Master Bellamy That Court which hath a power to make Lawes and rules for all the Courts and people in the Kingdome to be steered and acted by and whereunto the King is bound bâ— oath to consent must needs have the supreame power of the Kingdome residing in it But the House of Commons in Parliament assembled which say you as the Kingdome Representative even as the Common-councell is the City Representative upon your supposition hath such a power c. Therefore the House of Commons hath it seemes even by your owne arguing the Supreame power of the Kingdome lesiding in it One touch moâ—e Mr Bellamy from your Plea for the Comonalty of Lâ—nâ—on 〈…〉 Mr. Bâ—llamy you grant this arguing from your for 〈…〉 of the Kingdome and City Representative to 〈…〉 or â—râ—â—se I may reason upon you and that thus Sir He thâ—â— shâ—ll aâ—â—â— be that power unto the City Representatiâ—e in refâ—ence to the government of the City which he shall deny unto the Kingdome Representative in râ—ference to the Government of thâ— Kingdom doth quoad hoc preferre the City Representative in its power before the Kingdome representative in its power But Mr. Bellamy ascribes that power unto the City Representative in reference unto the government of the City which he denyes unto the Kingdome Representative in reference unto the government of the Kingdome Thereforâ—â— Bâ—llamy doth quoad hoc preferre the City Representative above the Kingdome Representative The Major proposition I think will not bee denyed for the proofe or the minor I must doe two things First shew what power Mr. Bellamy ascâ—ibes unto the City Representative in reference to the government of the City Secondly shew what he denies the Kingdome Representative iâ— reference to the government of the Kingdome Forth first Mr. Bellamy ascribes so much power unto the City Representative in reference unto the government of the City that the Lord Majâ—r and Aldermen must have no negative vote as Lord Major and Aldermen out must be considered as so many distinct persons together with the Commons concluding by the major vote of the whole Conjunctim and as unto such conclusions regarding the Lord Major and Aldermen but as so many distinct persons aâ— is the whole drift of the 15. and 16. pages of the said Plea for the Comonalty of Londâ—â— Secondly let us consider what he deniâ—â— the Kingdome Representative in reference unto the government of England and that is in termâ—â—is that the Suprâ—am◠〈◊〉 of this Kingdome doth not râ—side there neither wiâ—â— he 〈◊〉 the King Lords Commons in Parliament to be conâ—â—â—erâ—â— peâ—sonaliter and as so many distinct persons but 〈…〉 so then this 〈…〉 case The City is governâ—â—joy Common-councell consisting of Lord Major 〈…〉 Commons of the City but not three distinct Estaâ—e but as 〈…〉 men amounting to such a number the may 〈◊〉 concluding but the Kingdoâ— is governâ—â— by a Parliament 〈◊〉 sâ—tting of King Lords Commons not consider 〈…〉 persâ—ns who have their equall vot◠〈…〉 Mr. Bellamy and so the two Estates being the major part of Estate must conclude the third Now I appeale to all whether according to Mr. Bellamyes Logick the Kingdom representative which he himself saith is the House of Commons be not quâ—ad hoc 〈…〉 in its power in 〈◊〉 government of the Kingdome then the City 〈◊〉 in â—â—ference for the government of the City Well Mr. Bellamy 〈◊〉 the case be so I only quere for my further satisfaction and untiâ—â— you have answered these queâ—es do not insult over 〈…〉 nor charge him with destroying the power of two â—statâ—s oâ— the Kingdome when he did 〈◊〉 dâ—sire you â—o 〈◊〉 him the tâ—uth as concerning the residence of the suprâ—ame power of the Kingdome until I heare your answers I shall never in 〈◊〉 of your 〈…〉 to vnâ—ouâ—d Riddles and by 〈…〉 your selfe thâ— questions will be no 〈◊〉 unto you neither are they intended so to 〈◊〉 Take heed you doe not make a Nâ—t of your answers Here you slide â—rom the Replyer and deale with others as Lieu. Col. John Lilburn and anon after with Mr. 〈◊〉 Burroughs and the truth is I wonder how you can write so irreverently of him as you doe you call him one of the most moderate opposers of Presbyteriall Government and as if your bitternesse and unworthinesse of Spirit did resolve to be master you checke your soft saying with if any of them may truly be so called well Sir what say you of Mr. Burroughs thus in his book which he writ against Doctor Ferne page 125. of the first impression of his book called the glorious name of the Lord of Hosts but in the last impression the 9. page It seemes by the way that Doctor Ferne and you are agreed and now what was written against Doctor Ferne proves written against you is this becomming a christian thus in your Spirituall warfare at the command of the world to face to the right to the left to the front to the reare halfe face face about and as you were but what saith Mr. Burroughs in the place before quoted thus But if the Parliament should degenerate and grow tyrannicall what meanes of safety could there be for a State Answ I confesse the condition of such a State would be very dangerous and like to come to confusion particular men could not helpe themselves and the whole State ought to suffer much before it should helpe it selfe by any wayes of resisting but if you can suppose a Parliament so farre to degenerate as all to conspire together with the King to destroy the Kingdome and to possesse the lands and riches of the Kingdome themselves in this case whether a law of nature would not allow of standing up to defend our selves yea to reassume the power given to them to discharge them of that power they had and to set up some other I leave to the light of nature to judge You will say This cannot be because the higher Powers must not be resisted by any Answ This is not properly to resist the power but to discharge the power and to set the power else-where hitherto Mr. Burroughs and is this all you can say of Mr. Burroughs It is well malice it selfe can pick no worse from his writings and truly Sir you might have spared your marginall hand and finger except you intended to direct the Reader to observe your ignorance and envy in collecting his saying for first Mr. Burroughs did assert nothing but left it to any mans determination whether the Law of Nature would not allow of such and such a course in such and such a case and it seemes you the State case resolver generall undertakes the decision Once more Mr. Bellamyâ— give us but this foundation to build upon as none but malignant-royalists will deny it viz. salus populi suprema lex and then I thinke you will hardly like a wise and solid man speak otherwise to that point the rest of your proceedings in your Vindication is
though through the blessing of God they have been crusht in most places and the truth is the printing of twenty thousands of the said Remonstrances as intelligence informes the dispersions thereof both in all the parts of this Kingdome and beyond the seas with the strong and powerfull enforcements thereof by the Ministers upon the people after Londons example to doe the like as time and opportunitie may evidence to the World did argue the desires of many the prime â—romoters of the city Remonstrance to be no lesse then to make divisions and to disturbe the peace and quiet of the Church and State Mr. Bellamy You proceed to make good your charge against two Libells viz. the one a Moderate reply to the City Remonstrance the other the Interest of England maintained you encounter chiefly with the first and I shall second the same and leave the other having never perul'd it First you acknowledge the City Representative is made up and chosen of the City Collective and I likewise acknowledge the Kingdome Representative to be made up and chosen by the Kingdome Collective neither is there any thing charged as criminall by the Reply in this constitution you grant this likewise a truth that it is more common then commendable for men trusted with other mens goods to behave themselves to their trustees hurt But you demand what doth this reflect upon the City Representative or its Remonstrance Since you will not see you shall see except with your tonguâ— you will deny what you see with your eyes a common thing in these back sliding times you tell us against whom this charge is made good and you tell us the truth viz. against such who being trusted with the soules of a people by their common consent and choice to be their Pastor Whether Presbyterian or Independent Parrochiall or Congregationall have in stead of feeding them with the sinceere Milke of the word that they may grow thereby fed them with the foolish fancies of their owne brain viâ— that such a kind of government so and so disposed and digegested into a Parochiall Classicall Provinciall and Synodiall constitution with power and authority here and there placed to compell and enforce men to submit thereunto though against their owne judgements and consciences and that the Magistrate ought to exact uniformitie from all that live under them is jure Divino a meere fancie of their owne braine and in stead of keeping them together in the bond of unity have broken them to pieces with rents and divisions viz. representing those who agree not with them to be Heretiques Sectaries Schismatiques and what not and thus reâ—ding a sunder a people of as sweet nature heavenly spirit and loving conversation in former times as the world hath known It is confest Mr. Bellamy that these these are the men which behave themselves to their trustees hurt you proceed to answer what the Replyer tells you viz. that there are 4. cases wherein the City collective is not bound to the City Representative but ought in duty to dissent from it if not to protest against it Moderate Reply First when the City representative acts in a direct evident obvious maner against the expresse wil word of God 2. When in the like plaine and direct manner it acts against the apparent welfare peace and good of the Kingdome 3. When it acts after the same manner against the proper end of its owne being the Cities welfare 4. When it acts beyond the bounds limits and extents appointed to the endangering of all its immunities and freedomes This you affirme is the replyers plat-forme or ground-work of his after building and scoffingly say it is sutable thereunto though you except not against any one of these propositions but say you he dares not affirme that the City representative doth act in any one of the foure cases it may be it was more his modesty to forbeare then his impudency in case he had charged the City by that Remonstrance to act in them all and had it been Mr. John Bellamies act as it was the act of the City I would have undertooke and would have looked upon it as no great task to have proved him acting against every one of them and for that time made a separation a schisme from the society of Anonimusses You paralel the City Representatives the City Collective unto the Kingdome Representative and the Kingdome Collective I freely grant that the paralel holds good I mean as touching the constitution of the Kingdome Representative and City representative viz. by the collective body of the one and of the other though not in respect of their power and am not a fraid to grant it likewise that if the Kingdome representative should act in a direct plaine and obvious manner against the expresse will and word of God against the apparent welfare peace and good of the Kingdomâ— c. That the Kingdome collective ought in duty not to consent unto it As for the instance which you bring from Mr. Burtons affirmation from his 51 52. pages of his book called the vindication of those Churches commonly called Independents to make good your logick had not your silver shrines of the Presbyterian Temple dazled your eyes and dâ—mmed your sight you might have found assertions in abundance from the Presbyterian Authors which differ no more from what Mr. Burton saith in that point then twelve pence differs from a shilling please you Sir examine Mr. George Gillespy in the 13. Page of his book cal'd Nihil respondes written against Mr. Coleman and Mr. Samuel Rutherford in the last page of the Epistle to the Reader in his book called the divine right of Chuâ—ch gâ—vernment and Excommunication And see if he saith not as much and more of Mr. Burtons sence in that point then Mr. 〈◊〉 himsâ—â—fe hath said I for beare to set downe the words as supposing you are not without the books I referre you to and if thâ—se two will not suffice as occasion is offer'd you shall have 20 and 〈◊〉 of the Presbyterian party that shal be produced to have saiâ— the same but to the poynt in hand suppose the representative Kingdome that I may give you an instance in a case as you have given to the replyer should make a law for the hanging burning or banishing all such as shall deny the Popes supremacy the reall presence in the Sacrament of the Lords supper or other grosse popish absurdityes suppose they should establish Mahomatisme c. Is not the Kingdom collective bound in conscience and duty to dissent from it if not to protest against it suppose they should command us to abjure Iesus Christ and turne Iewes ought not you â— every man in the Kingdome to dissent from it if not to protest against it nay suppose that they should set up a government in a direct and knowne opposition to the word of God and the example of the best reformed Churches ought we not to
a Remonstrance of the Lords and Commons in Parliament of the second of Novem. 1642. to these words wee did and doe say that the Soveraigne power doth reside in the King and both Houses of Parliament Here you thinke you have given the Replyer a faire fall and therefore insult over him ever and anon upon this point but forbeare Mr. Bellamy turpe insultare jacenti for however you thinke you have given the Replyer such a full and ample satisfaction yet all the world cannot so easily be satisfied and therefore though for my part I was never yet a Common Counsell man and therefore cannot so possitively speak to such deep states businesse yet since you are so willing to satisfy the ignorant what I shall say herein shall be by way of quere First then I quere Mr. Bellamy What meane you by three Estates I have heard the tearme once by the Bishops friends when they were a falling and they concluded that there were three Estates in this Kingdome viz. the King and the Lords temporall were the first Lords spirituall were the second the Commons the third Estate and they gave this reason that the King and the Lords were but one Estate because the King made the Lords but though the King conferr'd the Honours and profits of Bishops yet did not make the Bishops themselves they as Bishops were jure divino you determine it otherwise I pray you Sir a little more satisfaction to that point 2. What meane you by fundamentall you say the King Lords and Commons are the three Estates of which the fundamentall constitution of this Kingdome is made up are there three fundamentals I confesse I have not understood so much I ever thought there had been but one and that I took to be the Commons and these reasons made me think so First because I ever thought that the Commons made the King and the King made the Lords and sâ— the Commons were the Prime foundation Secondly I ever took this for a truth likewise that both the King and the Lords were advanced for the benefit quiet and welfare of the Commons and not the Commons made for them and if I was deceived the Common maxim of saluâ—-populi suprema lex deceived me You see my doubt you see my reason a little satisfaction here also Mr. Bellamy Thirdly I quere whether upon this supposition that the Kingdome is made up three Estates as you say and so wee must not understand the Parliament consisting of so many men but of three Estates distinct quatenus estates apart by themselves those are your termes I quere I say whether that the King and suppose the major part of the Lords which make up two Estates doe agree together suppose it be to set up absolute prerogative and the Commons will not assent here unto whether the major part of Estates must not conclude the minor the two conclude the third and so as for the Commons will they nil they slaves they must be and slaves they shall be your judgment here likewise good Mr. Bellamy Fourthly Whereas you say the King is present in Parliament viz. in his Kingly power though absent in person I quere whether he is present with them as a distinct Estate I know Sir hee is present in power in all his inferiour Courts of justice as well as in the parliament but is he present as a distinct estate If so if one distinct Estate may be present in power quatenus an estate and absent in person may not a second Estate be so present though absent in body yea a third Estate so present and yet absent in body and so we shall have three Estates in Parliament and not a man amongst them this is a Riddle indeed Mr. Bellamy I pray you unfould this also Fiftly The Replyer observing the Remonstrants ascribing only a share of the Supreame power to the House of Commons proposeth this question to them will not you allow so much power to the Kingdome Representative in reference to the Kingdom as to the representative City in reference to London see page 13. And so do I quere wil not the CoÌ„mons of London yeild of ascribe unto the Commons of England as the CoÌ„mons of London to thmselves wil ascribe Therefore Mr. Bellamy to make your absurdities the better appeare in your paralel between the Kingdome Representative and the City Representative I come upon you thus First you grant that the Common-councell is the City Representative page the 2. of your Vindication Secondly You grant that the House of Commons in Parliament assembled is the Kingdome Representative in the same page Thirdly You say the City Representative hath power to make a Law for those whom it Represents in the 12. page of your plea for the Cmonalty of London Fourthly I desire to know whether you allow the Kingdome Representative the same power to make a Law for those whom it represents if so then let us examine your argument May wee reason after your Logick Mr. Bellamy see your Sillogisme Sir in the said book called a plea for the Comonalty of London I think I hit the right name of it though the Replyer was mistaken before in the 12. page it stands thus That Court which hath a power to make a Law and by that Law to conferre a power upon the Lord Major and Aldermen which as Lord Major and Aldermen theâ— had not beforâ— must needs be quoad hoc unto the making of a Law above the Lord Major and Aldermen But this Court of Common-councell hath c. Ergo this Court of Common-councell so farre as to the making of a Law must needs be above the Lord Major and Aldermen Now Sir I quere only for I cannot presume such skill may not I reason thus after your patterne That Court that hath a power to make a law and by that law to conferre that power upon the King and Lords which as king and Lords they had not before must needs be quoad hoc unto the making of a Law above the King and Lords But the House of Commons which say you is the Kingdome Râ—presentative even as the Common-councell is the City Representative upon your supposition hath a power c. Ergo the House of Commons so farre as unto the making of a Law c. May I not reason thus likewise according to your example from your owne supposition still that Court which hath a power to make or repeale what lawes they judge meet for the Common wealth and whereunto the King himselfe is bound by his oath and therefore ought in duty to consent must needs be quoad hoc unto the making and repealing Lawes the Supream Court But the House of Commons which say you is the Kingdome Representative as the Common-conncell is of the City of London upon your supposiâ—ion hath such a power c. therefore Or may I not reason thus for I doe not conclude any thing I doe but as a Pupill to his Tuter propound queres to
dâ—ssent from it c. For this as Paul did referre the Athenians to one of their owne Poets so shall I you to your own Oracle the City Remonstrance where you do in expresse terms affirme from the botome of your heart you do seriously professe before Almighty God that you do not conceive it in the power of any humane Authority King Lords Commons together or apart in Parliament or out of ParliameÌ„t to discharge or absolve you from adhering to the Covenant see Mr. Bellamy if you your self with al your brethen Remonstrants do not make good w ht I have affirm'd viz. that when the Kngdome representative acts in a direct evident obvious manner against the expresse will word of God the Kingdome collective ought in duty to dissent from it if not to protest against it and thus Mr. Bellamy your foot is taken in that very snare which you laid for your Brethren now Sir should I as weakly sult over you as you do over the Replier I may say what I pray you will thaâ— produce think you in the common Wealthâ—er Kingdom of England and anon after if this be not then I pray tell me what is the highway to desolution of Parliaments and consequently to the distructon of the Kingdome and therefore have not I as good reason to say to you and the rest of the Remonstrants as you had to the Replyer either shew me whether the Remonstrants have not said as much as the replyer or else confesse your error and cry peccavimus but to go on the Replier saith All which granted as cannot be denied You demand what he meanes by all which granted as cannot be denied I answer for him that surely he meanes nothing but what he did affirme Viz The undoubted truth of those 4 conclusions for he had said no more although he might have made it very good that the Common couâ—cell had acted in all and every one of the 4. fore-mentioned cases I shall instance in the first of the 4 and if that be cleared that the Common-councell by their Remonstrance did act in a direct evident and obvious manner against the expresse will and word of God it will follow that they did act against the apparent welfare of City and Kingdome c. LET VS TRY THEN WORD OF GOD. CITY REMONSTRANCE Rom. 14 5. Let every man he fully perswaded in his own minds That as we are subjects of one Kingdom so all may be equally required be they perswaded in their own minds or not perswaded to yeeld obedience to the government 〈◊〉 forth or to be set forth by Parliament Rom. 14. 13. That no man put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in bâ— brothers wâ—y That all such Sectaries as conforme not to the publique Discipline established or to See stablished may be fully declared against and some effectuall course setled for proceeding against such persons 5. Petition Heare is a stuâ—blingblock viz. a menace in a Brothers way Deut 19. 15. At the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every thing be established That Quarter-man may be brought to some exemplary punishment for the affront done by him c. Though no such thing was ever proved by one witnesse or testimony that what he did was any affront done to the priviledges and government of the City Hang him hang him what hath he done Mat. 7. 12. As you would that men should doe unto you so doe unto them for this is the Law and the Prophets Page 3. We will not receive impression of any forced construction of the Covenant Compare this with page the 7th The 4. Petition That no person disaffected to Presbyterian Government may be imployed in any place of publique trust but some effectuall course setled to proceed against such persons as in the 3. Petition Presbyteriall government is not in the Covenant therefore an interpretation and this you force upon others though you will receive no forced construction of the same your selves And thus the word of God and the City Remonstrance proclaime open warre one against the other and it is no hard matter to determine which shall get the victory and take the spoyle And for the other 3. cases the Replyer hath said more then your Vindication as substantiall as it is hath yet disproved But let us heare what your Vindication further affirmeth The Replier dealeth with your Remonstrance 1. In the Narrative Part of it 2. Petitionary Part of it 3. The tendency and dangerous effects of both 1. In the Narative part of it he tels you the phrase and Dialect of it carried afull complyance with his Majesties wonted declarations against the Parliament to this you answer it complies in verbis with a declaration of the House of Commons and referres your reader to the Remonstrance of the state of the Kingdome Page 19. where there are in deed the same words with your Remonstrance the Replier tels you that the phrase stile and dialect of your Remonstrance agrees with the Kings wonted declarations against the Parliament infinuating into the people that all manner of Heresies and Sectaries c. are tolerated by the Parliament c. you doe not seem to deny such things in the Kings Declarations but you deny any such things in the City Remonstrance and for this you compare the words of the Remonstrance with the words of the Replyer and demand whether the words of the Remonstrance be the same with the words of the Replier I answer you the Replier did not say they were the same but yet they were insinuations for the boldest and brazen â—ac'd Malignant that is durst not positively affirme it in the Parliaments quarters and should we produce as a very little labour will serve to doe it several passages and expressions from the tongues pens and pulpits of severall and divers sorts of men who had no small influence in the businesse of the City Remonstrance and reference unto it since it came out it would very easily appeare what were the Insinuations of the phrase stile and dialect thereof you say the Sectaries are incouraged by their misconstruction of that expression in the late declaration concerning tender consciences but how doe you know they are incouraged Surely it must be your observation of them and their expressions as you have occasion to converse with them give us but this ground to build assertions upon and we can boldly affirme that the phrase stile and dialect of the City-Remonstrance insinuates that the Parliament under a pretence of their respects to tender consciences designes a toleration of Sectaries Heretiques c. and more that Malignants Royalists Cavaliers Ignorant Scandalous Prophane Lewd and wicked persons are more imboldned encouraged tickled and comforted by this Remonstrance then by anything that ever came out against the Parliament blessed be God the Parliament hath still respect unto tender consciences surely the Remonstrants consciences were not very tender in taking any offence thereat and if they were
of little worth granting almost what the Replyer required only I see you most extreamely shuffling in one point that were you nor so well skil'd in facings might make men wonder at you and that is where the Replyer chargeth an untruth in the Remonstrance and bring in your self to stand by him and that is about the displacing or casting out of Mr. Quarterman from his Marshall ship of London the Remonstrance saith the City did cast him out the Replyer saith the City did not cast him out but it was the Lord Major and Court of Aldermen which are not the City either collective or representative in no sense the City as having power hereunto and hee produceth you to stand by him What Master Bellamy will you not stand by him in your booke called a Plea for the Commonalty of London wee have your judgement under your hand in blacke and white and will you faulter now you are called out to make it good Had you not better been an Anonymus when you writ that booke Then Master John Bellamy what kind of man are you They that observe your sayings what they have been formerly concerning the King concerning the Lords concerning the power of the Commons whispering your thoughts in the ears of many that now speak of it what your carriages have been not very long since in the Common Councel in or among your brethren the Stationers the Committee appointed for the keeping up and maintaining the expository Lectures and what your carriages are now stand with admiration and amazement at your wheeling thus about You say little more to the Replyer only I find you once more in an extreame heat of passion against him because he told the Remonstrant s of their pressing the Parliament to a suddaine payment of their debts c. you take on thus What is it now come to that passe that when the City and Cityzens of London who have lent and expended for the use and service of the Parliament more and greater vast sums ofâ—money then ever any if not all the Cities in the Land have done nay then ever any Citie in all the world a great word Mr. Bellamy and you need to be as able and dilligent a Reader as seller of bookes to make good what you say have done at any one time to and for the service of that State in which it stood and yet must it now by an Anonymus a Libeller be taxed c. Hold Mr. Bellamy leâ—'s have lesse of your passion and more of your reason doe not you give as just an occasion for others to say if they should steer their pens by your compasse What is it now come to that passe Shall not only the City overtaken as the best of Ciâ—ies may sometimes be see forth as strange a Remonstrance reflecting prejudice upon a Parliament that have done more and suffered more for them and by whom they have received more good then by any Parliament that ever they had nay it is verily believed then ever any Parliament in the world ever did for a City in any state where it hath been but must a private person a John Bellamy an Episcopall man an Anti-Episcopall man an Anâ—baptist an Anti-Anabaptist a Separate an Anti Sepâ—rate an Episcopall man again an Anti Episcopall man a Presbyterian a halfe Presbyterian so bi-fronted as to deny Presbyterie to be Jure Divino and yâ—t helping on the pressing and inforcing of it upon his bretâ—ren that cannot submit unto it because they cannot see it Jure Devino a Sectary an Anti-Sectarie a Schismatique an Anti Schismatique a Scoffer at new lights Doctrines of a new date a some thing an any thing an every thing must such a man as this stand forth in print with his vindication of such a Remonstrance You have a few words more yet to the Replyer he tells you he knowes not your meaning by private and separate Congregations you tell him what the City meanes but truly Sir except you shew your commission to be the City Interpreter you must give men leave yet to scruple what they meant thereby he tells you again he knowâ—s not your meaning by Anâ—baptists and Brownists you tell him they mean those so called by the Parliament not by the King printed in the booke of Declarations pag 659. What ever the Replyer thinkes I believe the Remonstrantes meanes those who ever they be that are but disâ—ffected to Presbyteriall Government as will easily appeare by comparing that second Petition of the Remonstrance with the third and fourth which next followes You find fault with the Replyer because he will not joyne with you in the third Petition viz. that as wee are all subâ—â—cts of one Kingdome so all may be equally required to yeild obedience to that government set forth or to be set forth by the Parliament The Reâ—â—yer saith that such a thing is against Religion and reason you answer no the meaning of this Petition is that one Law may equalâ—y obâ—iegâ— every Subject in this Kingdome and for this you give us a cluster of proofes you bid the Replyer make it out iâ— he can â—f there was any more then one Law that did bind the Church of Israell of old in the times of any of the Pattiarchs the Judges the Kings the Governors either before in or after the Captivity oâ— since the comming of Christ or of the Apostles either in the Churches of Jerusalem Antioch Rome Corinth Galatia Ephesus Philippi Colosse Thessalouica and the seven Churches of Asia c. But what is all this to the point in hand were any of these Churches you speake of governed by a politticall government according to the prudence of the States wherein they were or according to a divine rule given unto them from God doe yon Mr. Bâ—llamy with your bretheren Remoâ—strants desire the ParliameÌ„t to settle that pâ—atâ—forme of government which Christ hath appointed or noâ—lâ— no alâ— yâ—ur great â—cap of Scripâ—ure â—nstances are not to the purpose 〈◊〉 so be you doe so Why then one turne more Mr. Bellamy and conlesse that though yesterday you did not own any plat forme of Church government to be Jurediâ—ino yet to day you have new light and if so doe no longer jeare at new â—ight 〈◊〉 so be you hold Church government to be Jure politice why then iâ—â—he Parliament judge Jus politicum to permit uâ—en differing in judgment in that point let them alone You have here done with the Replyer and â—un to his Partner and let him answer you for I neither know him nor his Book FINIS