a third Argument Mr Bourns 3 Argument Whatsoever is the very word of God himselfe that is and ought to be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith But the holy Scriptures are the very word of God himselfe and therefore they are the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith The first not denied the second proved John 10.34 35 Jesus said is it not written in your Law I have said ye are Gods If he called them gods to whom the word of God came and the Scriptures cannot be broken c. Here our Saviour calleth the Scriptures the word of God therefore the holy Scripture is the word of God And the like againe Marke 7.12 13. Ye make the word of God of none effect by your traditions Christ plainly calleth the Scriptures the written Law of God the word of God therefore the holy Scriptures are the very word of God himselfe and so the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith Naylers Answer Nayler cavilled still and cried out it is false it is false the word is not the Judge and sit downe liar But Mr Bourne pressed him to answer And Nayler said the word was God but the Scripture was the letter and that was not Judge Mr Billingsleys 1 Argument Mr Billingsley pressed an Argument to prove that the written word of which the Question is made is not God That which is the word of Christ who is God that is not Christ nor God But the holy Scriptures and word preached and written by the Apostles is the word of Christ Therefore the holy Scripture is not Christ nor God First that Christ is God that is evident Rom. 9.5 of whom concerning the flesh Christ came who is God over all blessed for ever Therefore by this testimony it is evident Christ is God Secondly that the holy Scriptures and word preached by the Apostles is the word of Christ that is witnessed Col. 3.16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdome The Apostle doth not say let the word Christ dwell in you but let the word of Christ Therefore the word of Christ is not Christ nor God so neither the holy Scriptures which are the word of Christ and of the spirit of Christ which holy men spake and writ as they were moved by the Holy Ghost Naylers Answer Nayler instead of a better Answer still quarrelled and cried out liar liar the word is God and God and his word are all one but the letter was in time Mr Bourns Reply To this Mr Bourne replyed that was not so for although God and his written word were one in respect of that agreement of truth was in the written word and in God yet that word of God and God were not all one essentially as the naturall word or Son of God was all one and the same Essence or Being with God Naylers Answer To this Nayler cried out away with thy dark word Iohn â— 12 14. I do not owne that word essentially and so rejected the distinction of Gods written word and essentiall word Mr Bourns Reply Mr Bourne replied that the written word of God was not of the same Being with God Naylers Answer Nayler and one of his fellow Quakers by him cried out liar liar stop thy mouth for shame stop thy mouth God and his word are all one Mr Bournes Argument Mr Bourne bad Nayler hearken to an Argument to prove it by Scripture and told Nayler he was the brazen fac'd foule mouth'd fellow he had heard when his owne mouth was stopped that he could not answer an Argument he still cried out liar liar stop thy mouth stop thy mouth Mr Bourns Argument And Mr Bourne pressed this Argument No word which was written in time part by God himselfe and part by Moses and other holy men of God was or is all one with God essentially or of the same essence or being with God but the holy Scriptures were written part by God himselfe in time and part by Moses and other holy men of God Therefore that word of God was not of one or of the same Essence and Being with God The first Proposition is evident of it selfe The second is witnessed Exod. 31.18 where God gave unto Moses when he had made an end of communing with him two Tables of stone written with the finger or by the power of God And Exod. 34.27 God commanded Moses to write all the words of the Covenant for after the tenour of these words I have made a Covenant with thee and with Israel And this was written two thousand yeare after the Creation of the world which God made therefore God and that written word was not all one or of the same Essence and Being with God and so not the rest of the holy Scriptures which was written in after times Naylers Answer But Nayler with a loud voice still cried out liar liar is not God and his word all one and bad the people beare witnesse hee saith God and his word are not all one Mr Bourn For Reply We distinguish there is a unity of agreement so God and his written word are all one and a unity of Essence or Being so God and his written word the Scripture are not all one Mr Gardiners Argument Mr Gardiner Minister of Eckinton being present when he saw him so audaciously impudent called to Nayler to hearken to an Argument to the contrary which was to this effect Whatsoever is all one with God is eternall but the holy Scripture or written word is not eternall therefore it is not all one with God Naylers Answer The Quaker Nayler presently cried out in a scornfull manner away liar away stop thy mouth the word is eternall and God is eternall And one of his fellow Quakers that stood by Nayler called Mr Gardiner lyar lyar both with a loud voice stop thy mouth thou art a liar thou art a liar But let any indifferent man but read and consider the Argument and see if the Quaker be not proved the liar and justly deserved that shame himselfe which he so unjustly cast upon Mr Gardiner and the other Ministers Then Mr Godfrey Watkinson of Brampton an understanding Gentleman not a Minister being present Mr Godfrey Watkinson of Brampton Moor neer Chesterfield called to Nayler and told him he had lost the Question and he himselfe was the liar for even now he said the letter or written word was in time and so not eternall and now he saith the word is eternall and God and his word is all one when as the Question and Aâ—gument is about the written word which is not eternall and therfore he was the lyar lost the Question or words to this effect for I cannot remember every particular but I endeavour to keep the sence and words as well as I can remember Naylers Answer But Nayler kept on his loud mouthed pace and gave Mr Watkinson some unfit disrespective speeches and said he owned the Spirit speaking in holy men to bee the Judge but would
resurrection After which it was demanded what Kingdome Christ did speake of Acts 1. Reply of another to Nayler But some one neer Nayler Replied Acts 9.5 17. 1 Cor. 9.1 1 Cor. 15.7 8. that Christ was seen after his Ascension For he was seen of Paul as Paul himselfe doth testifie Am not I an Apostle have I not seen the Lord And last of all he was seen of me as one born out of due time c. Iames Naylers Answer Nayler answered Christ was seene but he was seen invisibly Reply To which one Replyed that was a Bull or a sencelesse Answer for whatsoever is seen must be seen visibly in what manner soever it is seene whether by the eie of the body or by faith the eie of the soule If we see him that is invisible as Moses did yet he is visibly seen with those eies Heb. 11.27 by which we doe see him either in Grace or Glory Nayler Yet Nayler still persisted in his confidence that some thing might be seen invisibly and continued his railing and reviling phrases liars liars or to that effect 4 Question Disputed The time was farre spent and Mr Bourn called to another Question and that was taken which was the last that was proposed and the last that was disputed This was whether it bee lawfull to call any man Master or Father upon earth The sense and meaning of the Question was whether it be lawfull to give any honour or titles of honour to men to Father or Master to Magistrate or Minister to Lords or Ladies or the like The occasion was in part the Qakers crying out against the Ministers of Christ because they are called of men Masters and in part the proud uncivill unchristian behaviour of some Quakers towards their naturall parents and ordinary masters some towards civill Magistrates honourable Judges and Justices of peace before whom being called they have some of them in my sight kept on their hats in a contemptuous manner and denied any outward honour or civill respect to be given unto them Iames Nayler in his answer to this Question in his false Relation yea Nayler himselfe in his written Answer calleth us the Ministers of Christ Antichrist because we are called of men Masters And Richard Farnworth another rayling Quaker R. Farnworths discovery of Faith and divers papers page 2.3 and their common practice of refusing to give any outward respect to Magistrates not only Fox and Nayler but their seduced proselytes witnesse daily But Mr Bourne brought an Argument to prove it lawful to call or be called Master or Father and to give civill honour and titles of honour and respect to men according to their place and dignity to this effect Mr Bournes Argument Whatsoever titles of honour or respect the holy Patriarchs or Prophets or Apostles or other faithfull men have given unto or received from each other which are no where forbidden in the Scripture or written word of God those are lawfull for Christians now to give unto or to receive from each other But these titles of honour or respect as Father and Master and Lord and Lady and the like they have been given and received by the Patriarchs and Prophets Apostles and other holy faithfull men and are no where forbidden in the Scripture or written word of God Therefore the same titles or names of Father and Master Lord and Lady and the like may lawfully be given and received by Christians in these daies or in this age of the world First proposition I conceive will not be denyed except by such as will not be tried by the holy Scriptures And for the minor or second proposition we shall make that evident by an induction from singular or particular examples of godly men recorded in holy writ First if you read Gen. 23.6 You may finde Example 1 that when Abraham came to the children of Heth to ge◠a burying place for Sarah his wife shee being then dead hee spake to the children of Heth and bowed downe himselfe to the people of the land to give unto them not any divine religious worship which is due to God but civill honour due to men and three times is Abraham there called Lord by that people and faithfull Abraham taketh that title to himselfe without any reproofe of them for giving that title to him or any refusing of that title given him which he would not have done if it had not been lawfull to have received any such honour nor would he have bowed downe himselfe to the people of the land if it had been sinne to have done so For Abraham was a knowing faithfull man believing in Christ the Messiah to come and rejoicing to see Christs day witnesse our Saviour John 8. Iohn 8.56 〈◊〉 Againe read Gen. 24. When Abraham sent his religious servant to provide a wife for his sonne Isaac Gen. 24.27 his servant putteth up his prayer to God O Lord God of my Master Abraham send me good speed this day and shew kindnesse to my Master Abraham And hee calleth Abraham Master sixteen or seventeen times in that Chapter which certainly he would not have done if it had not been lawfull to call Master Thirdly Gen. 32.18 read Gen. 32. And you may finde that Jacob calleth his brother Esau Lord in that direction of his to his servants whom he sent before with a gift to his brother When you meet my brother Esau saith he and he shall aske you whose are these Cattell you shall answer it is a present sent to my Lord Esau and he cals Esau Lord foure times in that Chapter Fourthly 1 Kin 18.7 8. read 1 Kin. 18. When religious Obadiah who did feare the Lord from his youth met Elijah the Prophet he calleth Elijah Lord. Art not thou my Lord Elijah And verse the 8. The Prophet calleth wicked Ahab Obadiahs Lord For thus speaketh hee to Obadiah Go tell thy Lord behold Elijah is here Thus doth that good Prophet not only suffer himselfe to bee called Lord but calleth wicked King Ahab Obadiahs Lord which he would not have done if it had not been lawfull and if it were lawfull to call prophane Esau Lord and wicked Ahab Lord wherefore is it not lawfull to call Master or Father or to give honourable titles to men now unto whom they doe belong both by naturall and civill respects witnessed by the practice of the Saints holy men in several ages of the world For fifthly if you read 2 Kin. 2. Did not the children of the Prophets at Bethel call Elijah Elishas Master Knowest thou not that the Lord will take away thy Master from thy head to day And againe another company of the Prophets at Jericho verse 5. Knowest thou not that the Lord will take away thy Master from thy head to day And in the same Chapter verse 12. When Elijah was taken up into heaven in a fiery Chariot Elisha cryeth out my Father my Father the Chariot of Israel and the
and holiness and by our own good conversation 1 Pet. 2.15 put to silence the scandals of malicious the ignorance of foolish men that God wil give repentance free pardon in Christ to all our Adversaries who complain of us as contentious because though after long sufferings we seeke in a just and lawfull way to recover our due and just Rights which they unjustly detaine from us desiring if it be the will of God that they may obtaine salvation in the Lord Jesus and be delivered from wrath to come and that one day they may enjoy a happy and peaceable communion with us in glory and to conclude daily powring out my soule to God That the Lord the great Protector of Sion will be pleased to preserve his Highness and Honourable Councell and you my Honourable Lords and the rest of the Honourable Judges Justices Magistrates and other Worthies who are Actors for Piety and Peace to Gods glory and the benefit of these Nations together with this whole Common wealth in Truth Unity and Peace long to continue Most humbly subscribing my selfe Your Honours daily Oratour at the Throne of Grace Immanuel Bourne Pastor of the Church in Ashover London Feb. 26. 1655. A Defence of the Scriptures and of the Holy Spirit of God speaking in them as the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith c. In a Disputation at Chesterfield in the County of Darby Jan. 3. 1654. FIrst when the Ministers came to the Church or Meeting House-yard Iames Nayler was there with his company but seemed unwilling to goe into the Church or Church-House yet at last went into the lower end and stood there But when Mr Billingsley Minister of Chesterfield began with praier to God for a blessing upon the meeting Nayler and his fellowes went forth againe pretending some plot might be against them But after praier assurance given there was none they came in againe Secondly Mr John Billingsley began to read the Questions But after Nayler read them in the Paper sent to him as I take it and then began to read his Answer in writing and when he had read his Answer to the first Question it was desired that that Question and his Answer to that might be first Argued and so the rest afterwards in order Question 1 The first Question was Whether the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures bee the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith Mr Bourne shewed Nayler the Bible and asked him if he would owne that as Gods word he answered part of it or to that effect First For the state of the Question By the Spirit was meant the Spirit of God 1 Iohn 5.7 the third Person in Trinity one with the Father and the Sonne Secondly by the Scriptures the Canonicall books of the Old and New Testament Thirdly By the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures that voice or speaking forth of Gods Spirit recorded in Scripture which is there now to be found so whether the holy Scriptures or Spirit in them be judg This state was not so fully opened by reason of disturbance even in the entrance Nayler endeavouring to avoid this Question Naylers Answer Nayler in his Answer owned the Spirit that did speake in the holy men who gave forth the holy Scriptures to be Judge and said that Spirit was Judge before the Letter was written and all Controversies were judged by that Spirit but hee did not owne that Spirit that doth now speak in the Scriptures Hee said hee granted the Spirit was Judge and would have avoided the Question Mr Bournes Reply But Mr Bourne pressed to go on with the Question and affirmed it was one thing to say the Spirit that did speake in the holy men that gave out the Scriptures was Judge and another to say the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures was Judge or that the holy Scripture was Judge Therefore pressed to go on with the Question and began as I remember with this Reason Mr Bourns 1 Argument Whatsoever was and is the speaking forth of the Holy Ghost himselfe that was and is the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith but the holy Scriptures are the speaking forth of the holy Spirit himselfe therefore they are the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith The first proposition was not denied and the second was proved Acts 1.16 the Scripture which the holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake concerning Judas Here it is evident what Scriptures David writ or spake by writing that the Holy Ghost spake Therefore the holy Scripture is the speaking forth of the Holy Ghost and so judge of Controversies The same again witnessed by the Spirit Acts 28.25 wel spake the Holy Ghost by the mouth of Isaias the Prophet saying c. Here you see the Holy Ghost is witnessed by the Apostle Paul to speak by the mouth of Isaias and that Scripture which Isaiah writ was the speaking forth of the Holy Ghost and so the supreme Judge of Controversies c. Naylers Answer Nayler gave no direct answer but he wrangled and said he did owne the Spirit to be Judge but not the written word or to that effect and that the Spirit did speak not in the dead but in the living which was as I did understand him not in the dead letter of the Scripture but in living men and vapoured as if he had said much but yet would have avoided the Question as needlesse to be further disputed on since he did yield the Spirit to be Judge although he denyed that the Spirit speaking in Scripture was the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith But Mr Bourn went on to press another Argument Mr Bourns 2 Argument Whatsoever Christ himselfe did appeale unto as to a chiefe Judge and send his hearers unto as to a chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith that is and ought to be esteem'd the chief Judge of Controversies of Faith But Christ himselfe appealed to the Scriptures and sent his hearers to the Scriptures as to the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith therefore the holy Scriptures are the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith The first not denyed the second witnessed by the Spirit in John 5.39 in that great controversie of Faith whether Christ were the Sonne of God or equall with God Christ appeales to the Scriptures Search the Scriptures for in them you thinke to have eternall life and they are they that testifie of me therefore the Scriptures are the chiefe Judge Naylers Answer Nayler did not give any answer to satisfie the Argument but said still the Spirit was the Judge not the written word and cried out liar liar hold thy peace the Spirit is Judge not the written word Mr Bourne bad him yield the Question since Christ himselfe appealed to the Scriptures But he cried out and one of his fellow Quakers away lyar the Spirit is Judge Mr Bourn replied The Spirit is Judge but not the Spirit speaking in any man but the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures and pressed
Scriptures I say to the satisfaction of a man or womans owne conscience in what they are to believe yea those to whom God hath given a more excellent measure of understanding in the mystery of Christ revealed in the Scriptures these may in some measure judge or be inferiour Judges of spirituall things and of private mens opinions in the Controversies of Faith For the Spirit of the Prophets 1 Cor. 14.32 is subject to the Prophets but all private spirits of men in the world yea the Pope himselfe and all the Quakers they are and must bee subject one day to the voice of Gods Spirit speaking in the holy Scriptures and that word of Christ recorded in holy Scriptures shall judge them all at the last day witnesse our Saviour himselfe John 12.48 The Quaker abuseth other places of holy Scripture But the Answers I have given may satisfie any understanding Reader I shal name only one more from Nayler and his fellow Quakers which seems to conclude against the Scriptures excellency and authority of being chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith calling the holy Scriptures a dead letter and the letter that killeth all to discountenance the credit of the Scriptures to exalt their owne private spirit The place of Scripture they pervert is that of the Apostle 2 Cor. 3.6 Who hath made us able Ministers of the New Testament not of the letter but of the Spirit for the letter killeth but the Spirit giveth life I might answer at large shew how the letter is taken in severall places of Scripture and evidence the falshood of Naylers application of this place also but in briefe The letter is taken 1. Propperly for the first Elements or beginnings of learning for the letters in severall languages from which by spelling and putting together are made syllables and words and sentences in and by which the mind of God and men is held forth to our understanding as in those letters of Greek and Latine and Hebrew which were written over Christ upon his Crosse Luke 23.38 And these letters may be called dead letters because of themselves they signifie nothing to declare the mind of the writer except they be joined and put together inâ— syllables words and sentences Againe Improperly and more generally letters are taken severall waies in Scripture for Epistles private or publick 2 Cor. 3.6 c. And in that place alledged The letter killeth The Apostle doth speak of the Law which he opposeth to the Gospell which is the ministration of the Spirit as will appear plainly if the Chapter be truly looked into yea the Law it selfe doth not properly kill of it selfe but is said to kill when men break it and so are become subject to death by sinning against it Rom. 7.12 13. Rom. 6.27 Psal 119.50 for the wages of sinne is death otherwise the Law and word of God doth quicken as David found by experience Psal 119. And the written words of God are lively oracles Acts 7.38 Heb. 4.12 2 Tim. 3.16 17 as the blessed Martyr Stephen witnessed yea mighty in operation and able to make us wise to salvation and therefore most fit to be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith whatsoever the deluding Quakers pretend to the contrary Thus I have done with the first Question I come now to the second Question Mr Bourns Argument The second Question Whether the private Spirit in the Pope or in any Quaker be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith This was denyed and Mr Bourne proved the negative by this Argument No Spirit which is subject to tryall it selfe can be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith but the private Spirit in the Pope or in any Quaker is subject to tryall it self therefore the private Spirit in the Pope or in any Quaker cannot be the chiefe Judge of any Controversies of Faith The first proposition was not denied and the second is witnessed 1 John 4. Beloved believe not every spirit but try the spirits whether they be of God for many false Prophets are gone out into the world And here you may see the Evangelist giveth a generall rule for Christians to try the spirit all spirits in any man yea all that pretend to the Spirit of God as the Pope and the Quakers doe therefore their spirits are to be tried and so are not fit to be chiefe Judges of Controversies of Faith Naylers Answer James Nailer wrangled about the Spirit but gave no satisfying answer to the Argument but said the Spirit was not a private spirit if he was but in one against a hundred and said the Spirit was in them and he was Judge in them as if the Spirit in the Quaker were a publick infallible Spirit and so fit to be the chief Judge of Controversies of Faith which cannot be for if the Spirit of the Prophets be subject to the Prophets 1 Cor. 14.32 then much more the Spirit in the Pope or in any Quaker subject to tryall and therefore they cannot bee the chiefe Judges of Controversiies of Faith Mr Bourns 2 Argument Then Mr Bourne pressed a second Argument No Spirit which is a Spirit of Errour lying and false accusation is or can be a chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith But the Spirit in the Quaker and in James Nayler in particular is a Spirit of Errour lying and false accusation therefore that Spirit in them cannot be a chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith The first proposition is cleare because a chiefe Judge must and ought to have in him a Spirit not of errour lying and false accusation but a Spirit of truth and righteousnesse that he may bee directed to give true judgement and not to wrest or give wrong sentence for this is contrary to the Law of God Exod 23.6 7. Thou shalt not wrest the judgement of the poor in his cause and keep the farre from a false matter c. Therefore a Spirit of lying and Errour and false accusation is not fit to be a chiefe Judge of Controversies especially not of Controversies of Faith And for the second proposition that the Spirit in the Quaker and in James Nayler in particular is a Spirit of Errour lying and false accusation Mr Bourne proved it by these Arguments Mr Bournes Argument Whatsoever Spirit did or doth affirme and falsely accuse the Ministers of Christ in England that they erre and are false Teachers because they say the books of Matthew Marke Luke and John are the Gospell that is a Spirit of Errour lying and false accusation But the Spirit that is in James Nayler and some of his fellow Quakers did or doth accuse the Ministers of Christ in England that they erre and are false Teachers because they affirme the books of Matthew Marke Luke and John to be the Gospell therefore the Spirit in the Quakers and in James Nayler in particular is a Spirit of Errour lying and false accusation and so not fit to be chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith To
due as well as tribute or custome or any other service I might call in the Apostle Peter to witness the same 1 Pet. 2.13 14 17. but I refer the Reader to the Scripture it self these testifie an honor due to our superiours And for the minor or second proposition That magistrates supreme or inferiour are Gods Ordinance set and approved by God for government above others the places alledged might suffice but if you read Exod. 18.21 23. when Jethro Moses Father in law gave him that good counsell to provide out of all the people able men such as feare God men of truth hating covetousnesse and to place them over them to be Rulers of thousands of hundreds of fifties and of tens And if thou doe this thing and God command thee so then shalt thou be able to endure and this people shall goe to their place in peace And Moses did so and God himselfe doth approve of this order of government of superiours and inferiours and giveth Moses order to gather to God seventy Elders and the Lord taketh of the Spirit of government that was upon Moses and gave it to the seventy Elders as you may read Numb 11.16 17 25. Thus are Governours over the people of Gods owne ordination as superiours and so a higher honour and respect is due unto them Argument 2 Againe that outward manifestation of honour and those titles of honour which have been given by holy men in Scripture to Princes Magistrates and Judges and others according to their places and dignities which are not reproved by Gods Spirit that may lawfully bee given now to Princes to Judges Magistrates Governours and others according to their places and dignities But outward manifestation of honour and honourable titles have been given by holy men in Scripture to Princes Judges and Magistrates and others according to their place and dignities therefore they may be given now to such without sinne yea it is our duties so to doe Psal 82.16 Doth not the Scripture call them Gods as in Gods stead And to evidence both propositions Example 1 I shall give you severall examples If we read that place Numb 11.28 when the Spirit of God rested upon Eldad and Medad in the campe Joshua in his zeale speaks to Moses to forbid them and cals him Lord and Joshua said my Lord Moses forbid them he giveth him an honourable title my Lord Moses And did not wise Abigal call David Lord when he was comming with his Souldiers to destroy churlish Nabal for his ingratitude 1 Sam. 25 24 25 c. Yea divers times in that Chapter she giveth David the honourable title of Lord. And did not good David cry after King Saul and giveth him this honourable title my Lord the King 1 Sam. 24.8 And doth he not then give outward reverence to Saul to witnesse his honorable respects to Saul as to his superiour in place and power the text saith David stooped with his face to the earth and bowed himselfe This is far unlike Naylers and his quaking companions carriage even to Princes Magistrates and Judges and Justices of the peace to stand with their hats on their heads and to speak to them in an irreverent manner thou man or thee man who sittest in the place of judgement do this or that as some of them have said and done May I not say the same of Abner who as David testifieth was a Prince and a great man in Israel yet when he came to David he gave him titles of honour I will goe saith he and gather all Israel unto my Lord the King 2 Sam. 3.21 What need I tell you of that great Prophet of God Elijah doth he not call Ahab Obadiahs Lord goe tell thy Lord behold Elijah is here 1 Kin. 18.14 Though Ahab was a wicked man yet hee doth not take from him his title of honour And doth not the Spirit of God give the title of Lord to that noble man on whose hand the King leaned 2 Kin. 7.2 What need I tell you that in the New Testament the blessed Evangelist Luke in that his history of the Gospell which he did write to Theophilus he giveth him that honourable title most excellent Theophilus Luke 1.3 a title of great honour and high esteem given to Theophilus And blessed Paul calleth Festus the Governour of that Province noble Festus Acts 26.25 27. And in the same Chapter when he was before King Agrippa to answer for himselfe he doth not in a proud or blind ignorant sottish manner call Agrippa thou man or thee man as the Quakers doe but King Agrippa believest thou the Prophets I know that thou believest Thus do these Saints give titles of honour according to mens place and dignities I will name but one more and that is the blessed Evangelist St John that beloved Disciple of Christ John 19.26 in his second Epistle hee giveth that gratious woman to whom he writ her title of honour and respect verse 1. The Elder saith he to the elect Lady And againe verse 5. I beseech thee Lady Thus doth the blessed Apostle give titles of honour to whom honour belongs And these certainly are witnesses sufficient to justifie this truth against the Quakers that there may be some kinde of respect civill respect I mean though not to corrupt or flatter yet to know and owne difference of persons and to give to each that honor which is due to them in their severall places Againe as it is a duty to give honour and respect so it is lawfull for Princes Judges Justices and others to this honour when in a right and due manner it is given unto them I shall call in only one witnesse to evidence this truth besides those whom I named before to whom honor was given of men none of which godly men did reject that honor which was ascribed given unto them which had it been unlawfull to have received they would certainly have refused The witnesse is that holy man Job one that feared God and eschewed evill and what doth he testifie of himselfe you may read Job 29.7 8 c. when I went out of the gate saith he through the City when I prepare my seat in the street the young men saw me and hid themselves and the aged arose and stood up Righteous Job was an honourable and just Judge he was eies to the blind and feet to the lame he was a father to the poor and the cause which he knew not he searched it out he did break the jawes of the wicked and plucked the spoile out of his teeth therefore was Job honourable and both old and young did honor Job not in their hearts only as the Quakers would have magistrates honoured but outwardly also in giving all civill outward honour unto them according to their severall place and dignities and good reason it should be so For who more honourable profitable and necessary then good religious just and righteous Judges and Magistrates in a Common-wealth When justice is