possible for any man to have his reason commanded by the will or at the pleasure of another 2. It is a true saying of the School-men Voluntas imperat intellectui quoad exercitium non quoad specificationem Mine owne will or the will of another may command me to thinke upon a matter but no will or command can constraine me to determine otherwise then my reason teacheth me Yet Sir I hope your Majesty will acknowledge for your Paper professeth no lesse that according to the saying of Ambrose Non est pudor ad meliora transire It is neither sinne nor shame to change to the better Symmachus in one of his Epistles I thinke to the Emperour Theodosius and Valentinian alleageth all those motives from education from prescription of time from worldly prosperity and the flourishing condition of the Roman Empire and from the Lawes of the Land to perswade them to constancy in the ancient Pagan profession of the Romans against the imbracing of the Christian Faith The like reasons were used by the Jewes for Moses against Christ and may be used both for Popery and for the Papacy it selfe against the reformation of Religion Church-Government and therefore can have no more strength against the Change now than they had in former times 3. But your Majesty may perhaps say That this is petitio principii and nothing else but the begging of the Question and I confesse it were so if there can be no Reasons brought for a Reformation or Change Your Majesty reverences the Reformation of the Church of England as being done legally and orderly and by those who had the Reforming Power and I doe not deny but it were to be wisht that Religion where there is need were alwaies Reformed in that manner and by such power and that it were not committed to the Prelats who have greatest need to be reformed themselves not left to the multitude whom God stirreth up when Princes are negligent Thus did Jacob reforme his owne Family Moses destroyed the golden Calfe the good Kings of Judah reformed the Church in their time but that such Reformation hath been perfect I cannot admit Asa tooke away Idolatry but his Reformation was not perfect for Jehosaphat removed the high Places yet was not his Reformation perfect for it was Hezekiah that brake the brasen Serpent and Josiah destroyed the Idol-Temples who therefore beareth this Elogie That like unto him there was no King before him It is too well knowne that the Reformation of K. Henry 8. was most imperfect in the Essentials of Doctrine Worship and Government And although it proceeded by some degrees afterward yet the Government was never reformed the head was changed Dominus non Dominium and the whole limbs of the Antichristian Hierarchy retained upon what snares and temptations of Avarice and Ambition the great Enchanters of the Clergy I need not expresse It was a hard saying of Romanorum Malleus Grosted of Lincolne That Reformation was not to be expected nisi in ore gladii cruentandi yet this I may say that the Laodicean lukewarmnesse of Reformation here hath been matter of continued complaints to many of the Godly in this Kingdom occasion of more schisme and separation then ever was heard of in any other Church and of unspeakable griefe and sorrow to other Churches which God did blesse with greater purity of Reformation The glory of this great worke we hope is reserved for your Majesty that to your comfort and everlasting fame the praise of godly Josiah may be made yours which yet will be no dispraise to your royall Father or Edward 6. or any other religious Princes before you none of them having so faire an opportunity as is now by the supreme providence put into your Royall hands My soule trembleth to think and to foresee what may be the event if this opportunity be neglected I will neither use the words of Mordecay Esth. 4. 14. nor what Savanarola told another Charles because I hope better things from your Majesty 4. To the Argument brought by your Majesty which I believe none of your Doctors had they been all about you could more briefly and yet so fully and strongly have expressed That nothing was retained in this Church but according as it was deduced from the Apostles to the constant universall practise of the Primitive Church and that it was of such consequence as by the alteration of it We should deprive our selves of the lawfulnesse of Priesthood I thinke your Majesty meanes a lawfull Ministry and then how the Sacraments can be administred is easie to judge I humbly offer these considerations First what was not in the times of the Apostles cannot be deduced from them We say in Scotland It cannot be brought But that is not the Ben but not to insist now in a Litourgy and things of that kind there was no such Hierarchy no such difference betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter in the times of the Apostles and therefore it cannot thence be deduced for I conceive it to be as cleare as if it were written with a Sun-beame that Presbyter and Bishop are to the Apostles one and the same thing no majority no inequality or difference of office power or degree betwixt the one and the other but a meer identity in all 2. That the Apostles intending to set downe the Offices and Officers of the Church and speaking so often of them and of their gifts and duties and that not upon occasion but of set purpose doe neither expresse nor imply any such Pastor or Bishop as hath power over other Pastors although it be true that they have distinctly and particularly exprest the office gifts and duties of the meanest Officers such as Deacons 3. That in the Ministery of the New Testament there is a comely beautifull and divine order and subordination one kind of Ministers both ordinary and extraordinary being placed in degree and dignity one before another as the Apostles first the Evangelists Pastors Doctors c. in their owne ranks bnt we cannot find in Offices of the same kind that one hath majority of power or priority of degree before another no Apostle above other Apostles unlesse in morall respects no Evangelist above other Evangelists of Deacon above other Deacons why then a Pastor above other Pastors In all other sorts of Ministers ordinary and extraordinary a parity in their owne kind only in the office of Pastor an inequality 4. That the whole power and all the parts of the Ministry which are commonly called The power of Order and Jurisdiction are by the Apostles declared to be common to the Presbyter and Bishop And that Mat. 15. 16 17. the gradation in matter of Discipline or Church censures is from one to two or more and if he shall neglect them tell it to the Church he saith not tell it to the Bishop there is no place left to a retrogradation from more to one were he never so eminent If these considerations doe not
FIDEI DEFENSOR Non enim to spreverunt Solum â—ed me spreverunt ne Regnem super ipsâ—â— Per Ecclesiam pâ—tor Giul Marshall sculp THE PAPERS Which passed at NEVV-CASTLE BETWIXT His Sacred MAJESTIE AND Mr ALEX HENDERSON Concerning the Change of CHURCH-GOVERNMENT Anno Dom. 1646. LONDON Printed for R. Royston at the Angel in Ivie-lane M. DC.XL.IX For Mr. Alex Henderson His MAJESTIES first Paper Mr. Henderson I Know very well what a great disadvantage it is for Me to maintaine an Argument of Divinity with so able and learned a Man as your self it being your not My profession which really was the cause that made Me desire to heare some learned man argue My Opinion with you of whose abilities I might be confident that I should not be led into an Errour for want of having all which could be said layed open unto Me For indeed My humour is such that I am still partiall for that side which I imagine suffers for the weaknesse of those that maintaine it alwaies thinking that equall Champions would cast the ballance on the other part Yet since that you thinking that it will save time desire to goe another way I shall not contest with you in it but treating you as My Physitian give you leave to take your owne way of cure onely I thought fit to warne you lest if you not I should be mistaken in this you would be faine in a manner to begin anew Then know that from my Infancy I was blest with the King my Fathers love which I thanke God was an unvaluable happinesse to me all his daies and among all his cares for my education his chief was to settle me right in Religion in the true Knowledge of which he made himself so eminent to all the World that I am sure none can call in question the brightnesse of his Fame in that particular without shewing their own ignorant base malice He it was who laid in Me the Grounds of Christianity which to this day I have been constant in so that whether the worthinesse of My Instructor be considered or the not few yeares that I have been setled in My Principles it ought to be no strange thing if it be found no easie worke to make me alter them and the rather that hitherto I have according to Saint Paul's rule Rom. 14. 22. been happy in Not condemning my selfe in that thing which I allow Thus having shewed you how it remaines to tell you what I believe in relation to these present miserable distractions No one thing made Me more reverence the Reformation of My Mother the Church of England than that it was done according to the Apostles defence Act. 24. 18. neither with multitude nor with tumult but legally and orderly and by those whom I conceive to have onely the reforming power which with many other inducements made Me alwayes confident that the worke was very perfect as to Essentials of which number Church-Government being undoubtedly one I put no question but that would have been likewise altered if there had been cause which opinion of mine was soone turned into more than a confidence when I perceived that in this particular as I must say of all the rest we retained nothing but according as it was deduced from the Apostles to be the constant universall custome of the Primitive Church and that it was of such consequence as by the alteration of it we should deprive our selves of a lawfull Priesthood and then how the Sacraments can be duly Administred is easie to judge These are the principall Reasons which make me believe that Bishops are necessary for a Church and I think sufficient for Me if I had no more not to give My consent for their expulsion out of England but I have another obligation that to my particular is a no lesse tie of Conscience which is My Coronation Oath Now if as S. Paul saith Rom. 14. 23. He that doubteth is damned if he eat what can I expect if I should not onely give way knowingly to My Peoples sinning but likewise be perjured My selfe Now consider ought I not to keep my selfe from presumptuous sinnes and you know who sayes What doth it profit a man though he should gaine the whole World and lose his owne Soule Wherefore my constant maintenance of Episcopacy in England where there was never any other Government since Christianity was in this Kingdome Methinks should be rather commended than wondered at My Conscience directing Me to maintaine the Lawes of the Land which being onely my endeavours at this time I desire to know of you what warrant there is in the Word of God for Subjects to endeavour to force their Kings Conscience or to make him alter Lawes against his will If this be not my present case I shall be glad to be mistaken or if my Judgment in Religion hath been misled all this time I shall be willing to be better directed till when you must excuse Me to be constant to the Grounds which the King my Father taught me Newcastle May 29. 1646. C. R. For His Majestie Mr. Alexander Henderson's first Paper SIR 1. IT is Your Majesties royall goodness and not my merit that hath made your Majesty to conceive any opinion of my abilities which were they worthy of the smallest testimony from your Majesty ought in all duty to be improved for your Majesties satisfaction And this I intended in my coming here at this time by a free yet modest expression of the true motives and inducements which drew my mind to the dislike of Episcopall Government wherein I was bred in my younger years at the University Like as I did apprehend that it was not your Majesties purpose to have the Question disputed by Divines on both sides which I would never to the wronging of the cause have undertaken alone and which seldome or never hath proved an effectuall way for finding of truth or moving the minds of Men to relinquish their former Tenents Dum res transit à judicio in affectum witness the Polemicks between the Papists and us and among our selves about the matter now in hand these many yeares past 2. Sir when I consider your Majesties education under the hands of such a Father the length of time wherein Your Majesty hath been setled in your principles of Church-Government the Arguments which have continually in private and publique especially of late at Oxford filled your Majesties eares for the Divine Right thereof your Coronation Oath and divers State-reasons which your Majesty doth not mention I doe not wonder nor think it any strange thing that your Majesty hath not at first given place to a contrary impression I remember that the famous Joannes Picus Mirandula proveth by irrefragable Reasons which no rationall man will contradict That no man hath so much power over his own understanding as to make himself believe what he will or to think that to be true which his reason telleth him is false much lesse is it
That all these Congregations were under one Presbyteriall Government because they were for Government one Church Acts 11. 22 26. And because that Church was governed by Elders Acts 11. 30. which were Elders of that Church and did meet together for Acts of Government And the Apostles themselves in that meeting Acts 15. acted not as Apostles but as Elders stating the Question debating it in the ordinary way of disputation and having by search of Scripture found the will of God they conclude It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us which in the judgement of the learned may be spoken by any Assembly upon like evidence of Scripture The like Presbyterian Government had place in the Churches of Corinth Ephesus Thessalonica c. in the times of the Apostles and after them for many years when one of the Presbytery was made Episcopus Praeses even then Communi Presbyterorum Confilio Ecclesiae gubernabantur saith Jerome Episcopos magis consuetudine quam Dispositionis Divinae veritate Presbyteris esse majores in Commune debere Ecclesiam regere 5. Farre be it from me to think such a thought as that your Majesty did intend any Fallacy in your other maine Argument from Antiquity As we are to distinguish between Intentio operantis Conditio operis so may we in this case consider the difference between Intentio Argumentantis Conditio Argumenti And where Your Majesty argues That if Your Opinion be not admitted we will be forced to give place to the Interpretation of private Spirits which is contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostle Peter and will prove to be of dangerous consequence I humbly offer to be considered by Your Majesty what some of chief note among the Papists themselves have taught us That the Interpretation of Scriptures and the Spirits whence they proceed may be called private in a threefold sense 1. Ratione Personae if the Interpreter be of a private condition 2. Ratione Modi Medii when Persons although not private use not the publique meanes which are necessary for finding out the Truth but follow their owne fancies 3. Ratione finis when the Interpretation is not proposed as Authenticall to bind others but is intended onely for our owne private satisfaction The first is not to be despised the second is to be exploded and is condemned by the Apostle Peter the third ought not to be censured But that Interpretation which is Authenticall and of supreme Authority which even mans conscience is bound to yeild unto is of an higher nature And although the Generall Councell should resolve it and the Consent of the Fathers should be had unto it yet there must alwaies be place left to the judgment of Discretion as Davenant late Bishop of Salisbury beside divers others hath learnedly made appeare in his Booke De Judice Controversiarum where also the Power of Kings in matter of Religion is solidly and unpartially determined Two words onely I adde one is that notwithstanding all that is pretended from Antiquity a Bishop having sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction will never be found in Prime Antiquity The other is that many of the Fathers did unwittingly bring forth that Anti-christ which was conceived in the times of the Apostles and therefore are incompetent Judges in the Question of Hierarchy And upon the other part the Lights of the Christian Church at and since the beginning of the Reformation have discovered many secrets concerning the Anti-christ and his Hierarchy which were not knowne to former Ages And diverse of the learned in the Roman Church have not feared to pronounce That whosoever denies the true and literall sense of many Texts of Scripture to have been found out in this last Age is unthankfull to God who hath so plentifully powred forth his Spirit upon the Children of this Generation and ungratefull towards those men who with so great paines so happy successe so much benefit to Gods Church have travailed therein This might be instanced in many places of Scripture I wind together Diotrephes and the Mystery of Iniquity the one as an old example of Church-ambition which was also too palpable in the Apostles themselves And the other as a cover of Ambition afterwards discovered which two brought forth the great Mystery of the Papacy at last 6. Although your Majesty be not made a Judge of the Reformed Churches yet you so farre censure them and their actions as without Bishops in your judgment they cannot have a lawfull Ministery nor a due Administration of the Sacraments Against which dangerous destructive Opinion I did alledge what I supposed your Majesty would not have denied 1. That Presbyters without a Bishop may Ordaine other Presbyters 2. That Baptisme administred by such a Presbyter is another thing than Baptisme administred by a private Person or by a Midwife Of the first your Majesty calls for proofe I told before that in Scripture it is manifest 1 Tim. 4. 14. Neglect nor the Gift that is in Thee which was given Thee by the Prophesie with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery so it is in the English Translation And the word Presbytery so often as it is used in the New Testament alwaies signifies the Persons and not the Office And although the Offices of Bishop and Presbyter were distinct yet doth not the Presbyter derive his power of Order from the Bishop The Evangelists were inferiour to the Apostles yet had they their power not from the Apostles but from Christ The same I affirme of the 70 Disciples who had their power immediately from Christ no lesse than the Apostles had theirs It may upon better reason be averred that the Bishops have their power from the Pope than that Presbyters have their power from the Prelats It is true Jerome saith Quid facit exceptâ ordinatione Episcopus quod non facit Presbyter but in the same place he proves from Scripture that Episcopus Presbyter are one and the same and therefore when he appropriates Ordination to the Bishop he speaketh of the degenerated custome of his time 2. Concerning Baptisme a private Person may perform the external Action and Rites both of it and of the Eucharist yet is neither of the two a Sacrament or hath any efficacy unlesse it be done by him that is lawfully called thereunto or by a Person made publique and clothed with Authority by Ordination This Errour in the matter of Baptisme is begot by another Errour of the Absolute Necessity of Baptisme 7. To that which hath been said concerning Your Majesties Oath I shall adde nothing not being willing to enter upon the Question of the subordination of the Church to the Civill power whether to King or Parliament or both and to either of them in their owne place Such an Headship as the Kings of England hath claimed and such a supremacy as the Houses of Parliament crave with Appeales from the supreme Ecclesiasticall Judicature to them as set over
not done for 2 Tim. 1. 6. it is evident that Saint Paul was at Timothies ordination and albeit that all the Seventy had their power immediately from Christ yet it is as evident that our Saviour made a clear distinction between the twelve Apostles and the rest of the Disciples which is set downe by three of the Evangelists whereof S. Marke calls it an Ordination Mark 3. 15. S. Luke sayes And of them he chose Twelve c. Luke 6. 13. onely S. Matthew doth but barely enumerate them by their name of distinction Mat. 10. 1. I suppose out of modesty himselfe being one and the other two being none are more particular For the administration of Baptisme giving but not granting what you say it makes more for Me than you but I will not engage upon new Questions not necessary for my purpose 7. For my Oath you doe well not to enter upon those Questions you mention and you had done as well to have omitted your instance but out of discretion I desire you to collect your Answer out of the last Section and for your Argument though the intention of my Oath be for the good of the Church collective therefore can I be dispensed withall by others than the representative Body certainly no more than the People can dispense with me for any Oaths I took in their favours without the two Houses of Parliament as for future reformations I will only tell you that incommodum non solvit Argumentum 8. For the King my Fathers opinion if it were not to spend time as I believe needlesly I could prove by living and written testimonies all and more then I have said of Him for His perswasion in these points which I now maintain and for your defensive War as I do acknowledge it a great sin for any King to oppresse the Church so I hold it absolutely unlawfull for Subjects upon any pretence whatsoever to make War though defensive against their lawfull Soveraigne against which no less proofs will make me yeild but Gods word and let Me tell you that upon such points as these instances as well as comparisons are odious 9. Lastly you mistake the Quaere in my first Paper to which this pretends to answer for my Question was not concerning force of Arguments for I never doubted the lawfulnesse of it but force of Armes to which I conceive it sayes little or nothing unlesse after My example you refer Me to the former Section that which it doth is meerly the asking of the Question after a fine discourse of the several wayes of perswading rather than forcing of conscience I close up this Paper desiring you to take notice that there is none of these Sections but I could have enlarged to many more lines some to whole pages yet I chose to be thus brief knowing you will understand more by a word than others by a long discourse trusting likewise to your ingenuity that reason epitomized will weigh as much with you as if it were at large June 22. 1646. C. R. For His Majestie Concerning the Authority of the Fathers and practice of the Church July 2. 1646. Mr. Alex Henderson's third Paper HAving in my former Papers pressed the steps of your Majesties Propositions and finding by your Majesties last Paper Controversies to be multiplyed I believe beyond your Majesties intentions in the beginning As concerning the Reforming Power The Reformation of the Church of England The difference betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter The warrants of Presbyterian Government The Authority of Interpreting Scripture The taking and keeping of Publique Oathes The forcing of Conscience and many other inferior and subordinate Questions which are Branches of those maine Controversies All which in a satisfactory manner to determine in few words I leave to more presuming Spirits who either see no knots of Difficulties or can find a way rather to cut them assunder than to unloose them yet will I not use any Tergiversation nor doe I decline to offer my humble Opinion with the Reasons thereof in the owne time concerning each of them which in obedience to your Majesties command I have begun to doe alalready Onely Sir by your Majesties favourable permission for the greater expedition and that the present velitations may be brought to some issue I am bold to entreat that the Method may be a little altered and I may have leave now to begin at a Principle and that which should have been inter Precognita I meane the Rule by which we are to proceed and to determine the present Controversie of Church policy without which we will be led into a labyrinth and want a thred to wind us out againe In your Majesties first Paper the universall custome of the Primitive Church is conceived to be the Rule In the second Paper Section the 5. The practise of the Primitive Church and the universall consent of the Fathers is made a convincing Argument when the Interpretation of Scripture is doubtfull In your third Paper Sect. 5. the practice of the Primitive Church and the universall consent of the Fathers is made Judge and I know that nothing is more ordinary in this Question then to alleage Antiquity perpetuall Succession universall Consent of the Fathers and the universall practise of the Primitive Church according to the Rule of Augustine Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec à Consilio institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi Authoritate Apostolicâ traditum rectissime creditur There is in this Argument at the first view so much appearance of Reason that it may much worke upon a modest mind yet being well examined and rightly weighed it will be found to be of no great weight for beside that the minor will never be made good in the behalfe of a Diocaesan Bishop having sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction there being a multitude of Fathers who maintaine that Bishop and Presbyter are of one and the same Order I shall humbly offer some few Considerations about the major because it hath been an inlet to many dangerous Errors and hath proved a mighty hinderance and obstruction to Reformation of Religion 1. First I desire it may be considered that whiles some make two Rules for defining Controversies the word of God and antiquity which they will have to be received with equall veneration or as the Papists call them Canonicall Authority and Catholicall Tradition and others make Scripture to be the onely Rule and Antiquity the authentick Interpreter the latter of the two seemes to me to be the greater errour because the first setteth up a parallel in the same degree with Scripture but this would create a Superior in a higher degree above Scripture For the interpretation of the Fathers shall be the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and accounted the very Cause and Reason for which we conceive and believe such a place of Scripture to have such a sence and thus Men shall have Dominion over our Faith against 2
My reason nor doe I conceive how 1 Cor. 2. 5. can be applied to this purpose For there Saint Paul onely shewes the difference between Divine and Humane Eloquence making no mention of any kind of interpretation throughout the whole Chapter as indeed Saint Peter does 2 Pet. 1. 20. which I conceive makes for Me for since that no Prophesie of Scripture is of any private interpretation First I inferre that Scripture is to be Interpreted for else the Apostle would have omitted the word Private Secondly that at least the consent of many learned Divines is necessary and so à fortiore that of the Catholique Church ought to be an authentique Judge when Men differ And is it a good Argument because Mat. 4. 4. 7. 10. Scripture is best interpreted by it selfe therefore that all other interpretations are unlawfull certainfull you cannot thinke Thus having shewed you that We differ about the meaning of the Scripture and are like to do so certainly there ought to be for this as well as other things a Rule or a Judge between us to determine our differences or at least to make our Probations and Arguments Relevant therefore evading for this time to Answer your 6 Considerations not I assure you for the difficulty of them but the starting of new Questions I desire you onely to shew Me a better than what I have offered unto you Newcastle July 3. 1646. C. R. For Mr. Alex Henderson A particular Answer to Mr. Alex Hendersons July 3. 16. 1646. His MAJESTIES fifth Paper UNtill you shall finde out a fitter way to decide our Difference in Opinion concerning Interpretation of Scripture than the Consent of the Fathers and the Universall Practice of the Primitive Church I cannot but passe you My Judgment anent those 6 Considerations which you offered to invalidate those Authorities that I so much reverence 1. In the first you mention two Rules for defining of Controversies and seeke a most old way to confute them as I thinke For you alleage that there is more attributed to them then I believe you can prove by the Consent of most learned Men there being no Question but there are alwaies some flattering Fooles that can commend nothing but with hyperpolick expressions and you know that supposito quolibet sequitur quidlibet besides doe you thinke that albeit some ignorant Fellowes should attribute more power to Presbyters than is really due unto them that thereby their just reverence and authority is diminished So I see no reason why I may not safely maintaine that the Interpretation of Fathers is a most excellent strengthning to My Opinion though Others should attribute the Cause and Reason of their Faith unto it 2. As there is no Question but that Scripture is the farre best Interpreter of it selfe so I see nothing in this negatively proved to exclude any other notwithstanding your positive affirmation 3. Nor in the next for I hope you will not be the first to condemne your selfe Me and innumerable Others who yet unblamably have not tyed themselves to this Rule 4. If in this you onely intend to prove that Errors were alwaies breeding in the Church I shall not deny it yet that makes little as I conceive to your purpose but if your meaning be to accuse the Universall Practice of the Church with Error I must say it is a very bold undertaking and if you cannot justifie your selfe by cleare places in Scripture much to be blamed wherein you must not alleage that to be universally received which was not as I dare say that the Controversie about Free will was never yet decided by Oecumenicall or Generall Councell nor must you presume to call that an Error which really the Catholique Church maintained as in Rites of Baptisme Formes of Prayer Observation of Feasts Fasts c. except you can prove it so by the Word of God and it is not enough to say that such a thing was not warranted by the Apostles but you must prove by their Doctrine that such a thing was unlawfull or else the Practice of the Church is warrant enough for Me to follow and obey that Custome whatsoever it be and thinke it good and shall believe that the Apostles Creed was made by them such Reverence I beare to the Churches Tradition untill other Authors be certainly found out 5. I was taught that de posse ad esse was no good Argument and indeed to Me it is incredible that any custome of the Catholike Church was erroneous which was not contradicted by Orthodox learned Men in the times of their first Practice as is easily perceived that all those Defections were some of them may be justly called Rebellions which you mention 6. I deny it is impossible though I confesse it difficult to come to the knowledge of the Universall Consent and Practice of the Primitive Church therefore I confesse a Man ought to be carefull how to believe things of this nature wherefore I conceive this to be onely an Argument for Caution My Conclusion is that albeit I never esteemed any Authority equall to the Scriptures yet I doe think the Unanimous Consent of the Fathers and the Universall Practice of the Primitive Church to be the best and most Authenticall Interpreters of Gods word and consequently the fittest Judges between Me and you when we differ untill you shall find Me better For example I think you for the present the best Preacher in Newcastle yet I believe you may erre and possibly a better Preacher may come but till then must retaine My Opinion Newcastle July 16. 1646. C. R. THE END