THe causes of my writing unto you at this time are three. 1. Your threatnings. 2. Your challenge. 3. The out-cryes of the people against you, for that which you delivered in Pulpits Pulpit, tur­ned into Cockpits where they expected to heare the Gospel of Jesus Christ Preached by you; in stead whereof, they heare proud boastings that you will after your skirmishing with the Separation take their Fort ▪ But peradventure you may, by your fishing for o­thers, be caught your selfe. Now our fort, and fortresse is Jesus Christ, and though you take him, you shall never take him from us, for he is all fulnesse to all, and sufficiencie for all, that draw neere unto him; But whether you intend so to take him as to rest upon him, or to take him as the High Priests Officers once tooke him, to crucifie him; let your hearers judge.

Sir, you are a brave warriour, and can fight well in a Pulpit, where you are sure none shall come neere you, so much as to give you an answer: for proofe whereof, witnesse your owne confes­sion in your Antipologia, that the Separatists will not come in your Churches: Therefore you may easily make the people be­leeve great matters by your juggling, where there is none to re­sist you, nor hold out the light in opposition to your false figures; [Page 2] But if they were there, they might not be admitted there to opose you, nor to use any meanes to undeceive the people; But it is an old saying (though somewhat grosse) that every cocke croweth on his owne miksen, and that makes you so bold, where you are sure you shall have no oposition.

But (Mr. Edwards) now I will counsell you, to muster up all your army you bragge of, and come forth, set up your colours, and pitch a field with the Separation, bring forth all your strong rea­sons, not only the last conceived, your latter thoughts, and studies, but also your large tractates [against the whole way of Separation,] which were the first conceived of old, which you promised in your former booke In your In­troduction. for you have brought no argument in your Anti­pologia against Separation from a false Church and false Ministry, but you have challenged all, high, and low, Anabaptists, Separa­tists, and Semiseparates, &c. to bring a ground from Scripture for the lawfulnesse of seperating from a true Church, which thing wee never strived for, for we know it is utterly unlawfull. But this was your policie (especially when you preached upon the house top,) to make the people beleeve that those who seperate from the Church of England seperate from a true Church: But this is yours to prove, I therfore challenge you now, to prove [by the Scripture] that the Church of England is a true Church, and the Ministry thereof a true Ministry, and that they have a true outward calling, which yet you have not done, neither have you brought any ar­gument neither in your former booke, nor in this Antipologia, that proves your Church and Ministry true; And I thinke you dare not deny but that these bee substantialls, and not some of your meere circumstances, which you would have decided without the word of God, Pag. 73. for if the Church be but a circumstance, and the calling of the ministry a meere circumstance, then you neede not stand so much for it, and upon ordination from the Pope, for if ever you be true Ministers of Jesus Christ it must be without that, and therefore it appeareth to bee you, who have ordination by persons that are not ordained, and not the Ministers of the Sepa­ration: for God hath ordained his Church to ordaine their owne Ministers, but hath not ordained the Church of England, nor the Ministry thereof at all, wherefore it appeareth that you can have no true ordination, unlesse you become Separate; And all your argu­ments [Page 3] in your former booke tended to the keeping downe of the kingdome and power of Jesus Christ. And all the tales which you tell in your Antipologia, tend to the defaming of your Brethren as they came from you. But (as your tales are in themselves) many of them turne to the praise of those whom you would defame.

As for instance, [you tell us of their humility, and that they say that they dare not take upon them to determine all the waies of God,]

For ought I know they doe well, 1 Sam. 13.14. for the Prophet Da­vid, who was not onely a King, but a Prophet of God, and a man after Gods owne heart, thought not himselfe sufficient for that worke of universall determining, which you may plainely see in the 119. Psalme, where he so often desireth of the Lord to teach him his - waies, -statutes, -precepts, -commandements, -te­stimonies, -lawes, - and to direct him in his word, yet David re­fresh not there, but strikes Covenant with God, promising that he will run the waies of Gods commandements when hee hath learned them, Psal. 119.32. and also that he would teach others when the Lord had taught him, even as you say these men have done, for you report that they are active for their way: Now if God have made knowne his way to them more fully then he hath done heretofore, they ought to be more active for it, and as God enlargeth their hearts, so to enlarge his praise.

You tell us of a sort of Anabaptists that would preach on the top of houses, because they would imitate the Apostles. But have you not now taken their turne? for these men (as you say) even the Apologists, with divers others have of late preached not only to the Parliament, but also to the people in divers places, which you name as Margrets Westminster, Michaell Cornewell, Mag­ [...]es at the bridge foot, and Stepney, with other places. These men (I say) preaching true doctrine there in the eares of the people, you have published it (as it were) upon the house top, for you have put them in print, that so we that are Separatists, who dare not come to your Church; and all the men in England may know it. And you have threatned to print them at large Pag. 219..

You say, their doctrines make for their way,—and they are active for their way. Answ.—Indeede (Mr. Edwards) though Gods waies be not as mens waies, yet when men make Gods waies their waies, they ought to be active for the same, for they are the waies [Page 4] of peace, the waies of truth, and the waies of life, and though they are narrow waies, because there is no rule leading unto them, but the Word of God, yet he that is guided by Gods spirit shall bee led into all truth Joh. 16.13; Therefore it is good for you and all persons to labour to be clothed with humility, for God hath promised to teach the humble his waies.

You say there are foure passages (in the Apologeticall Narration) which are good and usefull amongst so many bad, Therefore wee will consider of these which are good, & usefull, amongst those which you say are bad.

The first being their acknowledgement of the Parliament.

Answ.Herein I conceive they give Caesar his due.

The second of the Assembly of Divines. They did not give them the Title of a Synod, Answ. nor atribute authority to them to determine for the Church of Christ, lawes, rites, or cerimonies, &c. For I thinke they did not understand them to have (or to be capable of) any such power from God: for if these had knowne they had assumed it, they would not (as I thinke) have beene of them.

The third is their taking notice of the miscarriages of the Sepa­ratists.

Answ.In this they did very well, and made a good use thereof, as I may judge from your owne speeches, concerning their way, and I pray you tell me (Mr. Edwards) for what end were the misca­riages of Gods people (written by the direction of Gods spirit) but to warne others of the Saints from falling into the like; for where­fore did God at any time punish his people (for their Sinnes) but to recall them back, that so he might bee reconciled unto them a­gaine; but never to deterre them from his holy waies, wherein they walked before, or when they practised those miscarri­ages.

If Adam should have offered no more sacrifice, because Caine fell out with his Brother (for offering a better Sacrifice then hee,) he should have beene condemned of his owne conscience▪ for the way was never the worse for Caines miscarriage. And the way that Jacob walked in, was the way of God though the sonnes of Jacob sinned; They were godly and holy men in the maine, though they missied it in selling their brother; Gen. 37.7, 8, 9, 10. And did not God visit them in mercy, to bring them to a sight of their sinnes, when [Page 5] he caused their sheafs to bow downe to Josephs sheafe in Egypt, Gen. 42. and 43. and 44. &c. and caused Joseph to afflict them, to put them in minde of their sinne; yea, did it not worke that good effect upon them, for which the Lord sent it, by causing them to accuse themselves say­ing, we are verily guilty concerning our brother, in that wee saw the anguish of his soule when hee besought us, and wee would not heare, therefore this evill is come upon us; Nay, did not God further illu­strate Josephs glory before them, not only by making all their sheafes to bow downe to his sheafe, but in letting it be seene that the Sun, and the Moone, and the eleaven starres fell downe before him, when they all went downe into Egypt; wee will not deny but that the sonnes of Jacob did fatally miscarry, yet the way of God wherein they walked was not therefore to be abhorred, and yet their miscarriages are set before us all as land-markes, that we should take heede of running upon such shelves; And I hope these Apologists have not forsaken the wayes of truth for the miscarriages of some that have walked in the way before them, for you say, they have beene active for their way since; And I hope that they know that the way was Christs, though Judas betrayed his Master, & Annanias, and Sa­phira discembled, and Symon Magus was proud, and one of the Church of Corinth, committed fornication, and Demas forsook the way, and embraced the world, and Diotrephus (Antichrist like) sought for preheminence, and many Balaamites crept into their society, who preached for wages, and if any should have said that the way of the Gospel was not the way of Christ, because these persons (and such as these) did miscarry, it would have discovered great ignorance in them; for though they were spots in their feasts of charity, yet the Church of God had alwaies power to cast them out, and that without the helpe of a Synod ▪ which hath beene proved at large in my answer to your booke against Independency and Tolleration So that though the Saints of God who are chosen vessells unto him should faile, as Peter did in denying his Master, through the slavish feare that hee was in of that company of Priests, which Crucified Christ in that time, and the beleeving Corinths wrought upon to eate things sacrifi­sed to Idolls, (according to the doctrine of Balaam,) as some of the Church of Pergamus and Thyatira were, yet notwithstanding these personall infirmities, the way of God wherein they walked [Page 6] ought not to bee abhorred, but wee are to make the same use of these fatall miscarriages now, as the people of God were to make then of the miscarriages of Noah, Abraham, Lot, David, Solo­man, Hezekiah, and divers others, and not to runne upon the same shelves: And though these Apologists abhorred the miscariages of those that went before them, in the way of Seperation; yet by your report, they still follow the way, and so they ought, for we are commanded to walke in the way of good men, and to keepe the paths of the righteous.

Objection.But some may say, can those be called righteous men that so mis­carry?

Answer.We affirme still that the way is a righteous way, and if any man (that desireth from his heart to walke uprightly in it) faile through infirmity, hee hath an advocate with the father Jesus Christ the rihgteous, and needeth not to goe to a Pope, or a Synod for a pardon of his sinne.

Objection.Some peradventure will say, you will have the Saints to bee sub­ject to no Law!

Answer.If the Saints breake a just Law, they must submit to the sensure of that Law, if they breake their Covenant, and violate it in sin­ning openly against any of the rules of Jesus Christ which hee hath given to his Church, they are subject to bee sensured by the Church, for the law was made for the disobedient. But those that walke holily, against such there is no law. Magistrates were given for the punishment of evill doers, and not onely so, but for the praise of those that doe well, and these are the two parts of the Ma­gistrats duty, which if they neglect, they must answer it to God▪ who sitteth in the Assembly of the Gods, and weigheth all their proceedings.

And now what have you got by the Apologists declaration? (that they have observed the failings of the people of God ▪) You have meerely bewrayed your owne ignorance, for if you had knowledge, you might have made a better use of their speech.

You say, their fourth thing that is good is their discription of the people of the Church of England.

Answer.I conceive they speake of some of whom they had hope, be­cause they conceived them to be plyable to receive what is brought them for truth, and also capable to discerne error, in some measure; [Page 7] so it appeareth that if they preach errour, the people are capable to discerne it.

But to leave this as a thing that doth not much concerne us that are Separates, I will borow leave to paraphrase a little upon your applycation, which you make of the miscariages of the Separa­tion. You say you would have had the Apologists to have made use of these mens fearfull sinnes, to have deterd them from their way, and you nominate Brown, Boulton, Barrow, Smith, and Jonson. But here you commit two evills.

First, you insinuate a slander against the dead. Secondly, you would have men forsake the the way of God for other mens fai­lings.

For the first, you speake of their fearfull sinnes; but you men­tion nothing, The greatest sin that ever I heard any of them ac­cused withall was, their going backe to communicate with the Churches of England and Rome, which was a great sin indeed, for Idolatry is as the sin of witchcraft, and to speake the truth, this is that great principle which hath caused so much division among the Separation.

You refer us to the stories of Brown, Boulton, Barrow, Smith, and Jonson.

I pray you ( Mr. Edwards) what Stories are those? and what are their fearfull sinnes therein mentioned? It may be you mean some lying popish stories (made by some trencher Poets) for Prelates, like the stories made by Mercurius Alicus at Oxford, and some of those stories are (by those who are best informed) ta [...]n to be like this booke of yours. And like a booke written by Mr. Peter Studley [my old Parish Priest,] which he wrote divers yeares a­goe, against the Professors in the Church of England, concerning Enoch Abevan, who because he was mad, and in his madnes killed his Mother, and his Brother, this Mr. Studley (called by the ho­nest party, (Study-ly) inveighed against that way of profession, ☜ and nonconforming, as you doe against the way of Separation.

And touching the Apologists silence in not declaring the prici­ples which were the causes of the divisions.

I Answer. It may be they did not perfectly see them.

But I pray you tell me, how you dare charge all these men you have mentioned with fearfull sinnes? If the sinnes were so [Page 8] fearfull, which Brown and Jonson were guilty of, the one in step­ping backe to the Church of England, for feare of persecution. The other to the Church of Rome (for feare of nullifying his baptisme, because he had it in a false Church, thinking that there could be no true Ordinance (in any respect) in a false Church,) and so was constrained (through want of faith and light to justi­fie the Church of Rome and her daughters, (as Mr. Samuel Ruther­ford hath done,) tell me Mr. Edwards, what case are you in then? if their cases were so fearfull in justifying your Churches. For surely upon your owne principles, these were vertues to justifie your false Churches to be true.

Smiths, you may know was of another nature, for he went from the Churches of the Separation, because he judged them un­baptised persons, and that was his ignorance.

☞But what have you against Mr. Barrow? Was there ever any thing justly layd to this Separates charge? Hee was indeed hang­ed at Tyburne, for maintaining That the Church of England was a false Church ▪ and so was Mr. Greenwood who was his compani­on and fellow Prisoner, though there was no matter of fact layd to either of their Charge worthy of death or bonds: These two men were put to death by the Prelates, in Queen Elizabeths time, without her knowledge or privity, and that Early in a morning, the figure of their sufferings being seen in the Sky, by Mariners that were in other parts, and it was supposed, by the beholders of the figure (then to be done in England) because of the women's wearing of hats▪ ☞ for the two poore widowes that attended upon them in the Prison, waited upon them to the Gallowes bearing their winding sheets; the figure of all which was seen as was said before: But this was done without the Queens knowledge, the greife whereof (by relation of those who were neer her) shee car­ried to her death. Honest Penry suffered death about the same time, he was hanged at Saint Thomas a wattrings, Early in the morning; And who dare say ought against these men, but that they lived Saints, where Sathans throne was, and dyed as holy Martyrs of Jesus Christ as Antipas. And it may be, these are the fearfull judgements you meane befell them; for no other judge­ments befell them in this life, and they shall be freed from judge­ment in the life to come; But such false miracles you Priests [Page 9] worke, (as hath beene told you at large in my answer to your booke against Tolleration) to make all the world wonder and runne after the Beast, Revel. 13▪ saying, who is like unto the beast? who is able to make warr with him? But why did you not say that those were fear­full judgements of God which came upon the Martyrs, who were burnt in Smithfeild in Queen Maries time? they suffered for the same cause as far as they saw then: and the sentence against them (as it came from the seat of the Magistrate) came from heaven, as well as the sentence against Barrow, and Greenwood, and Penry, and all the rest of the people of God. If you will deny this, you will deny Queen Mary to be a lawfull Magistrate, for the secu­lar powers passed the sentence of condemnation then, as in Queen Elizabeths time; for when the preists once had cryed, that such and such of the Saints were guilty, then the Magistrates passed the sentence, that so the Preists hands might be clensed from their bloud; as witnesse Mr. Foxes booke.

But to leave these holy Saints at rest with God. I will speake something of those that are living, both the people of the Sepa­ration and the people of the Church of England, As touching the people of the Separation, they are all visibly holy. If any root of bitternesse is seene to spring up amongst them it is cast out.

But you would intimate that the casting out of a sinner is a strong division, or else what doe you mean, by the strong divisions you speake of, for there is no other division of the Separation, but the separating the pretious from the vile. That was a strong divi­sion which was made in the Church of Corinth, 1 Cor. 5. when they cast out the incesteous person, but it was a true, holy, and just division, be­cause God required it, and they were not to keepe the feast of the Lord, till they had made that division: For if they had, it would not have beene for the better, but for the worse. For they ought not to have kept the feast with old Leven: Such holy divi­sions you seldome (or never) make in the Church of England, neither indeed can you, being all in confusion, therefore you were not capable to pick motes out of other mens eyes, for as much as the beames were so bigg in your owne, And whereas those that commit sinne in the Churches of Christ are cast out and remaine no longer there, and are not admitted againe with­out repentance: The members of the Church of England com­mitting [Page 10] sinne, yea, being common, and ordinary, and knowne sinners ▪ yet they are forced to be still of your Church, or else they shall be punished: yea, though they commit sinne worthy of death, and be condemned by the sentence of the Magistrat, yet remain they uncast out of your Church, as appeareth by giving the Sa­crament to Theeves, and Murderers when they are going to the Gallowes, be they never so impenitent.

Objection.It may be objected, This is a false charge, for wee doe not now admit all to the Sacrament, wee are about reforming.

Answer.The Church of England was never so deformed [for the most part of the Kingdome] as it is now, yet there is not the worst Parish of the Church of England, but it hath the Sacrament still, by which actions the Priests become open violaters of Gods Com­mandements, and that against their owne knowledge, in casting Gods holy things to dogs; yea, the best in England, that taketh upon him a Parish charge, is guilty of this sinne actually, in sealing the seed of wicked men with Baptisme, yea, and all men in the Church of England are guilty thereof, that consent thereunto, though it be but with silence.

But how can it be said that any of the people of the Church of Eng­land are wicked, Objection. seeing they are all members of the Church; for the dogs and enchanters, &c. are without? Revel. 22.15.

Answer.By this it appeareth what manner of Church the Church of England is, even such a one as Mr. Henry Barrow hath discribed it to be long agoe; for if you please to read but his discovery of a false Church, which he wrote in prison, you shall see there he hath proved the Church of England to be as the Church of Rome is, even Babylon, a filthy cage of all unclean and hatefull birds. But rather then you will take Mr. Barrowes advice, and the coun­sell of the Holy Ghost to come from among them, you will sooner helpe to hang all such Barrowes, and then say it is the judge­ment of God upon them: for none hath beene more forward then your selfe to persecute the Lords people, as appeareth by your Writ of Ne admittas, ☞ which you sent to the Parliament, to keep the Petitions of the poore Saints out thence. But it will not be for the Parliaments safety, to take such wicked counsell as yours, I hope the Parliament seeth (by this time) that God is making inquisition for bloud, yea, for the blrud of the Saints. And there­fore [Page 11] it is better that all sinne which hath beene committed, should be repented of, then that more should be added to the stock.

By all this you may see that the 4. things (in the Apollogie,) which you say are good, are good for us, but not for you: And if you had not beene benumed in your spirit, you would never have taken up (against us) such weapons, which (if you had beene sensible) you might have known would have come positively a­gainst your selfe; But these tales which you tel in your Antipolo­gia, are like unto some of your tales which you tell the people in the Pulpit: for there you say you will face the Separation, and they will flie away, but you are shrewdly mistaken: For I, (who am one of the meanest) dare give you the meeting, and I hope to speed as well as I did, when I met that ragged Regiment which you set out against Independency and Toleration, which you cal­led your Scout; (in your 8 ^th. Reason against Independency) and joyned and subjoyned forces against Tolleration.

Moreover you say, (in your Antipologia) that the Anabaptists cast away thir baptisme, (received in a false Church) because they wil not put a new peice to an old garment. And upon the same ground, you say the Separation would have the Materiall Churches pulled down.

If this be one of the Anabaptists grounds (as it may be it is) then you may see their mistake: Answer. For they ought to discerne be­tween Baptisme in a false Church, which is an Ordinance of God; w ^ch that Church hath stollen & carried away in their Apostacie, they ought (I say) to put a difference betwixt that, and an Idol of their owne making, as for example. The circumcision, which Jeroboam caried with him, was Gods; but the Calves were his owne, Daggan, and his Temple was the Philistems, but the Arke was Gods. And therefore if the Separates desire the pulling down of the Idols Temples, they doe well, but if these high places stand, they will be no peice sowed to their garments, for they touch them not. But they have not been more forward (in this good worke of the pulling downe of the Idols Temples,) then your self in writing to the Parliament for a whole and totall Reformation, because they should not be blemished, you would have them to pull downe the high places and all Idols and Idolatry, ☜ as whosoever readeth your Epistle to your booke against Independency may see at large, where your reasonable arguments are set down to the [Page 12] Parliament for that end and purpose. But the Anabaptists have no such ground to put away their Baptisme which they received in a false Church, as hath beene proved before. The Calves and high places of Jeroboam were to be done away, and it was their duty to demolish them, because they were a curse to the Land, and Idols of his owne making as hath beene said before: But the Circumcision which was Gods, which they carried away with them, they brought againe to Gods Temple, (as wee have done our Baptisme,) and were accepted. By all which it appeareth that you are able to lay no errour to the chage of the Separation.

Moreover in this your Antipologie, you advance, and extoll your booke against Independencie and Tolleration: You say, that the Apologists meant that, as well as others, which were written with strength against there way: And secondly, you affirme it to bee argumentall, and that therefore it behoved either all or some of them to have answered it.

I Answer, They know best what they have to doe, yet for my owne part, I did conceive it ought to have beene answered, and therefore I answered it my selfe, and that for these reasons.

☞First, because you should not be wise in your owne conceit. Se­condly, because I read that our Saviour Christ answered Sathan, when Sathan brought false arguments against him, and it is also written, that we should be ready to give a reason of our hope, to every one that shall aske us: and I considering the many questions that you asked, and the weakenesse of your reasons and arguments, and the untruths of some of them, and how contradictory they were to one another, thought it very easie to undermine and o­verthrow them, therefore I answered them, holding it meet for those who were more able, not to trouble themselves therewith, but to be employed in matters of farre greater and higher con­cernement. But seeing you are yet so bold as to stand in it, to affirme that your booke was argumentall and ought to have beene answered by them all, or some of them.

I desire againe to repeat the heads of some of the Cheifest of your arguments, that so rationall men may consider, whether they be truely Logicall.

The substance of your first Argument is this: Its evident that the Church of God could not stand without some other helpe, ☞ then [Page 13] Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, & Teachers, and all other Officers: But you have not declared any evidence, neither Scrip­ture nor true reason: what! must wee then beleeve you upon your bare word? I will not, for that were to make you a God, or at least one infalliably inspired.

Your second argument is, that the Government of Independent or seperated Churches, is not of divine institution, because it forceth them to have Ministers without Ordination, which thing is an un­truth like your former, as hath been proved at large in the An­swer thereunto: and there are divers untruths in this rea­son (or section) which have been answered, as will plainely ap­peare to those that will take the paines to reade your booke and mine.

Your third, is; that it is not to be thought that Christ would leave such a Governement, that affords no way of appeale, &c. This is answered at large: that the Churches of the Separat [...] have true waies of appeale. But the Church of England hath not.

These be your mighty Arguments of strength, which deser­ved an answer, though you proved none of them: If the answer which I sent you already have not sufficiently proved your ar­guments to be groundlesse, declare (I pray you) what substan­tiall point is not answered, (if there be any substantialls in them) and it shall be answered by Scripture, and good reason, or else you shall have the conquest.

But you have (in this your Antipologia) named some learned Authors; who have written against Separation, amongst which Mr. Rutherford is one.

And I have seen Mr. Rutherfords booke, and also weighed it, But I could not discerne, that he hath set down any thing a­gainst Separation that hath any force, neither hath hee pro­ved any thing sufficiently, but hath propounded many queeries. which have been both framed and answered long agoe, and he hath in his discourse expressed and repeated many answers, which have been made (to those queeires,) by the Separation, and running them over, he telleth us what this man saith, and what that man saith, and what another man saith, but he in declaring his owne conceptions, (following his blind zeale, and popish Au­thors) runneth himselfe headlong to justifie the Church and Mi­nistry [Page 13] of Rome: against the Separates arguments, there specified, bringing no sufficient proofe either of his owne or other mens a­gainst them: Mr. Ruther­ford hath divers times in his booke na­med (or rather nicknamed) me in stead of answering me, he hath made a shew to re­peat some of my arguments, and yet there was no argu­ment in my booke (so childish) (though he calleth them so) which he hath answe­red, no, nor so much as set my arguments downe indeed as they are, as whosoever ta­keth the paines to read his book, & mine may see. Therefore I would have understanding men to con­sider whether this of his be learned or pious writing yea or no? The generall scope of his booke tendeth to prove that the power of the Church resteth in the hands of her Officers. But he should con­sider that Christ hath given the power to his Church which is his body and spouse, of which: (and of whom) he himselfe is the head and Husband, neither can any Officer in the Church move [ Eccle­siastically] without the power of the Church, no more then a mans Arme, or Leg, or prime member can move, except it de­rive power from the body of which it is a naturall member: Yea, the power of the Keyes is as absolutely the Churches, which is Christs wife, as the power of the Keyes of the Family are the Mistrises, to whom the Husband giveth full power; and I thinke no reason [...]le man will affirme (if her Husband give her sole power in his absence) that she is subordinate to any of her ser­vants. Now the Scripture is cleere, that Christ (who is ascended up on high) hath delivered the power to his Church, therefore it is against the light and law of nature, to conceive the Church to be thus subordinate to the servants; but rather (we may speake with reverence to Christ) that her servants are subordinate unto her; and it is a dishonour unto Christ for them to usurp ecclesiasticall authority over her; But in case they should so doe, she hath recei­ved commission from Christ her Husband, to deale with them, ac­cording to the offence committed by them, and if need require to cast them out, and then not to suffer them to enter in againe but by the dore of Repentance.

But as Mr. Rutherford, by pleading for the Ecclesiasticall pow­er to be in the Officers, hath given great advantage to the Pope, so hath he to the Anabaptists, by pleading the universallity of his Church, bringing in the seed of wicked men to be baptized be­cause their fore father was a beleeving Parent, Isa. 2, 6. but upon this ground all the Infants in the world are baptizable, because a belee­ver was the father of them all. But the Scripture teacheth us o­therwise, for the House of Jacob was forsaken by the Lord, because they enlarged themselves from the East, and were Southsayers like the Philistime, and pleased themselves, with the children of stran­gers.

[Page 14]YOu have joyned to your Antipologia, certaine reasons against Tolleration, which are the same in substance with those which you brought in your former; And seeing they have beene largely answered there, in the answer to your ten reasons, and in my reply, to your answer to their six reasons: It is folly for you to study to relieve those reasons to serve your turne; For untill you are able to stand out, and prove by the word of God, that the Church of England (which you call your Church) is the Church of Jesus Christ, as it now stands in confusion; And the ministry thereof (either in the Synod or out of the Synod) is the ministry which Christ gave to his Church, when he ascended up on high: Till this is proved (which can never be) all the arguments which you have brought, or can bring against the Separates (under the names of Sectaries) are still against your selfe. For whether there be Sectaries, or Scismaticks, whether Athists, or Papists? whether wanton witted Christians, (as you tearme them) disobedient to Magistrates, unfaithfull to King and State, Obstinate Rebels, nay, what ever wickednesse can be named, the persons practising the same are found to be Members of the Church of England. There­fore I would advise you, hereafter to let Baal plead for himselfe: And goe not about to make the Magistrates beleive, that it is their duty to suppresse the Church of Christ, to heale the Rents of your confused Church state, for though all the Prophets in the land would heale Babel, yet she shall never be healed, for in a generall Apostasie there can be no true Reformation, but by a totall visible Separation of the pretious from the vile. ☜ And therefore you come short when you would intimate, there is nothing between you and us in point of the ministery, but that our Ministers must sease from their outward temporall labours, imployments, or trades, for our Ministers have no false calling upon them, as yours have which is a great gulfe betwixt your Ministers and ours, and be­twixt you and us, And concerning our Churches you say the controversie were at an end, ☜ if our ministers would grant to our Churches, that Assemblies and Synods, might judge and passe sen­tence upon our members as often as they see just ground, But truely (Mr. Edwards) this were to adulterate from the true pat­terne left unto us, and as this argueth in you great slothfullnesse and pride, so (if your councell were followed) it would make o­thers [Page 16] like you; but as our Ministers doe not desire to live Idly, as you would have them doe, neither doe our Churches desire the thing which you would have our Ministers grant them: you may know that you doe not goe according to the rules of Scrip­ture, when you perswade the Ministers of the Gospel to sease la­bouring with their hands: For when Paul called the Elders of E­phesus, to give them their charge. He set before them his owne ex­ample, Acts 20. I pray you read the 20. Chapter of the Acts of the Apo­stles: And see whether Paul required any to leave working with their hands: no sure, he commanded the direct contrary: where he expressed that he Coveted no mans Silver or Gold, or Apparrell. But saith, that they knew that his owne hands ministered to his neces­sities, and them that were with him. And further saith, he hath shewed them in all things how that so labouring they ought to sup­port the weake, Remembring the words of our Lord Jesus, how he said, It is a more blessed thing to give then to receive. And concerning our Churches submitting to Synods, to judge their cases; That were to make themselves foole: That were to goe from the greater, to the lesser, and (you your self doe aske) what a rule is this: Pag. 136. For if ther be a wise man amongst us, we ought not to goe to law with one another before those that are without, for temporall things, much lesse about spirituall things: For the Apostle hath declared that the Saints shall judge the world, yea, the Angels; If this be true, (as no understanding man can deny) then it would be a more greivious sinne, and woefull a­dultery, for the Spouse of Jesus Christ to seeke, or sue, to a power, that is neither Jure Divino, nor Jure Humano:

And now I will speake something to these your 8. reasons a­gainst tolleration, though they are of the same nature with the o­ther in the first book, and so have been answered already, yet to satisfie the Reader more fully, I will here give answer unto them particularly. But I would have you (& all men) know, that I doe not (neither doe any that are truly religious) plead for such a Toleration, as you would father upon us, even a Tolerati­on to sinne; We plead not for a Toleration of all sorts of persons (who are members of the Church of England,) for that were to plead for a Toleration for Theeves and Murderers, and Adulte­rers, and Sabbath-breakers, and all sorts of wicked livers, that all men might doe as they list; But the thing wee plead for, is a pea­ceable enjoyment of our liberty to worship God, publikely, accor­ding [Page 17] to his revealed word, most especially upon that time institu­ted for his publike worship, even the first day of the weeke, being the Lords day: And that all the 6. dayes, we may follow our cal­lings without feare of the execution of such unjust Lawes which former Parliaments have made; against such, who would not come to their Common Prayer book, or submit to all the orders of the Parishes of England; for such a Toleration as this we plead.

IN your first reason, you affirme that a Toleration of Independent Churches and governement with their opinions and practise, is a­gainst the Magistrates duty laid down in the Scripture.

But I have proved it to be the Magistrates duty, to Tolerate the true worship of God, and those practises which are according to the word.

But you would insinuate still your old slander, that we plead for a toleration of herisie and Scisme: which we know is against the Ma­gistrates duty; and this maketh against your evill way; For if a Parliament may not (as you say) displease God to please men, nor winke at evill, to content some persons, And if Parliaments in making lawes for religion, must depend on the will of God, revealed in his word, and not upon the consciences of some People. Then it is dan­gerous for a Parliament to constraine men to submit to the de­crees of a Synod (or Presbytery) when neither the Presbytery, nor their decrees have ground in the word of God.

YOur second reason is, that The Toleration desired is against the Solemne League and Covenant taken by the Parliament and Kingdomes, and therefore the Toleration desired comes to late, the doores being shut.

Ans. Here you lay a fearfull aspertion upon the Parliament: for requiring such an Oath and Covenant, Gospel Cove­nants doe not teach men to persecute. as if they intended to shut the Kingdome of Christ and his true worship out of the three Kingdomes, for you say further, If the toleration were lawfull in it selfe, yet because of the Oath and Covenant, it is unlawfull, though it might have beene granted before, it cannot be granted now, least the Kingdome should be guilty before God of Covenant breaking.

Ans. Surely you will make the Parliament all like Herod, Mark. 6, 26. they must take poore John Baptists head off, because of their oath!

[Page 17]But is this oath so foule as you would make it? and yet is it like the Decree of the Medes and Persians, that it may not be altered. Wells God can deliver Dan. 6. poore Daniell in the Lyons denne, and (it may be) you shall come in our stead, when once the Parliament discerneth your wicked intentions. ☞

But (Mr. Edwards) bethinke your selfe, will not you blush, and be ashamed to give in the oath in these termes, as you have e­ver exprest it (in this your second Reason, pag. 283.) that we are to endeavour the reformation of Religion, in the Kingdomes of Eng­land and Ireland in Doctrine, Worship, Governement and Discipline, according to the example of the best reformed Churches, [forgetting the word of God] which ought to have beene set before you (as it was indeede by the Parliament) But you deale by the Covenant, ☞ as you deale by the Scriptures, hack them, and mangle, and labour to make them fit for your owne turne; and yet you jeered the Apologists (when they spake of the way and practise of their Churches) because they did not name the Law or O [...]d Testament in expres words (though they in the same place testifie that they reverence and adore the fulnesse of Scrip­tures and their sufficiency to make us perfect, &c.) but here you have shamefully forgotten your selfe, and overslipt both Law & Gospel. And so tye your selves to mens patterns without the word of God.

And surely I cannot beleeve that the Parliament hath Cove­nanted so, as you inferre in the same page of your booke, How (say you) can they grant a tolleration so different as their way is that will not depend upon a Synod? And in the next page of the same Reason you say, that there is in the Covenant a clause in the second branch, that wee shall without respect of persons, endeavour the extirpation of Scisme, and whatsoever shall bee found contrary to sound Doctrine, and the power of godlinesse, least we pertake in other mens sinnes. Now surely (Mr. Edwards) I wonder that wise men can smile upon you, except it be in consideration of your folly, for you are made all of contradictions, unlesse you would have us take it for granted, that it is according to sound doctrine, and the power of godlinesse, that a number of Priests should bee called to­gether of contrary religions, some for the Bishops and some for the Presbyterie, and some for Christ, and that the two first casting [Page 18] aside the last, should agree to make decrees, & a Parliament should bee bound to establish them. Would this bee now to extripate scisme? nay: it would be to establish a grand scisme: For godlinesse is cast out by the two first, and the Parliament must establish, what ever shall be thought of those two first to be sound, whether it be for the Bishops the antient fathers, ☜ or for the Presbyters their younger sonnes: and so you would have the Parliament to bee indeede guilty of their sinnes.

YOur third Rreason is, that A Tolleration is against the nature of a Reformation: and here you discover your selfe in this Reason; that the Reformation you intend to make is to force all men in the Kingdom to submit to some perticular forme, ☜ for you say you cannot make a reformation but it must offend many consciences. But if it be so, it will be the consciences of them that have knowledge in the word of God: For the ignorant multitude will bee offended at nothing, but of what ever Religion their King will be of, they will be of the same, therefore you are a contentious man indeede! that will offend the consciences of the godly, to make your Church great, that so your revenewes may be large!

YOur fourth Reason is, A tolleration of men in their errors is a­gainst the judgements of the greatest lights.

Ans. It is granted, Therefore you might have spared your labour, in citing your antient fathers: For in all that you doe herein, I oppose you not.

YOur fifth Reason, is that the Magistrates tollerating of errors, and new opinions, is a kinde of invitation to them, &c.

Ans. This thing I grant.

And therefore the Magistrates ought not to tollerate er­rors, or any opinion that is not grounded upon the word of God; And therefore I conceive it to be the Magistrates duty, to make tryall of the Synod, whether their gathering together bee according to the word of God? or according to the customes of this Kingdome? ☜ And whether they bee not of the same nature with the Synod which used to sit in the Convocation house? And whether any decree which they shall now pitch up­on [Page 17] [...] [Page 18] [...] [Page 20] [not having the Scripture for their warrant] may be consen­ted unto? And though it have the Scripture for their warrant, whether there bee ever the more weight in it for their decreeing of it: and it greatly concerneth the Parliament to consider whe­ther the Assembly have any thing to do with the things of God, [while they stand Priests by their OLD-POPISH-CAL­LING,] And that upon your ground (namely) that the Ma­gistrates ought not to tollerate errors, or new opinions.

And all waies, and practises, are new, and strange, which have not warrant in the word of God.

IN your sixt Reason, you pleade against a tolleration of different formes of Church governement, for feare of division among Mini­sters and families (you say) it will not stand with Christian policie, but it will stand with Matchevillian.

Mr. Edwards, If Christian policie might take place in the King­dome of England, and all your Matchivillian pollicie banished out, there would be no striving then about different formes of Re­ligion; but Christs true Religion and Gospel would then have a free passage without interposing, for the free tollerating of it will produce no mischiefes, nor evills at all; And it is not wee, that pleade for different formes of Church governement, but your owne party. ☞ We pleade but for one intire governement established up­on sound principles, unalterable. And not a government which may looke with severall faces, in severall times, upon severall occasions, according to mens fancies.

And therefore it had beene better for you to have held your tongue, then made so many repetitions of things which have beene sufficiently answered long agoe.

YOur seventh Reason is, that Independency, or the Church way, as being a scisme in forsaking the Reformed Churches, and con­stituting new, the way of constituting Churches by the people, the way of making their Ministers, the refusing of beleevers and their children to the Sacraments unlesse they bee Church members, with many more, are all flat against the primative patterne, &c.

In these words you have so jumbled things together as it were in a broken language. Answer. If you meane that the way of Separation from your false Churches, & their way of making ministers, & con­stituting [Page 21] Churches, is contrary to the primative patterne, you speake untruly; for they make the primative patterne their rule: And then (for their refusing of beleevers and their children from the Sacraments, unlesse they be members of their Church,) in this you accuse them unjustly also: for they doe admit beleevers, and their Infants to the ordinance of Baptisme, though they bee not members of a particular congregation: for they are not cape­able to be members before Baptisme, (in respect of order) and to partake of the Supper, till they be in [particular] Church fellow­ship. And this I will engage my selfe to maintaine against you, if it please you to dispute the case; And therefore you had no neede to have branded this practise, with such a blacke badge, to call it the fountaine of evill, and root of bitternesse and manifold er­rors and other mischiefes. For this is but your bitter language a­gainst the truth.

And if you intend to make your rejoynders, and large tractates (which you brag of,) of such stuffe as you have made this Antipo­logia; It were better for you to put on a buffe coate, & to go fight in the Army against your enemies, then to sit at home to slander and accuse your friends, even those who ne [...]er did, nor thought harme to you or any other.

YOur eighth Reason is a commendation of the Presbyteriall way, and that by the testimony of many fathers, and the testimo­ny of the Scottish Commishioners.

But you say there will be objected a passage against it, in a booke lately printed of M. Simpsons. ☜

Answ. I leave Mr. Simpson and you to try it ou [...].

But if you had so defined your Presbyterian governement, and set downe your bounds and limitts, what, and what not, according as you call upon the Apologists, to define their Church way, then you should have had my judgement of it, here, to the full. But to judge and determin so of a thing, which is not yet begotten, or brought forth in this Kingdome, is not so easie a matter, neither do we know what forme or shape it will have when it is brought forth. [It may (for ought I know) be a MONSTER like the Image of the seven beaded beast,] and if it bee found defective, Rev. 13.24. then all, who have taken the Nationall Covenant, are (by your own confession) to endeavour the exterpation of it. Yea, And further [Page 22] (you say) as the Parliament will not be respecters of persons, or par­tiall, they must grant no tolleration, but what is agreeable to sound doctrine.

In this you speake very true, although indeed you crosse ma­ny of your former speeches. And therefore the way to deside the controversie, is to sease writing of such large tractates, wherein you doe but (as it were) picke strawes (and make abundance of re­pititions, to tryfle away the time,) (In my judgement) ( I say) It were better (for your selfe, and Mr. Samuel Rutherford, and Mr. A.S. (or any of you, ☞ or whomsoever the Parliament shall apoint,) to produce Scripture and good reason for your way, (if you can) and let as many of the Ministers of the Congregations of the Se­paration, have freedome to produce Scripture, and sound reason, for their way, [in a free conference.] And let the houses of Parlia­ment who are able to judge of the great, and weighty businesses of the Kingdome (let them I say) have the hearing, and tryall of the conference, and as things are cleared, so let them allow, or dis­allow. And this is according to your counsell (in pag. 304. of your Antipologia where you say. To conclude, If the way of Inde­pendencie be of God, ☞ and the Apollogists can make that good, let it be established by Parliament, and let all come to that; but if not (say you) why then should it be tolerated. In this I thinke you say right, stand to this, and let it come to the tryall; and doe not insinuate against the Church way, as you have done (in this page, and di­vers other places of your booke) where you say, the Divell would affect th [...] [...]lleration of it. For that tolleration w ^ch the Devill would affect, is that tolleration, which you would slanderously father up­un us, and not the tolleration we seeke for.

And therefore I would have you to correct your language, and search and try your wayes, (as you exhort the Apollogists to doe;) Consider with what spirit, and intention you writ this booke, Let your conscience reflect upon what is plainely layd downe be­fore you, in the Answer to your former booke, and in this. And doe not seeke shifts, and superfuges. Consider and receive admoni­tion, though it be from a woman. I am sure many godly persons and Churches beyond the seas, are grieved at your writing, as well as in this Country.

Consider how that though you were, cryed up by the worser [Page 23] sort, whose Champion you were become, and that your confidence was so, of carying any thing, and saying any thing, yet your witt (so strong for you,) hath deceived you. ☜ Let my councell (therefore) be ac­ceptable unto you, Repent, Repent, of making this Antipologie, give glory to God, and recant it, testifie your Repentance by comming out of your false estate, and recall this Antipologia. I have shewed unto you the greatnesse of your sinne, and folly in particular, in ma­king this Antipologia, as well as your former booke: They were both unseasonable, disordered, sinfull and ungrounded vapours; scandalizing the Churches of Christ: There are many untruths in them both, & that not onely where you make naked relations of Tales, but where you make profession before God, and the World, to bring sufficient reasons; when indeede you bring nothing but shadowes and fig-leaves. And this sinne of yours is agravated, by your labouring to bring the houses to consent unto you, to keepe under the people of God, and to roote them out of the Kingdome, or at least not to suffer them to performe publike worship, in the way which God requireth. Now if a simple, and single untruth neede repentance, what repentance ought there to bee for such a compounded agravated evill as your is? And as I have represented it to your own conscience, that you may repent and be humbled: So I turn you over to the Par­liament, to deale with you for the same.

Now if you had beene a Member of a true Church, I could have admonished you in another way, ☜ But you [being in disor­der] could not be dealt with by such an Order.