The Kings Grant of any favour made contrary to Law is void Rex nihil potest nisi quid jure potest And Pag. 210. When all which the Wisdom of all sorts can do is done for the devising Laws in the Church it is the general consent of all that giveth them the Form and Vigour of Laws without which they could be no more to us than the Counsels of Physitians to the Sick well might they seem as wholesom admonitions and instructions but Laws could they never be without the consent of the whole Church to be guided by them Whereunto both Nature and the Practise of the Church of God set down in Scripture is found every way so fully consonant that God himself would not impose no not his own Laws upon his People by the Hand of Moses without their free and open consent O fearful Passage And P. 220. It is a thing even undoubtedly natural that all free and independent Societies should themselves make their own Laws and that this Power should belong to the whole not to any certain part of a Politick Body And P. 221. For of this thing no Man doubteth namely that in all Societies Companies Corporations what severally each shall be bound unto it must be with all their assents ratified Against all equity it were that a Man should suffer detriment at the Hands of Men for not observing that which he never did either by himself or by others mediately or immediately agree to And P. 205. If Magistrates be Heads of Church they are of necessity Christians as if no Magistrates but Christians were Chief Governours of the Church which is meant by Heads And P. 218 223 224. What Power the King hath he hath it by Law The Bounds and Limits of it are known The entire community giveth order c. P. 223. As for them that exercise Power altogether against Order although the kind of Power which they have may be of God yet is their exercise thereof against God and therefore not God otherwise than by permission as all injustice is P. 224. Usurpers of Power whereby we do not mean them that by violence have aspired unto Places of highest Authority but that use more Authority than ever they did receive in form and manner afore-mentioned such Usurpers thereof as in the exercise of their Power do more than they have been authorized to do cannot in Conscience bind any Man to obedience ☜ And Pag. 194. May a Body-politick then at all times withdraw in whole or in part the Influence of Dominion which passeth from it if inconveniences do grow thereby It must be presumed that Supream Governours will not in such case oppose themselves and be stiff in detaining that the use whereof is with publick detriment c. Sir I do not by reciting it dissent from every word that I cite but I am against Mr. Hookers Popular Fundamentals themselves and desire you to let me know whether these be the Prelates Principles which you defend And for an Exposition of Mr. Hooker remember that Sir Edwin Sandys was his Pupil and chief Bosom-friend But you say you have read his Book over and over and therefore it is not from ignorance of what he wrote that you become a defender of him I suppose you are not ignorant that these are the very Principles which I will not say the Long Parliament but the very Rump and Regicides went upon that Power is originally in the People and escheateth to them and that the King is Singulis Major but Vniversis Minor c. See Parkers Observations 1642. If I were writing to such as Mr. Walton who would tempt Men to question whether the 8th Book be not corrupted I would tell them 1. That the Passage in the first Book is the Sum of all the rest and sheweth that they came from the same Author 2. Dr. Spencer was not a Person so to be suspected as one that would befriend a corrupted Copy 3. I can yet give you the Testimony of one of the famousest Men in England for Learning in the Laws and Integrity who had long ago a Copy in M. S. agreeing with the printed Copy 4. Bishop Guuden dedicated it to the King and saith That even the eighth Book is interlined in many places with Mr. Hookers own Characters as owned by him and he proveth it by other Reasons And the same Bishop Gauden saith P. 18. He admirably expresseth the original of all Laws And yet Bishop Carlton Treat of Jurisdiction Pag. 12. saith This I observe the rather because some of the Popes Flatterers of late as others also to open a wide gap to Rebellions have written That the Power of Government by the Law of Nature is in the Multitude I conjecture that Mr. Hooker was the chief Man whom he meant by others And his foresaid Pupil and Friend was far from being a Presbyterian as his Europae Speculum sheweth and yet it 's well known how close he stuck to Abbot's Party and how great a Man he was in Parliaments for the Subjects Liberty and the restraint of Monarchy And even Bishop Gauden his last Publisher saith Pag. 4. of his Life This is certain that the strength of the Church of England was much decayed and undermined before it was openly battered partly by some superfluous illegals and unauthorized Innovations in Point of Ceremony which some Men affected to use in publick and impose upon others which provoked People to jealousie and fury even against things lawful every Man judging truly that the measure of all publick Obedience ought to be the publick Laws ☜ Partly by a supine neglect in others of the main Matters in which the Kingdom of God the peace of Conscience and the Churches Happiness do chiefly consist while they were immoderately intent upon meer Formalities and more zealous for an outward conformity to those Shadows than for that inward or outward conformity with Christ in Holy Hearts and unblamable Lives which must adorn true Religion To which he adds the Testimony of Dr. Holsworth So that it is a thing notorious and past contradiction that the Arminianism Innovations and supposed excesses and exorbitances of one part of the Prelatists gave occasion to the other part then accounted the Church and the more Protestant to vent their displeasure and fear in many Parliaments and at last to take up Arms and when they found themselves too weak to invite the Scottish Presbyterians to their Aid who fell at last into the Hands of the Sectaries And therefore I excuse or justifie none of the Parties but those that say that the beginners of the War against the King are guilty of his death as well as they that kill'd him must confess that it was the Prelatists or they must be impudent And therefore I again advise you to forbear the defence of Hooker and such Conformists and call them first to repentance who were first of the English in taking up Arms against the King § 34. It 's well you disclaim
cut off Laud is none of the Question All that I say was that Williams was an Arch-bishop and a Commander for the Parliament in Arms. § 31. When you turn me from Heylins Life of Laud to Heylins History of Presbytery you do but trifle and seek a Subterfuge I justifie not the Presbyterians in that he chargeth on them though you may know what Peter Moulin Prebend of Canterbury in his Answer to Philanax Anglicus hath said about the Forreign Churches But what 's that to the Question whether it was an Episcopal Parliament or a Presbyterian that began the English War will the fault of one excuse the other § 32. As to what you say of the Change of the Puritans since Jewel Andrews c. wrote for them and that they are not such as Ball c. I Answer 1. Is the Discipline changed which you speak of or the whole Chorus which you speak to Was there no Martin-Marprelates then Have we retracted our Doctrine or Consent to the Church Articles or to the Oaths of Allegiance or Supremacy Have we not in 1660. yielded to more than ever Ball or any of the old Non-conformists yielded to Deny it if you can 2. As for personal Charges others will be as ready to requite you with the like But neither you nor they should charge any more than you can prove guilty § 33. You tell me If Hooker were alive he would make such as me to quake so strong should we find his Breath in his deep close and strenuous Arguments I have read him over again and again yet I never observed him to be an Enemy to Monarchy You can find out if not New Worlds yet new Inhabitants and make strange Discoveries Answ A learned Confutator I say not that Hooker or Bilson were Enemies to Monarchy But I say that it was theirs and such Prelatists Principles that led me to what I did and wrote in the Book which I have retracted And must I be put to defend the King against such Men and Principles at the same time when we are charged with that which we oppose And will you indeed cry out of the Discipline of the whole Chorus of Dissenters as not Loyal and at the same time defend such Principles in the Prelatists Come on then I will cite you some of their words send me your defence of them in your next and you shall if I be able have my Reply and I begin with Bishop Bilson because he was the more Learned Man Difference of Christ. Subject c. Pag. 520. he saith Except the Laws of those Realms do permit the People to stand on their right if the Prince would offer that wrong I dare not allow their Arms I busie not my self in other Mens Common-wealths as you do neither will I rashly pronounce all that resist to be Rebels Cases may fall out even in Christian Kingdoms where the People may plead their Right against the Prince and not be charged with Rebellion If a Prince should go about to subject his Kingdoms to a Forreign Realm or change the form of the Common-wealth from Imperie to Tyranny or neglect the Laws established by common consent of Prince and People to execute his own pleasure in these and other Cases which might be named if the Nobles and Commons joyn together to defend their ancient and accustomed Liberty Regiment and Laws they may not well be counted Rebels I never denyed that the People might preserve the Foundation Freedom and Form of their Common-wealth which they foreprized when they first consented to have a King I never said that Kingdoms and Common-wealths might not proportion their States as they thought best by their publick Laws which afterward the Princes themselves may not violate And in Kingdoms where Princes bear Rule by the Sword we do not mean the Princes private Will against his Laws but his Precept derived from his Laws and agreeing with his Laws which though it be wicked yet may it not be resisted by any Subject with armed violence Marry when Princes offer their Subjects not Justice but Force and despise all Laws and practise their Lusts not every or any private Man may take the Sword to redress the Prince but if the Laws of the Land appoint the Nobles as next the King to assist him in doing right and with-hold him from doing wrong then be they licensed by Mans Law and so not prohibited by Gods to interpose themselves for the safety of Equity and Innocency It is easie for a running and railing Head to sit at home in his Chamber and call Men Rebels himself being the rankest Hooker Eccles Polit. lib. 1. § 10. Pag. Ed. ult 21. That which we speak of the Power of Government must here be applied to the Power of making Laws whereby to govern which Power God hath over all and by the natural Law whereto he hath made all subject the lawful Power of making Laws to command whole politick Societies of Men belongeth so properly to the same entire Societies that for any Prince or Potentate of what kind soever upon Earth to exercise the same himself and not either by express Commission immediately and personally receiv'd from God or else by Authority deriv'd at first from their consent upon whose person they impose Laws it is no better than meer Tyranny Laws they are not therefore which publick approbation hath not made so And lib. 8. Pag. 192. Unto me it seemeth almost out of doubt and controversie that every Independent Multitude before any certain Form of Regiment established hath under God Supream Authority full Dominion over it self And Pag. 193. In Kingdoms of this quality the highest Governour hath indeed universal Dominion but with dependency upon the whole entire Body over the several Parts whereof he hath Dominion so that it standeth for an Axiom in this Case The King is Singulis Major Vniversis Minor And Pag. 194. Neither can any Man with reason think but that the first Institution of Kings a sufficient Consideration wherefore their Power should always depend on that from which it did always flow by original influence of Power from the Body into the King is the cause of Kings dependency in Power upon the Body by dependency we mean sub-ordination and subjection ☜ A manifest Token of which dependency may be this As there is no more certain Argument that Lands are held under any as Lords than if we see that such Lands in defect of Heirs fall unto them by Escheat in like manner it doth follow rightly that seeing Dominion when there is none to inherit it returneth unto the Body therefore they which before were Inheritors of it did hold it in dependence on the Body So that by comparing the Body with the Head as touching Power it seemeth always to reside in both fundamentally and radically in one in the other derivatively In one the Habit in the other the Act of Power And The Axiomes of our Royal Government are these Lex facit Regem
Hooker Bilson and such Prelatists led me to what I did and wrote in the Book which I have retracted As for Bishop Bilson I have not his Book by me which you quote neither dare I take upon me to defend what all our Bishops have written I must either want Imployment or be very pragmatical to venture upon every Task you are ready to impose upon me If any of my Fathers discover their nakedness I will put on my Mantle and go backward I will not lick up their Spittle and say it is sweeter than Nectar and Ambrosia I will follow them only so far as they follow Christ I am satisfied that Bishop Bilson was willing to say something in behalf of our Neighbours of Holland in vindicating them from Rebellion against the King of Spain And so stretched the Doctrine of Subjection too far Whether this will satisfie you I know not I am sure multitudo pecantium non minuit peecatum If Bishop Bilson misled you in point of Subjection aud Obedience let him make you amends in setting you upright about Diocesan Bishops I said something upon your provocation in behalf of Mr. Hooker not intending to be drawn further into the Field I am jealous of my own failing and weakness and so am unfit to be anothers Second when I have enough to do to answer for my self I do still admire Mr. Hooker and I find my Betters have done so before me Cambden wish'd his Books had been turn'd into an universal Language Bishop Vsher Morton and Mr. John Hales had the same high opinion of him Bishop Gauden said he had been highly commended of all prudent peaceable and impartial Readers King James said his Book was the Picture of a Divine Soul in every Page of Truth and Reason The late King commended it to his Children next to the Bible And the same happy Pen which taught the Kings Book to speak as good Latin if possible as it had English had almost turn'd Mr. Hooker into the same Dialect for the benefit of the learned World Yet you say he led you into what you did and wrote in print you say the same you cite his 1. Book P. 21. Laws they are not which publick approbation hath not made They must be made by entire Societies What is this more than what some that wrote for the Kings Cause in the late Wars have confessed That quoad aliquid that is as to making of Laws our Kings have not challeng'd a Power without Parliaments though I find that the legislative Power of Parliaments is properly and legally in the King alone in Heylin And the same incomparable Hooker adds An Absolute Monarch commanding his Subjects whatsoever seemeth good in his own Discretion This Edict hath the force of a Law whether they approve or dislike it And else-where he saith Where the King hath Power of Dominion no Forreign State or Domestical can possibly have in the same Cause and Affairs Authority higher than the King Take heed you do not imitate him who only took what was for his purpose and left out the rest But you have found out other Doctrine in Hooker viz. That Power is originally in the People and Escheats to them that the King is Singulis Major Universis Minor I cannot subscribe to this for as by God Kings Reign their Power is from him so it Escheats to him No Ephori Demarchi or Tribunes can curb the Prince But Sir was you led aside by Hooker to what you did and wrote yet you quote these Passages out of his eighth Book Now you was led aside in what you did and wrote before that Book and his Fellows saw the Light perhaps you did and wrote and then after the Kings return you gathered up your Principles as it were ex postliminio as if you should first build the Roof of an House and then lay the Foundation or first possess your self of an Estate and then blunder for a Title Yet your Title is but crack'd if you have none but what you have from his third Book King Charles the first denyed them to be his If they were not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spurious or changelings yet they were so adulterated that they neither resembled Parent or Sisters My friend Mr. Walton did not guess amiss he had good Seconds Dr. Barnard says That Bishop Vsher noted that in these three Books there were many Omissions ex gr If a Private Man Offend there is the Magistrate that judgeth If Magistrates the Prince If the Prince there is a Tribunal in Heaven before which they shall appear on Earth they are not accountable to any Bishop Sanderson said That this Passage The King is accountable to the People was not in a Manuscript he had seen but he said the Copies had been interlin'd therefore he commanded nothing of his should be printed after his death And Dr. Spencer whom you recite said the perfect Copies were lost and that those which he saw were imperfect mangled draughts dismembred into pieces no favour or grace not the shadows of themselves remaining Had he liv'd to see them thus defac'd he might rightly call them Benonivs 35. I said I could not choose but nauseate that Discipline which startles at renouncing War against the King You ask Is it Prelatical Discipline No I acquit it Presbyterian No say you The present Non-conformists offered Episcopacy to the King You dare not undertake for all Some will startle as much at Episcopacy as they do at the Oath Except you castrate and qualifie it with your allays until you have made it quite another thing As Martial said of a Fellow who repeated his Verses amiss he made them his own The Poet would not own them So must you do with Episcopacy before it will slip down Indeed you puzzle me very much I am at a loss who these Non-conformists are When I write to them you tell me I traduce the Presbyterians But when you speak of them you say They are for Episcopacy By your words they are of a Motleylinsey-woolsey Kind Episcopal-Presbyterian-Nonconformists But what ever these Men are their Discipline must not be touch'd Neither the Chorus nor any Man of them startles at renouncing War against the King You have not prov'd their Practise such and is your printed Clamour come to this You say you know the Non-conformists better than I yet I know some that will not agree to the former part of that Oath about renouncing War against the King They have jealousies and fears almost about every word as if there were an Ambuscade to intangle them or to take away their Liberty What need I prove their Practise Is it not proof enough to point at those Men that flit their Habitations rather than subscribe to what I say Even as the Philosopher said nothing but walk'd up and down to prove that there was such a thing as Motion What if I should ask you whether you ever took that Renunciation I think I should stop
with so much moderation and sobriety that you need not incur the guilt or penalty of Treason May Mr. Baxter per me licet live as free as the Birds of the Air and not be coop'd up in any Recluse Long long may you live to the Glory of God the Peace and Wellfare of this Church And may you bring forth more and more mature Fruit in your Age I would not have you hazard the least hair of your Head for my sake I had rather Screene I mean stand betwixt you and danger than expose or betray you to the least uneasiness The more unkindly do I resent that bitter Reflection As if your Imprisonment came from my Parish I dare avouch you have not one Enemy in it except one Will. Lees whose Horses he says you took from him with your own hands in the time of the War 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he calls them Now were I in your Case I would not trust an Act of Oblivion here below to bear me out before the great Tribunal above without giving the Poor Man some equivalent satisfaction whilst he is in the way Q. 6. Whether any will print or sell such a Book A. This is all one as to enquire whether Huxters or Mercenary Men will refuse their Advantage You have been so happy as to inrich this kind of Men already Q. 7 8. How such a Work will please the Diocesan Party and the New Conformists A. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Never was any Man so happy as to please all Parties And I hope you do not study to be a Man-pleaser We must discharge good Consciences towards God and Men. And then Ruat Coelum Let the Mountains fall into the midst of the Sea Nobismet ipsi plaudamus nos liberavimus animas nostras Now Sir I have given you these Strictures in obedience to your demands Neither courting nor deprecating your further trouble Though I prefer the serenity of Peace before the most learned Dust I desire to reciprocate no other Saw of Controversie with your self than that of mutual Love and Honour And herein I shall be loth to afford you the Spoils of a Victory So far am I from constraining you to use virulency which you threaten that I had rather set a Lamb before an Elephant and by a Spirit of Meekness disarm your Menaces than make a Schism and Rupture in our Fraternal Bond. Sir until I shall be so happy as to see you I shall continue your Faithful Servant and Affectionate Brother Jo. Hinckley Northfeild Aug. 25. 1670. Mr. BAXTER'S Second Letter SIR WHen I had wrote an Answer to so much of your Book as concerned my self I cast it by perceiving that it contained a just detection and denomination of such things as none of my Reproachers hitherto have had patience to endure to be told of who had not the patience or sobriety to forbear committing them For your Book confirm'd me in the Opinion which late experience of the World had brought me to that it is one of Satans impudent designs to make sin pass uncontroll'd in the World and to render all that oppose it more criminal than them that commit it to tempt Men to sin in such kinds and degrees as that he shall seem an uncivil Railer that presumeth to charge them with it I purposed therefore to leave you in the Fruition of your self-pleasing-crimes lest the naming of them should transfer the imputed Guilt from you to me Therefore I only tryed you with a few gentle Questions in order to the fuller understanding of your sense I answer to which and in this second also you express so great tenderness and count your softest signification of a dislike to be Censures so harsh and passionate as if you were injured if your Crimes were not applauded And withall take it ill to be supposed impatient of hearing the Truth and call for my Proofs in the very Lines which vehemently express your impatience Your two Letters so abound with words which serve only to tell me your conceits and confidence and what you would have us do to be pleasing to you and so much pass over all that it concern'd you in Reason and Justice to have spoke to that it is with reluctancy that I trouble you with any Return For what benefit can be expected by it You importune me to break the Kings Laws by printing without Licence and in the same Volume represent us as hainous breakers of his Law for you know what You can suppose me without any proof to have formerly printed without License and when you thought I had sin'd once importune me to do it again You can intimate to the World how unreasonably I deal if I write not and publish not that which you judge it a sin to publish as being forbidden and so cunningly bring me under one of the imputations unavoidably either of sinning by my unreasonable silence or by breaking many Laws You lay this Charge on me before the World in print and so importune me to that Act which the Law of the Land will heavily punish and yet wipe your mouth and take it ill to be noted as one that would draw me into suffering And yet you want not words when you can give no reasonable Answer concerning any of this You cannot pretend that such Laws if I break them will not be excuted when I lie almost these two years under penalty adjudged to Newgate it self for six Months by Sentence and Warrant for a far smaller breach of the Law which my best understanding perswadeth me is none at all You think the silencing of about 1800 Ministers while many hundred thousand Souls are perishing through ignorance and ungodliness to be a Load not heavy enouh to the People and them to say nothing of the great indigence of many of their Families unless it be increased by your wordy bitter Oratorical Reproach when we would take it for rare clemency if we might but have leave to preach Christs Gospel without a farthing of their maintenance yea and to be confined to preach only on the Catechism Points to some of the poorest ignorant Congregations such as many in Wales c. as I offered when I was silenced first yea and under sharp Penalties if ever we speak against Bishops Liturgy or Ceremonies yet after nine years silencing we must be scorned by you as such as abjure their Calling and make themselves Milites emeritos When you know that God will not be served by deliberate avowed sin and that he that so entereth on and exerciseth his Ministry and will sin by Covenant that he may preach against sin can scarce expect a Blessing if a Pardon And when you cannot but know for you dwell in England and write against the Non-conformists that the sins which the Non-conformists fear they should be guilty of if they conformed not accusing any others are so inhumane and hainous that we dare scarce name them lest you startle and think we charge them upon
you whom we leave to your own Master Yet do you make a hainous matter of it that we thus by fearing sin our selves do seem to think that Conformity is any sin at all and say we weaken your Hands prejudice your Ministry and make the People cold in joyning with you What then should we do if we published the Reasons of our Non-conformity and opened all that sin which we fear which yet you so vehemently call for Yea you say Who would unmuzzle a fierce Panther that would worry him that set his Chops at liberty even then when I ask you but to get me a License for that which you so openly call for which is all one as to say Do it if thou dare and if thou do it not thou abjurest thy Calling and refusest to give the World a reason of it You can tell the World that in my Book of Rest I seem to go their way that hold That they may fight against the King if it were for the cause of Religion to purge the Church of Idolatry and Superstition and cite P. 123. in which Edition of 12 I know not when I never wrote so never thought so but have proved the contrary at large in several Writings Yet this is done deliberately in print You fetch your Charge from the old Editions of that Book eleven years after I had retracted and expung'd and left out of that same Book not only that which you pervert but all the rest from end to end which seemed in the least to favour the late Wars Either you knew this or you did not If you did was that done like a peaceable Minister to aggravate with such gross and odious untruth things retracted and utterly expunged even long before the Act of Oblivion and that so as directly tendeth to the temporal ruine of him you charge them on If you knew it not did it beseem you to meddle in Print where you know no better what you do oppose What good will Austins Retractations do him if he shall ten or eleven years after be freshly charged with all that he retracted and much more yea I gave Mr. Hampden Pie one of the Books of One of the latter Editions so altered but a little before he came to your House to his utter undoing If you did not see it you might have done before you had written against it Yea as not regarding your self-contradiction at the same time you call me to retract my Political Aphorisms and tell me how excellent a Work it would be when I had done it before and had so long before retracted what you aggravate Though the one was done so lately that you could scarce know of it the other that was done eleven years before might have been known And if so long time excuse not the Book or Author yet from your bloody Charge why do you desire him to retract another What good will retracting it do if you will nevertheless so many years after make such use of it from what Principles and to what Ends I leave to you The Aphorisms which you would have retracted you say are those especially which are gathered by an Eminent Hand Who can think but here you condemn all those which that Eminent hand hath gathered And the first of all is Governours are some limited some de facto unlimited The unlimited are Tyrants and have no right to that unlimited Government The next words are For they are all Subjects themselves and under the Sovereignty and Laws of God Because it is your highest Preferments as you say to preach the Gospel I beseech you give me some such light here as is necessary to a Retractation If any Governours are not limited by God tell me whether it be any sin in them if they make Laws commanding Men to deny God and blaspheme him to worship themselves as Gods as Caligula did to worship Mahomet or Idols to kill all the Innocent People of the Land I talk not of the absolute Power of all Mens Estates and Lives Nay whether there be any thing imaginable which they may not command or whether it be possible for that Man at all to sin that is not limited by God And tell me if this be the Doctrine which you count it your chief preferment to preach And whether you can think that any wise Governours in the World will take those for friendly Promoters of their Interest who would so calumniate them as to make their Subjects believe that they lay any such claim You can gather that I approve of Mens terms of Ministration because I joyn with the Church which they teach As if no more were required of a Curate than of a Communicant And as if the same Reasons which warrant my Worship as a private Man would warrant all my Subscriptions Declarations Oaths and all the rest of Ministerial Conformity You can blame me for not Actively submitting to the Laws when you can name no Law which commandeth me what you mean You can Magisterially say Not that loose paralitick Discourse given to the Kings Commissioners at the Savoy written rather Rhetorically ad Captandum Populum to insinuate into vulgar Capacities than Logically to evince the Hypothesis contended for strip'd of its multifarious Fallacies ungrounded Surmises and erroneous Suppositions c. 1. As if you knew what was given in at the Savoy when a considerable part of the Papers were never published Yea I have reason enough to believe that no Man living can give an account of them to you but my self because no Copies were taken and some Papers only read 2. There are many Papers printed which were given in upon that occasion and who knows by this Character which of them it is that is called the Loose paralitick Discourse 3. You talk of a Hypothesis contended for as if you had a mind to be thought to say somewhat though you understand not about what For no Hypothesis is named by you and no wonder If you mean the first second or third Paper given in at the beginning of the Business to the Lord Chancellor the Hypothesis was that union is desirable the means whereto we offered as we were commanded If you mean our exceptions against the Liturgy the Hypothesis was that the Liturgy was corrigible and to be altered in some things And do you oppose that Hypothesis which the King had expresly put into the words of his Commission so far as to appoint Men to alter it and which the Convocation by their actual alterations owned If you mean our Reply to the Answer of the Exceptions the Hypothesis general is the same And what made all those Learned Persons who wanted neither Time nor Will forbear ever to give an Answer to that Reply if it were so loose and contemptible as you make it Was it because contempt was fitter than a Confutation that could not be because smaller matters not written by Men commissioned by the King for such a Treaty nor offered by their own importunity
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
of those that are Modern and English And yet had you no acquaintance with these You say and you ingeminate it That there is not any Non-Conformist but is ready to swear he holds it not lawful to take up Arms against the King Why did so many of them then flit their Habitations five Miles from any Corporation or their own ancient Homes What was the Sum of that Oath was it not plainly and directly against taking up Arms Did it any way hinder Parliament Mens speaking or others peaceable petitioning for such Reformation as is necessary were not those who were commissione'd to administer it ready to declare the sense of it yet down it would not go with many latet aliquid But I find it is with many of you as I have found it experimentally with some who have been troubled in Conscience When I have apply'd the best Balm I could to these tender Souls so that they had nothing to say against their own Peace yet still they would be starting some black doubts against themselves turning their very Shadows into Gorgons that so they might continue in the Valley of Baca. Just so will you find knots in Bulrushes Mysteries in Cabbalistical Titles and Anexes spin Webs to intangle your selves out of your own Imaginations and with Thrushes pinion your own Wings that so you may scrupulously vex your selves You say well in your Book of Conscience That Melancholy is often mistaken for Conscience So I fear this shieness and skittishness of these Men is rather the result of an hot and feavourish Brain than any well-weighed conclusion of a sound Heart But put out the other Clauses out of the Oath let us have no more Oaths of Allegiance to Diocesans or Lay-Chancellors put upon us than Christs Churches had for six or eight hundred years imposed upon them Why do you lay this Injunction upon me and others in my Sphere Are we the King and Parliament Have private Men a Legislative Power Can they reverse and retrench Laws It is very plausible in you to bring all things to the Institutions of Christ and in things doctrinal 't is also necessary But as to what concerns all the Modes of External Policy and Administrations it is not only difficult but impossible Nay I think he may be impleaded of Schism and Singularity that stands up too stifly for the immediate Dispensations especially where they are so uncertain in opposition to the Instrumental teachings and directions of Men. You may find my Ground 1 Cor. 1. 12. It seems you are much troubled at Lay-Chancellors as if they hindered your Conformity by exercising the Power of the Keys in decreeing Excommunications and Absolutions Me thinks a Person of your ingenuity should rest satisfied with that modest declaration of our Rubrick concerning the Censures of the Church in the Preface to the Communion But since you say That Lay-Chancellors exercise the Power of the Keys in Excommunications do they do this of themselves as Lay-men or do they not You see 't is easie to push with your Horns and to evince that you are either ignorant or absurd But I shall only remember you what you cannot but know already That Lay-Chancellors though commonly very knowing in the Civil Law which is an excellent Hand-maid to Divinity yet they excommunicate not as Lay-men but by vertue of those Surrogates who are delegated for this purpose originally by the Bishop himself This Abstraction is not too hard for you to conceive But why are you so incens'd against Lay-Chancellors I 'le warrant you have more kindness for Lay-Elders if they were joyn'd with you in things Sacred as Catechising admission to the Sacrament and the Censures of the Church But as Luther distinguishes of little and great Devils so I think this of Lay-Chancellors is but a Gnat in your way The Camel or Belzebub is Diocesan Bishops The Episcopacy of Bishop Usher you are for and the Episcopacy of Ignatius you say is lawful I am glad you grant this for one of your Brethren maintained to my Face That there is no difference betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter in Ignatius But you are kinder to Bishops for where there is one I suppose you wish there were many hundreds And if this were allowable we that are minorum gentium as to our own Interest have no cause to oppose it For then it may be you and I might in some time of our Ages commence Bishops But me thinks we should now agree especially if you would call to mind that Maxim in Logick Magis minus non variant speciem If Bishop Vsher were now alive he would give you but small thanks for pressing his Model of Episcopacy if his now the King and Laws are restor'd which he only calculated as that which could be born by the iniquity of the latter times Sequestered Ministers who would gladly then have received a fifth part out of their Revenue would be loth now to be bound up to the same terms The Counsel Bishop Vsher gave to the late King Rather to part with his Life than Episcopacy And his Notes upon Ignatius concerning the division of Asia confuting Dr. Meric Causabon affirming that Episcopacy crept into the Church in the second Century do sufficiently discover his Judgment If Thieves should strip me of all my Cloths I I will rather accept from them my old Coat than go naked yet if the time come that honest Men may come to their Goods I would have all again to a very Shoo-string Let us not take up the old trick and method of the Papists they have given out that some famous Men who liv'd Protestants dyed Papists So let not us extract Presbyterian Government out of the dead Trunks of Episcopal Cedars Calvin seems to excuse his New Government at Geneva Habemus qualecunque Presbyterorum Judicium formam qualem ferebat temporum infirmitas What is there any Sorcery or Necromancy in the word Diocesan As Tertullian once jested De nomine Chameleontis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a modest word in Greek and is it become Babylonish by being rendred into English Beza was more propitious than you are to the Diocesan Bishops of England Fruatur says he ista singulari Dei beneficio quae utinam sit illi perpetua But you think they have too many Parishes under their Inspection and Jurisdiction This is but obliquely to reflect upon former Kings and Statesmen who have allowed such large Provinces Some of them have been much canton'd in latter Ages if we look into our own Stories What think you of Crete 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephesus Rome were there not many Parishes in these And I cannot think but as Jerusalem had her Daughters the Cities and Towns adjacent So many Regiones suburbicariae did belong to the Bishops of those great Cities ergo they had their Chorepiscopi to assist them Tell me true were there not Bishops before there wery any Parishes If so Christ never ordained they should be Parochial Do
the Politicks of Grotius But what abundance more Authors of Politicks could I name you that make the Majestas Realis to be in the People yea and the Power of judging Kings Such as Willius he whom Bishop Hall wrote his Epistle to in his Remains Alstedius c. Besides the Papists and if you agree with me in disliking those do not own the same in Hooker or other Prelatists § 35. Because you said Who can choose but nauseate that way of Discipline which startles at renouncing War against the King I desire you ro tell me what Discipline you mean You will not say Prelatical Discipline If you mean Presbyterian 1. I told you it was Episcopacy which the present Non-conformists offered to the King and Bishops 2. I desired you to peruse the Confessions and Descriptions of the Discipline of the Forreign Churches and to tell me which words do deny renouncing such War And what say you to this why first you deride the motion as a thing not to be required of you and say their Actions are quite contrary to their Confessions Will not your Conscience mark here 1. How your own Pen doth acquit their Confessions and yet you nauseate the way of Discipline that startles c. And where is the way of Discipline to be found but in those Confessions which even the Accuser now absolveth 2. And now you lay it on Practice and what 's that 1. to the way of Discipline 2. or to the whole Chorus which you speak to or any one Man whose Practice you have not proved such as you accuse And is your printed Clamour come to this § 36. And what say you of the Practice now 1. You tell me of Davila I pray next go to Parsons Image of both Churches and to Philanax Anglicus where you shall find the Prelatists as deeply charged And must Davila a Papist be credited against Bishop Jewel Bishop Bilson King James and many other on the other side And is not Davila a false Historian For instance he falsely saith That Carpenter was kill'd in the Massacre who dyed of the fright and that Peter Ramus the Father of the Independents was a Papist c. And is a false Forreigner and a Papist to be believed against the French Protestants I again refer you to the late notable Vindication of the Forreign Presbyterians in France Holland Embden Geneva c. by Pet. Moulin Jun. in his Answer to Philanax Anglicus And yet his Father might well blame them for some Instances as you cite him For as to the last Business at Saumurs and Rochel he was a noted and suffering Dissenter from that Party and so were other Protestants as well as he But one would think by your Progress that I had justified all the Wars or Actions of the Presbyterians because I told you that the Prelatists begun the English War which if you would insinuate or else you speak not sense you want either that understanding or that sincerity which beseemeth a Historian and a Divine But if really you will stand to it that their way of Discipline is to be nauseated who are guilty in practice of resisting Kings who do you not speak out then that the Prelatical Discipline is to be nauseated when you have not spoken a word of sense to disprove the aforesaid Charge against the Prelatists As to your Margin 1. I have no more to do with Martyn than you have 2. If you had any thing to have justifyed your Calumny out of T. C. or Travers you should have cited it for it 's but a silly shift to set down their bare Names 3. And I will no further believe Bancroft or Sir Th. Aston than they prove what they say no more than your self And I have reason for so saying § 37. Next you feign me to say That the Divines Presbyterian or Episcopal medled little with it whereas I had no such word but on the contrary told you That the Divines on both sides were too guilty if not the forwardest And are you a fit Man to state these matters in print for Posterity and pour out such Invectives against other Men that have not so much patience or care as to heed what you read in a Letter or what you write in answer to it What use can such Writings as these be of but to abuse the simple I only told you the differences were Political and Legal and not Theological but I said not that Divines medled not in them § 38. I did as you say desire you to name the Theological Differences if you know any for I never did And what say you to this would not any Reader here expect that you should have named some one difference But instead of that you exclaim This is strange and you ask me Did I never hear of Dr. Ferne Mr. Dudley Digs yes and of Mr. Weldon and Michael Hudson and Sir Francis Nethersole and more and have long ago read them all And what of that And I have read Jo. Goodwin Mr. Bridges Mr. Calamy c. And what of all that Why did you not name the Theological Difference You say That it was called the Cause of God Religion c. Did you think that you spake to the purpose when you said this It was Gratia materiae finis effect us that they accounted it the Cause of Religion They thought it had been the liberation of their Church and Country and the defence of Religion against Innovators But what 's that to the lawfulness of taking up Arms Is any Man so mad especially an Episcopal Parliament as to think all War lawful against the King which is for Religion Will a good end justifie ill means Your own Instance of Mr. Vines and Mr. Marshal to prove that in Rom. 13. by the higher Powers was meant the Parliament-houses c. if you had been a Man of consideration would have clearly shewed you how it confuteth your self That and many Texts of Scripture were agitated by Dr. Ferne Mr. Digs and those that answered them Upon all which it was agreed as far as I know that the Higher Powers were not by Arms to be resisted And this is all the Theological part But did you think that they thought that Rom. 13. or other Scriptures did tell the World whether Caesar or the Senate was the higher Power or which is the higher Power in Venice Germany Poland Hungary France England or any Country in the World Will you put the King to prove all his Power from Scripture What ever you take it I and all that ever I met with that were above the Rank of those you describe by Jobs Wife did take this to be a Point of Policy and Law and not of Theology and that Scriptures tell us not who is the Supream in every Republick but supposing that known commands us not to resist them And then comes in Bishop Bilson and saith what is before cited for Lords and Commons vindicating their Librerties and then comes in
Hooker and tells us That by the Law of Nature Legislation belongeth to the Body and that the King is dependent and subject to the Body and such like And many Divines took up those Opinions and Dr. Ferne and others were against them But what of all this Are not these Controversies in Law and Politicks though handled by Divines § 39. Your next say That Dr. Manton wrote on Jude and note my in-advertency that take no more notice of his Labours And I marvel more than you can do that I never heard of that Book before Nor could hear of it from any one till he told me himself that he had long ago published some Sermons which he preached very young c. on Jude And that I was hereof ignorant I confess § 40. You say of your Citation of Dr. Burges That the Book is in the Hand of a Friend and you add Are you such a Helluo Liborum and yet had you no acquaintance with these Answ I have read I think all Dr. John Burges's Writings except those against Conformity before he turned And I read Dr. Cornelius Burges Book of Baptismal Regeneration about 36 years ago and I after wrote somewhat against it and Dr. Ward and Mr. Bedford on that Subject and since I was familiar with the Author till near his death therefore I believe not that it was John Burges that wrote that Book but suppose you to be much liker to be mistaken than I. And unless Dr. John Burges wrote another Book of the same Subject which I shall also wonder that I never heard of I am as sure you are mistaken as my Eyes and Acquaintance can make me § 41. I told you I knew not one of the Ministers that was not ready to swear that which you feign the Discipline of the Chorus to refuse And you ask me Why then did they flit their Habitations Answ Did I not expresly tell you why and was your disingenuity at leisure to fill your Paper with the recital of an answered Question that you might have opportunity to vent your Latet aliquid And here you begin to dispute the Case Platonically But I cannot perswade my self to dispute it with one that no better understandeth it or careth what he saith only I answer your Questions Q. 1. What was the sum of that Oath was it not plainly and directly against taking up Arms Answ 1. And is that all the Oath or is there not a Clause for our Church-Government 2. If so why is the first Clause the Sum of the whole 3. Or need my Conscience stick at nothing in an Oath but what you will call the Sum O happy quieter of Consciences that fear an Oath Q. 2. Did it any way hinder Parliament Mens speaking or others peaceably petitioning for such reformation as is necessary Answ 1. You shall not draw me to say that an alteration of Diocesanes or Lay-Chancellors is necessary no not ad bene esse Ecclesiae for I know the Law is against it But if I thought so is Petitioning no Endeavouring Say so and shew that you care not what you say to draw down an Oath And must not I swear That I will not any time endeavour any alteration And shall I swear universally against all endeavour and mentally reserve excepting petitioning speaking c. Are Oaths things to be swallowed thus in sport And will wiping my Mouth thus make me innocent Q. 3. Were not those who were commissioned to administer it ready to declare the sense of it Answ 1. Where did the King and Parliament give them power to declare the sense 2. Is it not all the Justices in England that are authorized two at once to administer it And do you know what all the Justices in England are ready to do 3. Are you sure they will all agree in the sense or must we take it in several senses if several Men severally expound it 4. What Law or Divinity teacheth you to take an Oath in the sense of an inferior Magistrate that offereth it you who is not by the Law impowered to interpret it nor is so much as made a Judge of the sense but of my Fact of taking or refusing it If this way be lawful what if a Papist could find a Justice that would expound the Oath of Supremacy for the Pope May he therefore take it Is not the Law-maker the universal Expositor of his own Law except for the Judicial decision of a particular Case which he committeth to his Judges or can a Justice dispense with equivocation in Oaths and not a Pope 5. I was but once yet sent to Goal for refusing that Oath and then I told them that I refused it not but desired the Justices to tell me the sense of it which they refused and said I must take it according to the plain words or importance of the Phrase which is the truth And yet you say Are they not ready c. What wonder if Oaths go smoothly down where there are such Resolvers and it Books revile them that will not swear But here ensueth as confident a Rhetorical Invective against those that scruple this kind of swearing as if Logick first had done its part or at least one word of sense had been spoken to satisfie the Conscience of a Man that would not be stigmatized with PER. And we must swear without any smoother Oyl to get it down than such talk as this or else we must go with you for Men of hot and feavourish Brains But Swearers we find have a Heat of their own kind transcending others Such as your Book and other Mens Actions have declared § 42. I told you If you would put out the other Clauses of the Oath c. you should see how few would stick at that of taking Arms against the King Here you say Why do I lay this on you c. Answ But Sir you might have understood my Inference Why then do you pretend a false Reason of our refusal when we tell you the true Reason If you cannot put out the Clause which we refuse you could forbear to Calumniate us of Traiterous Meanings as if we stuck at another Clause § 43. When I desired the imposing of no other Oaths on us to Prelates or Chancellors than were imposed or used for many hundred years in the Church you tell us That it may be schismatical to stand up too stifly for immediate Dispensations as to the Modes of External Policy c. Answ 1. As some things not commanded in Modes of Church Policy are lawful so some things are unlawful or else you may swear to the Pope as well as to Diocesanes And is it lawful to swear to the unlawful part think you what that is I will not dispute with you 2. All that is lawful to be done is not to be sworn to and made so necessary as that a Church or Nation shall swear never to endeavour any alteration of it when a Change of Divine Providence can turn
thanks for pressing his Model of Episcopacy if his now the King and Laws are restored which he only calculated as that which could be born by the iniquity of the later times Answ 1. That the Model was his he told me with his own Tongue 2. That he thought better of it than of that which you set against it and did not offer it as a less desirable thing appeareth by the Reasons which he giveth for it from Antiquity and from the nature of the Pastoral Office to which he saith a part in the Keys or Discipline belongeth And he took this to be the true ancient frame of Government used for many hundred year after Christ and to be the true means of our union And he told me that he offered it his Majesty before the War and it was not accepted and after the War and then it might have passed And in conference with me he came lower than that Model as the Minimum that might serve for our agreement which I mentioned publickly to the Parliament in my Sermon the day before the Kings Restoration was voted by them printed by their Order And he told me That moderate Men would unite on those terms but he had tryed that others would not 2. But what is there in that Model that is so intolerable now Is one tittle taken from the Bishops or Arch-bishops Honour Is one farthing taken by it from their Estates Is any of their Power or Negative Voice taken away or is not the stated Ministry only made their Presbytery instead of a few uncertain Presbyters that must be present when they ordain and instead of the present Form of some Courts c. O humble Clergy-men that take this for more intolerable than all the contrary evils that we undergo Dishonour not our Church so as to tell Forreigners That to be reduced to such an Episcopal Government by Bishops with their Presbyters as was commonly in use for six hundred years at least as that which could be born by the iniquity of the latter times but cannot be born by the Clergy now if it pleased His Majesty so to order it But mistake me not I only speak of Ushers Model I do not now speak against the Government nor plead for a Change for the Law forbiddeth me As to what you say concerning Vshers Notes on Ignatius concerning the division of Asia I suppose you should have said His Notes on Ignatius and his Discourse of the Proconsular Asia which are two Books if you knew the Books you talk of But I know very well that he supposed Episcopacy to have been before the second Century but the question is what sort of Episcopacy and that Question his Model doth resolve § 50. To all that you talk after on this Subject I cannot find in my heart to trouble my self with any other Answer than to tell you that all you say is utterly impertinent to those you write of and sheweth that you do not at all understand the Case of the present Non-Conformists nor the state of the Controversie § 51. But about swearing Obedience to the Bishops you say 1. It is but in Licitis Honestis 2. That of old Presbyters have been obedient to their Bishops under the Penalty of an Anathema Answ 1. The Question is not only of Swearing to obey them but swearing never to endeavour any alteration of Church-Government 2. The King himself is to be obeyed but in licitis honestis And must we be sworn as much to the Clergy as to the King 3. Those that think the English Species of Diocesanes to be unlawful take them to be quoad jus divinum Usurpers And they say they would not swear to obey the Pope in licitis honest is nor Cromwel if he were alive lest it prove Treason against the true Sovereign to swear Obedience to an Usurper even in licitis honestis And how impertinently do you speak of Presbyters Obedience sub poena Anathematis when I only spake of antecedent swearing to them Nay not to them but to Men of another Office though of the same name Are we not now under Anathema's enough in the Canons if we obey not Yet how little have you heard the Non-Conformists say against those Canons these eleven years I mean such as have ever publickly agitated their Cause If you Anathematize me unjustly it is none of my sin But if I swear unjustly it is my sin I can obey many a Man that I cannot swear obedience to He that taketh away my Coat may have my Cloak also and if you bid me go a Mile for you I may rather go two than do worse And we must submit our selves to one another but yet I will not swear Obedience to all that I may thus obey And I may obey a Justice or Constable as my duty and yet not swear to the perpetuity of their Office and that before the Kings But if Obedience under pain of Anathema served above a thousand years without swearing it why may it not serve turn now Are new Oaths necessary to be sworn by us to the Clergy which never were necessary till of late You mean not I perceive that Antiquity or Universality shall be the Character of your Church or Impositions Nor to stand to Lerinensis Test quod ab omnibus ubique semper c. If we may neither have Ignatius his Episcopacy in specie nor be under such Bonds only as Ignatius speaks for without such Oaths as he never mentioned it is self-condemnation for you to cite the words of Ignatius § 52. You say Mr. Cartwright wrangled himself at last into Conformity Answ It is not well done of you to write Historical untruths so boldly You have no way to come off but either to say some body told you so or that by Conformity you mean that he separated not from the Parish Churches which he never did or that he was favourable to kneeling at Sacrament and not peremptory against the Surplice into none of which he wrangled but studyed himself And saith Amesius retracted his moderation about the Surplice But did he conform to Diocesanes to Subscription to the Oath of Canonical Obedience to the Cross c. How is the World abused by false Historians Thus one of my Antagonists chargeth him after Suttliffe with acquaintance with Hackets Villany and other such things from which he so fully vindicateth himself in a Manuscript of his own which I have by me given me by old Mr. Simeon Ash as may make the Reader wonder at the hardened front of Calumny § 53. When you say you will secure me about the Oath I have no confidence in your security till I see it to be better back'd than your bare word with a fallacious unlike supposed Simile when I must subscribe and swear That I will not at any time endeavour any alteration of Government in this Army Colledge Vniversity or Corporation nor of the State putting them conjunct with the State and before
Bishops Deans and Arch-deacons there is no mention at all of Lay-Chancellors except you will play the Chymist and extract them out of the rest c. and then you may make Registers Proctors Apparators to be the Government But Sir remember your self you tell me you must not give the Reasons of Non-conformity because this would be a traducing the Government Why do you print against Lay-Chancellors then if they be the Government Learned Men have maintained both in the Schools and from the Press a Divine Right of the Government of the Church by Bishops But who ever did so in behalf of Lay-Chancellors Is not this to have hot and feaverish Heads when you will startle at every Leaf as if it harboured a Serpent and turn every Bush in your way into a Gorgon Men will never want woe that are such pregnant Contrivers how to puzzle and intangle themselves When you seem'd perplex'd about Lay-Chancellors I did say Me thinks a Man of your ingenuity should rest satisfied with that modest Declaration before the Commination in our Liturgy concerning the Censures of the Church Have I done you any wrong in appealing to your ingenity who have so often caled me disingenious In that Declaration there is an acknowledgment That in the Primitive Church there was a godly Discipline which it is wish'd might be restored It is granted then that our Discipline is imperfect and though there is no mention of Lay-Chancellors yet Excommunication being a part of Discipline and belonging to Penance I thought you might be so ingenious as not to exagitate what is confess'd to be imperfect Poor impotent Flies stick upon Sores but generous Spirits are satisfied with an acknowledgment satis est prostrasse leoni You might perceive I had no mind to draw the Saw about Lay-Chancellors and Excommunication I had not mention'd them in my Book or asserted any thing about Excommunication but 't is your manner to draw any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into your discourse And then if I do but touch upon it 't is enough you will presently pour forth a whole Volume Just so when I was a Puny-Sophister in the Schools If I could catch an advantage from any word that fell from my Antagonist I would hold him there and pass by the merits of the Cause It may be I could wish that Excommunication were reduc'd into a more Scriptural Apostolical and Primitive Channel as much as your self but I never look that the Church below should be without spot or wrinkle I said what could be said that Lay-Chancellors do not excommunicate as they are Lay-men but by their Surrogates O quam vapulo I am push'd to a Stone-wall and pin'd up fast there and then I am bound to your Chariot whilst you sing Iö Triumphe Come on say you you speak just like an Hector Horns against Horns They excommunicate as Lay-men or as Clergy-men but not as Lay-men ergo as Clergy-men And upon this you ground many subsequent absurdities as Vno absurdo dato c. I shall break your Chain in the first Link for I deny your division Your major is imperfect for Excommunication is not from them either as Lay-men or as Clergy-men formally or by any proper Causality but from the Surrogates Say not our Articles the same Vnusquisque Vicarius Generalis Officialis seu Commissarius qui Ordines Ecclesiasticos non susceperit eruditum aliquem Presbyterum sibi accerset associabit qui sufficienti authoritate vel ab ipso Episcopo in jurisdictione sua vel ab Archidiacono Presbytero existente in Jurisdictione sua munitus idque ex praescripto ipsius Judicis tunc praesentis excommunicationis sententiam pro contumacia pronunciabit Inter Articulos Anno Domini 1584. Regnique Elizabethae vicessimo septimo Anno 1571. Nullus Cancellarius nec Commissarius nec Officialis procedet usque ad ferendam sententiam Excommunicationis sed sententiam deferent tantum ad Episcopum camque aut ipse per se pronunciabit aut gravi alicui viro in Sacro Ministerio constituto pronunciandum committet Anno 1597. Quotiescunque censura ista Excommunicationis in poenam cujusvis haereseos schismatis symoniae perjurii usurae incestus adulterii seu gravioris alicujus criminis venerit infligenda sententia ipsa vel per Archiepiscopum Decanum Archidiaconum vel Prebendarium modo sacris Ordinibus Ecclesiastica Jurisdictione praeditus fuerit in propria persona pronunciabitur Canon 13. in the sixteenth of Charles the first No Excommunication or Absolution shall be good in Law except they be pronounced by the Bishop in person or by some other in Holy Orders in whom is the Power of the Keys You did not do well to overlook what I said about the Lay-Chancellors being expert in the Civil Law and so were competent Judges about Intricacies arising about Spiritual Affairs and so might have a Superintendency and a Juridical Inspection over this Particular of Excommunication Tell me Sir May not a Man be said to do that vertually which he does not act immediately The King does neither preach nor administer the Sacraments yet has a Supremacy of Power in all things belonging to the Church Are not many things in Parliament ascrib'd to the Lords Spiritual which were transacted by their Proxies Did you never read that the Nobles of Jehosaphat went about all the Cities of Juda and taught the People Was not Teachings proper to the Priests Levites Prophets as Matters of Discipline were to the Apostles Why do you not quarrel with these Nobles for being Usurpers If you say as some Commentators that they taught the People in that they incourag'd the Levites to do so Why in this sense may not Lay-Chancellors act about Excommunication by informing and directing the Surrogates how to carry themselves in doubtful Cases as Jetho advised that Matters of the greatest concern should be brought to Moses Although all this while the original Authority is in and from the Bishop and we are all but his Curates as to the exercise of it I find that if you may be permitted to fix your Engine upon a false ground and begin your Building upon a precarious Foundation you will do wonders and raise a Babel as high as Heaven But remove this Sand and you come tumbling down like Lucifer You may please your self in comparing us to Cryers because we act subordinately to our Superiors I think as we are Gods Ambassadors we are no better Our Commission is limited and we do but Cry what is enacted above Nothing below an Independent Absolute and Autocratical Power will serve your turn Nobis non licet esse tam potentibus If the Presbyterians should succeed they would assume a Power to excommunicate Kings and then Men are not like to take much care what becomes of them Is it this you would have I dare not but name my Author it was the Lord Digby 45. I told you that if Lay-Elders medled in Excommunication you would not be offended at
them You say in effect you renounce them for you have written against them Where shall I find you If I touch upon any thing that may reflect upon the Presbyterians or their Discipline presently your blood is up and I must be call'd to a severe account by your self as the Achilles of the Party Yet if any part of that Discipline be charg'd upon you or want a defence then you fly off renounce the Cause you have espous'd You know not the Man although you think I am oblig'd to defend every usage of the Church with which you have a mind to quarrel What prevarication is this Into how many Shapes can you transform your self Hecate Triformis Flesh Fish Mirmaid Episcopal-Presbyterian-Independent yet none of these when you please An 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes in the Water and sometimes out I only wish you were either hot or cold I find that Beza made the same Complaints as you do that Excommunication was decreed by the Civil Lawyers and not by the Presbytery yet I find that at Geneva the Power of Excommunication was in the Consistory whereof two parts were Lay-men And how it was with the Sanhedrim Mr. Selden will inform you But as great a Mecaenas as you are for the Discipline I doubt whether you will own this If ever I be a Bishop I shall bless my self from such a defender and herein you would do me a kindness for you would be such a strange and uncouth a Bishop that it would exceed the skill of a better Advocate than I to defend your manner of Episcopacy But there is but little fear of this trouble for before Richard will agree with Baxter what kind of Bishop he would be it will be too late in the afternoon with me to undertake your defence 47. Here you say I sarcastically insinuate something about your Nolo-Episcopare and so you wish again for one grain of Ingenuity in me You might have sav'd this labour if you had not undertaken to know my mind better than I do my self Who gave you commission to read my thoughts backward as destitute of ingenuity as you make me I never reproached any with their misery or upbraided them with their choice It may be an act of magnanimity to refuse preferment for Nazianzen and many others have done it before you I will not be so curious and inquisitive as to search whether your motives and theirs be the same 48. Magis Minus non variant speciem holds in substances say you but not in relatives Yet neither substances nor relatives in my Logick Suscipiunt magis minus If they be relatives secundum esse But this is onely in respect of quantity and quality which do adhere to them For as one man is not magis homo so one Father is not magis Pater than another But say you Would a spoon be a spoon if it were as big as a Church It is enough for my purpose that there is no specifick difference betwixt a little Spoon and a great one nor betwixt a small Diocess and a great one and this you seem to assert in your next Section shewing that there is small difference betwixt Bishop Ushers and the present Model Take heed of absurd and ridiculous suppositions for as they are not argumentative so they infer nothing but monstruous conclusions Rub up your Philosophy about maximum quod sic minimum quod non and see what Vossius says that things only dissering gradually are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and then it may be you may give leave to magis minus and to be a Maxim still But right or wrong you must have a fling at Diocesan Bishops which you say can have no personal present Communion with a thousand Churches under them since they never saw one the other Is there no Communion but personal and 'twixt those that see each other Many of the Kings Subjects never saw his face yet they have many hands and eyes in respect of their subordinate Officers So have Diocesans in their Curats and may not we be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and have a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Saints below and the Saints above though we never saw them 50. To all you talk after on this Subject I cannot find in my heart to trouble my self with any other Answer than to tell you that all you say is utterly impertinent you would have cry'd out O easie Answer but why impertinent you had declar'd your self for the Episcopacy of Cyprian and Ignatius but not for Diocesan Bishops because they were not primitive I told you there were Bishops before there were Parishes therefore the most primitive Bishops were not Parochial Then I shew'd you the large Diocess of Ignatius Cyprian c. And I quote the very words of Ignatius in his Epistles and all this is impertiment but 't is no strange thing with you for when I mention'd several grand Authors about the Discipline you give me just such another Answer 51. You had spoken as I understood against our Oath of Canonical Obedience to Bishops I told you this was only in rebus licitis honestis This you canvas up and down yet when you had to do with Mr. Bagshaw you grant it but with me you dispute it over again Are Oaths necessary to be sworn to the Clergy It was once made necessary to swear and vow against the Clergy to the utter rooting them up and those that refus'd ran the hazard of all they had And may not we now promise Obedience to them in things lawful or rather by the King by whose Law this is injoy'nd but where is any Antiquity for it I produc'd the words of Ignatius to this purpose yet you take no notice of them 52. I had said Mr. Cartwright wrangled himself into Conformity you say it is well done of you to write an historical untruth so boldly you have no way to come off but to say some body told you so some body told you so is sometimes and in some cases a good account If we were stript of the advantage of Tradition you would be much puzzl'd about the Christian Sabboth But is this an Historical Vntruth You might have read the very words in print before now and in another Author you may read Cartwright either was or was perswaded to be satisfied when he was admitted to Warwick he faithfully promised if he might be tolerated to preach not to impugn the Laws Orders Government or Governors in the Church of England but to perswade and procure as much as he could both publickly and privately the Estimation and Peace of the Church he carried himself with as much respect to the Archbishop as any of the regular and conformable Clergy to his death Dr. Burges Observ'd that Cartwright opposed the Ceremonies as inconvenient not as unlawful and therefore perswaded men to conform rather than leave their Flocks so that you may see I had better ground
for what I said than meer hear-say 53. Here you repeat concerning the Oath of non-endavouring the Alteration of Government But as you say nothing but what hath been said before so I have nothing to say but what I have said already until something be produc'd de novo 54. Who it is that does most to drive people from the Parish Churches I am satisfied by experience and whether all Nonconformist Dissenters be such children of hell as you describe them Methinks you are like a waspish or cholerick Disputant who being impatient of contradiction and having spent his stock of reason falls to chiding and supplies the want of argument with the overflowing of the gall and 't is no wonder you begun to faulter and rage at the latter end of the day after so tedious a Journey I mean so long a discourse But when you are refreshed revolve with your self in your retirement and solitude 1. Whether we that now bear the heat of the day I might ask you according to your procedure whether you mean me do drive men from the Parish Churches 2. Whether I describe dissenters all of them to be the children of hell Reverende Pater in hisce duabus Quaestionibus expecto animi tui sententiam Take heed of that pernicious Luciferian Counsel Calumniari fortiter haerebit aliquid Let St. Paul rather instruct you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to speak the truth in love Away with these Heats let 's tear one the other in pieces no longer Can you blame me for saying such dissentions make Musick at Rome Let us shew our selves to each other like Joseph and his Brethren at their interview in Aegypt Though my Judgment leads me to be Pius Inimicus to the Non-conformity of the Non-conformists yet nothing shall make me uncharitable to their Persons 55. To write a just Defence of the Non-conformity which I own would take up more time than I have to spare unless I saw a probability of better effect than by putting it into your Hand as now you motion I will not say this is a Tergiversation for if there be any that comes near St. Johns Hyperbole of writing more Books than the World can contain you are the Man If you do but open the Flood-gates of your Lips out there gushes such a Torrent I allude still to St. John but 't is to the Dragon in the Revelation that is enough to overwhelm such a Pigmy as I am Your Foam is the more grievous because it is brackish I expect nothing from you but scorn and that you should pronounce your wonted Raca against me in a higher Key and a more Emphatical Accent You will have the Lions Motto Nemo me impune lacessit Yet I could wish that if your Writing be no sweeter it might be shorter and that you would contract your swelling thoughts and like the Oracle speak much in a little for I am weary in following you I hope you will no more tell me that I call upon you to blow against a flaming Oven and to do Impossibilities when I call'd for your Reasons of Non-conformity You tell me I know no such Book could be licens'd yet when I made the motion in assisting you in the Birth you utterly waved my Overture If you are under affliction I hope it will make you to judge as one that must be judged Sir I told you the very truth I was entering into the Furnace in my last and since that God has been pleas'd to drench and plunge me deeper both as to my Person and Family else you had receiv'd this Return much sooner Though I might have thought such an Intimation might have procur'd your forbearance and that you would not have come upon me when I was sore I thank you that you have any hope that I may improve my afflictions by sucking some Honey out of such a hard Rock and I can bless God that of very faithfulness he hath caused me be troubled I can kiss the Rod without any murmuring Sobs and adore him that has made me to smart 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is God that beareth Rule in the Kingdom of Heaven and Earth therefore I praise honour and extoll him all whose Works are Truth and his Ways Judgment What Talents the same God hath bestowed on me I shall lay them out not to drive Men from the Congregation but to invite and wooe them more and more into the Church that they may come under the Net of the Gospel and the droppings of Heaven Herein I should rejoyce to have your Co-operation and the assisting Labours all little enough of all our dissenting Brethren Whilst I am an unworthy Labourer in the Lords Vineyard and Your Devoted Friend Jo. Hinckley Northfeild Octob. 13. Mr. BAXTER'S Fourth Letter SIR WHen I had written an Answer to your last the Transcriber moved slow in his Work and it being somewhat long fourteen Sheets before he had finished it I heard from a double report of your own acquaintance that you purposed to print what you got from me At the first hearing I was not sorry for it But upon second thoughts these four Reasons put a stop to the mission of the Papers to you 1. I have written more plainly and smartly than I would have done if it had been for any ones use besides your own A secret conviction and reproof may be sharper than an open one 2. I am confident that you cannot get the whole licensed and I cannot easily think that you are willing Upon your encouragement a few sheets against Bagshaw since dead were printed without License and were surprized in the Press and if you should print mine by scraps and not entirely I should take it for a great injury and dishonesty 3. And I doubt it would be offensive to some and so might tend to my own disquiet for to make it so plain as that nothing but a high degree of Ignorance or Impudence can contradict it that the Parliament that raised Arms against the King were by profession Episcopal such as Heylin describes Abbot to be as against those whom they accused of Innovation and rais'd suspitions that they were reconciling us to Popery at the price of our loss of Propriety and Liberty I have been fain to name so many Men of whom some are yet living that I know not how they will take it to have their Military Acts recited after the Act of Oblivion and I believe those Clergy-men that have used this false Visor to put on the Non-conformists to make them odious that it was they only and not the Episcopal that began the English War will be very angry to have their fraud detected 4. But all these are small matters in comparison of the last Though God hath given us a King who is so firm to the Protestant Religion as to make a severe Law against all that shall cast out suspitions of his being inclin'd to Popery yet all Men are mortal and God knoweth into
the Lord and his Anointed Qui non vitat peccare c. And will any dare to run upon the thick Bosses of his Buckler There is a sad Text in the tenth of Hosea The Princes of Juda were like to them that remove the bound That is They neglected the Laws which were as bounds in matters of Religion Now it was a great Sin in the Law to remove the ancient Landmark Therefore it follows in that Text I will pour out my wrath upon them like water Josiah and Hezekiah Constantine and Theodosius have embalmed their Names to all Posterity The former by beating down Idolatrous Altars and Groves The latter by encouraging the true Christian Religion not only against its open Enemies the Heathen But defending it too against the Arrians and other dangerous Hereticks who endeavour'd in the very bosom of the Church to eat out the very Bowels of it Those Churches have been most commended which have been most Zealous for the Truth against those that have oppos'd it As the Church of Ephesus That she hated the Doctrine of the Nicolaitans The Church of Thyatira was condemned because she suffered the woman Jezebel who call'd her self a Prophetess to teach and seduce his Servants to commit fornication that is the impure Gnosticks The Lord had also a quarrel with the Church of Pergamus that she suffered them that held the Doctrine of Balaam And if these things be blameable in Churches it cannot be for the Honour of the chiefest Magistrates who are the Supreme Governors of them to suffer Jews and Gentiles Barbarians and Scythians Parthians Medes and Elamites Papists Arrians Independents Anabaptists Quakers to set open their Shops and expose their Trinkets in their Dominions for though these look several ways yet they are mov'd and carried about with one and the same Primum Mobile or Spring of Confusion Miserable are the People that are in such a Case As once it was in Israel when every one did that which seemed good in his own Eyes It shew'd the Impotency of Julian that when he saw his Cruelty would not abate the Zeal of the Christians He gave every one leave to follow his own Religion This is not the Case of our Constantine His Garments are not dy'd with the blood of his Subjects nor are our Streets prophan'd with the doleful cries of poor Orphans But by mildness clemency and gentleness both he and his Subordinate Officers had made such a Conquest upon the hearts of the People that even by the Cords of love they were drawn into an happy Harmony except some few Obdurate Caitiffs who can only be melted and softned by an hotter Element But alas There comes an unlucky wind out of the wilderness which on a suddain blasts all our Hopes and throws all our Doors from off their Hinges All the Bars of our Gates are broken Come Foxes Come Leopards Here 's a free and open passage we shall be an easie prey who will may sport themselves in our gore and lay wast our pleasant Plants Although our Laws were almost asleep before this Hurricano came yet the very Image and Picture of them did fright away the Birds of Prey The Woolf durst not Approach our Folds so long as there was but the Resemblance of a Mastiffe-Dog But now these Terriculamenta these Scare-crows being taken away the Laws being fallen into a Swoon I had almost said the Laws being extinct the Frogs Croak up and down in every corner I hope they will never be so impudent and saucy as those were in Pharaoh's days to hop or dance their Hays in Kings Chambers By this you will easily see that this Indulgence is not the way to procure God's blessed favour upon Magistrates and their Government nor does it tend to their safety for though these Dissenters seem to be Innocent harmless Creatures without either Tushes or Talons yet they have rooted and ayowed Principles in them against the Grandeur and Majesty if not the very Being of Kings and though they fawn at present and bless God who hath put such a thing as this into the heart of the King and are ready to say They have a greater share in David than we Yet let but a warm gleam ripen them into Maturity let their Fangs and Sampson's Locks grow out again or let them be cross'd in their darling Dalilah by brideling them up from then beloved liberty and then will they not lift up their heels or Curse him to his Face Looking backward in this Case will be looking forward And History will be down-right Prophecy Pelle sub agninâ latitat mens saepe lupina You Remember that when the late King Declar'd That the Right according to Law was in him to Arrah his Subjects for the Defence of his Person and Government And accordingly He did Commissionate many worthy Persons to put the same in Execution that not one of these Dissenters would Comply with that Declaration When also He Prohibited any to take the Covenant by his Royal Proclamation Do you call to mind any one of these new Royalists that did obey it But now there comes out a Declaration Mouth-meet which throws the Reins upon their own Necks and permits them like unbroken Colts to go whither they will and now who better Subjects than they What Not obey the King's Declaration It is their Duty So that should the King rule by Edicts as our Stories tell us His Predecessors have done before the Reign of Henry the First who began the Foundation of Parliaments these men are like to be his most sequacious and obsequious Followers Ready fixt to make him an Absolute and Glorious Prince Some it may be will be ready to add Yes as they did his Father before him For I much fear That if it should please His Sacred Majesty to set forth another Declaration to try the temper of their Obedience to Reinforce the Laws concerning Episcopacy and the Liturgy that these Men would not then obey the same for Conscience sake It is strange to see what queazy Stomachs these men have one Morsel which is Cook'd to their Palats they will swallow without chewing And at another which is every whit as wholsom they will sputter as if it were Poison Mr. Baxter himself has had Experience of this Inconstancy If he call upon them to Confederate and associate themselves in Private Meetings they say he is return'd to his first love and his old Principles But if he tell them of his receiving the Sacrament on his Knees and call on them to stand up at the Hymns in the Common-Prayers then they say he is an Apostate It may be this Indulgence like a thick Gobbet may stop their mouths at present The King may sleep securely for a time whil'st Jacob and Esau are struggling in the Womb whil'st York and Lancaster are in Aequilibrio poised in an even Ballance But alas this would be but a serene Calm before a Tempest The drinking a Cup of Wine before a Feverish Fit or
a lightning before Death for whoever either by Power or Policy can get ground of his Fellows and leave them in the Valley will be sure to shew their predominant Power not only to their Competitors but to the Government it self It hath been a fallacy which some have put upon themselves that pity and gentleness will indear and oblige these Dissenters But he that calls to mind how dear one Prince has paid already for his lenity to them may have a Clew wherewith to extricate himself out of that Error and may also undeceive others It is pity that Kindness as we say of fair Weather should do harm But as Panthers are choak'd with Perfume so Mercy it self degenerates into Cruelty and sometimes brings Ruine after it St. Austin confesses it was once his Judgment That no Compulsion should be us'd in matters of Religion Yet he lived to see his great mistake For he found by Experience that by punishing one Offender who was Refractory and turbulent in his Diocess He did more good than by all his wooing Orations Such Libertines are like Birds put into a Cage They flutter at first but when they see themselves coop'd up they 'l struggle no longer to get into the open Air roosting quietly in their narrow Confinement I have not wonder'd a little to read some of their Books wherein they complain Tragically of Prisons and Gaols Three Persons are named who have suffer'd in this kind for their Disobedience Mr. Calamy Mr. Baxter and Dr. Manton But if we would go about to requite them with our Arithmetick we could reckon for every one of them an Hundred who were in the time of their Tyranny clap'd under Shipboard or strarv'd But what did those three men lose by their Imprisonment What Ignatius said of his Fetters He look'd upon every link as made of precious Stones So may these men glory in their golden Chains Some of them got more by a Weeks Imprisonment than we get by Preaching a whole year so that a Gaol was as beneficial to them as a Bishop's Palace and to Confine them was to set a Fine upon the Heads of the Zealous Citizens Those that know the Idiotism or proper language of these times can tell that by doing of good works is understood Liberality to Dissenting Ministers I condemn no man's Charity yet I should be loth to be an Object of theirs Therefore may our tranquillity be lengthened and the King's Throne Established in Righteousness by the due Execution of Laws which are both our Birthright and Security lest we be constrained at last to beg in vain for that Indulgence which they now Injoy The neglect of a speedy Reforming and effectual Suppressing of Errors and Schisms will both encourage and increase them for though at first they may seem like that Cloud in Scripture of an hand breadth yet by Seditious Spirits they will soon be blown up into so large Dimensions that they will darken the whole Heaven It has been accounted a great oversight in Q. Elizabeth of Blessed Memory that she gave too much liberty to Foreign Divines to Preach in London and other places until they had leaven'd the minds of her Subjects with prejudice against her own Government and had almost introduc'd the Platform of Calvin into the room of it The smell of those mistaken flames of Charity are upon us until this day So many Iliads of mischief are contained in the little compass of an unseasonable Connivence It does not only Ruin Churches but Princes too As Impunity is the Mother of Impiety towards God So tolerated Libertines will quickly prophane the Hallowed Diâ—dems of Kings They are all hot as an Oven and have devoured their Judges All their Kings are fallen Hosea 7. 7. Habent hoc Proprium Calvinistae ut statum in quem irrepserunt evertant neque antè ipsi Conquiescant quà m rerum potiuntur These men nibble already at the very root of the Royal Cedar By telling the King's Subjects in Print That they are not oblig'd in Conscience to obey Magistrates and their Laws An ill requital sure for the King 's gracious Indulgence What Do you thus requite the King O Ingrateful and unkind If Conscience be once debauch'd with such Principles as these the Throne will lose its principal Pillar and the King will find himself weakened by these treacherous Priests and undermining Popelings who go about to Absolve his People from the very Ligaments and Sinews of their Obedience which is never more genuine generous and lasting than when it is for Conscience sake This is all one as to tell the King to his face that it is his safest course to guard himself with the Power of Arms For if ever he be so unhappy as to take a measure of their Consciences they will make no more scruple to Dethrone him than they did to Depose his Father Men without Conscience are like Mastiff-Dogs when they grow mad or Lions which have been tamed when they recover their natural fierceness They shake off all awe to their Masters and Keepers neither will they boggle at taring them into Pieces How turbulent these Men are when they are let loose may easily be gather'd from some few smattering Dissenters of this kind in our own Parishes who are errant Firebrands where they live There is not a Difference betwixt Neighbours but they are at one end of it blowing up and inflaming Contentions by their Whispers and Nods and by their Pragmatical Intruding into other Mens matters As if they were injur'd if they are not look'd upon as the only Competent Judges and Umpires of all Contests where any place is bless'd with sound peace and quietness there these Men are un-elemented They starve and pine away unless they can make what they do not find And since one or two of these Innovators are so pregnant with quarrels in our narrow Precincts what Earthquakes what a Conflagration will these vapours these sparks raise when they are encourag'd to Conglomerate and to Unite their Forces in the Bowels of a Church or Kingdom There is a Tradition of some Parliament-men when it was disputed whether Priests should Marry They cry'd out yes by all means It was better they should have Wives of their own than be too busie as they had been with other Mens So It were better these Dissenting Brethren had Diocesses of their own than that they should be such busie Incendiaries in other Mens Bishopricks If they say Nolumus Episcopare It is because they desire to be Archbishops I had almost said Popes and Overseers of the whole Church CAP. VIII A Toleration does not tend to the Happiness of the Kingdom HE that has time to Ransack Stories will find how fatal small and inconsiderable Meetings have been to the downfall of States and Kingdoms either in letting in a Foreign and professed Enemy as it was in that Conventicle met together in the Trojan Horse or by mastering and bringing under the Governours of them by devillish
to find out whole streams of Blood This Beast has still the same Instruments of Cruelty though she hide them as the Viper her Teeth yet when any Game is started that is fit for her prey then her fangs do appear Blood is as natural to this Woman as 't is to a young Lion or a young Eagle She loves to dabble in gore until as St. John says she be drunk with the blood of Saints and Martyrs Yet who can conceive that any should be so fond of Slavery as to return into this Babylon so Ambitious to hold the Pope's Stirrup and lay his Neck under his insulting feet that he should be accessary to promote his own Bondage to bring his Person Conscience and Estate under the Harrows of this Usurping Tyrant to make the Land of his Nativity Tributary to a foreign Power by becoming as Egypt once was the Granary of Rome Others fear a Storm from France The Clouds gather that way But maugre all the Pride and Power of that growing Monarchy we may be safe under the Protection of the Almighty and the Conduct of our National Prince if we were as a City that is at Unity in it self more Zealous in the Service of that God who dwells on high and laugh's those to scorn that think to trample on their Neighbours by virtue of their own brawny flesh without any Commission from himself and to lead into Captivity those that desire to be quiet in their own Land If ever we fall by a foreign Enemy we shall be accessary to our own Ruin either betraying our selves by our own Sins and so forfeiting God's blessed Providence which has been so long a wall about us or by some Persidious Sinons among our selves that shall open our Gates to our open Adversaries If we could Reduce and Unite our roving and distracted Affections into one Point gather our selves into a Rundle as the Spanish Fleet did their greatest Danger in the days of Q. Elizabeth If like Sheep when affrighted with Dogs we could rally into one Body we might be impregnable in our own Island If the Stars in their course or God himself did not fight against us But alas we are so shatter'd and look such several ways As if we were contriving how to sink with the least trouble to our Assailants and give them an easie and cheap Victory we have almost as many Parties as Men And each Party stands on Tiptoes waiting for the Destruction of the rest Alas poor England What evil Spirit is come abroad and crumbled thee into so many shivers What Stars did then prevail when thou becamest the By-word of other Nations who wast the Glory of all Lands The Battails of Cressy and Agencourt are not yet forgotten in Story And shall our Sins so bow down our Backs that we must fear those whom we have Conquered Shall we now so unravel our Cord by our Intestine Divisions that they may be easily broken apart which were inviolable whil'st twisted together This is to bring swift Destruction upon our selves without yielding any glory to those that shall spoil us Where was the Kites renown that soop'd away the Frog and the Mouse whil'st they were contending and aiming at each others Ruine whilst their eyes were so blood-shotten with Spite that they never attended the Motions of their Common Enemy Those fowl that are tame do even dread the Shadows of Birds of prey by the instinct of Nature though they hover in the Air at a great distance from them And shall not we have so much Prudence as to reunite our selves now our Enemies are not only hovering but ready to fall directly upon our heads Hannibal is even at our very Gates Titus is casting up his Trenches and we like those Zealots in Jerusalem are pulling each other by the Throat Was there ever Madness like this Madness O for the Harp of David to allay this rage and to charm down these Furies O that some Rays from the face of God might shine upon us That these Clouds might be dispell'd and our Fears prevented If that Grace which brings Salvation did once arise in our hearts by reducing us to the same Point where we first parted That is the door of the Sanctuary by teaching us to worship the same God in his own way there might yet be hopes in our Israel concerning this we might all speak the Language of Canaan again and become a terror to our Enemies The Lord is terrible in the behalf of his People by sending Hornets among their Adversaries when they are gather'd together in the holy Place of his Zion T. Quintius said the Snail was safe in her shell so might we be in the Sanctuary You see 't is hard to live in a Countrey-Cell and not gather some Melancholly Air. Yet 't is for a Consolation that I have both liberty and leisure to breath out the same to my God in Devotions and to give a vent to it by transmitting the Eccho thereof to your self I wish these Lines may find you free from all Incumbrances of Sadness that no such ghastly Objects may perplex or disturb your Recesses And lest I should be guilty of pouring Water into your Wine I will shake off my Hermits Pall and dazle you with a more taking Dress My Gratulation shall requite you for my former Complaints and I will both encourage you and my self with what follows The Truth is not only common Fame but my own secret Thoughts have suggested to me an equal fear from your London to that from Rome and France For I am old enough to remember what Commotions arose from that place about Forty years ago The King of blessed Memory was affronted in the Streets All loyal Members of Parliament and Conscionable Subjects were aw'd with the dreggs of the People Judgment was turn'd backward those gave the Law that did violate it most and deserv'd to be made Examples by it Seditious Pamphlets and Insolent Petitions flew abroad like Granado's and he that durst give a check to this Torrent was sure to be over-whelmed and to perish in this Gain-saying of Core Wo be to Righteous Lot if found in the midst of these Sodomites Wo be to St. Paul himself if he stood in the way of Demetrius and his Crew No man fit to describe these Confusions but he that wears Buskins has a Vein of writing Tragedies and can set forth the Plague of Athens in its own direful Colours I once thought I should have dy'd St. Steven's Death only for Preaching on the Fifth Commandment When I look back and consider what Tails these Comets drew after them I am like one that goes upon a narrow Bridge over a deep River My head and my heart tremble and pant and I can scarce believe my own Happiness that I have escaped the roaring of these Waters for so the Sacred Writ calls a tumultuous Multitude Methinks I am only in a Dream and I sometimes seem to see the Mountains smoaking and Firebrands coming out