Doctrine and Reformation did but touch to render them the hatred and indignation of the world Yea and Luther himself doubted not to raise it to a generall maxime or observation that Godly men must beare the name title of men that are seditious schismaticall and Authors of infinite evills and troubles in the world That great and blessed alteration and change that God made in the State of Religion and things of his worship by the sending of Jesus Christ into the world and the preaching of the Gospel is called the shaking of the Heavens and the Earth because of the great concussions troubles distractions rents and divisions in the great concussions troubles distractions rents and divisions in the world which did and doe yet daily accompany them by reason of the pride ignorance and unbeliefe of those which oppose either the one or the other And as the Doctrine of the Gospel in the generall never comes amongst any people in excellencie and power but that it smites the foundations of that unitie and peace wherein it finds them makes breaches upon them renting one part of them from another upon which discontents and disorders follow like the waves of the Sea in like manner every considerable piece or branch of the Gospel in the first discovery and breaking out of it even in such places and among such persons where and amongst whom the Doctrine of the Gospel in the generall hath been of a long time professed by reason of the strangenesse of it and that contrarietie and crossenesse which it beares to the judgements and wills of many must needs be offensive and distastefull unto them and so occasion distractions disorders discontents So that Mr. Prynne by representing my Parish as divided disordered by my Independent way hath rather given testimony to the truth and Evangelicalnesse of it then brought any argument to disprove either And to say as he doth a few lines after that he needs no other evidence to prove it a schismaticall by-path and so no way of Christ then the schismes and discords which it hath raised in other Parishes is just such a saying and resolution as that of the High Priest against our Saviour when he rent his cloaths and said He hath spoken blasphemie What further need have we of Witnesses The blasphemie of Christ and the guiltinesse of Independencie touching the matter of division and disorder are sins much of the same order and calculation To his fourth and last reason which renders him a man of jealousie against the way of Independencie and prevailes with him so farre that he cannot as he saith think it a Way of Christ wee Answer 1. That this way is no Pioner or underminer of Parliamentarie Authoritie nor hath Mr. Prynne found it nor ever shall find it such the principles of this way being none other then what are laid in the Scriptures unpossible it is that it should destroy or pull downe any thing which they build up Therefore if Mr. Prynne hath ought in this kind against any of the sons of this way let him implead these in a lawfull triall and spare not but if for their sakes he will needs blaspheme the way he will open a dore of example very effectuall for those that are opposite to his way of Presbyterie to heap shame infamie and reproach upon the head thereof without end yea and for those also that are enemies to Christian Religion to render that as hatefull wicked vile in the eyes of men as themselves can desire it should be esteemed If all the errors and misprisions found in the writings of Presbyteriall men should be charged upon the way of Presbyterie as the Authoresse and Foundresse of them she would appeare ten times more erroneous and deformed then her Independent adversaries are yet willing to judge or conceive her to be 2. For the Sons or Patrons of this way as Mr. Prynne pleaseth to term them I verily beleeve that there is none of them all but are willing ready and chearfull to invest Parliaments with as full high and compleat a power and Authoritie as are by any by all the rules and principles either of reason or Religion competible unto men If Mr. Prynne or any other of the Presbyterian way conceive that in times of Parliaments when they apprehend them like to be for them they may and ought to say that Gods are come down to us in the likenesse of men we confesse that we cannot our reason our Religion will not beare it at our hands subscribe any such Apotheosie But let him and his first survey the territories patrimonie and heritance of Heaven the royalties and prerogative of the most high God and of the Lord Jesus Christ blessed for ever and set them out by the line and rule either of reason or Religion and look what power Authoritie Jurisdiction soever shall be found situate lying and being without the compasse of this line no waies enterfeering with those that are within wee all unanimously universally professe that incunctanter and with both our hands we will cast and heap it upon the Parliament asking no further question for conscience sake Therefore whereas he challengeth this way for devesting Parliaments of all manner of Jurisdiction in matters of Religion and Church-Government we answer 3. That neither this way nor the Patrons of it devest them of any or any manner of Authoritie in what matters soever unto which Mr. Prynne or any other Master of the Presbyterian way is able Salvo jure coeli to entitle them For jurisdiction in matters of Religion and Church-Government we willingly give unto them the same line measure and proportion herein to the full which himself asserteth unto them from the examples of those Kings and Princes Cyrus Artaxerxes Darius c. which he insists upon p. 20. Who as he here said enacted good and wholsome Lawes for the worship honour and service of the true God Let him instance particularly in any such Law or Lawes enacted by any of them and doubtlesse none of us will denie the Parliament a power of enacting exceptis excipiendis the like But if Mr. Prynnes intent be to make Precedent of whatsoever was enacted or done by any or all of these Heathen Kings Princes and States to warrant a lawfulnesse of power in the Parliament of enacting or doing the same we conceive that he neither hath nor knows where to have any thing to justifie such an intent I trust that that Law enacted by Nebuchadnezzar and his Nobles Dan. 3. 6. That whosoever falleth not downe and worshippeth shall the same houre be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace shall not be drawne by him into precedent for the vindication of a Parliamentary Jurisdiction in matters of Religion and Church-Government 4. Whereas to make good his last charge against the way so often smitten by his pen he referres to the passage of the two Independent Brethren recited p. 3. of his Independencie examined
adding after a parenthesis of much untruth there being many that have represented the way he speaks of in her native colours and lineaments that I rather aggravate then extenuate the guiltie of the said passage by my explanation which he there recites I answer 1. That for matter of guilt the passage referred unto standeth as yet cleare innocent and untouch'd as concerning any thing in way of demerit that hath been prov'd against it 2. As concerning the explanation that also keeps its standing and that upon holy ground notwithstanding all that Mr. Prynne hath done or attempted to doe for the removall of it manet illa suóque est robore tuta Yea the truth is that in all his contra-remonstrance he hath not so much as once touch'd or mentioned that which is the maine base or foundation of the principall conclusion managed in the said explanation and principally opposed by him The conclusion is not that which Mr. Prynne extracts from the passage which he cites viz. that there is not onely an improbabilitie but an absolute impossibilitie that the Parliament should have any power at all to enact Lawes and Statutes in matters of Religion Church-Government c. Here are words which the explanation knows not either in the letter or in the spirit of them as by name these not onely an improbabilitie an absolute impossibilitie no power at all c. but the maine conclusion driven at in the passage is this That the generalitie or promiscuous multitude of the Land have no authoritie or power from Christ to nominate or appoint who shall be the men that shall order the affaires of Christs Kingdome or institute the Government of his Churches The maine foundation or base of reason upon which this pillar of Truth stands in the said passage is this Because such an Authoritie or power viz. to nominate or appoint who shall order the affaires of Christs Kingdome or institute the Government of his Churches is greater then ever Christ himself had I meane as man or Mediator at least then ever he exercised which in the sequell I explaine and prove Now then this is that which I say that Mr. Prynne in all his long reasoning against the Conclusion doth not so much as with the least of his fingers once touch this ground or answer any thing at all to it So that he hath not as yet the least colour or pretence to blame me if I be not proselyted to his opinion by what he hath written here And because I desire faire and Christian quarter with him for the future I doe here promise and protest in the sight of God Angels and men that if Mr. Prynne shall at any time God preserving my life and understanding plainly and substantially demonstrate and prove either that the generalitie and promiscuous multitude of the Land have a power greater then ever the Lord Christ himself had or exercised as man or Mediator or that a power to nominate and appoint whom they please amongst men to order the affaires of Christs Kingdome and institute the Government of his Churches is not a power greater then ever Christ had or at least exercised as either man or Mediator I promise and protest againe as before that if Mr. Prynne or any other shall at any time clearly and fairly prove either the one or the other of these propositions I will pull downe with both mine hands what I have built up but with one and without any more adoe joyn judgement with Mr. Prynne touching the power of the Civill Magistrate in matters of Religion but till this be done I neither see how Mr. Prynne can with a good conscience persist in his nor require me to desist from mine It is true the Lord Christ as Mediator had all power given him both in Heaven and on Earth Mat. 28. 18. That is had the whole and intire execution and transaction of all his Fathers will pleasure and decrees concerning all men Angels creatures whatsoever put into his hand power And hath given him Authoritie TO EXECUTE judgement also because he is the son of man Joh. 5. 27. But he had no power or Authoritie given him to carry any thing contrary to his Fathers will or pleasure Verily verily I say unto you saith he himself Joh. 5. 19. the Son can doe nothing of himself but what he seeth the Father doe c. So againe ver 30. I can doe nothing of my self Now then as Christ had no commission or power to give eternall life but onely to those whom God the Father had given unto him Joh. 17. 2. Joh. 6. 37. So neither had he any Authoritative power to institute or appoint any other government for his Churches then that which he had seene with or received from his Father much lesse had he any such power to delegate unto men least of all unto unsanctified persons and rude multitudes a power of nominating whom they should please to appoint and settle what government they pleas'd in the Churches of God Certain I am that Christ never exercised any such power as this and therefore have little hope of being convinc'd that he ever had it Howsoever let us give the Gentleman an unpartial hearing in what he pleads against the aforesaid Conclusion 1. To his former marginall Annotation p. 22. honoured with a Preface made of this word Note wherein he tells me that Gamaliel and my Text never taught me any such Anti-Parliamentary Doctrine I answer that neither doth Gamaliel nor my Text nor any other Text whatsoever in Scripture teach Mr. Prynne to call the truth an Anti-Parliament try Doctrine But both Gamaliel and my Text teach me to take heed of fighting against God and I being taught so high and necessary a point of wisdome conceiv'd it my dutie not to eat such a morsell alone but to spread a Table for as many of my Brethren as pleas'd to come and sit downe and eat of the same with me I and my Doctrine are onely in such a sense Anti-Parliamentarian as Christ and his were Anti-Cesarean 2. To a second Marginall note in the same page ordered likewise to be noted as the former I answer likewise that though people have authoritie to nominate such who by the rule of Gods Word may limit some particulars though not by their own bare Authoritie without or against the Word yet it followeth not either 1. That they have authoritie to nominate such who shall have authoritie by vertue of such nomination to peremptorize by fire or sword all their limitations whatsoever as agreeable to Gods Word Nor 2. Doth it follow that in case their limitations should be agreeable to the word of God therefore they have power to compell any man by externall violence to subject either in their judgement or practise unto them especially whilst they are not able to convince them of any such excellency in these limitations as an agreeablenesse to the word of God It is no waies agreeable
to be printed in a differing character as if they were mine and onely transcribed by him citing in his margin pag. 25. 26. as their quarter in my discourse the truth is that this is no fair play for there is no such line or juncto of wordseither in either of those pages or elsewhere in those Sermons It never came into my thoughts to think nor surely ever issued out of my pen that every private man hath or ought to have a power to constitute his own Minister And besides he puts a more quaint and subtlle distinction upon me then I am capable of I cannot conceive that any private man hath a power to elect or constitute his Minister except he ought to have it That power which God hath been pleased to conferre upon any man he both ought to have and hath though the exercise and benefit of that power may be injuriously denied unto him or withheld from him 2. Whereas he further presumes that I will grant that private men have power likewise to set up Independent Congregations which have Authoritie to prescribe such Covenants Laws and rules of Government Discipline worship as themselves think most agreeable to the Word and hereupon demands if then they may derive such an Ecclesiasticall Authority to Independent Ministers and Churches why not as well to Parliaments and Synods likewise by the self-same reason I answer 1. That he is mistaken in his good opinion of my bountie For I do not grant either first that all or every sort of private men have power to set up any Independent Congregation Or 2. That any private men have power to set up any such congregation consisting of other men then themselves but onely to agree together amongst themselves to become such a congregation Or 3. That any Congregation whatsoever hath any Authoritie to practise much lesse to prescribe either such Covenants Laws Rules of Government or worship as themselves onely think most agreeable to the Word of God but onely to practise those amongst themselves which they know to be agreeable to the Word of God without prescribing either these or any other unto others God gives no person or Congregation any Authoritie or power so much as to practise themselves what they simple think most agreeable to his Word but onely that which REALLY IS agreeable unto his Word much lesse doth he give either the one or the other any Authority to prescribe their thinkings in this kind unto others But 2. Whereas he demands Why private men may not derive an Ecclesiasticall Authority unto Parliaments and Synods as well as unto Independent Ministers and Churches the account is readie 1. No private men whatsoever can in any sense neither in whole nor in part derive any Ecclesiasticall Authority either unto any Minister but onely him unto whom they commit the charge of their â—ouls nor unto any Congregation but onely that whereof they are members themselves Therefore it no wayes follows Private men have power to derive Ecclesiasticall Authoritie to those Congregations whereof they are the respective members themselves therefore they have the like power to derive the same Authority to Parliaments and Synods whereof they are no members Take a parallel The Assistants in the Company of Chirurgians have an interest in the Government and carriage of the affairs of their own Companie therefore they have the same interest in the Government of the affairs of the Company of Merchant-taylors 2. A person qualified for the office and work of the Ministery according to the word of God is a subject capable of Ecclesiasticall Authority and may accordingly by persons Authorized by the word of God thereunto be lawfully invested with that power But we have no rule or direction from the word of God either 1. to judge whether or when either Parliaments or Synods are subjects capable of Ecclesiasticall Authoritie nor 2. is there any rule or warrant to be found there for the Authorizing of any sort or rank of men actually to conferre such an Authority or power in case they should be found subjects capable of it Therefore Mr. Prynnes arguing in this place is of no better form or strength then this Private men may do that which Gods Word authorizeth them to do therefore they may do that also which Gods Word doth not authorize them unto But 3. And lastly The main foundation and ground-work upon which he builds the fabrique of his reasoning here is an utter mistake For I neither grant nor think that private men either when by consent they first congregate themselves and chuse a Minister or Pastor over them much lesse when they joyn themselves to a Congregation already gathered and form'd do derive any Ecclesiasticall Authority unto it but that a company of persons fearing God and consenting together to become a Church-body or holy Congregation have an Authoritie which you may call Ecclesiastique if you please but I shall not commend the terme unto you in this case nor would I willingly call it an authoritie but rather a right or priviledge derived unto them not by themselves but from God First to chuse unto themselves a Pastor and other officers as opportunity shall be such as are recommended in the Scriptures as meet for such places and then by and together with these to administer and order their Church-affaires in all the concernments thereof according to the word of God in the name and authoritie of our Lord Jesus Christ whose properly all Ecclesiasticall authoritie is To his fift argument we answer 1. By a demurre whether God doth oft-times makes use of unsanctified persons and the rude multitude which I doe not under-value because I refuse to entitle them to a power in Church-matters greater then ever the Apostles had to advance his glory propagate his Gospel promote his worship vindicate his truth edifie his Church A Judas a Balaam a Saul a Gamaliel a persecuting High Priest were not the rude multitude unsanctified persons it is like they were at least most of them But God did not oft-times make use either of Balam or Saul or Gamaliel or the persecuting High Priest either to propagate his Gospel promote his worship edifie his Church c. but the Devill oft-times made use of them to the contrary viz. to hinder his Gospel to pollute his worship to persecute his Church c. And for the vulgar multitude which he commends as none-such for forwardnesse to beleeve follow professe Christ embrace the Gospel though he confesseth that many of them did it for sinister ends I answer 1. That this multitude was but one swallow not a multitude of swallows and therefore not sufficient to make his spring of Gods oft-times using the rude multitude to doe such and such things 2. They that beleeve follow professe Christ embrace the Gospel out of sinister ends when they decline and fall back as all sinister-ended Professors are like to doe first or last and as this vulgar multitude generally did are like more
detriment in his occasions then it is for men to know how to chuse men tolerably qualified for Parliamentary imployment especially if one part of this imployment consists in making Lawes Statutes in matters of Religion worship c. agreeable to the word of God The reason of the difference is plaine Recourse is made to Lawyers and so to Physicians Architects respectively onely for one kind of help or imployment and that such which is proper to their profession and wherein their abilitie and sufficiencie is or very possibly may be sufficiently knowne But Parliamentarie service or imployment consisting according to Mr. Prynnes notion as well in making Church-lawes in matters of Religion worship agreeable to the word of God as in framing Laws politique to accommodate the civill affaires of the Common-wealth which are imployments of a very differing nature hardly incident unto and very rarely found in one and the same person it must needs be conceived to be a matter of very great difficultie and requiring a very choyce and excellent spirit of discerning to make a commendable yea or a competent choice of men for that investiture and trust Yea himself 〈◊〉 acknowledgeth little lesse then an utter inconsistencie of respective abilities in one and the same person for these so different imployments For here he requires both Politicians and Statesmen os fit to be consulted with a suit a Church-Government to the Civill State and likewise an Assembly of Divines to square it by and to the word But in as much as whatsoever an Assembly of Divines shall determine in or about Churh-Government or other matters of Religion cannot passe into an Act Law or Statute but by the superveening of Parliamentarie interest upon their determinations and there beeing every whit as great if not farre greater abilities in Divinitie and knowledge of the Scriptures requisite to enable men rightly to discerne and judge whether a Church-Government or other Decision in matter of Religion be agreeable to the word of God as there are to discourse and make out that in either kind which is agreeable thereunto yea and further it being no waies either Christian or reasonable that a Parliament should passe that into an Act Law or Statute as agreeable to the word of God and obliege an whole Kingdome under mulcts and penalties to submit unto it accordingly which themselves are not able to discerne whether it be indeed agreeable unto the word of God or no these three things I say duly considered evident it is that it is a matter almost of infinite difficultie and therefore not so obvious to unsanctified persons and rude multitudes as Mr. Prynnes would carrie it to discerne or make choice of persons of a due temper and composition for Parliamentarie operations Mr. Prynnes supposition being admitted viz. that making Lawes in matters of Religion as well as in civill affaires is a part of these operations To set then his comparison upright wee must state it thus Suppose Mr. Prynne were of none of the three Professions he speaks of neither Lawyer nor Physician nor Architect but stood in need of the help of them all having 1. a suite at Law of very great concernment to him 2. a dangerous distemper or disease upon his body 3. an house to build for his necessary accommodation and in this posture of necessities were necessitated or limited to make choyce of three men but all of one and the same profession either all Lawyers or all Physicians or all Architects to minister unto him in all his respective concernments and necessities I beleeve that under such a constellation of circumstances and occasions as these though he be a man of farre greater judgement and reason then the generalitie of men are yet he would not find it so easie a matter to satisfie himself in the choyce of his men within the compasse of any one of the three professions This is the true state and case of the difficultie of Parliamentarie Elections upon Mr. Prynnes supposition of Parliamentarie interest and power 4. Suppose yet further that unsanctified persons and rude multitudes had skill enough to elect the most eminent and ablest men for Parliamentary service yet who knoweth not but that there is somewhat yea much more then knowledge of what is a mans dutie required to make him willing to doe it To him that knoweth to doe good and doth it not to him it is sin saith James Jam. 4. 17. It is no wayes reasonable to think that unsanctified persons and men addicted to sinfull lusts and pleasures should willingly and by the ducture of their own inclinations put a power of making Lawes into the hands of such men who they know are professed enemies to those lawlesse waies of theirs and therefore are like being interessed in such a power to make Lawes for the restraint and punishment of them That God when he pleaseth may by an extraordinarie hand of Providence over-rule the natures and dispositions of men in this kind and serve unfanctified persons in their Parliamentary Elections as he did the Syrian host of old which he led blindfold into the midst of Samaria when they thought they had been going to Dothan is not denied yea it is acknowledged that in grace and mercy to this Nation he hath stretched out that very hand of Providence we speake of in the choyce of many members of the Honourable Assembly of Parliament whose perseverance in a faithfull discharge of their imployment declares that their Election was more from God then from men Therefore that one word of Mr. Prynnes which follows p. 24. viz. That the choyce which your vilest and most unworthy of men have made this Parliament may for ever refute this childish reason the corner stone of your Independent fabrique fastened together with Independent crotchets unable to abide the Test this one word I say is no word either of reason or of truth An happy election made by men over-acted by God in the action doth no more prove either a proportionablenesse of wisdome or a sutablenesse of affection in such persons to make such a choyce then that praise which God hath ordained and which he accordingly draws out of the mouths of babes and sucklings proves these babes and sucklings to be indued with a naturall strength and abilitie of yeelding such praise unto God or then the service which the Ravens did the Prophet in bringing unto him bread and flesh duly morning and evening proves that they had a principle of reason and understanding to know and to consider the necessities of godly and faithfull men or that such men ought to renounce their estates and callings and to depend upon Ravens for their sustenance And besides how doth the election of so many members of this Parliament who stand by their trust with faithfulnesse and honour more refute then the election of so many unworthy ones who have not onely turned their back but head also upon both confirm my reason not
the Parliament though I dare not gain-say it fearing lest Mr. Pryn claiming as it should seem a priviledge to make the privileges of Parliament what he pleaseth should make it a presumptuous and wilfull undermining of the undoubted priviledges of Parliament by the very roots yet I must ingenuously professe that it is a notion which I know not how to procure quarter for in my brain as yet What I may doe hereafter when the Gentleman shall bestow more cost and pains upon it to reconcile the disproportion which for the present it carrieth to my understanding I will not predetermine But none of all the Authors or Books that ever yet I was debtor unto for any grain or scruple of that knowledge wherewith God hath pleased to recompence my labour in studying ever licensed mee to call any Assembly the Representative Church of any State or Kingdome wherein there is not so much as any one Church-officer to be found Whereas he affirmes it in the same page a truth so cleare that no rationall man good Christian or subject can deny it that the whole representative Church and State of England in Parliament have sufficient authoritie by Gods law to over-rule and bind all or any particular members or congregations of it as well as the major part of an Independent Congregation power to over-vote and rule the lesser part and to order yea bind any of their particular members though for the danger aforesaid it be not perhaps so safe for me simply to call the latter assertion touching the comparison between the two powers either an error or a mistake yet that this assertion should be a truth so royally qualified that no reasonable man or good Christian can deny it seemes not so reasonable The reason is because in an Independent congregation all the members by free and voluntary consent have submitted themselves to the regulation and order of the whole body or which is the same of the major part of it and therefore this body having received a lawfull power in a lawfull way for the reiglement of her respective members may lawfully exercise it according to the tenor and true intent of the delegation of it whereas there are many thousands in the Church and State of England who by Mr. Prynnes owne acknowledgement p. 24. line 3. 4. have not given any such consent for their regulation in matters Ecclesiasticall and which concerne Religion unto the Parliament yea and there are many thousands more besides those which hee there describes and intends who will not owne any such Resignation Therefore the difference between the one case and the other is very broad and no lesse considerable so that a reasonable man may without any dispraise to his Reason and a good Christian without any prejudice to the goodnesse of his Christianity demurre a while before judgement upon the case Besides there is no question or ground of doubting but that a good Christian may lawfully and with a good conscience submit himself unto a godly able and faithfull Pastor together with his people whom he hath good ground to judge godly and faithfull also as well for their edification in their most holy faith as for the inspection regulation of themselves in matters of life and conversation But whether it be lawfull to submit to any man or any rank or association of men especially of men of whose sufficiencie and faith fulnesse in the things of God and Jesus Christ we have either but a very slender or no testimony at all yea whose persons are altogether unknowne to us in matters which concerne the worship and service of God cannot but be a question and that of great moment to all considering and conscientious men who are not already satisfied in the negative part of it The Apostles doe not onely permit but give it in charge to Christians in Church-fellowship to submit themselves one to another in the feare of God Eph. 5. 21. i. to be yeelding and tractable easie to be intreated one by another And submit your selves every man unto another 1 Pet. 5. 5. If one man ought to submit to another man in this kind much more ought one to submit unto many and most of all to the whole society of Saints whereof he is a member But as touching submission unto any man or men whatsoever in matters which concerne the worship and service of God the Scripture is so farre from imposing this upon any man that it imposeth the contrary and that with great Emphasis and weight Call no man your father upon earth is our Saviours owne charge Matth. 23. 9. for one is your Father which is in heaven And in the preceding verse Be ye not called Rabbi for one is your master or Doctor even Christ and ye all are brethren And the Apostle 1 Cor. 7. 23. Yee are bought with a price be ye not the servants of men He speakes of a servility or subjection in judgement and conscience to the decisions or determinations of men in matters of conscience and Religion And whosoever doth submit or subject himselfe in things of this nature unto any man or men whosoever that is resigne up his judgement and conscience to be ordered obliged and tied by the meere authority or magistery of men in such things Call's men Fathers on earth makes himselfe a servant unto men and consequently makes himself a transgressor both of our Saviours injunction and charge in this behalf and of his Apostles also Thirdly he that submits himselfe to a Pastor and Congregation of Saints for such regulation as hath been mentioned is presumed to know and understand before-hand of what spirit both the one and the other are how matters appertaining to the worship and service of God are carried managed and ordered amongst them so that he may with the full concurrence and consent of his judgement and conscience submit himselfe unto them as touching communion with them in their practice in this kind but what any Synod Assembly or Court of men will determine or enjoyn in such things cannot be known before-hand by any man and consequently no man can with a good conscience submit himselfe unto them as touching any of their determinations or decisions untill he first understands what they are and whether according to the light and judicature of his conscience agreeable to the word of God Fourthly in case a Pastor and Congregation shall afterwards so farre alter and vary from that posture either in Doctrine or practice wherein they stood when a man first joyned and submitted himselfe unto them that hee cannot with the peace of his conscience walk any longer with them hee may with leave obtained or otherwise if by request it cannot be obtained withdraw himselfe without any inconvenience from their communion and incorporate himselfe elswhere as he judgeth best This may bee done with farre lesse trouble and inconvenience then ordinarily a man upon a dislike of his Parochial Pastor can remove out of one Parish
time proceed from Kings Magistrates whether Heathen or Christian unto which we cannot submit with a good conscience and for conscience sake but are necessitated even for conscience sake to decline them Onely we question whether Kings Magistrates Heathen or Christian have any power from God to punish good and godly men for declining such commands of theirs for conscience sake which they cannot for conscience sake submit unto 6. For those Princes and Magistrates who were long sence predicted to become nursing Fathers to the Church under the Gospel we wish them all Christian care tendernesse and compassion according to the nature and tenor of this so honourable a service and imployment so long sence by prophecie from God assign'd and recommended unto them But whether it be proper for those that desire to be look'd upon as nursing Fathers of the Church to sacrifice the peace and comfort of one part of the children of the Church upon the service of the wills or humors of another part of them I leave to nursing mothers who have twins of their womb hanging upon their breasts to judge and determine 7. And lastly for the good and wholesome Laws enacted by Cyrus Artaxerxes Darius c. for the worship of God c. We gave I trust a good and wholesome answer in the former part of this discourse published some weeks since Wee freely grant a power yea and more then a power a necessitie by way of dutie in Kings Magistrates to further the honour and service of the true God and his people in the worship of him It is onely a power of discouraging his people of interrupting and hindring their peace and comfort in the worship and service of the true God which we conceive incompetible unto Magistracie as any gift or donation setled upon it by God His third Argument or ground of jealousie against the way of his great Contestation is that it appears to be a way that will breed infinite confusions disorders by confounding the bounds of Parishes c. We answer 1. That Physicians seldome complain of sickly times nor Millars of those that bring griest to their mills The old saying was De morbo gaudet medicus It is strange to me that Mr. Prynne should thus prevaricate with his profession But it may be this argument is figurative and cat-antiphrasticall And so by confusions disorders c. he means peace unitie and concord amongst men whereby confusions disorders and consequently suits at Law will be prevented and cut off And the truth is that such peace unitie and concord amongst men whereby such unchristian mischiefes and miseries as these may in ordinary way of providence be prevented is the genuine and naturall product of this way and a fruit that is daily gathered from it by many 2. Whereas he chargeth this way with confounding the bounds of Parishes and in his margent cites p. 38. to 40. of my two Sermons for the justification of this charge the truth is that both charge and justification may go together and serve in the Forlorne hope having neither reason nor truth to second either For 1. the way he speaks of intermeddles not with offers no violence to the bounds of Parishes onely it thinks it equall that the bounds of Parishes should not offer violence or be houses of bondage unto the consciences of the Saints nor be as barres of iron against them in the way of their comfort and spirituall edification 2. Whereas I am sub-pena'd for a witnesse against this way touching the crime objected I meane of trespassing upon the bounds of Parishes May answer is that the printed copie of those Sermons of mine which I have hath ne gry quidem either in pag. 38 39 or 40. of any such matter nor hath it any where else any page passage sentence line word syllable letter point or tittle amounting to the import of such a charge 3. Whereas his pen spits this black reproach in the face of Independencie that it is a Government inconsistent with Royaltie and the civill Government My answer is that look in what degree this accusation and charge would be weighty and sore in case it could be prov'd in the same degree it is light and contemptible through a deficiencie of all and all manner of proofe or colour of proofe whatsoever The Roman Empire lost nothing of her beautie strength or interest by the Churches of Christ practising this Government in severall places within the bounds and territories of it If it sustained losse in any of these by occasion of this Government it was not because of their toleration of but their opposition to it 4. Nor is this charge that it giveth way to every sect to choose Ministers erect Churches of their owne without controule of any better commendation in point of truth then the former For it giveth way to no sect whatsoever without controule it reproves oppugns censures and condemns sects and sectaries of all sorts so far is it from granting allowance to them to choose Ministers and erect Churches without controule Indeed it knows no authoritie or commission which it hath from God to countenance the controulement of the civill sword against such persons who in the simplicitie not convicted obstinacy of their hearts are misled in matters of Religion it trembles to make misprisions in things of that difficult high and rare attainment as the acknowledgement of supernaturall truth is in matters of Religion and the things of God to be matter either of confiscation of goods imprisonment banishment death unto men though it denies not a power of restraint from opposing the received faith with publick disturbance and offence 5. Whereas in Answer to somewhat argued by me to make the innocency of Independencie touching matter of Divisions as cleare as the noone day he repones thus That those who in point of conscience cannot communicate or agree together in one Church will never questiolesse accord well together in one familie bed Parish Kingdome as experience manifests I answer 1. That experience manifests the quite contrary How many Ministers of the Presbyterian judgement are there in the Kingdome yea in and about the Citie that hold communion in all deare and Christian respects and terms of love and friendship with many called Independent and these againe with them The difference in judgement between them in point of Church-Government in some rather increasing then diminishing or dissolving their familiaritie and acquaintance How oft doth Mr. Edwards himself in his Antapologie acknowledge his Apologists to be dearly and deeply interessed in the love and care of many of his judgement Yea he commends his own love and affections towards them once and twice and the third time also How many families are there in and about the Citie wherein the respective members injoy themselves together with much Christian sweetnesse and peace notwithstanding relations to severall Pastors Churches among them I had it from a person worthy credit in a greater matter
to the word of God that men should be punish'd either in their bodies or estates for not siding with the truth in difficult and hard Questions as all such may well be presum'd to be wherein sober and conscientious persons cannot be satisfied The word of God doth not permit two persons or parties of a dissenting judgement about an hard case or question to judge or think hardly one of another much lesse doth it permit them to punish or lay violent hands one upon another Nor 3. And lastly doth it follow that though Princes Magistrates Ministers Parliaments Synods should be nominated or elected by the lawfull power of the people and withall should have Authoritie by the word of God to limit any particulars thereof that therefore this Authoritie should be deriv'd upon them by means of such nomination Every private man hath sufficient Authoritie though perhaps he may want abilitie of gifts to limit any particular in the word of God according to the word of God this being nothing else but a true and right apprehending or understanding of this word Which apprehension or understanding of his though he hath no power by way of office to impart unto others yet hath he a right yea and an obligation upon him by way of dutie so to impart it when God affords season and opportunitie time and place for it So that this marginall note is not accessory to any harme done to the said Conclusion 3. To a third marginall note subservient in the same page to the two former I answer 1. That though it should be granted that every Magistrate Parliament and Synod have power to declare and injoyn what is necessarie to be beleeved practised by or according to Gods Word yet this is nothing more then what every Pastor or Minister over a congregation hath power to do yea and ought to do from day to day in the course of his ministery But 2. If by declaring and enjoyning he means any such declaring and enjoyning whereby Magistrate Parliament or Synod shall be enabled temporally to punish those who shall either not beleeve or not practise I answer that this is but petitio Principii a supposall of that which is the main Question and therefore waits still upon Mr. Prynne's pen for a more sufficient proof the old writ of Ipse dixit being out of date long since We have reconciled the margent and nothing doubt but that the page will be of as easie accommodation Therefore 4. Whereas he puts himself to the needlesse labour of repeating the charge formerly charged upon my Doctrine a an underminer of the Authority of Parliaments c. I shall take admonition by it and save a needlesse labour of repeating what hath been already said in way of answer to it Onely I shall adde that this Repetition of Mr. Prinnes judgement and charge of my fore-mentioned Doctrine compared with my own thoughts and apprehensions of it puts me in mind of a saying of a great Casuist Eadem possunt alicui videri manifestè vera quae alteri videntur manifestè falsa The same things may seem to one manifestly true which to another seem as manifestly false That Doctrine which Mr. Prynne arraigns as an underminer of Parliamentary Authority I conceive to be a Doctrine of the richest establishment and confirmation to it of which apprehension of mine I have given a sufficient account elsewhere 5. Whereas he further chargeth the said Doctrine with contrarietie to my late Covenant and Protestation and that in the most transcendent manner that ever any have hitherto attempted in print and refers himself to all wise men to judge whether this be not so I referre both himself and all his wise men to judge whether I have not given a sufficient answer hereunto in my Innocencies Triumph p. 4 5 6 c. yet lest sentence should be given against me herein I here adde that certainly no clause in that Covenant and Protestation intended that the Subscribers unto it should be bound in conscience by vertue of such subscription to make Gods of men or which interpreted amounts to as much to give any man Dominion over his Faith If this be but granted my Doctrine is no Delinquent at all against the Covenant and Protestation 6. Whereas he promises or threatens which he pleaseth short answer to my extravagant discourse and first alledgeth that the objection might be made against the generall Assemblies Parliaments Kings of the Israelites who were chosen by the people yet they made Laws and Statutes concerning Religion and Gods worship with his approbation I answer 1. That the Generall Assemblies and Kings of Israel were not chosen by the people at least by any formall free choice of one out of many as our Parliaments and Assemblies are For first the Generall Assemblies consisted of the generalitie of the people and so were not chosen at all for where all are admitted there is no choice Or secondly if by the Generall Assemblies of Israel he means the seventy persons spoken of Numb 11. 16. 24. c. it is evident from the context first that they were not chosen by the people into that Assembly but by Moses and that by expresse order and command from God They might possibly be chosen by the people into the places of Elders and Governours over their respective Families and Tribes but they had no right or calling by vertue of such eldership to gather themselves into an Assembly of seventy upon any such terms or for any such ends as the fore-mentioned Assembly were drawn together by God Secondly evident like-wise it is from ver 25. that these seventy had a speciall anointing of the Holy Ghost from God and prophecied Therefore there is a great difference between this Assembly and generall Assemblies now 2. Neither were the Kings of Israel chosen by the people but by God except we will call a subsequent consent and that by way of duty and homage to the choice made by God a choice When thou shalt come unto the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee and shalt possesse it and dwell therein if thou say I will set a King over me like as all the Nations that are about me Then shalt thou make him King over thee whom the LORD THY GOD SHALL CHVSE c. Deut. 17. 14 15. Saul their first King was chosen and appointed by God 1 Sam. 9. 15 16. So David their second King 1 Sam. 16. 1. yea his seed likewise was chosen and appointed by God to succeed in this Kingdom and to reign after him for ever 2 Sam. 7. 12. 16. yea and notwithstanding this generall choice and designation Solomon their King is particularly said to have been chosen by God 1 Chron. 29. 1. So for the Kings that reigned over the ten Tribes after the rent of the ten Tribes from the other two Jeroboam the first King was chosen by God 1 King 11. 31. yea and his seed also conditionally ver 38.
But Nadah his son proving wicked brake the condition and cut off the intailment Their third King Baasha was not chosen by the people neither but was fore-chosent by God 1 King 14. 14. to do that execution upon the house of Ieroboam which is recorded 1 King 15. 27 28 29. Elab their next King succeeded his Father by right of inheritance and is no where said to have been chosen by the people into the throne Zimri the next was a bloody Traytor and usurper The two next following him Omri and Tibni were set up indeed by the people but not in any way of a lawfull and regular election but by way of tumult and faction and the one partie prevailing the King followed by the other was soon suppressed Ahab the son of the prevailing King without any election by the people except a connivence or permission be called an election by the ascent of descent or succession got up into the throne After the same manner also Ahaziah his son came to be King This Ahaziath dying without children his Brother Jeboram another son of Ahath and next to him by birth as it seems by the priviledge of his birth came peaceably to the Kingdom without any election by the people any where heard of 2 King 1. 17. The next King Jehu by name was chosen by God himself after a speciall manner 2 King 9. 1 2. and his children after him to the fourth generation 2 King 10. 30. to sit upon the throne of Israel Shallum who succeeded Ahab and his race their date of Reiglement being expired came to the Kingdome by blood and is indeed said to have smote Zachariah the last of Ahabs race before the people and so to have reigned in his stead 2 King 15. 10. but by what maxime enle ley the murthering of a King before the people will be interpreted a being chosen King by the people I understand not Menahem his successor after a moneths reigne found the same way to the Kingdome I mean by blood which his Predecessour had chalked out Pekahiah his son and successour had no other choice we read of but onely by that his relation Nor had Pekah who succeeded him in the throne any other choice into this dignitie but onely by the murther he committed upon his Master except it be said that he was chosen by those 52. men who assisted him in that bloody execution 2. King 15. 25. Nor had Hoshea the last of these Kings any other choice entrance or accesse we read of unto the Throne but the same with his Predecessor a bloodie conspiracie against his Lord and Master So that Mr. Prynne is absolutely mistaken in the very bottome and groundwork of his first allegation affirming the Generall Assemblies Parliament Kings of the Israelites to have been chosen by the people 3. And lastly neither did they make Laws and Statutes concerning Religion and Gods worship with his approbation except his approbation went along with the transgression of his Law For by this they stood expresly charg'd not to adde unto the word which he commanded them nor yet to diminish ought from it Deut. 4. 2. And againe Deut. 12. 32. And what addition could be made with an higher hand or with more provocation in the sight of God unto this word of his then an enacting Laws and Statutes concerning Religion and his worship whereunto men should stand bound in conscience to submit as well as unto the Lawes of God themselves declared in this word Or if it be said that men were not bound in conscience to submit to such Laws and Statutes as well as unto the Laws of God then were they not to be punished for non-submission to them unlesse we will say that men ought to be punished for somewhat else besides sin To his second reason against the Doctrine and Conclusion aforesaid I answer that as God himself used the ministery assistance of Cyrus Artaxerxes Darius for the building of his Temple and advancement of his worship for which they made Decrees Statutes so I conceive he doth expect and require the ministery assistance of Christian Magistrates Parliaments and Laws and Statutes to be made by them for the promotion of his worship But as Cyrus Artaxerxes Darius made no Decree Statute to discourage any of the true worshipers of God nor yet to compell them to any kinde of worship contrary in their judgements to the word of God or in case they did make or should have made any such Decree Statute they should have exceeded the limits of their just power and not have done justifiably in the sight of God So neither can Christian Princes Magistrates commend themselves unto God in any such exercise of their power whereby they shall constraine or enforce the conscientious faithfull servants of God to any kind of worship contrary to their conscience or by the performance whereof condemning it in their judgements for unlawfull they should pollute and condemne themselves in the sight of God To his third Reason we answer likewise that for most Christian Kings and Magistrates in the world whether claiming to be hereditarie or whether eligible by the people as the Members of Parliament are we CAN without either disloyaltie or absurdity deny them any such Authority in matters of Religion and Church-Government whereby they should be enabled to destroy crush or undo such persons as live godlily and peaceably under their jurisdiction and that for none other reason or offence on their parts but either for weaknesse in judgement and understanding by reason whereof they cannot see the agreeablenesse of those things that are imposed on them to the Word of God in case they be indeed so qualified or else for the goodnesse of their conscience which is unwilling to ship-wrack it s own peace by going contrarie to its own light and dictate We freely allow to all Christian Kings and Magistrates in the world any Authoritie whatsoever in matters of Religion Church-Government or in what other causes or cases soever it can be desired either by them or for them which will not claim or challenge a right of power to punishmen for not being as wise as learned as farre insighted into matters of Religion as themselves or for such matters of fact which are occasioned directly and meerly by such defects as these We allow a power to all Magistrates to punish the wickednesse of mens wils when this discovers it self by any sutable action in what matters or cases soever but the weaknesse of mens judgements we conceive cals rather for means of instruction then matter of punishment from the Magistrates hand We cannot judge that the mistaking of a mans way in a dark controversie deserves a prison or any other stroke with the civill sword To his fourth we answer 1. That whereas he affirms that I do not onely grant but argue that every private man hath yea ought to have power to elect and constitute his own Minister causing these words
to hinder and set back the Gospel by their declining then ever they propagated or promoted it by their profesion But 2. Whereas he inferres that therefore they may well have power to chuse such persons who shall and may make Lawes to promote the Gospel and Government of the Church of Christ I answer 1. That Gods power to make use of unsanctified persons or a rude multitude to promote the affaires of his Gospel Worship Churches c. is no argument to prove that therefore men may commit the care and trust of these affaires to such persons or multitudes or interesse them in any such power which it is ten to one but they will use rather in a destructive then promotive way thereunto Gods power to powre out a Spirit of prophecie upon a person altogether ignorant of the Scriptures and so to powre out a Spirit of grace and holinesse upon a gracelesse and prophane person is no ground or warrant for a Christian Congregation to chuse either such an ignorant or prophane person for their Minister or Pastor 2. Neither is Gods will act or example in this kind as viz. when to shew the soveraigntie of his power over and above the powers of darknesse and the God of this world he makes use of Satan to give testimony unto his Son Jesus Christ as he did Mar. 1. 24. Luk. 4. 34. and so to exercise the patience of Job by afflicting him as he did Job 1. Such acts I say or dispensations of God as these are no grounds for the justification of such men who shall make use of the Devill to preach the Gospel or to afflict the Saints for the exercise or improvement of their patience Therefore nothing that ever God hath done how oft soever he hath done it either by unsanctified persons or by rude multitudes for the propagation of his Gospel the edification of his Church c. doth any waies countenance or warrant men to invest either the one or the other with such a power whereby they may endamage and make havock and spoyle both of the one and the other The reason is plaine because the evill Spirit that said Jesus I know and Paul I know yet said to the Exorcists but who are yee So the powers of sin and wickednesse in men which will tremble at the voyce of God and forget their natures and motions at his command will laugh all the conjurements and charmings of men in the face to scorne and will act their own parts and drive on their own way with what fury and violence they please notwithstanding all charges intercessions and obtestations of men to the contrary Therefore no power can with reason equitie or conscience be put into the hand of such persons I meane persons unsanctified and rude multitudes or nominating whom they please I meane from amongst persons eligible enough by the Lawes of the Land either for Parliamentary or Synodicall interest to umpire in the affaires of the Gospel and to make what Lawes they please for the government of the Church of Christ If it be yet objected and said But why may not unsanctified persons and rude multitudes nominate and chuse such who by vertue of such nomination may have power to make Lawes in matters of Religion Worship Government of the Church c. though not according as they please yet according to the word of God and such as are agreeable thereunto What inconvenience is there in this I answer 1. By way of concession that the grant of a power in persons so nominated and chosen to make Lawes onely of incouragement and protection to the servants of God in matters of Religion and Church-Government or to order some particularities in either onely upon incouragements to those that shall obey without penall enactions against those that cannot obey may possibly not tend or sort to much inconvenience Nor let any man think that outward mulcts and penalties are essentiall unto Laws whether in matters of Religion worship or in any other cases Threatning of bodily punishment saith learned Mr. Rutherford one of the Commissioners for the Kingdome of Scotland is not essentiall to Lawes in the generall because some Lawes are seconded onely with rewards Yet this inconvenience it's like would attend even such a power were it granted Those Lawes which should be made in matters of Religion worship c. by men in authoritie would be of like consequence amongst the generalitie of men with the traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees by which they made the Commandements of God of none effect I meane they would so interesse themselves in the hearts and affections of the common sort of men that they would soone place more in the observation of them then in keeping the Commandements of God An experiment of which inconvenience we had in folio in the Ceremoniall and superstitious injunctions of the late Prelaticall power when men thought better of themselves for standing up at the Creed joyning in Gloria Patri secundum usum Sarum bowing at the Name Jesus cringing before an Altar c. then they did of others for hearing the Word of God preached with reverence and attention or for walking in a conscientious conformitie unto it But 2. If a further power shall be granted unto men so chosen I meane by unsanctified persons and rude multitudes as Mr. Prynne calleth them as viz. a power of enacting Lawes and Statutes in matters of Religion worship c. under what mulcts and penalties they please who shall judge whether these Lawes and Statutes be agreeable to the word of God or no If they themselves the Law-makers shall be Judges miserable is the condition of the servants of God under them like to be because it is not to be expected but that they will avouch whatever Lawes or Statutes they shall make in this kind to be agreeable to the word of God The Popish Parliaments during the reigne of Antichristianisme in the Land did no lesse If the people from whom obedience and subjection to such Lawes is expected shall be authorized to judge whether these Lawes be agreeable to the word of God or no which of necessitie must be granted otherwise obedience unto them can never be yeelded with a good conscience this will reflect prejudice and disparagement upon the wisdome and prudence of the Law-givers and consequently enervate their Authoritie especially when any of these Judges shall give sentence in oppositum and determine a nullitie in such Lawes for want of due correspondence with the word of God The nomothetique power or Authoritie wherever it resides will never consult honour interest confirmation or strength to it self by making such Lawes which in their very nature frame and constitution are matters of dispute and which must passe and abide the tests of the judgements and consciences of the best and wisest of those that are to yeeld subjection unto them and that with so much hazard of censure and contradiction as Lawes made in matters
of Religion worship and Church-Government alwayes have been and ever will be exposed unto The point of agreeablenesse to the word of God in Lawes and Statutes about matters of Religion will be a farre longer suite and Question between Legislators in that kind and conscientious subjects then ever any Chancerie suite was or is like to be 3. To me it is a question whether in this assertion at least understood according to the proper importance of the words Men have power to make Laws and Statutes in matters of Religion worship c. agreeable to the word of God there be not contradictio in adjuncto as Logicians speak It is a very hard matter for me to conceive how any thing should be agreeable to the Word of God at least in matters of Religion worship c. but onely that which for the spirit matter and substance of it is the word of God it self There is no great agreeablenesse between that which is necessarie and that which is unnecessarie between that which is indulgent and favourable to the Saints and others in point of libertie and that which inthrals and brings them into bondage between that which is of divine inspiration and that which is of humane Now certain it is that whatsoever is imposed upon men by the word of God is necessarie and of divine inspiration and whatsoever the word of God doth not impose upon men it doth it in a way of a gracious libertie and indulgence unto men And as certain it is that whatsoever shall be imposed upon the Saints or others by men especially in matters of Religion worship c. which for the matter and substance of it is not the very word of God it self is first unnecessarie for otherwise we must make the Word of God imperfect and defective even in matters of necessitie which is Popery in the highest and secondly it is but of humane inspiration except we hold Enthusiasme and the revelations eccentrick to the Scriptures are yet authentique and of propheticall authority thirdly and lastly it is an abridgement of the libertie a cancelling of that indulgence wherewith God in his Word hath gratified the world Therefore whatsoever shall be imposed by men upon men in matter of Religion worship c. under a pretence of an agreeablenesse to the word of God in case it be not in the sense declared the very word of God it self it can have no other agree thlenesse with this word then Pelop's shoulder which if Poets feign not was made of yvorie had with the other limbs and members of his body which were all living and sound flesh Yea and whether any Law or Statute can in any sense be said to be agreeable to the word of God which shall make the Saints servants and bondmen where God in his Word hath either made them or left them free I refer to further and more mature consideration But 4. And lastly Suppose it were granted as a thing convenient that some should be intrusted or invested with a power of making Laws and Statutes in matters of Religion worship c. provided they be agreeable to the Word of God yet in asmuch as the making of such Laws and Statutes upon such terms necessarily requireth the most exact and profound knowledge and understanding of the Scriptures I cannot conceive that unsanctified persons or rude multitudes should be Authorized by God or by any principle of sound reason to have the nomination or election of those men but rather another Generation who may in reason be conceived to have a more excellent spirit of discerning of such abilities in men then they When men stand in need of the help and advise of a Physician Lawyer or Divine they do not addresse themselves to a company of children playing together in the market place as our Saviour speaks to nominate or vote amongst them what person in any of these professions they should imploy commit their concernments unto No more did God ever issue any commission out of Heaven to unsanctified persons rude multitudes men ignorant of God and of the Scriptures to nominate or chuse for him who or what men he should imploy to make Lawes and Statutes for his Saints and Churches in matters of Religion and which concerne his worship A man of ordinary discretion and that knows any thing of the nature or disposition of the Fox will never chuse a Fox to be his Caterer as our English Proverb hath it To his sixt and last Argument I answer and end 1. That it is not alwayes found that those who have no skill at all in Law Physicke or Architecture have yet judgement and reason enough to make choyce of the best Lawyers Physicians Architects when they need their help If this were true these professions would prove malignant unto and eat up the far greatest part of their own children and professors there would be very few in any of them that ever should have imployments For who is there that would set a bungler on work that hath judgement and reason enough to chuse a Master-workman Especially considering what our Engish Proverb saith The best is best cheape There is no man will ride upon an ox that may have a well-manag'd and mettal'd gelding to carrie him But 2. Suppose it should be granted as universally true that men who have no skill at all in the said professions yet had judgement and reason enough to make choyce of the best in every of them respectively when they stood in need of their help yet this supposition must be made withall that these best Practitioners which according to the other supposition will be chosen have given a sufficient account proofe and that to publick satisfaction of their respective abilities in their severall professions Otherwise how shall they who have no skill in their professions come to know or understand so much as by conjecture who are the best in them This being so Mr. Prynnes comparison or parallel halts right-downe Because many of those who are by the Laws of the Land eligible into places of Parliamentarie trust and power yea haply many of those who are of the best and richest accomplishment for the discharge of that part of this trust which Mr. Prynne will needs suppose belongeth to them I meane in making Lawes in matters of Religion worship Church-Government c. agreeable to the word of God never have given any publick account or proofe nor perhaps ever had opportunitie to doe it of those abilities which God hath given them in that kinde And if so how should the rude multitudes or the generalitie of the people ever come to know or understand who are the best or fittest men to be chosen into those great places of trust and power 3. When men stand in need of the help either of a Lawyer Physician or Architect it is a far easier matter to know how to chuse a man in any of these professions without running the hazard of much
to mention so many elections as have been made both in Queen Maries dayes and many a time before these of such members who made many a Law as agreeable to the Word of God as harp is to harrow Which further shews of how slender esteeme in point of truth that assertion of his pa. 23. is where he saith that those that are unjit or unable to be Members of Parliament themselves yet have had wisdom enough in all ages and especially at this present to elect the must eminent and ablest men for such a service So that if my pen were not more bashfull then Mr. Prynnes it would say that the Reason Defendant is by many degrees more childish then the Reason Plaintiffe and that this Presbyterian engins wherewith he makes account to batter my Independent Fabrick are made of Independent metall able to do no execution at all There is not one brick or tyle in all my Independent Fabrick as yet bruised crack'd or shaken by all the hot and loud play of Mr. Prynnes artillery against it But 5. Whereas in further prosecution of this last reason he argues thus If the common people which neither are nor can be Parliaments Emperours Kings Judges Magistrates Ministers have yet a lawfull power to make others such by their bare election to give them such Authority and power as themselves never actually were nor can be possessors of then why by the self same reason may they not likewise delegate a lawful Ecclesiasticall Legislative Authoritie in Church affairs to their elected Parliamentary and Synodicall members which was never actually in themselves as well as Mr. Goodwin delegate the power of determining who should be fit persons to receive the Sacrament and to become members of his Independent Congregation to eight select Substitutes which was never actually vested in himself nor transferible thus to others by any Law of God or man In answer passing by the Grammatical illegality of the period 1. That Mr. Goodwin never delegated the power he speaks of of determining who c. to any Substitutes but this delegation was made respectively by those who had power yea haply and dutie too by the Law of God and power sufficient by the Law of man to referre themselves for matter of examination and triall touching their fitnesse for the Sacrament unto persons of competent abilities for such a Christian service Mr. Prynnes pen is I think the most unhappie and un-successefull in matters of impeachment and charge that ever contested against the misdemeanors of men it seldome or never lays the indictment right Here he chargeth me with delegating such and such a power to eight Substitutes a little after that I have wilfully yea and presumptuously undermined the undoubted priviledges of Parliament by the very roots a little before that I scandalously terme the Commonaltie of the Land the vilest and most unworthy of men not long before this viz. pa. 21. that I preach but seldome to my Parishioners that I receive their tithes that I gather an Independent Congregation to my self that I prescribe a Covenant unto them before they be admitted members of it that I preach to these alone neglecting my Parishioners c. in all which suggestions and charges there is but one and the same proportion of love and truth 2. Whereas he supposeth that the common people by their bare election give such an Authority and power to Parliaments Emperours Kings c. as themselves never actually were nor can be possessours of he doth not I conceive speak like a man of his profession certain I am that he doth not speak the truth no nor yet the thoughts of men of learning and judgement in the point For 1. to reason the case a little in point of truth if the common people were not actually possessed of that Authority and power which by their election they give to Parliaments Emperours Kings c. I demand how or after what manner they were possessed of it For in saying they were not ACTVALLY possessed of it he supposes and grants that they were some wayes or other possessed of it No man excludes one speciall modification from a thing but for the gratification of another Now then if the common people were not ACTVALLY possessed of that Authority and power which by their election they give unto Parliaments Emperours c. they were onely potentially possessed of it For actually and potentially are opposita yea and of that kind which they call opposita immediata So that whatsoever is had or possessed by any and not actually must of necessiue be had or possessed potentially and potentially onely at least in respect of an actuall possession Now then I reason first thus If the people have that power though not actually yet potentially which by their election they give to Parliaments Emperours Kings c. then are they capable of it even actually also which yet Mr. Prynne here plainly denies in these words Nor can be possessours of The consequence is undeniable For whatsoever any entire subject hath or is potentiâ there is no impossibilitie but that it may have or be actu or actually So that Mr. Prynne is here upon the matter in an absolute contradiction For he supposeth that the people may have that Authoritie or power potentially which yet he saith is unpossible they should ever have actually Again I would willingly for the bettering of mine understanding know and learn how any person or other Agent whatsoever can actually conferre that upon or communicate that unto another which it hath onely potentially it self Water whilest it is actually cold and onely potentially hot cannot heat that which is put into it Nor can a man that is actually ignorant of such or such a truth and potentially onely knowing it actually communicate or impart the knowledge thereof unto another by vertue of that potentiall knowledge which he hath No more can a people that is onely potentially possessed of any Authority or power actually give or conferre it upon any whether Parliaments Emperours Kings c. The ground of all such consequences as these is that common principle or maxime in reason Modus operandi sequitur modum essendi Things that have but a weak or imperfect being themselves cannot give strength or perfection of being unto others But had Mr. Prynne said the body of a Nation have that authority really vertually eminently and collectively which they cannot have formally distributively and exemptively I should have had the lesse to say unto him For the judgement of men learned in matters of this concernment he that shall please to read the Discourse of Christophorus Besoldus intituled Dissertatio Politico-Juridica de Majestate in genere c. shall find a little Jurie of Lawyers joyning with him in the verdict of his judgement upon the case the tenor whereof is that there is not onely an Authoritie or power but that which is somewhat more a majestie also in the people which is coevall with
the Republique or common-wealth it self and which continues as long as the body thereof remains yea and stands firm under all vacancies of Personall Empire and all alterations and changes of Government in which respect he saith it may be called the foundation or ground-work of the Common-wealth This majestie in the people he cals Reall that in the King or chief Ruler Personall this he saith still fals and expires with the death of the person invesred with it and returns to the people or commonwealth Yea and adds that the people in making or setting up a King over them transferre onely a power of administring not of constituting the common-wealth With more to like effect Therefore the opinion of this man with his Associates clearly is that the people have Really or actually that Authority or power which by their election they transfer upon or derive unto their Rulers and Governours 3. And lastly for this whereas he affirmeth that such a power as he supposeth to have been delegated by me to eight Substitutes is not transcrible to others by any Law of God or man and yet demands Why the common people may not as well delegate a Lawfull Ecclesiasticall legislative Authoritie in Church-affaires unto their elected Parliamentarie and Synodall members as I delegate such a power I answer and confesse that they may every whit as well and no whit better delegate such an Authoritie to such their members as I delegate such a power to my Substitutes 6. Whereas in prosecution of his last argument he further argues and interrogates thus Why may not a man bring an Ecclesiasticall or spirituall extraction out of a secular roote as well as a Regall Magisteriall Parliamentall Ministeriall extraction out of a meere popular or servile roote or the best strong waters out of the vilest lees the richest mineralls out of the coursest earth the most Orient pearles out of the basest Oysters I answer 1. That no Regall Magisteriall Parliamentall Ministeriall extraction can be made out of a meere servile roote A people meerely servile can have no libertie or power to appoint or chuse unto themselves either Kings Masters Parliaments or Ministers Therefore Mr. Prynnes Question very truly imports that the one extraction may â—s well be made as the other but it no waies proves a possibilitie of either 2. There is a plain reason why and how a Regall Magisteriall Parliamentall extraction may be made out of a popular roote but there is a loud reclamation in reason and Religion both against a possibilitie of making a spirituall extraction out of a secular roote Regall Magisteriall Parliamentall extractions are in their respective natures and tendencies means proportioned to the civill and temporall ends or good of the people and God having endued men I meane the common sort or generalitie of men the people with wisdome and understanding to accommodate and provide for themselves in such things as these hath given them power accordingly to make use of such principles and endowments in a regular way for the accomplishment and obtaining of such ends Now civill Rule and Government being a naturall proper and direct means whereby a good societie or communitie of men may best obtaine a civill or politique good viz. a safe just and peaceable living and conversing together in the world God therefore hath given them a libertie and power to contrive and cast themselves into what forme of Government they should judge most conducible to such ends Upon which indulgence or grant from Heaven they have a lawfull power by consent among themselves to elect and chuse whom they please to governe them and that upon such terms as they conceive most agreeable to those ends And yet even in this Government it self one communitie or corporation of men have no right or lawfulnesse of power to chuse or appoint either Government or Governors over another least of all hath any communitie consisting of men altogether uncivill ignorant and unexperienced in matters of Government any lawfulnesse of power to appoint either Rule or Rulers over other Societies whose members generally are of a better accomplishment for civilitie parts of wisdome learning and understanding But all societies of men since the dissolution of the Judaicall politie are left free by God and nature to set over themselves what Government and Governors they shall judge of best accommodation for their temporall safety and peace But now in spirituall things and matters of Religion the case is farre otherwise differing as much from the former as the Heavens from the Earth God hath not endued the generalitie of men with spirituall wisdome and understanding nor with the knowledge of those things which are of a supernaturall concernment unto them and consequently hath not invested them with any power of casting themselves into what forme of Government they please in respect of these nor of chusing whom they please to rule over them no nor yet of appointing upon what terms they will be governed in these The naturall man saith the Scripture perceiveth not or receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishnesse unto him neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned 1 Cor. 2. 14. Now certaine it is that the farre greater part of men in every State Politique or Kingdome are naturall men and consequently perceive not the things of the Spirit of God Many are called saith our Saviour but few chosen And 2. as certaine it is that God doth not interesse or invest any man or men with a power of interposing in such things which are not of their cognizance and whereof they have no knowledge or perceivance Much lesse 3. hath he given a power to naturall men who perceive not the things of the Spirit of God to appoint Rulers and Governors in these over men that are spirituall and which doe perceive them This were to give a power unto the blind to lead not the blind onely but even the seeing also Nay 4. and lastly God hath not given unto spirituall men themselves any power to nominate or chuse men to make any new Lawes or Articles in matters of Religion Worship Church-Government c. but onely to administer execute and teach those which are already ordained and established by God himself as hath been prov'd already Thus then we see there is reason enough and to spare why such a spirituall extraction as the two Brethren speak of cannot be made out of a secular roote though a Regall Magisteriall Parliamentall extraction may well be made out of a popular roote But 3. Whereas Mr. Prynne supposeth that a Ministeriall Extraction as he calleth it is or may be made out of a meere popular or servile roote this supposition is not made without opposition to the truth For no people or men meerly such that is as they are simply people or men have any power delegated unto them by God or by Christ to set a Minister or Pastor over them neither can they
as meerly such by any call election or ordination whatsoever conferre a Pastorall office or dignitie upon any man The reason is because it is an essentiall propertie or part of the Pastorall office to feed rule and governe a flock of Christs sheep I meane a Societie or company of such persons who in the judgement of charitie are to be reputed such and to administer the seales of the Covenant ordinarily unto them c. Now no company of men meerly and simply as men have any power to invest any man with any authoritative power to performe either of those administrations One company or societie of men however qualified cannot derive any Authoritative power upon any man to performe the office of a Pastor to another societie of men Therefore except that company of men which calls and chuseth a person into the place or office of a Pastor as it supposeth be such a flock of Christ as was expressed their act in so calling and chusing is but a nullitie the person called hath indeed and in truth no Pastorall investiture upon him by vertue of such a call As for example Suppose a company of ignorantly prophane and desperately debauch'd men should make choyce of a man of worth to be a Pastor unto them the man thus called and chosen hath no authoritie or power hereby either to feed or govern any flock of Christ no not so much as any flock of Christ in appearance or to administer the seales of the Covenant unto any and consequently is made no Pastor thereby Or if Mr. Prynnes meaning be that a root meerly popular that is any company of people whatsoever may lawfully call or chuse a man to preach the Gospel unto them and in this sense be said to make a Minister I answer that the man thus called is no more a Minister then he was before nor hath he any more Authoritative power to preach the Gospel unto them by vertue of such a call then he had without it onely he hath thereby a greater opportunitie and a more speciall invitation from the providence of God to preach the Gospel unto those who so call him then unto others Therefore in this case there is no ministeriall extraction made out of a meere popular roote 4. Whereas he speaks parables and further demands Why not a spirituall extraction out of a secular roote as well as the best strong waters out of the vilest lees the richest mineralls out of the coursest earth the most Orient pearles out of the basest Oysters I answer 1. That I know not by what rule of true speaking Mr. Prynne either calls those the basest oysters out of which the most orient pearls or that the coursest earth out of which the richest mineralls or those the vilest lees out of which the best strong waters are extracted That expression of the Poet Veios habitante Camillo 〈◊〉 Roma fuit I never yet heard censured by any Noble births and inhabitants ennoble Cities and Countries And thou Bethlehem in the land of Juda art not the least among the Princes of Juda for out of thee shall come a Governor that shall rule my people Israel By the consent of this principle which hath testimony both from God and men those are not the basest but the noblest oysters which give birth and breeding to the most ortent pearles nor that the coursest but the finest and best earth that yeelds the richest mineralls nor those the vilest but the most generous and best deserving lees which gratifie their Distillator with the best strong waters But 2. Not to impose any tax upon an acyrologie there is this plain reason why no spirituall extraction out of a secular roote though all those other extractions may be made out of those respective roots appropriated unto them because a man may very possibly find a thing where it is but it is unpossible for him to find it where it is not A man may very easily and very lawfully extract five shillings out of his purse that hath five shillings or more in it but he that shall undertake to make an extraction of five shillings out of a purse that is emptie must Acheronta movere make himself a debtor to the black art The pearle is in the oyster and the minerall in the Earth and the strong water in the lee and therefore it is no great matter for art and nature joyning together partly by allurement and invitation partly by a stronger and more forcible hand to sequester all these from their native and proper elements and to draw them out of their dark and secret habitations Nor is it any waies unlawfull thus to practise upon them because God hath not serv'd any prohibition upon men to inhibite any such extractions or separations either in a naturall or artificiall way But there is no such spirituall extraction as the two Brethren speak of in their secular roote there is no Ecclesiasticall Legislative power in matters of Religion worship and Church-Government neither formally nor eminently in unsanctified persons rude multitudes men ignorant of God c. therefore no such power can by any extraction whatsoever proceed or be drawne out of these There is indeed a lawfulnesse of power in them if they had a principle to incline them to the due exercise of it to assist the servants of God against violence and wrong to incourage and countenance them in well-doing to admonish and reprove them for doing any such evill which falls within the compasse of their cogniance yea there is a lawfulnesse of power in them if they have not given it out of their hands already and invested others with it to make Lawes for the regulation of the Saints themselves in all their civill affaires and to restraine them by mulcts and penalties from all such courses actions and practices which are properly and in their natures disserviceable unto the common peace and weal-publick And all such power as this they may lawfully devise and demise unto persons meet for the manage and exercise of it because in this case they doe but give of their own yea they give it in a regular and rationall way upon which termes God hath given unto every man a liberty or power to doe with his owne what he pleaseth But the persons we now speak of never had a power of regulating the Saints in their Religious or Spirituall affairs or of compelling them under temporal mulcts and penalties to order themselves in the worship and service of God as they pleased or to preach and teach onely such points and doctrines amongst them as they should think well of Therefore how they should convey or make over any such power as this unto others by a Title or Conveyance good in Law I desire Mr. Prynne to consider If his desire had been to have paralleld the Brethrens spirituall extraction out of a Secular root with naturall comparisons or similitudes he should have done it not with those which hee hath