with silver base metall of lead brasse yron and so carried it into the Tower in great Ingots c b Gangr 3d. p. 192. This man as I understand is by this time knowne not to have been a great Independent as Gangrena blazoneth but of more affinitie both in judgement practise with one Mr. Edwards So that Sectary who snatched the mans band and tore it in pieces before his face if Sectarie he was or is it is of that Order sirnamed Presbyterian The like may be said of the Baptizers of Ball-Esau c Gangr 3d. p. 18. with many others But for Gangrena and that service which she hath done unto Satan against the Saints by reproaching calumniating aspersing traducing them in the sight of the Sunne I shall leave them from henceforth unto him who judgeth righteously not intending to rake in this dunghill any more which begins to be very noysome and offensive even in Presbyterian nosthrills themselves So little cause have either I or my partie to feare her writings more then any other mans who hath yet appeared as she most vainly but so much the more like unto her selfe boasteth though it were no great honour to a thiefe that useth to rob on the high-way to be more feared by travailers then an hundred honest men For the present I shall adde that as some Great Benefactor to the Popish Religion bestowed a Legend of lies upon it which they call Legenda aurea the golden Legend for a prop or pillar to support it because it was crazie so hath Gangrena's master out of his tender affections bountifull respects to the cause of high-Presbytery being extremely jealous as it seemes that it will never stand strong upon foundations of Truth been at the cost and charge to compose a great body of the same kinde of materialls which we may very truly and properly call Legenda plumbea or the Leaden Legend to supply that which is wanting in the Truth for the supportment thereof But certainly it will be more tolerable for the Golden then for the Leaden Legend in the day of judgement First because the Golden Legend belies onely or for the most part Saints of her own or her friends making and secondly belies them still on the right hand whereas our Leaden Legend advances onely stories on the left hand and with these dishonours either only or for the most part Saints made such by God In so much that had Gangrena pretended to plead the cause of that Government by Presbyterie which the Parliament hath established and not that so importunely desired by her self and her friends which is opposite to it she had been a notorious Trespasser against the late Ordinance of Parliament which prohibiteth any thing to be either preached or written in derogation of that Government which they have established For as be that should come under prop or apply to a strong and new-built house a company of crooked and ill-shapen shoares or pieces of old worme-eaten tymber should derogate from the strength of the building and notoriously disparage the Architect so whosoever shall goe about to confirme strengthen or uphold the Government setled by the Parliament by any base unworthy and indirect means cannot reasonably be judged but by such practises to act in derogation thereof and that in an high degree And so Gangrena farewell Res Tuas historias tuas habeto tibi They shall from henceforth be to me as things which are not excepting onely my promise of a further addition unto my Answer to the Antapologie whereunto God willing I shall apply my selfe when I see the times in a state of convalescencie and likely to gather strength to beare such a subject In the meane time thy preferment which it seemes is to be Principi Tenebrarum ab historiâ I shall lament not envie Persecute the Saints reproach the righteous traduce the friends of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ but know thou that for all these things God will bring thee to judgement a Eccles 11. 9. Having dispatcht with Gangrena I have onely a word Sect. 16. or two to speake with some of her friends about another businesse There are of this Generation who it seemes having a facultie to make verball victories of reall disasters importunely applaud their Champions which were foure if not five to two and congratulate their great successe in a disputation lately held in Christ-Church-Parish about the lawfulnesse not so much of the payment as of the demand of tithes by the Minister By meanes of which dispute though there was nothing said but had tantum for quantum answer for argument in full returne not so much as any one man that I can heare of who came scrupul'd in the point that went away satisfied except it were in the justnesse of the ground of his scruple and of the unlawfulnesse of that which could not by all that was there said be justified yet some of the partie as if they were bound by their Covenant to provide perfas nefas that Presbyterians may in all things have the preheminence or were acted by that Maxime of the Consistory Quod non potest fieri per viam justiciae fiat per modū expedientiae of Rome That which cannot be done in a way of right let it be done by way of expediency have as I understand from severall hands fill'd the Citie with this vapour that Mr. Goodwin and his Colleague in the dispute had their mouths stopt and were not able to answer a word to those who opposed them I was once under some thoughts of penning and publishing the contents of the said Disputation looking for this puffe of winde from that point of the Compasse from whence it now bloweth and may yet upon the occasion given do it if I could cleere my hands of some other work which as yet sticks close to them In the mean time Reader thou maist please to understand that there were onely two arguments produc'd and insisted upon by the Patrons of Tithes which I speak unfeignedly being thoroughly examin'd and look'd into are of no more strength to carry the cause of demanding tiths then a couple of silly Lambs yok'd in a teame are able to draw a Western waine of twentie hundred weight thorough the deepest waies or up the steepest hils I had not touch'd upon this string had not others plaid too loud upon the base One thing amongst many others seemes very unreasonable Sect. 17. unto me in the way of High Presbyterie which I judge worthy advertisement in this place The Sons of this judgement way judge it Christian and meet as they have reason in abundance to doe mutually to tolerate one another in lesser differences as they use to call thē that is in such differences about such opinions which lie off at some distance from the fundamental Doctrines or Principles of Christian Religion which are deducible from these by processe of rational discourse
so cleare in any other Churches as it is here in England I see the morall of the fable verified if a man be the painter the Lyon shall be made to couch at his feet Thirdly That the truth of it is not setled in other Kingdomes or States as it is amongst us it seems they make a difference between cleering and setling and so I beleeve that in their sense there is a very great difference indeed the former being Gods way the latter mens In the fourth place they adde it may justly be beleeved that if he Calvin were now alive in this Kingdome he would not publish or maintaine any thing contrary to the observation of the Lords day as it is enjoyned by the Lawes and Ordinances of this Realm But may not the justnesse of these mens beliefe in this case be justly questioned Is it a just or righteous thing to beleeve or to suppose that a man of worth of able parts of eminent learning of a composed judgement of a tender conscience would baulk with God and his own soule in shunning to declare what upon mature studie upon diligent and faithfull inquirie he judgeth to be the counsell or will of God thorough feare of an Ordinance or Law in a civill State I beleeve if Calvin were now alive whether in this Kingdome or in any other he would conne these Gentlemen small thankes for such a commendation The dregs setled in the bottome of this Answer are these can it be lesse then a wilfull slaunder and malicious purpose of rendring the Ordinance odious to name death as a punishment for maintaining any thing against the Ordinances and Lawes about the Lords day c. But so this Querist deales in other of his Queries c. But let charity or reason or common sense or who yee will judge whether it be lesse then a wilfull slaunder and malicious purpose of rendering the Querist odious without a cause to charge him with naming death as a punishment for maintaining any thing against the Ordinances and Laws about the Lords day To Queree whether Calvin deserved either imprisonment or death for teaching and maintaining c. which is the tenour of the Queree is this to charge Sect. 56. the Ordinance with threatning death as a punishment for maintaining any thing about the Lords day against the Ordinances and Laws If not how can it render the Ordinance odious except haply it be either in the jealous consciences of such men who are under some regret and secret counterworkings of conscience through feare lest the Ordinance though pleasing to them that is to their flesh should yet be odious indeed in the sight of God or else in the over-jealous conceit of those whose chiefe hopes and comforts on earth are bound up in the honour and successe of the Ordinance and who lye under the bondage of this feare that if the Ordinance should prove odious in the eyes of men themselves should suffer and beare the same burthen with it To say that Nicholas or Matthew or any other person is either homo or BRVTVM is it any wayes to name or intimate that brutuâ—s is either the genus or species of either But when mens mindes are set to doe unworthily they become uncapable of greater differences then are between conjunctive and dis-junctive particles though there be no such affinity or likenesse between these which need incumber any sober mans judgement in or about their dijudication But Gangraena and her Paramour hath justified all the sons of Presbytery besides in all their slanders calumnies false aspersions malicious imputations and reports they that are malicious are not malicious in comparison of him that super-abounds in malice Omnis Caesarea cedat labor Amphitheatro Vnuâ—â— pro cunct is fama loquatur opus Let all mens malice give Gangraena place Let Fame instead of all this one piece grace In their Answer to their twelfth Argument if they meane as Sect. 56. they say they make some part of atonement for their delinquency against the Queries hitherto For here they grant that no man is punishable for his meere mistake whatever his opinion be but for being so pertinacious in his mistake in matters of great consequence as that he will not forbeare to publish his mistakes to the infection of others and the mischiefe of their soules and to the ruine or at least miserable Sect. 57. disturbance of the Church of God I freely acknowledge that whosoever out of pertinacy in his mistake not onely in matters of greater consequence but even of lesser will not forbeare to publish his mistakes to the infection of others c. i. e. with a desire or intention to infect and mischiefe the soules of others c. deserves severely to be punished nor shall I ever plead mercy for such a man If the Ordinance had explained it self after any such manner as this I I presume with many others should have been satisfied in it without any more adoe and not have needed to crave satisfaction about it as now wee have done But in case any man shall really and conscientiously judge that opinion of his which others call a mistake and perhaps is so indeed to be a truth of God and shall withall really judge that he is bound in conscience to hold forth such an opinion as being in his judgement and conscience the undoubted truth of God and withall necessary to be published and made known unto men for their spirituall benefit and good in case I say the publishing of his opinion or mistake upon such termes as these shall prove the infection of others or inconvenience or if you will mischiefe the soules of others c. I have no ground either in Reason or Religion to judge this man worthy either death or bands Nay if to publish such mistakes and that even with pertinacy which tend to the infection of others and mischiefe of soules c. were a matter worthy either death or bands I have sufficient grounds both in Reason and Religion to judge and think that very many Ministers of the Anti-Independent interest yea many of very eminent repute amongst them would upon due examination and triall be found in the condemnation The strength of their Answer to their thirteenth Argument Sect. 57. leanes upon this staffe That the open and publique profession of errors is more pernicious then the practise of sins in a like kinde and degree they instance To teach there is no Christ is more dangerous they say then to live as if there were no Christ and yet make a profession of him Well but my judgement and the judgements I beleeve of many more and this Doctrine are at oddes But these men attempt a reconciliation by the mediation of this reason for the proofe of their Doctrine The one they mean the publique profession of errours justifieth what it doth as lawfull under pretended Sect. 57. grounds of truth The other practiseth and yet POSSIBLY not so impudently
one or the other is so or such as he beleeveth them to be As to the two instances wherein they insist the Doctrine of the Sect. 91. Trinity and the Incarnation of the Son of God affirming that a man ought not to refuse to beleeve them although for the manner of them he cannot by his reason comprehend them I Answer First that as by my reason I can and doe comprehend and know them to be incomprehensible so I beleeve them accordingly to be Again Secondly as by my reason I neither doe nor can comprehend or conceive the particular modus or manner of either so neither doe I or ought I nor indeed can I without running an extreame hazzard of an erroneous belief beleeve any thing at all concerning them save onely their incomprehensiblenesse in the generall or that they are incomprehensible which as was said I am able by my reason to comprehend So then these two Assertions or Doctrines well understood First That a man ought to beleeve no more then what he hath reason and ground for in the Word of God And Secondly tâ—â—â— That a man ought to beleeve no more then what he is able by his reason to comprehend are but of an equipollent import and there is nothing more much more nothing more erroneous in the one then in the other That towards the beginning of this Answer yea there is a piece of a duplicate of it in the end of the Answer too is extreamely unreasonable and obnoxious wherein they suppose yea little lesse then in terminis affirme that they that will be satisfied what the Ordinance meaneth by making it an errour to hold That a man ought to beleeve no more then what by his reason he is able to comprehend must read the Socinian Books and there inform themselves what their proper opinion is For is it in any degree reasonable equall or just that such an Ordinance or Law should be made and that for the imprisonment which is by interpretation the utter undoing of men in case of delinquency the sense or meaning whereof they are in an utter incapacity to understand unlesse they read such books which first are onely extant in such a language which not one of an hundred is able to Sect. 92. understand and secondly are so rare and hard to be gotten that for the space of 13 yeers and upwards ever since my comming to the citie though I have from time to time made a narrow inquiry after them and laid out in severall places where I conceived I should be most likely to speed for some or other of them yet could I never to this day procure either for love or money as the saying is so much as any one of them Their groundlesse mistake about what the Querist as they say would imply to be the sense of the words in the Ordinance and their turning of the Querie with a wet finger as if there were nothing materiall in it but an heapâ— of words I passe by and pardon being content they should be numbred amongst their infirmities quotidianae incursionis In their Answer to the thirtieth Querie they maintaine that Sect. 92. the Ordinance doth expresse what it meaneth by obstinacie when it threateneth the publishing of such and such doctrines with obstinacy Their reason is because the Ordinance appoints admonition to go before punishment But is this an explication of what it meaneth by obstinacy Certainly these grand Assertors of the Ordinance had quitted themselves upon termes of more wisedome for the honour of it if they had plainly gâ—â—â—ted that it had not indeed made any sufficient explication of it selfe in that particular For is a man to be judged obstinate who shall do that though after admonition which his admonition notwithstanding he judgeth and that upon good grounds to be his duty to doe Were the Apostles obstinate for preaching in the naâ—â— of Jesus after that the High-Priest Rulers and Elders solemnly met in a Councill had admonished them yea and straitly charged and commanded them that they should in no wise speak or teach any more in that Name * Act. 4. 18. Oh England awake for I feare thou sleepest look about thee and consider how easily and when thou least thinkest of it thou maist be an obstinate offender if men of this spirit should be thy Judges In their 31 Answer they tell a mysticall or mistie story of Sect. 93. the sense or meaning whereof I am no wayes guilty yet I shall tell it after them because some possibly may understand it though I cannot As some perhaps say they of the Querists friends may be thanked for it they speake of that strong opposition insinuated in Sect. 93. the Querie between the government established by the Parliament and that so importunately desired by the Ministers who have endeavoured to binde heavy burthens upon others ever persecuting them for not yeelding to those things which even the consciences of those that presse them know they cannot and beleeve they may not yeeld unto so carefull and tender are they of their Brethrens consciences so is it neither of that kinde they would have it being no way in favour of there Indâ—pendency For First It is the strangest news to me that I have heard many a day that any of my friends should deserve thankes either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the opposition they speake of between the two Governments I cannot believe that any person man or woman Congregationally inclined did ever either perswade any of the Ministers they speake of to oppose that Government by Presbytery which is established by the Parliament nor yet distill into them any of that spirit or those principles out of which they oppose it How then should they be accessary to the opposition Secondly whereas they charge the friends of the Querists yet further with endeavouring to binde heavy burthens upon others ever persecuting them for not yeelding to c. this is tidings yet seven degrees stranger then the other If it be true then is the scandall of Independency ceasâ—d from amongst us For if Independents also endeavour to binde heavy burthens upon others and to persecute men for not yeelding unto those things which in conscience they cannot yeeld unto then are we all of one minde and of one judgement and practice the same things But Thirdly I would faine know what heavy burthens they are which the independents since they must be so called endeavor to binde upon others Doe our Brethren of the Presbyterian interest call or judge this a heavy burthen to be restrained from or not to have their hand strengthened by the Parliament or Lawes unto the troubling or molesting of their Brethren who dissent in some particulars from them I know no other burthen but this any wayes endeavoured by any of that parswasion to be imposed or bound upon them If they call or count this a burthen better they hurthened with the peace of
of old Therefore behold saith he I will proceed to doe a marvellous worke amongst this people even a marvellous worke and a wonder for the wisdome of their wise men shall perish and the understanding of their prudent meâ— shall be hid a Esay 29. 14. These politick and prudent sonnes of High Presbytery thought they had spread a table for themselves of their Syllogismes but that God who taketh the wise in their owne craftinesse b 1 Cor. 3 19. hath turned this table into a snare unto them and hid their understanding out of the way when they lift up their hand to the Syllogismes For in the framing of these their answers considered they are like such Conjurers who being novices in their profession sometimes raise those spirits which their skill failing them they know not how to lay or conjure downe Though I owne not any one of the Syllogismes as intimated or asserted either Majors Minors or Conclusions by me in the Queries yet to let the Kingdome and whole world see upon how broken a reed they shall leane if they trust to the Learning or Judgement of these men in the great things of their peace I shall be willing to undertake for the Syllogismes at least for the most of them against their Answers For doubtlesse the Arguments doe by their Answers as Aarons rod did by the rods of the Egyptian Sorcerers c Exod. 7. 12. they swallow and eat them up In my Vindication of the Gentlemens Syllogismes against their Sect. 9. Answers to save as much as may be without detriment to the cause the labour of transcribing and so to contract the whole discourse into as narrow a compasse as the Subject of it will beare I shall not repeate the Syllogismes themselves but onely lay open the weaknesse and insufficiencie of the respective Answers and this by a manifest disabling and overturning the Principles reasons and grounds on which they are built I could wish the Reader who shall have the opportunity and please to peruse these papers had the Vindication it selfe or those Anti-papers by him to which these by way of opposition relate it is like he might apprehend the particularity and appositenesse of what is here insisted Sect. 10. upon for the dissolution of those Answers more fully and with some â—dvantage to his satisfaction yet by what he shall heâ—e finde he may be able even without that ayde competently to conceive and judge what is the strength and what is the weaknesse of the said Answers First then their Answer to their first Argument or Syllogisme Sect. 10. fram'd by occasion of my first Querie is built upon this distinction The making of snares of any of the Doctrines of Christ for the destruction of the lives of men may be taken two wayes first for a malitious intention and formall desire to take away mens lives Secondly for no more but the appointing of the punishment of death for such as shall WICKEDLY oppose any of the Doctrines of Christ In this latter sense they conclude it lawfull yea and necessary to make snares of the Doctrines of Christ for the destruction of the lives of men and denie it in the former But First the Ordinance doth not say who shall WICKEDLY preach teach publish any opinion contrary c. but that all such who shall VVILLINGLY preach teach c. shall without abjuring suffer the paines of death Therefore the said Distinction is impertinent and reacheth not the cause in hand For who with halfe an eye is not able to see a vast difference between preaching or publishing a point VVILLINGLY and VVICKEDLY when Presbyterian Ministers preach false Doctrine as that tithes or Presbyteriall Government are Jure Divino that it is unlawfull either to sell or buy Bishops Lands that the Parliament is bound to doe as the Assembly would have them that legall preparations are simply and absolutely necessary before Conversion that men are bound to believe that which they have no reason to believe that Repentance goeth before Faith that Christ suffered the torments of Hell with twenty and ten vaine speculations and visions of their owne hearts besides wherewith they corrupt and poyson the Judgements of their simple and credulous Auditories I presume they doe all this VVILLINGLY but whether they doe it VVICKEDLY or no let themselves judge and say But Secondly suppose the Ordinance had said VVICKEDLY as the Syllogismeâ—s speake I demand of them what they meane by the word VVICKEDLY and who shall judge and determine of this modification or aggravation of the offence Suppose a man Sect. 10. should preach very zealously and with fervency of Spirit against any of those Tenets which these men call the Doctrines of Christ as against the Jus Divinum or lawfulnesse of tithes or of Presbytery or the like will they call this a preaching VVICKEDLY If so then themselves preach VVICKEDLY as oft as zealously If by VVICKEDLY they meane obstinately or with obstinacie an expression which the paper called The Ordinance useth this is to give light by darknesse and I demand as before what they meane by obstinately For neither doth the Ordinance nor the Asserters of it who yet undertake too to be the Interpreters of it when and as they please a page 1 2. declare or determine any thing at all herein If by preaching or publishing a Doctrine obstinately they meane a preaching it after admonition or after meanes us'd yea or after sufficient meanes us'd I meane sufficient in the Judgement of those that use them yea or of those who are interressed in the same judgement with those that use them then themselves as oft as they preach the point of Infant-Baptisme preach obstinately and consequently VVICKEDLY For they have been admonished again and again by the Anti-poedo-baptists both by writing and otherwise who also have used meanes upon meanes and those by themselves and all of their party judged to be abundantly sufficient to convince them of the errour of this Doctrine for so they judge it to be So againe according to this interpretation of the word when they preach against the lawfulnesse of selling and buying the Bishops Lands they preach obstinately and so VVICKEDLY for by the late Ordinance of Parliament published in that behalfe they are admonished yea and in the Judgement of the Parliament sufficiently informed of the lawfulnesse of both Instance might be given in twenty points more of like consideration If they have any other sense or meaning in the word Obstinately which is more crypticall or mysterious it is but reasonable and equall that it be declared and made knowne before the lifes or liberties of the Saints or other men be endangered by it It is most un-christian and repugnant to the law and light of nature it selfe that any such Lawes or Statutes should be made wherein either the lifes or Liberties of men are touch'd and yet the sense and meaning of them by the ambiguity of the words wherein
they are conceived be of doubtfull interpretation unto those who are so Sect. 10. deeply concern'd in them Lawes and Statutes wherein the precious lives and Liberties of men are concern'd ought not to be like Aristotles acroamatiques concerning which he said when he had published them edidi non edidi i. I have published them and I have not published them meaning that as he had set them forth few were able to understand them but to be plaine and transparent in their sense and meaning that even persons of meanest capacity may without an Interpreter see to the bottome of them Or Thirdly and lastly if by VVICKEDLY in their distinction they meane maliciously which the word seemes most properly to import I desire to know of them whom they will constitute or make Judges of this inward and soule-misdemeanour or what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what Symptomes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or signes they will Authorize as infallibly demonstrative of this malignitie For it is no wayes Christian or equall that the Saints or indeed any other sort of men should be deprived of their lives or precious Liberties upon what Interpretation of the Law either the Jurie or the Judge shall please to make But the case and condition of the Saints would be most deplorable upon such terms as these in as much as there are very few either Juries or Judges but being strangers to the worke of Grace inwardly hate this generation of men according to that with many the like saying of the Scriptures Marvell not my Brethren if the world hate you a 1 Joh. 3. 13. whereunto that of our Saviour himselfe also agreeth Because ye are not of the world but I have chosen you of the world therefore the world hateth you b Joh. 15. 19. Now it being the genius or property of this affection of hatred to desire and seek the destruction of that which is hated Quem quisque odit periisse expetit it were most sad with the Saints if they that hate them should have the Liberty of interpreting not onely their actions and practises as they please but also of the Lawes themselves too by which these are to be judged Thus then it fully appeares that the Distinction upon which the Syllogizers build their Answer to their first Syllogisme is by reason of the ambiguity and doubtfulnesse in one of the most signall and important terms in it altogether insufficient and null and in exactnesse of truth no distinction at all no more then a dish with an hole in the bottome of it is a dish or a man without a soule a man Miserable is the condition of those whose Faith Sect. 11. 12. must be pinn'd upon such sleeves as these There are severall other importune reasonlesse and false assertions Sect. 11. and suppositions made to support the said Answer and Distinction As 1. That he that shall but insinuate a reproach upon the Ordinance in such a phrase as this of making a snare for the destruction of the lives of men doth with the same hand or tongue cast a reproach upon ALL the punitive Justice that ever was or will be in the world a page 3. Certainly these Gentlemens Logick stood at their left hand in stead of their right when they advanc'd such a consequence or saying as this Doth he that insinuates it as a thing unlawfull to put an Heathen to death for asserting the principles of his false Religion cast a reproch upon the Justice which shall punish him with death for murther rebellion or insurrection Or doth he that insinuates it as a thing unworthy a Christian Magistrate or Judge to put a man to death for professing or affirming that for truth which he verily beleeveth to be so though indeed it be false cast a reproch upon such Magistrates or their punitive Justice who shall punish murther perjury incest or any the like sinnes committed against the light of nature and the knowledge of the perpetrator with punishments suitable to the respective natures and demerits of them It seemes that to sinne out of ignorance and with knowledge with Conscence and against Conscience are of one and the â—ame consideration and demerit with these men Oh England if thou sufferest thy selfe to be led by such Guides as these take heed of falling into the ditch out of which there is no rising againe Secondly the said Answer leanes upon the broken reed of this Sect. 12. supposition that the Spirit of Christ now should be contrary to Gods Spirit in the Old Testament if it should not justifie and allow yea and require the punishment of death under the Gospel for the violation of such Doctrines and Lawes as well of the first as second Table for the violation whereof this punishment was expressely appointed by the Authority of God then If the pens of these men were not intoxicated with the new Wine or Must of Presbyterie they would never utter such Atheologicall stuffe as this Was the Spirit of Christ in the New Testament contrary to Gods Spirit in the Old because he discharg'd a woman taken in adultery onely with this admonition Goe and sinne no more permitting none but such to stone her who were Sect. 13. without sinne a Joh. 8. 3. 7. 11. whereas the Spirit of God in the Old Testament appointed that both the adulterer and the adulteresse should SVRELY be put to death b Levit. 20. 10. Deut. 22. 22. Or because Christ prohibited calling downe fire from Heaven to consume those who refused to receive him c Luk. 9. 55. was his Spirit contrary to the Spirit of God in the Prophet ELIIAH by which he called for fire from Heaven to doe that sad execution and that upon personâ— of an inferiour delinquencie in respect of them at least as the tenour of the Histories compared together seems to import Or what reason can these irrefragable Doctors give why the Spirit of God in the Old Testament which is but one and the same Spirit with the Spirit of Christ in the New should not be at as much liberty to alter the punishments or penalties as the Ordinances of worship appointed in the Old Testament under the New Are the former so much more sacred then the latter that though these be changed yet those must of necessity abide for ever Is there nothing in that great dispensation of God by which he shooke the Earth also as well as the Heavens d Heb. 12. 26. I meane the sending of his onely begotten Sonne Jesus Christ in the flesh into the world was there no occasion hereby ministred unto God to vary from his ancient oeconomie of governing his Church and people as much as an alteration or change of some externall penalties amount unto But wee shall have occasion once and againe to discourse Old Testament matters with our new Masters before they and I part therefore for the present we leave them under the shame of this supposition
also Thirdly the said Answer halts shamefully upon this leg also Sect. 13. it affirmeth that that speech of Christ Luk. 9. The Sonne of man iâ— not come to destroy mens lives but to save them hath a peculiar reference to his being on Earth in the forme of a servant which implyeth that when he laid aside the forme of a servant and ascended up into Heaven he ascended not to save mens lives but to destroy them or at least that now being in Heaven he is more inclinable to destroy the lives of men then he was whilst he remained in the forme of a servant Both which are emphatically false the Lord Christ even after his receiving up into glory being altogether as tender of the preclous lives of men as before yea and giving out his Divine vertue and power every whit as bountifully as well for the comfort and preservation of mens lives whilst they Sect. 14. stood by them as for the restoring or recalling of them when they were departed a Act. 9. 40. Act. 20. 9 10. Yea the Scripture teacheth us to looke upon the blessed condition of Christ glorified as a more hopefull ground of obtaining grace and favour from him in every kind then his being in the forme of a Servant was For if when wee were enemies saith the Apostle we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved BY HIS LIFE b Rom. 5. 10. Fourthly the said Answer blusheth also with the red of this inference or supposall viz. that because that negative expression of Christ mentioned that he came not to destroy mens lives is not necessarily an absolute negation but rather a preferring of one thing before another therefore it is necessarily and absolutely a preferring of one thing before another and the meaning of it necessarily and absolutely this that Christ came not onely or so much to destroy mens lives but to save them Doth the possibility or non-necessity of the being of a thing either so or so necessarily and absolutely imply the being of it otherwise This it seemes is one of the Logick pillars upon which Presbytery hath built her house Fiftly and lastly the Answer wee speake of vanisheth away and dieth in the hand of this most senselesse and importune reasoning Sect. 14. If Peter by his word struck Ananias and Sapphira dead for their sacrilegious dissimulation and Christ himselfe threaten destruction to Jerusalem for rejecting him their Messiah then is the destroying of mens lives by the Civill Magistrate for contradicting the most fundamentall Doctrines of Christ agreeable to the Spirit of Christ Doth the Antecedent and consequent in this hypotheticall proposition agree any whit better then harp and harrow Is the contradicting of what a man knowes no sufficient ground or reason why he should judge or thinke it to be a Truth nor with his best endeavours is able so to judge of it which according to the common Tenet of these men themselves is the case of all unregenerate men in respect of the fundamentall Doctrines of Christ a sinne of the like nature or equally punishable with the sinne of Sacrilegious dissimulation which the sinner cannot but know to be an abomination See before Sect. 11. Or is the threatning of destruction by Christ himselfe to Jerusalem upon an old score of all manner of provocations and abominations which had run on for many generations together which threatning notwithstanding was not Sect. 14. put in execution till almost fourty yeares after it was denounced is such a threatning I say as this by Christ himselfe of a like consideration with the actuall and present inflicting of the punishment of death upon a man by a Civill Magistrate onely for contradicting in words such or such Tenets in Christian Religion suppose the most fundamentall of the Truth or likelihood whereof the miserable wretch hath no assurance nor perhaps knoweth how to come by any Whatsoever an Apostle may doe by the immediate and infallible direction of the Holy Ghost nay whatsoever Christ himselfe may doe by vertue of his Authority and Interest having all power of Judicature put into his hand by God may a Magistrate doe by vertue of that limited Authority and Interest which he hath and by the suggestion or direction of his owne spirit onely or of those that are subject unto errour and misprisions as well as his Is it reasonable to say that a child may undertake as much as a man or a Subject as much as his Prince Take a parallel of these mens reasoning if the Vine may bring forth grapes why not the thorne if the fig-tree figs why not the thistle Take another If Presbytery be Jure Divino why not Episcopacie why not Independencie If something be something why not nothing The Faith of these men had need be strong for their reasonings I am certaine are extremely weake But their salve for this soare is to injoyne their Proselytes upon paine of death to cast their Reason out of their Religion and then quid libet will serve to prove quodlibet But before I discharge them at this point I must know of them or at least demand of them by what light new or old did they discerne this for a truth that Peter by his word struck Ananias and Sapphira dead for their Sacrilegious dissimulation Doe these men justifie the Argument of the Romish Disputants from Ecce duo gladii Behold here are two Swords to prove that Peter was invested as well with secular as a Luk. 22. 38. Ecclesiastick power Or doe they conceive that smiting with death is an Ecclesiastick or Church Censure Or suppose it be had Peter power to inflict it by his word Did God impart his omnipotencie unto him Concerning Ananias it is indeed related how Peter according to the duty of his place admonished him of his sin and that Ananias upon hearing the Admonition or Reproofe gave up the Ghost a Act. 5. 5. or died but it is no where said nor is it any wayes Sect. 14. probable that Peter intended any such severe execution in his admonition and consequently it cannot be said that he struck him dead with his word except onely in such a sense as a man may be said to kill his Brother who doth it at unawares and if a Magistrate shall thus slay with death an Heretick or opposer of the Doctrines of Christ viz. at unawares I shall doe my utmost to excuse him and the rather if he shall doe it onely by admonishing or reproving him for his errours Concerning the death of Sapphira it is said indeed that Peter foretold it before it was inflicted behold saith he unto her the feet of those which have buried thy husband are at the dore and shall carrie thee out But from these words it cannot be concluded that Peter struck Sapphira dead with his word except onely in such a sense as the faithfull Ministers of this Land may be said
to have struck it with all those heavy Judgements or plagues that have fallen upoÌ„ it in as much as they foretold and preadmonished the Nation of them before they came The greatest difference is that Peter had his prediction of Sapphira's death by a more immediate revelation from God the Ministers have their predictions of the Judgements executed upon this Nation by the mediation of the Scriptures which hold forth grounds for such predictions If Magistrates be able upon substantiall grounds to foreshew what Judgements will fall upon those that shall oppose the Doctrines of Christ in case these Judgements shall fall upon them accordingly without the Magistrates interposall for their procurement I shall freely allow them this imitation of Peteter in striking Ananias and Sapphira dead with his word For I much doubt whether it had been lawfull for Peter having prophecied of Sapphira's death to have slaine her with a Sword for the vindication of his Prophecie But surely these men were not aware of their friends if of themselves when they pleaded the example of Peter smiting Ananias and Sapphira with death for dissimulation to strengthen the hand of the Civill Magistrate to punish offenders accordingly For I verily believe were it his duty and he conscientious in the performance of it to smite hypocrisie and dissimulation with the Sword that great and numerous party which the Anti-Querists have for the present in the Land would soone be reduced to the shaking of an olive tree and to the gleaning of grapes after the vontage In the meane while Sect. 1â— we cleerely see with what rotten tymber the house of the Lord so called is now built by the great Architects of it Wee have now done with the Answer of our Syllogists to their first Argument and have found the Argument laughing the Answer in the face to scorne Proceed we in the next place to the examination of their Answer Sect. 15. given to their second Syllogisme which by the strength of their imagination and Logick together they hale and pull out of my second Querie that unhappy Querie of Classique indignation at which so many of this way have made shipwrack of their patience and man-like ingenuity discovering themselves not to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Jam. 5. 21. subject to like passions with other men which was Eliiah's infirmity but to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. subject to passions appropriate to themselves of a worse and more deplorable nature then other mens But let us heare how they answer this Argument of their owne this they attempt to doe first by Reason secondly by Passion For the first this Answer or rather this part of their Answer stands upon two legs with much adoe the first is this That they who after admonition maintaine damnable Heresies are no longer to be esteemed Brethren but enemies to Christ c. and therefore are to be accordingly dealth with b page 4. This ground is true but as true it is that it is nothing to the purpose For first there is no mention of any such thing as damnable heresies in the Argument which they propose to answer but onely of such opinions which for ought the inflicters of death know may be the sacred Truths of Christ If they will grant that such opinions may be damnable Heresies which for ought the men they speak of know may be sacred Truths of Christ I grant both the Truth and pertinencie of the supposition or ground but if they grant it it undoeth them in all they further have to say either in way of Reason or of passion in this Answer as will appeare presently And Secondly whereas they say that such who after admonition shall maintaine damnable heresies c. are to be dealt with all accordingly i. either as God hath commanded or as otherwise is reasonable in such cases I know no man 〈…〉 in this gainsayeth them But what is this to the inflicting of the heavy censure of death upon men these are the termes of the Syllogisme which they pretend to answer Sect. 16. Are these equipollent expressions in their Logick to deale with an offender according to his offence and to inflict the heavie censure of death upon him Surely these men are Stoicks and hold the Paradox Omnia peccata esse aequalia i. that all sins are equall The question between them and their Syllogisme is not whether they who maintaine damnable heresies after Admonition be to be dealt with accordingly no nor yet whether such are to be punished with death but whether it be agreeable to the mind of Christ for men to inflict the censure of death upon men for holding forth such opinions which for â—ught they know may be the sacred Truths of Christ But to this Question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quidem is to be found in all their Answer neither in the more lightsome part of it which should have been reason had it prov'd nor yet in the darke of it which is passion without dispute The second leg made of reason such as it is upon which this answer Sect. 16. stands in the rationall part of it is this that the Opinions threatned with death in the Ordinance the makers of the Ordinance doe CERTAINâ—Y know to be damnable heresies This they prove by this Reason because they are contrary to the MANIFEST word of God and overthrowing the very foundations of Christian Religion But By the way what if the makers of the Ordinance which I and many more suppose to be men of Clergie-orders rather then persons of any other Interest or capacity have that certainty of knowledge which is here with so much confidence asserted to them though this I confesse were it granted would be somewhat to the Syllogisme though not much neither yet is it nothing at all to the Querie from whence the Syllogisme pretends legitimacie of descent For certaine I am that the Querie denies it not If it be replyed yea but it intimates a deniall of iâ— I demand upon what ground is this supposition built or what reason is there to charge the Querie with such an intimation if it be answered because it was fram'd upon occasion of the Ordinance and ownes relation to it And therefore except some such supposition as this be vertually contain'd in it viz. that the makers of the Ordinance doe not certainly know the opinions threatned therein with death to be damnable heresies the Querie is altogether eccentricall and irrelative to the point to which it pretends I answer that this is a most simple and unclerk-like allegation and no wayes demonstrative Sect. 17. For First what though the Querie was fram'd upon occasion of the Sect. 17. Ordinance yet is it not necessary that it should speake to or of any of the particulars contained in the Ordinance When a man being below intends to goe up into a chamber or upper roome he doth not set his first nor second nor third step into the
Truth of this Doctrine yea and am ready God assisting to die for it that God is one in three Persons yet I know some who denie it who notwithstanding this denyall I know also in part by my owne experience and acquaintance but more fully by the testimony of others worthy credit in as great a matter as this to be of exemplary life fruitfull in good workes holy heavenly Christian in all their Conversation as farre as men are able to judge or discerne Shall wee say that such men as these hold not the foundations of Christian Religion But it is none of least or lowest of our Classick intrusions to umpire among the Starres I meane the Doctrines of Christian Religion and to determine positively and above all possibility of mistake which are of the first which of the second which of the third magnitude Sect. 28. and with all to call them all by their Names as if they knew them as exactly as he that made them Besides when the Ordinance sentenceth a denying of the Scriptures Sect. 28. to be the word of God with death I desire to know whether by the SCRIPTVRES it meaneth the English Scriptures or that book or rather volume of bookes called the Bible translated as is said and as I believe out of the originall Hebrew and Greek copies into the English tongue Or these Originall or Greek copies themselves or my third thing really differing from either of these I suppose it is no foundation of Christian Religion to believe that the SCRIPTVRES in the first sense are the word of God these Rabbies themselves doe not hold it for an Article of their Faith that God spake to his Prophets or Apostles in English no nor yet that our English Translation doth agree in all things with the true sense and meaning of the Originalls If they doe believe either of these I must thus farre professe my selfe an Anti-sidian to them If by the SCRIPTVRES the Ordinance meaneth the Originall Hebrew and Greek copies out of which the English Bible is said to be translated I desire to know upon what grounds either of Reason or Religion these men or any others can require of men under the paine of death yea under the paine of eternall death a The Vindicaters call the denying of the Scriptures to be the word of God a DAMN BLE heresie to believe such writings to be the word of God the matter or contents wherof they neither know nor are capable of knowing upon any better termes of assurance I meane in an ordinary way of providence then the testimony Common Report or Authority of men For what other or better assurance can plaine and unlearned men and such who are altogether ignorant of the originall Languages and not in any capacity of learning them which is the case of thousand thousands in the Land attaine or come unto that such and such things as the English Translation presenteth unto them are contained in those Originall Copies Yea in case they were expert in the Originall Languages themselves according to what is called expertnesse or skilfulnesse in them at this day what other or what better assurance can they have then the Testimony and Authority of those men from or by whom they have gained this knowledge that this skill or knowledge of theirs is according to the Truth or that those respective significations meanings importances of words and Sect. 29. phrases which they have learned from men are the very same with those which the Pen-men of their Originall Copies intended respectively in their writings It is well knowne amongst Scholars and men but of ordinary reading that words and phrases in other Languages by continuance of time and succession of generations lose their primitive and ancient force and significations and contract such which are very much differing from them Many instances might be given hereof both in the Latine tongue and our owne but I leave this for men the face of whose studies is set towards such observations And put the case there were no such mortality as wee speake of in the significations and importances of words but that they also were yesterday and to day and the same for ever yet the Scholler can have no better assurance then his Masters honesty or word that he is taught by him according to the best of his skill or knowledge except haply it be the concurrent testimony of other Teachers in the same Profession whose words and testimonies are but of the same line of fallibility with his So then the holding the Scriptures to be the word of God in either of these two senses or significations of the word can with no tolerable pretext or colour be called a foundation of Christian Religion unlesse their foundations be made of the credits Learnings and Authorities of men If the Ordinance intendeth any third sense of the word SCRIPTVRES when it threatneth the denyall of them to be the word of God with death these undertakers for the Innocencie of it shall doe well to declare and explain this sense and not to leave it as a Lyon hid in a thicker to break out upon and destroy those that passe by at unawares Thus have wee prov'd at large that the two legs on which Sect. 29. the Anti-Querists Answer to their second Argument stands to be but two sticks covered with rotten or proud flesh and this skin'd over onely with a superficiall or washie colour of Reason and consequently that the said Argument remaineth still in full force strength and vertue and so the Querie from whence it was drawne to be impregnable honest sober and harmelesse as well in the proposall as consideration of it no wayes unbecomming the wisdome gravity or zeale of a sound Christian As for that distinction which they subjoyne concerning a mans being infallible I cannot likely thinke but that they are self-condemned in it Sect. 30. For surely they could not imagine that the Querie speaks of any absolute or universall infallibility or that the Querist doth not partake so farre in common sense with the Anti-Querists themselves as to know that an infallibility in discerning some one thing from another doth not necessarily require an universall or infinite infallibility And thâ—fore to what purpose come they forth with this grave Aphorisme that â—â—â— may certainely know some things and yet not be infallible in all things Had it not been a saying of as much savour if they had said certainly men may be worth an hundred pound in estate though they be not worth a thousand a Sparrow may be as big as a Partrich though it be not as big as a Swan And yet notwithstanding though they build their Answers with such hey stubble as these they must needs glory over the work of their hands with this acclamatiâ—n Thus this second Querie is sufficiently answered c. Surely the word SVFFICIENTLY in these mens Dialect imports the manner of all actings and pleadings for the High-Presbyterian
cause so that whatsoever they shall say or argue in order unto this it receives this modification from betweene the efficient and the end it is SVFFICIENTLY argued and prov'd May they noâ— in a manner as well pretend and say when they have onely cited those first words in Genesis In the beginning God made Heaven and Earth that they have by this Scripture SVFFICIENTLY proved the Jus Divinum of Presbytery as make their boast that they have SVFFICIENTLY answered my second Querie with those impertinent weake reasonlesse truth-lesse allegations as hath been abundantly proved of which this Answer so called is made But as it was in that old saying amongst the Romans between their two Captaines that Odeâ—â—â—uâ— conquered but Gallienus triumphed so is it between the present Syllogisme and the Answer to it The Syllogisme conquers and the Answer triumpheth Oh England my heart is inlarged towards thee and I will open my mouth proportionably unto thee Take heed of the grand Imposture of this word SVFFICIENTLY in the writings and in the teachings of thy Teachers they have learned to call their chaffe wheat and to say of stones that they are bread But in what degree these men were straightned for want of reason Sect. 30. in answering their owne Argument they are inlarged in Sect. 30. passion against my Querie But what were they so super-superlatively incens'd against it because they were able to make no better worke of answering it Or diâ— thâ— spirit of it touch the apple of their eye and so through the extreamâ—ty of the paine their imaginations suffered yea and their Consciences also through a consent and sympathie with the part affected But whatsoever the true cause of the accident is I verily believe that never did there such a flood of prophane and senselesse passion breake out of the spirits of men that were called Christian from the first day of this Denomination in the world to this very houre as these men poure out upon a Querie whose innocencie I say not weight and worth hath been vindicated upon such grounds of evidence and Truth that the light of the Sunne is not more apparent at noone-day then it Were not the Fountaines of the great deep of Corruption within them all broken up when this Deluge of bitter waters issued from them And as Joshua that he and the people with him might be avenged of their enemies spake unto the Sunne and Moone to stand still Sunne stand thou still upon Gibeon and thou Moone in the valley of Ajalon a Josh 10. 12. so did not these men their hearts being set to take revenge upon the Querist when they girded themselves to the worke commanded their reasons and consciensces to stand still and cease from their motions each of them respectively directing themselves to their own and saying Reason stand thou still over passion and thou Conscience in the valley of Indignation untill wee have avenged our selves in fire and brimstone upon our enemies that Arch-Enemy of our most beloved Designes But if in the day of their Answer I meane in the Rationall part of it we found nothing but night and darknesse can wee hope in the night thereof I meane the passionate part of it to find day or so much as the dawnings of reason truth or understanding I had once thoughts of speaking particularly to every straine and passage herein but upon more mature debate with my self about the undertaking I considered that in case I were an Engineere I should doe but childishly to load a Cannon only to batter a mushrome or a bubble which children raise with soape and spittle out of a nut-shell And thus our second Querie that great abomination of Classick soules hath fully recovered her selfe out of those fogges and Sect. 31. mists which partly by the ignorance partly by the ill will of her adversaries were spread round about her and shines in perfect beautie being onely troubled and full of sorrow for this that ever shee should be an occasion to men pretending to Religion of so much rebuke and shame as must needs fall upon those who have opposed her Sect. 31. Their third Argument rejoyceth against their Answer given to it because this also is built upon sandy foundations As 1. that to be called Rabbi is to require men to beleeve that which they teach them meerly because they teach it without any Authoritie from God in his Word This is a most strange and truthlesse saying and excuseth Scribes and Pharisees and who not from ever desiring to be called Rabbi For certainly none of these were ever so simple as to require men to beleeve that which they taught them MEERLY because they taught it without any Authoritie from God in his word There was none of them all but pretended Authoritie from God in his word for what they taught but especially it is the first-borne of incredibilities that they should require men to beleeve what they taught them upon this ground MEERLY because they taught it without any Authoritie from God in his word Can it enter into the heart of a man especially of any man that professeth the service of the true God and beliefe of the Scriptures to thinke honorably of his Teacher MEERLY and simply because he teacheth without any Authoritie from God in his word Certainly if the Scribes and Pharisees had fish'd with this baite especially amongst the Jewes for the acclamations of Rabbi they had caught nothing but contempt and shame in stead thereof Therefore for men to enjoyne or compell men to call them Rabbi is in the sence of the Querie in the Scripture import of the phrase either to enjoyne them especially under any penaltie as of their dis-favour or the dis-favour of God or otherwise to receive or beleeve any Doctrine as the Truth of God because they teach it for such viz. either as a true Interpretation of or deduction from the word of God whether they give any sufficient account that it is either the one or the other unto those on whom they impose upon such terms this tribute of beliefe or else to prohibit them on the like terms the holding and maintaining of such or such Doctrines because they judge them to be contrary to the word of God without giving any sufficient account or reason unto the prohibited Sect. 32. to prove them so Now I querie the Anti-Querists whether the makers of the Ordinance doe not in this sence compell men to call them Rabbi i. Whether they doe not prohibit men under penalties and those most grievous from holding forth such and such Doctrines as being contrary to the word of God without giving any sufficient account or indeed any at all that I say not without being able to give any that is sufficient unto the persons thus prohibited that they are indeed contrary to this word 2. The Answer now under correction is polluted with this uncleane Sect. 32. supposition viz. that the makers of
in force under the New Testament Therfore the commandement which enjoyns them for such an end is still in force and consequently the Anti-Querists ought to weare fringes with a ribband of blue upon their garments If it be here answered and said it 's â—â—ue the Lawes enjoyning Sect. 35. Ceremonies or things typicall as Circumcision and fringes were Sect. 35. though the end of them still takes place and remaines under the New Testament yet the Commandements themselves and the Ceremonies or typicall things commanded are abolished by Christ but the putting of Idolaters blasphemers false Prophets to death are not Ceremonies or things typicall Therefore the Lawes injoyning these may remaine in force though the other be abolished and the rather because their end as hath been said remaineth But for Answer 1. Be it so that these latter commands were not abrogated by Christ though the Truth will appeare on the other side yet the Gentlemens reason urged for their non-abrogation is lame viz. that their end is still in force If this were a sufficient reason for the non-abrogation of a Law those other Lawes enjoyning Ceremonies would be still in force and as much un-abrogated as these their ends as hath been proved remaining in force as well as the end of these And these Gentlemen I make no question know by this time that they are in a Logique premunire in this argument as being guilty of treason against that soveraigne Maxime A quatenus ad de omni efficax est illatio And yet the truth is that if the continuance of the ends in force of those Lawes they speake of under the old Testament be altogether impertinent and insufficient as wee have shewed it is to evince a still-standing or a non-abrogation of the Lawes themselves I know not how to relieve them in this case nor where to finde a reason better colouring with such a supposition But 2. Neither is it such a Sun-shine Truth to say that the punishments enjoyned by God under the Old Testament were not typicall Certaine I am that the Apostle Paul having spoken particularly of severall punishments executed by God upon his people under the Old Testament upon the occasion concludes thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. All these things or punishments befell them as types a 1 Cor. 10. 11 And as the common opinion I suppose of these Divines themselves is that the promises made unto the Jews of the Land of Canaan and externall happinesse and peace there in the Old Testament were typicall as well as literall carnall historicall whereas the promises made unto the Churches of God under the New Testament are generally more spirituall having lesse of the Earth and more of Heaven in them So if I shall say that the Sect. 36. threatenings or punishments also enjoyned by God then I meane under the Leviticall Law to be inflicted in his Church upon delinquents were more bodily and afflictive to the outer man then the punishments enjoyned under the Gospel and consequently were not onely carnall or bodily but typicall also and presignificative of those greater and more spirituall in the Gospel I say if I should reason thus à comparatis I beleeve I should receive no better answer to my Argument from my Classique Antagonists then I have done to my Queries in their Vindication For certainly the Analogie is savourie and Scripture-like that as God when he discovered and opened Heaven more then he had done formerly thought good to put more of it and of things relating to it and lesse of the Earth and of the things thereof into those promises of his by which he now intended to gather in the world unto him in like manner when he had discovered Hell also and the dreadfull terror thereof farre beyond all former discoveries that he should put more of it and of things relating to it and lesse of outward or bodily sufferings into those threatenings or punishments by which his purpose was to vindicate the Gospel with the Grace thereof from disobedience and contempt in his Churches Cutting off from his people under the Law is exchanged for casting out from his people under the Gospel And if the expression of cutting off be any where found in the Gospel it is metaphoricall and allusive onely to the usuall manner of dealing with or at least of threatening offenders under the Law being such a figurative expression as that wherein Beleevers are called Priests a Revel 1. 6. and their distributions or almes-deeds Sacrifices b Heb. 13. 3. There is this cleere reason why that Old Testament Law for Sect. 36. the putting of false Prophets Blasphemers and seducers to Idolatrie to death should not now be in force upon any such terms as it was when and where it was given because in all difficult cases that happened about matters of Religion the Jewes to whom this Law was given had the opportunitie of immediate consultation with the mouth of God himselfe who could and did from time to time infallibly declare what his own mind and pleasure was in them So that except those that were to give sentence in cases of Religion had been desperately wicked and set upon bloud and had despised that glorious Ordinance of the Oracle of God amongst them they could Sect. 36. not doe injustice because God himselfe was alwayes at hand to declare unto them what was meet to be done and what kinde of Blasphemer and so what kinde of Idolater particularly it was that he by his Law intended should be put to death Whereas now the best â—â—acles that Magistrates and Judges have to direct them in doubtfull cases abouâ— matters of Religion are men of very fallible judgements and every wayes obnoxious unto error and mistake Yea confident I am that the wisest and most learned of them are not able cleerly or demonstratively to informe the Magistrate or Judge what Blasphemy or what Idolatrie it was which was by God sentenced to death under the Law I cannot but think that they will for acquaintance sake be mercifull unto that Idolatrie and not vote with the old Law against it which yet the Apostle Paul condemnes and commands to be mortified Col. 3. 5. And for many other things or practises which are commonly called Idolatrie and so I question not voted by these men I must for conscience sake so farre be mercifull unto them as not to judge them neither sentenced by God to death in that Law And for that Blasphemie which was made punishable with death by this Law some of the Jewes restraine it onely to the naming or expressing of the Name Jehovah others of them extend it no further then to the naming of this and that other Name of God Adonaic I presume that our Anti-Querie-masters themselves doe not judge the naming of either the one or the other or both of these Names to be a Blasphemie worthy death no nor yet to be the Blasphemie sentenced by God to death under the
that the thing which Ezra blessed God for putting into the heart of this King was precisely and particularly this the beautifying of the house of the Lord which was at Jerusalem As for that part of this Kings Edict wherein he makes the transgression of his own Lawes i. the dictates of his owâ— will equally punishable with the transgression of the Laws of God v. 26. certainly this was never of Gods putting into his heart nor did Ezra ever so judge nor consequently ever blesse God for it 3. Nor have wee yet the compasse of the folly in this Answer For it further argueth a confirmation that waies of violence and bloud for the support of true Religion are according to the light and Law of nature from hence because they have been used by Idolatrous Heathens to maintaine their Idolatrie and by Anti-Christian Papists to maintaiâ—â— their abominations Because the WHOLE world as John saith lieth in wickednesse b 1 Iohn 5. is it an argument that wickednesse or to lie in wickednesse is therefore according to the light or Law of nature Did it ever enter in the heart of an understanding or considering Sect. 44. man to imagine that those waies or morall practices wherein even the worst or vilest of men as Heathenish and Antichristian Idolaters are generally walke are according to the light and Law of nature Certainly this saying was rather spoken according to the light and Law of nature Recti argumentum est pessimis displicere i. That Sen. which displeaseth the worst is like to be good And if it be according to the light and Law of nature to support Religion by methods and waies of outward violence and bloud I desire to know of what Religion this is asserted whether of that which is true or that which is Idolatrous and false If of the former then is it notoriously contrary to the light and Law of nature to seek to destroy the true Religion by methods and waies of violence and bloud and consequently the heathenish and Antichristian Idolaters who attempted the destruction of the true Religion for the support of their own by such meanes walked not according to but directly against the light and Law of nature in so doing And then this practise of theirs is so farre from being any argument that waies of violence and bloud for supporting Religion are according to the Law and light of nature that it argueth the contrary If it be understood of the latter viz. of an Idolatrous or false Religion certainly no support of this by any means whatsoever is according to the light or Law of nature in as much as these directly lead to the abhorring and detesting of all such Religions not to the supporting of them in any kinde Deare English soules take heed of your Teachers especially when they plead for themselves and their own Kingdome very seldome in these cases doe they speake words either of sobernesse or Truth Their seventh Argument or Syllogisme is not framed according Sect. 44. to the tenor of the Querie to which it pretends and in this respect we may well wave their Answer given to it Yet to let the world see how superficiall these men are in their divinitâ—e wee shall animadvert a few things upon it First they here affirme that whoredome adulterie murther theft are the strong holds of Satan mentioned 2 Cor. 10. 4. as well as heresies and errors But how doe they prove this onely by the thread-bare argument of their own Authoritie which both reason and Scripture ever and anon failing them as being neither of them calculated for the meridian of their affaires they are necessitated to use so frequently that familiarity hath bred contempt Certain I am Sect. 44. that the best Expositors and some of their best friends otherwise leave them to themselves in that notion Strong holds saith Calvin the Apostle calleth Counsells and height lift up against God of which he speaks afterward but thus he calleth them properly and significantly For his intent is to glory or boast that there is nothing so fortified in the world but that he is able to throw down As if he should say I know how carnall men pride it with their swelling conceits how presumptuously and securely they despise me c. a Munitiones vocat confilia celsitudinem adversus Deum elatam de quibus poâ—tea loquitur sed proprie significauter itâ— appâ—llac Vult enim gloriari nihil esse tam munitum in mundâ— cui diruendo non sit pâ—r futurus acsi dâ—ceret Scio equidem quam superbiant suis ampullis humines carnales quam fastuose ac secure me contemnant c. Calv. in 2 cor 10. 4. Musculus is of the same minde about the same expression Of what strong holds saith this Authour the Apostle speaketh he presently declares saying casting down imaginations Some translate the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 counsels but it properly soundeth reasonings or ratiocinations He meanes the counsells of humane reasoning not sincere but corrupt in which especially Satan reignes amongst men And then cites Chrysostomes Exposition for the confirmation of his own Chrysostome saith he expounds it of the pride of the Greeks and the strength or power of their Sophismes and Syllogismes with more to this purpose b De quibus autem munitionibus loquatur evestigio subjungit dicers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vertunt autem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confilia Vox ipsa soâ—aâ— ratiocinationen Intelligit de confiliis ratiocinationis humanae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed corruptâ— in quibus potissimum Saâ—an râ—gnaâ— inter homines Chrysostomus expoâ—it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Muscul in 2 cor 10. 4. Besides whereas they most unworthily and contrary to all reason and without the least occasion given insinuate That he who will maintain from that Text 2 Cor. 10. that none but properly spirituall weapons are to be used against the strong holds of sin there is not the least intimation of such a thing in the Querie he wholly denies all civill punishment and all the exercise of the Magistrates sword against evill doers the cleare truth is that themselves by numbring whoredomes adulteries murthers thefts c. amongst the strong holds there spoken of are the men that dash their foot against this stone For if spirituall weapons be mighty through God to cast down the strong holds here spoken of and murthers thefts adulteries c. be some of these to what purpose is any civill punishment or what necessity is there of any exercise of the Magistrates sword against evill doers when there is any one meanes appointed by God which is MIGHTY through him to effect Sect. 45. that which is necessary to be done what necessity is there of any other of any more meanes to be added hereunto for the effecting of it Is it agreeable to any rule of Scripture or principle of reason to multiply meanes for the bringing any thing to passe
estimated by some such rule as this that which is as apt or likely to corrupt the mindes or judgements of men with the evill of the errour hath the same likelyhood in it to produce the evill and that which hath the greater aptnesse in this kinde hath the greater likelâ—hood Now that method or meanes of corrupting the mindes of men with errours which is more plausible and tempting and more complying with the flesh is more apt and likely to produce the evill then another which is lesse plausible and tempting in this kinde If so then for men to live as if there were Sect. 59. no Christ is more pernicious and likely to mischiefe the soules of others then to say or professe in Words that there is no Christ. For first examples are more insinuating and tempting and apt to gaine upon men then doctrines or bare assertions or arguings of things are Peter speakes of some husbands who may be won by the conversation of the wives when they cannot be gained by the word * 1 Pet. 3. 1. And if examples on the right hand be more operative and perswasive in this kinde then doctrines of the same kinde certainly examples on the left hand are not behinde He spake both reason and experience who said Tardiùs irritant animos demissa per aurem Horat. Quà m quae sunt oculis subjecta fidelibus What by the eare is let into the minde Ingageth little but it soon inclines By what the eye presenteth Secondly this great errour that there is no Christ being presented Sect. 59. and recommended to the sensuall hearts of men for a truth with those sensuall accommodations of present pleasures and profites as it is in the example of Adultery Drunkennesse Deceit c. comes upon tearms of more advantage to gaine entertainment with men then when it comes onely in a sound of words or in the drie notion of a doctrine Yea the truth is that the great errour we speake of that there is no Christ would be of little or no accommodation to the flesh and consequently there would be no great danger of its infection did it not contribute towards that peaceable liberty for the practise of sinne which the flesh or sensuall part of men so ardently wisheth and desireth Therefore when it commeth unto the soule visibly attended and accompanied with that retinue of carnall gratifications which it in part as well begetteth as maintaineth the very sight and beholding of these pleads and procures acceptation for it in the eyes of the carnall judgements and fleshly mindes of men and awakens and invites the foolish heart to intertaine it Thus we see how in-Orthodox these Anti-Congregationall zealots are in the main pillar of that Answer which now we oppose Sect. 60. being as hath been said this That the open and publique profession of errors is more pernicious then the practise of sins in a like kinde and degrâ—e O England who hath bewitched these and many others of thy Teachers that they should so seldome see or at least speak the Truth as they doe But Secondly because in the sequell of this Answer they strike againe at that dis-junctive expression in the Queries either imprisonment or death as very injurious to the Ordinance when the opinion queried about is by the Ordinance onely threatned with imprisonment and Gangrena her self who is loath to be out at any game of frowardnesse or folly is partaker with them of this un clerk-like yea unmanlike exception * Gang. 3. par besides what hath been already said for the full justification of it with men who have no soft places in their heads nor hard in their hearts I here adde that howsoever Lucis tam dira cupido Virgil. as the Poets expression is i. e. such an uncouth or dismall desire of life may possibly inthrall or bewitch Gangrena and her lovers that a prison above ground and a prison under ground may seem very un-synonomous and as farre distant one from the other as the East is from the West yet to ingenuous and free-spirited men there is no such great difference between them Nay unto many dispositions yea unto all men of solid understanding present imprisonment in the chambers of death is many wayes more desirable then perpetuall imprisonment or for term of life under the hand of our common Jaylors especially upon those tearmes of misery and extremity which the farre greater part of those suffer and indure who are imprisoned by men So that in case the expression in the Queries so oft quarrelled had been conjunctive imprisonment and death and not dis-junctive as now it is imprisonment or death there had been no such capitall injury or offence committed against the Ordinance how much lesse the dis junctive being every wayes as well in appearance as in truth and substance innocent But eares must be horns when Lions will Their fourteenth Answer commeth not â—eere their fourteenth Sect. 60. Argument by sixteen foot at least Their Major in this Argument is this None ought to urge a truely faithfull and conscientious Sect. 61. Minister to publish contrary to what he is perswaded of nor to threaten him with death or imprisonment if he shall declare himself otherwise To this they are pleased to Answer That this Major is not universally true Their reason For though no Minister that is truely faithfull and conscientious may publish any thing when he â—â— perswaded it is an errour yet if any such Minister hath first published any dangerous errour to the dishonour of God and the mischiefe of soules he may be justly urged to make reparation for the evill which he hath caused by publishing the contrary Truth and may if he shall refuse be threatned with imprisonment and even of death They that can reconcile this reason unto the cause which it undertakes may doe it if they please I confesse I cannot For is there so much as a face or the lightest stricture of an appearance of any thing in it to prove That a truely faithfull and conscientious Minister may be urged or threatned with imprisonment or death to publish contrary to what he is perswaded of c. If he be perswaded of Truth in that which is contrary to what he hath published he shall not need being truely faithfull and conscientious to be urged much lesse threatned with imprisonment or death to make reparations by the publishing of it His faithfulnesse and conscientiousnesse will of their own accord lead him hereunto If he be not perswaded both the Querâ—e and the Argument are still where they were both un-answered Whereas in the sequell of this Answer they cite that of the Apostle Sect. 61. Gal. 5. 12. I would they were even cut off that trouble you to prove that he that shall still persist to publish dangerous errours may be threatned with death I suppose they mean and cut off by death also I answer first that certainly though they let Paul
are fornicators adulterers drunkards deceitfull covetous oppressors proud persecutors c. Doe they suppose I say that such abomination-workers as these doe not at all provoke God against the State or bring dishonour to him or do mischiefe unto his people For without such a supposition as this it is evident that those who maintain some one yea or more of the heresies so called or errors made punishable by the Ordinance may be as truly serviceable to the State as those of contrary judgement yea and this with the full consent of that very reason which is here brought to prove the contrary Or doe these men conceive that whosoever will undergo the penance of bowing downe his neck to the yoke of high Presbytery shall hereby obtaine Sect. 66. a plenary remission of all his sinnes from God yea and Doâ—aâ—iâ—tae qui prae sâ— omnes alios Christian as condemnaâ—ant severitatem censurae in suos reâ—ana 〈…〉 et in suis â—aetibus hâ—mi es 〈…〉 os â—â— optâ— oâ— Gildoâ—iaâ—â—s Primianosque pa â—â—â—auturâ—â— Mart. Loc. Class 4 cap. 5. â—â—ct 15. further be made uncapable of all further provocation These men who are so furiously clamorous against Sectaries and Heretiques in which bundle of clamour they binde up the names of many that are precious in the sight of God and good men doe themselves imitate one of the worst straines that was found in one of the worst kinde of Sectaries I meane the Donatists with the reproach of whose memory and practise they so frequently stigmatize those who dissent from them The Donatists saith Peter Martyr who condemned all other Christians in comparison of themselves were very remisse in their censures of those of their owne Sect. and patiently suffered even the most impure of men in their Assemblies * And of Eunomius the Heretique it is reported that suis sectatoribus quodvis scelus indulgebat That is he favored Sect. 68. his complices or followers in any mischiefe whatsoever Fourthly whereas they alledge that each of the erroneous opinions punishable by the Ordinance hath somewhat of visible prejudice Sect. 67. to the Church and state and from hence argue that those who hold and publiquely maintaine any of these opinions cannot be so serviceable to the State as those who hold the truth in those things may be this is a bird of the same feather and hath beene pluck't already Doubtlesse they who hold the truth in thâ—se things may notwithstanding hold such erroneous opinions otherwise and withall be so unworthy beyond the others in their practises and course of conversation that there may be much more visible prejudice both to the Church and State in these yea in either of them then in the errors of the other But when they adde that the Queree against which they argue seems to inferre that no Law is to be made to afflict or punish those that are godly and serviceable to the Common-Wealth they lay a necessity upon me either to judge them selfe-condemned in the charge or else weak beneath the line of such men who understand plaine English For the cleer truth is that there is not so much as the least sâ—emingnesse of any such inference or intimation in the Querie In their Answer to their seventeenth Argument they follow Sect. 68. their occupation first they dictate and then calumniate They dictate that the Ordinance is not like to discourage they meane from the Ministery any but hereticall and erroneous spirits who would do mischiefe in the Ministery if they were admitted unto it By the way is it not much that Ministers of an Anti-Congregationall Interest should speake against those who doe mischiefe in the Ministery Therefore saith the Apostle thou art unexcusable O man whosoever thou art that judgest for wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thy selfe for thou that judgest dost the same thing * Rom. 2. 1. But how doe they prove that the Ordinance is not like to discourage any but hereticall and erroneous spirits No otherwise then by the profound demonstration of an Authoritative silence They are nâ—â—i ad imperium borne to Sovereignty and it is an indigne thing to put them upon the servility of disputing The rule is Lex imperet non disputet and is it not meet that Law-makers should partake of the honour and priviledges of the Law But if they could content themselves with the office of Dictatours and not Sect. 69. intrench upon Sathans imployment also of calumniating it were a very considerable deduction from that summe of misery wherewith the nation is now charged by them Our Anti Querists have borrowed Gangrena's forehead and are not ashamed to say that it is the Querists calumnious insinuation that the common doctrines of the Churches of God in this present age are but misprisions and common errours in matters of Religion Reader if there be so much as the quantity of a moâ—e in the â—unne of any such insinuation in the Querie let them weare the crown of Sagacious and quick-discerning men and let the dung hill meet for slaunderers to sit on be assigned unto me for my portion But if they in the charge have sinned the sinne of the dung hill why should sinne and shame part company All the Querie can so much as seem to intimate about this point is that men of greatest worth for parts and abilities are more likely then other men to discover the common errours and misprisions of the present age in matters of Religion But doth he that supposeth there are common errours and misprisions in matters of Religion intimate that the common doctrines of the Churches of God are but misprisions and common errours in Religion Or doth he that supposeth that there is much base and counterfeit coine abroad intimate that the best Silver and Gold are but counterfeit Or doth he that supposeth that illiterate and ignorant men are common in the world intimate that the wisest and most learned men are but illiterate and ignorant Apagè calumniarum quisquilias In their eighteenth Answer p. 20. pretending to answer an Sect. 69. Argument drawn from the parable of the tares they say that the parable doth not forbid to pluck up the tares in one field for feare left others should plucke up the wheat in another field In this doubtlesse they speake most truly For Christ was not afraid left the plucking up of the tares in this world should occasion the plucking up of the wheat in the next world For the field wherein both the wheate and the tares are to grow together is expresly said to be the world i. e. this present world The field is the world Matth. 13. 38. So that our Antagonists thus farre in the point in hand speake most substantially for matter of truth but most childishly as for matters of Answer or reason otherwise Whereas they adde that the parable forbids to pluck up the tares when by the Sect. 70. same act they may be in danger to
meritorious straine of ingenuity in these men having two distinct senses of a clause ready formed stated and presented to their hand with a modest desire to know which of the two was to rule for them to have clearly answered either for the one or for the other or in case neither of them had comported with the intent of the Ordinance to have substituted a third in their stead But instead of this they disparage themselves with this tergiversation in the procedure of their answer But the Parliament hath so oft declared against Arminianâ—sme of which this I wonder which or what is a chiefe Article and so 〈…〉 our former Parliaments that no man hath any reason to imagine that they understand any other thing by that opinion they should have done well to have told us what opinion it is they speake of then the Arminian freewill which by the Reformed Churches is generally condemned as a pernicious Error But First I wonder how these men come to know or to presume what the Parliaments sense is about that Free-will which is sentenced with imprisonment in the Ordinance when as confident I am that they have never yet given an account of their sense therein either unto them or any other Secondly I would willingly ask these men what competent grounds they have to think especially with so much confidence as their words import that either the Parliament or especially the makers of the Ordinance mean the Arminian Free-will when as first it is probable that they never studied the state of the Controversie between the Arminians and their opposers about the point of Free-will and so cannot know at least otherwise Sect. 86. then by loose and common heare say what the Arminian Free-will is And secondly inasmuch as many and those Scholars and Students in Divinity by profession who have bestowed some time and study in the controversie are yet scarse able to give any sensible account of the difference or state of the Question between the combatants Thirdly I desire of them that they will please in their Rejoynder to relieve my darknesse in the point with their light and clearly informe me what themselves mean by the Arminian Free will I have bestowed some time and upon occasion inquired as narrowly as some others to finde out what was the sense and opinion of Arminius himself about the bondage and freedome of the will I have likewise consulted the writings of some that are generally reputed his followers upon the same occasion By comparing the Master with some of his Disciples I clearly finde that there is to the full as great a difference between the judgements of the one and of the other in the point now under consideration as there is between the judgement of the generality of learned Divines in England and Arminius himself Yea I professe that looking lately into Arminius on purpose to finde some passaâ—â— or expression one or more of some rank import upon the subject and I could meet with none but what with a faire and reasonable construction of the words was fully reconcileable with the judgements and expressions of some reformed Churches yea and of some of eminent note and desert both for piety and soundnesse of judgement amongst our selves Amongst some of Arminius followers I confesse I found it otherwise Now then this is the request which I make to these men and I trust they will not judge it unreasonable that they will plainly declare themselves what they mean by their Arminian Freewill whether that which is held and taught by Arminius himselfe or which is maintained by some of his followers there being so materiall and considerable a difference between them Fourthly and lastly whereas they send us to the generality of Sect. 86. the Reformed Churches to informe our selves what Free-will it is which is made punishable by the Ordinance with imprisonment defining it to be that which by the Reformed Churches is generally condemned as a pernicious Errour First I cannot but judge it unreasonable Sect. 87 in the highest that the generality of men amongst us should be made obnoxious to imprisonment by such an expression in an Ordinance or Law the sense and meaning whereof they cannot come to understand but onely by consulting the writings and all the confessions of Faith set forth by all the Reformed Churches respectively Alas the farre greater number of men amongst us are wholy uncapable of this information not understanding the language wherein these Confessions of Faith are written Secondly To my knowledge the Reformed Churches themselves do not generally at least not universally agree in condemning the Arminian free-will as a pernicious Errour but some of them doe subscribe and publish that to the world upon this subject for truth which others of them condemne for an Errour So that the Anti-Querists have meerly baffled in their Answer instead of giving any satisfaction to the Querie demanding the sense of this clause in the Ordinance that a man by nature hath free-will to turne unto God In their 26 and 27 Answer pag. 29. though they quit themselves Sect. 87. with somewhat more fairnesse and ingenuity then they do in all the rest yet they do not speak distinctly enough to the minde of the Querie when by Blaspheming in the Ordinance they say are meant onely such horrible expressions against God as cannot with patience be heard by any Christian eare In this description there are sundry particulars of a very doubtfull interpretation As first when they define Blasphemy by horrible expessions against God whether they exclude Christ man or as being man from being an object capable of this Blasphemy Secondly what they mean by a Christian ear whether the ear of a person who is Christian indeed i. e. a true and sound Believer or of a Christian at large and by outward prâ—â—â—ssion onely We know there is a great difference between the eare of the one and of the other in respect of tasting Blasphemy If they meane the eare of a sound Christian a true Beleever it is a point of no easie decision to determine who amongst men are such If the eare of a Christian at large I suppose they cannot but know that there are many such eares who can heare any Blasphemy whatsoever with patience whatsoever is meant by it more then enough Thirdly and lastly what they Sect. 88. meane by being heard with patience whether by Patience they mean such a composednesse of minde and spirit which keepes men from all unseemly deportment or expression of themselves outwardly in cases of provocation which is the common signification of the word or else such a temper by which a man is indisposed to greeve or take sorrow upon such occasions which usually cause sorrow and griefe of heart unto men Stand we by either the one signification of the word Patience or the other the clause cannot be heard with patâ—â—nce will be found very inconvenient to be put into the definition or description
of Blasphemy If we stand by the former certaine it is that the more Christian the eare is the greater Blasphemy will be heard with patience The stronger and better built any Christian is the further he will be from any unseemly carrage upon any provocation whatsoever If by the latter the sense is altogether uncouth and no meat either for the eare or understanding Of like ambiguity and incumbred with the same difficulties is their explication of this clause in the Ordinance impugning the word of God this they say cannot reasonably â—e thought to signifie lesse then such reproaches against the Truth or divine Authority of the Scriptures as are not to be indured by those that beleeve them to be the word of God If this be all that is meant by the said clause then men may impugne the word of God I meane the Scriptures in a Scholastique way by arguments fram'd against the Divinity of them without comming under the dint or stroake of the Ordinance in case they râ—fraine reproachfull expressions But suppose these men should give us a cleer and a faire sense of these and all other expressions in the Ordinance that are dark and dubious yet this would not justifie the Ordinance unlesse the makers and contrivers of it will please to ratifie them with their subscriptions For as the maxime is Ejusdem â—st â—â—rprâ—tâ—ri cujus est condere They onely have power to interpret a Law viz. authoritatively and with such an interpretation on which a subject may safely repose who by a lawfull power made it Their Argument pretending to the 28 Querie is fram'd quite Sect. 88 besides it and their Answer as much besides the Argument In this Answer they first grant that to say and maintaine that God seeth no sin in the justified in a sense is justifiable and true and yet Sect. 8â— secondly they affirme that it may be made punishable notwithstanding The reason they give is onely this because in another sense which they call the literall and common it is a dangerous and pernicious error But will any man Christianly disposed judge it meet that the saying or publishing that Christ is a Vine or a doore should be made punishable unlesse they declare the particularity of that sense wherein they make it punishable But this light courtesie cannot it seemes be obtained in the case of Gods seeing no sin in the justified of those who yet would have the world beleeve that they have sufficiently Answered the Queries Before they come to Syllogize the twenty ninth Querie they Sect. 89. make a sad complaint of it that it is perplexed and the sense of it involved c. But I marvell why they should turne Querulists against the Querist upon occasion of this Query when as in their Answer to it setting aside a gentle evaporation of some folly towards the beginning of it and a little fit of frowardnesse in the end they are more distinct and speake more steadily to the heart of it then they doe to any of the rest in their respective Answers yea they have not quitted themselves so like men of judgement and understanding in all their discourse besides as they have done in the sober part of this Answer which for their credit I shall set downe in their owne words and improve a little for their benefit He say they that hath read the Socinian bookes whose proper opinion it is that a man must beleeve no more then by his reason he can comprehend will easily be satisfied that the Ordinance plainly requireth that a man should not refuse to beleeve those Doctrines which are clearly and certainly for the matter of them laid downe in the word of God as for example the Doctrine of the Trinity and the incarnation of the Son of God although for the manner of them he cannot by his reason comprehend them and NOT THAT A MAM MVST BELEEVE THAT WHICH HE HATH NO REASON OR GROVND FOR IN THE WORD OF GOD. So then they clearly and fairly grant that the Ordinance doth not require that a man must or ought in point of Religion beleeve any thing but what he hath reason and ground for in the word of God From hence then it follows First that Reason ought to be every mans leader Guide and Sect. 90 Sect. 90. Director in his Faith or about what he is or ought to beleeve and that no man ought to leap with his Faith till he hath looked with his Reason and discovered what is meet to be beleeved what not This is sound Divinity indeed and few more such principles as this well digested by these men and their friends would make them worthy of that title of honour which they so much affect I meane Orthodox Secondly From the said Grant it followeth also that Ministers ought not to require their people to beleeve any thing much lesse every thing which they teach unlesse they have a reason and ground for it and those sufficient for mortuus honâ—â— non est homo nor is an insufficient Reason any reason at all in this case from the word of God Thirdly it followeth yet further that neither ought men to receive or subscribe unto with the hand of their Faith the determinations or Decretalls of Synods Councils or Assemblies of persons of what capacity or worth soever in matters of Religion unlesse they have a sufficient Reason or ground from the word of God for what they doe receive in this kinde Fourthly and lastly it followeth yet once more from the foresaid grant that men ought to make use of yea and ingage to the uttermost their Reasons or their discursive abilities in all matters of Faith and Religion whatsoever and not to swallow any thing by a loose credulity but to look narrowly upon every thing with the eye of Reason before they receive it by the hand of Faith All these deductions are of a legitimate and cleere descent from the mentioned grant and are all of them pregnant noble and magnifique Truths Onely I cannot well understand why the Gentlemen should grant that a man must not or ought not to beleeve what he hath no reason or ground for in the Word of God and yet condemne this for an error that a man ought to beleeve no more then what by Reason he is able to comprehend For if a man cannot beleeve any thing but what he knows to have a being nor yet beleeve the parricular modus or manner of any thing unlesse he knows it to be such as he beleeves it to be and againe if he cannot know either being or manner of being unlesse he conceives or comprehends it in and by his Reason what either the one or the other is which is a Truth unquestionable it undeniably Sect. 91. follows that a man ought not to beleeve any thing either being or manner of being but what by reason he is able to comprehend i. e. able upon good ground to satisfie himself that either the