may see that his Charity and his Veracity are proportionable he hence inferrs p. 57. Did ever any Bishop aspire to such Tyranny as this the Pope only excepted Is not the King and whole Nation greatly culpable not to trust themselves with the ingenuity of this people c. Answ Reader which is liker to be guilty of Tyranny 1. We that desire no power but to plead God's Law to mens Consciences 2. And that but with one Congregation And 3. with no constrained unwilling persons but only voluntary Consenters 4. And to rule over none of our Fellow-Ministers 5. And only to be but Freemen as Schoolmasters and Philosophers be in their Schools of Volunteers that we may not against our Consciences be the Pastors of the unwilling or such as we judge uncapable according to God's Laws but to use the Keys of Admission and Exclusion as to that particular Church 6. And to do all under the Government of the Magistrate who may punish us as he may do Physicians Schoolmasters or others for proved mal-administration and drive us not from but to our Duty 7. And to be ready to give an account of our Actions to any Synod or Brethren that demand it and to hear their Admonitions and Advice Yea and to live in peaceable submission where Archbishops or General-Visitors are set over us and upon any Appeals or Complaints to hear and obey them in any lawful thing belonging to their Trust and Power 9. And if we be judged to have worngfully denied our Ministerial help and Communion to any we pretend to no power to hinder any other Church or Pastor from receiving him 10. And if we be by Magistrates cast out or afficted for our Duty we shall quietly give up the Temples and publick Church-maintenance of which the Magistrate may dispose and without resisting or dishonouring him endure what he shall inflict upon us for our obedience to God This is our odious Tyranny 2. On the other side our Accusers 1. Some of them are for power in themselves to force men by the Sword that is by Mulcts and corporal Penalties to be subject to them or be of their Church and Communion 2. Others are for the Magistrate thus forcing them when the Bishop Excommunicates them 3. They thus make the Church like a prison when no man knoweth whether the people be willing Members or only seem so to escape the Jail 4. They would be such forcing Rulers over many score or hundred Parishes 5. They would have power to Rule Suspend and Silence the Pastors of all these Parishes when they think meet 6. They hinder the Pastors of the Parish-Churches from that exercise of the Keys aforesaid in their own Parish-Churches which belongs to the Pastors Office 7. They would compel the Parish-Ministers to Admit Absolve or Excommunicate at least as declaring other mens Sentences when it is against their Consciences 8. They would make Ministers swear Obedience to them and Bishops swear Obedience to Archbishops 9. Some of them are for their power to Excommunicate Princes and greatest Magistrates though contrary to the fifth Commandment it dishonour them 10. Some of them say that if the King command one Church-Order or Form or Ceremony and the Bishop another the Bishop is to be obeyed before the King As also if the King bid us Preach and the Bishop forbid us 11. And they say that their Censures even Clave errante must be obeyed 12. And that he whom a Bishop cuts off from one Church is thereby cut off from all and none may receive him 13. And that it is lawful to set up Patriarchs Metropolitans c. to rule the Church according to the state and distribution of Civil Government Look over these two Cases and judge which party is liker to Church-Tyrants and then judge what Credit is due to such Accusers of the Non-Conformists in this Age. § 43. II. As to Reordination I have answer'd to Mr. Cheny what he saith He deceitfully avoideth determining the first Question whether they intend a Reordination or not Whereas I have proved 1. That the Church of England is against twice Ordaining 2. That they call it and take it for a true Ordination which is to be received from them by such as Presbyters had Ordained 3. And therefore that they suppose the former Null 4. And this is much of the reason of mens doubting whether they should receive the second which is given on such a Supposition But this man is little concerned in the true stating of the case § 44. III. What he saith of the Ministers power for Discipline is answered already to Mr. Cheney that hath the same § 45. About the Covenant 1. he falsly makes me say that the King took it Whereas whether he did or not I only say that he was injuriously and unlawfully drawn to seem to owne it and declare for it 2. Next he aggravates this Injury And who contradicteth him 3. He pleadeth That the King is not obliged by it to make any alteration in the Government of the Church Answ I will not examine your Reasons The King never made me his Confessor nor put the question to me Why then should I make my self a Judge of it And why must my Ministry lie on a thing beyond my knowledge But am I sure that no Parliament-man that took that Vow is bound there in his place to endeavour a Reforming Alteration when I am past doubt that much is needful He would 1. make it doubtful Whether it was a Vow to God I think it not worth the labour to prove it to him that doubteth of it after deliberate reading it 2. He saith Any lawful endeavours are not denied Answ But the Obligation to lawful endeavours are denied Are not the words universal 3. He saith The Covenant condemned as unlawful cannot lay an Obligation Answ A Vow to God unlawfully imposed and taken may binde to a Lawful Act. 4. He calls it unnecessary alterations against the Law of the Land Answ I suppose I shall prove some reforming alteration necessary And it is not against Law for a Subject to petition for it or a Parliament-man to speak for it Yet when the man seems to me to be pleading Conscience out of the Land he saith Would not this cause the Christian Religion in a short time to be exploded out of all Kingdoms Alas poor people what uncertain Guides have you 5. He concludes that the power of Reforming being in the King the Vow was null Answ The Regal Power of Reforming is only in the King To change Laws without him is Usurpation But Parliament-men may speak for it and Subjects petition and on just causes write and speak for needful Reformation And I speak for no other § 45. IV. About not taking Arms against those Commissioned by the King He plainly professeth that we must not distinguish where the Law doth not And if it be an unlimited Universal Negative it will quite go beyond Mainwaring or Sibthorpe And for all
only to the Ministry in general but in settled Churches it is usually inconvenient And he that is ordained to a fixed Church doth at once become a Minister in the universal Church and may act as a Minister and not as a Layman when called elsewhere and also a fixed Minister of a particular Church even as he that is baptized into a particular Church is a member of both Though Baptism and Ordination qua tales enter but into the Universal XXXVII It is not this or that mode of signification of consent that is necessary to either relation of Pastor or Flock but Consent signified intelligibly where Laws and Custome order it that actual ordinary attendance in publick worship and communion and submission to necessary ministration shall be the signification all that so do express consent by it And therefore our ordinary Parish-Assembling and Communion being express consent to the mutual relation have that which is necessary ad esse to true Churches and they slander them that say they are not such But ad melius esse more may oft-times be profitable 1. Because that is the best means which is best fitted to the end But the end of Signes being Notification that is caeteris paribus the best which is most notifying as that is the best Language which is most significant and intelligible Why should playing in the dark or dealing under-board be preferred in the greatest things 2. It oft falls out that some that live in the Parish are known Church-Papists Church-Atheists Infidels will tell in their meetings to their companions I believe not the words of the Parish-Priest It is his Trade to talk for gain I will do what the Law requires of me for my safety but I will have no more to do with him nor do I take him for a true Pastor that hath any Authority but by Law nor for any Pastor to me And 3. there are many Hereticks and Schismaticks engaged Members of other Churches who yet to avoid suffering will do that in the Parish-Church which the Law requireth 4. And the Antient Churches used express Consent yea and Election So for the Minister he is no Pastor without his signified consent but actual Ministration may be such a signification This is enough to reconcile the difference about Church-covenants XXXVIII They that rail against a more express consent in cases truly dubious as if it were tyranny and destructive to Christianity do suppose that if the King and Law commanded such a thing they commanded Tyrannically that which destroyeth Christianity and contradict themselves when they say that Rulers may make various orders of Church-governours and determine of undetermined Modes XXXIX As it is not needful and usual to set up a Coordinate Imperium artificum vel Philosophorum in Imperio Civili so it seemeth also of an Imperium Religiosum The first Question is whether Christ hath Instituted such The second whether he hath given power to Men to make it There is not in any Kingdom that I hear of but somewhat towards it in China such a Society of Physicians Astronomers Navigators Lawyers Schoolmasters Philosophers c. who set up a Co-ordinate Empire or Government that shall have all degrees of self-governing power as a National Socity with one Supreme either Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical Head according to the order of Civil-government Nor doth any reproach Schools Colledges Hospitals or any trading Societies that they are confused Independent and ungoverned because they have no common Governour but God and the King nor any particular Governour but the Principal or Master and Fellows of the Society nor any National association besides their subjection to one King and their voluntary correspondence for concord and mutual assistance with one another And much less is there any Co-ordinate Political Regiment of any of these through all the world under one visible humane Head personal or collective And yet many think that there is such a Society and Regiment for Religion National say some Universal say others That all that will serve God and be saved must be under one Co-ordinate power over all the Kingdom or World besides Christ and the Supreme Magistrate and they contend whether this power be Monarchical or Aristocratical c. I am so far Independent as to think that Christ hath Instituted no such Universal or National Power and Head of Religion but that 1. his own Universal Kingdom 2. And particular Churches under their several Bishops and Teachers 3. And Synods for concord and mutual help 4. And Christian Magistrates to rule all by the Sword 5. With the improvement of Mens eminent gifts and opportunities that these be Instituted by Christ I doubt not 6. And whether some should succeed the Apostles excepting their extraordinary powers in having a visiting instructing ordering care of many Churches and their Bishops and Teachers I confess my self uncertain and therefore will never strive against such nor deny due obedience to them who shew a true call to such an employment Nay if Christ have made no such Institution yet 1. if the Christian Magistrate 2. or the Churches by consent choose some faithful Ministers to such a power onely to direct instruct guide admonish reprove exhort the Bishops and Teachers of the particular Churches without any other force than the Apostles used and not destroying any of their proper power and duty or that Church-order which the Apostles setled I am no opposer of any such though my uncertainty disables me from subscribing and swearing to the right of their Authority The Scots themselves even by Knox's consent set up Super-intendents over many Churches John Spotswood Super-intendent of Lothian and so others And the power of a President Principal or Rector of a Colledge of Physicians Philosophers or Divines doth not make him of any other Order or species of Office and Profession than the rest But if any affirm more than this I will learn but cannot yet swear or subscribe it XL. Those that are for the obligation of the Jewish order I have fully spoke to in my first Plea for Peace Those that are only for the power of man to make such several Orders or Ranks of Governours in the Church as are in Armies and Kingdoms 1. Must tell us what sort of power may be given them 2. And who must give it And 1. No men can Institute a power of the same species or another species from that which we call the Sacred Ministry or as the Fathers the Sacerdotal but what is subordinate about the Accidentals of Religion and the Church 1. Not the same species because it is Instituted by God already No Man can create a creature already created 2. Not of another supra-ordinate or co-ordinate for 1. they can prove no power given them to do it 2. And that were to accuse Christ of insufficient doing his undertaken work and being less faithful in his house than Moses 3. And it will infer Mans introduction of a new co-ordinate
sense about this matter 9. It is not true as far as any London Ministers can know that ever the Judges declared their sense as you say for that limitation That is that ever they did by any Consultation and Concord give any judgment in the Case whatever any single Judge as the Lord Keeper might say privately or any one alone when another may say the contrary 10. If they had it 's a known thing whatever their judgment may do to make Cases in the Common Law yet as to Statute Law only the Law-makers are the Law-Interpreters as to any Interpretation which shall be as the Law it self a Rule universally to the Subjects And that Judges and Justices who here are made the Judges do only interpret the Law for the decision of particular Controversies that come before them And if all the Judges and Justices in England should meet and agree of this Statute it would only shew how they resolve in particular judgments to expound it and not what is the true obliging sense to the Subjects Conscience Otherwise the Judges would be equal to if not above the King and Parliament For he hath more power who determineth what sense and soul the Laws shall have than they that only make the words and body which others may put what sense they please on Nor can all the Judges make it lawful to take up Arms against the King if they so expounded any Law They have a deciding Expositors judgment as to the Case before them but not the regulating universal expounding power at all 11. We think that Divines that preach against sin above al◠men must not stretch their Consciences in so dangerous a point as publick swearing 12. And we think that if men be once taught to equivocate and play fast and loose with the sacred Bond of Oaths Conscience is quite debauched no sufficient Bar is left to keep out any the greatest sins Preachers and People become incredible humane society is endeavoured to be dissolved and the King's Life secured much by his Subjects Fidelity and Conscience of an Oath is exposed to the wicked wills of men We charge no others with all this but we will avoid it our selves though it cost us yet more You may swear not to endeavour and mean particularly not by Tumult or Arms but by some other endeavour but so cannot we Therefore do you enjoy your Liberty Maintenance and Honour and we will be without them and to morrow at death we shall be as free and as high as you But fie Sirs why will you talk of straining Oaths and turning plain Oaths into Snares ana◠allowing no Interpreters Are your ways here equal too 1. What is the plain sense but an universal sense of an universal enunciation If by All or None I understand All or None and you understand not All but Some who is the Strainer of the Oath And I pray you tell me if once any endeavour shall be excepted who shall determine how much it must be The first part of the Oath saith Not on any pretence whatever That is we must not take up Arms against any Commissioned by the King What if a bold limited Expositor will here come in and say Except King John deliver up the Kingdom to the Pope Or except the King's Commissions through the Officers fault should be contradictory Or such Exceptions as Wil. Barclay and Grotius make Should not this man rather be the Equivocator and Strainer of the Oath than he that thinketh so plain a Phrase as not any pretence whatsoever is exclusive of any pretence whatsoever Never trust the man that feareth not an Oath 2. But why talk you of none being Interpreters we cannot give the Power to whom we please The Law-makers think it best as it is and will not interpret as you do when they can and know all the Reasons that you can give them The Justices are made our Judges I told you that the Justices when they sent me to the Gaol refused to Expound it and told me I must take it according to the proper sense of the words Yet do you go on as if none of all this had been said to you As to what you say of Obligation by the Covenant and leaving a gap c. I answer Melancholy men by fearing bring the thing feared on themselves It was the Et caetera Oath 1640 that forced me who else had lived quietly in my ignorance to read and study many Authors to know the truth before I swore who turned me not against Episcopacy but against the Italian and Diocesan frame The Covenant is not the thing that they are in danger of but their own Diseases we firmly believe that the Covenant bindeth us to nothing but what we were bound to if we had never taken it as being not a primary Bond to make new Duty but a secondary to bind us to that only which is antecedently a duty and that no Vow or Covenant bindeth us from obeying the King in any thing indifferent much less a duty before These are our Principles however you nauseate them But without respect to any Vow or Covenant we hold that we are all bound not to any Treason Rebellion or any illegal means but in our true Place and Calling to endeavour that those things may be reformed in the Discipline which my first Dispute of Church Government hath proved to be evil After which so long unanswered you need not so loudly have called for my Reasons And if this be it that maketh you think my Retraction not sincere think what you please I never retracted any of this § 44. First They that exercise the Keys of Excommunication and Absolution in the ordinary open Judicatures of the Land are Church Governours But Lay Chancellors exercise the Keys of Excommunication and Absolution in the ordinary open Judicatures of the Land Ergo Lay-Chancellors are Church-Governours 2. Who doubts but the Et caetera included them If it included None it was superfluous If Any how exclude you them And is it not said As it standeth and ought to stand But were it but Deans and Archdeaeons I would not swear that if the King commanded me by Writing or Petition to endeavour some alteration I will resist or disobey him you may do as you will 3. It were too long now to tell you how far I take my Conscience obliged to a Lay-Chancellor and how far not 4. But what 's next That no Learned men so much as maintain in the Schools the Lay-Chancellors Church Government And yet have we hot and feaverish heads if we will not swear to that which no man will maintain Well! let it go for our Crime or Folly while such men judge 5. Add p. 20. The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom a good understanding have all they that do them Fools make a mock of sin See that ye walk circumspectly not as fools but as wise To fear an Oath is a mark of the fear of God and
Colledge though in the great remote end they both agree But you fly to that poor shift of bidding me take heed of absurd and ridiculous Suppositions not argumentative c. As if you had shewed any absurdity in these Suppositions Or as if plain undeniable Instances had no place in Arguments or Answers but were ridiculous Suppositions and he that would say that a Kingdom is greater than a Family and the King than a Master or Major used a ridiculous Supposition Just thus the poor Nonconformists are perswaded by your Pithonalogy to subscribe swear c. But I seem you say to assert this my self by saying there is a small difference between Bishop Usher's Model and the present Answ It 's tedious disputing with one that must have still another Writing to help him to understand that which he will first confute yea and seemeth not willing to understand It is a fallacy A dicte secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter I only askt you What Farthing doth it take from their Estates What Title from their Honour Power Negative voice even their Lordships and Parliament places But is this the Question We then laboured to satisfie the unsatisfied Ministers that not only Bishop Usher's Reduction but even the King's Declaration about Ecclesiastical Affairs had changed the very species of Prelacy without any of those Abatements If you would know it is by one word Consent restoring the inferiour Pastors and Churches though not to their Integrals yet to their Essentials And we were so inclinable to Conformity that on that supposition we had Conformed had but that Declaration stood though some of the Sects are of another mind whom you Arguments would confirm For we judge that a Bishop of one only Church consisting of five hundred or a thousand Chappels or Congregations that are strictly no Churches as having no Bishops doth specifically differ from a Bishop of a thousand Churches which have every one their proper Bishop and so he is truly an Archbishop or General Bishop But I am not to trouble you with this And now how impertinent was it to bid me Rub up my Philosophy about Maximum quod sic minimum quod non Know you not that the common use of those Writers are to intimate the same thing that I am saying against you That there is a subjective maximum minimum which only are capable of the relative form But I am next turned to Vossius de invoc sanct of which he hath there disputed and one Histor Thes and I am not told which of them but the words are in the first Thes 49. to prove that the Saint in Heaven and those on Earth make one Society Quare cum nihil obstat quo minus unius civitatis cives dicamur nec causae quicquam erit quo minus aeque civilis honos dicatur qui civibus coelestibus exhibetur quam qui civibus terrenis Nam grad◠quidem honores isti differunt sed uterque tamen est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And was it possible that you should think that this made for you Because the world or Universe of Rationals are one Body or Society and so civil honour is the same thing as such in genere to them in Heaven as to them on Earth doth it follow that in this universal Society there are no Kingdoms Cities or Families specifically different Nor no different species of the civil honour what not to Kings Parents Masters What a thing is factions Interest Vossius only proveth Generical Identity of civil honour and the specifical difference of it from the honour of Religious Adoration The Church universal is one and the love and honour which we owe to the Saints in Heaven and Earth is Generically of the same kind But do you believe therefore that there are no subordinate Species of Churches and Honour on Earth What not the Honour due to the King the Bishop the Chancellor the Parish Curates the Deacons and the Beggars Yet all this with you are Premises sufficient to conclude And then it may be you may give leave to Magis minus non variant speciem to be a Maxim still See what Evidence it is that must perswade us to Nonconformity Are they not worthy to be silenced and branded as you have done that can resist such Light But you come to the quick and say Is there no Communion but personal Answ Yes else they could not be two ends to make two Societies You add Many of the Kings Subjects never saw his face yet they have many Hands and Eyes in respect of their subordinate Officers so have Diocesans in their Curates Answ Very true And that proveth that a Kingdom is one Society and a whole Diocess also one Ignoras Elenchum But doth that prove that there are no subordinate Societies in these Which though subordinate in point of Power yet specifically differ Is there no such thing as Personal Communion in presence because there is such a thing as distant Communion of another sort For all that your terms of Hands and Eyes would hide it I scarce think you are ignorant that under the King there are Heads as well as Hands and Eyes Heads of Families Schools Colledges Universities Corporations Cities who are constitutive parts of real Societies which are not of the same species with a Kingdom though in it And if Archbishops be of God's appointment so it should be with Archbishops and Bishops and every Church should have a Bishop But if you will not have it so but we must only have a Bishop and Curates and a Diocesan Church and Chappels you betray our Cause to the Brownists who easily prove No Bishop or Pastor no Church in sensu politico And so when you have granted them that we have no true Parish Churches there are few of them whose Wit is so weak as not to disprove the pretended right of such Diocesan Churches as consist of the Carkasses of many hundred mortified Parish Churches § 50. My Answer I must not repeat take it how you will you here come to the very Controversie I will not begin it with you because I cannot prosecute it I have so much to say on it as at these rates may engage you and me in dispute for many years if we lived so long which I find no reason allowing me to undertake Get me leave to Write and Publish it and I will write you a just Volume of it since it is published till then I again tell you I have said enough though too negligently in my Dispute of Church Government though one hath nibled at the Forms of some Arguments in it If you would have more answer Gers Bucer Parker and Ames's fresh Suit to name no other § 50. I shewed the invalidity 1. Of your Licitis honestis 2. And of former Obedience sub poena anathematis as nothing to our case in hand and do you deny what I said and disprove it 2. I tell you that so far as Bishops or
of both known to us in the world I oft enough distinguishing de nomine aequivoco have told men that it is not every Christian Assembly that we speak of but societas politica And all Politicks call the form of the Government the specifying form of the Politick Society throughout the known world So Monarchy Aristocracie Democracie are specifying forms of Republicks And Schools Armies Navies have divers Relative forms specifyed by the union of the various Regent Relative parts to the rest § IV. The Form is a chief essential part § V. Therefore divers specifying forms prove divers essences in specie § VI. It is not the generical form that specifieth Else all things that are ejusdem generis should be ejusdem speciei All bodies are not Animate nor all Animals Men nor all Men Bishops or Physicians § VII The Genus denominated without defining it with the specifying form or difference makes the Definition of the Species Else the Definition of the species infima would be confounded by the conjunct definitions of all the superiour Genera He that defineth a King must not put in it the definition of Homo of Animal of Vivens of Corpus and Anima of substantia § VIII The highest species must be defined by its proper highest form though not the subordinate species The King must be put in the definition of a Kingdom but not of a City Country Church Family School he is there supposed in a Kingdom And so of others § IX The higher Genera must not be named in the definition of the species but the next which is the superiour species Therefore Mr. Ch. mistook his Art of defining when he said I mist it by naming Christ as the Head of the Church Universal and adding that I blame my self that defining of a particular Church As in Relations it is not the ultimate end but the nearest that must be in the definition so is it not the highest but the next Genus that must be named In defining all the lower species the higher Genera are but implyed in the naming of genus proximum and not named § X. The Relation of Jesus Christ and of a humane Bishop are not the same Relation in specie though both be called Heads or Rulers Proved There is not the same subjectum nor the same fundamentum vel ratio fundandi nor the same Correlate for all the Christian world and a Diocese are not the same nor the same nearest terminus Ergo not the same Relation § XI Therefore the Universal Church Headed by Christ onely and a particular Church subordinately Headed by a Bishop or Clergy-head are essentially divers and two Proved Where the formal specifying Head or Regent part is two or divers and the Body divers c. there the societies are divers in specie or essentially But so it is here Ergo. That One and One are Two I will not undertake to prove to Mr. Ch. nor think it needful to prove to others nor yet that Christ is One and a Bishop one and not the same That Christ is the formal Head of the Universal Church all Christians confess and therefore to be named in the definition whether Mr. Ch. will or not and not supposed Baptismal Union and subjecting to him maketh us Christians and not supposeth us such in visible Church-state That Christ is not the formal specifying Head of a particular Church as such but of the Universal and so the Supream Head only of the particular is proved before 1. Because the specifying forma totius heterogenei is not the specifying form of the parts 2. Else all that Christ is Supreme Ruler to should be such particular Political Churches which is false It is not true of single persons of Christian Armies Troops Markets Parliaments Courts c. as such 3. Christ himself by his Apostles hath ordained a subordinate humane species of Church-heads or Rulers 4. From parity of cases Natural and Political The forma animalis is not forma hominis nor forma hominis forma oculi manus pedis c. The General is the formal Head of the Army but not of a Regiment but the Colonel Nor the Colonel of a Troop but the Captain nor the King of a City but the Maior or other subordinate head Nor the King or Maior of a Family School Colledge but the Pater-familias the Master the Rector c. Depose the subordinate Head and it's part of the Kingdom still but no Family School Colledge Troop Regiment c. All Mankind that profess dealing in such subjects as far as I know are agreed in all this As to the Body related also a Diocess is not all the Christian world § XII Every true particular or single Church is part of the Universal which is Headed only by Christ That it is part of the Universal I know not that ever man denyed till now that a conformable pious Divine maketh this with the former Atheistical making God and Christ a deceiver driving all Religion out of the world Popery worse c. Proved Quae unita totum constituunt sunt partes At Ecclesiae omnes particulares cum membris caeteris Christo Capite totam seu Universam Ecclesiam Redemptorum constituunt Ergo sunt Ecclesiae Universae partes Ecclesia universa constat ex horum unione Ergo haec omnia sunt ejus partes Again If the single Churches be no parts of the Universal either they are Co-ordinate Churches with the Universal or there is no Universal If the Universal be All without them than they are none If not then it is not Universal if there be other Churches which are no parts of it Again If they be no parts of the Church Universal they are no parts of the Body or peculiar people or Kingdom of Christ for that is but one 1 Cor. 12. Eph. 4. 15 16. 5. c. But they are parts of the Body of Christ Ergo. § XIII To say that the whole Church e. g. at Corinth and the whole Church in the world are the same and what 's predicated of one is also of the other is a saying not to be justly denominated The subjectum relatum correlatum fundamentum terminus proximus and so the relation are divers The whole Church and its Head and a part and its subordinate Head are not the same The Kingdom and the City the City and a Parish or Ward the University and a Colledge the Man and a hand c. are not the same § XIV To say as he doth that a Family is not a part of the street or that of the City and London no Member or part of the Kingdom is stuff that I will not name an ill foundation for the charge of Atheism Blasphemy and all Impiety But I am out of all fear that he should make one Proselyte that 's sani cerebri If any accuse him of less than denying God and Christ even but of Deposing the King from most of his Kingdoms and saying that London and
subordinate Head and all but the named parts are denyed As if he would have more than the genus proximum and differentia specificans in a definition yea even the genus supremum and Christ shall be the specifying Head or none § XXVI He saith So the same thing shall be contrary to itself As if 1. Christ and a Bishop in formal relation were proved to be the same 2. Or things subordinate were contrary which he denyeth himself § XXVII He saith Christs Church in this world is but one Answ If there be but one particular Church 1. Then numerically the Church of London and Basil are one And then if I separate not from the Church at Basil I separate not from the Church of London 2. If de specie there be but one then a Patriarchal Diocesane Parochial Presbyterian and Democratical Church are but of one species And why then did you use so many words to tell us of the need of Bishops over Bishops and of the several sorts of supra-ordinate Church-Rulers Then a National Church and a Parish-Church are but one § XXVIII He addeth Quae conveniunt uno tertio conveniunt inter se but the Church Universal and particular agree in uno tertio c. Answ As if Convenientia generica were convenientia totalis vel specifica or Convenientia partialis totalis Accidentalis Essentialis were all one What pretty Logick is here to prove a King and a Constable all one because they are both Men both Christians and both Rulers I hope then a Bishop and a Presbyter are all one that in your sorry sense agree in uno tertio But let us hear the inferred Charge against us § XXIX An Addition of Homogeneous Particles saith he makes no essential differences Answ Christ and a Bishop are heterogeneous Yea a Diocesane and a Parish-Priest have you proved that they are not or that they are § XXX It will necessarily infer that God is contrary to himself saith he Answ O Temerity in the dark that is unless his Church-relation be the same with the Bishops As if the King be contrary to himself if his Kingdom and a Corporation or School be not of the same species § XXXI He saith If this opinion stand Religion cannot stand An. Do you mean in you or in me or all others Do you resolve to cast away all Religion if Christ and a Bishop be not the same informing regent parts of the Church Universal and particular Think better of it first for Religion is more necessary than so Do you think that the Christian world which hath ever been of the opinion which you detest had never any Religion Nor hath now any Which way do Churches that are parts of the Universal cast out all Religion § XXXII If Christ set up two essentially different Church-Forms he is not the Saviour but the deceiver of the world Answ And must Christ bear such a charge as well as I I should sooner have expected it from a Turk or Jew than from you § XXXIII He saith Why then do you blame turning Parish-Churches into Chappels and making them but parts of a Diocesane as a Troop of an Army Answ Putide putares When shall we meet with a true Sentence It is not for making them parts of a Diocesane Church as Troops of an Army but for making them no Political true Churches but disbanding all the Troops by making them no Troops but such parts of a Regiment as Squadrons are It is for putting down Inferiour Bishops and not for being themselves Bishops over them yet on this doth he ground his charge of my deceiving men and wronging God and his Church c. § XXXIV He addeth Look what Bellarmine maketh the Pope c. that do you c. for you say that particular Churches as headed by their respective Bishops and Pastours are parts of another Church called the Church Universal By which assertion you set up an Universal Head besides Christ and you say this is of Divine Institution and lay the Concord of all the Churches on it Answ If you are sani Cerebri this is so gross that your putarem hath no excuse Had you not your self repeated my definition and carpt at those very words Headed only by Christ and many times your self repeated it as my opinion 2. Or had you tryed your wrangling wit to have proved that if Christ only be asserted to be the Head I thereby assert another Head or that If I make Bishops particular specifying Heads I therefore assert a humane Universal Head you had some cloak for your putarem But now If you next print that I said that a Dog is a man I will no more wonder at it than at this See Reader how my Church-Concord is oppugned and by what weapons Satan doth that work As if he that saith the King only is the specifying Head of the Kingdom and the Captain of his Troop or the Diocesans of a Diocess were a Traytor and did assert another Head of the Kingdom than the King § XXXV Do but grant the Papists saith he this one assertion that particular Churches as headed by their respective Pastors are parts and members of the Universal as Cities of a Kingdom and overthrow the Popes Headship over all if you can It will follow that there must be besides Christ an universal Monarch on earth c. Answ 1. Affirmanti incumbit probatio Did you think we must take your bare word in so great a case Do you say one word to prove your affirmation Must we all turn Papists upon your immodest naked saying it is so 2. But your immodesty is in this excessive to me that have written two Books against Johnson alias Terret and the later but lately and largely to prove that the Church hath no Universal Head but Christ notwithstanding the particular Regency of the Bishops and for you to give me not a word of answer to them and bid me now prove it if you can when I have voluminously proved it This is such dealing as I will not name 3. But I am heartily sorry what ever did it that you are got so neer to Popery As if you will be a Papist unless all the writers of the Christian world are deceived and if the particular Church be a part of the Universal which â—â—â—â— dare boldly swear it is and sober men doubt not XXXVI He adds Indeed you have gone beâ—ond Bellarmine in setting up Papal Monarchy Your â—ther assertion sets up Atheism by making the holy God the authour and founder of two essential different Churches or Church-Forms Answ Putares But if all the Christian world be of the same mind do they all set up Atheism and are you only free As for Tho. Hooker whom you cited though it be twenty four years or thereabouts since I read Mr. Hudson and him and will not tast away my time in perusing them my memory doubts not that it was only a Universal Church made one by one universal
Experience Why is it not done if it be morally possible Have you not had near twenty years Trial by your Reasonings Preachings Writings Reproaches Allurements Threatnings Canons Fines Jails Informers crying out for execution of the Laws c. and is it yet done Have there not since more of the Laity turned from you than have turned to you Will not Experience convince you 9. Judge by the great diversity of mens conditions and capacities which I have elsewhere opened Will ever men of such different Capacities Educations c. agree in such and so many things 10. Judge by the requisites to such a Concord It must be by bringing all the Ministry to a higher degree of Knowledge or Conscience and Honesty than all the Nonconformists For it can be nothing that you think keeps us from Conforming but Ignorance or Badness Dr. Asheton undertaketh as going to the bar of God to prove that it is Pride and Covetousness And how can you hope to make us all so much Wiser and Better than we are Do you believe that the seven Thousand that had Conformed to the Directory and staid in by Conforming to your Law 1662. were so much Wiser and Better than the two thousand that were cast out Or that the greater part of your Countrey-Priests now if the lamenting people wrong them not do Conform because they know more or are Better men than we If it be so he is unworthy to be a Pastor that knoweth not how hard a matter it is to make all the Ministers of a Nation so much wiser and better He is blinde that seeth not that it is Fines Jails and Death that our Prosecutors trust to And will true Conscience be convinced by such Arguments Would you your selves change your minds in Religion if you were but Fined and Imprisoned If so you are men of no true Religion If not why expect you it from us § 13. But what am I doing Will it not more tire than profit the Reader if I should number abundance more of his Untruths I will step to his concluding Farewel to me and then see how he justifieth the trade by pleading for Equivocation Pag. 128. You gave several intimations that the King was Popishly affected as Bishop Bramhal affirms Mend. 15. Answ Why did not the man tell where and when I have Printed the contrary in the time of highest Usurpation that the King was no Papist Is he not a Calumniator unless he prove it But he saith Bishop Bramhal affirms it Answ A man that never saw me why did he not cite Bishop Brambal's proof But see what this sort of men are come to Do they think it enough to warrant their slanders of us because one of their Archbishops hath slandered us before them What Credit then is to be given to such mens History or Reports Is this it in which the Authority of Archbishops consisteth that they must be followed in slanders No It is not their Obedience to Archbishops but their Conformity to a calumniating Spirit For Brambal's Predecessor Arch-Bishop Usher a man honoured by all good men that knew him for Learning Piety and Honesty was of no such Authority with them but we are scorned for conforming to his Judgment But you see that a Calumniator with you is no singular person They are not ashamed to tell the world that their Archbishops lead them and are as bad as they § 14. Impl. p. 128. You applauded the grand Regicide as one that prudently piously and faithfully to his immortal Honour did exercise the Government Mend. magn 16. Answ Reader Do not wrong this man so much as to think he is the Father of this He taketh it up but in Conformity to his Fathers and Brethren that have oft printed it before him and he must keep company and be Conformable Alas It is not one or two such men as are the Guides of Souls in England But what Had he no pretence for it Yes more than for many of the rest He that undertook to be a Lying Spirit in the mouth of all Ahab's Prophets never undertook to deceive them without any pretence I have somewhat else to do than to write the History of my actions in those Times as oft as any such man will tell such a Story as this In short I thought then that both sides were faulty for beginning the War but I thought the Bonum Publicum or Salus Populi made it my Duty to be for the Parliament as Defensive against Delinquents and as they profest to be only for King Law and Kingdom When at the New Moddle they left out for the King and changed their Cause I changed from them and was sent by two Assemblies of Divines to do my best though to my utmost labour and hazard to disswade them Cromwel having notice of it would never let me once come near him or the Head-Quarters I continued on all occasions publickly and privately to declare my judgment against him as a rebellious Usurper till he died But being at London a year or two before he died the Lord Broghil since Earl of Orery would needs bring me to him where I dealt so plainly with him in demanding by what Right against the Will of almost all the Kingdom he pull'd down our lawful English Monarchy that we were sworn to and the Parliament as cast him into such Passion as broke out in reviling many of the worthiest Parliament-men that he knew me to be familiar with The last time the Earl of Orery saw me he told me he had told the King of that Conference and that he should love me the better while he lived for my Faithfulness He and Lambert and Thurloe were silently present A Twelvemonth after Sir Francis Nethersole would needs dispute me into Repentance for being for the Parliaments Cause by way of Writing I told him that the sad effects were enough to make us all suspicious but I would give him those Reasons that had moved me with a true desire to know the full truth that if I had erred I might not remain through Ignorance without Repentance He wrote to me that in the mean time seeing I was satisfied against Cromwels Usurpation I should go to London to set it upon his Conscience to perswade him to restore our present King I sent him word that as he took me for his Adversary so his Conscience was not so easily perswaded to give up such a prey and that this was not now to do I had been lately with him and I and others had tried such perswasions or the like in vain While I was preparing my Papers for Sir Francis Nethersole cometh out Mr. Harrington's Oceana contriving the Settlement of a Democracy which they called a Commonwealth and Sir H. Vane was about another Model I wrote somewhat against them and Mr. Harrington printed a Paper of Gibberish scorning at my Ignorance in Politicks Against him I wrote my Political Aphorisms called A Holy Common-wealth in the beginning pleading for the Divine
his talk my ignorance of the Law shall suspend my Subscription 1. King John gave up his Kingdom to the Pope I cannot say it had been unlawful for the Kingdom to resist such as he should have Commissioned to execute it 2. Nor such as should be Commissioned to dispossess the right Heir and settle it on a Stranger or an Enemy 3. Nor such as should be Commissioned to seize on all the Subjects Estates or Lives yea or lay Taxes contrary to Law in cases where the Law enableth the Sheriff by the Posse Comitatus to resist 4. Nor if any get the Broad-Seal to Commissions to seize on the King's Garrisons Forts Navies Treasures Guards whereby a traiterous Lord-Keeper might at any time Depose the King I have told you that old Parliaments Popish and Protestant and Archbishop Abbot and Bishop Bilson c. were as much Nonconformists in this as I am And so much to the Impleaders Accusations of the Nonconformists and his Reasons for the justifying of their Silencing and ruine and the Lawfulness of some of the things which they judge to them unlawful Let the impartial Reader try and judge The rest of my Book which is the far greater part he answereth by contempt and silence CHAP. IV. Of his dealing with the Second Plea for Peace WHile we hear men that should be our Brethren go on to call to Magistrates for Execution of the Laws which they have got against us and for want of matter of Accusation against those that they prosecute raking up odious Criminations from the late Wars which few of the now Silenced Ministers had any hand in and never ceasing to tell men that the Beginners of that War were guilty of the King's Death After 17 or 18 years Silence 1. I told them That two parties of the Episcopal Conformists being the beginners in England it 's wonder'd that they see not how they accuse themselves And why do they not profess Repentance first 2. I fully told them what are our Principles of Government and Obedience and intreated them to shew me wherein they are disloyal or culpable And this man is the first that I finde pretending to assault it and shame lessly passeth over the Book itself and by his silence seemeth to justifie our Doctrine And yet to shew his Will he taketh occasion again to take up the foresaid actions of the evil Civil War as if that were any thing to the present Cause or as if he were calling the dead to Judgment For we have oft offered them thanks if they will Silence only those that had a hand in those Wars 2. He taketh on him to answer my Historical Preface and therein heapeth abundance of untruths part of which I mentioned in the second Chapter and the rest I have so fully confuted in my Answer to Mr. Hinkley and in an Historical Index of those affairs that I will not waste my own and the Readers time by saying the same things here again And his Accusations of my Concord and Moral Prognostication I have answered before It is the manner of the man to name Books and take occasion from somewhat in them to pour out that which he most abounds with and to try whether men will take this for a Confutation O miserable world Where the very Preachers of Holiness Love and Peace go on to the Grave and Judgment and Eternity fighting against Holiness Love and Peace forbidding others to worship God that cannot swallow all their Inventions and not enduring their Brethren to live in Peace among them But 't is Letter in the World of Holy Love and Peace A REFLECTION on the REFLECTER on a Book against Sacrilegious Desertion of the Sacred Ministry § 1. WHen the King being more merciful than the Canoneer Clergy had granted Licenses to the Nonconformists for the publick worshipping of God in peaceable Assemblies many of the Clergy still cryed down such Assemblies as Schismatical when before they seemed to lay the charge of Schism on them for their want of Authority And these are the men that when it is for their Interest are zealous defenders of the Royal Power against some Parliaments Limitations but their Interest can extol or at least absolve Mr. Hooker himself Some of them would have perswaded us to forbear the Liberty which the King had granted us and so to be the Silencers of our selves and to forbear Gods publick Worship till we dare Conform And no wonder when they apprehended such dismal Consequents to their Church from our Preaching as Mr. Hinkley in his Letter-book hath told you Among others Dr. Fulwood would have drawn us into half this guilt on pretence of perswading us to the moderate use of our Licenses On which occasion I wrote a small Book to prove that wilful deserting of our Ministry even when it is forbidden unjustly and yet remaineth notoriously necessary to the ends of the Institution is downright Sacriledge and worse than alienating Church-Goods or Lands But I took occasion in it to deal as plainly with those Non-Conformists who are inclined to unwarrantable Separations as with our Accusers Dr. Fullwood wrote an Answer to this Book I never replyed partly that they may see that I can give such men the honour of having the last word and partly to save mine own and the Readers time But now either he or some other unnamed Author that is marked M. A. hath published more Useful Reflections on that Book He knoweth to what use and let him use them accordingly § 2. I. Part of his Reflections are Citations out of that and other of my Books of such words as seem to be for them and against the Non-Conformists and my self II. The other part is his descant on the words which he disliketh and setteth them to the Tune which suits his Inclination and may serve his turn Should I Print an Answer to such stuff as this and in many Sheets tell men where and how such men speak amiss the Reader might think that Satan hath such power on me as by any of his Instruments at his pleasure to draw me to cast away my own and other mens precious time § 3. All therefore that I shall say to him shall be this I. As to the first that 1. I can reconcile my own words though he cannot And as he never desired me to teach him to do it I am not at leisure to offer him my Service All is not contradiction which men that understand not words do think so 2. Readers You see here when they call for Moderation and would have us come as near them as we can they do but turn it to reproach And one that granteth them all that they cite out of my Books and comes as near them as I do is nevertheless thought unsufferable by them in the exercise of the Ministry and out of Jayl This is the spirit of the men § 4. II. To the other part I only say The man mistakes all the question which is not