united save that a few Anabaptists Brownists and Independents break the union as the Scripture requires a true Church to be 3. You two shew no willingness of joyning with us so far as the ordinances are carried uncorruptly for you hold that without such corruption the godly amongst us may be admitted to your Sacraments and yet you deny to do it we bless God we need not to it 4. It is a fond thing that you should urge your humane inventions as a means to carry Gods ordinances uncorruptly Sect. 6. You say Reply p. 35. 1 Cor. 1.1.2 Shews either what the members of the Church of Corinth were at first or ought to have bin or what some of them were at that time and ought to have bin viz. sanctifyed in Christ c. As Hemingius Gualter Pareus do note and say that a definition of the Church may thence be fetched Rejoyn 1. Though this text doth indeed shew what some of them were and all ought in duty to have bin yet your selves dare not assert either that it proves that the Church of Corinth was constituted wholly of vâ—sible Saints or 2. That then when Paul writ it consisted wholly if mostly of visible Saints were all the carnal Schismaticks 1 Cor. 3.1 2. The Incestuous person and they that were puffed up and gloryed 1 Cor. 5.1 2. The Contentious persons Fornicators Idolaters Drunken Communicants denyers of the Resurrection spoken of 1 Cor. and 6.10 11 15. chapters the false teachers despisers of Paul impenitent persons mentioned Epist 2. Chap. 10 11 12. visible Saints you know they were not or 3. That the Church of Corinth did or ought to have examined all she admitted whether true grace was wrought in their heart or no or 4. That the Church of Corinth had better bin no Church then not constituted of Saints or 5. That it is necessary that a Church should be constituted of visible Saints or else sin is committed I conceive none of those Divines can hence conclude any of the foresaid things by me denyed nor can they rightly gather the definition of a visible Church from these words taking Saints in the same sense that you do for then if a Church should not consist of visible Saints then it wanteth the definition and consequently the being of a Church Surely none of them did judg the way of Independency to be the Scriptural way as you would pretend to the Reader they did at least in this point Sect. 7. Reply p. 35.1 The end of Church-fellowship is not conversion but edification Ephes 4.11 12. Acts 9.31 For if it were all unconverted ones whether they make profession of faith and repentance or no may enter in Rejoyn 1. Conversion is as much the end of Church-fellowship in the time of the Gospel as in the time of the law when all the lews and their seed though not all visible Saints were within the Church conversion to the Iewish Religion was not the end of Church-membership then not conversion to Christianity now but conversion to true sanctity might then and now be one end of Church-membership 2. Your texts say that God hath given Apostles Evangelists Pastors and teachers for the edifying of the body of Christ and then were the Churches edified and walking in the fear of God were multiplied Hence you conclude not only that edification is the end which indeed the Text imports but also that conversion is not the end of Church-fellowship The weakness of which inference doth thus appear 1. The Apostle saith not that edification is the only end or that conversion is not one end of Church-membership 2. The Apostles of whom Paul speaks as wel as of Pastors are acknowledged by your selves to be sent not for edification but for conuersion though that Text by your exposition would as wel prove that their mission as the mission of Pastors was not for conversion contrary to Math. 28. 19 20. Acts 26.18 3. The word which we translate edifying is building and in common phrase signifies as wel the rearing of a new house as the repairing strengthning and amending of an old house And yet 4. there can be no repairing of an old house without some addition of new materials not can it be conceived how the Church a collective dying body can be built or preserved without conversion of souls 5. To be builded in Scripture-phrase is to have children Gen. 16.2 30.3 So Sarah and Rachel are said to be builded See Ainsworth in Gen. 16. And God made the midwives houses Exod. 1.21 that is gave them children and so Pastors are given to build the Church viz. to beget children hence they are said to plant also Jer. 1.10 Persons converted are the joy and crown of their Pastors and an argument of their mission from God 6. Acts 9.31 saith the Churches were multiplied 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which cometh of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now how I pray you could they be multiplied without conversion of some new souls 7. One of your texts sheweth the end of giving Apostles Pastors Teachers of which we have spoken before The other shews the fruit of the Churches rest and peace but neither of them doth at least not directly and plainly tell the end of Church-fellowship 3. As for the entrance of unconverted ones and persons not professing saith and repentance into the Church I answer 1. Infants do enter into the Church though they neither profess faith nor repentance and these must either be converted in the Church or not at all 2. Though conversion be one end of Church-membership yet it follows not that Jews Turks Pagans may enter because a profession of Christianity is required by Gods law before admission and so much care as God prescribes ought to be taken 3. Though one end of conversion be hearing yet if God have secluded excommunicate persons from hearing as I conceive he hath Excommunication being vltimum remedium then he must not be admitted to the Word So though one end of Church-fellowship be conversion to true sanctity yet none but they that are converted to the profession of Christianity can partake in it and so Turks and Jews are excluded Sect. 8. Reply p. 36 Excommunication is to recover persons desperately sick and ready to dye it is in the use of it as Physick 1 Cor. 5.5 and therefore supposeth the persons to whom applied to be alive therefore all Church-members are to be reputed in the judgement of charity living stones 1 Pet. 2.5 Rejoynd 1. Excommunication and Physick are not alike in point of the life of the object for no man gives physick to one whom he knows to be dead but though one spiritually alive being scandalous or erroneous may be excommunicated yet the more certainly yea suppose infallibly a man is known to be spiritually dead the more liable and fit he is to be excommunicated for Excommunication looks upon a man as sinful and erroneous yea as incurably such
effect Sect. 4. When I tel you that New-England men wil not allow a Presbyteryan Church nor a new Independent-Church against the wil of the Magistrates You Reply P. 8. The Questian is not what they would allow but what a company of people planted there which cannot without unfaithfulness to their own light be subject to any other government save the Presbyterian ought to do Whether if their livelihood lie there and that they cannot remove they are not bound to keep Faith and a good Conscience what ever it be that they suffer for it Our beliefe of New England is this that they would suffer the godly and peaceable to live amongst them though they differ in point of Church-government from them Because so far as we could ever learn they never banished any but unpeacebleness together with desperate erroneousness was the cause of it Rejoynder Yes the Question is what they would allow for 1. It may be presumed they do not transgress the charter they have from old England nor the due power of the Magistrate in the opinion of the Churches there 2. That they do to others as they would be don unto 3. Your selves intimate that if Presbyteryans have no livelyhood there then they should remove 4. A course hath bin taken that they should have no livelyhood there for when some of them being persecuted for non-conformity writ into N. E. desiring that they might be a sister-Church and have the liberty of their Consciences N. E. bretheren would not then tolerate them though now the case is altered and the difference is pretended to be so smal that one party ought to tolerate the other 5. They that now plead for liberty of Conscience and toleration wil and if they hold Presbyterian government to be Antichristian as some do must endeavour to the utmost to root it out if ever they have ability and opportunity for such a designe these times shew much and after-times wil shew more to the grief and shame of the luke-warme or as they would be called moderate Presbyterians Sect. 5. To omit that it is plain notwithstanding what you say in your reply that the chiefest Independents in London did think it unseasonable to gather Churches at that time that you did gather yours and that so far as any thing is unseasonable so far it is unlawful When I sayd that it may be Brownists Anabaptists Antinomians Familists and other gross Heretiques and Schismatiques do also pretend the doctrine and practise of the Apostles You reply They must be found to be lyers but those which not in pretence but in truth have the doctrine and practise of the Apostles with them may lawfully practise according to it though they want the commandment of man to warrant it The Church of Ephesus found the false Apostles lyars and rejected them Rejoynder 1. You here omit a fair opportunity of bearing witness against those Heretical and Schismatical conventions saying only what themselves would say that they should be found lyars 2. They are found lyars both when in disputations and conferences they are solidly confuted as they often are or when they are subdued or constrained to yedd at least feigned and dissembled obedience Deut. 33.29 Psal 18.44 As they ought to be 3. Sure you would not have them let alone by the Magistrates and ministers til they confess themselves to be lyars do not all Heretiques and Schismatiques say that they in truth and not in pretence have the doctrine and practise of the Apostles with them and it may be they think so too being given up to beleeve lies and therefore by your argument they may yea are bound to erect Churches in their own way Did the false Apostles of Ephesus did those opinions of N. E. whom neither preaching nor conference nor the assembly of the Churches could cure confess they were lyars though the Churches knew them to be so no no they went on in their former course not only to disturb the Churches but miserably to interrupt the civil peace and pour contempt upon Courts and Churches and therefore the Magistrates did convent and censure them and if the Magistrates had not so don they had bin guilty of those Heresies Schisms Seditions and of the bloud of so many soules as should perish thereby as he that willingly suffers men to go about to poyson all waters in a country is guilty of the death of those which are thereby poysoned nor had they bin nursing fathers to the Church nor had discharged the trust reposed in them by that Plantation yea should they have tolerated Hereticks and Schismaticks for their own profit or some Politique end as the Pope doth Jews and Curtizans their sale of Religion truth and the soules of men for money or worldly interest would have made them abominable to God and all good men CHAP. 4. What number makes a Church Sest 1. WHen I alledg that the case of Adams family and Noahs was extraordinary there being then no more in the world And that Adam and his wife and first son were the Church if then there was any and that Cain lawfully married his own Sister you reply P. 9.1 That I grant in that extraordinary case that 7. 8 or 9. may make a Church That the Church is Christs body and every body consists of members if all were one member where were the body and therefore one Adam could not make a Church That we have a manifest Prohibition of a mans marrying with his sister but what scripture say you is there against this that what number of beleevers have formerly bin a Church such a number may yet be a Church and no greater number is required to the simple being of a Church And that God hath not percisely determined what number do make a Church Rejoynder 1. I no more grant that seven or eight then that two or three did then make a Church much less that they may now make a Church but that two or three may now make a Church though it be the opinion of some congregational men as white Summer Ilands P. 23. is rejected upon good grounds by Mr. T. and Mr. M. against Mr. H. and by M. Cotten P. 53. For if thy brother offend thou must tel him his fault between him and thee and if he heare thee not take one or two with thee now they are three or four yet this was but the 2. admonition which if he did not heare then they were to tel the Church now as the second admonition was to be given by more then the first so the third admonition was to be given by more then the second and therefore the Church must of necessity consist of more then two or three 2. If one Adam could not make a Church it is nothing to my answer for I only say that Adam was the Church before Eve was made and Adam and Eve before their first sonne was born if then there was any and this you know is most true 3. The Apostles
Andrew Thomas c. Paul and Barnabas assembling a whole year with the Church at Antioch though they did not covenant themselves into it are sayd to be within that Church Acts 11.26 cum cap. 13.1 And therefore if implicite covenant agreement or combination doth make a true Church we are not deficient therein 5. As for that of the Sichemites being one people that is to say one Church or one people to God as elsewhere you phrase it I conceive that Simeon and Levi did not pretend them to be one Church neither would this have bin an acceptable motion to an Heathenish Idolatrous people nor would Circumcision alone have effected it Edomites and others were Circumcised and yet were not of the Jewish Church except they had renounced their idols and become Proselytes 2. I conceive the poor Sichemites had no thoughts of altering their Religion for a wife nor would the men of the City in all probability have so unanimously consented to it they might look upon Circumcision as a national rite and by being one people they do interpret themselves to mean of a civil union viz. dwelling trading marrying one with another enjoying the cattel and substance one of another Gen. 34.21 Of any overture or pretence of Simeon and Levi or any desire or hope that the Sichem tes had that they should be one Church one people to God partakers of the same Sacrifices and ceremonies there is no mention I conceive therefore it is but your gloss what covenant is involued in Circumcision we shal shew hereafter Sect. 2. Reply p. 38. Relation and combination to domestick ends and purposes is the form of a family unto politick and civil ends is the form of a Common-wealth c. And so relation and combination of so many Saints as may wel meet in one place unto the enjoyment of Church-ordinances doth make a Church Rejoyn 1. Do you not mean that this agreement or covenant is only of them that are sui juris must every member of the Common-wealth as mean men servants women children per se at least implicitly consent to their relation or combination in the Common-wealth and every particular member of a City and family also or he else is not to be judged one in that Common-wealth City or family and do you hold the same of Church-relation 2. Do you mean that this covenant is not only between inferiors and superiors but between equals viz. that all the subjects of the Common-wealth must agree together to be one all the children and servants in a family should agree to be one all the wives of David and all the wives of Solomon did agree to be one and not only that there is an agrrement between Magistrates and subjects Masters and servants as we acknowledg also between Ministers and people but that there must be agreement or covenant of the wives amongst themselves the servants amongst themselves the subjects amongst themselves and that this is the form of a family or of a Common-wealth and so consequently Christians agreement to be a Church is you say the form of a Church 3. Do you mean that any former agreement or covenant made by our parents unto Domestique Politique or Ecclesiastique ends and purposes doth not bind us their children and successors but notwithstanding the same we without a particular and personal consent are not of the same family City Common-wealth or Church that they were of I pray you express your selves plainly Sect. 3. Reply p. 38. A solemn express and verbal covenant or agreement we assert necessary to the purity and strength of a Church how should Saints and they alone living promiscuously in the world have communion together without express verbal consent which yet we judg ought to be if the rule be wel attended Rev. 22.27 22.14 And how else such loosness as in our Parssh Churches from which we may remove into another Parish without rendring a reason the members in a natural body the stones in an house are not so loosly set to which a particular Church is compared Eph. 2.22 1 Cor. 12.27 may be prevented therefore we conceive a covenant necessary for such purposes Rejoyn 1. You assert here more then I can yeeld unto For. 1. The Scripture gives us no precept or president of such a solemn express and verbal covenant which you assert necessary to the strength and wel-being of the Church For. 1. Church-covenant hath reference to Church-state and Church-duties as such as marriage hath to conjugal duties as such Apol. for Church Cov. p. 3. 25. This doth distinguish it from the covenant of grace and other covenants which have no more reference to those duties if so much as to other duties 2. Your Church-covenant binds men to walk in all the ordinances of God which in the known sense of your Church expressed by your confession of faith and by your practise is no other then to walk in the congregational or Independent way now no Scripture doth require that men should covenant to walk in that way 3. Your Church-covenant is not only with God but with a particular Congregation which doth difference it from all those covenants that are made with God only and not with any Church 4. Your covenant is publike vocal express and this doth distinguish it from all those agreements that are only implyed in actions as one that dwels in Manchester joyns in choosing and submitting to the Constables and other officers payes lays and taxes assists officers and bears office if required doth tacitely agree that he is a Manchester man and yet we do not say he hath entered into covenant or that none can be a Manchester man but by covenant 5. Your solemn covenant is before the choosing of officers which distinguisheth it from al such covenants as are made by a Church having officers 6. It binds men not to depart without leave-asking which though it be no ordinance of God but a politique invention yet it doth infringe much the liberties of the Church members w th els in some cases might lawfully depart without leave asking 7. If a man cannot in Conscience consent to your covenant he shal be secluded from the Sacrament though he be never so fit and holy 8. Your covenant doth translate men and remove men out of our Churches into yours and makes them members of a distinct Church whereas Scripture-covenants at the most did but confirm if so much men in their Church-state If you can shew such a Church-covenant as this in Scripture or that hath all the essentials of your Church-covenant then I shal incline to beleeve it not only lawful but necessary to the Churches welbeing but I cannot beleeve any thing to be necessary to the strength and purity of the Church if it cannot be found in Scripture some have sayd If set formes of prayer had bin lawful Christ would have prescribed them I may much rather say if this Church-covenant were so necessary Christ would have prescribed it
their hands at the dissolution of Abbies they might either give them to the Ministery or dispose them to private persons or possesse them to the publike use the present inhabitants or country-men having no more legal right unto them where they were assigned to the Ministery then where they were assigned to other persons and uses for when they bought or took their Lands they did not think of buying or taking the Tythes or did the sellers or setters think of setting or selling them if they had they would have required more money for the sale or lease Sect. 6. Reply p. 61. There is great inequality in Tythes and in all setled maintenance if not unrighteousnesse Persons whose estates arise from Trading and consist in goods not having any lands in some places pay nothing to the Ministery out of duty and so the Country maintains the Ministery of the Town though many Chappels perhaps be robbed thereby and persons who are much poorer in Estate then others but have larger Lands then they yet pay more because of their lands then they and if houses be rated or mens present estate valued and maintenance setled in the just proportion yet because mens estates are like the Moon some in the increase others in the decrease it will soon grow unto an inequality again besides mens estates lie many times where their persons inhabite not neither can inhabite and then their estates go to maintain a Ministery to which they do not belong and they are so much the more disabled i◠supporting the Ministery to which they do belong Rejoynd 1. Is there not as great an inequality when Tythes are paid to a Gentleman possibly a Papist as where they are paid to the Ministers Or do you intend that as well the Parliament-men and others should be wronged of the Tythes legally due to them as the Ministers 2. Is it any inequality or unrighteousnesse that men should pay their debts which they are legally bound to by their own consent because it falleth out that a poorer man may pay more then a richer When a fifth part of the land became Pharaohs Gen. 47.26 was it unequall or unrighteous that they which possessed much lands should pay for the fifth part of them more to Pharaoh then richer men that had lesse lands did Is it unequall or unrighteous that he that hath a greater quantity of ground should pay a greater Rent or a greater chief then a richer man that hath lesse 3. You count it lawfull for the State to allow setled maintenance how can they do it any way but there will be some pretence of inequality or unrighteousnesse If the State do allow an Independent Minister 40. l. 50. l. or 100. l. per annum out of the sequestred Tythes of a neighbouring Parish may not the people complain of inequality and injustice as well 〈◊〉 if they were of a Ministers own parish and paid their tythes to him 4. If any inequalitie or unrighteousnesse be now or hereafter the Parliament may from time to time rectifie it 5. If Tythes be so burdensome as you say they are to the poor what if it be possible to find some poor Church-members to pay much more to the Contributions then their tythes come to Nor is their act meerly voluntary it is expected they should give something every Lords day and two pence every Lords day Fast and Feasting day cannot be lesse then 10. s. per annum it may be his Tythes comes not to two shillings and he is not worth 10. or 20. l. Surely your rich ones do not keep their proportion with your poor ones and for every ten or twenty pounds they are worth pay two pence per diem 6. Conscience tells us that every one should have his own but conscience in sundry cases doth not determine that this or that is mine nor must I be mine own Judge in it even good men are partiall in their own cases as Judah and David though just in other mens therefore the Lawes we live under must determine it Sect. 7. You say in Congregat way justified p. 8. If Christ our Lord hath appointed no such thing as stinted maintenance then it is unfit for the Church to settle stinted maintenance Rejoynd 1. Your conclusion should be Therefore it is unlawfull A thing may be unfit at least in opinion and not unlawfull 2. Hath Christ appointed that the State may settle maintenance and forbidden it to the Church or may the State plead exemption from Christs appointment any more then the Church See above Sect. 5. Reply p. 61. And this setled visible maintenance can be the maintenance but of peaceable times when the Magistrate is a Christian and countenanceth Religion for in the Apostles dayes and afterwards for three hundred years together while the ten Persecutions lasted there neither was nor could be on foot any such maintenance But the Church-treasury duly kept up by contributions according as God blesseth every man will afford maintenance while the Church hath any thing at all times whether peaceable or troublesome whether the Magistrate be a Christian or a Heathen Rejoynd 1. What then is it therefore unlawfull Maintenance from the State is not had but in peaceable times therefore it is unlawfull too Publike meeting-places for worship cannot be had but in peaceable times are not they unlawfull too And sometimes the Church-treasury may be robbed spoiled the free and publike peaceable exercise of Religion cannot be had but in peaceable times you will not therefore conclude that they are unlawfull 2. For lasting the trade of the Begging-Friars outbids your Church-stock for the Ministers may beg whether times be peaceable or troublesome whether the Magistrate be a Christian or an Heathen whether there be maintenance out of the Church stock or no. 3. The tythes amongst the Jews were paid to the Jewish Priests in the time of Christ and his Apostles if the Apostles had been never so desirous of them they could not have had them The Christians were very poor in respect whereof for fear of offence the Apostles did preach freely in some places having neither maintenance from Church nor from State but working with their own hands And yet you say that set maintenance from the State is not unlawfull though such maintenance neither was nor could be on foot for the first 300 years CHAP. XXI Of Ministers maintenance out of the Church-stock and Lords-day Contributions Sect. 1. YOu say p. 62. This maintenance out of the stock of the Church we think we see most warrant for from the New Testament as most probable we once disputed but neither then nor now are we peremptory in it And in your last you say That the Ministers are to be maintained by such a stock as is raised by weekly contribution because it is not absolutely clear in the Text at least to us we thought fit to dispute it only as probable Rejoynd 1. Then it seems the Scripture annexed to the Position is not
expresseth their opinion that the contribution 1 Cor. 16.1 Was properly intended for the poor 2. That some Churches appoint not any part of it towards their Ministers maintenance 3. That those that do it do it but conditionally if much be given in if there be an overplus and in a secundary way which is not the manner of your Churches which or at least some of them make it an ordinance of God 5. The setting up of this way of Ministers maintenance is the grand designe of Hereticks and Schismaticks though some godly men in the simplicity of their hearts may approve it or actin it for some or all of these ends 1. That they may strengthen the hands of Cormorants who under pretence of Reformation and abhorring Idols do now as in the dayes of Henry the 8. commit sacrilege viz. That do take away to private use things deputed to holy uses or maintenance and furtherance of Gods worship for what is the sinne of sacrilege if this be not by the received custome and consent of the Churches by donation of Princes legacie of Testators severall Acts of Parliament and Magna Charta and do alien them from their generall end whose sinne consisting in devouring that which is holy or devoted to the service of God and his Church Prov. 20.5 Lev. 27.28 30. and in abrogating the Testaments of men Gal. 3.15 makes them worse then Ananias and Sappirah which did only with-hold part of that which they had pretended to give to the Church though before they gave it it was in their own power but these do take away that which neither they nor it may be their ancestors did give but others strangers to them and long since dead 2. That they may make way for their own maintenance in their severall separated Congregations as of Divine institution whether they be tolerated or no. 3. That they might put an imputation of covetousnesse and burdensomnesse upon the Ministers of the Gospel as the false teachers did upon Paul who therefore took no maintenance at all though he might but wrought with his hands that he might take off that imputation 4. That they might catch men to their party because this way is for the peoples profit 5. That they might discourage Learning 6. That they might set the People aloft over their Ministers 7. To bring the Ministers which cannot in conscience comply with their unsteddy unsound people to basenesse and beggery and that they might neither have learning nor leisure books nor spirits to oppose their ungodly wayes 6. As for Chemâ—itius I have spoken before and now adde You do not produce him to say that de jure it ought to be so now but only de facto it was so then he saith contributions was the maintenance amongst the Jews not that it ought to be so amongst Christians CHAP. XXII Of the burning Mountain cast into the Sea REVEL 8.8 9. Sect. 1. TO shew that that is not rightly applied to setled endowments brought in to the Church I urge that Kings and States are called mountains Zach 4.7 Casting of mountains into the sea implieth great commotions and troubles Psal 46.2 Their burning with fire signifieth their opposition and fiercenesse whereby they become destroying mountains or as the Septuagint whom the Pen-men of the New Testament much follow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a mountain on fire Jer. 51.25 But I find not that setled and stinted Maintenance is in any Prophesie understood by a mountain burning with fire cast into the sea You reply p. 68. that Constantine did bring in great riches and setled endowments to the Clergy of the Church and that this may be clearly evidenced from credible Authors But why do you not shew this in your first or second book and that those Authors meant not of Constantines donation which is justly accounted a fiction What other setled endowments did he give to the Clergie and to whom and who are those credible Authors that assert it You further reply If Kings and States be called mountains so is prosperity in riches and honours Psal 30. Thou hast made my mountain to stand strong that is my condition so prosperous And sea in Scripture is the Church sometimes or the Religion of the Church Rev. 13.1 15.2 Therefore casting of a mountain into the sea may be bringing prosperity and casting riches and honours upon the Church and though mountains should be in your sense for Kings when almost Regal riches and honours were cast upon the Prelates and the ambition of Prelates did set the world on fire it might be called a burning mountain Rejoynd You know Kings and States are called mountains The most learned and godly Interpreters of Prophesies Brightman Mede c. tell us so you need not to If it 2. The place Psal 30.7 may be understood of Davids Kingdom in which God had setled him it was a Psalm at the dedication of his house v. 1. 3. Do you hold indeed that Kings may not cast any riches and honour upon the Church how are Kings nursing fathers and mothers if the Church be as poor and beggerly as when they were enemies how can the Kings of the earth bring their glory and honour into it Rev. 21.24 Why might not Constantine bring in setled endowments as well as the State allow setled maintenance are they not both one yet the one you hold lawfull and not the other 4. I had nothing to do with ampla praedia the Position was of setled endowments Even N. E. men bring it against them and I understand it of set maintenance which may be either lesse or more which you deny to be lawfull from the Church therefore the leaving out of ampla praedia minding you alwaies of what is said in answ to Pos 8. was no fault in the producers of the Position 5. You should shew that setled endowments given to the Church are in any prophesie called a burning mountain cast into the Sea but because you cannot do it therefore you acknowledge Congr way justified p. 9 10. that the interpretation is but probable and doubtfull and that you dare not speak definitively of it And so I leave it minding you only that many which seemed most Anti-Prelatical do justifie the Bishops setting the world on fire Sect. 2. You tell me of my misinterpreting and misreporting of T.W. to W.R. p. 59. I shall relate the case and leave the determination of it to any ingenuous indifferent person It is thus New-England men being asked Whether they do allow or think it lawfull to allow and settle any certain and stinted maintenance upon their Ministers do answer But for setled and stinted maintenance there is nothing done that way amongst us except from year to year because the conditions of Ministers may vary c. Mr. Weld saith For a way of setled maintenance there is nothing done that way except mark the exception from year to year And a little before he saith The Church usually meets twice in the