the merits of the Cause he had often affirmed in his Answers That the Command of a most lawful Act was sinful if that Act commanded might prove to any one a sin per accidens This Assertion I did then and there presently and openly lay to his charge and when he denied it as it was most frequent with him immediately to deny what he had before affirmed the answers which he had delivered written with his own hand were produced and upon the reading of them the Justice of my charge was most apparent whereupon I urged him farther that this Assertion of his was not only false but destructive of all Authority Humane and Divine as not only denying all power to the Church of making Canons Ecclesiastical for the better ordering and governing of the Church but also taking away all Legislative Power from the King and Parliament and even from God himself I delivered at the same time my reason for what I said which was briefly this because there can be no Act so good of it self but may prove per Accidens or by Accident a sin And therefore if to Command an Act which may prove per accidens a sin be a sin then every Command must be a sin And if to command be a sin then certainly God can command nothing because God cannot sin and by the same reason Kings Parliaments and Churches ought not to command any thing because they ought not to sin Thus far I then charged Mr. Baxter and to this Charge he gave then no satisfaction Neither can I yet conceive it possible to give any satisfaction but by one of these two wayes either by proving that the Assertion with which I charged him was never his or by shewing that the consequence I urged is not good neither of which was he then able to do and by what he hath now been pleased to publish it is more then probable that he can never perform either of them For in his bold but weak Apology he doth not so much as pretend to shew any Invalidity in my Inference and for the Assertion with which I charged him he denies it so poorly and goes about to prove another instead of it so manifestly that he may without any injury be interpreted to yield it He saith indeed now That he told us that his Assertion made not every Evil Accident to be such as made an Imposition unlawfull But whether he ever said so before this time or no it was then clearly proved that he did assert That an Act for nothing else but because it might be per accidens a sin could not be commanded without sin And now in his publick appeal he hath taken a strange way to wipe off all this for he makes a very brief Narration and most notoriously imperfect and then sayes You know my Crime as if that were all that had been or could be objected against him Besides in the relating of this short Narrative he relies wholly upon his own memory not so much as endeavouring to satisfie himself before he presumed to satisfie others How his memory may be in other things I know not in this if it hath been faithfull to him he hath been very unfaithful to others He relates an Answer in what terms he pleaseth and brings one Proposition as made by his Opponents in what terms he thinks fit and the Application of this answer to that Proposition he propoundeth as all his Crime whereas his answer was far more largely given and that to several Propositions in several Syllogisms of which the Proposition which he relateth was but one or rather none so that he hath most shamefully abused his Disciples at Kidderminster with a short and partial Narrative of his fact As for his Concurring with Learned Reverend Brethren which he would pretend to be part of his Crime and his invidious insinuation That they are not forbidden to Preach for it though he be the reason is clear He had often delivered this Assertion before the company his Brethren had not the words of the Answer were written with his hand not with his Brethrens His Brethren had several times declared themselves not to be of his Opinion as particularly when he affirmed That a man might live without any actual sin And therefore we were so just as not to charge them with this Assertion especially considering they did shew themselves unwilling to enter upon this dispute and seemed to like much better another way tending to an amicable and fair compliance which was wholly frustrated by Mr. Baxters furious eagerness to engage in a Disputation All his discourse which followeth after his imperfect Narrative in justification of himself is grounded first upon a misreporting of his own Assertion Secondly upon the dissembling of the several Propositions to which his answer was so often applied Thirdly upon his pretending That he sayes more now than that which had offended formerly which is most palpably false and in all probability if he have any memory against his own Conscience And this will presently appear by the vanity and impertinency of all those specious instances which he brings to mollifie his Assertion To Command a Navy to Sea he sayes is lawfull but if it were foreseen that they would fall into the Enemies hand or were like to perish by any accident it were a sin to send them Is this more then he said before or is it any defence of his Assertion at all It is not certainly because the Opponents had put it expresly in the Proposition That the Act in it self lawful was to be supposed to have nothing consequent which the Commander of it ought to provide against and yet being so stated Mr. Baxter affirmed That if the Act might be per accidens sinful the Commanding of it was sin Now certainly the falling of a Navy into the Enemies hand or the perishing of it any other way if foreseen ought to be provided against by the Commander whereas Mr. Baxters answer did import That if any Prince did Command a Fleet to Sea though he did not foresee the Fleet would fall into the Enemies hand or perish any other way yet if by Accident it miscarried that or any other way which he could not foresee or were not bound to provide against the very Command at first was sin The same reason nullifies his instances of the poyson and the knife because the sin in selling them supposeth the murder of the buyer to be foreseen and consequently that the seller ought to prevent it but if he will speak in correspondence to his former Answer he must shew that though the seller do not foresee that the buyer will use the poyson or the knife to his own or any other mans destruction yet if by any Accident or mistake either the buyer or any other perish by the poyson or the knife the Seller is guilty of his death His instance of setting a City on fire or putting Gunpowder under the Parliament House when the King
this account of the cause for which I am forbidden the exercise of my Ministry in that Countrey I now direct these Sermons to your hands that seeing I cannot teach you as I would I may teach you as I can And if I much longer enjoy such Liberty as this it will be much above my expectation The Bishop of Worcester's Letter to a Friend for Vindication of himself from Mr. Baxter's Calumny SIR I Have received that Letter of yours whereby you inform me that Mr. Baxter hath lately written and printed something with such a reflection upon me that I am obliged to take notice of it I thank you for your care of my Reputation which next to Conscience ought to be the dearest of all things to all men especially to men of my Profession and Order who the more they are vilified whether justly or unjustly the less good they will be able to do especially amongst those that have industriously been prepossessed with prejudice either against their Persons or their Functions This was St. Pauls Case when there were some that did what they could to make the Corinthians to undervalue his person that thereby they might discredit his Doctrine and weaken his Authority whom therefore he thinks he may without breach of Charity call False Apostles and Deceitful Workers Nay this was our Saviours own Case who whilest he lived here upon the Earth was ever and anon traduced and slandred by the Scribes and Pharisees those proud Hypocrites who were the greatest pretenders to holiness and yet the greatest seducers of the people and the grossest falsifyers of Gods Word that ever were in the world until these our times which have brought forth a generation of men St. Johnaptist would have called them a Generation of Vipers who in the Art of holy jugling and malicious slandring have out-done the Pharisees themselves and all that went before them witness their so often wresting and perverting the Scripture in their Sermons to stir up the people to Sedition and their as often Libelling the King in their Prayers in order to the making of his Subjects first to hate him then to fight against him and at last to take away his Crown and his Life from him And is it any wonder that those that are such Enemies to Kings should not be friends to Bishops or that one who hath done what he could to make the late King odious unto his People should do what he can likewise to make the Pastor odious unto his Flock to his Flock I say For it is the Bishop of Worcester and not Mr. Baxter that is Pastor of Kidderminster as well as of all other Parochial Churches in that Diocess neither did I or any other Bishop of Worcester ever commit the Care of Souls in that or any other Parish of that Diocess to Mr Baxter though by that Preface of his to those of Kidderminster he would make the world believe that they were his Flock and not mine and that therefore he hath the more reason to complain of my defamation of him as he calls it in that place and before that people whereas the truth is that Mr. Baxter was never either Parson Vicar or Curate there or any where else in my Diocess for he never came in by the Door that is by any legal right or lawful admission into that Sheepfold but climbed up some other way namely by violence and intrusion and therefore by Christs own inference he was a Thief and a Robber and indeed he did Rob him that was then and is now again the lawful Vicar of that Church he Robbed him I say first of his Reputation amongst his Flock and then of his means and maintenance by taking away the Fleece as well as the Flock from him though as Mr. Baxter himself hath confessed to me He be a man of an unblamable life and conversation though not of such parts said Mr. Baxter as are fit to qualifie him for the Cure of so great a Congregation which whether it were so or no I am sure Mr. Baxter was not to be the Judge but in that Case the Bishop that was then living should and would have provided him a Coadjutor as I have done since and such an one as I hope will feed that flock with much more wholsome Doctrine then Mr. Baxter did when he sowed the seed of Schism and Sedition and blew the Trumpet of Rebellion amongst them For which cause I thought it my Duty as being their Pastor in Chief not onely to forbid Mr. Baxter to Preach there any more which by the way he had done without my License but likewise to Preach there my self and to do what I could to undeceive that poor seduced and miserably deluded people which was not to be done as long as they had the person of their Seducer in so great admiration and therefore by the example of St. Paul who in order to the same end did take the same course with Alexander the Copper-smith with Demas Philetus and Hymeneus as likewise by the example of Christ himself who in order to the same end did take the same course with the Scribes and Pharisees I thought it necessary to let them know that one that was of great authority amongst them meaning indeed though not naming Mr. Baxter was not the man they took him for that he had not dealt faithfully with them nor preached the word of God sincerely to them when he made them believe it was lawful for them to take up Arms against the King nor in suffering if not making them to scruple at these things as unlawful which he himself confesses to be lawfull and afterwards making use of those scruples of theirs which he himself had infused into them or not endeavoured to take from them as the only argument why those things they did so scruple at should not be enjoyn'd by lawful Authority though lawful in themselves because forsooth the enjoyning of things lawful by lawful Authority if they may by Accident be the occasion of sin is sinful which assertion of his as I then said and must still maintain is destructive of humane society in taking away the Authority of Commanding and the obligation of obeying together with the whole Legislative power Civil as well as Ecclesiastical and Divine as well as Humane And thus much as Mr. Baxter himself saith I told him before in mine own house neither did he then deny the assertion or endeavour to disprove what I inferr'd from it by any of those distinctions or instances he now useth And that this is true the Reverend Dr. VVarmstry now Dean of Worcester will witness for me whom I desired to be by whilest I conferr'd with Mr. Baxter foreseeing what misreport a man of Mr. Baxters principles and temper was like enough to make of what should pass betwixt us And it was very well I did so for I find that the Presbyter aswell as the Papist will serve themselves as often as they are put to it of
otherwise in point of gesture then perhaps it was received at the first institution so Christ and his Apostles conforming themselves to the order and practise of the Church of their times did celebrate the Passeover otherwise then according to the first Institution it was to be celebrated in point of gesture also thereby perhaps intending to teach us that as long as the Essentials of Doctrine and worship which are unalterable are preserved we are not to separate from the Church or quarrel with our Superiours if those things that are in their own nature alterable be not alwayes and in all places just the same that they were at first because there may be very just cause for the alteration of them and whether there be such a cause or no in this and the like particulars it is the Church that is to be the Judge So that there is nothing that can be collected either from the Canons of the Councels or from the practise of the Primitive Church no nor from Christs own example that can prove kneeling at the Sacrament to be a sin neither doth Mr. Baxter himself believe it to be sinful for if he did he would not say as he does Pag. 411. of his five Disputations that he himself would kneel rather then disturb the peace of the Church or be deprived of its Communion In which words he confesseth First that Kneeling at the Sacrament is not sinful or unlawful Secondly that not to Kneel when it is imposed is to disturb the Peace of the Church and Thirdly that the imposing of it upon penalty of being deprived of the Communin is an effectual means to make those that otherwise would not kneel to conform to it and consequently that the imposing of it upon such a penalty is prudent and rational and whatsoever is prudent and rational cannot be unlawful so that not onely the Act of Kneeling it self but the imposition of it by lawful Authority must needs be lawful Neither indeed would the People scruple at the imposition if they had not been taught that the thing it self were unlawful or if Mr Baxter would yet teach them to believe what he himself believes namely that it is lawful which with what conscience he can refuse to do I know not for sure he is obliged to teach them obedienâ—e not to Divine Authority only but to humane authority also in all lawful things and not to let them go on in such an erroneous opinion as will disturb the Peace and deprive them of the Communion of the Church and consequently make them sin against God and man and their own Souls Of which sin of theirs he must needs be a partaker in a great measure if he do not perswade them from it seeing as he himself saith Qui non vetat peccare cum potest jubet And what Power he hath to lead or mislead those kind of men their venturing to kill and be killed in a most unrighteous quarrel upon his perswasion hath more then enough demonstrated during the time of the late troubles unlesse he will say that he hath conjured up a Spirit that he cannot lay Howsoever by how much the more fault he hath been in misleading them heretofore by so much the more zealous he should be to reduce them into the right way hereafter which if he and the rest of his Brethren can do as I am confident they can if they will they will make some amends for the mischief they have done and then there will be no fear or danger of Ministers being Ejected for their tenderness towards the People nor of the Ejecting of any of the People from the Communio of the Church for not conforming themselves to the Orders and Commands of it and consequently there will be no Schisms or Divisions amongst us when we shall all worship the same God the same way But if they will not do this which by all obligations humane and Divine they are bound to do for my part I know no better way for undeceiving and reducing of the People then by removing such Ministers and then we shall see when the blowing of those boisterous winds ceaseth whether the waves will not be still or no In the mean time I hope the removing of erroneous and seditious will not necessitate the introducing of ignorant and scaâ—dalous Ministers though Mr. Baxter ought to remember that as there is no sin more heinous then Rebellion so no teacher ought to be more scandalous I am sure there is none more dangerous then a teacher of Rebellion And now to use Mr. Baxters own words I think there is no man to be found on earth that hath the ordinary reason of a Man but will confess That it is indeed destructive of all Government and Legislative power to Assert as Mr. Baxter did Assert the command of a thing in it self lawful by lawful Authority under no unjust punishment with no evil circumstance which the Commander can foresee or ought to provide against for all these pre-cautions were expesly put in the proposition which Mr. Baxter denied is a sinful Command for no other reason but because the Act Commanded may be by Accident a sin Let Mr. Baxter then know and if he have ingenuity enough confess that the words I spoke as to this particular were words of truth and words of charity also as being intended and spoken to no other end but to undeceive that People who by having his person too much in admiration as if he could neither deceive nor be deceived had been so long and so dangerously mislâ—ad by him so that it was not I that defamed him then but it is he that hath defamed me now Neither could I expect less from the boldness of this man and that Party who have had the confidence publickly to own the obligation of the Covenant even since it hath been condemned to be burnt by the Parliament And truely I see no reason why all those Books and Sermons which have been Preach'd and Printed in defence of the Covenant or to maintain the same or worse principles of Sedition then are in the Covenant should not be burnt also Nay I dare be bold to say that if the Authors of such Books and Sermons were not still of the same opinions and if they be God deliver us from such Preachers if they were not still I say of the same opinions but did truely repent of them and were heartly sorry for the horrible mischief they have done by them they would with those converted Exorcists Act. 19.19 bring all those Conjuring Books of theirs together and to save the Hang-man a labour would publickly burn them all with their own hands that so though by the burning of their works they may perhaps suffer some loss in point of reputation with some of their Disciples yet they themselves may be saved but so as by fire 1 Cor. 3.15 At least they ought to be enjoyned to write Books of Retractation as St. Augustine did having much
enough as joyned to Gods Laws to oblige us to consent and obey him as our Governour Thes. 153. XII When God doth not notably declare any person or persons qualified above others there the people must judge as well as they are able according to Gods general rules Thes. 157. XIII And yet All the people have not this right of choosing their Governours but commonly a part of every Nation must be compelled to consent c. XIV Those that are known enemies of the Common Good in the chiefest parts of it are unmeet to Govern or choose Governours but such are multitudes of ungodly vicious men Pag. 174. So that if those that are strongest though fewest call themselves the Godly Party all others besides themselves are to be excluded from Governing or choosing of Governours And amongst the ungodly that are to be thus excluded he reckons all those that will not hearken to their Pastors he means the Presbyterian Classis or that are despisers of the Lords-Day that is all such as are not Sabbatarians or will not keep the Lords-Day after the Jewish manner which they prescribe and which is condemned for Judaism by all even of the Presbyterian perswasion in the world but those of England and Scotland only XV. If a People that by Oath and Duty are obliged to a Soveraign shall sinfully dispossess him and contrary to their Covenants choose and Covenant with another they may be obliged by their latter Covenant notwithstanding their former and particular subjects that consented not in the breaking of their former Covenants may yet be obliged by occasion of their latter choice to the person whom they choose Thes. 181. XVI If a Nation injuriously deprive themselves of a worthy Prince the hurt will be their own and they punish themselves but if it be necessarily to their welfare it is no injury to him But a King that by war will seek reparations from the body of the People doth put himself into an hostile State and tells them actually that he looks to his own good more then theirs and bids them take him for their Enemy and so defend themselves if they can Pag. 424. XVII Though a Nation wrong their King and so quoad Meritum causae they are on the worser side yet may he not lawfully war against the publick good on that account nor any help him in such a war because propter finem he hath the worser cause Thes. 352. And yet as he tels us pag. 476. we were to believe the Parliaments Declarations and professions which they made that the war which they raised was not against the King either in respect of his Authority or of his Person but only against Delinquent Subjects and yet they actually fought against the King in person and we are to believe saith Mr. Baxter pag. 422. that men would kill them whom they fight against Mr. Baxter's Doctrine concerning the Government of England in particular HE denies the government of England to be Monarchical in these words I. The real Soveraignty here amongst us was in King Lords and Commons Pag. 72. II. As to them that argue from the Oath of Supremacy and the title given the King I refer them saith Mr. Baxter to Mr. Lawson's answer to Hobb's Politicks where he sheweth that the Title is often given to the single Person for the honour of the Commonwealth and his encouragement because he hath an eminent interest but will not prove the whole Soveraignty to be in him and the Oath excludeth all others from without not those whose interest is implied as conjunct with his The eminent dignity and interest of the King above others allowed the name of a Monarchy or Kingdome to the Commonwealth though indeed the Soveraignty was mix'd in the hands of the Lords and Commons Pag. 88. III. He calls it a false supposition 1. That the Soveraign power was only in the King and so that it was an absolute Monarchy 2. That the Parliament had but only the proposing of Lawes and that they were Enacted only by the Kings Authority upon their request 3. That the power of Armes and of War and Peace was in the King alone And therefore saith he those that argue from these false suppositions conclude that the Parliament being Subjects may not take up Arms without him and that it is Rebellion to resist him and most of this they gather from the Oath of Supremacy and from the Parliaments calling of themselves his Subjects but their grounds saith he are sandy and their superstructure false Pag. 459 460. And therefore Mr. Baxter tells us that though the Parliament are Subjects in one capacity yet have they their part in the Soveraignty also in their higher capacity Ibid. And upon this false and trayterous supposition he endeavours to justifie the late Rebellion and his own more then ordinary activeness in it For IV. Where the Soveraignty saith he is distributed into several hands as the Kings and Parliaments and the King invades the others part they may lawfully defend their own by war and the Subject lawfully assist them yea though the power of the Militia be expresly given to the King unless it be also exprest that it shall not be in the other Thes. 363. The conclusion saith he needs no proof because Soveraignty as such hath the power of Arms and of the Laws themselves The Law that saith the King shall have the Militia supposeth it to be against Enemies and not against the Common-wealth nor them that have part of the Soveraignty with him To resist him here is not to resist power but usurpation and private will in such a case the Parliament is no more to be resisted then he Ibid. V. If the King raise Warre against such a Parliament upon their Declaration of the dangers of the Common-wealth the people are to take it as raised against the Common-wealth Thes. 358. And in that case saith he the King may not only be resisted but ceaseth to be a King and entreth into a state of Warre with the people Thes. 368. VI. Again if a Prince that hath not the whole Soveraignty be conquered by a Senate that hath the other part and that in a just defensive Warre that Senate cannot assume the whole Soveraignty but supposeth that government in specie to remain and therefore another King must be chosen if the former be incapable Thes. 374. as he tells us he is by ceasing to be King in the immediately precedent Thes. VII And yet in the Preface to this Book he tells us that the King withdrawing so he calls the murdering of one King and the casting off of another the Lords and Commons ruled alone was not this to change the species of the Government Which in the immediate words before he had affirmed to be in King Lords and Commons which constitution saith he we were sworn and sworn and sworn again to be faithful to and to defend And yet speaking of that Parliament which contrary to their