BEfore I beginne the Refutation of this Pamphlet, it shall not be amisse, that I apologize for my selfe, for refuting a Book already sufficiently refuted of it selfe, and by that very same Booke, whereof it intendeth the refutation: I will therefore here declare unto the Christian Reader how I came to undertake it; how un­willing I was to doe it; upon what reasons I was moved thereunto. The truth therefore is thus: That some daies after the publication of this booke, I hapned to fall in company with some men of quality that were reading of it, and after the perusall thereof, it was the joint wish of them all that some answer were drawne up unto it. A few dayes after that, I chanced to re-encounter with some of the same company, and some others very well affected to Reformation, who after sundry discourses fell upon the same Theme againe, some of them saying that it would doe well that the Commissioners of the Church of Scot­land would answer it. Where some of them desiring me to deliver my opinion, I replyed severall times (as occasi­on required) in substance that which followeth; That it might seeme strange to others if men of such gravity and learning, and much more of so eminent place and employ­ment, [Page 2]representing the whole Nationall Church of the Kingdome of Scotland, should stoop to answer every idle Anonymus Pamphleter, peradventure some Anabaptist, peradventure some Don̄a Catherina (it may be of purpose) put upon the Stage, to make them ridiculous, if they should acknowledge such inconsiderable persons as a considera­ble party. Besides this I told them, that I thought the Author of the Booke was a man very ill-bred, and impru­dent, and that for many reasons; and among the rest, First, because he being (as it seemeth) but a private man, he will needs be begging of a quarrell with the Scotch Commis­sioners, who never offended him, nor (for any thing that appeareth) knew not whether hee was inverum natura, or not. Secondly, and if he pretend that they offended some of his Sect, viz. the five Authors of the Apologeticall Narration; then seemes he yet unwiser then I tooke him to be, esteeming so highly of himselfe, as if he were abler to answer for them, then they for themselves: so judge not wise men, much lesse this wise Parliament, for then haply it had made choice of him to have beene a Mem­ber of the Assembly, which yet it did not. Thirdly, they are of age, very able men according to all wise mens judg­ment, and therefore it seemeth more fit that they answer for themselves; and so much rather, because neither they depend of him, nor he of them, nor any of them one from another; or all, or any of them, from any superiour Eccle­siasticall power; but every one of them standeth for him­selfe. And finally, if they had offended those five vene­rable persons, or their Sect, in apologizing for the Go­vernment of all the Orthodox Churches, and namely that of Scotland, whereof they be Commissioners, (howsoe­ver no offence appeareth) 1. yet offended they them not [Page 3]in particular: 2. Neither tooke they them directly for parties: 3. Or their Apologeticall Narration formally to refute, no more then they five tooke the foure Commis­sioners for their formall party, or the Discipline of the Orthodox Churches, or that of Scotland formally to re­fute. If this Anonymus Divine had imitated the prudence of either of them, hee would have appeared wiser then now he doth; neither should his Booke needed to have beene suppressed (as it is) in nature of an infamous Libell. Hereupon I was desired to set upon the worke my selfe: Whereunto I answered, that hardly could I doe it, not knowing who was the Author of it, or of what Sect or Sex he might be. They taking this my answer for a mer­riment, which I gave them in good earnest, replyed, That it could not be a woman, fince the Independents permit not them to write Bookes: but this satisfied not at all: for howsoever the Quinqu' Ecclesian Ministers admit them not to judge of controversies in Doctrine, or in Ecclesia­sticall censures, yet is it but a particular opinion of those five, and of some others; and however they admit them not to such acts, yet may it be doubted whether they per­mit them not to write Bookes of Divinity. Afterwards they would willingly have perswaded mee that it was no Anabaptist, since he was an Independent, and disclaimed them, and spoke contemptuously of them: But that pro­ved no more satisfactory then the rest: 1. For howsoever all Independenters be not Anabaptists, yet all Anabap­tists, all Sectaries, and Heretickes at this present about London, pretend to bee Independents. 2. That the Ana­baptists here in London for the most part agree with them in all things, save onely in delaying of Baptisme till the time that the parties to be baptized be of age sufficient to [Page 4]give an account of their faith; and in re-baptizing such as are baptized in all other Churches, save those of their owne Sect, as I have heard of themselves. 3. Sundry of the Independents also hold them for very good men, as they declare to the people in their Sermons, what ever they write to the contrary. 4. Many of them also hold the Anabaptist errour very tolerable, which is (it may be) the cause that so many daily fall away from Independen­cy to Anabaptisme; and that not without just cause: for if the Independents stand to their owne principles, and hold no men to bee Members of Christs Church, or visible Christians, till they be able to give account of their faith, and of the motions of grace that they feele within them­selves, what need they to Christen those that are not vi­sible Christians? Wherefore delay they not Baptisme as the Anabaptists? and that so much the more, since they refuse it to some of the children of those of their owne Sect. However they esteeme their parents to bee very godly, and that onely because they were not churched, or received into Church Covenant with them before their death. Some other reasons were alledged, which here I omit. To bee short, I was entreated againe to answer the Booke, which I promised to doe, if the Author could bee discovered; whereupon they did what they could, so did I also, but could not certainly discover him. In fine, I suf­fered my selfe for some particular reasons to be perswaded by them. Onely before I enter the lists with him, since the Author will needs march under a veyle, and conceale himselfe, I shall pray the Christian Reader and him both to excuse me, if without any respect to his person, I refute his Booke as it deserveth.

Whatever he be, for feare lest good men bee deceived [Page 5]under pretext of his pretended piety, with so many of his Abs, and deare Brethren, I pray them to observe in him, or at least in his Booke, his great weaknesse, yea (if I may by his permission say it) his great wickednesse in these points following. 1. He would make the world beleeve, that the Scots Commissioners acknowledge some defects and errors in their Discipline, p. 1. which against the knowne light of their conscience they will not reforme. 2. Hee falsifieth the Covenant, in adding some words to it, which corrupt the sense, p. 1.3. And that to extenuate his perju­rie inferres, cleering and expressing those equivocations and mentall reservations which before he concealed, p. 4. he denieth that the Synod gave any thankes to the Scots Commissioners for their Reply to the Apologetical Nar­ration, or rather for the cleared Reformation, p. 3. which I submit to the Synods judgement, whether there be not an Act of theirs to the contrary of what he saith in this point. He will perswade the Reader, that the Synod only voyced them thanks for a two penny Booke which they gave them, as if that grave Assembly had nothing else to doe.

I might note many more untruths; if he had had any prudence he might have learned the contrary either in the City, or at Westminster Hal: but the Scripture must be true, The labour of the foolish wearieth every one of them, Ecclesiast. 10.15. be­cause he knoweth not how to goe to the City. Prov. 12.13. The wicked is snared by the transgression of his mouth. And this I pray the Reader to examine, and not to suffer himselfe to be misse­led by any prejudicate opinion of his apparent pietie, his smooth style with his sweet Brethren, but to examine all things, and to retaine what is good, and to consider, that a man so bold and adventrous, as to propound in face of [Page 6]this most honourable and wise Parliament, the venerable Assembly of so godly and learned Divines, and of all the world, so many, so palpable untruths, must needs be ve­ry passionate for those opinions, which with so blinde a zeale, and so little care of his credit hee maintaineth here, and may be no lesse passionate in other things then in this. As for the reasons and motives inducing me to refute this Libell, they were not any stuffe the Booke contained, or the least feare I had that it could worke upon any rationall man; nor set I upon it with purpose to offend any man, no not the five Independent Members of the Synod; yea, nor so much as the Author of this Libell, (who has so highly offended all the best Reformed Churches) for ne­ver any one of them offended me; neither is it their Act, neither beleeve I that they had any hand in it; or if they had any, they avow it not. And as for the Author, I can not offend him wittingly, since I know him not, and this I hope would excuse very much the offence, if any should be: nor indeed ought hee to take offence at this Answer, since he dare not owne the Booke. Now if he be either a wise man, or any wayes gracious, I suppose hee ought rather to thanke mee for such an ingenuous reproving of his wicked calumnies against the whole body of the Re­formed Churches; for, A reproofe (saith the Wiseman) entreth more into a wise man, then an hundred stripes into a foole. Besides, as I conceive, it is an act of love: for as a Father saith, Aust. Epist. ad Mate. Magis amat objurgator sanans, quam adulator dissimulans. Neither can such indignities well bee endu­red by any man, that knoweth how handsomly to cast them off, especially when they are published in Print, and that because of the imminent danger thereby of infecting the weaker sort of people, not onely that now are, but also [Page 7]of the posterity to come. For, as saith the Roman Philo­sopher: Vitia transmittis ad posteres, Sen. de Morib. qui prasentibus culpis parcit. But if he should be so fond as to thinke that he has done well in what he has done, yet shall this Answer have some effect upon him: for as Gregory saith well, Greg in Past. Protervos tunc melius corrigimus, cum aequae bene egisse credunt, male acta monstramus, ut unde adepta gloria creditur, inde utilis confessio sequatur.

As for me I can truly say, my principall aime and mo­tive was Gods honour, the vindication of the Protestant Churches, and especially that of Scotland from this mans vilde aspersions, and to give contentment to good people, who I am afraid may have beeno deceived with the glo­rious pretext of this mans piety; and particularly, that I might comply with the desires of those my worthy friends that moved me hereunto. And so come I to the Title of the Booke, which is,

A coole Conference betweene the cleered Reformation and the Apologeticall Narration, braught together by a well willer to both.

Here it is to be observed, 1. That this Booke carrieth with it no Approbation by those who are ordained by the Parliament to licence the printing of any Bookes: From whence it may be inferred, that in so contemning their Lawes and Ordinances, and afterwards in maintaining, that Independents (of whom hee pretendeth to bee one) give more to the Civill Magistrate, then the principles of Presbyterian Government permit them to doe; that this is done, and that said in derision of them both, and by a man no wise minded to practise what hee saith or profes­seth, [Page 8]by some Nostro damus of whom it is said,

Or rather done as the Souldiers did to Christ, who bowed the knee to him, saying, Haile King of the Iewes, and mocked him, & spit upon him. He giveth them much Paper-honour with much reall disgrace, and will live as Independent upon all Civill as all Ecclesiasticall autho­ritie.

2. It is to be observed, as I said before, that the Author taketh no proper name to himselfe, but onely is described by a common name, which is more ordinary among beasts then men. For as mens individuall Natures and Persons are signified by proper Names, so are all beasts ordinarily represented by names common to the whole Species, if you except a few tame beasts: so here there is no indi­viduum signatum for to owne this Pamphlet, which ma­keth some judicious men to thinke, that he found himselfe conscious of what I have said, or am to say; and therefore went cunningly to worke in not owning it, for feare of some castigation in stead of confutation.

3. That this Authors common Name here is a Good­willer to both, whereupon at first, before that I had read over the Booke, I wondred much what sort of creature this could bee, what Hybrida and Amphisbaena in matter of Religion, bred of so opposite Species, having its heads in so opposite parts, carried by so contrary motions, to­wards so contrary ends, viz. of Dependency and Inde­pendency. But afterwards in running it over I found no such thing answerable to the Frontispiece, neither in mat­ter nor in manner. For it ye consider the first, it is nothing else but an intended justification (howsoever with little [Page 9]successe) of the Apologeticall Narration, and a senslesse arraignment of the Reformation cleared: If the second likewise, his expressions, which bee evermore we, us, our, &c. testifie most evidently, that hee is a formall partie. Truly hee willeth the Commissioners so little, and his Quinqu 'Ecclesian Ministers so much good in this cause, that he would make the world beleeve that the one partie saith all, and the other nothing at all. But what ever good ye will them, pardon us if we give you no credit till they be brought together, and it bee seene what each of them can say for themselves. In the meane time I pray the Rea­der to take notice how this man in the evry threshold fur­nishes us with so evident an argument of his weaknesse, in that, intending a disguisement, he had no better contri­vance, then by his owne penne so shamefully to bewray himselfe. Alas poore man, that professing here so much truth and honestie, thou shouldst thus foully betray thy selfe to be neither true nor honest. He endeth his Booke in an extraordinary way, with an &c. intimating some­thing of the Booke behinde, and afterward Finis, assuring us of nothing behinde; as if his onely aime were to con­tradict himselfe, and so to try our patience, and his owne parties credulity, how farre the contrary partie will per­mit, or his owne admit such palpable untruths, both in the beginning, and in the end of his Book. Ecclesiast. 10.32. The word of a foole will swallow himselfe: The beginning of the words of his mouth is foolishnesse, and the end of his talke is mischievous madnesse. O what a shame in this Prophet that professeth such pietie, that the lying spirit should so prevaile in his mouth! 1 Reg. 22.22. If it please the cour­teous Reader to goe along with me in the Examen of it, he shall finde him no better in the midst, so he shall have [Page 10]him (by Gods grace) compleatly like to himselfe in Prin­cipio, Medio, & Fine.

5. The Title or Inscription of his Book is A coole Con­ference. The Author might have said, A very hot and coole Conference, for it is so hot for the one partie, that ye may esteeme it a burning coale, or fire of zeale for it, howsoever without knowledge: igneus est illi vigor & ter­restris origo. But for the other it is so coole, yea so cold in its behalfe, that he may be judged to be ex frigidis & ma­leficiatis, or this his discourse to be dropped from Diacal­dius, Driswerus, Nosedropensis, who wrote de frigidis me­teor is Nive; Glacie & Grandine. Neither can it ascend to the supreme Region of the Ayre, or produce any effect upon great spirits.

If it work at all, it must bee in the lowest Region thereof, and upon very weake braines, who will not hearken unto the truth. But not to insist upon the Title of the Booke, I come to the Booke it selfe.

In the first page, because the Scotch Commissioners say, We are neither so ignorant, nor so arrogant, as to ascribe to the Church of Scotland such absolute puruy and perfection, as hath not need, or cannot admit of further Reformation.

Ans. I am assured, that there is no man that professes Christianitie that can finde fault with this humble and most modest expression; and yet this well-willing Pam­phleter sets himselfe to jeere at it, as a golden peace signify­ing-speech, as if dropped from the mouth of some Chryso­stome, or conceived by some Ireneus. But it is no new thing that men of golden, and peaceable spirits, such as Chrysostome and Ireneus, should meet with enemies, such as theirs were: for Chrysostome had adversaries who had ferreum os, aeneam [Page 11]frontem, plumbeum cerebrum; and Ireneus had his, who were every whit as busily cudere [...], as he could be cudere [...].

2. Upon this he groundeth a latitude of Religion, as I beleeve, greater then that of Noahs Arke, to receive all sorts of cleane and unclean beasts: but we desire to know of what latitude he would have it; if it shall receive Brow­nists, Anabaptists, and the Independenters of New Eng­land, who interesse all the people, yea women too to judge in matters of Religion, and in all Ecclesiasticall Censures whatsoever.

3. Under condition of his latitude of Noahs Arke, or rather of the Regions of the world, he assureth us of their Good will acccording to the Covenant, wherein they sweare to endeavour the preservation of the reformed Religion in Scotland, in Doctrine Worship, Discipline and Government, against our common enemies; the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdomes of England and Ireland, in Doctrine, Wor­ship, Discipline, and Government, according to the Word of God, and the example of the best reformed Churches; And shall endeavour to bring the Churches of God in the three Kingdomes to the neerest conjunction and uniformity in Re­ligion, Confession of faith, and form of Church Government.

But here we see no latitude nor condition.

But the Pamphleter to shew his wit and skill, and how cunningly he can draw the guilt of perjury upon himselfe, has recourse to a Glosse of Orleans, and some mentall re­servations, whereby he strangely tortureth the Covenant against the Text. Hee telleth us that the Covenant onely saith, the Reformed Religion in Scotland, that is, or shall bee; and till further Reformation wee will preserve it against our common enemy. But never a word in the Covenant of the [Page 12]Reformation of the Religion in Scotland, that is or shall be; and till further Reformation. This is an addition to the Text, yea a meere falsification of the Covenant. The Covenant speaketh onely of an endeavour of the reformation of Re­ligion in England and Ireland, according to the word of God, and the example of the best Reformed Churches, wherof it presupposeth that of Scotland to be one, 1. since it sweareth to preserve it; Neither could the Covenanters sweare to preserve it, if they thought it to bee deformed, for that were to sweare to maintaine deformity in Religi­on, &c. 2. And this may further be confirmed, for endea­vour is finis intenti sed non adepti; of a thing intended, that as yet is not existent, but to exist; but preservation is of a thing already existent, and supposed to be. 3. Because it is so expounded in the thanksgiving of the Assembly to the Scots Commissioners for their Booke. Neither for all this beleeve wee that the Reformed Churches, and namely that of Scotland cannot erre, as the Romanists at­tribute unto their Church: But the question is only whe­ther or no they doe erre, and wherein? if in that, that they will not receive the Independent Anarchie, and Papalitie into every particular Congregation, in permitting their particular Consistory compounded of one Minister, and two or three ruling Elders, to judge so many hundreds of persons, who will not suffer themselves to be judged by any, yea not by the whole Christian world: If in this, or any other thing they erre, they professe themselves ready to bee informed, and afterwards reformed. But because they are fallible, and may erre, to conclude therefore that in every thing wherein they differ from Independenters, Brownists, Anabaptists, &c. they doe erre, and so to quit their Religion, they are not such fooles; for by the same [Page 13]reason we might as well conclude our Brethren should quit their Tenets, and come to us.

P. 2. Apol. Ah deare Brethren: Here he calleth us deare, and sweet Brethren: but this Doctor had need of a Doctor, for his palate is so feverish and vitiated, that he relishes bitternesse in the sweet expressions of those whom he calleth sweet Brethren; and his conceptions are so far disordered, that he applieth to the Apologists what the Reformation cleared saith of ignorant and ill-informed people onely; and doth not apply that, which justly he might have applied to them in the following words, viz. the misrepresentations and indirect aspersions of others, who doe so commend, &c. and this distinction appeareth cleerly by those particles (mistakings of some, and mis-re­presentations of others.

This well-willer telleth us, that wise men are silently intentive, expecting disputed positions from the Assembly.

Ans. And why not ye also, since in the last disputed Po­sition ye caried away so great glory. If good Cato say true, Virtutem primam esse puta compescere linguam, truly ye had the chiefe of all vertues, and that in a most high de­gree, yea in gradu heroico, for ye troubled the Assembly very little with any Reply to what they answered you. But will ye, our Well-willer, either give us, or let us give you some positions upon this Subject, that we may receive of you some edification in particular at least, if we can­not have it in publick. Here I offer you a man to dis­cusse whatsoever positions you please, in all points, wherein yee dissent from all Protestant and Christian Churches. And since you put us in minde of it, let me tell you, some have been very desirous to have had some accesse to some of your Ministers, to the end they might have received some edification of them, and have known [Page 14]their opinions, but found them evermore inaccessible; so desirous were they, it should seem, to hide their opinions. As for your Prodromus, which ye say hath not deserved to be whipt, if the Parliament permit any of the Assembly dif­fering one from another in opinion, to present their judge­ments with their reasons unto the Houses, you cannot judge it a crime, &c.

Answ. This is already answered by the Author of the Observations and Annotations upon the Apologeticall Narration. 2. This Proposition is conditionall, and who­ever hath the least tincture in Logick, knoweth, that con­ditionalis propositio nil ponit in re, nisi positâ conditione. 3. And if the Parliament permit it not in this your foolish fashion, what will you say? 4. What if very wise Par­liament men already say, that if in the Generall Councells every one that differed in opinion one from another, had written bookes one against another, they should rather have been held for Councells of fooles then of wise men. 5. And if it be so, (as you say,) wherefore I pray should not the Scotch Commissioners have written against your Apologeticall Narration; since they differed in opinion from the Apologists, and so much the rather, being that they were calumniated by them.

He complaineth also of their bitternesse; And I on the other side wonder at their patience and meeknesse, that they have so little gall against Innovators, calumniating the government of all Protestant, yea of all Christian Churches, except their owne Conventicles, as destitute of the power of godlinesse, and as Papists, and Lutherans, de­faming them with nicknames, as Calvinians, &c.

P. 3. He asks the Authors of the Reformation cleared, if they thinke that the Elders of the quinque Ecclesiae be dark?

Answ. Who these Elders of the quin (que) Ecclesiae can be, I know not: I have read in the Revelation of the Angels of 7 Ecclesiae; in the Councell of Trent, de Dudithio E­piscopo Quinqu' Ecclesiensi, and of a Town in Hungaria na­med Quin (que) Ecclesiae, at this present under Mahomet, and by the Turks named Porsheu, and by the Germans Funs­kirchen; but of any Protestant Quinq' Ecclesian Elders, I never heard or read of before this: Neither know I what he can meane by them, but the five independent Ministers of the Assembly, whom hitherto I never heard designed by such a name or title; and if these be they, I answer, that the Commissioners say not that they are darke, but those who in the dark are afraid of that which they know not. Now light may be in darknesse; Neither can he apply this to these Presbyters or to himselfe, unlesse he finde in himselfe there be conscia mens.

The Commissioners adde (for explication of them­selves) and suffer their affections to run before their under­standing.

The Well-willer replieth: Are we not morall men (vo­luntas vult, ut intellectus intelligit) to understand first, and affect after.

Answ. Master Well-willer, if your affections may be judged of by your actions, certainly they are so indepen­dent, that they will not be tyed, according to the rules of Philosophy, to depend upon the understanding, [...] un­derstand first, & to affect after: and we can tel you, S [...] from Scripture, that if a man be not a very gracious (I say not a morall) man, he will readily understand as he affects, rather then affect as he understands.

2. That maxime of Philosophy striketh not at all at the Commissioners expression: they say that their affe­ctions [Page 16]run before their understanding, and not that their will runs before their understanding: Now will and affe­ction be two things; the one in the Reasonable soule, the other in the Appetite; unlesse with the old Philosophers, as Aristotler elateth of them, l. 3 de Anima, cap. 3. tex. 150. ye will confound mentē cū sensu, and consequently voluntatem cū appetitu, & so make mans soul mortall, as the late Author of the Mortality of the Soul.

2. Or if ye take the affection in a more large, but lesse proper signification, as it signifieth also the inclinations and movements of the will, then they understand not thereby the consulted, deliberated, & advised, but the rash inconsiderate, precipitate, and indeliberate actions of the will, otherwise called the first movements of the wil motus primo primi, qui omne judicium rationis antevertunt, which attend not, but prevent the judgement of reason. i. e. the deliberation and examen of the understanding; And in these movements it is certain that the affectiō goes before the understanding; for in such movements the sensitive ap­petite which is led by the sense, misleadeth the understan­ding; not formally, but objectivè, in so far forth as drawing with it the phansie or imagination, whose phantasmata or images determine the understanding in its judgement, & it being so determined, suddenly without any morall de­liberation determineth the will; but so the will is said to affect without judgement, i. e. without that deliberative judgement, which is necessary to your morall man, or ra­ther to the morall actions of his will: and in this sense the Poet said, Scilicet insano nemo in amore videt. Boetius the Martyr: Quis leges det amantibus? major lex amor est sibi. And Seneca: Quod ratio poscit, vincit; at regnat furor, Potens (que) tota mente dominatur Deus. So Aristotle: Qualis quis (que) est, talis ei finis esse videtur, ne (que) eadem videntur a­mantibus [Page 17]& [...]dio habentibus. So should you have taken this judicious expression of the Commissioners. 3. Item, the will in actionibus suis imperatis, whereof some be acts of the understanding, must goe before the understanding; for the understanding must command, before that the understanding can obey. 4. The Actions of the under­standing, that are not involuntary, but voluntary, or wil­ling, must follow the will, for voluntarium belongeth first to the will, and by the will to the other faculties. 5. Ori­ginall sinne also, ill habitudes, customes, and violent passi­ons, hinder the will from following the understanding, and make it some times to miscarry against the light of the understanding. 6. Albeit the will in its movements presupposes necessarily some judgement of the understan­ding, yet this judgement necessarily presupposed, moves it not necessarily, for it may be as well moved and directed by another judgement, (that moveth it not) to the con­trary action, whereunto it is not moved or directed, as it is this or that judgement, that actually moveth and directeth it to this, or that action in effect. 7. And if you beleeve that the understanding moveth the will necessarily, then in our Regeneration it should suffice, that the under­standing alone should be renewed, for it should necessarily draw the will after it, which cannot be, since Scripture in­culcateth no lesse the renovation of the will, o [...] Heart, than that of the understanding. 8. A mans Regeneration should consist in Faith alone, without Charity which likewise cannot hold; for howsoever a man be justified by Faith alone, without Charity, yet is he not regenerated by Faith alone, without Charity. 9. A man being endowed with intellectuall habitudes, should not stand in need of Morall vertues to perfect the Will; but to be, as you call it, a mo­rall, [Page 18]or rather a good man morally, it should suffice to be prudent; and so morall vertues should have their seate in the understanding, and be nothing else but Sciences, opini­ons, or prudences, which was the opinion of Socrates, uni­versally blamed by all Philosophers. 10. And finally, howsoever the Will is evermore ruled by some judgment, yet that finall judgement, that ruleth it, or that judicium ultimum, and practicè practicum, that ruleth humane acti­ons, dependeth of the Will, as the Philosophers and Schoolemen both hold. And so much touching this quarrell, which you here begged with your vaine Philo­sophy, so much condemned by S. Paul.

P. 3 §. 1. Wherein, say you, hath appeared this preposte­rousnesse toward you, whiles the Apologie smiles upon you, and sweetly calleth you and Holland by name the more reformed Churches? Doe you give them one such a kinde word in all your Reply?

Answ. Here it seemeth, that this Well-willer would paction with the Commissioners for an interchange of Commendations: but they have already answered, that they cannot praise you, but so far forth as truth will suffer them, p. 2. §. 2. Neither doe they deny, but the Reformed Churches Discipline may have need of reformation, as their faith, that is still growing from faith to faith; but from thence it followeth no more, that it is erronious, then that their faith is so. And here it is to be noted, how closely this originall sinne in arguing evermore à Posse ad Esse, sticketh to this as to all other Independenters bones. Let him shew, wherein either the Scots, or other Ortho­dox Churches need Reformation: Let him prove, that their Government is but a contrived Episcopacie; that it is such as maketh all Reformed Churches unworthy of [Page 19]Independenters communion; that their owne Churches are endowed with such a Seraphicall perfection, and ours so corrupt, that they dare no more communicate with us, then the Pharises thought they could doe with the people: item, that there is no subordination in Ecclesiasticall Ju­dicatories; That men are not Church members, before they be admitted by a Church Covenant distinct from the Covenant of Grace. If that he can doe this, it will be more to the purpose then all these ridiculous exclamati­ons and complaints: We desire arguments, and no com­pliments.

P. 3. S. 2. Not to make, &c. This is very dangerous, and may breed, if it have not already, as many Sects of E­pheticts, Scepticts, Aporeticts, and Pyrrhoniens amongst you, as were in former times amongst the Philosophers, no lesse destructive of all faith and setled Ecclesiasticall lawes, then theirs were of all Sciences; and therefore both so justly branded by the Apostle, 1 Tim. 3.7.

There is one thing more, that maketh the Apologists more confident of their candor, in that their Apologie received so great an Approbation from so pious and learned a man, &c.

Answ. How confident the Commissioners may be of their candor, and ye should be of yours, it were better to heare it of the Assembly then of you, since it is more to be believed in this cause, then ye in judging of your selves. And as for that Approbation, it was but from one man. 2. It was not approved by the whole Assembly, as was that of the Reformation cleared, which was approved by that same very learned man also. 3. And he by that very approbation did solemnly condemne your Apologeticall Narration. 4. Neither approved he the substance, but some circumstances of your Apologie, viz. its modestie, [Page 20]&c. wherein he might be very easily deceived. Item, your Communicablenesse, hoping better of you than appea­ringly he will find; and compatiblenesse with Magistracy, which hitherto is not fully proved. 5. Whether he ap­proved all that ye presented to him at first in your Booke, your selves know best: if not, we have not as yet your opinion, till according to exigence of time, &c. you give the world a second edition of it, and then ye may tell us newes of your candor. 6. Neither could he judge of your candor, since he could no way judge of your heart, & con­sequētly whether your writ was consonāt to your words, and your words to your heart. Besides all this, in that Approbation he declareth his aversion from yours, and inclination towards the Presbyterian Government: So as this mans braine seemeth of a very strange temper, in citing for him, that, which is so directly against him.

As on the other side, though the Assembly voted you thankes, yet was it only for the Bookes you gave them not for the Reply, as it was expressed (to that effect) in the Vote, if observation faile not.

Answ. This cannot but be most untrue: 1. for the Assembly voted them no thankes for the books, till all the Members thereof had read & considered the same, & were extreamely well satisfied with the contents thereof. 2. He would make this grave Assembly very ridiculous, (to say no more) if it had nothing else to doe, but to imploy so much time in voting thankes for so small a matter, viz. for a two-penny book. 3. If it be so, wherefore voted it not thankes for the Apologeticall Narration, which was a great deale bigger, and sold 6 ^d? 4. Here according to your judgement, it cannot escape the blame of great in­gratitude [Page 21]towards the Apologizers, whereof yee will doe well to admonish it. 5. For feare your observation faile you, I pray you looke the Act, and afterwards you can­not (if you have any candor) but in imitation of S. Austin disabuse the world by some booke of Retractations, which here you abuse by this your false observation.

And thus far I came with my reasons grounded upon some generall, but very certaine relations, concerning the Assemblies speech, in giving thankes to the Commissio­ners of the Church of Scotland for their Reply to the A­pologeticall Narration: but since this my Book hath been ended, upon more particular information I adde these fol­lowing reasons. 8. The Assembly in thanking them for it calleth it a very learned and pious piece, which is not a praise of two sheets of paper and a little inke; but also of the matter it containeth. 9. It was there said, that it is ve­ry usefull for this time, when the Assembly hath vowed and covenanted to come as neare as they can, in the Go­vernment of this Church unto that of other Reformed Churches, and namely of that of Scotland, taking ever­more Gods Word for their first patterne and infallible rule of direction. 10. They are thanked for it, because it refuteth some unworthy aspersions, that some have faste­ned upon the Government of the Reformed Churches; now who can those be, judge you Sir. If here the one be thanked, I may probably say, the other getteth little thanks for his paines. 11. The Assembly rejoyceth at the wash­ing away of those aspersions, yea unworthy aspersions, as they are termed by them. 12. The Authors of such fil­thie aspersions were there said to affect wayes of their owne: now what can be those wayes that be their owne, since they are not called Gods wayes, judge yee againe? [Page 22]13. They are paralleled there with Bishops, being both two opposite enemies to the Government of the true Re­formed Churches, the Bishops saying, no Bishop, no King, and the others, that the Reformed Churches gave not the Civill Magistrate his due; which I interpret to bee, as if the one said, a King cannot be without a Bishop, and the other, a King cannot bee with Presbyteriall Govern­ment. 14. Because it was there said, that it was necessary to vindicate the Churches of God from so unjust imputa­tions. 15. Because the Assembly like wise men commend­ed very highly the sincerity, gravity, and ingenuity of the Book. 16. Because the Synod declareth, how it acknow­ledgeth it self very much beholden to the Commissioners for the vindication of their owne and other Protestant Churches. 17. It is called a temperate and seasonable vindication. 18. The Assembly saith in name of all the Churches of this Kingdome, that they desire to keep with them all and that of Scotland a more arct Communion and uniformity in the Ordinances of Jesus Christ. 19. The Assembly declareth there, that they had a very high e­steeme of the Church of Scotland. 20. It commended also the Commissioners for their judicious and grave dis­course in the Assembly, which contributed much to the foresaid Uniformitie with all the Protestant Churches. And all this I have deduced at length, not onely to refute this untruth, but many others, heretofore and hereafter, which this unworthy Pamphleter casteth upon the Com­missioners, yea upon all our Churches, to kindle a fire of Division betwixt the Civill Magistrate and them, in these most calamitous times, when both Church and State are in combustion already. But after such evident untruths, he addeth, if observation faile not: Here he seemeth to make [Page 23]us believe, that the Author of this Pamphlet is one of the Members of the Assembly, or that some Member of the Assembly has dealt treacherously and perfidiously with the Assembly, in pinning upon them such an Act, flatly contrary to their formall expressions, (for none but some Member of the Assembly could make any such observa­tion) But of this I will say nothing, it being a matter of higher concernment. I beleeve rather that the Author of this Booke is minded, in principio, medio, & fine, to be like to himselfe.

P. 4. §. 1. We read nothing else but of the Independen­ters admirations (which Philosophers call the daughter of ignorance) and some of their thoughts and judgements, as if they were giving an account of their Creed: as p. 2. we read nothing but Interjections of lamentation, ah, oh, &c. of holy and gracious men: whereas we crave some quia's, ergo's, or other rationall Conjunctions; whereunto we cannot better reply, then did Scotus to a Doctor of the Sorbone in Paris: This Doctor when he could not answer Scotus his argument by Reason, said evermore, Respondeo cum Sancto Doctore: Cum S. Doctore, replied the other, si sanctus oret pro nobis, si Doctor, respondeat ad argumen­tum: so we to you; If those men among you be holy, let them cry, ah, for their sinnes, and pray to God for Gods Church, but let Doctors propound and answer ar­guments: but this man reasoneth not, but giveth out Sentences, as if he were some Iudge of one of the Benches. You doe but imagine and fancie whatsoever you say in this Section of your imagination of the Commissioners extr ajudiciall and eccentricall Act: your acts may rather seeme Eccentricall secundum quid to London, and Con­centricall secundum quid with Oxford, where, me thinkes, [Page 24]they have more regard a great deale to your tender Con­sciences, then to those of the Commissioners; Neither can any mortall man hinder so independent imaginations. It hath been already proved, that you have given the first, second, and third blow, and in your Apologeticall Nar­ration you threatned yet another: your judgement is ut­terly erronious, in thinking that this was intended to dis­unite the Presbiterians from others, i. e. from Indepen­denters (since no others can well be thought upon, all o­ther Orthodox Churches, and all the Synod being no o­ther) for their intention is altogether to unite you with them. Neither are there, for any thing we know, any that disunite you from them, or them from you, save your selves onely.

P. 4. §. 3. This well willer is very impertinent in pro­ving against the Commissioners, that Visibility and Succes­sion are not essentiall notes of a true Church, which they, I beleeve, never thought, I am sure never said. And yet I must say, that howsoever visibility be not essentiall to a true Church, yet it is essentiall to a true visible Church, whereof we all dispute here. And howsoever of a true Church wee cannot inferre visibility, yet from true visibility we may in­fer a true Church.

P. 5. §. 1. He blesseth God, that God hath made a Rehoboth for the Scots.

And God willing wee shall bee fruitfull in the Land as Isaac, and we pray God he and his be not as the Herdsmen of Gerar, even striving with our Herdsmen of Isaac. If we have a Rehoboth, wherefore will yee not drinke of our Spring? wherefore (to use your termes) will ye not jumpe with us? or if yee will not, ye may be gone as Lot with your Pastours, and separate your selves from Abraham and Isaac.

Ibid. Who can hinder the windes, if they blow, and bring blacke weather from the North, or West?

Answ. No true English hearts have made any such judgement of the Northerly windes these three yeares last past. How much trulier might it bee said of a few Dona­tisticall spirits, with their Vbi habitas amica mea in meridie? that trouble their mother Church, esteeming all her chil­dren unworthy of their Communion.

Pag. 5. §. 3. Ye come up me thinkes somewhat lamely with your Catalogue of Prophets. 1. For onely ye have one Brightman, and yet none of yours, hee is of ours; for he preferreth the Scots Church, constituted of Parochiall, Classicall, and Synodall Assemblies, before all other, or at least postpones it to no others. 2. Neither in exposing the Prophecies of Scripture according to Scripture, can he be said to have had the gift of Prophecie, since his expo­sitions were not infallible: for so every true Minister of the Gospel should be a Prophet.

As lamely came ye up with your Martyrs. 1. For when you call it a civill death or Martyrdome, the word Civill is terminus diminuens aut alienans, which diminishes, or rather transfers it from a proper to an uncouth or impro­per signification; as the word dead, when I say Peter is a dead man, for a dead man is not a man, i. e. a living man, in making it a civill and improper death, or Martyrdome; ye make it lesse then that of the Presbyterians, which was reall: And so indeed it is, for wee finde you evermore in all the story flying reall Martyrdome, rather then attend­ing it. 2. It is also a maxime in Logicke, that à termino di­minuto vel alienato non argumentamúr ad eundèm terminum absolutè acceptum: So this your argument must be capti­ous in arguing, that yee dye a civill death, or are civilly [Page 26]Martyrs. Ergo, ye are Martyrs. It is no better then to say, There is a golden Calfe: Ergo, there is a Calfe.

P. 6. §. 3. I say, to receive and practise some things uni­versally received in the Reformed Churches, and not to receive or practise others, but either to reject them openly, or cunningly to professe that yee retaine your judgement, seeke for further-light, or doubt as the Ephectici, Sceptici & Pyrrhonii, sufficeth not to make you parts of the Refor­med Churches. 1. For by the same reason the Donatists should have beene parts of the Orthodox Churches of their time. 2. Item, the universall Reformed Church in respect of its externall form is a totum homogeneum, which may bee attributed in recto to all the parts or particular Churches thereof, which could not be, if some particular Churches differed in so many practices from all the rest. As for your instance of the Church of Scotland, that the Commissioners say, it may receive further Reformation; that may be understood in moribus, sed non in morum legi­bus, in manners and practice, but not in Rules of Disci­pline touching practice. Or if it bee taken of Rules or Lawes, it is not in the Rules or Lawes that concerne the essentiall or principall integrant parts of Discipline, but things meerly accidentall, as they expound themselves, by the example of faith, which the best Christian in the world may have, which evermore is perfect essentially, and according to its integrant parts, in respect of its exten­sion to the principall parts of its object, how ever it may be imperfect, quoad entitatem intensivam; and extensivam accidentalem & ratione partium minus principalium: so their Ecclesiasticall Lawes may ever better and better bee put in execution, and augmented extensivè, in respect of the accidentall and most inconsiderable parts of its object, [Page 27]according to the exigence of time, places, and other cir­cumstances: But reade the Text and ye shall finde, that it saith no such thing as this Doctor would draw out of it.

P. 6. §. 4. To excuse themselves in calling all Orthodox and Reformed Churches Calvinians, the Well-willer im­ployeth all his wit, Rhetoricke, and Philosophy. Here he beginneth againe with his Ah; censures the Commissio­ners for complaining of this nickname put upon them, and would faine perswade them, that it is ad honores, and con­sequently, that they are bound to thanke them for this in­jury they have done them.

Answ. But 1. we have Saint Paul expresly condemning such names. 2. They who accept of them, hee calleth them carnall. 3. And willeth us not to accept of any name, but of his in whose we are baptized, viz. Christs. 4. For as he argueth us to be named Cephaists, Paulinians, or Apollonians: so may we to bee called Calvinians, Lu­therans, &c. is to make a Schism. 5. Because all the Ortho­dox Churches have evermore refused it. 6. And only their enemies, Papists, and Lutherans stil pind this name upon us as opprobrious. 7. Since it is put upon us against our will, it cannot be good for us, at least in our estimatiō. 8. For even good urged upon a man against his will is troublesome, and a burden to him. 9. Besides all this, we have the te­stimony of Saint Hierome, quoted by the Commissioners, who with us taketh Saint Pauls part against this Doctor. And hereupon commeth in according to his ordinary cu­stome his lamentable exclamations, his Ohs thrice reite­rated, Oh unhappy conjunction; Oh heavy application; Oh coale blacke termes. Those be termes of Rhetoricke, but not of Logicke. I like better of a quia, then of your Ah, oh, &c. he will neither depend upon Saint Paul, nor upon [Page 28] Hierom. But he will neither depend upon Saint Paul, S. Hierome, nor any reason, but will argue against all, 1. That it is to distinguish us from more corrupted Churches.

Answ. Saint Paul forbiddeth such names of distinction, and Saint Hierome saith; that it distinguishes the Antichri­stian Church from the Church of Christ. But if ye will needs be distinguishing us, name us on Gods name by the names that we accept of, as by that of Orthodox, or Re­formed Churches, which our common enemies refuse us.

2. Ob. It was used to decline the word Presbyterian, that lesse offence might be taken.

Answ. It is not necessary to name us by either the one or the other: and yet were it better to name the Protestant Churches Presbyterians, since this name is taken from the forme of their government.

Ob. 3 I is a name of honour.

Answ. We desire not such honours as are forbidden in Scripture, and that with such a violent courtesie are urged upon us.

Ob. 4. Papists disgrace not themselves in calling them­selves Catholickes: Ergo, No more doe the Apologists in calling us Calvinians, since they be such themselves.

Answ. I deny the consequence, for the Catholicke Church is a terme of the Creed, Heb. Panegyris.

As for your selfe yee may take what names please you best, yet desire wee you to take none that be forbidden in Scripture: Neither heard wee ever that yee accepted it before this present, and that as we conceive to excuse your selves, rather then that you have any great minde to it yet.

Afterwards P. 7. the Doctor calleth this expression or reason of the Commissioners Coloquintida, or Colocynthis, q. [...], Dogges meat, but of what Dogs I know not, [Page 29]but of such as accept of such names; if it be dogs meat, then the Apostle and S. Hierome have given you dogges meat. This injury and dogged answer striketh no lesse at S. Paul and S. Hierom, then at the Commissioners: if Colo­cynthis be quasi [...], because it serveth for a vo­mit or purgation for the belly, to purge all petui­tous, bilious and melancholious humours, we pray God it may worke well upon you, and that this be the last vo­mit against the Reformed Churches. If it be applied outwardly, it killeth the fruit, & abortum parit: utinam vobis abortum p [...]riat; I pray God againe it may cause you abortivenesse, and make you cast your unhappy fruits, before they come to maturitie.

Yet, as if in revenge, you ding the words of [Separation] and [Brownists] against the Apologists, as if you had forgot­ten, or di [...] intend to misapply what you had said in the next line afore quoted out of Hierome.

Answ. Te frustra Augurium vani docuere parentes. Sir, you are no good Diviner, for it is not the Apologists, but the Brownists, whom they call the Separation, as appea­reth most expresly by their own words: The Seperation may be well allowed to be called Brownists. This therefore is but a meere calumny that ye pin upon them, to the end that thereupon ye may bewaile and lament your conditi­on and great oppression before the people, which take your words upon credit: but the more to blame a great deale you are, that so ordinarily deceive their easie cre­dulitie. And truly if ye could quit this kinde of reaso­ning, the rest of the matter you stuffe your Booke with, would be found very weake. And yet I must say of my selfe, what elsewhere I have ever said, that ye are really Separatists, since ye separate your selves from the Sacra­mentall [Page 30]communion of all other Orthodox Churches, e­steeming them unworthy of your Communion. So by this time any one may see, they want not memory in what they say, but you judgement to understand them, or honestie at least to relate faithfully what they say. Ha­ving so dealt with them for want of some other Encomi­ast, he setteth forth the praises of his own vertues, viz. his great patience and mercy towards them. Were it not for patience, nay that would hardly doe it; were it not for reve­rence of you and your Nation, a home answer would be shaped to such a mishapen misprision. But to love is to live.

Answ. 1. Your patience, Sir, is very weak, yea scarcely in gradu continentiae, since it can hardly so command your choler and desire of revenge against a pretended and so imaginarie an offence. 2. So surely must be your other vertues, and consequently your Reverence; for there is a necessary connexion betwixt them all, at least in gradu temperantiae, under the which they cannot absolutely have the name of vertues. 3. Reverence is a vertue, whereby we give honour to vertuous persons, and feare to offend them, because of their vertues, merits or dignitie: If so, I pray what Reverence is it, so to calumniate them as you have done? 4. Or if they be such as you have represen­ted them to be, then can they not be the object of Reve­rence, and so this your Reverence is no reall vertue. 5. As for the Reverence ye carry to our Nation, I will but put you in minde of the good esteeme you have of it; as be­ing very windy and unluckie for English men. Your words are, Who can hinder the winds, if they blow, and bring black weather out of the North or West? If it be such, it can­not be thought worthy of any Reverence: so this, you say here, cannot be said, but in derision of it, unlesse you be [Page 31]content to give a lye to your selfe. But what ever be your judgement of your own Nation, or of ours; We thank God that they have such esteeme one of another, that you cannot much further or hinder it. As for my selfe; what Erasmus Roterodamus saith of his Holland, that I may ap­ply to our Scotland. Terra mihi semper & celebranda & veneranda, ut cui vitae hujus initia debeam: atque utinam illi nos tam possimus honestamento viciss [...]m esse, quam illa nobis non est poenitenda. Our Country, Sir, is an honour to us both, I pray God none of us be a dishonour to our Countrey. And as for you, I may say, that when your Countrey and the Church of God therein (as many of your Countrey-men, very good Christians and Patriots say) had most need of you, ye left it and neglected it; and at this present, when it standeth in no need at all of you, ye returne againe unsent for, to vexe the Church of God, and to hinder Reformation in it.

6. I answer: in matters of so high importance, so holy men as ye pretend to be, should make no distinction of persons, nor distinguish betwixt the Greek and the Schy­thian: all should be to you one in Christ; To love indeed is to live, if your love be such as it should be: but some­times amantes sunt amentes, and their love is rather a dreame then reall, when they dote more upon their owne fancies more then upon truth: Credimus an qui amant, [...]n qui sibi somnia fingunt.

He addeth, that we must not set our houses on fire to rost our own egges. Answ. Who doth it now in matter of Re­ligion, but the Independenters? Vestrorum causa malo­rum vos estis.

P. 8. §. 1. We are glad that as ye disavow the rest, so ye do this, that ye intended not to touch the Church of Scot­land, [Page 32]in saying that ye had no Commonwealths to reare. Only this we say, that if ye say true, that then it was impertinent­ly put in: And as ye say, it might better bee understood of those of New England, who had the Kings Patent for what they did in Policy, as Gods Word for Church Government. Onely here I observe, that you acknowledge the King and his Patent, onely in Policy, and Gods Word onely in Church government. Now I pray, then what more give ye to the Civill Magistrate, then other Reformed Chur­ches in the point of Church Government? And as for Policy, no Reformed Churches ever medled with it, that I know of.

P. 8. §. 3. If ye thought it not a blessing of God, or some good worthy of thanksgiving, not to bee engaged by educa­tion or other wayes to any other of the Reformed Churches. This discourse must be very impertinent, in bringing this for a reason, that your Discipline is good, or better, then that of all other Reformed Churches; for afterwards yee bring your selves in as spectators of all Churches and Dis­ciplines, being of none your selves, but in abstractione pra­cisionis.

Neither say the Commissioners absolutely, that the A­pologists were left to their owne private thoughts to bee mo­ved by, but ex hypothesi, that they were not engaged to o­ther Churches; and truly no reasonable man can thinke but they were so, since they say that in looking upon all Governments they were simple spectators; so that this Doctor for this extravagant sense, so repugnant to the text, may be thought to have beene Graduate at Orleans.

And since this Well-willer his profession is to live to love the Commissioners, I shall onely note by the way what a rare and curious expression he has found out to de­clare [Page 33]it by, viz. that they are men of a better spirit then the venemous Spider of envy. They are bound to thanke you Mr. Doctor of well-willing, for this pretty complement ye passe upon them.

P. 9. § 3. As in all the rest of his Booke, so here he go­eth very cunningly to worke, evermore omitting what is most materiall in the Commissioners Booke. Hee answe­reth not a word to the number of Church Officers, or to their justification against the aspersions laid upon them for Lay Elders, or their accusation against the Independents, because of their Laymen Preachers and Prophets &c. All this he passeth over by a Doctorall priviledge, hic & ubi (que) terrarum tacendi. Onely he scratcheth at the proofe they bring for Presbyteries, Classes, and Synods: but refuteth it not; no more then hee doth the Arguments brought by Master Rhetherford, Guelaspe, and others, taken from Gods Attributes, as 1. from his Goodnesse, 2. Wisedome, 3. Ju­stice, 4. Providence, 5. from the nature of the Church, &c. Item, from the Law of Nature, 6. from sundry in­conveniences. 7. From the order established in the Church of the Jewes. 8. From the practice of the Church in the times of the Apostles. 9. From Christs institution in the New Testament. 10. From parity of reason or propor­tion betwixt a Parishionall Session or Consistory, and six or seven persons in the reall Church thereof, and a com­bined Presbytery, as ye call it, and every one of the Chur­ches; peradventure two or three or ten thousand Parishio­nall Consistories subject thereunto. 11. From the ends of the Church, 12. her Conservation, Peace, &c. where­of ye may happily heare more within a few dayes. In the meane time I pray you answer to what is written, and not to clude such arguments with tales at Assizes, Wooll-packes, [Page 34]Cannon-shot. Bullets, Batteries, and termes of mi­litary Discipline, wherewith we are not so well acquain­ted.

P. 10. §. 3. Here it seemeth that this Doctor would ex­cuse the Apologizers, in saying that they give more to the Civill Magistrate, then the principles of the Presbytertall ge­vernment will suffer them to yeeld. As if it were rather said by way of retaliation and in anger, then in truth, because (as he saith) the peace-plea calleth them Independents. If it be so, 1. their passion is worthy of the others compassion. 2. But this should not have made them to offend all the Reformed Churches, and especially their Benefactors in the Netherlands, which are all Presbyterians. 3. All comparisons are also odious, especially amongst men well bred. 4. And yet howsoever they hate the name, yet they love dearely the thing signified by the name, and will depend of no Ecclesiasticall Judicatory, yea (as the Au­thor of the Observations and Annotations sheweth clear­ly) not upon all the Churches of the world; and yet will that their Congregations depend of themselves, who yet will depend upon no men in spirituall power or authority.

But the Doctor saith, If upon a grosse errour of another Church they (viz. Independent Churches) dare exercise only a non communion with it, then there is more left for the Ma­gistrate to doe, then when you have excommunicated it.

Answ. In excommunicating a private person, or a par­ticular Church (when it can be done with lesse hurt to the Church then is the good included therein) it leaveth all to be done by the Magistrate, that God has ordained him to doe, viz. in politicall government. Non auferet mortalia, quiregna dat coelestia. Neither requireth the godly Ma­gistrate, our King or this Parliament any more: but ye are [Page 35]importune who will give him more then he requireth of you, or then either God or the Magistrate hath comman­ded you. The French say of such men, Il est valet du Di­able, ilfait plus que commandement. I will not here insist upon your impertinency in denying the name of excom­munication to non communion, and that great pride in not submitting the judgement of five or six (some times) idle, yea (oftentimes) wicked felllowes, to the judgement of all the Divines and Churches of the world, in case they should dogmatise and sustein the most damnable heresies of the world, and yet unto their judgement, however so contemptible a number, ye will submit the judgement of all their Congregation, amounting peradventure to the number of many hundreds, (it may be) better men then themselves. Neither is it enough to leave it to the Civill Magistrate; for his power is not spirituall: God hath gi­ven an intrinsecall power to the Church, sufficient for its spirituall end: the Civill Magistrate may be a Pagan, an Antichristian Christian, an externall Christian, but an in­ward enemy to the Church: he may be negligent in his charge, &c. and is it credible, that in such cases God hath instituted no Discipline or Government to take order with offenders? But of this I need not to say any thing, this evasion being so well, so evidently and briefly refuted in the Commissioners own words, which I pray the Reader to consider, p. 21.22. if it please the Reader, he may have sundry reasons against this opinion in the con­siderations and Annotations upon the Apologeticall Nar­ration. It is an untruth also that the Doctor presupposeth here, viz. that a Classicall Presbyterie is made up of many Ministers and Lay men in the Kingdome of Scotland or among other Protestants; And false againe, that their [Page 36]Assemblies are made up of persons partly Ecclesiasticall & partly civill, or that they there rule persons partly Ecclesi­asticall, partly Civill: we say that there can be no such persons; for howsoever one person may have one charge Ecclesiasticall, and another secular or Civill, yet is he not therefore a mixt person, neither be these severall charges mixt, but distinguish'd in him, fince of the two there re­su'teth not any third Charge compounded of both, as in mixtions: but he exercises them both distinctly and se­verally, in such a fashion, that the one never concurreth to the function and operation of the other. By the same rea­son it should follow, that the divers faculties of the soule, as the understanding, & expulsive facultie in a man, should be mixt together, since they be both in one soule, as the most part of Philosophers hold. When a States-man sit­teth as a member of an Ecclesiasticall Assembly, he sit­teth no wayes as a States-man, but as a Church-man: nei­ther judgeth he a State-man or secular person in qualitie of a States-man, or of a secular person, but in qualitie of a member of the Church: So they judge not of civill mat­ters formally, as they are subject to the Civill Magistrates authority, but materially & in so far as they are subject to a spirituall formality, or conduce to a spirituall end, under the which notion they belong not ordinarily to the Civill Magistrate, or per se & intrinscce, but per accidens & extrin­sece. as all Orthodox Divines of the Reformed Churches do teach. But this is not all, for sundry of the Independents have told us, that the Civill Magistrate, according to Gods Word, cannot punish any man for matters of Religion, how abominable soever his opinions be.

P. 11. and 12. the Doctor will not answer, because he hath not the Books at hand, and so shifts over the argu­ment: [Page 37]What he saith of Aerius, who held out against Bishops, as our Reformed Churches doe, is not to the purpose: No more is this, That Councells may erre. Afterwards he telleth us, that French Ministers (as Ano­nymus as himselfe) and the French Discipline is for the Independenters, but proveth it not; but supposeth that we should take it upon his word, which we may not at any hand doe, till we see more candor and sincerity in his pro­ceedings. As for Merellus and some Ministers of the French Church, excommunicated for their erronious o­pinions, or ill lives, and afterward assaulted the Discipline whereby they were sentenced, if they have any such for them, we envy them not such brethren.

Because the Commissioners, p. 18. of the Reformation cleated, mainteining the fidelity of the Reformers of the Scottish Church, say, that they deserted not their Chur­ches, nor caried away Churches with them, nor did un­dergoe any voluntary exile, but thought it a great spoile after that they were sentenced to exile to save their lives, and to live with very small meanes, farre from any friends to comfort them. This the Doctor applieth to the Inde­pendenters, of whom the Commissioners doe not speake, but of their owne Ministers: But since it is his pleasure to doe so, I must say that hence it followeth, that their exile was a far greater suffering then that of the Independents: 1. for it was involuntary; but the more involuntary that any afflictions be, the greater they are; and the more voluntary they be, the leste they be; for, poena debet esse molesta & involuntaria; but that which is voluntary, is not troublesome. 2. That of the Indepen­dents was accompanied with many friends and worldly meanes: so was not the other. 3. It may be doubted, if [Page 38]Pastours for their personall or particular persecution may fly, without actuall compulsion, and the publick consent of their Flock, since they are not in the Church in qua­lity of particular, but of publick persons, and Heads of the Flock; Neither can that Text of Scripture helpe him, viz. When they persecute you in one place, flie to another; for that is said of particular, and not of publick persons: or if it be said of the Apostles, as to the Apostles, it holdeth not in particular Ministers tyed to particular Churches, for they are tyed to their particular Churches, but so were not the Apostles, who were equally bound to teach all the Chur­ches of the world, according to that saying of Christ, Goe teach all Nations, Matth. 28.19. and so could never aban­don their flock. And as for his Answer, that they hept themselves for a reserve, to assist the Church at their returne: I must say they were very provident in foreseeing such an extraordinary case, and prudent in preserving of their per­sons, whereas the others sacrificed their lives for Christs truth.

Pag. 12. §. 3. and p. 13. §. 1. & 2. the Doctor saith no­thing against that which the Commissioners say, and so approveth it: he applieth it to the Independenters, and denieth that they esteeme so of Excommunication, viz. that to limit the censure of Excommunication, in matter of opinion, to the common and uncontroverted principles, and in the matter of manners to the common and universall practises of Christianitie, and in both to the parties known light, is the dangerous opinion of the Arminians and Socinians, openeth a wide dore and proclaimeth libertie to all other practises and errors which are not fundamentall, and universally abhorred by all Christians, &c.

To this he answereth with complaints, and saith, that [Page 39]there is no argument here: But in this Laconick discourse there be more arguments then he seeth. The first is,

Arminians and Socinians opinions are not to be re­ceived.

But to limit Excommunication in matters of opinion, &c. is Arminians and Socinians opinions.

Ergo, It is not to be received.

The second is:

What openeth a doore, and proclaimeth libertle to all other practifes and errors, which are not funda­mentall, is not to be admitted.

But to limit Excommunication, &c. is such, Ergo, it is not to be admitted.

The third is:

An opinion universally abhorred by all Christians, is not to be received.

But to limit Excommunication, in matter of opinion to the common uncontroverted principles, and in matter of manners to the common and universall practises of Christianitle, and in both to the par­ties known light, (viz. of Nature or of Grace,) is an opinion universally abhorred by all Christians, Ergo, to limit Excommunication, &c. is not to be admitted.

4. The Doctrine that tendeth to the overthrow of the Reformed Religion, is not to be received.

But to limit excommunication, &c. tendeth to the o­verthrow of the Reformed Religion, Ergo, it is not to be received.

To these Arguments he answereth not formally, neither to the matter nor to the forme; and no wonder, for he could not observe them. Only to the end he may seeme [Page 40]not to have answer'd nothing at all, he telleth us, that Pa­gans and Infidels doe not practise: But how is that to the purpose? since in all the Commissioners Discourse there is not one word of Pagans or Infidels. 2. He answereth that Papists, Prelates, Socinians, Arminians, Brownists, and Separatists, doe not hold some common truths with Christians. But to what purpose he saith this, I know not: if it be to prove, that they may be excommunicated, we deny it not; but say, that to hold such an opinion, is Ar­minianisme, Socinianisme, &c. i. e. an Arminian or Soci­nian opinion, whereunto he answereth not. Againe, by Socinians, Arminians, &c. either he understandeth those who are not borne in the Church, and who professe not our Religion; or those who are borne in the Church, and professe our Religion: If the first, they cannot be excom­municated, since they are not, nor ever were of our com­munion: if the last, it is true, they may be excommuni­cated; but that is not the question: but whether this be not Socinianisme and Arminianisme, viz. to limit Excom­munication in matter of Opinion to the common and uncontroverted principles, and in matter of Manners to the universall practises of Christianity. Item, whether this openeth not a doore to all other errors and practises, as they say?

After this, when he can answer nothing, he returneth unto his ordinary lamentations, that they are compa­red to Infidels, &c. But the Commissioners serve not themselves of bare comparisons, as ye use to doe, but with solid Arguments, which prove you clearely what they say: neither are ye compared by them with Seperatists, but I prove you to be such, for separating your selves from the reformed Churches Sacramental communion; neither are [Page 41]ye compared with Brownists, &c. for conforming of Church Government with Scripture, as ye pretend, but for perverting of it against Scripture; wherefore all these your complaints are nothing else but calumnies, that yee cast upon the Church of Christ, evermore sophisticating with your captions of non causa ut causa, according to the ordinary custome of your Sect.

And I pray this Doctor, what if a man become brui­tish, and have the light of his understanding altogether corrupted, so as to deny that there is any sinne against the light of Nature? shall he not be excommunicated for it? shall his ignorance excuse him? is not his ignorance a sin, and especially when it is concomitant or subsequent to some other sinne or action of the will? when he has pro­cured it to himselfe, or when he used not morall diligence enough to chase it away? shall, or can the ignorance of the Law, or of his duty, which hee is bound to know, ex­cuse him, or free him from excommunication? Is not that Socinianisme, Arminianisme, judge ye Master Doctor? and answer not with complaints, & lamentable Interjecti­ons, as if you would rather be pitied then bound to prove any thing ye say; pay us not with generalities, and Indivi­duum vagums, but signatums. Answer I pray you to the point.

All the authority that this Master Doctor Well-willer can bring for himselfe, p. 11. and 12. is a Morellus, and some other excommunicated Ministers in France, which yet he hath borrowed from the cleared Reformation.

As for that which he saith, p. 13. §. 2. that a Bishop is a Presbytery contracted; and a Presbytery a Bishop diffused: 1. It is but one of the Separatists ordinary jeeres against Presbyterian Government. 2. They prove it not. 3. The [Page 42]Commissioners answer it, p. 25. 4. And if it were so, yet Presbyterian Aristocracie should bee admitted, since it is Gods ordinance, but nor Episcopacy, since it is not Gods ordinance. 5. Amongst the Helvetians, if one man should goe and contrive into his owne person all the authority, which is diffused amongst all the Rulers there, thinke you that they would endure him, or rather not put him to death, as a Tyrant and a Traytor, according to his deme­rits? The very contrivance of authority into one person, which God hath diffused in many, is unjust and tyranni­call in Gods Church.

But the Doctor objecteth, that in forbearing Excom­munication (I beleeve he understandeth the greater) they leave more to the Magistrate then the Presbyterie doth.

Answ. This the Doctor saith, but proveth it not: and therefore we deny it with the like facility that he propoun­deth it: our reason is, because when a man is excommuni­cated, the Civill Magistrate ceaseth not for all that to pu­nish him civilly: for the Presbyterie by excommunica­tion exileth or casteth him out of the Church society: not­withstanding which he remaineth in the State society: and if his sinne be against the State, and deserve it, the Magi­strate may exile him, and cast him out of the State society, or of the Kingdome, but not out of the Church, no more then the Church may cast him out of the Kingdom. As for your comparisons in saying that it is not an English heart that speaketh so, it is but a sophisticall evasion, sedi­tiously to clude their argument, whereunto you cannot bring so much as a probable solution: so you grant what they say. Neither is our dispute here about English, Scots, or French, but about Christian hearts and consciences: It is a shame to an English man to be Author of Schisme [Page 43]in his owne Country, when Strangers imploy all their endeavours for union and peace, both in Church and Common-wealth. But this I leave, and pray you to tell us what ye give more to the Civill Magistrate then we? whether it be an Ecclesiasticall or Civill power, and wherein? whether to judge in matter of Doctrine or Discipline? Remember, Sir, that in speaking of New England, P. 8. you give them nothing else but Gods word for Church Government, and the Kings patent for what they did in Policie; and tell us if ever they followed the Kings or his Councels directions in Church Policie. Item, tell us whether it is the Civill Magistrate, or the Church Officers part to erect Church Government, and to make the Lawes thereof; to judge according to the same, and to put them in execution &c?

Here he telleth us also, or objecteth, that Excommuni­cation hath need of better grounds then mens sinning of sim­plicity or ignorance.

Answ. So the ignorance of Jesus Christ, and deny­ing of his merits should not incur the sentence of Excom­munication.

Hee objecteth, that the punishment of Excommunication for small faults will make the punishment at last small in the eyes of men.

Answ. It is true, but is it the doctrine of the Reformed Churches that it should be inflicted for small faults?

But to cleare more this matter, two things are needfull to be expounded: the first is, what the Independents un­derstand by great sinnes? the second, what they under­stand by the parties knowne light: thirdly, what by Chri­stianity: fourthly, what by common received practices of Christianity: fiftly, what by the Church?

As for the first, a sinne may be great either quoad essen­tiam, [Page 44]or quoad entitatem, according to its essence or entity, or as it were its quantity. That sinne is said to be greater then another according to its essence, the species whereof degenerateth most from the divine Rule of Gods Law, such as be the sins, that are greatest in regard of their object; so it is a greater sinne to offend God then man, because it in­cludeth in it selfe a greater objective deformity, then the other. But a sinne is greater then another according to its entity or quantity, that has greater extension, intension, or duration, i. e. more parts, more degrees, and of a longer continuance then another: By extension, or more parts, I understand either objective, or formall parts, viz. when a sinne is committed against more persons as the sinne com­mitted against twenty is greater then that committed a­gainst two; or has more materiall objects, as when one stea­leth more money, viz. two pound, it is a greater finne then to steale two pence: So it is a greater sinne in respect of the formall perts, or acts wherein formally sin consifteth, if they be taken in concreto, when a man returneth oftentimes to the same sinne, as hee who stealeth ten times is a farre greater sinner, then he that stealeth but only once.

In respect of the intention or degrees of sinne, that sinne is greater then another wherein there be more degrees, as when it is committed more willingly, with greaterliberty, with greater violence, with greater knowledge; Item, by him that hath greater helpes of grace, or of nature to resist it, and to produce the opposite effects of vertue. Finally, that sin is greater then another in duration, that continueth longer: So a sin may be greater then another quoad essen­tiam, and lesse quoadentitatem, or essentially greater, but entitatively or in quantity lesse then another: and on the contrary greater then another quoad entitatem, or in regard of its quantity, but not greater essentially. For example, if a [Page 45]man sin against the precepts of the first Table, in not loving God with all his heart, & be sory therefore; and against his Father, not onely in not loving him as himselfe, but also in abusing him willingly, and offering him violence with­out any remorse of conscience, the first sinne is greater es­sentialiter, but the last is greater entitativè: so some Schoolemen say, that faith is more certaine then any natu­rall science quoad essentiam, but that naturall sciences and the habitudes of naturall principles are more certaine quoad en­titatem: and this distinction being observed, it may so fall out, that a sin that is greater essentially may not deserve Excommunication, and that which is lesse, deserve it: so that this Maxime of the Independenters will not hold u­niversally.

As for the parties known light or knowledge, it is either Speculative which of it self directeth not the will in its pra­ctises or actions, as to know that there is three Persons in the Trinity; or Practicall, which directeth the Will in its actions, in dictating unto it to doe good, and to flie evill: This is either Generall, as in generall to know that good should be done; or Particular, as when it dictates that this good should be done; and then either it is Practicall in part, or imperfect; or altogether, absolutely, and perfectly; which, when the thing that is to be done being well exa­mined according to its substance and all its circumstan­ces, it dictates, that it should be done here, in this place, by me, in this time, notwithstanding this opposition, &c. and this ordinarily in the Schooles is called cognitio practi­cè practica, a knowledge practically practicall, i.e. altogether practical. Now I desire to know of which of these severall sorts of light, or of knowledge of the Partie, this Doctor speaketh, otherwise we cannot understand him?

In the 3. and 5. difficultie, we wish that our Brethren would declare unto us, whether by Christianity and the Church they understand all those who professe, Christi­anitie in name, or those only who professe it really and in effect; and then; whether all those who hold their funda­mentalia or Essentialia only; or if they will them not to stand in meere fundamentall points, but also require that they passe unto their Superstructories, and how farre? item, that they would distinguish between their fundamen­tall and superstructory points in Doctrine and in manners; for this is the whole foundation and ground of this their debate: otherwise all that they say is but so many evasi­ons, and we cannot know wherein they dissent from us, or what they would be at. Item, whether by the word [Church] they understand any Church or multitude that layes claime to this name? or the true Church? or the pure Church? and then whether pure in their Fundamen­talia only, or also in their Superstructories?

As for the 4. Difficulty: Common received practises in Christianitie, are of as large an extent as Christianity or the Christian Church, and may signifie practises common to all Churches either nominally or really, or common to the only reall and true Christian Churches, either in fun­damentall points only, or also in Superstructories, or com­mon to all pure Churches only: The Doctor then, and his Sect, to the end they may be understood by us, whom they oppose, must clearely expound us what they meane by these words and expressions.

But to cut off all sort of Sophistication, and to bring them to the point, I will presse and urge them more close­ly in this fashion: Either our Brethren in this point about Sinne and Sinners, who are the adequate object of Excom­munication, [Page 47]agree with us, or disagree from us: if they grant the first, what needeth all this dispute and contenti­ones they fight but with their owne shadow, if the se­cond, let them shew us wherein we disagree; and either we shall give them sufficient satisfaction, or render our selves to the [...], in case we be gone astray from it.

But to generalities we cannot answer. Neither is it Christianly done by pretended Reformed and Reformers to cast such generall filthy aspersions upon all the Refor­med Churches, when as they can particularize nothing at all: The Lord lay it not unto their charge in that great day when all such captions and sophistications shall be in no request.

There be two maine objections, which ordinarily the Independents propound against the Government of all the Reformed Churches, and namely of that of Scotland. The Commissioners from pag. 2. §. 2. to the end of their Booke propound them in as great force as possibly they can have, and dissolve them both so strongly and evident­ly, that it is a wonder how this Well-willer had any sto­mach to reply. The Doctor also bringeth them from p. 14. §. 2. to the end of his booke, where he travaileth so slen­derly, to justifie them, that he seemeth willingly desirous to be condemned: onely rather then to be thought a de­sertor of the cause, he would rather answer impertinent­ly, then to quit his Brethren.

The first argument put in forme, will be thus:

Where there is or may be exhortation of partioular Churches one to another, and protestation of one against another and the withdrawing of Commu­nion one from another, (especially when the Ma­gistrate interposeth his power) there the Autho­ritative [Page 48]power of Presbyteries and Synods is not necessary.

But in the Church of God or Militant Church, there is or may be exhortation of particular Churches, &c.

Ergo, In the Church of God or Militant Church, the Authoritative power of Presbyteries and Synods is not necessary.

The Assumption is certain.

The proofe of the Connexion of the first Proposition may be thus:

Where there is a sufficient remedy, and no lesse effe­ctuall against all offences, then the Authoritative power of Presbyteries and Synods, or of Excom­munication, there an authoritative power of Pres­byteries and Synods, or of Excommunication is not necessary.

But where there is, or may be Exhortation of particu­cular Churches, &c. there is a sufficient remedy, and no lesse effectuall against all offences then the Authoritative power of Presbyteries, Synods, or of Excommunication.

Ergo, Where there is, or may be Exhortation of par­ticular Churches, &c. there is no need of the Au­thoritative power of Presbyteries, Synods, or of Excommunication.

They prove the Assumption here, for he who will or dare condemne the one, will not care for the other, unlesse the Magistrates Authoritie intervene.

Answ. The Commissioners answer 1. that this Ar­gument supposeth an extraordinary Case, which hath ne­ver fallen out in the Church of Scotland, or any other Re­formed [Page 49]Churches, except those of the Separation, who propound the Argument, viz. the pronouncing of non­communion or excommunication against a whole Church, and we hope such a case never shall fall out. Now lawes are made for cases that be ordinary, and not for these that are extraordinary.

The Doctor replies, that they speake not one word to extenuate the Authority of Synods.

Rep. But in depriving them of their Authoritative pow­er, which is their forme, they extenuate their Authority yea they destroy their essence; for without an authoritative power, they sit in quality of private persons onely, or of Ministers gathered together by chance, or otherwayes, and not in quality of Synods; or rather, as the Commissi­oners answer most judiciously and clearely, In this Exhor­tation, &c. there is no more to be found then one particu­lar member may do against another, which yet is acknow­ledged to be insufficient for removing of offences, unlesse the Authority of the Church of which both of them are members, shall intervene.

The Doctor replieth, that besides Exhortations, Prote­stations, and non-communion, they professo themselves ever to submit, and to have recourse to the Civill Magi­strate.

Inst. This profession of submission is either voluntary, de­pending of their own free will; or by necessity of obligation, whereunto they are subject by Law: If they chose the first, it is no more then a number of Watermen, Tinkers and Coblers may doe of them-selves by a particular con­vention. 2. It is not juris divini, as they pretend their Government to be, but humani, depending of their own fancy. And to professe themselves to be willing to have [Page 50]recourse to the civill Magistrate, it is not at all to the pur­pose, but most absurd: 1. for that power of the Cl­vill Magistrate is not intrinsecall, but extrinsecall unto the Church: but we speake only of the power that is intrin­secall, and proper to the Church; and so must our Brethren also, if they will speake rationally. 2. In so doing, they make the Civill Magistrate Judge of Ecclesiasticall con­troversies in Doctrine and Discipline, and Head of the Church, &c. which cannot hold when he is an Infidell, an Antichristian, &c. whereof see more in the Commissi­oners answer, and in the Observations and Annotations upon the Apologeticall Narration. 3. In so doing, ye make the Churcle power subordinate to Civill power, which cannot be, for subordination is betwixt things of the same kinde or sort; but such are not Civill and Ecclesiasticall power, which are opposite, or rather contradistinguished or differenced one from another, as things destinated to or different ends, the one spirituall, and the othertem­porall.

2. He complaineth that the Commissioners call [them] these of the Separation, unlesse withall they exprest they meant the seperation from the Prolates wayes, as Scotland and England now doe.

Answ. Yea, but they separate themselves also from the Sacramentall communion of all Christian Churches, yea of all the Reformed Churches of the world: And (if it be true, what we have read in the letters from New-England) from the communion of one Church with an­other amongst themselves.

3. He saith, that such a Case may fallout amongst us, with swasmes of Anabaptists and Antinomians.

Answ. That cannot be; for they have no Commu­nion [Page 51]with us, and therefore cannot be excommunicated by us. 2. It may easily fall out amongst you, for the Anabaptists, as we have already shewed, are your owne, and not ours.

4. He sayes, that the Commissioners suppose more in their second Answer, viz. that two or more Churches may mutually pretest and pronounce the sentence of non­communion one against another.

Answ. This Doctor is either very dull, in not concei­ving of this cleare and solid answer of the Commissioners; or else very malicious in disguising of it; for the Com­missioners argue here upon a Case, according to the Inde­pendenters Hypothesis, which cannot but be ordinary a­mongst them, according to their Discipline: and how­beit their Churches be very few, and have been a very short time in rerum natura, yet it hath fallen out amongst them in New England, and they have had the like Case in the Netherlands, according to their owne Relation: but in our way and Discipline it cannot fall out amongst us; for if two Parish Churches have any difference, they sub­mit themselves both to the Colloque, or to the Provinci­all Assembly: if two Provinciall Synods or Assemblies differ, the Nationall Assembly judgeth betwixt them both; so that this Case cannot fall out amongst us: and it is a practicall principle, that par in parem non habet im­perium, since neither of the equals are subject one to the other; and such are all Parish Churches amongst them­selves, Classes amongst themselves, and Provinciall Sy­nods amongst themselves.

The Doctor by a Doctorall power jumpeth over the 3. and 4. Answer, with this worthy and most Laconicke re­ply, viz. This same reply sarveth to year third and fourth [Page 52]answer. Which, whether it be truly said, I remit it to the Readers judgement.

The Commissioners fifth Answer is, By what probabi­lity can it be made to appeare to any rationall man, and indif­ferent minde, that no authority shall be as valid as authority against the obstinate; that via admonitionis and requisitio­nis is equall with via citationis & publiea authoritatis? There cannot bee so much as triall and examination of the offence without authority, unlesse the party bee willing to appeare: that perswasion and jurisdiction, that the deli­vering over to Satan, and thereby striking the conscience with the terrour of God by the authority of Jesus Christ, which hath the promise of a speciall and strong ratificati­on in heavn, and any other Ecclesiasticall way whatsoe­ver, which must be inferiour unto this, and depend onely upon perswasion on the one part, and free will on the o­ther, can be supposed to be like efficacious. No man will say, but in civill matters it is one thing to have adoe with our neighbour, who hath no more authority over us, then we have over him; and another thing to have to doe with civill power, which hath authority over both: this soluti­on I have written over in the Commissioners own words, because it is so significative, so strong and evident, that it dissolveth all the frivolous Replies of this good Doctor.

The Doctor hence supposeth 1. That there is no autho­rity but Scripture-authority, (by Scripture-authority I be­leeve he meaneth that instituted by Scripture, otherwaies Scripture authority is the excellency of Scripture verity, which binds us to beleeve it, because of its Author, which is God) 2. He supposes that to be most valid, that convin­ceth and conquers actus elicitos, the minde, rather then that which doth onely manacle and constraine [...]us imperatos, the [Page 53]outward carriage: then makes his quaere thus, Is the way of admonition, protestation, and non-communion no authority?

Reply. But here the Doctor is mightily mistaken, both in his Authority, and in his Actus eliciti, and Imperati. 1. For every thing that is said in Scripture, howbeit its verity be grounded on Divine Authority, yet giveth it not men an authority or authoritative power; for what authoritative power is given to man or Angel by those words, In the be­ginning God made the heaven and the earth? 2. Neither doth every admonition in Scripture made to men, arm them with authority, as that place of Saint Paul whereon the Doctor buildeth his authority, Give no offence: for it com­mandeth not an authority, or authoritative power to be ex­ercised, but an act of obedience to be practised. Item, no pub­lique power or authority, but a private duty, because it is common to all men, which cannot be said of Ecclesiasti­call authority.

Likewise that other passage, better a milstone were han­ged about ones necke, and he cast into the Sea, then to offend a weake brother. Item, that we were better not to eate flesh, then to offend, &c. All this is said by Divine Authority in re­spect of its truth, in so farre as authority signifieth an ex­cellency or dignity in this truth, for which it should be be­leeved, because of the excellency of the Author, who is God, who cannot erre, by reason of the infallibity of his knowledge, or verity; or lead others into errour, because of the goodnesse of his will, or veracity: but to say that these passages signifie any authority, whereof wee speake, i. e. either power to judge, to command, or to inflict spiri­tuall punishments, no reasonable man can thinke it, that knoweth what power or authority meaneth. 1. For the acts of power are either imperative, or executive, or some [Page 54]other like, whereof none is here expressed. 2. These sen­tences are all meerly [...]ntiative, which formally are not authoritative, or of power. 3. Authority belongeth rather adfacultatem, actum, imperantem, quam ad elicientem; as this here. 4. The acts of power perse, of themselves, be­long to the will, and not to the understanding, as these here expressed. 5. They are not expressed by Verbes of the In­dicative or Optative, but of the Imperative mood; not in this fashion, this should be done; oh, that this were done; but in this; do this: whereunto sometimes are annexed promises, in case of obedience; sometimes comminations, in case of disobedience; after which followeth the performance or execution, viz. actuall recompence, or punishment. 6. If an admonition, a protestation, or a non-communion be au­thority, then every beggar hath this authority, yea as much as all the Churches of the world, as it followeth upon the Commissioners Argument, who say, that every neigh­bour should have it who hath no more authority over us, then we over them.

The Doctor also is mightily mistaken in limiting actus imperatos to the outward carriage; for many of the acts of the minde, will, and sensitive appetite, are imperati, as when I will understand, or willingly understand, when I will my selfe to will, and in vertue of that will I will. Item, when I will apply my appetite to good, and command it to doe good. No lesse a fault is it in him to take actum elici­tum in the same latitude with the actions of the minde, for some of them are meerly eliciti, & others meerly imperati.

We grant you that to bee most valid that convinceth, and conquers actus elicitos, i. e. (as yee take it) the inward actions, rather then that which doth only manacle and con­straine actus imperatos, the outward carriage. But we deny [Page 55]you that Ecclesiasticall Discipline, much lesse your admoni­tion, &c. can doe it, for that is a work of Gods Almighty power only; hee onely who created all things, can create new hearts in us, and he onely who knoweth mens hearts can perswade them: the voice of the Minister only soun­deth externally in our cares, but Gods Spirit to the heart. Neither is it the internall, or neerest ayme of Discipline or Church Government to worke upon, or rule the mind, which is not knowne to the Church, or Church Gover­nours, but to procure the externall peace of the Church, which may be obtained, the minde remaining still uncon­vinced. Aliud est, esse bonum Christianum, aliud, bonum ci­vem in Ecclesia.

The other Objection is, That by this authority and order of Government, one Church hath power over another, which is contrary to that liberty and equality Christ bath endowed his Church with, and is no other but a new Prelaticall dominion, set over the Churches of Christ.

The Commissioners answer, denying that by their Go­vernment any particular Church can judge another; but that the whole Representative Church in vertue of its ag­gregative power judgeth of them all, which they illustrate very prettily and judiciously by examples taken from the parts of a mans body, the Members of a Parliament, and Townes and Cities. Neither is it a Prelaticall dominati­on, as they calumniate it, for that of Prelates is extrinse­call to particular Churches, as being inclosed in their Me­tropolitane Church, which is extrinsecall to the particu­lar Churches, as not compounded of any of their mem­bers per se, particularly called thereunto: but that of our Presbyteries and such like Ecclesiasticall Senates is intrin­secall to every particular Church, being compounded of [Page 56]their organicall parts, or Ministers, in vertue of their gene­rall vocation, and particular mission, admission, or electi­on particularly called thereunto. But here I pray the Reader to consider the Commissioners most cleare and judicious expressions, which being compared with this well-willers reply, will sufficiently refute all he saith.

Our Well-willer replieth: Sure your Lawes doe impose, that one Congregation shall be subject to the Elders (suppose) of twenty Congregations; And the Authority of nineteen of them is as Collaterall.

Answ. Note here fallaciam [...], a captious Argument, whereby he proves one thing for another, that which is not in question, for that which is in question: viz. an Authority that is as collaterall, in stead of an Authority that is collaterall; which is an Epidemicall sicknesse in independent Divinity.

2. I answer, that the Elders of particular Congregati­ons, who sit in Classes and Synods, may be considered two wayes: 1. Materially, as men, who are Elders: 2. Formally, in quality of Elders; and then againe, either 1. in quality of particular Elders, tied to such a particular Church, in vertue of their particular Mission, Admission, or Election, made by such a particular Church; or 2. in quality of Elders in generall, called to feed the whole Church, in vertue of their generall vocation; which againe as the Author of the Observations and Annotations told you, may either be considered in actu signato, when only it is signified to belong to their Charge, before they exercise it, or in actu exercito, when in vertue of some Mission, Ad­misson, and particular Commission they may exercise it.

If the Elders of particular Churches be considered mate­rially only, they are not so much as formally Elders: If 2. [Page 57] formally, in quality of particular Elders, tied to a particu­lar Church, they have not power to reed any Church but heir owne particular Church. And in this sense it is an untruth, that any one Congregation is subject to nineteene or twenty particular Congregations. Yea, they are so far from this disorder and confusion, that the Pastour of one Con­gregation cannot preach in another without the consent of that particular Congregation, as the Rules and Lawes of our Ecclesiasticall Discipline may [...], if they be considered. 3. In vertue of their [...]ll v [...]ion they have power to rule the Church in generall, and may actually doe it in Synods, in acta signate, if they be considered pre­cisely, before their particular mission and commission, and in actu exercito, i.e they may exercise it actually after their particular commission, their mistion from their particular Representative Church, and admission into the Repre­sentative or Collective Body or Association and Repre­sentation of many particular Churches, whether Clasicall or Synodall.

Master Well-willer replyes, that the Congregations eve­ry one chose their owne Officers to rule ever them in the Lord, but not to rule ever themselves, and others.

Answ. 1. What is Well-willer understandeth by Congregations, whether Ministers alone, of Ruling Elders alone, or both together, or men, or all men, women and children, and in a word, all the members of the Church, I know not. Neither doth hee expresse his minde upon this point. Only I must say, that being once in company with some of their Preachers; I heard some women maintaine stoutly in presence of the Minister, without any contradi­ction made by him, that women also had power in Ec­clefiasticall Assemblies to judge of Controversies of Re­ligion, [Page 58]and in matter of all Ecclesiasticall Censures.

2. I answer, it is one thing 1. to call a Church Officer to his charge, or to give him his vocation or calling: 2. a­nother to send him into the charge, or to give him his mis­sion: 3. another to admit him into the charge, and to elect him or choose him. The first is an act of the Church of­ficers who examine his life and Doctrine, and afterwards give him his Ordination, in the name of the whole Mini­stry. The second is an act of those who send him, and sometimes is done by the Ministers in a Colloque, or a Sy­nod, which give him his Ordination; as when hee is sent to feed a particular flocke; sometimes by a particular Church, as in some particular Commission to a Classe, or Synod, but in the name of the universall visible Church, as yee see in the Assembly at Antiochia, in sending some Ministers to the Assembly at Hierusalem. The third is an act sometimes of particular Churches, as in the admission and election of their owne Ministers. Sometimes of a Col­loque and Synod, as in the admission of the Members ther­of, as in that Synod at Hierusalem. And here to avoid all Sophistications of our Adversaries, note that I speak here only of the visible Church according to its visible forme, and consequently of the visible and externe Vocation, Mission, Admission, and Election of Ministers: so I say e­very Church chooses, i. e. elects its owne Ministers, but it calleth them not, nor sendeth them; It giveth them not their generall Vocation nor Mission into the Ministery, but that is an act of the whole Church, which in actu signato belongeth to the whole Church, but in actu exercito, accor­ding to the exigence of time and places to particular Mi­nisters, not in quality of Ministers of particular Congrega­tions, but of greater consociations, in a representative bo­dy [Page 59]of many particular Churches. So a Minister in a Sy­nod hath power of God by the whole visible Church to judge, rule, and feed many Churches, positis ponendio, & ut poni debent; so as nothing thereunto requisite bee want­ing, but all ordered as it should, viz. if it be by consent or election of his particular Church, and he bee admitted by the Classe or Synod whereunto he is sent, &c. as it is or­dinarily practised in our Reformed Churches.

Master Well-willer replyeth againe, That Episcopacy is as intrinsecall to particular Churches, as the Presbyteric, since Bishops are chosen by the people at their instalment, where cu­stomarily people are allowed to make any just exception.

Answ. I deny the Assumption, viz. that it is as intrin­secall, and that for the reason brought by the Commissio­ners. As for that which hee bringeth for confirmation thereof, viz. because they are chosen by the people, I an­swer 1. It is not enough they have their Election from the people, but they must also have their Vocation and Missi­on from the Church in the name and authority of Christ, which they have not according to this Well-willers owne Tenets. 2. Because the people can make no Church Of­ficer, and principally Ministers, since they have not the a­bilities to judge of their learning and gifts. 3. In choosing of an Archbishop it is not morally possible that all the peo­ple can elect him, and especially when he is a great Arch­bishop, or a Primate over a whole Kingdome, for all the people cannot well meet together. 4. And howbeit they could meet, yet could not their consent and voyces easily be gathered. 5. It were a ridiculous thing in choosing of him to seek the consent and voyces of every idle and ig­norant fellow, yea of women, that are of the people. 6. Neither is it enough to chose a Bishop, to make any just [Page 60]exception, for that is not to elect him, but to hinder his E­lection. 7. Neither is this ordinarily practised. 8. And Master Well-willer to the Bishops here confesseth in the next line, that it hath had little successe.

But Master Well-willer confirmeth it out of that ordi­nary passage of Hieronymus, To avoid Schisme one of the classicall Presbyterie was chosen to be as Chair man.

Answ. 1. Such a Bishop is not an English, or Papist Bi­shop, but a Moderator of the action, or a Master of the Chaire, which will not make up a Bishop, in so farre as a Bishop is distinguished from an ordinary Minister, for yee your selves pretend to have your Synods, which cannot be without some Moderator, President, or Master of the Chaire, and yet ye deny that ye have any Bishops, or Epi­scopall Government. 2. Neither are Bishops annually. 3. To bee short, Master Well-willer bringeth us here no reall, but imaginary Bishops, in the Kingdome of Utopia, viz. that are only Masters of the Chaire, annuall, &c. 4. I­tem, whose Chancellour, Archdeacon, &c. were Parishioners. 5. Their Chancellours are not ordinarily Ecclesiasticall, but Lay-men, as ye call them, who neverthelesse judge of all Ecclesiasticall Causes, which ye ordinarily blame. 6. Neither have they Vocation from God, as yee confesse. Neither are they chosen by all the Churches that they rule and feed, if any food they give, and feed not them­selves with the fat of the people.

You are also too bold Master Well-willer, to say that the people formerly have beene as willing they should reigne as ever any people were in your Kingdome to have the Presby­tery ever them.

Answ. We can shew you hundreds, yea thousands, who have cutled their Government both in England and in [Page 61] Ireland; and what hath been the good will of the Scots towards them, they can best tell themselves, as having felt it these foure or five yeares last past. But as for the Presbyterian Government, ye have never heard the Peo­ple murmure, much lesse rise up against it. 2. But if it be so, that ye have found them so sweet, what needed ye run away, and desert the Church here? They did compell Ministers and Churchwardens to doe many things against their conscience, and in case of refufall did ordinarily un­doe them, as we can produce many examples both in England and Ireland, yea of the Independenters them­selves, before that they spake this way, in despite of the Reformed Churches. The like of this cannot without sin­gular impudence be said to have been any where practised by any Scots Presbyterie. We grant you, that it is not the peoples consent only, but if according to the Word that makes a Government lawfull. But wherefore may not a Congre­gationall representative Church as well choose men for Classicall Assemblies, as for Synods? What pattern have you for the one rather then for the other? To all this ac­cording to your usuall custom, ye say much, but prove litle or nothing of what is in dispute betwixt us: many books ye make, but little to the purpose: And now when ye can doe no better, ye can your selves most desperately on the Bishops side, to maintain their cause, when ye are yet too weake to maintaine your own.

This Well-willer, in the end of his Booke, wishes that the Commissioners golden speech be written upon all their actions, viz. That those that are most averse to Presbyterie, if they allow no matertall difference in Doctrine, Worship, or Practice, might enjoy their peace, and all comforts of their Ministery, and Profession under it, without controllment of [Page 62]that Authoritative power which they so much apprehend.

And thereunto replieth, We have (saith he) been of late made to feare the contrary, by the reports of some (not of the meanest ranke) rf your own Nation.

Answ. No godly man, that knoweth what is Presbyte­rian Government, can doubt of it; for according to the rules thereof, 1. no man is compelled to be Actor in any thing against his own conscience. 2. If you will be under it, and allow no materiall difference, &c. without doubt the Synod and all Orthodox Churches will cherish you, and assure you of it.

But if ye wil ever live in Panick feares, and be so witty as evermore to find out new matter of jealousies to vex your own soules, and make you to live in such a perpetuall diffi­dence, all the forces of the King and his three Kingdomes is not able to hinder it; ye must trust in God, and admit of such securitie from your Brethren as morally ye can have: If this doe not the businesse, we know not what to advise you.

As for that Anonymous Country-man of ours, who he can be, and if any such be, and whether his discourse with you could give you matter of just feare, we know not, and therefore forbeare to answer: Only I wish seriously on your behalfe, ye would doe nothing against the glory of your God, the weale of your Country, or to the breach of charity with your Brethren, who so much desire to live in peace with you all. The peace of God be with you all. Amen.