CHAP. I. How some have been and are averse from, or adverse to disputations in Religion: how farre and for what rea­sons.

SOme are not altogether against disputations in Religion, but are jealous over them with a godly jealousy, as Paul was over his Corinthians, 2 Cor. 11.2. lest they should be in­considerately undertaken, or indiscreetly managed, and so as Isti dum ni­mium scalpunt veritatem a­mittunt (ut a­cutusille mimi versiculus;) ni­mium altercan­do veritas a­mittitur. Lu­dovic. Vives de causis cor­ruptar. artiū. l. 3. p 127. Ludovicus Vives saith; The truth by too much scratching and alte­ration should be lost; lest errour by artificiall arguments and orna­ments should have such a glorious flourish and varnish set upon it, as to make it to be taken for the truth: which is not unlike to fall out; for some Interdum orichalcum ma­gis exprimit co­lorem auri quā aurum ipsum. Ibid. Copper (saith he,) hath a more glorious Lustre then some true gold. And nothing, as Nihil est tam incredibile quod non di­cendo fiat probabile; nihil tam horridum, tam incultum, quod non splendescat oration [...]. Cicer. paradox, Prooem. p. 436. Num. 3. Cicero observeth in the prooeme of his Paradoxes, is so incredible, but by elequence it may be made to appeare probable. Nothing is so horrid, but by a garnish of words it may be made to shine. This imposture is ea­sily put upon the vulgar; for ^e it is very easy with volubility of tongue to deoeive the simple common people, who What they do not perceive with understanding, they receive with admiration; nor can they ^f put a due difference betwixt garrulity and authority: And they are commonly more affected with what they say who gainsay solid and long believed verity under pretence of new discoveries of truth; and errour then with what hath warrant from the word of God, and consent of all the Christian Churches of the world, both of ancient or of later times: and the fallacy takes with them the more tenderly, because these [Page 4]Novell Dogmatists make a faire profession of mortification and self-deniall, refusing those advantages and accommodati­ons of a comfortable living, which their opposites do enjoy; and bear themselves boldly against authority, as if they meant to merit that Elogium which the Disciples of the Pha [...]isees with the Herodians gave of our Saviour, Mat. 22.16. Master we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God truth; neither carest thou for any man, for thou regardest not the persons of man. And therefore they set up what Religion they plea [...]e, making their conventicles when and what they please, and in them speaking of God and man what they please, that which is fitter to be whispered in the dark or rather buried in eternall silence, then as Divine dictates, as our Saviour would have them, published on the house-top, Luk. 12.3. yet that their more private carriage of their profession in Chimnie-houses, where there is ever more smoke then light, may not be interpreted to their prejudice, as if they had not conscience and confidence to own their tenets in publick; they have presumed many times, even the weaker sex hath so much strength of fan­cy and will, as to offer to set up their new lights in our steeple­houses, and to call our Preachers down from their Pulpits, as having no calling from God to be Preachers of the Gospel: and herein many of the shallower fort do so applaud them­selves, that they had rather appeal to them to be their judges, Factus est populus specta­tor, arbiter, Index. Ludo­vic. Vives. de causis corrupt. artium. l. 1. p. 38. as some judicious writers have observed, then to any others; & Inde arro­gantia, quod aliquod sibi vi­derentur quia stulto judici videbantur. Idem l. 3. p. 327. they arrogantly applaud themselves in their approbation. But that which maketh the wiser sort more unwilling to give too much way to religious disputations, or rather to disputations of Religion (especially in publick) is the subtilty of some of unsound principles & the simplicity of others of a better belief; who suspect­ing no deceipt, & confiding in the strength of truth, are easily in­tangled with ingagements to dispute to the greatest disadvantage of their cause, not forethinking how their adversaries may be fur­nished for assault; and what liberty of misreport they will take, either to make shew of victory, or to shadow a foil; this inconvenience is obvious to an ordinary apprehension: But there are some stratagematicall depths, and policies of those who are Masters in the Mysteries of iniquity, both of the old [Page 5]and new Antichristian faction, which I confesse my shallow­nesse had not imagined, had I not been informed of them by a double testimony of good account and credit; the one was told me by a Learned Scotchman, a great Traveller, when we met and became well acquainted in Oxford, which though above 4 yeares ago I very well remember it was thus. The Protestants of Luthers and Calvins profession have had many disputes and conferences in severall places, which The Prote­stants have had above 100 meetings, con­ferences, dispu­tations, coun­cels and Sy­nods, from their first dis­putation held at Lypsia upon the year 1519 to their synod in Vilna, 590. So Parsons Preface to the 10. disputati­ons recounted by John Fox, v. 26. he takes his ingelli­gence from. Stanislaus Res­caus his obser­vations, and meanes, though he do not particu­larly quote his Book, wch he calleth Ministromachi­am, in qua E­vangelicorum Magistrorum & Ministro [...] de evangelicis magistris & ministris mutua judicia Testi­monia &c. recensentur. E [...]us. Cole­niae. apud Henric. Fal­ken. birg. 1522. Parsons numbers to above a 100. betwixt them; at one of their meetings, which brought them near a conclusion of accord, there came in a man in the name of a Lutheran Minister, which desired to be heard, and he was admitted to speak; and he so set up soothed and animated the Lutherans, to stand out against all comply­ance with the Calvinists, and so exasperated the Calvinists with reproch, that they went away worse minded towards each o­ther, then they were when at first they met together. The o­ther cunning device was, of some of our English Sectaries about the yeare 1647. And that was a plot upon a dispute managed in this manner; some of them had provoked a Minister (lear­ned enough for his time, but too young to match them in sub­tilty either of caution or of contrivance) to a publick dispute, which he accepted of: and though he acted his part as well as could be expected of one of his parts and yeares, yet he rather lost then gained reputation to his cause or person, because one of their side pretending himself till then to be of a contrary judgement to theirs, at the close of the dispute, openly profes­sed his conviction and conversion to their party by the satis­faction he had received at that disputation; whereas it was af­terward dicovered that he was a great Zelot to that cause and party in former times, which (together with the other particu­lars fore mentioned) induced me to propose unto my Brethren of the Ministry of Cheshire, when they met to subscribe their at­testation to the Ministers of London, Jun. 1648. (the penning whereof by their unanimous vote they put upon me) that no Minister might make or take up a challenge for a set disputation upon any point of Religion, without consultation and consent of his Brethren, who should judge

1. Whether it should be disputed on or no; if so

2. How the disputation should be ordered, that the truth, and those who are advocates for it, may be clear and secured from circumvention and slander. The like (upon an especiall occa­sion) I moved to my fellow. Ministers at our meeting at Kil­lingworth in Warwickshire, and in both ( viz. that in Cheshire, and this in Warwickshire,) as many as met together (who were a considerable number) signified their consent, by subscription to what I proposed, in these words:

Besides these religious considerations which most concern Ministers to look unto, there is another, which upon a Civil account belongs most to the Magistrate, viz. the preservation of the publick peace, much endangered by a numerous con­course of people of adverse principles, for debate of their differences. From which will hardly be separated that pest of concord, as Concordiae pe­stis vincendi pertinax libido. Erasm. Epist. praefix. operi­bus. Hilar. p. 5. ( Erasmus calleth it,) a pertinacious desire to conquer the adversary; which may be like to break out into opprobri­ous words, and from such words it may be to blowes and bloud-shed. Therefore S. Paul clearing of himself from Ter­tullus his accusation, of moving sedition among all the Iewes throughout the world, Act [...]q 5. he saith v. 12. that his ac­cusers neither found him in the Temple disputing with any man, nor raising up the people, neither in the Synagogues, nor in the City; implying that disputation did dispose men to popular [Page 7]disturbance; and with reference to the affinity betwixt the one and the other, the Catholick meeting in a lesse number then the Donatists, (for a publick dispute) made this advantage of the dif­ference, viz. That if any tumults should arise the disorder could not in reason be imputed unto them who were fewer, but to their ad­versaries that in number exceeded them. Pauciores ca­tholici q [...]m Donatisl [...]e [...]e si tumultus esset minori numero non impatare­tur August. Operts brevicu­li collat. Prae­fat. Tom. 7. part. 1. p. 686. Though sometimes there is more danger of commotion from a few turbulent Spi­rits on the one side, then of a multitude of sober minded Ci­tizens on the other; whereof you had evidence enough at your City Coventry, when those who came as abetters to Mr. Knowles and Mr. K [...]ff [...]ns contestation, against you and your brother Dr. Grewe, behaved themselves so rudely, that the Committee re­siding there thought it necessary to forbid your dispu [...]tes, and the City-Magistrates denyed the use of their Town-Hall for that purpose, though they had promised it before their coming, when there appeared no such perill of breach of the publick Peace, as after their coming they soon perceived. How it came to passe, that (notwithstanding the declared unwillingnesse of the Committee and Magistrates of the City against the publick dispute,) you fitted them with a publick place and polemical entertainment, who came so far out of their way, as from London to Coventry to quarrell with you, I shall shew in a more convenient place: And (to go on with observations of like sort) I very well remember that in London (when Sir, Iohn Gayor was Lord Major) there was a disputation betwixt Mr. William Ienkins then Preacher at Christ-Church, and Mr. Benjamin Cox, in Mr. I. his house, at which I was present, be­ing invited by Mr. I. And at the end of that dispute, there was another resolved on betwixt Mr. Iames Cranford, and the same Mr. Cox, and that within a few dayes after; but before the time concluded on I had occasion to bring his Lordship a lift of such Ministers as I thought fit to be Preachers at Pauls, as he had requested me to do; and then I telling him (the discourse we had inducing me to it) the dispute be­tween Mr. I. and Mr. Cox, and that I was present at it, and that another was intended and concluded betwixt Mr. Cran­ford and Mr. Cox within a while after; he replyed, that he would have suffered neither of them, if he had had timely ad­vertisement [Page 8]of them both; but since the one was past and could not be recalled, he would send his warrant to prevent the other; and that it might be certainly and speedily done, he put me upon it to draw up a form of prohibition of it: which I did, whereupon the parties served with it desisted from their purpose. There was another disputation more publickly be­spoken, and as I have heard agreed upon to be betwixt your two, Cov. Antagonists, and Mr. Calumy, at his Church in Al­derman-bury; but such animosities of Spirit, and symptomes of tumult began to stir, and to gather near the time and place of the publick meeting, that there was great cause to fear, that how ever it fared with the truth, the common peace would be much endangered, if that concourse were not hindred; and therefore by the civil Magistrates it was forbidden, and as in du­ty it was requisite, accordingly forborn.

And I doubt not of Religious Civil Magistrates, though their proper office serve principally for the preservation of peace among the common people, but some of them have the lesse liking of disputes in Religion, because they fear it must be prophaned by polemicall contestations of such as are Hoc morbi fe­re innatum est hominum inge­iis, ut cedere nesciant. E­rasm. ubi su­prà too stout to stoop to the truth, and so Est hoc per­tinaciae ple­risque morta­lium ingeniis insitumut, quod semel quocun (que) casu pronun­ciaverint, nun­quam [...]u [...] de­sinant, etiamsi compe­rerint perperä pronunciasse. Ibid. p. ult. pertinacious in their opinions, as not to recede from what they have pronounced, nay though they see their errour, and that they have pronounced amisse: and this E­rasmus observeth as a disease and infirmity naturally incident to most men. And as the Magistrates are publick persons, if withall they be religious, they cannot think it fit the common interest in sacred and Catholick truths of doctrine and practise, should be permitted to private persons to tosse to and fro, (as a Ball betwixt two Rackets) in wrangling altercation. This moved the Emperour Marcianus, in ratification of the Conn­cel of Chalcedon, Ne cui am­plius liceret publicè de fide differere. Baron. Annal an. 452. num. 1. Tom. p. 187. to decree that none should publickly dispute of matters of Faith; Clericus fuerit qui, &c. consortio clericorum mov [...]a [...]ur; fi militia praectnctus sit, cingulo spoliabitur; caeteri sanct issima ur­be pellantur. Baron. Ibid. num. 4. col. 688. and he laid a penalty on such as presumed to act contrary to what he had decreed: as for Clerks, to be put out of the number of the Clergy; for a Souldier, that his helt and sword shall be taken from him; for Citizens, to be expelled the City; and for others, their contumacy was to be Competentibus suppliciis subjugandi. Ibid. subdurd with other competent purishments.

There are two great opposites to each other, too opposite to all disputations of Religion, the Turke and the Pope; who though their Pride make them ambitious of the highest place, the head, their wickednesse makes them worthy of the lowest, the taile, Deut. 28.44.

1. First for the Turk, Mahomet, (that famous impostor and false Prophet, the founder of that impious and impure Sect of the Mahametans) not onely forbids all disputes about the Religion of his Bible, (rather Babell) the Alcoran, but instructs his deluded disciples how to answer them who are disposed to dispute: Tecum dispu­tare volentibus dic, Deum so [...] omnes tuo; actus agnoscere, qui die postremo lites omnes & contrarietates discutiet. Alcaroni. c. 32. Say unto them, (saith he) God alone knowes all thy acts, and at the last day will discusse all controversies and contrarieties. Again, ^r to incredulous men say thus, I follow not your Law nor you mine; therefore let me alone with that which is mine, and I will let you alone with yours.

2. For the Nobis nullum fas est inire certamen cum hominibus com­munionis alie­nae; divina scriptura prae­dicante homine haereticum post primam & se­cundam cor­reptionem de vita. Tom. 3. Concil. p. 625. Col. 2. edit. Bin. 1636. Pope Gelasius decreed against disputation with those who are of another Communion; for which he pretends the authority of the Apostle Paul, A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition reject. Titus 3. v. 10. ^t Azorius the Jesuit in his morall institutions putteth this question, whether it be lawfull for Clerks to dispute publickly of the Catholick Faith? And he answereth negatively, and quotes for it A decree of the Trinity and Catholick Faith: and for lay persons the Popes prohibition is expresse and peremptory, ^u we inhibit (as unlawfull for) any lay-man publickly to dispute of the Catholick Faith. And if there be ^w any disputes of matters of Faith, betwixt Catho­licks and Hereticks published in any Mother-Tongue, they are forbidden in their Index of prohibited books.

Qu. But did not Bellarmine read his controversies or dis­putations of the difference between the Popish and Protestant Religion, at Rome? and (amongst other questions) did he not [Page 10]discusse the capitall questions, of the Popes supremacy and in-infallibility, as well as others of inferiour titles?

Ans. He did so, and because he stood up as a Champion, for the Antichristian Creed and Church, he was allowed to do so, especially there where his hearers were wilfully fortified against the true faith: But so little is any disputation liked by those who are most Popish, that as a very wife and observant Tra­veller informeth us, (in his judicious Book called Europae spe­culum, or a view or survey of the state of Religion in the We­stern parts of the world;) that he Sir Edw. Sand. Europae. specu­lum, p. 121, 122. sought for the controversies of Card. Bellarm. in verity in all places; but neither that, nor Gre­gorie de Valentia, nor other Popish School-men, nor any of that quality could be ever in any shop of Italy set eye upon: which made me (saith he) entertain this suspicious conjecture, that no part of the Protestants positions and allegations should be known; they were so exact as to make discurrent (in some sort) even those very books which were constrained to cite them, that they might refute them; in such wise as not to suffer them to be commonly saleable, but one­ly to such, and in such places as the Superiours should think meet. And it is not an improbable opinion of some, that Bellarmines dispatations are the lesse pleasing to the Pope and his dearest favourites, because he citeth our Authors too fully, and set­teth on their arguments further then his answers reach to take them off. And for the point in hand, disputation is the most cryed down in Italy, the Popes Country, above other places: for as the same prudent Author observeth Ibid. p. 117. as in the foundation of the reformation (which is the Scripture) so much more in the edifice it self, the Doctrines and Opinions of the reformed Churches, they bear away all sound and Eccho of them, being not lawfull there to alledge them, no not to glance at them, not to argue nor dispute of them, no not to refute them: he goeth on; In ordinary commu­nication (saith he) to talk of matters of religion is odious and suspi­cious; but to enter into any reasoning, (though but for argument sake, without any other scandall) is prohibited and dangerous: yea it was once my fortune (saith he) to be half threatned for none other fault then for debating with a Jew, and upholding the truth of Christianity against him; so unlawfull there are all disputes of Re­ligion whatsoever, &c. Ibid. I believe him there in the rather, because [Page 11] Azor. Insti­tut. part. 1. l. 8. c. 26. p 571. col. 2. Azorius confesseth, they are so jealous of all disputations, as that they will not allow of a confutation of the Alcora n in any Mo­ther-Tongue: Not that they care either for the Jewish or Tur­kish Religion, but that if they must be so much secured from common contradiction, much more must that which they call Roman Catholick, especially for those points which concern his Holinesse indisputable and all disputative priviledges, to whom Papall Parasites appropriate that of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 2.14. The spirituall man judgeth all things, yet he himself is judg­ed of no man: But, the cause common to them both (why the Turkish and Popish Religion are so tender over their Tet [...]ets, that they may not be touched by dispute) is, for that they are like the apples of Sodom, which how fair soever they seem to the eye, if they be handled they fall unto ashes and smoke, Joseph. of the wars of the Jewes, l. 5. c. 5. fine capitis. as Josephus recordeth, because they have no solidity of truth that can en­dure the triall.

Having shewed in the precedent discourse how averse many have been from disputations in Religion; why and how far and how adverse the Mahometans and Papists are unto them; I will adde but one observation more under this Title of Dispu­tations in Religion concerning the Pope and his party of this generation, who (besides the reason wherein by their dislike of them, they agree with the Turks (which is a part of their Turco papismus, as Dr. Sutlive hath entitled a book against them) are vehemently bent against them (where their power is most predominant) out of pride and disdain of all Religions but their own, especially of the Protestants, because they have done them the most dishonour and damage; and because by the domineering decrees of the Councell of Trent, and by the Tyrannicall authority of the Inquisition, they are better able to oppose them, then by Disputations and Arguments from Scripture or reasons; and for this reason among others is the Popish Pope Paul the fourth said it was the principall secret and Mystery of the papacy. Hist. of the Council of Trent lib. 4. p. 405. and the true Ram to bear down heresie and defend the Apostolick Sea. Ibid. p. 409. rather then ^“ Spanish inquisition, though set up princi­pally against the Iewes and Moores, carryed on so cunningly and cruelly against the Protestants, that the Bishops and other [Page 12]of the Popish Clergy might not be put to too much paines in ar­guing with them; as it was said by some who wrote against the English Bishops, for pressing ceremoniall conformity with too much rigour; So in the beginning of a Dialogue betwixt Dio­trephes a Bi­shop, Tertullus a Papist, Pan­docheus an In-keeper, and Paul a Preacher of the word of God. that the clink and the Gate-house (two com­mon Gaoles) were the strongest Arguments they had to main­tain their cause; but they were as houses with paper walls in comparison of the Prisons of the Pope-holy inquisition, as, the ^c Spanish History, besides other writers, have reported it.

CHAP. II. Of a contrary disposition in some too much addicted to dis­putation; in being too forward to make or accept of of­fers of dispute, and multiplying of needlesse and pre­sumptuous questions and resolutions in matters of Reli­gion.

IN the precedent chapter we have shewed how averse from, or adverse to disputations in matters of Religion, some have been, how far, and for what reasons: There are others (of ano­ther mind) so diverse from them, or contrary to them, that their difference maketh a juster ground of dispute then diverse others which are drawn out into many and long debates. There have been and are some men (to pretermit with contempt that daring Bedlamite Theaura John taking upon him to be high Priest of the Jewes, set up a challenge to both the Universities of Oxford & Cambr. and proclaim­ed it with a three-fold O yes to answer his printed Dotages in Pauls-Church. April. 5. 1652. Theaura Iohn) who having an high opinion of their own good parts for knowledge and utterance, think their eminence cannot be sufficiently known, nor they enough admired and honoured without publick oftension, I might say ostentation, of it in a polemicall concertation. This was the hu­mour [Page 13]of Leontinus Gor­gius primus ausus est in conventu pos­cere quaestionem, id est, jubere da­cere quadere quis velit aude­re; audax ne­gotium dicerem & impudent, nisi, &c. Cicer. de finibus bo­nor. & malor. l. 2. princip. libri. Gorgius Leontinus, of whom the Roman orator no­teth, that he was the first that took upon him to demand a question, that is, to aske the people what question they desired to be dis­puted, and they should presently heare him dispute and dis­course of it. A bold businesse, saith the orator, I would say an im­pudent too, but our later Philosophers have taken example by him for the like undertaking. And if not by imitation of heathen Phi­losophers, yet by naturall corruption have divers Christian pro­fessors been puffed up to the like degree of vain glory; being proud of those preeminences for which by the Apostles admo­nition and caution they should have been rather humble and thankfull: for he would have none to be puffed up against ano­ther for any abilities they have and others have not, 1. Cor. 4.6. and he pathetically expostulateth with such as think too well of themselves, and disdain others: who maketh thee to differ from another (saith he,) and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why boastest thou as if thou hadst not re­ceived it? v. 7. that is, as if it were thine own of thy self, without being beholding to another, especially to God, who might have made him whom thou contemnest glorious, and thee contemptible. It is probable that Iohn Picus Earle of Ma­randula (so much admired for wit and learning, as that he is sti­led, Theologorum & philosopho [...] sine controver­sia principis sic in titularipag. operum cudit. Basil. quam Se­bast cam. Hen­ric Petriann. 1519. without controversie, the Prince of Divines and Philosophers) might be lifted up with appreheasion of his own excellent en­dowments, and the applause of men when he put forth a kind of challenge to the Christian world, to dispute Nengentas de divinis & na­turalibus quae­stiones proposui, ad quas in pub­lico doctissimorum hominum consessu essem responsurus. John Pici Mirand. Apol. Tom. 1. operum p. 76. upon 900. The o­logicall and Philosophicall questions at Rome, and in any of them to be ready to be respondent to any opponent: wherein though some commended his studiousnesse of good arts, yet did his offer give ^g great offence unto many that accounted him an audacious and temerarious young man, who (not yet fully of age of 24 yeares) durst propose a disputation, of the profound points of Philosophy, of the sublime mysteries of Christian Theology, of unknown arts and disciplines in so famous a City, and so ample and numerous an assembly of learned men. And much more op­position [Page 14]and reproch he met withall: for his (at least) suppo­sed presumption, Cum nuper Romam venis­sem, pedes sū ­mi pontificis Innocentii ectavi, cui ab innocentia vi­tae nomen, me­ritissimè de more oscula­turus. Ibid. princip. Alpo. p. 76. which gave them just occasion to su­spect, (though he were so superstitionsly humble as to come to Rome to kisse the Popes foot) and seemingly so religiously lowly as to shew himself seriously affected with the fore-cited saying of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 4.7. Quid habe­mus quod no­strum sit? non­ne cuncta quae in nobis sunt Dei sunt? quid ergo oporter se extollere mag­ni facere osten­tare? glorie­tur qui gloria­tur in Domino &c. John Pic. Mirand. Tom. 2. de studio di­vinae & huma­nae Philosoph. l. 2. c. 6. p. 25. what have we (saith he) that is ours? are not all things that are in us the things of God? why then should any one extoll, magnifie, or boast himself of any thing he hath? but let him that glorieth, glory in the Lord, since all good things are his and by his infinite grace and goodnesse bestow­ed upon us. Whether he thought seriously of this, when he made his challenge forementioned, we cannot determine, nor will we conjecture: But there are some, of whose for­wardnesse to dispute we can have no good conceit, as of Fe­lix the Manichean Heretick, who provoked Augustine (the re­nowned Bishop of Hippo) to publick dispute; whereto he was so unprepared, that it was a doubt to him that published the report of what passed betwixt them, ^k whether were more to be admired, the impudence of Felix braying, rather then disputing; or the patience of the people, hearing his absurd arguings without tumult; or the invincible stomach of Augustine, who with such lenity continued so long to answer his unlearned follies. Of this o­ver-eager affection to dissenting altercation, we find many examples among the Romanists, as Iohn Eccius (whom ^l Possevine commends for a notable Champion against Luther and other Hereticks, who when a disputation was appointed at Ratishon, ann. 1541. betwixt Iulius Pilugius, Iohannes Gropperus, and himself for the popish party, and Philip Melancthon, Martin Bucer, and Iohn Pistorius, for the Protestants, ^m all but Eccius, modestly desired to be excused, and intreated that others more fit might be appointed to discusse the points in difference betwixt them; [Page 15]but he said he was ready prepared for the purpose, yet it was to little purpose; for though he were so hot upon the matter, God took him off with another heart for Aliquanto post in febrim inci­dit, it a quidem ut interesse non posset. Sleid. Ibid. 14. princip. lib. p. 281. he seized on him with a feaver, and thereby served him with a prohibition, that he could not be present; of him it is to be noted that though he were so forward to dispute, he wrote one discourse against disputing with Hereticks, and See Posse­vinus ubi suprà. another that Hereticks were to be burned: which sheweth that he would not have their minds enligthned with instruction, but their bodies inflamed to destru­ction by burning faggots reared round about them. Iohn Co­chlens his mate in malignity to Protestant truths, was so vehe­mently and confidently bent, (by disputation) to oppose such as professed themselves Protestants, that he offered himself to dispute with any Lutheran, upon perill to lose his life if he failed in his proofs; but his confidence is the lesse, to be regarded, be­cause as he persecuted truth; Eccius com­mentar. rerum inde gestarum ann. 1531. p. 271. under the name of Heresie so he published Heresy under the title of truth for he was the first that set forth the workes of Iohannes Maxentins Cochleus o­pera Johannis Maxentii sub. nomine ortho­doxi patris pri­mus edidit. Tom. 4. Bibli­oth Patr. p. 433. as an or­thodox father whom some of his own side, (more learned then himself, as Margarinus Dola Bigne) have since dicovered to be an Opera Max­entii cautissi­mè legenda, nec illis fiden­dum, cùm late­at Eutychianae haereseos vene­num. Ib. &c. p. 445. Entychian Heretick, as the reader may see in the fourth tome of Bibliotheca Patrum: the Eutychian heresie acknow­ledged but one nature in Christ, and that was the divine, and ^s held that our bodies at the resurrection shall be more subtill then the wind, so that they shall neither be seen nor felt. After Eccius and Co­chleus was set up the sect of the Iesuits, which some place up­on the year ^t 1530. some in ^u 1540. Among them none ever set a bolder face upon so bad a cause as the ^w Iesuit Edmund Cam­pian did; who made a thrasonicall challenge to dispute with the Ʋniversities of England, reducing the reasons of his dis­pute to ten heads, which Possevine (a fiery-spirited Iesuit, for the good liking he hath of them, and fearing (in time) so small a book as they made might be lost, incorporated into his ^“ first part of his Bibliotheca Selecta. In these reasons of his offer, he [Page 16]seemes cum ratione insanire, to be mad with such a mistake a­theirs who think they have reason, when they kill Christs ser­vants, to think they do him service, John 16.2.

His confident expressions in his cause, argue either a strange imposture of a deluding spirit, or a brasen impudence of a bragging Jesuit, Si hoc praesti­tero, coelos esse. Sanctosesse, fidem esse, Christum esse, causam obti­nui. Camp. in Epist. Acade­micis Oxonii florentibus. Ib. 320. If I do make good (saith he) that there is an Heaven, that there be Saints, that there is faith, that there is a Ghrist; I have won the victory. Patres si quando licebit accedere, con­fectum est prae­lium; tam sunt nostri quàm Gregorius ipse 13. filiorum Ecclesiae pater amantissimus [...] Ibid. ratione 5. p. 315. If we come to try our differences by the fathers, the war is at an end; they are as certainly ours as Pope Gregorie the thirteenth, a most loving Father of the Chil­dren of the Church: But when he was disputed within the To­wer, ann. 1581. he that was so loud and vigorous in his chal­lenge, was so low and feeble in performance, that it gave them cause to conceive who had well observed them both, See Alex. Nowell and Will: Dayes Preface before the dispute printed ann. 1583. that the book was none of his which was published in his name; how­soever he that reads his challenge, and the true relations of the dispute or conference fore-mentioned, will find that his rhetorick was more plausible in the one, then his logick po­werfull in the other; so that we can neither say (according to Sampsons riddle) out of the strong came sweetnesse, Judges 14.14. Nor out of the sweetnesse came strength. For it was his weaknesse of judgement to take so great a burden on him as he was nor able to bear, and the weaknesse of his cause and judg­ment both, which suffered it to sink when he took it into pro­tection, and undertook to support it against so many vigorous Assailants as he provoked to oppose it; when one learned man was able to turn that counterfeit Divine into a meer Thraso, his reasons into bubbles, his threats into trifles and vapours of vanishing smoke; Campianum ita fregit Whi­takerus, ut omnes sanae mentis facile viderent ementitum Theologum in verum Thrasonem, rationes in ampullas, deni (que) omnes minas in meras nugas & fumum levissimum evanuisse. Melch. Adamus in vita Whitakeri part. poster. p. 169. as Melchior Adamus very fit­ly setteth forth his folly and foile.

There have been some women who have so much forgotten the frailty and modesty of their sex, as to make chattings to learned men for disputation in matters of Religion; of this there is a memorable story, but how true it is I cannot tell, be­cause [Page 17]cause I have it but upon the report of Parsons in the Preface to his report of 10. disp. p. 29, 30. added to the third part of his treatise intitu­led the 3 con­versions of England. a Iesuit, (who howsoe­ver most highly honoured by his sect, is for his many See the glo­rious Elogium of Robert Par­sons in Capi­tall Letters in. Philip. Ala­gamb. Bibliothe­ca. Societat. Je­su p. 414. falsities, and some forgeries, of little credit among the Protestants,) which is this: In the year of Christ 403. Acertain wilfull wo­man, of the City of Antioch, named Julia, infected with the abo­minable heresie of the Manichees, and fervent therein, came to the City of Gaza, whereof Saint Porphyrius, an holy learned man, was Bishop; and beginning there to pervert Christians, and be­ing reprehended for it by the Bishop, she challenged him to an o­pen disputation, which the good man admitted, she behaved her self so insolently as was intolerable: what the issue and effect was, is to be observed under another title. Another example I had occa­sion to note in a letter to a worthy Lady, of a woman for her learning above most of her sort, or sex, her name was Arga­la, a Protestant, of whom Gretzer. Tom. 1. defens. Bellarm. lib. 2. c. 51. Col. 833, 834. Gretzer the Jesuit reports that she sent a challenge to Eckius, (of whom we have spoken before) to dispute with him, who not so patient as the Bishop fore­mentioned, sent her a distasse and spindle, to put her upon employ­ment more proper to her Sex. It had been more to her com­mendation, if she had been as learned as the noble Virgin An­na Maria a Schur-man, to have been as modest and silent as she was, who needed the Immortale virginū decus, cùm nihil na­tura tibi dene­gaverit, ac om­nia detulerit eruditio, vide­ris tamen late­re velle, & co­mitem rectè factorum glo­riam repudiare: totnè linguas calles, ut sile­as? totnè dis­ciplinis gene­rosum istum in­struxisti animū, ut unitas agiter inglorius artes? 2. Sic Joh. Beverovicius Epist. ad illam p. 5. illi­us libri edit. 1641. Lugd. Batav. urgent perswasions of learned men, to let her learning be known for the benefit of others: and though ^e she have written much, worthy to be commit­ted to publick view; yet such was her modesty, that not without much importunity, that little which is printed was extorted from her, which had not been obtained of her but that some had anticipated her consent by precedent publication. I can find but few such examples to commend to the imitation of women; and I need not bring more of such extravagants from Christian moderation, and female modesty, as some fore-noted; since our age hath afforded many hereticall viragoes, who have dared to set upon Preachers in their pulpits on the Sab­bath day, in full Congregations; taking upon them not onely to be opponents of their Doctrine, but to be judges both of it [Page 18]and them, which offices they usurped with a kind of papall presumption, as if they were guided in what they did by an in­fallible spirit; and some have not been ashamed to put others to blush for their impudence, and these of both Sexes, as well Evites, as Adamites: but that which at present we have in pur­suit and prosecution, is that intemperate humour of dispu­ting, of which a wise and learned States-man said, Pruritus dis­putandi est scabies Eccle­siae. Sir Henr. Wootton, War­den of Eaton college. the itch of dispute is the scab of the Church: Which he might happily take from Ludovicus Vives, who hath an expression of neare affini­ty, or rather consangunity unto it; As those Quemadmo­dum qui pruri­tus tic [...]latione acti, nimium scabentes san­guinem elici­unt, & dolor succedit in lo­cum suavitatis; ita istidum ni­mium scalpunt veritatem, &c. Ludovic. Vives de causis cor­ruptar. artium l. 3. p. 127. (saith he) who are acted by the tickling of itch, do scratch too much and draw bloud, (whence there succedeth sorenesse for sweetnesse, pain for pleasure:) So those who scratch the truth too much by disputation, wound it, and leave it in a condition of a necessity for some other meanes to cure and heale it.

Quest. But are not the Protestants much commended by a Sir Edw. Sands Europae Speculum. p. 85. judicious writer, for their offers of disputation to their adver­saries in all place? For their iterated and importuned suits for publick audience and judgement? and is it not observed by him, for matter of advantage to the Protestant proceedings, as a thing which greatly assured the multitude of their soundnesse, whom they saw so confident in abiding the hazard of publick triall? they standing in like termes as a substantiall just man, and a fa­cing shifter; whereof the ones credit is greatest there where he is best known, and the others where he is least.

Ans. Whereto I answer, that when Luther and others made revolt from the Romish Religion, the Romanists were most grosse in doctrine, most loose in practise, (especially the Prelates and the ruling Clergy) most injurious to the right and liberty of the people (both as men and as Christians;) for which they were justly made odious to them which had a true relish of Religion or morall honesty. All these particulars I could undeniably demonstrate if there were need, and this place were fit for such a proof as the charge will require: Therefore

It was the prudence of the Protestants, not their intempe­rance or distemper, to desire disputation in those times; be­cause then as they had more just cause to oppose the Roma­nists, so had the Romanists lesse ability to defend themselves: [Page 19]for, as that worthy Gentleman well Ibid. observeth, they were not so cunning then in the questions, nor so ready in their evasions, as now they are grown: so that (as he saith) the effect of their offers, (whether received or refused) was in most places such, as to draw with them an immediate alteration in Religion; and he medneth it by turning frrm the Popish to that which is Protestant. This doubt cleared, I shall returne to my discourse of the dispu­ting discase, whereto as some have it thing cares, (as the Apo­stle saith, 2 Tim. 4.3.) so some have itching tongues; some itch­ing fingers and pens. Such are those disputing Papists, who are commonly called School-men; of whom (though Peter Lombard Bishop of Paris, was the founder, father or master, (and well he deserved that title, saith Collegit sen­tentias sacrorū theologorum, & magister sen­tentiarum & sa­crorum theolo­gorum dici me­ruit. Bellarm. de Eccles. Script. ad ann. 1145. p. 322. Bellarmine;) yet his Scholars and followers, (especially Aquinas, and Scotus, with their Scholastick Commentators) have multiplied the number of needlesse questions, far beyond the limits of sober, reaso­nable and religious inquiries. I will set down some of them, and those so many as may serve to make good my charge; (not omitting others as occasion shall induce me to mention them, though not of their tribe.) Beginning with Aquinas, Aquinas prim­part. vol. prim. q. 6. ar. 1. and taking more out of him then any other Questionist, because he is a Canonized Saint of the Romish Church, and in their Schooles and Bookes commonly styled the Angelicall Doctor.

His questions are, 1. Of God. 2. Of. Christ. 3. Of Angels. 4. Of Men.

Aquinas prim­part. vol. prim. q. 6. ar. 1.1. Whether it be agreeable to God to be good.

Ib. q. 14 ar. 2.2. Whether God understand himself.

Ib. q. 19. ar. 1.3. Whether there be a will in God.

Ib. q. 21. ar. 1.4. Whether there be justice in God.

Ib. q. 25. ar. 1.5. Whether there be power in God.

Apud Ludov. Viv. in Aug. l. 18. c. 16.6. Whether he can give power to a Crastore to create.

Aquinas ad. 2d. vol. prim. par. q. 44. ar 4.7. Whether it were convenient that God should require to be beloved with all the heart.

2d. 2d. vo 2. q. 90. ar. 1.8. Whether God be to be praised with the mouth:

2. Of Christ, he hath some vain questions, but because o­ther Papists have far worse, I will mention theirs rather then his. First, it is a very vain and fond question. Orat. Dan. Cromeri. op­pos. Bellarmino. p. 170, 171. which Cromerus noteth, viz: Whether Christ were of the order of the Domini­cans, [Page 20]or Franciscans. But they are worse then vain, for they are vile; worse then fond, for they are mad: which Erasmus hath collected, I will set them down in his Language; for they are most of them so profane and blasphemous, that I am loth to deli­ver them in any other: and therefore I will set them down as I find them in that Author, so much the more worthy of credit, because by three Popes, Leo Pontifex maximus dile­cto filio. Eras­mo. Eras. Epist. l. 1. p. 49. idem l. 2. p. 72. Upon which the note of the index expurg. is, pa­ternis visceri­bus pius pater nutantem ovi­culam blandis encomiis allicere conatur. p. 237. col. 2. Leo the tenth, Epist. l. 23. p. 864. 865. Adrian the sixth, and ^x Paul the third, he was acknowledged for a Son of those Ghostly Fathers by their Letters written to him, two by Pope Leo, by Pope Adrian two, and by Pope Paul one; in all which he is not only kindly accepted, but highly commended by them. In his 1 Num sint plures in Christo filiationes. 2 Num possibilis sit propositio, Deus odit filium. 3 Num Deus potuerit suppositare mulierem. 4 Num Diabolum. 5 Num allnum. 6 Num Cucurbitam. 7 Num silicem. This is somewhat like that of Ludovic. Vives, An Deus posset suppositare hanc pennā qua scribo. Plut. in com. in libro. Aug. de c. 13.8 Tum quemadmodum si cucurbita esset concio­natura. 9 Num editura miracula. 10 Num figenda cruci. Hac apud Erasm. Moriae Encom. Quid sit suppositum & suppositare in divinis, vid. Suarez. disp. Tom. 1. p. 150. disp. 11. Moriae Encomium he rehearseth ten, whereof the first is foolish, the rest blasphemous, as the learned Reader may see, though but in a marginall observation: for I had rather set them down on the lest hand, covered with a Latine mask, then to place them bare-faced, for the readiest view of an ordinary Reader.

To such questions may pertinently be applied the censure of Nazianzen, they are so wretchedly affected Greg. Naz. vol. 1. orat. 33. p. 431. (saith he) that they make it their delight to make trifling disputes of divine matters, and are as presumptuous many times in resolving of curious questions, as rash in proposing them to the triall of dis­putation; Idem. Orat. 35. p. 561. whose precipitation and temerity he thinketh very fit to be bridled and restrained.

3. Of Angels, Aquinas inquires Aquin. prim. part. vol. 2. q. 56. ar. 1. whether they know them­selves.

2. Whether their knowledge be matutine and vespertine; which he takes occasion to dispute from the expression of Aug. Super Genes. ad lit. l. 2. c. 8. An­gustine.

3. Aquin. prim. part. vol. 3. 2. q. 60. ar. 3. Whether Angels love themselves with a naturall or an elective dilection.

4. Ib. q. 63. ar. 9. Whether as many remained in the state of grace as fell from it.

5. Ib. q. 117. ar. 2. Whether men can teach Angels.

1. Of man, whether the rib of which Eve, was made were one of Adams necessary ribs, or one superfluous: this is the question of Peter. super Genesin. c. 2. q. 6. p. 159. Pererius a learned Jesuit, which by his own con­fession is by one of his own centured for a superfluous que­stions

Ibid. Tom. 1. lib. 4. q. 2. p. 166 Quomodo statu innocentiae fae­minae generati possunt &c. Ib. q. 3. c. 2. An in statu in­nocentiae inte­gritas faeminei genitali s commixtione viri, &c. Ib. q. 4. col. 1.2. Whether in the state of innocency, the number of males and females should have been equall.

To these two we may adde two more out of the same Jesuit; but because they are not so modest as the former, I had rather make a marginall note of them, in the Latine words of the Au­thor, then expresse any part of them in my English text: yet be would seem very bashfull to the Popish Bishop Abulensis To­status, who discusseth so obscene a question about circum­cision, that he cannot for shame make mention of it, and there­fore thinketh it best to passe it over in silence; and so do I: there are many of that sort in Sanchez his great bellied book de mat [...]imonio, which maketh good the words of De delectati­one praeputia­torum, &c. Ita pudenda est il­lius oratio & disputatio, ut praester ca silentio praeteriri. Perer. in Genes. 17. disp. 2. p. 596. v. 1. Cū coelibatum profiteantur, nimis [...]e muliebrium rerum peritos testantur. Pareus in Gen. 19. v. 33. Pareus, of the badnesse of such as pretending to live chastly single shew themselves by their discourses too well acquainted with wo­mens matters.

Of mans death and resurrection there are moved many dis­putes, as idle and audacious as the rest: there is one Bartholo­mew Sybilla hath written a whole book of strange questions, among which Barth. Sybil­la specul. pere­grin quaest. de­cad. 1. c. 2. q. 7. p. 5455. one of the passage of the soul out of the body, whether it go on the right hand or the left; whether forward or backward.

Of the resurrection Aquinas hath many vaine queries; as Aquin. sup­plem. tertiae part. q. 81. ar. 3 c. whether all shall arise in the male Sex, and Ib. q. 8. ar. 2. whether the haires and nailes shall rise up with the body; with many others of like sort, which I passe over because I would leave roome for others of another kind, which manifest the Papists to be the greatest doters upon impertinent and unprofitable questions, and the boldest determiners of doubtfull things, that are. This appeareth not onely by their disputes and questions, such as I [Page 22]have observed already; but by their resolution of many doubts (as they pretend) by divine revelation; which may best be delivered by way of question and answer, (as in form of a Catechisme) divers of which are set down in two such Papists books, as usually supplied matter to their Priests for Sermons to the people; of which the one is the big book of the lives of the Saints, called by themselves the Golden Legend: though by by those who have read it with indifferency, the lying legend, made by Jacobus de Voragine, as he is ordinarily termed (but as Posse. Appa­rat. Sacr. vol. 1. p. 794. Possevine corrects the name, Iacob de Varagine, Archbishop of Geneva) his book was printed at Venice, ann. 1575. The other book is a book of selected Sermons, printed by Iames Kavi­nell, for the use of simple Priests who want cunning to preach: So in the title of the book, the time and place of the first publication of it I find not noted. This premised, I will be­gin the questions out of their former book of lies with the au­thor of lies the Devil.

Quest. 1. What is the proper likenesse of the Devil? Leg. aur. fol. 244. p. 1. col. 2. He is like an Ethiopian, more black then thunder, his face sharpe, his beard long, his haires hanging unto his feet, his eyes flaming as hot as fire, casting out sparkles of fire, and out of his mouth come flames of sulphur; his hands bound with chaines of fire behind his back.

Quest. 2. When the Devil had tempted Adam and Eve, or Adam by Eve, to eat the forbidden fruit, what penance did they undergoe, (after they had yielded to the Devil) and were expelled out of Paradise?

Thebook of se­lected Sermons printed by James Kavinell Dominic. Sep. mages. fol. 8. p. 1. col. 2. Ans. For many yeares before their death they stood either of them in water a night up to the chin, (far from one another) till their flesh was as green as grasse.

But we must make a long leap into the new Testament, else we shall stay too long, and make our questions too many.

Quest. 3. Why was Peter bidden to put up his sword when he drew it in our Saviours defence?

Menot, Serm. fol. 47. col. 4.Because he had nor cunning enough to use it; for he cut off Malchus his care when he should have cut off his head.

Quest. 4. How many thornes were in the Crown that was set upon the head of Christ?

Apol. for He­rodot. l. 1. c. 35. p. 274. out of Bonaventure, Lyra & May­lard.Just a thousand.

Quest. 5. How many wounds had the body of our Saviour in the whole?

Ans. pa. 14. of the office of the Virgin, printed at Paris. ann. 1524. Five thousand four hundred and sixty.

Quest. 6. What were the theeves names that were cruicified with Christ?

Ans. Leg. aur. fol. 16. p. 1. col. 2. Dysmas the name of him that was saved, and Gesmas the name of him that was damned.

Quest. 7. Why was Dysmas saved rather then Gesmas?

Ans. A Franciscan of Bourdeaux Apol. for Hero­dot. l. 1. c. 33. p. 260. Because he would not suffer his fellowes to rob Christ when he fled into Egypt.

Quest. 8. How know you that S. Thomas Becket (whose salva­tion hath been See Speeds Chron. l. 9. c. 6. p. 510. col. 2. 43. called in question, even among our own ca. because of his contumacy against his King) was saved?

Ans. A Leg. aur. fol. 180. p. 2. col. 1. young man died and raised by miracle, said, there was in heaven a void seat; and asking whose it was, answer was made, that it was kept for a great Bishop of England named Thomas of Canturbury. Symbolum dedit, coenavit. Ter. Andr. Act. 1. Sen. 1. Durand. Ratio­nal. l. 4. c. 25. fol. 133. p. 1. Erasm. Cate­chism. Symboli Apostolor. &c. set out with pictures to eve­ry Article at the beginning of the book.

Quest. 9. How was the Creed called the Apostles Creed composed by the twelve Apostles?

Ans. As a shot made up by guests each paying his share, for

• Article 1 was laid down by Saint 1 Peter.
• Article 2 was laid down by Saint 2 Andrew.
• Article 3 was laid down by Saint 3 Iames the Son of Zebede.
• Article 4 was laid down by Saint 4 Iohn.
• Article 5 was laid down by Saint 5 Philip.
• Article 6 was laid down by Saint 6 Bartholemew.
• Article 7 was laid down by Saint 7 Thomas.
• Article 8 was laid down by Saint 8 Matthew.
• Article 9 was laid down by Saint 9 Iames the son of Alpheus.
• Article 10 was laid down by Saint 10 Simon.
• Article 11 was laid down by Saint 11 Thaddeus.
• Article 12 was laid down by Saint 12 Matthias.

Quest. 10. What shall be the condition of the world the last fifteen dayes before the day of Judgement?

Ans. See Leg. aur. on the advent of our Lord. fol. 2. p. 2. col. 2. and compare it with the se­lected Sermons out of it pub­lished by James Kavinell, fol. 2. p. 2. col. 2. &c. In whose book the dayes are thus numbred and the number thus precisely reckoned as precedent immediately before the day of judgement. The first of the fifteen dayes the water shall rise upon [Page 24]the Sea, and it shall be higher then any hill by forty cubites.

2. The second day the Sea shall fall down so low, that un­neath the earth may be seen.

3. The third day the great fishes, as Whales and others, shall appear above the water, and shall cry unto Heaven, and God onely shall understand their cry.

4. The fourth day the Sea and waters shall brenne.

5. The fifth day all trees and herbes shall sweat bloud, and all manner of fowles shall come together, and neither eat nor drink for dread of the doome that is coming.

6. The sixth day all great buildings, Castles, Towers, Steeples and Houses, shall fall down, and brenne till the Sun rise again.

7. The seventh day all Stones and Rocks shall beat together, that each shall break other, with an horrible noise, the which shall be heard into Heaven.

8. The eight day the Earth shall quake, so that there may no man stand thereon but shall fall down.

9. The ninth day the people shall go out of their dens, and go as they were mindlesse, and none speak to other.

10. The tenth day Hills and Earth shall be made even and plain.

11. The eleventh day all graves and tombes shall open, and the bodies shall stand upon them.

12. The twelfth day Stars shall fall from Heaven, and shall spread out raies of fire; on this day, it is said, that all the beasts shall come to the field howling, and shall not eat nor drink.

13. The thirteenth day all living shall die, to the end that they shall rise with the dead bodies.

14. The fourteenth day the Heaven and the Earth shall brenne.

15. The fifteenth day shall be a new Heaven and a new Earth, and all things and all dead men shall arise.

I had not been so serious, nor insisted so long in discoverie of the foolish and unlearned questions (such as the Apostle re­proveth, 2 Tim. 2.23.) of the Papists, both polemicall School­men, and Legendary Preachers, and their ridiculous vanity in resolving many curious and superfluous doubts by [Page 25]revelation; but that I have many of that deceived sort in my parish, (though I thank God some fewer then I found when I came thither, and I hope to make them yet sewer, if God please to give me time to effect what I have in desire, and design, which is, to manifest, that the ruling Romanists are the subtillest Masters of the subtillest Mystery of iniquity in the world; and their se­duced disciples, (especially the illiterate) the most foolish peo­ple in the world, from whom they keep the Scripture, and so keep them in blind ignorance, that (like hooded hawks) they may carry them whither they please; for which wrong they would seem to make them some recompence by setting images before them, which are commonly called Lay-mens books, though they can reach them none other lesson then that a Christi­an should not learn, viz. falshood, vanity and errours, Jer. 10.14, 15. and by pretended revelations, which are either meer forge­ries of their audacious Doctors, or meer fallacies of the great deceiver mentioned by St. Iohn, Rev. 12.9. who makes them do­ters about questions and strife of words, 1 Tim. 6.4. and puffeth them up to an affectation of forbidden knowledge, as he did our first parents, Gen. 3. and their disciples receivers of any foolish fancie which they suggest unto them.)

But my principall aim in what I have hitherto said in this Chapter, is, to curb those men of corrupt minds, who are too prone to perverse disputings, such as the Apostle reproveth, 1 Tim. 6.5. and since (by their disputings) questioning and re­solving, aiming to be wise above that is written, 1 Cor. 4.6. they have bewrayed their egregious folly to the world, we may tauntingly take up the question of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 1.20. and put it to them, where is the wise? where is the Scribe? where is the disputer of the world? hath not God made foolish the wisdome of this world? he hath doubtesse: and we may take the great School-man and Questionist Aquinas for instance, whom though Bellarm. de Eccles. Script. ad ann. 165. p. 347. Bellarmine commend for his holinlesse and wisdome, was neither so holy nor so wise as he should have been: not so holy, 1. Because he was so bold as to put to dispute so many un­doubted principles of divinity as we have noted.

Secondly, because he lacked humility, without which there is no true holinesse, which he might have learned of his Master [Page 26] Peter Moderatior est Petrus Lombardus, qui sententias alie­nas recitans non temerè de suo addit, aut si quid, timidè proponit. Erasm. in Epist. ad Caron. delectum Episc. Panorum. Epist. l. 28. p. 1161. Lombard, of whom Erasmus righly observeth, that re­siting the opinions or sentences of others, he did not rashly adde any thing of his own; and when he added any thing, it was rather with fear then confidence.

Nor was he so wife as he should have been: for as much as he wanted in humility, so much he had in pride, and as much pride, so much folly; for pride and folly, as humility and wise­dome, are sorted together by the wife man, Prov. 14. v. 3. c. 11. v. 2. And though he looked for credit by his bold inquiries and conclusions, and had it of those of his own side; yet such as were sound in the faith, and not partiall in affection, discove­red and disdained his pride, and so it was followed with shame, as Solomon observeth, Prov. 11.2. whereof we have a memora­ble passage betwixt Erasmus, and Dr. Collet, the godly and famous Deane of Pauls, in K. H. the 8, his daies; to whom when Erasmus had much commended Aquinas, to heare his judgement of him, and he gave him none answer, he proposed and more vehemently pressed the praise of him the second time: to which Tanquam af­flatus Spiritu quodam, quid tu, inquit, mihi praedicas istum, qui nisi ha­buisset multum arrogantiae, non tanta te­meritate, tan­toque superci­lio definisset omnia; & nisi habuisset ali­quid Spiritus mundani, non ita totam Christi doctri­nam sua pro­phanâ Philo­sophiâ conta­minasset. Erasm. Epist. ad Jodoc. Jonae l. 15. p. 486. Collet, as if he had been inspired with an answer from God, presently replyed, What meane you so to praise that man to me, who if be had not had much arrogancy in him, would not with such temerity and superciliousnesse have defined all things? and if he had not had somewhat of the Spirit of the world, he would not have so defiled the Doctrine of Christ with his profane Philosophy. How worthy a man Dr. Colles was (for learning and Godlinesse) they that desire to know, may find a short story of him in Mr. Fox his ^t second volume of Acts and Monuments, and in the fore-cited Epistle of Erasmus, he was so much a Pa­pist (being levened with the corrupt Doctrine of the age where­in he lived) that King Henry the 8. after a Sermon preached by him in his presence, and long communication with him, by oc­casion thereof dismissed him with these words, Let every one have his Doctor as he liketh, this shall be my Doctor: and yet so much a Protestant both in his preaching and practise, that as ^u Bi­shop [Page 27] Latimer sald, he should have been burned in K. H. the Eight his reigne, if God had not inclined the Kings heart to the contrary.

CHAP. III. That disputations on matters of Religion are warranta­ble by Scripture and reason, and not onely lawfull, but sometimes also expedient and profitable.

THough for the undoubted duties of morality, the Apostle prescribeth present and prompt obedience, without mur­murings or desputings, and that in all things of that kind, Phil. 2.14. yet for matter of faith and conscience he requireth no such facility either in affection, or in fact; but giveth leave and leisure, or rather advise to Christians, to bring both the Spirits and speeches of men to triall, 1 Iohn 4.1. 1 Thes. 5.21. and when he requireth of Christian believers that they be ready alwaies to give an answer to every one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in them, 1 Pet. 3.15. he meaneth (doubtlesse) that if any cavil at that answer or reason, he that giveth it should make answer for it to defend it; and if this be required of a Christian, much more of a Minister, who should be able by sound Doctrine both to exhort and convince the gaiansayers, Tit. 9.11. as it is said of Apollos, that he mightily convinced the Iewes, and that publickly, shewing by the Scripture that Iesus was Christ: which may stop the mouths of some adversaries; as they say of Mr. Trapp on Tit. 1.11. Frogs, that if a light be hanged over the lake wherein they lie, will leave crocking: though some be so contumacious against the truth, so malicious against them who prevalently plead for it, that they will rather stop their mouthes (by violence) who have overcome them by the power of truth, as they did by Stephen when they stoned him, Act. 7. v. 54, 57, 59. then con­fesse themselves convinced or satisfied with the clearest evi­dence produced in the plainest cause that can be debated: but [Page 28]this is not the fault of disputation it self, but the perversnesse of the disputant, who will disputare or discedere (for according to that sense we may make the Etymology of the word) though he have not one wise word to say for the folly and falsity of his opinion; we must, as saith that ancient Doctor and Confessour H [...]larius, Non tam evi­tanda quàm [...] ­futanda [Dog­mata] non tam refugere debe­mus quàm re­fellere, &c. Hilaran Psal. l. 2. p. 186. not flee from the erroneous doctrines of men, a [...] afraid to encounter them; but must refell and conquer them by disputations as Picus Mirandula saith, It is the Disputatio cribrum verita­tis. Picus Mi­randula. Tom. 2. operum. 3. Epist. p. 853. sieve or searce to sever the fine flower of truth from the course branne of errour: which is not more for the honour of truth, then for the benefit of those that do embrace it; for so distinguished, it is not onely more amiable to the eye, and more pleasant to the taste, but more nutritive, as breeding better and puter nourishment to the soul. And as it is a deed and duty of charity for such as have the charge of soules to feed them with the finest of the whest, and with the honey out of the rock to satisfie them, which is the provision that God is willing to bellow upon his obedient people, Psalm 81. v. last: So is it also a charitable act and office, not to suffer them to be choked with the bran of er­rour and Heresie, which many are too forward to obtrude upon ignorant and inconsiderate people; yea hereticall seducement is more dangerous then so, for the Apostle saith of such as Hymeneus and Philetus, who were hereticks, that their speech will [...]at like a Canker, or Gangrene, 2 Tim. 2.17. which is easie to catch, and hard to cure: what their Heresie in patticular was, is not discovered in the Scriptures, nor in any ancient Author near the times wherein they lived: of Philetus there is mention but once, that is in the place fore-cited; of Hymeneus twice, viz. both here and 1 Tim. 1. last, where he hath another malignant mate named with him, viz. Alexander, whom Saint Paul delivered to Satan, that they might learne not to blas­pheme: by which we learn, it was a blasphemous Doctrine, and probably it was (as Theodoret on the 1 Tim. 1. last. Theodoret conceiveth) well known to Timothy; and we know that a Canker and Gangrene are very dangerous diseases, and those who are Spirituall Physicians, ought in charity to do their best to keep their flocks from such infective and destructive mischiefs. And if disputation be a meanes, as being wisely ordered it may prove, it may be expe­dient [Page 29]that way to curb and discourage Hereticks from corrup­ting of them: which may serve also for an antidote to preserve their ears from the venome and poyson of hereticall tongues; who, if they be let alone, without opposition will go on to sub­vert whole houses, as the Apostle saith, Tit. 1.11. And as for prevention of the spreading of Heresie, so for recovery of such as are already ensnared by it, and for reconciliation of such as dissent in judgement and affection, disputations may be requi­site and use [...]ull; to which purpose Pollid. in vi­ta Aug c. 3. Honorius the Emperour compelled the Donatists to give meeting to the Catholi [...]ks, and sometimes they have proved very advantageous to the truth: Thus it was in the beginning of the reformation of Religion, when the errours of Popery were in their nature more grosse, more rude in their dresse, and their Priests nothing so politick as since they have been; the Protestants Sir Edw. Sands Europae speculum. p. 85. loffired disputations in all places the effects whereof, as were touched before whether received or refused, drew with them an immediate alteration of Religion: for if they were received, the better cause prevailed; if they were not, they who refused gave cause of suspicion, that their Coine howsoever it were gilded, was indeed but Copper, which could not (as pure gold) endure to be tried by the touch stone; and the alteration of Religion then was such as Disputatio Bernensis s [...]une finem habuit apud illos & aliquot vicinos, missae, arae & statuae erant abolitae. Surius com­mentar. ann. 1527. p. 208. Surius com­plaineth of; Masses, Altars and images were abolished.

And as disputation, if ordered as it ought to be, may produce good effects, so the want of that, especially the refusall of it, when it is importunately called for by the adversaries, may give them occasion of insulting; and Taciturnitas corumquiresi­stere deberent perverrenti [...]us fidei veritatē, es­set errorisconfir­matio. Epist. Sy­nod. in Concil. Basil. Tom. 8. p. 230. col. 2. the silence of such as should contest with them may be turned to the confirmation of errour, as is observed in the Synodall Epistles of the Councill of Basil, which was likely to have been the ill effect of yours and Doctor Grewes refusall to encounter with M. Knowles and Mr. Kiffin, if you had not been as resolute to resist them as they were pre­sumptuous to provoke you to dispute.

Lastly, as conferences and debates may effect much spirituall good, if managed as they should be, (and I still understand them with that limitation) so may they be meanes of [Page 30]corporall good also; for where no disputations are allowed of, there the matters of difference are carried with more fraud, force and violence; as we have touched before upon the Spa­nish Inquisition, and may observe further, out of the Neque in dis­putando apud tales pertinaci animositate centendentes & annitentes propriae pru­dentiae, ullus unquam erit finis; &c. Cochleus Hist. lib. 1. c. 21. Chap. 2. let. n. Epistle of John Gerson to the Archbishop of Prague, wherein he would not have him to put the matters in difference with the Bohemian Protestants to disputation, but adviseth him to take another course, which is to cut down Heresie by the Temporall Sword; he meanes the Hereticks: for (saith he) by disputing with such as with pertinacious animosity contend, leaning to their own pru­dence, there will never be an end, &c.

This agreeeth well with that of Eccius, who (as we noted be­fore) wrote one Treatise against disputation with Hereticks, another for burning of them; which Bellarmine would have taken not for a persecution of them, but for an act of favour and benefit to them, as we shall have occasion more particular­ly to note in the fifth chap. Much more charitable and Chri­stian was the Can. 66. Sy­nod Lond. ann. 1604. Canon of our English Bishops for conference with Recusants; and had they been as carefull to ordain onely good and able Ministers as they should have been, we might have found better fruits of their government then we have done. But the effects and issues of colloquies, conferences and disputations, I reserve for another chapter, viz. the fifth now cited.

CHAP. IV. An Historicall collection of disputations of severall sorts, principally concerning differences in matter of Religion. In two sections.
• 1. Containing examples from the Apostles to Luther. , and • 2. Of examples from Luther to the present age. 

CHAP. V. Of the various Issues and Successes of Conferences, Collo­quies and Disputations about matters of Religion.

IT is the observation of Aug. Thuan. apud Melch. Adam in vita Pet [...]i Boquini, p. 146. Lorinus in Act. Apost. cap. 9. v. 29. at. p. 422. Possev. Bibliot. select. tom. 1. c. 13. p. 365. divers learned man, that conflicts in matters of Religion have for the most part been fruitless of good effects, and sometimes that they have brought forth much evil fruit. For example: The Collation, Conference or Disputa­tion of Catholicks with the Donatists, though it were fairly carried against them, and that by the Testimony of the Judge, who was constituted as Moderator in the cause, yet they would not acknowledge themselves convinced; and when the sentence of the Judge was produced against them, they raised a slande­rous report against him and their Antagonists, Dicunt judi­cē fuisse proe­mio corruptū. Aug. Collat. cum Donatist. tom. 7. part. 1. p. 726. as if they had corrupted him with bribes to pass an honourable sentence on their side: which occasioned Augustine to write a Confutation of them after the publick Collation with them.

And in his particular Disputation with Poscentius a Noble­man, and an Arian Heretick; when he was shamefully foiled, he vain-gloriously gave out, Aug. ab ipso superatū Aug. Epist. Poscent. Ep. 174. tom. 2. p. 898. that he had gotten the victory of Augustine. But the Examples of our own State and later times may be more for our instruction and caution: And we have but too good proof of very bad effects of Conferences or Disputations with Papists; So in the Dean of Pauls and Dean of Windsors Epi­stle before the Report of the Conference with Campian, printed ann. 1583. as in the year 1581. when Campian that Thrasonical Champion of the Romish Church, of whom we have made mention before, when discovered by his Anta­gonists to be a man of confident undertakings, and impotent performances, yet Reports and Pamphlets were spread abroad every where by his party, as though Campian, like some great Bear or Lion, had shaken his Adversaries off, like cowardly Curs one after another.

What followed upon the disputes with the Jesuite Fisher, and a third with Dr. Laud, the Bishop of Saint Davids, with the same Of Doctor Whites reply to the Jesuite Fisher, p. 8, 9. Fisher, Dr. White sheweth in his Epistle to the Reader, in these words, His Majesty had experience of the unfaithful dea­ling of Pontificians, when they make relation of such things as pass by word of mouth onely in private Disputations; and he well un­derstood how the Cretizing Jesuite had dealt with a reverend Bishop, and with my self; for had we been School-boys of thirteen years old, he could not have made us seem more childish and unskilful then he did; dispersing hundreds of papers to his own praise, and to our disgrace.

But such lying reports will, at long running, turn to the dis­grace of those that divulge them: and that the more, by how much they are the more notoriously untrue; as that fiction of theirs of D. Featly his dispute with the same Fisher, who was such a busie & pragmatical Jesuite, as to be found fishing for silly souls in many places: With him the Doctor being drawn to dispute (by one Mr. Buggs, who in his sickness was sollicited to set up his rest for salvation in the Romish Religion) and the dispute ended: The Romish Fisher caught and held in his own net by Doctor Featly, in the Preface to the Relati­on of the con­ference, June 27. An. 1623. p. 3. About a week after the Earl of Warwick, who was present at it, having occasion to pass over the Seas, and coming to Saint Omers, had the company of Doctor Weston at his Inne, to whom this Doctor, taking the Earl for a Roman Catholick, told for fresh and most hapyy news out of England, That at a conference betwixt Father Fisher and Weston, sweet Jesuites, and two Pro­testant Ministers, the Jesuites had quitted themselves so well, and the Catholicks Faith prevailed so far, that two Earls, and one hundred others of the auditory were joyned to the Church of Rome with this encounter of those two Earls. The party to whom he spake, was one who could not but smile at this relation; for there Ibid. p. 6. were not near an hundred of both parties in all at the conference, whereof twenty were professed Papists, and known Recusants; and for the rest, which were Noble men, Gentlemen, and Gentlewomen of qua­lity, with some few Divines, there was not any one of them any way staggered in Religion by this meeting: but on the contrary, they have openly profest that they were much established and confir­med in the Protestant Religion by it; and Mr. Doctor Featlys Refutation of an Answer to the Book inti­tuled the Fish­er, &c. p. 130. Buggs himselfe, whose satisfaction by this conference was principally intended, who [Page 50]before had doubted of our Church, gave thanks after the Dispu­tation to Sir Humph. Lynde for the meeting, and assured him that he was well resolved now of his Religion, that he saw plainly it was but the Jesuites bragging without proofs; and whereas formerly by their Sophistical perswasions, be was in some doubt of the Church, he is now so fully satisfied of the truth of our Religion, that he doth utterly disclaim the Popish Priests company, and their Do­ctrine also.

Though it be a wicked thing to lye (albeit it were for a good intent, yea, for the glory of God, Iob 13.7. Rom. 3.7, 8. and no wickedness as such, is matter of laughter, but rather of sorrow) yet they mingle such folly and absurdity with their lying, as the Priests of Baal did with worshipping of their Idol, that they deserve to be derided for it, as they were by the Prophet Eli­jah, 1 King. 18.26, 27. and the more, because it is frequent with them, and by some of the approved as a pious fraud: but sometimes their malignity produceth sad effects, especially of publick disputes; as is observable concerning the Dispute of that Illustrious and Incomparable man, the Lord Morney, as Doctor Illustri & incomparabili viro Domino Philippo Mor­nayo, &c. Epist. dedicat. prae­fix. Critic. Sacr. Rivet calls him, and the Bishop of Eureux at Foun­tainbleau forementioned; the Noble and Learned Lord confi­ding in the truth of his Allegations, which were excepted a­gainst, as hath been said, wanting the use of his own Library, and forced to make use of his Adversaries Books: they brought him one Book over night of one Edition, another in the morning of another; and withal, as Doctor Sut­lives Answer to Parsons, l. 3. c. 12. and out of him Mr. Birkbeck in his Answer to the Antido­tist, added to the second E­dition of the Protestants Evid. p. 474. some have written, put a powder into the places quoted, the smell whereof was like to have cost him his life: that he ^g fell very sick upon the first days conference, so as they could proceed no farther, is testified in the report of their Dispute in the French History; and some of his Adver­saries spake suspiciously of his sickness, as if it were more in his mind then in his Body, being astonisshed with the success of the praludium of that dayes Velitation, which ^h Gisbertus Voetius disproves: and concerning the cause of his disease, he saith nothing of poyson, because he takes it from such Authors of [Page 51]the Popish party, as if they knew it to be true, would rather conceal it if they could, then let it come abroad into the world. But the matter is probable enough;

First, because there are such poysons, as will not onely make one sick, but kill him too, though he neither eat them nor drink them; as by anointing the leaves of a book with poyson, whereby Berkbeck ex Binfield ubi ante. Averroes is said to have killed Avicen; by poyson­ing of clothes, arms, seats, saddles, whereof Joh. Maria­na de Rege, &c. l. 1. c. 7. p. 67. Mariana the Jesuite shewes many examples in his book De Rege, and Regis Institutiones; yea, a man may be killed by carrying a poysoned Torch: Anno 1574. Carolus Cardinalis Lotharingiae diem obiit non sine suspicione veneni, facis per noctent praelatae pestifero odore cerebro corrupto. Bucolz. Index. chronol. p. 638. ex Thuano. so was the Cardinal of Loraine, a great and busie man in the Councel of Trent, poysoned with the smoke of a Torch carried before him in the night.

Secondly, it is not improbable, that some of the Lord Morney or Plesses enemies might both know that there were such poysons, and where to procure them, and how to apply them; Haereticis ob­stinatis bene­ficium est quod de hac vita tollantur; nam quò diutiùs vivunt cò plu­res errores ex­cogitāt, plures pervertunt, & ma jorem sibi damnationem acquirunt. Bellarm. Tom. 2. l. 3. dc Laicis c. 21. verbis ul­timis. for it seems by that we now noted of the Cardinal of Loraine (which fell out An. 47.15.) that destructive arts were neither unknown, nor unpracticed at that time; and the dispute betwixt the L. M. and the Bishop of Eureux was 26. years after. Any such wickedness is the more probable of a Papist against a Pro­testant, because of the Popish Doctrine, which is this, it is a benefit for obstinate Hereticks to be taken out of this life, for the longer they l [...]ve, the more errors they invent, and the more they pervert, and procure to themselves the greater damnation. It was not to be expected, but the disputation being broken off by the L. M. his occasion, the Papists would insult and re­port whatsoever might make for their own glory, and his dis­paragement, as indeed they did; but how poorly the Popish Bishop began to make good his charge and challenge against the L. M. the learned Reader may see by that which Gisbert. Vo­etius de despe­rata causa pa­patus l. 3. Sect. 2. c. 10. à p. 680, ad 692. Gis­bert Voetius hath written of it in his Book Of the desperate cause of the Papacy, and by the excellent ⁿ Refutation of the Tract set out by the L. M. after the Dispute for his own just defence, [Page 52]to which the Bishop his Adversary Perronus ad illum librum nunquam re­spondit. Ibid. And this was 35. years after, for Voetius his book was prin­ted An. 1655. and the dis­pute was An. 1600. and this Apologet. Treat. soon after. never made any answer.

But the most certain and remarkable issue or effect of this Dispute was, that Serres French Histo­ry ad Ann. 1600. p. 1053. Canoy one of the Commissioners for the Di­spute, President in the Chamber of the Edict at Charters, left his profession of the Reformed Religion, and became a Romish Catho­lick; many thought that Casaubon the other Protestant Commissi­oner, and Greek Reader to King H. the Fourth, would have fol­lowed the same course; but he left not the world long in this opini­on, having written to the Synod of Ministers assembled at Gargean, that he was not so wretchedly instructed in piety, as that for want of knowledge of the truth, he should suffer himself to be carried a­way with every humour of Doctrine.

The causes of so little good success of Debates, Disputes, Conferences, or Controversies of Religion, betwixt parties of opposite opinions are divers; in some the prevalent power of fansie or imagination above judgement, is the cause, that Ar­guments, whether artfiicial of reason, or inartificial of testi­mony, will work little upon prejudicated fancy: of the various working whereof we may read many observable particulars in the learned discourse of Picus Earl of Mirandula, of Jo. Picus Mi­randula lib. de imaginatione, vol. 2. operum p. 91. praecip. c. 7, 8, 9. that Title.

Secondly, With some, custome is a great obstacle against the receiving of truth: and thence it is that those who have been trained up in untruth from their Child-hood, are with greatest difficulty convinced of it, or converted from it. We may see the refractoriness of this resistance in Peter, Acts 10. who, when v. 12,13. a vision was presented unto him, shewing him several kinds of creatures, clean and unclean, and he had a command to kill and eat, v. 13. Not so v. 14. Lord (said he) why so Peter? he gives this reason of his refusal, though the command came from Heaven; because of his customary forbear­ance of forbidden meats, I have never eaten any thing that is common and unclean.

Thirdly, With others Prava vel honoris, vel pecuniae cupi­ditas animos disputantium invasit, ut tanquam in pugna sola spectaretur victoria [...] Ludov [...] Vives de causis corrupt. artium, l. [...]. p. 38. a corrupt cupidity of glory or gaint is a great cause of their standing out against clear discoveries; such will not yield to verity, so long as they can with confidence [Page 53]and impudence make any shew or appearance of victory, or outface the foil they have taken in dispute.

Fourthly, Some withstand the truth in unrighteousness, prin­cipally out of hatred and disdain of their Adversaries, lest it should be thought, that by them they were brought to yield unto it: this was the humour of the Arch-Bishop and Cardinal of Capua, who would yield to reform nothing, though many corruptions were discovered, Nicol. Archi­epis, Capua­nus, Magna contentione clamabat ne quid omnino reformaretur, ne Lutherani jactent quasi ab ipsis prope­modum adacti illud fecerint. Job. Sl [...]idan Comment. l. 12. p. 242. An. 1538. left the Lutherans should brag that they had been brought to reformation by them.

Fifthly, Some account it their credit to be no changelings, especially in Religion; not knowing the difference betwixt con­stancy and obstinacy.

Sixthly, And oft times it falls out, that by the subtilty or elo­quence of Disputants, when they are somewhat evenly match­ed, the Auditory is kept pendulous, or irresolute; even he, perhaps, for whose sake the Dispute or Conference was under­taken, as Ille cujus causa in con­gressum de­scendis Scrip­turarum, ut cum dubitantem confirmes ad veritatem an nagis ad haeresim deverget, hoc ipso motus, quod te videat nihil promovisse aequo gradu negandi & defendendi, certe de pari & altercatione incertior discedit, nesciens quem Haereticum judicet. Ter [...]ul. prae­script. advers. haereticos Tom. 1. c. 18. p. 170. Tertull. sheweth; He, saith Tertullian, for whose cause thou descendest into a Controversie of Scripture, that thou maist confirm him against doubting, it is hard to say whether he tend more to Verity or to Heresie, because he sees thou pre­vailest nothing, the dispute going on in an equal degree of denying and defending: certainly by such a parity in altercation he will depart more uncertain, not knowing what he should judge to be Heresie.

Seventhly, When Conferences and Disputations in Religion succeed not so well as good men would have them, is, because they are not ordered or managed in such a manner as they should be; whereof I shall speak in the next Chapter, as in its p [...]oper place. In the mean time this good order will require, that I now observe, what good success hath been the issue of some disputations betwixt Michael and the Devil in Iude, Christ and the Devil, Matth. 4. By the way, some take Michael the Arch-Angel for Christs Son, for a created Angel to me it is, which I will now neither determine nor discuss: and for the [Page 54]disputes of Stephen and Paul, they must needs have the better of their adversaries, because they were not able to resist the Wis­dome and the Spirit by which they spake, Act. 6.10. not with any evidence of truth, or appearance of reason: yet when the truth was most illustriously set forth, some were so blinded and hardned with their own malice and envy, that they could not see it, or would not confess themselves to be convinced by it; is, as when our Saviour had mightily and miraculously proved himself to be the Son of God by casting out Devils, the Devil would not suffer his Adversaries to acknowledge it, but stirred them up to impute the power of the holy Spirit to Beelzebub the Prince of Devils, Matth. 12.24. And when Athanasius had a Disputation with Arius, he would not yield that the power of Truth had prevailed, but Arius in quit nulli dubium est quin magi­cis artibus Athanasius non desinat judicum pervertere sensus, &c. Athanas. disp. contra Arium Laodiceae, tom. 2. col. 393. most absurdly suggested, that he managed his cause by Magical Arts.

Notwithstanding the issues and effects of some Disputations have been more successful (besides those which were carried on by a Divine Power against Humane or Devillish malignity) as that of Octavius a Christian, with Cecilius an Heathen, set forth by Minutius Felix; whereof we have observed before, that some take that for a real story, some for a pious discourse com­posed by Minutius himself Dialogue-wise, under the borrowed names of Caecilium superstitiosis vanitatibus e­tiamnum in­haerentem di­sputatione gravissima ad veram religio­nem reforma­vit Octavius: sic Minutius Felix Conclus. Dialog. Tom. 9. Bibliothec. Patrum, col. 22. Octavius a Christian, and Cecilius an Heathen: the effect whereof, whether it were historicall, or poeticall, or moral, was such as was answerable to such convincing premises, viz. that Cecilius converted by Octavius from superstitious vanities, they parted with mutual congratulation, and Minutius thereby accounted himself Felix, ^y rejoycing with and for them both.

^z Eusebius and ^a Hierome make report of Beryllus Bishop of [Page 55] Bostra in Arabia, that he fell from the faith to strange doctrine of the Divinity and Humanity of Christ; but conferring with Origen, was convicted by manifest proof, and recovered to his former sound opinion. The effect of the Dispute betwixt Baron. Annal. tom. 2. ad ann. 277. parag. 16. Ar­chelaus and Manes was rather the confusion of the Heretick then his conversion; for he run away from his Antagonist when he had convinced him, and would not appear in his sight any more. And though Augustine sometimes wholly lost his labour in conflict with Hereticks, who continued contumacious and clamorous against the Truth and him: yet sometimes he was ve­ry successful in his Disputations with them; sometimes as Origen was with Beryllus, Aug. fin. l. 2. de Artis cum foelice Manich. tom 6. p. 657. as when he brought Felix the Manichean Heretick to a Recantation of his Errour, and subscription a­gainst it: sometimes as Archelaus, when he disputed with Ma­nes, whose foil and flight I have noted in another Chapter: As when having disputed with Fortunatus a Manichean, and Possid. in vit [...] Aug. c. 6. put him to silence, he put him also to so much shame, that he went out of the City of Hippo, and returned thither no more. More might be observed of his good success, either for conversion or victory, but that I must leave a little room for some other memorable Examples of like sort; not to mention that which I had occasion to bring in Ibid. c. 4. ad ann. 325. before, of a subtile Phi­losopher and Logician convinced and converted by a plain old man. We may note next the issue of that famous Disputation betwixt Maximus the Monk, and Pyrrhus the Archbishop of Constantinople, about the See cap. 4. ann. 645. Will of Christ; which was, that the Archbishop gave way to the Truth proposed and proved by Maximus. The issue of the Dispute (betwixt Gregentius a Greek Bishop with Herbanus a Jew) continued about 40 days toge­ther, Tom. 1. Bibli. Patrum Graec, Lat. p. 277. concluded with the conversion of many from the Jews. I will conclude this point of the good success of Disputation with one or two domestick [...]; the one is of Dr. Reynolds con­ferring or disputing with Hart in the Tower, who it seems in one point of moment was brought to acknowledge a Protestant Truth, viz. Hart in his Epist. to the indifferent Reader, p. 2. before the Conference. That the opinion which makes the Pope a Temporal Lord over Kings and Princes, is unreasonable and unprofitable al­together; for he hath not to meddle with them or their civility, much less to depose them, or give away their Kingdoms: that's no part of [Page 56]his Commission. But the Doctrine of Non licet Christianis to­lerare regem infidelem aut haereticum, si ille conetur subditos ad su­am haeresim vel infidelita­tem pertrahere: ad judicare an rex pertrahat ad haeresim necne, pertinet ad Pontificem cui est commissa cura Religionis, ergo Pontificis est judicare regem esse deponendum vel non deponendum. Bellar. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 5. c. 7. tom. 1. p. 351. col. 1. Bellarmine is, (wherein not onely the Jesuites, but other Zelots for the Papacy follow him) That Christians ought not to tolerate an Infidel or Heretical King, if he endevour to draw his Subjects to Heresie or Infidelity: but to judge whether the King draw his Subjects to Heresie or no, belongeth to the Pope, to whom is committed the care of Religion.

So that it belongeth to the Pope to try whether he be to be de­posed or not.

But had the learned and religious Doctor prevailed nothing at all with his Adversary, but that Hart had been so hardened in all Popish Errors, as to renounce none of them, as he did what he could by Sophisms and Lies, by Fraud and Falshood to out-face the Truth, as Confer. c. 7. divis. 7. p. 377. Dr. Reynolds justly chargeth him; yet we cannot but account it an happy effect of their Dispute, that it produced in print so excellent a Book as the Report of that Conference is, so full of all kinde of Learning pertinently ap­plied, and meeting with the shuffling shifting Papists at every turn.

Though in this respect this Conference proved in the issue and effect of it better than was expected, yet it is more strange, and such as the like hath seldome hapned, which fell out upon the Dispute of him and his Brother William: Mr. Fullers Church-Hist. of Great Brit. l. 10 p. 47. 48. John Reynolds, Mr. Harts Antagonist, at the first was a zealous Papist, whilst William his Brother was as earnest a Protestant; and afterwards providence so ordered it, that by their mutual Disputation John Reynolds turned an eminent Protestant, and William an invete­rate Papist, in which perswasion he died. This gave the occa­sion to an excellent Copy of Verses, concluding with this Distich:

The success of the Dispute betwixt Dr. Featly and Fisher both good and bad, I have observed already in this Chapter. And so much may suffice for the issues and effects of Colloquies, Conferences and Disputes in matters of Religion.

CHAP. VI. How Disputations are to be ordered that the Truth may be cleared; and being cleared, both it and they who plead for it may be secured from reprochful mis-reports.

THough nothing be many times more rashly undertaken than a dispute of Religion, yet in nothing is more pru­dence and caution required than in that, that it may be mana­ged to the best advantage for victory on the Truths side. And therefore where there is an association of Ministers, it will be agreeable to their goodness and wisdome, to joyn in a resolution not to enter the Lists of publick Disputation with any, though provoked, without a serious consultation of the Brotherhood, to deliberate,

First, Whether the matter be fit to be disputed or no.

Secondly, Concerning the persons who are to be actors in it, or present at it.

Thirdly, What shall be the Laws and Conditions of Di­spute.

First, whether the matter be fit to be disputed or no: [...] Greg. Nazianz. Orat. 31. tom. 1. q. 531. Gre­gory Nazianzen propoundeth it as matter of special considera­tion, that we dispute not of matters which are above the model of our own wits, and the Auditors apprehension and ability to conceive. The Emperour ^b Gratian would not allow the Arrians to dispute of God, and therefore by an especial Law forbade [Page 58]such Disputations, because the Mystery of the Trinity is a My­stery of Faith far above the reach of Humane Reason. In lower and more De vulgari­bus rebus dis­putantem ali­quem vinci minime gravè est; ne que enim omnis est, &c. gravissimum autem est divi­nitatem detri­mento affici, cam (que) sophistis prodere. Elias Cretens. Comment. in Nazianz. orat. 23. tom. 2. col. 852. vulgar matters for a man to be overcome or gra­vell'd, as Elias Cretensis noteth upon Nazianzen, is no great matter, because every one hath not the art of disputing or solving of Sophisms; but it is a sad thing for the Divinity of God or Christ to be disparaged, and as it were to be betraid into the hands of Sophisters. The Heathens were wary in preserving the reve­rence of Religion, that they held it ^d an evil and impious cu­stome to dispute of their gods, whether an adversary or in good earnest.

Though he who hath this fundamental infidelity in his heart, may be disputed out of his Atheism by secret conference, yet it is no way lawful to enter the Lists of publick Disputation with an Atheist, as if it were a problematical point whether there were a God or no; no more meet is it to entertain a publick dispute with Antiscripturists, especially now, since his The humble Petition and Advice to His Highness the L. Protector, &c. p. 27, 28, 29. High­ness the Lord Protector, his Councel, and the Members of the Parl [...]ament, take an Oath To uphold and maintain the true Refor­med Protestant Christian Religion in the purity thereof, according to the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, and to incourage the profession and professors of the same. Nor will it, as I conceive, be fit to admit the Arminians to a publick Dispute, especially of Mr. John Goodwyns fancy or faction; as his absurd and hor­rible Errours have been lately and lively set forth in their colours by Pag. 65, 66, 67, 68, 69. of his solid and acute Confu­tation of Mr. Joh. Goodwyns Calumniatory Cavil in his Book which he calleth [...], or The Triers, &c. Mr. Marchiamont Nedham. And as it is matter of religi­ous piety to forbear such disputes upon any point as may violate the Majesty of Religion; so I believe it is a civil duty which we owe our Superiours, who are pleased to protect Orthodox Reli­gion, not to offer any part of it whereof they take the Patro­nage, as in the Oath fore-mentioned, and without their licence and allowance in such a way as their prudence shall approve of: And it cannot but be matter of great offence and scandal to any prudent and pious Christian, to have any fundamental point of Faith once delivered to the Saints, delivered up to be tossed up­on [Page 59]the tongues of men; it may be such as G [...]eg. Naz. Orat. 33. tom 1. p. 531. Nazianzen taxeth, as making a sport in a trifling manner to dispute of divine mat­ters. Nor are some questions more to be forborn for their sa­cred Sublimity, than others for their ridiculous Levity; as, whether according to the Multa rena­scentur quae jam cecidere, cad [...]nt­que Quae nu [...]c sunt in honore vocabula, si vo­let usus; Quem penes arbitrium est, & jus & norma loquendi. Horat. So the Greek word [...], Tyrannus, was anciently taken for a King in a good sense, when Homer called Jupiter [...]: But for many hundred years ago it hath been taken in an ill sense, Tempore Lucae vocabulum illud Tyrannus tantum accipiebatur in malam partem apud Gaecos & Latinos. Estius Act. Apostol. 19. v. 9. So the word Idiot in Lukes time was ta­ken onely for one that is unlearned and ignorant. So Peter and John are called [...], that is, Unlearned and Idiots, Acts 4.13. And 1 Cor. 14.16. How shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned, [...], of the Idiot; and 23. If there come in those that are ignorant and unbelievers, [...], that is, Idiots and unbelievers. So the word Knave, in Chaucers and Gowers time, and in the Stat. 1. c. 3. ann. 14 of Ed. 3. signified a servant. See Minshaws Dictionary, verbo Knave: and the French word Madam, is of that latitude in the proper original signification, that any woman that hath a servant, may by her servant be called Madam. Were it not now an unreasonable innovation, to go so far out of the received use of words, as to call a King a Tyrant, an Apostle an Idiot, an honest Servant a Knave, an ordinary Husbandmans wife Madam? The first would be dangerous, the second blasphemous, the third slande­rous, the fourth ridiculous, because quite out of use in our manner of speech; as the word Thou is, as applied to Superiours in a civil, or rather by the Quakers in an un­civil sense. Law of Language, which is a com­mon use, we should say You in civility to our Superiours, or Thou unto all, with those proud, rude and railing Levellers, the Quakers: On whose absurd and novel vanity I will here be­stow a marginal Note (h) and no more.

There is another question of note, but neither for the super­lative eminency, nor for the extreme lowness and lightness of it, as that of the Quakers, but for the subtilty, unprofitableness and impossibility to be determined by publick and personal di­sputation; and that is the captious question of the Papists, touching the Visibility of the Church in all Ages: In which point they have made bold Challenges to the Protestants party, who in my poor opinion should rather have disputed altogether against the unreasonableness of the question, than have under­taken the discussion of it, as Dr. Featly did with Fisher: For though he said much very learnedly and wittily after his man­ner, [Page 60]partly to shew the impertinency of the Proposal, to prove the Protestant Church visible in all Ages, and to name visible Professors of Protestant Religion in all Ages; and was very cautelous in his distinctions and assertions, for the framing of his Conclusions to the first question, which was, that The Romish Fisher caught & held in his own Net, part. 1. p. 103. The Pro­testant Church, according to the distinctions and assertions premi­sed, hath been in all Ages in some degree visible: And used the like prudential course concerning his Conclusion of the latter question, Of the Names of Protestant professors in all Ages; yet he undertook to give in a Catalogue of them in every Age, beginning with the Evangelists and Apostles, and going on from Clemens Romanus to Clemens Alexandrinus, with whom he makes up his second Century. Dr. Featly Ro­mish Fisher caught & held in his own Net, par. 1. p. 8. Of which question himself con­fesseth, that it required rather a large Historical Volume, than a brief Syllogistical Dispute. For what time would be required to bring such a Debate to a satisfactory Issue? how many dayes dispute, how many moneths, yea how many years will be taken up in distinguishing legitimate Writings of the Ancients, from such as are spurious or suspected for such even by the Papists themselves, who reckon of those ambiguous Brats no fewer than 187 several Treatises? and then for the legitimate works, how many are corrupted, and which Edition of them is the truest? and when that is known, Where shall we finde the do­ctrines in difference betwixt the Papists and us discussed or re­solved, when many of them were altogether unknown in their dayes? For those that speak any thing of the matters in que­stion, it is hard to judge what is their setled judgement in any point; for sometimes they play the Orators, flourishing with all figures of Rhetorick, which must not be taken in a Dogma­tical sense; as Dum essem adolescens, imo penè pu­er—Scripsi ad avunculum, sed in illo ope­re pro aetate tunc lusimus, & calentibus. adhuc Rhetorum studiis, &c. nunc jam cano capite & arata rugis fronte, &c. Hieron. ad Nepot. Tom. 1. p. 11. princip. Epist. Hierome confesseth of himself in his Epistle to Nepotian, While I was a young man, said he, and in a manner a Boy, I wrote unto my Ʋncle Heliodorus, but in that work I did but play with Rhetorical Studies, and painted my paper with a Scholastical flourish; now my head is grey, and my forehead fur­rowed, I write in another manner. Which may give them cause in their elder years, to retract and correct what they wrote [Page 61]when they were not so ripe in judgement being young: So did Augustine in his two Books of Retractions. And some things they have written in passion, violently turning from one extreme to another: So did Dionysius Alexandrinus; and therefore Basil. Episi. 41. Maxim. Philosoph. Basil compareth him to a Gardener, who when a bough groweth crooked one way, writhes it to be as crooked they other way. And in examining of these humane Testimo­nies, it will require time and judgement to distinguish particular Opinions from Church-doctrines. Now by that time all asser­tions in difference have been carried through all Ages, with all the distinctions and cautions until Luthers time, the Protestants bringing their proofs, and the Papists theirs, and time allowed for each party to make Exceptions as they please, how many years will be spent, and at last how fruitless will all this labour be? when if there were such consent to be found among them, as the Papists brag of, it would make but an humane Faith, which might be subject to falshood, as Quod histo­rici quidam meminerint eorum concili­orum, non po­test parere nisi fidem humanā cui potest sub­esse falsum. Bellarm. lib. 2 [...] Sacr. offic. c. 25. verbo ult. Tom. 3. Contr. p. 86. Bellarmine confesseth. And yet both the subtile Jesuites, and silly Papists by their In­struction, call for this trial of Religion by bringing a Catalogue of Professors in all Ages; on which the Jesuite Fisher so perti­naciously insisted, The relation of the Confe­rence, Jun. 27. 1623. p. 28. that he would not answer Dr. Featly touch­ing Christ and his Apostles in the first Century, unless he first brought in a Catalogue of Professors of Protestancy through­out all Ages: And which shewed his impiety and absurdity in the highest degree, in the Catalogue called for, he would Ibid. p. 27. not allow the Doctor to begin with Christ and his Apostles.

This plainly bewrayed the Jesuites great diffidence in his crazy cause, and his craft to secure it from a due trial, which this way he knew could never be effected: and with this fallacy they have locked up their seduced Proselytes in misbelief; so that we know not how to deal with them: for they will not hear us in any thing, unless we speak to the point of visibility in all ages; and if we offer to answer them in a readier and surer way, by the infallible Testimony of the Scriptures, they will not accept of it: yet notwithstanding all the advātage they have had by the predominacy of their power over Persons, Books & Pres­ses, to print and suppress what they please: we need not decline that way of trial out of any distrust in our cause, since there [Page 62]is yet so much upon record for us, and against them; that if such a tedious and dilatory discussion of our differences were to be undertaken by dispute face to face, they could be no gay­ners in the utmost issue of it, as we may well judge by Mr. Berkbeck in his Protestants evidences of the second Edition printed this year in Folio, so much amended and augmented a­bove the former in Quarto, that I take it to be the best Book extant in that kind.

When upon deliberation a resolution is made what shall be disputed on;

The next consideration is concerning the Persons.

For the Persons, and they are chiefly,

• 1. Disputants.
• 2. Presidents, or Moderators.
• 3. Notatories.
• 4. Witnesses.
• 5. For others, whether admitted by choice, or promiscuously without limitation or exception.

First for the Disputants; in them these four qualifications are chiefly requisite:

• 1. They must be learned.
• 2. Of quick conceipt.
• 3. Temperate, not passionate, or cholerick.
• 4. Pious, preferring Verity before Victory.

First, they must be learned in the Learned Languages, in Arts, and Histories, in Textual and Polemical Divinity; for they may in conflict be put to it, to make use of all the learning they have.

Secondly, They must be quick in conceipt, because they must presently without pause or study take their advantage, either of objecting or answering.

Thirdly, They must be temperate, not passionate, or chole­rick like Costerus the Jesuite; for Costerus, of whom Doctor Halls observation is, Dr. Hall. 1. De­cad. of Epist. Epist. 5. p. 282. that he wa [...] more teasty then subtile, more able to wrangle then to satisfie: for passion will blind the judg­ment, so as to make a man less fit to make use of his own strength, or to take advantage of his Adversaries weakness; besides, if a man be cholerick, it will make him forget the mo­deration [Page 63]of Michael the Arch-Angel, in forbearing railing ac­cusations, Jude 9. And the caution of Haec est modestia dis­putantis ut nulla adfera­tur audienti­bus ex disse­rentis sermone molestia: Chry­sost. in Epist., ad Hebr. ch. 2. homil. 3 Tom. 4. col. 1679. Chrysostom, which is, that the modesty of the Disputants should be such, that no­thing drop from their mouths which may be offensive to the ears of the hearers, which doth not only give distaste to them, but takes off much from the acceptation both of the Disputant and the cause disputed; one that appeared in Beza's disputation at Poy­sie, when though he were an excellent learned man, and plea­ded the cause of Reformation very sufficiently against the Ro­manists, was taken up and commanded to conclude; Hist. Conci. of Trent, l. 5. p. 453. because in the matter of the Sacrament he grew into an heat, which not only very much provoked the Prelates to indignation and disdain against the new Evangelists, as the Cardinal of Tornon called him and his party, but gave ill satisfaction to those of his own side: but this exorbitancy of passion is more familiarly the offence of the Romish wranglers, who are chosen of pur­pose by their party for Disputants, because of their zeal to the cause, which kindles quickly into choler, as we have partly observed in Eccius and Gretz [...]r; and may further note in one of Doctor Featleys Antagonists (Doctor Eglestone) who was so transported with passion, as to say to him, The Romish Fisher caught and held in his own Net, par. 3. p. 128. I will be hanged at the next Gallows if I make you not confess that it implies no contradiction, for an accident to be without a subject; if he wou'd have stood to his word, he had been sure to be hanged; for it was not in his power to force the Doctor to such a confes­sion.

Fourthly, The Disputants ought to be pious, that (out of conscience) they may prefer Verity before Victory. Of this mind doubtless was the Apostle Paul, when he professed he could do nothing against Victoriâ ni­hil dulcius, Cicer. Act. in verrem, fol. 876. the truth, 2 Cor. 13.8. to a corrupt and carnal mind nothing is more sweet then victory; but if truth appear to have the preeminence, a godly man will not be a­shamed to yield unto it, though with change of his opinion; for he takes not himself to be of so great authority and fame, as to be ashamed that he erred, as Ne erubes­cas de com­mutatione sententiae; non es tantae authoritatis & famae, ut errasse te pudeat. Hieron. Apolog. advers. Ruffin. Tom. 2. p. 199. Hierom said to Ruffinus, do nothing through strife or vain glory, Phil. 2.3. as the Papists [Page 64]did against the Protestants in the Councel of Trent, Hist. of the Councel of Trent, l. 1. An. 1530. when as Cardinal Langi Arch-Bishop of Saltzburg said, that the Refor­mation of the Mass was honest, the liberty of meats conveni­ent; but that a poor Monk, meaning Luther, should reform all, was not to be endured: some conceive it matter of moment, that the Disputants be matched in quality and calling, as in the The Romish Fisher caught and held in his own Net, p. 3. p. 118, 119. Disputation betwixt Master Walker and Doctor Egle­ston.

Before I dispute upon the question, saith Mr. Walker, I desire to know your quality and calling, whether you be a professed Popish Priest or no?

Dr. Egleston. I am a Roman Catholick, not a Priest, but a Doctor of Physick.

Mr. Walker. I desire then another Adversary, some of the Priests here present, that we may dispute on equal terms; I hold the cal­ling of a Protestant Preacher and Divines, more honourable then a­ny Popish Priesthood; and therefore if your Priests think them­selves too good to dispute with me, you shall not brag that your Lay­men are fit matches to dispute with Protestant Preachers and Di­vines.

Dr. Egleston. Mr. Walker, you being a Divine, ought to give me, though a Lay-man, the best satisfaction you can.

Mr. Walker, I am ready to give you satisfaction, if you come as a Layman, ought to a Divine, that is, with a desire to hear, and to be instructed in all humility, not with a mind to contradict and oppose the truth.

And so they proceeded to Disputation, as in the relation quoted in the Margin; and it may be the Doctor of Physick was a better Divine then the Priests that were present.

Doctor Brian in this respect might have had more just cause of disdain, to take Mr. Only for his match, then Mr. Walker Doctor Egloston, since the disparity was more betwixt them two, then betwixt a Divine that was not a Doctor, and a Do­ctor that was not a Divine.

This for the qualification of the Disputants. Now, secondly, for a Moderator, or President, to manage the disputation with decency and order.

It is requisite that some person of worth for wisdom and [Page 65]gravity (and if it may be also of power and authority, so that his power be not byassed by partiality on either side) be Presi­dent and Moderator to mannage the disputation with order and decency, for prevention of vain jangling and confusion: when disputations are national, and particularly authorized by the supreme power; that power commonly makes choice of a Pre­sident, or of Commissioners to preside over the disputation: so did the Emperour Aug. Breric. Collat. Praefa. Tom. 7. par. 1. p. 684. Honorius, who published an Edict for disputation betwixt the Catholicks and Donatists at Carthage, and by the same Edict ordained one to preside in the disputati­on, who was called a Judge. So did the Emperour Sleyd. Com. l. 16. p. 353. Charles in the Conference at Ratisbone. In that at Poysie in France be­twixt Beza and the Popish party: Beza and those of his Hist. of the Councel of Trent. l. 5. p. 451. side desired, that the King and his Councel would be present to govern the action, with especial exception against the Clergy, that none of them might preside, because they were their professed adversaries; and some of them unwilling that the Protestants should be gratified in that request, would have perswaded the Queen Mother to keep her son King Charles away, lest being young, he should be led away by the plausibility of error. So in the concertation at Fountain­bleau, betwixt the Lord Morney and the Bishop of Eureux, King Henry the Fourth was prsent and President the first day, yet appointed he Commissioners, because himselfe would not be engaged to attend the debate until it were ended; though he did so, because it brake off after one day by the sickness of the Lord Morney, as hath been said before. In the publick Dispu­tations at Oxford and Cambridg, betwixt the Protestants and Pa­pists, in King Edward the sixths time, certain Commissioners were sent in the name of Fox Martyr. vol. 2. p. 756. col. 2. & 760. col. 2. Visitors, to the number of five to each University, to oversee the Disputation orderly carried on, and to make report of it to His Majesty. In the three dayes conference at Hampton Court, King James himself was Presi­dent, and it was well he was so, else some of the Prelates would have soon put to silence Doctor Reynolds and his assistants; for when that Reverend, Religious and Learned Doctor did but modestly observe a The second dayes confe­rence at Ham­pton Court. p. 25. Contradiction in the Service Book about Confirmation, one place confessing it was a depraved imitation of the Apostles, another grounding it upon their example, Act. 8.9. [Page 66] and thereupon desired that the contradictions might be considered, and the ground of conformation examined: the Bishop of London cut him off, and kneeling down, most humbly desired His Ma­jesty that the ancient Canon might be remembred, which saith, Schismatici contra Episcopos non sunt and endi: was there any thing in the Doctors speech which deserved so sharp a censure, as that for that he should be called a schismatick, & such a schis­matick as might not be suffered to speak, because that which he speaks both piously and prudently, is said by a pettish Prelate to be spoken against the Bishops? But had he not cause to be much moved? the partial Pen-man of that Conference will tell you he had: for Ibid. some of these men (saith he) the evening before, and the same morning had made a semblance of joyning with the Bishops, and that they sought for nothing but unity; but now they strook at their overthrow (if they could) all at once. Episco­pacy, or rather Prelacy, surely is like the Apples of Sodom, if such a tender touch of the Doctor would overthrow all at once: But the Doctor and those of his mind, though as peace­ably minded as any, should have been overthrown at once, if the King (who acted the office of a Moderator) had not been more moderate, and given some check to the Bishops choler, Pag. 28. telling him, he should have suffered the Doctor to have taken his course and liberty; concluding, that there is no order, nor can be any effectual issue of disputation, if each party might not be suffer­ed without chopping, to speak at large what he would; and there­fore willed, that either the Doctor should proceed, or that the Bi­shop would frame his answer to the motions already made. And this is the proper work of a President, or Moderator at a Disputa­tion or Conference.

Sometimes the power which doth authorize the Dispute, lea­veth liberty to the Disputants, by consent, to chuse their Presi­dent or Moderator; So did Sigismond King of Poland to the Trinitarians and Antitrinitarians for their Disputation at Pe­tricovia, Antho. Poss. Biblioth. Sele. Tom. 1. l. 8. c. 13. p. 363. who after some debate, resolved that the President should be chosen by turns one out of each party.

I will give you but one Observation more concerning this matter; and it is that memorable one betwixt Ambrose Bishop of Millain, and Auxentius and Arian Bishop; the [Page 67] Arian challenged the Orthodox Bishop to dispute, procured the Authority of the Emperor Valentinian (a Child not yet bap­tized) by the favour of the Empress Justina an Arian, for his summons to appear in the Emperors Court or Consistory, sig­nifying that certain learned Jewes and Pagans were chosen as Judges on Auxentius part, and allowing him to make choice of his Judges. Ambrose from such premises expecting no good conclusion, refused to answer either the challenge of the A­rian, or charge of the Emperor; and Ambrose Ep. 32. l 5. Tom. 3. p. 121, &c. makes his Apology to the Emperor with a modest boldness, giving him all reverenti­al and dutiful terms, yet freely without fear, pleading with him the right of his cause.

3. The next particular is the Persons requisite for the order­ing of a Dispute, are Notaries, who have an Notariorum arserat, ut quae dicebantur notatis qui­busdam exci­perent tanta celeritate, ut non dictantis tantùm sed lo­quentis vocem assequerentur, unde Graecis [...] dicuntur. Erasm. in vita Origen. fol. 3. p. 1. art of short and swift writing, to set down what is spoken in disputation, when it is spoken. This was the manner of publick disputations be­fore ^k Epiphanius his time, as he sheweth by example; and so it was in the disputation betwixt the Catholicks and Donatists, wherein ^l Augustine had to do; and in his disputation with ^m Foelix the Manichean, there were Notaries on both sides.

In later times the like hath been observed, as in the contro­versie at Petricovia in Poland, that we may be sure it was waged betwixt Papists and Arrians: Anthon. Pos­sev. Biblioth. Select. videat lit. c. Possevine relateth, the Scribe or Notary was a noble personage, who had written against Calvin. In the conference at Ratisbone, betwixt the Protestants and Papists, the Protestants moved, that what passed in the conference may be Protestan­tes, qui vide­rent quibuscū adversariis es­sent commissi, collocutionem omnem & acta describi pe­tunt. Sleyd. comment. l. 16. p. 353. set down by Notaries: and at that in Poysie it was one of the conditions of the Colloquie propounded by Beza and his associates, ^p that there should be Notaries cho­sen by both parties: so was Mr. Alesbury chosen to write the Conference or Dispute betwixt Doctor Featley and ^q Fisher. The office of a Notary is faithfully, and without partiality, to [Page 68]write what passeth betwixt the adverse parties. Against a false Notary the Emperor Alexander Severus was so severe, that he Notarium in­cisis digitorum nervis, ut nun­quam scribere posset. Bucolz. Index Chron. ad An. 223. p. 171. caused his fingers to be cut off, so that he could never write after. Mr. Fisher the Jesuite, I believe, had not read that sto­ry, when he thrust himself into a Notaries office, at a Dispute betwixt Dr. Featley and Mr. Musket, and Romish Fish­er, &c. p. 37. falsified that office. Some that mean not well have no mind of Notaries, Pascentius verba sua ex­cerpi noluit. Aug. Epist. 174 Tom. 2. p. 901. as Pa­scentius the Arrian, Augustines Adversary, who would not yield to have his tongue followed by the Notaries pen; the Po­pish party liked not the motion of the Protestants for Notaries in the Conference at Ratisbone, alledging it would draw out the debate too long, if that might be an exception, then it can­not well be so, at least not so well: now in our more expert age, wherein there are many, who by Brachygraphy, can write as fast as most men ordinarily speak. Possidon. in vita, Aug. c. 17. The want of No­taries in a private Dispute betwixt Augustine and Pascentius, gave him occasion and encouragement to brag that he had the better of it, and put Augustine to make a confutation of that falshood, by their testimonies who were present at it. From the same cause was it, that Dr. Fr. White was represented so silly a Disputant with Fisher, as if he had been a School-boy of thirteen years old; for he Doctor Fr. White his reply to Jesuite Fish. answ. Pre. p. 9. princ. & fine. confesseth there was not a word written at that time, when he and his Adversaries dispu­ted together.

The fourth sort of persons convenient to be present at a Di­spute of Religion are such, as for their integrity and discretion, are worthy to be witnesses of what passeth in Dispute. Such are not superfluous (besides the Notaries) to attest the trans­action of every dayes dispute, and the whole at the last: and such had Possid. vide lit. q. Augustin in his private dispute with Pascentius, though without Notaries. And by such was the cause and credit of the Protestant Religion, and the Champion for it Doctor Featly, righted against the fictions and falshoods of Fisher and his par­ty, concerning the close of their conference, which in truth was thus; Fisher refusing to answer to Christ and his Apostles, the Protestant party present called off, or rather pulled off the opponent Doctor Featly; so the conference brake up: and this is attested The Romish Fisher, &c. par. 1. p. 45, 46. by the subscription of two Earls, two Knights, three Esquires, [Page 69]one Doctor, two Batchelors in Divinity, besides the Notaries cho­sen by both parties.

Fourthly, For other Auditors, it were to be wished that none were admitted, but such as in some competent measure are able to judge, and are not weaklings in the Faith, since the Apostle saith, him that is weak in the Faith receive, but not to doubtful disputations, Rom. 14.1. But it cannot be that (as it was at the conference at Ratisbone and Hampton Court) the hearers should be alwayes only such as are particularly called, or admitted: and we find examples of promiscuous admission of all persons, both in ancient and in latter times; for the former we have an instance in Augustines time, when at his disputation with a Ma­nichean Doctor Convene­runt in unum, concurrenti­bus (que) plurimis viris studiosis turbis (que) curi­osis. Possidon, de vita Aug. p. 6. there came together not only many studious men, but the curious multitude: and when Gregentius disputed with Herbanus the learned Jew, the [...], &c. Biblioth. veterum patrū Graeco Lat. Tom. 1. p. 194. whole City came thron­ging together to hear. The disputations of latter times especially, since those errors which heretofore used for fear or shame to sneke into corners, have got the impudence to give affront to Preachers in the Pulpit, and their maintainers to challenge them to dispute; a kind of necessity hath been put upon some to con­test for the truth in the most publick Audiences and Assemblies of the people. Thus much for the persons considerable in and about disputations of Religion.

Our next observations must be set upon Rules and Lawes, whereby disputations must be regulated in order to an happy issue and success.

First then, According to the religious Aphorism of [...]. Greg. Nazianz. Orat. 1. Tom. 1. p. 1. Na­zianzen, the work must begin with God, and end with God by prayers and praises, for he is the father of Lights, James 5.7. and can make dark things clear; and when he sets a light before men, he can open their eyes to see it, and bind their hearts to embrace it.

Secondly, Whatsoever point or Doctrine we bring to discus­sion, we must make Gods word the authentick rule of tryal, re­ceiving nothing as matter of Faith Fundamental to Salvation, but what is in express terms contained in it, or by just conse­quence deduced from it.

Thirdly, The matter in question must be truely and clearly [Page 70]stated and agreed upon before the disputation begin, else it may be See the ex­plication of the proverb, c. 4. lit. w. Andabatarum pugna, a blind buffeting of the Disputants betwixt themselves, or a beating of the air, as the Apostle phra­seth it. Alternis vi­cibus conten­tioso fune u­terque diem in vesperam tra­xerunt, nubulo quodam veri­tas obumbra­batur. Tertull. advers. Judaeos c. 1. princ. cap. Tom. 1. p. 198. Tertullian in the beginning of his book against the Jewes, observes such a disputation betwixt a Christian and a Jewish Proselyte, who drew out the day as by a cord of conten­tion until night; in the mean time the truth was overshadowed by a cloud, which was to be cleared up by determining the Summum quaestionis ip­sius certis li­neis determi­nemus, Ibid. c. 2. p. 19 [...]: summe of the Question, within certain lines or limits of reso­lution for the state of it, as he speaketh afterwards. If this be not first done, nothing in the dispute can be well done, no orderly proceeding can be made in the way, but a wild wander­ing out of the way; which might justly have moved your Ad­versary Mr. O. in sober sadness (without any jeering) to con­fess that he was miserably overseen, yea, in the understanding of that very question upon which he disputed, until he came to page 113. of his Examination of your Reply, which in all con­taineth but 130.

Fourthly, That the Disputation be not drawn out by Rhe­torical Exspatiations (as the Jesuite Cotton was used to do, who was, as Petrus Cotto­nus Rhetori­cus jactantior quàm dialecti­cus acutior. Daniel. Cham. Praefat. ad 2. par. Epist. Je­suit. Chamier saith of him, rather a braving Rhetorician then an arguing Logician) but rather contracted by Logical Ar­gumentation. Some have no mind of Logical Disputes, because there are others who use Sophistry, or fallacious Conclusions, which Contorta Sophismata, sic enim ap­p. Hantur fal­laces conclusi­unculae. Cicer. Acad. quaest. Edit. 1. l. 2. num. 67. Cicero calleth writhed and pricking Sophismes, for Lo­gick; and which Seneca gravely derideth, Non debuit hoc nobis esse propositum argutè disserere, & Philosophiam in has angustias ex sua majestate detrahere, ne (que) quicquam aliud istae disputationes sunt quàm inter se peritè captantium lusus. Senec. Epist 48. p. 464. Edit. Lipsian. as a degrading of Philosophy from the latitude of her Majesty into streights; and meer plays or triflings betwixt such as are cunningly captious: and when Doctor Featley required of his Antagonist M. Fisher, that both the opponent and respondent should be tyed to Logical form: Fisher answered, that he did not hold that fit, because the company understands not Logick form; to which the Doctor answe­red, there are of the company that understand Logick as well as you or I, the rest are men of understanding and reason; and I am resolved to keep Logick form, and expect from you direct answers: Romish Fisher, E. c. 1.1. par. p. 8. [Page 71]and well he might, for Logick is nothing but Reason brought into Rule; wherewith by the light of Nature many are well en­dowed, though they have not the art of Logick: but it seems they meant a strict Form of Logick by Syllogismes, Ibid. though the Question of the visibility of the Church in all ages (which they had in debate) required, as the Doctor told the Jesuite, rather a large Historical volume, then a brief Syllogistical Dispute: and for Lo­gick, I know not how any dispute can be well ordered without it; since, as Aug. Tom. 1. p. 375. Dialectica ni­hil aliud do­cet quàm con­sequentia de­monstrare, seu vera veris, seu falsa falsis, Aug. contr. Crescon. Grammat. l. 1. c. 20. Tom. 7. par. 1 p. 261. Augustine saith, it teacheth nothing else but to de­monstrate consequences true or false, from true or false principles; ^l which Christian Doctrine (saith he) is never afraid of; as the Apostle Paul did not fear it in the Stoi [...]ks, whom he did not re­fuse, when they were willing to confer with him.

But for Logickly strict Form of Syllogisme throughout the disputation, it cannot well be observed, much less is it of ne­cessity to be required; and indeed it was very seldom practi­sed by the Ancients; yea, that great Disputant, Augustine him­self, though he have not only written a Aug. Tom. 1. operum p. 375. Treatise of Logick, but an Aug. contra Crescon. Grā ­mat. l. 1. ubi supra. Apology for Logick, putteth very few of his Rea­sonings into Syllogistical Form. And when they Syllogize, some of the shew themselves no very good Artists at it, as we may see by Gregory Nyssens ten Syllogismes against the Manichean Hereticks: and for latter times, Greg. Nyssent Tom. 3. p. 180. [...]. though some disputations have been carried on by a Series of many Syllogismes artifici­ally concluded in Mood and Figure, Fox. Martyr. vol. 2. p. 757, 758, 759, 760. as that of Peter Martyr a­gainst Doctor Tresham, Chadsey, and Morgan before the Kings Visitors at Oxford, Ann. 1549. ordinarily they have passed by Alternation and Reciprocation of Reasons and Exceptions, without forming of Syllogismes in Mood and Figure, and have not been the less profitable and successful; as we see in that excellent Debate or Dispute, called a Conference betwixt Do­ctor Reynolds and the Jesuite Hart.

Fifthly, That there be allowed an equall vicissitude for ob­jecting and answering without interruption; and that none interpose, or take upon them to be Disputants, but those that [Page 72]were agreed upon before the disputation began: the care of these cautions belongeth especially to the Moderators or Pre­sidents office, as King James his example sheweth in the confe­rence at Hampton Court, by reproving the Bishop of London for interrupting Doctor Reynolds, as hath been brought in al­ready, though to another purpose.

Sixthly, When there is an Intermission, or end of the dispu­tition, First, the Notaries writings are to be compared, and if they differ, to be reconciled.

Secondly, The Disputants are to have liberty to revise their own Reasons, Objections, and Solutions, and to correct them by altering, adding, or expunging, so as may make for the a­mendment of their own Arguments and Answers. This liberty Dr. Reynolds and Mr. Hart allowed one another.

Thirdly, When each side is satisfied, and that their opini­ons and pleadings are set down as they would have them, then the Parties, Notaries, and Witnesses hands are to be subscribed to them.

Seventhly, Sometimes secrecy is required upon oath, that nothing be revealed to any one absent from the conference, un­til a certain time; Sleyd. Com­ment. l. 16. p. 534. as when the Emperor imposed this con­dition on the conference at Ratisbone, viz. that nothing should be communicated to any one not present, before the Emperor and Princes of the Empire were made acquainted with all the transactions under the hands of the Notaries; which the Pro­testant party could not yield unto, because their Princes requi­red an account of their proceedings of the Colloquie from time to time: this occasioned the breaking up the conference abrupt­ly without fruit, but not without mutual offence on both sides.

There be some other Rules which might have augmented the number, if I should have counted on with them; but I have virtually premised th [...]m already in the qualifications of the Disputants: I shall add no more but only this advice, that the dispute, according to the admonition of Nazianz. Tom. 1. orat. 1. p. 1. Nazianzen, begin and end like the eighth Psalm, with glory to God. If Colloquies, Conferences, and Disputations of matters of Religion were thus begun, continued and concluded, the truth would be not [Page 73]onely militant against, but triumphant over rebellious errour, which presumes to affront it, and sometimes to challenge it in­to the field, and over reproachful rumour which dogs it with barking obloquie afterwards; and so there would be no need of playing an after game with the Adversary, as now there is with yours, of whom, with what he hath written against you, I shall in that which followeth, according to your request, give you a reason of my former advice, not to honour him any more by taking him for your Antagonist; and so from Disputations in general, I shall pass to your Disputation with Mr. O. in par­ticular.

CHAP. VII. Of the Disputation at Kenelmworth, betwixt John Brian Doctor in Divinity, Minister at Coventry, and John Onley Pastor of a Church at Lawford (as he styles him­self.) How it was occasioned, undertaken, and conti­nued at divers monthly meetings there.

THe occasion of the Disputation (as it is related in Doctor Brians Letter to me, and in both his and Mr. Onley's Epi­stles printed with, and prefixed before the printed Disputation) was this; When the Lecture at Kenelmworth, at the Monday monthly meeting there was agreed upon by many Ministers, and begun Decem. 1. 1655. for the setting up, and setling of a Go­spel-order in Parochial Congregations. Doctor Brian, who took the first turn in it, held it on himselfe the space of six months together; the Text he treated on was Colos. 2.5. Though I b [...] absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joy­ing and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ. In my second Sermon (saith he) I desired any that should hearme, or hear what I delivered touching the way of reforming [Page 74]our Parochial Church's, which we resolved on, if they doubted of the truth of any thing, they would signifie their doubts or scruples in writing, and I would endeavour to satisfie them. Accordingly a godly Brother of the Congregational way (Lieutenant Fox by name) sent in sundry objections to the Doctors third dis­course upon that Text, and some letters passed betwixt them, whereof he ( i.e. Mr. Fox) desired not any publication (though for parts and piety he is judged no way inferiour to Mr. Onley) but he, viz. Mr. O. the next day openly declared his dissent, and desired to dispute with the Doctor publickly upon these two Questions.

First, Whether the Parish Assemblies of England generally be true visible Churches; which Mr. O. denied.

Secondly, Whether every Brother, though no Elder, that hath received abilities from God (whereby he is enabled to preach) may publickly preach; which he affirmed; appointing me, saith Do­ctor Brian, to be Opponent in the first, and Respondent in the second question the next monthly day.

It would have signified some modesty in Mr. O. not to have appoynted Dr. Br. but to have the turns of dispute as he would appoint them.

I need not tell you (saith the Doctor) how many disswasions I had from entring the lists with an illiterate Adversary, as Mr. O. was taken for by many: among others this that in so doing, I should disparage my selfe, nor was there any probability of good to come of it; which it had been well, if he had heeded so far, as to re­fuse not so much the dispute it self, as to undertake it with such an unequal opposite. But he argued himself into an acceptance of the challenge, out of some reasons of piety, charity, and humility, which (as event hath proved) were misapplyed to Mr. O. and that rather by his injurious misdoing, then by the Doctors imprudent mistaking. Besides he had an inducement to adventure some inconveniencies by the dispute (while but doubtful) from the experience of his contestation with two A­nabaptists of London, Mr. Knowles and Mr. Kaffen, who came from thence to Coventry, with a great deal of confidence to confront Dr. Brian, and his worthy Brother Dr. Grewe in a publick disputation: for which purpose, though the Magistrates [Page 75]of the City, and at their request, promised to lend the Town-Hall (upon the boysterous misbehaviour both of themselves, and of many of their followers, on the Sabbath day before the disputation (who flocked in great numbers thither, to counte­nance and encourage their Champions) they recalled their con­cession, & for the same cause the Committee of Parliament resi­ding there, for bade the dispute. The 2. Doctors notwithstanding were necessitated somewhat to Symbolize with the Anabaptists, viz. so far as to a non-obedience of their Governours therein, & that rather in hope of their pardon, then in contempt of their power; because the Anabaptists imputed these prohibitions, not so much to the prudence of the Magistrates, as to the diffi­dence of the Doctors to undertake the defence of their profes­sed judgment and practice: and this sinister suggestion so far swayed with some religious persons, that they inclined to make a Schisme from the Church, if these far-fetched Fencers should find none to take up the Sword and Buckler against them. For prevention of which scandal, they were publickly encountred, the truth so strenuously asserted, and they so ful­ly confuted (in a very numerous Auditory) that such as before were wavering, and in a manner tottering towards a revolt (if they should have had cause to glory, that they put off their harness, because none durst put on any to combat with them) were throughly satisfied, and firmly setled and established in the truth. The like bravadoes Doctor Brian might expect from his Thrasonical challenger, if he had not been underta­ken, and his factious adherents would have triumphantly tra­duced him, that he durst not commit his cause to such a publick trial, and so they might have gained a great advantage, which might have confirmed his fellow-Sectaries, and dissetled the sim­ple, too much addicted to listen after novel fancies, and to like them too well. Besides, he might have good hope also that the success of a disputation at Kentlmworth would be such, as there was of that at Coventry. And so the day prefixed to begin the disputation being come, nine Arguments were brought by the Doctor, in vindication of the Affirmative in the first Question; and when half the time was spent in debate of the two first, Mr. O. (as himselfe saith) moved for the rest of the time to oppose [Page 76]in the second question, which was granted only with a motion of reading the other seven in the Congregation: whereto Mr. O consented, desiring a copy of the Arguments undisputed of, to return an answer to be likewise publickly read the next mee­ting, which was Monday month after; according to which, Mr. O. drew up, as he saith, a Reply, and read it in the Con­gregation.

CAAP. VIII. Of the printing of the Disputation. By whose motion it was made. By whom, and how managed.

IMmediately after what Mr. O. had drawn up was read, a Gentleman then present, desired that the Disputation might be printed, and desired Mr. O. to move it to the Do­ctor, which he did; whereto he replied, if he might reply he was willing: but said withal, that he had twelve Arguments more in proof of the question: to which I replyed (saith Mr. O.) I was contented he should reply to mine answer to the nine first without any rejoynder, provided I might answer to the twelve last without his reply, onely till they were printed; and then each should be at liberty to write what he pleased. To this motion of printing the Doctor yielded in the close of the third or fourth dayes disputation. viz. that Mr. O. his Argu­ments, Answers, Replyes, and Rejoynders might be put in print, and (for his proviso) Doctor Brian gave him liberty to oppose what he pleased, and take in also the help of Mr. Marley, and those other seven who assisted him in disputation, that the ut­most he and they could object further against our Parish Chur­ches, might come under one view: and withal, the Doctor wish­ed him to forbear in stead of arguing, to make any more excursions by tedious and impertinent declamations against our Ministers and [Page 77]Members, wherein all your answers (saith he to Mr. O.) for the most part spend themselves. So in the Epistle of Doctor Brian to Mr. O. I have related the more out of both their printed Testimonies, touching the disputation and impression of it, because the printed book is very hard to come by, though Mr. O. saith it was published with both their consents, which may be very much doubted of for divers reasons. For,

First, there were no publick Notaries and Witnesses, to write and attest what passed in dispute betwixt them.

Secondly, Though there were copies taken of the dispute, the chief pen-man of the whole was Mr. O. who In the Dis­putat. p. 46. confessith, by reason of a mighty crowd of people he could hardly breathe, or write one perfect sentence of Doctor Brians Sermon: and there might be as much difficulty in taking by his pen other Dictates deli­vered by word. The crowd it is like was very great, for Dr. Brian speaking of seven which took Mr. O. his part in the dis­putation, who were Antipedobaptists; he in his answer saith, J. O. in his Exam. of the Doctors Re­ply. p. 23, 24. he believeth there was seven times seven thrice told that took his part, that is 149. and I believe for one such a one, there was 20. at least of a contrary judgement.

Thirdly, But if there were a perfect copy of the Dispute made up by the Doctor and him, that copy was committed to Mr. O. his hand to be promoted to the Press, and no copy kept, whereby it might be known to be truely printed: such was the Doctors candid and suspectless dealing with his adversary, which laid a great engagement upon him, of fair and ingenuous cor­respondence with him again.

Fourthly, When the book was printed, he should have sent the Doctor a copy of it, before he had printed his Letter of consent unto it, that he might allow or disallow it, as he should see cause.

Fifthly, Mr. O. having the Manuscript in his own hands, might have altered his own part for the better, the Doctors for the worse at his pleasure. And that he had a mind to magnifie himself, and disgrace the Doctor all he could, is plain, both by the book of the disputation, and by his latter book of the Ex­amination of the Doctors Reply. For the former, it may appear to any indifferent Reader, that for a good part of the Book, [Page 78]from the beginning (wherin Doctor Brian is Opponent) he ex­presseth the promptness of a ready Text-man, and the acumen of a Polemick School-man, as his assiduous and uncessant (yet very powerful) preaching, sheweth him an excellent Pulpit­man: But in the relation of the latter part of the Book Mr. O. so enervateth the vigour of his discourse, as if he had suf­fered a failing of his faculties, as Sampson did when his locks were shorn. And this he did that he might have more hope to appear a conqueror in the conflict. To which end he contract­eth the Doctors Speeches, and enlargeth his own after what size he pleaseth: so that he neither doth, nor can acknowledg he hath done him right in the printed Edition of that disputati­on. And who that knoweth his eminent abilities for quickness of conceit, soundness of judgement, and liveliness of spirit, and volubility of speech, can imagine that he would suffer Mr. O. to enlarge his answer to his ninth Argument, of less then four lines, to well towards forty; and in that answer to sum up the Dispute into a Triumphant Compendium for his own reputati­on, and the Doctors reproach, without one word of Reply for himself or his cause? As in this printed disputation he hath done him little right, so in the other Book he hath done him a great deal of wrong, for not being contented to magnifie his own performance, with a mastership in the Dispute, as him­self sets it forth (when it had been honour enough for him, in that Doctor Brian accepted of him for his Antagonist, though he had submitted to him as his convert) he published another Book as an examination of the Doctors Reply; wherein he took a great deal more liberty to traduce him. But that which I will observe at present, is his unworthy dealing with the Do­ctor, in the publication of those two Books: for because he could not for shame but publish something in the dispute, which might appear answerable to Dr. Brians deserved estimation (for otherwise hundreds would have accused him as a falsary) that book of the dispute was rather suppressed, then common­ly sold; for so soon as I heard that it was to be printed, I wrote to my Stationer for it, and remembred him of it with much importunity many times for many weeeks and months together, to procure one for me; and though he used his best endeavour [Page 79]and diligence to that purpose, he still returned a non est inven­tus for that book: but so soon as I heard of Mr. O. his second book, and sent for it, I received it by the first return of the Carrier afterward: the readiest reason of which difference I conceive to be this, Mr. O. his falshood in the former Book, might more easily be discovered then in the latter; and his honour to the Doctors dishonour in the later was more set forth, then in the former. In the publication whereof, besides the offensive Contents of it, he gav [...] Doctor Brian cause of complaint, in that this later Book against him (much more a­gainst him then the former, because it was much more contu­melious and insolent) had been abroad a long time, before he had any notice thereof. Truely whatsoever Mr. O. thinketh of his own omission herein (and it may be his desire was, that he of all men should never have seen it) I could not but take it for a part of ingenuity and justice (when my case was like his) to give as timely intelligence as I could, of what I had published against his Friend mine Adversary Mr. S. by leaving one of my Books with his Stationer G. C. so soon as it came from the Press, to be sent to him with speed: and so I dealt with Do­ctor H. for (having received some copies of my first Book a­gainst him, first of all upon Friday night) I sent my servant with one to him the next Saturday following.

CHAP. IX. Of Mr. Onley his Quality and Condition, his Wit and Utterance, his Ignorance and Arrogancy, his reprochful speaking of such as are not of his Sect, and partiality to himselfe and them, his carping at the Magistrates for medling with matters of Religion, and countenan­cing of Ministers.

I Shall say little of the man, but what I find published to the world by his own Pen, and if that have betrayed him to the condemning censure of pious and judicious Readers, he must blame himself, not me, who have no exception against his per­son. I confess he once maketh mention of me, In the Ex­am [...] of Dr. Bri­ans Reply. p. 32. as of an Ad­versary, but dismisseth me without any incivility at all. And I am so far from detracting from any commendation due unto him, that I shall not fear the sharp Criticisme of Baronius con­cerning Onuphrius, which was, Aventinum infectum Hae­resis scabie be­stiam indigne nimis Onu­phrius homo Catholicus pectine scalpit eburneo, dum eum praedicat virum esse disertum. Baron. Annal. Tom. 10. Anno 996. col. 496. that he being a Catholick, did too unworthily claw a beast infected with a scab of Heresie, with an Ivory comb, when he commended Aventine for an eloquent man; I should not, I say, fear such a censure.

Though for the two first particulars, as some have represen­ted him to me, I should say of him, as Augustine did of Tychonius Donatista ho­mo quidem a­cri ingenio & ubere eloquio praeditus. Aug. l. 1. contr. Ep. Parmen. c. 1. Tom. 7. par. 1. p. 9. Ty­chonius the Donatist, that he is a man endowed with a sharp wit, and copious utterance; and that made him more able, and more willing to wrangle with the Doctor, and to his partial adhe­rents to seem victorious, when in the judgement of the most judicious and equal hearers, he was vanquished, as some of them have told me; and I conceive I have the more cause to believe it, because in whatsoever he most excelled the Doctor, was far [Page 81]above him, being eminently endowed with all kind of learning: wherein to speak to the third particular [Mr. O. his Ignorance] he was very deficient, though he bring in now and then a few words of Hebrew, Greek and Latine, that an illiterate Reader may take him for a learned man. And if he had been such a one indeed, he would not have brought in Historical reports of matters of importance done many hundred years before he was born, without quoting some Author of account; as for that of Mr. O. his Exam. of Dr. Br. Reply. p. 7. Paphnutius, who though but one man, prevailed for the li­berty of marriage of Clergy-men, against a General Councel; for which he should (and no doubt would, if he had been versed in venerable Antiquity) have cited Concil. Nice. prim. Tom. 1. Counc. p. 423. col. 1. edit. Bin. 1636. the Councel of Nice, or Socr. Scholast. li 1. c. 8. Niceph. Eccles. Hist. l. 8. c. 18, 19. So­crates Scholasticus, or Nicephorus, or some other Historiographer of some of the precedent ages. In which story, though he glory very much, and repeat it several times without proof, it makes as much for the credit of the Quakers, against his schismatical party, as for them against the more numerous company of re­gular Professors of the Doctors way; for which purpose he produceth the singular example, but it bewrayes more igno­rance of Antiquity in that: for the first division of Parishes by Honorius Bishop of Canterbury, Mr. O. in the Misput. p. 14. he citeth a very late No­vellist Mr. Saltmarsh, and by him learned Mr. Selden (in his Book De Decimis) an Epithet and Subject in learned Mr. Sel­den well matched, and as well in ignorant Mr. Saltmarsh and Mr. O. both, in this particular especially; for the Book is not, as the Author entitles it, De Decimis, but the History of Tithes: and in that Seld. Hist. of Tythes. c. 9. paragr. 3. p. 256, 257, 258. History he disproves their opinion, who hold that Honcrius Arch-Bishop of Canterbury divided his Province into Parishes, or Parochial Limits, such as we have; for the word Pa­rochia in his age, may be taken rather for a Diocess, then for a division of lesser compass, as in later times; for in the Prelacy of his next successor but one, whose name was Theodorus, An. 673 there was a Councel celebrated at Herudford, as Beda report­eth, whereof in the second Canon it is ordained, Nullus E­pis coporum Parochiam al­terius invadat, sed contentus sit gubernatione creditae sibi plebis. Concil. Herudford: cui Praesidebat Archiep. Theodor. can 2. apud Bed. Eccles. Hist. Gent. Anglor. l. 4. c. 5. p. 160. that no Bi­shop invade another Bishops Parish, but that he be content with the government of the people committed to his charge. That which [Page 82]answereth to the extent of a Bishops authority in the language of those times, was not of so narrow a circumference as a Pa­storal charge. The truth is, neither Mr. O. nor Mr. Selden, though an industrious Antiquary, could determine the Anti­quity of Parochial Divisions. H [...]norius Archiepisco­pus Cantuari­ensis circa an­num à salute reparata 636. Angliam pri­mus in Paro­chias, ut legi­tur in Historia Cantuariensi, distribuere coe­pit. Camb. Brit. p 99. & 100. edit. 3. Cambden I confess assigned the Division of Parishes in England to Honorius for the person, and to the year 636. for the time; but he gives too short a note of it, to resolve the doubts that are moved about it: and by that which next followeth, we may conceive he meaneth the division into Diocesses or Bishopricks, according to the Canon now cited. For mine own and others satisfaction I made a more serious search into the question, the result whereof I delivered in the sixth Reason annexed to the petition to his Highness the Lord Protector, and to the High Court of Parliament, for the establishment of Ministers in sequestered Benefices for their own lives.

Now if I may be allowed to plow with mine own Heyser, though it were not known to be mine (the Book being publish­ed under the name of Pkilotheus Philomystes) I conceive it con­venient to repeat it here, not onely to discover the ignorance of Mr. O. and Mr. S. but to take off the edge of their confi­dence, when they cry out upon Parochial divisions as of Anti­christian institutions: for the original of Parochial partitions Doctor Tooker of the Fab. of the Church and Church Li­vings. p. 44. Tooker and Hooker Ec­cles. Pol. l. 5. p. 333. Mr. Hooker refer it to Evaristius Bi­shop of Rome, Anno 112. but neither quote any Author for it. They that do name the Book called the Pontificale of Dama­sus, who was Bishop of Rome about the year 367. but that (say Baron. An­nal. Tom. 4. ad Ann. 384. num. 22. Baronius and Possev. Ap­par. Tom. 1. p. 410. Possevine) was not the Book of any Damasus at all, but of Anastasius Bibliothecarius, saith ^r Bel­larmine; and whose Book soever it was, it is (for divers un­truths) disapproved by ^ſ Baronius, and ^t Binius: others re­fer the distinction to Dionysius who was Bishop of Rowe, Anno 261. as ^u Binius accounts, but ^w Baronius reckons Anno 270. and ^x reports it rather as a Renovation in his time and by him, then a new institution.

Obj. But if the division be derived from a Bishop of Rome, it is Popish, and by consequence Antichristian also.

Answ. Not so neither; for in the primitive times, when Chri­stianity was persecuted, Mr. Fox Martyr. vol. 1. p. 732. col. 2. 22 Bishops of Rome for it were mar­tyred one after another, from the Apostles time downward, to the end of the third Century; and it will be no good manners neither in morality nor Christianity to call them Antichristian, who laid down their lives for Christs sake.

Obj. But they are called Popes, and is not that Popery which cometh from the Pope?

Answ. The Title Pope signifieth Father, and anciently was not appropriated to the Bishops of Rome, but communicated to Bishops in common, as Onuph. in Bo­nif. 3. p. 81. col. 1. Onuphrius a learned Papist confes­seth: all Bishops were called Popes, until Justinians time, saith Pamel. Cypr. p. 11. Pamelius, as Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria was called Pope by Epiph. haeres. Tom. 2. haeres. 68. Epiphanius, so Heraclius by Apud Euseb. Eccles. Hist. l. 7. c. 6. Dionysius Alexan­drinus, and Cypriano Pa­pae Moys. & maximus Ep. 26. p. 32. col. 1. edit. Pamel. Cyprian is often called Pope, yea by the Benedict. Pa­pam Cyprian. sic clerus Ro­man. ad clerum Carthag. Ep. 3. p. 10. col. 2. Cypr. Papae clerus Rom. Ep. 30. p. 55. col. 1. Cypriano Papae Presbyt. & Diacon. Romae. Ep. 31. p. 36. col. 2. & in fine Epist. optamus to beatiss. & gloriosiss. Papa. p. 38. Ibid. Cler­gy of Rome (albeit he were not Bishop of Rome, but of Car­thage) and by a Pope (it was Pope ^h Ʋrban the second) was our Arch-Bishop of Canterbury called Pope of the other world, meaning, of the Island of great Britain, severed by the Sea from the world. Hierom, though (as hath been noted) he were re­spective enough of the reputation of the Roman Prelate, fami­liarly applyed that title to others as well as unto him, as to ⁱ Cromatius, to Hieron. Apolog. advers. Ruffinum l. 2. Tom. 2. p. 225. ante medium. Epiphanius, to Hieron. Ep. ad Chromatiam Tom. 1. p. 216. circa med. Valerianus, to Hi [...]ronym. ad Princip. Marcellae viduae Epitaph. Tom. 1. p. 119. prope initium. Atha­nasius, to Ibid. Tom. 2. p. 311. Ep. Theophilo & p. 310. Ep. Pammach. & Marcello. Theophilus, to Idem Tom. 5. p. 63. in Prolog. in 10. vision. Esa. Amabilis, to Idem Tom. 4 p 64. de viro perfect. sub nomine H [...]eron. Ambrose, to Symbol. Suffin. inter opera Hieron. Tom. 4. p. 129. lin. 1. Symbol. Hieron. Laurentius, to Tom. 2. p. 368. Ep. August. Alipius, and to Idem Tom. 2. p. 322, 351, 358, 368, &c. Augustine; none of which were Bishops of Rome, but of other places.

Ob. But if Bishops, it is enough to discredit all they do, for saith Mr. O. (and therein he bewrayeth his gross ignorance a­gain) Mr. O. in Dis­pute. p. 30. the Devil ordained the Pope, the Pope the Bishops, and the Bishops you, to Doctor Brian; how can you be true Mini­sters by him that was none himselfe?

By that which hath been observed of the Title Pope, as in the ancient acception of it, the Devil no more ordained the Pope, then he did Bishops.

For, Bishops as Bishops were ordained neither by the Pope nor by the Devil, but by the Holy Ghost, as we have it Act. 20.28, Take heed to your selves, and to all the flock, over which the holy Ghost hath made you [...] Overseers, the same word elsewhere is rendered Bishops, Philip. 1.1. 1 Tim. 3.2. Tit. 1.7.

The Popes now adayes, and of long time ago, are made by Cardinals, and he makes them again, as Ice and Water pro­duce one another; but the Pope seldom makes Bishops, but Bishops make Bishops, both according So in the Canon of those that are falsely called the Canons of the Apostles. Bin. Tom. 1. Can. 1. p. 16. Concil. Arelatens. Ann. 314. It was ordained there should be Bishops to consecrate Bishops, three at the [...]east. Arelat. Can. 21. Tom. 1. Concil. p. 267. col. 1. to Ecclesiastical con­stitution, constant custom, and usage of the Church.

If the Bishops were Popish and Antichristian, it doth not follow, that all they do is Popish and Antichristian.

For first, Popes and Papists of all sorts and ranks, doe some things as men, by the light of Reason, and instinct of natural conscience, as Rom. 2.14, 15. So if Honorius did divide his Pro­vince of Canterbury into Parishes, as many hold he did (parti­cularly Godwin in his Godwins Catalogue of Bishops. p. 52. Catalogue of Bishops) it was (as he saith) that he might appoint particular Ministers to particular Congregations; a course so rational, that no man can justly take exception at it; for doth not common reason dictate the same for the ordering of all civil Societies, subdividing a Nation into Counties, Counties into Hundreds, Hundreds into Cities, Towns and Villages? and are they not governed by Judges, Justices, and Constables, High and Petty, and all limited within certain precincts, and divided according to the vicinity of their habitations, as the meaning of the word [...] i.e. juxta habi­tare, to dwell nigh together: Paroecia intimateth; and so in ordering of Armies, Academies, Colledges and Schools. [Page 85]The course taken according to Reason, is to divide and subdi­vide into Companies and Classes, and to set Officers over them, so as may most conduce to the benefit of all: and if we shall re­nounce Reason, and act by Antipathies, Purch. Pilgr. [...]. [...] c. 1 [...]. we may perhaps be­come as wise as the Pagans in Pegu, who both men and women make their teeth black, because dogs teeth are white; and they scorn to imitate a canine Candor.

Secondly, Some things they did as men ingenuously educated, and endowed with knowledge of Arts, and Tongues, and Hi­stonies, and so many who are in their Religion and Profession Popish, have written divers excellent Books and Discourses of all sorts.

Thirdly, Some things they do as Christians, assenting to the authority of Scriptures, and teaching and practising many things consonant to the truth and tenour thereof, so many of them (even the most Antichristian as the Jesuites) have written divers godly discourses and commentaries upon many Books of the Bible, and some upon all, which are very conducible to the understanding of the Sacred Text.

Fourthly, Some things they dictate, and do as Antichristian, and in such things only we are to depart from them; if the Devils believe there is one God, we may believe so too, and therein we do well, James 2.19. and if we should not do so, wo should be worse then Devils; whatsoever is good, in whomsoe­ver, is from God; and it is more to be esteemed in relation to him, then to be condemned in relation unto others, though they he never so wicked.

Fifthly, For the Bishops that ordained our Presbyters, they ordained them as Presbyters, or Ministers, for such they were before they were Bishops; and so being Presbyters or Mini­sters, those whom they ordained might well be true Presbyters and Ministers also.

I will note but one thing more of his ignorance, and that is a probability that he cannot be learned, from his condition and course of life; for as one of his disciples told Doctor Brian, and the Doctor wrote unto me in his Letter, March 6.16.56, He painfully follows Husbandry all the Week dayes, and preacheth to a congregation of Anabaptists and Ʋniversalists on the Sabbath.

How he should be Learned who spends the most of his time as a Husbannman, unless, as Amos an Herdsman at Tekoa, he were divinely inspired, Amos 1.1. and cap. 17. ver. 14, 15. I cannot conceive: but if he be such a man as he taketh upon him to be, we may in his Name give answer to the Apostles que­stion, Who is sufficient for these things? 2 Cor. 2.16. Here is M. O. a man sufficient, and more than sufficient for the Ministry; for he can act the part of a laborious Husbandman six days to­gether, and on the seventh can perform the Office of a Spiri­tual Pastor to a Church or Congregation of Christians. And besides his Sermon-sufficiency, is so well furnisht with Polemi­cal Divinity, that he dare challenge our most learned Doctors to dispute with them in the greatest Assemblies; and if he may be allowed to report the passages of the Disputation, will baffle them in print into shameful silence, and leave them to be laugh­ed at. Such was his vapouring vanity in his Examination of Doctor Brians Reply, where having made a ridiculous Argu­ment in the Doctors Name, he exposeth it to this scornful que­stion, Spectatum admissirisum teneatis? Mr. O. his Ex­am. of Dr. Br. Reply, p. 61. This may fitly lead in the next note of him, which we may take for an effect of his Ignorance, that is, the Arrogancy of his Spirit.

For the Novice or young Scholar (who hath least know­ledge) is apt to be lifted up with pride, 1 Tim. 3.6. and who but an ignorant and arrogant man would in the Title-page of his Examination of the Doctors Reply, affront him (so well known to be every way a man of great worth) with such dis­dainful and disgraceful words as these, The Invalidity of his Answers, his Sophistical helpless impertinent self-contradicting Al­legations, are presented to himself and others, &c. And as he be­ginneth, so he holds on the same insulting style, and concluding as he began, Ibid. p. 115. I have (saith he) passed through your Reply, and it is proved empty in relation to the Vindication of your Ordination and Entrance. And in the last pag. but one of his Examination, his words are these, Ibid. p. 129. Thus in the midst of many Employments Tem­poral and Spiritual, seldome allowing me one hours opportunity to­gether to attend on this task, I have given you (saith he to Doctor Brian and the world) an account of the unsatufactoriness and in­sufficiency of your Answers: And yet he confesseth the Doctor [Page 87]so sufficient, See pag. 15. of his Epist. to the Churches of his way. 1 King. 12.10. that he is as well able to draw something out of any thing, any thing out of nothing, to his present purpose, as any man he knows in England. ‘But for all that, when he came under your hands, mighty Mr. O. (whose little finger. Rohoboam like, is thicker than the loyns of Solomon) he was able to do nothing but marre his own Cause, and shame himself, that you might have the more glorious victory over both. It was well for him that you had so little leisure to attend on this task as you say, else if you had had time enough to manage your Conte­station against him to your best advantage, Puritanulum istū in jocos & tricas contere­rem. Weston. de triplice ho­minis officio. he might have been handled by you, as Weston the bragging Papist threatned the learned Doctor Reynolds, which was, that if he could come by him, he would grinde that little Puritan into jests and trifles.’

But the Doctor is (though such a one as before we have re­presented him to the Reader) but one man, and to con­quer him is nothing with this Goliah, unless he bid defiance to the whole Host of Israel, and (with him) may stalk it over all the Parish Churches of this Nation; yea, and with them over all the Churches of Europe and New-England, as trodden down by his strength. He professeth his opposition of them in that latitude, in the first page of his Examination, and makes account he hath so far carried the Cause against the Doctor (as by the passages already noted may appear) wherein though he disclaim all appearance of Popery both in the Dispute and Ex­amination, Ibid. pag. 115, 129. he bewrayeth a Papal proud Spirit, even the Spirit of Pope Victor, who would have Excommunicated all the Churches which did not observe his rule for the time of Cele­bration of the Feast of Easter; as hath been noted under ano­ther Title.

The next notorious quality of Mr. O. is his railing and re­proching in his Examination of the Doctors Reply: as where he setteth upon him with these uncivil terms; Exam. p. 60. Tour doting dregs of desperation, and denial of the greatest part of the very Go­spel it self, by which you are involved in a labyrinth of absurdi­ties, errours and confusions: And afterward in the same page, Sure, saith he, you see not what makes for you, and what against you: There is one part of the Gospel that you confess not, but [Page 88]reproch, contemn, vilifie and deride, viz. The Death of the Lord Jesus Christ for all men in the world, which is commonly called Ʋ ­niversal Redemption. How far that Doctrine is to be denied, contemned, vilified, and to be bewailed rather than derided, for the horrid Blasphemies concomitant with it, and consequent upon it, the Reader may be shortly and sufficiently informed by Mr. Marchemont Nedham, Pag. 67, 68, 69 in his fore-mentioned Book a­gainst Mr. John Goodwyn. And against the Ministry in general, Mr. O. venteth himself in this virulent manner:

Mr. O. and those of his strain, think they spight the Mini­sters of England much by calling them Priests, Pag. 32. and their Mini­stry a Priesthood, as Mr. O. doth here and * elswhere, in a way of reproch, wherein they bewray both their ignorance and malice: for 1. The Etymologie of the word, it is either from the La­tine word Praeest, he presideth, or the Greek word [...], one set over another; or it is a contraction of the word Priester in Low Dutch, which is a contraction of the word [...] in Greek, signifying an Elder, and so it is a Name of honour; for the Lord hath said, Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head, and honour the face of the Elder, Lev. 19.32. And that this is at length, what the word Priest is in short, is evident by the al­teration which Archbishop Land made in the old Service-Book of England, when it was to be sent into Scotland; for every where, where the English hath the word Priest, the Scotch Ser­vice-book hath the word Presbyter: nor is the word Priest a word of disparagement in the New Testament, since the word Priest and Priesthood is ascribed to Christ above or about ten times in the Epistle to the Hebrews.

The same is given in an honorable sense unto Christians in 1 Pet. cap. 2. where they are called An holy Priesthood, ver. 5. a royal Priesthood, ver 9. and holiness and honour do well sort together, 1 Thess. 4.4. & Rev. c. 1. v. 5. c. 5. v. 10. they are (as by Titles of honour) called Kings and Priests, c. 20.6. Priests alone, in regard of their spiritual Sacrifices, as of praise, Heb. 13.15. of prayer, Psal. 141.2. of a broken and contrite heart, Psal. 51.17. of Alms, Heb. 13.16. by presenting their bodies a living sacrifice unto him, Rom. 12.1. by mortifying inordinate affections and evil concupiscence, Col. 3.5. and by offering them­selves [Page 89]as dying Sacrifices for Christs sake, Phil. 2.17. when they shall be called unto it. Thus we are not ashamed to own the name Priest, but take it for a term of honour, both in the native sense of the word, and use of the Gospel: yet so we do not appropriate it to our selves, nor can they impose it upon us in any signification which hath affinity with a literal Sacrifice, ei­ther Jewish or Popish. In which respect, and because in the New Testament Gospel-Ministers are never called Priests (as by a peculiar Title) Archbishop Whitgift in his last Book against Mr. Cartwright, p. 722. Mr. Hookers Eccles. Polit. lib. 5. parag. 77. p. 419. speak rather against, than for the use of it, as so li­mited to restrained.

The Priesthood of this Nation (saith he) are proved to be a com­pany of covetous greedy dogs, that never have enough. Page 34. And where good Sir, is that proved? or when will it be proved? ad Graecas calendas? not before. But why doth he thus bark at, yea bite the Ministry under the Title of Priesthood? It is very like he thought his Master, Mr. Saltmarsh, had proved it, or could prove it, when he confidently demanded, What is the maintenance of Mi­nisters by Tithes, but Jewish and Popish undeniably? This is some of the vanishing vapour of his Pamphlet, which he calleth The Pag. 25. See the Answ. to it in my Light for his Smoke, p. 19. Exam. p. 123. Smoke of the Temple.

Afterwards Mr. O. reneweth this Reproch again in these words, O ye Priests! ye violently clasp and gripe into your clutches (to maintain you in Lordly Pomp) the Tenths; nay, if all consi­dered, the fifth part of the Nations increase, and poor mens labours, though many from whom you exact them, can hardly get bread for their Families. It is an easie matter to make this saving Doctrine of Tithes, as well as the other of Universal Grace, plausible to carnal and covetous peple; and with such, to aggravate the de­nial of the one, and assertion of the other to an high degree of hatred. But we look for Reason, not Railing, to evince the un­lawfulness of Tithes, and with Mr. O. and his party, not so im­potently to rail, prattle or scrible against them, as they use to do, but seriously and solidly to set upon the Confutation of those which plead their lawful Tenure, against their cavils and clamours who except against them. And because it may be they know not who they be, if they have any heart to undertake [Page 90]such a Task, they may be better acquainted with them by the Catalogue at the end of this Discourse. And if the Books be too many for them to meddle with, let them confute but three of them; one of Sir Clement Spelman an English, another of Sir James Sempell a Scottish Knight, the third of Mr. Prynne. I choose them before others, not onely because they have writ­ten very sufficiently and fully of the point in question, but be­cause they cannot be justly suspected of partiality, since none of them ever had any Ministerial Function for their Calling, nor any Ministerial Maintenance for their Living: And if they will confine themselves to one onely, let it be that of M. Prynne, whose integrity hat been eminently tried, and yet was never tainted. And that they may presently perceive what his Tenet is, I will set down the summary Contents of his Book, as he hath set it forth in the Title-page. But be­sides Mr. O. his quarrel against the maintenance of Mi­nisters, he chargeth them with Cove­tousness in an ex­cessive degree, cal­ling them greedy dogs, who can ne­ver have enough.

A Gospel Plea (interwoven with a Ratio­nal and Legal) for the Lawfulness and conti­nuance of the ancient setled Maintenance and Tenths of the Ministers of the Gospel; prov­ing, That there is a just, competent, comfort­able Maintenance due to all lawful, painful Preachers and Ministers of the Gospel, by Di­vine Right, Institution, and express Texts and Precepts of the Gospel; That Glebes & Tithes are such a maintenance, and due to Ministers by Divine Right, Law and Gospel; That if substracted or detained, they may lawfully be inforced by coercive Laws & Penalties; That Tithes are no real burden nor grievance to the people; The abolishing them no benefit to Far­mers, Husbandmen, or poor people, but a preju­dice and loss; That the present opposition a­gainst Tithes proceeds not from any real grounds of Conscience, but base covetousness, carnal policy, and a Jesuitical and Anabapti­stical design to subvert and ruine our Mini­sters, Church, Religion. With a satisfactory Answer to all Cavils and material Objections to the contrary. By William Pryn of Swains­wick Esq.

Words bad enough for Hippolitus Car­dinall of Medicis, Hist. of the Councel of Trent, lib. 2. p. 251. Pope Clement the sevenths Nephew, who had by his gift all the Benefices of [Page 91]the world, Secular and Regular Dignities and Parsonages, simple and with Cure, being vacant, for six meneths, to begin from the first day of his possession, with power to dispose and convert to his use all the Fruits:

Or bad enough for the Popish Priests in King Henry the eighths time, against whom these Articles, with divers others, Mart. Hist. of 20 Kings, pag. 381, 382. were ex­hibited: Besides their Ecclesiastical Bentfices, they became Far­mers of great Granges, taking them in Lease in every Shire, and became Husbandmen and Grasiers, many of them kept Tanning-houses, and were Brokers, Buyers and Ingrossers, snatching up all, and inforcing Tradesmen to buy those Commodities at the second or third hand at unreasonable prices; yea, divers ignorant men among them held and enjoyed 8, 10.12, yea more Benefices and Spiritual promotions severally, and yet lived not upon any of them.

Too bad for such as were under the Bishops Government, when one man had two Benefices, a Deanry, and an Arch-dea­conry, as D. D. of A. and some had more both in value and variety than he had. But since by the late Reformation Plurali­ties are taken away by Authority, and Ministers are now con­fined to, and contented with the Revenue of a single Incum­bency, (and some of them I am sure refused to be double­beneficed while the Law did allow them) what ground or co­lour can Mr. O. have for such an outragious Reproch? or what motive, but his own malice, and the instinct of the accuser of the Brethren, Rev. 12.10. thus all-to-be-slander them, not onely in condemning their Title to Tithes as Jewish and Popish (as before is observed) but in charging them with clasping and griping into their Clutches a fifth part of the Nations increase? Wherein

• 1. He implicitely taxeth Gods dealing with his own peculiar Nation the Jews, as guilty of partiality to the Priests, and of oppression of the people; for the proportion paid from the one to the other, was much more than the Ministers of England receive or require of their Parishioners.
• 2. When he numbreth 8432 parishes in England,
  Disp. p. 7. Exam. p. 29.
  as divers times he doth:
  • 1. According to his manner, he quotes no Author for it; and I finde a difference betwixt him, and those who have [Page 92]been more diligent in Inquisition, and more exact in computation than he,
    Speeds Catal. of Religious houses, &c. at the end of the Reign of K. H. S. p. ult. of that Catalogue.
    as Mr. Speed, who reckoneth but 8327 in England, and in Wales 905: in both, 9232.
  • 2. Of so many parishes in divers Counties, the greatest part of the increase tithable, is taken up by the Title of Impro­priations, whereof the Incumbent Minister hath no part.
  • 3. Where there is a Minister possest of a Legal Right to re­quire and receive Tithes, it is not in his power to clasp or gripe into his Clutches, as Mr. O. malignantly phraseth it, any more than his due: The Parishioner who hath all the Ten parts with­in his compass, may easily lessen his portion, yea he may take all the ten parts into his possession, and put him to sue for his tenth part, as one who took that defrauding Doctrine from Mr. O. his Church (though now he be gone beyond it, whither he, as well as Mr. Fisher, may follow and overtake him) and by the pra­ctise of it, hath for three years together robbed the Minister of his Right, inning it with his own nine parts into his Barn, and persisting in his dishonest dealing with such Impudence, as to contemn the Law, and to call him Thief, who doth but with lenity and mildness require an account of his injurious dealing. And hence it cometh to pass, that there is a vast difference be­twixt the true value of a Benefice, and that which it yeeldeth to the Incumbent Pastor; that may be well worth 400 pounds per Annum, and this not amount to half so much hire to him that laboureth in the Word and Doctrine: And many can speak much herein upon certain experience, and yet many times a rackt rate and estimation is set upon them both, that there may be more colour to oppress the Minister by Taxes and other ex­pences.
    M. O. Exam. p. 325.
    But where is that Lordly Pomp he speaks of maintain­ed by such clasping and griping into the Clutches of the priests? Where are those pompous priests to be seen? There was a time when the Popish Secular Clergy were a scandal to their Regular Clergy,
    Bern. Ser. 133. in cant.
    as in the time of Bernard especially, when that devout Abbot set them forth in their pomp and pontificali­bus, wearing gold in their Bridles, gold in their Saddles, gold in their Spurs, having their Tables abounding with variety of meats [Page 93]meats and drinks, over flowing with surfetting and drunkenness; which yet hath been exceeded by some English Clergy-men, as by George Nevil Archbishop of York,
    See Godw. Ca talog. of Bish p. 612. in Ed. 4 time, an. 1466 Mart. Hist. of Eagl. p. 368. in H. S. his reign.
    who at the Feast of his Installation (the greatest that ever was for any of his rank) was attended with Earls and Lords, and by Cardinal Wolsey, who was served with Dukes and Earls when he washed his hands. The Bishops since the Reformation of Queen Elizabeth being by Office Lords of the Upper House of Parliament, and having precedence before Lords Temporal, were pompous and Lordly enough: but since by this last Reformation, the Hierarchy is come down, and their Revenues gone, I do not think but it will be very hard for Mr. O. to finde out a Minister (a parish Mini­ster) that liveth in Lordly pomp, or any thing like it; and therefore by charging them first with ravenous Avarice, and afterwards with Lordly pomp (as if according to that of the Orator, That which they got with greediness, they lavished out in Luxury) is not their double sin, but his double slander;
    Quod per sce­lus adeptus est; per luxuriam effundit. Cicer Orat. pro Q [...].
    not their guilt, but his gaul and guile to make them odious, which yet with judicious Readers may produce a contrary effect; and the od [...]um he intends against them, may recoyl upon himself, for charging upon Oxthodox Ministers such notorious and extrava­gant untruths; of which Calling there are now more good and fewer bad (blessed be God) than ever they were in any Age: And therefore such excessive Revilings of them are not onely most unjust, but most unseasonable.

Yet he hath not done with the slander of Covetousness, for to render the Parochial Ministers more worthy of reproch, and less capable of excuse for that Crime, and indeed hopeless of all cure. His next Charge, That this iniquity came in with the first foundation of Parochial Divisions; and so as he saith, though most untruly and absurdly of Churches, it will follow it cannot be reformed.

Fifthly, Therefore to give you his own words, Exam. p. 32. The end why England was first divided into parishes, was, at first, to distinguish the flock asunder, that so the shepherds, or rather the sheep-shearers, saith he, might know where to look for their fleeces. And to this he addeth a Marginal Note, as corrupt a Gloss as the Text, and the Note is this, A work they can well enough away with still, or [Page 94]any thing else that makes for their honour or profit, the two things on which the Priesthood—moveth. Was that the first or chiefe end of dividing England into Parishes? what proof have you of that Mr. O? your second-hand citation of Mr. Saltmarsh out of the book of learned Mr. Selden De Decimis? I believe you have no better: and how little credit is to be given to that Testimony (as you bring it in) you may read by review of mine answer to it.

If you had read Mr. S. you might have learned to make a more charitable construction of limiting publick Ministries, and allowing maintenance for Ministers, Selden Hist. of Tithes. c. 9. p. 259. who writeth thus of them: when devotion grew firmer, and most Lay-men of fair estates de­sired the Country-residence of some Chaplains, who before lived in common with the Bishops, that they might be alwayes ready for instruction of them, their families and adjoyning Tenants, &c. That was the first and chief end of building Oratories and Churches, and of endowing them with peculiar maintenance from the founders for the Incumbents, which should there only reside: and where we read of the division of the Province of Canter­bury into Parishes by Honorius Arch-Bishop thereof: the rea­son rendered is, that he might appoint particular Ministers to particular Congregations: those are the words of the Godwins Ca­talogue of Bi­shops. p 52. Eccles. Historian, which point to the work of the Minister among the people in the Church, not to his reward from the people, either in the fields of corn, or flocks of sheep.

He hath many other reviling terms, which brought together, would make a great bundle of unsavoury weeds: but I pass over, conceiving a less proportion like a poysie, may suffice to shew the bitterness of his spirit towards Ministers, and Churches in general. I will adde but one reproch more against Doctor Brian in particular, which I may not omit to remember and re­fute; Exam. p. 29. it is in the Epilogue of his latter Book: Had I time, as I have not (saith he) by being maintained like you by the sweat of other mens brows, as I desire not, &c. In which words are im­plicitly comprised a Negative Thesis, that a man, especially a Minister, should not be maintained by the sweat of other mens brows; and a Positive Hypothesis that Doctor Brian is so maintained.

For the first; if since God layd the Law upon Adam, that in the sweat of his face he shall eat bread, Gen. 3.19. it hath been unlawful for one man, especially for Ministers, to live by the labours of the people, why did God maintain his worship by the Ministry of the Levites in that manner all along the old Testament? and if it be unlawful under the new Testament for Evangelical Ministers to be corporally supported by those who are spiritually instructed by them; why did the Apostle say, 1 Cor. 9.11. If we have sowen unto you spiritual things, is it much, if we reap your carnal things? And doth not Solomon say, the King himself is served by the field, Eccles. 5 9. and yet he doth not, nor is it fit he should put his hand to the plow as you do? nay it is so far from being a fault, to live by the labour of another, that we must one labour for another, in one kind or other: and there is a sweat of the brain as well as of the brow; And you, methinks Mr. O. should experimentally know them both to be painful, and that of the brain more painful of the two, unless you preach by Enthusiasme, without any study: for of the sleep of a labouring man, Solomon saith, it is sweet, Eccles. 5 12. (i. e.) the bodily labour: but the labour of the brain will not suffer; and the fault is not for a King or a Coun­cellor, or a Judge, or a Warriour, a Minister, or an Artificer to live by the sweat of the Husbandmans brows; for without his labour no society of men could subsist: but to live idle like a Drone among the Bees, to take no pains for his living; for such idle persons should not live by the Apostles sentence; when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat, 2 Thes. 3.10. This for Mr. O. his Thesis; now for his Hypothesis, as to Doctor Brian compared with himselfe; he is not (saith he) maintained like Doctor Brian, with the sweat of other mens brows, if he mean that he li­veth idle, so as not to deserve his maintenance of those for whom he labours, he knows neither his worth nor his work: if he did, and were (as he is) an Adversary, and as such an one, would not withhold the truth in unrighteousness, as Rom. 1.18. he would confess him as able, as painful, powerful and profitable a Minister (no disparagement to any) as any of his knowledge this day in England, and well worthy of a far more liberal sala­ry [Page 96]then he receiveth; for besides his preachings, which are very frequent, both on the Sabbath, and on the week day, he cate­chizeth dayly from house to house every person in every family within his parish, and yet doth much good service in other pla­ces, as just occasion requireth, and opportunity serveth, both as a learned man, and as a godly Minister: and were he Mini­ster of a Country Parish, where Mr. O. labours as an Husband­man, I would endeavour to perswade him to pay him Tithes, with the words of Augustine, that worthy African Doctor, and famous Disputant, Meus est homo quem feci, mea est terra quam colis, mea sunt semina quae spargis, mea animalia quae fatigas, meae sunt im­bres & pluviae, & ventorum flamina mea sunt, meus est solis calor; & cùm omnia m [...]a sunt elementa vivendi, tu qui manus accommodas, solum decimum merebaris: Deus sibi tantum decimum vendicans, nobis omnia donavit, ingrate fraudator & perside, &c. Aug. de Temp. Serm. 219. Tom. 10. p. 640. or rather the words of God, for he speaks in his name to the Husbandman: Mine is man whom I have made; mine is the earth which thou tillest; mine is the seed which thou dispersest; mine are the cattel which thou weariest in tillage; mine are the showrs of rain which moysten the earth, and make it fruitful; mine are the blasts of winds which fan the air; mine is the heat of the Sun, which warms both earth, and seeds, and plants, and makes them grow; and when all the Elements of life are mine, thou who only lendest thy hand to all these means, and deservedst but a Tenth, hast nine parts, and God hath reserved but a Tenth for himself, and wilt thou withhold that, thou ungrateful and perfidious wretch, wilt thou defraud him of that? pay to God the tenth, lest he bring thee to the tenth, &c.

The next ill quality which I shall note in Mr. O. is his Parti­ality, whereof I will give three Testimonies in stead of many more, which I might produce out of his examination of the Doctors Reply; one at the beginning of it in his Epistle, as he stileth it, To the impartial Reader, to which it might be truly ad­ded, From a most partial Writer: There he speaketh much against Epistolary prejudice, to make the Readers to reject the opini­on which the Writer opposeth, when himself is so forward to commit the same fault, that he is guilty of it in the Title page, where he anticipateth the Readers judgement of the cause (be­fore it be heard) with notorious calumnies of his adversaries part of the difference and egregious flatteries of his own in these words which I have cited in part At pag. 126. before under another [Page 97]Title, and to another purpose: but in this place it will not be impertinent to set forth more fully his malignant partiality.

Doctor Brians Reply to the Answer of his ten first Argu­ments, levied (saith he) to prove the Parishes of this Nation true Churches, Examined.

The invalidity of all his answers, his sophistical helps, imperti­nent self-contradicting allegations are presented to himself and o­thers, to the clearer discovery of the Popish, Political, Antichristian, and like present constitution of the Parochial Assemblies of this Na­tion, having yet never been true Churches from their very founda­tion, nor possible to be made true by Reformation, having had ne­ver yet any true Gespel-constitution.

As also the Antichristian Call, Entrance, Doctrine, &c. of the National Ministry in part unvailed.

With a Confirmation of some of those precious Apostolical truths, so vehemently cried down as Heretical, so far as directly or occasionally there was way made for their vindication; By J. O. an unworthy servant of Jesus Christ, and of his poor despised Church. To which he annexeth two Texts of Scripture, Jer. 15.14, 15. and Revel. 18.11, 15. both against Babylon.

That which in all this is principally now to be noted is his palpable partiality, and most apparent contradiction betwixt the contents of his Title page, and his Epistle to the Reader: but withall, I might observe many gross untruths, both against the Doctor and the Churches, owned and defended by him, and a­gainst the Call, Entrance, and Doctrine of the National Mini­stry, which he calleth Antichristian; when, for ought I can perceive by the printed Disputation, or his Examination, he doth not know who is Antichrist, or what is Antichristian. But [Page 98]these are met withal elsewhere in this discourse, as just occasion required. For the present I shall only commend unto the Rea­der this observation of Mr. John Onley and his adherents, viz. that most indiscreetly and absurdly they usually renounce that which in the Romanists is agreeable to the Dictates of Rea­son, Conscience, and Scripture, as Popish and Antithristian, as I have already shewed in this Chapter, and agree with them in that which is truely popish and Antichristian, as Error, Pride, Schisme, Censoriousness, Malice, Slander, sophistical Subtilty, as their writings and doings do declare, especially Mr. J. O. in his dealing with Doctor Brian, in his unfaithful publication of the disputation at Kenelmworth, and in his other bitter and inso­lent Book of Examination afterward.

The second proof of his partiality is this; when Doctor Bri­an hath proved our Churches of England to be true Churches of Christ by convincing arguments; Nam quae non prosunt sin­gula, juncta valent. Disp. p. 6. (convincing if taken toge­ther, though all of them be not of equal evidence and vigour [...]) all that avails nothing towards Mr. O. his satisfaction, unless he prove an impertinency to the Question, viz. That they were true Churches from their very foundation, that is, as he explaineth himself more fully elsewhere, that all the parishes of this Nation, in their first division into Parishes were visible Saints, and that those Churches gathered by preaching onely 500. Exam. of Dr. Br. Reply. p. 30, 37. Ibid. p. 24. Disp. p. 5. years before Augu­stine the Monk, were such as our Parishes now are, or that they are such now, as they were then: and this he maketh the life of the Doctors cause; and if he prove not this (saith he) he doth nothing, whereas it is neither the life nor limb of his cause; no, neither hair nor nail of it; neither a skirt nor an hem: but indeed meet nothing to the purpose. And therefore the Doctor did justly and discreetly decline it as impertinent, saying, it is our Chur­ches present, not their primitive state which I undertake to vin­dicate; and this upon very good reason. For,

First, The Churches, whose primitive constitution was the best and nearest to that of the Apostler, both in time, matter, and form, as that of Jerusalem, Rome, Antioch, and the Churches of Asia, long since are fallen from the faith, and have unchur­ched themselves by their Apostasie.

Secondly, It is but a Jesuitical evasion from the pertinency and [Page 99]life of the cause of a true Christian Church, to wave the present qualifications and notes of it, and to put all the weight and stress of the trial upon the Historical report of precedent times; as while we prove our Church to be a true Church, and our Faith a true Faith by the Scriptures, as Doctor Featley d [...]d a­gainst Fisher the Jesuite, that would be taken for no good proof with him, unless he deduced the visibility of the Protestant Professors, through all ages from the Apostles to Luthers time; and he professed he would not proceed in the dispute, unless that were first done, as is observed before.

Thirdly, If it were pertinent, and were also proved by Chro­nological History, it would serve but to make up a meer Hu­mane and Historical Faith, which is not effectual to Salvation; and the doubt of it where it is required and not proved (as it is no easie matter to do) may raise perplexing doubts and fears of salvation in weak, though well-minded Christians; as causing suspicious conceits of their being in a true Church, out of which, as out of Noahs Ark (the common saying is) none are sa­ved.

Yet this unsound and groundless assertion of his, which hath neither proof of Scripture, Reason, or of any humane Author of credit or account, be not onely putteth into the very front of his Examination (frontinulla fides) but repeateth it over and over, both in the Disputation and Examination, to puzzle the simple Hearers of the one, and Readers of both; Disp. p. 1, 6, 7, 12. Exam. p. 11, 12, 13, 24, 27, 28, 30, 37. and to make them believe that there was somewhat in it, which made the Doctor afraid to meddle with it; whereas it was a meer extra­vagancy from the question in hand, which to such as are intel­ligent, shews Mr. O. to be a Jesuitical shifter; and that he may appear more and worse then a Jesuite, he taketh upon him to be a Pope, peremptorily defining tanquam ex Cathedra Pesti­lentiae, not only that our Churches have never been true Chur­ches from the foundation of them, but that it is not possible for them to be made true by reformation. Thus in the Title page of his Examination, wherein his ignorance, confidence, and imprudence are all of them superlative, and worthy of none o­ther answer then a scornful silence.

Yet the other part of his partiality which now I am to prove, [Page 100]will implicitly at least confute it fully; for he that is so injuri­ous, as to impose upon the Doctor such an impertinency, as the life of his cause, and to regard none of his proofs, though ne­ver so pregnant, for the truth of our Churches, is so gracious to his own side, as to resolve that a true Church may be consti­tuted thus, A company of true Believers assembled in the Name of Christ, willing to follow him in the way of his ordinances revealed in his word, and yet seeing their want of a personal succession, and yet knowing it their duty, and the will of Christ, it should be per­formed, did appoint one that was unbaptized to reassume and set a­foot this ordinance of Christ. And if so, how partial is Mr. O. who makes it impossible for our Churches to be made true by any reformation? for how easie a matter is it for Churches to be reformed after that manner?

The third partiality of Mr. O. appeareth in his Epistle to his Schismatical Sister-Churches, where he taketh upon him to make a long Paraphrase on the words of Ananias to Saul, Acts 22.18. but when Doctor Brian makes but a short one on the words of Peter, Acts 2.39. The promise is made to you and to your Children: saying, if the promise be made to believers and their children, the command must reach not only to them but to their children, as running thus, be baptized you and your children, for the promise is made to you and to your children.

To this Mr. O. in a jeering manner replye [...], As if Peter Were not wise enough to express his own meaning, to direct us who should be, or the grounds upon which they should be baptized, without your priestly prudence: surely might you have come to the honour, or been worthy to have been a Dictator to Peter, you would have taught him to have said some what from whence Infants right of Baptism might have been proved. With this partiality appeareth a spice of his insolency formerly observed. But if Doctor B [...]ian had been worthy, and had taken upon him to play the Dictator, he had acted that part a great deal better, by deducing Infants Bap­tisme from the words of Peter, then Mr. O. did, dictating such an Aphorism out of his own fancy, concerning necessary re­course to the primitive constitution of a Church, to prove it to be a true Church at present, which we have now examined and refuted.

The fourth partiality I shall mention is this; he will not be turned over by Dr. Brian to Mr. Hollingworth for satisfaction concerning the name Parish, and parochial precincts; Exam p. 22, 23. Disp. p. 48. yet in a matter of greater difficulty (as the setting up of Church-ordi­nances by an unbapt zed person) he turns his Reader over to an obscure Treatise, entitled, The way to Zion: and Doctor Brian citing Mr. Baxters 27 Arguments for Church-membership, Mr. O. puts him off with Mr. Fishers Reply, Exam. p. 128. in his imagination proving the contrary, where he hath this ill hap to make his reference, and to bestow a commendable Epithet upon a Qua­ker (for such an one is Mr. Fisher now become) and as such an one Mr. O. must be a sharp adversary against him, Epist. p. 15, 16, 17. Disp. p. 15, 18, 19. Exam. p 32, 38, 39, 42, 43, 45, 47, 50. unless he will be partial in that also; for he writes sharply against the Quakers. But Mr. Baxter is a more rational, religious, sound, and setled Divine, then that there can be any fear at all that he will ever turn or become so wretched a changeling.

I will take but one exception more out of the two Books of his publication, and that is concerning the Civil Magistrate, a­gainst the exercise of whose authority in matters of Religion he often uttereth his dislike, especially as it is assistant to Mi­nisters in the Ministerial function; whereof I will mention but one passage of some importance, Exam. p. 53. margin. though it be with him but in a Marginal note, which is this; [The Sword of the Magistrate being your best relief, without which I think you would live but a while.] Whereof his meaning may be, that their authority maintains the Ministers publick maintenance, without which they could not subsist. But consider the spightful spirit of him and his Sect against them, as supposing them and their Chur­ches to be Romish, Popish, Antichristian, and Babylonish; and so would have them used no better then Babylon (but would stir up mortal enemies against them, as against her, according to that of J [...]r. 50.14, 15. in the Text set in the Title page of Mr. O. his examination) there is a just cause of jealousie, by that speech, of as malicious a meaning as may be towards them, because of the affinity of their principles with those of the Donatists, and of their consanguinity in practice with the bloody-minded Ad hanc hae­resin, id est, Donatist. [...]in Africa, & illi pertinent qui appellantur Circumcellin­nes, genus ho­mi [...]ū agreste, & famosissi­mae audaciae, non solum in a lios immania facinora per­petrando, sed, &c. Aug. d [...] haeres. Tom 6. p. 33. Cir­cumcellions, to which Sect they are sorted by Augustine in his Catalogue of Her [...]sies.

CHAP. X. A Conclusive Answer to Doctor Brians desire of Advice (whether it be better to let Mr. O. alone, or to an­swer him according to his folly) sent him a good while ago by his Son, but now published with enlarge­ment, for satisfaction of others as well as of the Do­ctor himself: Reasons many and weighty for the Nega­gative.

WHat was my mind (in answering your request by your Son when he brought you Letter, the Disputation at Kenelmworth, and Mr. O. his Examination of your Reply, after the reading of what you sent me, and writing of these Papers I now send you) in the same I persist with stronger confidence then I had at first; and for it I shall now give you clearer and fuller evidence of the expedience of my Advice then at that time I could do, which was the same that Hezekiah gave to his people concerning railing Sabshtkah, answer him not, a Kings 18.16. and Isa. 36.21.

My Reasons are,

First, I thought you came much below the elevation of your own worth, when you entred the Lists with an illiterate man, as Mr. J. O. is, albeit of a wrangling wit; though there was a kind of necessity I confess at that time, for the exercise of your humility upon his proud challenge, as of your ingenuity and ability in the conflict.

Secondly, I suspected your confidence in committing the copy of your dispute to his publication by the Press, would be abused by him, and so I believe it was more wayes then one, as I have shewed.

Thirdly, I saw the arrogancy of the mans spirit in the Title page of his Examination, which made me deem him an indoci­ble Sophister, far from the good mind of Hierom, who desired [Page 103] proficiency in what is good, and to change his mind from any thing that is bad. Utinam mihi sic semper dis­putare contin­gat, ut ad me­liora profici­ens—dese­ram quod ma­lè tenebam. Hieron. [...]dve [...] ­sus Luciserian. vol. 2. p. 147. Disp p. 33. Your selfe had some experience of his refractory humour; when though he did or might have heard from your mouth a satisfactory discourse, in vindication of the Ministry of England, wherein all that he had objected, and much more was fully answer­ed; yet he said, that you would not, or could not prove it a true Mi­nistry.

Fourthly, I observed how perversely he dealt with you, in imposing unreasonable conditions upon you in disputation, where­in if you did not satisfie him, all you did was nothing; whereas that with him of so great moment was nothing to the purpose, as I have shewed: and in a wilful refusal to consult with any Author of your proposal for his satisfacti­on. You turn me over to Mr. Hollingworth (saith he) in answer to which shift, I tell you once more, in that path I will not follow you; for in this controversial age, so many books have been written on both sides, if we should take this way, when should we answer our selves? To return each other to others works, you may find me (and I could you as easily) work till you are weary, to answer all books, Mr. O. Exam. p. 22, 23. pro and con, about this subject; then in doing of which (seeing enough is said already) I hope to employ my self better.

For what you shall answer your self, either of your self, or by the pens of others transcribed for your self, let it be Mr. Hollingworth, Ibid. or who it will be, I will not decline the answering thereunto; but at your return to them I will not go, it being you I deal with. Where­in refusing your offer, he renders a reason which makes against him, viz because in this controversial age, so many books be writ­ten on both sides; why then should any more be added by you and him of the same controversie, when they have been more accurately discussed already by writing and printing, then by polemical concertation in discourse (whereof much is meerly extemporary) they are like to be? And he saith, he hopeth to employ himself better; and if he can employ himself better then by reading such Books, as were advisedly and deliberately di­ctated, to satisfie such as doubt, and settle doubtful Readers in the truth in question; sure you may employ your self better, then in putting your self to the pains and expence of time, to write out Arguments and Answers for his sutisfaction; because [Page 104]he wants the books you direct him to, or will not be at cost to buy them, or trouble to peruse them; and if he did read them, would bring a resolution rather to cavil at them, then to re­ceive resolution from them. When you have leisure to wash a Black-moor, you may spare some time to spend upon your self-conceited and self-willed adversary Mr. J. O. for such an one will every judicious man judge him to be, who reads with indif­ferency the Disputation and Examination published by him a­gainst you.

Fifthly, you have too much precious work in your hands e­very day, then that you can warrantably lay any part of it a­side, to contend with such an obstinate adversary as Mr. Onley is; and I am verily perswaded, and I assure my self, many that know your various and uncessant pains for the souls of your people of Coventry, are of my mind, that thereby you do more good in a week there, then you shall do by disputing with, or writing against a perverse Anabaptist a whole year toge­ther.

Sixthly, There are so many now engaged in the defence of the Churches of Christ (for now Mr. O. sets himself against all the Churches of Europe, and New England, besides Old En­gland) that so much work cannot in reason fall to your share, as still to manage the defence of them all against him, or any such obstreperous talker; especially having such a weighty bur­den of pastoral employment continually upon you.

Seventhly, If you should set all aside, and encounter him at the Press, as you have done by Disputation in the Church, it would be to little purpose or profit, both in respect of Mr. O. and of his party. For,

First for him, unless you answer him in every particular how impertinent soever, you shall still be under his exception and insultation, to the great prejudice both of your cause & person; for he not onely taxeth you for deficient answering already, say­ing, to a great part of his answer you have not said one word, and that your Reply passeth over just half his Answer, without a word of Reply. Exam. of Dr. [...]. Rep. p. 28. Ibid. p. 115. But such is his insolency, that (as if he had authority to prescribe your part of the controversie, as well as to dispose of his own) he layeth this severe Law upon you, if you contest [Page 105]with him again, exactly to answer to each particular plainly and downrightly by reasons and Scriptures directly to the purpose, or else to confess you cannot, by saying nothing. Neither so nor so; For datur tertium, a man may silently pais by an especial part of his Book written in defence of a precious truth, Mr. O. his Ex­am. of Dr. Br. Reply, p. 69. as he phraseth it, that is, Universal Redemption, because it is discovered to be a pernicious error, and abundantly confuted by Doctor Kendall, in answer to M. John Goodwins Book called Redemption Redeemed; and another part as impertinent as that so often inculcated position of Mr. O. Of the first constitution of Churches; and an­other part is answered by Dr. Br. before, as that for the Vin­dication of the Ministry of England: no need then of confessing you can say nothing, Disp. p. 33. because you do not say all things as he appointeth you. Mr. Fisher made a more modest resolution concerning his adversary and himself; If any one answer (saith he) and I have satisfaction from him to the contrary, he shall hear of my Recantation; if I have not, he shall see it by my silence. Mr. Fisher in his answer to Nobody in 5 words. p 465. So may you better signifie your dissatisfaction with Mr. O. his Ex­amination of your Reply by your silence, then endeavour his satisfaction by a printed answer unto it, and that upon his rea­son, viz because he would not lose any more time from preaching, at I see I must (saith he) if I meddle any more at the Press with this subject.

Secondly, It would be to as little purpose and profit, in re­spect of his party, Vestra solum legitis, vestra amatis, caetera causâ incog­nitâ condem­natis. Cicer. l. 2. de natur. deorum. p. 216. Medicamenta nesciunt, & in­sani sunt ad­versus antido­tum quâ sani esse potuissent, Aug. confess. l. 9. c. 4. who are so possessed with prejudice against your cause by their teachers, odious invectives and exclamati­ons against you, your Church and Ministry as Popish and An­tichristian, that they will not onely not buy, but not so much as look upon an Apology for you, being sick of the perverse partiality which the Orator reproveth in some Philosophical Hereticks of his time, You read onely what is written for your own side (saith he) and love onely what is your own, for other things you condemn them, the cause unheard. And as Agustine observeth of some of like distempered passions, though so much the worse, as errors in Divinity are worse then errors in Philo­sophy: They know not what is Physick for them, and are mad (saith he) against the Medicine which shouldoure them of their madness. Such are many of the besotted Proselytes of seducing Teachers of the present age.

In respect of such froward and perverse opposites, as both they and they leaders (for the most part) manifest themselves, si­lence may sometimes be more seasonable then Replications and Rejoynders: for, Quorum dicta contraria si toties refellere velimus, quo­ties obnixa fronte statue­runt non carere quid dicant, dum quomodocunque nostris disputationibus contradicant, quàm infinitum & aerumnosum & infructuosum? &c. Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 2. c. 1. Tom. 1. p. 63. as Augustine putteth the case, If we should set our selves to refell the contrary Tenets of those who have hard­ned their foreheads, so as to resolve they will have somewhat to say, so they may any way gainsay our disputations, how endless, how grievous, how unprofitable will our trouble be?

Eighthly, If there were a necessity that Mr. O. should be fur­ther answered by you, or some body for you, you have three Sons, the youngest of whom would be able enough to under­take him by an Examination and Conviction of his Examinati­on of error and slander, of pride and vanity: but neither would I have any of them put to so unprofitable a Task, because I hear they are all of them dayly employed in better work. Therefore,

Ninthly, If after these Animadversions upon him and his Book, it be requisite to take any further course to take down the Tympany of Mr. O. his swelling self-conceit, I shall pro­pose it to the serious considerations of our Venerable Society, at their meeting at Kenelmworth, to invite him to a publick Disputation there once again, to be ordered and managed ac­cording to the Rules forementioned. So you have mine advice as you desired, with what I further promised; for which, if any thing be worthy of your acceptance and theirs, who are our Brethren in interest and affection to the cause wherein you first, and now I am publickly engaged, I desire your thanks to God for it, and prayers for me.