SInce the finishing of my lately pub­lish'd Innocency and Truth tri­umphing to­gether. Discourse, my Antagonist having (as it seems by his own expression My no­cturnall lucu­brations, bor­rowed from the houres al­lotted to my necessary na­turall rest, &c. Epist. Dedic.) sacrificed the necessary naturall rest of his body, upon the service of the un-necessary and violent restles­nesse of his spirit, hath thereby gotten the op­portunitie of doing very good service to the way of Independencie (so called) by sending forth a Discourse into the world, intituled Truth triumphing over Falshood; i. (by the figure Hypallage) Falshood triumphing over Truth: For whereas the weight of his credit and reputation before lay somewhat heavy upon the shoulder of Independencie, and oppressed it; by the unchristian ex­travagancie and impertinencie of this Discourse, he hath so farre eas'd and reduced the burthensomnesse of it, that it may now be endured and borne without much detriment or disadvantage. And doubtlesse, Divine providence was above him in drawing this acknowledgement and confession from him, that these Collections or Lucubrations of his are distracted Epist. Ded. Propè finem. and impotent Epist. to the Reader. Propè finem.: Distracted they are in point of argument or reason; Impotent, in point of heat, height, and passion. Or did we wave his own confession of the di­stractednesse of them, his expectation of such preferment for them as the satisfaction of the learned Epist. to the Reader. Versus finem., yea, and conviction of all the world Pag. 110. Versus finem., were a demonstration, and that à priori, of such a [...], or affection cleaving to them. For can any man, with any consi­stency of Reason, expect or think, that learned men, who have risen early, and gone to bed late, bestowed much time and paines to inquire [Page 2] out the truth and certainty of what they hold and professe, should yet be so desultorie and light in their judgements, as by a few in­digested, nocturnall Epist. De­lic. non longè à fine., subitane Ibid. & p. 1., impotent Epist. to the Reader. collections and lucu­brations to be turned out of their way; especially when the Colle­ctor makes no more conscience of speaking truth in matters of fact and of the most obvious and easie cognizance, then Mr. Prynne in many passages doth in these his lucubrations? Doth he think that the elaborate and long-studied notions and apprehensions of lear­ned men, are of no better use or worth, then onely to adorn the tro­phies and triumphs of his extemporanie pen? If he expected such obsequiousnesse of Faith from the judgements of learned men to his subitane and indigested collections, in matters of more difficultie and weight, his method had been to have laid the foundation of such credence, by speaking Truth in those things, which are every mans inquirie and cognizance, and wherein the miscarriage of his pen is obvious unto all. For he that hath not so much policie as in par­vis sibi fidem praestruere, will never get an opportunitie magnâ mer­cede fallendi. And he that will not deale honestly in the light, who will trust in the dark?

I shall not (for the present) insist upon the refutation of those twelve imputations in his Epistle to the Reader, Sect. 2. wherewith he la­bours to render the Independents odious; all and every of which, (except the fift) are every whit as appliable (as I am able to de­monstrate in the sight of the Sunne) to his partie, as to the Inde­pendents, and some of them with farre more truth to the former, then to the latter. And for that inference which he deduceth from the fift particular there charged upon the Independents (which is the sting of the charge) as viz. that denying there is any Nationall Church under the New Testament, they must of necessitie deny one Article of their Creede, That there is a Catholique Church; This Collection (I say) is so impotent and undigested, that he that runs may reade Non sequitur written in the face of it.

Nor secondly, do I intend to unbinde or meddle with that far­rago, that bundle of blind learning; I mean, those transcriptions and quotations, fetch'd many (if not most) of them, out of the darkest times of Popery, (as himself somewhere doth little lesse then confesse) Pag. 106. which are the bulkie and unweildie part of his dis­course: For, What communion hath light with darknesse? old ob­solete, [Page 3] exolete Records, fetch'd out of the darkest times of Popery, are no Vrim and Thummim, no Oracles to be consulted about the mind of Jesus Christ; no competent Judges or Interpreters of the Lawes and Statutes of Heaven. The saying of Cyprian is seasonable upon this occasion: This is not to be esteemed true Antiquity to understand, quid hic out ille ante nos fecerit, aut docuerit, sed quid is qui ante omnes est Christus, &c. i. what this or that man did or taught before us, but what hee did and taught who was before all, even Christ himselfe, who only is the way, the Truth, and the life, from whose precepts we ought not to digresse Cyprian ad Caecil. lib. 2. Ep. 3.. And besides, if M ^r Prynnes hand was no steadier, in transcribing these old matters, then it hath been in some things of later date concerning me, his Antiquity it self may have cause enough to complain of being perverted into noveltie.

Nor thirdly, shall I thrust my sickle into my brother Burtons harvest; but leave the latter part of the Discourse unto him, ei­ther to neglect, or answer, as God shall direct him.

But fourthly, (and lastly) I shall briefly acquaint the Reader, how unworthily my Antagonist hath dealt by me, (that I say not by himself, and his own Reputation) first, by assertion of untruths; secondly, by cruell and unreasonable wrestings and torturing of my words, to make them speak what they never meant; thirdly, (and lastly) by slight and empty replies to things asserted and laid down by me.

For the first, Sect. 3. he cites my two Sermons (intituled Theomachia) and my Innocencies Triumph, as denying ( hee means disswading) all opposition in word, deed, or thought against the Way of Independency, as a direct fighting against God Epist. Ded. p 3. paulò ab initio.; which is a most notorious untruth; all that I drive at in these Discourses, is to disswade men from op­posing this Way with an high hand, lest in so doing, men should fight against God: there is no such assertion as this which M ^r Pryn chargeth upon me, nor any neer it, or like unto it, in either of those Tracts. I no where affirm, all opposition to this Way, whether in word, deed, or thought, to be a direct fighting against God. Nay, p. 12. of my Theomachia, I affirm the quite contrary, viz. that it is not every degree or kinde of opposing a Way or Doctrine which is from God, which either the Text or the Doctrine calleth a fighting against God; but only such an opposing which is peremptory, and carried on with an high hand, &c.

2. He cites my Sermon, Sect. 4. preached Febr. 25. 1643. My Theomachia and Innocencies Triumph, as holding forth this Position, That every particular Congregation of visible Saints, and Independent Church, is under the Government of Christ alone, as the ONLY Head, King, Governour, Law-giver of it; and subject to NO OTHER JU­RISDICTION, then that of Christ, his Word and Spirit, &c. Ibidem. Which conclusion, though generally held and maintained by Protestants against Papists; and in that respect I need neither be afraid, nor ashamed to own it; yet if hee can find, or make out with any tolerable construction of words and saying, of any, or all of those pieces of mine which he chargeth with it, let Mr Pryn be true, and me the lier. But if otherwise, currat lex, &c.

3. He chargeth me with affirming (in the fore-mentioned Ser­mon) that it would be more easie for me, Sect. 5. and I should rather yeeld to be torn in pieces by wild horses, then submit to such a Government which proceeded from a Parliament chosen by the Riffe-raffe of the world, Ibidem. &c. Never was there an innocent and harmlesse expression more cruel­ly and despitefully handled, since the world was first haunted with a spirit of unrighteousnesse and untruth. The passage of mine, represented by M ^r Prynne, as you have heard, was only this (I shall go as neer the very words as my best memory will lead mee; but the effect and substance of the saying I perfectly remember) It were as easie for mee to be torn in pieces by wild horses, as to submit to any Church-government whatsoever, which is not agreeable to the Scriptures, and minde of Christ. But to deny subjection unto a Government which should proceed from a Parliament, because chosen by the Riffe-raffe of the world (which terms I mean the Riffe-raffe of the world, are sup­positious too, and none of mine) was so far from my thoughts in that Sermon, that I expresly declared, and said (as severall of those that were examined about the Sermon before the Com­mittee, there testified, and I nothing doubt, but to this day, do per­fectly remember the saying) that as a Church-government was not therefore to be received or submitted unto, because it is injoyn'd by men; so neither is it therefore to be rejected, because it is commanded by men.

4. He cites the fore-mentioned Sermons (called Theomachia) as holding forth this assertion, Sect. 6. p. 48, 49, 50. that perchance all, or the greatest part of the Parliament and Assembly are not indued with the sanctifying Spirit of God, Pag. 156. &c. If there be so much as the least hint [Page 5] or insinuation of any such matter in any, in all of those pages, I shall mistrust either my eyes, or my sensus communis for ever. But if it be otherwise, M ^r. Prynnes tongue and pen (as well they deserve) are like to beare the burthen of this my diffidence.

5. Hee cites the prementioned, Theomachia, with my two books since, for crying up the Independent Way, as the very Government, Disci­pline, Kingdome and Ordinance and Christ himself, Pag. 134. &c. whereas,

First, since the coming out of my Theomachia, I had put forth on­ly one book (and that a very small one too, and which the violent and mercilesse proceedings of himself against mee, extorted from me,) when this was affirmed and printed by him.

And secondly, there is no such cry, as that w ^ch his fancie is trou­bled with, to be heard throughout either the one of those books, or the other. So that here is a double notorious untruth in this quo­tation: 1. that I had set forth two books, since my Theomachia: 2. that in these two, as also in my Theomachia, I cryed up the Independent Way, as the very Government, Discipline, Kingdome and Ordinance of Christ.

6. Whereas hee avers, Sect. 7. that pending the complaint against me be­fore the Committee for plundered Ministers, for some Antiparliamentary passages (so called by him) with other particulars, I justified the said passages again very unseasonably in the Pulpit on a solemn first day, and likewise in two printed books, to the one whereof I prefixed my name Pag. 106.; the truth is, first, that (if my memory serves me not as ill as Mr. Prynnes confidence serveth him) I never justified, nor medled with those pas­sages he speaks of in the Pulpit, either on any solemn fast day, or any other, within that compasse he speaks of: nor secondly, had I ju­stified them in two books, when M ^r. Pryns pen avouched it, though by this time it may be interpreted that I have; nor thirdly, have I put forth any book since, to which I have not prefixed my name; or at least suffixed it to an Epistle, if not at large, yet by the initiall letters of it. Therefore if M ^r. Pryn implies, that I have published any book within the time hee speaks of, which I do not publikely own, he is implicated with a further untruth in such his implication.

7. Whereas he affirms (with no want of confidence) that hee hath elsewhere answered, and fully refuted Pag. 106. the passagers aforesaid; what truth there is in this affirmation, let my last Discourse Innocency and Truth tri­umphing to­gether. testifie. He hath answered those passages of mine he speaks of, much in such a sense, and after such a manner, as M ^r. Walker and M ^r. Ro­burrough, [Page 6] have answered my Socinian errors: which Answers hee adviseth his Reader to see ( p. 109. in the margent) but tells him not where they are to be seen.

8. Whereas he chargeth me in my Innocencies Triumph (quarrel­ling with the very title, Sect. 8. as if it were unfit, and he unwilling that Innocency should triumph) with denying those very matters of fact which I voluntarily confessed in his hearing before the Committee Pag. 107. paulo ante me­dium., for which I was sequestred; the truth is, that there is no truth at all in this his allegation or charge. For, first, I am certain, that Jesus Christ was present at the Committee, as well as M ^r. Prynne; and certain I am that in his hearing (which is every whit as good as M ^r. Pryns) I confessed nothing there, which is denyed by me in my Innocencies Triumph. I neither confessed that I neglected my parishioners, nor that I seldome preached unto them, nor that I prescribe a Covenant to my In­dependent Congregation, with in stead of my parishioners I have gathered to my self, before they be admitted; nor that I receive tithes of my pa­rishioners in any other way, or after any other manner, then as I declare and expresse in my said book. If I had confessed any of these things, either before the Committee, or any others, I had been of M ^r. Prynnes confederacie against mine own innocencie, and the truth. But what I did confesse before the Committee, I confesse as plainly in my Innocencies Triumph; as viz. first, that I had refused to baptize some children of my parishioners Innocencies Triumph. p. 18. 19.. Secondly, that I had not administred the Sacrament to my Parish for some moneths Ibidem.. Again, secondly, where­as he saith that I was sequestred Ibidem. by the Committee, for the mat­ters before mentioned, and denyed by mee in my Innocencies Triumph, in this hee asperseth the honourable Committee every whit as much (if not more) then mee. For (doubtlesse) it no way stands with their honour to sequester a man for that which was never done by him. Nor thirdly, do I know whether I may take Mr. Prynnes word (it is now grown so unstable) that I am suspended, censured, or sequestred by the Committee, either for the one thing, or the other; and besides, a friend of mine, inquiring of some that are Members of the said Committee concerning that suspension or se­questration which Mr. Prynne speaks of, received this answer from them, that they knew no such thing. I suppose it is not ordinary, that a sentence or censure should passe in a Court of Justice against any man, and hee not to have any knowledge of it for severall [Page 7] moneths together: but if it be so, Gods will, and Mr. Prynnes wish, ( Fiat Justitia) in Mr. Prynnes sense, are fulfilled together.

9. He is not ashamed to avouch, Sect. 9. that I publish my brain-sick jea­lousies and suspicions of the Parliament behind their backs in open Pul­pit, and then to the whole world in print (a strange misdemeanor in­deed, and more monstrous and incredible, then ever committed by the VERY Pope or Turk himself, or the great Antichrist, or the Arch-Prelate, or Oxford Aulicus, or the most venemous Malignant, that a man should doe that behind mens back, which he doth in print to the whole world) of purpose to make my Auditors, Readers, jealous of them, as men who invaded the very incommunicable royalties and privi­ledges of Heaven Pag. 108. Circà medium.: Whereas the God of Heaven, who knows my purpose and intent in those passages (as in all my actions besides) much better then Mr. Prynne knows the contrary; and that my purpose therein was singly and simply, and with all faithfulnesse, as becomes a Minister of Jesus Christ, to caution those worthy per­sons of honor and trust, against that snare of sinning against God, into which great places of power and interest in the world are apt to lead men before they are aware.

10. He chargeth my late Sermons and Pamphlets to have kindled such unhappie flames of contention in our Church and State, Sect. 10. as all the teares of Repentance which I may shed, will not be sufficient to quench. For my part I know of no such, I heare of no such, I know no cause why I should imagine that any such unhappie flames as he speaks of, should be kindled by any of my Sermons or writings. I have much more reason to conceive and think, that Mr. Prynnes writings charge mine with kindling flames of contention, much af­ter the same manner, and upon the same terms, that one charged Eliah with being the troubler of Israel 1 King. 18. 17.: and that mine may re­charge his, as the Prophet did that King 1 King. 18. 18..

11. Whereas he further chargeth me, Sect. 11. that in my Innocencies Triumph, I slander the Parliament more then before, and shew my self a man despising Government (at least any Church-Government the Parlia­ment shall establish not sutable to my fancy) self-willed, and even speaking evill of Dignities, &c. Pag. 110. Circà medium.; The truth is, that there is far more slander in the charge, then in the crime: the best is, that that book is open before the world, to see and judge whether therebe, I doe not say any aspersion of slander, but so much as the least touch or tincture [Page 8] of any thing dishonourable to the Parliament, or to any Govern­ment or Dignitie whatsoever, because not sutable to my fancie.

12. Whereas he insinuates a guilt upon me of Socinian errors Pag. 109. Paulò post ini­ [...]., Sect. 12. and in his margent invites his Reader to see Mr. Walkers and Mr. Roburroughs answers to them; the truth is, that in the Answers he speaks of, his Reader may see and finde mistakes of my opinion, and confutations of those mistakes, as substantially managed as want of apprehension of my thoughts, and somewhat else, was able to manage such an enterprize: but for any Socinian errors of mine, they are onely to be seene in such books as were never written: and then where the Answers to them are to be seene, remaines yet as matter of further inquirie for Mr. Prynne.

For the second head propounded, Sect. 13. the unreasonable wresting, torturing, and tormenting of my words, I shall chiefly insist upon his paraphrase upon that passage, recited (in part) by him, p. 107. ( but mis-cited in the margent, as touching the page, where it stands in my book). The tenor of the Passage in this; If I have denyed the least dram or scruple of that power which is truly Parliamentary, and consistent with the word of the great and glorious God (of which misde­meanor I am not in the least measure conscious unto my self as yet) I most seriously and solemnly professe in the presence of this God (my conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost that I lie not) that I did it out of a loving, tender and affectionate jealousie over the Parliament, lest possibly they might dash their foote against that stone, by which all Rule and all Authoritie and power will one day be broken in pieces. So that if either my tongue or pen have in the least miscarried, it was, Error amoris, not amor erroris, &c. You have heard the text: and if you have any mind to see darknesse brought out of light, hearken to the In­terpretation.

But good Sir (saith this Intepreter, one, I may say of twentie thousand) can any rationall man think (though you should protest it ten thousand times over) that such Anti-Parliamentary passages as yours are, should proceed from your love to the Parliament? Suppose the passages he speaks of were Anti-Parliaentary (an aspersion I conceive fully at­toned in the foregoing discourse) yet is it so highly irrationall to conceive they should proceed from love to the Parliament, (especially upon ten thousand Affidavits made for it) that it must be made matter of a doubtfull disputation, whether it be possible for a ratio­nall [Page 9] man so to think or conceive? Did Mr. Prynne never heare of a veine of people, who did bona animo malè precaris, wish that which was hurtfull to their friends, out of good affection towards them? Seneca (I am certain) speaks of such. And God himself is said to have testified things against his people (as the former English transla­tion, and Junius out of the Originall reads the place, Gen. 32. 46.) Cannot a rationall man conceive that these things might proceed from love and good affection in God towards this people, because they were against them? I cannot but think that Mr. Prynne himself hath been Anti-Parliamentary, I meane, hath done some things, (if not many) in their natures at least, if not in their fruits and ef­fects, prejudiciall to the honour and safety of the Parliament, as (by name) in representing their cordiall Friends (as sometimes his conscience, or something else prevailes with him to call them Though for the most part really cordiall in their affe­ctions, actions to the Par­liament and Church of England (spea­king of Inde­pendents) E­pist. Dedic. Circa initium.) unto them as dis-affected unto them, and as acting, and that succes­sively against their jurisdiction more desperately then the worst Malig­nant, Royalist, Cavalier, on the Arch-Prelate himself Pag. 107. Circa finem.). Doubtlesse, such a practise as this, is in the nature and tendency of it very dis­serviceable to the Parliament; as making sad (and so indisposing) the hearts of those, whose inclinations otherwise stand ready bent with all chearfulness, to serve the Parliament with all their strength and all their power, as (blessed be God) they are resolved to doe; after the example of Christ, who continued still to cast out Devils, though represented by the Pharisees unto the people, as dealing by Beelzebub the Prince of the Devils, in casting them out. Compare Mat. 9. 34. with Mat. 12. 22. &c. So againe by representing unto them as peaceable, innocent and harmlesse a generation of men, as the land beares any, yea, persons as deeply and dearly devoted un­to, of as high and honourable endeavours to promote the publick peace both of Church and State, as those that are extremely deroga­tory and destructive unto both, yea, and great disturbers of our Peace and unitie Epist. Dedic. Paulo post ini­tium. Yet againe when he infuseth such notions and principles into Kings, Magistrates, highest civill powers, as this, that Christ hath delegated his Kingly power unto them, &c. Full Reply. p. 7. Circà ini­tium.. he spreads snares of death in their way, and tempts them to think higher thoughts of them­selves then He that is higher then the highest of them will beare. Now however in these and severall other things of like considera­tion (which are ready too for instance) I absolutely conceive him [Page 10] to be very whit (yea, and much more) Anti-Parliamentarie, then ever I have been in any passages whatsoever, whether from my tongue or pen; yet doe I not think but that I may very lawfully, and without trespassing upon the reputation of my reason, conceive and think, that he did both the one and the other of the things mentioned, out of love to the Parliament.

Secondly, Sect. 14. The honey of the foresaid passage, by reason of an ill digestion in his stomach, breeds this cholerick argumentation: If this proceeded from such affectionate jealousie over the Parliament, I pray what made you so strangely, if not malignantly, jealous over them, as to feare and presume they might dash their foote against that stone, which, &c. Good Sir, let me seriously intreat you to be more jea­lous over your pen for the time to come, and see to it, that in re­peating and arguing mens words and sayings, it deale more ho­nestly, then to adulterate and imbase them, as you doe both here and elsewhere in this discourse. Doe I any where say that either I feare, or presume the Parliament might dash their foote against the stone spoken of? Why then doe you represent me so strangely, if not malignantly, jealous over them, as to do both, both feare and presume? I confesse, I should be very strangely jealous, or (however) very strangely affected in one kinde or other, both to feare and presume in respect of one and the same thing, as you feare not, but presume to say here that I doe. You find out I know not how many signifi­cations (I beleeve more then ever any man did before you) of the word Presume, p. 109. to salve the reputation of your pen in char­ging me to have done that presumtuously, which I never did at all, or at most very ignorantly; but is there any one amongst them all, that is able to reconcile PRESVMPTION and FEARE, and make them draw together in the same yoke? But this by the way. Onely this I desire you would candidly account unto me, why you translate my expression, Lest possibly they might dash, by fearing and presuming they might dash. I beseech you deale ingenously with your self and me: is there not farre more malignancie in the interpreta­tion, then in the text? or did you not straine the roote overhard, to make such an extraction as this out of it? Nay, out of the vehe­mencie of your intention to make an unchristian advantage of your Brothers words, did you not almost forget the proprietie of your owne? I conceive I should speak much beneath the line of Mr. [Page 11] Prynnes reputation for a Scholar, if I should expresse my self thus; I feare and presume that Mr. Prynne might doe that which is very possible for any man to doe. An English care any thing well pala­ted, would find no pleasant taste in such words.

But let us give Mr. Prynne the libertie of an Interpreter or Tran­slator, who is not bound Verbum verbo reddere Nec verbum verbo curabis reddere fidus Interpres. Hor. de Art., Sect. 15. and accept of his substitues, presumption and feare; is either a feare, or a presumption (or both) that a Parliament might, or may, dash their foote against that stone I speak of, any demonstration or argument at all of so strange a jealousie as he speaks of, and which he is at a stand with himself, whether he should not call malignant? If any of the other Apostles had feared or presumed, that Peter possibly might fall (as he did) by denying his Master, (as they had reason enough to have done, in respect of that humane frailtie whereof the best men are partakers, and Peter himself was with the rest) and had dealt lo­vingly and faithfully with him to have kept him upright, by cauti­on, counsell, or advice; had this been any argument at all, or so much as a colour of any such jealousie in them, which should have carried in it any touch of malignancie towards him? When Paul feared in the behalf of the Corinthians, Lest by any means, as the Ser­pent beguiled Eve through his subtiltie, so their minds should be corrupted from the simplicitie that is in Christ 2 Cor. 11. 3.; was this so strange a jealousie over them? Indeed himself calls it a godly jealousie Ver. 2.: and in such a sense, as godlinesse is strange Isa. 8. in the world, let Mr. Prynne vote my jealousie over the Parliament, STRANGE; and then he shall be eas'd of his scruple, whether he should call it malignant, or no. But jacta alea est; and he intends not to make a stand here, but advanceth thus.

Did the Parliament ever give you the least colour or occasion of such uncharitable, Sect. 16. unchristian, that I say not detestable, jealousie? Could you have harder or more jealous thoughts then these of the very Pope or Turk himself, or of that Great Antichrist, who exalts himself above all that is called God? Can such jealousies as these issue from any, but from a ranco­rous or dis-affected heart towards the Parliament? or did ever such exe­crable jealousies as these proceed from the heart, tongue, much lesse the pen of any Oxford Aulicus, or most venomous Malignant to our Parliament? The straine of eloquence in these passages, may be thought above the line of Mr. Prynnes Rhetorique; nor can I beleeve but that he [Page 12] had some supernaturall assistance in the raising and composure of them. And therefore whereas others (it's like) will be apt to cen­sure him more for a few such lines as these, then for many others of a softer temper, and more plausible allay; I on the contrary, can better beare with him in these, and be content to passe by and spare him, as our Saviour spared Peter, when he rebuked Satan in his stead Mat. 16. 23.. But did I know that Mr. Prynne would not accept of this purgation, but when recovered out of that Tartarean Ecstasie, wherein he spake this dialect of Dragons, would still stand by and owne those ebullitions of bloud, as the naturall and genuine pro­ductions and fruit of his pen; I should hardly refraine from ta­king a solemne vow and protestation upon me in the sight of God, Angels, and men, never more to have to doe with him in word or deed, at least untill he repented, and turn'd Christian. Well might the Apostle Paul pray to be delivered from unreasonable men 2 Thes. 3. 2.: They that neither make use of their reason nor goodnesse, (or charitie) dwell in such a darkness which is inaccessible to all principles both of Nature and Grace. For the present, though I think it not meet for me so far to dis-interesse my self of my libertie to comply with such opportunities from Heaven, which may possibly and unex­pectedly come in my way, as absolutely to abjure all commerce with him by pen; yet this I professe, that I am as neere the brow of such a resolution, as ever I can goe without falling into it. From hence­forth I shall give Mr. Prynne leave to write stormes and tempests, whirlwinds and earth-quakes, thundering and lightning, mill­stones and mountains, (or if his pen knows how to utter it self in any thing more formidable then these) better cheap, then hitherto I have done: I see there is no mercy with him; and therefore I shall not feare him; no, nor in the mind I am in for the present, ever look after him in his writings more, this answer finished. But to his lines (or, whose-ever they be).

First, Sect. 17. Doth Mr. Prynne think that he is heire to that Laurell which was long since wreath'd for the head of Socrates, reputed in his dayes the Grand-Matter of wisdome in the world; ‘Tanquam umbrae velitant alii; solus sapit iste?’ Other men generally as well learned and Scholars by profession, as others, yea, even those in whose affections neither my person nor [Page 13] cause were any wayes interessed, gave testimony to my Innocencies Triumph (and consequently to that passage also so cruelly handled by Mr. Prynne) as moderately and inoffensively written: onely Mr. Prynne, as if his eyes were given him to condemne all the world besides of blindnesse, espies Bears and Tygers, Lyons and Dragons, where other men saw nothing but doves and sheep; discovers fa­natique jealousies, rancourousnesse and dis-affection of heart, execrable­nesse of jealousies, Oxfordian Aulicisme, venomousnesse of malignancie, and I know not how many other strains of most portentuous and hideous outrage against the Parliament, where no man besides him­self either saw or could see, any jot, tittle, letter, syllable, word, or sentence, but what both was and is of the fairest consistencie with the honour, dignity, peace and safety of the Parliament.

But secondly, how irrationall and weak is that demand of his; Did the Parliament ever give you the least colour or occasion of any such uncharitable, unchristian, that I say not detestable jealousie? as if to feare, or think it possible that men might be men, that is, do weak­ly or unworthily, were an uncharitable, unchristian, detestable, exe­crable jealousie over them; Or, as if there were not ground and reason enough, yea, and more then enough, in the very natures of the best and holiest of men, to judge that they may very possibly miscarry, and that dangerously, unlesse they should adde ex super­abundanti, such personall irregularities, as might further presage their future falls, I wonder what Epithet or Name Mr. Prynne will find for that jealousie of an ancient Father over Kings, out of which he uttered this saying: Miror si aliquis Rex salvahitur; I wonder that any King should ever be saved. If so be such a jealousie over them, which only conceiveth a possibility of their perishing, be un­charitable, unchristian, detestable exeorable; of what censure is that jealousie worthy of, which makes it matter of admiration that any of them should be saved? Considering that there hath scarce (if at all) been any Councel or Synod since the Apostles dayes, but which hath miscarried and heterodogmatiz'd, more or lesse; would it be my uncharitable, unchristian, detestable, execrable jealousie over any Synod or Councel now fitting, to think that they also might possibly miscarrie, unlesse they gave some particular and speciall oc­casion so to think and conceive of them?

But my Adversarie hath not yet finished his severe Commenta­ries Sect. 19. M ^r. Pryn, p. 108 [Page 14] upon his gentle and harmlesse Text; his pen moves forward thus: Had you had any just cause of such a jealousie, yet it had been your duty privately to have informed your friends in Parliament with it in a Brotherly Christian way: but to publish these your brain-sick jealousies of them behinde their backs in open Pulpit, and then to the whole world in print, of purpose to make your Auditors, Readers, jealous of them, as those who invaded the incommunicable Royalties and Priviledges of Heaven, &c. —or to defame or draw an odium or contempt upon them, and prepare the people beforehand to oppose or reject whatsoever Church-government they shall establish, &c. —is such a transcendent crime and high affront against the Parliament, as you are never able to expiate: and is so far from extenieating, that it aggravates your former offences beyond expression.

I answer, first, that howsoever by reason of my yeeres, profes­sion, and tenour of studies, it is (I confesse) a shame to me, that I should not be as able to teach M ^r. Prynne his duty, as (it seems) he is to teach mee mine; yet glad and willing shall I be to receive in­struction, were it from a far meaner hand then M ^r. Prynnes, in any thing that becomes me in a way of dutie to do. But,

Secondly, Sect. 20. whereas the tenour of his Instruction to me is this, that it had been my duty privately to have informed my friends in Par­liament with it in a Christian Brotherly way; I perceive hee hath heard of dealing with his friends in a Way which well becomes him, as well as it doth mee; I mean, that which is Christian and Brotherly. But it seems, hee that teacheth another, doth not al­wayes teach himself. For since the mountains were brought forth Psal. 90 2. and settled Prov. 8. 25., it may very probably be thought, that there was never any son of Adam, whose pen made a broader digression from that Christian Brotherly way he speaks of, then his own. For look as low as the Earth is beneath the heavens; so far is M ^r. Prynnes Way of dealing with his friends, beneath that which is Christian and Brotherly.

Thirdly, Sect. 21. whereas he conceives it had been my duty to have in­formed my friends privately of what I preached and printed pub­likely in the premisses; I conceive it had been his duty to have un­derstood himself better in the point, before hee had taken the Chaire. For first, the greatest part of the things which I either preached or printed in the premisses, concern'd only or chiefly [Page 15] those to whom I preach'd, and the generalitie of men to whom I printed, not the Parliament. That it is a terrible and most dreadfull thing for men to be found fighters against God, that it is better and more righteous to obey God then men; that men in great places, men of great parts, learning, and Grace, may possibly erre, and de facto have err'd from time to time, with some few particulars more of like consideration (which are the sub­stance of what was either preached or printed by mee in the pre­misses) are Doctrines of equall (if not of superiour) concern­ment to the generalitie of the people, with the Parliament. As for that passage in my Innocencies Triumph, wherein I mention my tender and affectionate jealousie over the Parliament, &c. (the passage so tenter'd, tortur'd and tormented by the evill spirit which so much haunts M ^r. Prynnes pen) it was occasioned (indeed neces­sitated) by his own most unreasonable, bloody, and importune suggestions, clamours and instigations of authoritie against mee: in regard of which I had no other course but to give a faire and reall account out of what principle and motive (in reference to the Parliament) I spake such and such things, which were most unchristianly handled and misused by his pen. Now then to whisper those things in the eares only of a few, the knowledge whereof concernes so many thousands, is not the duty, but an high prevarication of the duty of a Minister of Jesus Christ. Secondly, neither doth he know whether the Doctrines so much questioned and quarrelled by him, did, or do so particularly concern my friends in Parliament (by my friends, I suppose hee means my acquaintance: for otherwise I trust the whole number of that ho­nourable Assembly are my friends; at least I know no cause but why they should) as many other members of this Assembly. If so, his ignorance in such a circumstance as this, plainly proves that he hath here prophesied above the analogie or proportion of his Faith Rom. 12.; and consequently, (even in his own notion of the word Pag. 109. paulò ante me­dium.) hath done it PRESVMPTVOVSLY. Yea, thirdly, how doth he know but that I did prevent the admonition or reproof of his pen, by doing the very duty, for the neglect whereof I am so deep­ly censured by him. I presume that my acquaintance in the Parlia­ment have not communicated unto him all things that have pas­sed between me and them; therefore his ignorance in this parti­cular [Page 16] also, proves him (according to the responsall of his own Oracle, even now intimated) to have been somewhat PRE­SVMPTVOVS in his charge of neglect of Duty in mee. Fourthly, and lastly, there being nothing in the particulars ex­cepted against, either preached or printed by mee, which in the judgement of any indifferent or Christian-spirited man, is of any hard or disparaging reflexion either upon any particular per­son in the honourable Assembly of Parliament, or upon this Assembly it self, there could be nothing in the publishing of them, whether by preaching or printing, any wayes repugnant to any duty lying upon me.

That which followes in the late transcribed passage, Sect. 22. as that I publish my brain-sick jealousies and suspicions against them behind their backs, of purpose to make my Auditors, Readers jealous of them, as men who invaded, &c. or to defame or draw an odium or contempt upon them, to prepare the people before-hand to oppose or reject, what­soever, &c. these things (I say) with many others of like calculati­on, both in this and many other of his writings, are but the rea­sonlesse presumptions of his exasperated, transported, unchristiani­zed spirit, over-heat (it may be) with his nocturnall lucubrations, and in part occasioned by the fuliginous vapors breathing still up­on him from his lamp; and in this regard, I judge them unwor­thy to have day-light bestowed upon them for their refutation. Hee talks of my brain-sick jealousies and suspicions; but these are more then brain-sick, even brain-dead calumniations and slan­ders; ten degrees (to speak in his own language) more unchristian, uncharitable, detestable, execrable, then any (even the worst of) jea­lousies or suspicions whatsoever. If he would but authorize mee to reason after the rate of his Logique in raising conclusions from his premisses, I could prove (according to the tenor of such authori­tie) that Mr. Prynne hath written against the Congregationall Way, hath represented those that walk in it as extremely deroga­tory and destructive both unto the Parliament and Church of Eng­lend Epist. Dedic. non longè ab mitio., as great disturbers of our publique peace and unity Ibidem.; hath slan­dered them in their spirits, principles, practices, over and over Epist. to the Reader, all most through­out, and else­where in seve­rall other of his writings, as his ful Re­ply, &c.; hath presumptuously attempted to infuse such dangerous principles as these into Kings, Magistrates, and highest civill powers, that they are Christs Substitutes, Vicars, in point of Government (Church-government [Page 17] hee speaks of Full Reply pag. 7.) that Christ hath delegated his King­ly power unto them Ibidem., that it may passe as tolerable, that Christ is King alone over his Churches in matters of Faith, Full Reply p. 6. propè fi­nem. &c. with many others of like undue insinuation; I could prove (I say) by the Commis­sion aforesaid, that Mr. Prynne hath done all these things on pur­pose to despite the Spirit of God, to defame the Gospel, to make the Wayes of godlinesse and Religion hatefull unto the world, to increase divisions, to multiply distractions, to bring a snare and evill day upon the Parliament, to expose the whole Kingdome to utter ruine and destruction. Yea, the truth is, that there is a far more rationall connexion between the premises last mentioned from M ^r. P ryn's pen, and such collections and conclusions as these; then there is between those premises of mine transcribed by him, and the inferences which he extracts and deduceth from them.

A man might think that the Gentleman had by this time laid out himself to a sufficient proportion, in depraving both the ex­pressions and intentions of him, that never (to his best know­ledge) did him the least wrong, nor ever administred the least oc­casion of provocation; — Sed audi facinus majoris abollae.

Your last clause ( saith he, yet further, p. 108.) And if continued, &c. intimates and speaks, aloud without any straining that the Parliament for the present are guilty of dashing their foot against Christ the Rock: of claiming the most sacred incommunicable royalties and priviledges of heaven, and making themselves equall with God: and that if they per­severe in the course they have begun (to Reforme our Church, &c.) it is such an high provocation against the most High, as will kindle a fire in the brest of him whose name is Jehovah; he should have said jealous, ( but that his pen hath contracted an ill habit of stumbling) which will consume and devoure, &c. Could all the malignant and Prelaticall party in England lay a greater, wickeder, or more unjust scandall in our Parliament then this, or more defame them then by such a false report? enough to fire the whole Kingdome against them, as well as Gods wrath, &c. as it followeth in his most unjust and ignoble strain of Calumny. But for answer,

1. Doth a wicked or unjust scandall use to fire Gods wrath against those upon whom it is cast, and who are the sufferers. Though the sin committed be enough to kindle a fire in the brest of him whose name is jealous, against those, whosoever they be, that lie under the [Page 18] guilt of such a Commission; yet is there not the least colour to imagine, that the false or scandalous imputation of it unto any, should have the like operation, in respect of those that are so scandaliz'd.

He tells me of my being a meer Divine, p. 109. and a man altogether ignorant in the ancient Rights and Privileges of our Parliament, (with how little pertinencie or advantage to his cause, shall be taken into consideration in due place.) And by such passages as this, it seems he is every whit as meer a Lawyer as I a Divine (and consequently of no such super-transcendent abilities neither, to discerne and judge of the Rights and Privileges of Parliament, as will be manifested in due time.) For he that knowes not, that God is no wayes offen­ded with men for having wicked & unjust scandals cast upon them, surely had need to be taught what are the first principles of the Oracles of God Heb. 5. 12.. And

2. Whereas in the beginning of the last transcribed passage, he speakes thus, Your last clause, And if continued, &c. intimates and speakes loud without any strayning, that, &c. doth hee not seem to re­joyce, as if now he had met with a full feast, and had onely scram­bled for all he had gotten and satisfied his hunger with till now? And doth he not without any strayning, seem to imply, that all my former clauses without straining, would have spake none of those things, which now by his rackes, screws, and engines, he hath made them to speak? So that here we have confitentem rerum: oh that we had but the Participle as well match'd as the Adjective, that is (by interpretation) emendantem confitentem, and then let both our bookes to the fire together, to purge out the drosse of them What ever censure you deserve, I fear your book de­merits the fire to purge out this dross. p. 109.. But

3. The grand unhappinesse of the man is, that what I speake onely in thesi, or in the generall throughout the whole period or passage, wherein this clause, And if contemned, &c. stands, hee here represents upon the Stage of his passion, as if it had been spoken in hypothesi, with particular and precise application to the Parlia­ment. The whole period, though it be somewhat long, yet that the Reader may not be denied any part of his due in point of satis­faction, I shall transcribe, ab ovo usque ad mala, as it begins at the bottome of page 2. of my Innocencies Triumph. I confesse I am in the habituall and standing frame of my heart and spirit, tender and jealous over all the world, and much more over those who are deare unto me, but [Page 19] most of all over those who being deere unto me, are likewise more exposed then others unto the tentation and danger of the sinne; extreamly jea­lous and tender (I say) I am over such, lest they should touch with any title, or claim the most sacred and incommunicable royalties and privi­leges of heaven, and so count it no robbery to make themselves equall to God; knowing most assuredly, that this is a high provocation in the eyes of the most High, and if continued in, will kindle a fire in the breast of him whose name is Jealous, and will consume and devoure.

I confesse I spake in some passages before this, of the Parliament by name; nor doe I deny all relation between this and the for­mer: but all the relation that can reasonably be imagined between the one and the other, will not amount so much as to a colourable justification of this high-handed and full-mouth'd charge, that the latter speaks aloud without any strayning, that the Parliament is guilty of dashing, &c. of claiming, &c. And that if, &c. These are every whit as pure and clean straines of that disposition which acted in the former part of this exposition, as any of those other which have playd before us already. And

4. Suppose the period had been perfectly Hypotheticall, and the contents of it applied to the Parliament by name, yet it is farre from speaking the dialect that Mr. Prynne would fain force into the mouth of it. He that shall represent the great evill or danger of a sinne, as suppose of oppression, drunkennesse, adultery, or the like, unto a man, in these or the like terms, Know most assuredly, that such a sinne is a most high provocation in the eyes of the most High: and then should adde, And if continued in, will kindle a fire in the breast of him whose name is Jealous, &c. doth no wayes suppose, that the person to whom such an addresse or representation is made, is under the present actuall guilt of the perpetration of such a sinne; but onely demonstrates the dangerous and deadly consequence of it unto him, in case he shall be intangled with the guilt, and con­tinue in the perpetration of it without repentance. Therefore Mr. Prynnes lucubration and collection, that this clause, And if continued, &c. speaks aloud without any strayning, any such Parliamentary guilt as he deciphers with his pen, is nocturnall, neither is there so much as a beam of the light of truth in it.

5. Whereas he chargeth that innocently-offending clause of mine, And if continued, &c. both to intimate and speak aloud, and that [Page 20] without any straining, that high misdemeanour lately mentioned, (little lesse then capitall to him that shall avouch it) I cannot con­ceive any regular consistence in the charge. For though one and the same man, who hath a liberty and power both to alter his tone and voyce, and tenour of expression, may one while only inti­mate, i. whisper, or expresse a thing sparingly: and otherwhile, speake it out aloud, with a full and strong voyce, (though hardly thus with­out any straining at all) yet how one and the same clause in writing, which hath neither principle nor shadow of any variation or change of expression in it, but is still uniforme and standing both in the matter which, and in the manner wherein, it speaketh, should both intimate (or whisper) and yet speak aloud too, one and the same thing, is a saying divided in it selfe, and which my understan­ding knoweth not how to make to stand. But thus, God many times makes both tongues and pens which imagine evill against o­thers, to f [...]ll upon themselves Psal. 64. 8..

6. And lastly, whereas he pretends the forementioned clause, And if continued, &c. guilty of speaking aloud and without any strai­ning, the prenamed enormitie, the truth is, that this charge speaks aloud and without any straining, that Mr. Prynne loves all devouring words Psal. 52. 4., whether they be words of sobernesse and truth Act., or of ano­ther inspiration. Is it not very strange, and a miracles fellow (at least) if not a miracle, that Mr. Prynnes hearing should be so predo­minant in the world, that he alone should heare a loud s [...]eaking, where all the world besides could not heare the least muttering or whisper? But when men have Brick to make, and want straw, they must bee content to gather stubble in stead of it Exod. 5. 12.. The buil­ders of Babel were fain to make use of slime in stead of mortar Gen. 11. 4.. [...], were a generati­on of men in Plato's dayes, & the line (it seems) is not yet extinct.

Many other passages there are in this Triumphing discourse, wherein the author doth miserable carnifice other words and pas­sages of mine; but Caesars image and superscription may bee seen in a peny Mat. 22. 19, 20., as well as in a pound.

But because the great Guerdon and Crown for which Mr. Prynne runnes in this and other his lucubrations against me, is to transform me into a man of a ranc [...]ous and disaffected heart against Parlia­ments Pag. 108., and to couple me with the worst Malignants, Royalists, [Page 21] Cavaliers, yea with the Arch-Prelate himself Pag. 107.; before I leave the point in hand, I shall briefly specifie, both what, in what degree I have done, and continue yet doing from opportunitie to opportunitie, to the utmost of my power, for the Parliament: and withall so­lemnly professe in the sight of God and men, that if either Mr. Prynne, or any other man, can direct or say unto me, how, or what, when, or wherein I may yet doe more for them, or shew and ex­presse more love or affectionatenesse unto them, then I have alrea­dy done, and still doe (upon occasion) daily; provided onely that I may see and understand, that what shall be required of me in this kind, doth really and indeed, not in shew and pretence onely, tend to the benefit, honour and safetie of the Parliament; I am ready and willing, and doe by these presents obliege and bind my self, Testibus Coelo & Terrâ, to performe. I have once See my Anti-Cavalierisme. and againe See my Bonc for a Bishop. in Print, with the utmost ingagement of my weak abilities in that kind, asserted the Parliamentary cause against the Oxfordian; yea (as far as I yet understand) I was the first amongst all my Brethren who serve at the Altar, that rose up in this kind, for the Parlia­ment: with what exposall of my self to danger, on the one hand, and with what successe and advantage to the cause undertaken by me on the other, many there are that know, and (I make no question) are ready upon occasion to declare and testifie. How frequently, yea for many moneths together, when the Parlia­mentarie occasions were most urging and pressing, (almost) un­interruptedly, and with what fervency and contestation of spirit, I laboured by preaching to advance the service; yea with what ala­critie and importunity, I continually sollicited and promoted all Parliamentarie occasions, suits, and motions recommended by Or­dinance or otherwise; was openly testified by a Member of that Honourable Committee before which I was called, pending the complaint against me there. How many young men and others, as faithfull as usefull in the Armie as any others of their rank and imployment whatsoever, what by preaching, what by conference and perswasion, were through the blessing of God, armed with courage and resolution by me for the warres, there are both in the Citie, and in the Armie, more then a few that can informe. Nor is it unknowne to thousands, with what contention and striving of spirit, with what earnestnesse of prayer and supplication I have [Page 22] without ceasing in my publick prayers, commended the Parliament with all their proceedings and affaires unto God; nor have my later intercessions for them, either in strength of affection, or in any other desireable respect whatsoever, given place unto my for­mer. Without any disparagement to M ^r. Prynnes Orisons Epist. Dedic. in sine. be it spoken, I may conjecture I have been both as frequent, and desired to be as fervent in commending that Honourable Assembly with all their pious endeavours to the Divine Benediction, as himself. As touching pecuniary expressions of my self to and for the Parliament, my af­fections may (perhaps) suffer losse and disadvantage in the thoughts of some, who measure by the Arithmeticall, in stead of the Geome­tricall proportion (by which our Saviour measured the poore wid­dows gift, cast into the treasury Mar. 12. 43., and every mans expressions of himself in this kind should be measured) yet I make no question but I can produce speaking papers, (yea and men too, if need be) that will abundantly testifie, that I have not been behind many of those who are before me for matter of estate, and who are look'd upon too as men sound-hearted to the Parliament. There hath no proposition for advance of moneys, been at any time recommended by the Parliament unto the Citie, that I know of, but hath been entertained by me with a full proportion of my estate. And look what I have been, and have appeared to be in publick, and in view of many; the same have I bin also in all my more private intercour­ses and colloques with men; strengthning the hands of some which began to be feeble and to hang downe, loosing the bands, resolving the doubts of others, so setting them at libertie to serve the Parlia­ment, who before were bound up, and could doe nothing. Nor have I quitted my self at this rate in the Parliamentary service, in or about the Citie onely: but have been as diligent and faithfull an Agent for them in the Countrey also where I have become, and that not without some considerable successe. I am a foole (I confesse) to speak all this of my self: but M ^r. Prynne hath compelled 2 Cor. 12. 11. me. If I be yet defective and wanting in any thing that is my dutie to doe for the Parliament, if there be any other service or labour of love wherein I may yet further expresse my self to, and for them; all the powers of my soule stand ready bent and prest within me to embrace the opportunitie, and to fall on upon the work. If for all this I must be numbred amongst men of rancorous and disaffected [Page 23] hearts against the Parliament, I shall congratulate the felicitie of those that are better thought of; and yet shall think mine own the more Princely portion Reglum est malè audire, cum bene fece­ris.. Mala opinio benè parta delectat. A good conscience is never at the full of her sweetnesse, light, and glorie, but when uprightnesse suffers and is eclipsed: the antiperistasis of outward sufferings, intends the inward vigor and strength of that principle, out of which a good conscience acteth, when shee com­forteth. If the affections of men to the Parliament, must be com­pell'd to hold up their hand and be tryed at M ^r. Prynnes barre, and the Law ruling there be this, that whosoever will not adore M ^r. Prynnes notion of an Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction in the civill Magistrate, and submit the cleare and lightsome decisions (at least in the eye of their judgement & conscience) of the Oracles of God to the Spirit that spake in old Stories, Statutes and Records in the darkest times of Popery, though they have given never so satisfactory and abundant an account of the goodnesse of their affection in this kind otherwise, must be condemned and cast as venemous Malig­nants and underminers of the undoubted priviledges of Parliaments, &c. I confesse, that my affection will not abide the tryall of this fire. Neverthelesse, this I solemnly promise and professe, that if Mr. Prynne or any other, shall reasonably demonstrate unto me truth in either of these Positions; either 1. in this, that any thing is to be esteemed a Priviledge, which is not for the benefit, good, or safety of those that shall injoy it; or 2. in this, that such an Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction or power, as Mr. Prynne in all or most of his discour­ses upon this subject portraictures and sets out, tends in the nature and constitution of it, to the benefit, safety or good of the Parlia­ment; I shall soone be his convert, and cause my present appre­hensions in the point to bowe downe at the feet of his. This for the second head propounded.

For the third and last, the insufficiencie, or (to speak the dialect of his own pen) the impotencie, of those few exceptions which he makes against some few particulars in my Innocencies Triumph, such as he conceives (it seems) to be more soft and tractable under his exceptious pen. First, to salve a sore that will never be perfectly healed, to justifie (I meane) his Indictment against me, that I did not only or simply undermine the undoubted priviledges of Parliament by the very roots, (this being not a charge, as it seems, worthy the [Page 24] indignation or discontent of Mr. Prynnes pen) but that I perpetra­ted this high misdemeanour PRESVMPTVOVSLY; he informes us as matter of high concernment to his cause and honour, that Grammarians, Lawyers, and Divines informe us, that the word, Pre­sumptuous, comes from the verb, Praesumo: which verb he presumes will accommodate him with one or other of those various signifi­cations, which with great care and circumspection that none be wanting, he there musters and enumerates. And because the ho­nour and validitie of this his purgation rests altogether upon such significations or acceptions of his verb, as are most mens mysteries; therefore in his margent he calls in Thomas Aquinas, Calepine, with some others, for his compurgators. But

Good Sir; did you either expect or intend, that either the Par­liament or your other readers, should be so above measure tender either of your reputation or of mine, as that meeting with the word PRESVMPTVOVSLY in your indictment against me, they would goe and search Calepine, Thomas Aquinas, Holy-oake, Media-villa, and I know not how many more, to informe themselves in how many senses or significations the word might be taken, lest other­wise they should take you tardy with an unjust crimination, or me with a foule crime? What you may conceive them likely to doe in this kind out of tendernesse of respect to your reputation, I will not prejudge: but to deale plainly with you, I expect no such quar­ter from any of your Readers, for the preservation of mine. They that have a mind to beleeve you in that point of your charge, (yea and indeed any other, considering other expressions of yours of the like importance) are like to take the word Presumptuously, ac­cording to the vulgar and most familiar signification of it in com­mon parlance, and that which is next at hand: in which significati­on, it doth nothing lesse then import all that varietie you speak of, but a plaine wilfull (as your word elsewhere is) perpetration of an evill; and as for the three last significations which you fasten up­on it, as that it signifies, against Authoritie, or Lawes, or upon hopes of impunitie; though I have not the Authors by me upon whom you father the proprietie of these significations, to examine the truth of what in this you affirme; yet am I very strong of Faith, that men of learning and judgement (as most of the Authors you cite were) never assigned any of these three senses or importances, as the pro­per [Page 25] and legitimate acceptions or significations of the word. When John the Baptist told Herod (a man in great Authoritie) to his face, that it was not lawfull for him to have Herodias his Brother Philips wife Mat. 14. 4., was this done PRESVMPTVOVSLY, especially in the proper signification of the word? Againe, when Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego refus'd to submit to that Decree or Law which Nebu­chadnezzar and his Nobles had made, which commanded all to fall downe and worship the golden image which the King had set up Dan. 3. 18.; and so when Daniel trangress'd that Law or Statute which Darius and his Nobles had decreed and established according to the Law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not Dan. 6. 8. 10., by kneeling upon his knees three times a day, praying unto, and praising God, with his chamber-window open towards Jerusalem; did either of these sin, or doe any thing (under the Interpretation aforesaid) PRESVMPTVOVSLY? Mr. Prynne himself (I presume) dedicated these his Lucubrations to the Parliament, upon hopes, yea upon more then hopes of impunitie, upon hopes of Grace and Acceptation: hath he therefore done PRESVMPTVOVSLY? I am content in this sense to own the word PRESVMPTVOVSLY, in my prementioned charge; and confesse that I did that, which he (calling it quite out of its name) calls an undermining of the undoubted Priviledges of Parliament, &c. PRESVMPTVOVSLY. i. I did upon hopes, yea and somewhat more then upon hopes of impunitie, upon hopes of acceptation both with God and men. And if Mr. Prynne would have pleas'd but to have declar'd in his margent or otherwise, that in the aforesaid indict­ment he meant the word, PRESVMPTVOVSLY, in this sense, and no other; he had saved me a double, and himself a single la­bour, (if not a double also) for I should not have lift up so much as a word of exception against it.

But let us see a little, how like a man he quits himself in vindi­cating the truth and equitie of his so-dearly-beloved terme, PRE­SVMPTVOVSLY, as it stands, or lies, (which you will) in the controverted indictment. His first signification of the verb PRAE­SVMO, is to forestall; and to prove that in this sense of the word, I committed the capitall crime objected PRESVMPTVOVSLY, he reasons, or rather talks, thus. First you preached and printed those passages of purpose to forestall the Parliaments and Assemblies pious reso­lutions, &c. But Mr. Prynne, there is a rule in the civill Law (and [Page 26] because there is so much reason in it, I conceive your Common Law complyes with it) which sounds thus; Non esse, & non appae­rere, aequiparantur in Jure. How will you doe for witnesse, or evi­dences competent in Law, to make it appeare that I printed and preached the passages you speak of, for such a purpose as you pretend? can you find the present thoughts or purposes of all particular men in this age, in the ancient Records which beare date, from the darkest times of Popery? Or hath the Omniscient anointed your eyes with any such eye-salve, which makes you able to see into the hearts and reins and spirits of men? or have I acknowledged either in writing or otherwise, any such intent or purpose as you speak of, in those passages? or is it beyond the upper region of possibilities, that I should have any other purpose in them, then what you af­firme? When you print, that I printed the passages you mention of purpose to forestall the pious resolutions of the Parliament; doe you print this OF PVRPOSE to forestall the pious inclinations or resolu­tions of the Parliament, not to make more offenders by punishment, then were made such before by delinquencie? Or when you print­ed, that Christ hath delegated his Kingly Office unto Kings, Magi­strates, and highest civill powers Full Reply pag. 7. Circa initium., did you print it of purpose to make them think that they had as much power and Authoritie to make Lawes for his Churches, as Christ himself hath? Such affirmations and right-downe conclusions as these, are worse then the most un­charitable, unchristian, detestable, execrable, groundlesse, fanatique jea­lousies Pag. 108..

The second signification of the auxiliarie verb, PRAESVMO, is (as Mr. Prynne from his Authors, or otherwise, informs us) to con­ceive before-hand: and to prove that in this sense I trespassed the tres­passe of his complaint, PRESVMPTVOVSLY, he advanceth with this demonstration. 2. To establish and support that Independent way which you had before-hand without any lawfull warrant conceived, ere the Parliament had made choyce of, or setled any Church-Government for them, &c. But good Sir, hath no man a lawfull warrant to consi­der, inquire after, (and consequently, to conceive) what Christ hath established in point of Church-Government, untill the Parliament hath made choyce of, or setled such a Government? Every man hath warrant enough, yea and that which is more then a warrant, an in­gagement by way of dutie lying upon him; especially Divines (as [Page 27] you call them) whose particular calling and profession it is to search the Scriptures, and to discover the mind of Christ there, to conceive before-hand, if they be able, what tenour or forme of Church-Government is most agreeable to the mind of Christ; and not to suspend their studies, inquiries, conceptions in that kinde, un­till men have fram'd their conceptions or apprehensions for them. The Parliament had not made choyce of, nor setled any Church-Go­vernment for Mr. Edwards, when he compos'd and printed his An­tapologie? Did he therefore PRESVMPTVOVSLY, to conceive it before-hand, and so peremptorily conclude for it as he hath done? Whether yet they have made choyce of any, or no, I cannot say; I have no demonstrative grounds to think they have: but certain I am that they as yet have setled none, and so are still at libertie to choose another, in case they have chosen any. Hath not Mr. Prynne then done PRESVMPTVOVSLY, to conceive a Government before-hand, and to print for it, the Parliament as yet having chosen none, or however, setled none? If Mr. Prynne being a Lawyer, had a law­full warrant to, conceive a Church-Government before-hand, as he hath done, Church-matters being eccentricall to his profession; much more hath he that is a Divine, and neverthelesse because he is a meere one. Neither can the five Apolog. be said to have done this first, because they rather shew their own practise and desire libertie therin, then peremptorily, (as some others) prescribe to others un­der the notion of schismatiques and troublers of the publick peace, if they be not of their minds in all things, about what they practise and professe, as (in their judgements) most agreeable to the truth.

A third signification of the verb we wot of, is according to Mr. Prynnes Lexicographie, to usurp or take that upon a man which belongs not to him. And to prove that in this sense also I am a Son of PRE­SVMPTION in the transgression voted by M ^r. Prynnes pen, upon me, he riseth up higher then yet in this insulting straine. It was no lesse then high PRESVMPTION in you, being a meere Divine, and a man altogether ignorant of, or unskilfull in the ancient Rights and Pri­viledges of our Parliament (as your writings demonstrate, and your self intimate, p. 5.) to undertake and judge of them so peremptorily—When as if you had knowne any thing concerning them, you might have learned this among other things, that Divines are no competent Judges of Parliaments priviledges: that the Priviledges, Rights and Cujiomes [Page 28] of our Parliaments, are onely to be judged and determined by the Parlia­ment it selfe, not in or by any other inferiour Court, &c. In this passage there are some things true, and some things false; and both the the one and the other make aloud and without straining, against the Author, and neither of them against me at all. For,

1. If I be a man altogether ignorant if the ancient rights and pri­vileges of Parliament, how come I to be charged, as a wilfull under­miner or violator of them Full Reply in the very last clause.? Ignorance though it bee good for little, but to cause men to stumble and doe amisse; yet it is (for the most part) a preserver of men from offending wilfully, how ever it selfe may be a wilfull offence. Those things (saith Aristotle) appeare to bee involuntary, [...]. Arist. E­thic. ad Ni­chom. l. 3. c. 1. or unwillingly done, which are done either by externall compulsion, or out of ignorance. If I judge Mr. Prynne ignorant of that government which the Scriptures hold forth, I cannot reasonably judge him a wilfull opposer of it.

2. If the Privileges, Rights and Customes of our Parliaments, be onely to be judged and determined by the Parliament it selfe, and not in or by any other inferior Court, how comes Mr. Prynne by his authority or com­mission to judge and determine, that I have wilfully violated, presump­tuously undermined the undoubted privileges of Parliament, by the very roots? Surely he hath not the power which an inferiour Court of Judicature hath, much lesse is he the Parliament it selfe: and yet he undertakes to judge and determine, & that positively and negatively, (which I doe not) not onely the privileges themselves of Parlia­ment, but the very roots also of these privileges. If according to his own assertion, he hath no power or authority to judge or determine of the privileges we speak of, why doth he judge and censure me as a PRESUMPTUOUS underminer and violator of these privi­leges? Can any man reasonably passe a sentence against another as a delinquent in such and such cases, when as the cases themselves are not of his cognizance, nor lawfull for him to judge of?

3. If the Privileges and Rights of our Parliament bee onely to bee judged by the Parliament it selfe, upon what Christian or indeed rea­sonable foundation, shall we a vouch the taking of the late Natio­nall Vow and Covenant, wherein with our hands lifted up to the most high God (among other things) we sweare, that wee would sin­cerely, really, and constantly, in our severall vocations, endevour with our estates, and lives, mutually to preserve the Rights and Privileges of [Page 29] Parliament, &c. Did we sweare in this most tremend and solemne manner, to preserve those things, not onely that wee know not what they are, but which it is not lawfull for us to enquire after, at least, not to judge and say what they are after our most diligent and faithfull enquiry after them? If before the taking of this cove­nant, I had conceived, that whatsoever Mr. Prynne should please to avouch for Privilege of Parliament, I should have stood bound by the covenant taken, to maintain with my estate and life, for such; I should rather have exposed both to the mercy and equity of the Parliament by refusing it, then both these and my selfe besides, to the displeasure of God, by such an unchristian, yea unreasonable and unmanlike action. Besides, Parliament privileges are either fundamentall, generall, and common Rights of all nationall Bo­dies, or else peculiar to this State; and so also they are either such as are by their constant practice commonly declared, or else more reserved for occasional emergencies. The two former are obvious to judge of; and the latter also apprehensible upon their discovery of them, especially with their grounds, else how could they have been assisted in the defence of them all this time?

4. Whereas he vilifies, or insults over me as being a meere Di­vine, I confesse I have not much to except against the disparage­ment; yet I desire leave to speak these three things. 1. That if Mr. Prynne himselfe had been a meere Divine, he had chosen the bet­ter part: and if he yet knew how to tranforme the skill which hee hath in the Law, into a like proportion of sound Divinity, he and the Church should gain by it; so great plenty is there of good Lawyers, and so few faithfull labourers in Gods harvest.

2. Though I pretend to no great knowledge in any other Sci­ence, but to that which is the glory of all the rest ( Divinity I mean) no nor yet to one halfe of that knowledge in this, which my years and opportunities, had not I been a sonne of folly and infirmities above many, might well have furnished me with; yet can I not with truth yeeld my selfe so meerly a Divine, as not to understand many Principles and Maximes of reason, besides those which I have lear­ned from the Scriptures; As that every whole is more then any part of it: That no effect can possibly exceed the vertue or efficacy of the totall cause thereof: That one part of any contradiction is verifi­able of every thing: That the good of many other circumstances [Page 30] being alike, is to be preferred before the like good of one, or of a few: with many others of affinity with these. By the authority and aid of which alone, without the concurrence or assistance of a­ny Principle at all, proper to the Science of Divinity, I know (God assisting) I am able to make good the ground which I have chosen to stand upon in the controversies depending between Mr. Prynne and me. Yea, I should injure mine own ignorance and weaknesse, and censure them too deep, if I should deny but that I know some­what in other Arts and Sciences also.

3. And lastly, if I be a meer Divine, I remember I have read some such observation as this for my comfort, that when the streame of endevours is divided, the waters of knowledge run but shallow in a plurality of channels, [...]. But

5. Whereas he lifts up this Iron mace on high, and thinkes to break all in peeces like a potters vessell, that I have either said, or ever shall be able to say, to escape the push of his pike, PRESUMP­TUOUSLY, wherewith he makes at me in the pre-recited charge, that Divines are no competent Judges of Parliaments privileges; and that therefore it was no lesse then PRESUMPTION, nay then PRESUMPTION upon PRESUMPTION, then high PRESUMPTION for me being a meer Divine, and a man altogether ignorant in the ancient Rights and Privileges of our Parlia­ments, to undertake to determine and judge of them so peremptorily, &c. I answer.

1. If I had been altogether ignorant of the Rights and Privileges of Parliament, I was not so capable of ingaging my selfe by that solemne vow, which is now upon me, for the maintaining of them sincerely, really, constantly, &c. For though a man may indefinitely swear to maintain the just rights of such or such a Body, though he know them not all distinctly, yet that he may sweare in judge­ment, it is requisite he be not altogether ignorant of them. So that if Mr. Prynnes doctrine in this point be true, it is more then time for me to flie from my Covenant, as from a Serpent, and to abhorre my selfe in dust and ashes before the presence of God, that ever I took it. But blessed be God, my ignorance of the Rights and Privi­leges of Parliaments, is not such, but that I know many of them: These by name (questionlesse) are some of them; To bee the Sove­raigne Tribunall, and supreme Judicatory in the Kingdome: To have a [Page 31] Legislative power in civill affaires in respect of the whole Kingdome: To have a power of discharging or repealing all former Lawes and Statutes that are found inconvenient for the State and Kingdome: To dispose of the Militia of the Kingdom, for the safety and best advantage thereof: To im­pose Rates and Taxes of money for the necessary occasions of the King­dome; to call even the greatest Delinquents in the Kingdome to account, and to inflict punishments upon them according to the nature of their crimes: To defend, protect, and encourage, and that with an higher hand then others can doe, those that doe well, and live peaceably, and are ser­viceable in their callings and imployments to the State. Besides many others like unto the Starres in the Firmament of heaven, which cannot be numbred.

2. Whereas Mr. Prynne to make light of darknesse, and to co­ver the shame of his darling (PRESUMPTUOUSLY) with honor, thrusts Divines out of doors, as no competent judges of Parlia­ments privileges, he must know from a meer Divine (if there be any place left in him for an addition in that kind, and intus apparens doth not prohibere alienum, with too strong an hand) that Divines in one respect, & that of soveraigne consideration, are Judges of a bet­ter & more regular competencie of such things, then Lawyers are, (without prejudice to that profession be it spoken) yea & the meerer Divine (in M. Pryns sense) the more competent Judge in this kind, as the meere Physitian a more competent Judge of medicines then o­thers. There is a double judgement or dijudication of Parliament Privileges: the one positive or affirmative, the other privative or negative. The positive or affirmative judgement wee speake of, consists in a faculty or ability of discerning what really and indeed are the Privileges of Parliament: the judgement which I call ne­gative, consists in the like faculty or ability of discerning, what are not. For this is a most certain and undoubted Maxime, That no­thing that is sinfull, or contrary to the will and word of God, can possibly be a privilege of Parliament. The reason whereof is plain: Nothing that in the nature and direct tendencie of it, is dishonou­rable or destructive to a creature, can possibly bee any privilege thereof. Now whatsoever is sinfull, and displeasing unto God, is in the nature and direct tendencie of it, dishonourable and destru­ctive to the creature, as the whole tenour of the Scriptures (al­most) yea and the impressions of naturall light and conscience in [Page 32] all men, doe abundantly confirme. Ergo. So then the Scriptures or word of God being the Standard or supreme Rule whereby to judge what is sinfull, and consequently destructive to the creature, and what not; evident it is, that they who reasonably may be pre­sum'd to have the best knowledge and soundest understanding in these, are the most competent Judges (from amongst men) in all cases and questions, about what is sinfull, and what not. And whe­ther meere Lawyers, or meere Divines, may with more reason be pre­sum'd to be men of this interest, let either Lawyers themselves, or Divines, or who ever will, judge. I had not known sinne (saith the A­postle Rom. 7. 7.) but by the Law: He speaks of the Law of God, not of any law of men. And another Apostle to like purpose: Whosoever com­mitteth sinne, transgresseth also the Law: for sinne is the transgression of the Law 1 Ioh. 3. 4.; speaking as the other did, onely of the Law of God. Now howsoever Mr. Prynnes meer Divines cannot reasonably bee supposed to have spent so much of their time in traversing and rea­ding over the ancient Records of Parliamentary transactions, as Lawyers have, nor consequently to be so able or ready as they, to tell Stories in this kind, of what Parliaments formerly have done; yet when any case of conscience, or question ariseth, about such and such customes or passages in Parliaments, (call them Rights, Privileges, or what you will) whether they were lawfull in point of conscience, and justifiable in the sight of God, or no, the meere Lawyer with his bookes and records, must stand by, as having nei­ther part nor fellowship in this Judicature; the meere Divine is the on­ly competent Judge in the case; yea, and this is confirmed by Parlia­ments themselves, who have decreed that in some Courts and Ca­ses, Clergy-men, as some call them, should fit, and was the cu­stome till very lately in London it selfe, the Bishop usually and by right sitting at the Sessions of life and death; yea, and in case of life, if the Clergyman saith, Legit ut Clericus, the Law saves the man. And if Mr. Prynne conceives, that all customes or Presidents of Par­liaments will make Privileges of Parliament, I conceive the present Parliament will abhorre his conception; many of them being on­ly matter of sorrow, shame and caution, not of Privilege or ex­ample. So then to deale clearly and unpartially between Lawyers and Divines, touching their respective abilities and interests for discerning and judging of the Customes, Rights and Privileges (so [Page 33] called) of Parliaments; The Lawyers interest and facultie (if he be a Master in his profession) as such (I mean as a meere Lawyer) is to collect, draw together, and present to view, all, and all man­ner of Parliamentary transactions, passages, statutes, customes, presidents, &c. good and bad, one with another, without distin­ction, out of their respective Records: but the interest and facul­ty of the Divine (if he be a man worthy his profession) is to sur­vey this collection presented unto him, to consider whether there be nothing in them contrary to the will and mind of God decla­red in his Word: (which contrariety dissolves the authority and interest of any Statute, Custome, President, whatsoever) and so to se­parate the vile from the pretious Ierem. 15. 19, that which hath a consistence with the word of God, from that which opposeth and con­tradicteth it. The entrie series or story of Parliamentary passages, is like the Polypus head, wherein there are observed to bee [...], many good things, and many bad; the Statutes of Moses, and the Statutes of Omri, the manner of the house of David, and the manner of the house of Ahab, are intermixed and wrapped up together there. Now alas, with the meere Lawyer (I speak of him, as such, and not as Christian or godly) all is fish that comes to net, all this Congregation is holy, even every one of them Numb. 16. 3.; every Statute without exception, if unrepeal'd on earth, though nullified in heaven before it was made, is still va­lid, and good in Law; every custome, without difference, an un­doubted privilege of Parliament: every passage a sufficient president for after-imitation, the Statutes of Omri as good for his turn, and in his eye, as the Statutes of Moses: the manner of the house of Ahab, as laudable as the manner of the house of David, or of the house of God himselfe: as is the good, so is the bad, (to him) the Sta­tute that curseth, as that which blesseth a Land. All this is evi­dent from that voluminous coacervation of old matters, passages, presidents, &c. by Mr. Prynne himselfe in the former part of this discourse, many of them (as himselfe intimates Pag. 106. l. 9. 10.) fetch'd out of the darkest times of Popery, and highest ruff of Pope, of Prelates: and yet thinkes that these are enough to evict and convince me and all the world besides, that I have not only violated, but denied, oppugned the privileges of Parliament in Ecclesiasticall affairs Pag. 110. in fine.. In the case last presented, ex­cept the Divine shall come with his fire from heaven, to separate [Page 34] and purge the Tinne from the Silver, and the Drosse from the Gold, and be as the mouth of the Lord to take away the vile from the pretious Jer. 15. 9., that enmity unto God, and that unrighteousnesse which cleaveth, and is like to cleave (notwithstanding all that the meere Lawyer is able to doe by way of reliefe) unto many the Lawes and Statutes of a State or Kingdome, is like to be first an heavie scourge, and rods of Scorpions, for the punishment of the State; and in fine, the utter ruine and destruction of it. [...] (saith the Apostle Rom. 8. 6.) i. the wisdome of the flesh is death: The reason whereof he gives in the next verse, which is this, because the wisdome of the flesh is enmity against God. So that wheresoever there is any enmity against God, especially if it utters it selfe in any the consultations, acts, or results of the wisdom of the flesh, it disposeth the subject wherein it is sound, whether it be Person, Family, State, or Kingdome, unto death. And whether this enmity against God which wee speake of, sound in some of our lawes & statutes yet unrepeal'd (if not in more then is generally observed and knowne) hath not made God an enemy unto us, and strengthened the arm of his displeasure and in­dignation against us, I leave to Divines of sound judgement and conscience, to consider: yea and to such Lawyers who have san­ctified their profession with the sound knowledge of the word of God and prayer.

By what hath been argued in this last passage, evident it is, that the skill, faculty, and interest of the Divine, (yea of the meere Di­vine) to discerne and judge of the customes, rights, privileges of Par­liament, is farre more usefull and necessary, then that of the meere Lawyer. The reason is plaine; because there is no manner of doubt or question to be made, but that whatsoever is not sinfull & pro­hibited by the word of God for them to doe, is an undoubted privilege of Parliament, without the authority or contribution of former passages or records: and on the contrary, whatsoever is sin­full and displeasing unto God, can never make Privilege, as hath been already argued and proved. Now then the faculty or skill of the Lawyer, as such, excending it self only to the conquisition and mustering together former transactions, passages and records of Parliament, or at most to assist in the literall explanation or inter­pretation of them; but matter of sin, and what is lawfull by the law of God, belonging properly to the cogniance of the Divine, it is [Page 35] as evident as evidence it self in her highest exaltation can make is, that Divines are more usefull, necessary, yea and competent Judges (in the saense declared) of Parliamentary Priviledges, then Lawyers are: Notwithstanding

To the last recited passage I answer 3. and lastly; that whereas my Adversary chargeth me, to have determined and judged of the an­cient Rights and Privileges of our Parliaments so peremptorily, &c. that this charge is like all or most of the rest, undue untrue; I doe not meddle with any ancient Right or Priviledge of Parliament; I one­ly argue and work upon the Principles of mine own Profession, the Scriptures and Word of God: if these in their naturall and proper in­clination, ducture, and tendencie, lead me to any such position or conclusion, which enterfeers with something which Mr. Prynne will needs call an ancient Right or Priviledge of Parliament, it is meer­ly accidentall, and which I cannot with my Allegeance to Heaven, nor otherwise then at the utmost perill of my soule, no nor with­out a sinfull prevarication with that dutie which I owe to the State I live in, decline. And therefore whereas

The 4 ^th signification which the Gentleman finds of the verb Praesumo (to salve the miscarriage of his pen, in the word, PRE­SVMPTVOVSLY) is to doe a thing before a man be lawfully called to it, and hereupon tells me that I had no lawfull calling or warrant from Gods Word or our Lawes to handle the Jurisdictions and rights of Parliament in my Pulpit, &c. and concludes against me without bayle or mainprize, that in this I was PRESVMPTVOVS by the Scriptures owne definition, 2 Pet. 2. 10. I answer,

1. That the Apostle Peter in the place cited, gives no definition at all, of the word, Presumptuous, but onely speaks of a wicked ge­neration of men, who walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleannesse, and despise Government, presumptuous, self-willed, and they are not afraid to speak evill of dignities. Can a man gather any definition of Presump­tion, or of a Presumptuous man, from hence? When the Apostle Paul confesseth himself to have been a Blasphemer, Persecutor 1 Tim. 1. 13., &c. doth he give any definition of either? I had rather Mr. Prynne should call me a Presumptuous man a thousand times over, then that he should be able once to prove it out of any definition of S ^t Peter. The Scrip­tures which Mr. Prynne still citeth, are acknowledged to be very good; but he imployeth them against their wills; and so their [Page 36] goodnesse and his purpose, doe not greet or kisse each other. But

2. Whereas he tells me I had no warrant from Gods Word, or our Lawes to handle the Jurisdictions or rights of Parliament in my Pulpit, &c. I first demand what warrant from Gods Word or our Lawes hath he, thus to calumniate a Minister of the Gospel, onely for his faith­fulnesse to God and men; to wring, wrest, and wier-draw his words and sayings, as he hath done these ten times (at least) in this and his other writings? I shall have my warrant, and that Au­thentique enough, to shew for what I have done, when his will be to seek for what he hath done, and (that which is worse) will no where be found. As for his charge, that I handle the Jurisdictions and rights of Parliament in my Pulpit, &c. it is but a dead corps of an accusation, without any life or soule of Truth in it at all; and may well be reputed free of the company of his other not more foule then false criminations. I never handled any such theame or subject in my Pulpit as he talks of, except it were in pleading the justnesse of their cause in the present warres, against the determi­nations of the Oxford Schooles. I trust Mr. Prynne will forgive me this offence. But

3. If by handling the rights and Jurisdictions of Parliaments, he means those passages wherein I argued against the lawfulnesse of submitting unto any Government from men, except it be agreea­ble also to the Word of God, and mind of Christ; or against any lawfulnesse of power in any civill Magistrate or Magistracie what­soever, to make any such Lawes or Statutes in matters of Religion, and which concerne the worship of God, whereunto the servants of God shall stand bound under mulcts and penalties to submit, whether they can with a good conscience submit unto them, or no; if this be the tenor of my charge, I answer, that I have warrant both from the Law of God, and from the Laws of the Land also, as farre as I understand them, (and I hope I understand them sufficiently in this) to doe whatsoever I have herein done. The warrant of a Law, (whether we speak of the Law of God, or of the Law of men) for an action, doth not stand onely in a positive or expresse injun­ction, or declaration in the Law, that such or such an action, either must, or may be done: but also in the totall silence of the Law, (directly and by evident consequence) as touching any restraint or prohibition of the action. It is true, the totall silence of humane [Page 37] Lawes concerning many actions, doth not simply and absolutely warrant them for lawfull or good, (though this be true concern­ing the Divine Law) but it warrants them sufficiently against any crime imputable, against any censure or punishment infligible by the Authoritie of such Lawes. Where no Law is (saith the Apostle Rom. 4. 15) there is no transgression. So then, if amongst all the Laws and Sta­tutes of the Land, there be no one Law or Statute to be found, which prohibiteth or restraineth a Minister of the Gospel from declaring and making known the whole counsell of God Act. 20. 27. unto men, (of which wretched import I know none, yea I am securely confi­dent that there is none) then have I warrant sufficient, in respect of our Laws, both to preach and print whatsoever I have done either in the one or in the other, in the passages aforesaid: because in them I have neither preached nor printed any thing, but what is part of the counsell of God, as I have abundantly manifested & made good, in severall tracts, especially in that which was last published Innocencie and Truth tri­umphing to­gether., against all opposition and counter-reasonings whatsoever.

As for the word of God, I have not onely a warrant from thence, to doe all that I did in the premises, but (that which is more then a warrant, in the sense specified) precept upon precept, injunction upon injunction, command upon command: yea I stand here most deeply and dreadfully charged, as I will answer it at the great and terrible day, when the Lord Jesus Christ shall be revealed from Heaven, with his mightie Angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ 2 Thes. 1. 7, 8., to doe that which I did in the passages excepted against. I charge thee therefore (saith the Apostle to Timothy, a Minister of the Gospel) before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and dead at his appearing and his Kingdome: Preach the Word: be instant, in sea­son, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long-suffering and Do­ctrine. For 2 Tim. 4. 1, 2., &c. Peruse the other Scriptures presented unto you in the margent Ezek. 3. 10, 11. 18, 19, 20. Jer. 1. 17. Esa. 58. 1. Mat. 10. 27, 28 Act. 4. 19, 20. & 20. 24, 25, 26, 27. Rom. 12. 6. 1 Pet. 4. 10, 11. 1 Cor. 9. 16. Tit. 1. 9. & 3. 15, &c.; behold, they lift up their voyces together, calling, crying out amaine for all diligence, faithfulnesse, zeale, undaunted­nesse of courage and resolution in those who are entrusted with that great dispensation of the mind and counsell of God in the be­half of the world, in the discharge of this most high and honoura­ble trust committed unto them. And therefore for Mr. Prynne to charge me with boldnesse, daringnesse, audaciousnesse, &c. for stick­ing [Page 38] to, standing by, and maintaining what I have said and done out of faithfulnesse both unto God and men, and according to the true tenor and intent of my Commission from Heaven; is as child­ish and weak, as if I should charge him with boldnesse, daringnesse, audaciousnesse, for eating his bread, or pleading the righteous cause of his honest client. He mistakes his mark day and way, if he thinks either to (rayle I might truely say, or) threaten me out of the way and course of my dutie, by his great words. Through Christ strength­ning me, it is as easie for me to beare all his unjust and hard sayings, as it is for him to speak them: to stand under, and carry the grea­test burthen of infamie and reproach, as it is for him to lay it on; yea to suffer the worst and hardest of sufferings, as it is for him to procure them. He that cannot [...], and that at any rate whatsoever, will never make good Souldier indeed for Jesus Christ. His pen (I hope) you see, hath not prospered hitherto, in pleading the cause of his client, PRESUMPTUOUSLY: he cannot finde any one signification of the word, that will stick or fasten.

The fift and last signification, which he insists upon, is this. The verb ye wot of, PRAESVMO, yet further signifies, to doe a thing boldly, confidently, or rashly, without good grounds, &c. To help him­self at the dead lift he is now at, by this signification of his verb, he sets on thus; After you were questioned before a Committee of Par­liament for those very passages in your first Sermon, as exceeding scanda­lous and derogatory to the Members and Privileges of Parliament, yet you in a daring manner, whilst you were under examination, audacious­ly preached over the same againe for substance in your Pulpit on a solemne Fast day, and published them with additions in no lesse then two printed books: yea since your very censure by the Committee for them, you have in a higher straine then ever gone on to justifie them in print once more, in your Innocencies Triumph (like an incorrigible Delinquent) wherein you slander the Parliament more then before, &c. Where before I answer, observe 1. That the signification here insisted upon is, lower then the charge; it signifies to doe boldly, &c. but his charge is, that I did it presumptuously. 2. In this great Muster-roll of the severall significa­tions of his verb Praesumo, he passes over, and forgets to list the com­mon or generall acceptation of the word, as it is usually taken amongst us, and as any Author that writes English uses to be un­derstood; viz. for a wilfull and high-handed commission of some wicked thing. But for answer;

1. What Logick is there in all this Rhetorick to prove, that what I did in the passages under contest, I did rashly or without good grounds? Here is nothing so much as in pretence (in reality no where else) to disable those grounds upon which those passages stand.

2. How unkindly he deales with the truth, in affirming, 1. That I preached over the same again for substance or a solemne Fast day. 2. That I published them with additions in no lesse then two printed books, whilst I was under examination; hath been already presented to view towards the beginning of this Discourse. And here wee have yet more (besides these) ejusdem farinae, (seu potius, furfaris) as 1. That the passages in my first Sermon were exceeding scandalous, and derogatory to the members and privileges of Parliament: There hath been nothing yet proved, nor (I beleeve) ever will or can be proved, that there was any thing in this Sermon, not only not exceeding scandalous and derogatory, &c. but not scandalous or derogatory in the least or lightest manner or degree either to any member, or any privilege of Parliament whatsoever. 2. That since my very censure by the Committee for them, I have gone on to justifie them in an HIGHER STRAIN then ever, in my Innocencies Triumph. Mr. Prynne I see is no Astronomer, to take the altitude or elevation of a strain in Rhetorick; if hee were, he would be ashamed of this calculation, that in my Innocen­cies Triumph I justifie my passages in a HIGHER STRAINE then ever. Whosoever reads this little peece, cannot lightly but see and confesse, that all along I creep as neere the ground as any man (lightly) can goe. 3. That in my said Innocencies Triumph I slander the Parliament more then before. Here wee have untruth upon un­truth, position upon supposition, and both vanity. For this asser­tion 1. supposeth, that I had slandered the Parliament before, (wherein I am certain Mr. Prynne slanders me:) And 2. i affirmeth, that I slander it a second time more then I did before. If he had conten­ted himself only to have said, that in my Innocencies Triumph I slander the Parliament as much as I did before, he had spoke a kind of truth, though of very slender importance. 4. That I was censured by the Committee for the passages in my Sermon. If by censured he means se­questred (as by the tenor of all he writes concerning me in this dis­course, it should seem he doth) granting the truth of the act or censure it selfe (which yet to me is very questionable, upon the rea­sons [Page 40] formerly mentioned) yet I cannot beleeve but that Mr. Prynnes pen faulters in assigning the grounds or reasons of the censure. It will not enter into me, to conceive a thought so dishonorable to that honorable Committee, as that they should suspend or sequester a Minister of Jesus Christ, who hath in all things from the first to the last, approved himselfe faithfull unto them, and to that hono­rable cause wherein they are ingaged, for preaching his judgement and conscience in a point of doctrine, having such substantiall and weighty grounds both from the Scriptures themselves, and other­wise, (which I then in part accounted unto them, and am still rea­dy to perfect the account, if called to it) to conceive and judge is none other but the very truth of God.

3. And lastly, whereas he brands me for an incorrigible Delin­quent, and elswhere for one impenitent after censure Pag. 107. circa medium.. I answer and confesse, 1. That I am incorrigible indeed, by a crooked rule, as the Apostles themselves were, when being charged and commanded by a whole Councell, not to speak at all, or teach in the Name of Jesus, they notwithstanding professed, that they could not but speak the things which they had seen and heard Act. 4. 18. 20.. Rectitude is alwayes unrecti­fiable, i. incorrigible: And 2. I answer and confesse yet further, that I am impenitent also in respect of that wherein I know no unrigh­teousnes, or sin. The truth is, I am conscious to my self of too many sinnes and failings in my selfe, to cast away my Repentance upon such things as need it not If I can find repentance for all my finnes, I shall leave all my other actions to be lamented and mourned over by the world. If Mr. Prynne will indict me for such incorrigiblenesse and impenitency as these, so be it: I know the great Judge of heaven and earth will acquit me. And thus you see that Mr. Pryn still stands as a man convicted of an unrighteous charge in the word PRESUMPTUOUSLY; haeret lateri lathalis arundo: the arrow sticks still in his sides, and all his wringling and wresting, and pulling, cannot get it out.

His last charge and contest against me in this peece, is, that the Authors which I cite to justifie my selfe, are miserably wrested and mi­staken for the most part. The common saying is, That it's ill halting before a creeple; The Proverb seems to import some dexterousness of faculty in him that halts continually, to take those tardy who onely counterfeit, and doe that by way of designe, which himselfe [Page 41] doth out of necessitie. The truth is, though Mr. Prynne may reasonably be conceived to have a more sagacious facultie then other men, of taking those with the very manner, who wrest Authors and mistake their meaning, as being a man so fami­liarly exercised in the practise himself (I speak of his writings against my self) yet either his skill fails him, or his will stands too fast by him, in the sentence pronounced against me in this kind; as will appear presently. In the mean while, I cannot but take notice of that expression, mistaken for the most part, as an expression of the greatest caution and care, that (to my best re­membrance) I have met with in all that he hath written against me. It is very rare to find any of his uncharitable as­sertions concerning me, at all bridled or corrected with any allay of any diminutive, lenitive, limitation or restraint: but the saying (I remember) is, that he goes farre, that never re­turns. But let us hearken unto his complaint of the behalf of those Authors, whom he so bewaileth, as being miserably wrested by me.

The first is his Friend Mr. Edwards, from whose unaunswerable a piece of Presbyterie, I cite this passage, The Parliament inter­poseth no Authority to determine, what Government shall be; and ga­ther upon it thus; therefore his opinion APPEARS to be ( not, as Mr. Prynne, whose pen I see loves to play at small game in mis-reports, rather then sit out, recites it soon after; Therefore his opinion is) either that the Parliament hath no Authoritie, or at least intends not to make use of it, it determining a Government. How mi­serably this good well-meaning Author is by me wrested, he de­clares thus: It was written onely with reference to the present time, the Parliament having at that time when he writ (during the Assemblies debate and consultation) interposed no Authority is determine what Government shall be.

But good Sir, though you (it may be) hit the meaning of the Author better then I, having and the opportunity to con­sult with him about it, which I have not; yet I am sure I hit the meaning of his words better then you. If men and their words will be of two different minds and meanings, I confesse their meanings may very easily be mistaken, not by me onely, but by those that are wiser, and farre more able then I to under­stand [Page 42] stand the force and proper import of words. And yet now I come upon this occasion to review my expression, I find it more cautions and warie, then I can remember my self to have been in the calculation or inditing of it; and altogether free even from that cavilling and shifting exception, which is here made against it. For I do not absolutely say or conclude, that his opinion was or is either so or so, (as Mr. Prynne, pro more suo, char­geth me to do) but onely that it appears to be either the one or the other: and I think there is scarce any that understands English, from the child that hath new learn'd his Primer, to the greatest Master in the language, but will acknowledge an ap­pearance at least of one or other of those opinions in the words. And how anomalous and sharking that interpretation of the words, which Mr. Prynne would force upon them, is, will best appear by comparing the words and interpretation with other expressions of the same Grammaticall character and constru­ction both in the same Author, and in others. When ( p. 170. of his Antapologie) he cites this saying out of Zanchie; that which doth not disturbe the publique peace—the Magistrate PRO­CEEDETH not against; doth he imagine that the meaning of this Author was to confine that non-proceeding of the Magi­strate he speaks of, to the particular and precise time of his writing; as if then indeed he did not so proceed, but at all other times he did. So again when himself (p. 169. of the same Tract) saith thus, the power of the Magistrate by which he punisheth sin, doth not subserve to the Kingdom of Christ the Mediator; can any reasonable man think that his meaning onely should be, that this power of the Magistrate which he speaks of, doth not thus sub­serve whilest he is in speaking or writing it; but that afterwards it may, or doth subserve in such a kind? Apagè nugas! when the Evangelist John, speaking of Christ, saith thus: This was the true light that LIGHTETH every man that cometh into the world Ioh. 1. 9.; is his meaning that Christ performed that act of grace he speaks of, enlightened men coming into the world, onely whilest he was writing his Gospel, and that afterwards he suspended it? In such constructions of speech as this, the common Rule of Divines (touching matter of Interpretation) is, that verbum praesentis notat actum continuum seu consuetum: i. a verb of the pre­sent [Page 43] tense noteth a continued or still accustomed act. So that whilest Mr. Prynne goes about to prove, that I miserably wrest his Author, how favourably soever he may deal with his Author in comparison of my dealing with him, certain I am that he mi­serably wrests his words, with which I deal as favourably, as their genuine and native signification, according to all rules both of Grammaticall and Rhetoricall construction will bear.

As for that reason which Mr. Prynne alledgeth, to counte­nance the sense which he puts upon the words now contested about, to the disparagement of mine, viz. that be maintains point-blank against me throughout his Treatise a legislative and coer­cive power in Parliaments; and that the inference which I draw from the said words is quite contrarie to the next ensuing words and pages; I answer,

1. (To the former part of the Reason) that it is most un­true: he doth not maintain point-blank against me throughout his Treatise a legislative and coercive power in Parliaments and civill Ma­gistrates. I every where acknowledge and assert a civill legislative power in both; therefore Mr. Edwards maintaining such a power in them, maintains nothing point-blank against me. And whether he maintains a spirituall or Ecclesiasticall legislative power in them, especially throughout his Treatise, let this passage be wit­nesse between me and my Adversarie: There is nothing more com­mon in the writings of the learned and orthodox, then to shew that the civill power and Government of the Magistrate, and the Ecclesiasticall Government of the Church, are to to genere disjoyned: and thereupon the power of the Magistrate by which he deals with the corrupt manners and disorders of his people, it in the nature and specificall reason distinct from Ecclesiasticall discipline Mr. Edwards Antap. p. 169.. I know not what artificiall con­struction and meaning Mr. Prynne may possibly find out for these words; but surely he that hath not affirm'd the contra­rie, as Mr. Prynne very inconsiderately (that I say not PRE­SUMPTUOUSLY) hath done, will not affirm, that Mr. Edw. in this passage maintains an Ecclesiasticall legislative power in Par­liaments or civill Magistrates, but the contrary; yea and affirms this to be the common judgement of men learned and orthodox. So again when he affirms, p. 282. that it is their duty (speaking of the Parliament) by their power and Authority to bind men to the Decrees [Page 44] of the Assembly, he doth not (doubtlesse) maintain an Ecclesia­sticall legislative power in the Parliament: for they that have such a power, cannot be bound in dutie to own the Laws or Decrees of others, much lesse to bind others to subjection to them. I omit many other passages in this book of like importance. The truth is, that Mr. Prynnes opinion concerning an Ecclesiasticall spirituall Jurisdiction in the Civill Magistrate, which yet is his grand notion in all that he hath written upon the subject of Presbyterie, overthrows the main grounds and principall foundations upon which the Doctrine of Presbyterie is built by all her ablest and most skilfull workmen. Insomuch that I wonder not a little, that the Masters of that way and Judge­ment, have not appeared at another manner of rate then yet they have done, for the vindication of their principles against him that hath made so sore a breach upon them, and laid their honour in the dust. Somewhat I know some of them have done in this kind: but the Prophet Elisha reproved the King of Israel, for smiting thrice onely upon the ground, and then ceasing, telling him that he should have smitten five or six times.

2. To the latter part of the Reason, I answer and confesse, that the inference I draw from the words mentioned, may very pos­sibly be quite contrarie to the next ensuing words and pages, and yet the sense of them no wayes wrested, nor mistaken by me; because it is familiar in the Discourse, for the Author to contradict himself, as well as other men; according to one of the ingre­dients in that most true and happie character of the Discourse, given by a woman, who describes it to be wrangling-insinuating-contradictory-revengefull storie Katharine Chidley New-yeers gift. E­pist. to the Reader.. And the truth is, that in the eye of an unpartiall and disengaged Reader, there is scarce any passage or period throughout the whole Discourse but may be commodiously enough reduced under one of these 4. heads. And therefore whereas Mr. Prynne gives this elogium of it, that it is in truth unanswerable Epist. Dedic. non longe à finè; I confesse that unanswerable it is in severall respects and sundrie wayes. First, it is unanswerable to that esteeme which my self with many others had of the Au­thor formerly. Secondly, unanswerable it is to that opinion, which he would have the world conceive of his parts and lear­ning, and in speciall manner of his abilities to deal in the par­ticular [Page 45] controversie. Thirdly, it is unanswerable to his profes­sion as he is a Christian. Fourthly, much more unanswerable is it to his calling, as he is a Minister of Jesus Christ and of the Go­spel: And fifthly (and lastly) most unanswerable it is to those fre­quent, solemn and large professions which he makes both in his Epistle and elsewhere, of his love to the Apologists, and candor and fairnesse in writing. But for any such unanswerable­nesse as Mr. Prynne intends, the one part of it will not indure that such a thing should be spoken of the other; there being enough in the Discourse it self to answer whatsoever is to be found in it, of any materiall consideration against the Con­gregationall way; as will in time convenient be made mani­fest in the sight of the Sun, God not preventing, by more then an ordinarie (or at least expected) hand. And whereas Mr. Prynne glorieth (and that twice over at least, for failing) that it hath not been hitherto answered by the Independents Epist. Dedic. non longe à fine. And again, p. 111. non longè à fine.; I answer three things: First, that neither hath Mris Katharine Chidleys Answer to Mr. Edwards his Reasons against Independencie and Toleration, been yet replyed unto or answered, either by Mr. Edwards himself, or any other of his partie; notwithstanding the said Answer be but a small piece in comparison of the An­tapologie: and besides hath been some yeers longer abroad, then this. Besides this, there are many other Tractates and Discourses extant (and so have been a long time) in defence of the Congregationall way, which as yet have not been so much as attempted by any Classique Author whatsoever. A particu­lar of some of these you may see, p. 65. of my Innocencie and Truth triumphing together, in the Margent. As for that which A. S. or (in words at large) Adam Steuart hath lift up his pen to do against M. S. if men will needs vote it for an Answer, an Answer (so called) let it be: Whereas M. S. hath these words: Better a thousand times is it that such distempers as these, though found in millions of men, should suffer, then that the least haire of the head of one of those men should fall to the ground: This passage A. Steuart ( [...]) interprets this: Better that millions of us, who desire the suppression of all Sects, should suffer, then but any of them should lose but one, yea the least hair of their heads. The second part of the Duply, &c. by Adam Steu­art, p. 180. What M. S. cals, DISTEMPERS, A. S. interprets, Presbyterians; and is not able to conceive how the one should suffer without the other. And this line of interpretation he stretcheth over this whole Discourse: [...]. but (doubtlesse) he that wants either will [Page 46] or skill to distinguish between the persons and the distempers of men, is in an ill capacitie (or incapacitie rather) of framing any sober answer to a sober Discourse. Secondly, Mr. Edwards himself, the smallnesse of the content of the Apologeticall Nar­ration considered, took not a whit lesse time to give answer to it, then hath yet been taken by the Independents to answer the Antapologie. But thirdly (and lastly) if Mr. Prynne knew and considered, who it was that hath hindered the Independents, and that once and again from answering it as yet, viz. he that sometimes hindred Pauls coming to the Thessalonians 1 Thes. 2. 18, though (in Mr. Edwards apprehension) he both hastened and furthered the coming back of the Apologists into England Actapol. p. 191.; he had little or no cause to glorie in that priviledge. But Quod defertur, non an­fectur:

Having (as you have heard) befriended Mr. Edwards (his fellow-labourer in the Presbyterian cause) with the best ac­commodation he could to make one piece of him hang to ano­ther (but alas, who is able to comprimize between fire and wa­ter?) he proceeds and tels me behind my back, (and yet with an intent I presume that all the world should take notice of it) that my passages out of Mr. Hayward, Bishop Jewel, Mr. Fox, Mr. Calvin, Jacobus Acontius, &c. make nothing at all against the legislative Au­thority of Parliaments in matters of Religion and Church Government, and have no affinity with my passages, words, most of them propugning the very Ecclesiasticall power of Parliaments, which I oppugne: And yet in the very next words adds; that indeed some of their words seem to diminish the coercive power of Magistrates, and enforcing of mens consciences in matters of Religion; as if I ever oppugned or de­nied any other Authority or power in Magistrates, then this. If he will please but to peruse my Innocencies triumph, pag. 8. and my Innocency and Truth triumphing together, pag. 72. 73. 78. with severall other passages in these and other my wri­tings, he will (or at least very easily, may) see that I oppugne, de­ny no other Authority, power in Parliaments, Civill Magistrates, but onely that which is enforcing of mens consciences in matters of Reli­gion. Whereas he promiseth or undertakes that he shall in due place answer these words of theirs, which (as he saith) seem to di­minish [Page 47] the coercive power of Magistrates in matters of Religion, and manifest how I abuse the Authors herein as well as Mr. Edwards; My answer onely is, that he may indeed soon answer them after that rate of answering, at which he hath answered any thing of mine hitherto, and he may shew how (i. say that) I abuse them; and without writing or speaking, as well as by either, manifest that I abuse their Authors herein, as well as I do Mr. Edwards. But for this last particular, I am willing to save him the labour and pains of writing for the manifestation of it. For I here freely con­fesse, that I have abused these Authors in what he speaks of, just as I have abused Mr. Edwards: and both of them just as much as amounts to no abuse at all. I wonder by what art or way the Gentleman means to go to work, to prove that I have miserably wrested, or abused the Authors he here speaks of, or their words, when as I have put no construction at all or interpretation upon their words, nor drawn any inference or deduction from them, but onely transcribed them with as much dili­gence and faithfulnesse as I could, and presented them cleerly as they stand in their respective Authors. If his meaning be, that I have miserably wrested and abused them by my quotation of them, as subservient to my cause or purpose, (a deed of folly which himself commits with the holy Scriptures themselves many a time and often) my answer is, that were this assertion true, that they are not subservient to my cause or purpose, yet my recourse unto them, for aid to my purpose, were no misera­ble wresting or abusing of them. Our Saviour being an hungry, did not abuse the fig-tree by repairing to it, though there prov'd nothing upon it for his purpose. Nor should Mr. Prynne abuse a Tavern by going into it to drink a cup of wine that pleaseth him, though he shold be disappointed in his expectation when he comes there. Nay in this case would he not rather think (and that much more reasonably of the two) that the Taverne had abused him, then he it. In like manner, if those Authors and sayings which I have produced, and which Mr. Prynne speaks of, have no affinity with my passages and purpose, I may much more truly and reasonably say that they have abused me, then Mr. Prynne can either say or ever prove, that I have abused them. For the truth is, if they do fall me, or refuse to stand by [Page 48] me in the defence of those passages spoken of when Mr. Prynne hath done his worst to them, they are the greatest dissemblers that ever wore the livery of paper and inke. Never were there sentences or sayings that more fully and freely complied with any mans notions whatsoever in terms and words, then farre the greatest part of these do with my passages and purpose. If Mr. Prynne can dissolve or abrogate the Authoritie of Grammar rules, and destroy the naturall and proper signification of words, then may I have some cause to fear, that he may pos­sibly evict me to be a miserable wrester and abuser of Authors and their sayings. But if words be able to defend themselves, and make good the possession of their known significations and rules of construction, their both ancient and moderne interest in the understandings of men, against the Authority or vio­lence of Mr. Prynnes pen; I defie all his interminations and threatnings of manifesting me either a miserable wrester or abuser of my Authors.

The last parcell of his high contest against me in this Dis­course, is, that I pervert the meaning of the Divines of Scotland, in one, or more, or I know not, he knows not, how many or how few, of those passages which I cite from them; whereas I med­dle not little or much with any sense or meaning of any of them; but onely barely tender them unto the Reader, leaving it free unto him to judge of the sense and meaning of them, and whether they consort with my apprehensions, or no. And though he be doubtfull of that interpretation or meaning which himself (however) adventures to put upon them (as there is reason more then enough, why he should) delivering himself with this sub-modest caution, If I mistake not; yet am I rated and chidden at no lower rate, then this: you may THERE­FORE blush at this (I wonder, which) your perverting of their meaning, as if they held, that the Parliaments of England or Scotland had no power to make Ecclestasticall Laws for Religion and Church Government. THEREFORE may I blush: wherefore? what? be­cause Mr. Prynne hath put such a sense and interpretation upon the passages in hand, of which he knows not (it seems) what to make, but suspects a mistake in it? Blush in this respect I con­fesse I may: but what cause have I to blush, at my perverting of their [Page 49] meaning, when as 1. I do not interpose to put any meaning (I mean any particular or speciall meaning) upon any of them. 2. Why should I blush upon Mr. Prynnes injunction, at any mea­ning which I put upon them, when as that very meaning which himself puts upon them, by way of confutation and disparage­ment of that which he pretends to be mine, is by himself little lesse then suspected for a mistake? The tax of blushing which Mr. Prynne imposeth upon me, should in reason be rather levied upon the estate of his own modestie, who by his own confession runs the hazard of perverting the meaning of those passages under debate, whereas I never came so neere the crime of such a perversion, as to ingage my self in any Interpretation of them at all. But if you will please to heare his Interpretation, and compare it diligently with his Text (the passages cited by me from the Divines of Scotland) you may very fairly translate Mr. Prynnes, If I mistake not, into, certainly, Mr. Prynne mistakes. I Answer, (saith he) 1. That their onely meaning (if I mistake not) in these passages, is, that the Prince or chiefe Civill Magistrate of himselfe, without a Parlia­ment, or without the assistance and consent of his Nobles, Commons, Cler­gie, cannot legally make any Ecclesiasticall Lawes to oblige his people. Mark this saying well; and see how like it looks to the genuine Interpretation, sense or import of these (and the like) ensuing sen­tences. All men, as well Magistrates, as inferiors, ought to be subject to the judgement of the Nationall Assembly in Ecclesiasticall causes without any reclamation or appellation to any Judge, Civill or Ecclesiasticall, within the Realme. Againe; It belongeth to the Synod (the Clergie ha­ving the chiefe place therein to give Direction and advice) not to receive and approve the definition of the Prince in things which concerne the worship of God, but it self to define and determine what Orders and Cu­stomes are fittest to be observed, &c. We see here in the Text, that the chiefe place, yea the sole power (for what other sense can be put up­on those words, It belongeth to the Synod it self to define and deter­mine) of defining and determining Orders and Customes in things which concerne the worship of God, is ascribed unto the Synod, (wherein also the Direction of the Clergie ought to be predominant) not onely without the definition of the Prince, or chiefe Civill Magistrate, but with rejection of his definition: NOT TO RECEIVE OR APPROVE THE DEFINITION OF THE PRINCE [Page 50] (saith this text.) Whereas in Mr. Prynnes Interpretation, the Prince or chiefe Civill Magistrate (as we heard) hath the preheminence and precedencie in all such definitions and determinations assigned unto him; and next to him, the Nobles, and next to them the Commons, (of neither of which ne [...] quidem in the Text) are interessed in the same; and the Clergie, or Synod, which are made the head, and have the chiefe place, if not the sole power, about such definitions and determinations in the text, are in the Interpretation made the taile, and compelled to come behind all the rest, as a partie borne out of due time, or at least in the lowest influence of power, for any such Interest. If Mr. Prynne be not (at the softest) mistaken in this Interpretation, the sense and meaning of those words, Abraham be­gat Isaac Mat. 1. 2., may very possibly be this, that Judas went and hung himself Mat. 27. 5.. Judge, Reader, between me and my Adversary, who hath more cause to blush, and who is the more miserable wrester of words, and perverter of meanings. And whether there be not an ayre or gentle breathing of a contradiction in this period which he sub­joynes, within it self, and in one part of it to the premised Inter­pretation, I desire the Reader attentively to consider. But that the King (saith he) or supreame temporall Magistrates, assisted by a Par­liament and Orthodox Divines, may not make binding Ecclesiasticall Lawes, or, that their or our Parliaments have not a reall Legislative power in any matter Ecclestiastique (the onely point controversed) is di­rectly contrary both to the constant Doctrine and Practise of our Brethren and their Church, &c. I beleeve that neither our Brethren, nor their Church, will conne Mr. Prynne thanks for this his vindication and plea for them: but however, I shall not speak in his cast, nor fore­stall his market. Onely I desire to know of him, if their, and our Parliaments have a reall Legislative Power in matters Ecclesiastique (as he affirms in the latter part of the sentence) why he requires an assistance of Orthodox Divines in the former part of it, to make binding Ecclesiasticall Lawes. They that have a reall Legislative power in, or within themselves; need no forinsecall assistance of others, to make their Laws binding, though they may need forinsecal advice for the better constitution of them, as in Laws about any particular trade; yea he had given this judgement in the case a little before (as we heard) that the Prince or chiefe civill Magistrate cannot legally make any Ecclesiasticall Lawes to oblige his people, not onely not without a [Page 51] Parliament, but not without his Clergie also. Doth he not here in­teresse the Clergie every whit as farre, and as deep in the very essence or substance of the Legislative power to make binding Ecclesiasticall Lawes for the people, as he doth the Parliament it self? And whereas in the passage last recited, he affirms the onely point in controversie to be, whether our Parliaments have not a reall legislative power in any matters Ecclesiastique; I wonder why he storms me and my writings with so much indignation, pag. 106, 107. &c. for printing passages onely charged by him as being against the Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction of Parliaments Pag. 106. ante medium.; which likewise is his usuall expression elsewhere. Doth he apprehend no difference at all, between an Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction, power, Authoritie; and a legislative power in or about Ec­clestiasticall matters, or things? Mr. Edwards, if he will vouchsafe to learne of him, will teach him a wide difference; who in many pla­ces gives and grants unto the Magistrate a power and Authoritie about Ecclesiasticall causes, and businesses Antapol pag. 159, 160, 163, &c. of many kinds, (though not of any pag 166. 169. 170, &c., as Mr. Prynne bountie extendeth) but no where (to my remembrance) grants any Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction or power to him: yea p. 163. of his Antapologie, he interrogates his Apologists, Whether there doth not reside in the Church all Ecclesiasticall power ab­solutely necessary to the building up of the Kingdome of Christ, and sal­vation of men, even when the Magistrate is not of the Church? The im­port of which interrogation agrees well with that assertion of the same Author; and tract p. 169. that the civill power and Government of the Magistrate, and the Ecclesiasticall Government of the Church, are toto genere disjoyned; and thereupon the power of the Civill Magistrate, by which he deales with the corrupt manners and disorders of his people, is in the nature and specificall reason distinct from Ecclesiasticall Disci­pline. If there be an Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction or Legislative power in civill Magistrates, Parliaments, to make Ecclesiasticall binding Laws; why may not the exercise of this power in the administration or execution of these Lawes, be called Ecclesiasticall Discipline or Go­vernment? yea, why not rather Ecclesiasticall, then civill? So that Mr. Prynne confounding an Ecclesiasticall power, with a power about Ecclesiasticall things, plainly shews that he is not perfectly initiated in the mysterie of Presbyterie: and did not his writings more ac­commodate that cause and partie by the weight of their Authori­tie, and height of language, and confidence, together with unpa­ralleld [Page 52] bitternesse against his opposites, then by their worth in strength of reason, I beleeve they would hardly think them worthy to be numbred amongst their Benefactors.

But notwithstanding all that Mr. Prynne hath done or said to, or against me, or my Innocencies Triumph, in particular; in the 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112 pages of this his Discourse, yet his spes gregis, the strength of his hope that he hath done sufficient exe­cution upon me, rests onely upon his former sections; however the Question of many concerning them, is, Cui bono? He tells me, that my own conscience and judgement cannot but informe me, that he hath written enough in the former Sections to convince me and all the world besides, that I have not onely violated, but denyed, oppugned those Privi­ledges of Parliament in Ecclesiasticall affaires, which our own Parlia­ments in all ages, and Parliamentary Assemblies in all other Kingdomes have unquestionably exercised, &c. I answer,

1. I confesse that in the former sections he hath written enough, quantitativè, to convince any reasonable man (if not all the world) of any errour or mistake whatsoever: but much too little qualitativè, to convince either me, or any reasonable man, that I have violated, or oppugned any Priviledge of Parliament; I have farre more reason to conceive and hope, that in this and my last-published Discourse, I have written enough both wayes to convince both him and all the world, that I have NOT violated or oppugned any Priviledge of Par­liament, truly, or with the consent of Heaven, so called. If he intends to conclude, that therefore I have violated, oppugned the Privileges of Parliament, because I have argued against some positions or opi­nions, which Mr. Prynne, with some others, are pleased to call Pri­viledges of Parliament; the Logician, who is a man of reason, will answer for me, that à terminis diminuentibus non sequitur argumen­tatio. It doth not follow, that a piece of metall or coyne is there­fore gold, because it is counterfeit gold; nor that Mr. Prynnes Great Grandfather is a man, because he is a dead man. If he can, or shall fairly demonstrate unto me (though in a far lesse content of words, then his three former sections amount unto) that any act, practise, or exercise, either by continuance or succession of time, or by fre­quencie of repetition, or customarinesse of reiteration, by conni­vencie or want of opposition from men, must needs change the nature and kind of it, and of sinfull become lawfull, he shall by [Page 53] such a demonstration as this, put life into his former sections, and render them potent for that conviction which he expects from them; but till this be done, that great bulk and body of things done in the dark, and time out of minde, will partake of that infirmitie which the Author himself acknowledgeth as cleaving to the Dis­course, I meane, impotencie These my impotent en­deavours. Epist. to the Reader, ver­sus finem.; and can with no tolerable pretence of reason or equitie, demand that interest in the judgements, con­sciences, understandings of men, which he challengeth (it seems) on their behalfe. It is as poore and low a designe, onely by alledging the examples, opinions, or judgements of men, to attempt the con­viction of him that builds his opinion upon the Scriptures & word of God, yea though he builds besides his foundation; as it would be in a man to carry a sack of chaffe to the market, hoping to bring home a like quantitie of wheat for it, without giving any other price. Yea to alledge and cite the Scriptures themselves, though in never such an abundance, without close arguing and binding them to our cause; is a means of very small hope, whereby to prevaile or doe good upon such a man who holds his opinion, not barely or simply upon a supposall of Scripture-Authoritie for it, but upon Scripture thoroughly debated, and by principles of sound reason and naturall deductions, brought home unto his judgement and cause.

Againe, 2. in all that great body of premisses contained in all the former Sections he speaks of, there is not one word, syllable, letter, or tittle to prove that maine ingredient in his Conclusion, unquestio­nably exercised. Logicians justly reject and exauthorize all such Con­clusions, which swell above the line of their premisses. By all the tables and donaries presented unto Neptune by those that in Ship­wracks escaped with their lives, it could not be knowne, who, or how many they were, that were drowned.

3. Nor is there any whit more in any, in all the said Sections or premisses, that reacheth home, or indeed comes neere, to that spe­cialtie in the Conclusion, in all ages. Evanders mother lived many ages agone; yet the mother of Abel had the precedencie of her by many generations. Therefore surely all the world will never accept of the Conclusion so insufficiently and lamely prov'd.

4. And lastly, Whereas Mr. Prynne tells me, that if I now make not good my promise, few or none will ever credit me hereafter; I should [Page 54] be very glad to meet with my condition, that so I might performe my obligation. But in the meane time, whether any or none will credit me hereafter; I know not well how I, or any other should credit him for the present, as touching the authentiqueness and truth of those citations and transcriptions, upon which the principall weight of that Conclusion depends, whereof he expects conviction both from me, and all the world to boote. Is it lightly possible for any man to refraine jealousie in this kind, that doth but consider how oft his pen hath dash'd against the rock of truth, in represent­ing me, my opinions and sayings, (yea, I can say further, affections, intentions) upon the open theatre of the world, where any man that will, may see his nakednesse in this kinde? Is boldnesse in the Sun, like to prove modestiē in the shade? As for satisfaction by exa­mination of all particulars, it is not every mans, indeed very few mens, opportunitie. The respective Authors and records, where­in particularities must be inquired after, and found, for satisfacti­on in that kind, are in few mens hands; and not of all mens under­standings. So that Mr. Prynne by dealing so unfaithfully and un­christianly by me and my sayings, as he hath done, hath not onely obstructed the course and passages of his own reputation and cre­dit; but hath further also injur'd the world round about him, by rendring those good parts and abilities wherewith God hath in­trusted him for publick accommodation, if not wholly unservice­able, yet of very meane usefulnesse and concernment, in comparison of what their line and tenour would well have borne. It is a saying in the Civill Law, that he that hath injur'd one, hath threatened many.

I end, with a word of Christian admonition and advice, both to the Gentleman my Antagonist, and my selfe. Sir, the Great and Glorious God that made us, in mercy remembers both our frames, and considers that we are dust Psal. 103. 14.. This gracious remembrance of his we injoy both by night and by day, in whatsoever we injoy in the Comforts of this world, yea or in the opportunities wee have of laying hold on that which is to come. Our dust which abaseth us, in this respect, yet relieveth us, and becomes a Mediator for us with the bountifulnesse of God: were wee creatures of a more ex­cellent line, those sins and infirmities would (in all likelihood) were they found upon us, be our ruine, which now doe not so much [Page 55] as shake the least haire of our heads. If wee would but remember and consider one the other, as God doth us both, that common principle of frailtie, out of which wee act to a reciprocall discon­tentment and offence, would be of soveraigne use to mollifie and supple, if not perfectly to heale, both our wounds. Not to think any thing that befalleth us strange, is almost (being interpreted) not to think it evill. We shall not quit our selves like men, if we make any great matter of it, to be evill intreated by men. Mutuall dis­contentments now and then are a known tribute which men must look to pay for the commoditie of living & conversing together in the world. If we have offended one the other, happie shall we be in forgiving one the other, and circumvent him whose designe was to have circumvented us, and made hatred (a kind of upper hell) of our contestation. If I have offended you otherwise then by speaking the truth, and so as the defence of it, all circumstances duly poy­sed, required, you shall not need long to complaine of want of Christian satisfaction, as far as I am able either to doe or to speak any thing that may accommodate you, if you please, but to signifie your aggrievance, and make your demands in a Christian and lo­ving way. And if your heart will but answer mine in these inclina­tions, the storms and tempests of our contestations, shall yet end in a sweet calme; and men shall look upon us, as if wee had never been they: If you reject the motion of a Christian compliance by the way, I can very patiently, and with comfort enough, awaite the Decisions of that Great Tribunall, whose awards will shortly seale all the righteousnesses and unrighteousnesses of men, against all further disputes or inquiries to the dayes of Eternitie.