SIR, you are well met here at London, I am glad to see you, what is the reason you look so sad?

Sir! I thank you, I am in health, but perplexed in minde.

What is the news in your Countrie from whence you com: or what is it that trouble's you?

There is no news but new di­stractions both in Church, and Com­mon-wealth, arising by reason of old Errors and Heresies countenanced everie where.

What Errors and Heresies do you mean?

They are so manie I cannot ea­sily count all, that the Sectaries and Schifmaticks of this age have broa­thed.

Do you conceive that these are the occasion of the distempers in the Common-wealth as well as in the Churches?

Yea without all doubt, for the unsetledness of the Church (occasioned by Sectaries) causseth the distemper of the Common-wealth, both sympathi­zing in each others miserie.

What do you think might cure these distempers?

There is no other way of cure but by setling Church-Government with the Classes and Synods.

How will that cure all things?

• 1. Hereby Errors and Here­sies will bee discountenanced, and the Sectaries the broachers of them re­streined and punished.
• 2. None will bee admitted to the Ministrie but such as were brought up at the Ʋniversitie, or licenced by the Assemblie.
• 3. Private men will bee inforced to continue in their callings, and not meddle with the Ministers Office in ex­pounding the Scriptures.
• 4. Everie man will bee forced to pay his Tythe and dues to his Mini­sters that thereby they may bee honora­bly maintain'd.
• 5. Lastly everie one will [...]e orde­red to keep their own Parish▪ and not follow Sectaries and seducing teach­ers. If these, and such like▪ were look­ed to and observed, the Church and [Page 4] Common-wealth would soon bee quiet. and the want of these things is the oc­casion of all the miseries which wee lie under▪ as well the late Warrs as all the sad effects thereof.

Indeed War is an heavie judgment, and I think I may tru­ly say that the rigid Presbyterians, to advance those things you have mentioned, and other worldly re­spects and carnal ends, have been the occasions thereof.

How can that bee?

By their preaching and prayings they have everie where disgraced the Parlament, stirred up the people against the Armie, incouraged Neuters and Malig­nants, and put the English and Scot's Malignants in hope to finde a partie strong enough in England to destroie both Parla­ment and Armie.

I confess wee have justly com­plained against the Parlament and Ar­mie, becaus the one did not settle the [Page 5] Presbyterian-government, and the o­ther countenanced all Sectaries and Hereticks, but wee did it not to the end to destroie the Parlament.

What ever your intents were, I am sure your practice was abominable, you fill'd all places with your clamors and out-cries against the Parlament and Armie, as the Scotch Ministers likewise did, untill you and they had conjured up more evil spirits then you could allaie. And I am con­fident, had it not been for the men of your faction, who prepa­red the people for a new War by the courses aforesaid, neither our conquered enemies at home, nor the Scots durst have attempted anie more to make head against us.

What prejudice can the Par­lament or Armie receiv by the Mini­sters? It's well known wee praied for them both. And what can you object a­gainst our Praiers or Preaching?

I could fill a volume with your reproaches and evil surmises, scandals disgraces, calumnies, and other unsavorie matter by you cast upon the Parlament and Ar­mie in your Sermons (for a taste whereof view the book called the Pulpit-Incendiarie) and let anie man judg whether this did not much alienate the people's hearts from the Parla­ment and Armie. And for your praiers for them they were for the most part like your Sermons: and still in your Sermons and praiers you speak of the Armie as ene­mies.

Well, it was time for the Mi­nisters to speak and praie and deal plainly with the people, when all things were grown into such confusion and disorder as they were, far wors then un­der the Episcopal Government.

I do confes, there were dis­orders, but the Churches are not in so bad a condition as under the [Page 7] Prelacie: for that Hierarchie was Antichristian.

I denie that, it may bee som things injoined by the Prelates were Antichristian; but not they as they stood in the Church of England: for Antichrist, wheresoever hee is descri­bed in Scripture, is described by his fals doctrine: and manie of our Bishops were Orthodox men, free from Popish Errors and Heresies.

I'le grant you, they might hold fundamental truths, and yet their calling bee Antichristian, for who know's not that Anti­christ is described as well by his power, pride, crueltie, blasphemie, hypocrisie, and idolatrie. as by fals Doctrine. Rev. 17. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. & 18. 3. & 13. 2, 6, 11.

Well, notwithstanding what you saie, if Episcopacie had been lop­ped, the abuses taken away, those which were naught removed, and good men put in their rooms, wee had never seen these disorders and confusions: [Page 8] for that government, although but pru­dential (as som would have it) was an excellent means for staying the growth of errours and heresies in the Church.

Indeed that was the pretence at first, but the cure was worse then the disease; for it proved a heavie scourge to the Church of God, and out of that egge grew the Serpent, that Antichrist the head of Prelacie: and I conceive that Government could never have been profitable to the Chur­ches of Christ.

I will say no more of that Hie­rarchie, seeing the same is abolished, and the State hath thought fit to take it away: but why is not the Church set­led?

What do you mean by a Church in Gospell sense?

The word CHURCH (besides the general acceptation of it signifying all the Elect) hath a double significati­on. 1. It's taken for a particular Congre­gation, [Page 9] so many as may or do meet to­gether to partake in divine Ordinan­ces, or as wee call it a Parish, and so the word Church is strictly taken. 2. But the word Church in a lar­ger sens, comprehends not onely such a company, but also the Christians in a whole countrie, as Ephesus and Achaia, and so many Thousands who could not possibly meet together in one place: yet they are called a Church. Act. 2. 41. & 21. 20.

Time will not permit mee to enter into that controversie, but for mine own part I am satis­fied that the Churches under the Gospel are not Oecumenical, Na­tional, Provincial, or Diocesan, but ^* Congregational, which Congregational Churches ought to consist of so many Christi­ [...]ns as may join in Christian fel­lowship [Page 10] and communion under one Pastor, who ought to convers with them, and know their state and condition, and apply his Mi­nistrie answerably unto them: but for your greater Church and Pa­rish Church I acknowledg none such.

However you think, yet it is plain in that place of Act. 2. 41. & 21. 20. where the Christians were many Thousands (Myriads) they are called the Church, &c. Ergò &c.

It's evident the word Church applied to so many Thousands as you speak of, is not to bee taken properly, but tropically, and so by a Synechdoche it may bee taken for many Churches: or els for part of the Catholick Church which manner of speaking is usu al in ^a Scripture. But I mar­vell why you should endeavou [...] [Page 11] to prove that a Church in Gospel sense should contain more Chri­stians then can convene in one place, to partake in Divine Or­dinances.

I doe it to let you know that men of greater parts and learning may have more dignitie and superin­tendencie, and also a greater reward and encouragement.

So plead the Papists and the polititians amongst the super­stitious Protestants (of this last age,) for the Prelacy and Hierar­chy who affirme that the Angells of the seven Churches of Asia, and Timothy and Titus, (who were Evangelists) were Diocesan Bishops. And the same argu­ment likewise serves for mainte­nance of the Bishop of Rome his preheminencie above all other Bi­shops, which, I think you will not defend.

I will not dispute the right of E­piscopal government, seeing with us it's [Page 12] abolished, but you must admit a dif­ference and degrees amongst Mini­sters and Churches, or greater incon­veniences will follow: for the Pa­rishes which are the particular Con­gregations are not all of a bigness nor equall, and I think they are well di­vided, conducing much to my pur­pose.

The Pope and his agents dealt not so equally in that point as they might have done. Its true, that devotion in such as founded Churches, and such as gave Tythes to them, did it in such sort as they saw good or convenient for their posteritie: but the great Lateran Councell at Rome, Anno 1215. held under Pope Innocent the third, (the most abominable conspiracie that ever was against Christs Gospell, except the Councell of Trident) took away the liberty which men before time had viz. to give their tythes to whom they pleased, and tyed them up to pay them to [Page 13] their own Parish Priest, which absolutely enthralled the people, and causeth that the worst deserv­ing have had commonly the most meanes, and this perfected the di­vision of the Parishes, as now they are. Look Repor. L. 2. p. 44. Parsons Laws, pa. 66.

I confess the Parishes are not equall, but the greatest is little enough, and as its well for the Church that they are divided, and their bounds known, that every Parson, or Vicar may know his owu sheep, and the bounds of his Parish.

You reason carnally, and aime at earthly respects.

What can you alleadge against the Parishes?

I must tell you they are Popish in their very institution and originall: and some Parishes, especially about London, and in other Cities and places are so po­pulous, (containing twenty thou­sand people, or more) and of so [Page 14] huge extents, that no Minister of the Gospell can converse with the people of the whole Parish, as a man of God ought to doe: nor discharge his duty to them all with a good conscience.

You would open a wide gap to our brethren, or rather adversaries (for they are both) the Brownists and Independents, who long to see our Pa­rishes broken in pieces.

I will not so far enter into that Controversie, as to maintain all things held by all men called by those names: but this I say, I dare pawn my life there can bee no Reformation whilest the Pa­rishes and Ministrie stand as they do, let the Goverment bee Pres­byterial or Independent.

Why say you so?

First, for the Parishes I told you before, some of them are so vast in greatness, and populous that they need ten Ministers where there is but one.

I grant it, that if more means could be found out to maintaine them, it were well there were more Mini­sters: but you must not take the Tythes from the Parson, Vicar, or Minister, to whom They are due Jure divino, and give them to others. The Mini­ster ought to have all the tythes of his Parish, as well by the Law of God as man, and the contrary by consequence is Sacriledge.

You cannot yet make mee believe (though I have heard and seen it much pleaded for) that Tythes are due to the Ministers of the Gospell Iure divino.

I doubt not but you may very well have heard them pleaded for as Jure divino, for the streame and current of Antiqúty runs clearly that way.

I confess the Papists gene­rally hold it; some of the Fa­thers, and some of the more co­vetous and superstitious Prote­stants: and yet [ Car. Bellar. Cont. l. 1. Liber. [Page 16] de Cler. pa. 316, 317, 318.] Car­dinall Bellarmine and Suarez the Jesuite, the great Patrons of this opinion have not agreed with the rest: nor between themselves what part of the Tythes the Priest or Minister ought to have: nor whether he himselfe should have all which the Priests and Levits had. I would know of you why Tythes should be due jure divino under the Gospel, more then all other offerings and profits which the Priests had under the Law: The Tythes then were not only for the Priests, but for the Le­vits, the poore and the stranger, who were more then the twelfth part of the people: our Ministers not the hundreth part. They did bodily service about the sacri­ficing, and had garments for that purpose, which (the formulists say, the Surplices resembled, and which are condemned as supersti­tious and Jewish: or rather since [Page 17] taken from the Pagans. The Priests and Levits might buy no land in Canaan, but be content with the portions and Cities which God gave them. These Je­wish Ordinances are abolished, and the Priesthood is changed. Our Ministers are content to leave the killing of beasts and doing of such service, & hold it not unlaw­full to buy Land when they can get Money. But they will have all their Tythes jure divine: whereas the Christians in Affrica and many in other places paid no Tythes till after Augustins time. Bellarmine, Contro. li. 8. de Cler. pa. 315. Pope Innocent the third brought in pai­ment of privy Tythes (about an­no 1215.) Fox Act. & Mon, val. 1. pa. 336. Col. 1. And in the dispu­tation at Prage upon the Articles of John Wicliffe, Art. 17. its con­cluded that Tythes are meer alms: and Augustine and Chrysostom are cited to the same purpose upon Luc. 11.

We do not take the Tythes as by any judiciall or Ceremoniall Law, for they were payed by Abraham to Melchizedech before the Law, and by Christ himself, and there is nothing in the new Testament for abolishing of them.

I have no intent to enter into that controversie, further then to let you know, that were it not for the upholding of the pomp and pride of the pretended Clergie, this could be no contro­versie at all. For that which you say concerning Melchizedech and Abraham his paying Tythes to him before the Law, I conceive the Law was the same in substance in tradition before it was written; and without doubt Adam taught his sons to sacrifice, and instructed them in the things appertaining to the Worship and service of God. Abraham gave the tenth of the spoile of his enemies, and that freely; what is that to the pay­ment [Page 19] of the Tythes of the fruit of the Land and increase of the beasts, &c. especially you being no Priests after the order of Mel­chizedech. And touching Christ his paying of Tythes (which in­deed I have heard insisted upon) if it be taken in a proper or Gram­maticall sense is a meer fable, for Christ had nothing of which he could pay Tythes, not so much as a smoke-penny or a garden-penny. And I do not finde he wrought any miracle to provide ought to pay Tythes as he did to pay Tri­bute.

But I pray you what inconve­nience would follow if Tythes should continue to be paid as formerly under that notion as due jure Divino.

I could tell you of many evils which must of necessity fol­low such payment of Tythes, of which I will give you a taste and omit the rest: 1. Its a retaining of part of that Law which is abo­lished [Page 20] by Christ, Heb. 7. 11, 12. If the Priesthood be changed, then there is a change of the Law. 2. It upholdeth a main point of Pope­ry, which is, that upon the same ground the Ministers take the Tythes, the Pope as high Priest over the Clergy is to have the first fruits and tenths, and his Prelats their Procurations and Synodals. To salve up which, our State, not by colour of Divine Law but by humane law, gave these tenths and first fruits to the King. 3. Hereby is condemned the practice of all other reformed Churches, as li­ving in a Nationall sin, where the Ministers are not thus maintained by Tythes, which is a very uncha­ritable censure. 4. If Tythes be due jure divino, then must the divi­sion of the Parishes be jure divino, else why may not the Tythes be divided to many Ministers, as I for­merly told you, and that some of you hold as bad as living upon stipends.

I will not reason with you fur­ther whether Tythes be due jure divi­no, you and I differ in our opinions. Suppose we should take them as the al­lowance of the State by humane Law, they are little enough to maintain the Ministers, who ought to have double ho­nour, the honour of reverence and the honour of maintenance, and we do ex­act of you as due to us by the Apostles rule, honourable maintenance, and not to live upon Alms, or as the Ministers of Germany upon mean stipends.

I confesse that the Mini­sters of the Gospel ought to live of the Gospel, and to be honestly provided for, that they need not through want or necessity be in­cumbred with worldly businesse, but attend their Ministery with­out distraction: but to exact ho­nourable maintenance savours too much of ambition and avarice un­beseeming the servants of Christ. I conceive the faithfull Ministers are worthy of double honour, as [Page 22] Antichrist is worthy of double punishment, not so much in kinde and number as in weight and mea­sure. And if that will not content you, I affirm you are unlike to the Apostles of our Lord, and the Mi­nisters of the primitive times, and savour of the leaven of Popery: as the Ministers did in the end of the third and in the fourth Centu­ries after Christ, who strove for honour and dignity untill Anti­christ came to his height. And up­on what I now hear from you, comparing it with the practice of these times, I do conclude that it is not the perversness and peevish­nesse of the people, so much as the pride and avarice of the pretended Clergie, which hindereth the Re­formation; and that I shall make appear unto you.

What can you say against the present Clergie of the Land, as they are established by the known Law; they are generally all desirous to further the in­tended reformation.

I dislike the name Clergie in your sense, for if you mean Gods lot or portion, then are all Gods people properly so called. But (whatever the present pre­tended Clergie intend, I know not) it's plain that their pride and avarice is the cause of all the evils in the Land, as well Heresies and Schismes in the Church, as troubles and distractions in the Common-wealth.

It may be giddy heads take oc­casion of offence (when none is given) to run out of our Church, and to move sedition in the Common-wealth: but that is not the fault of the Clergy, but of themselves, who are causlesly offen­ded; and I believe the Clergy are much troubled at it, that reformation goeth not forward, and that there is no better order in Church or State.

I conceive the Clergie which you mean may be divided into four ranks.

• 1. First such as were professed [Page 24] for Antichrist so far as to bring in all his Ceremonies, Crosses, cringinges, Altar▪ worship, and other bodily exercises and super­stitions devised by the man of sin to captive souls, and were fully bent to joine us to the Church of Rome, and might probably have prevailed, but that the Popes Su­premacy was conceived danger­ous, and might have been a curb both to the Clergie and superstiti­ous Statists, who yet liked Pope­ry well enough, but feared the Popes Supremacy as it's feared in France. And I doubt not but ma­ny of these men through Gods just judgement were so blinded, as to think they did God good ser­vice in their superstitious waies, and by the prosecutions raised thereupon.
• 2. The second sort are those dumb dogs and Idoll Shepherds who either could not, or would not preach at all, nor give any [Page 25] alarm when the woolf cometh, and these were all ruled by the former as their Oracles and Lea­ders.
• 3. The third sort are they who pretend more conscience, and are more strict in their lives, and more orthodox in their opinions then many others, and were so far inlightned as to condemn the two former sorts (the one as too superstitious, the other as igno­rant) and well know and ac­knowledge the Ceremonies and other injunctions of Antichrist to be naught, and yet subscribed to all, and used many, but upon other grounds then the former sorts, viz. That they might get into, and keep their Livings, and be capable of preferment; and these corruptions of the times they yeelded to (as they pretend­ed) for necessitie sake rather then to leave their Ministery.
• 4. The fourth sort are those [Page 26] few faithfull men who stood out and (as much as in them lay) op­posed the superstitions and cor­ruptions of the times, and left their Ministerie rather then of­fend God, having learned that rule of the Apostle, not to do evil that good may come thereof; and knowing that God hath no need of mens sins to accomplish his works.

The two first sorts of these Church-men (as they call them) are cashiered; the fourth sort so discountenanced, that they either lurk in obscure places, or are gone beyond the seas; for parish Chur­ches they meddle with none, un­der the notion of visible Chur­ches. The third sort are the men for these times, who have so great influence upon all sorts of men, that if the Parliament and Ar­mie, and all other men dance not after their pipe, they are Here­ticks, Schismaticks, Sectaries, di­sturbers [Page 27] of the peace, and hinde­rers of Reformation.

I do confesse that in our Church there have been Ministers of all those sorts which you have described: but the third sort whom you seem to blame are they who suffered under the cor­ruptions of the times, and yet fulfil­led their Ministery, and subscribed for necessity sake, rather then the Church of God should be deprived of their labours. These now are, and then were, constrained to bear the bur­then and heat of the day; and of this sort (for the most part) are all the chief actors in the intended Reforma­tion, and we finde many of them have given a worthy Testimouy to the truth of Jesus Christ, and against the He­resies of the times.

I knew no necessitie there was for them to keep their livings upon those terms. And for the Testimonie which these men have given, if you mean in writing, I think their Testimonie is partly [Page 28] true and partly false. But verie few of these men ever gave testi­monie to the truth, so far as to suffer much for Christ, not so much as to hazard their Livings. It's an easie matter to testifie a­gainst Blasphemies against God and the Persons in the Trinitie, and against those errors, which being repugnant to divers Arti­cles of the Creed, are declaimed against both by the Papists and loose Protestants. But I never heard any of these men declaim against the corruptions of the times, nor confesse their own er­rors in Symbolizing with Anti­christ, and receiving of the mark of the Beast, to the scandall of the Gospel, and prejudice of the Church of God.

Alas you know not what the mark of the Beast is; I can tell you what it is, but I desire to know what you mean by it.

I shall declare that to you, [Page 29] not as any conjecture of mine own, but from the learned, and some such as you cannot well re­fuse their testimonie. Learned Na­per a Baron of Scotla. expounding 13. Rev. 16. saith that the Crosse is the mark of the Beast; and a­mongst divers reasons he gives for such his opinion, this is one, viz. Because all men are enticed under the colour of the Name of Christ to reverence that Chara­cter. Bellarmine, who knew the use of the Crosse in the Church of Rome, saith it is Gods mark mentioned Ezek. 9. 4. Bellar, not. in lit, [...] in Gram. Ebr. & cont. de effect. Sacram. lib. 2. pag. 221. & de Sacram confir. lï. 2, cap. 13. pag. 371. And he makes it the chief­est mark of the Church of Rome, because nothing can be consecra­ted without it. A mark is that by which any thing is known. Brightman in Apoc. 13. 16. another learned man, saith, That the [Page 30] mark of the Beast contains sum­marily all those waies by which men are bounden to the obedi­ence of Antichrist.

Reverend Paraeus in Apoc. 13. 16. agrees with profound Doctor Ro­bert Abbot, whose exposition up­on the place above named he com­mendeth, and reciteth it thus: To the common Character (or mark) appertaine those things which are practiced by all Anti­christians, as the observation of Fasts and holy daies instituted by the Pope, the worshipping of their breaden God, and doing other things not commanded of God. And Paraeus upon the next words saith, No man may buy, receive, or sell the holy wares of Masses, Indulgencies, Absoluti­ons, Dispensations, Tythes, &c. but these Spirituall Hucksters, marked with this perpetuall cha­racter, to wit, Bishops, Priests, Monks, and the like Merchants [Page 31] of souls, citing that place, 2 Pet. 2. 7. Through covetousnesse shall they with feigned words make merchandize of you. And that of Paul, 2 Tim. 6. 5. They suppose godlinesse is a gain (or merchandize). What think you now is the marke of the Beast?

These things may be the mark of the Beast, but what do they concern us?

They do most of them belong to you the pretended Clergie of England, I mean to the Formalists of this age, who have held their Livings, and sub­scribed for pretended necessitie sake.

Shew me how that can be, the things mentioned before agree to the popish Priests.

So do they (for the most part) agree to you and your fel­lows, little differing in these things from the Papists; and our pretended Clergie have received [Page 32] them from the Church of Rome, and have practised the same &c. Viz.

• 1. First they have subscribed to, and used the sign of the Crosse, the chief of all Popish Ceremonies.
• 2. Secondly, they have obser­ved Popish Fasts and holy daies, and many other superstitions in the worship of God, without warrant of the Word.
• 3. Thirdly, they have sub­scribed and conformed to the Book of Common-prayer, which makes their holy daies equall to the Lords daie. See the beginning of that Book.
• 4. Fourthly in their subscri­ption they made themselves the Prelats, and so the Popes vassals and servants, and took their li­censes to preach from them.
• 5. Fifthly they have dealt in those Wares and Merchandizes, Dispensations for non-residence, [Page 35] Absolutions, Tythes, and the bo­dies and souls of men, the proper merchandize of Rome.
• 6. Sixthly they have received the names of such spirituall Mer­chants as are of the devising of Antichrist, as Priests, Parsons, Vi­cars, Curats, although they refuse the names of Monks, sa­vouring of too much austeritie of life, yet more antient and inof­fensive.
• 7. Seventhly and lastly, their kneeling in the act of receiving is little better then bread-wor­ship, or God under the form of bread.

You strain things very far; I shall not trouble my self to answer your conjectures; onely the last thing by you mentioned is very offensive to me, for I hold kneeling in the act of re­ceiving, to be the most reverend gesture, and practised it upon that ground, the rather because injoyned by the Church.

I intend not a large dis­course [Page 36] about abolished Ceremo­nies, but advise you so far to view them as they concern the matter we spake of, which is the mark of the beast, of which this is a part.

• 1. For first kneeling was in­joyned in reverence to the Sacra­ment, as appears by King Ed­ward's second book of Common­prayer.
• 2. Secondly it was never used or known till after the Lateran Councell anno 1215. where the carnall presence of Christ was de­creed. The next Pope Honorius the third, within seven yeers af­ter decreed kneeling in the act of receiving, in regard of that (sup­posed) carnall presence of Christ. [ For Act & mo. Dial. between Cu­stom and verity, Book 2. pag. 780. Col. 1.]
• 3. Thirdly upon that ground of the carnall presence, Bellarmine urgeth kneeling, affirming it were [Page 37] dangerous to kneele, or worship: (for its all one) if Christ were not corporally present. Bellar. contr l. 3. de euch. cap. 21. pa. 633. A. & cap. pa. 634.

Well, notwithstanding what you say, I conceive the admitting and submitting to the authority and supre­macy of the Bishop of Rome to be the marke of the Beast.

If that be so, and nothing else be the mark of the beast, then have not many of the Popish Congregations of France receiv­ed the mark of the beast: for they allow not of the Popes Supre­macy. Nor more did the very City of Rome submit untill about 230. yeares since. Cal. Inst li. ca. 11. Ser. 14.

I have nothing to say to the Congregations of France, but these men whom you thus mark with the mark of the Beast, are the chief actors in the intended reformation.

If these Formalists be the [Page 38] men, who must reforme, and teach the way to the people, I shall ne­ver look for reformation: I told you they have received the marke of the Beast, as his vassalls and slaves, and have acted for Anti­christ: not onely doing wicked­ly themselves, in subscribing to, and using popish Ceremonies, superstitious, and humane in­ventions in the worship of God, having no foundation from the word of God, which is the rule of his worship: but also many of them have perswaded others therein to transgresse, and by their examples have caused many to fall with them into the breach of the second Commandement.

For these sins they have mani­fested no repentance, nor given any satisfaction to the Congre­gations to this day: for which cause God will never honour them so far, as to make them instruments to reforme the [Page 39] Churches. My opinion therein is grounded upon that Text of holy Scripture, Mat. 5. 19. Who­soever shall break one of the least commandements, and teach men so shall be least in the Kingdome of hea­ven, which I take to be meant of the Church of God, under the Gospell. And it is to be there­fore feared, that reformation will be deferred untill the carcases of the chief of these men are fallen in the Wilderness, that they may never see the promised land.

You censure the faithfull Mi­nisters of the Church very uncharita­blie, why should you suspect their faith­fulness in reforming Gods house: seeing they are painfull in their cal­lings, and faithfull in that which is committed to them.

I honour the faithfull Mi­nisters of the Gospel, and I be­seech the Lord to increase their number. But besides, what I [Page 40] have formerly said, I will remem­ber you of what passed in these last years; and by that you may judge of their faithfulness, whom you so much commend. Its manifest in what condition the Parlament found this whole Nation at their first meeting: even posting in all hast to Rome, longing after the Garlick and Onions of Egypt: and they had Captains made to lead them thi­ther; the whole Rabble of Pre­lates as their Captaines and cheifs. And the inferiour Cler­gy, Parsons, Vicars, Curates, Priests, &c. with the rest of their Apocryphall, Ecclesiasticall Or­ders, as their Lieutenants, and inferiour Officers: And these faithfull men you speak of (ser­ving the time) made no head a­gainst the rest: but patiently bear what their Lords put upon them, and so marched with the throng towards Egypt.

I cannot say, but that the Church of England (although the most famous Church in the World) furnished with a most learned, and orthodox Clergie, had manie in it who were very cōrrupt and superstiti­ous. But these are removed and or­thodox, godly and learned Divines of whom we formerly spake, put in their roomes and places.

You glorie like the An­gell of the Church of Laodicea, in your gifts and graces, and know not your want and po­verty, Rev. 3. 17. Its partly true, that in some places the ignorant, scandalous, and others, who would not take the Covenant have been removed, and some of these orthodox men put in their roomes, and that is, and will be the bane of these Churches and Church-men. Take but a view of their practices, and let that speak, how well they have carried themselves within five [Page 42] yeares past, since they got their preferments; I could instance in many places, where superstiti­ous and blind bussards were put out of their Livings, and some of these Orthodox men put in their roomes: and when they had got good Livings, were they, or are they contented? Some hold livings in the Country, and live in London, hardly ever com­ing to the flock, but to take the fleece: Some hold two or three Livings a peece; some leave one and run to another, when they can finde a greater; nay, they will fight for a better Living ra­ther then loose it. And yet fals­ly bewitch the silly people to belive, that its the call of God so to do, when its nothing els but the delusion of Satan, and of their own wicked hearts to satisfie their ambition and ava­rice. See but how these men presse the Committee for plun­dered [Page 43] Ministers for augmentati­ons, and removals from day to day, and how they ingage Par­lament men to act for them, cal­ling themselves in their Certi­ficats, and Petitions, godly, learned, and orthodox Divines. And it is observed in the Coun­try, that many of those who are thus put in, prove more proud, covetous, and contentious then those which were put out. And I doubt not, but when these mens bellies are full, and they at ease, they will agree to make a golden Calfe, and rise up to play as their Predecessors did. And I do believe that those who serve their cures as they (call them) by a Deputy, will without repen­tance go to heaven by a De­puty.

Although I will not excuse all the Clergie of the land, who have two Livings, nor their removal from place to place, where they had suf­ficient [Page 44] maintenance before: nor the pride, contention, or avarice of some of them: yet I know many of the Clergy, of whom I know there is no cause, to fear their revolting or fal­ling into popi [...]h errours, or supersti­tion [...], or other ill courses, they be­ing known to be religious and godly men. It is true, some are constrain­ed to take two livings, for that one will not maintaine them, and others for a time to hold two Livings, be­cause they are not sure of the better holding it, but during the Sequestra­tion.

Sir, I doubt you have been a little tacked with that Epide­micall disease of a pluralist, and guilty of removing from place to place. But I must tell you your excuse will not bear you out at Gods Tribunall. The very Popish Doctors and Can­non Law condemn pluralitie of Benefices in a Presbyter: men do not use to put away their wives, [Page 45] nor take another to her, which formerly he had upon such pre­tences. The truth is, the preach­ing of the gospel is meerly made a trade to get money; they preach for hire, run before they be cal­led, come in at the window like a thief, and preach according to their pay: provided they may have sufficient to keep contempt from the Clergie; be as power­full as the Popish Doctors, and able through their abundance to contend with their whole Parish, and swagger in their silks as their Predecessors did, they will be content,: otherwise they will tell you, you rob God in not paying their Tythes, and do not allow them honorable mainte­nance.

These things which you charge the Ministers with, are inconsistent with honestie and religion; and I told you many of the Clergie, who intend the reformation (according to the [Page 46] foundation, laid by the Parliament, by advice of the Reverend Assem­bly of Divines) are godly Orthodox and learned men, whom in charitie you are bound to belive, can never fall into damnable errors, heresies, or abominable practices.

Touching their final estate, I will not judge, but leave that to Almightie God: yet this I dare say, none of these men are better then Peter, who once acted the Devils part: nor better then Aaron, who upon like pretence, as these men have, viz. necessitie or convenience joyned to make the golden Calf: nor are they better then their predecessors, whose mouths were stopped, and their judgments blinded with honorable maintenance and pre­ferment. Consider but this; Cranmer and Ridley (although godly Bishops and Martyrs) were two of those, who opposed King Edward the sixt, and his Coun­cell [Page 47] in the case of Mr. Hooper, when he would have omitted popish Ceremonies at his en­trance into his Bishoprick. Act. Mon. vo. pa. 146. Also call to minde Jewell, Babbington, Chappell, Mr. Hutton, Davenant, Morton, Whitgift, Ro: Abbot, Pilkington, and Hall, who all deserved well of the Church of God, (and better then most of these Ortho­dox men, whom you so much ad­mire) whilest they continued in their uprightness, before they were loaden with honor, and honorable maintenance. But see how they carryed themselvs afterwards, some of them turned notable persecutors, others grew idle, some erroneous, if not he­reticall in their judgments: And attained with their Lordships, Hierarchicall superstitions. I could name others of inferior ranke, of great note for learning, pietie, and soundness of judge­ment, [Page 48] even in points controver­sall, who upon conformitie (af­ter long standing out) accepted great livings, and presently be­came the very Atlas's of popish Ceremonies. Vpon all which I conclude, that these pretended reformers, having heretofore ta­sted of the Devils broth in their conformitie and subscription, and having not yet repented of it, will shortly fall to eat the flesh, and swallow up any thing which makes not against their honor, or profit.

You cast very foule aspersions upon our reverend Clergie, aud have drawn mee into a discourse, which I never intended, I intimated to you be­fore, that it's the peoples fault that they do not joyne with their Ministers, to settle the Church, and reforme the abuses in the same. It's an easier matter to finde a fault then to amend it: for my part, I think the pervers­ness, and peevishness of the people [Page 49] is the cause which hindreth Refor­mation, for that they will abide no government, but every one will be of his own Religion without con­troul.

I cannot excuse all the people, nor think I all faultie, who are afraid of having their Religion measured out unto them by the Presbyterie: especi­ally by the rigid sort, who ac­count all error and heresie, which suites not with their con­ceptions, and all men schisma­ticks, and Sectaries, whose con­sciences are not just of their size; and yet I am perswaded that re­formation goeth not forward, is chiefly the fault of the pretended Clergie.

How can that be? or how doth it appear?

Because most of the pre­tended Ministers must be ca­sheired, before there can be any reformation: for either the Mi­nisters [Page 50] are dumb, blinde guides: or els so prophane, irreligious, or superstitious, that if they be reformers, their Elders in all probabilities will be of the same stamp to joyne with them: And then I leave it to you to judge, what reformation here's like to be, when Satan must cast out Satan.

This is the condition, but of few places, many being better fur­nished, both with Ministers and people.

The most of the best sort of Ministers stand so much upon their own interests: and besides are in so great slaverie to their Patrons, that we see they straine their wits, to advance their own honor and profit, and to please men; least either their Livings should suffer any diminution: or some one finde a hole in their coat, some Symonie, lapse, or other flaw in their Title, where­by [Page 51] to put them out of their Living, which before they will loose, the most will adventure their souls. And upon these grounds it is, that every one living within the compasse of their Parish, or their perambu­lation walk must be acknow­ledged one of their flock, and comming to Church, he is (with­out doubt) a member of the vi­sible Church, how ignorant or wicked soever; or els how can they demand any Tythes or of­ferings from them. And for the same reason the Ministers labor to preserve their Parishes intire, and not to leave out any part thereof, least they loose the Tythe and benefit which comes by it. And hence is it that they maintain every Parish to be a vi­sible Church, although there be neither lawfull Minister, nor any Congregation of faithfull peo­ple there, who have given any [Page 52] testimonie, that they are mem­bers of Christ, or of the hous­hold of faith.

These things may easily be amended: and I presume when the Church is setled, and the Presbyteri­an government, with the Classes and Synods confirmed, these things which are amiss may be altered, or changed; they are but pettie blemishes, and the Ministers will therein satisfie the weak, and such as are offended: But its well you have no greater mat­ters to charge them with.

I could acquaint you with other abhominable things, main­tained by your Ministers on pur­pose to satisfie their lusts of pride and covetousness (to which all other things are but drudges) be­sides, what I formerly told you off, which although you account them pettie matters: yet are they repugnant to the essence of a Church of Christ: And I see none goeth about to amend them: [Page 53] they have Elders and Officers chosen as if they intended refor­mation; but the Ministers and their confederates, the Elders do but provoke the Lord, grieve his holy Spirit, and mock and abuse the people of God. Where is anie of your great Presbyters that ever confessed that his Pa­rish was too great, and the peo­ple too manie, although they were twentie thousand, and his Living worth 500 l. per annum: or that anie of the people were so wicked that hee would spare them out of his Church: or de­sired to have his Parish divided that hee might make way for o­thers more able or worthie then himself. Least also hee should part with some of his Tythes and so diminish his revenue and greatness, which is against his honour and profit.

I have already given you sa­tisfaction to that you now said, and [Page 54] tell you again wee must not expect to have a reformation at once; its a matter requires time and autoritie to compell obedience to the Orders of the Church, and then you shall see the Presbyterie act vigorously, and re­formation will undoubtedly go on a­pace. But I pray you what are those other things to which you take excep­tion, as things abominable, and yet maintained by the Clergie?

They defend and main­tain their Popish callings from the Prelates, their old conformi­tie and subscription (which in­gaged them to bee the Prelates, and so the Popes Vassals) the Pa­trons right to present to the Churches, the Popish and Apo­cryphal names of Priests, Par­sons, Vicars and Curates; the Book of Common Prayer, and Homilies, and use of popish Ce­remonies, maintenance by Po­pish and superstitious offerings, double benefices, leaving one li­ving, [Page 55] when they can get a greater, thrusting themselvs upon people without their suffrage, consent, maintaining Popish Vestries, bee­ing a mear mockerie of Christs Ordinance, as if they intended to separate the precious from the vile, when they do nothing less. All which things with others might easily bee shew­ed to bee abominable, and not to bee suffered in the Churches of Christ. Besides these, they plead stifly, that mar­rying, burying, and funerall O­rations belong to the Ministerial function: and allow of all chil­dren to bee baptized, although the Children of Turks and Infi­dels, (but especially those of their Parish) if they bee offered to them, how wicked soever their parents are. And in like man­ner they admit all to the Lords Supper, how unfit soever, if they come but to Church. These, and [Page 56] others such like have I heard pleaded for with great confidence, whilest they have blamed others, who take upon them to preach, not having such callings, as they howsoever gifted; and yet for advantage they will bear with anie novice, or ignorant fellow, having been two or three years: or it may be less at the Universi­tie, and put him up into the Pul­pit, not doubting of his calling to the Ministry: And all these in order to the service of these mens pride and covetousness.

I perceive you finde fault al­most with every thing, although ne­ver so ancient and inoffensive: What can you say against Mariage, why it should not be accounted to belong to the Ministry, having been so long used in the Church.

I answer, that Marriage is a civill action, and belongs to the Magistrate to see it orderly done, and so was used under the [Page 57] Law, and is so used at New-Eng­land, and in other reformed Churches at this day. Ruth. 4. 9. Lechfield newes, &c. pag. 39. Its true, that in corruption of time when Antichrist prevailed above the civill power, it was brought into the Church that the Priest might have an oare in every boat, and no man marry but whom they permitted. And by this meanes it was looked to that the Priests might not marry, and those persons who did mar­ry must have the Parish Priests Certificate, or Licence, least any grist should go by their mill.

This may be true, and yet the thing not unlawfull; for the Mini­ster in the face of the Congregation to joyne the marryed couple, and to give them some good exhortation fit for such a Solemnitie.

Why may not as much be done by a godly Magistrate be­ing a civill action, and common [Page 58] to all Nations? But that is not all: after the Marriage was an­nexed to the Ministeriall functi­on, the Church of Rome soone made it a Sacrament, and the Ring must needs be added as the outward signe of love, the in­visible grace, that as the Ring is endlesse, the marryed couples love should be endlesse. A wor­thie Sacrament, and without doubt fit to be retained in the Church, for the benefit of the Clergie, both in respect of ho­nor and profit, the two maine things of all their designes.

But I pray you, why may not burying the dead be a fit action for the Minister, and a funerall Ser­mon requisite for them which are living?

For burying the dead. Its also a civill work of Charitie for Christians to accompanie the corp's of their dead friends to the grave, and to lay them there [Page 89] without more adoe: and the dead also may burie their dead; And what the Minister hath there to do more then another man I know not.

Its fit he should give some ex­bortation to the people: and if he preach a Funerall Sermon, its done for the edification of the living, and not for the dead, and preaching is good in season and out of season.

I confess the word ought to be preached in season and out of season: but some times and places are so unseasonable, as no christian prudence will admit it convenient to preach (as the times now are) for a man to preach in Westminster-hall when Judges are sitting (though Paul preached upon Mars-hill (the Judges Court) at Athens) or to preach a Sermon in a common hall, when a companie are at din­ner, where no man regards, these times and places are too un­seasonable, [Page 90] there being conveni­ent times and places for such re­ligious actions. And for your exhortation or funeral Sermon, they are more inconvenient and unseasonable, then at anie other time and place, being more a­bused; and the very original be­ing naught.

• 1. First, we read of no such thing in the Scripture, onely we finde godly men used to ac­companie others to the grave, and sometimes made lamentation for them.
• 2. Secondly, these funeral Sermons (or rather Orations) were first used by the Heathen, and then taken up by the Church of Rome, who used at these So­lemnities to praise the dead.
• 3. Thirdly, thence the Church of Rome came to pray for the dead, and to this day defend it stifly. And therefore as a learn­ed man once said in a Sermon in [Page 91] my hearing, we have left pray­ing for the dead, for the evill of it; we may as well leave off pray­sing the dead by reason of the abuse of it.
• 4. Fourthly, now besides this the corruption of the times are such, that the gift for the fune­rall Sermons, so blindeth the eyes of the Ministers, that gene­rally they alwaies finde out one thing or other, to commend the dead for, although most pro­digiously wicked (as what man in his sickness, or at some other time, will not do or say some good) for which the Minister presently (in conceipt) placeth the dead partie in Para­dise: to the woful hardning of the wicked (many of their au­ditors) in a course of sin, when they hear as bad as themselves ab­solved by the Minister, as a Saint departed, and a faithfull bro­ther, according to the blinde [Page 92] charitie of our Service-Book. And were it not that some profit comes to the Clergie by these fu­neral Orations▪, they would as easily be laid aside, as their prayer and exhortation at the grave, for which they had nothing given unto them.

You seemed before to take ex­ception to the Baptisme of Infants, and truly you reason like an Indepen­dent, who are for the most part Ana­baptists.

I do not disallow of the Bap­tism of some Infants, whom I con­ceive to have right to Baptism: but I do not allow of the Bap­tism of all children indifferent­ly: nor of all such children whose Parents profess Christianitie.

The ancient Fathers testifie the Baptism of Infants in the Church to be an Apostolicall Institu­tion, and to have been used from the Apostles times, when whole housholds were baptized, and no exception of [Page 93] children. And there are many rea­sons, and unanswerable arguments grounded upon Scripture, both in the old and New Testament, to warrant it. And the verie Text it self is clear, Acts 2. 39. The promise is made to you, and to your children, &c. And if the promise be made to them (children) they then have right to the signe, or seal of the promise.

Touching what you al­ledg from the Fathers, I con­fess, I have not all those books in my custodie, which I finde cited for this purpose; but I have searched divers of them, and if you please to examine them, they make nothing for you. All agree in this, that Infants were bap­tized in the Primitive Church▪ and Augustine affirmes it to be an Apostolicall Tradition. Au­gust. contr. Donat. l. 4. ca. 23. 24. Lib. 10. de gen. ad liter. ca. 23. Ciril. in levi. l. 4 But this doth not prove that the children [Page 94] of Heathens; nor of all such who professed christianitie were baptized, how wicked and lewd soever their parents were: or whither of the Church, or ex­communicate. And such as hold all ought to be baptized, hold that children dying without Baptisme cannot be saved. Cipri. Epi [...] ad fidum. 137.

And for your Arguments from Scripture, you can thence con­clude nothing, But that the In­fants of believers have been, and may be baptized. And if you ob­serve where you finde whole Fa­milies baptized, as the Jailor, Acts 16. 14. 15. 33, 34. and Lydia's, the Parents▪ at least one of them were believers. And touchin [...] that place in the Acts, which onely seemes so plain to you, If I should admit the pro­mise there mentioned to be that which you meane, which may verie well be questioned, it [Page 95] makes nothing to prove that for which its intended, by the men of your opinion, who will have all the children in their Parish, if their parents come to Church, to be baptized. The next words clear it from such construction, and give you a full answer. The promise is made to you and to your children, and to such as are a far off▪ (but the Apostle further addes) even as manie as the Lord our God shall call, so that by your construction, this must be concluded. Converts have right to the promise, and so have their children, &c. You conceive the State hath done well, in debar­ring the wicked and abominable from the Lords Table, and if the Parents be separated, or excom­municate (so I account them who are debarred from that Sa­crament) how can their children have right to the other, as being born of believing Parents.

We conceive, we have suf­ficient warrant to baptize all Infants that are brought to us, being offered in the Church to be baptized: For although their immediate Parents were neither of them Beleivers, yet some of their ancestors might be (and we are bound in charitie to be­lieve they were) Believers: for God sheweth mercy to thousands of genera­tions of them that love him.

You are without doubt singular in your opinion, and upon this ground all the chil­dren of Turks are to be baptized (if offered in the Congregati­ons) because they proceed from Abraham by Hagar; and all the Jews, because they proceed from Sem: yea, and all the Gentiles, because they proceed from Ja­phet; and all the world, be­cause they proceed from Adam, I never heard asserted, untill of late, nor do I think any Ortho­dox Divine will maintain it. I [Page 97] confess, I once heard something to that purpose, from a Minister whom you know very confi­dently affirmed. But afterwards he having to deal with the Ana­baptists, forsook that hold, and stood onely upon that point to prove, that some Infants had right to (or might be) baptized, which he then, and at other times proved by Doctor Featleys arguments against the Anabap­tists.

How ever it may be with the children of Turks, and other Infi­dels, yet there is no doubt, but the children of such as are members of the Church by outward profession (al­though we see not the signes of grace and election in them) have right to Baptism.

I account godless, impeni­tent persons living in the bosome of the Church as Infidels, and Heathens, and the Apostles rule is so, and in the language of the [Page 98] Scripture, they are dogs and swine, to whom holy things are not to be given, nor the chil­drens bread to be cast to them, Matth. 7. 6. And their children (where neither Parent can be judged a believer, which no no­torious wicked man or woman can be) are pronounced unclean, 1 Corinth. 7. 14. How ever God may shew mercie, the Church ought to judge according to out­ward appearance, and not to ad­mit the wicked Parents to the one Sacrament, nor their chil­dren to the other, without re­formation in the Parents, or one of them.

But I pray you, why was not the child baptized, which was brought (from another Parish) to your Congregation to be baptized, I understand the Minister refused to baptize it.

Its true, but it was not re­fused upon your ground▪ the Mini­ster [Page 99] consulted with the heads of the Parish, and upon debate of the mat­ter, they concluded it was not fit it should be baptized there, least it might be chargeable to the Parish.

I am sorrie to hear this car­nal resolution from such a Mi­nister, and so long taught a peo­ple. It seems some Ministers and people dare transgress the Law of God, if it be for advantage. As the Pharisees taught upon pretence of their Corban (the Box) But how doth this agree with that tenet, that all chil­dren of such as are members of the Church, by outward profes­sion (which all are in that Pa­rish where that Childe was born) ought to be baptized.

If it be a fault, let him, or them answer for it, who did it, it may be they are able to give satisfaction therein. But touching that which you said before, that some are to be ac­counted unclean; we cannot censure [Page 100] any, as profane or unclean: nor keep them from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper: the Minister cannot do it of himself, without the Elders, (Church-Officers) joyn with him. Although the Minister know the Com­municants, to be prodigiously wicked or ignorant, and in all probabilitie eat and drink their own judgment, or damnation, he cannot keep them from the Sacrament: Such must be suspended by the Church, before the Minister can refuse to admit them; and untill then their children ought not to be denied the Sacrament of Baptisme, for the reason before al­ledged.

Touching admitting all to the Lords Supper upon that ground, because the Minister cannot refuse them, not being prohibited by the Church (you mean the Presbyterie) I answer, the Minister is bound to forbear to administer the Sacrament to them, whom he knowes eat and [Page 101] drink their own judgment for the reasons aforesaid: Although you have not the power of the Church-censures in your hand. The reason is clear, because it is alwaies a sin to give holy things to dogs, and to prophane Gods Ordinances. But its no sin to forbear, to administer a Sacra­ment upon just occasion for a time. The Jews were not re­proved for omission of Circumci­sion in the Wilderness: Joshua 5. 5. and the Passeover upon just occasion might be deferred for a moneth: Numb. 9. 9. 10. And although I think it no fin to communicate with the wicked in the Ordinances, where I am not a personal actor, nor appro­ver of their sin, but a partaker. Yet its without doubt, a sin to be an actor in such a case; for the actor transgresseth the rule, and causeth others to transgress.

It seems you stumble at mixt [Page 102] Congregations, do you ever think to finde a Church on earth so clean, as not to have wicked men in it. The tares will grow in the field with the wheat untill the harvest which is the end of the world.

I confess, your mixt Paro­chiall Congregations do so far make mee stumble, that I much question whether they can be re­puted true visible Churches of Christ; And I hold that manie of them are not, having not the essentials, either the material, nor formal causes of a Church, in Gospel sense; but are rather the Synagogues of Satan, like Priests, like people, and the best are le­prous, and very unclean.

I know the Tares shall grow with the wheat; Matth. 13. 38. but if you mean by Tares, pro­fane wicked men, they shall grow in the field, that is, in the world, not in the Church: the Tares which shall be in the Church un­till [Page 103] the harvest are hypocrites; profane men shall be cashiered, or rather never admitted into the Churches of Christ. But I can­not devise, how its possible these Parochiall Congregations can be purged without disbanding, there are so few, who are fit to be Church-members, and so many of the wicked.

Although we have not the Di­scipline set up to sweep, and cleanse the Church: yet we endeavor to put a difference between the precious and the vile, and to give everie one their portion, and to order things in the best manner we can, both for the Ministerie and people.

Its true, you have the Image, or rather counterfeit of some such thing, as putting a difference in he Popish Vestries. But I pray you what garments have you to keep there, that the Vestrie must needs be upheld, the Whoores smock, with the Cope, [Page 104] Rochet, Tippet, and other trumperie are gone. And I know not any of Baals Priests here, who now use such vestments, that there is any need of a Ve­strie to put them in, or that so manie men need be trusted with them.

That meeting which you scoffe at is no such Vestrie, its only a place for the heads of the Parish to meet in, to consult about the affairs and Orders of the Church, and for setling and chusing the Minister, when there is need, and providing maintenance for him.

It seems then that those Vestrie-men, who are there to consult, are more worthie then the rest (who are without) and may not intermeddle with these things about which they consult. These do very well resemble the conclave of Cardinals at Rome, advising about the chusing, de­posing and ordering the affairs [Page 105] of the Pope, and his Church. But I pray you, by what Law of God have these your Vestrie men autoritie to elect, and put out the Minister, and to prescribe rules and Lawes for the residue of the people; I protest against all their Orders and agreements, how just soever they may seem, as not daring to submit to such an usurped power, being con­trarie to Christian libertie, in which the Apostle Paul com­mands the Galatians, and in them all Christians to stand fast, and to maintain the same as being purchased by Christ himself. Gal. 5. 1. compared with chap. 3. 1. 3. chap. 4. 10.

I confess this Vestrie is not a right Presbyterie, nor claim they any such power by colour of any di­vine Law: But yet for order and conveniencie, I think they ought to be tolerated untill the time of refor­mation. But Sir, what doth this [Page 106] concern you: It becomes you to be a hearer, and a learner, rather then a Teacher having no calling there­unto.

It concerns me, and eve­ry Christian as a member of the Church (if your Church be a true Church) to elect our own Minister, and not to have him thrust upon us, either without or against our wills or consents, as the manner now is. And he that comes in otherwise then by the suffrage of the people, enters not by the door, but comes in as a Thief and a Robber, and hath no lawful calling. Calvin. Instit. l. 4. ca. 3. Sect. 15. Act. 14. 23.

For our calling to the Mini­sterie, we doubt not of it: nor ever questioned it, being confident its war­rantable. Those who ordained us be­ing Bishops and lawfull Presbyters: or at least they stood in the place of such; and acts don by them are valid; Sacraments administred by [Page 107] Papists and other hereticks, are right Sacraments, so they be duly admini­stred, for the matter, although joyn­ed with their corruptions. And I h [...]ld it unlawfull for any man, to take upon him the Office or function of a Minister, without a lawfull cal­ling.

And I finde that in those ancient Canons, called the Canons of the Apostles, it is ordained that one Bi­shop may ordain a Presbyter.

This is a poor and insuf­ficient calling, if a Bishop had any autoritie to ordain a Mini­ster, or to judge of his gifts in order to his admission to a Church, which I denie (and the same is a point of Poperie) yet, that thereupon the Churches suffrage, or assent should be by the Bishop conferred upon the Minister, is against all sense and reason, much more against Re­ligion, which ought to be squar­ed by the word as the Rule. [Page 108] Mar. de vulson. de libert. de le E­glises, Gallicane. Pag. 148. ca. 9▪ And for your Canons of which you speak, none regard them but the more ignorant sort of Papists, they being known to be of a later date then the Apostles: and are credited as much as Lucianus scoffes: Tobits and Ju­diths stories, or Jeffery Munmouth his tales. And those Canons were coyned just at his time, some four hundred years since, by some of Jeffery's Religion. But can you shew no more then this for your calling, then give over railing against others who have not the same, and yet it may be a better calling then you have.

Why, what do our Ministers of the Church of England want, or what is requisite to a lawfull Calling to the Ministerie.

Besides abilities of gifts, and inward graces, every Mini­ster ought to have a more due or­dination, [Page 109] and this is to be per­formed by the Church or Con­gregation, for the better effect­ing whereof, they may take the advice of the learned, who are able to make tryal of his gifts, and of his abilitie, and aptness to teach.

And then the same is perfected by the free election, or suffrage of the people who are Church­members: And in these things the Scripture is plain; shew how you have such a calling.

For the first, I had thought I had given you satisfaction alreadie, when I told you we were ordained by Bishops, who had abilitie to judge of the Ministers gifts, and were (or stood in the place of) true Presbyters. And for that which you call Election, or the Suffrage, or assent of the peo­ple, although it have no place with us, regarding everie circumstance in the formalitie of it, yet we have that which is equivalent to it.

I pray you what is that?

We, at the least some of us have the consent of the Parish, or at least the most of them, either before, or after our admission, and if not, we are presented by the Patron of the Church, who is instead of all the Congregation, being their represen­tative, in as much as he was intrusted by them all, to chuse for them all in regard of their weakness, and to a­void confusion in the election: and his act in presenting is the act of all the people, as the Acts of Parlament, being made by those who are chosen by the people, are the Acts of the people. And the people are bounden as well by the Acts of the one, as of the other: yet, if any man except against the per­son presented, he hath his liberty to do it.

O most profound divini­tie: or rather notable poperie. By the same Rule, and upon the same ground, the Pope collated to many Churches in England, and the Bishops had the oversight [Page 111] of all the Churches in their Di­ocesses (some peculiars excepted) and put in, and put out at their pleasures, and this must be al­lowed for the people surrendred (or rather yeilded up by compul­sion) into the hands of these wolves (pretending to be Shep­herds) all their right and pow­er. But alas, this grew through corruption of time, when Anti­christ was come to his height, then he and his Prelates inthral­led the Churches, and wrested from the poor people that right which the Gospel gave unto them, and which continued for the first three hundred years after Christ; as is confessed by the Pa­pists and Protestants. Fullers ho­ly state, li. 2. ca. 12. pa. 87. Acts 1. 23. & 6. 5. Calvin Instit▪ l. 4. ca. 19. Sect. 31 & 14. Se. 31. Cath Divine. An. Caudrey Case. Prefa. sect. 8. Magd: Cent. 2. ca 7. cent 3. c. 7 Cipr. epist. l. 1. epist. 4. & epist. 3. & l. 1. 3. epist. 11.

[Page 112]But these Wolves made void the Law of God, by their Tra­ditions; and the slavish Ministe­rie of England are unwilling to come out of this Babylonish ser­vitude; but with Issachar, be­cause he sees rest is good (or ra­ther his Benefice fat) he croucheth down under the burthen. But see the use and equitie of it in our dayes; it may be at the first this power of presentation was given to a good man (or rather he took it) because he founded or en­dowed the Church) but by revo­lution of times it comes by de­scent or purchase to an Atheist, a Papist, a Symonist, or some wretch not fit to be trusted with the life and death of a dog, much less with the soules of men. And by this means the souls of men according to that Prophecie become the merchandize of Rome, for who seeth them not set to sale almost by every Patron? yea [Page 113] and their bodies too, Rev. 18. 13. [...] for according to the number of the people, and the profit of their bodily labours is the Advowson sold for more or less. And I know no other way in all the world, how the bodies and souls of men can be made the merchan­dize of Rome, but by this means: nor is the Prophecie any other way fulfilled; for if it should be meant of selling slaves, that pro­perly belongs to the Turks.

But I told you (although some Patrons prove Latrons, and sell the Presentations) the people may except against the partie present­ed, if he be not a worthie man, and if they do not, its their own fault.

You had need to have more skill in Divinitie then you have in the Law: Alas this Li­bertie is but a meer gullerie and cousenage of the people. If any one refuse to admit, or do keep [Page 114] out the partie presented. And a quare impedit, or such Writ be brought to trie the right, Gods Law never comes into question, but only who hath the best title to present by the Law of the Land, which is Popish in that point (as in manie others the Lord of heaven amend it) and lookes only upon the presenta­tion as a temporal right without judging the matter, as apper­taining to Religion: therefore I pray you speak no more of this matter; for the more you stir in in it, the more it stinks: But shew me some better evidence of your calling.

I will shew you sufficient; Wee have abilities and gifts fit for the Ministerie, being apt to teach, and able to divide the word of truth aright; And our Ministerie is seal­ed by the conversion of soules: and however our outward calling in a ni­cetie may be defective: yet we have [Page 115] the inward, which is most effectuall; and therefore there is no cause of se­paration.

For your calling I account it not right, for what you for­merly alledged: And for that you last said its no proofe that your calling to the Ministerie is lawful: for a private man may be abundantly gifted, yea, and convert souls, as common expe­rience sheweth, and yet have no calling to the Ministerie. And this I dare farther add, and know by mine own observation, that God doth not bless the Ministers labours, who have received the mark of the Beast (by their con­formities and subscriptions) as he doth the labours of other faithful men. And the reason is, because they stood not in Gods wayes, for if they had, they should have turned the peo­ple from their iniquities. But for want of a faithful Ministerie, it [Page 116] hath pleased God to blesse the en­deavours of godly Parents and religious governours of families, and private Christians (who with Joshua serve the Lord) to the con­version of many more souls then are turned unto God by these mens Ministery, how learned and Orthodox soever. So that where a man can hardly finde any con­verted by the Ministery of these men, he may finde the footsteps of Religion and godlinesse deri­ved from religious Parents and Families, for the continuance of the Church from generation to generation, even to admiration. And your old conformitie and Subscription, which you are constrained to defend by Popish arguments, when you have to deal against the Brownists and Independents, are a great blemish to the Ministery.

We subscribed to nothing which was unlawfull, although many [Page 117] things were inconvenient.

Thanks bee to God that we be rid of the Hierarchy of Arch-bishops, Diocesan Bishops, Arch-Deacons, Deans, and the rest of that rabble, the Books of Common-prayer, Homilies, con­secration of Priests and Deacons, with the spiritual Courts, Li­censes, Dispensations, Commu­tations of Pennance, Consecrati­on of daies to Saints, and some to wicked men and Idols, as the Crosse and the Rhoode, daies observed by some, forbidding of meats and marriage at some times, with their Canons and Ceremo­nies, Crosses, Surplices, worship of the breaden God, and many other popish trinkets. All which the most ingenious amongst your selves have condemned, as not capable of purgation, but fit to be abolished: else I could easily prove the whole body of them (which are contained in your [Page 118] Subscription) most of them be­ing injoyned and set forth in the Rubrick, and the rest compre­hended in your Oath and Cano­nicall obedience to be reliques of Antichris [...] [...] by that man of sin and his va [...]ls, and are at the best humane presumptions brought into the Church with­out warrant of the Word, Vid. Preface to the Common-prayer Book, or teaching Ceremonies which Christ onely ought to appoint, who is the Teacher of his Church; and serve for nothing else but to mis-leade the simple, and to offend the weak, and tend onely to conformity with Rome: And therefore altogether unlaw­full. But cheifly the Cross (which in Baptism is made the sign and Seal of the whole work of San­ctification is the worst of all Po­pish Ceremonies, and the greatest Idol in the Romish Church (ex­cept the Virgin Marie) for that [Page 119] blesseth all the rest, and therefore is the greater, as Bellarmine teach­eth, Bellar. Contr. de sacra. Confer. l. 2. c. 13. pa. 371. These things you know better then I do; yet I name them thus briefly, that you may consider of them, and not wilfully hudwink your consci­ence, and imprison or withhold the truth in unrighteousness, but that you may come to the sight of that your sin; and as you have publikely offended, you may make publike satisfaction, by ma­nifesting your repentance for this publick breach of the second Commandment.

Peter offended grievously in denying his Master, and yet we finde no publike confession which he made of his sin, nor any such satisfaction as you speak of.

Although his form of con­fession is not mentioned, yet its clear he manifested his repen­tance so that it was fully taken [Page 120] notice of. What greater manife­station of sorrow then tears; and what greater figne of repentance then sorrow for sin with amend­ment; both which were evident in Peter; his sorrow, his weeping is mentioned by three of the E­vangelists, and one saith he wept bitterly. And the Evangelist Luke, who wrot the Gospel, either saw it himself, or heard it from them which saw it, Luke 1. 2. as he did the rest of the story of our Lord in the flesh. And therefore no private weeping. And for his re­pentance, it was answerable to his offence, otherwise his con­science could never have been so well satisfied, nor would he have been so confident in professing his love to Christ as afterwards he was, John 21. 16, 17. Nor did Christ upbraid him for not ma­nifesting his repentance, as he did Thomas for the hardnesse of his heart and unbelief. And why [Page 121] should you think much to con­fesse your offence more then Pa­trick Adamson the late Archbishop of Andrews in Scotland, Bartro. Apolog. in Exord. who confesseth his sinne and error touching Church-government, and others have done the like.

If I were satisfied in my con­science that conformity and subscripti­on to these things was a sin, I should be willing to make satisfaction: I shall think upon it further hereafter, and do what I finde fit to be done as neer as I can.

You speak ingeniously, I have not known many Ministers of your condition would say so much. I onely offer you this con­sideration; you deservedly ex­spect that such as have committed offences against the seventh Com­mandment, somthing lesse then the grosse act of adultery, and that in private before it was re­vealed should publikely give sa­tisfaction [Page 122] to the Congregation; and it was done so; Spiritual Adulterie is worse then corpo­ral. And everie breach of the second Commandement is a de­gree of it, and yours not the least. I leave you to apply it, &c. And if I could see you repent of this sin you would then hate the gar­ment spotted by the flesh: and would cast off the very names of Parsons, Vicars, Curates and Priests. And everie name and thing belonging to Baal, and say to them get thee hence.

What think you of the late Prebends, I think you cannot finde more faults in them, then you impute to our painfull ministerie: And all men condemn them as useless, and unprofitable.

The Prebendaries, al­though but of humane Institu­tion were more tolerable then these Parsons, Vicars and Cu­rates, more innocent in their [Page 123] foundation or Institution (at least manie of them) less destru­ctive to the Churches, and not so diametrically opposite to the Kingdom of Christ in the out­ward administration of it.

I am sorrie you should justifie a companie of idle drones, who are justlie abolished as unprofitable bur­dens, and such as have eaten up the fat of the Land: and consumed that which might have maintained manie faithfull Ministers.

You mistake me, I do not justifie them, but comparatively (for I think they are justlie abo­lished) I say they are more tole­rable, &c. and that I will justifie.

I hold it it impossible to prove that our Ministers, Parsons, Vi­cars, and Curates are worse or less tolerable in any respect then the late Prebendaries.

Touching their persons as men, Schollars, or Preachers, I shall say nothing but this, [Page 124] these Ministers and the Preben­daries were as sheep go to the fould, some good some bad, some learned, others unlearned, some Preachers, others dumb Dogs, some idle droanes, others more painful, some sober and temperate; others given up to Luxurie and drunkenness, some Polititians; others morall ho­nest men, some devout; others profane, some more Orthodox: others erronious and heretical, some more sincere and Gospel­like; others wholly given up to superstition.

I do confess of both sorts of these Church-men there were, which have had their vices and vertues, such as have been eminent for vertue and pietie, aad others infamous for wickednes. But wherein lies the dif­ference that you prefer one before the other, the worse before the better.

I prefer the Prebendaries in two respects. First relating [Page 125] to their original or Institution. Secondly to their practice and condition of life. For their ori­ginal, I consider these Preben­daries as a civill societie or cor­poration, as a Hall or Colledge in the Universitie, and so they were the Bishops Councell or As­sistents, who was a Baron or Peer of the Realm having his place in Parlament. Secondly, and for their practice and condi­tion of life as they were not, so they stood not as Ministers ha­ving (as you call it) cure of souls, as the Parsons, Vicars, and Curats usually had.

This was not all their im­ployment, or office; they pretended to be Preachers and Ministers, and had much of the revenue of the Church in their hands.

I confess the Prebendaries as manie of your pretended Cler­gie have had fat morsells for their little labour: But that [Page 126] seemes to be the simplicitie or devotion of those who gave it to them. Howsoever if they did any service (as I told you what was their Office) it could not be expected they should wait and at­tend the Bishop as his Councell for nothing; especially they be­ing the supports of his magnifi­cence. And the matter of that Hierarchie being to be upheld with so much policie.

Our Ministers serve for bet­ter use, and therefore to be preferred before these Prebendaries: Is this all you can say for them?

No, I can say something more, I told you what they were in their institution positively; now I will adde something of their negative righteousness, which I formerly touched at, viz. They were not originally insti­tuted to stand in the roome of true Pastors, As our Parsons, Vicars, and Curats were. They [Page 127] were only bound to preach (by themselvs or others) certain Ser­mons yearly in the Cathedrall, not pretending to any Pa­storall charge: And so as they did little good they did little hurt. But when with their Pre­bends they got Church-livings, and became Parsons and Vicars; they became more guiltie of the bloud of souls then ever their Prebends could have made them. Then they became Pluralists, idle droanes, Non-residents, kept out true Pastors, made a strong faction against reformation, and to uphold their Parsonages they joyned with the rest to keep Christ out of his Kingdome.

Now lay all this together, your Parsons, Vicars and Curats are of the devising of Antichrist without warrant of the word, and are such as I have described: The Prebendaries and their ap­purtenances are justly cashiered, [Page 128] see now if it be not high time to pluck up those also.

It doth not appear to me there is any evill in these names, you shall find many godly and Orthodox Di­vines, Parsons, Vicars and Curats, who shew themselves glad to be quit of all the Ceremonies, and heartily desire a through reformation, and some of these are not ashamed of the name Priest.

I pray sir forsake these A­pocryphal and Popish names, for a great part of the Religion of Antichrist is wrapped up in such names of his Creation, as Car­dinals, Abbots, Priors, Arch-Bishops, Lord Bishops, Deanes, Arch-Deacons, Chancellrs, Commissaries, Parsons, Officials, Vicars, Curats, Priests, &c.

For all these names and Orders; but the four last we have nothing to do with them: and what harm is in any of these four names; or what offence comes by them, I know not.

I shall endeavor to let you know somewhat of that evill which I conceive of them.

1. First, in their Institu­tion and original (they ha­ving no foundation in the Scrip­ture) are of Antichrists devising, and in their nature and use con­trarie, or unlike to the Mini­sters of the Gospel, who are only Pastors and Teachers. For their original, they grew up in this manner. The Diocesan Bishop (who in corrupt times was con­ceived to have the care of all the Churches in his Diocess, which for the most part were endowed with all the Tythes of the Pa­rish) did usually appoint the Preists or Ministers, which in­deed were but the Bishops Cu­rates or Clerks.

Fullers holy State. Lib. 2. cap. 12. p. 87. citeth. Conci. Toledon. An. 589. Can. 9.

Now when the Bishop had given [Page 130] to the Minister, the cure of souls and care of the Church with all the Tithes and profit [...] thereof, undiminished by his In­stitution, he was called the Re­ctor, or Parson, which verie In­stitution being accepted, was an acknowledgment that the right to the Church was originally in the Bishop, and that made the Parson but the Bishops Curate: or rather servant or Clerk: and so it continued until the dissolu­tion of the Bishopricks.

2. Secondly, the Vicar (as a Clergie-man said) was created, or rather made by the Devil or the Pope: for when the Parson grew too great, or the Patron had founded a Monasterie, or o­ther superstitious house towards the maintenance thereof, the tithes of several Parishes which formerly belonged to the Churches, were appropriated, and this was done by the Patron [Page 131] with consent of the Bishop, and the incumbent Priest, if there were any, and sometimes this Appropriation was made by ver­tue of the Popes Bull: and then the care of the Church was in the Governour of the house (or o­therwise according to the foun­dation) who served the cure (as they called it) that is performed the Idolatrous service by a Monck of their house who was called the Vicar: and to him there was allowed for his paines, sometimes a stipend in monie, sometimes the small Tithes, &c. such a proportion as he could a­gree for with his Master, the Go­vernor of the house: And when the house came to the Crown by dissolution, it stood charged with that stipend [...]: or else the Vicar had the smal Tithes, or such part thereof, as formerly was agreed for, and the Bulk of the Tithes became a Lay fee, and [Page 132] were sold out, and enjoyed as the superstitious house held them, and the Composition or endowment of the Vicar remain­ed, and so continues as his por­tion to this day for serving the Church, &c. But usually he had his institution from the Bi­shop.

3. Thirdly, the Curate grew in this manner; when the Bishop held a Parsonage in commendam in his own hands, to augment his Bishoprick, or a Parson grew idle; or had severall Church-livings; then they hired some inferior Priest for what they could to sup­plie the cure for a year, a moneth or as they could agree; and he was called the Curate, who came and went according to his pay, and at the discretion or will of him that hired him: and so he continues to this day.

I tell you these things not be­cause I suppose you know them [Page 133] not, but to put you in minde how unlike these orders are to the Mi­nisters of the Gospel; for you see the Gospel had nothing to do to approve or disapprove of the pre­tended Minister, Parson, Vicar, or Curate, but all was original­ly in the Pope (or in the Bishop his Vicegerent) from whom the Bishop originally received his power, which continued here in force for manie hundred years.

Cath. Devin. Respons: Cook. l. Cau­drey. Case. pa.

4. And for the name Priest, its true it is a contract of Pres­byter; but as its used, it com­monly signifies a Popish Mass Priest, and is a a derogation from the Office of the Lord Christ; for I know none other sacrificing Priest in Gospel-sense; but Christ who was the last Priest and the last Sacrifice.

Well, I account there is no [Page 134] evill in these nams, yet for offence sake I shall be willing to leave them: and do conceive that the Ministers of the Gospel who are to continue to the perfecting of the Saints are properly Pastors and Teachers, who ought to be maintained liberally, and to have all incouragement by payment of all things due unto them.

I have alreadie told you what I conceive of their mainte­nance, and particularly what I think of tithes: But there is one thing which I wonder at, why the Ministers should stand so much upon superstitious offerings and mortuaries.

They have been anciently be­longing to the Church: and although they of the Separation say they were the things of Idolaters, I doubt not but they may be used being converted from their Idolatrous use.

As for those offerings which it seems you agree to be Popish, as indeed the most of those [Page 135] Offerings were, which were of­fered at the Altar (called the Al­tarage of the Church) some to Saints, Idols, or Devils to whom the Churches were dedicated; o­thers to the Virgin-Marie; Some for Tapers and Lights, and other superstitious uses; others taken from the Jewes by the Papists.

I conceive all these unfit to be given to, or received for the ser­vice of God: for that some things of Idolaters, not Idola­trous in State, as their goods and houses may be made use of for maintenance of the service of God: But those things of theirs which were Idolatrous in State, that is, such as were invented by Idolaters for perfecting their Ido­latrie, and served for no other use (as all Popish Ceremo­nies and popish offerings) ought not to be used by Christians.

And for those Jewish offer­ings, it is no more lawful to use [Page 136] them to retain Circumcision and other Ceremonies of which Paul saith, If you be circumcised Christ profits you nothing, Gal. 5. 2. for that the retaining of Circum­cision is a forsaking of Christ, and makes us bound to fulfill the Law; and with that all o­ther Jewish Ceremonies are abo­lished.

And touching Mortuaries, they are a foolish and ridiculous offering, and were anciently gi­ven as an amends and satisfaction to God (but they went to the Priest) to purge the guilt of the deceased; which he contracted by his non-payment of Tythes whilest he was living, and ought as well as other Offerings be laid aside; according to that, Thou shalt not bring the hire of a Whore, nor the price of a dog into the house of the Lord, &c. And what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols. Deut. 23. 18.

But now I pray you according to your ▪judgement, what must be­come of all our Churches; It seems by your argument (if one may believe you) they must all be plucked down as the Brownists teach, what say you to that.

Touching the name CHURCH, in your sense I do not greatly like it; for it pro­perly signifieth a Companie, and is used for the companie of the faithful, yet for the present I shall admit the word by a Me­tonymie, to signifie the place of their meeting: And I do not conceive there is any necessitie to pluck these Churches, or meeting places down. I confess I put no holiness in them, and think the Congregation may as well meet in any other convenient place: and that there is neither Legal nor Evangelical holiness in them. And that plucking down all the Popish and superstitious [Page 138] and Monuments of Ido­latrie (I do not mean the Arms of men of renown) and placing a faithfull Ministerie, there is a sufficient purging of these places to make them fit for the people of God to meet in for partaking of the holy Ordinances of God.

Why say you so? These Churches were founded by Papists and have been used to Idolatrie: And therefore you may as well allow of the things you speak against even now, as these Churches, I think both ought to be allowed indifferently.

I hold there is great diffe­rence: First for those I spake of formerly, we are sure they were the inventions of the Man of sin; and its possible to shew when and how they were brought into the Church of Rome. But these Churches (at least manie of them) are more ancient then Poperie or Antichrist; for its not possible that Antichrist could come un­till [Page 139] the Roman Empire was bro­ken and removed, which was at least four hundred years after Christ. Before which Christi­anitie was plentifully spread in England, and many Churches and Congregations planted for the true worship of God. 2. Thes. 7, 8. Reve. 13. 2.

Antiquitie with full consent agree that Christianitie was here planted in or neer the Apostles daies, and that upon occasion of the Persecution that rose a­bout Stephen Acts 11. 19. divers of the Apostles and Disciples came into England, amongst whom the Ancients reckon, Pe­ter, Paul, Joseph of Aramathea and Symon Zelotes. And that some Brittaines, both men and wo­men were famous Christians, and some suffered Martyrdom here in the first ten Persecuti­ons. Fox Act. & Mon. vo. p. 147. 148 Speeds Chron pa. [...] Arch-Bishops [Page 140] we cannot conceive but that the pietie and devotion of those times (when they had a Christi­an King, Lucius An. 180. pr. Christ. and Christianitie coun­tenanced and priviledged by di­vers of the Emperors, especially Constantine and Theodosius) would stir up the Christians to build them meeting places Besides, about the year six hundred, when Augustin the Monck (falsly called the English Apostle) came into England, sent by Pope Gregorie the Great, who had not taken upon him the Title of universal Bishop) he found the reliques of manie Churches, and Congre­gations of Christians, planted in England and Wales. Fox Act. & Mon. vo. pa. 150. 151. And he disputed with the Monks of Bangor about Ceremonies, by which its conceived he brought not so much Religion with him, [...] he did superstition and Intro­ductions [Page 141] to Popery; for the Brittains had learned Religion from better Tutors: Its true, af­terwards these meeting places were generally all polluted with Popish Idolatry, all which, with the Reliques thereof, being swept out, they are clean as before.

But what say you to this, ma­ny of our Churches were Idols Tem­ples. Goodw. Ant. Ro. ca. 20. de delubro.

The Parish Churches I conceive were built for the ser­vice of the true God, the forms of them are unlike the Idol Tem­ples: But I confess some of the Cathedrall Churches were the Temples of Idols, as of Jupiter, Apollo, Janus and Diana; some of which are demolished, and some were new built; as Pauls at Lon­don by Ethelbert the King about 1060 years since: At which time hee put out the Flammins and Arch-flammins, and set up Arch-Bishops [Page 142] and Bishops. These Churches were built and dedica­ted to Idols, or rather Devils and false Gods, and therefore ought to be demolished, as I con­ceive, according to that Law; Ye shall destroy all the places where they served their Gods, and break down their Altars &c. Deut. 12. 2, 3 &c.

Well, I hope shortly to see the Church-government setled, with the Classes and Synods, and that there­by all things will be well reformed, for the Appeals will regulate every thing which is irregularly done, and many will see more then a few.

I should be glad to see a through Reformation; but I do much feare these Prudentiall things the Classes, Synods, and Appeals to them, will prove but imprudentiall, and Physicians of no value. And I doubt not, but those who put the Parliament up­on them, have their own ends and aims in them.

Why say you so? the Church of Antioch did appeal to the Coun­cell at Jerusalem in a case of Con­science, Acts 15. and why may not we do the like?

I deny that there was any such Appeale as you mean; its true the Church of Antioch in a case of conscience did voluntari­ly send Paul and Barnabas and o­ther brethren to Jerusalem, to ad­vise with the Apostles, Elders, and Church there about that matter. And accordingly they received the sentence and judge­ment of the whole Church, as well Brethren as Apostles and El­ders, which Apostles had extra­ordinary gifts of knowledge and revelation, and what they dire­cted them, was in stead of the written Word: We have no per­sons so gifted in these daies, but must have recourse to the Law, and the Testimonies, the written Word of God.

But do you not think that these Classes and Appeals will be of excel­lent use for cropping and curbing of Errors, Heresies, and Sectaries, and keeping the Church free from pollu­tion?

I am unwilling to tell you what I think of Presbyterial Go­uernment, Ile say nothing of it, but take thus much, mark the end and observe it. These things the Classes, Synods, and Appeals can never profit the Church of Christ. The Appeals are in effect the same wee had before from the Arch-Deacon to the Consistory of the Bishop, from thence to the Ar­ches, then to the Audience, and then to the Delegates, so from the Congregation Presbyterie to the Classes, from the Classes to the Provinciall Synod, then to the Nationall. Here is work for the Civill Lawyers, to wyer-draw a cause (as a Proctor once said) untill dooms day, if he lived so [Page 145] long. These are not so likely to do good as the superintenden­cie of Bishops, which grew up within the first three hundred years after Christ, and were or­dained as (was pretended) for a remedie against Schisme and He­resie, which yet proved more dangerous then the disease, and made way for Antichrist the head of Prelacie. The Com­mission granted by King Henrie the eight to the Lord Crumwell; Fox Acts and Monum. vol. 1. pag. 503. to visit the Clergie. And the. High-Comission (Stat. 1. Eliz. ch. 1.) granted in the first year of Queen Elizabeths Raign, had as great shew and Probabilitie of doing good as these Classes and Synods. And for present I con­ceive did some good: But when wicked men became High Com­missioners, that proved a notable scourge to the godlie of the Land: And so will your Classes [Page 146] and Synods in a short time (when wicked and ambitious men get into the chief places and Power) prove as bad, if not worse, be­cause they be more then the High Commissioners, who were but two and thirtie. And this through the just judgment of God, because these Policies are not of his appointment.

Why should you say so?

Because God never useth to bless means devised by man, to accomplish his work in things appertaining to Religion: espe­cially when they come in Com­petition with those things which he hath appointed, when men's posts are set up by God's Posts, or when Go'ds means are laid a­side. For example, God hath ordained his word and the Cen­sures of the Church, to keep and drive out the profane, and to bring them to Repentance and amendment of life: Instead of these [Page 147] the State erected, or rather conti­nued from the Papists the Spiri­tual Courts, or rather Baudie Courts whose Officers lived upon the bloud of the best, and the sin of the worst. I need not tell you what profit or rather hurt came to all sorts of men by this means. To come a little nearer to that which hath a little more shew of State-Religion: The Parlaments of this Nation have made several Acts & Ordinances for reformation of offences against profaning of the the Lords, day, and against swearing and drunkenness; but the Church-Censures have not been used for those ends; See but the effect, what good these Laws have done, no reformation, much less any repentance in the Delinquents, for the punish­ments touch not the heart- and soul: But for the present, cause the sinner to rage and raile, and some to vow to be avenged of [Page 148] those who accuse them, and some to sin on purpose to pro­voke others who are more griev­ed for their transgressions then they themselvs, or because of the sleight punishment appointed for expiation of such offences; whereas if Gods waies were ta­ken up, he would bless the same for the conversion and amend­ment of such as belonged to him, and the rest would either be out­wardly reformed, or at least left without excuse: So then if these things be not of God, I shall expect no good from them. And can those things which are▪ meerly prudential overtop those things which undoubtedly are of divine institution. The foolish­ness of God is wiser then man.

But you said even now, that those who put the Parlament upon these things, have their ends and aimes in them. What good or profit can they have by such Classes, Sy­nods or Appeals?

They do much conduce to uphold their double honour which they labour so much for.

I conceive the chief Engineers for contrivance of these things are the greatest, and wealthiest of the pretended Clergie, who have the greatest power in everie Countie, which they extend to the utmost, having an oare al­most in everie boat, and they take themselvs wronged, if they may not order or contrive all de­signs, both concerning peace and war: nay and their projects reach verie far, take but a view of the late great designes, where­in, besides their secret interests in particular States-men, which they extended far, and wherein they prevailed much: Their publick preaching was almost nothing but Politicks in manie places; Their fear was (and yet is) that the Parlament and [Page 150] Armie complying, would spoil their great livings and counte­nance their opposites more then they, and so the wheeles of their Chariots would fall of. This fear they tearmed the miserie and danger of the Church (as the late Arch-Priest Laud did in a case not much unlike theirs) And their praiers and preaching must prevent it (if possible) and fur­ther their designe, which was: First to raise a new war, and then to prepare the sillie people to entertain the Scots (as avengers of the Covenant) to perfect that design which was to set up that Government and Platform which they had modelled as neer the Scotch fashion as would stand with their honour and pro­fit, and by their subtiltie and earnestness they prevailed much upon the people, and manie of the more religious sort believed them both in Citie and Coun­trie. [Page 151] During this time they bent all their force against Rebels, Hereticks, Schismaticks and Se­ctaries, which they said did much endanger the Church (that is the Diana of their great Livings.

Well, it pleased God (by part of that Armie of Sectaries whom some of these men had cursed, and scoffed at by the name of Saints) to frustrate the de­sign (by scattering the enemies Armie, almost miraculously) which was not prepared for re­lief of the Church, as our Cler­gie told us, but to root out and destroie the godlie of the Land. But the snare is broken, and we are delivered, blessed be God; and there that design ended. Now these men fall to work afresh, and if you will believe them, the Hereticks and Sectaries do again threaten the destruction of the Church of God: and more hurt comes to the Church by these [Page 152] Hereticks and Sectaries then did by all the Marian Persecution: and accordingly the people in manie places begin to believe them as they did before. But the Cen­ter where all their lines meet, and the Axis upon which they turn, is their honour and profit; for for if they can hold their own, they have and will have all the best livings, all the peoples heads under their girdles, and all the power in the Classes and Sy­nods: and so upon the point the power of the Countie, and of the whole Common-wealth, and will without doubt reign in the Consciences of all sorts of men, and incroach upon the Temporal power as much as their Predecessors the Prelates did before: And this must needs conduce to their honour and profit.

Alas it cannot be conceived that so learned Orthodox men should [Page 153] aime at such ends, being for the most part godly, painful Preachers of the word.

I do not judge all Mini­sters, but conceive many to be faithful: but I speak of the most of those whom you account the best, the Ringleaders, chief Pro­jectors, and rigid of the Presby­terial Partie, whose preaching for the most part is but reading, and their Sermons for the most part Politicks, either concern­ing Monarchical Government, Libertie of the people, Munici­pal Lawes, Obedience to Princes, foundations of Government, Levying of Warre, disbanding of Forces, exalting the Clergie, payment of Tithes, punishing of other men of contrarie judge­ments under the names of Secta­ries and Schismaticks, defence of Classes and Synods for poli­tick ends, under pretence of Or­der, defence of their own Cal­lings [Page 154] to the Ministerie, and other such like tending to their honor and profit; And in effect their preaching it self is but a preach­ing of themselvs, when they tell us of the great honor due unto them, and of their great labour: that they travel as those that bring forth labour as the hus­bandman, nay as under Rowers in Turkish Gallies, from whence one said the Metaphor is taken: although there was no Turkish Gallies within the space of 620 years after that was written. And of their honorable mainte­nance which they plead for, All which are but meer Policies: and oftentimes with these things they mingle divinitie, as Thomas Aquinas doth Philosophie with his Schoole divinitie. And upon the whole matter Preaching is made but a trade to get money, and to live by, and the Conver­sion of souls comes in but as a [Page 155] subordinate end, to their other advantages.

I wonder how you dare thus vilifie the Ministers of the Gospel, they take no more honour to themselvs then the holy Prophets, Apostles and enen of God did assume; and for their painful callings, they say no more then Paul and others of the Apostles said: And for their preaching its a matter of labour, and alwaies founded upon some Text of Canoni­cal Scripture.

What I have said is no way dishonorable to the holy Prophets, Apostles, Pen-men of the holy Scriptures, to whom a­gree all those things properly which these Politicians falsly and arrogantly take to themselvs.

First for honour, it stood in this that they were the Secreta­ries of almightie God, and of the Lord Christ, the unerring Scribes and Pen-men of the holy Ghost, holy men of God, and [Page 156] are all in heaven. And for their labours I refer you to a Cata­logue of them, left recorded by the holy Apostle Paul. 2 Corinth. 6. 5. 11. 23. &c. But above all their labours there mentioned, behold the sufferings who (as the Prophets did) most of them laid down their lives for the Lord and his Christ, and for that truth of God which they deliver­ed. 37, 38. Hebr. 11. 36, Where are any of these men who dare say this honour belongs to them, they have undergone these la­bours, or have suffered thus for the Lord Jesus his Cause or truth.

All they can say, is, that they are Ministers of the Gospel, I wish that were true, from my ve­rie soul if it be not, but I doubt the most part of these men make merchandize of the Gospel, and in▪ managing thereof use as ma­nie sleights and deceits of men, [Page 157] as others do in secular Callings, carrying all their busines aloft in a mysterie that they may be accounted Oracles; and will have everie one bound to be­lieve all they deliver, how false, frothie, and erroneous soever, be­cause their Text is a part of the holy Canonical Scripture, but a great part of their Sermon no kin unto it: but composed to further their own honour and profit.

You talk of manie sleights and deceits which they use in their Ministerie, I pray what are they?

I could tell you manie: but I will only name two of these mens sleights (besides what I have alreadie pointed at) which tend much to their ease and pro­fit, and are invented of late.

What are those?

The first is this, when they are young and have little or no­thing to do, They make them a [Page 158] common place book of the Bodie of Divinitie (as young Lawyers make them a common place book of the Law) And this they ga­ther out of such writings as suit best with their genius or fancie; the most fantastical, who would be counted most learned, col­lect it out of the Schoole men (a sort of rotten Divines) and Fa­thers, especially Origen. The superstitious out of School-men, Postillers, and other Friars; the most discreet and sober out of the writings of modern Di­vines, as Perkins, Amesius, Chemnisius, Musculus, Calvinus, Ʋrsinus, Vossius, Beza, Rivetus, Weames, Peter Martyr, Piscator, and such like. The more igno­rant sort make use of Boyce's his Postills, or collect a compa­nie of Sermons, either as they hear them preached: or as they think fit to cull them out of the great store of English Books, [Page 159] which are in everie place to be had. And this may be some two years work, and that is time enough: when this is done they are readie for a Church Living, and without doubt (as one of the sons of the Prophets) have an especial calling to preach. Then they come from the Universitie, and bring with them the curse of Elie's house, crouching to some or other to put them into the Priests Office, that they may eat a morsel of bread (have a Living to maintain them and keep from want) or use their friend Symon Magus his wisdom to shew an ap­parition of Angels, and by that means wrap for a thousand bo­dies and souls of men or more or less as their purse will speak. Well, the bargain is made, the man is approved of, rung into his Church, and gives great hope that he will be a peaceable man, and use the Parishioners well for [Page 160] their Tithes. And so falls to preaching so soon as he hath had sufficient time to fit himself, to satisfie the humours of his audi­torie (which is a main Poli­cie at the first.) And to this pur­pose (if he have not his Ser­mons alreadie written) he takes a a Text sutable to his common place upon which he will preach, and writes his Sermon in a Book verbatim. Then when he comes up into the Pulpit; in­stead of preaching he reads his Text, and all his Sermon out of his paper Book, which some­times for the credit of his Cause is bound up like a Bible; And this is the pains he takes, and is as confident that he dischargeth his dutie as if he exercised all the gifts of the Spirit: and this Ser­mon serves for twentie Texts be­ing reduced to his common place: This course the most learned and Orthodox amongst the rigid [Page 161] Presbyterials (whom I know) do take from day to day, some making better Sermons then o­thers; but generally all are tack­ed with these diseases of idleness and hypocrisie in this respect. The idlest and most unlearned reade over their tasks of Sermon, having but a certain number (as I have seen proved upon oath) and then begin again: And I once heard one that lately was a Minister in London, charge another that he never studied, but on Saturdaie night wrote out of a book half an houres matter, and then reade it in the Pulpit on the Lords day, and another that he thought not of his Ser­mon untill the bell ringed. And yet all these men in my knowledg pass for constant preaching Ministers, and nei­ther Readers of Homilies nor dumb Readers of the old fashi­on: whereas indeed they that [Page 162] thus read, are either such as with the evil Servant and sloathfull, hide their Talent in the Earth, or are not Ministers of the Go­spel, not being apt to teach, and so not of Gods sending, and without repentance shall have a reward according to these works.

It may be some mens memo­ries be short, and have need of helps; I take this to be no great fault: If the other sleight you speak of be like this, I shall make no great matter of it.

There is a vast difference between walking with a staff, to stay a man if he should slip, and going upon crutches without legs: the same proportion is be­tween reading a Sermon, and ha­ving some notes for help, if need be; the last may be allowed, but the first is no more then a childs work, who can reade without the exercise of other gifts. And the dumb dogs of this last age, [Page 163] who are cashiered, were judged by all learned men to be no Mini­sters of the Gospel for that very reason. And to defend themselves they were constrained to hold that reading is preaching.

There is somthing to that pur­pose, Acts 15. Moses is preached be­ing read in the Synagogue every Sab­bath day. And when it's said, Acts 20. 7. Paul continued preaching (at Troas) untill midnight, the word signifieth homilizing: Its not certain what Sermon hee repeated, whether his own or some others.

This indeed I heard once from a learned man; and it is the Argument of Doctor Heilen (a Geographer of more learning then conscience) a superstitious Divine. But it's a shame for any Minister of the Gospel to take for his refuge such a Burrow of a dunce. To what end go you to the University, onely to learn to read? For answer to these Texts, [Page 164] to that Acts 15. I confesse in a ge­nerall sense reading is preaching, that is, declaring, or shewing sorth, or publishing, but when it's applied to the Minister, it is taken in a strict sense, for read­ing and giving the sense, or ex­pounding answerable to Ezra's reading the Law, Neh. 8. 3, 4, 8. and so it must be understood; which preaching is also called teaching or prophecying; to which that a man may be fit, he must be 1 Tim. 3. 2. apt to teach, and able to di­vide the Word of truth aright, 2 Tim. 2 15. to anatomize, as it were to lay open every vein, joint, and sinew. And touching that of Paul, The word is likewise in­differently used for preaching or rehearsing; but it's a sencelesse thing to conceive, that Paul ha­ving extraordinary gifts of Pro­phesie and Revelation, besides or­dinary gifts fit for the Ministery, would lay all aside, and betake [Page 165] him to another mans Sermon, and become a pattern of idlenesse to all dunces to the end of the world. But because no such Ser­mon appears, we must presume he spake as the Spirit gave him utterance. If our Ministers had Pauls spirit and gifts then they would sure be ashamed of such reading.

What is that other sleight (as you call it) of the Ministers, with which you finde fault?

It is their removing from place to place, for none other cause but case and profit.

How can that be, removing is chargeable, and the saying is, The rowling stone gathers no moss; and it's also painful and troublesom.

Its true, it is so to other men who remove upon necessity, or upon hard termes, as they do when they over-buy their Li­vings; for some of them are ne­ver able to give a dog a crust of [Page 166] their own afterwards. But the most take a wiser course, never to remove but to a greater Li­ving, or for some great advantage one way or other: and upon eve­ry remove commonly they endea­vour to take the Summers profits of both Livings, or get some o­ther help to bear charges. How­soever they have commonly no losse in removing: and for the most part they double or treble their Revenue: And if not, they have this benefit, That when all their old Sermons are read over, which is commonly done in two, three or foure years, and some­times sooner, then they are all new in a new Living; and then they confidently say them over again, which doth abundantly save their pains, and afford them leisure to oversee their Tythes, to build, plant, take their ease and pleasure, or follow any other im­ployment beseeming their quali­ties [Page 167] and conditions. And this is the other shift of which I told you.

Now I have given you my rea­sons wherefore I conceive these men of so great honour and cre­dit intend no reformation. And that their pride and covetuous­nesse absolutely hindereth the same more then any thing in the Land.

Why should you not think they intend Reformation, have they not submitted to the Ordinances of Par­liament injoyning Reformation, and conformed themselves so far as the State hath appointed, and what hath been done by the Parliament, hath been done upon the Assemblies advice, un­lesse it be in some few particulars.

I confesse the Assembly hath done something which is in effect as good as nothing, if we rest there; and it may be observed they have not acted any thing a­gainst their honour and profit.

Why say you so? shew me how or wherein that may appear.

I shall easily do that in ma­nie particulars.

• 1. First they have renounced the Prelacie being a curb to them, and obscuring their magnifi­cence, and some say they were Antichristian. But they defend their Callings from them least they should be accounted no Mi­nisters.
• 2. Secondly, they have left the Ceremonies as unprofitable; but they retain their Popish of­ferings.
• 3. They give over reading and praying at the grave, for which they had nothing; but for their see they will make you a Funeral Oration.
• 4. Fourthly, they tel you they de­sire the Call of God and his peo­ple to their Livings: but if they can get the Patrons presentation, or the Committee for plundered [Page 169] Ministers Order: they will fight for it ere they will leav it, let God and his people say what they will.
• 5. Fiftly they are content to Iay aside the Common Praier-Book, and reading Homilies as emptie formes and nurses of idle­ness, but they will reade all their Sermons, manie of which are scarce so good as some of the Ho­milies. Vide Homilie against the peril of Idolatrie.
• 6. Sixthly they will not buy two Livings, and so become Pluralists, for sometimes the bar­gain is hard and too dear; But they will take take three Livings or places during the Sequestra­tions (so they can have them freely) which may continue du­ring their lives.
• 7. Seventhly, they at least most of them put no difference in admitting to the Lords Table (although the Parlament have [Page 170] enjoyned some to be debarred) least those debarred should be thought to be none of their sheep, and so they loose their Ea­sier offerings and Tithes. But they are content to complie with the heads of the Parish in their Vestrie to keep out the poor▪ and others not of their faction, and so (in conceit) separate the precious from the vile, who might make head against them.
• 8. Eightly, they leave of cau­sing the Corps to be presented in in the Church; But they will have the Corps present or mor­ [...]narie; or what covers the corps, where the Law will give it them.
• 9. They say, the Church and Chancell (regarding the mate­rials) have no holiness in them, and they account it superstitious to hold otherwise; But you shall neither lift up axe nor ham­me to break the ground, espe­cially [Page 171] in the Chancel, unless you pay to the Parson a large Fee, besides what will repair the ground, and then you may bu­rie the dead as high as the Altar Place.
• 10. Tenthly they are content that the Altar smelling of Idola­trie should be taken away: But they expect the gift or offering called the Altarage; used to be offered at the Altar.
• 11. Eleventhly, they scruple (and some have refused) to bap­tize the children of strangers by whom they have no profit; but they will baptize all the chil­dren whose Parents live within their Parish (being offered with­in the Church) least they should seeme to be none of their flock, and so they loose their fleece.
• 12. Twelvethly, they have laid aside their superstitions Procession; But they must pre­serve their perambulation walk [Page 172] and limits of the Parish, least they loose anie of their tithes.
• 13. Thirteenthly, they cryed down the High Commission, as a Rack for mens consciences; and yet they will needs be spiri­tuall Judges and Commissio­ners of Appeal too, so that they (Pope like) may have the sole Power and the Laietie may have nothing to do there.
• 14. Fourteenthly, they will Petition for an augmentation to be granted to them by the name of the Ministers, &c. And yet for advantage you may be per­mitted to call them Parsons, Vi­cars, Curates and Priests: And in conclusion whatsoever is bur­densome, and tends neither to their honour or profit that they are willing to part with all. But if any thing conduce to ei­ther of those ends that they re­tain.

I have now shewed you in [Page 173] some sort the Character of these Reformers, to the end you and others may know your selves and your fraternitie better then before.

Do you believe that all these men sin against their own consciences in what they do in their Mini­sterie.

I do not say so, nor do I believe so: but rather think that manie amongst them are godly men who through incon­siderateness (taking things of trust from the chief actors and forward men, and some meerly through simplicitie being wil­ling (as everie man is) to be perswaded of the lawfulness of such things as serve for their temporal good, especially being controverted, and so manie sub­til heads, some reputed for godly men imployed to defend them) have fallen into (or ra­ther been misled up at the Uni­versitie [Page 174] in) these sins and cor­ruptions, and thereupon they retaine the taste of that where­with they were first seasoned: everie man being unwilling to be accounted imprudent; which is argued by making retractations of former errours, and being also suspicious and loath to en­tertaine any new custome, or to decline from the Traditions of their Ancestors: especially if they were reputed wise and lear­ned. And that is the reason why the Ceremonies and other cor­ruptions in worship and Disci­pline which are lately abolished stuck so long upon as they did, namely, because Cranmer, Lati­mer, Ridley, Hooper, and other learned godly men left them to us at the beginning of Refor­mation: although all those who left them did not approve of them ( Vide Fox Acts & Mon. vol. 3. pa. 146. 147.) nor intended [Page 175] they should continue, but that there should be a further Re­formation, as appears by the verie Rubrick of King Edwards Common Praier-Book: and these had been soone abolished but for the reasons aforesaid. And because the Prelates grew worse and worse, as all men do (who walk in an evill way) until they return.

But what course is most pro­bable and likely to bring on a Refor­mation.

Truly not to believe men that are interested: and espe­cially such who have hitherto laboured to drive on their own designs of honour and profit, and are guided by principles of pride and covetousnese: as the Ringleaders of the established pretended Clergie are: who fearing to lose their fat mor­sels (as a godly man said) for their little labour, abuse the [Page 176] State with false surmises and pre­tences of Reformation which they will never accomplish.

Why? This famous Assem­blie of learned Divines have long consulted about the affairs of the House of God, and have propounded to the Parlament waies of Reforma­tion, and where it sticks I cannot tell.

I had almost said, the Mountains have travelled and brought forth a mouse. I wish for their good, manie of them had less learning upon conditi­on they had more conscience and honestie: And that some Pa­phnutius (who would not be lead by the multitude in their opi­nion; but convince them sound­ly, not by Philosophie but by the word of God) were amongst them them, to stir up those that are sincerely godlie, who I doubt are but few; and those wearied out with the noise of the mul­titude [Page 177] of them who vex their righteous souls from day to day by their ungodlie deeds. And therefore not to trouble you further, I must tell you I do so far dispair (not of any Synod, as one of the Fathers said, but) of this Assemblie their doing any good in point of Reforma­tion, That I hope and expect shortly that the Parlament will finde cause to send them away from Westminster, with a charge to preach abroad in the Coun­ties, to leave Politicks and preach Christ, and so endeavour to prepare the people for Refor­mation, where their preaching may surely do more good then their State-Policie can do at Westminster: And when that is done (if the Parlament by fa­sting and Praier will solemnly seek and consult with God, and then advise with such godly and learned men, who are no way [Page 178] ingaged as formerly was done in the daies of King Edward the sixt, when Paulus Phagius, Mar­tin Bucer, and Peter Martyr, and other strangers were called into England for that purpose who never received the mark of the Beast) then I doubt not but to see a Reformation to some pur­pose and not before.

Well, however let us not loose that we have to seek for that which it may be we shall never have; our Parishes are true visible Churches of Christ, and so consessed by the Ministers of New England, and by Mr. Cotton in particular.

It may be some Ministers of New England will say as much as you say, yet that doth not make your Parishes true visible Churches. As for Mr. Cotton, he refused to take upon him the Charge of any Parish-Church, and upon that ground, separated and renounced his Calling from [Page 179] the Bishops divers years before he went to New-England. Lichfords new pag. 7. 8. & 22. And the practise at New-England, shew­eth that they are not of our opi­nion; for all the people profes­sing Christianitie are not mem­bers of the visible Church, but such as are admitted as Church-Members.

Well, what ever some others think in all places in this Land where Parishes are divided, there is either a lawfull Minister, or one who stands in place of such who in some degree preacheth, or at least publisheth (by reading) the word of God, and administreth the Sacra­ments to the people: therefore in cha­ritie they ought to be accounted the Church of God.

The division of Parishes, and such a Ministerie and Ordi­nances as you speak of, are not sufficient to give the Parish Con­gregation the denomination of [Page 180] a visible Church of Christ. For then must almost all the Congre­gations under the Papacie be vi­sible Churches: for amongst them the Parishes are divided, and so they were in England almost 340. before any Reformation: And those Popish Congregati­ons had the word of God dailie read: nay and preached con­stantly, and expounded in manie places by their Friers and Postil­lers, as may be seen by their works in Print; Nay, and their verie Mass-Books have much of the word of God in them: al­though most miserably corrupt­ed, and mingled with their own inventions. They have also had both Sacraments amongst the Papists for a long time, and have yet at least. Calvin. Instit. l. 4. ca. 3. Sect. 11. Baptisme (mingled with Popish Ceremonies, of which the Cross is the worst) and some other footsteps of a true [Page 181] Church. And if these had made a Congregation a true Church, poore Penry was unwise to pub­lish that a great part of Wales never had the face of a Church of Christ, the Parishes being di­vided, and the Churches furnish­ed with such a Ministerie, and Ordinances as you speak of. Yet (he and others) have formerly charged the State with refusing the Gospel, and rejecting Christ and his pure worship, in as much as there was no Reformation, although it cost him and others their lives for their boldnes. En­tri. Cook. Judit. pa. 352.

You speak of dark Corners of the Land, as if none were in bet­ter condition: you may finde amongst the manie thousand Parishes of this Nation, manie visible Churches of Christ, and mine in particular.

I doubt not but there are manie visible Churches of Christ in this Common-wealth, and [Page 182] true Ministers of Christ lawful­ly called. But when I pray you became your Parish to be a true visible Church of Christ.

My Parish hath been a visible Church ever since it was instituted, aud the Church founded; you know not the contrarie, and therefore ought to admit it, having so continued beyond the memorie of man until this day.

When was your Church founded?

You your self have confessed that the Gospel was planted in Eng­land, before Poperie came to its height, and the Ministerie and Churches were then setled, and had succession from the Apostles daies: shew me when the Succession failed.

If I should admit the place that you call Church, viz. the meeting Place to have been built before Poperie, yet this proves not that the Congregation is a visible Church: your succession [Page 183] hath had several interruptions and discontinuance.

First, it is to be considered that the whole Current of Hi­storie agree that the Romans commanded the better part of Brittaine from the time of Ju­lius Caesar until Theodosius the younger, which was almost five hundred years; and the tenth Persecution about 337. years after Christ, during which time there were not above five of the Emperours who were either Christians, or shewed favour to Christians, but ge­nerally all the rest first or last in their times were wicked Persecutors, Heathens and wor­shippers of Idols, some of which by exquisite Torments wasted the Churches of Christ, aud drove the Professors into corners, they not daring to meet in publick. When the Ro­man Empire was broken, or [Page 184] at least was grown to an ebb, the Saxons invaded this Island, and about the year foure hun­dred and fiftie the Brittains were beaten into Wales by Gor­mundus, and thence grew the great Colledge of Moncks at Bangor, with whom Austin con­tended.

And the Saxons as well as the Romans were Heathens, and had their Idol Priests, Flammins, and Arch Flam­mins (like the late Bishops and Arch-Bishops for dignitie and Power) and these conti­nued until about six hundred years after Christ: where is now your Succession?

But yet there were manie faithful Christians, both Pa­stors and others in the worst times, and I could tell you of ma­nie who suffered Martyrdome for Christ's cause in this Nation; and if we cannot prove Succession, it is [Page 185] rather for want of the light of Hi­storie, then for that there were no such Churches or Pastors. Never­theless from the time of the abolish­ing of the Heathens Hierarchie, and Idolatrie which was done by King Ethelbert above a thousand years since: we have a verie fair Succes­sion.

This indeed manie of you boast of, but it makes little for your purpose. To omit to speak of the miserie brought up­on this Land, and the decay of the true Religion by meanes of the incursions, or rather Con­quests of the Saxons and Danes after Ethelberts time. It is cer­tain, and you cannot denie it, that all your successions both of Ministerie and Parish-Churches came from your Mo­ther the Church, or rather the Whore of Rome, who had all at her devotion until King Hen­rie the eight drove out the Pope and kept Poperie.

[Page 186] Cath. Divine An. Caudreys Case. P. 108. 109. Bed. l. 1. Hist. Angl. ca. 22. & 27.

Well, its true, that for about five hundred years, untill the Refor­mation began, the Bishop of Rome usurped authoritie over the Church of England; but yet all did not sub­mit alike: some faithfull men escap­ed both Ministers and people; as John Wickliff and his followers persecuted by the name of Lollards, who grew in great number, even in our Countrie about two hundred years before the Reformation. From which time of Reformation you cannot denie, but that my Parish in particular hath been a true visi­ble Church: where there hath been a competent number of faithful people, and a Minister who claim­ed nothing from Rome: for the Popes Supremacie was abolished by King Henrie the eight as you now said.

If the rejecting of the [Page 187] Popes Supremacie make your Parish a true Church, then like­wise are the most of the Popish Congregations of France true Churches; for they likewise have rejected or refused to re­ceive the Popes Supremacie, and have not received the Coun­cel of Trent; but have had a Pope (a Cardinal) of their own for manie years past. And Car­dinal Richelieu (called a Prince of the Church) was as great a Pope as William Laud late Prelate of Canterburie.

Marc. de vulson des Libert. de'l Eglise Gallicane. lib. 3. pa▪ 233. 234. 235.

You cannot denie the Suc­cession of faithful Ministers, which if you admit, you must also admit the Succession of Churches since the time of Reformation.

For your Succession its a [Page 188] mear dream, If at any time there was no visible Parish-Churches, then was there no Pastors of those Churches: for although there may be a visible Church without a Pastor (as when the Pastor dieth the Church is not unchurched) yet can there be no Pastor of a Church unless there be such a Church in be­ing. And for your Succession since the last pretended Reforma­tion, it was interrupted in Queen Maries daies, when a Popish Priest was your Prede­cessor, who had his autoritie from the Bishop, who was a Papist and held of the Pope, [...] could tell you their names i [...] need were. And neither that Priest or any of his Successors ever since have had any other calling, or Ordination, but from the Bishops as long as they were standing.

If this were true touching [Page 189] Succession, yet you cannot denie but that we have the word and Sacra­ments; and a companie of faithful Christians communicating in those Ordinances under a faithfull Pa­stor, are a visible Church of Christ.

Touching the Word and Sacraments, I have alreadie gi­ven you an answr, and in­deed the Papists and almost, all Hereticks pretend as you do, and have the word a­mongst them, and their Mini­sters or Priests have as orderly a Calling and Ordination as yours have, and yet this makes them not the true visible Churches of Christ, as all you do acknowledg.

I do not conceive that the Papists have either the Word or Sacraments amongst them for that, the word is so corrupted by their false Glosses and Translations, that its made a leaden rule to be bowed [Page 190] everie way to serve their own turn for upholding their superstitions; and their service is in Latine which the common people understand not. And for the Sacrament of Bap­tisme, it hath so manie additions that the Nature of it is destroied. And for their Ministerie, they are professed Papists and adversaries to Christ in all his Offices.

I do confess their Mini­sters are no Ministers of Christ, but lims of Antichrist in re­spect of their Callings: yet I do not condemn them all as Reprobates no more then I do Pope Gregorie the great, Thomas a Kempis, Ferus, Stella, and o­ther their Preachers, whom I think to have been godly and devout men in their times. And for corrupting the Scriptures, if putting false Glosses upon them, make Gods word cease to be Gods word, then are you Formalists deeply guiltie; for [Page 191] the vulgar Translation is abo­minably corrupt: and yet you allowed it, and manie of you used it translated in the late Ser­vice-Book. And all that you alledge for your succession of Ministerie and visible Churches, your Classes, Councels and Synods, their autoritie over other Churches compelling o­thers by the Temporall Power to believe and worship God as they see best, is in effect grounded upon or agreeing with the corrupt Glosses, and notes of the Rhe­mists upon the New Testament, and other popish Authors, and thence fetched by the late For­malists to defend themselves a­gainst the Puretans. And for the Latine Service, it is much like our Organ Anthems, both edifying alike, and the one as tol­lerable as the other. See the old Protestant and New Formalist. Pa. 36. 37. And concerning the [Page 192] Papists addition of Cream, Salt, Spittle, &c. to the Sacrament of Baptisme. I confess the addi­tion wicked and abominable, and yet no worse haply, nor so bad as the Cross (which you received and used) for that serves to blesse, or rather con­jure all the rest, and is honored with Divine honour, and an holie daie appointed for it. And yet I must tell you that with one consent you allow of this Sacrament administred by the Papists (who do not administer it but with these ad­ditions) to be a true Sacrament: And you hold that those who were baptized by Papists are not to be rebaptized.

For my part I have cast off these corruptions, and am constant to those principles tending to Re­formation, which others my Reve­rend Brethren of the Clergie have approved of, and I am now about, to [Page 193] set up the Government of Christ in my Parish.

I fully understand your designe, you and your fellowes intend the old (but not the old­est way of pretended Reformati­on, wherein you shuffle and cut as fast as Hocus Pocus, and your proceedings are so ridiculous that everie indifferent capacitie hath light enough through your figleaves to see your naked­ness.

Wherein are we guiltie of such shufling, or why are we so ridi­culous?

In your proceedings for upholding your Parishes, you pretend one thing, viz. Refor­mation: but your end and de­signe is to avoid the danger of loosing your Livings, in case the Parishes should be dis­solved.

I know nothing we do for which we can be justly censured, [Page 194] we continue our preaching, and do endeavour to settle Presbyterian Go­vernment according to Gods word.

For your preaching I earnestly desire you may sincere­ly applie your selves to it, for that probably may do some good: but for your other fetches and devices they savour more of Politicks then Religion squared by Gods word.

What Policie can there be in setling the Presbyterian Govern­ment with the Classes and Synods? we settle nothing but what we are willing likewise to submit unto, and to be judged by as well as the peo­ple.

Let the Government be what it will, so your Livings and estates may be secured, its no great matter, if the Parla­ment please but to declare that all your Parishes are visible Churches, that you may hold them intire, and the people be [Page 195] inforced to pay you all your Tithes, Oblations, obventi­ons, Mortuaries and other dues, you will be satisfied and wait for further Reformation when it may stand with your honour and profit. And upon that condition you will submit to the present Government of the Common-wealth. But if your interest in these things be inter­rupted or in danger, you know no other way to secure them but by setling this Go­vernment. And this is the mark at which you shoot: take but a view of those places (your own Parish for one) where the Elders are chosen, do they serve for anie thing but Cyphers, or do you and they act anie thing towards Refor­mation, but meerly to this end and purpose?

I do confess if the Churches were equall or independent, so there [Page 196] were Government, as well in Church as Common-wealth and other things in order it might be well. And where the Elders are chosen if Reformation go not on, it is because the Elders re­fuse to act or joyne with the Minister.

I confess, I know some nominated for Elders who make scruple to joyne with you in your business, haply because they have found out your de­ceit, which is meerly to make a shew of Reformation, but your chief end is the securing your Livings.

That is not the cause of their refusal, it is because the Parla­ment doth not arme them with power to execute their Offices, and compell obedience to their injuncti­ons, as is fit for Ecclesiastical Magistrates.

If your proceedings were of God, you would not need the secular Power to compel to obedience such as are within [Page 197] the Church (and for those which are without, you have nothing to do with them) The censures of the Church are Gods Ordinance for that end, and are most effectual. But for that compulsive power you speak of, it savours of the Ty­rannie of Antichrist, and so doth your title of Ecclesiastical Magistrate: which title I have not heard used by anie Ortho­dox Minister since the Lord Bishops those Popish Ecclesia­stical Magistrates were cashier­ed, who were indeed neither Magistrates nor Ministers, but like the Pope between both.

I confess the Elders for­merly chosen (some years since) in my Parish have refused to act to my great grief. But now lately I my self and the Church-wardens have nominated others, and the Parish have assented to the choice: and although the persons chosen [Page 198] will not take upon them the Office of the Eldership: yet they have as­sented to joyne with me in debar­ring the scandalous and profane from the Lords Table, which is a chief point of Reformation, and I rejoice much in it.

How did you prevail to bring the business so far?

I had found some difficultie in it, but that at last I gave the honest partie (who best liked our proceedings) good satisfaction, and so the choice was verie free and una­nimous, none opposing.

How was that possible, seeing all the people within your Parish liked not of your proceeding, how came it to pass that none declared against it.

I do confess some few there are in my Parish, whom I knew to be of contrarie judgement, and some stick not to say our proceedings are Antichristian, and have no foun­dation [Page 199] in the word of God, but I took a course to have all such ab­sent when the matter was debated, and at the choice of those Assi­stants.

What course did you take? I desire to know, for I have heard you censured for that business.

First, I conferred with the wealthiest, best, and most leading men in my Parish before I came to the choice, some in private and some in companie with others at several meetings, and gave them satisfaction, and these I knew would draw the most of the com­mon sort: And for the rest whom I knew I could not convince, I warned them publickly in the Church to absent themselves, and by message privately I desired such as I thought would oppose to forbear to hinder us in that business. And by this means and by telling the men who were to be chosen, that they should only [Page 200] assist mee in keeping the scandalous and ignorant from the Communion, and do nothing els, they assented, and I hope whll cheerfully joyne with me in that work.

Now do you think this is a sufficient Reformation?

It is a principal part thereof, we must wait untill we can bring on the rest.

It seems there your pre­tended Elders are no Elders, but assistant, I am sorrie you have shewed your self so bold, as to set up a new Office in your pretended Parish Church: shew me where ever anie man pretending to be a Minister of Christ by himself, or with two, three, or four more usurp­ed that power over a thousand persons, as you and your new fashion Elders if they be rul'd by you intend to do. I confess in the Popish Congregations, and lately here in England the [Page 201] same was practised. The Bi­shop or his Chancellour with a Presbyter or Minister did ex­communicate, or debar from the Sacrament, but in worst times no man could be sus­pended without a Presbyter joyning in that act. And the Church-Wardens which are yet in request were assistants to the Priest, as your new fashion Elders are, and both alike keep Christ out of his King­dom: and so most suitable to your Parish Churches, which are not fit for lawfull Elders, no more then they are capeable of lawful Ministers.

I have erected no new Of­fice, but the same which the Scrip­ture holds forth: only their power is limited by mutual assent of them and the Minister. And for the ex­ercise of that power in keeping the scandalous and profane from the Sacrament, it is included within, [Page 202] and is part of their Office, Mat. 18. 17. where the Church signifi­eth the Ministers and Elders, who are the representative Church: for the rest its answered be­fore.

That question concern­ing the Church, I will not enter into, but leave it to the learned, who have sufficiently discussed it; But for my part I am confident no such constru­ction can be made of that place: for the Church alwaies signifieth the whole bodie, Mi­nisters and people, or the members distinct from the Of­ficers.

This question being one of the principles upon which all the Controversies between us, and the Independents are founded, I shall wholly wave you; you have heard my opinion in publick to which I adhere, and shall do untill I see better cause to alter my judgement.

Let that pass, but what was the reason why you car­ried the business of chusing your pretended Elders, so clan­destinely and with such poli­cie, without hearing other mens opinions, who were of contra­rie judgment.

To tell you the truth, I fear­ed opposition and that the work may be hindered, and therefore I de­sired to avoid all occasions, and to carrie on the work as smoothly as I could, and I am glad of it.

Its a sign you think your mettal is naught, because you fear the Touch-stone. The truth seeks no corners, but in light shines more clearly.

The truth may have oppo­sition, and yet is the same still. We fear not the touchstone, but the sleights of men: who most oppose those things which are best.

It seems now you have your desire, what proceedings [Page 204] have you made towards Refor­mation, do your pretended El­ders act according to your minde, do you think they per­form their dutie.

Yea truly, I have much comfort in them, and doubt not but we shall separate the precious from the vile, and yesterday we made a verie hopeful beginning insomuch as they undertooke to do in joyning with me to keep the scandalous and profane from the Lords Table.

What course did you take to make that separation.

The Elders refer it to me to examine all those who were to communicate the week before they came to the Sacrament, and ac­cordingly I published my intention, not to admit anie who did not come to the Church at the time appointed to be examined. And manie of my Parish came and submitted them­selves to be examined according­ly.

Your pretended Elders are verie confident: it seems they see with your eyes, and hear with your ears: But I pray you what did you finde by ex­amining those who came to you, and concerning what did you examine them?

I questioned those whom I suspected to be ignorant about the grounds of Religion, and touching the nature of the Sacraments; and and for others whom I feared not, I did not examine them at all, al­though some of those came to me, and others sent in their names, and I entred them all in a Book, as well such as appeared as those who sent in their names, and did not ap­pear.

But did you all this your self, I mean examine the peo­ple judicially in order to their admission to, or suspension from the Lords Table, and that by the advice of your new Elders [Page 206] or assistants; surely herein they made you an absolute Pope and sole Judge of that which the Bishops never allowed, nor do your Brethren of the Province of London approve thereof. But was this all you did? I doe sup­pose you and your Elders should have informed your selvs whether such as intended to communicate had set up Christ in their Families and places, in the exercises of Religion, and had shewed forth by their con­versations the signs of faith and Repentance, these things are necessarie for all Communi­cants.

For the lives of the Commu­nicants they are better known to o­thers then to me, and for my part I shall not take notice of them, but do desire that those who are privie to such offences as may justly debar the receivers from the Sacrament will make it known to me, and I shall ac­quaint [Page 207] the Church, viz: the El­ders with it, and take their ad­vice what to do: And so shall I like­wise crave their assistance in Judiciall Examination for the future.

It seems you go no fur­ther, but only to bring the peo­ple to conform to your new Go­vernment: for I understand you had some of your Communi­cants were so verie ignorant that they could not tell you how manie Commandements there are: and others knew not what Faith was; and others answered as ignorantly: And yet the names of these were taken by you, and they admitted to the Lords Table, and none were re­fused.

Its true, I confess I found some ignorant, but verie willing to conforme and receive instruction, and that gave me good hope of them: And therefore for the present least I I should discourage others, I admit­ted [Page 208] all that offered themselves at the Table whose names I had before entred in my Book: and divers others who were not of my Parish came also to my Church to receive at the same time for the incourage­ment of others.

Do you account this su­perficial dealing separating the precious from the vile, when none are refused: It is just as I expected it would be: this is but the Counterfeit of Reformati­on, and much like the Refor­mation which manie in the Church of Rome would willing­ly have, for they have written divers Books tending to Re­formation, so it might not de­molish the stately Fabrick of their pretended Church, but might rather polish it by tak­ing away those things which all men crie shame of, and which do therefore indanger their Church, the reforming of [Page 209] which would give them more hope of the continuance of the old Idolatrous Babel, which yet together with all your de­vices will ere long come to ru­ine.

Nothing is perfect when its first brought forth, what ever you think, I conceive this to be a good begining of Reformation, and I hope we shall proceed in it, to more perfection. But touching the Refor­mation of the Church of Rome, I never expect anie, they being ap­pointed to destruction. These are but the discouragements of you and others who oppose the setting up of all Government in the Church.

I have often told you, we do not oppose all Govern­ment, we would only have this building demolished, that a better might be set up in the roome of it.

What course would you have [Page 210] for preaching the Gospel, if the present Ministerie should be removed, and the Churches disbanded.

Without doubt the Par­liament seeth how that may be provided for. For my part I wish that all the Parishes were dissolved as to the matters of the Church, and all the Tithes belonging to the late Bishops, Arch-Bishops, Deans and Chapters, Donatives, Parsons, and Vicars were released, or sold at a reasonable rate to the owners of the Lands out of which they arise. And these probably without anie addition may raise a sufficient revenue for maintenance of a godly and able Ministerie, through this whole Common-wealth, to preach the Gospel to all who will hear the word of God. And all who shall be found wor­thie may be imployed.

What will this conduce for Reformation?

By this means this plant (I meane this Popish Order of Ministerie, who unjustlie usurp authoritie over the bodies, souls and States of men calling them their Churches, their Parishes, their flock, their sheep and their Tithes, as if all were theirs nothing▪ Christs) not being of the planting of our heavenly Father, will be plucked up, which being removed the faith­full will have libertie and op­portunitie to separate them­selvs from the wicked and pro­fane, and be gathered unto Christ under true Pastors and Church-Officers, who will lead them in the pathes of righte­ousness and truth, where being associated together in Church­fellowship they will be more reformed then ever can be ex­pected [Page 212] from anie companie in anie Parish-Congregation.

Well, I now fully perceive what your intent is: in a word, you set your self to cast contempt up­on our learned and reverend Cler­gie, and to take from them their double honour both of reverence and maintenance; and to bring them as low as the slipendarie Clergie of Germanie. And I see no hope if your amendment: I will there­fore spend no more time with you: yet I doubt not but we shall hold our Parsonages aud Church-Livings as formerly we have done. And if some will needs separate, let not that hinder us of our Tithes and profits, and then let them run af­ter what new Teachers they please: If they run from us we are dis­charged of that care, which we should otherwise have of them.

Sir, it may be before you and I meet again, you may [Page 213] wheel about and change your minde as you and some others have done alreadie: Remem­ber what I say, and so fare you well.