adding after a parenthesis of much untruth there being many that have represented the way he speaks of in her native colours and lineaments that I rather aggravate then extenuate the guiltie of the said passage by my explanation which he there recites I answer 1. That for matter of guilt the passage referred unto standeth as yet cleare innocent and untouch'd as concerning any thing in way of demerit that hath been prov'd against it 2. As concerning the explanation that also keeps its standing and that upon holy ground notwithstanding all that Mr. Prynne hath done or attempted to doe for the removall of it manet illa suóque est robore tuta Yea the truth is that in all his contra-remonstrance he hath not so much as once touch'd or mentioned that which is the maine base or foundation of the principall conclusion managed in the said explanation and principally opposed by him The conclusion is not that which Mr. Prynne extracts from the passage which he cites viz. that there is not onely an improbabilitie but an absolute impossibilitie that the Parliament should have any power at all to enact Lawes and Statutes in matters of Religion Church-Government c. Here are words which the explanation knows not either in the letter or in the spirit of them as by name these not onely an improbabilitie an absolute impossibilitie no power at all c. but the maine conclusion driven at in the passage is this That the generalitie or promiscuous multitude of the Land have no authoritie or power from Christ to nominate or appoint who shall be the men that shall order the affaires of Christs Kingdome or institute the Government of his Churches The maine foundation or base of reason upon which this pillar of Truth stands in the said passage is this Because such an Authoritie or power viz. to nominate or appoint who shall order the affaires of Christs Kingdome or institute the Government of his Churches is greater then ever Christ himself had I meane as man or Mediator at least then ever he exercised which in the sequell I explaine and prove Now then this is that which I say that Mr. Prynne in all his long reasoning against the Conclusion doth not so much as with the least of his fingers once touch this ground or answer any thing at all to it So that he hath not as yet the least colour or pretence to blame me if I be not proselyted to his opinion by what he hath written here And because I desire faire and Christian quarter with him for the future I doe here promise and protest in the sight of God Angels and men that if Mr. Prynne shall at any time God preserving my life and understanding plainly and substantially demonstrate and prove either that the generalitie and promiscuous multitude of the Land have a power greater then ever the Lord Christ himself had or exercised as man or Mediator or that a power to nominate and appoint whom they please amongst men to order the affaires of Christs Kingdome and institute the Government of his Churches is not a power greater then ever Christ had or at least exercised as either man or Mediator I promise and protest againe as before that if Mr. Prynne or any other shall at any time clearly and fairly prove either the one or the other of these propositions I will pull downe with both mine hands what I have built up but with one and without any more adoe joyn judgement with Mr. Prynne touching the power of the Civill Magistrate in matters of Religion but till this be done I neither see how Mr. Prynne can with a good conscience persist in his nor require me to desist from mine It is true the Lord Christ as Mediator had all power given him both in Heaven and on Earth Mat. 28. 18. That is had the whole and intire execution and transaction of all his Fathers will pleasure and decrees concerning all men Angels creatures whatsoever put into his hand power And hath given him Authoritie TO EXECUTE judgement also because he is the son of man Joh. 5. 27. But he had no power or Authoritie given him to carry any thing contrary to his Fathers will or pleasure Verily verily I say unto you saith he himself Joh. 5. 19. the Son can doe nothing of himself but what he seeth the Father doe c. So againe ver 30. I can doe nothing of my self Now then as Christ had no commission or power to give eternall life but onely to those whom God the Father had given unto him Joh. 17. 2. Joh. 6. 37. So neither had he any Authoritative power to institute or appoint any other government for his Churches then that which he had seene with or received from his Father much lesse had he any such power to delegate unto men least of all unto unsanctified persons and rude multitudes a power of nominating whom they should please to appoint and settle what government they pleas'd in the Churches of God Certain I am that Christ never exercised any such power as this and therefore have little hope of being convinc'd that he ever had it Howsoever let us give the Gentleman an unpartial hearing in what he pleads against the aforesaid Conclusion 1. To his former marginall Annotation p. 22. honoured with a Preface made of this word Note wherein he tells me that Gamaliel and my Text never taught me any such Anti-Parliamentary Doctrine I answer that neither doth Gamaliel nor my Text nor any other Text whatsoever in Scripture teach Mr. Prynne to call the truth an Anti-Parliament try Doctrine But both Gamaliel and my Text teach me to take heed of fighting against God and I being taught so high and necessary a point of wisdome conceiv'd it my dutie not to eat such a morsell alone but to spread a Table for as many of my Brethren as pleas'd to come and sit downe and eat of the same with me I and my Doctrine are onely in such a sense Anti-Parliamentarian as Christ and his were Anti-Cesarean 2. To a second Marginall note in the same page ordered likewise to be noted as the former I answer likewise that though people have authoritie to nominate such who by the rule of Gods Word may limit some particulars though not by their own bare Authoritie without or against the Word yet it followeth not either 1. That they have authoritie to nominate such who shall have authoritie by vertue of such nomination to peremptorize by fire or sword all their limitations whatsoever as agreeable to Gods Word Nor 2. Doth it follow that in case their limitations should be agreeable to the word of God therefore they have power to compell any man by externall violence to subject either in their judgement or practise unto them especially whilst they are not able to convince them of any such excellency in these limitations as an agreeablenesse to the word of God It is no waies agreeable
in seven yeeres And when hee saith that our Saviour both instructed and refuted his opposites and auditors by demanding Questions only I conceive it is a mistake As for those Scriptures which hee cites to prove this some of them being more then half Chapters most of them very large portions of Chapters he that shall please to peruse them shall finde more in them then demanding Questions only No question demanded by our Saviour was further instructive then as it gave occasion to an answer It is the marrow of the answer not the bone of the Question that nourisheth with instruction And Luke 2. 47. the first Scripture alledged by him in this Cause it is said That all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and ANSWERS not at his Questions Notwithstanding we acknowledge Aristotles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be very usefull and serviceable for the advancement of knowledge only herein we must crave pardon if we judge it no signe of any depth or thoroughness in an Argument or Subject to be imperious and sore in asking Questions about it and but weak and superficiall in giving Answers Again whereas hee supposeth p. 4. that Independent Ministers and Congregations lay claim to a soveraign Temporall all Jurisdiction for the prescribing and setting up of a Church-Government certainly it is a mistake whatsoever it is more they claim to Jurisdiction at all much lesse any temporall Jurisdiction least of all any soveraign Jurisdiction to prescribe unto any much less to command or injoyn under penalties which is proper to soveraign Temporall Jurisdiction any Church-Government whatsoever they only submit to that good and holy and perfect Will of God for the regulation of themselves in point of order amongst themselves as far as he hath pleased to inlighten them with the knowledge thereof without taking any offence at others for being contrary-minded to them and without the least semblance or shew of claiming any Authoritative or Temporall power to impose or force what they practise themselves upon others Again whereas because some of the Independents as he chargeth them p. 5. whether truly or no I can neither affirm nor deny refuse to heare the Scriptures read in our Churches hee thinks to evict this practice of theirs by proving and that by no lesse then thirteen Texts of Scripture that publique reading of them is an ordinance of God I conceive it is a defect or mistake in point of proof Because if such refusall be made by any it is not made either upon denying or questioning whether publike reading of the Scriptures be an Ordinance of God but either upon questioning whether the bare reading of them in publique without giving the sense of them or framing some exhortation upon them or the like be an Ordinance of God which some of the Scriptures cited by himself particularly Neh. 8. 8. make very questionable or else upon this reason and ground of conscience that a man may very safely refuse an inferiour accommodation for his soul when he hath a lawfull opportunity to injoy a superiour Again whereas he affirms p. 5. the only point in question I presume he means about Church-Government only to be whether the Independent modell alone be that exact unalterable form of Church-Government which Christ hath punctually particularly set down for all Christian nations Churches to follow and yet both in the same page afterwards and in severall passages besides in this Discourse denies that there is any such form of Government so punctually and particuarly set down by Christ doubtles it cannot but be a mistake if it amounts not to an error for they that hold the Independent modell as hee calleth it to be the only form of Church-Government which Christ hath so punctually and particularly set down must needs hold withall that Christ hath set down a form of Church-Government upon such terms I mean which is and must be unalterable Now Mr. Prynne with many others of his judgement in this controversie denying this latter opinion as well as the former evident it is that the former cannot be the only point in question But the truth is that besides both the one point the other there are many others in question though possibly not of that difficulty or importance yea himself in the following page propounds another question differing from this to which notwithstanding hee appropriates the same honour and affirms it to be the sole Question too Again p. 6. whereas he determines moderated or regulated Episcopacy to be the same with Presbyterie I conceive this determination will hardly be voted orthodox in the Assembly it self nor in the generall Assembly of the Church of Scotland For my part though I cannot approve of it as matter of truth yet for matter of inconvenience otherwise I have nothing to charge it with Again whereas in the same page in case the Parliament by the Synods advice should unanimously establish a moderated Episcopacy as most consonant to the Scriptures he professeth for himself that hee shall readily submit unto it and withall demands of the Anti-Querist Why not hee and all others as if either the consonancy of a practice to the Scriptures or the example of one man submitting unto it as consonant thereunto were a sufficient ground for all men whatsoever to submit likewise unto it without any more ado this savours strongly of that error which comports so well with the practice of some viz. that if men in Authority shall conclude and injoyn any thing as consonant to the Word of God all men are bound readily to submit unto it without asking any Question for conscience sake yea or whether they see either consonancy or dissonancy in it thereunto Again whereas he owns this saying p. 6. as the naturall issue lawfully begotten of the body or soule th' one of his own position that Politicians and Statesman are fit to be consulted with to suit a Church-government best to the Civill State certainly it is no assertion to be rejoyced in For as the Apostles made their enemies themselves judges in this point between them Whether it was meet to obey God or them So shall I willingly abide the arbitration of any of all those that make but the least conscience of fearing God and his King Christ whether the government of Christs Church and Kingdome should condescend and be compelled by Politicians and Statesmen to doe obeysance to civill States in accommodating them or whether the government of these should not rather veyle and doe homage unto that and deny themselves in their most indeered Principles and maximes of State to give all accommodation and honour unto it The truth is that the government of Christs Kingdome in a civill State will never do any great thing for it except it first receive accommodation from it The truth knowes no compliance but onely with those that submit to it Whereas pag. 6. he placeth the whole representative as well Church as State of England in
the Parliament though I dare not gain-say it fearing lest Mr. Pryn claiming as it should seem a priviledge to make the privileges of Parliament what he pleaseth should make it a presumptuous and wilfull undermining of the undoubted priviledges of Parliament by the very roots yet I must ingenuously professe that it is a notion which I know not how to procure quarter for in my brain as yet What I may doe hereafter when the Gentleman shall bestow more cost and pains upon it to reconcile the disproportion which for the present it carrieth to my understanding I will not predetermine But none of all the Authors or Books that ever yet I was debtor unto for any grain or scruple of that knowledge wherewith God hath pleased to recompence my labour in studying ever licensed mee to call any Assembly the Representative Church of any State or Kingdome wherein there is not so much as any one Church-officer to be found Whereas he affirmes it in the same page a truth so cleare that no rationall man good Christian or subject can deny it that the whole representative Church and State of England in Parliament have sufficient authoritie by Gods law to over-rule and bind all or any particular members or congregations of it as well as the major part of an Independent Congregation power to over-vote and rule the lesser part and to order yea bind any of their particular members though for the danger aforesaid it be not perhaps so safe for me simply to call the latter assertion touching the comparison between the two powers either an error or a mistake yet that this assertion should be a truth so royally qualified that no reasonable man or good Christian can deny it seemes not so reasonable The reason is because in an Independent congregation all the members by free and voluntary consent have submitted themselves to the regulation and order of the whole body or which is the same of the major part of it and therefore this body having received a lawfull power in a lawfull way for the reiglement of her respective members may lawfully exercise it according to the tenor and true intent of the delegation of it whereas there are many thousands in the Church and State of England who by Mr. Prynnes owne acknowledgement p. 24. line 3. 4. have not given any such consent for their regulation in matters Ecclesiasticall and which concerne Religion unto the Parliament yea and there are many thousands more besides those which hee there describes and intends who will not owne any such Resignation Therefore the difference between the one case and the other is very broad and no lesse considerable so that a reasonable man may without any dispraise to his Reason and a good Christian without any prejudice to the goodnesse of his Christianity demurre a while before judgement upon the case Besides there is no question or ground of doubting but that a good Christian may lawfully and with a good conscience submit himself unto a godly able and faithfull Pastor together with his people whom he hath good ground to judge godly and faithfull also as well for their edification in their most holy faith as for the inspection regulation of themselves in matters of life and conversation But whether it be lawfull to submit to any man or any rank or association of men especially of men of whose sufficiencie and faith fulnesse in the things of God and Jesus Christ we have either but a very slender or no testimony at all yea whose persons are altogether unknowne to us in matters which concerne the worship and service of God cannot but be a question and that of great moment to all considering and conscientious men who are not already satisfied in the negative part of it The Apostles doe not onely permit but give it in charge to Christians in Church-fellowship to submit themselves one to another in the feare of God Eph. 5. 21. i. to be yeelding and tractable easie to be intreated one by another And submit your selves every man unto another 1 Pet. 5. 5. If one man ought to submit to another man in this kind much more ought one to submit unto many and most of all to the whole society of Saints whereof he is a member But as touching submission unto any man or men whatsoever in matters which concerne the worship and service of God the Scripture is so farre from imposing this upon any man that it imposeth the contrary and that with great Emphasis and weight Call no man your father upon earth is our Saviours owne charge Matth. 23. 9. for one is your Father which is in heaven And in the preceding verse Be ye not called Rabbi for one is your master or Doctor even Christ and ye all are brethren And the Apostle 1 Cor. 7. 23. Yee are bought with a price be ye not the servants of men He speakes of a servility or subjection in judgement and conscience to the decisions or determinations of men in matters of conscience and Religion And whosoever doth submit or subject himselfe in things of this nature unto any man or men whosoever that is resigne up his judgement and conscience to be ordered obliged and tied by the meere authority or magistery of men in such things Call's men Fathers on earth makes himselfe a servant unto men and consequently makes himself a transgressor both of our Saviours injunction and charge in this behalf and of his Apostles also Thirdly he that submits himselfe to a Pastor and Congregation of Saints for such regulation as hath been mentioned is presumed to know and understand before-hand of what spirit both the one and the other are how matters appertaining to the worship and service of God are carried managed and ordered amongst them so that he may with the full concurrence and consent of his judgement and conscience submit himselfe unto them as touching communion with them in their practice in this kind but what any Synod Assembly or Court of men will determine or enjoyn in such things cannot be known before-hand by any man and consequently no man can with a good conscience submit himselfe unto them as touching any of their determinations or decisions untill he first understands what they are and whether according to the light and judicature of his conscience agreeable to the word of God Fourthly in case a Pastor and Congregation shall afterwards so farre alter and vary from that posture either in Doctrine or practice wherein they stood when a man first joyned and submitted himselfe unto them that hee cannot with the peace of his conscience walk any longer with them hee may with leave obtained or otherwise if by request it cannot be obtained withdraw himselfe without any inconvenience from their communion and incorporate himselfe elswhere as he judgeth best This may bee done with farre lesse trouble and inconvenience then ordinarily a man upon a dislike of his Parochial Pastor can remove out of one Parish
sins which rendered them justly obnoxious either unto excommunication by the Church or unto death by the Civill Magistrate before either of these censures or sentences pass'd upon them Therefore if they actually cease not to be members when excommunicated they cease not at all to be members or at least no otherwise then they ceased to be before such excommunication and if either what doe we with this learned impertinencie actually But 2. if wicked members when excommunicated doe not actually cease to be members I marvaile our Saviour should allow them no better quarter amongst their fellows then to be look'd upon as Heathens and Publicans Mat. 18. 17. It seems Heathens and Publicans may be actuall members of Mr Prynnes Presbyterian Church yea though they be by the highest hand the Church can lift up cast out of it Ne verè ne me ad tales compellite coetus And 3. and lastly what mysterious notion he should intend to let in or what dangerous conceit he should intend to shut out by that emphaticall insertion after they are baptized is out of the hemisphere of my apprehension All that I can work out of it is this that there is or may be a two-fold excommunication of the members in a Christian Church one before they are baptized and another after and that by the power of the former excommunication they actually cease to be members of their respective Churches not so by vertue of the latter which it seems is either more indulgent or lesse vigorous and active If this be Mr Prynnes Doctrine it is most properly and peculiarly his Libera per primos posuit vestigia Princeps if it be not his Sensum sententiam vestram ô verba after they are baptized Whereas immediately after he argues thus that since none separated from the Churches of Ephesus Colosse Smyrna and though they had some corruptions and evill members therefore for us to separate from and un-church such Nationall or Parochiall Churches which have such members in them is to un-church all Churches in the old and new Testament c. He commits as many errors in arguing as a man shall lightly meet with within such a compasse of words For 1. he must be beholding either to an abundant weaknesse or charitie th' one in his Reader to obtaine the grant of that which is the base or rise of this whole argumentation viz. that none separated from the Churches of Ephesus Colosse c. Negative proofes from the Scripture in this case are not concluding But suppose charitie should cover the nakednesse or weaknesse of this supposition and passe it as a truth yet 2. that such a supposition should argue that to separate from Nationall or Parochiall Churches which have evill members in them is to un-church all Churches in the old and new Testament hath neither head nor foot neither body nor soule of reason in it For 1. they who separate from a Nationall Church supposing no place or ground for such a Church under the New Testament have no ground or colour but to judge that such a Church was lawfull and truly so called under the old as they who now separate themselves from Circumcision and other Judaicall observations as superstitious and highly displeasing unto God doe in no reasonable construction hereby deny but that sometimes they were or might have been a legitimate and acceptable worship unto him 2. Nor is there any sinew or strength of reason at all in this position they who separate from a Nationall or Parochiall Church which have wicked members in them doe therefore separate because of these members more then there is in this they who avoid the company of men with heads doe therefore avoid them because they have heads There may be reasons more then enough of separating either from a Nationall or from a Parochiall Church besides the wickednesse of some of the members of them yea I doe not conceive that ever any man separated from either of these Churches Nationall or Parochiall simply or solely upon this ground nor doe I judge it a sufficient cause of separation from either Mr Prynne himself hath separated from the Church of England as Episcopall and hath given the strength of his assistance to cast it into another frame or mould of Government whereby it will specifically differ from it self and yet it is a plain case that he hath not made this separation from it because of the wickednesse of some of the members that were in it whilst Episcopall because it is like to have many of this character in case it shall be torkened to Presbyterall Therefore a man may separate either from a Nationall or Parochiall Church which have wicked members in it without unchurching yea or disparaging any Church at all either in the Old or New Testament Whereas p. 12. he collects thus If Independents denie that there were diverse particular Congregations at Jerusalem then they must prove that all the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem were Pastors but of one and the self-same Individuall Congregation it is at least a mistake though pardonable in a Lawyer yet not in a Logician For 1. suppose there were diverse particular Congregations at Jerusalem it doth not follow therefore all the Elders belonging to these severall Congregations were Pastors of them except we stretch the signification of the word Pastor beyond the Staple of the Scriptures as Presbyterians I confesse usually doe to help themselves at a dead lift and extend it unto all manner of Governours and Officers in the Church And consequently a pluralitie of Congregations at Jerusalem may be denied though no proofe or supposition be made that all the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem were PASTORS to one Individuall Congregation 2. A pluralitie of Congregations supposed it doth not follow that all or any of the Apostles were Pastors unto any of them Pastors and Apostles being contra-distinguished Eph. 4. 11. He therefore gave some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and Teachers The Apostles had a Commission to preach unto any particular Church or Churches without being made Pastors unto them yea himself afterwards in this very page confesseth that the Apostles were not immediate Ministers or Pastors to particular Churches Therefore Mr Prynnes collection however faulters 3. And lastly The presence or continuance of so many of the Apostles at Jerusalem for a time for that all the Apostles should be present at the meeting Act. 15. is onely Mr. Prynnes Gospel no wayes implies that their stay there was so much either for the Government or edification of the particular Church of Jerusalem whether consisting of one or more Congregations as for the generall accommodation of the Gospel and of the affaires of all particular Churches elsewhere this Citie being their Head-quarter or Rendevouz from whence upon occasion they might and did the more commodiously issue forth by parties into other parts upon their spirituall designs as God called them or gave opportunitie So that there is no
any Church or association of Churches obtaine a quicker or richer spirit of discerning or a more accomplished facultie of convincing Churches that are delinquent of their errors or injustice by being armed with a compulsive power over them then they were or would be capable of if their authoritie were consultative and perswasive onely Or hath a Church called to an account for error or injustice any more reason to acknowledge either for such because they are adjudged such unto her by Churches one or more having a coactive power over her then if this sentence were passed by Churches not daring to claime owne or exercise any such power 4. And lastly I would faine know why it should be more schisme or separation for an Independent Church to appeale onely unto Churches of their owne partie and not unto the Presbyterian then it is for Presbyterian Churches to appeale onely to Churches of their partie and not unto the Independent considering that Churches of this constitution are every whit as much at least Churches of Christ as those of the other But the truth is it being lawfull and free as himself here supposeth for Churches to appeale to Churches as well of the one constitution as of the other that it is somewhat an uncouth and strange conceit to make schisme or separation of appealing either unto the one or the other Whereas p. 17. he gives us leave to differ in judgement from the decrees of Synods and Parliaments when erroneous and contrariant to the expresse Word not to our owne fancies inferences or opinions doubtlesse he mistakes taking that away from us with the one hand which he gives us with the other which I presume was not his intention For if we may not differ in judgement from Synodicall decrees when they are contrariant to our opinions wee may not so differ from them at any time Or may we or can we differ in judgement from that which is not contrary to our opinion Though Mr Prynne differs in judgement from those that hold forth the Congregationall way yet it seems he may be of the same opinion with them concerning that way Whereas in the same page he demands of us If we deem not our selves more holy then our brethren or be not sweld up with spirituall pride why refuse we to close with them now as we have done heretofore The ground of the demand questionlesse is a mistake and should not suffer ultrâ condignum if it were called an error There may be many reasons why one man closeth not with another in point of judgement and consequently why not in practice also besides deeming himselfe more holy then his brother from whom hee dissenteth or being sweld up with spirituall pride I doe not conceive that the Apostle Paul deemed himselfe more holy then Peter much lesse that he was sweld up with spirituall pride when hee not onely dissented from him touching the justifiablenesse of that course and practice wherein Peter now walked but as the text saith withstood him to his face but that the true ground of such both dissent and resistance was partly the standing of Pauls judgement in opposition unto and dislike of what Peter did partly the desire hee had of doing his fellow Apostle the Christian kindnesse of making streight that which was crooked in his way partly also if not principally his zeal and faithfulnesse to his Lord and Master Jesus Christ and his Gospel and his Saints that none of these might suffer losse or disadvantage in the world by the misprisions or miscarriages of any man how great or holy soever as farre as lay in his power to prevent it Nor would it have been any disparagement or dishonour at all to the name of Mr. Prynne nor wound I beleeve to his conscience if hee had wav'd those hard suggestions we spake of and substituted these or the like in their stead as the true grounds of his brethrens not closing with him and those of his judgement in the Presbyterian way The truth is that for my part and I verily beleeve that I may truly speak the same for many thousands more any conceit or deeming of my selfe more holy then others was so far from interessing either my judgement or affections for the congregational way in the least or from keeping me at any distance from my brethren of a contrary judgement that a sense of mine owne defectivenesse therein together with an earnest desire of better accommodations for my supplies was not the least of those motives and arguments which carried and set my heart upon that way And here I make open profession in the presence of Heaven and Earth that if any of my brethren of opposite judgement shall give me any reasonable account or satisfaction how in an ordinary way of providence or experience I may build up my selfe in holinesse better or if it be but as well in the way of Presbytery then in that way wherein I am for the present ingaged I will soon pull down what I have built and dwell no longer in the Tents of Independencie but devote my selfe and all my strength and might to the service of that way which for distinction sake is called Presbyterie For I make no question but that way of Church-government which hath the richest sympathy and most direct and full compliance with the edification of the Saints in holinesse is against all reasons grounds and arguments of what seeming strength or evidence soever the way which Jesus Christ hath sealed For any harsh censures cast or passed by any Congregationall men upon Mr. Prynne or other of their brethren of Mr. Prynnes judgement and way I trust the complaint is to the height of the crime I cannot justifie one harsh censure given by a thousand received but if there were a Law for any such attonement I make no question but that all the Congregational delinquency in that kind would be fully purged If my pen hath trespassed in this kinde whereof notwithstanding I am no ways conscious though upon some charge I have made diligent enquirie after my own guilt I hope the last period in this Mr. Prynnes Reply will speak a good word for it and salve the imputation of such a sin Hitherto I have examined onely such passages in the Reply which concerne the common cause depending between the two wayes of Church-government so much ingaged in competition My Pen must now travaile for her selfe and make triall of her strength for the redeeming of her own Innocency out of the hand of those accusations which have laid violent hands upon her I intend scarce so much as to touch or mention any thing that was brought to the touch-stone in the former part of this discourse a single vindication is large allowance for criminations without either substance or colour of truth the chiefe almost the only thing which I have now to doe is to weigh the discussions of Mr. Prynnes pen in opposition to those of
mine in the ballance of reason and truth that so the reader to whom judgement in this case belongeth may give sentence accordingly But first it is a thing almost incredible doubtlesse farre beyond the belief of any sober or ingenuous man that a man of that Name and Reputation not only for learning but for Religion also which Mr. Prynne is should affirme those 15. lines about the middle of page 18. to be the main doctrine prosecuted in my discourse called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the said 15 lines being nothing else but a rapsody or collection of severall words phrases and expressions scattered here and there throughout the Discourse some of them being expressly contrary to those restrictions and limitations under which the doctrine there prosecuted is propounded and asserted in the explication of it As for example whereas page 18. of the said Theomachia I expresse my selfe thus If to attempt the suppression or keeping downe any way doctrine or practice which is from God bee of no lesse concernment of no safer interpretation then a fighting against God then certainly it is the greatest imprudence or improvidence under heaven for any man or rank of men whatsoever to appeare especially in any high-handed opposition or contestation against any way c. In stead of those words To appeare especially in any high-handed opposition he most unworthily and unchristianly substitutes these to appeare or so much as to lift up an hand or thought against any way c. Which falsification of my words is so much the more unsufferable because in the explanation of my doctrine page 12. I expresse my selfe thus It is not every degree or kind of opposing a way doctrine or designe of God which either the Text or the doctrine calleth a fighting against God but onely such an opposing which is peremptory and carried on with an high hand so that those instruments of God which hee hath anointed to hold forth that way doctrine or designe of his in the world are not suffered to execute their commission but are countermanded either by the authority or over-bearing strength or power of men And immediatly after for the further explanation of my intent in the doctrine proposed I distinguish thus It is one thing to oppose or contend against a doctrine or way of God per modum doctoris another to doe it per modum judicis The former I grant may befall the best and faithfullest of men yea the later I grant to be somtimes incident to men otherwise upright in the main before God onely affirming that the children of this later contention and contestation against their maker must expect to be taught more wisdome and reverence towards him with thorns and briers And that the Reader may yet more clearly see and judge of Mr. Prynnes artifice in swelling my two lines at most of doctrine into his 14. or 15. of representation that so hee may have the fairer mark and bigger But to hit I shall verbatim transcribe it as it is laid down about the middle of page 12. of the said discourse The content and words of it are onely these That for any man to endevour or attempt the suppression of any doctrine practice or way which is from God is to fight against God himselfe Which doctrine especially so qualified and understood as the subsequent explication states the sense purport and meaning of it I could not lightly expect should ever have been opposed or contested against by any that were willing to owne Abrahams relation of friendship unto God But with what successe Mr. Prynne hath attempted to shake the foundations of the truth of it or whether indeed he hath attempted this at all and not rather contrary to the Law of all regular disputation fallen foule onely upon the conclusion it selfe without giving any answer at all unto the premises shall bee presently taken into consideration In the mean time let mee adde this That if the grossest and most abhorred Heretickes in the world might have but the same liberty to prove their hereticall opinions out of the Scriptures which Pryn taketh to represent the doctrine prosecuted by me and quarrelled against by him out of my Sermons they might prove them and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from thence For what opinion is there or lightly can be imagined but that all the words wherin it is or at least very easily might be conceived may be found some where or other scattered here and there severally in the Scripture so be framed together into a sentence By the law of such a liberty as this I might say that Mr. Prynne in his Full Reply holds That wee must speedily oppose resist avoid suppresse Parliaments Emperours Kings Judges Magistrates Ministers even for conscience sake and the Lords sake too For all these words and clauses are to be found in this discourse of his as the pages cited in the margine doe direct yea and twenty moe as wild and uncouth opinions and as farre from Mr. Prinnes judgement as this might by the liberty aforesaid be collected out of the same piece But let us come to consider those grounds and reasons upon which in Mr. Prynnes judgement it may justly be questioned whether the Doctrine expressed towards the beginning of the last Section which is the maine indeed the onely Doctrine prosecuted in those two innocently-offending Sermons be Orthodox or tolerable His first Reason is because it opens a wide gate to the reviving of all the old the speading and propagating of all new Heresies Errors without the least timely opposition or prevention to the endangering of infinite soules and disturbance of the Churches Kingdomes peace For there is no Heretique Schismatique or Sectarie whatsoever but pretends his way Doctrine practise opinions to be the way of Christ c. Will any reasonable man conceive that there is any reason at all in all this to question the truth or soundnesse of the prementioned Doctrine For any man to forbeare the suppression of any Doctrine or Way which is for any thing that is knowne to the contrary from God and that least he should fight against God is this to open a wide gate to all heresies errors and schismes Then by the rule of contraries the suppression of all Doctrines and wayes which for any thing that is knowne to the contrary are from God must be the fast-shutting of the gate against all heresies errors and schismes This is the heart soule of the first reason which interesseth Mr. Prynnes judgement in questioning the Orthodoxisme yea the tolerablenesse of the premised Doctrine But by the way if Mr. Prynnes judgement concerning the Doctrine be that it opens a wide gate to all heresies errors schismes sects whatsoever both new and old c. it is marvaile it should have no further operation upon him then onely to prevaile with him to question whether it be Orthodox or tolerable Such an effect or
before they are discovered or manifested to be such or that being discovered or manifested to be such they ought to be either resisted or suppressed by any other means then what God himself hath authorized in that behalf least of all is there any jot tittle or peep of a proof of that which is the burthen of Mr. Prynnes undertaking viz. that to attempt the suppressing of any Doctrine or Way which is from God is not to fight against God Nor doth his third Reason any whit more accommodate his enterprize then the former For what contrariety or shew of contrariety is there in these unquestionable maximes of Divinity Policy and Morality Principiis obstaâ—e venienti occarrite morbo c. to that Doctrine which only pronounceth the attempt of suppressing any Doctrine or Way which is of God to be a fighting against God yea or to this that no Doctrine or Way ought to be suppressed untill it be certainly known whether they be from God or no He that gave counsell Principiis obstare iâ— to withstand beginnings did not mean to advise men to make resistance against such beginnings which might for ought they know be as wel the beginings of good or of strength as of evill or sicknesse but only such beginnings which did cleerly presage inconvenience ensuing if not timely prevented And though all wise men hold preventing physique best for their bodies yet no wise man holds such Physique best or good in any degree for his body which is as like to prevent the health and sound constitution of his body as any infirmity or distemper of it He that will either launce or seare before he knowes whether the condition of his body requires either may abound in flesh but sure is no true born son of Wisdome That creature which is indued by God with principles of discerning certainly was not made to act especially in things of highest importance as matters of Religion are at peradventure His 4th and last Reason holds no correspondence at all with the Truth For what contrariety is there in the Doctrine under Mr. Pryns arrest to the Policy Practice of most godly Magistrates Princes Ministers Churches in all Ages Nations When did the Policy or Practice of any of these affirm that to attempt the suppression of any Doctrine or Way which is from God is not to fight against God If his meaning be that the Policy and Practice of the persons hee represents never indulged any known Heresies Errors Schismes no not for an houre the Doctrine against which hee contends in this contends not at all against him but gives him the right hand of fellowship in such an apprehension Only it adviceth godly Magistrates Prince Ministers Churches to be very carefull and wary of suppressing Angels of light indeed instead of Satan transformed into an Angel of light of baiting and hunting the sheep of Christ in stead of Wolves that come in sheeps clothing of smothering light in stead of darknesse of smiting truth in stead of error and heresie And is there any harme in this counsell or contrariety either to the Policy or Practice of any wise or godly man Or if there be any contrariety to either it is because there is a contrariety in them to the Word and Wildome of God Whereas in the same Reason he makes himself a further debtor unto mee by charging mee that I plead for Schismes and CONVENTICLES set up only by private spirits in opposition to the publique established Church-reiglement My Answer is 1. That I know a publique Church-reiglement abrogated and demolished but I know none as yet established When Mr. Prynne by his Logique shall convince mee of acting in opposition to that which is not I trust I shall be provided with mine to give him a satisfying answer 2. Whereas he declares against me as a Pleader for Schismes and Conventicles I answer that hee is the happiest man I know of his Profession if he never pleaded any worse Cause then that which I plead in those Sermons But whereas in other places of his Reply his margent glorieth with quotations in abundance here it seems it is ashamed as not knowing what to say nor where to finde or point at any pleading for Schismes and Conventicles as the lines in the page adventure to affirm 3. Mr. Prynnes privie notion of a Schisme or Conventicle is I am not able to say but if hee be here of the same minde and judgement with his own marginall note p. 10. which affirmeth that none are Conventiclers but Heretiques and Schismatiques who wholly separate themselves from our publique assemblies established by law certain I am that I plead for no Conventicles in those Sermons nor do I approve of the practice of any who wholly separate themselves from our publique assemblies But calumniare audacter aliquid haerebit holds good it seems in Law But 4. If by pleading for Schismes and Conventicles he means a pleading for the spirituall liberties of the Congregations of the Saints and of the Assemblies of the first-born whose names are written in heaven whom Jesus Christ hath made Kings and Priests unto God his Father and who are shortly to judge the world if the vindication I say of the rights and priviledges of these in point of exemption and immunity in their spirituall affaires and such as concern the regulation of their consciences in matters appertaining to the worship and service of God from the Jurisdiction and interest of the Commissioners and Delegates of the world if this once again be pleading for Schismes and Conventicles I had quitted my self much more like a faithfull Minister of Jesus Christ if I had pleaded for them yet seven times more then now I have done My sorrow and shame in part is that I have pleaded this honourable Cause so weakly as to leave thoughts and imaginations in Mr. Prynne which still exalt and magnifie themselves against the righteousnesse truth and equity of it 5. And lastly whereas hee calls the Church-government which I plead for a Government set up only by private spirits if it be found to be a Government set up by the Spirit of God in the Scriptures the consideration unto which all my pleadings for it in those Sermons are homagers being all of them conditionall and none peremptory or absolute Mr. Prynnes spirit and the spirits of all others that shall oppose it how publique soever their persons may be will be found to be the private spirits disallowed in the Scriptures by the Spirit of God Whereas hee yet addes that differences and varieties in matters of government are such tender things that they cannot be tolerated in one and the self-same Church and State without infinite inconveniences and distances c. I answer 1. That differences and varieties in matters of Government are not things so tender in any degree as the consciences of the Saints and therefore no reason that Reason of State should be more tenderly respected then these Better
produce nothing positively to prove the Way I plead for or rather against the suppression of it to be Christs own Way Mr. Prynne takes the courage to assault the credit and reputation of it by four Reasons or Arguments as hee desires to have their number thought though the second and fourth be but one and the same and the third nothing but what hee had said before and that unsuceessefully as was argued in the 39th Section of this Discourse and the first second third and fourth nothing to prophane the excellency or pollute the beauty of that Cause against which his pen is armed But let us answer them so far as they have not been answered already only this one thing pre-observ'd that Mr. Prynn's conscience with the assistance of all his four Arguments doth not yet serve him peremptorily or simply to condemn this Way as none of Christs own Way but only to suspect it none of his as himself expresseth himself in the last line of pag. 19. Now being advanced no further in the confidence of his judgement against this Way but only to suspect it for none of Christs I trust that remembring what Cameron a learned Presbyterian saith viz. that suspicion of falsity was ever a calamity incident to truth he will advance no further in his opposition to it untill his suspicion be grown up to the stature of a perfect cleere and certain knowledge This only premised let us try whether the grounds of his jealousie it self will not shake To the first wee answer 1. That whereas this Way is here charged to be a new Way never yet heard of in any age or Church of Christ it hath been sufficiently proved by those that have written in the defence of it that in point of Antiquity it hath the preheminence of its Competitresse to the value of 1500 yeers as having been that Way of Government wherein the Primitive Churches of Christ through his gracious wise indulgence administred unto them by his Apostles in this behalf rejoyced for the space of about 200. yeers as Mr. Burton in his Answer to Mr. Prynn's two first pieces upon this subject lately published cleerly manifests p. 19. and 24. shewing moreover how these Churches in time came to degenerate in point of Government and to lose their spirituall liberties therein 2. Whereas the opposition of the generality of Magistrates Ministers and people to this Way is pleaded in barre to the legitimacy and truth of it We answer 1. That according to the tenor of Poeticall story Vlysses after twenty yeers absence from his house and home was grown out of the knowledge of his friends and neighbours yea Penelope her self his wife knew him not at his return at first but upon some conference and discoveries otherwise hee became known both to the one and the other Nor should it seem strange to any that a Church-government set up by the Apostles so many hundreth yeers since and having for a thousand yeers and upwards been in exile the rights priviledges and possessions of it seised upon and usurped by others should not presently at the first return of it be acknowledged by the generality of men no nor by the generality of her friends themselves I mean godly sober and understanding men whom I call her friends because I make no question but there lies love and friendship to her at the root and bottome of their hearts though there be a crust of enmity and opposition at the top for a season Joseph will in due time make himself known unto his brethren 2. Though numbers of those that are opposite to this Way if we compute the generality of them be confessedly far greater then of those that plead for her yet the barren begins to rejoyce and to beare children apace and the desolate may in time come to have more children then she that hath an husband John Baptist had many moe Disciples and followers at first then Christ himself yet ingenuously subscribed to the dignity of Christ above himself saying He must increase but I must decrease Joh. 3. 30. 3. The judgements both of Magistrates and common people concerning this Way depending chiefly if not solely upon the judgements of Ministers it is the lesse strange that there should be found such a grand concurrence in the judgements of both against it especially for a time There are these twelve Reasons among others why the judgements of Ministers especially may according to the course of humane affairs in other like cases stand off at some distance form this Goverment for a season First their judgements have for a long time conversed familiarly with another and that with approbation and contentment by means whereof there is a kinde of a pleasing sympathy or connaturalnesse growne between them which is such a conveniencie or accommodation that nature will not suddenly quit or lose nor without good consideration No man saith our Saviour that hath drunk old wine streight way desireth new for he saith the old is better Luke 5. 39. Secondly godly Ministers more generally stand publiquely declared in their judgements for another Government And how hard a thing is it even for good men in the Philosophers phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to do execution upon their own tenets and opinions especially when they have own'd them in the sight of the world The casting out of his son Ismael is said to have been a thing very grievous in Abrahams sight notwithstanding he had the advantage of the expresse Commandement of God upon him to make it easie Gen. 21. 11. It is confessed that this haply with some others of the Reasons following beares as hard against some Independents in their adhesion unto and stiff-standing by their Way as it doth against Presbyterians in their resolvednesse for theirs But this rather confirms then any way infeebles the argumentative authority of it for that probation which it undertakes Thirdly many Ministers conceive that if they shall pull out but one stone out of their building though never so ill laid they shall shake the foundations of the whole fabrique and that in case themselves should begin with any one of those Doctrines which they have taught to disclaim it the people will follow their example herein and do the like by all the rest Whereas on the contrary the truth is that to separate the vile from the precious is to raise the honour and esteem of that which is precious and the cancelling of some things which a man hath taught as erroneous is an high confirmation of all the rest according to that Schoole maxime Exceptio firmat regulam in non exceptis Fourthly many by being declaredly ingag'd for such or such an opinion have fared the better for it either in their credits and reputations or otherwise yea and haply at unawares have gained deep interest and honour with persons of name and prime respects in the world by means of a co-ingagement in the same opinion with them Now as
time proceed from Kings Magistrates whether Heathen or Christian unto which we cannot submit with a good conscience and for conscience sake but are necessitated even for conscience sake to decline them Onely we question whether Kings Magistrates Heathen or Christian have any power from God to punish good and godly men for declining such commands of theirs for conscience sake which they cannot for conscience sake submit unto 6. For those Princes and Magistrates who were long sence predicted to become nursing Fathers to the Church under the Gospel we wish them all Christian care tendernesse and compassion according to the nature and tenor of this so honourable a service and imployment so long sence by prophecie from God assign'd and recommended unto them But whether it be proper for those that desire to be look'd upon as nursing Fathers of the Church to sacrifice the peace and comfort of one part of the children of the Church upon the service of the wills or humors of another part of them I leave to nursing mothers who have twins of their womb hanging upon their breasts to judge and determine 7. And lastly for the good and wholesome Laws enacted by Cyrus Artaxerxes Darius c. for the worship of God c. We gave I trust a good and wholesome answer in the former part of this discourse published some weeks since Wee freely grant a power yea and more then a power a necessitie by way of dutie in Kings Magistrates to further the honour and service of the true God and his people in the worship of him It is onely a power of discouraging his people of interrupting and hindring their peace and comfort in the worship and service of the true God which we conceive incompetible unto Magistracie as any gift or donation setled upon it by God His third Argument or ground of jealousie against the way of his great Contestation is that it appears to be a way that will breed infinite confusions disorders by confounding the bounds of Parishes c. We answer 1. That Physicians seldome complain of sickly times nor Millars of those that bring griest to their mills The old saying was De morbo gaudet medicus It is strange to me that Mr. Prynne should thus prevaricate with his profession But it may be this argument is figurative and cat-antiphrasticall And so by confusions disorders c. he means peace unitie and concord amongst men whereby confusions disorders and consequently suits at Law will be prevented and cut off And the truth is that such peace unitie and concord amongst men whereby such unchristian mischiefes and miseries as these may in ordinary way of providence be prevented is the genuine and naturall product of this way and a fruit that is daily gathered from it by many 2. Whereas he chargeth this way with confounding the bounds of Parishes and in his margent cites p. 38. to 40. of my two Sermons for the justification of this charge the truth is that both charge and justification may go together and serve in the Forlorne hope having neither reason nor truth to second either For 1. the way he speaks of intermeddles not with offers no violence to the bounds of Parishes onely it thinks it equall that the bounds of Parishes should not offer violence or be houses of bondage unto the consciences of the Saints nor be as barres of iron against them in the way of their comfort and spirituall edification 2. Whereas I am sub-pena'd for a witnesse against this way touching the crime objected I meane of trespassing upon the bounds of Parishes May answer is that the printed copie of those Sermons of mine which I have hath ne gry quidem either in pag. 38 39 or 40. of any such matter nor hath it any where else any page passage sentence line word syllable letter point or tittle amounting to the import of such a charge 3. Whereas his pen spits this black reproach in the face of Independencie that it is a Government inconsistent with Royaltie and the civill Government My answer is that look in what degree this accusation and charge would be weighty and sore in case it could be prov'd in the same degree it is light and contemptible through a deficiencie of all and all manner of proofe or colour of proofe whatsoever The Roman Empire lost nothing of her beautie strength or interest by the Churches of Christ practising this Government in severall places within the bounds and territories of it If it sustained losse in any of these by occasion of this Government it was not because of their toleration of but their opposition to it 4. Nor is this charge that it giveth way to every sect to choose Ministers erect Churches of their owne without controule of any better commendation in point of truth then the former For it giveth way to no sect whatsoever without controule it reproves oppugns censures and condemns sects and sectaries of all sorts so far is it from granting allowance to them to choose Ministers and erect Churches without controule Indeed it knows no authoritie or commission which it hath from God to countenance the controulement of the civill sword against such persons who in the simplicitie not convicted obstinacy of their hearts are misled in matters of Religion it trembles to make misprisions in things of that difficult high and rare attainment as the acknowledgement of supernaturall truth is in matters of Religion and the things of God to be matter either of confiscation of goods imprisonment banishment death unto men though it denies not a power of restraint from opposing the received faith with publick disturbance and offence 5. Whereas in Answer to somewhat argued by me to make the innocency of Independencie touching matter of Divisions as cleare as the noone day he repones thus That those who in point of conscience cannot communicate or agree together in one Church will never questiolesse accord well together in one familie bed Parish Kingdome as experience manifests I answer 1. That experience manifests the quite contrary How many Ministers of the Presbyterian judgement are there in the Kingdome yea in and about the Citie that hold communion in all deare and Christian respects and terms of love and friendship with many called Independent and these againe with them The difference in judgement between them in point of Church-Government in some rather increasing then diminishing or dissolving their familiaritie and acquaintance How oft doth Mr. Edwards himself in his Antapologie acknowledge his Apologists to be dearly and deeply interessed in the love and care of many of his judgement Yea he commends his own love and affections towards them once and twice and the third time also How many families are there in and about the Citie wherein the respective members injoy themselves together with much Christian sweetnesse and peace notwithstanding relations to severall Pastors Churches among them I had it from a person worthy credit in a greater matter
That experience manifests the contrary to what he here affirms viz. that the subordination or subjection of severall Trades Societies to the whole Corporation Parliament or supreame Magistrate doth not keep them all in peace and writie What contentiones quarrels emulations suits amongst them from day to day any such subordination or subjection notwithstanding 2. Whereas by way of opposition he addes that Independent Churches will be regulated obliged onely by their own peculiar edicts which must needs occasion infinite schismes and disorders We answer 1. We wish that by way of commendation and praise in many cases to Parliaments temporall Magistrates and Synods which is here cast upon Independent Churches by way of imputation and charge I mean regulation and obligement by their own peculiar edicts But 2. Whereas the charge is thus laid against these Churches that they will be regulated obliged onely by their own peculiar Edicts the truth is that they are every whit as willing to be regulated obliged by the Edicts of any other as by their own alwayes provided that they be conform to the Word and this conformitie sufficiently proved and made known unto them They put no difference at all between the mind of Christ presented unto them by others or discovered and found out by themselves Yea and that subordination and subjection which they all professe and own to the written word of God is a farre more effectuall and hopefull means to keep them all in peace and unitie then that subordination mentioned by Mr. Prynne is to keep all Trades and Societies in the same precious posture Onely in this one thing these poore Independent Churches desire Parliaments and Magistrates and Synods to be mercifull unto them that they cannot write any of them infallible nor yet subscribe unto any their injunctions or decisions in matters of Faith or which concern the worship and service of God without retaining the Scriptures for their Counsell and advising with them what to do therein To his third and last difference also we answer 1. That he saith very well in point of truth when he saith that Christians as Christians are all of one and the self same society and profession as those of one trade and calling are But this truth as yet is not at all conscious to his intention or purpose Therefore he addes therefore they should all have but one Church and Government as these trades have Nor doth this if granted make any whit more for the Presbyterian cause then for the Independent because it doth not follow Christians as Christians ought all to have one and the same Church and Government therefore this Church and Government ought to be Presbyterian Take a parallel Simeon and Levi ought to have been Brethren therefore they ought to have been Brethren in iniquitie Take another Aâ—aniaâ— and Sapphira being man and wife ought to have agreed together therefore they ought to have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord. But 2. If by his one Church he means one and the same Catholique mysticall and invisible Church We answer that Christians as Christians have all one and the same Church in this sense they are all members of this one Church But if he means one and the same ministeriall and visible Church we answer by demanding How can this thing be We have heard indeed of some Oecumenicall Councels but of Oecumenicall visible Churches wherein all Christians should be comprehended as members I beleeve there hath been Oecumenicall silence unto this day 3. Whereas he goeth about to set the comparison of his own making upright by stating it thus If some of one Fraternitie in London suppose Merchant-t tylors Sadlers c. should fall out among themselves and one would have one form of Government another another and thereupon divide themselves into severall conventicles and pety meetings in corners not at their common Hall and one chuse one Government or Master another another and so sever the Company and continue Independent this no doubt would prove an apparent schisme and seminary of infinite divisions to the distraction destruction of the whole Company and Fraternitie and then addes This is the true State of your Independencie We answer that the comparison thus stated holds no proportion or correspondence with the State of Independencie For 1. That number of Christians which pleads for Independencie so called is not the whole Socieitie of Christians nor indeed any confiderable part thereof in respect of number as that Fraternitie of Merchant-tayloes or Sadlers the comparison speaks of is therein supposed to be the whole Societie of such a Company Therefore to set Mr. Prynnes comparison upright and make it agree with the State of Independencie in this particular it must be stated thus Suppose two or three members of a numerous and vast companie consisting it may be of ten or twenty thousand persons should differ from the rest of the Societie in some things about their Government and hereupon should withdraw themselvs from that Society and seek incorporation elsewhere would such a dissent or withdrawing of so few from amongst so many any waies threaten the distraction much lesse the destruction of the whole Company 2. Suppose a considerable part of a Company should out of a conscientious dislike of the carriage of things in the Government of the body withdraw themselves and refuse subjection to this Government so ordered and administred though in probabilitie this act of theirs may occasion some distraction or disturbance in the rest of the body for a season yet supposing it done upon substantiall and due grounds it may be so farre bringing destruction to this body that very possibly it may occasion the Reformation and amendment of those things that were unjust in this Government and consequently destructive to the bodie and so become a means of the preservation of it from destruction And this is the true state of our Independencie 3. In case the Fraternity of Merchant-taylors in London should fall out amongst themselves and one would have one form of Government and another another and thereupon divide themselves c. What ever inconvenience should or might hereupon ensue to the Company yet still it was determined by equall and prudent Judges who or which partie gave the chief occasion of these distractions and rents there is no reason why any one partie should fall foule upon all the rest and give an extrajudiciall sentence for themselves For any thing that God hath yet determined to the contrary the Independent partie of Christians in the Kingdom may be as innocent yea more innocent of the breaches and distractions amongst us in point of Church Government them the Presbyterian They that call and plead for that Government which is held forth in the Scriptures calling and pleading for it in a regular meek and Christian manner are those that are innocent and those that call and plead for any other or indeed for any in a violent preposterous and unchristian manner light