IT is a saying of Solomon, To every thing there is a season, and a time to every pur­pose under the Heaven, Eccl. 3.1. I know not that ever there was a time or sea­son more fit then now to publish these things. For I hope (and till I see the contrary, shall believe it) that those men who are the Higher Powers, as they will prove all things, so, hold fast that which is good. My meaning is, whatsoever they find upon due and mature examination, to be the mind of Christ re­vealed in his holy word, & as a work proper to them so they will accordingly act and doe that good, that acceptable and perfect will of God. First then I shall lay down this Asser­tion, and humbly set it before them.

Whatsoever Decrees and Institutions of Popes, and Popish Coun­sels, have been established by the Law of the Land, and have been continued and confirmed throughout diverse ages by se­verall Acts of Parliament, against Jesus Christ, in the order and way of the Gospel (the same yet standing) ought by the present supream Authority of this Nation, to be taken away.

My Reasons for it are these.

1. This tends to the effectual accomplishing of that good Promise in Zeph. 2.11. where the Lord speaks that he will fa­mish [Page 2]all the Gods of the earth, and men shall worship him, &c. Now what way or course can be taken more effectual and certain, to starve and famish the Antichristian Idols (as the false Church, Ministry, Worship, Government) then the Magi­strate to take away the food and maintenance, whereby hi­therto (and at this present) they are nourished, fed, and kept alive.

2. If the Civil Magistrate, be to hate the whore, and make her desolate and naked, as it's expresly prophesied, Rev. 17.16. then he is to repeal all such Lawes and Statutes which Po­pish Princes formerly have made, whereby she hath lived de­liciously and proudly, and keeps on to this day, her who­rish attire. And this I understand as one speciall and choise work of the Magistrate, To make the whore desolate and naked, It is that no Act or Law doe stand in force, which doth yeeld any relief or help to her.

3. If we must pray for Kings, and all that are in Authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, in all godlinesse and ho­nesty, as 1 Tim. 2.2. Then it must needs follow, that as it is our duty to pray, that those Decrees and Institutions of Popes and Popish Counsels, which have been established by the Law of the Land, against Christ, may be taken away; so it is the Magistrates part and duty likewise, to repeal them; for o­therwise the Church and people of God, cannot lead a qui­et, and peaceable life, &c. but either must live unquiet, or un­godly, or both.

4. If the Civil Magistrate be at all concern'd in taking vengeance on Babylon, as to set himselfe in array against her, bend his bow, fan her, and empty her. If the pouring out of the later viols, doe any way belong unto him, this then is most proper to him (as acting within his own sphear) to null all Statutes and Lawes, which idolatrous Princes have made (when they gave their power to the Beast) whereby the Antichristian Kingdome ever since hath stood and been supported.

5. How are the Kings and Judges of the Earth, wise and in­structed, how doe they serve the Lord in fear, and kisse the Son, as they are commanded, Psa. 2.10, 11, 12. If people under their Government, are required and commanded by any Law [Page 3]in force (though enacted before their time) to practice false worship, or any act of Idolatry and Superstition, or to suffer in their person or estate, in case they refuse.

6. So long as Rulers permit old Lawes and Statutes in force, whereby superstition and false worship is continued and established, they are a terror to good works, and not to evil: They are not (in this respect) the Ministers of God to us for good, which is quite contrary to Pauls doctrine, Rom. 13.3, 4.

7. Such Lawes and Statutes as were made at first by Ido­laters, against the wayes and truths of the Gospel, so long as they are not repealed, all succeeding Governours which allow and command the practice of them, doe wrap them­selves in the sin and guilt of that power by which they were first enacted, and stand no lesse guilty before the Lord, then the authors and contrivers of them; and so much is clear by the words of the Prophet; For the Statutes of Omri are kept, and all the works of the house of Ahab, and yee walk in their Counsels: That I should make thee a desolation, and the inhabitants thereof a hissing, therefore ye shall bear the reproach of my people. Mic. 6.16. Omri and Ahab were both deceased long before, but some unjust Statutes of theirs remained, for which the Lord hath a Controversie with the mountaines of Israel, in regard they had not repealed such wicked acts. It is true, the Pro­phet in the place, doth not expresly say what those Statutes and works were: neverthelesse by the History of the Kings of Israel, it may easily be conceived: They had devised a false worship, and ordained Priests for the high Places, and for the Devils, and for the Calves which they had made.

Now this being done, no question but it was by the States of Israel afterwards Enacted, 1. That those Priests should be acknowledged to be true and lawful Ministers, and that none should separate from them, but communicate in all their publick Acts of Idolatry. 2. That the people should pay Tythes to these Priests of the high-places. 3. That no man unlesse ordained after the manner and form of these Priests, should presume to open and expound the Law publickly to the people.

I shall say no more concerning the proof of this Asserti­on, [Page 4]only my desire and prayer to God, is, that those who are in Authority, may well consider, how much it doth con­cerne them, to inquire after the Decrees of Popes and Popish Councels, which have been by the Law of the Land establish­ed against the Gospel, and are to this day unrepealed: In re­gard if the same be stil allowed by them, how they wrapt themselves (as was said before) in the guilt and sin of those men who first made such irreligious Laws: And therefore the Magistrate hath need to take heed what Law he makes (or being made before, doth allow) in matters appertaining to Religion, and the worship of God, as binding men to the obedience and practice thereof.

I come now to the next particular, that is, to shew what Decrees of Popes, established by the Lawes of the Land, a­gainst Jesus Christ (yet in force) ought to be repealed.

1. The Nationall Ministry, commonly called the Ministry of the Church of England. That this is a plant which the heaven­ly Father never planted, and therefore to be pluckt up by the roots (howsoever established by Law) I shall make it good by many plain demonstrations.

But by the way, least I should be mis-understood, and the matter applied further and otherwise then is intended, this I have thought good to declare, that I doe believe there are in this Nation, many faithful and true Ministers of Christ, e­lected and ordained according to the Gospel: some I know, whom I love, and honour: so that it is a Ministry, or more truly a Priesthood, taken and derived from the Sea of Rome, which I here speak of, this I call the Nationall Ministry, because to say the truth, I know no ecclesiasticall person (properly so called) which the Law of the Land allowes as lawful, but he whose Ministry is essentially derived from the Pope. But to proceed.

1. The Nationall Ministry is so carnal and earthly, as that such as hold and maintain the same, they have not a piece of Scripture, precept nor example to justifie their opinion: In­somuch as the learnedst of them, and those who are true to their owne Principles, doe ingeniously confesse the very thing which we said before, namely that the Ministry of the Church of England (that which is established by the Law of [Page 5]the Land) is derived from the Pope. Thus Francis Mason of Consecration, published by Authority, proves at large by undenyable Reasons. So M ^r Yates, we are Ministers from Rome, though not of Rome, and gives this, as a bone for the Brownish to pick. Model of Divinity, page 257.

2. This being so, that their office and calling is essentially derived from Rome, and the Pope, it must needs follow, that such men as have not renounced that Ministry, but stand for­mally and actually in the condition they were at first, whi­ther Bishops, Priests, or Deacons, have dangerously run them­selves upon a point of Treason and Fellony, and might be legally executed for treason and fellony, if the State were not pleased to interpret the Statute contrary (as I conceive) to the very letter and forme of it. The words of the Statute are these, Eliz. 27.2.

It shall not be lawfull for any Seminary Priest, or other Priest or Ecclesiasticall person what soever, made without or WITHIN any of her Majesties dominions, by ANY AUTHORITY CHALEN­GED OR PRETENDED FROM THE SEA OF ROME, by or of what name, or title, or degree soever the same shall be called, or knowne, to be, or remaine in any part of her Highnesse dominions, and every person so offending, shall be judged as Traytor, and shall suffer as in case of Treason: And every person which shall witting­ly or willingly receive, relieve, comfort, or maintain any such Priest or Ecclesiasticall person, shall be judged a Fellon without benefit of the Clergy, suffer death, loose and forfeit, as in case of Fellony.

Now hence it was (as I conceive) that the Non confor­mists made so many humble suites unto Princes and Parlia­ments, for a lawful Ministry to be established throughout the Realm, and that the present Ministry might utterly be abolished, as a base Ministry, which God never erected in his Church. As they knew it was originally from Rome, so not safe to be taken up, for being ordained Priests and Ecclesiastical persons, by autho­rity from the Sea of Rome, they became ipso facto by our Statute, Traitors and Felons, and might have been punished as other Priests, had the Law been prosecuted indifferently against the one, as the other. And heere I cannot forget the zeale of the old Puritans, against the Nation Ministry, their opinion of it, and often addresses to the State, to have it quite taken away.

It is in their writings ordinarily affirmed by them, that the Ministry of England is a base Ministry, which God never erect­ed in his Church, but came wholy from the Pope: not onely the cal­ling of the Hierarchy but also their dependent Offices, all un­lawfull and Antichristian: A Ministry strange from the Scriptures, and never heard of in the Primitive Church, a meer humane invention taken up without any warrant from Gods word, and brought into the Church by the boldnesse of men: It wants the life, essence and being, whereby a Minister is a Minister.

The Books are extant wherein these things and a great deal more are asserted, with Admonitions, Supplications, petitions to the Parliament to have the Nationall Ministry quite rooted out.

Now is it not strange, this being so, that those men in times so dangerous, and when little could be expected from the supream Authority, in answer to their Petitions, should appear with so much boldnesse against the Nationall Ministry: whereas now though we have better times, and better men in place, from whom we may expect better things, and more then they could hope for, neverthelesse not so much is done, but the good principles of the Non-conformists are laid a­side, the nationall Ministry pleaded for, and by whom? even such as pretend more to purity of Ordinances, then the old puritans ever did.

3. To countenance and allow such a Ministry as is from Rome, is a great dishonour to our State, specially now, as if we must be beholding to the Sea of Rome, and know not how to worship God without taking a Popish Clergy from thence. As on the contrary to disown it, by repealing the Law by which it stands, and so to send it back from whence it came, this would make the faces of our Governours to shine, and their names to be precious, and blessed in future Gene­rations.

4. To allow such a Ministry, is to acknowledge the Pope of Rome to be a true minister of the Gospel. I pray ob­serve it, those Laws and Statutes by which the nationall Mini­stry is established and continued, they do acknowledg and justifie that great Antichrist, as to be a true and lawfull mi­nister of Jesus Christ. Hence it is by our Law, that those [Page 7]who are made Priests in the Church of Rome, if they come to the Church of England, retein their Priesthood as full and ample as before. And the Reason is, because the Law puts no difference between a man, made Priest at Rome by the Pope, or Ordained Priest by a Prelate in England, as to the Office and Calling, it is one and the same.

5. This nationall Ministery is a great dishonour and shame to the Gospel, and to Christ himselfe in his most excellent servants, the Apostles and Churches of the Apostolique In­stitution, in rejecting and reproaching their precept and practice. And therefore it much concernes the Parliament, to confider how they suffer such lawes in force, as doe open­ly and publickly speak out contempt against Jesus Christ. I doe not deny but men may be (yea and ought to be) tol­lerated, though they erre in their opinion and practice: But that the Magistrate should make a Law (or continue any Law made before) to the dishonour of Christ and the Go­spel, this they cannot doe.

6. It is a dishonour to a State that any mark of the Beast should by Law be justified and practised in it: But this na­tional Ministery as derived from the Sea of Rome, is one of the most perspicuous and notorious markes that Popes and Popish Councels ever gave, one of the first, and by which Babylon hath been most advanced, and Sion ever since most opposed, hated, persecuted.

7. This Antichristian Ministery, (whether it be in Spaine, France, England, &c. For it is all one, I speake of the Of­fice and calling, and not of the Administrations of Priests) is guilty of bloud, for thousand thousands of Saints have been murdered by it. And therefore as the Lord is making Inquisition for bloud, so should those who are called gods on earth, now follow the Lamb, and shew forth the likenesse and Image of their great God & Master in heaven, in search­ing after the bloud of the Prophets, and of the Saints, and to execute the judgement written.

It is true, as the times may be, some Acts of Justice may be foreborn, which afterward ought, and must be don. David complaines, that the sonnes of Zerviah were to hard for him, yet Solomon following (being in a better capacitie) put one of them to death, and justly too.

To illustrate this by a Comparison; though murder be discovered, and the person knowne, yet no execution can be don upon him, till he fall into the hand of Justice. Indeed then, if the Magistrate neglect his dutie, and suffer him to es­cape, he wraps himselfe in the bloud and guilt of the Male­factor. That bloud guiltinesse lies on that Ministery which essen­tially is derived from the Sea of Rome, this hath been known to Saints in former ages: but the sonnes of Zerviah were still to hard for them. But now, when the power shall be in their hands, not to arraign and execute the murderer, is to be ac­cessary (I mean in some measure and degree) to the bloud of the Prophets and of the Saints, shed in all ages and nati­ons by this bloudy Ministery.

Lastly, It might here be shewed what great inconvenience will follow, so long as this National Ministery is not aboli­shed: for though Tithes be taken away, yet will the people doe as they have done, goe to these Priests for marrying, bu­rying, Christnings, Churchings, administring the Lords Sup­per, Reading the Service Booke, &c. And joyn with them in other Acts of superstition and will-worship. Which they will not doe, if by publick authoritie it be declared, that this Ministery is held no longer true and lawfull, and all such lawes Null, by which the same was established.

Object. That ignorant and scandalous Ministers, be re­moved, none, or few are against it, but we would have such as are godly Ministers to continue in their places: otherwise men would live like Heathens, without God and Christ in the world.

To this objection, I shall answer divers wayes.

1. If we consider the persons of the National Ministery, as distinct from their calling, here indeed we are to put a diffe­rence between persons, though not things. Concerning their persons we grant, some are much better then other: but for the thing it selfe, that is, the Ministery, the Law allowes and owns all alike, good and bad, godly or ungodly, wise or foolish. And this is no other then what is asserted by a great Doctor of their own: If you repel (saith he, writing against Mr Penrie) the unpreaching Minister because of his outward cal­ling, you may by the same reason discharge the worthiest Minister in [Page 9]the Land of the holy Ministery; FOR ALL HAVE ONE AND THE SAME EXTERNALL CALLING IN THE CHƲRCH OF ENGLAND, D ^r Somes last Treat. c. 10. p. 125.

And this is most true, and therefore to make the calling of one Narional Minister better or more lawfull then another, is absurd: In their personal graces, qualifications, admini­strations, here they may differ, but as to their office and Mi­nistery, so they are alike, and all one. I speake here what the Law of the Land hath established, and allowed, not valuing the distinction which some make of their own head.

2. That the disowning of the National Ministery should hin­der the propagation of the Gospel. I answer: 1. This is to cast some dishonour upon Christ, as if there were a necessitie that he must be beholden to the greatest Enemy he hath, to helpe him in the carrying on of the preaching of the Gospel, for the sadding of soules. 2. Howsoever it is true, God hath made the labours of some National Ministers succesfull to the comfort of many soules: yet that he hath ever ownd their Calling or Ministery, that I deny. It is no good reasoning, Because the Lord makes a mans worke prosperous, therefore he justi­fies the false calling he hath taken up.

But 3. That the laying aside of this National Ministery will be for the furtherance of the truth, appeares thus. 1. Because the greater number (I thinke I may here leave out but few) are ignorant of the Gospel, and have not received the things of the spirit of God, but they are foolishnesse unto them. How fitly here may that place be applyed, Matth. 23.13. Woe unto ye Scribes and Pharisees hypocrites: for ye shut up the kingdome of heaven against men; for ye neither goe in your selves, neither suffer ye them that are entring to goe in. 2. As the un­worthy are laid aside, so for men of parts, and pietie, though the State doe no longer own that Ministery which they took from the Sea of Rome, yet setting themselves on the Lords worke in his own way, doubtlesse they will give them coun­tenance and all due encouragement. Besides, they shall have the presence of God with them more then now they can ex­spect. 3. The whore of Rome, hath so bewitched the Nations of the world, which have drunk the wine of her fornication, [Page 10]that untill her abominations be put away, they will not hearken to the voyce of Christ. We see the throwing down of the Bishops was very much for the enlargement of Christs kingdome, of this we have had ever since large experience; so the disowning of the National Ministery, will be as much (if not more) to the propagation of the Gospel, for it is no other then to pluck up a weed, that the good Corn may grow and prosper the better.

The next particular we are to handle, concernes Tythes: a thing (as now in use) devised first by the Pope and his Councel, and established by the Law of the Land, contrary to the true maintenance of a Gospel Minister, and therefore by the Magistrate to be taken away. But before I prove this, a word or two by the way.

1. The Author of that Booke lately published, entituled, A view of all Religions, reckons this (among other things) to be the opinion of the Independents, viz. that the maintenance of Ministers by Tythes is superstitions and Judaical: It is probable heretofore when some such men were not in a capacitie to take Tythes, by reason of Subscription & Nonconformitie, they were against the thing, and held it superstitious and Judai­cal, as the learned Knight reports: But the power of the Pre­lates being since broken, their opinion now seems to be o­therwise, their practice I am sure speakes it so.

2. As the saying is; Ʋno absurdo mille sequuntur, grant one absurditie, and a thousand will follow: So is the case here: grant a National Ministery, which is Popish and Antichristian, Tythes must follow: For what more congruous and pro­per, then every Ministery (whether Christian, Antichristian or Jewish) to have its maintenance, according to the Rule and Law belonging to it. I know it is the opinion of many that Tythes being taken away, a multitude of prophane and scandalous Priests will fall with them. Now admit this be so. Neverthelesse, if the National Ministery be as unlawfull as Tythe: and that which is the foundation of it, why should it not be taken likewise into consideration, yea and first of all. Physitians tell us, and we finde it true by experience; The effect ceaseth, when the cause is taken away.

3. Howsoever I have seen severall Addresses made to the [Page 11]Parliament, and many books in print against Tythes: yet methinkes, I doe not finde the Case well stated, at least not home; That tythes are an oppression and too great a burden for the people to beare, a great discouragement to the husbandman, &c. Though this be true, yet its rather a circumstance or an ag­gravation, then the thing it selfe. I would state the case thus; The Pope and his Councels have sent hither an unlawfull Ministerie, and for the maintenance of it, they have appointed Tythes, as the Priest had under the Law. These Ordinances and Con­stitutions of the great Whore have been established here by Idolatrous Princes and Parliaments, against the Lord Jesus, who is the King of Kings, and whom all the powers of the world should obey. In which regard it is desired, not so much for the ease of the people, and hus­band mans sake, as for Gods sake, for Christs sake, and for the Go­spel sake, that such sinfull lawes may be repealed, and this mark of the Beast kept here by Authoritie no longer.

4. Howsoever I do observe that the Independents and Pres­byterians doe appeare most for Tythe, yet the truth is, nei­ther of them by the Law of the Land have any title to it. For they are not such Incumbents or Ecclesiasticall persons, as the Law allowes in case of Tythes. For whosoever hath not been ordained Priest or Deacon by a Bishop, that is, whose Ministerie is not essentially from the Sea of Rome, to use Masons words. Or as the Non-Conformists expresse it, he whose en­trance into the Ministerie is not by a Popish, and unlawfull vocation, strange from the Scriptures, and never heard of in the Primitive Church: Cannot (as a Minister) by act of Parliaments claim any proprietie in Tythes. Again for such as have re­nounced their ordination by Bishops, and take themselves to be Ministers by Election and Ordination some other way, these the Law of the Land counts Sectaries and Schismaticks, men that have forfeited their livings and places, and so to be suspended.

It is true, Doctor Corn: Burgesse, though he have turnd of­ten, yet probably hath not turnd himselfe out of his title, but with Gilhinham, Gauden, Hamond, Slater, Reeves, Taylor, Aern: And so Mossom, Hardie, Baker, Williams, and other Ser­vice Readers, he, I say, and such as these of the old Popish way (as true to their Principles) may pretend something to [Page 12]Tythes, as they have been established by the Law of the Land, and as they have been continued and confirmed throughout diverse ages by severall Acts of Parliaments: but for others (specially the Independents and the Presbyters made since the Bishops were put down) as the Law of God is cleare against them, so the Law of the Land will not speake one word for them, though their Counsell may.

5. For what cause some lately desired the Committee, to have Counsel to plead the Incumbents proprietie for Tythes, it is a riddle to me: For who doubts but there is custome, usage, Lawes, and Statutes of this Land for payment thereof: as Bi­shops, Deanes, Prebends, and (before them) Monkes & Fryers had. Besides that honorable Committee, well knows, by the politick Law or custome of England, which is the common law of Eng­land, Tythes have bin vested & setled in persons Ecclesiastical. But the Question is; 1. What the Incumbent hath to say, Why the Lawes and Statutes of this Land enjoyning the pay­ment of Tythes should not be abrogated. 2. Why Tythes should continue payable to this Nationall Ministerie. 3. Why the Magistrate (as a thing proper to his place) ought to ap­point Tythes, as the due maintenance of a Gospel Minister. Now here is little worke for Lawyers, it belongs rather to the Parsons and Vicars themselves to speake to this point.

And here I cannot but take occasion to note, how some men lately in their namelesse Pamphlets for Tythes, have made a great noyse about a Catalogue of the Acts of Parlia­ments, confirming the Right of Tythes to the Church. And that the world may know, what paines they have taken for Ba­bylon (or it may be rather for their own Interest) they begin at Magna Charta, and goe through all the Popish Parliaments, even to the reigne of Queen Elizabeth; and raking together a great deale of the Popes trash and dung, tell us very sober­ly, of many speciall Acts and Grants for payment of Tythes, confirmed by such a King in the yeares so and so: what re­medies the Priests had for recovery of the Tythes, and penal­ties for non-payment of them, as treble damages, imprison­ment without baile. Now what is all this but wind and va­nitie, a seeking to gull and befoole the Nation: I except the [Page 13]Parliament, for I hope they are so wise, as to see this to be a cheat (and as we commonly say, causam pro causa) a taking that for defence of their cause, which maketh nothing to the purpose. For thus they argue, Because Popes have made un­lawfull decrees, and idolatrous Magistrates have confirmed them. Ergo, this Parliament must doe so too. Now I come to the Rea­sons against Tythes.

1. This way of maintenance of Ministers by Tythes, is a Popish custome, imposed by the Popes authoritie, without any warrant for it in the New Testament: not practised in the Primitive Church in the Apostles times, nor in the times of the Ministers that succeeded them for the space of some hundred yeares, untill Christian doctrines, and Apostolicall orders were corrupted with errours, heresies, and idolatrous orders of superstitious persons, as Monkes, Nunnes, &c. But no sooner sits the man of sin in the Temple of God, and had set up an Antichristian Priesthood, calling himselfe the high Priest, and the Priests, the Tribe of Levi, and Gods inhe­ritance, but he made all the Clergie to swear Alleagiance to him; See Fox Act. pag. 961. And commanded the people to pay Tythes to his Priests, and his Priests to pay first fruits, and tenths or tythes to him, after the manner of the Jewish people, and Levites to Aaron under the Law.

For the Antiquitie of the payment of Tythes in this Na­tion, the Original I thinke can hardly be shewed: Doctor Willet saith in his Synops: in the fift General Controversie, pag. 314. that in Austins time there was no general law nor custome in the Church for the paying of them. And in those Questions that Austin the Monk (after that he came into England) pro­pouned to Gregorie Bishop of Rome: and in the answer which the Bishop sent him back, there is nothing said of Tythes, nor any such thing required for the maintenance of the Ministers, but of the free gift of the people; and this was about 596 yeares after Christ; see Fox Act. Mon. pag. 105.

Before the Councel of Lateran, which was under Innocent. 3. in the yeare 1215. any man might have paid his Tyth to any Ecclesiasticall person he pleased, but by that Councel it was decreed, that Tythes should be payd to the Pariochal Priests. William Thorpe, saith, that Pope Gregory 10. was the first that [Page 14]ordained tythes to be payd to Priests in the yeare 1211. Fox pag. 494. Doct. Ridley in the booke of his called, A view of the Civil law, pag. 147. saith; The Customes we pay our Tythes by at this day, were setled upon this kingdome by the Popes Legates, in Provincial and Synodal Constitutions about the time of Henry 3. and Henry 5. Howsoever these writers agree not in point of time, yet in this they accord, that the maintenance of Priests by Tythes, was a decree of the Pope, that vile person divided the Land for gain, Dan. 11.39. which was confirmed by Po­pish Princes. And therefore to be abolished, as we have pro­ved before.

This I shall onely adde: In the second Article of the Cove­nant of the two Nations, many have sworn to endeavour the ex­tirpation of superstition, and all kinde of Poperie, that the paying of Tythes is popish, nothing more certain, and therefore as it is a case of conscience, so men ought to be carefull, either how they presse it, or practice it.

2. If we will follow the example and practice of our Sa­viour and his Apostles, and the Churches of the Apostolique Institution, the Ministers maintenance is not any set porti­on of mens goods, nor to be taken from them by compulsi­on, but to be free, 2 Cor. 9.5, 6, 7. It is true the exhortation is, Let him that is taught in the word, communicate unto him that teacheth him in all good things, Gal. 6.6. Againe, They which preach the Gospel, should live of the Gospel, 1 Cor. 9.14. But will it hence follow. 1. That the Magistrate is to appoint what the Minister shall have. 2. And so much every man shall be forc't to give. 3. That he must allow him maintenance, who teaches him not. 4. Though his calling be unlawfull, and doctrines unsound, yet he must have tythes. Master Shaw, I heare, in a Sermon lately drew some such Conclusions, where bewailing the going down of tythes, he had this pas­sage: Some (saith he) call us hyrelings, if we be so, yet we ought to have our wages. Others say, we are Beasts: grant it: yet the mouth of the Ox that treadeth out the Corn is not to be muzled: beasts have provision allowed them. Admirable! its his own I dare say, it lookes so like him.

One looking as it were babies in anothers eyes: But for [Page 15]Answer, 1. Being hyrelings, why seeke ye wages of those who set you not at worke, nor doe any thing for them. 2. What have I to doe to provide for that Beast, which is nei­ther my own, nor workes for me. 3. If any thing be al­lowed to such creatures, it should be onely that which is meet and proper for hyrelings and beasts to have.

3. To retein tythes, is to keepe up and give honour to the Jewish shadowes, which by Christs death were taken away. It is no other then superstition and abomination, a mani­fest tempting of God, and by consequence a denying that Je­sus Christ is come in the flesh. Hence a Jew might well twit our Tyth-Takers in the words of the Samaritan woman. How is that thou who professest thy selfe a Minister of the New Te­stament, observest our Mosaicall Ceremonies, and livest by Tythes as did the Priests under the Law? I know what their usual answer is. Tythes were paid before Moses time, long before the Ceremoniall law was written; for Abraham paid tythes to Melchisedek of all that he had, Gen. 14.19, 20. And Jacob vow­ed that if God would prosper his journey, he would give unto God the tenth of all that he should give him, Gen. 28.21, 22. And it is pro­bable by this fact of Abraham, and vow of Jacob, that tythes are due by the law of nature, and the tenth of every thing was given un­to God: and so it is no part of the Ceremonial law, there being no prescription or law written.

I cannot say of this Objection, that is (certo certius) not liable to exception: For 1. By the same reason we should take up Circumcision, Oblations and Offerings, distinction of clean and unclean, both of Beasts and Fowles, the ob­servation of the seventh day Sabboath, for these things were practiced before the Law was written.

But 2. Neither Abraham, nor Jacob, nor any other man, nor Adam himselfe before his fall, did or could know Gods will, by any Law of nature, or naturall knowledge, as how he would be worshipped and served by the Creatures which he had made for mans use, or with which of them, or how much of them, whether all, or any one of them, God would accept of at mans hand, untill he had revealed his will to him for a command of his worship and service, Gen. 2.16, 17. & 3.1, 2, 3.

[Page 16] 3. We answer, that the Ceremoniall Law of sacrifices, ob­lations, and offerings of first fruits, and tythes, and the di­stinction of clean and unclean Beasts and Fowles, was revea­led to Adam, presently after the fall, and to the Fathers be­fore the Flood, and God commanded so much of the Cere­moniall Law, as might serve for the good of his Church and people, at that time, Gen. 3.21. & 4.4, 5. & 8.20.21. Hence it is plain, that the Ceremoniall Law of first fruits, and Tythes, or the tenth part of mens goods, was not known by any Law of Nature or Nation all knowledge, to be due unto God, no more then the distinction of clean and uncleane Beasts, and Fowles, was known unto men by any naturall knowledge to be offered unto God, but (as we said) the Lord revealed it to the Fathers before the Flood, and after­ward established it under the Priesthood of Levi. And the Law of first Fruits and Tythes was to be abolished, with the Priesthood of Levi, under which they were established with other Ceremonies, as may be collected from Heb. 7.12.

But 4. suppose a man should grant Tythes are due by the Law of nature; that is, the tenth of every thing is to be gi­ven to God, what is this to the parish Priest, or nationall Mi­nistrey, Can there be nothing given to God, but what the Priest must have? now such must be the conclusion, or nothing can be made of it.

4. Though I shall not meddle with the great controver­sie about the Magistrates power in Ecclesiasticall things, and how far he is Keeper of both Tables, yet this certainly may be Asserted, viz. that no Parliament by any Act or statute, is to command any thing contrary to the Lawes of God, either of the first or second Table. As the Magistrate is not to make any Law (neither if made, to let it stand) which should require men to steale, murther, commit adultery, sins forbidden in the second Table, so neither must he command the practice of I­dolatry, superstition, wil-worship, &c. by any Law, either new or old, against the first Table.

Now for payment of Tythes, it is a sin two ways against the 2 ^d Commandement. 1. In it self, as being Jewish and superstiti­ous. 2. As paid to an unlawful and Antichristian Ministry. That the maintenance of Ministers by Tythes is superstiti­ous, [Page 17]and forbidden in the second Commandement, we prove it thus.

1. From the nature of superstition, which is as lib. 1. vit. ex­cul. oppos. Col. 501.502. Zanchy de­scribes it, a taking into the worship of God, more then he requires in his worship. Hence superstition (as some derive the word) is that which is done supra statutum, and in this respect the paying of Tythes is superstitious, as being a serving of God upon no other ground, but mans invention.

2. According to the Aquin. 2.20. Q. 92. Art. 1. Schoolmen, that is superstition, when any thing concerning Religion, is given, Vel cui non debet, vel non eo modo quo debet, either to the person it should not be, or not in the way or manner as it ought: and this is held a sound truth by all Orthodox writers. which is the case here.

3. It is a great superstition to approve, countenance, or give honour to any of the wayes or devices of Antichrist. They that are sincere Christians (saith In Censura. cap. 9. fol. 471. Bucer) cannot abide any thing that is his. The least shew (said synop. An­tichrist. Vigandus) to please him or his followers, is will-worship. Of this judgement were in Hos. 2.16. Ju­nius, Loc. com. de trad. p. 421, 422. Musculus, Tract. theol. vol. 3. p. 210. Beza, in Psa. 16. Mollerus, de Polit. p. 72. Sipperus, Contr. Mon. pag. 70. Sadeel, and others. Now men approve, countenance, and give honour to the wayes of Antichrist, by paying Tythes to Priests, we have shewed before.

4. It is vitious and superstitious to simbolize with Ido­latery. By the Deut. 12.30. Lev. 18.3. Exod. 23.24. Gen. 25.2, 3. Deut. 14.1. Lev. 19.17.27.28. Isa. 27.9. Scriptures we are forbidden all conformity with them in any of their way, order, custome, traditions, & manner of worship, or religious observations. And the Saints in all ages have carefully shun'd it, as might be shewed by several examples. It was the Herodot. in Thalco. Becan. in Anolog. vetet. nov. test. c. 5. custome of the Arabians, and other Heathens, in imitation of Dionysius, that is, Bac­chus, to round the corners of their head, now this the Israelites Lev. 19.27. might not doe, though a thing indifferent, (as Calv. in Levit. 19.17. Calvin ob­serves) because God would not have them to be like Ido­laters.

[Page 18] 5. Superstition is committed, when more estimation is had of a thing, more dignity and excellency placed in it, and more regard had to it, then God alloweth, or can stand with his will revealed in his word; and so much lib. 1. de vit. ext. cult. oppos. col. 504, 505. Zanchy proves by sundry instances. And in this regard also, paying of Tythes is superstitious, because that thing is honoured and embraced, which we find not in the New Testament to be lawful, and thus an idol is set up, Tanquam deus ex parte, though not deus simpliciter.

6. This may be further proved by the testimony of learn­ed men: For to have any thing common with Idolaters, or to serve God after any way of theirs, or to take up, and make use of any of their rites, orders, customes, observati­ons, institutions, they hold it utterly unlawfull. Thus have the Tertul. de coron. mil. Greg. l. 1. epist. 44. ad Leon. Theod. l. 1. c. 10. August. ep. 86. ad Casul. old Fathers affirmed, so our later writers, Pareus in 1 Cor. 10.14. Bu­cer in Mat. 18. f. 143. Beza Tract. theol. vol. 3. p. 210. Calvinists, Cen. 4. c. 13. col. 406. Chemnit. exam. theol. Melane. par. 2. p. 491. Luthervns, B. Jewel upon 1 Thess. 5. p. 219. Sutclief. chal. p. 62. Formall Protestants, Perth. Assemb. p. 55, 56. Altar. Damosc. p. 539. Reformists, Bellar. de monac. c. 40. & de ester [...]. sac. l. 2. c. 31. sect. 10. Rhem. Annot. on 1 Cor. 6.14. and 1 Tim. 6. sect. 4. and in Rev. 1.1. Papists, yea many See M ^r Ainsworth on Levit. 19.27. Jew Doctors, and some Taledo can. 5.40. Laodec. c. 38. Brac. can. 32. and 73. Councels have thus conclu­ded, and the Deor. pa. 2. caus. 26. quaest. 27. c. 13. &c. 14. Cannon Law speaks so too.

Thus much for the first particular, that Tythes ought not to be paid, as being in it selfe superstitious: The next is not to be paid to an unlawfull and Antichristian Ministry, as is this nationall ministery, essentially derived from the Sea of Rome. Our Reasons are,

1. Because this is little better then to rebel against Christ, and to seek what in us lies, to uphold that thing which the [Page 19]Lord will cast downe, and utterly destroy.

2. It manifesteth the great want of that zeale, and love of God which all Christians should have, specially here the Higher powers, as to disown and abrogate all Decrees of Popes, and Popish Counsels, which have been confirmed by idola­trous Princes for the payment of Tythes to an unlawfull Clergy.

3. To pay Tythes to this Nationall Ministry, is to serve Antichrist, according to that saying, His servants yee are, whom yee doe obey.

4. To doe this, it is to condemn the Generation of the righteous, who have suffered under Popery and Prelacy, for refusing to pay Tythes to the ministers of Antichrist, and to destroy what the others built.

5. So long as Tythes are payable by Law to this mini­stry, it grieves the hearts of the righteous, and gives just cause of offence to the Churches of the Saints: Now wo un­to that man by whom the offence cometh.

6. The continuance of Tythes will be an occasion to har­den the Nationall ministry in their error and sin, as to think their unsanctified places are lawfull and good, because the Law allowes them maintenance. And indeed they have little else to say for themselves, their calling being so contrary to the order and way of the Gospel.

7. This paying of Tythes strengthens every where the ig­norant people, in their superstition and blindnesse, and is a means to hinder them from the light and knowledge of a Gospel-minister. For how can they otherwise but believe that their Parish Priest is sent of God, and Tythes due to him: so long as by the Law of the Land, his ministry is onely owned and justified. And he shall say, Cast yee up, cast yee up, prepare the way, take up the stumbling-block out of the way of my people, Isaiah 57.14.

Before I end this point, I shall answer two Objections (and I know no more of weight) which are usually brought a­gainst the taking away of Tythes. 1. That it is injurious. 2. Irreligious. First, Injurious to alter or abolish them, seeing the Law of the land hath vested and setled them in persons Ecclesiasticall, and so are their right and possession. We might send these plead­ers [Page 20]for Tythes, to what hath been said before as a full and sufficient Answer to this Objection: Notwithstanding we shall further add.

1. This is no more then what the Bishops, Deans, Prebends, &c. and before them, Monks and Fryers might have said: and upon as faire pretence, ground, and reason: so that in taking away their Tythes, if no injury was done them, then none here, the case being clearly one and the same.

2. Acts of Parliament are Acts of men, not Oracles from Heaven. A Parliament (as well as a Councel) may be led by wrong principles, and so err, and make Lawes and Acts that are unjust: We doe not think (though Tythe-takers would be glad if it might be so) that Acts of Parliaments are like the Lawes of the Medes and Persians, that never alter. But the same power that made such an Act, can repeal it againe: yea, and is bound so to doe, if it stand not with the rule of justice and equity, contained in the morall Law of God and nature, or sound natural reason. And this is the case here, viz. that those Acts and grants confirming Tythes to Priests, were not agreeable to the moral Law of God, nor to the Law of nature, or sound naturall reason, not according to the rules of equity, and justice, but devised by Satan and Antichrist, to support their Kingdome, and carry on their interest, a­gainst the Lord Jesus Christ.

3. The taking away of Tythes is so far from doing inju­ry, as that it will ease the people (specially the Husband­man) from one of the forest burdens, and greatest opres­sion and Tyranny that lies upon them: This by other hands is already manifested, and abundantly proved, and therefore I shall let it passe, and the rather, because my purpose is, to prove the unlawfulnesse of paying Tythes to the Nationall Ministers, upon another ground.

For the other Objection, How irreligious a thing it will be to abolish Tythes, which are the Ministers maintenance, their lively­hood and subsistance, and to leave them destitute of all provision, o­ther then what their new Congregations shall voluntarily bestow up­on them.

Answ. 1. It is worth the noting, how handsomely they beg the Question.

[Page 21] 1. That they are the Ministers of Christ (for so I think they would be understood.

2. That the Ministers maintenance is to be by Tythes, thus, Fallacia alia aliam trahit, one falshood or suttlety bringeth in another. But this is too much to grant all at once. As all the reason Laban could render Jacob, in cozening him with the elder Sister for the younger, was but pleading the cu­stome of the Countrey, Gen. 29.26. So it is now with our sticklers for Tyth, Jus divinum, is laid aside, its antiquity and custome that they flye unto: But this plea, I believe, will be too weak to deceive our State thereby.

But 2. Why must it be irreligious to take away Tythes? Are Tythes the props and foundation of Religion? Wee know before the Priests had Tythes, Religion did flourish, and doe believe when they are abolished, the truth shall pros­per more then now it doth.

3. I doe not yet see by any thing they can say, that it is irreligious to abolish Tythes and the Priests too. Indeed when Hezechiah had put down the high places, and the Priests of Baal, he was charged by Rabsaketh with irriligion and sacriledge; as if he had committed a grievous crime; but the Scripture commends him greatly for it; so possibly it may be, that the Parliament in abolishing tythes, and dis-owning the Natio­nal Ministerie, shall be cryed out against, as irreligious men, and Enemies to the Church, but the Lord will commend their zeale and love them for it.

But I may not here omit the example which is brought to prove the abolishing of tythes to be an irreligious thing: I shall deliver it in their own words. These sort of people ne­ver red nor heard of the historie of those two great persecutors of the Church of Christ in the primitive times, the one under Diocletian the Emperour, the other under Julian the Apostata. This Diocle­tian intending to root out and utterly to extirpate Christianitie, murdered all the professors and Preachers of the word of God; but the historie tels us, that the more he killed, the more did Christian Religion increase and flourish: For the bloud of the Martyrs proved to be the seed of the Church. But though this persecution was bar­barous and horrid, yet that which followed did more mischiefe: for Julian intending the same thing tooke another course. For he laid [Page 22]violent hands upon the Revenues of the Church, robbed and spoyled the spirituall persons of all they had to live upon, and this proved more destructive to Religion and Christianitie then the other. For in short time, insued great ignorance of the true worship and service of God, and consequently a great decay of Christian profession.

Trallianus reports of a woman who continually kept her hand shut, least the world (which in her opinion was be­tween her fingers) might escape her, by opening the same. It is no marvaile that tythes are held so fast; they would perswade us, that all Religion is folded up in them, but this is no other then a melancholy conceit, like Oromazes enchan­ted egg, which had (as he boasted) inclosed in it all the happinesse of the world, but being broken, there was found in it nothing but wind.

But to answer: 1. That such great ignorance should fol­low upon the taking away of the Revenues of the Church, it may easily appeare what kinde of men these spirituall per­sons were in that time: some Pluralists, Non-Residents, Par­sons and Vicars gotten into great livings, such as served not the Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly: For had they been such Pastors and Teachers as were before in the Primi­tive Church, they would have continued teaching and in­structing the people, though for their livelihood they had wrought with their own hands.

But 2. we have not onely read and heard of the history of Julian, but of Constantine too, and doe perceive that either these men are not well vers'd in the history of the Church, or they are like the unjust Steward, in giving us but fiftie for the hundred. Therefore to undeceive the ignorant, I shall set down what is truth concerning the Revenues of the Church, as we have received it by tradition.

When Censtantine first began to endow the Church with a set maintenance of lands and possessions, a voyce was heard from heaven, saying; Hodie venenum Ecclesiae est immissum, that is, this day is poyson powred into the Church. And indeed it was just so: For thereupon most of the primitive Instituti­ons, Orders, and Customes were broken; and men began to run mad in ignorant devotion; and thinking that true pie­tie stood in workes of that nature, made themselves slaves to [Page 23]the Priests (then called the Church) by giving away not onely their Lands, but their goods and labour under the name of tythes: And then men of evill and corrupt mindes entred into the Ministerie, that were not fitted nor qualified with gifts and graces for that calling; nor ever minded the glory of God, nor the good of the people, but looked at their own self-ends, to make themselves great among the people, and to live in pomp and ease upon the labours of the poore people.

Thus you have in short what was the effect in endowing the Church with a set maintenance of lands and possessions: viz. idlenesse, pride, riot, covetousnesse, &c. in the Priests, and ignorance and grosse superstition in the people.

It is true, Julian afterward, tooke away some lands and possessions from the Clergie: But I deny that it tended to the hinderance of the Gospel, or power of godlinesse: it rather occasioned such as were sincere and upright to doe the more good in a private way. Some by this meanes were pluckt down from their pomp, pride, excesse, and their beastly lies and vanities not so publickly practised, as before. But wherein did the truth suffer for this? What! Because the just hand of God was upon the covetous and ambitious Priests. Besides, if there ensued great ignorance of the true worship and ser­vice of God, upon this action of Julian. It was not so much occasioned by Julian, as through the idlenesse and basenesse of the Priests, that would not teach the people, unlesse they had great and large revenues.

But I wonder how any man, unlesse a Prelate, would men­tion this of Julian? considering it was the revenues of Arch­bishops, and Bishops, &c. which he tooke away: nothing from the Parish Priest: for as yet there was no set maintenance for him, nor such a humane creature in the world. But why is this story of Julian so often repeated in their Pamphlets? It must be for one of these two Reasons: either to render the Parliament irreligious and contemptible to the world, if they take tythes away; or else that they cannot take care for Religion and Christianitie, unlesse they support a carnall Ministerie by tythes. For the plea which they make of the Pa­trons Interest in the Donation of Parsonages and Vicarages; The [Page 24]thing is so unjust, as the Non-conformists in their writings against the Bishops, usually cald them, Latrons, Theeves: and professe their places to be unlawfull and wicked, and give many Reasons for it. If some one in a Parish had entailed to him, and to his heires for ever, the power of appointing husbands and wives to all the people therein, the slaverie were unsufferable, although in a matter of a Civil nature. But how much more then unsufferably great is their sinne, which loose a spirituall freedome, and greater those Patrons which keepe it, and greatest such Time-servers, who labour what they can, to maintain so corrupt and vile a thing.

I come now to the last General head, which is, that the Gospel may have a free passage amongst us, and all such men libertie, publickly & every where to preach the same, whom the Lord hath fitted & enabled for that work (though not in office) and all restraints and prohibitions to the contrary (both former and later) removed and taken away. Our Reasons are.

1. That none should preach unlesse ordain'd: this (as the Nationall Ministerie and Tythes) came likewise from the sea of Rome: For Gregorie 9. in the yeare 1227. made a Decree that no lay man should preach. Here began the abomination that ma­keth desolate: Now the occasion was, to suppresse the truth, which at that time began most gloriously to breake forth by the Waldenses; so that no higher can they bring this prac­tise, then to the yeare 1227. Neither have they any other Author to father and fasten it on, then Satan and Antichrist: For howsoever before this time many fowl abuses and cor­ruptions were crept into the Church; yet, it was so many yeares after Christ, before this Decree of the Pope came forth, viz. That no lay man should preach. But how sinfull and unlaw­full that Decree of the Pope was, will appeare by this Posi­tion or Conclusion which I shall here lay down, and prove; namely;

That faithfull men, able to speak to edification, exhortation, and comfort, though not Ministers, or in any office, may open and apply the holy Scriptures, to the profit and benefit of others. Or thus: Preaching of the Gospel whether in publick, or private, is not tied to any office, function, calling, ministerie, but those out of office, have [Page 25]right, power, libertie, to make knowne the truths of the Gospel, wheresoever they are, or come.

1. This was a practice both allowed, and observed in the Jewish Church. For howsoever Christ and his Apostles were more then private men, viz. extraordinarily cald of God: yet were they not by the Jewes, acknowledged as Prophets and Apostles, or men in office, either ordinarie or extraor­dinarie, but as gifted men, and able to teach; so they were permitted according to the laudable custome of the Church, Luk. 2.46, 47. & 4.17, 18. Act. 4.4. Act. 13, 14, 15, 15. And there remaines among the Jewes the foot steps of this practise to this day: as I have often seen in their Synagogues.

2. Whether the Primitive Churches took up this practise as from the Jewes, I shall not determine: But that the bre­thren not in office, might publickly preach, it cannot be de­nyed: You may all prophesie one by one, saith the Apostle, 1 Cor. 14.31. That he speakes not of any Church Officer or Minister, the words, vers. 34. make it cleare. Let your women keepe silence in the Churches, for it is not permitted unto them to speake. This is brought in, to answer an objection; as thus: If all may speake in the Churches, then women likewise No, saith the Apostle, it is not allowed them, for severall Reasons. Besides, if none might speake to the edification of the Church, but Ministers, then the Apostles words (forbid­ding women to speake) would be vaine and absurd: For what use was there that he should mention a restraint or prohibi­tion of women: if none might speake, no not men, unlesse Pastors or Teachers.

3. As this was practised both in the Jewish and Christian Church, so we finde it a dutie prest upon the people of God, and earnestly cald upon, not to quench the Spirit. But as every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good Stewards of the manifold grace of God, 1 Pet 4.11. Againe, Having then gifts, differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophesie, let us prophesie according to the proportion of faith. Or ministerie, let us wait on our ministering, or he that teacheth on teaching, or he that Exhorteth on Exhortati­on, &c. Rom. 12.6, 7, 8. He that well observes the words here, may plainly see, how the Apostle distinctly sets downe [Page 26] the Exercise of prophesie, from what is to be don ministerially, and by the officers of the Church.

4. If men out of office may not open and apply the holy Scriptures; observe what absurdities would follow.

1. In case the Church have no Minister, (as it may often fall out by sicknesse, persecution, &c. then she must want Teaching: and so, Vision ceasing, the people perish, Pro. 27.9.

2. Multitudes in darknesse and the shadow of death are hereby left to perish in their bloud and sinne: For to deny preaching to them by men out of offices, is to leave them without the arme of God, for their conversion, gathering, and bringing in to the Lord Jesus.

3. Should there be no preaching till there are Ministers, then necessarily after the General Apostacie of Antichrist, there could never be raysed up either Churches or Officers. For it is so absurd and ridiculous, to imagine Officers be­fore Churches: and therefore we well know, by the preach­ing of men out of office, people were first called out from Babylon, and being seperated from the world, they covenan­ted together to walke in the faith and order of the Gospel, and they become the true Churches of Christ, electing and ordaining afterward their own Ministers, according to the Apostolicall Institution.

5. The benefits are great and pretious, which not onely Saints, but sinners too, may receive, by the private and pub­lique teaching of men out of office. For 1. what doth more speake out the glory of Christ in his Saints, then to see the gifts and graces which he hath bestowed upon them, shining forth to the refreshing and comfort of others. The light of the Sun if it should be restrained to some particular place or Country, would not have the praise which now it hath for so excellent and glorious a creature. So to restraine the gifts of the Spirit to particulars (as to shine forth from none but Ministers) it is to eclipse the honour of Jesus Christ ex­ceedingly. 2. If this be more practised, truth will more in­crease, errour and superstition dayly be discovered and con­vinced, and the glorious Scepter of Jesus Christ more lifted up and advanced. I know it is objected that this libertie; for which I plead, opens a doore to heresies, blasphemie, A­theisme, [Page 27]and what not. And some have with such swelling words formerly so prevailed with the Magistrate as to con­firme and keepe up Pope Gregories Decree, to wit, that no lay man should Preach.

But to answer this Objection in briefe: 1. I doe affirme, and will abide by it, since it pleased the Lord to draw out the hearts of some Souldiers, and others, publickly to preach (which is not above 10 or 12 yeares) the people of this Common-wealth have had more true light and glorious discoveries, of Christ and his kingdome, then all the Nati­ons Ministers ever before made known to them, since first they tooke their calling from the sea of Rome, to this day.

2. As Nero dealt with the Christians, who hurled them to dogs to be devoured: and when he saw the Mastives would not touch them, he clad the Christians in Beare-skins to kindle the furie of the dogs, that they might take them to be beasts, and not men. So hath the Clergie every where dealt with the Truth, that the Magistrate might suspend and stop the passage of it, and people be discouraged from em­bracing the same. They hence rendred it odious to the world, Clad it with Beares-skins, as naming its errour, heresie, blasphemie, &c. And no marvaile though they have prospe­red in such a designe; For as children what you give into their hand, they put it into their mouth; so ignorant and simple people will believe what the Priests tell them, be it never so false, improbable, impossible. And here lies the Master-piece, of the Scotch Ministers, in aspersing the godly of this Nation (as to be Separatists, Brownists, Anabaptists, Anti­nomians, &c. Hence they keepe up their idle Traditions, and formalities, and occasion that people to be disaffected to the puritie of Gods ordinances, and the power of Godlinesse.

But 3. Why should not Ministers be suspended from preaching as wel as those that are not in office, if it be to pre­vent the publishing of Errour: For the greatest heresies and blasphemies which have been in the world, have been broa­ched by them, whereas lay men (as they call them) at the same time have been found in the faith, and zealously earnest against such abominable doctrines. As I could give many ex­amples both ancient and modern.

Object: If Ministers deliver any unsound Doctrines, there is a course to be taken with them, by conviction, suspension, or otherwise.

Answ. The like may be done if private men be exorbi­tant and offensive, and no question but the State will doe so, when there is just cause for it.

Object: But to give way that all shall preach who are able and willing, will bring Ministers into some contempt, and their labours the lesse regarded and rewarded.

Answ. 1. One Reason of the Papists, which they give, why the Priests at Masse are to have the Wine alone, it is to put a distinction between them and the people, and to keep them at distance. My mind gives me, there are some would have none but Ministers to teach the people, thereby to keepe up their own reputation, as being loth to come into an one­nesse and likenesse with their Brethren.

2. There is a spirituall Monopolie as what is civil, and this much worse, and more hurtfull then the other: Now to en­grosse (as it were) the whole trade of preaching into the hands of the Clergie, its a Monopolie superlative, & therefore the State (as I conceive) is bound to see it supprest, as they have don in the case of other Monopolies of far lesse concernment. This being the Popes Monopolie, as the other from the King.

I shall now draw to a conclusion, I see there is at this time much adoe about Tythes, and great thoughts of heart some have for the maintenance of Ministers: I could wish (in the middest of these things) that something were consi­dered, and effectually done for the encouragement and ena­bling of such as are willing to give themselves freely to the work of the Lord, to spend & to be spent. And for their live­lyhood, to live by faith in the promises of the Gospel. That the State would set open the publick doores which the Parish Priests shut against them, and disclaim Pope Gregories Decrees. Whilest the former Parliament stood, we thought it not strange to see a company of precious Christians constrained to be in private houses, and there to worship God in spirit and truth: Whilest the Parish Priests, and unhallowed mul­titudes, had the publick places to doe their will-worship in. But now seeing we have better men (as we have hope) so [Page 29]we expect better things: namely, that these publick places (which are the States) may be otherwise and better dispo­sed. It is not the place we affect, for if they were razed to the ground it would be well. But considering at present, they are the places where the people of the Nation resort to, we desire they may be left open to such as will freely declare the mysteries of the Gospel to the people, and left no longer to a company of Hirelings, who as they use the place, in ma­ny places, it's a Den of Thieves, and Cage of unclean Birds, then the gathering together of Saints, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.