go to seek him in another Parish where he dwells when ever we need a Pastor's Councel were he at Leisure and willing he could not have time to speak to one of an Hundred that might at once wait to speak with him So that we have none of this necessary Pastoral Help when we greatly need it Yea not the Sixth or Tenth Part of the Parish can come to Hear him in the Church And when We that most desire it get in it troubleth us to think that we thereby keep out those that least desire it but most need it who knowing the Difficulty of getting Room do stay at Home and never seek it So that Five Parts of Six of our Neighbours use not to go to any Church at all no more than Infidels And if in pity we perswade them to go to any Nonconformist's Meeting they say the Clergy will Damn them as Schismaticks The Question now is Whether Ten Thousand or Twenty Thousand in a Parish are bound to live without all Private Pastoral Help and Councel yea and to forbear all Publick Worshipping of God and Hearing of his Word And if they seek Relief of Nonconforming Ministers Publickly and Privately Whether it be Sinful Separation If Men can spare the Ministry Why are they Maintained If they are needful for the Safety of Mens Souls Must so many Thousands hazard their Souls for want of needful Help lest they be called Separatists If the Dean of St. Pauls be called the Parson of the Parish and Preach to others that can Hear him Will that serve the Needs of all the rest XX. In Moscovie where a Christian Prince and the Laws forbid all Preaching and Publick Worship save the Reading of Homilies and Liturgies Is it Separation and Sinful Schism to Disobey this and otherwise to Preach and Worship God XXI Is it Schism in France and such other Countries for the Protestants to Meet to Preach and Worship God against the Wills of the King and Bishops It 's true that great Sin is necessarily thus avoided by them which are not Imposed upon us But if it prove that any Sin is made necessary to Communion the Degree will not much vary the Case as to the Point of Separation XXII In divers Countries the Prince is of one Religion or Mode of Religion and the Bishops of another The Question is Who are the Schismaticks the People that in their Assemblies and Mode of Worship do â—ollow the Prince or they that follow the Bishops Some great Writers for Conformity tell me That if the King Command one Liturgy Translation Version Ceremony c. and the Bishop another I must obey the Bishop before the King Others say I must Obey the King before the Bishop of which before Bishop Goodman of Glocester a Papist complaineth of the King that would not consent that Clergy-Men should be Chancellours And I speak with no Bishop that disowneth not Lay-Chancellours Use of the Keys The Helvetian Magistrates are Erastians against the Clergies Power of Excommunication Many of the Pastors are of the Contrary Judgment The Duke of Brandenburgh is a Calvinist His Bishops and Clergy are Lutherans Which Party are the Schismatick XXIII Were all those Separating Schismaticks who from the Apostles Dayes did Meet Preach and Worship God against the Will and Laws of Princes sometimes of Heathen Princes and sometimes of Christians Constantine Valens Theodosius the Second Anastasius Zeno Justinian c. If so most Christian Bishops have been such Separatists I have in my First Plea and my Church-History given Instances enough XXIV Is it Schism or Sinful Separation to Disobey a Command about Religion which no Man hath true Authority to Give Authority is the Objectum Formale of Obedience and where there is no Authority there is no Disobedience in a formal Sense or privative Most Politicks say That Princes have no Authority against the Common Good All Power of Princes and Pastors is of God and is for Edification and not for Destruction God giveth no Power against Himself or his Laws nor the Souls of Men. If the King should Command me to Marry a Wife whom I know to be intolerably unmeet for me or to Feed my self and Family with Food which I find to be against our Health or to use a Physician whose Ignorance or Negligence or Untrustiness would endanger my Life I am not bound to Obey him both because it is a Matter that is without the Verge of his Governing Authority and because it is against the End of Government Regal Power destroyeth not Family-Power nor Personal Interest and Self-Government No Man hath Power to Destroy or Endanger the Souls of Men nor forbid them seeking their own Edification and Salvation I Repeat Bishop Bilson's Words p. 236. of Subjection Princes have no Right to Call or Confirm Preachers but to Receive such as be Sent of God and give them Liberty for their Preaching and Security for their Persons And if Princes Refuse so to do God's Labourers must go forward with that which is Commanded them from Heaven Not by Disturbing Princes from their Thrones nor Invading their Realms as your Father doth and defendeth he may do but by mildly Submitting themselves to the Powers on Earth and meekly Suffering for the Defence of the Truth what they shall Inflict Pag. 399. The Election of Bishops in those Dayes belonged to the People and not to the Prince And though by plain Force he placed Lucius there yet might the People lawfully Reject him as no Bishop and cleave to Peter their Right Pastor On this I further ask XXV If the Nonconforming People can prove That notwithstanding the times of Civil Usurpation and Bishops Removal their Pastors had a Lawful Call and title to their Office over them and they were truly obliged to them as in that just Relation Whether the Magistrates or Bishops Acts have made those Relations and Obligations Null That the Temples and Tythes are in the Magistrates Power we doubt not But more than Bishop Bilson even many Councils deny it of the Office and Pastoral Relation Yea the Universal Church was of the same mind And if so how prove you e. g. that the Relation of the Ejected London Ministers and their Flocks was Dissolved and that the Succeeders were true Pastors to the Non-consenting Flocks XXVI That there are Alas Multitudes of Young Raw Injudicious besides Scandalous Priests no Man can deny that knoweth England and hath any Modesty If then honest People that are not willing to be Damned shall say We best know what is suitable to our Needs and what Teachers profit us and what not And we find that some are so Ignorant that they are unmeet as Plowmen to resolve the most concerning Cases of Conscience and their Conversation savoureth not of any serious belief of Christianity and the World to come and they do but Read a few dry words like School-Boyes saying a Weak Oration without Life or Seriousness and we can but little profit by them How prove you
Worship to all save a few thousands Is Authority vain unless all the rest turn like to Atheists No good Christian should obey the Popes Interdicts of whole Kingdoms though he had as much Authority as the King A power to damn souls is a frightful word 2. Either the supposition that it is unjust is true or false If false it will not justifie their Preaching If true either his Preaching is necessary or unnecessary If it be necessary we must obey God and disobey man as Grosthead saith by an obedient disobedience If it be unnecessary though the Magistrate sin I must forbear there and go to some place where I may preach without doing more hurt than good So that Controversieâ—ieth â—ieth but in this Whether the Preaching of the 2000 silenced Ministers was unnecessary and tended to do more hurt than good And this is all that Mr. Rathband or any sober Nonconformist meant And this is plain truth though the best of your Hearers and Readers or your self contradict it § 15. And whereas you say This I am certain is contrary to the Doctrine of all the Nonconformists of former times your Assertion is so rash and false in matters of notorious Fact that it weakneth my reverence of your Judgment change his dwelling And in London Lodgers may change frequently If I know those called Puritans better than you I must profess that I believe of the two it is more the Preacher and his Preaching which maketh the difference with them than the Liturgie For my part I seldom hear any but very good well studied Sermons in the Parish Churches in London where I have been But most of them are more sitted to well bred Schollars or judicious hearers than to such as need more Practical Subjects and a more plain familiar easie mode And it is not your Reasoning that will bring all Appetites to the same Food nor make the same Books serve every form I have always found that such conformable Preachers as were Mr. Bolton Mr. Fenner Mr. Whately Bishop Vsher c. Were flockt after by those called Puritans as much as the Non-conformists But when they find all together 1. That the worship and the preaching is more suitable to their good 2. And that their Souls have need of much other Pastoral help than publick 3. And doubt of the calling of obtruded men no wonder if they prefer the other § 10. But you lay the stress on the Prohibition of the Law which the greatness or smallness of the Parish doth not make more or less Lawful Ans God hath commanded all Christians ordinarily to Learn and Worship him under the Conduct of his Institution all Christians grant this No man hath Power to forbid this All Law that forbiddeth it is of no Obligation In a Parish where 10000 20000 40000 cannot come within the Church to hear if they have no other place to go to they must forbear all publick Learning and Worship So that the English of your Words is that if the Law forbid the most of the People all Publick Learning and worship of God it is there as unlawful for any to Congregate against that Law as where there is no such need But 1. I again tell you Councils Doctors and the Universal Church thought otherwise and abhor'd this Doctrine 2. Why will you not give us one word of proof but your naked Authority to prove such Authority in the Magistrate and to satifie us what Rulers have it and how far it reacheth Hath the King enabled Justices to depose him or cast down his Honour or Prerogative Hath God given Magistrates Authority to damn as many Souls as they will by keeping them from the means of knowledge Faith and Holiness and to forbid his Subjects to Worship God Did Robert Grosthead of Lincoln take this to be the greatest Sin save Antichrists and do you take it for an Act Authoriz'd Is it unlawful to preach when forbidden or worship God when forbidden at Japon Indostan China Turkie France c. or only in England and where § 11. Yet do you conclude I wonder a person of your sagacity should think to satisfie your self or others by such slight evasions as these which scarce any of my Auditors or Readers how mean so ever their Capacities were but could discern the weakness of them Answ 1. O pity then the frailty of human understanding I get nothing by it if I err but my great labour and the hazard of my Salvation by Sin It must needs be then against my will and is none of my size to be endured How few Congregations are so happy as yours if all your Auditors are so much wiser but 1. Be the thousands of your Parish as wise that hear you not 2. How come some that I thought the wisest that I know of your Auditors to say as I say and lament your Case Reader you see here that it must be somewhat better than the confidence of Teachers that must guide and secure the peoples Faith This Reverend Man you see is most confident of the strength of his Reasons and the slightness of mine And I am so far past doubt on the other side as that I think he overthroweth all Religion and seteth up Man in open Rebellion against God He may as well wonder that I take any thing to be of Divine command If all Publick Worship is sinful when forbidden all Private may be so too Daniel may go to the Lyons The Martyrs Fathers Councils the Universal Church are all foolisher than the meanest of his Auditors It 's strange that he can be sure Gods Word is true and yet be so sure that Mens Laws are above it and may suspend it when yet Mens Laws have no more strength than Gods Laws give them 1. I believe that the spirit of God hath said Forsake not the assembling of your selves together know them that labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you and esteem them very highly in Love for their work sake 1 Thess 5. 12. 13. That have spoken to you the word of God that watch for your Souls Heb. 13. 17 24. How shall they hear without a Preacher c. Rom. 10. 2. I believe that where the Gospel is hid it is hid to them that are lost And without knowledge the Heart is not good and without Faith there is no Salvation and that it is Life Eternal to know God in Christ 3. Therefore they that forbid Men to hear and worship God Publickly forbid what God commandeth and what is ordinarily needful to Salvation 4. I believe that God is Almighty the highest Universal King and we are all his Subjects and the Scripture is his Law 5. I believe that there is no Power but from him and that he hath given none against him or his Laws nor above him and that Man is not God and that we must obey God rather than Man when they Contradict 6. I believe that we must Love Fear and Serve God
or Humane Law is not necessary to the being or Government of a Church nor is it necessary that it be National And do you think that the Greek Churches have not Power to govern and reform themselves though they be not a National Church Why did Paul write to Corinth as Clemens also did and to the Galatians c. and John to Ephesus and the other six Rev. 2 3. to reform themselves if they had not Power to do it But if all the Christians under the Turk be one National Church then it is either because they have one Civil Head or one Ecclesiastical Head Not the latter for they have none such though the Bishops of Constantinople have some Primacy by their old Canons and Customs Not the former for an Infidel cannot be an essential part of a Christian Church as a constitutive Head is § 19. And the Churches in the Roman Empire before Constantine were true Churches of Christ's Institution and they had power to govern and reform themselves and yet they had no humane Constitutive Head Regal or Sacerdotal though they had a Civil Heathen Governour which was an extrinsick accidental Head It is so contrary to all Sence and Religion that either a Man as a Man or a Family or a Church as such should have no power to govern and reform it self that I must needs judg that while you speak confusedly you meant only a Regal or Supreme Civil Power which yet is totâ specie distinct from that which is properly Ecclesiastical § 20. Serm. p. 17. And so the several Churches of the Lydian or Proconsular Asia if they had been united in one Kingdom and governed by the same Authority under the same Rules might have been truly called the Lydian Church Answ 1. And is the Controversy de nomine Whether they might be called the Lydian Church when we expected a satisfactory explication de re No doubt but a Church is so equivocal a word that many sort of Assemblies or Societies may be so called I have told you of divers Sences in which we are called a Church National first Plea pag. 251 c. Either a Christian Kingdom or else the Churches of a Heathen or a Christian King as associated by agreement may be called a National Church 2. What if they be united in one Kingdom of a Heathen Mahometan or Arrian King and governed by his Regal Authority under the same Rules which he sets them Is this it that you mean in your Description A King as such is not an Ecclesiastick Person and therefore is not an essential part of a Church unless as it is equivocally so called And is it his Civil Laws for Church-Government that you mean or the Clergies Canons or God's Laws The Greeks under the Turk are under one Prince and governed by the same Civil Authority and Laws and also are under one Patriarch and by the Princes toleration are governed by the Ecclesiastick Authority and Laws of another Species If you confound these two Species or tell us not which you mean in your Definition it tendeth not to Edification 3. And what if they be under divers Kings as the Bulgarians and Greeks were and yet ruled by one Ecclesiastick Authority and Law why may not they also be called One Church as the Moscovites are now called part of the Greek Church 4. And why might it not be called the Lydian Church while it was a part of the Empire as the African and other Countries were But what is all this de nomine to the Controversy All grant that the Civil Power must be obeyed in their place and the Church-power in theirs 5. But here you grant that they are several Churches before their Union in one Kingdom And I suppose they were Churches 1. of another species than the National described by you 2. and were of Divine Institution 3. and continue so after their Union in one Kingdom 4. and have power to govern and reform themselves still though not Regal power § 21. Serm. Just as several Families united make one Kingdom which at first had a distinct and independent power but it would make strange confusion in the World to reduce Kingdoms back again to Families because at first they were made up of them Answ And are they not several Families still and have they not still a distinct Family-power to govern and reform themselves tho not a Regal Power Doth making a City or Kingdom dissolve Families You cannot mean it What mean you then by reducing these Kingdoms back to Families when they are Families still Had you said that dissolving Kingdoms or Cities and reducing them to be only Families is confusion it 's undeniable But still as Families in a Kingdom retain Family-power so particular Churches in a Kingdom retain the Church-power which God by his Institution gave them And this is that we desire § 22. Serm. Thus National Churches are National Societies of Christians under the same Laws of Government and Rules of Worship Ans 1. All Christians are under the same Divine Laws and Rules 2. Some Princes make no Church-Laws to Christians but their Civil Laws for the common Peace And some make various Laws for various sorts of Christians under them § 23. Serm. For the true Notion of a Church is no more than a Society of Men united together for their Order and Government according to the Rules of the Christian Religion Ans 1. There be many true Notions of such an equivocal word as a Church is 2. The Generical Notion sure is not enough for the definition of each species There must be more The Universal Church is a Society of Men so united and so may the Churches of divers Kingdoms and so is a Christian Kingdom as such and so is a Provincial Church and a Diocesan Church and a particular Parochial Church yet all these are not of the same species for they have different terminos in specie 3. This is a very defective Definition where 1. Men are made the qualified Subject when it should have been Christians 2. The two constitutive essential Relations of Pastor and Flock are not mentioned as if a Kingdom were defined without the mention of King and Subjects 3. They are said to be united in general without telling us what uniting is meant whether only by force command or consent whereas most take even the Mode of Investiture Baptism as well as Consent to be necessary ad esse as to the Visible Church 4. It is said they are united for Order and Government as if these were but the Terminus and so may those by agreement de futuro that yet have no Government whereas the Government is the constitutive Form 5. This Definition leaving out the specifick Form and Terminus maketh an Army a Navy a Ship a company of Christian Merchants or Corporation c. to be a Church For all these may be Societies of Men united together for their Order and Government according to the Rules of the
that it is lawful for such to use more suitable helps though Men forbid it A Soul is precious God Worketh by Means and according to the suitableness of Means That agreeth not to some which others can make shift with Two or Three words from a Conformest that saith God can Bless the weakest Means to you or the Fault is in your self will not serve instead of needful Helps The King or Bishop have not Authority to Tie a Sick Man to Eat that which he cannot Digest or Hurteth him Every Man is neerliest concerned for his own Soul and most Entrusted with it Parish-Order it self is but a humane alterable Circumstance which I am not bound to observe at the hazard of my Edification and Salvation XXVII What if the Magistrate grant a Toleration of divers Modes of Worship as the French and Dutch Churches are here Tolerated and many in Holland and in many other Countries Are these separating Schismaticks that differ from each other If so it is not because they disobey the Magistrate for he Tolerateth them all If not then meer diversity of Modes of Worship maketh not Schismaticks XXVIII If it be no true Political Church in the strict sense as an Organized Society which hath not true Authorized Pastors and if any Parish have either Vncapable Persons or such as were never Consented to by the Flocks and so have no True Pastor and if the Bishops hold That Parishes are not proper Political Churches but parts of Churches having no Pastors that have the Power of the Keyes or the whole Essence of the Pastoral Office but only Half-Pastors that want an Essential Part of the Power If on any such Account any Parishes are no true Pastoral Churches Qu. Whether to Separate from such a Parish be to Separate from a Church in the sense in question XXIX The mutual Condemnations in the times of the Novations Donatists Nestorians Evtychians Monothelites Phantasiasts Image-Patrons c. tell the World how needful mutual forbearance is to prevent worse Divisions and Confusions And the Papists take themselves to be all of one Church though they differ even in Doctrines of Morality as dangerously as the Jansenists against the Jesuits have shewed and though many Sects and Orders be permitted to Live and Worship God with very great diversity in their several sorts of Monasteries Why then should the little differences of our questioned Assemblies be thought to be so great as maketh us not to be of one Church XXX Some good Christians think That though an undisciplined Church may be Communicated with occasionally yea and constantly while there is a hopeful Tryal of its Reformation yet when there is no hope after Patient Tâ—yal a better Course and Communion should be chosen where it may be had And they think that Multitudes whom they know to be prophane Swearers Cursers Drunkards Fornicators Haters of serious Piety Hobbists Infidels Atheists Sadduces c. are continued in the Church of England And they say they scarce ever heard one Man of all these Excommunicated nor one Man of them all ever brought to Publick Confession and Repentance And they think Lay Chancellours having not rightfully the Power of the Keys there is no ordinary Means of hopeful Reformation and Exercise of Discipline especially the Largeness of the Diocesses making it impossible to be used to One of an Hundred that according to the Law of Christ it should be used on And they think That the Church-Discipline is not only None as to the Right Use and made Impossible but worse than None while it is used most to Excommunicate from Christ's Church the True and Conscionable Members of Christ that dare not Conform and so to lead to their Imprisonment and utter Ruin And they think That no Man hath true Authority to confine them to such an Undisciplined and Illdisciplined Church and forbid them the Use of better where Christ's Discipline may be used Whether these Men be in the Right or in the Wrong if the Matter of Fact be true I should desire rather the Reformation of such a Church than the Reproach or Afflicting of Men as Separatists and Schismaticks that choose another sort of Communion as to their more Ordinary Practise not denying this to be a true Diseased Church And so much in these Thirty Instances about that which I think deserveth not the Reproach of any dangerous Separation I told you Thirty Instances also of Unlawful Separation which I named And now you may judge whether you spake to Edification when you said That the People are Condemned by their own Teachers without telling whom and for what and how far they Condemn them and how far not § 34. And Did you think the Consequence good That because we think it Lawful to Hear you yea and to many a Duty therefore we Condemn them for Hearing any one else that Conformeth not As if they that have Communion with your Diocesan-Church must have Communion with no other So far am I from your Opinion that I take it to be wofully Separating and Schismatical And will never be a Member of a Particular Church which will forbid me Communion with all others that differ from them yea that doth not hold its Communion in Unity with all the True Christian Churches on Earth Though a Schismatical Disputer for Prelacy tells me That though I Communicate with the Church of England I am a Schismatick for Communicating with Nonconformists who saith he are Schismaticks But he that will Communicate with no Church that hath any Guilt of Schism when the Christian VVorld is broken into so many Sects I doubt will be the greatest Schismatick and will Communicate with few on Earth And as Smith Baptized himself not liking any other Baptism this Man may become a Church to himself And indeed the word Condemn them sounds Harsh when it signifieth no more than that we Judge them to be Mistaken and Culpable If I Condemn every Man or every Church which I judge to be Sinners I must Condemn all Mankind I use not so harsh a Phrase of your Self as to say I Condemn You When yet I Judge your Book to be more Schismatical than the Meetings of most that I am acquainted with which you Accuse § 35. But yet your Mistake is Greater than I have hitherto mentioned I know not many if any that use to Hear Me who Separate from You Many of them are Episcopal and for your Liturgy and Ceremonies I think most of them go to the Parish-Churches and few if any that I know do deny it to be Lawful How then can you prove it True that we Condemn them What is it for Is it because they neither Separate from the Conformists or Nonconformists This is it that we Exhort them to It was an ill Slip to put our Condemning them for Commending them But a fair Exposition will make it Lawful § 36. But you say How they can preach lawfully to a people that commit a fault in hearing them I do not
that I craved your Answer 2. And do you not know that in the Bills of Mortality it appeareth that the Parishes within the Walls are but about the seventh part of the whole and the outer Parishes which are thus great are about six parts And in these Parishes it is not the tenth part in some and the sixth in most that can come within the Church to hear And it is pity that one half or two or three parts of such a City as London should be left like the Indians without any publick Teaching and Worship and such as you say so much for it § 8. You say The Separate Meetings are kept in the City Hackney Newington c. Ans 1. What 's that to me and all such other 2. I can tell that some City Churches are yet unbuilt and the Tabernacles will not hold the People as Christ-Church and others 3. And divers keep Meetings within the Walls where they found most peace for the reception of those without the Walls that cannot come into their own Churches 4. What 's done at Newington I know not But at Hackney I know of two Meetings where the Ministers so preach out of the time of Publick Worship that none may be hindred from going to it and deny not Communion with the Parish-Churches And they tell me that as the Incumbent Officiateth by another so the Parish is so great and the Preachers Voice so low that a great part cannot hear him 5. Why do you say they are separate Meetings when you know that you have cast them out The Preachers had rather Preach in your Temples and they cannot be suffered Preachers and People that are professed Nonconformists but in Opinion are by the Canon ipso facto Excommunicate § 9. As to what you say of the Reason of their Meetings I Answer 1. I think as far as I can Judge the most of my Hearers I think ten or twenty to one do also hear in the Parish Churches So that your Charge of Separation against them is but for hearing both And I believe it is so with many others 2. Every one that preferreth better doth not separate from all the rest Your Church alloweth any free Man to forsake and change his Bishop and Parish Priest as oft as he will so he will but 8. I believe that a Father must be honoured and having care of his Childrens Life and Soul he must command them necessary Food and Means for Body and Soul and they must obey him if the Law forbad it 9. I believe that murdering Souls privatively or positively is a sin as well as murdering Bodies as many undertaking and not performing Pastors will find 10. I believe that he that obeyeth not a Law which was made against Gods Law or without Authority given by him sinneth not against Authority 11. I think in such cases he that submitteth to the Penalty of a Penal Law doth enough 12. I conjecture that the multitude of Casuists Politick Writers and Lawyers who say that Because the Common Good is the End of Government and all Power is for Edification no Law obligeth which is against the Common Good or at least that is destructive of it are like to be near as knowing in such matter as the meanest of the Doctors Hearers and Readers 13. And I am past doubt that he that denieth these Principles will shortly have no cause to glory of his Wisdom And O what cause have we that are Teachers in stead of proving those intollerable that differ from us in such matters as our Conformity to consider that an Errour in us especially so Practical and momentous is far more dangerous than in the People If all my Neighbours mistake my Disease and the Remedy it may not hurt me but if my Physician mistake it it may be my death Bishop Vsher and many Protestants do except a Learned Papist much more than the unlearned from the hopes of Salvation § 12. I will readily Answer your Queries though you refuse to Answer mine To your first Those who rightfully give Orders must give such Orders as God hath instituted and may not limit or suspend contrary to his Institution or Laws As he that marrieth Persons may not except the Husbands Power of Government nor may unmarry them againe save for Adultery None may silence Ministers that forfeit not their Office On just cause to pull down Churches and alienate the Church Goods as some Bishops of old did for the Poor is no Sacriledge nor to silence an intollerable Teacher But to silence Ministers unjustly is another matter If men will cant over still Who shall be Judge We still repeat 1. Whoever is Judge he hath no Power to cast out faithful Ministers and if he mis-judge them it justifieth not his act And every man is the discerning Judge of his own Duty § 13. To your second Querie Christian Magistrates may justly preserve the publick Peace by all just means and may repress all rebellious Practices and Principles but if they should mis judge any principles to be such that are not and for not renouncing those should silence Ministers if they have fitter means than silencing to correct them silencing them when their Ministry is needful is a sin But seeing these words are significant of your mind for silencing us and the Reasons of it why would you not tell me what those Principles are which we refuse to renounce and so deserve silencing Either you lay the stress on the guiltiness of our Principles or on the Magistrates judging them so You cannot think that if he mis judge it will justifie his silencing men Else Valens Hunnierichus that cut out the Preachers Tongues those that silenced the Preachers in Germany on one side for not swearing for the Pope and on the other for not swearing for the Emperour c. all did well Seeing then you speak as an Accuser of us as guilty of refusing to renounce such Principles and subscribe your implied consent to our silencing for it O that you would be so charitable as to help our Conversion and tell us what those Principles are I have told the World at large my own and many other Principles of Government and Obedience in my second Plea for Peace I crave your discovery of my errours therein Yea I provoke also such as more fiercely accuse us as Plotters or cherishing Principles of Rebellion to name that Principle which I have not there renounced If all that 's there be not enough I know not what will be enough § 14. To your third I answer 1. It followeth not That Authority to silence justly is to no purpose unless all unjustly silencing must be obeyed The Apostles the old Bishops the most of the Churches have disobeyed such as did the Waldenses Bohemians German Protestants the French Belgians Remonstrants and Contraremonstrants c. You say Greatness of Parishes makes no difference What if the King turned all London into one Parish and so foâ—bid all Preaching and Publick