THe First Quaere shall be this, If Episcopacy, The OR­DER it self may be justly outted, because that the Name or Title wherby the men in the order entitled or designed, viz. Episcopus, which is rendred in our ordinary language Bishop, doeth seeme to our Disciplinarians, forsooth, sapere fastum, to savour of pride and arrogancy.

Answere. GOod LORD! What presumptuous and bold, as unwarrantable ignorance is this, from off of the Name, from whence men in a CALLING receive their denomination, to raise grounds or reasons to infirme and wea­ken a CALLING? Is not this Ludere in vocibus, rather then seriò agere, nay, impiè ludere in re tam seria? But to the Point. This their Alleadgeance is false: for this is a TITLE oneris po­tiùs, quàm Honoris, of a burden rather, then of honour. Doth not this very NAME Episcopus or Overseer, import and designe Curam et solicitudinem, which requires no little vigilancy and carefulnesse? And so as Honos, or Honour is conferred to them, so an onus, or burden is imposed on them, and thus it is incumbent on them, as praesse, so prodesse, since dignity and duty go together. This very Name of GODS own imposition, is like a Memento, or as the voyce of a Cryer, to sound out wholsome admonitions and instructions on both sides: for to them, Aurem vellit et admonet, it pulleth them by the eare and admonisheth them of the heavy burden imposed on them, and weyghty charge entrusted them; That they so oversee, as men who must one day reddere rationem villicationis suae, give, ren­der and make an accompt of their inspection and oversight; And on the other hand, IT bears on them, who are cōmitted to their inspection and oversight, the returne of a reciprocall duty of acknowledgement, subjection and submission. But I cannot [Page 2]sufficiētly wonder, That men of Learning should, yea or could have stumbled at this, though the Name whereby they are designed should import no slender Honour or Prerogative, se­ing that, as if the Earth could not sufficiently furnish us titles of Honour to dignifie that Office or Calling, accordingly, wee finde the Heavens sought unto, to afford according Titles, to set forth the high & surpassing great dignity of that so emi­nent and honourable an Ministration, and so ennobled by the blessed TRINITY. IT is to be wished, as Gregory saieth well on that they are called Angeli Domini exercituū. Mal. 2.7. ut di­gnitatem servarent in nomine, quam explent in operatione; yea, et è converso, ut quam dignitatem obtinent in nomine, explerent in ope­ratione, Numero, ut nomina rebus responderent suis, et res nomini­bus. If we should be pleased to prove idle, & seek out any lur­king Pride in vocables, we might arcesse their Presbyters or El­ders, Seniores, of no lesse arrogancy, & so call their divine and so much cryed up office of Eldership in question, which were a piacular sin: for doeth not the French word Seigneurs, as if ye should say, Senieurs, flow from that of Seniores nay, and Senato­res too? but this is but an idle Logomachy or vaine contest a­bout words. But this shews forth to the full, as their hate and aversation of the matter or Office, so their best poore willing­nesse, to beare out their point, and roote out the Order. If this were safe and sure argumenting, Why might we not no lesse justly cry out against the dignity of Christians under Christs Kingdome, where we are said in common to be made in Him [...], into a Royall Priest-hood, wher every word serves to advance the surpassing great dignity of our Condition under the Gospell, above that under the Law. IT wonders me not a little, How that these men, who bowed the knee to Independency, and proved active and instrumentall to bring in a Paritie in State, as in Church, grudged not, and ex­cepted against the usurped name of a Lord Protector, since that the Prophet Isai. fore-prophecying of Christs Kingdom, Is. 32. from the beginning, may justly seeme to vindicate this Title to that Man Christ, Who is both GOD and Man, and so can only prove an hiding place from the winde, & a covert frō the [Page 3]tempest. How is it that they so deeply forgot themselves, as shuning Charybdis, they should so willingly, as willfully cast themselves into Scylla, & esclave themselves to a farre higher and harder dependency: where their least finger proved bigger, then were their Fathers loynes? Certes me thinks it no won­der, That men, who made it no scruple or conscience, to cast off their RƲLER, whom GOD had set over them, Their just Titular KING, though GOD Himself to dignify the Office of Kings, is pleased to impart to them, and cōmunicate with them His Name and Office, by an Ego dixi dij estis, I have said, yee are gods, Ps. 82.6. That they bearing His Image and Superscription, as it were, might labour to be answerable to their Prototypon, and so strive to be [...] live­ly Images of GOD, in ipso judicandi munere, in their due ad­ministration of Justice; I say, I can think it no wonder, That these who scrupled not, or made the least conscience to make such an alteration in State, should not stand on this, to banish all order in Church: and so bring in confusion in both. Truely these so grave and learned Divines and pious Reformers, arces­sing from the bare and naked Name, grounds and reasons to infirme the Office, may not without just cause seeme to re­semble that Rhetorician, who could Mirifice res exiguas verbis amplificare, wonderfully amplifie small matters with hye words, whom Agesilaus thought no more commendable for it, then the Shoe-maker, who should make great shoes for little feet. Thus you see, That this is no verdict or true saying, but a false-dict or false-saying, that the name or appellation of Bi­shop savours of Pride & arrogancy. I pray you num [...] quae Bezae perplacet appellatio, caret omni superci­lio, stands this Compellation voide and free of all pride? yea and wheras the Pope of Rome calls himself servum servorum; doth this impaire his pride, and not rather augment and increase his deepe hypocrisie? Is not this sacred and venerable Title ascribed to Christ Himself in scripture? Is not Hee called, The shep-herd and Bishop of our soules? Nay, may we not upon the same ground, unicâ liturâ, expunge Apostleship: as that which is [Page 4]stylled by the Holy Ghost Episcope or Bishoprick, thus Act. 1.20. whereas Matthias is suffected in Judas his roome, It is said, Et Episcopatum ejus accipiat alter, And his Bishoprick let another take. Where, by the way, observe; That the word in the o­riginall [...] is evill rendred in our Transla­tion, Communibus suffragiis allectus est: for the Apostles were not by Election, but by Christs immediat designation; And so it is better rendred in our vulgar language, Annumeratus est, from [...] calculus, And he was numbred with the eleven A­postles, Act. 1.26. If any should except here, That this Charge sortitò ei obtigit, befell him by Lot, IT is easily replyed, That the disposition of the Lot is of GOD, and so this proves nothing prejudiciall to his immediat and extraordinary CALL. Thus Non est fastus in nomenclaturâ, there may well be in stomach [...] vestro fastidium; Nay, and though this Name be usurped with our Adversaries, this bereaves not us of our just right: for wee cannot losse our just title or claime to things, frō hence, That they are abused to superstition, for I pray you, What is so holy, which may not be abused to superstition? Now the abuse of a thing, as it taks not away, so can it not defraud us of the lawfull vse of it; for else Exscindenda essent nobis vites, and wee should take out of the Firmament duo illa Luminaria magna. CHRIST made vse in His very first Miracle, of turning water into wine, of the vessels used in the jewish Purificatian; Paul sailled in a Shipe carrying the badge of Castor and Pollux; Nay, & our strickest Reformers preach in Temples bearing the names of forged and doxastick saints in the popish Legendory. I beleeve, There is no little distance twixt these two, to mu­tuate, emprunt or borrow a thing from superstition; and to vindicate it from superstition. Magnum hîc [...], la­bes, lacuna, dissidium. Now Popedome gave not the source or originall to Episcopacy, but oweth it cadence or descent to it. For Closure, I would gladly learne; If the name of Superinten­dent, which is a name of mans imposition, did savour of lesse Pride, yea and wherin stood his power or prostasy lesse. Now this sort of government obtained and found place, at our first Reformation.

Now to come more pressly to the Point; The second Quaere shall bee this; If Episcopacy be Institutionis dominicae, or barely dispositionis ecclesiasticae, of Divine institution, or of meer Ecclesiasticall disposition.

The Apostle S. Paul having called the Elders of Ephesus to­gether to MILETUS, Hee exhorts them to take heed unto them­selves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost had made them Overseers, (where the word in the originall is, Episcopos) to feed the Church of God, which Hee had purchased with His own Bloud: Now I beleeve, That Praefectura Spiritus San­cti, cannot be denied to stand Ordinatio, or Institutio Divina, a Divine Ordinance and Institution. If any should except here, That this Name stands common to these our gregary Laik-Elders brought on our stage to day; There be two maine argu­ments militating here to the contrary: For first, The Charge gi­ven to them or entrusted them, sciz. Pascere gregem, to feed the flock, evinceth the contrarie, for Hi tondent et diglubunt. 2. This Charge is said, to have been entrusted or committed to them, by the Holy Ghost, which both are here wanting with our temporary, yea well oft extemporary Elders. Againe, The same Apostle Phil. 1.1. Having directed his salutation to all the Saints in Christ Jesus in common, subjoines, with the Bishops and Deacons; Wherupon S. Chrysostome having posed the que­stion, wherfore he had left no place intermedio Tagmati Preshy­terorum? Replyes straight, [...], because there is no distance or difference here: For, sayeth hee, [...], the same things are competent to the one, which to the other: for the Order stands but one and the same, admitting onely a disparitie of degree in the Order. Who seeth not, except a Borne blind, That if we shall deny E­piscopacy, to stand of divine Right and Institution, we shall uni­câ liturâ expunge Presbyteratum cum Episcopaetu, ELDERSHIP with EPISCOPACY out of this Classe, and so to deny it to stand of divine Institution, which with our zealous moderne Refor­mers to day were grande nefas, et plus quam morte piandum. Nay [Page 6] Ex promiscuo usu vocabulorum, non statim rectè infertur paritas Ministrorum: for the promiscuous use of a word, doeth not alwayes straight subinferre with it, the indistinctiō of a thing. Wee would heed well in this Argument, to remember that Episcopacy may be considered two wayes, either in the Ab­stract, as an Order, or in the Concret, as exerced by men in the Or­der. Now thought it should not have been rightly here exerced and administred by these, but that they should have singularly appropriated to themselves somthings which stood cōmon to Presbytries with them, This could not nor cannot infirme the Office: for personall infirmities beare no aspersion upon the Calling; What Calling stands so holy, which may not suffer abuse? I beleeve, That our holy and zealous Disciplinarians cannot, yea dare not take upon them to justifie all their tran­scendent actings whether in State or Church: for do we not heare daylie of their Retractations and Retro-gradations in both. In multis labimur omnes, no place here for perfection; wee must not confound viam cum patria, or e converso. Againe, 1. Cor. 12.28.29. Liquido cernere est imparitatem Mi­nistrorum. Againe the same Apostle 1. Tim. 3. from the be­ginning; calleth this a verdict or true saying, That If a man desire the Office of a Bishop, he desireth a good work. yea and layes down his required qualification; as semblably Tit. 1. which could not hold true, if Episcopacy stood an unlawfull and un­warrantable Office in Church. But lest any should or could frō hence inferre an Isotomy or Homotomy, an equality of Honour from off of the communion of Names; you are to take heed well in this argument, that from aque ad aquale, the conse­quence, stands inconsequent: for under the LAW, Sacerdotiū, the Priest-hood was but one and the same, they were all aquè Sacerdotes, & yet there ceased not frō hence to be a disparitie of degree in one & the same Order: for the High-Priest prae cae­teris eminebat, he emine above the rest, and so from that legall oeconomy this Order may be arcessed and instructed. Againe lest there should be any place left here for exception; That from the Law, to the Gospell it should prove inconsequentiall; This is no lesse consencaneous & agreable with the Evangelicall oeco­nomy [Page 7]or dispensation under the Gospell: forwheras CHRIST as­cended up on high, Hee gave some to be Apostles, & some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some pastours and teachers. Ephes. 4.11. where there cannot be denied to have been a disparity of degree. but lest there should be any place here left for excepriō, that this onely serves to militate here, and to instruct a di­stance and disparitie of degree twixt the severall Classes, but can make nothing to instruct a disparitie of degree amongst those of one and the same Classe. I would pose him here, How is it, that amongst the very Apostles some are called [...], Insignes, seeming pillars, as James, Cephas and John, Gal. 2.9. May not this seeme to im­port some disparitie, if not in officio, saltem in regimine: for why may there not be impares gradus in regimine, yea, and that in aequali officio, to avoide disorder and confusion? What would S. Paul imply, whereas be saieth, That he was nothing inferiour to the very chiefest Apostles; for albeit this passage will not straight subinferre, that, besids the Twelve Apostles, there wer others of a secondary rank, yet it maks the Argument stron­ger, in that there were amongst the very Twelve, some more, some lesse chief; Now Magis and minus, though they alter not the spece, they alter the degree. I am not ignorant how some except here, That there is a fallacie here from the communion of Names. But I pray you, doeth communion of Names, import and inferre alwayes with it, a communion of Office and communion of equality of degree in the Office, yea and in the externall regiment too? Doeth it straight follow from hence, That Peter calls himself [...], a Fellow-Presbyter, 1. Pet. 5.1. that he emined not, or had no prerogative above these whom he thus enstiled? I would glad­ly learne (where I promise to yeeld my self docil and teach­able) wherefore there may not be an inequality of Power in government, as there is a disparitie acknowledged to be in o­ther gifts? May there not fall our abuses in these, as in that of Power? Wherefore is Timothy enstiled The first Bishop of the E­phesians; yea and Titus the first Bishop of the Church of the Cre­tians? [Page 8]I know some to except here, That the argument can­not be thought pressing, which is onely taken from the sub­scription. Answ. There be in Epistles these three; Inscriptura, Scriptura and Subscriptura. Now with what parresy or free­dome they may challenge Subscripturam, may they not with the same Inscripturam? Yea I have heard some of the strictest Presbyterians or Disciplinariaens challenge Scripturam, call the whole body of an Epistle in question, a thing of a well dange­rous consequence, and giving the enemy no small advantage; But I reason not simply from the subscription, but make Scrip­turam, the body of the Epistle my Ground. How is it, That these Charges are borne on these two, on Timothy That he lay not on hands suddenly on no man, 1. Tim. 5.22. Yea and that he layes down Rules to be observed of him in reproving, vers. 1.2. and on Titus, That he should set in order the things which were wan­ting, and ordaine Elders in every City, Tit. 1.5.? what belonged this to Timothy, if he had no further power then any ordinary or gregary Presbyter, to admitt or receive orderly of accusa­tions against Presbyters? But I know some to except here, That Timothy was an Evangelist, and that so Bishops cannot from hence acclaime to any interest in that his right. IT wonders me to see men so blindly wedded to their own Notions; That they cannot but cherish them, how unsound soever: like to a woman kissing and embracing her own abortion: for if he shal turne an Evangelist from hence, that he is bidden Do the work of an Evangelist, II. Tim. 4.5. Why may we not from a con­gener warrant transhape him into an Apostle; In that S. Paul willeth the Corinthians to receive him so, as that he may be with­out feare, and the reason is subjoined, Because that he wrought the work of the Lord, as he did, 1. Cor. 16.10. Thus Nihil hîc nisi scopae dissolutae. I pray you, was imposition of hands a part Extra­ordinarii muneris, of an extraordinary Chaerge? Certes, thus it should cease to have any place or vse with us to day, & expire with the persons of an extraordinary Call. Againe, How do these Seers so deeply forget themselves here? whereas they straight abase and degrade him, redact him into the classe & [Page 9]ranke of ordinary and gregary Presbyters, from off of that passage 1. Tim. 4.14. where he is exhorted by PAUL, Not to ne­glect the gift that was in him, which was given him by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytrie. Which cannot be aver­red of an Evangelist, or of one extraordinarly called: Now Men­dax oportet sit sui sēper memor, A liar would have a good memo­ry. Nay, and how do they againe forget thēselves so deeply, as to argue from off of this passage, since Paul restraines this, to the laying on of his own hands, II. Tim. 1.6.? Nay and some of the learned take Presbyterium, pro presbyteratu, for the Order or Office it self, and not for a Colledge or Society of meere Presby­ters. Now as I have said, Episcopatus and Presbyteratus, stand but unum et idem Tagma, admitting onely a disparity of degree in the Order; Alwise I would learne of these Seraphick and en­lightned Doctours, Wherefore it is, That seing in the Church of the Cretians there were more Presbyters; This is singularly recommended to Titus, to ordaine Elders in every City, to set in order the things that were left undone, to reject an Heretick after the first and second admonition? Why is this priviledge singular­lie indulted and permitted to Timothy and Titus, Presbyteros constituere vel exauctorare, if any gregary presbyter had a like power with them? For as I beleeve, par in parem non habet po­testatem.

Shall we deferre no respect to the Antiquity of this custome in the Church of God, in, & throughout the whole 4 Patriarchicall seas or seats, Hierosolymitana, Antiochena, Rōana et Alexandrina. as Eusebius deduceth well the series or line of the perpetuated succession of Bishops to his times, which evidenceth that this sort of government obtained well timeously in the Church, from the very dayes of the Apostles; Shall we deferre nothing to the testimony of that famous Councel of Nice (Wherunto, I beleeve all our purer Moderne Councels in these our dayes of so blessed and glorious, so much cryed up work of Refor­mation, cannot be parelleled or stand worthie to come in competition) which affirmeth this Government not to be Nova Institutionis, sed antiqui moris, of new Institution, but of [Page 10]ancient custom; Nay, & the same Councel decreed, That ther should not be two Bishops in one City, but this change with us to day, is nothing to be admired, to see men to contemne, yea condemne all Antiquity, who love onely Novations, and dote upon Novelties.

Nobilitat Novitas, quod damnat saepe vetustas

I could thinke, that some respect were to be deferred to the testimony of piously learned Calvin, a witnesse of old with the best of this stampe of Presbyterians or Disciplinarians, omni exceptione major. Now he in the fourth book of his Insti­tutions. sect. 1. sets down these expresse words; It shall be pro­fitable in these things to consider the forme of the old Church, which shall represent to our eyes, a certaine Image of Gods Institution: for although the Bishops of these tims did set forth many Canons, wherin they seemed to expresse more, then was expressed in holy Scripture, yet they with such heedfulnesse framed all their order, after the onely rule of Gods Word; that a man may easisly see, in this behalfe; that they had nothing dissagreeing from Gods Word. And straight after subjoines; Thaet out of a sincere zeale they endeavoured to preserve Gods Institution, and that they swarved not much from it. Nay, and straight againe in the 2. sect. he subjoines, That in e­very City they elected or choosed out of their own number one Man, to whom they gave specially the title of Bishop, lest from an equality, as it usually falls out, dissentions should grow and arise; I beleeve, That we have found and felt the smart of this trueth, by sad & dolefull experience of late amongst our selves. Let our fyerie Zelots, these sonnes of Thunder see to it, quâ facie, quô fronte, quâ [...], quâ audaciâ, with what face or conscience, they could not onely have themselves: but violently enforced others, to abjure simply, this so ancient, so sacred, yea and di­vine Institution, as meerly Anti-Christian: and so out of an im­plicite faith, called for, yea and exacted a blind obedience. Now I beleeve, That ultima fidei analysis, the last resolution of faith is, in Deus dixit: for Credere promiscuè quicquid affirmatur à Praelatis, non opus est virilis intelligentiae sed puerilis inscitiae. It fears me not a little, from the fyrie heate, which our Moderne [Page 11] Reformers have shewed and kithed in the prosecution of this their so much cryed up work of Reformation, that if those holy fathera, S. Augustine, S. Ambrose, S. Cyprian, nay and all the rest of that stampe, who wer of old holden Ecclesiae Lumina, Christianae Reipub. Columina; yea, and those Learned & godlie Bishops in our Neighbour Nation, who suffered Martyr-dome for bearing testimony to Christ, and to His Trueth, had lived in these our dayes amongst us; They should have found no more mercy, with, or from them, then did our Moderne Pre­lats, yea and many honest suffering Brethren: but all should have gone through their firery triall. But to returne, unde ne­scio quo digressus luxuriante calamo; Wherefore is it I pray you, That S. Iohn directs all his Epistles which he writs to the seven Churches in ASIA, Angelo cujusque Ecclesiae, to the Angell of each Church singularly? I know that our Reformers will not have that to be denied of the rest, quod de uno praedicatur, and that so the word Angell should be rendred per Ministrum simply, or lese all the Ministry in common to be comprehen­ded and designed here, and so to be taken Collectively, and not one particular Person to be pointed at. But with their leave, Since there were in each of these Churches more Presbyters or Ministers then one, as may be instanced from that of Ephesus; This interpretation must needs fall of will, which renders the word per Ministrum in the singular number onely, for thus it should follow; That there should have been but one Presby­ter or Minister in each Church, againe on the other hand, If all the Prebyters or Ministers in cōmon should, or were here to be understood under this name of Angell, why do we offer vio­lence to S. Iohns words, by the change of the Number? Wher­fore is it, that he still directs his speech to One, nay and if the speech stand directed to the Ministry in common, how could it be cognosced to whom it were singularly thus directed? Againe, If this One stood not instructed with some power over the rest, but all in common partooke of alike Power with him, how is he thus singularly entituled above the rest? And which is more, How is the faultinesse of all in common, imputed sin­gularly [Page 12]to him? Marlorat on the 2 of the Revel. jumps here in judgement, whiles he sayes, most pertinently to this purpose, Non populum aggreditur leannes, sed Principem Cleriuti (que), Epis­copum. Nay, and hitherto Beza in his Annotations on the 3 of the Rev. rendreth the word Angelo, by [...] quem oportuit de his rebus imprimis admoneri, from hence it followes, That this Angell had a Prostasie, preseance, presidence and prehe­minence above his Fellow-Ministers; But I heare some replying here, That if this Prostasie was of this kind, it was only over the Common flock, and not of power and authority over his Fellow-Ministers. Answ. Dato, non concesso, giving, but not granting; That this Prostasie or preseance were only over the Flock, yet it remains, That it was a prostasie of Power, else how could he have excerced any Authority over them; Nay but he is cōman­ded to exerce it, even against Fellow-Ministers or preaching Elders, yea, and is commended from hence, that he tooke or­der with them, Who called themselves Apostles, but were not, & found them liars. Revel. 2.2. I heare againe some excepting against this Trueth, though so clearly and fully vindicated and asserted, from off of these passages, Math. 20.25.26.27. and I. Pet. 5.2.3. Where Christ prohibits his Apostles to exerce such Dominion as did Reges terrae or Magnates, and where Peter warnes the Elders so to feed the flock of God, as not domineiring over the Lords inheritance: but proving ensamples to the flock. Now in both these there is a plaine fallacie, à mo do rei ad rem, from the manner, to the matter; Now I beleeve, that the different manner of a thing, is so far from the overthrowing or the re­moving of the thing it self, that on the contrary, Ponit et subin­fert, it puts & subinferres it, and so both, Christ & S. Peter take not away simply all power frō them, but such a modalized one, viz. a despoticall, herill or civill power, but not Paternall & Pasto­rall. Doth not the Apostle S. Paul I. Cor. 14. last vers. cōmand, That all things be done in the Church decently, and in order. Now I beleeve, that Order which is [...], as Nazianzen calls it, secluds a parity, for what else is ORDER, Quàm parium impariumque, sua cui (que) tribuens [Page 13]loca, dispositio? and so wher all stands alike in dignity & power, ibi ordints, decori ne umbra quidem, there can be no shaddow of Order or Comlinesse: from whence it is consequentiall, That if we take away imparity, una et eadem opera omnem ordinem in­ter sacros Evangelii Ministros turbatum et eversū ibimus; we shall overturne all order, and banish it the Church. I heare some re­plying here, That it cannot be denied, that Presbyters for a time did governe some Churches, pariauthoritate et communi Consilio. Ans. This derogats nothing from Episcopall dignity, nor proves prejudiciall to it, but rather confirmes the necessi­tie of Episcopall Charge, in that this sort of Regiment even in the very Apostles dayes and times, perpetuiis dissidiis Ecelesias dilaceravit, did rent the Church by perpetuall dissentions. I deny not with S. Hierome, Episcopos presbyteris majores, consue­tudine magis, quam Dominica Institutionis veritate: but this is rightly to be understood, sciz. as to the appropriation of the Tule to one above another: for it was Consuetudo Ecclesiae, the custome of the Church that made the title of a Bishop greater, then that of a Presbyter; & not any Dominicall or Apostolicall disposition or constitution, & so his words ar to be understood by accommodation and restraint to his own times, and so of that Authority, which Bishops so called obtained then over Presbyters. Alwise for the least, it is cleare and evident from hence, That S. Hierome did not averse an imparitie in Church, yea, and giving, though not granting, That this imparity or diversitie of degrees amongst the Ministers of the Gospel, is not founded or grounded upon any expresse warrant of Christ in the Scriptures, yet this so ancient a practise taking its source & beginning from the very Apostles, and having continued so constantly since in the Christian Church, may stand for a Pre­cept to us, and may serve us for a Directory for the regulation of our comportment and approbation of so ancient a custome and practise, and not of new Institution. IT is not unknown how Aeriꝰ was condemned of Heresie, for condemning of Epis­copacy; There be many Aerians with us to day, both for Name & matter, if it were lawfull ab eventu facta putare, to cōstrue of [Page 14]things from their events, I might mak bold here, to referre the matter, not only to indifferent Arbiters, but to the decision of the most strict Disciplinarians, whether the Church or trueth of Religion prospered or flowrished more, under that Prelaticall Government, as some are pleased thus odiously to traduce it. then under this late Presbyteriall, & under which of these two, the Church in her just liberties stood more or lesse eclipsed; I may boldly averre, That as Aarons rod budded, blossomed and bore rype Almonds, whereas all the rest of the rods of the twelve Princes of Israell were blasted: so under Episcopall government the Trueth was maintained in greater purity; the Church enjoyed farre greater Liberties freedome & Priviledges, then under this new coyned and forged Presbyteriall: for under that facta multa accessio credentium Ecclesiae, There was made a great ac­cession of Beleevers to the Church: But alas under this no lesse decession, as was wel timously fore-prophecyed by a Reve­rend Prelate, at the first rearing up of this so great, so glorious cryed up worke of Reformation. And if any accession bee made, it is credendorum, and not Credentium, for these men scruple not fidei articulos condere et solvere, as they durst make bold to turne Christi documentum, into Nocumentum: and blasphemously to call the Lords Prayer, a Nocent Ceremony; yea, and to account the recitall of it at service, a Note of Ma­lignancy; I may no lesse boldly averre now, that many with us to day both in State and Church, Quà ibatur cuntes, but quà eun­dem non inquirentes, from off of this so sad and dolefull expe­rience of the bitter fruits of this lamentable Change and altera­tion in State, as Church, their Government would be glad to run back [...], et [...], and submitte their necks with all cheerfulnesse to those yokes of woode, under the which they were well gently pressed under that Government in both, that they might shake themselves loose and free of these of Iron: lying so heavily on them, under these new in­troduced ones. Veritas est filia temporis; for a parity in Church, hath brought on and in, a parity in State; and so a lamentable and deplorable confusion and disorder in both. Thus no wonder [Page 15]That KING JAMES of blessed Memory, used this ordinary expression, No Bishop, no KING: for Quàm benè convenium, mutuas sibi praestant operas, et conspirant amice. If I durst make bold here, I would interpone my poor and meane, but well meaning advice in this bussines, which shortly take it thus; That the Ʋse may remaine and be keeped on foot, the Abuse onely being removed and taken away, which might hap­pily have at first, composed the Contest; viz. That whereas there shall happen or fall out any vacancy in an Episcopall sea or seat; That the Brethren of the Diocy may fullie conveene themselves, and condescend upon some selected Ones out of their Number, of best abilities for a due acquitall in so eminent a Ministration, and give in these to the Supreame Magistrate in a Lite or List, granting him Conge de lire, or Liberty of Election: as Penes quem solū sit prae esse externo Regimini. Whose solely it is to manage the externall Regiment of the Church, standing with Constantin the Great, Episcopus ad extra; and that such a One be thus praefected over the rest, for the preservation of good Order, and keeping all in a right frame, and shuning of Confusion, upon an confused parity; Ad Culpam onely, And not ad vitam, even in case of abuse of his Power to Tyranny: for Forma Apostolica haec est, dominatio interdicitur, indicitur Mini­stratio; The spirits of the Prophets stand subject to the Pro­phets, and so their Power standing but a delegated one, upon abuse may suffer and admit a warrantable repetition. If this Course had been taken, or presented by our violent Reformers to our sacred and dread SOVERAIGN, I am assured that such wofull disorders had not fallen out in State and Church. Who may not see, except a Born-blind, the dolefull sequels? yea I may boldly now say, upon sad and lamentable experience (which Asseveration at the first setting on foot of this great & glorious work of Reformation, stood grande uefas, et plus quàm morte piandum) effects of an arbitrary government in State or Church: For Let there be no King in Israel, and then every man shall do what seemeth good in his own eyes, as you may see in the latter chap. of the Judges passim. Nay, and let Moses the Ci­vil [Page 16] Judge subduce himself to the Mount for the least space, and then the whole people, etiam Aarone duce, shall fall a­way in common to Idolatry. I beleeve we may learne a better After-wit in both, having bought it by dolefull experience at the highest rate.

By your leave, That I may speak somewhat [...], or en passant of this new modalized Presbyteriall Government; I would gladly understand, on what Mount they have seen the Patern, after the which they have effigia­ted, exasciated, edolated and reared up this structure of this Presbyteriall Government, consisting or made up of such ingre­dients or constitutives, viz. of two sorts of Presbyters or El­ders: RULING and LABOURING, nay, and wherefore ordina­rie, as their bussinesse in hand called for, the number of the RU­LING was doubled, Quò certaretur numero, praevalerent confuso boatu, for Suffragia numerabantur, non ponderabantur (majori parte vincente saniorem, It fears me, it was not mount Tabor, for I cannot thinke that Christ frequented but the least this Mount, farre lesse that Hee was here transfigured, Hee may well perhaps have been disfigured. Sure I am it is the Arch­type it self: for seing that the Divines agree in common that there be Two Classes onely of standing Officers in the Church under the Gospel, Bishops or Presbyters, which stand but one and the same order, and Deacons. I would learne upon what warrantable grounds, they have brought upon our stage to day, this third Classe or Ranke of RULING or LAIK Elders, as they are pleased to baptize them, a spece of Presbyters unwar­ranted by Gods Word, yea unknown to all Antiquity. IT is not unknown what Tertullian disproved in his time, Hodie Presby­ter, cras Laicus, I beleeve with the Apostle, That it is not law­full Manum huic aratro admotam dimovere, to take back the hand from this Plough. Thus Anniculi nostri or Biennales Pres­byteri were unknown and unheard of in these times, far more these extemporary Elders, whereof use was well oft made, as the necessity of their Affairs required. Whereas they were pretended to have been brought in, for the better ordering of [Page 17]Gods House, The event hath proven the contrary, that they wrought no small Disorder both in State and Church; And whereas they were pretended to have been brought in vse on our stage with Aaron and Hur, to have sustented and stayed up Moses his hands, whiles going about a praying, and so for the good and help of the labouring Presbyters to strengthen their hands, the sequel hath proven, that there was no vse made of them, but to weaken the hands of the ablest Mini­stry, yea to work their degradation, if they did not prove active and instrumentall to promove the glory of their Worke, and should happen to shew the least dissaffection to the Worke in hand. Who is so blind, that hee may not clearly see from bought experience, That they are so farre from being worthy to carry an Ephod before the Lord, that they are not worthy with the Gaboanites, to hew wood, and draw water for the use of the Lords Altar? Since Antiquity disclaimes them, and will not owne them, let us come to the Word of GOD the safest and surest Directory for the finding out of Ministeriall Offices or Charges: Now we finde neque volam neque vestigium, no trace of them here at all, for if we shall be pleased to look to the first institu­tion of Deacons, Act. 6. or to the Canons whereunto this spece of Ministry ought to be appended and exacted, I. Tim. 3. We shall finde them not to have so much as any colourable War­rant from hence, whether for manner of Qualification, or In­stitution and Ordination. As to the first, They behoved to be men of good and honest report, full of the Holy Ghost, and of wisedome, men having the Mysterie of faith in a good Conscience; who might have been received to that Charge, admitted to that Ministery; Now with us [...] in hoc Collegium cooptantur, hoc munere vestiuntur, hoc titulo gaudent, ornantur, some promiscuously of the very dreggs of the People, nay, and some stigmatized ones, Carbone notati most dissolute, and licentious Livers have proven readiest recei­ved into this wholesome Incorporation: as who durst not but approve their best subservencie to their Lustfulnesse. As to [Page 18]the 2. They were invested in this Charge, by prayer and imposi­tion of hands. Quae omnia hîc desiderantur, which are all here wanting with our moderne Elders; Nay, and this was not a vicissitudinary or temporary Charge as this is with us, but they that had ministred well, and acquitted themselves in an in­feriour Ministery, acquired and purchased to themselves [...], praeclarum gradum, a faire and further degree, which S. Nazianzen calls [...], ceu [...]. I am not ignorant that some, yea, and these not unlearned too, will have them to stand of a divine generation, and hitherto arcesse their Pedegree, Cadence or Descent from off of that passage of scripture I. Tim. 5.17. where, The Elders that rule well, are commanded to be had in double honour, but especially (say they) these who labour in Word & Doctrine; But it fears mee, if wee will be pleased to eye this Text more nearly and narrowly, we shall finde this to be but a glosse of Orleans destroying the Text, as may evidently ap­peare from these a few ensuing Reasons. First, The Apostle is not classing or distinguishing Elders, in Ruling and Labouring Elders in word and doctrine, for thus both should stand worthy of double honour, though mainely that the Labouring do merite or challenge this respect. But hee defines well Ruling Elders to stand and be such, who painfully labour ad sudorem pulvereum (which the word [...] from [...] or pulvis, im­ports) and thus the Apostle sets not down two severall Classes or ranks of them.

• 2. Doth not the annexed or subjoined Rea­son, wherfore this honour is averred to stand due, clearly evict this to the full, viz. That wee should not muzle the ox that trea­deth out the Corne; and that the Labourer is worthy of his hyre or wages? Now are these your Ruling-Elders brought on your stage, of the number of these Oxen, that tread out the Corne? You confesse them not to be of the Cense of these Labourers, else why do yee contra-distinguish them.
• 3. If yee will needs have a distinction or classing here of Presbyters or Elders, Lo it must needs be here, Inter Magis et Minus laborantes. The [Page 19]more, or lesse painfull Labourers; Now Magis et Minus, More or Lesse, as they speak in Schooles, non mutant speciem sed gra­dum, they change not nor alter not the spece, but the degree onely.
• 4. IT is not unknown that some, yea, and not unlear­ned too, by [...] understand stipendîum. wages or re­ward. I pray you then as yee divide the Province or Task, why will yee not suffer and admit a division or partage in the Wages or Reward. IT fears me, and that well justly too, That in this case, the strictest of you would not prove deficient to themselves, but would endeavour themselves to finde out a new glosse on the words, and make up a new Commentary; as I am no lesse assured on the other hand, That these our well Ruling-Elders with us to day, would be no lesse ready to ac­claime to their right and interest in this Reward, if they should finde any sure or firme basis whereupon to ground their Chal­lenge and Claim.
• 5. Some no slenderly expert in the origi­nall language averre, That after [...] there would be required the adversative particle [...] to import a ne­cessarie distinction.
• 6. Some no lesse expert in this original language, arcesse some ground of reason from off of the ac­cents and grammaticall spirits, to infirme and weaken this di­stinction or classing.

But I love not to straine apiculations in grāmatications. Thus this very passage, wherin tantum ponunt praesidij, they place the full force and strength of their CAUSE, petit jugulum causae, it cuts the throat of their Cause; and so unde illi vitam, nos mortem. This poor wandering Levite must harbour and rest with the Godly Party forsooth; finding no where else in Heaven or upon Earth an harbouring or shelte­ring place. No wonder that such a Heterogenious body, com­pacted of such dissimilary parts should suffer such a sudden dissolution. Thus it is evident, that we must needs go elswher to seek out their generation, then from Gods Word or yet sound Antiquity. In a word they were [...] foetus necessitatis, the birth and brood of Necessity; for we find no use for them to day, except in such a case, where a bussines or work in hand, cannot be effectuated and brought to passe, but by [Page 20]the subsidiary help of their suffrage, Majori parte vincente sa­niorem, which else in reason or by force of Argument would fall short. May it not justly seeme according to Gamaliel his decision in a congener case, That this Counsell or this work hath not been of God, but of men, Act. 5.38.39. seing it is so soon come to nought, for there is no use of them now, their worke being accomplished which they intended, or in case of any new emergent bussines, calling for their subsidiary help to hold up that ruinous and decaying Fabrick and structure, so that for the best they are but Nocturni Fungi ex nocturna pluvia nati, or an untimous birth and abortion, no sooner brought to light, then expired.

THe Second Quaere is, If our Cōmission of Church did right­lie determine anent the receiving in of Nuncupative Ma­lignants into the bosome of their Army, to fight pro Pa­tria, pro aris et focis, for KING, Countrey, Religion, Lives, Li­berties, Fortunes in such a nick of time and exigence of affairs, against Forraigne invasion of so dangerous an Enemy infesting the whole Kingdom, and seeking to overturne and raze all frō the very foundation; or pronounced therein Clave errante. Nu­merò, If that stood an Ʋnlawfull Engagement with the Godly Party, or men of godly understanding?

IT marvels mee not a little, how the Question can be thus stated and modelled, whereas adhuc sub Judice lis est, which of these two contesting Parties, Herodians or Pharisees so to speak, should be thus branded with the Note of Malignancy. I beleeve, That Veritas which is Filia temporis, TRUETH which stands the daughter of time, hath given us some farther light and clearer insight in this bussinesse; For how have they I pray you acquitted thēselves here, who were so much cryed up for sole men of known integrity? Have they not detected to the [Page 21]world their deepe masked hypocrisie, and so bred more nor just matter of jealousie in the hearts of all these who are of truly godly understanding? Coelum et terram hîc in testes advoca­re possem. 2. Is it not strange, That our new start up Prote­stators should so maligne men under this name and notion of Malignancy, whereas they roundly professe their ignorance here, of the true Notes and marks from whence they may be discerned and dignosced, as the Desire or Petition put up by them, The sole Nuncupative Godly Party, or men of Godly un­derstanding, to that Venerable Assembly at Edinburgh anno 52. for their information hereanent in their 3. Proposition bears, & instructs to the full; Now is it not more nor strange, That they should have so maligned men under this name and notion, whereas it is not yet conveened upon and condescended, what stand these Notes and marks? Ʋbi nulla lex, ibi nulla trās­gressio, where there is no Law, there can be no Transgression. May it not justly seeme That Malignancy receives subinde, new Notes and Characters or Marks according to the various revolution of Cases, and exigence of times, or rather men their brain-sick apprehended fancies? Nonne haec Ecclesia in Maligno posita est? Et quae non animā justè odit coetum hujusmodi Malig­nantium? 3. I would gladly understand the Reason or discre­pance here, (where I promise to yeeld my self docil and teach­able) Why the Non-conformists at first, These who found not themselves fully satisfied with the publick Resolutions of our Church, whiles this work was but in it Infancy, as it were, and so when, as I beleeve, it stood more veniall and pardonable to have scrupled theranent, were branded with this Note of In­famy and Reproach; yea, and most cruelly persecuted, as it wer, with fire and sword; And the Non-conformists now, so avowedly protesting against all their publick Resolutions, and opposing themselves with an high hand, when this work is come to a perfection, to the stature of a Perfect man, shall not onely go unbranded, but go under the name of the Godly Party, or men of godly understanding, and shall go over these dangerous rocks, without the least Jacture or Naufrage, yea, turgidis velis, ven­to [Page 22]secnudo, nay, and should be sealed in their fore-heads with a Noli me tangere. What! Is your so glorious a Sun come to so sudden a declining? How is the faithfull City become a harlote, how is your silver become drosse, and your wine mixed with water? how is the strong staffe broken, and the beautifull Rod? I dare be bold to averre, That the Approbation at first of the publick Re­solutions of Church stood to many Cyphers both in State and Church, who in effect stood more expletive then significative, Their best qualification and endowment, yea stood the sole means of their advancement to the highest roomes in both. A blind Obedience out of an implicite faith stood for all qualifications else, and an approven and evidenced activity to promove the great & glorious worke in hand; This was Panchrestū, panacaea, a so­veraign salve against all sores; Omnibus malis averrumcandis pollens Alexipharmacum; yea, vestis talaris a faire and goodly rob to cover all nakednes, blemishes or defects whatsomever. It was the balme of Gilead, and The tree of the twelve manner of fruits.

The grave, learned and judicious Cōmissioners of our Church have sufficiently and fully vindicated and asserted this Tenet, and confirmed the lawfulnesse thereof in the Case set downe, from the universall uncontroverted practise of all Christian Kingdomes, and approbation hereof by the unanimous consent and judgement of all the soundest protestant Divines, in the Case of just and necessarie defence against forraign invasion; From the very law of Nature, which no positive law of man can infirme or infringe, calling us hereunto, binding and ob­liedging every Member of the politick bodie of a Kingdome, to endeavour to the uttermost, the good and preservation of the whole, and allowing the Body, yea, laying an obligation upon such as are in Eminency or in Power, to call for this help and assistance at the hands of every Member; yea, and bea­ring no small guilt upon such as shall prove deficient, and shall withdraw their ayd and assistance in such an exigence, as be­trayers of their Trust. AND last from Gods Word, holding out unto us innumberable cleare and sufficient warrants for ap­proving of this Practise. For re-collection; Is this practise ju­stifiable [Page 23]from and by the very law of Nature, who can prove so farre denatured here, as to maligne the same? Stands it justifiable by Gods Word? Then what man can prove so im­pudent, and dare make so bold, as to seclude and disclude whom God admits? I beleeve, That where God hath not a mouth to speak, man should not have an eare to heare. Optimus sobrietatis terminus est Deo loquendi finem faciente, sapere velle de­sinere, It is not safe, to co-argue Gods Wisdom of folly. Ve­rum vero semper consonat, vos vobis constate.

But because I finde as yet not a few pestred and infected with this leaven of the Pharisees, I finde me necessitated to speak a little more fully of this Matter, and to contribute my poore mite, out of a willing and free minde for the use of this Taber­nacle: for why may it not justly seem lawfull to these, vel Taurū è▪ farina fingere, qui praetenui peculio vitulum vivum divis elustra­re nequeunt? Is it not notourly known, That some works of Necessity, which not unfitly is indigitated, Lex temporis, The Law of time, become justifiable, which extra hunc casum, with­out this case would cease to be such, as the Disciples their pluc­king eares of corne on the Sabbath day. Davids eating of Shew bread, which was onely lawfull for the Priests. Now who dare prove so impudent, as to deny an urgent and pressing necessity here, so that it can not be in reason challenged of any unlawfulnesse? Is it rather wisely or safely done by us, out of uncertaine praeconceived dangers, yea, and but fears of such, and these evitable too, from fellow-subjects, to cast our selves into seene and certaine dangers of a forraign Enemy? Let me pose you here, If a King can be in reason denied the common benefite of the law of the Subject? Now shall subjects without chal­lenge make use promiscuously of fellow-subjects, yea, and a­gainst their Native KING, and shall we condemne this fact in His Sacred Person; to make promiscuous vse of His subjects both in His own just and necessarie defence and theirs too? O for an impartiall Judge to decide this controversie aright! are we not bound and tyed both by League and Covenant, to man­taine the KINGS just Greatnesse, the liberty of the Subject; and [Page 24]shall we comply with Enemies to both, to the subversion of both? Shall we make so great Conscience foresooth of the mea­nest heads and articles of our sworne unto Covenant, and none of this maine one? If these fiery Zelots had lived in Christs and his Apostles their dayes, doubtlesse they would have en­vyed and maligned the accession of so many thousand soules to the Church in one day; who maligned so the receiving in of bare Nuncupative Malignants into the bosome of their Ar­my. Certes, These differ much in practise from that of Christs, in receiving in of Publicans and sinners May not these Hote-spi­rited seeme most justly to be altogether ignorant of the nature & properties of love set downe I. Cor. 13.4.5.6.7.8. verses? Shall Christ weeping over Hierusalem professe his great care­fulnesse and earnestnesse, to gather her Children, notwithstan­ding of their great waywardnes, untowardnes & frowardnes, as an Hen gathereth her Chickens under her wings, Matth. 23.37. and shall we be more propense and bently set for dispersion and scattering, then gathering? Shall Christ professe this to be the End of His coming into the World, to seek the lost sheepe, to bring againe what had gone astray: and shall these who would singularly acclaime this Prerogative to themselves, as that they stand solly his Ministers amidst a cōmon defection, vouchsafe no pains here? It fears me, The Scribs & Pharisees compassing sea & dry land, to gaine in a Proselyte, shall rise up in judgement a­gainst our strictest, rigide and violent Reformers, and con­demne their carelesse and sinfull neglect here, and fiery and violent procedure. God is said to be [...], A God of long Nostrills, and so is slow to anger, gentle and easie to be appeased; but these quite contrarie to Gods Naturall, partake onely in the evill both of the Cholerian and the Melancholian, they are short spirited, soone set on fire & edge, but their wrath is not easily quenched and abated, they prove implacable Edomits against their brother Jacob, yea, Nova­tians, veniam omnem denegant lapsis; for I heard this expression from some of their mouths, That they could sooner and rea­dier comply with a Turk, then with a Malignant, [...], [Page 25] hîc [...], no lesse irreconcilable enmity, then twixt the seed of the Woman, and the seed of the Serpent, but I spare you, studens Correctioni, parcens pudori. I could wish these holy Zelots to shew me warrants from Scripture, the safest Rule and surest Directory, Where a KING, Iudge or Ruler is reproved for making promiscuous use of his subjects, for the defence of the People of God, and making warre u­pon their Enemies; Nay, and on the contrary, wee see them sadly reproved for their neglect and omission here; Hitherto Iudg. 5.23. Curse ye Meroz (said the Angel of the Lord) curse ye bitterly the inhabitants therof, because they came not to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the mighty. Did not Gideon a Iudge of Gods own designation, choosing and sending out in his might, Make an Ephod, and put in Ophrah his City, after which all Israel went a-whoring: and which thing became a snare unto him, and to his house, and tended to their destruction, Iudg. 8.27. Now did the people from hence, with our fiery Zelots, re­fuse to go under his conduct, or yet receive from his hands or by his means many notable deliverances? Nay, was not the Coun­trey in safety and quietnesse fourty years in his dayes? Let me pose these so tender-conscienced men, if in the 20 of Deut. 5.6.7.8. verses; where, the Martiall Law is set downe, they do finde this exception of Malignancy, so much as in the parallel of it? Certes, Too vehement a Purgation of the Body proves for common well dangerous: for thus the Vitall spirits be­come exhausted and quite spent. I pray you, will yee finde a Church or Army onely Electorum? This were to seek Patriam in via, and to confound viatores and compraehensores voyagers and cōprehensors. In the field of the Militant-Church upon earth, we will not faill to finde still tares, cockle and darnell amidst the best Corne or Wheat, till the day of the great separation. When the Lords People went fourth to Battell, were they not promiscuously without any instituted Purgation (a new and unheard of, in Gods Word, piece of policie brought on our stage) gathered as one man from Dan to Beersheba, with the land of Gilead, unto the Lord in Mizpeh, Iudg. 20.1. Nay, and is not [Page 26]this called, A Calling of all generally without our new modelled Limitations, II. Sam. 17.11. Was not the numbering of the People for Warre, instituted and taken from their ability to carry Armes and skill in handling them, and not from any new found out qualifications? Reade we not Sauls practise, ad­mitting all the men of Israel and Judah. without difference, to go forth with him, in the case of Jabesh-gilead commended of God, and seconded with a blessing, I. Sam. 11.? In the time of the Judges, when the people fell away from the Lord, to or by Idolatrie, did not these very Idolaeters fight the Lords Battels and carry the victory? Nay, and the very Judges themsel­ves, who fought the Lords battels stood not free, under whose conduct the people of God obtained many notable delive­rances, as was presently instanced in the person of Gideon. Who was more bloudy and wicked then Joab, and yet fought the Lords battels? Nay, and did not David oversee him in a seeming prudentiall way for his time, though he gave a spe­ciall command to his son Solomon against him, I. Kings, 2. ? Did not Abner make a bloudy warre against David, and yet he did not cease frō hence to make use of him? Wer not these men, who were with David when he fled from SAUL, Out­laws & Male-contents, Now forbore he to make his best vse of these Malignants, to speak in the language of Babel? Nay, Did he not welcome Simei, who had formerly cursed him, & stood his most cruell Enemy in the time of his adversity: and that notwithstanding of Abisha's instancie to the contrary? I wish wee should propose before our eyes Davids practise and example (who was called a man according to Gods owne heart) for our safer direction, and better regulation of our Comportment here. Spectemus hanc Cynosuram; Now David sent to Zadok and Abiathar the priests, to rebuke the negligēce of the Eleders of Judah, to bring againe the King to his house, whereas the people contested and strove here in forewardnes, and that from an argument taken from his interest in them, & their attingency to him, sciz. That they were his Brethren, his [Page 27] flesh & his bones; Nay, and he sent thē to Amasa, who had been a Ring-leader in a present rebellion with Absalom against him, willing them to make use of this same argument with him; Nay, and promising fairely to make him Captaine in Ioabs stead, which he accordingly performed, did not God second this with a succesfull blessing? Did he not bow all the hearts of the men of Iudah as of one man, II. Sam. 19.11.12.13.14. vers. To apply here home, Why might not, or may not our KING use the same policie even to reclaime, and win in the hearts of these, who had been Ring-leaders in a known and open Rebel­lion against him, farre more to make use of His loyall subjects? May I not frō hence thus safely argue & reason? Do not all in whom he hath a-like common interest stand justly liable in, & to the same common duty? What wisdome or prudence were it in a common Combustion and Conflagration, to debarre & se­clude any from contributing their ayd & assistance, for quen­ching and extinguishing the same? Let me pose them here, if these whom they so odiously traduce under the name of Ma­lignants, had or have no part or right in their KING, that they might be so farre neglected, as that neither their advice nor assistance should be sought or called for, for his safety and preservation, 2. Sam. 19.43? I would gladly understand the rea­son of difference here, why these whom they are pleased to traduce under such odious nomenclatures as Malignants and Engagers, whereas adhuc sub judice lis sit, whether the Engagers for their KING, or these for the Common Enemy, may, yea and justly should be holden and accounted true and reall Ma­lignants? Why I say these were admitted, ad omnia interiora sacra, ad [...] to the participation of the sacred Sym­bols in the Sacrament, and yet denied admission into the bosom of an Army, alleadged raised for the good of the wholl king­dome in common, wherein they have their just interest? Is there greater Religion to be shewed here in This, then in that Other? May it not justly fear me, That as Ieroboā made religion subservient to his by-ends, whereas hee made the two golden Calves, and set the one in Dan, and the other in Bethel, yea, & [Page 28]made a Temple; where Altars were built for Idolatry, or an house of high places, and made Priests of the lowest of the People (with our pious and zealous Reformers to day) Which were not of the sons of Levi, pretending one thing, The Ease of the people: but intending another, To keepe the hearts of the People, that they should not turne back againe unto their Lord, even to Rehaboam King of Judah, I. King. 12. That it did so go and fare with thē here, that they made Relegion but tributary and subservient to their own by-ends: for may it not now clearely be seen; That their Pretenses or pretexts, and their Reall intentions have never reciprocated and retro-commeated? That returned Answere of Ʋriah to David, bidding him go downe to his house, II. Sam. 11. Whereas the Ark, and Israel and Iudah were sojourning in tents: and his Lord Ioab, and the servants of his Lord were encamped in o­pen fields, that it was not time to him to go down to his house, may prove much usefull and subservient to the Purpose in hand: for was it time, I pray you, for any Subjects promiscuously, when KING and Kingdome, PRINCE and Subject, all stood in danger, a cōmon Enemy infesting the Land, to sit the Charge, not answere the Call, or for any to withdraw or with-hold their aide and assistance in so pressing an exigence, or yet for the Ministery to open their mouths so wide against a present, so ne­cessarie & just expedition? I could be easily & no lesse justly ad­duced & induced to believe here, That salus populi, should have stood suprema lex. But Quod dolendum, juxta ac pudendum, our violent Reformers have overturned all; They have brought on our stage all new Rules for ordering of things, Novam re­gulam Credendi, novam faciendi, novam precaudi, whereas the Lord forbids us, To take His Name in vaine. How many have they adacted to conceive many blinde Oaths, which is a flate Taking of His Name in vaine? Nay and how many have they enforced to swear against the very light of their Conscience, not onely doubtingly, yea and to conceive a quite Contrary-Oath to that whereunto they had sworne formerly? Now I beleeve, That two Contrary-Oaths cannot be averred to have their due qualifications, to be in Trueth, in Righteousnes and in [Page 29] Judgement; Have they not professed Perjury in the person of their Characterized ones, to stand but a Personall infirmitie, for extenuation of that haynous sin in men of their stampe? Have they not pleaded for Muther & for the Murtherers vindi­cation & absolution, in the person of some rightly affected to their Worke in hand? Have they not taught disobedience to Ci­vil Powers, yea, and severly punished others for teaching Obe­dience, as their Doctrine by them formerly condemned of un­soundnesse, upon after recognition declared sound and orthodox, can make faith? How many have they enforced to beare false witnesse against themselves, by the acknowledging parforce of the equity of their most unjust sentences, which is no lesse sin­full then to beare the same against their Neighbour? How have they not onely overseene, but besides a Toleration, patro­nized uncleannesse in the person of their sealed ones? Numerò, throughout all, contrarie to Tertullians prescript, That Fides non aestimanda ex personis, sed personae ex fide, They passed their constructions upon men their actings of whatsomever kinde, as they did favour or disfavour the Actours. Non Abel è donis, ob Abelem donae placebant; As to the RULE of Faith, Their Cove­nant. is made the sole Authentike RULE. As to the RULE of Prayer, they not onely cashiered that patern of Prayer prescri­bed by Christ, but blasphemously traduced it under the name of a Nocent Ceremony, and constructed of the bare conceiving of it, at any publick service, a Note of Malignancy, Quae hos dementia caepit.