Cum Bono DEO.  
A REMONSTRANCE TO THE GODLY PARTY.  
Two main Queries, Which stand much useful for these our times.  
The One is anent that, which made this woeful Diaphragma or Dissepimentum, this Division twixt KING, State and Church; And this is Episcopacy.  
The Other is anent that, which hath so pitifully rend our Church in herself, & so stands maceries, paries intergerinus, or intergerivus, The partition-Wall twixt our PROTESTERS, the GODLY PARTY, (as they are pleased out of a more than a Pharisaical pride superciliously to arrogate this title to themselves) and the Assembly-men; So that it is turned questionable with not a few with us to day, which of these two contrary Factions we should acknowledge for our true Representative Church, both these acclaiming in jure, this Title to themselves.  
AND this is, If our Commission of Church did rightly determine anent the receiving in, into the bosom of their Army of Nuncupative Malignants, in such a nick of time & exigence of Affairs, or pronounced therein clavae errante. Numerò, If that Engagement stood lawful with the One, or unlawful with the Other:  
AND A VINDICATION of Both, By ANDREW LOGIE sometime Arch-Deane of Aberdene;  
Penned by the Author, Ann. 1654., And printed 1661.   

OF Episcopacy.  
THe First Quaere shall be this, If Episcopacy, The ORDER itself may be justly outted, because that the Name or Title whereby the men in the order entitled or designed, viz. Episcopus, which is rendered in our ordinary language Bishop, doth seem to our Disciplinarians, forsooth, sapere fastum, to savour of pride and arrogancy.  
Answer. GOod LORD! What presumptuous and bold, as unwarrantable ignorance is this, from off of the Name, from whence men in a CALLING receive their denomination, to raise grounds or reasons to infirm and weaken a CALLING? Is not this Ludere in vocibus, rather than seriò agere, nay, impiè ludere in re tam seria? But to the Point. This their Alleadgeance is false: for this is a TITLE oneris potiùs, quàm Honoris, of a burden rather, then of honour. Doth not this very NAME Episcopus or Overseer, import and design Curam et solicitudinem, which requires no little vigilancy and carefulness? And so as Honos, or Honour is conferred to them, so an onus, or burden is imposed on them, and thus it is incumbent on them, as praesse, so prodesse, since dignity and duty go together. This very Name of GOD'S own imposition, is like a Memento, or as the voice of a Crier, to sound out wholesome admonitions and instructions on both sides: for to them, Aurem vellit et admonet, it pulleth them by the ear and admonisheth them of the heavy burden imposed on them, and weighty charge entrusted them; That they so oversee, as men who must one day reddere rationem villicationis suae, give, render and make an account of their inspection and oversight; And on the other hand, IT bears on them, who are committed to their inspection and oversight, the return of a reciprocal duty of acknowledgement, subjection and submission. But I cannot sufficiently wonder, That men of Learning should, yea or could have stumbled at this, though the Name whereby they are designed should import no slender Honour or Prerogative, seeing that, as if the Earth could not sufficiently furnish us titles of Honour to dignify that Office or Calling, accordingly, we find the Heavens sought unto, to afford according Titles, to set forth the high & surpassing great dignity of that so eminent and honourable an Ministration, and so ennobled by the blessed TRINITY. IT is to be wished, as Gregory sayeth well on that they are called Angeli Domini exercituum. Mal. 2.7. ut dignitatem servarent in nomine, quam explent in operatione; yea, et è converso, ut quam dignitatem obtinent in nomine, explerent in operatione, Numero, ut nomina rebus responderent suis, et res nominibus. If we should be pleased to prove idle, & seek out any lurking Pride in vocables, we might arcesse their Presbyters or Elders, Seniores, of no less arrogancy, & so call their divine and so much cried up office of Eldership in question, which were a piacular sin: for doth not the French word Signior, as if ye should say, Senieurs, flow from that of Seniores nay, and Senatores too? but this is but an idle Logomachy or vain contest about words. But this shows forth to the full, as their hate and aversation of the matter or Office, so their best poor willingness, to bear out their point, and root out the Order. If this were safe and sure argumenting, Why might we not no less justly cry out against the dignity of Christians under Christ's Kingdom, where we are said in common to be made in Him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, into a Royal Priesthood, where every word serves to advance the surpassing great dignity of our Condition under the Gospel, above that under the Law. IT wonders me not a little, How that these men, who bowed the knee to Independency, and proved active and instrumental to bring in a Parity in State, as in Church, grudged not, and excepted against the usurped name of a Lord Protector, since that the Prophet Isai. fore-prophecying of Christ's Kingdom, Is. 32. from the beginning, may justly seem to vindicate this Title to that Man Christ, Who is both GOD and Man, and so can only prove an hiding place from the wind, & a covert from the tempest. How is it that they so deeply forgot themselves, as shuning Charybdis, they should so willingly, as wilfully cast themselves into Scylla, & esclave themselves to a fare higher and harder dependency: where their least finger proved bigger, than were their Father's loins? Certes me thinks it no wonder, That men, who made it no scruple or conscience, to cast off their RULER, whom GOD had set over them, Their just Titular KING, though GOD Himself to dignify the Office of Kings, is pleased to impart to them, and communicate with them His Name and Office, by an Ego dixi dij estis, I have said, ye are gods, Ps. 82.6. That they bearing His Image and Superscription, as it were, might labour to be answerable to their Prototypon, and so strive to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lively Images of GOD, in ipso judicandi munere, in their due administration of Justice; I say, I can think it no wonder, That these who scrupled not, or made the least conscience to make such an alteration in State, should not stand on this, to banish all order in Church: and so bring in confusion in both. Truly these so grave and learned Divines and pious Reformers, arcessing from the bare and naked Name, grounds and reasons to infirm the Office, may not without just cause seem to resemble that Rhetorician, who could Mirifice res exiguas verbis amplificare, wonderfully amplify small matters with hie words, whom Agesilaus thought no more commendable for it, than the Shoemaker, who should make great shoes for little feet. Thus you see, That this is no verdict or true saying, but a false-dict or false-saying, that the name or appellation of Bishop savours of Pride & arrogancy. I pray you numb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quae Bezae perplacet appellatio, caret omni supercilio, stands this Compellation void and free of all pride? yea and whereas the Pope of Rome calls himself servum servorum; doth this impair his pride, and not rather augment and increase his deep hypocrisy? Is not this sacred and venerable Title ascribed to Christ Himself in scripture? Is not He called, The shep-herd and Bishop of our souls? Nay, may we not upon the same ground, unicâ liturâ, expunge Apostleship: as that which is stilled by the Holy Ghost Episcope or Bishopric, thus Act. 1.20. whereas Mathias is suffected in Judas his room, It is said, Et Episcopatum ejus accipiat alter, And his Bishopric let another take. Where, by the way, observe; That the word in the original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is evil rendered in our Translation, Communibus suffragiis allectus est: for the Apostles were not by Election, but by Christ's immediate designation; And so it is better rendered in our vulgar language, Annumeratus est, from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 calculus, And he was numbered with the eleven Apostles, Act. 1.26. If any should except here, That this Charge sortitò ei obtigit, befell him by Lot, IT is easily replied, That the disposition of the Lot is of GOD, and so this proves nothing prejudicial to his immediate and extraordinary CALL. Thus Non est fastus in nomenclaturâ, there may well be in stomach● vestro fastidium; Nay, and though this Name be usurped with our Adversaries, this bereaves not us of our just right: for we cannot loss our just title or claim to things, from hence, That they are abused to superstition, for I pray you, What is so holy, which may not be abused to superstition? Now the abuse of a thing, as it takes not away, so can it not defraud us of the lawful use of it; for else Exscindenda essent nobis vites, and we should take out of the Firmament duo illa Luminaria magna. CHRIST made use in His very first Miracle, of turning water into wine, of the vessels used in the jewish Purificatian; Paul sailed in a Shipe carrying the badge of Castor and Pollux; Nay, & our strickest Reformers preach in Temples bearing the names of forged and doxastick saints in the popish Legendory. I believe, There is no little distance twixt these two, to mutuate, emprunt or borrow a thing from superstition; and to vindicate it from superstition. Magnum hîc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, labes, lacuna, dissidium. Now Popedom gave not the source or original to Episcopacy, but oweth it cadence or descent to it. For Closure, I would gladly learn; If the name of Superintendent, which is a name of man's imposition, did savour of less Pride, yea and wherein stood his power or prostasy less. Now this sort of government obtained and found place, at our first Reformation.  
Now to come more pressly to the Point; The second Quaere shall be this; If Episcopacy be Institutionis dominicae, or barely dispositionis ecclesiasticae, of Divine institution, or of mere Ecclesiastical disposition.  
The Apostle S. Paul having called the Elders of Ephesus together to MILETUS, He exhorts them to take heed unto themselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost had made them Overseers, (where the word in the original is, Episcopos) to feed the Church of God, which He had purchased with His own Blood: Now I believe, That Praefectura Spiritus Sancti, cannot be denied to stand Ordinatio, or Institutio Divina, a Divine Ordinance and Institution. If any should except here, That this Name stands common to these our gregary Laik-Elders brought on our stage to day; There be two main arguments militating here to the contrary: For first, The Charge given to them or entrusted them, sciz. Pascere gregem, to feed the flock, evinceth the contrary, for Hi tondent et diglubunt. 2. This Charge is said, to have been entrusted or committed to them, by the Holy Ghost, which both are here wanting with our temporary, yea well oft extemporary Elders. Again, The same Apostle Phil. 1.1. Having directed his salutation to all the Saints in Christ Jesus in common, subjoines, with the Bishops and Deacons; Whereupon S. chrysostom having posed the question, wherefore he had left no place intermedio Tagmati Preshyterorum? Replies strait, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, because there is no distance or difference here: For, sayeth he, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the same things are competent to the one, which to the other: for the Order stands but one and the same, admitting only a disparity of degree in the Order. Who seethe not, except a Born blind, That if we shall deny Episcopacy, to stand of divine Right and Institution, we shall unicâ liturâ expunge Presbyteratum cum Episcopaetu, ELDERSHIP with EPISCOPACY out of this Class, and so to deny it to stand of divine Institution, which with our zealous modern Reformers to day were grande nefas, et plus quam morte piandum. Nay Ex promiscuo usu vocabulorum, non statim rectè infertur paritas Ministrorum: for the promiscuous use of a word, doth not always strait subinferre with it, the indistinction of a thing. We would heed well in this Argument, to remember that Episcopacy may be considered two ways, either in the Abstract, as an Order, or in the Concrete, as exerced by men in the Order. Now thought it should not have been rightly here exerced and administered by these, but that they should have singularly appropriated to themselves somethings which stood common to Presbytries with them, This could not nor cannot infirm the Office: for personal infirmities bear no aspersion upon the Calling; What Calling stands so holy, which may not suffer abuse? I believe, That our holy and zealous Disciplinarians cannot, yea dare not take upon them to justify all their transcendent actings whether in State or Church: for do we not hear daily of their Retractations and Retrogradations in both. In multis labimur omnes, no place here for perfection; we must not confound viam cum patria, or e converso. Again, 1. Cor. 12.28.29. Liquido cernere est imparitatem Ministrorum. Again the same Apostle 1. Tim. 3. from the beginning; calleth this a verdict or true saying, That If a man desire the Office of a Bishop, he desireth a good work. yea and lays down his required qualification; as semblably Tit. 1. which could not hold true, if Episcopacy stood an unlawful and unwarrantable Office in Church. But lest any should or could from hence infer an Isotomy or Homotomy, an equality of Honour from off of the communion of Names; you are to take heed well in this argument, that from aque ad aquale, the consequence, stands inconsequent: for under the LAW, Sacerdotium, the Priesthood was but one and the same, they were all aquè Sacerdotes, & yet there ceased not from hence to be a disparity of degree in one & the same Order: for the Highpriest prae caeteris eminebat, he emine above the rest, and so from that legal oeconomy this Order may be arcessed and instructed. Again lest there should be any place left here for exception; That from the Law, to the Gospel it should prove inconsequential; This is no less consencaneous & agreeable with the Evangelicall oeconomy or dispensation under the Gospel: forwheras CHRIST ascended up on high, He gave some to be Apostles, & some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some pastors and teachers. Ephes. 4.11. where there cannot be denied to have been a disparity of degree. but lest there should be any place here left for exceprion, that this only serves to militate here, and to instruct a distance and disparity of degree twixt the several Classes, but can make nothing to instruct a disparity of degree amongst those of one and the same Class. I would pose him here, How is it, that amongst the very Apostles some are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Insignes, seeming pillars, as James, Cephas and John, Gal. 2.9. May not this seem to import some disparity, if not in officio, saltem in regimine: for why may there not be impares gradus in regimine, yea, and that in aequali officio, to avoid disorder and confusion? What would S. Paul imply, whereas be sayeth, That he was nothing inferior to the very chiefest Apostles; for albeit this passage will not strait subinferre, that, besides the Twelve Apostles, there were others of a secondary rank, yet it makes the Argument stronger, in that there were amongst the very Twelve, some more, some less chief; Now Magis and minus, though they altar not the spece, they altar the degree. I am not ignorant how some except here, That there is a fallacy here from the communion of Names. But I pray you, doth communion of Names, import and infer always with it, a communion of Office and communion of equality of degree in the Office, yea and in the external regiment too? Doth it strait follow from hence, That Peter calls himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Fellow-Presbyter, 1. Pet. 5.1. that he emined not, or had no prerogative above these whom he thus enstiled? I would gladly learn (where I promise to yield myself docil and teachable) wherefore there may not be an inequality of Power in government, as there is a disparity acknowledged to be in other gifts? May there not fall our abuses in these, as in that of Power? Wherefore is Timothy enstiled The first Bishop of the Ephesians; yea and Titus the first Bishop of the Church of the Cretians? I know some to except here, That the argument cannot be thought pressing, which is only taken from the subscription. Answ. There be in Epistles these three; Inscriptura, Scriptura and Subscriptura. Now with what parresy or freedom they may challenge Subscripturam, may they not with the same Inscripturam? Yea I have heard some of the strictest Presbyterians or Disciplinariaens challenge Scripturam, call the whole body of an Epistle in question, a thing of a well dangerous consequence, and giving the enemy no small advantage; But I reason not simply from the subscription, but make Scripturam, the body of the Epistle my Ground. How is it, That these Charges are borne on these two, on Timothy That he lay not on hands suddenly on no man, 1. Tim. 5.22. Yea and that he lays down Rules to be observed of him in reproving, vers. 1.2. and on Titus, That he should set in order the things which were wanting, and ordain Elders in every City, Tit. 1.5.? what belonged this to Timothy, if he had no further power than any ordinary or gregary Presbyter, to admit or receive orderly of accusations against Presbyters? But I know some to except here, That Timothy was an Evangelist, and that so Bishops cannot from hence acclaime to any interest in that his right. IT wonders me to see men so blindly wedded to their own Notions; That they cannot but cherish them, how unsound soever: like to a woman kissing and embracing her own abortion: for if he shall turn an Evangelist from hence, that he is bidden Do the work of an Evangelist, II. Tim. 4.5. Why may we not from a congener warrant transshape him into an Apostle; In that S. Paul willeth the Corinthians to receive him so, as that he may be without fear, and the reason is subjoined, Because that he wrought the work of the Lord, as he did, 1. Cor. 16.10. Thus Nihil hîc nisi scopae dissolutae. I pray you, was imposition of hands a part Extraordinarii muneris, of an extraordinary Chaerge? Certes, thus it should cease to have any place or use with us to day, & expire with the persons of an extraordinary Call. Again, How do these Seers so deeply forget themselves here? whereas they strait abase and degrade him, redact him into the class & rank of ordinary and gregary Presbyters, from off of that passage 1. Tim. 4.14. where he is exhorted by PAUL, Not to neglect the gift that was in him, which was given him by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. Which cannot be averred of an Evangelist, or of one extraordinarly called: Now Mendax oportet sit sui semper memor, A liar would have a good memory. Nay, and how do they again forget themselves so deeply, as to argue from off of this passage, since Paul restrains this, to the laying on of his own hands, II. Tim. 1.6.? Nay and some of the learned take Presbyterium, pro presbyteratu, for the Order or Office itself, and not for a College or Society of mere Presbyters. Now as I have said, Episcopatus and Presbyteratus, stand but unum et idem Tagma, admitting only a disparity of degree in the Order; Alwise I would learn of these Seraphic and enlightened Doctors, Wherefore it is, That seeing in the Church of the Cretians there were more Presbyters; This is singularly recommended to Titus, to ordain Elders in every City, to set in order the things that were left undone, to reject an Heretic after the first and second admonition? Why is this privilege singularly indulted and permitted to Timothy and Titus, Presbyteros constituere vel exauctorare, if any gregary presbyter had a like power with them? For as I believe, par in parem non habet potestatem.  
Shall we defer no respect to the Antiquity of this custom in the Church of God, in, & throughout the whole 4 patriarchical seas or seats, Hierosolymitana, Antiochena, Ronana et Alexandrina. as Eusebius deduceth well the series or line of the perpetuated succession of Bishops to his times, which evidenceth that this sort of government obtained well timeously in the Church, from the very days of the Apostles; Shall we defer nothing to the testimony of that famous Council of Nice (Whereunto, I believe all our purer Modern Counsels in these our days of so blessed and glorious, so much cried up work of Reformation, cannot be parelleled or stand worthy to come in competition) which affirmeth this Government not to be Nova Institutionis, sed antiqui moris, of new Institution, but of ancient custom; Nay, & the same Council decreed, That there should not be two Bishops in one City, but this change with us to day, is nothing to be admired, to see men to contemn, yea condemn all Antiquity, who love only Novations, and dote upon Novelties.  
Nobilitat Novitas, quod damnat saepe vetustas  
I could think, that some respect were to be deferred to the testimony of piously learned Calvin, a witness of old with the best of this stamp of Presbyterians or Disciplinarians, omni exceptione major. Now he in the fourth book of his Institutions. sect. 1. sets down these express words; It shall be profitable in these things to consider the form of the old Church, which shall represent to our eyes, a certain Image of God's Institution: for although the Bishops of these tims did set forth many Canons, wherein they seemed to express more, than was expressed in holy Scripture, yet they with such heedfulness framed all their order, after the only rule of God's Word; that a man may easisly see, in this behalf; that they had nothing dissagreeing from God's Word. And strait after subjoines; Thaet out of a sincere zeal they endeavoured to preserve God's Institution, and that they swarved not much from it. Nay, and strait again in the 2. sect. he subjoines, That in every City they elected or choosed out of their own number one Man, to whom they gave specially the title of Bishop, lest from an equality, as it usually falls out, dissensions should grow and arise; I believe, That we have found and felt the smart of this truth, by sad & doleful experience of late amongst ourselves. Let our fiery Zelots, these sons of Thunder see to it, quâ fancy, quô front, quâ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, quâ audaciâ, with what face or conscience, they could not only have themselves: but violently enforced others, to abjure simply, this so ancient, so sacred, yea and divine Institution, as merely Antichristian: and so out of an implicit faith, called for, yea and exacted a blind obedience. Now I believe, That ultima fidei analysis, the last resolution of faith is, in Deus dixit: for Credere promiscuè quicquid affirmatur à Praelatis, non opus est virilis intelligentiae sed puerilis inscitiae. It fears me not a little, from the fiery heat, which our Modern Reformers have showed and kithed in the prosecution of this their so much cried up work of Reformation, that if those holy fathera, S. Augustine, S. Ambrose, S. Cyprian, nay and all the rest of that stamp, who were of old holden Ecclesiae Lumina, Christianae Reipub. Columina; yea, and those Learned & godly Bishops in our Neighbour Nation, who suffered Martyrdom for bearing testimony to Christ, and to His Truth, had lived in these our days amongst us; They should have found no more mercy, with, or from them, than did our Modern Prelates, yea and many honest suffering Brethren: but all should have gone through their firery trial. But to return, unde nescio quo digressus luxuriante calamo; Wherefore is it I pray you, That S. john directs all his Epistles which he writs to the seven Churches in ASIA, Angelo cujusque Ecclesiae, to the Angel of each Church singularly? I know that our Reformers will not have that to be denied of the rest, quod de uno praedicatur, and that so the word Angel should be rendered per Ministrum simply, or less all the Ministry in common to be comprehended and designed here, and so to be taken Collectively, and not one particular Person to be pointed at. But with their leave, Since there were in each of these Churches more Presbyters or Ministers than one, as may be instanced from that of Ephesus; This interpretation must needs fall of will, which renders the word per Ministrum in the singular number only, for thus it should follow; That there should have been but one Presbyter or Minister in each Church, again on the other hand, If all the Prebyters or Ministers in common should, or were here to be understood under this name of Angel, why do we offer violence to S. john's words, by the change of the Number? Wherefore is it, that he still directs his speech to One, nay and if the speech stand directed to the Ministry in common, how could it be cognosced to whom it were singularly thus directed? Again, If this One stood not instructed with some power over the rest, but all in common partooke of alike Power with him, how is he thus singularly entitled above the rest? And which is more, How is the faultiness of all in common, imputed singularly to him? Marlorat on the 2 of the Revel. jumps here in judgement, whiles he says, most pertinently to this purpose, Non populum aggreditur leannes, sed Principem Cleriutique, Episcopum. Nay, and hitherto Beza in his Annotations on the 3 of the Rev. rendereth the word Angelo, by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quem oportuit de his rebus imprimis admoneri, from hence it follows, That this Angel had a Prostasie, preseance, presidence and pre-eminence above his Fellow-Ministers; But I hear some replying here, That if this Prostasie was of this kind, it was only over the Common flock, and not of power and authority over his Fellow-Ministers. Answ. Dato, non concesso, giving, but not granting; That this Prostasie or preseance were only over the Flock, yet it remains, That it was a prostasie of Power, else how could he have excerced any Authority over them; Nay but he is commanded to exerce it, even against Fellow-Ministers or preaching Elders, yea, and is commended from hence, that he took order with them, Who called themselves Apostles, but were not, & found them liars. Revel. 2.2. I hear again some excepting against this Truth, though so clearly and fully vindicated and asserted, from off of these passages, Math. 20.25.26.27. and I. Pet. 5.2.3. Where Christ prohibits his Apostles to exerce such Dominion as did Reges terrae or Magnates, and where Peter warns the Elders so to feed the flock of God, as not domineiring over the Lord's inheritance: but proving ensamples to the flock. Now in both these there is a plain fallacy, à more do rei ad rem, from the manner, to the matter; Now I believe, that the different manner of a thing, is so far from the overthrowing or the removing of the thing itself, that on the contrary, Ponit et subinfert, it puts & subinferres it, and so both, Christ & S. Peter take not away simply all power from them, but such a modalized one, viz. a despotical, herill or civil power, but not Paternal & Pastoral. Doth not the Apostle S. Paul I. Cor. 14. last vers. command, That all things be done in the Church decently, and in order. Now I believe, that Order which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Nazianzen calls it, secluds a parity, for what else is ORDER, Quàm parium impariumque, sua cuique tribuens loca, dispositio? and so where all stands alike in dignity & power, ibi ordints, decori ne umbra quidem, there can be no shadow of Order or Comeliness: from whence it is consequential, That if we take away imparity, una et eadem opera omnem ordinem inter sacros Evangelii Ministros turbatum et eversū ibimus; we shall overturn all order, and banish it the Church. I hear some replying here, That it cannot be denied, that Presbyters for a time did govern some Churches, pariauthoritate et communi Consilio. Ans. This derogats nothing from Episcopal dignity, nor proves prejudicial to it, but rather confirms the necessity of Episcopal Charge, in that this sort of Regiment even in the very Apostles days and times, perpetuiis dissidiis Ecelesias dilaceravit, did rend the Church by perpetual dissensions. I deny not with S. Hierome, Episcopos presbyteris majores, consuetudine magis, quam Dominica Institutionis veritate: but this is rightly to be understood, sciz. as to the appropriation of the Tule to one above another: for it was Consuetudo Ecclesiae, the custom of the Church that made the title of a Bishop greater, then that of a Presbyter; & not any Dominical or Apostolical disposition or constitution, & so his words are to be understood by accommodation and restraint to his own times, and so of that Authority, which Bishops so called obtained then over Presbyters. Alwise for the least, it is clear and evident from hence, That S. Hierome did not averse an imparity in Church, yea, and giving, though not granting, That this imparity or diversity of degrees amongst the Ministers of the Gospel, is not founded or grounded upon any express warrant of Christ in the Scriptures, yet this so ancient a practice taking its source & beginning from the very Apostles, and having continued so constantly since in the Christian Church, may stand for a Precept to us, and may serve us for a Directory for the regulation of our comportment and approbation of so ancient a custom and practice, and not of new Institution. IT is not unknown how Aeriꝰ was condemned of Heresy, for condemning of Episcopacy; There be many Aerians with us to day, both for Name & matter, if it were lawful ab eventu facta putare, to construe of things from their events, I might make bold here, to refer the matter, not only to indifferent Arbiters, but to the decision of the most strict Disciplinarians, whether the Church or truth of Religion prospered or flourished more, under that Prelatical Government, as some are pleased thus odiously to traduce it. then under this late Presbyterial, & under which of these two, the Church in her just liberties stood more or less eclipsed; I may boldly aver, That as Aaron's rod budded, blossomed and bore ripe Almonds, whereas all the rest of the rods of the twelve Princes of Israel were blasted: so under Episcopal government the Truth was maintained in greater purity; the Church enjoyed fare greater Liberties freedom & Privileges, then under this new coined and forged Presbyterial: for under that facta multa accessio credentium Ecclesiae, There was made a great accession of Believers to the Church: But alas under this no less decession, as was well timously foreprophecyed by a Reverend Prelate, at the first rearing up of this so great, so glorious cried up work of Reformation. And if any accession be made, it is credendorum, and not Credentium, for these men scruple not fidei articulos condere et solvere, as they durst make bold to turn Christi documentum, into Nocumentum: and blasphemously to call the Lords Prayer, a Nocent Ceremony; yea, and to account the recital of it at service, a Note of Malignancy; I may no less boldly aver now, that many with us to day both in State and Church, Quà ibatur cuntes, but quà eundem non inquirentes, from off of this so sad and doleful experience of the bitter fruits of this lamentable Change and alteration in State, as Church, their Government would be glad to run back 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and submit their necks with all cheerfulness to those yokes of wood, under the which they were well gently pressed under that Government in both, that they might shake themselves lose and free of these of Iron: lying so heavily on them, under these new introduced one's. Veritas est filia temporis; for a parity in Church, hath brought on and in, a parity in State; and so a lamentable and deplorable confusion and disorder in both. Thus no wonder That KING JAMES of blessed Memory, used this ordinary expression, No Bishop, no KING: for Quàm benè convenium, mutuas sibi praestant operas, et conspirant amice. If I durst make bold here, I would interpone my poor and mean, but well meaning advice in this bussines, which shortly take it thus; That the Use may remain and be keeped on foot, the Abuse only being removed and taken away, which might happily have at first, composed the Contest; viz. That whereas there shall happen or fall out any vacancy in an Episcopal sea or seat; That the Brethren of the Diocy may fully convene themselves, and condescend upon some selected Ones out of their Number, of best abilities for a due acquittal in so eminent a Ministration, and give in these to the Supreme Magistrate in a Light or List, granting him Congee de lire, or Liberty of Election: as Penes quem solum sit prae esse externo Regimini. Whose solely it is to manage the external Regiment of the Church, standing with Constantin the Great, Episcopus ad extra; and that such a One be thus praefected over the rest, for the preservation of good Order, and keeping all in a right frame, and shuning of Confusion, upon an confused parity; Ad Culpam only, And not ad vitam, even in case of abuse of his Power to Tyranny: for Forma Apostolica haec est, dominatio interdicitur, indicitur Ministratio; The spirits of the Prophets stand subject to the Prophets, and so their Power standing but a delegated one, upon abuse may suffer and admit a warrantable repetition. If this Course had been taken, or presented by our violent Reformers to our sacred and dread SOVEREIGN, I am assured that such woeful disorders had not fallen out in State and Church. Who may not see, except a Born-blind, the doleful sequels? yea I may boldly now say, upon sad and lamentable experience (which Asseveration at the first setting on foot of this great & glorious work of Reformation, stood grande vefas, et plus quàm morte piandum) effects of an arbitrary government in State or Church: For Let there be no King in Israel, and then every man shall do what seemeth good in his own eyes, as you may see in the latter chap. of the Judges passim. Nay, and let Moses the Civil Judge subduce himself to the Mount for the least space, and then the whole people, etiam Aarone duce, shall fall away in common to Idolatry. I believe we may learn a better Afterwit in both, having bought it by doleful experience at the highest rate.  
By your leave, That I may speak somewhat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or en passant of this new modalized Presbyterial Government; I would gladly understand, on what Mount they have seen the Pattern, after the which they have effigiated, exasciated, edolated and reared up this structure of this Presbyterial Government, consisting or made up of such ingredients or constitutives, viz. of two sorts of Presbyters or Elders: RULING and LABOURING, nay, and wherefore ordinary, as their business in hand called for, the number of the RULING was doubled, Quò certaretur numero, praevalerent confuso boatu, for Suffragia numerabantur, non ponderabantur (majori parte vincente saniorem, It fears me, it was not mount Tabor, for I cannot think that Christ frequented but the least this Mount, fare less that He was here transfigured, He may well perhaps have been disfigured. Sure I am it is the Arch-type itself: for seeing that the Divines agree in common that there be Two Classes only of standing Officers in the Church under the Gospel, Bishops or Presbyters, which stand but one and the same order, and Deacons. I would learn upon what warrantable grounds, they have brought upon our stage to day, this third Class or Rank of RULING or LAIK Elders, as they are pleased to baptise them, a spece of Presbyters unwarranted by God's Word, yea unknown to all Antiquity. IT is not unknown what Tertullian disproved in his time, Hodie Presbyter, cras Laicus, I believe with the Apostle, That it is not lawful Manum huic aratro admotam dimovere, to take back the hand from this Plough. Thus Anniculi nostri or Biennales Presbyteri were unknown and unheard of in these times, far more these extemporary Elders, whereof use was well oft made, as the necessity of their Affairs required. Whereas they were pretended to have been brought in, for the better ordering of God's House, The event hath proven the contrary, that they wrought no small Disorder both in State and Church; And whereas they were pretended to have been brought in use on our stage with Aaron and Hur, to have sustented and stayed up Moses his hands, whiles going about a praying, and so for the good and help of the labouring Presbyters to strengthen their hands, the sequel hath proven, that there was no use made of them, but to weaken the hands of the ablest Ministry, yea to work their degradation, if they did not prove active and instrumental to promove the glory of their Work, and should happen to show the least dissaffection to the Work in hand. Who is so blind, that he may not clearly see from bought experience, That they are so fare from being worthy to carry an Ephod before the Lord, that they are not worthy with the Gaboanites, to hue wood, and draw water for the use of the Lords Altar? Since Antiquity disclaims them, and will not own them, let us come to the Word of GOD the safest and surest Directory for the finding out of Ministerial Offices or Charges: Now we find neque volam neque vestigium, no trace of them here at all, for if we shall be pleased to look to the first institution of Deacons, Act. 6. or to the Canons whereunto this spece of Ministry ought to be appended and exacted, I. Tim. 3. We shall find them not to have so much as any colourable Warrant from hence, whether for manner of Qualification, or Institution and Ordination. As to the first, They behoved to be men of good and honest report, full of the Holy Ghost, and of wisdom, men having the Mystery of faith in a good Conscience; who might have been received to that Charge, admitted to that Ministry; Now with us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in hoc Collegium cooptantur, hoc munere vestiuntur, hoc titulo gaudent, ornantur, some promiscuously of the very dregs of the People, nay, and some stigmatised one's, Carbone notati most dissolute, and licentious Livers have proven readiest received into this wholesome Incorporation: as who durst not but approve their best subservencie to their lustfulness. As to the 2. They were invested in this Charge, by prayer and imposition of hands. Quae omnia hîc desiderantur, which are all here wanting with our modern Elders; Nay, and this was not a vicissitudinary or temporary Charge as this is with us, but they that had ministered well, and acquitted themselves in an inferior Ministry, acquired and purchased to themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, praeclarum gradum, a fair and further degree, which S. Nazianzen calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ceu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I am not ignorant that some, yea, and these not unlearned too, will have them to stand of a divine generation, and hitherto arcesse their Pedigree, Cadence or Descent from off of that passage of scripture I. Tim. 5.17. where, The Elders that rule well, are commanded to be had in double honour, but especially (say they) these who labour in Word & Doctrine; But it fears me, if we will be pleased to eye this Text more nearly and narrowly, we shall find this to be but a gloss of Orleans destroying the Text, as may evidently appear from these a few ensuing Reasons. First, The Apostle is not classing or distinguishing Elders, in Ruling and Labouring Elders in word and doctrine, for thus both should stand worthy of double honour, though mainly that the Labouring do merit or challenge this respect. But he defines well Ruling Elders to stand and be such, who painfully labour ad sudorem pulvereum (which the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or pulvis, imports) and thus the Apostle sets not down two several Classes or ranks of them. 

2. Doth not the annexed or subjoined Reason, wherefore this honour is averred to stand due, clearly evict this to the full, viz. That we should not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the Corn; and that the Labourer is worthy of his hire or wages? Now are these your Ruling-Elders brought on your stage, of the number of these Oxen, that tread out the Corn? You confess them not to be of the Cense of these Labourers, else why do ye contra-distinguish them.  
3. If ye will needs have a distinction or classing here of Presbyters or Elders, Lo it must needs be here, Inter Magis et Minus laborantes. The more, or less painful Labourers; Now Magis et Minus, More or Less, as they speak in Schools, non mutant speciem sed gradum, they change not nor altar not the spece, but the degree only.  
4. IT is not unknown that some, yea, and not unlearned too, by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 understand stipendîum. wages or reward. I pray you then as ye divide the Province or Task, why will ye not suffer and admit a division or partage in the Wages or Reward. IT fears me, and that well justly too, That in this case, the strictest of you would not prove deficient to themselves, but would endeavour themselves to find out a new gloss on the words, and make up a new Commentary; as I am no less assured on the other hand, That these our well Ruling-Elders with us to day, would be no less ready to acclaime to their right and interest in this Reward, if they should find any sure or firm basis whereupon to ground their Challenge and Claim.  
5. Some not slenderly expert in the original language aver, That after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there would be required the adversative particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to import a necessary distinction.  
6. Some no less expert in this original language, arcesse some ground of reason from off of the accents and grammatical spirits, to infirm and weaken this distinction or classing.   But I love not to strain apiculations in grammatications. Thus this very passage, wherein tantum ponunt praesidij, they place the full force and strength of their CAUSE, petit jugulum causae, it cuts the throat of their Cause; and so unde illi vitam, nos mortem. This poor wandering Levite must harbour and rest with the Godly Party forsooth; finding no no where else in Heaven or upon Earth an harbouring or sheltering place. No wonder that such a Heterogeneous body, compacted of such dissimilary parts should suffer such a sudden dissolution. Thus it is evident, that we must needs go elswher to seek out their generation, then from God's Word or yet sound Antiquity. In a word they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 foetus necessitatis, the birth and brood of Necessity; for we find no use for them to day, except in such a case, where a bussines or work in hand, cannot be effectuated and brought to pass, but by the subsidiary help of their suffrage, Majori parte vincente saniorem, which else in reason or by force of Argument would fall short. May it not justly seem according to Gamaliel his decision in a congener case, That this Counsel or this work hath not been of God, but of men, Act. 5.38.39. seeing it is so soon come to nought, for there is no use of them now, their work being accomplished which they intended, or in case of any new emergent bussines, calling for their subsidiary help to hold up that ruinous and decaying Fabric and structure, so that for the best they are but Nocturni Fungi ex nocturna pluvia nati, or an untimous birth and abortion, no sooner brought to light, then expired.   

THE SECOND QVAERE.  
THe Second Quaere is, If our Commission of Church did rightly determine anent the receiving in of Nuncupative Malignants into the bosom of their Army, to fight pro Patria, pro aris et focis, for KING, Country, Religion, Lives, Liberties, Fortunes in such a nick of time and exigence of affairs, against Foreign invasion of so dangerous an Enemy infesting the whole Kingdom, and seeking to overturn and raze all from the very foundation; or pronounced therein Clavae errante. Numerò, If that stood an Unlawful Engagement with the Godly Party, or men of godly understanding?  
IT marvels me not a little, how the Question can be thus stated and modelled, whereas adhuc sub Judice lis est, which of these two contesting Parties, Herodians or Pharisees so to speak, should be thus branded with the Note of Malignancy. I believe, That Veritas which is Filia temporis, TRUTH which stands the daughter of time, hath given us some farther light and clearer insight in this business; For how have they I pray you acquitted themselves here, who were so much cried up for sole men of known integrity? Have they not detected to the world their deep masked hypocrisy, and so bred more nor just matter of jealousy in the hearts of all these who are of truly godly understanding? Coelum et terram hîc in testes advocare possem. 2. Is it not strange, That our new start up Protestators should so malign men under this name and notion of Malignancy, whereas they roundly profess their ignorance here, of the true Notes and marks from whence they may be discerned and dignosced, as the Desire or Petition put up by them, The sole Nuncupative Godly Party, or men of Godly understanding, to that Venerable Assembly at Edinburgh anno 52. for their information hereanent in their 3. Proposition bears, & instructs to the full; Now is it not more nor strange, That they should have so maligned men under this name and notion, whereas it is not yet convened upon and condescended, what stand these Notes and marks? Vbi nulla lex, ibi nulla transgressio, where there is no Law, there can be no Transgression. May it not justly seem That Malignancy receives subinde, new Notes and Characters or Marks according to the various revolution of Cases, and exigence of times, or rather men their brainsick apprehended fancies? Nun haec Ecclesia in Maligno posita est? Et quae non animam justè odit coetum hujusmodi Malignantium? 3. I would gladly understand the Reason or discrepance here, (where I promise to yield myself docil and teachable) Why the Non-conformists at first, These who found not themselves fully satisfied with the public Resolutions of our Church, whiles this work was but in it Infancy, as it were, and so when, as I believe, it stood more venial and pardonable to have scrupled theranent, were branded with this Note of Infamy and Reproach; yea, and most cruelly persecuted, as it were, with fire and sword; And the Non-conformists now, so avowedly protesting against all their public Resolutions, and opposing themselves with an high hand, when this work is come to a perfection, to the stature of a Perfect man, shall not only go unbranded, but go under the name of the Godly Party, or men of godly understanding, and shall go over these dangerous rocks, without the least Jacture or Naufrage, yea, turgidis velis, vento secnudo, nay, and should be sealed in their foreheads with a Noli me tangere. What! Is your so glorious a Sun come to so sudden a declining? How is the faithful City become a harlot, how is your silver become dross, and your wine mixed with water? how is the strong staff broken, and the beautiful Rod? I dare be bold to aver, That the Approbation at first of the public Resolutions of Church stood to many Ciphers both in State and Church, who in effect stood more expletive than significative, Their best qualification and endowment, yea stood the sole means of their advancement to the highest rooms in both. A blind Obedience out of an implicit faith stood for all qualifications else, and an approven and evidenced activity to promove the great & glorious work in hand; This was Panchrestum, panacaea, a sovereign salve against all sores; Omnibus malis averrumcandis pollens Alexipharmacum; yea, vestis talaris a fair and goodly rob to cover all nakedness, blemishes or defects whatsomever. It was the balm of Gilead, and The tree of the twelve manner of fruits.  
The grave, learned and judicious Commissioners of our Church have sufficiently and fully vindicated and asserted this Tenet, and confirmed the lawfulness thereof in the Case set down, from the universal uncontroverted practice of all Christian Kingdoms, and approbation hereof by the unanimous consent and judgement of all the soundest protestant Divines, in the Case of just and necessary defence against foreign invasion; From the very law of Nature, which no positive law of man can infirm or infringe, calling us hereunto, binding and obliedging every Member of the politic body of a Kingdom, to endeavour to the uttermost, the good and preservation of the whole, and allowing the Body, yea, laying an obligation upon such as are in Eminency or in Power, to call for this help and assistance at the hands of every Member; yea, and bearing no small guilt upon such as shall prove deficient, and shall withdraw their aid and assistance in such an exigence, as betrayers of their Trust. AND last from God's Word, holding out unto us innumberable clear and sufficient warrants for approving of this Practice. For re-collection; Is this practice justifiable from and by the very law of Nature, who can prove so fare denatured here, as to malign the same? Stands it justifiable by God's Word? Then what man can prove so impudent, and dare make so bold, as to seclude and disclude whom God admits? I believe, That where God hath not a mouth to speak, man should not have an ear to hear. Optimus sobrietatis terminus est Deo loquendi finem faciente, sapere velle desinere, It is not safe, to coargue God's Wisdom of folly. Verum vero semper consonat, vos vobis constate.  
But because I find as yet not a few pestered and infected with this leaven of the Pharisees, I find me necessitated to speak a little more fully of this Matter, and to contribute my poor mite, out of a willing and free mind for the use of this Tabernacle: for why may it not justly seem lawful to these, vel Taurun è▪ farina fingere, qui praetenui peculio vitulum vivum divis elustrare nequeunt? Is it not notourly known, That some works of Necessity, which not unfitly is indigitated, Lex temporis, The Law of time, become justifiable, which extra hunc casum, without this case would cease to be such, as the Disciples their plucking ears of corn on the Sabbath day. David's eating of Show bread, which was only lawful for the Priests. Now who dare prove so impudent, as to deny an urgent and pressing necessity here, so that it can not be in reason challenged of any unlawfulness? Is it rather wisely or safely done by us, out of uncertain praeconceived dangers, yea, and but fears of such, and these evitable too, from fellow-subjects, to cast ourselves into seen and certain dangers of a foreign Enemy? Let me pose you here, If a King can be in reason denied the common benefit of the law of the Subject? Now shall subjects without challenge make use promiscuously of fellow-subjects, yea, and against their Native KING, and shall we condemn this fact in His Sacred Person; to make promiscuous use of His subjects both in His own just and necessary defence and theirs too? O for an impartial Judge to decide this controversy aright! are we not bound and tied both by League and Covenant, to maintain the KING'S just Greatness, the liberty of the Subject; and shall we comply with Enemies to both, to the subversion of both? Shall we make so great Conscience forsooth of the meanest heads and articles of our sworn unto Covenant, and none of this main one? If these fiery Zelots had lived in Christ's and his Apostles their days, doubtless they would have envied and maligned the accession of so many thousand souls to the Church in one day; who maligned so the receiving in of bare Nuncupative Malignants into the bosom of their Army. Certes, These differ much in practice from that of Christ's, in receiving in of Publicans and sinners May not these Hote-spirited seem most justly to be altogether ignorant of the nature & properties of love set down I. Cor. 13.4.5.6.7.8. verses? Shall Christ weeping over Jerusalem profess his great carefulness and earnestness, to gather her Children, notwithstanding of their great waywardness, untowardness & forwardness, as an Hen gathereth her Chickens under her wings, Matth. 23.37. and shall we be more propense and bently set for dispersion and scattering, then gathering? Shall Christ profess this to be the End of His coming into the World, to seek the lost sheep, to bring again what had gone astray: and shall these who would singularly acclaime this Prerogative to themselves, as that they stand solly his Ministers amidst a common defection, vouchsafe no pains here? It fears me, The Scribs & Pharisees compassing sea & dry land, to gain in a Proselyte, shall rise up in judgement against our strictest, rigid and violent Reformers, and condemn their careless and sinful neglect here, and fiery and violent procedure. God is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, A God of long Nostrils, and so is slow to anger, gentle and easy to be appeased; but these quite contrary to God's Natural, partake only in the evil both of the Cholerian and the Melancholian, they are short spirited, soon set on fire & edge, but their wrath is not easily quenched and abated, they prove implacable Edomits against their brother Jacob, yea, Novatians, veniam omnem denegant lapsis; for I heard this expression from some of their mouths, That they could sooner and readier comply with a Turk, then with a Malignant, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hîc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, no less irreconcilable enmity, then twixt the seed of the Woman, and the seed of the Serpent, but I spare you, students Correctioni, parcens pudori. I could wish these holy Zelots to show me warrants from Scripture, the safest Rule and surest Directory, Where a KING, judge or Ruler is reproved for making promiscuous use of his subjects, for the defence of the People of God, and making war upon their Enemies; Nay, and on the contrary, we see them sadly reproved for their neglect and omission here; Hitherto judg. 5.23. Curse ye Meroz (said the Angel of the Lord) curse ye bitterly the inhabitants thereof, because they came not to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the mighty. Did not Gideon a judge of Gods own designation, choosing and sending out in his might, Make an Ephod, and put in Ophrah his City, after which all Israel went whoring: and which thing became a snare unto him, and to his house, and tended to their destruction, judg. 8.27. Now did the people from hence, with our fiery Zelots, refuse to go under his conduct, or yet receive from his hands or by his means many notable deliverances? Nay, was not the Country in safety and quietness forty years in his days? Let me pose these so tender-conscienced men, if in the 20 of Deut. 5.6.7.8. verses; where, the Martial Law is set down, they do find this exception of Malignancy, so much as in the parallel of it? Certes, Too vehement a Purgation of the Body proves for common well dangerous: for thus the Vital spirits become exhausted and quite spent. I pray you, will ye find a Church or Army only Electorum? This were to seek Patriam in via, and to confound viatores and compraehensores voyagers and comprehensors. In the field of the Militant-Church upon earth, we will not fail to find still tares, cockle and darnel amidst the best Corn or Wheat, till the day of the great separation. When the Lords People went fourth to Battle, were they not promiscuously without any instituted Purgation (a new and unheard of, in God's Word, piece of policy brought on our stage) gathered as one man from Dan to Beersheba, with the land of Gilead, unto the Lord in Mizpeh, judg. 20.1. Nay, and is not this called, A Calling of all generally without our new modelled Limitations, II. Sam. 17.11. Was not the numbering of the People for War, instituted and taken from their ability to carry Arms and skill in handling them, and not from any new found out qualifications? Read we not saul's practise, admitting all the men of Israel and Judah. without difference, to go forth with him, in the case of Jabesh-gilead commended of God, and seconded with a blessing, I. Sam. 11.? In the time of the Judges, when the people fell away from the Lord, to or by Idolatry, did not these very Idolaeters fight the Lords Battles and carry the victory? Nay, and the very Judges themselves, who fought the Lords battles stood not free, under whose conduct the people of God obtained many notable deliverances, as was presently instanced in the person of Gideon. Who was more bloody and wicked than Joab, and yet fought the Lords battles? Nay, and did not David oversee him in a seeming prudential way for his time, though he gave a special command to his son Solomon against him, I. Kings, 2.? Did not Abner make a bloody war against David, and yet he did not cease from hence to make use of him? Were not these men, who were with David when he fled from SAUL, Outlaws & Malcontents, Now forbore he to make his best use of these Malignants, to speak in the language of Babel? Nay, Did he not welcome Simei, who had formerly cursed him, & stood his most cruel Enemy in the time of his adversity: and that notwithstanding of Abisha's instancy to the contrary? I wish we should propose before our eyes David's practice and example (who was called a man according to Gods own heart) for our safer direction, and better regulation of our Comportment here. Spectemus hanc Cynosuram; Now David sent to Zadok and Abiathar the priests, to rebuke the negligence of the Eleders of Judah, to bring again the King to his house, whereas the people contested and strove here in forwardness, and that from an argument taken from his interest in them, & their attingency to him, sciz. That they were his Brethren, his flesh & his bones; Nay, and he sent them to Amasa, who had been a Ringleader in a present rebellion with Absalon against him, willing them to make use of this same argument with him; Nay, and promising fairly to make him Captain in joabs' stead, which he accordingly performed, did not God second this with a successful blessing? Did he not bow all the hearts of the men of judah as of one man, II. Sam. 19.11.12.13.14. verse. To apply here home, Why might not, or may not our KING use the same policy even to reclaim, and win in the hearts of these, who had been Ringleaders in a known and open Rebellion against him, fare more to make use of His loyal subjects? May I not from hence thus safely argue & reason? Do not all in whom he hath alike common interest stand justly liable in, & to the same common duty? What wisdom or prudence were it in a common Combustion and Conflagration, to debar & seclude any from contributing their aid & assistance, for quenching and extinguishing the same? Let me pose them here, if these whom they so odiously traduce under the name of Malignants, had or have no part or right in their KING, that they might be so fare neglected, as that neither their advice nor assistance should be sought or called for, for his safety and preservation, 2. Sam. 19.43? I would gladly understand the reason of difference here, why these whom they are pleased to traduce under such odious nomenclatures as Malignants and Engagers, whereas adhuc sub judice lis sit, whether the Engagers for their KING, or these for the Common Enemy, may, yea and justly should be holden and accounted true and real Malignants? Why I say these were admitted, ad omnia interiora sacra, ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the participation of the sacred Symbols in the Sacrament, and yet denied admission into the bosom of an Army, alleged raised for the good of the whole kingdom in common, wherein they have their just interest? Is there greater Religion to be showed here in This, then in that Other? May it not justly fear me, That as Ieroboā made religion subservient to his by-ends, whereas he made the two golden Calves, and set the one in Dan, and the other in Bethel, yea, & made a Temple; where Altars were built for Idolatry, or an house of high places, and made Priests of the lowest of the People (with our pious and zealous Reformers to day) Which were not of the sons of Levi, pretending one thing, The Ease of the people: but intending another, To keep the hearts of the People, that they should not turn back again unto their Lord, even to Rehaboam King of Judah, I. King. 12. That it did so go and far with them here, that they made Relegion but tributary and subservient to their own by-ends: for may it not now clearly be seen; That their Pretences or pretexts, and their Real intentions have never reciprocated and retro-commeated? That returned Answer of Vriah to David, bidding him go down to his house, II. Sam. 11. Whereas the Ark, and Israel and judah were sojourning in tents: and his Lord joab, and the servants of his Lord were encamped in open fields, that it was not time to him to go down to his house, may prove much useful and subservient to the Purpose in hand: for was it time, I pray you, for any Subjects promiscuously, when KING and Kingdom, PRINCE and Subject, all stood in danger, a common Enemy infesting the Land, to sit the Charge, not answer the Call, or for any to withdraw or withhold their aid and assistance in so pressing an exigence, or yet for the Ministry to open their mouths so wide against a present, so necessary & just expedition? I could be easily & no less justly adduced & induced to believe here, That salus populi, should have stood suprema lex. But Quod dolendum, juxta ac pudendum, our violent Reformers have overturned all; They have brought on our stage all new Rules for ordering of things, Novam regulam Credendi, novam faciendi, novam precaudi, whereas the Lord forbids us, To take His Name in vain. How many have they adacted to conceive many blind Oaths, which is a flate Taking of His Name in vain? Nay and how many have they enforced to swear against the very light of their Conscience, not only doubtingly, yea and to conceive a quite Contrary-Oath to that whereunto they had sworn formerly? Now I believe, That two Contrary-Oaths cannot be averred to have their due qualifications, to be in Truth, in Righteousness and in Judgement; Have they not professed Perjury in the person of their Characterised ones, to stand but a Personal infirmity, for extenuation of that heinous sin in men of their stamp? Have they not pleaded for Muther & for the Murderers vindication & absolution, in the person of some rightly affected to their Work in hand? Have they not taught disobedience to Civil Powers, yea, and severely punished others for teaching Obedience, as their Doctrine by them formerly condemned of unsoundness, upon after recognition declared sound and orthodox, can make faith? How many have they enforced to bear false witness against themselves, by the acknowledging parforce of the equity of their most unjust sentences, which is no less sinful than to bear the same against their Neighbour? How have they not only overseen, but besides a Toleration, patronised uncleanness in the person of their sealed ones? Numerò, throughout all, contrary to Tertullia's prescript, That Fides non aestimanda ex personis, sed personae ex fide, They passed their constructions upon men their actings of whatsomever kind, as they did favour or disfavour the Actors. Non Abel è donis, ob Abelem donae placebant; As to the RULE of Faith, Their Covenant. is made the sole Authentic RULE. As to the RULE of Prayer, they not only cashiered that pattern of Prayer prescribed by Christ, but blasphemously traduced it under the name of a Nocent Ceremony, and constructed of the bare conceiving of it, at any public service, a Note of Malignancy, Quae hos dementia caepit.  

EXCEPTIONS or OBJECTIONS.  
I meet here with three main Exceptions taken against this Truth, though so clearly evidenced and fully vindicated and asserted, or Objections builded upon weak and infirm Topics, whereby they go about to infirm and weaken this Truth.  

The First is, from that Fact and Example of Amaziah, separating from his Army, The houndreth thousand valiant men of Israel, who came to him out of Ephraim, II. Chron. 25.  
The Second is, from gideon's purging of his Army judg. 7.  
The Third is, That thus All former Principles so fairly and firmly laid, are hereby quite inverted, changed and overturned.   
To overrune these Calaemo currente, By a running pen.  

1. To the First. Nihil hîc Praesidii, There is no help from this Mountain: for did not Amaziah make a promiscuous Choice and use of all those, that were able to bear Arms, handle spear and shield, to go forth to war, without making any difference? Now who dare prove so impudent as to aver, That in such a numerous Army, there was no mixture of good and bad, or to speak by accommodation, of Covenanter and Anticovenanter, as we learn now to speak?  
2. Amaziah stood here instructed with an express Warrant from the Man of GOD, for his instituted Purgation and separation, straight inhibiting and discharging him, to let the Army of Israel go with him, because the Lord was not with them, II. Chron. 25.7. Now instruct the like Warrant for this your instituted Purgation, and so ye shall justify and warrant your Practice. I believe, That this sort of oeconomy is now ceased, God doth not so speak to us now in these last days. Heb. 1.2.  
3. The hundreth thousand men of Israel, who were separated, were men hired out of the ten Tribes, who had made a former revolt both from GOD and their King: But these men whom they would have purged out of their Army, were men fearing God and their King, or as Peter speaketh, Fearing God and honouring their King, and so hîc magnum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, labes, lacuna, dissidium, There is a great distance here. IT were to be wished, that some Armies with them had not almost altogether consisted of open or masked Rebels.  
4. IT is not safe argumenting from an Idolatrous King, to a Christian: for this Amaziah (whereas he should have given Praise to God for his victory) he fell foully away to Idolatry, for he brought the gods of the Children of Seir, and set them up to be his gods, and worshipped them, and burned incense to them, ibid. vers. 14. Nay, and a great many of his own subjects, whom he had promiscuously admitted, sacrificed & burned incense in the high places, II. King. 14.4.  
5. From a Contremand, to associate with Idolaters and Foreigners, to a Positive Commaend, to seclude and exclude Fellow-subjects and Professors. The Consequence stands inconsequent, Thus this strong Hold being dismantled, Ad quod se recipient diverticulum, To what starting hole can they betake them now?   

To the Second. gideon's Purgation.  
1. Certes, Me thinks, This is no less impertinently alleged for the justification of a called for Purgation of our Army: for he had an immediate and express Warrant from God, to qualify and justify that his Purgation.  
2. This his Purgation was instituted and made upon a fare different respect, Lest Israel should have vaunted themselves against the Lord, and said, That their own hand had saved them, as the TEXT bears.  
3. GOD commanded this Purgation for a special End, to prove Himself To be the Lord of Hosts, Who saveth not by sword or bow, spear or shield: but can save by few, as by many; Now Deus non sibi, sed nobis ponit, fert legem.  
4. The Lord gave GIDEON a sign, whereby he might know and discern these whom the Lord would have to go with him, sciz. The lapping of the water, And this for the confirmation of his faith.  
5. The Lord assured them by a Dream, and the interpretation thereof, of the Victory by a few: Now I believe, That the Lord dealt not so with the Army of our Water-lappers; Omnia haec hîc desiderabantur, all these were here wanting: and so the Event comproved That God was not with them, and that their instituted purgation of Armies, stood unwarrantable and unjustifiable.   

To the Third. The Change & Alteration of Principles.  
Here the West-land and North-land Donatists in common make bold to arcesse our Representive Church of Defection and Apostasy.  
1. I would learn of these Seraphic & enlightened Doctors, What sort of Principle this can be called and accounted, To deny Fellow-subjects this liberty in common, to fight pro Patria. pro aris et focis, for KING, Country, Religion, Lives, Liberties, Fortunes in such an Exigency of so neessarie and pressing a Defence against a Common Enemy, infesting the whole Kingdom, and seeking the overthrow, & subversion or supplantation of all? If this be a Principle of divine irrefragable and immutable verity and Authority, or of humane Policy, Institution & Invention, set only on foot by man, for his own sinister and By-ends, as a mean most powerful to keep the sword and all Power else in their own hands, as they scrupled not openly to profess their fear here of the same danger from others; In a word, Lest they should be cried down, & others up to speak homlie. Certes, This was a deep Policy from the very forge of hell, to divest the KING of His just Power, which they call the chief place of Trust, to stir up the one part of His subjects, and that not a little considerable, to a just jealousy, if not open Rebellion, and so denude Him of their just and due aid & assistance: and so to expose Him to the mercy, rather Cruelty of a most dangerous Enemy infesting Him & the whole Kingdom in common. Numerò, to redact His Monarchy, into an Aristocracy or Oligarchy, nay, into a Democracy and popular Confusion: for Virtus quò unitior, eò fortior; and ubi fingli pugnant, singuli vincuntur; Factions make fractions, and these are the certain forrunners of an unavoidable after Confusion. I believe, That I have found out Laban's gods for all Rachel her Cunning, and close sitting on them, and labouring to hid them from our fight.  
2. Ye do well to call this a Principle: for Principia praesumenda, non probanda, as they speak in Schools: Thus it is safest to presume this for a Principle: for sure I am, That ye shall never prove able, to prove and instruct it by any, demenstiative Proof, Note or Mark, as is clear and evident out of the Premises; And so the Philosophy which they kithe and bewray here, is only depraedatrix, a spoiling or robbing Philosophy, for through the deceit thereof, with the little, but pernicious skill they have, they have done what in them lay, to have carried away a fair spoil and goodly booty, By their vain traditions and elements of the World, and not of Christ, Coll. 2.8. Nay, and overturned both State and Church, and brought all under desolation.  
3. If we shall be pleased to construe of things and measure them ab eventu, What better success had that Westland Army, which consisted to their judgement of mere Water-lappers? Was God found to have been with that Army?  
4. What need you to stand upon this, to change and alter such a Principle, since you dared to make bold to invert Principles of a fare higher nature? For of old Ecclesiastical Constitutions stood not obligatory in foro externo, till the Magistrate should have interponed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or his Sanction, and so these were confirmed in Parliaments: but now the Chase is turned, the case quite altered; By your Ecclesiastical Constitutions, you made bold to confirm or infirm Parliaments, warlike Engagements, and what not? Did ye not thus transcend your sphere, and outrepasse your Line, Non sic fuit ab initio.  
5. Did not your Westland Donatists protesting against their KING His bare sitting with them in Council, let be presiding. Whose proper right it is praeesse externo Regimini, to moderate the external government of the Church, invert a Principle of a higher nature? Distant hac duo, Potestas Ecclesiastica propriè sic dicta, et potestas circa res ecclesiasticas versans; The Civil Maegistrat stands Episcopus ad extra, as CONSTANTINE the great termed Himself, as the Ministry stand Episcopi ad intra.  
6. Let me pose you, If similarie parts be not of the same tenure and nature, and so what case hath behapned or befallen the Church, in changing and altering these her first Principles, might not have befallen her at the first substerning them for Principles? What I pray you could have privileged your Church from Errability or fallability at the first more than now? I wish from mine heart, she had never made farther nor fouler defection.  
7. Is it not agreed upon amongst all sound Divines, That even the sentences or decrees of ecumenical Counsels stood not obligatory, propter authoritatem pronuntiantis, sed propter veritatem aequitatem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, pondus sententiae, because of the Authority of the Pronouncer, but for the Truth, Equity and weight of the sentence? Hitherto makes that dispute twixt S. Augustine and Maximinus an Arrian; where both roundly acknowledged, That the Authority of Counsels is not binding. Is it not a received Maxim amongst the jurists, Sententia legibus contraria, ipso jure est nulla?  
8. I believe, That the Change and alteration of all Principles formerly holden, cannot in safe construction be accounted Apostasy; Turned Paul an Apostate, whereas of a strict Pharisee, he turned an Apostle? or S. Augustine, whereas he left off to be a Manichaean, or when he had his Retractations? Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, Act. 7.22. now did he always hold fast all their Principles?  
9 Doth not the Apostle even command a certain Apostasy by an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Let every one depart or apostate from iniquity. Would to God there were more of such Apoctates. Now such is this, if it may be called Apostasy.  
10. Quod transcendit omne mirum, How have these rigid & so strict Observers of Principles, so deeply forgotten themselves, that almost they have retro-graded and trodden under foot the greatest part of all their prior principles? Fear here stands the Law of time.  
11. I pray you, did you not invert and quite overturn a Principle of a far higher nature and deeper Concernment, whereas in your so much cried up Covenant, as of a divine frame, you limited your obedience due to your KING, in the preservation of Religion, whereas in the Confession of Faith homologated by both the Nations, you stick not roundly to confess & acknowledge, that neither Infidelity nor difference in Religion makes voide the Magistrates just and legal Authority, nor doth free the people from their due obedience? Mendax oportet sit sui semper memor. O! What an Acatastasie and Confusion would this bring in Kingdoms, where Subjects and Prince stand of contrary professions? I was taught that every one should live peaceably, under the laws of the Lord of the Territory, wherein he liveth.  
12. Do ye not substerne and lay this as a firm principle, & of undoubted divine Authority, the abjuration of the Articles of PERTH? Now I would pose you, If Christ prescribed any certain gesture to be observed at the perception of the Eucharist; Nay, or if he used the gesture of sitting Himself, wherein they place so great Religion? If this particular gesture stand instituti or praecepti divini, how should they not condemn the French-Church who administer it in transitu, or en passant, and so arcesse her of Apostasy: for what is preceptory, is to all obligatory? I pray you, Is the different estimation of days, a principle of divine, irrefragable and immutable verity? I believe, besides that both in the Jewish & Christian-Church some Days have been had in greater veneration, That the Apostle willeth every one anent his different estimation of them Rom. 14. to labour for a pleroforie or fullness of assurance for his acting hereanent, Let each of these, him who esteemeth one day above another, & him who puts no difference here, but esteemeth every day alike, do it to the Lord, and all shall go right. The kingdom of God stands not in meat & drink, (where omnia congenerae are to be understood) but in righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost; alace whereas they have so busily and painfully gone about to bring in a Reformation, in Circumstantials or matters of a middle nature or indifferency, they have inverted and overturned many substantials, nay, Luxarunt et laxarunt Compagem utriusque Tabulae.  
13. What needed you to scruple much here, anent the change and alteration of this Principle, Anent the qualification of men to be received into the bosom of an Army, whereas you made no conscience to invert & overturn a Principle of far higher Nature and greater Concernment, viz. That having sworn in Covenant to maintain the KING'S just Greatness, (where under this word, just, experience hath proven many hid pieces of dishonesty to have lain lurking) & Authority, you surrendered Him into the hands of His Enemies? IT cannot but wonder me, you should strain a Gnate, having swallowed a Camel; Was this to make conscience of that sacred oath tendered by you to maintain His Sacred Person and just Greatness? In an Oath we ought no less heedily to look, Cui, then quid juraverimus as the schoolmen teach us, whose Name is interponed, the sacred Name of God, Whom-unto rather, then where-unto. As David reported well to Abner, I. Sam. 26.15. with no less just matter may I here to you. Were not ye only men of known integrity, the Charactarized Ones, and none like you in all the kingdom, for Loyalty, valour, & gallantry, wherefore did not you keep better your LORD, the KING, whereas a common Enemy was seeking His overthrow & of this whole kingdom? Alace, whereas formerly we were accounted men of unstained and untainted Loyalty, yea and of no small valour & provesse, throughout all Nations, as that we were admitted & received by foreign Kings, to stand their Guardians or guard du Corpse, as they speak; Now with Reuben we have fallen from our dignity, and lossed our excellency, and most justly incurred the stain & note of Infamy at home (in that we tendered not more the preservation & safety of our KING) to our everlasting diffamation and never dying reproach; loquetur posteritas. whereas you fond pretexe for your justification, that they keeped not Covenant here with you or Capitulation; This will not cover your nakedness, but your heels shall be found bare: for Non faciendum malum, ut eveniat bonum, we must not do evil, that good may come of it; far less, for an uncertain after-good, commit a certain present evil. Is not our whole duty we own our KING, borne upon us by Negatives? Now as the Schoolmen teach us here, Negative precepts or Commands bind and oblige as ad semper, so pro semper, as to all times, so for all times, Nay, & doth not the Scripure bind up the whole man and the whole of man here, totum hominem, et totum hominis, tongue, hand & thought, so that albeit cogitationis poenam nemo patiatur in foro soli, in foro popoli it goeth not unpunished, so that it is not safe for us to curse the King, no not in our thought Eccl. 10.20. and it is worthy our best and narrowest remark, who shall stand the discovers or revealers hereof, for a bird of the air shall carry the voice, and that which hath wings shall tell the matter. May not this strick us with fear & terror, to prove deficient in our bonden duty to out Sacred and dread SOVEREIGN? As we reply to Papists going about to justify their Idolatry, averring that they set up Images, non ad culium, sed ad usum historicum; That it is better and safer lapidem offendiculi è via consulari tollere, quàm ponere, with whatsomever Cautions or Caveats over the head of it: so may I here; IT had proven better & safer, to have keeped our LORD the KING and capitulated with them, then upon the surrendering of Him into their hands, to trust to their after-Capitulation. Do not your Ministry discover both your & their own Skirts, whereas from Chair they make bold to attest God, how evil ye stand acquitted for your Loyalty and good service done them, which hath proven disloyalty and bad service to your Supreme LORD of Heaven, and His Deputy upon earth.  
IT is a received MAXIM; Quod quis per alium facit, ho per se meritè facere videtur, yea, & there is another to the same purpose, Quod quis non vetat, cum potest, quod vetare tenetur, is jubet. Thus I see not how you can stand free of the crying bloud-guilt of your Sacred SOVEREIGN. Do not, I pray you, S. Ambrose yea, and Gregory too, aver; Non carere scrupulo societatis occulto, ubi quis manifesto sceleri desinit obviare. I dare be bold to aver, That unsoundness of Doctrine hath done no less harm, than the Sword of Persecution throughout the whole bussines. As is recorded of ARRIUS Heresy, That it did more hurt to the Church of God, than the ten bloody Persecutions. IT fears me, That it may be truly said of our Church, for all the cried up glory of this great and glorious work of Reformation, That her works are not to be found perfect before God, as is said of the Church of Sardis, Revel. 3.2. Nay, And that Christ hath not a few things against her, as is said of the Church of Pergamus. Revel. 2.12.  
14. I cannot understand upon what warrantable ground this can be goodly called a Principle, To deny fellow-subjects liberty, to fight pro patria, pro aris et focis, for KING, and Kingdom, whereas Wise Solomon determines quite to the contrary: for he shows that In the multitude of people stands or consists the King's honour, as on the other hand, In this defect or want His destruction, Prov. 14.28. The truth and smart whereof, we have found by sad and doleful experience. For Closure, Let me recommend both to State and Church, throughout this kingdom, Mordicai his healthful advice to queen Esther; For if thou altogether holdest thy peace at this time, then shall there Enlargement and deliverance arise to the Jews from another place, but thou and thy father's house shall be destroyed, Esther 4.14. So accommodate ad subjectum, by accommodation to the subject or purpose in hand; If you shall prove deficient and wanting to repress, yea and redress all formerly Disorders both in State and Church, and carefully repair by gone slips & misgivings, these shall prove but the bare and naked beginnings of greater After-sorrows and Calamities, and God shall not fail or prove wanting, to foresee and provide, for the good and well of His own Zion. As on the other hand, Queen Esther her practice in undertaking the suit, by taking her life, as it were, in her hand; If I perish, I perish, to your imitation; That so disrespecting, as it were, the quality of whatsoever opposers, and laying aside all Panik-fears, you would endeavour to break thorough all contrary Letts and thwarting obstacles: & make the peace of State and Church your chiefest joy & aim, and that so according to Christ's prescription, you would at last, Render to Caesar, the things that be Caesars, as to God, the things that are Gods. Nay, & I would wish from mine heart, That as you have committed, by following Achitophelian counsel, a transcendent, exorbitant and unparelleled Transgression, by surrendering up of your KING into the hands of His cruel & bloody Enemies, yea, & whereas He came of His own accord under your wings to trust, whereby you have done what in you lay, to precide and cut off all just hopes of all after Reconciliation. So now following the example of the Aramits, you would in all submission and out of a deep resentment of guilt and sorrow, stay and present yourselves to His Son, your Sacred and dread now SOVEREIGN, with rops about your necks, relying on His Merciefulnes; & you might yet expect some favourable aspects & respects: for, NOBILIS EST IRA LEONIS, parcere subjectis et debellare superbos; And sure I am, That He will account it His no less glory, to succeed His Royal FATHER of Blessed and never dying Memory, Who lived a SAINT, and died a MARTYR, in, and to His most rare and commendable Christian Virtues, then in, and to His Crowns.     

Printed by James Brown, APRIL, 1661.