those who can really be judged to be so if prophane persons must be in the Church as you say then I know no reason but all may be in the Church and no man in the world may be said to be out of the Church for the most are ungodly if ungodly ones do steal in among the Saints to a Church they prosper not and Christ will discover them to their everlasting shame and more dreadfull judgments follow none as these Christ dwells in his house which is the Church and it s no pleasure to Christ to see a mixture among his owne he that made a whip of cords to drive out the buyers and sellers out of the materiall Temple will take rods of iron to whip out such ungodly wretches I am sure Christs bread belongs to no such dogs only the children are welcome and he hath given power to his Church to keep out these that have not a judged right Againe if prophane persons and such as walke not like Saints are to be cast out of the church then such as are judged so must not be admitted into the church but the former is true Ergo. That they are to be cast out of the Church is cleer from the Scriptures Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. that therefore they ought not to be admitted is as cleare for the same ground is in both they are admitted in because they walke as Saints and so are judged to be Saints they are cast out because they walk not as such the truth is this principle will soon lessen a Nationall Church and therefore no wonder the Presbyterians are shye of holding it for they must cast out the most of their members assoon as they receive them in It s the strangest thing to me and I startle at it many times what strict rules the Presbyterians have laid down in their Sermons in print Master Dâ—…s preparation to the Sacrament and their Sermons before the Sacrament every moneth in which they lay on men such qualifications both habituall and actuall that there is not one in a hundred of the best Saints can follow them and yet blame their brethren for keeping of there which they cannot judge to have the least degree of these qualifications they tell them it belongs not to them they will eate and drinke their owne damnation on and yet cry out in these that would not have these poor souls contract such guilt and draw on such ruine on their own souls and therefore keep them back do you take in these who are drunkards whoremongers c. into communion in the ordinances blame us not if we keep our selves from such defilements For his answer saith he to that of Act. 15 all ages Churches till this present have held it as an expresse warrant for provinciall and nationall Synods and their making Cannons in Church affaires I shall not say much to this not doubting but we shal see these things shortly in print which our brethren have urged in the Assembly How that can be a formall Synod I could never see yet made forth For First This was not a gathering of the Elders of many Churches who make a Synod but only some messengers whether Elders or no the Text speaks not occasionally sent up to Jerusalem to that Church there Secondly here was the whole multitude viz. the Brethren present besides the Apostles and Elders and the Letter that is sent is as much written in their name as of any of the Elders now the Brethren or multitude are not usuall to be Members of Synods Thirdly the Message is sent as the mind of the Holy Ghost and not their bare judgments but that which they had principally received by inspiration from the Spirit and is not now ordinary to any Synod for what Synod I can say it seemeth good to the Holy Ghost and us to lay such things on you Fourthly if this were a Synod made up of Elders of severall Congregations and that Paul and Barnabas went not up to prove the false Apostles lyars but to have the truth manifested which they could not do then a Synod of Elders have more power then bare Apostles to order things in the Church Paul and Barnabas were men very unfit to be Apostles if they could not have determined such a question whether it was necessary for the Gentiles to be circumcised who were to plant and order things in all the Churches and who had power over all Churches and were to write the man I of God to them surely one Apostle had more knowledge of the things of God and of matters of controversie in the Church then all the Synods in the world besides nay all are to follow what they loft to the Churches it were greatly to diminists the Apostles power and the highnesse of that office to think than they could not determine such a question but must go to a Synod to have it cleared up to them Besides it was an Apostle when they came up to Jerusalem viz. Peter who decided the controversie and Paul and Barnabas were men of as great judgement and had as much power as he However we think not that to be a Synod yet the convening of Assemblies and Synods for advice and counsell we deny not but that any Synod or Councell hath an authoritative jurisdiction to impose Laws and Canons for all Churches to walk by we conceive cannot be proved neither from this of Acts 15. or any other Text Yea even this Assembly now among us the Parliament have called onely for advice not intending to give them a power of jurisdiction over them and all the Kingdome Master Pryn saith and takes much pains to prove in his late triumphing book that Synods and Councells and Magistrates have ever used to make Laws for the Church to exercise a coercive power in matters of Religion De Facto and he might have saved himself labour to have proved it but whether De Jure there is such a power invested in them and from what Scripture I have not yet seen and should be glad to be informed by him To my ninth Querie saith he and Argument in it he returns nothing worthy Reply but upon this Petitio principii that the Scriptures and the Apostles have prescribed a set form of Government c. which I have proved before and that the Churches in the Apostles dayes were Independent though doubtlesse saith he all Churches were then subject to the Apostles Laws and Edicts c. therefore not Independent What there is in this worthy of Reply I am ignorant of yet this is to be noted hwo the Presbyterians make a market of this scandalous name of Independents they have fastened on us viz. To make the world beleeve that we are subject to no Laws that neither Gods Word nor mans is a rule to us for this is the naturall sense of his words he saith The Primitive Churches were subject to the Apostles Laws Ergo Not Independent As if we held that we were
A Moderate ANSWER TO Mr. Prins full Reply To certaine Observations on his first Twelve Questions VVherein all his Reasons and Obiections are candidly examined and refuted A short description of the Congregationall way discovered Some Arguments for indulgence to tender Consciences modestly propounded By the same Author LONDON Printed for Benjamin Allen and are to be sold at his shop in Popes head Alley at the signe of the Crowne 1645. A Moderate Answer to Master Prinnes Booke called A FULL REPLY I Will not stand upon the many loose passages and hard speeches that this Reply is full of desiring rather the opening of truth then the discovery of any mans corruptions wise men that must see us both will judge us not by our words but by our reason If truth be on his side surely he hath very much spoiled her beautifull face with his black and uncharitable language Truth is most glorious in her owne garments whatever men cloath her with but her owne apparell doth but deforme her If this be her attire that Master Prinne presents here arrayed in certainly she hath changed her forme she never came out so of the bosome of Christ she was never wont to appeare among the Saints in such a garbe passion and railing were never wont to be her companions peace gentlenesse and meeknesse ever attended her as handmaids How little of this waits on his Reply let any that was ever acquainted with such a spirit judge In the very title-leafe he cryes out an anonymous Author ashamed of his name were you ashamed of your name Sir when you put forth The unbishoping of Timothy and Titus The quench Coale The Abreviate all which you owne in this Reply You that writ The Anatomy of Independency The mystery of Iniquity The Subjects liberty all without your name call in your Books write no more You are ashamed of your names You are not ignorant of the many worthy things that have beene put forth without a name there be many reasons may be given for it it is not the name but the thing not who writ but what is written that will satisfie The truth is we are falne into times wherein as Tertullian of old complained men receive fidem ex hominibus non homines ex fide I desired naked truth might appeare though I was not seene in the setting of it forth in his Preface he cryes out He is hated envied â—…pugned for telling of the truth If to answer be to envy hate c. no truth of Christ can lawfully be stood for surely the Spirit of Christ never taught you to jduge so harshly of those who onely labour to vindicate the truth of Christ and friendly to examine your ungrounded queries about it To passe over many other things which to speake to will rather fill up the paper then be satisfactory observe but one or two of these reasons he gives for his writing by way of question First In his Preface to independency examined c. that he saith the Independents had never dogmatically to his knowledge resolved or discovered in print what that Church-government is they so eagerly contend for and yet take notice he confutes them urgeth these Queries as his Reasons What a contradiction this is let all judge how a man can confute that in an opinion which he knowes not to be held in it and out-argue that he never knew dogmatically resolved on is beyond my intellectuals to conceive Neither I saith he nor any one writer ever discovered it and yet Master Prinne hath confuted it unanswerably For that saith he he seriously professeth thefore God Angels or men that he could never yet discover in least footsteps of it in Scripture Antiquity c. I shall only pray that God would anoint your eyes with the eye-salve of the Word that you may see these truths of Jesus Christ which are yet hid from your eyes which many precious Saints humbly conceive they see and so see that if God should call them are willing to seale their sight with their blood But to the matter To the first question he saith I give no answer but onely misreciteth the question without his limitations and then refute what my selfe propounded not be he should have shewne wherein and then might justly have challenged me for it I shall intreat the judicious Reader but to compare both It seems Master Prinne is ashamed now to thinke that there is no positive rule in the Word for Church-government but that it may be suited to States He saith I should have exactly proved by direct Scriptures that Christ hath prescribed one set immutable forme of Government to all Christians Nations c. from which none must vary in a tittle and then have proved from Gospel Texts that which he calls independencie to be this Government but in this Point the Respondent is wholly silent and I shall expect saith he his Answer Ad Graecas Calendas Observe Reader that yet he saith in the following words I indeavour to prove it to say nothing to be wholly silent and to indeavour to prove a thing to me can have no better title then a grosse contradiction but to the thing First Whereas he requires of me as in the former words so here a full discovery of Church-government in the world and this is that he in all his papers demands that we will fully discover this Government in the word I answer First If by a full discovery he meanes that we say all that can be said of it in the word or is laid up there it is Iniquum postulatum most unjustly demanded for even In credendis in matters of faith neither Master Prin nor any else is able to say all that can be said of it or fully to discover the many things that the word holds forth to be beleeved for salvation God reveales more and more of the Gospel every day in a fuller and clearer manner much lesse can any man as yet discover what is required for matter of Government As for our parts we are far from such a thought that we know all things in the word about Church-government but that more of it may be still revealed and we daily search and wait for more knowledge in it But secondly if he meanes we should discover what we hold concerning it let him know that for what we hold in it we can evidence from Scripture every particular and as much as is needfull in this Controversie For the matter of a Church that it should be Saints we conceive it to be evident from these Scriptures Rom. 1. 7. 1 Cor. 1. 2. 2 Cor. 1. 1. Ephes 1. 1. Phil. 1. 1. and in vers 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it s a righteous thing for me to judge so of you all now the Apostle wrote to them as they were Churches of Christ and to explaine what they were he calls them Saints such as it were an unrighteous thing to judge otherwise of them and its reason that
members of Churches should be thus judged Saints because all the Ordinances that Christ hath left it s for to build up the Church they are to be administred in the Church now none have right to the Ordinances but Saints and therefore none may be admitted but such as can be judged so by the Saints Againe for the former which we say is consent or agreement whether by covenant or any other way we stand not on it we conceive first it ariseth from the nature of the thing the Church being a politick body wherein is rule and authority nothing but free consent or agreement to walk in such wayes can constitute it as in all other policies What makes England as a Common-wealth or as a Church to be such a policie but the consent of the people who have given up themselves to be governed by such Laws and Constitutions Secondly if this be not granted there can be no distinction of Churches in the world but all must be under one power for what makes England as a Church distinct from Scotland or Scotland from all Churches that they have no authoritative power over each other but onely this that the members of England or Scotland have not consented to walk under any other power but their own Surely the bounds of Seas or Rivers can no more distinguish Churches then a wall or a doore can if there be no other distinction and no other thing but consent can forme a Policie Besides Scripture is no way silent for the proof of this Not to urge many that place is famous and may serve for all in Act. 9. 26. Paul after he was converted it is said Assayed to joyne himselfe to the Disciples at Jerusalem and the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to be glewed to them Now observe Paul was converted and a Saint yet not joyned to the Church he was in that place where they were he was joyned to them as they were Saints yet he was not joyned to them as a Church and this joyning was not Physicall but Morall Now this must be done by free consent and willing subjection to the Ordinances or no way For the ordinary Officers of the Church they are Pastors Teachers 1 Cor. 12. 28. Ephes 4. 11. Teaching-Elders and Ruling-Elders 1 Tim. 5. 17. Deacons Acts 6. 1 Tim. 3. Widows 1 Tim. 5. 9. Rom. 16. 1. That the Church hath power of choosing its own Officers is cleare from Acts 1. 21. Acts 6. 3. and Chap. 14. 23. That a Church is but one Congregation having power within it selfe to exercise all the Ordinances is apparent in the new Testament neither do we read of any other there First the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used for the Church signifieth no other neither hath it any other signification in the new Testament when referred to any visible Company neither is it used by any profane Author for to note out a larger Society then could meet together in one place For the Church at Jerusalem it was but one Church Acts 2. 46. and 5. 12. and 6. 1. and 15. 25. and 21. 22. and 25. 22. so the Church of Antiochia was but one Church Acts 14. 27. they are said to gather the Church together now that could not be the Elders for for Elders onely the word Church is never used and the same persons that are called the Church vers 27. are in vers 28. called the Disciples and Chap. 15. 1. the Brethren so Acts 11. 26. the same persons are called the Church Disciples and Christians Besides the Church of Corinth was but one Church was but one particular Congregation 1 Cor. 5. 4. 1 Cor. 14. 25. 1 Cor. 11. 17. vers 23. In uno codem loco neither can the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ever be shewed to signifie any thing else besides one particular Assembly as learned Baines wel observes I shal conclude this with quoting of what that judicious Divine D. Ames saith in this particular Med. p. 190. Hine variae Congregationes fixae ejusdem Regionis ac Provinciae plurali numero semper appellantur Ecclesiae non una Ecclesia etiam in Judaea quae tota fuit antea una Ecclesia Nationalis Act. 2. 46. 15. 12. 14. 27. 1 Cor. 5. 4 11. 17. 23. 1 Thes 2. 14. Acts 14. 23. and 15. 41. Rom. 16. 4. 5. 16. 1 Cor. 16. 1. 1. 19. 2 Cor. 8. 1. 18. 19. Gal. 1. 2. 22. 1. Rev. Ecclesiae enim illae particulares quae in N. T. commemorantur convenice solent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neque in toto N. T. legitue de institutione Ecclesiae amplioris a quo minores Congregationes penderent c. Thus you see a short description and discovery of what we hold about Church-government with some Scriptures in stead of others that move us to this way The Reasons and Grounds I doubt not but we shall see at large when that shall be made publike which our Brethren have urged in the Assembly and presented to the Parliament But to proceed For that part wherein he saith I should have proved that Christ hath set one immutable forme of government and have made it out by direct Scriptures besides what is laid down in the Observations which I doubt not to make good against his cavills I thought Master Prin had read learned Master Parker de Eccles Pol. Cartwright and the most of the Nonconformists who though Presbyteriall in their judgement yet have largely proved that to whom I shall refer him for larger satisfaction I know none that ever writ against the immutablenesse of a forme of Church-government in the new Testament but Episcopall and Pontificiall men as Hooker Bilson The judgement of the Church of Scotland is quite contrary For they assert their Presbytery to be Jure Divino and holds its Title onely from heaven it seems the Presbyterians differ as well as the Independants and they are also various in their judgements some think there is no forme of government others that there is But to the Arguments First Exod. 25. 40. I said if this were granted the Gospel would be straiter then the Law Heb. 8. 5. Christ more unfaithfull then Moses and the Argument lies thus according to his own drawing if God set a pattern to Moses of every thing to be done in the Church from which he was not to vary upon any termes these being but carnall Ordinances comparatively Heb. 9. 10. then he hath prescribed a forme of government in the new Testament to all Churches Nations c. from which they may not vary but the former Ergo the Medium or ground of arguing between these two is from the care that God hath of the Church at all times being one and the same rather more in the new Testament God had shewed lesse care over his Churches now than then if he had not prescribed a set Government for them also besides their Ordinances had been more spirituall far then ours
for that which God directly appoints is more spirituall then what man appoints in Gods worship though for the kinde more noble and the use in reason far more excellent To this he saith in generall thus That if I or any other can shew him such a patterne so clearly delineated in the new Testament as that in the old he will beleeve my sequell else he shall judge it a meere independent Argument to this before Master Prin knows its a good way of reasoning if the same ground hold the same consequence we are sure for your Presbyteriall-government you cannot have the least direct Texts and you are faine to go to miserable extorted consequences c. there is nothing that we hold but we will shew in cleare Scriptures as before where did you or any one ever read of either name or thing of a classicall Presbytery of a Provinciall or Nationall Synod either alone or by way of subordination He goes on in way of Answer and saith if this consequence will follow then this must needs also God prescribed to Moses the expresse patterne and fashion of Aarons and his sons garments c. under the Law Exod. Ergo He hath likewise shewed the expresse patterne fashion and colour of all Bishops Presbyters and Ministers garments under the Gospel How weake this absurdity is that he labours to fasten on this Argument let wise men judge First I say not That what ever was commanded in the old Testament must be commanded now for the matter of it if my meaning had been so this consequence had been good but when I argue from the exact description of every thing in the old Testament to the like in the new I argue from the equity and common reason that is in the thing there was something in the Ceremonies and in their forme of worship that was Juris Moralis Naturalis the equity of which remaines for ever and the Apostle argues from it in severall places as that God should be worshipped after his own way and according to his own prescript not through mens inventions c. As for the matter of the things commanded in the old Testament these things that were Ceremonies then and had a spirituall signification are but circumstances now and not to be regarded as Place Garments c. You shall finde the Apostle arguing thus from this very head and instance in that Heb. 8. 5. See that thou do all things according to the patterne in the mount he speaks this of Christs Priestly Office and proves that Christ was a true and reall Priest and he proves it by this because all the Priests of the Law served but to the example of heavenly things and they had their Commission onely from heaven God gave it Moses in the mount surely then Christ saith the Apostle must needs be a reall high Priest in whom all these things are fulfilled eminently and he instanceth in this of the Tabernacle which could not prove it but by reason of the equity of the thing and its one of Calvins Observations from the place Hic docemur perversos esse omnes cultus adulterinos quos sibi proprio ingenio citra mandatum Dei comminisci homines permittunt nam cum praescribat Deus ut fiant omnia secundum suam regulam nihil penitus alienum facere licet He applies this to all worship in generall and that from the equity of the thing it selfe To quell this Argument saith he further 1. The patterne in the mount was meant onely of the materialls forme utensils of the Tabernacle not of the Government and Discipline therefore very impertinent to prove a seeled form of Church-government Answ I never said that the Tabernacle was a patterne of Church-government and therefore that will not answer for grant it to be a prescribing of the materialls c. yet there is as great a reason that God should prescribe the forme of government as that and God did prescribe a forme of government to them from which they could not vary I onely instance in this because the Apostle makes use of it to prove as different the thing as this there was nothing to be done either in Church or Common-wealth but was discovered to Moses as a rule for him to walk by See Exo 2â— 21 22 23 24 25 26 27. Chapter which he could not vary from in a tittle there is a great reason it should be so now because the Ordinance and Government of the Church is more spirituall The Materials of the Tabernacle he grants were exactly prescribed and why not then the particulars of Government seeing it is as great an Ordinance as that Secondly he saith It was shewed to Moses the Temporall Magistrate not to Aaron or any independant Priest and therefore if there be any consequence from this Kings Parliaments c. ought to prescribe and set up such a Church-government as is according to the word c. I answer it s no matter at all neither doth it a jot prejudice my consequence to whom it was discovered whether Moses or Aaron they were not to vary from it and there is as good reason for Church-government as that but let me ask a question or two of you seeing you have urged that First Was this discovered to him Quae a Magistrate under that consideration onely or no Secondly If to him as a Magistrate then where will you finde a correlate to Moses now Thirdly Whether as a Magistrate he durst prescribe any thing more in a tittle or any thing besides the patterne in the mount let Magistrates shew us what they have received immediatly as the minde of God and we will as willingly take it from them as any durst Moses though chiefe Magistrate in a prudentiall way for the good of the people prescribe any thing besides the patternes much lesse may any now who never had the minde of God revealed to them as Moses had In fine saith he If there be any expresse unalterable form pray inform me why it was not as punctually described in the new Testament as the forme of the Tabernacle To which is answered againe that it is as punctually described as hath been formerly shewen Nay saith he why was the Tabernacle altered into a Temple different from it and why did the second Temple vary from the first in the same Church and Nation I answer I never said that God tied himselfe so as he could not alter the frame of Government but that no man could if God will change the Tabernacle into a Temple it s his pleasure and that is our rule but none else could do it had David or Solomon done it without a word from heaven what thanks would they have had It was a sinne in Jeroboam to set up places of worship in Dan and Bethel when God said they should go onely to Jerusalem though afterwards God changed it and made every place fit to lift up pure hands to God in Besides God changed
things among the Jewes according to the fitnesse and conveniencie of their condition the Tabernacle was made as suiting with their condition in the wildernesse being fit to carry up and down with them but when they vvere become a setled nation rich and vvealthy and in peace then God commands to build a Temple Under the Gospel it s otherwise Christ being come himselfe as King of his Church hath made a covenant with no nation under heaven but in every nation he that feares him is accepted with him his Laws being onely spirituall and that concerning the conscience it suits with the condition of all Saints and may be practised in every Kingdome neither can it be altered the Laws written in the new Testament being the last that ever shall be given to the Churches for ever so that Master Prins Reasons against this Argument will not hold when they are truly tried To that part of the Argument wherein it is said that Christ should be more unfaithfull then Moses if he should not prescribe a set unalterable Discipline in the word he answers nothing whereas the Apostle urgeth it in Heb. 3. 2. 5. 6. Moses was faithfull in his own house as a servant but Christ as a son wherein lay the faithfulnesse of Moses but in declaring faithfully what God had prescribed to him in the governing of the Church and ordering all things which concerned the worship of God according to the patterne given in the mount Now how much more unfaithfull then Moses should Christ be if he should not as eminently do the like to his own house For it was not onely matters of Doctrine and the foundations of Religion that Moses was faithfull in prescribing to the people but all the Ceremonies and parts of instituted worship to which Discipline is to be referred he did not onely give them the Decalogue but every thing that was to be practised by them even to a pin of the Tabernacle and therein lay his faithfulnesse And is not Christ as faithfull as Moses To the second Argument That Christ should neither be faithfull as a husband head nor King of his Church if he should give others power to order it as they pleased to their own civil government not setting down his own Laws for them to walk by he saith it s both a fallacie and absurdity yet he shews neither That he sayes to make it good is this That one may be as faithfull a Husband Head King though he lay not down particular Laws to regulare his Wife Subjects c. To which I answer That its against the law of nature to require obedience of a Subject Wife c. in things immediatly appertaining to a Husband King and not to prescribe rules of obedience and its greatest unfaithfulnesse that can be to leave these that are committed to ones care and trust to others to rule and order who cannot do for them as the party intrusted can Should the Parliament be faithfull to the Kingdome if they should not make particular Laws for the governing of it but leave it either to others or else set down generall dark confused things like so many blanks and Et cetera's that every one may adde what they will Either the Government of the Church is a part of Christs Kingly Office or not if it be he cannot be faithfull if he prescribes not particular Lawes for them to walke by Besides either the Discipline of the Church is spirituall and to edification or not and if it be spirituall then none can prescribe it but Christ for that is onely spirituall in instituted worship which hath Christs Precept for it Neither will the giving of generall rules take away this blemish as that Rom. 14. 40. Let all things be done decently and in order which you call a generall rule for Church-government for every particular Office and Ordinance in the Church is for to effect some supernaturall end to build up the soule in grace now no Office or Ordinance can do that but onely what is instituted by Christ to that end For that place in the Corinthians I spake somewhat of it in the Observations and I wonder he past it over without mentioning for these words Let all things be done decently and in order is onely meant of ordering things in a Church already constituted not of giving rules for the constitution of it and the words import nothing lesse for what is order but a fit disposing of things already made and constituted in their proper place it being a word taken from martiall Discipline where every man is set in his Rank and File according as occasion is Now you shall finde the Apostle applying of it so in the place quoted for he speaks it to regulate the exercise of Prophesie in that Church and whereas they were wont to use that Ordinance confusedly one speaking when another spake he tells them they might all speak one by one if they would but stay before each other had done and then layes down this as a rule to direct in the exercise of this and all other Ordinances Let all things be done decently and in order I wonder how men that are not lost in prejudice that haue any intellectualls about them can so mistake this place as to say its a generall rule of prescribing a forme of Church-government left arbitrary to any people seeing neither the signification of the words nor the coherence of the place hath the least shadow of such an interpretation where the fallacie of this Argument lies I cannot as yet discerne much lesse where the absurdity is which Master Prin hath charged it with His third Argument saith he is that Revel 11. 1 2. we read of a measuring of the Temple and Revel 21. 1 2. of the new Jerusalem comming out of heaven c. Ergo There is a setled divine Church-government universally prescribed to all Christians in the new Testament To this he saith nothing in answer either to the interpretation of the place or the application of it to this particular onely he seems to retort First That this is no better proofe of this Assertion then the Angel of the Church of Ephesus is of our Prelates Lordly Hierarchie Jure Divino but how or wherein the parallel holds he shews not yet this he thinks is a full Answer Secondly he saith I might as well yea more properly conclude thence That the Altar was measured as well as the Temple Rev. 11. 1. referring to the Jewish not Christian Church which hath no Temple nor Altar Ergo We ought to have an Altar yea one set forme of Altars in all Christian Churches under the Gospel Thus far he What the sense of these words is I cannot as yet understand much lesse where the Argument lies I never thought to have found such a piece of absurdity fall from Master Prins mouth His Argument will run thus if put into forme If the Temple was measured then as an absurdity the Altar was measured and
if the Altar was measured which was Jewish and not Christian then we ought to have an Altar yea one set forme of Altars under the Gospel Who doubts but the Altar was also measured for the Text saith it expresly Now by Altar was meant the worship as by Temple the Church and so it s commonly used in all the new Testament the Altar is put by Synechdoche Piscator in locum for all the worship in the Gospel as the Temple for the Church and here Master Prin gives a good encouragement to the Papists for the maintenance of their Altars if he will interpret these Scriptures literally The Apostle saith Heb. 13. 10. We have an Altar c. And what can the Papists infer otherwise if they will argue from the word but that there may be Altars now for that he saith it refers to the Jewish not Christian Church if he mean by referring that there are used the tearms given to the worship and Church of the Jews it s granted but if as his words carry it he meanes that it is meant of the Jewish Church and the measuring of their Discipline and worship nothing can be more absurd because that Church-State they were in was disanulled and new Ordinances of the Gospel were brought in and the Book of the Revelation is not an Historie but a Prophesie Nay the holy Ghost using the same words and tearms of the worship and Ordinances of the old Testament in expressing the worship of the new gives a cleare ground to infer that as their patterne was punctually described viz. of the Temple and the Altar c. so also now is the worship and discipline of the new Testament signified by these expressions as punctually prescribed What is that measuring of the Temple spoken of in Ezech. 40. and 41. Chap. but the exact describing of the frame and fashion of it with the utensils in it and what must this measuring of the Temple and Altar here be but the doing the same spiritually That which is observed from this place of the Revelation is First That under the Gospel there is a Temple and Altar that is a Church and worship in it Secondly That this was to be measured that is the exact proportion of it taken now nothing can be measured without a rule and the following words cleare it for the holy Ghost speakes of witnesses who give Testimony to it and are slain for it now who would be so used for that which was never written as a rule but left arbitrary to every nation and kingdome and that it was worship they witnessed to is plaine both from the words Temple and Altar being never used for doctrine in the new Testament but for discipline and worship as likewise from the types and parallel of them as compare vers 4. with Zach. 4. now what did Joshua and Zerubbabel witnesse to but the worship It s Master Brightmans note upon the place Pag. 347. The true Christian Church is shaddowed out by the types of the old Temple each part whereof was most exactly decyphered and measured out in the old by the commandement of God himselfe and that unto this end that men might know that this house is framed by God and is not made by mans might and cunning and that therefore they should not take upon them any power to change matters at their pleasure as if the Divine Wisdome had not provided sufficiently to ordaine every thing in the fittest manner that could be thus far he So that yet Reader you may see that this Argument is not yet quelled nor the absurdity of it in any measure shewen how ere the full Replyer boasts and gives it out to the world But yet to make this more evident let this be an Argument That which tends to the salvation and edification of the soul must be appointed by God and so have the word for its rule but such doth discipline in a Church Ergo The Major is denied by none that I know yet for instance the Sacraments Bread and Wine and Water have nothing in themselves or their own nature to produce such spirituall effects as they do but onely because Christ hath instituted them to that purpose and it is that which gives them such an efficacie this was the great and indeed unanswerable Argument the Non-Conformist alwayes used against the Ceremonies that the imposers of them put a peculiar significancie in them and gave them as helps fit and apt to stir up the dull mindes of men the better to serve God as is exprest in the Preface of the Book of Common-Prayer now say they none can give that as a help to build up a mans soule or to stir him up to any spirituall thing which in its owne nature hath nothing to produce such an effect unlesse they can give these things power for the working of it and nothing but what comes from God will carry to God For the Minor or assumption that the discipline of the Church is for salvation the Apostle is cleare in 1 Cor. 5. 5. speaking of Excommunication one of the chiefe parts of discipline saith It is for the salvation of the soule now what is said of that may be said of every part of Discipline every part being homogeneall and of the same nature I le end this with the saying of Master Brightman on Rev. 2. p. 50. The Government of the Church is common to all times and places and is not permitted to be at the arbitrement of men to follow what they list but alwayes in Reforming Churches we must have recourse to the first beginnings unto the which as our onely rule we must call back what ever strayeth from it and that they are not to be turned and tuned according to the crookednesse and jarring sounds of succeeding Churches In the next place saith he He pretends my third Querie contradicts the first because I suppose a Church government may be consonant to Gods word in the generall which is not particularly prescribed in it a pretty fancie quoth he as if nothing could be consonant to Gods word which is not particularized or verbally injoyned in it To which I answer passing by many bitter expressions that follow it that things to be done in or about the worship of God are either matters of circumstance as garments place time c. such as these come under generall rules of the word such as that 1 Cor. 14. To let all things be done decently and that they be consonant to the word is sufficient Or else secondly Things are such as partake of the nature of worship and are to edifie and to attaine a spirituall end so nothing is consonant to the word but what either is punctually exprest or can be deduced by necessary immediate consequence and in this sense it s not sufficient that it s no where denied unlesse it be some where commanded and the reason is this because matters of instituted worship as Divines call it depend
Church is a particular congregation of Saints having power of censures within themselves and exercising all the Ordinances of Christ Now this Antiquity proves to be in the primitive times even many yeeres after the Apostle but suppose the contrary that there could not any such footsteps of this way be found in Antiquity yet have we no ground to thinke it s not true great was the Apostacie of the Churches from the Apostles doctrine that truth hath beene lost for a long time among the most It is a great mercy that since that defection from the pure wayes of Christ to Antichrist there have beene any glimmerings of light preserved any in secret that might worship him after his owne minde that any thing hath beene refined and restored to its primitive institution yet all times are not alike now God hath in an abundant cleere manner so scattered the mists of Popery and darknesse hath revealed many truths which formerly lay hid Unhappy we if we yet see not more then the godly formerly did who but then came out of Antichristian darknesse God is now opening the mysteries of the Gospell discovering the truths that concerne Christs Kingly Office why may not this be one though never discovered before or if discovered yet crusht and made light of The opinion of the thousand yeers which was antiently generally condemned for a Heresie is now imbraced as a precious truth and maintained by many learned lights as Alstede Mede Doctor Twisse Doctor Stoughton with divers others That is ancient which is primitive and to be found in the Scriptures neither are the names of these that either have beene of this judgement or have or doe practise it of meane and contemptible reputation but they have given sufficient testimony to the world of their learning and godlinesse as learned Baines Ames Cotton with the many in these times both in New-England here and other places men not a jot behinde any of their Predecessors in the knowledge of the mysteries of the Gospel yea anointed with the gifts of the Spirit above most of their fellows Notwithstanding that you say that for any reverend godly person who now contends about this new Modell though I reverence their persons and judgements too in other things yet I cannot subscribe to them in this new dangerous by way Yet those men cannot think you reverence dither their persons or judgements for then you would not be so rash as to condemn what they hold before you knew what it was or whether it was so or no for either you think them judicious and conscientious or not if the former then you would judge what they hold they have ground for if the latter that then they durst not practise that is generally opposed without a clear warrant at least in their own judgements from the Scriptures Neither do they desire you should subscribe to their judgements in this or any thing else yet this is your duty to give them the right hand of fellowship a while and not rail on and condemn with all bitternesse the way they practise untill you had heard what they could say for themselves In the seventh saith he the grants That the Law of nature that teacheth men to unite themselves into one nationall State or civill Government doth likewise teach them to joyn and subject themselves to one nationall Church and to nationall Synods and Parliaments in point of Church-government Let any one judge that reads what I answered whether there be so much as a shadow for such a mis-recitation the sunne of my Answer was this That the Law of nature teacheth every man to joyn himself to such a particular Society where every man may have his personall vote in every thing that concerns him as well as any one or a Company to set up either one or more over them to whose judgement they will submit and who shall be the Vltinum of all their Appeals and Counsels And that there is as great a sutablenesse to the Law of Nature in a Democraticall and Aristocraticall Government of which the Congregation consists as in a Monarchicall or 〈◊〉 Arisocraticall The Liberties of Saints and Subjects differ though Subjects may put theirs into the hands of others the Saints cannot theirs without ingratitude for Christs purchase of them and disloyalty to his Soveraignty who alone is King of his Churches for if I give up my power unto others I must stand to what they determine what ever my Conscience be to the contrary and what if they crie He grants that the Magistrate hath not still power over mens Consciences is over mens bodies yet he saith that God hath enjoyned us to be subject to every lawfull Ordinance of man and not repugnant to the Word c. To which I answer What if the commands be repugnant to direct Consequence of Scripture though not against any expresse Texts And what if a man thinks it repugnant to the Word must a man obey it that which to me is repugnant to the Word is my sin if I do it Besides what if it should be repugnant Either you must say the Magistrate can command nothing repugnant to the Word and therefore must be obeyed or else a man must see it in his own judgement not to be repugnant before he can obey it God forbid a tittle of the power God hath given Magistrates should be taken from them yet I would things were so stated that Christ might not lose his Prerogative Master Prin in his other twelve Queries and the latter end of this labours to perswade the Parliament that these whom he cals Independents are against the power of Parliaments on purpose to make them odious in their eyes But let that honourable Assembly know that what ever power the Principles of Presbytery will give them the Congregationall way will give much more neither have the Parliament truer friends then they who will be more willing to venture their lives and sacrifice all they have for them onely this is desired by them which they know is the desire of that Honourable Assembly that the Rights and Liberties Christ hath purchased by his own precious blood and left the Saints as his last Legacie may not be taken away by the secular power as that the secular power might not be encroached on by Christian Liberty After this he goes on to justifie his bitter and unchristian passage in comparing our Church-meetings to the Conventicles of of the Arrians Donatists c. Could you finde no smoother or lovinger comparison to scandalize us by Can no other title be bad enough but a Conventicle A name given by the Bishops and all their crew to all the godly meetings of the Saints Take heed that you that are so skilled in the Bishops language come not to take up their weapons too what do you but in one word cal us hereticks Schismaticks and the worst of men For this you say in the Marthat 35. Eli. c. 1. none are Conventicles but
shall all be called together the most part of the nations shall beleeve and come to Christ in 1 Pet. 2. 9. which he quotes The Apostle calls the scattered Saints a holy nation yet they were no nation but scattered thorow many nations and these Scriptures are meant of the multiplicity of beleevers that shall be brought under Jesus Christs Dominion and these Texts do no more prove a nationall Church or any one nation wholly converted then that Text Go preach the Gospel unto every nation Matth. 28. proves that every nation shall therefore be converted to Christ and they rather prove that all nations shall be reall Saints then that any one nation or more shall be so Besides if the Church be nationall every one of the nation is a member and there can be no censures of Excommunication rightly administred for there can be no Excommunication but either by cutting the person off from this life or else banishing which are for destruction not edification for whiles he lives in the Kingdom he is a member and the bounds and limits of the nation are the bounds and limits of the Church Againe of what Nation in the world can it be said which is said of the Church you are a peculiar and holy people nay are not all the Nations corrupted few or none in the most imbracing the Gospel England hath been accounted as Protestant and as refined a Nation as any hath been for Doctrine yet how many vipers hath it bred in its own bowels who ever have been more wicked then they where have the Saints been more persecuted then here Againe if Nations may be Churches there will be no distinction between the World and the Church all will be Saints and as far members of the visible Church as the best Saints To that I say that he cannot shew any Nation every Member whereof is qualified sufficiently to make up a Church unlesse wee will take in Drunkards Whoremongers c. and this cannot be avoided in a Nationall Church he answers that he daces not be wiser then his Lord and Master who informes him that there will and must be alwaies in the visible Church on earth goats among the sheep châ—ffe amongst the wheat c. I answer 1. That there will be goats is most certaine but that there must be is neither necessitate praecepti nor medâ—j Christ never commanded it neither is it of absolute necessity for the Saints can live be built up without any mixture of such society is it a delight and pleasure to Christ to see goats among his sheep in his own fold what need then this must be so confidently put in Secondly goats chaffe bad fish are taken for hypocrites as well as profane men and in these places they are only to be taken so as for example that place Mat. 13. 24. of the good seed and the tares which he quotes by tares are not meant profane persons but hypocrites 1. the * Scutietus in obse vat in Mat. Pasor Lexicon in â—…b Word expresseth no more tares as Historians observe are a weed like the wheat now profane men are no way like the Saints 2. if it be meant of profane men and Master Pryn take it of their being in the Church then all the censures of the Church are out off ipso facto for the Text saith expressely they must be let alone till the harvest that is the day of judgment so that no wicked man may be excommunicated or any censure passe upon him yea 3. it is plaine they are hypocrites they were discovered by none but the Angells yea 4. if you will needs take it of profane men the Text saith expressely that these were not in the Church but in the world the field is the world vers 38. whereas he saith he finds that in the Churches of Galathia Collosse Pergamus c. there were drunkards Epicures whoremongers c. I answer in general that I know no Churches openly taxt for any such grosse acts of sin in all the New Testament only the Church of Corinth abou the incestuous Corinthian which is spoken as a defilement and a blot upon them whereby they were corrupted and he therefore exhorts them to cast him out that they might be a new lumpe 1 Cor. 5. As for 1 Cor. 11. where the Apostle saith one is thirsty and another is drunke I think it not meant of that grosse act which we call drunkennesse but the same with that which is said of Joseph and his brethren Gen. 43. 5. they dranke and were merry they drank more freely then they ought at that time though it might be lawfull at another time but however though there were these in such Churches Yet First I speak of the first constitution of a Church and what Churches should be not what they are degenerated into Secondly they were most spirituall sins that were laid to the charge of the seven Churches and other Churches as that they lost their first love countenanced false teachers c. not such grosse acts of prophanesse as whoring c. Yet Thirdly what heavy and sad threatnings are there denounced by God against these if the continued in that estate and what judgment did follow for God is very tender of his worship and what is become of all these Churches now how greatly hath God been displeased with them the Jewes might not enter into marriage with the daughters of a strange Land much lesse might they admit them to ordinances among them unlesse really converted and made proselytes now such are all not visible Saints in the judgment of the Saints unto those that are really called and joine together in the ordinances and they ought to be as shye of those as they were of them whatever a Church rightly constituted may fall into by defection I speak not of but what they ought to be such as the word calls Saints which can hardly be given by any knowing Saint to the most part of men in England For that he asketh whether we have not drunkards cozeners usurers c. members of our Churches I answer we know none and we should thank Master Pryn if he could discover any such account him our reall friend in it For that he saith where was there ever a Church of all elected ones that is a state for heaven not for this world I answer there 's none saith a Church must be all of elect but of such as can be judged by the Saints to be elect If men be not saved it s not because the Church is deceived but themselves the Church goes only on these probable rules of judging by which the word prescribes the visible Church in Scripture is called Heaven often times as Mat. 25. 1. Heb. 12. 26. Mat 13. and in Esa 4. 5. its called glory to intimate that none should properly be of the Church but should go to Heaven and it s called the body of Christ none should be admitted as members of that body but
Independent from the Apostles Laws And if he put it as an Argument it runs thus if the Primitive Churches were subject to the Apostles Laws Rules then are all Churches now subject to a Presbytery and Synods the consequence we desire you to prove To whom should the Church be subject but to these who gave them the minde of God immediatly And here let the Reader observe that in this Head Master Pryn brought in many Arguments by way of absurdity upon the holding of the Primitive Churches to be a pattern of all other which it seems he is ashamed to mention and seeth now because of what was retorted on him that even they themselves are absurd For that he saith of my retorted That the Scriptures were written in the infancie of the Church therefore better might be written now that is a blasphemous conclusion It s confessed Yet had it as good a consequence as yours that the Churches now had a more perfect constitution then the Churches in the Apostles times because they were the first and as you call them Infant churches Whereas you say that the Scripture was writ by the Ancient of dayes who hath neither infancie nor imperfection as the Church hath I Answer That the Scripture was writ to be a Rule to perfect the Churches and the reason of the imperfection of the Churches is because it comes not up to that Rule and these Churches how ever you deemed them Infant had more knowledge of that Rule then ever any yet have had they receiving it more immediatly from Gods mouth then any since and their Churches must needs be more exactly constituted then any since who lived under the Apostles direction and had all they had from them as from God To that I say that he would make a Nationall Church more perfect then a Congregationall he saith he doubts not to averre it since warranted by direct * Eph. 4. 11 12 13. 2 Cor. 13. 9. Heb 6. 1. 1 Pet. 9. 10. Phil. 3. 12. 2. Heb. 13. 21. James 1. 4. Scriptures to the which I shall refer the Reader but to look over and then let him learn hereafter to be taken with Master Pryns Marginall Quotations what shaddow there is of proof in these Scriptures but a cast of an eye will discern But yet I answer Imperfection in any thing ariseth more or lesse either from the defect of something essentiall or which is to the beauty and ornament and glory of a thing or both then is a thing more or lesse perfect when either its essentialls are more perfect or that which accidentally goes to the adorning of it What there is more of these two in a Nationall Church then in a Congregationall I know not unlesse the mixt multitude of beleevers and profane persons growing up together into a bitter bulk of sin should adde either to the essence or ornament of a Church if God had seen so much beauty in Nationall-churches above others he would not have destroyed the Jewish State or at least would have stablished the like in the Gospel and would have converted the heathen Empires and have took them in to be a Church to him It was the mixt multitude which came out of Egypt with the Israelites that brought them to so much wo indeed were a whole nation such as could be judged reall Saints it would be a lovely sight to behold so many Churches walking together in the unity of the faith but that never hath been yet we know not what may be we have little hopes of it untill the Jews be called if then And which is a more perfect State a company of visible Saints joyned together in love and walking in all the Ordinances of God according to their light or a whole nation wherein there is here and there a Saint walking with Whoremasters Drunkards and all sorts of ungodly ones without distinction and enjoying all these Ordinances that the most have no right unto The comparison between a grown experienced Christian and a babe in grace is no way proportionable to this thing Wherein lies the growth and perfection and experience in a Nationall-church that is not in a Congregationall Either it lies in the Presbytery and Nationall-assembly or in the distinct Parishes and the Members of them If in the Assembly that they are so experienced the people have little benefit by it unlesse to subject their necks to what they say and there is the same in many Congregationall-churches when met for advice if in the Parishes and the severall Congregations the same is in this way we speak of much more little is the edification the members have from the perfection of a Nationall-church seeing they cannot meet together or be present at the hearing of these experiences that others have the onely benefit the members have is from the enjoyment of the gifts of their own Pastour and it may be he one that they never chose as Pastour to them but was imposed on them and the truth is this is but to circumscribe the Church in the Ministers for else there may be more understanding men and experienced Christians in a Congregationall-church then generally thorowout a nation the common people being most ignorant every where One thing he urgeth more in this That a Congregationall-church is forced to pray in the aid of other Churches for advice assistance c. which a Nationall-church need not Now here let all the world observe whether he or any of the Presbyterians have cause to call us Independent What more independent then a Nationall-church It s a Pope infallible needs no aid assistance of any Church in the world it hath a spirit of infallibility tied to its girdle We acknowledge we need help and assistance from other Churches they need none and here all you Presbyterians either renounce Master Pryns opinion and get some other Champion for you or else for ever cease to open your mouth to call any of the Congregationall way Independent In fine saith he He himself confesseth that the Apostles made new rules for Government and Discipline as occasion served and as God fitted occasions so he made known new rules successively by degrees not at once c. Therefore the infant-Infant-Church in the Apostles dayes was not so compleat and perfect in all its parts as the multiplied and grown Churches afterwards A. How much he hath failed in the recitall of this let the Reader compare and judge I will not say wilfully as he saith of me for he hath left out that part which was the strength of all which if he had took in his Position had been overthrown which was that though the Apostles added by degrees according as occasion served new Rules and Offices for to what end should they adde untill there was occasion yet so as at length they discovered all the minde of God concerning his Churches Government and left it as a pattern to all the Churches As the Scriptures were not written all at once but
some Epistles were written to some Churches before others according as occasion was and the Revelation discovered last as concerning the last Ages of the Church yet so as still at length that the whole Scripture should be written and left as the minde of God to all ages And unlesse Master Pryn saith that the Churches constituted by the Apostles had not at length a full discovery of Church-government he hath no ground to think they were not so compleat as the following Churches My tenth Querie saith he he wilfully mis-recites as he doth the rest and then returns an Answer by way of Dilemma Charity would have prompted you otherwise to which he Answers thus That if the Parliament and Synod shall by publike consent establish a Presbyterian Government as consonant to the Word the Laws and Regiment of this Kingdome Independents and all others are bound in conscience to submit under pain of obstinacie singularity in case they cannot prove it Diametrally opposite to the Scripture c. Something hath been said in Answer to this before Yet further if Master Pryn means by submitting that actually we must yeeld to the Presbyteriall judgement and on the first setting of it up presently lay down every thought of Reason and Argument we have raised up against it and say it is the way of Christ and the onely way which we must serve Christ in if he thinks any of us to have the least principles of reason he cannot imagine we should do so But if he means thus That we ought not to stand against that Authority that sets it up but submit to the penalty if the least can in conscience be imposed which shall be laid on us we grant it I hope we shall not be found despisers of Authority in that but shall expect as great assistance from Jesus Christ as ever you did in a matter far lower even the writing against a Bishops Court or a Cardinalls Cap as crossing the Statutes of the land and as you confesse but a matter of meer opinion I speak not this to upbraid you or detract from your sufferings which are indeed badges of honour not of shame but as far as your self detract from them in telling us the true ground of them that we might not too much glory in you These places you so often quote Rom. 13. 1. 1. Tim. 2. 1. c. They make as much for Heathen Magistrates as Christian and in every thing as well as any thing if it be meant of actuall obedience To his crosse Interrogatories saith he I Answer First That if the Popes Councell command lawfull things to them that are under their power they ought to be obeyed as well as the commands of Heathen Emperours Magistrates Parents by Christian Subjects Wives Servants living under them Notwithstanding this the Argument is still in force That Heathen Emperours are to be obeyed as well as any Christian Magistrates if that as Magistrates they must be obeyed for that you say and seem to make a distinction of it if they command lawfull thing But the question is still who shall be Judge of that Is it not as great a reason that I shall be Judge of the lawfulnesse of the things I am to obey as the Magistrate should judge of that he commands to be lawfull If this be not granted blinde obedience must necessarily follow If I obey because he judges it lawfull I obey not out of a principle of judgement concerning the thing but meerly because of the command what blinder obedience there can be I know not Again as before either the power commanding is to be obeyed or else the things themselves command obedience If the former that is alike to all Magistrates and in every thing there must be obedience where that power is If for the latter then the things themselves binde and then I must needs see it to be lawfull and that necessity of sinning put upon a man by this is not taken away by any thing I see in Master Pryns Reasons for if I obey not the power commanding of lawfull things I sin if I do obey before I am convinced of the lawfulnesse of it or have a scruple or doubt of its unlawfulnesse much more when I positively think so I sin against God and he will condemne me as an hypocrite a time-server as one sinning against my light and contradicting these motions that for ought I know are from his good spirit God cares not for nay will condemne whatever is done without knowledge though the things themselves be what he hath commanded so that either we shall intreat Master Pryn to give us new eyes or else not to censure us if we actually follow not that we have no knowledge in Secondly saith he there is a great difference between matters of opininion only and of practice as whether Episcopacy be jure divino c. though the resolutions of a Synod and Parliament should be affirmative they could not binde my judgment saith he absolutely so far as to subscribe to their opinion as an undoubted truth unlesse they could satisfie my arguments yet they should and ought to binde me to practise So if the Parliament and Synod should establish any Church-government though it bindes not Independents to be simply of their opinion or unlesse your reasons and arguments be sufficient to convince their judgments yet it bindes them in point of practice and obedience outwardly to submit thereunto This Argument contradicteth the fundamentals of Religion and gives way to the greatest hypocrisie in the world this is that God requires in all services that the heart and the head and the hand goe together to oppose the practice and the judgement in spirituall obedience is to separate the soul from the body and bid the body act God hath put the understanding in a man to be a light to his path a mans understanding is a mans practice as the eye to the body without which it cannot walk safely and men may be what they will if this be true that a mans judgment may be one way and a mans practice another a man may deny God break the Sabbath sweare in his practice so his judgement be contrary But it may be Master Pryn meanes it of indifferent things meerly circumstantiall but I hope he accounts not matters of worship and Church-government so whatever is not of faith is sin no mans practice can be of faith who knowes not what he doth lawfull much lesse whose judgement is contrary It s true matter of opinion is one thing if it be a meer opinion that is not reducible to practise and I may only hold an opinion and being contradicted by higher powers though I may not be convinced yet I may be silent but when things come to be prest on me to practise and that in the worship of God and my judgment is not satisfied then I must be convinc't or else it s a sin for me to practise how Master Pryn thinks in his