Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	book_n	church_n	minister_n	2,564	5	6.5894	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43841	Fasciculus literarium, or, Letters on several occasions I. Betwixt Mr. Baxter, and the author of the Perswasive to conformity, wherein many things are discussed, which are repeated in Mr. Baxters late plea for the nonconformists, II. A letter to an Oxford friend, concerning the indulgence Anno 1671/2, III. A letter from a minister in a country to a minister in London, IV. An epistle written in Latin to the Triers before the Kings most happy restauration / by John Hinckley ...	Hinckley, John, 1617?-1695.; Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1680 (1680)	Wing H2046; ESTC R20043	157,608	354

about Discipline Put out your other Clauses and let us have no more Oaths of Allegiance or Fidelity to Diocesanes or Lay-Chancellors put upon us than were imposed on Christs Churches for 600 or 800 years and then try who will refuse to swear a Renunciation of War against the King 7. But I admire how you came to such an obdurateness as to talk of nauseating that way of Discipline which startles at renouncing War against the King Is it Episcopal Discipline that you mean If not what way of Discipline is it that startles at it unless you mean Military Discipline Read over the Confessions of the French Belgick and all other Presbyterian Churches and see whether there be any thing in their Discipline that startles at it What if it had been the Presbyterians and not the Episcopal that in England raised the War Doth it follow that their way of Discipline was for it Name us that Form of Discipline and tell us where to find it which you mean that is guilty of what you charge on it Doth he that saith Every Church should have a Bishop and not only a thousand or 600 in a Diocess hereby say we may not renounce War against the King Do not so wrong God as to think him so unjust as always to suffer such as you thus to abuse the Innocent 8. And you that talk so malepertly of the Savoy Papers it 's like know that it was not Presbytery nor any other than Arch-Bishop Usher's Form of Episcopacy in terminis in his own printed Paper which we offered the King and Bishops as the Medium of our Concord in 1660. And when that would not be received see in the Kings Declaration about Ecclesiastical Affairs whether it was not the down-right Prelacy that was submitted to with only the additions of some Pastoral Power in a Rural Deanery And I never heard Presbytery pleaded for by Word or saw it by Writing in all that Treaty but only Vshers Episcopacy Why then do you talk of the Discipline of the Chorus unless you mean the Episcopal Discipline And do you not know that write about the Cause that the War was not founded in Theological Differences but in Law Differences and that it was Statesmen and Lawyers that made the difference by their Political and Law-Controversies Not but that Divines on both sides were too guilty if not the forwardest But my dull Brains could never find out any one Point of difference in Theology about the Power of Kings and the Duty of Obedience in the People between the Divines called Presbyterians and Episcopal If you know any name them me and tell me your Proof I know that they medled too much with the Political and Law-Controversies of Lawyers and States-men for there lay the difference as I did my self in my Pol. Aphor. of which I unfeignedly repent though I thought then that Oceana forced me to do it 10. It 's not probable that so Learned a Man is ignorant what Bishop Jewel Bishop Bilson Bishop Andrews in Tortura Torti and many more such have said to prove that Calvin and the Presbyterians and the English Puritans differ not in these things from the Theology of the Church of England taking the same Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance c. And how come you to be wiser than they and to prove the Discipline Interest in the disagreement And when you have taught the Papists to say that Andrews c. spake falsly how will you prove it I know that there were many Sectaries and some individual Persons of the Episcopal and Presbyterian Judgment that erred in Law and Politicks and perhaps in Theologicals too But what 's that to a difference between the Parties in their Religious Principles 11. For can you be ignorant that it is the grand Champions for Prelacy that have written for the Principles of the Long Parliament by which they pleaded for their War Do you not know to pass by Bishop Jewel what Bishop Bilson of Subjection hath said and what Rich. Hooker in his Eccles Pol. L. 1. 8. hath said higher than those Parliament Soldiers that I was most acquainted with I have now written a Book Licensed which containeth a Defence of Monarchy against R. Hookers Popular Errors Why then do you not call the Episcopal Party to repentance or why do you insinuate such suspitions into Mens Minds that the Discipline is it that startles at renouncing War against the King You know I suppose what Grotius de Jure Belli also hath said in his Enumeration out of Barclay of Cases in which it is lawful to take Arms against Kings Even that Grotius who was the Master of the late Game and boasteth of the approbation of the English Prelates Was Arch-bishop Abbot a Presbyterian who saith he was suspended for refusing to License Dr. Sybthorpes Book see his Narrative in Rushworth Did he and all the Clergy and Parliaments that went his way forsake the Church of England Who then were the Church Yet you can add P. 125. And since the Lines of our Peace and Happiness as to Church and State do meet and concenter in him as our common Father is it unreasonable for Subjects to swear they will not endeavour the alteration of Government in the Church and State who would think that any Natives of a Land professing themselves the Followers of Christ and expecting protection from a lawful Prince should once demur whether they should make this Declaration or take this Oath O easie happy Swearer Qui deliberant desciverunt Such as doubt of this have even shak'd off the Yoke of Subjection unhappy Doubters 1. Here They will not endeavour the alteration of Government is put in stead of will not at any time endeavour any alteration of Government 2. In Church and State is put instead of in Church or State 3. Not one Man of my acquaintance of them you question refuseth to swear that he will never endeavour any alteration of the Church Government as it is in the King according to the Oath of Supremacy 4. They that offered Bishop Vshers Form of Episcopacy are not for altering Episcopacy as such 5. The Oath of the Canons 1640. put we will not consent in stead of endeavour And a Parliament condemned that Oath and no Parliament since thought meet to justifie or restore it 6. We know that Lay-Chancellors exercise the Power of the Keys by decreeing Excommunications and Absolutions And we believe that exercising the Power of the Keys so is Church-Government And we are all agreed that yet no reforming alteration is to be attempted by Sedition Rebellion or unlawful means but only by Subjects petitioning Parliament-mens speaking c. And if you think to come to Heaven by swearing that we may not petition against Lay-Chancellors use of the Keys cannot you go quietly your own way and let others alone that trust not to such means 7. We believe that Ignatius his Episcopacy every Churches unity being known by one Altar and one

have found some of them at leisure for a more particular Consideration If it be our Liturgy offered them that you mean the Hypothesis there is That those forms there offered were fit to be taken into consideration as the Addenda mentioned in the Commission If this be false what can you imagine to be the reason that we could by no importunity ever procure any by word or writing to open to us the faults of that Liturgy and that L'Estrange himself had no more to say against it Though being drawn up in eight days only we desired we might have had leisure to have made it more perfect which might easily be done If it be the Petition for Peace that you mean the Hypothesis was That our Concord was so desirable as that they should make the abatements there mentioned to attain it but especially rather than silence so many Ministers and choose the other ill Consequents that would follow If this be it you mean and you are ambitious of acquainting your Rulers that you will stand at Gods Judgment as an approver of all that enjoy the pleasure and fruit of your desire If the silence of so many hundred Ministers and the Consequents to so many thousand ignorant Souls be a Blessing to be rejoyced in put not your Sickle into other Mens Harvest but let the Labourer who is worthy have the hire If it be otherwise what need any Man say Their be on us and on our Children 4. And when you talk of Vulgar Capacities do you not reproach the Reverend Bishops as Vulgar Capacities in print To whom were they given but to them And I never heard of any that they shewed them to If you say That they were printed afterward I answer 1. Some were and some were not 2. How could we then foretel that when we gave them in 3. They were done as far as I can learn by a poor reading Curate that gave the Printer Copies through meer poverty to get a little Money without our knowledge For he was th● Scribe that we were forced to use for Copies and I hear he kept some for himself 4. I sent to the Kings Secretary Sir IV. Morrice when I heard they were in the Press to desire him to search the Press and apprehend them 5. The printing of them by offending our Antagonists and by the intollerable falseness of the impression was a very great injury to us Moreover you dare publish to the world Had Men kept close to the Church of England they needed not have stumbled at swearing That it is not lawful to take up Arms against the King I must tell the whole Chorus of my dissenting Brethren that this very Fly is enough to spoil the Box of pretended Oyntment who can choose but nauseate that way of Discipline which startles at renouncing War against the King Do you think you were able to bear it patiently if I should tell you how much of the Diabolical Spirit is in these Lines and how unfit such a Spirit is for the Sacred Ministry 1. You know that it is a time in which our Rulers are justly exasperated for the horrid Murder of the King and for the Treasons and Rebellions that have been committed And you know that no design could more gratifie the Prince of Darkness than to bring the Odium of all this upon the Ministry or upon any part of the Ministry whose labours are needful to the Church 2. I suppose you know that it is not one of a Multitude of the Non-conformable Ministers that ever took up Arms against the King I suppose in all Worcester-shire there is not now two for I remember not one though there are some Conformists that were in Arms against him 3. I suppose you cannot be ignorant because you dwell in England that they were Episcopal Parliaments that were long quarreling with the King and that still cried out of the danger of Popery Arminianism Monopolies c. of which Rushworths Collections sufficiently inform you And that Dr. Heylin in the Life of Arch bishop Laud hath fully acquainted the World that it was one Party of Episcopal Men of whom he would make Arch-bishop Abbot the head that contended against the other and put in the difference about the Subjects Propriety into the Quarrel and that besides Neile Laud Buckridge Howson Corbet and Mountague the Bishops went all the other way So that by Andrew's advice it was thought unsafe to let a Convocation meddle in their Cause 4. I suppose you cannot easily be ignorant that the War in England against the King was begun by an Episcopal Parliament where as some of the Members aver to me there was but one known Presbyterian in both Houses and there or four Independants and two or three Sectaries and about four hundred Episcopal Men and Erastians And also by an Episcopal Army for such was the Earl of Essex and almost all his Chief Officers and by almost all Episcopal Lord-Lieutenants who were first put into possession of the Militia against the Kings Commissioners of Array In so much that even the Propositions sent to the King at Nottingham were but for the Regulation of Episcopacy and not the Extirpation And among all the Westminster Assembly there were not called ten Non-conformists nor I think eight Nor indeed was Presbytery then well known in England till the notice of it came in long after with the Scots and Covenant So that it is past doubt with any but the desperately impudent that it was Episcopal Men in England on both sides that raised War against each other though one Party of them afterward fell in with the Presbyterians of Scotland and the Sectaries for fear of wanting help and of being overthrown 5. You cannot but know that it is not the whole Chorus of your dissenting Brethren that scrupled swearing that it is not lawful to take up Arms against the King That twenty in London took the whole Oxford Oath at once and more after That the chief Nonconformable Ministers took it in Northamptonshire Somerset-shire Devon-shire and some other Places That many Non-conformists were against the War as Mr. Geery Mr. Capel and almost all the Gloucester-shire Ministers and many others Poor Mr. Martin of Weedon lately in Goal near you for preaching in private lost an Arm in the Kings Service in his Oxford Army when the only Arch-bishop left in England Williams was a General in Wales in the Parliaments Army 6. You have not given the World any Proof of any Presbyterian Minister in England much less the whole Chorus that ever scrupled swearing what you mention I should know their minds as well as you and I know not one that I remember that is not ready to swear that It is not lawful to take up Arms against the King I say again I know not one And shall a Levite stand up and intimate though it be not so spoken out To the King and to Papists and to Posterity that it is the whole Chorus of Dissenters

who never wrote on Jude but only on James and that citeth Dr. John Burges of Regeneration who never wrote of such a Subject it 's like the Subject drew you to think that he that wrote so much for the Ceremonies though once a Non-conformist was like to be the Author of such a Book which indeed Dr. Cornelius Burges wrote when he was a great Conformist who was afterward Assessor in the Westminster Assembly and though a Protestor for moderate Episcopacy wrote that Book for the necessity of Reformation which so much offended the Episcopal Party In your last you liken me to the Papists that take liberty more than enough when you cannot name one Book since the Act before your importunity that I took more liberty in than was given me that I remember And you in the same Paragraph invite me to comply with your sober request and to direct it to the Common-wealth of the English Clergy and yet talk against unmazzeling the mouth of the Panther as aforesaid but these no doubt you can reconcile better than I. As for my nonsense in putting Librum pro Authore it is such as I am not seldom guilty of as I am also of putting the Author for the Book As to your particular Exceptions 1. Speaking slightly of Conformity Do you expect that a Man that by not conforming loseth more than you have yet gotten by conforming and that also loseth his Ministerial Liberty more desirable than all the Bishopricks in England should commend the Conformity which he so avoideth As for Mr. Dod's words I glad that you say Doth God stand in need of our Lie O! no nor of our Perjury neither should we speak wickedly for God or talk deceitfully for him No I think we should not nor deliberately covenant or do any wicked thing on pretence of securing the liberty of preaching against the sin of other Men. But yet it is my opinion that we may thank God for the effects that are brought to pass by Mens mis-doings though not for the sin it self even for the death of Jesus Christ which was all that Mr. Dod could mean 2. If you had but seen the Colections of Instances given in by some body at the Savoy Treaty to the reforming part of the Commissioners of Defects and Disorders or Immethodicalness in the Liturgy you would not wonder that I now take it not for Perfect Especially when you compare it with the Liturgy which we offered them and see there what difference we made can you forbear a Censure of ours which hath hitherto strangely scaped their Censures who rejected it and yet marvel not that we take not yours for perfect As for your likening me to the Jews that hire Christian Servants to dress their meat There is but one cometh sometime to my House and he will eat no meat there on any days but of his own dressing Remember that you said even now God needeth not our Lie or deceitful wickedness that we may have leave to preach or pray 3. As to your third Exception 1. When you have got me liberty to write my Reasons I will tell you more of my opinion about Diocesanes if you cannot understand it by my Disputes of Church Government long ago printed which if you have read do you still expect that I should approve of Diocesanes or marvel that I think better of the Waldenses Bohemian Episcopacy and that which obtained in Ignatius yea in Cyprians days But what thought you of when you call me to obey old Establishments and not invent now ones and set the People on gadding after Innovations Did you really think that our Establishment was elder than the days of the Apostles of Ignatius and that theirs were Innovations to ours And that Arch-Bishop Vsher reduced Episcopacy to Novelty when he pretended to reduce it to the ancient Form Doth not Dr. Hammond maintain that there were no Bishops in Scripture times that had more than one Congregation and that de facto there was then no such things as distinct Subject-Presbyters Is 1650 years ago the time of Novelties to us and our establishment the true Antiquity Well! let it be so 2. But you untruly report me to say that we must not communicate with a Parish-Minister who concurreth with the Bishop P. 77. If you had added In consenting to our silencing For I only said that I made that none of our Question The reason was because my work lay another way and it would have hindered the edification of those I wrote for to have pleaded that Cause with them But do I deny all that cometh not into our Question To deal openly with you I fore-knew long ago what would stick most against our Concord when I laboured in vain to have prevented it and now the thing which I fore-saw is come When I perswade the People to Communion in the Parish Churches they say shall we have Communion with those that have silenced so many hundred such Ministers and set up such and such in their stead And here I may as well drive them through a Stone Wall as drive them on directly in that way If you can do it why have not you done it I am sure I cannot They will sooner renounce Communion with me than hold Communion with those that they think have been the chief Promoters of all this that are of the Clergy And if I did not challenge them to prove if they can that ever such and such Parish Ministers were the Silencers I could get them to hold Communion with none of them all If you will have your work done your own way on your own terms do it I cannot so do it for I am not of your judgment And now Sir I am not so unacquainted with what I do as to tell you I have given you a lenifying Answer or to expect that this should please you who accounted a few gentle Questions so sharp If my business had been to win your good opinion and report of me I would have spoken you fairer But though veritas odium parit I am naturally addicted to speak plain truth without any ill will to you or any though I foresee that impatient guilt will call it railing and what not If none deal plainly with offending Preachers how much worse is their condition than the Peoples But had it been for publick view and not for your own private admonition I should have used a softer Stile on several accounts As I take none of your plainness with me amiss so far as it containeth truth so the imitation of it ought not to seem injurious to you Nothing hath more moved me to it than to find by your Letter how greatly averse you are to Repentance in the promoting whereof I should gladly be Your Servant Ri. Baxter April 28. 1671. AN ANSWER TO Mr. Baxter's second Letter SIR YOurs of April 28. came to me May 19. It may be it visited some Friends by the way which retarded its passage And though my

that you printed about the Savoy Business that which you understood not and cannot justifie why do you not rather retract it than wish things had been managed worse Do you not know how much yea very much more we yielded to than ever Hildersham whom you praise or the other old Non-conformist would have done See but the Kings Declaration about Ecclesiastical Affairs and read Dr. John Reignolds Papers to Sir Francis Knowles against Episcopacy and judge whether he himself would have gone any further Indeed I know not that I differ in any Point of Worship Ceremonies or Discipline from that learned Doctor whom you praise § 23. You make me wonder to read what you urge us with about Popery when we so long together spake aloud when we were allowed and told them Our union is our strength and all the faithful Ministers of England are too few to cast and keep out Ignorance Popery and Sensuality and if we were all never so conformable our selves we do know the Land so well that we are sure if such and such things be made necessary to Ministration and Communion many hundred worthy Ministers will be silenced and many thousand religious People will become Separatists and more be offended and our Divisions will involve us in discontents and murmurings on one side and severities on the other and Popery and Prophaness will prosper under our Divisions And you will be necessitated to fill up our Places with many such Ministers as will increase all this misery and all this may now be prevented by that which will do you no harm at all And when after all our endeavours the Flood-gates are pluck'd up which we would have kept down it is now pretended that if we cannot nimbly and deeply swear and subscribe and do all that is imposed on us Popery forsooth will come in and it 's long of us that would fain have prevented it and stop'd the gap § 24. When I had beyond all sober contradiction proved to you that it was Episcopal Men in England that raised the War against the King that I might move you to impartiality and to call them to Repentance you do the poorliest put off that which you cannot confute and yet will not acknowledge as if nothing were criminal in them that are of the Church of England Who knoweth not that many Episcopal Parliaments before had begun the same Quarrels against the King which the Long Parliament prosecuted and cryed out still of Monopolies loss of Liberties and Propriety Arminianism and Innovations in Religion toleration and increase of Popery Read but Rushworths Collections and Heylins Life of Arch-bishop Laud and deny it if you can You cannot deny but that the Long Parliament began in the same temper as the former ended having the irritation of that which they accounted Lauds Innovations to go higher You cannot I think name two in all the House of Commons that were Presbyterians when the War began I provoke you to read over the List of the Lord-Lieutenants of the Parliaments first Militia throughout all England and prove but one of them to be then a Presbyterian or any of them that survive yet to this day I provoke you to name me one General Officer yea or three Collonels in all the Earl of Essex his first Army that were Presbyterians I might have gone further and wish'd you to peruse the Names of all the Parliaments old Major-Generals or Chief Commanders in the several Counties the Earl of Stamford Sir William Waller M. G. Massey the Earl of Denbeigh Sir John Gell Ferdinando Lord Fairfaix Dointz Mitton Sir Tho. Middleton Morgan the Earl of Manchester c. and tell me how many you can find that were Presbyterians I can witness that many greatlyest famed of late for Presbyterians have earnestly pleaded with me for the present Episcopacy I asked you whether it was not only the taking down that which they took to be the Innovations and Exorbitances and civil Power of the Bishops which the Parliament asked when the War began You can give me no answer to any of this that savoureth of sense and modesty but what must grant that it is notoriously certain that it was not a Presbyterian but an Episcopal and Erastian Parliament in England which began the Wars And yet you will rather hide their fact and fault while you aggravate the same in others than you will call the Episcopal Party to repentance What credit shall we ever give to History when a thing so publick and notorious as a Parliament an Army the Lord-Lieuteants the Major-Generals yea and the Synod shall all be represented to be Men of another Party and that had another Cause than indeed they were and had If in the same Age the same Land even where and when a great part of them are yet living and the rest lately were our Neighbours and Familiars there shall yet be found such Men yea Preachers as have the face to tell the World that these at the raising of the War were Presbyterians we may next expect that History may make Posterity believe that they were not English-men I my self knew many of the Parliament many Lord-Lieutenants many of Essex his Army many of the Major-Generals and I scarce remember one Presbyterian among them all at the beginning of the War except two or three Scottish Soldiers that were in Essex's Army and I do not know that they were such but only that they were Scots And for the Westminster Assembly except only the six or seven Independents that were there I provoke you still to name me three English Divines that were Presbyterians or that were not Conformists Now what do you say to all this Do you deny Do you confute any of it Do you name a Man as an instance of my mistake or can you do it § 25. First you tell me I am at much pains to clear the Non-conformists of the guilt of the late War Answ No such matter I only tell you that it was not a Presbyterian Parliament or Army that began the English War 1. The beginning of the War is one thing and the progress is another the Presbyterians or saith Dr. Heylin the Scots Lords for their Church-Lands and Tyths sake began it in Scotland the Papists began it in Ireland one part of the Episcopal against another began it in England 2. All Non-conformists were not Presbyterians 3. Cannot I say that the Episcopal began it without clearing those that did second them or the Sectaries that carried it on to the end You feign me to say that A very few Non-conformists of a multitude were engaged in it whereas my words were It is not one of a multitude of the Nonconformable Ministers that ever took up Arms against the King I speak there of Ministers only and those that are now Non-conformists of whom the far greatest number were then Children and many unborn and many of the elder yea most never medled with Arms But as for the beginning of the

War I cannot say of a multitude a few only were ingaged for there was then no multitude in England of Nonconformable Ministers Little did I think to have ever been put to dispute such a Cause about open matter of Fact I know not your age but being a Preacher near four years before the Wars I was old enough to know that in all the Counties that I was acquainted in there was not above one poor obscure Nonconformable Minister in a County taking one with another nor I think past one for two Counties Poor old Mr. Barnet in Shrop-shire Mr. Langley in Cheshire none in Worchester-shire Mr. Atkins in Stafford-shire Mr. Angier in Lancashire and how few more in all England and which of these medled with the Wars § 26. And here you say I had thought currente rota while your Hand was in you would have said that the Regicides were Episcopal too c. Sir I now perceive Cateline was a Fool c. Answ And is there any sense or strength in such an Answer Do such words satisfie your Conscience for the falsifying of such notorious matters of Fact Is there any room for a doubt in the Business except to Strangers or those that were unborn or Children Would you make me believe that I saw not what I saw and heard not what I heard You say If Episcopal Men began and carried on the War and Presbyterians were free c. Answ Did I say that they were free or that they joyned not in the Progress How could a non-ens be free or guilty There were very few Presbyterian Ministers then in England the Scots did bring in Presbytery afterward You add § 27. You were too credulous c. were they Episcopal Men that cryed To your Tents O Israel that preached Curse ye Meroz first voted and then fought against the King Answ Is there one Man named here as an Instance to Confute me Is this Evidence fit for such a Contradictor of notoriety it self When you have named me the Men that used those words I will answer you whether they were Episcopal I think Dr. Burges was one of the most accused Preachers being Assessor in the Assembly and Chaplain to the Earl of Essex's own Regiment And he was one that protested for a Salvo for Episcopacy when the Covenant was taken in the Assembly as he hath told me with his own Mouth and wrote to me with his own Hand and none deny And Dr. Downing of Hackney was one of the next Chaplain to the Lord Roberts's Regiment who being Dr. of the Civil Law hath Writings yet visible in print for Prelacy and Conformity Mr. Marshal and Mr. Obadia Sedgwick were two of the next one Chaplain to Essex the other to the Lord Hollis's Regiment both old Conformists Of all the Chaplains of Essex's Army I knew not a Non-conformist and Presbyterian but Mr. Ash and I think I knew them almost all And for the Parliament I said enough before The Members yet living say that Mr. Tate of Northampton-shire was the only Presbyterian then in the House of Commons and I never yet knew one among the Lords § 28. You say If they were they were degenerous from the English Episcopacy they did not keep close to our Church which were my words to our Articles our Canons our Lyturgy our Homilies 1. Answ Your words were also Who can choose but nauseate that way of Discipline c. 2. Speak out then and confess that they were degenerous Episcopal Men and call them to repentance as the Raisers of the War and deceive not Posterity by telling them the contrary 3. But Sir what mean you by your Church which they kept not close to Doth not the Canon Anathematize them that deny the Convocation to be the Representative Church And must not the main Body of the Clergy then be your Church And doth not Dr. Heylin largely shew you that there were but five Bishops joyned at first with Bishop Laud and that Abbot had the rest with him in so much that they durst not commit their Cause to a Convocation And that Arminianism new Ceremonies with Matters of Propriety and Prerogative were the Matters then of the Contention which made Heylin say That he knew not whether the Church could have a greater plague than a Popular Prelate because of Abbots Interest in the Nobility Gentry and People How should one then have known which of the Parties was the Church and who shall be Judge which Party it is that keeps close to the Articles Canons Lyturgy and Homilies Whitgift with Dr. Whitaker thought that the Anti-Arminian Lambeth Articles were the sense of the Church and Articles George Abbot Arch bishop and Robert Abbot Bishop of Salisbury with Davenant Hall c. thought the middle Augustinian way was the true sense of the Articles Lyturgy c. which is the plain truth Bishop Laud with his four Partners Neile Buckeridge Howson and Corbet thought as Heylin saith that the way called Arminian was the true sense of the Articles and Church Overal and Mountague kept with them of the middle way in the main yet were more averse to the Calvinist Prelates than the rest These fall out among themselves The Arminians being few are born down by the rest in Parliaments and Convocations The Duke of Buckingham and as Heylin saith the King favoured the five dissenting Bishops When favour strengtheneth their Party they call themselves the Church accordingly one part of them pleadeth for His Majesties Prerogative c. and the other are for Parliaments and cry up Propriety and Liberty At last the Scotch and Irish Bussles prepare all for a War and these two Episcopal Parties sight one Party cryeth down Arminianism Innovations Altars favour to Papists Ship-money c. the other Party cryeth out against absolute Reprobation Calvinism Puritanism c. the one Party cryeth down the Papists and calleth the Scots Presbyterians to their help the other Party cryeth down the Presbyterians and calleth the Papists to their help Which of these is the Church which keepeth close to the Articles Canons c. for my part I am none of the Judge between them in that Point And I think if you call one side the Church it will be never the more the Church for that unless the King doth make it so but surely they were both Episcopal though one Party after fell in with the Presbyterians and the Presbyterians were conquered or cast out by the Sectaries and the other Party kept with the King § 29. You say Would Episcopal Men conspire to root out Episcopacy Answ At first they conspired but to restrain and regulate those that they thought Innovators and Arminians c. I speak only of Church Matters but after they were too weak to defend themselves without the Scots and Sectaries and were content to take down Episcopacy to please their Helpers rather than to be overcome themselves § 30. Whether Williams or Laud was the better Arch-bishop or whether they did well that

that did so vehemently complain of Grievances and Innovations I question not aim'd at that which their Successors accomplish'd the down-fall of Bishops and the possessing of their Lands Nay some of them lived to make it good what was the Quarrel they design'd Who did the King mean 2. Caroli when he said the Hand of Joab was in the mis-understanding 'twixt him and his Parliament and that the Incendiaries of Christendome had suddenly and subtlely insinuated those things which had unhappily caus'd diversions and distractions There might be clashing 'twixt those Episcopal Men in Parliament yet it would have been long enough e're these had rais'd War against the King You are not ignorant that in the Marian days many Lay-men and Clergy fled beyond the Seas to Geneva and other Places at their return their Garments smelt of the Disciplinarian Fire ever after which grew stronger and stronger until it had burnt the Cedar in our Lebanon and level'd the glorious Towers of the Church How did Calvin and Beza labour with their Favourers here to promote their Discipline that as it was once said The S. S. came from Rome to Trent in a Cloak-bag so did it come from Geneva hither in Packets You say Sect. 25. There was but few Presbyters or Non-conformists here before the War no Presbyterians except two in the Parliament The General Lieutenant-Generals Major-Generals were Episcopal Men. I little thought to have disputed such a Cause I medled not with Lay-men but with my dissenting Brethren Though the other cannot be excus'd yet these were most guilty in blowing up the Trumpet Dathan and Abiram of the other Tribes rose up against Moses but that Rebellion was call'd the gain-saying of Core because he being of the Tribe of Levi was deepest in the Conspiracy And it is observable that all Insurrections against Princes have been inflam'd by some Clergy-men or other for some Centuries last past But were there so few Non-conformists in England before the War yet Anno 1603. King James is said to be saluted with a Petition of a thousand Ministers against Episcopacy and before that Anno 1582. Mr. Cartwright who was no Episcopal Man for he had renounc'd his Episcopal Ordination beyond Seas met usually with sixty Ministers of his own Way in some Corner of the Land Did not these think you increase and multiply If five or six in the Assembly and five Bishops as you say in the Parliament rais'd such stirs what shall we think may be effected by so many Dissenters Whereas you think that the late Wars furnish'd us with Presbyterians out of Scotland it is doubtful to me whether Scotland infected us or we Scotland for when the King was in Scotland he was inform'd that the Scots had neither taken up Arms nor invaded England but that they were incouraged to it by some Members of Parliament you 'l say these were Episcopal Men on a design to change the Government of Church and State One Proposition sent to the King after Edgehill was That he should yield to extirpate Arch-bishops Bishops c. yet you 'l say that all the Parliament except two were Episcopal Men. As good as any among the Covenanters who vow'd to abolish Prelacy c. or as any of those in your own Association When Alderman Pennington with his 15000 Myrmidons petition'd against Bishops it may be you 'l vouch them to be Episcopal Men as well as you do the Parliament Men Yet I do not find that any said any thing against that Petition besides the Lord Dighy as for many others it did appear that such Lettice was too suitable to their Lips yet sound Episcopal Men in your sense The War was called Bellum Episcopale not as if fought by Episcopal Men on both sides but Episcopacy or rather the Bishops Lands was the Palladium or Helena one side fought for it the other against it Mulciber in Trojam pro Troja c. And here was the very stick at last in the Isle of Wight As for the particular Members in the Army they were better known to you than my self I delight not in personal Reflections or Quarrels If those that are yet alive be not Episcopal I wish they were so But that they were whilst they acted in the support of the late Cause I have not so far renounc'd my reason and experience as to fall in with your Account And if you persevere in this new Doctrine we shall be as distant as the two Poles One Document I cannot but observe from what is said That the late War was so odious that neither side will own it Even as the dead Child in the Parable was rejected by both the Mothers § 28. Your notion of the Arminian and other Calvinian Bishops fighting and beginning the War and also each claiming to be the Church is a pritty singularity and savours of a Romantick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Did they all fight against one another Did they not all equally abhor the War Where did either part pretend to be the Church You have fram'd a strange imagination and when you are setting of it up it will not hang together I may say of it as the Lacedemonian did of one setting up the body of a dead Man when his Head swagg'd this way and the other he cried out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 something is wanting within So it is with your discourse it is Soul-less and Life-less sine sanguine succo It is true Arch-bishop Williams was in Arms but he lost the Lord-Keepers Seal and was not admitted to do his Office at the Kings Coronation This inflam'd the Man and transported him beyond his duty towards the end of the War The missing of a Bishoprick did pervert Arrius and St. Jerom himself was not a jot the better for it 29. 31. I had said Would Episcopal Men root out Episcopacy You apply your former groundless Hypothesis They intended at first to regulate the Arminians but after by the help of Scots and Sectaries they took down Episcopacy How transparent and thin is that Answer Just as our modern Naturalists salve every Phaenomenon with their round square and forked Atoms So do you silence Doubts by the Arminian and Calvinian Bishops But you must prove it better that the Bishops began the War or else all you say tumbles to the ground You say I trifle in referring you to Dr. Heylin on the Presbyterians though you referred me before to his Book on the Life of Arch-bishop Laud Who would have thought but ad hominem this Method had been justifiable If I am sparing of my pains and forbear an elaborate Answer to such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such shallow and partial reasonings another Man would soon pardon me You say you will not justifie the Presbyterians in that he chargeth on them yet he says the Presbyterians thrive best when they involve whole Nations in Blood and Sacriledge I mentioned them not at all yet you charge me for traducing them 33. The Principles of