desire the abolishing of all others.

As for the kneeling at the Lords Supper, it being indifferent, must not be pressed as necessary, so as that one shall not receive the Sacrament exc pt he kneeles: yet methinks because of the gross er­rour of Papists about it, it will be well to abstain from that posture, to avoid appearance and suspition of Idolatry: As it is the Apostles advice, and it may lawfully be taken in another posture: for at such [...] a man ought not to be in a praying posture: yet if a person [...] [...]tisfie me, that he hath no superstitious reason to take it this: I think a man ou [...]ht to administer it to him. But being gone [Page 8] already beyond the [...]tent of a Letter, and [...]ea [...]ing to [...] you [...] patience in the pe [...]sal o [...] this, I [...]ave le [...]ve to b [...]t [...]e my self to my [...]er [...] till the [...]en [...] opp [...]tunity I shall have, to testifie [...]ith my father: obedience to your commands how sincerely I am,

IT i [...] an [...] [...]nary satisfaction to me, and a sign of your wont­ed [...], that you do accept of my weak endeavours which I have [...] the sati [...]fy [...] of your desires, and since you are [...], that I have had the happiness to answer your ex­pectation i [...]to [...] a measure, and to give such a deal of content­ment to that Noble person. I take it not as a reward de [...]erved by my passed l [...]b [...], but [...] [...]n encouragement to that which i [...] to come: having therefore in the end of my last, spoken of the judg­ment [...] men and P [...]by [...]er [...]a [...]s, d [...]ffe [...] in: abo [...] circumstan­ [...]l things as [...]ard Rites and Ceremonies: Now I must shew they differ in [...] of a hi [...]er nature, such as Ordination. The P [...]l [...]; any d [...]ay that Ordination [...] to be lawfull which is not made by a B [...]hop, this is a most uncharitable thought of the [...]: as if the O [...]nation of [...]la [...]sh Ministers to France and Holand were no lawfull ordination though with [...]ut B [...]sh [...]: Yet, some of the [...] [...] men t [...]k [...] them to be, as they are, lawful Ministers, and one of them: [...] I wish all [...]e [...]e like to him [...], that a Bishop ordaineth no [...] [...]t a Bi [...], but as a P [...]s [...]er, and in [...] Scripture doth shew that it is done by P [...]e [...], [...] 4.14. Neither [...] I [...]ee any reason why th y sh [...] make any distinction between the [...]na­tion of Bis [...]o [...] in their s [...]n [...]e and Ministers, and to call the one con­secration as if by o [...]nation they were not consecrated, when it is [...]ell known that con [...]tion of Bishops (to make use of their word) [...] called by S. Paul, The [...]ing on of hands by the Presbyters: it [...] thy we [...] a Bishop, [...]s they assert it. 1 Tim. 4 14. You see then, tha [...] though [...] should [...] Bishops to be different in [...]egree [...]om Ministers whi [...]h we deny) yet they ought to submit to the [...]aying on of h [...]nds by the P [...]byter [...], which impo [...]tion of hands, it is after the [...]iving of the [...] of Fellowship, as St. Paul speak [...], Gal. 2.9. As to the conse­cration [Page 9] of Churches, it hath no President in the New Testament; and I know of no other Consecration but the separating of them from a common use, and appointin [...] them to an holy end; As for the na [...]ng, or as they call it Christning and baptizing of Churches and Bells, their authority is from Popery and not Scripture; howso­ever I may observe it as a prophanati [...]n of that holy Sacrament, and an adulterating of it's Object.

B [...]t alas, if there were nothing but this, although it be much, yet it would be tolerable, but there is that which is a great deal worse, they do d ster in more then Church-Government: it is even in fundamental points of Doctrine: I fear the [...]d consequences of Prelacy, if it be set up, for the face of the Church shall be overflown with a stream of Errours and Heresies: I tremble to think, and I am frighted to say there will be Antichristian Bishops: for if that way be set up, then those that are most eminent amongst them will be set up in that Office; and it is known that two sorts of persons are Antichristians, some being against Christ's Person, and others against his Grace: and amongst them I know some (whose names chari­tably I spare, although there be no need of such tenderness, since some have published in print their Errours,) Some I know to be Socintans denying Christs Deity; Others, Pelagians dis­owning original sinne. Others have, and still do professe them­selves Lutherans in the point of Consubstantiation, which de­stroyeth the nature of Christs Body, and the Articles of his Ascer­sion, and sitting at the right hand of God: As for Arminianism de­structive of Grace, it is boldly and publikely professed by most of them, if not all: For, I confesse of those many whom I know to be of that party; there is none who destroyeth not Grace, to set up the strength of mans will which is meet Sci [...]pelagianism, owned by them to the hei [...]ht: Nay, there be some so impudent as to publish in p [...]nt that which is called Arminianism to be the Doctrine of the Church of England, wilfully, not taking notice of the 9. Artic. that after the Synod of Dor [...] were inserted into the Confession of Faith of the Church of England by King Iames his command, who, as it is known was no friend to Puritans, yea, a great enemy to Ar­min [...]ant, because of their affinity, nay, identity of Doctrine with [...]erttius in point of prescience, whose great Antagonist King James, was, as his writings declare him to be.

I know well, that to make the Presbyterian Church-Government [...]ous, they much disclaim against the rigidness of it: saying, the [...]st [...]er of it to be heavier then the [...]ins of Episcopacy: but we [Page 10] must cons [...] in [...]hat the [...] are ne [...]d and [...] it [...] in necessary things: [...] they are to be commen [...] and not blamed for th [...] or­der [...], the necessary [...] it is to restrain [...]uous­nesse and [...] to [...] Ch [...]rch-Cen [...]res [...] there must be no [...]ang be [...], and [...] to be [...] can [...], we [...]re [...] [...] C [...]monies, [...] which are necessi­ty, [...]s the san [...]ifi [...]tion of the Sabbath, and [...]an like.

I [...] they w ll press that oft e [...]ne [...] Maxi [...], No Bi [...], [...] therefore, to [...] P [...]r [...]archie, you destroy Monarchie; [...] appeare [...] by the [...]amp [...]e o [...] t [...]e Protestants in [...], who [...] they have no Bishops, yet they are [...]reat lo­ [...] and loyal to their Kin [...], even amidst the greatest perso [...] uri­ [...] they have p [...]d th [...]i [...] fideli [...] to their Sove [...]. So [...]n [...] of Gov [...]rn [...]en [...] a [...] the Pa [...]a [...], [...]and [...], &c. And to [...]o [...]re ne [...] home into Scotland, [...]n the late troubles they had no Bi [...]p [...] (in the late sence) yet their loyaltie to their Soveraign, testif [...]d by their several attempt [...] for him, at Worcester, &c. do clea [...]ly evince the [...] [...] have been as loyal to his Majestie as any part of [...]g [...]and wherefore, I cannot b [...]t abhor the damnable sl [...]nde [...] of [...] [...]ainst Pa [...]itan [...], as if they were persons of prin­ciples [...] to the Authoritie of their P [...]inces: and their rea­son it, beca [...], say they, Cal [...] allows it, but al [...], have the Paritans sw [...] up [...]n the [...] Ca [...] [...] they consider him in [...]ed as a [...], who in his time w [...] [...] be wonder [...]lly for Reformation; [...] of a man so extraordinary [...]ed, they will [...] than be [...] consonant to Scriptures, which he [...] in the mean while he gives them the lye for [...], in his W [...] De Mag [...]stra [...] the lost of his institution. And [...] Presbyterians by their pra­ [...] [...] [...]pon t [...] l [...] Deliveran [...]e, and c [...]nsider them [...] Royaltie do, they [...] where [...] that, they were as low as [...], let them [...]ant now as high as they will. How great [...] M [...] receiv [...] from the [...]e [...] who [...] his Army? D d not the Lo [...] [...] a [...]pear to b [...] h [...] [...]as not the C [...]y, [...] mo [...] P [...]t [...]r [...]s then [...]ceptal, [...]ow [...] and [...] not the secluded members [...] th [...] [...], that is was fo [...] want [...] no [...] yet by the [...] [...] to [...] in, [Page 11] by causing the Covenant to be set up in the House, and in all publick places; In a word, the Presbyterians cannot be deprived of the ho­nour of having brought in the King. And if M. had not herein departed of his honesty, that Parliament might have made this a hap­py and setled Nation in state as it began, but in Church, better then, I fear it will be.

Yet the Presbyterians trusted upon the King's taking the Cove­nant, the performance of which they may plead; for, it was not found in Scotland alone, but also extended to England and Ireland: it was indeed with horrour I heard one of the prelatical party to say, that the King was not obliged to keep the Covenant, but only to repent o [...] it? Is not this, I beseech you, to break all divine and hu­mane R ghts and Societie, and to let the door open to all perjurie: The Anabaptists say no more, they do not think themselves bound to observe any Oath; but we hope the King hath a better consci­ence then such unconscionable persons, or else I tremble to think what judgements are like to befall his person or Family, or the Land; a Covenant taken in so solemn a manner, God being called upon as a witnesse and Avenger in case of perjurie; he will not be mocked, not suffer to be called a witnesse to a lye, for he saith, he will not hold him guiltlesse that taketh his Name in vain; No, it is well known how his Majestie took it, and that therein be s [...] to extir­pate Prelacie, and that he is bound to the observation of it no god­ly person can deny: indeed there are four kinds of Oathes, which being evil in the substance, it is evil to take them, and double evil to execute them, as in Herods oath to Herodian's daughter: but as to oathes taken about indifferent things, which we may take or not take, we are bound afterwards to observe them, when they are taken, though, as David saith, Psalm 15. they were to our own hurt. The King was not forced to take it, for if he would not, why did he take it: I heard a Lawyer say, That a man may bind himself to a post, and if that post can call him to the performance of his bond, he is bound to perform it: so his Majestie having taken the Covenant, it in conscience bound (I speak as a Ca [...]ist) to see it performed, since he freely consented to take it when he was yet at Breda afore he came to Scotland, but chiefly because, the end of the Covenant, to wit, Reformation, was good, yea necessarie, as it may clearly be de­monstrated from the danger wherein Religion was when it was ta­ken; I will give him the Example of Joshua and the Gibeonites, who, although they had belyed him, and although God had afore [Page 12] forb [...]en to ma [...]e any covenant with them, yet because they had [...] by the L [...]d, [...], I [...]b. 9. and we know how [...] by Saul upon the King­dom in Davids [...]yes [...] and then upon Sau [...] children: I desire that C [...]enant and [...] p [...]alle [...]ed in all [...] [...]m [...]an [...]es. As for me, I eve [...] [...] upon [...], as one of the [...]ying sinnes that brought such [...]dgem [...]nt [...] these Nations. We be [...]e therefore that the King will answer the opinion that eve­ [...]y one [...]oth [...] being a con [...]n [...] Prince: and I find it was a [...] ob [...]ervation made by Mt. D [...]la [...] at the C [...]nation Sermon a S [...]a [...]d, [...] the not per [...]man [...]e of Ki [...] James his [...]th, had been one of the chief causes that brought [...]ch heavy judgements [...]. B [...] as to this point of oaths, Hon urable Sir, I refer you to my [...] upon the third Commande [...]ent, a Co­ [...] he [...] of I now [...]nd you in [...]losed, which with th [...], will, I fear, [...] have [...] from,

I Con [...] [...] to you, not [...]t of conceit in [...] of any [...] [...]int [...]ent an [...] you [...] Commands, or to require the ho [...] i [...] y [...] la [...] upon [...]e in things abo [...] which you might have a [...] from many [...]ore [...]apable to give it then [...] effect o [...] that absol [...] obedience I have sw [...] to your commands, and that con [...]mmit I have promised to y [...] plea [...]e, [...] where [...], I will endeavo [...] at this time to lay open the [...] con [...]oversie between P [...]ans, as they a [...]e [...] and [...] salen. The sonne [...] do with and maintain the Church [...]ght to be ruled by Elders, whence they have the name of Presbyte [...]: for, you kn w that P [...] [...]n Greek signifieth an [...]lder, and first, there ought to be Cong [...] Elders in every Parish, for it b [...]ng granted, that the [...]e ought to be an order in the Church, it must be that which is [Page 13] grounded upon Scriptures: if now these Elders ought to be secu­lar men, as it will be proved hereafter. They are sometimes cal­led Lay-Elders (which expression we will make use of because it is the common expression) for they are chosen from the Layitie of the people, for in pretence to the Ecclesiastical Office they are not lay men. Truly, besides divine institutions, there is a great advantage cometh this way: in union these persons that are El­ders having influence upon others of the Parish, may by their example and perswasion bring people into submission of order and holinesse of life; for Elder: must be persons of an excellent knowledge, and of unblameable life. And secondly, hence disci­pline will be observ'd; for these persons here, being from amongst the people, and changed from time to time, their censure and judgement shall the more willingly be submitted unto; the sentence of many is more considerable then that of few, and thereby the hatred cast upon a Minister in the execution of discipline, and the suspi­cion of his being partial may be washed away: besides, that it is ea­sier to bribe one then many: before these within their Parish, the breach of Gods Law in Religion, as prophanesse and neglect of Ordi­nances: so the breach of Charitie, in quarrels, divisions, scandals, ought to be judged as our blessed Saviour saith, Matth. 18. If thy brother hath offended thee and will not be reconciled in the prisoner of few, till if the Church: that is, the Rulers of the Church; to wit, the Elders: For first, this cannot be understood of the Minister alone of the Church, who indeed may be called the Angel of the Church. Secondly, This is not understood of every individual person of the Church, this would introduce a strange confusion if all were to be judges, which cannot be, because of the incapacity and other un­qualifications of persons, as of women, children, and some men: therefore it must be done by the Ministers and Representatives of the Church, to wit, Elders, as you will see hereafter.

But as sometime such is the quality of the persons and nature of businesses as they cannot be decided in the Parish, there may be an appeal to the Classis of those parts, that is, a certain number of Presbyters select for that division, over which there ought to be a Moderator cho [...]en by Plurality of Voyces and this only pre tempore. Now this Classis is subordinate to the Synod of that County or Province, which is the convention of all the classes of that Coun­ty, over the which shall also be a Moderator, and this only pro tem­pore, as Saint James was in Jerusalem, Acts 15. by Plurality of Voy­ces: [Page 14] and this provincial Synod shall be subordinate to the Natio­nal, wh [...]e th [...] of high: [...] decided, to the which, two or more M [...]e is and Pr [...] o [...] every shire a [...] to be [...]ent. This may be call [...]d on [...]e a year, the Provincial once every ha [...] year; the Cla [...] [...] every month is ther [...] [...] ca [...]e, and the con­s [...]ty o [...] congregation [...] b [...]tw [...]ne every Lo [...]de [...]ry, eve y forth night. The P [...]nate of L [...]nd, [...]ave his [...]gement [...] as Doctor Bernard doth testifie; and certainly, [...] of Go [...]n none hath p [...]ved so happy as [...] in F [...]ance, Scotland, parts of Germany and other places whe [...]e it is strictly observed, t [...]te hath been no schism [...], [...] of wickednesses committed, howsoever not un­ [...]nished) [...]o [...] hereby they may presently be re [...]ained, if incu­ [...], sp [...]d out of the Church. I might shew the happiness of the Reformed Churches in France, under it considering their condi­tion, for they are Subjects to a Popish King, but I have matter e­nough b [...]des this.

A [...]e I prove th [...] to be of a divine Institution, I will endeavour to pro [...]g [...]te E [...]j [...]p [...]r, which being done, it will be n [...] ha [...]d mat­ter to acte [...]s Pr [...]ery. But first, Presbyters [...]an [...] do allow of Bishops, provided they be reduced to their former purity: that is, to be a Minister, and not above a Minister of an [...]we [...]eet, or superintendent, [...] this is the [...] s [...]nication of the [...]o [...] its o [...]nal. Now, to be to Overices o [...] h [...] flock, is pertaining to every Minister, Acts 20, 28. to you see every Minister is a Bishop, 1 [...]w. 3. But B [...]hops by way of it [...] authority, prima [...]y, or dependency of one Minister from a [...]bet, is in no [...] grounded [...]on S [...]tures, but it is Tyrannical, by [...]rpation, and of humane invention: as to the case of A [...] Bishop, they must confess it as they do to be instituted of men.

Supremacy therefore in Church is very dangerous, it is a tempta­tion to p [...]de and occasion of ambition which men are naturally prone unto, [...] Saint John had lived in these our dayes, [...] many D [...]re­phe [...] w [...] he have di [...]covered, whom he condemneth in his three Epistles, [...] he loveth to have the preeminen [...]e; and sure I am we [...] have a better Pattern for the Role of the Ch [...]ch then the school of Christ, where he was so far from allowing of it, that he reproved them when they had disputed who should be the [...], he, such C [...]i [...] that will be the greatest shall be the le [...]t, where be makes an opposition between the Government of Church and State; The King of the Nations exercise lordship [...]ver them, and those that are [...] use authority [...]ver them, but amongst you it shall not be so, he [Page 15] that will be the greatest let him be your servant, Matth. 20.25. Why shall we so much condemn in the Pope that which they approve in others? Shall one and the same thing evil of it self, pride and usur­pation be a crime in the Bishops of Rome, and a vertue in the Bishops of England; an Arch Bishop here that hath the precedencie of some of the Kings sonnes: is he not an Image of that of Italy; true it is, it is not in such a Degree, howsoever it is in the nature of it, they ever aspi [...]ing from one place to a higher preferment: let one of these Bishops come to Church in a Coach and six Horses, with a gallant attendance, and be called my Lord here, my Lord there, Will Christ own him for his servant? Is this his Lesson, Be humble and lowly, as he was even in washing his Disciples feet? Will not the Lord Christ say, Hast thou left all to follow me? Canst thou serve the world and me too? This is indeed the posture of a man drunken with the pleasures of this world, more then of those meek and humble Apostles of Christ? What difference, to see a Mini­ster of Christ in a very low condition, and a Bishop professing him­self to be a minister in the plenty of all worldly enjoyments: but they will say, this is the liberalitie of Princes; yet, let them know, that they cannot serve the world and Christ, and therefore they should not ask it as some do, but rather refuse these great earthlie things, account them but loss and dung, and say to them who profer these temporal favours, I must not be so cumbred with the things of this world like Martha, but with Mary I must take the good part: for all these riches, honours and pleasures are but snares to entrap them.

For, as you will hear in the case of Popes, so it may be in this; Popes at first were no more then other Bishops: but because Rome was the seat of the Empire, therefore Christians ever placed in it persons eminent for Pietie and Learning: who, because of their great parts and abilities received a more then ordinary respect; This being a great bait to ambitious persons, such as their successors, they began to look upon it as a thing due to their Office, no consideration had to the person or parts, and thereupon they began to usurp: so, the Pope having gotten to be the head, those that adhered to him in forraign parts, assumed much to themselves because of the adora­tion which in times of darknesse was granted to the Beast: No Pro­testant can deny but that this in Poperie deserved Reformation, as many Popish great and learned men did acknowledge? Why then, God sending puritie of Doctrine by the conversion of this Nation [Page 16] to the truth of the Gospel, was not there a Reformation of this ex­ceeding power derived as streames from that ambitious Antichrist: but no eve [...] have seen Reformation wrought by degrees; therefore a great [...] and opportunitie is afforded to his Majestie, in remo­ving that whereby the servants of Christ are in these dayes so diffe­rent from those in times pa [...]t [...] as if there were a new Gospel brought from Heaven.

Th [...]t desire of Supremacy doth argue a spirit much different from that of Saint Paul, [...] saying to the Corinthians, 2 Epist. 1. To state you [...] are not yet [...]me to you, as if this had been too high for a servant of Christ: he presently addeth, not for that we have dominion over your faith, yet it is that which some undertake, by la [...] as necessary upon [...] those things that are indifferent; so that I must account these Ceremonies to be good, becoming and edifying, not because I believe it, but because they tell it to be so, in pressing it upon me, even when my conscience perswadeth me it is not so. And further, if we look on that place, the scope will shew us, that the Apostle doth not mean by having dominion over their saith, to have power over things to be believed for it would have been in vain to have expressed such a thing, since the same Apostle tel [...] in another place, there is one Faith and one Lord, as I may say by joyning them together: one Lord of that saith; besides those whom he [...] write to know this fundamental point, that no man hath po [...] over our faith, and that Saint Paul was too humble to have had any such meaning; when he saith for to snare them he came not, but this I take to have been sp [...]ken upon the account of the incestuous, of the toleration of whom be d [...]h complain, 1 Cor. 5. Wherefore, becau [...] they had been neg­lect [...] in the administ [...]ation of censure a [...]in such a man, he would not [...]me, le [...] he had been forced to re [...]ove them for their neg­lect. Not, saith he, that I h [...] [...]dren [...] you, but like a brother I [...]ght to rebuke you, even as he [...] Peter upon a different [...]tion, Gal. 2. So the sen [...]e of this [...] Faith will be this, as to force y u t [...] a thing against you [...] e [...]ent, o [...] which you believe ought not to be done, that is, to censure or ex [...]mmunicate the in­cest [...], [...] approve of h [...] by not calling of him to an ac­count, whence these two [...]reat truths are afforded us: First, Saint Paul confesseth to have no power over their Faith, that is, their profession (for to it is often taken in Scriptures) in the discharge of Ecclesiastica Discipline, the execution of which he cannot force upon them.

But the second truth is this, That the Discipline of the Church is and ought to be administred by the Church, and therefore the Bishop or Minister cannot do it but by the Church, this case here is clear of of the incestuous, for the Discipline was not committed to any single person but to the Corinthians, to the Church, as he calls them, that is, at Corinth, 1 Cor. 1. it is not to the Minister alone, but to the Church, whence it is visible that the Church was to take course where they thought fit about such a man; wherefore, the Church hath power to chuse so ne Representatives (for every one cannot be a judge in it) in whose hands is the administration of Church-discipline, as here we see it used in Parliaments, every free-born English man hath right to complain of grievances, and to indite any one that hath injured him, yet it is not fit that every particular man should go up to be a Par­liament man and a Judge of affairs, but they have Representatives to do it; In the Church these Representatives can be no others but Elders: That this is in the power of the Church, it is clear out of Acts 14.23. Paul and Barnabas ordaining Elders, not whom they pleased, but [...] by the votes and suffrages of the people, whose maxime it was acco [...]ding to the custom of the Greeks, to give their votes by lifting up of hand [...]; and in the c [...]se of choosing Deacons, the twelve left it to the power of the Church, Acts 6. Titus being left in C [...]es to ordain Elders, preaching or Ruling: it is to be under­stood this ordination was to be made by the consent of the Church, for it is not probable that Saint Paul would [...]ive that liberty to Titus which he assumed not to himself, to elect Elders without the con­sent of the Church▪ and in all this there was no Primacy, for there was not a Bishop of a Bishop, or a Pr [...]sbyter of a Presbyter (to make use of their distinct words:) so that it is clear, the Keyes of Disci­pline did not belong to one simple person, as the Minister alone, it would be, saith C [...]lvin, lib. 4. iu [...]tit. cap. 11. [...]ect. 6. as if the Con­su [...] had exp [...]ll [...]d the Senat [...], which name Martyr giveth to the El­ders the Sen [...]te of the Church, in his Com [...] lasse 4. loco 1. sect. 1 [...]. To conclude, Honourable Sir, it doth appear by things afo [...]e­s [...]d, that a Bishop hath no prerogative of superiority by vertue of his Office or place over any other preaching Presbyter, but that every Minister is a Bishop: for, amon [...]st themselves they have gi­v [...]n the hand of fellowship; And further, you see that this Bishop that is this Pastor can do nothing as to point of Church-discipline, without the consent of the Church rerpresented by the Elders; why should then B [...]shops be set up again, there being no ground for their [Page 18] Prelacie in Scriptu [...]e, and whose e [...]irpation hath [...]in so solemn a manner been sworn by [...] most of the people, and two Houses of Parliament▪ but I t [...]n [...] it is high time to withdraw from Bi­shop to g [...]t P esbyter [...], [...] enquire of what they can say for them­selves, and by w [...]at a [...] they stand, all which shall faithfully be communicated [...] Worship by

HAving had opportunity to accomplish the design expressed in my l [...]st, I am now in a capacity of performing my promise, and to shew you that the Government which Presbyterians do wish in the Church is not prounded upon humane invention, but it is of a divine institution: all their Adversaries, those only excepted in whom [...]e [...]on is subservient to passion, do acknowledge it to be out of prudence, for some things were left to the Church, say they, to insu [...] as the Church should see occasion; and therefore in some places it sitting well the temper of persons, it is lawfully tolerated as a thing not contrary t [...] Scriptures; but let a man question a Bi­shop, whether he will t [...]erate lay Elde [...]s within [...] D [...]ocer [...]s: then [...] this is to restrain their jurisdiction, they will g ve a denial, not out of any reasons no they have against it, but only out of [...] that it may be of a bad consequence as a president to [...]thers to with­d [...]aw from the [...] of the Bishop, w [...]i [...]h, say th [...]y, [...]ill in­troduce con [...] in the Church, when it is well known, that the di [...]cipl [...]n [...] which P [...]t [...]te [...] [...] [...]bserve, doth create an order inferiour to none; but Bishops will perhaps out [...] c nsi [...]e [...]ation suffer some extremity of their Wines, [...]s some Ceremonies to be clipt, but if you clip [...] to the flesh, that is their Supremacy, they cannot endure it, yet I hope they will give us leave (which we shall take, let them give it [...] not) to bring the t [...]uth-stone of the Word for informati [...]n and edification of us and others in this point: but least we dispute of a thing unknown, we will tell what these Elders are. They be [...] o [...]ght t [...] be [...], knowing and grave men, given to be helpers to [Page 19] Ministers in things concerning Discipline, to take notice of scanda­lous, [...]ebauched and Ordinance-neglecting persons: so in the visita­tion o [...] the sick, for sometimes such will be the number of the sick in great places as that the Pastor and Deacons cannot afford to be with all, and sometimes occasion shall require it, when the Minister i [...] busied about the Word, either in preaching, or else preparing him­self to it, and in this the Lord Jesus his Wisdom is to be admired; [...]or in certain great places there can hardly be main [...]nance for one M [...]n ster, [...]o that the whole burthen might happen to be too heavy for him, fo [...] there being no meanes there shall be no other Mini­ [...], who must have the fruits of their labours, 1 Cor. 7.11. Gal. 6.6, &c. and the workman is worthy of his hi [...]e; and since the things done by [...]e [...]s as aforesaid ought necessarily to be practised, there­fore God hath appointed persons, who, without any such Re­ward will supply in this kind, that which the Minister cannot at­tain unto.

And verily, it is either a gross ignorance of a great malice in the Aversa [...]s to say, that this was set up within these few yeares: for those that are acquainted with the practice of the primitive Church, will find thus in great Cities, the preaching Presbyters, did from amongst themselves Elect by the major vote one whom they called Ba [...]o [...], not that he should have any preeminence over o­thers, but that [...] might be Moderator in their Assemblies, to ask the opinions and see the Resolves put in execution, which was prudentia [...]ly excogitated according to the emergency of affairs and necessity of times, yet there remained an equality between this and other Pre [...]byte [...]s: wherefore, saith Jerome upon the Epistle of Titus, the Presbyter is the same as a Bishop; whence it doth appeear, first, that as men did set them up, so they might take them down: se­con [...]ly, since it was upon a necessity of affairs, so this necessity cea­sing [...] must cea [...]e from that function: but this being not properly of the point in hand, though it conduceth much to the whole of the Controversie, we wi [...]l come to the new observation. In the same Antiquity, [...] learn that the people had a share in choosing of Pre [...]byters and Bishops, as it was confirmed it should be: so in the Council of Antioch, whence came this maxime; Let him be E­lected whom the major part of the people hath desired; for he that is to be over all the people must be chosen of all the people: so, that when Ne [...]tarius was to be ordained in the general Council of Constantinople, the Fathers would not do it without the consent of [Page 20] all the M [...]nisters and of the people: whence we see, that the Fathers of the [...] did not lord it over o [...]he [...] Pre [...]byters, and then the rig [...]t o [...] the Church is [...]sse [...]ted, as y [...]u may [...]ee more at la [...], Cat. li [...]. 4 [...] 4 [...] 1 [...], 11, 12, &c. And there [...]re the Church hath a th [...]re in the Government, consequently it may, as it doth [...] it to [...] amongst themselves: and they did so in the p [...]imitive Ch [...]ch, for th [...]y were consulted about Church-affairs: take for this the te [...]timony o [...] [...] of M [...]lla [...], complain­ing of the [...] and slighting of the practi [...]e upon 1 [...]m. 5.17. The ancient Syn [...] [...], [...]th he, and the Church after had Elders, without who [...] [...] no [...]ing was done, by what neglect this is discontinued I know not, except through the slothfulness, o [...] rather pride of Doctor [...], whilest themselves al [...]ne would seem to be some­thing. This then shews that aso [...] h [...]e, there were such Elders, and be [...]ause of the neglect of pride of Bishops o [...] Pastors, it came to be ab [...]o [...]ted and wholly [...]oote [...] out in Popery Wherefo [...]e, to res [...]o [...]e the [...] to that right, is to [...]enew the practise of the former primitive Church. And with this take the Autho [...]ity of C [...]p [...]a [...] Bi­shop of Ca [...]hage, Epist. 10. l [...] [...] [...]r [...] [...] b ginning of my being Bi [...]hop, I [...]ved to do nothing [...] the consent of the people: so that the people were not encluded f [...]o [...] the knowledge of things: I might further bring some thin [...] o [...] o [...] [...] to this purpose, but I will come to that which is Antiquity it self: yea, of a grea­t [...] a [...]thority then Antiqu [...]ity, this is Scripture.

And to begin with [...]u [...] ble [...]e [...] Saviours A [...]th [...]rity, Mat [...]h. 18. v. 15, 16, 1 [...]. I [...] the brother [...] tre pa [...]s [...]g [...] thee doth n [...]gl [...]ct to [...] thr [...] [...]; This sheweth that in the Church the [...]e was one Discipline to do him right: for [...]e [...]e indeed, no [...] is given to the Church, for he [...]de st [...]ndeth the J [...]wi [...]h Ch [...]ch spea [...]ing to Je [...]s, so that in the Church there is a N [...]bedren, a Co [...]ncil of Senate, where all do not [...] to ne [...] pe [...]ons called E de [...] of the people, Matth. 1 [...]. [...]1. and [...] 10.1. and in [...] 5 12 they are called [...] calle [...] on [...] of the Rulers: whence I ob [...]erve, that in th [...] [...]yn [...] [...] there is the Church, there we e some R [...]le [...], [...] diss [...]tent from Levite [...] and P [...]iests in office; and what is [...] R [...]lin Elders. Secon [...]ly, That as in the Sy­nago [...]e there we [...]e R [...]lers, so [...]ome to be [...]led, and therefore this R [...]ng po [...] was not [...]n every member of it Now that these Ru­lers were [...]ny, it appe [...]rs, J [...] [...]2.42. A [...]o [...]g [...]t the chief Rulers [Page 21] many believed on him; [...]o that by other places you will know that there were Rulers in the Synagogue, who h [...]d the government of [...] [...]o that they [...]cised an Ecclesiastical Discipline by excluding, [...] for a time, or altogether, as Iohn [...] 2 [...]. They [...] a [...]eed it any one confesseth [...]m to be the Christ, he should be put out of the Synagogue. S. J [...]n, 16.12. They shall p [...] [...] of the [...]ynag [...]gu [...]s: For fear of this, Nicodemus a R [...]ler of it, [...] to [...] b [...] night. No [...] that their Synagogue wa [...] th [...] [...] Chu [...], [...] cannot b [...] doubted, for it was upon the Sab­bath day [...] th [...]t Ch [...]t enter [...] into their Synagogues, where they were a [...]sembled for religious D [...]ties: And that he speaks nere of the Je [...]sh Chu [...]ch, it i [...] clear by the Jewish [...]ule, Let him be a [...] an Heathen and a Pa [...]ca [...]. The substance of the Lord Jesus his saying is this, it thou hast been offended, so that thou hast ought against thy brother, because he hath offended thee, tell it to the Chu [...]h, the Senate of the Church, t [...]t he [...]pe [...] here of the Church in [...]sti [...]tion to the Jurisdiction of the Civil Magistrate; whi h b [...]th Jurisdictions a [...]e d [...]in [...]t in Scriptures, it is clear by what he saith in the 17 ver. [...]f loosing and binding, whereby the keyes of the Church are signified. It is kn [...]wn that the Church took notice of such private offences, and made reconciliation between distenting pa [...]ties, for the doing of which there was no need of the whole Sy­nagogue but only of the Elders: who as Writers testifie were used to do it, in all which ou [...] Saviour doth express the custom of his Na­tion in his time, so el [...]e who could have understood what he said: The summe of al [...] is thi [...]; In the Church of the Jewes, there were Rulers of the whole Chu [...]ch distinct from Priests and Levites, to re­concile differences, and to inflict punishments, as censures and ex­communication expressed by putting out: and there was no Tyranny in it▪ as some at this day report it to Presbyterians:) For Christ would not have spoken in this manner of that custom if he had ac­ [...]unted it unlawfull; who then is so blind as not to see here that there were lay-Elders so called, Ruling the Jewes Church; and there­fore, let none contest with us fo [...] antiquity about Ruling lay-Elders: since therefore we see nothing since forbidding the continuation of it in the Ch [...]istian Church, how lawful is it for us to imitate a Church so well ruled, which being approved of by Christ in thi [...] place, makes it in some respect to be of a divine institution, specially, if we look upon Scriptures indited since the Lord his As­ [...]nsion.

One is Acts 15.2 [...]. Three sorts of persons are assisted in it. Apostles, Elders and Brethren, who the Apostles were, there is no question: who the Elders the preaching Elders. By the Brethren, are understood the Ruling Elders so called for distinction from o­ther Elders, herein the Apostles and the Elders are clearly distin­guished from the rest of the Assembly, and the Letter sent by the common consent and advice of the Brethren, as of the Apostles and I Elders: hence I say against the Independents: the whole Church as to every particular member of it, is not to be understood, for then Proselytes, ignorant women and children as members should have been admitted in, and what great confusion would follow from thence: as for women they are excluded from speaking in the Church, 1 Cor. 24. which I understand of Teaching or Ruling: As for ignorants and children, how should they be admitted to the considerations of so great and serious affairs: besides, that it is more then probable that in Jerusalem there were more then one Church: I not there were so many Nations as we read of, Act. 2.9, 10, 11. besides the Jewes, and so every member of the Church would not go, but they sent some from amongst them, their Elders, and though there had been but one Church, it must be granted to have been very numerous, and so the same inconvenience remaineth, to wit, confusion, and therefore they had their Deputies, viz. their Elders. But, whether here by the word Brethren, the Adversaries may con­ceive it to be meant of Evangelists or Deacons, I know not, how­soever, there is no ground for it in the place, for it would have been expressed by that name, as the Apostles by the name of Apostles, Elders by the name of Elders: so it would have been said, the E­vangelists and Deacons as a more special and honourable Title then the name of Brethren so common and applicable to all: besides, those called Brethren did sit in the Council, by vertue and commission from Churches, and the Evangelists would have had place, not upon this account, through I confess it was not the office of Deacons to be judges of things that were to be spoken of them, for their chief occupation was in things of Charity, to which end they were cho­sen, Acts 6. Nor the Evangelists whose chief office it was to write the Evangelical History, Wherefore, I say, there were in the Council some Evangelists and Deacons, or not, whether there were any, it cannot be affirmed, because they were but few at that time, for ought we [...] five Deacons of the seven, Steven having been stoned, and Nicholas becoming an Apostate. As for Evangelists at [Page 23] the time of this Council, there were but four that we know of, and two of them Apostles, and, therefore they might have been els­where for the Council was held occasionally; and suppose they had been there as perhaps they were, then they were included un­der the name of preaching Elders: for Evangelists did preach some­times, inasmuch as one and the same person can be an Evangelist and a Pastor as Timothy was afterwards: so did the Deacons teach, not by vertue of their office, but accidentally if occasion were offered, to Steven disputed and taught, Acts 6 and 7. Further observe, they could not be Deacons and Evangelists, I mean, they could not be cal­led Brethren because they were Evangelist Deacons, but because they were Deputies o [...] the Church: for it is known, these Brethren took place in the Council, not as Evangelist Deacons, but as Representa­tives, that is, as Elders of the Church, for in the 22. ver. it pleased the Apostles, the Elders & the whole Church; and in the next ver. the A­postles, the Elders and the Brethren instead of the Church: so that the business is clear against the Episcopal party, though with the Independent there seems to remain a scruple; it being said, the whole Church, which seems to imply every particular member of it; but not so, the Brethren in the name of the whole Church, like Parliaments here when they do things, they may, and sometimes do, say the whole Nation, because it is by them represented. But to conclude, I say, those Brethren were preaching men, or not, if preaching men, then included under the name of Elders, whereby here are understood Ministers, and so no need of the word Brethren, which yet is necessary, because inserted amongst those from whom the Letter came: if they were no preaching men, then no Evangelists no [...] Deacons, who preached occasionally in the absence of Pastors, so it must needs be lay-Elders: Wherefore, though here be not the name of Ruling-Elder, yet we find the nature and office of such as were chosen from amongst the people to assist the Apostles and Ministers with their counsels and approbation in things to be debated in that Synod, but specially in things not concerning the Doctrine of Faith, but the welfare and edification of the Church, and order in it, as in the case of eating blood or strangled things, which is the occasion of the Letter.

Another proof of Scriptures is from Acts 20.17. He sent for the Elders of the Church of Ephesus: to know who these Elders were, it is necessary to search into the whole matter, contained from the 17 to the 28 ver. yea, in the 31. there is something to be [Page 24] taken [...] wherefore I [...] that, I [...] Es [...] are here to be understood, who [...] [...]e things [...]en [...]re so belong un­les; but the things herein spoken do not belong to preaching Elders but to Rasin [...] Elders; therefo [...], the Elders, [...]en [...] here are Ru­ling l [...]y Elders: the m [...]o [...], [...]ut the A [...]tle could not so much mistake as to spe [...] to one this which belon [...]eth not to the same, but to another, the Min [...]ter will appear o [...] the examen of se­veral particulars: First, they are th [...] [...] t [...]e Church of E­ph [...], the word Ch [...] in the [...]nal bein [...] in the singular num­ber may [...] that there [...] but one Church, I mean, not Temples, [...] perhaps they had more then one, but one assembly and conven­tion [...]d of Christians in that place, set there is not the same reason for Eph [...]s [...]us as the Je [...]usa [...]m, because first in Jerusalem, the number of conrr [...]ted me [...] [...]as much greater then at Ephesus; since there was a suffi ient c [...]u [...]a [...] n three Ap stles, Peter, Jame [...] and Je [...]a, Gal. 2. Secondly, In Jerusalem there were Conve [...]t [...] of seve­ral Nations, A l [...] 2. [...], &c. which cannot be positively ffi rmed of Ephe [...]us, a [...] therefore there was but one Chu [...]ch (though perhaps confining [...] Je [...]es and Gentiles, that is Ephe [...]ans) the [...]e could not be to many preaching Elders of that Church, as that it should be [...]er e [...]t [...]y for Saint Paul to say to them, ver. 25. T [...] a [...] am [...]g [...]t whom I have been preaching [...]all see my [...]ace no more: when it is very probabl [...] that in those dayes, wh [...]rein C [...]ri [...]tians were not [...]t [...]nanced has per [...]ecuted, the lab [...]ers should be so many, as to have two, three, and perhaps four at the most to preach; Now, why S. Paul sh [...]ld s [...]ea [...] so generally to three or four, [...] all: I see no reason n [...] n [...]cessity. I [...] tho [...] t [...]ings Ministers we [...] not so neg­lectfull as they we [...]e lately on [...]er Epis [...]pa [...], to that we think we had lately reason to complain in Gregories wor [...] s more then h [...]. The [...], sa [...] he, C [...] [...]t P [...]t [...]r [...], yet se [...] lab [...]u [...]ers in the Harvest, [...] ­ [...]a [...] we [...] that [...]ce, and we as [...] the work of the [...], &c. there [...]ore, since ten Min [...]ters, [...] vigilant, could carry on the work of the Chu [...]ch of Ephe u [...], as to pre [...]chin [...], which was thei [...] [...]nter work, and that [...] were the Elders [...] the Church of Ephesia [...] only, which Paul [...]entin [...], speaking to them as [...]o many, it doth necessarily follo [...] there w [...]e other kind of Elders more in number then the former [...], perhaps ten of fifteen to a preachin [...] Elde [...], for affair [...] being un [...]er [...]e [...] an [...] disturbed in those dayes, many were required, where [...] to look to the order and Dis [...]ne of the Church, while [...]t Ministe [...]s minded the preaching of the Word. The [Page 25] word Elders was common to both, because both sorts were Elders in quality. But another thing spoken here to these Elders which could not belong to Ministers, is this, verse 20. I have shewed you and taught you publikely, an [...] from house to house. Saint Paul being an Apostle was able indeed to teach Preachers, but to be taught publikely it is proper to people and not to Pastors, for in publick Assemblies it is the people and not Ministers that meet to be taught: therefore, the word You may very well be spoken to the persons of the Elders whom he preached to, and whose duty it is to be Hearers and not P [...]eache [...]s: for Ruling Elders, the Discipline of the Church set a­part, are not different from the rest of the people, they are appoint­ed not to preach but to hear, specially in publick. Secondly, The word [...], may be spoken of the people, to you, that is, to the peo­ple represented by you to be taught, cannot well and properly be said of Ministers who are in office: but perhaps they may have dis­coursed with, instructed and taught in private, but to be taught pub­likely is applicable to the people: And not only so, also from house to house, to teach and instruct Ministers it doth imply this absurdity, They that were judged capable to teach and preach in publike, have need themselves to be instructed in private. That Saint Paul should be put to go from house to house to teach Ministers, this would argue a great oversight in them (may be Paul) who had or­dained them to the Ministery: and a great blemish of insufficiencie in them that are Teachers to be taught in publick and private: but, perhaps some will say, by Teaching are to be understood Conferen­ces, and conversation about points of a difficult nature and hard to be understoo [...] even by the Learned, as in the Mysterie of the Trinity and Incarnation, &c. This was not it, for, ver. 21. we will find it to be ordinary subjects principles of Christian Religion known by any Proselite, as Repentance and Faith in Christ; and this not for few dayes, weeks or mouths, but three years together, I ceased n [...] — and what? not, to teach as afore, but to warn and admonish, and this, not some houres of the day, but day and night, and not as if it had been indifferent to me that you had repented and believed, but with desires, entreatings, beseechings, yea even with teares: every word you see doth carry a strong reason. And, what kind of Mini­ster would this have been? What could Saint Paul do more to un­converted, ignorant and every disobedient hearer? And thus he had dealt with all, as after he prayed with all, ver. 36. And, that these Ministers (if such) should have no more power over their grief, [Page 26] be [...] grave, and have no more of Ch [...]tian generosity, and res [...]tion, a [...]d if they had been [...]u [...]pri [...]d at th [...], [...] they shoul [...] weep [...], [...]all on Pa [...] nec [...] and [...]. This indeed doth at­ [...] the tempe [...] of th [...]e who were more [...]it to receive instruction then to give [...] And since the Epi [...]le afterwards written to the E­ [...]h [...], is e [...]ected not to the Ministers but to the Church and Saints, in it I may then c [...]clude, that these words were not spoken to preaching but Ruling Elders. Yet for all this we do not e [...]clude preaching Elders called overseers, whom he giveth the charge to, [...] 28. as in the 29. He doth charge the others to watch; for the Ministers went to Pa [...]l, accompanied by the Adjutors, Ruling El­ders, not only as having a share in the Church Government, and so to see him and receive some good instructions from him, but also as Deputies from, and Representati [...]es of the Church o [...] Eph [...] ­s [...]. Hence you may [...]ee, Hon [...]rable Sir, this truth to be pround­ed up [...]n the foundati [...]n of Scriptures: we might say more to it, but [...] we [...]ear to attempt so much upon y [...]r patience, when you c [...]me to the per [...]al of this, we reserve the conclusion to the next, and crave liberty to be,

NOt [...] to [...] my self of in [...]i [...]e [...]ne [...]s, for then, be­c [...]e [...] [...]itation, it would be to make you accessa [...]y to [...] my se [...]f hereby in that success I have to satisfie (as you [...]) the ju [...]ment o [...] so a [...]ute and one per [...]ons as you and the No [...]e [...]an a [...]e: In [...]eed Sir, I confidently pour my heart into you [...] very b [...]om. I have no hundreds of pounds in Livin [...]s to lose, and tho [...]h I had, I [...]ould prefer the keeping of a good con­science to the pain [...] all the world: Neither do I of the other side, [...]pect in th [...] wo [...]ld any advantage by professing this truth, which I am com [...]ced to be according to the Wo [...]d of God, there­fore, you may look upon me (as you assured me you do) as an un­interessed [Page 27] person: And I hope through grace, chiefly in things of this nature to keep from me the blemish of dissimulation, since my warrant for it is out of Scripture. Without Complements there­fore, which you cannot expect from him who is capable of none, specially in things of this serious concernment: I proceed to ano­ther place of Scripture.

It is, R [...]m. 12.8. He that ruleth let him do it with diligence. In this place the Apostle doth enumerate the spiritual Gifts and Offices in the Church: it is clear from ver. 4.5. which he divideth into two kinds, ver. 6, 7. The first is Preaching, called Prophesying. The se­cond Ruling, called Ministring: which division is observed, 1 Pet. 4.11. If any man speaks, here speaking is for preaching: If any man Minister, there is Discipline, as in the other is Doctrine, preach­ing in this, Rom. 12. is lively described: in the two parts of it, the first is Teaching, the second Exhorting; so that one is the inform­ing of the judgement, and the other is the moving of the affecti­ons, or, if you will have it, clear Teaching containeth explication, and Exhorting comprehendeth application: As to the offices of Mi­nistration three are expressed, ver. 8. One is the Deacon's, he that giveth, for he is the Distributer of almes, which he must do in sim­plicity without any fraud: The third is the function of those that were appointed for the care of the poor, by attending on them; these were Widowes spoken of, 1 Tim. 5.9. Let not the Widow be taken into the number under threescore yeares old: this is intimated, Acts 6.1. but the second office expressed in this ver. is his who is a Ruler in the Church, he that Ruleth, which he ought to do with Diligence and care: Hence doth appear first, that there is in the Church a particu­lar office for the ruling thereof. He that ruleth, he implieth that there are some who do Rule, or else the Apostle doth suppose a false thing. Secondly, hence it is clear, that this function of Ruling is distinct from other offices of administration in or about the Church, as from the the Deacon and from the Widow attending the poor, and as the office of the Deacon which is to distribute almes to the poor, is really distinct from the function of the Widow, which is to look to, and be carefull of them, either by looking to their per­sons when sick, or else by providing for them things necessary out of the almes given by the Deacon, so the office of the Ruler is different from both the other two, or else it would be in vain for the Apostle to express it if it were but one and the same with the others: and we know, that as the Deacon [...] not the Widow, not the Widow [Page 28] the Deacon: so the Ruler t [...] neither the De [...]con not the Widow: it so, then much [...] shall [...] of Prophe [...]ying [...] an [...] this in [...] [...]th which spe [...]ie [...] are compre [...]nded un [...]er this Gents. [...] so it is Rule [...] and Preache [...] are t [...] [...]ifferent of­fices, the R [...]ler is n [...]t the Preacher, although the Preacher be a Ru­ler, but th [...]s will [...] presse [...] on when we shall explain that, [...] N [...]w, that there are [...]ifferent [...]ffi [...]es it i [...] clea [...], for the Ap [...]tle in t [...]e [...] them [...] differen [...], and these several and [...]fferent [...] are upon several and different persons, which is well represented by the com [...]ion of many members in one body, and all me be [...] have a different [...]. 4. so that t [...]e o [...]fi [...]e of the [...] of the oth [...]: the [...]unction of the eye is diffe­rent [...]rom [...] of the ear, the one [...] [...]ee, the o [...]he to hear, [...] the oth [...] of the hand is not the office [...] the [...]oo [...], whereby it [...] clear that t [...]y are several different membe [...]s and they have se­veral different offices▪ in the l [...]e manner, that one b [...]dy the Ch [...]ch [...] [...]everal differ [...]nt members, as Preachers, Dea [...]ons, Ru­lers as in a natural b [...]y, we know the han [...] is a member diff [...]ent [...] so in the mysti [...]al b [...]dy the Ruler is not the P [...]ea­che [...]: and a [...] the [...]unction of the hand [...] real [...]y distinct and different [...] the [...], to the office of the Ruler is really distinct and diffe [...]n [...] from that of the Preacher. But n [...]ther it will appear, that a [...] t [...]e Ruler is different from the Minister as to the office, so he is [...] kind and order of persons: for, we see it is [...] amongst the Laymen the word Lay is in opposition to Pasto [...]s) Deacons and Widows [...] of the T [...]e of Le [...], but selected from the people as you [...] Act. 6.3. From this it is as clear as t [...] day that there are R [...]linglay-Elders in the Church; the stren [...]th of this the adversaries know very well, wherefore they are forced to make a [...] of [...] [...]ay, for they would have this to be as a Precept un­to all men that are in power, as civil Magistrates, as well as in Church to rule with diligence, but how poo [...] a shut this is, it appears from [Page 29] the words of the Apostl [...], for ver. 5. he speaks of the Church, by him called the bo [...]y of Chri [...]t, and Scriptures make alwayes a distin­ction and difference between the civil and Ecclesiastical powers and offices, making no con [...] [...]n between them: besides, that in the time that this Epistle was w [...]tten by Saint Paul to the Romans, there be­ing amongst them no Ch [...]istian Magistrate, he could not speak this to a civil Magistrate but to them that were joyned to the Pastor as as­sisting in the Gove [...]nment of the Church.

This same matter is handled more at large, 1 Cor. 1 [...]. By the same Apostle who hath spoken to this Subject more then any of all other holy Writers, so that minding the Discipline as the Doctrine of the Church, he is in several places very clear upon this point, so in this Chap. vers. 28. he speaks of Governments: what we must understand hereby, it will be sai [...] a little below; for introduction into it, it is to be observed, that the Apostle in this Chap. doth speak of spiritual gifts, vers. 2. whi [...]h gifts are in the Church, vers. 28. and thereupon they are to be lookt upon as excellencies where­with God hath graciously adorned his Church: all which are re­duced under these three kinds: First Gifts, vers. 4. expressed, vers. 8. Secondly, Operations affirmed, vers. 6. described, vers. 9, 10. Thirdly, Administrations, vers. 5. enumerated, vers. 28. Between all which, he maketh a difference, and sheweth a diversi­ty between them; the two first being not to our present purpose, we omit to come to the third, that is, Administration, wherein se­veral are expressed, and all easie to be understood; only this I may observe, that though in some English Translation: I find helps of Governments, or in Governments by others, as if one and the same office was designed, Government being the subject, and helps the adjunct: in which translation, though I find nothing contrary to both, yet because in the O [...]iginal I find [...], I take it to be two distinct and several functions; and by Helps, In­terpreters understand the Deacons, and widows spoken, Rom. 12. And by Governments, we understand Presbyters that rule and go­vern the Church: But afore we lay down the grounds of this which is the Judgement of Martyr Calvin, Be [...], and other Re­verend Divines upon the place, we must answer an objection that may be made; Whether any of these Offices have ceased, and whether this of Government is amongst them? To which I say, At first some Offices were necessary for the planting and propagating of the Church, and confirmation of the Doctrine: Such were miracles, [Page 30] healings, so the Apostles immediately called of Christ, and extra­ordinarily indue? with the Spirit: So the Prophete not so much to [...] [...]uture events, [...] to shew the fulfillin [...] of the prophesies con [...]ning the M [...]h in the Lord Jesus Christ; to these we may add the [...] Writes of the Go [...]pel, and therein of Christ h [...]s [...]h, [...], [...]ath and the c nseq [...] nces of it; these I say were [...], because of the then present condition of the Ch [...] [...] there [...] no need [...] them, becau [...]e of the growth [...] the Church, th [...] confirmation of the Doctrine, and that we ex­p [...] [...]. But as to Teachers or Preachers spoken in [...] [...]s necessa y to have them alwayes; in Mat. 28. Christ sent [...] D [...]ples not to pr [...]phe [...]e, t [...] [...]al, or to work Miracles, but teach the Nations, v rs. 1 [...] which function [...] rehearsed, vers. [...]0 teachin [...] them: To his D [...]sciples, as Ministers or Teachers, not as Apostles [...] Prophets h [...] promi [...]ed his presence untill the end of the world, so [...] till then the [...] shall be Teache s in the Church; and as the Doctrine is to be continued to the Church, to is Discipline, for [...] ess [...] to the being, so is the other to the well-being of [...] as long as the Church shall be Church, as lon [...] there shall be a Government: for the hou [...]e of God is the h [...]se of Order [...] t [...]e t [...]n [...]s prea [...]e [...], we could not omit, because they are a g od [...]lation for what we intend to say, which is t [...]s.

There is an office in the Church of God here called Government, [...] the objected that office is government. This you see assert­ [...] [...] G [...] hath to [...] in the Church Governments, that is, [...] [...]es, that the afore- [...]oin [...] offices are named in the [...]nc [...]te and persons, as Apostles, Prophets, &c. and this [...] un [...]erst [...]d, I [...]nd th [...]s Hebratines often used in Scri­ptu [...]es, w [...]en [...]e [...] of su [...]tiantiv [...] [...] p [...] [...] the [...]n [...]te o [...] [...] is made W [...]d [...]m, Ri [...]hteousn [...]s, that [...] To deny that there are such in the Church is [...] the Lord Chr [...]t, from whence are administra­t on [...] 5 [...]n [...] in this 2 [...], he hath set this order. Secondly, It [...] to g [...]ve t [...] lye to the Apostle, and thi [...]dly, [...]t is to [...]n into the ab­surd [...]y [...] the natu [...]al body, ve [...]. 15, 16. If the so [...]t shall say, [...]ecause I am [...] the hand, I am not of the body; is it not of the body▪ so, [...] Rule [...] of Governours in the Chu [...]ch shall say, because I am not a Teacher, therefore I am not of the Church? is be not therefore of the Church, for if all were Preachers, where were the Hearers, the [Page 31] Rulers, &c. And to know who, and how these Governours are, I wish it were taken notice of, that the Apostle maketh a comparison between Christ's mystical body the Church, and a man's natural body, for, as there are several members that have several functions: so in the body mystical of Christ, there are several members that have several offices, and as these offices are different one from another, as ver. 5. so the persons by whom they are administred are different, and therefore, as the persons, so the offices are not to be confuted: the one cannot administer the function of another without intrusion and usurpation: the Ruler must not preach, and if the Preacher doth govern, it is not as he is a Pastor, but as he is a Ruler; let therefore, (as the Apostle saith elswhere) ev [...]ry one abide in that whereunto he is called: hence I gather, that these Governours here do differ in person, and charge from the Teachers expressed in this place: so, that some may be and are Rulers in the Church which are no Preachers nor Teachers in it: if so then, they are no Ministers but they are laymen: so there are laymen Elders and Rulers in the Church, and, though here the Church be taken for the universal Church of which particular Churches are members and parts, yet these particular Chur­ches of Congregations must have in themselves that which is essential to a Church, as it is a Church and integral to this or that Church as it is such, for else it will not have the being of a Church, nor the well-being of the same, but we know it cannot have the being of a Church without doctrine, not the well-being without discipline: and as doctrine is necessary and administred by Preachers, so discipline is necessary and administred by Rulers: and as the object of the Preach­er, to wit, Preaching, doth differ from the object of the Ruler, which is Ruling, so that Ruling is not Preaching, neither is Preach­ing Ruling, therefore, the person that Preacheth and the person that Ruleth must be two distinct and different persons: but if they say, these functions may be administred by one and the same person, I will Reply then, the functions of all the members of one body may be in one member of the same: so hearing, seeing, smelling, feeling, &c. may be in the hand or in some other member; the rea­son is clear from the comparison of the Apostle, the life and strength whereof doth consist in the diversity and difference of members: and of their functions; and since this comparison is so much pressed by Saint Paul, we think it ought not to be neglected by us: but to con­clude this, although we confess that in the Church a Minister may be, and is a Ruler, yet thereby we do not both eye the Ruling office [Page 32] in the Ch [...]rch which may be and sometimes is in it though there were no Preachers, as it happeneth in some places, where though they have no Min [...]ters, yet they love Elders to Rule, and some, ei­ther De [...]on of other, in such a case to read the Word before the Congregation: of which places I have the charity to believe they a [...]e a [...], [...] though they have not the Word preached, yet they have [...] read till Go [...] be pleased to afford the [...]. Ministers.

B [...]t to draw ni [...] to the end of this whole matter, we will [...]ome to that place which is so s [...]l and so clear for this truth, as that what­soever they an [...]e [...] to it is but three or four wo [...]ds, for the which they can g [...]ve no reason nor p [...]esident in Scripture, so that I account it [...] answe [...]able, the place is well known, 1 Tim. 5.1 [...]. the words are there, L [...] the Elders that rule well be counted w [...]thy of [...]n [...]le [...]s­ [...], esp [...]ially they who labour in the W [...]rd and Doctrine. Hence doth appear that there are tw [...] [...]in [...]s of Elders, some who do preach, and some who do not, as lay-Elders: for an int [...]du [...]tion unto the proof [...] this, we must take notice that Saint Paul doth write to Timothy instructions for the discharge of his office only, of which this Te [...] [...]s; It is [...]nown that Timothy was a Minister in the Church of Ephe [...], and an Oversee [...], not [...] other Ministers, as having any [...] over them, but of [...]is flock, which for a time only was com­mitted to his cha [...]g [...], and perhaps he was the superintendent of o­thers his fellow Presb [...]ter [...] Thus [...], a [...] to be a Moderator in their Assemblies, having been pre [...]erred to it either by Saint Paul's credit, o [...] el [...]e (which I b [...]lieve) the rathe [...] by vertue of the choyce made of [...] by his fellow Presbyters because of his piety and pru­dence, he [...] [...]uch: there were some that stood between him and the p [...]le: there were Elders as they are called here, whom he was to [...] els and she accounted by others, worthy of double [...] are Rulers whose quality was honour [...]e, of [...] they Ruled well, b [...] [...] more, [...] be [...]es the other [...] perfection, well they labo [...]red in the word [...] that [...] they were not only Ruling [...]ders, but al [...]o [...] El [...]s [...]m the place I a [...], he thus: two sorts of Presby­ters [...] There, but of them one sort [...]h not preach, and t [...]e o [...]he [...] [...] preach, therefore there is a kind o [...] lay Presbyters be [...] [...]ed▪ the Minor as proved: here are asserted some who role [...] in the word and doctrine, and some who only rule, but tho [...]e that only rule and labour not in, &c. they do not preach, there­fore [...] are some Elders who do not preach; but perhaps they [Page 33] will say, that this is spoken but of one person, in whom this preach­ing and Ruling are gradually distinct, that is one and the same per­son is a ruling Elder and a labourer: but I argue here is a double subject, one general, and another special, but every subject here is a person, therefore there is a double person; the Minor is clear, be­cause universal and special are really distinct, so here must be a real distinction of persons, and therefore the same person which is the Elder labouring in the word and doctrine is not that person that is the ruling Elder only: that general and special are really distinct it appears, because Genus and Species are such as it is clear from A­ristotle's definition of description of both: as Species and Number are really distinct because this distinction is between res and res: but to avoid falling off from the question, we say, hence the preaching Elder may be a Ruler when the Ruler shall not be a Preacher; as now let us put Elder for the Genus as it is here, and Ruling with Preach­ing, the difference or several Species rather as anon we will prove it to be, then we must draw these true propositions. A preaching Elder is a Ruling Elder, but a ruling Elder is not a preaching Elder: this I say in Logick, every man is an animal, but every animal is not a man, every living thing is a substance, but every substance is not a living thing: so every Minister is an Elder, but every Elder is not a Minister, because, although every Species hath the Genus, yet the Genus shall not be spoken equally of both Species in one and the same subject.

But the truth doth throughly appear from the particle [...] spe­cially, which is particular restrictive and specificative, but that which is part, rest, and specif. is distinctive, therefore this particle is distinctive of things, if joyned with things and of persons, if joyned to persons, as appeareth by the word et qui, this is clear from other Scriptures, where being ordinarily joyned to persons it doth really distinguish them, as 1 Tim. 4.10. God is the Saviour of all men, especially them that be­lieve, whether there be not a distinction between all men and belie­vers? Is not the particle [...] added to restrain and specifie be­lievers from all men? Are all men redeemed and saved? Is not this proper to believers: and here to say that Believers are not speci­fied from all other men that are not believers, it is to make a sad confusion between Believers and Reprobates: so the same Apostle in another place, do good to all man especially to them that are of the houshold of faith: whether those of the houshold of Faith are not specified from that generality, all men, and whether they be not a [Page 34] different sort of persons from all men that are not of the houshold of Faith, so here in the Te [...]t? Whether they that are said to labour in the Wo [...]d [...]ith [...]n E pecially, are not persons different from tho [...]e that are afore [...]d to Rule well in general without a word of la­bouring wherefore we must say, that all those th [...] Rule do not labour in the Wo [...]d, [...] the the particle specially is superfluous (which G [...]d so [...] we should think as it b [...]ing distinctive it doth not di­stin [...]uish where it i [...] put: Nay, I say, that this specification of labouring made [...] some Elders, doth imply, that some Elders do not lab [...]. I hope the A [...]re [...]te [...] have not forfeited their know­led [...]e th [...] Rule in Lo [...]ick, that a particular affirmative doth sup­pose a particular Negative▪ thus Some man is good, it doth sup­po e and [...]me man is not [...]: so, some Elders labour in the word and [...] me, or do preach, therefore some Elders do not preach, yet [...] Rule, [...] as clear as t e day, and it is the judgement not only of Modern but also of very ancient Authors, such as Am­bro [...], [...] upon this place doth asse [...]t, that there were such Elders in the P [...]imitive Church, and he doth complain that it was neglected t [...] have them, watch in part be attributes to the pride of Teache [...] ▪

Some of the A [...]versaries whom I have di coursed with upon this [...]o [...]nt, being [...]ed by the a [...]o esaid reasons, do confe [...]t that there are too dan [...]er Pre [...]byters, yet both they would have to be preach­ing: to wh [...]. I an [...]wer, th s cannot be that they should be di­ [...]ct [...] pre [...]ch, and this inconsistence of those two asser­ [...] [...] thy [...] one a [...]ment, that which is common to [...] make a d [...]fference and distincti [...]n between both: [...] cannot put a diffe [...]ence between Peter and J [...]hn, [...] they say it c mmon to both, therefore preach­ing [...] make a difference between both. [...] that to say that both do p [...]each, [...] to deny distinction and difference between both, [...] ass [...]rted otherwise then by acknowledging the truth [...], that there are Ruling El [...]ers who [...]o not preach: but, [...] this answer of theirs▪ I say, if there be no [...], and they grant, nay affi [...]m, that h [...]e are two kinds of Elders ready d stin [...]uished then besides Ministers, no other kind can be affi [...] but Bishops in their sense, whom they also call Elders: if to them the [...]e wil be Bishops of Bishops that is plainly Tyranny, or el [...]e, [...] these two kinds of Elders b [...] only Ministers, and not Bi­shops in their sense with this distinction, that one shall Rule well [Page 35] and preach, and the other rule well, yet not preach though a Mi­nister, what else is it but a lay-Elder if he doth not preach, for so h [...] cann t be called a preaching Elder: Or further, if they un­derstand such Elders, as that bo [...]h shall preach, yet one shall labour or take more paines (as they interpret it) then the other. Then this will be to force the word Lab [...]ur, which being joyned to Word and Doctrine, do not signifie to take great paines in it more then othe [...]s, but only it properly si nifieth to preach the Word, for Ministers are called by Christ Labourers and Workmen in the Harvest and Vineyard of G [...]d. B [...]sides this, I would put them in mind that [...] Especially, is put between Ruling and Labour­ing, and not between preaching the Word and labouring in the Word, so that the difference is between Rulers and Labourers, and not between Preachers and Labourers: for every Preacher must la­bour, as Aretius doth very well say in his Comment upon Acts 20.28. Think not, saith he, the word [...]ish [...]p to be a title of honour and dignity, no, it is a name of labour; Whereupon, with Scripture he calleth speculative Ministers or Bishops, dumb d [...]gs: wherefore, saith famous Calvin upon this place, 1 Tim. 5 17 Honour [...] due not to the title, but to the labour, so that there is no Minister but he is a labourer, and he must spend and be spent in doing the work, the work committed to him (and not be drones as they were formerly under Pre [...]acy, for I may name some who preached but twice in se­ven yeares, and othe [...]s hardly once in two yeares:) Whether it be the duty of those who are not labourers in the Word but labourers in Discipline, as Censors and Senates to Rule well. The order of which persons is so clear from Scriptures by what hath already been spoken, that I dare to say, none but wilfully b [...]inded can doubt of the truth of it: And to go further about the point of illustration of it, it will be to li [...]ht, as they say, a Candle at noon-day: but, if any one is curious to hear more of this Subject, let him peruse the writings of that incomparable Minister Calvin, in his Institution, lib. 4. from [...]hap. 4. to the 12. inclusively, and Martyr's C [...]mmon-place, chap. 4. loc. 1. sect. 1, 2, &c. chiefly sect. 10. and Hinder­sons Conferences with the late King: where through the edge of his reasons be concealed, and the King's put to the height by an E [...]isco [...]al Pen, yet truth in it doth triumph over all the reasons and Replies of the Adversaries of that divine verity.

Wherefore, as it is evident out of Scriptures that there is an of­fice in the Church; if lay Elders to rule it, so it is no lesse conspi­cuous [Page 36] that the Episcopal party i [...] to bent upon that Diana, as they would mov [...] heaven and [...] [...]ther then to lose any thing by the [...] a [...] into [...] [...]o them: so that [...] no [...]or [...] [...] they [...] H [...]a Pe [...]nacie derived in that [...] Popery through pride and am­b [...] [...] thereby t [...] Church hath b [...]en deprived [...] Christ and yiel [...]ed by the Apostles [...] of t [...]ings of any importance [...] the people of that [...] a sac [...]iledge to cut off from the [...], in [...]tituted in and practised by the [...] the Apo tle [...] [...] and since. Now to be brief, the sub [...]tance of all that hath been spoken is this▪ there ought not to be [...]ch Ruling [...] a [...] are spi [...]i [...]al L [...]ds and pretend any Primacy over any M [...]ni [...]ters, and [...] shall be in no danger of [...]our and He­resie, we shall be f [...]ee from so many innovations introduced into the Church from Popery; we w [...]ll bear no more of the strange [...] Deanes, Chapters, Prebends, Canons, &c. whose mean [...] [...] to the encou [...]aging of a go [...]ly able preach­in [...] [...] of w [...]ich a [...]e often to want even of that which others [...] to their [...]ounds: a B shop shall have 4000 or 5000 [...] a year, when some Ministers that have great Families have not above 25 or [...]0 pounds a year: if it be so, then we shall hear [...] expressions, as Presbyters Overseers of their stock, and not Lord [...] to, or of [...]ellow-Ministers, neither will there be so much [...] given to the Devil of tempting men to pride and Am­ [...]t [...]on. But,