you had your adversarie at a great advantage {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} as the Greek proverb is and as we are wont to say Here is great cry and little wooll For whereas the proposition may beare this double sense The continuance of Episcopacy in this Iland hath had no contradiction or There hath been no contradiction to the right of the continuance of it in this Iland at the choice of the propounder I am ready to make it good in both senses neither are you able justly to oppose it in either I am sure those instances which you bring out of Wickliffe Lambert Richardus de Mediavilla Occam Walter Mapes Robert Langland in your next Section will shrink in the wetting and come farre short of your undertaking BUt brethren I must sadly tell you that in your next and last exception you have exceeded your selves in malice what loud and hideous out cries have you made against me both in your Answer and Vindication for a safe and innocent passage in my Remonstrance Speaking of the continuance and derivation of Episcopacy from the Primitive times I had said Certainly except all Histories all Authors fayle us nothing can be more plaine then this truth Now comes your charitable veracity and in your Answer seconded now againe by your Vindication reports the words thus Except all Histories all Authors fayle us nothing can be more certaine then this truth and thereupon cry out Os durum and descant fearfully upon the word Nothing more certain What Is it not more certaine that there is a God Is it not more certaine that Christ is God and man Must this bee an Article of our Creed c. Nothing more certaine Oh that men should not onely forget themselves but God also and in their zeale for their own honour utter words bordering upon Blasphemy Thus you whether like sober and honest men let the Reader judge who casting back his eye upon that passage of my Remonstrance shall well finde that I have used no such word at all as you have thus insolently and injuriously plaid upon My phrase was onely Nothing can be more plaine you falsifie it Nothing more certaine and run strange and uncharitable descant upon it such as whereof I think your friends will be ashamed And when I not urging the great difference of this expression was willing to pass it over with intimating onely the ordinary use of this manner of speech in our hourely discourse wherein we would be loath to be called to an account of our Creed yet still as eager and unsatisfied in this your Vindication you redouble the charge upon me Wee cry out you say of such a shamelesnesse as dares equall this opinion of his of Episcopall government to an Article of our Creed When as here was no mention no thought either of certainty or of Creed but onely an harmeless affirmation of the cleare evidence of this truth But I will not stirre this puddle any more onely beseeching my Reader by this one passage to judge of the spirit of these men so set upon detraction and contradiction that rather then they will want colours of exception they will devise them out of their owne braines and fasten them where they would disgrace Lest this place should not yeeld you sufficient ground of so foule a crimination you flye back to Episcopacy by Divine right and thence will fetch a clearer conviction where the Author saith He for his part is so confident of the divine institution of the Majority of Bishops above Presbyters that he dare boldly say there are weighty points of faith which have not so strong evidence in Scripture He said it and made it good by instances in the same place Why do you snarle at the speech and not confute the proofes Trie your skill in that one particular the Baptization of Infants which I am deceived if the Church holds not a weighty point of faith Let us if you please enter into a serious contestation Shew me more cleare evidence of Scripture for this holy and universally received position and practise of Baptizing Infants then I can produce for the Majority of Bishops above Presbyters till then give me leave to returne your owne prayer God give the men lesse confidence or more truth and let me adde more charity for truly in whether of these two latter you are more defective it is not easie to judge In the meane time you have as much failed in clearing your selves from those just imputations which are laid upon you as you have over-reached in the unjust bespattering of your stanch and innocent adversarie ANd now forbeare if you can Readers to smile in the parting at the grave counsell of our wise Smectymnuus who after he hath tyred his Reader with a tedious volume in answer to my short Defence adviseth mee very sadly that my words may bee lesse in number Yet howsoever his weary loquacitie may in this causelesse exprobration deserve to move your mirth I shall resolve to make good use of his counsaile Est olitor saepe opportuna locutus In the sequele my words which were never yet taxed for an offensive superfluitie shall be very few and such as to your greater wonder I shall be beholden for to my kinde adversaries The rereward of my late Defence was backed by the sound testimony of Dr. Abraham Scultetus the famous professor of Heydelburgh and the great Oracle in his time of the Palatinate who in both the Tenets of Episcopacy by Divine right and the unwarrantablenesse of Lay-presbytery agrees so fully with me as I doe with my selfe the grounds whereof I dare confidently say are such as no wit of man can overthrow or weaken Now what say my Smectymnuans to this For brevity sake we will content our selves with what that learned Rivet spake when these two Treatises of Scultetus were shewed to him by a great Prelate amongst us and his judgement required Haec omnia jamdudum sunt protrita profligata All these have beene long since overworne and beaten out and baffled In good time Brethren And why should not I take leave to returne the same answer to you in this your tedious velitation of Episcopacie There is not one new point in this your over-swolne and unweldie bulk No hay-cock hath beene oftner shaken abroad and tossed up and downe in the winde then every argument of yours hath been agitated by more able pens then mine Haec omnia jamdudum sunt protrita profligata Why should I abuse my good houres and spend my last age devoted to better thoughts in an unprofitable babling You may perhaps expect to meet with fitter matches that have more leasure The cause is not mine alone but common to this whole Church to the whole Hierarchy to all the Fathers of the Church throughout the world to all the dutifull Sons of those Fathers wheresoever You may not hope that so many learned and eminent Divines who finde themselves equally interessed in this quarrell can suffer either so just a cause unseconded
Errors Let the cause speak for it self and let that great Moderator of Heaven to whom we both appeal judge It was a light touch that I gave to your Grammaticall slip of Areopagi wherein it would not have hurt you to have confessed your over-sight had you yeelded that you stumbled though withall you say You stumbled like Emperors we could have passed it over with a smile but now that you will needs fall into a serious contestation and spend almost a whole leaf in a faulty Defence I must tell you that you make this an hainous trifle To face out wilfully the least errour is no lesse then a crime and such is this of yours as every true Grammarian knows I doubt not but you had heard of Dionysius Areopagita but if you should have cited him under the name of Dionysius Areopagus every Scholar would have laughed you to scorn Had you said The admired sons of Iustice the Areopagus I grant it had been good according to that which you cite out of Sarisburiensis but to say The admired sons of Iustice the Areopagi no Grammar no authoritie can bear you out and however you face it that you can bring precedents enow out of approved Authors name but one and take all That of Sarisburiensis which you alledge is altogether for me against your selves he sayes that Senate of Athens was called Areopagus so said my Margin before But what is this to your false Latine Brethren this matter of Latinity is but a straw but let me say this willing defence of a plain falshood is a block which your very friends cannot but stumble at and how can the Reader choose but think he that will wilfully stand in the defence of a known falshood in Language will not stick to defend a known Errour in his cause Before ye stumbled now ye fall rise up for shame in a just confession and look better to your feet hereafter But belike you have not a better facultie in stumbling then I in leaping and talk of huge great blocks that I have over-skipped in this whole Book Where are they which be they Brethren If such were they are I hope still visible shew them me I beseech you that I may yet trie my skill You instance in some words sounding to contempt I thought what these blocks would prove meer matter of words not lesse windy then the froth of your next Paragraph wherein your gravitie is set upon a merrie pin and in a becoming jeer tells us of the Gentleman student in Philosophy that desires to learn the rare secret of the sinking of froth for which I remit you and your deep student to the next Tapster IT is not all your shuffling that can shift the just charge of your grosse uncharitablenesse The Remonstrance comparing in a generall notion the forms of Civil government and Ecclesiasticall expresses it in these Terms Since if Antiquitie may be the rule the civill Polity hath sometimes varied the Sacred never And if originall authoritie may carry it that came from arbitrarie imposers this from men inspired then which no word can be in a right sense more safe or more innocent Your good glosse appropriates what in thesi was spoken of all forms of Civil government to our particular Monarchy and tels your Reader that I deliver it as Arbitrary Alterable then which there cānot I suppose be any sclander more dangerous and to mend the matter now in your Vindication you redouble your most injurious charge upon the Remonstrant as if upon this ground it could follow that to attempt the alteration of Monarchicall governement had beene in his opinion lesse culpable then to petition the alteration of Episcopall quite contrary to the expresse words of my Remonstrance whose implication is no other then this That if it were capitall in them who indeavored to alter the formes of Civill government they must needs seeme worthy of more then an easie censure that went about in a Libellous way to worke the change of a setled government in the Church See Reader this latter is in the Remonstrants judgement worthy of more then an easie censure the others accusation is no lesse then deadly Whether now doth hee hold lesse culpable Truly brethren if you be not ashamed of this unjust crimination I hope some body will blush for you With how bold a face dare you appeale to the Reader yea to the most honourable Parliament and to the Sacred Majesty of our Soveraigne that you doe the man no wrong Joyne issue then and let all these judge First you say one of the most confident Advocates of Episcopacy hath said that where a Nationall Church is setled in the orderly regiment of certaine grave Overseers to seeke to abandon this forme and to bring in a forraine Discipline is as unreasonable as to cast off the yoke of just and hereditary Monarchy and to affect many-headed Soveraignty This you think an assertion insolent enough that sets the Mitre as high as the Crowne But what a foule injury is this Reader doe but view the place and see where the Mitre stands The words run thus So were it no lesse unreasonable where a Nationall Church is setled in the orderly regiment of certaine grave Overseers ruling under one acknowledged Soveraign by wholsome and unquestionable Laws and by these Laws punishable if they overlash c. Say now Reader whether this man sets the Mitre as high as the Crowne Neither doth hee say it were no lesse haynous for the difference of the morality is excepted before but no lesse unreasonable as that which is there said to argue a strange brain-sick giddinesse in either offence Yet more anger The Remonstrant rises higher and sets the Mitre above the Crown Wherein I beseech you brethren What a Woolseian insolence were this Hee tels us you say that Civill government came from Arbitrary imposers the Sacred from men inspired now Civill government here includes Monarchy therefore this is to advance Episcopacy above Monarchy since the one challenges God for the Founder the other humane arbitrement Brethren had your argument as much reason as spight it would presse sore now as you have framed it it is a meere cavill The Remonstrant speaks of all Civill government in generall the severall formes whereof amongst severall nations and people no reasonable man can deny were introduced variously according to the first institution of their Founders What error can your sharpe eyes finde in this proposition Now you will needs draw this by an envious application to Monarchy as if I meant to derive it onely from men not from God Ye are mistaken brethren they are your better friends that thus deduce Monarchy For us wee hold it is from God by men from God as the author ordainer by men as the meanes wee fetch it not from earth but from heaven wee know who said By me Kings raigne and from him we derive their Crownes and Scepters But yee may know
innovations as the turning the Table to an Altar and the low crindging towards the Altar so erected but as for the Leiturgy or Service of the Church of England not a touch of either in his thoughts or tongue Now brethren learne you hence just matter of private humiliation for so foule a sclander of a grave and religious Bishop and in him of this whole Church For learned Calvin if those who professe to honour his name would have beene ruled by his judgement wee had not had so miserable distractions in the Church as wee have now cause to bewaile all that I say of him is that his censure of some tolerable fooleries in our holy Service might well have beene forborne in alienâ Republicâ your vindication is that hee wrote that Epistle to the English at Francford Who doubts it The parties were proper the occasion just but not the censure Parciùs ista when wee meddle with other mens affaires I may well be pardoned if I say that harsh phrase doth not answer the moderation which that worthy Divine professeth to hold in the controversie of the English AS for that unparalleld Discourse whereon you run so much descant concerning the Antiquity of Liturgies deduced so high as from Moses time you argue that it cannot be because you never read it Brethren your not omniscient eyes shall see that my eyes are so Lyncean as to see you proudly mis-confident you shall see that others have seene what you did not and shall sample that which you termed unparalleld It is neither thank to your bounty nor praise to your ingenuity that the question is halfe-granted by you but an argument of your self-contradiction An order of Divine service you yeeld but not a forme or a forme but not prescribed not imposed and for this you tell us a tale of Iustin Martyrs Leiturgie and Tertullians Leiturgie how much to the purpose the sequell shall shew In the former you grant that after the Exhortation they all rose and joyned in prayer prayer ended they went to the Sacrament but whether these prayers were suddainly conceived or ordinately prescribed there is the question and whether that Sacrament were administred in an arbitrary and various forme mee thinks your selves should finde cause to doubt But Iustin saies to cleare this point that in the beginning of this Action the President powred out prayers and thanksgiving according to his ability and the people said Amen What ever his ability was I am sure you have a rare ability in mis-construing the Fathers and particularly these testimonies of Iustin and Tertullian To begin with the latter out of him you say The Christians in those times did in their publike assemblies pray Sine monitore quia de pectore without any prompter but their own heart Prove first that Tertullian speaks of publike assemblies Secondly know that if he did the place is to your disadvantage for as a late learned Author well urges would ye have it imagined that the assembled Christians did betake themselves publikely to their private devotions each man by himself as his own heart dictated this were absurd and not more against ancient practise then as your selves think piety Was it then that not the people but the Minister was left to the liberty of his expressions What is that to the people How did they ere the more pray without a prompter How is it more out of their heart when they follow the Minister praying out of unknown conceptions then out of foreknown prescription So as you must be admonished that your Sine monitore without a prompter is without all colour of proof of prayers conceived your Zephyrus blows with too soft a gale to shake the foundation of this argument and indeed is but a side-winde to my Heraldus and the very same blast with your Rigaltius though you would seem to fetch them out of different corners If I give you your own asking you have gained nothing For what would you infer Christians prayed for the Emperors without a monitor as the heathens did not therefore they had no formes of Christian prayers He were liberall that would grant you this consequent when rather the very place shews what the forme was which the Christians then used We are praying still for all Emperors that God would give them a long life a secure raigne a safe Court valiant hoasts faithfull Counsellors good people and a quiet world This was Tertullians Leiturgie wherein the hearts of Christians joyned without a monitor It is small advantage that you will finde in my sense of Sine monitore not being urged by any superior injunction If no injunction you say how could it be a Leiturgie a commanded imposed forme You are unwilling to understand that the injunction here meant is generall a command to pray for the Emperour not a particular charge of the forms injoyned in praying this was therefore the praise of their Christian loyaltie that even unrequired they poured out their supplications for Princes Shortly then after all these pretended senses Tertullian will not upon any termes be drawne to your partie Those other two places of Tertullian and Austine are meerely sleevelesse and unproving not making any whit at all more for conceived prayers then for prescribed Who ever made question whether wee might build our prayers upon our Saviours form or whether we might vary our prayers with our occasions Those Fathers say no more we no lesse Ye dare not say there were no publique Leiturgies in S. Austins time My Margin was conviction enough which ye touch as an Iron too hot with an hand quickly snatcht away Your denial should have drawn on further proofs Iustin Martyr though fifty yeers before Tertullian follows him in your discourse How guiltily you both translate and cite him an Author of no mean judgement hath shewed before me I shall not therefore glean after his sickle But shortly thus take your {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in your own best sense for quantum pro virile potest what will follow The President prayed and gave thanks to the utmost of his power therfore the Church had then no Leiturgie What proof call you this Look back Brethren to your own citation you shall finde Prayers more then once in their Lords-day meetings These latter were the Presidents the former some other Ministers these in the usuall set forms those out of present conception both stand well together both agreeable to the practise as of these so of former ages BUt whiles I affect over-full answers I feel my self grow like you tedious I must contract my self and them Your assertion of the originall of set forms of Leiturgy I justly say is more Magistrall then true and such as your own testimonies confute That of the Councell of Laodicea is most pregnant for set formes before Arrius or Pelagius lookt forth into the world wherein mention is expresly made of three formes of Prayer