Suppose yet the same man obteyneth a licence from the L. Byshop of the Diocesse without any unlawfull condition for to continue in that his course ; 3 Qu: I ask , whether that leav , or licence given doth pollute the actions : seing a man may ask leav of the great Turk to preach the Gospell within his dominions ?

This Supposition conteyneth a contradiction : Ans. for the very obteyning , & receiving of the Bishops licence ( which yet I think no man doth before he have receaved orders as they are called ) is a real acknowledgment that the Byshop hath a lawfull power to graunt it , which is an vnlawfull condition . John Claydon a martyr of Christ was otherwise minded then this man , 14●5 . Mr. Fox . when he witnessed that the Byshops licence to preach the word of God , was the true character of the beast . i. e. Antichrist . Rev. 13. 15. 16. 17. & 14 9. 10. Neyther is there the like reason of procuring the Byshops liecence to preach the gospell in his Province or Diocesse , & of asking leav of the great Turk to preach in his dominions . For 1. he minceth the matter too much , in making this obteyning of the Bishops licence to be nothing but the asking him leav , as a man may ask leav of the great Turk , that is , desire him not to hinder him . For to obteyn licence of the Bishop is to obteyn publique authority of the publique officer , and according to the publique lawes , of the church , to excercise a publique ministery . 2. The great Turk is a lawfull civill Magistrate in his Dominions , with whose civill authority it is lawfull to partake : but so is not the Byshop a lawfull Ecclesiasticall officer in his Province or Diocesse , with whose spirituall jurisdiction Gods servants may communicate . And is this to lead men by the hand , to take for graunted the mayn question in controversy , to wit , that the Bishops jurisdiction in their Provinces & Diocesses is lawfull : which I have also by sundry arguments proved vnlawfull , & antichristian . Act: 9. Surely they who suffer themselves thus to be led must be as destitute of spirituall sight , as was Saul of bodily , when men led him by the hand to Damascut . Theyr authority then being proved ( & so confessed by this myne opposite els where ) antichristian , Rev. 18. 4. & so consequently one of the sinns of Babylon ; whether excercised by themselves or by others ; eyther Officials in the Consistories , or ministers in the Parochiall churches , may not by Gods people be partaken with , no not in actions though otherwise lawfull , under the peyn of Babylons plagues .

And this answer also serveth to the 4th demaund , 4 Qu: Ans. or Supposition of this persons takeing besydes his licence , the form of admission called orders , of the Diocesan . And so , that which I bring pag: 15. Arg: 2. of my book , is here misapplyed . I there speak of lawfull actions performed merely by the personall grace of fayth , & the Spirit in a godly man , though of infirmity remayning in an estate , & standing otherwise culpable : but here of actions , though in themselves lawfull , yet performed immediately by vertue , or vice rather of that very vnlawfull state , & standing .

Suppose after this that being desyred , 5 Qu: & so chosen by some assembly wherein there are many fearing God apparently , he taketh a Pastorall charge of them , haveing the Bishops , & Patrons admission , but cheifly , & professedly grounding his calling vpon the peoples choyse : & that he do nothing but the same he did before , besydes the administration of the Sacraments to such as are in charity , & discretion to be esteemed worthy , what hindreth from communion here ?

Indeed if men may take liberty in disputeing first to suppose what themselves have a mynde vnto , Ans: and after to suppose , that others are also of the same mynde with them , and yet have litle reason eyther for the one or other , they may then easily conclude theyr purposes . But .1 . I deny that an assembly gathered , & consisting of many fearing God , & many ( which must also be supplied ) without the fear of God , is a lawfull Church-assembly , haveing a right in communion , or common right , to call , & enjoy a pastour , & his pastorall administrations . 2. I deny that any doth , or can truely take a pastorall charge in the parrish assemblyes . It belongs to the pastours charge not onely to teach , & minister the sacraments , but also ( & that as a mayn parte , or duety thereof ) to govern , and rule the flock : which no parochiall minister doth , o● can take vpon him . Act. 20. 17. 20 1 Thes: 5. 1● . 1 Tim: 5. 17.

3. The Church of England ; doth acknowledge no such calling as is cheifly grounded vpon the peoples choyce : but onely that which is grounded vppon the Bishops ordination at the first , and to the ministery at large : and determinately , eyther uppon the Bishops license , or vppon the patrons presentation , Bishops institution , and Arch-deacons induction , confirmed by the publique lawes of the same Church , both ecclesiasticall , & civill . According to which publique lawes , and orders ( especially submission vnto them being publiquely professed and given , as is by the minister here deciphered ) we are to judge of the publique ministery of the Church , & not according to the private intendiments , and vnderhand professions of particular persons . And let God , & all reasonable men judge between me & myne opposite , whether a man goeing to the publique governers of a Church , & desyreing of them a publique office , or publique orders , & so receaving them according to the publique lawes of the same Church , & therewith authority to preach the word , & so preaching publiquely in the same Church , whether I say such a man be not to be esteemed as called to that work by these governers ; & so by consequence , whither al men pertakeing with him in that work of preaching for which he was so sent , do nor partake therin withall what in them lyeth in the authority of the sender . And for such a man ( except he have publiquely renounced his former calling ) to pretend in secret vnto his freinds whom he dare trust , & who , he thinks , will agayn trust , & beleeve him , eyther that he preacheth not by that calling , or by an other principally , is but to put on a cloak of shame , & to walk in craftines , ● Cor. 4. 2. more like in truth to a disguized familist , then a minister of Iesus Christ . And if any ministery grounded , as this man supposeth , be to be found in any of the assemblyes , I deny the ●ame to be the ministery of the Church of England , about which our question is . And howsoever men do build much vppon the peoples acceptance of , and submission vnto theyr ministery , yet is this a very sandy foundation wherevpon to build such a weight . If they be not the lawfull ministers of those Churches before , it is theyr syn to accept of them , Rom: 15. 31 Heb: 13 17 & submit vnto them , as such . The peoples acceptance , and submission are not causes , but consequences of the ministers calling , & duetyes , which they ow vnto them all theyr life long . 4. The supposition is but an imagination , that any parochiall minister doth administer the sacraments onely to such as are , in charity , & discretion , to be esteemed worthy . He is by his parochiall cure ( & shew me the man whose practise is not answerable ) to administer the sacrament of Baptism to all the infants born in the parrish , though neyther parent can , no not in the most enlarged , if ●ot over-stretched charity , be judged to be of the fayth , & so in the covenant of Abraham ; according to which covenant Baptism is to be administred . Lastly , I would know of this man ( & so of others who would bring the presbiteriall government vpon the parrish assemblyes without a separation ) what should be done with such men of years in the parrish , as are to be esteemed vncapeable of the L : Supper . It should seem , as the common opinion is , that such should be suspended , & so consequently ( remayning obstinate & incorrigible ) excommunicated . But by what law of God , or reason of man , do the Censures of the Church apperteyn vnto such , as had never right to be of the Church , nor were within Gods * * Gen: 17. covenant made onely with theyr faythfull , & theyr seed ? And since the Church is onely to † † 1 Cor: 5. 12. iudg them which are within , & the same faln from theyr former holines , at least , externall ; how should not excommunication be greatly prophaned vpon such , as never came vnder that condition of eternall holines ?

Suppose at length that he be deprived by that prelate , ● Qu: which formerly admitted him , for not conforming to humayne corrupti●ns , & his people for fear of 〈◊〉 forsake him , if he I say now reiected by the prelate , & witnessing agaynst his corruptions , shal without seeking any new licence fynde place to preach the gospell in occasionally els where , why should any refuse to hear him ?

First this his deprivation ( especially for well doeing or not doeing evill ) by the prelates spirituall jurisdiction , Ans: shewes his spirituall bondage vnto the Anticristian H●erarchy : as doth also his forsakeing his flock when ●he wolfe thus cometh , Ioh: 10. declare ( by the testimony of Christ himself ) of what Spirit he is . And very fadeing is the colour , which here he sets vpon the ministers cess●ation from theyr ministery : which is the peoples forsakeing them for fear of da●nger : whereas the contrary is most true , & that the ministers did vniversally , for fear of daunger , forsake the people : and that in sundry places , where the people offered to suffer persequution with them at the magistrates handes . But myne answer is , that this man remayning by the prelates ordination a minister of the Church of Engl: & as he was before his institution , or licence , & so preaching by that calling , communion cannot be had with him therein , without submission vnto & vpholding of the Prelates Antichristian authority , which in that work he exerciseth .

Suppose lastly that the s●me man doth besydes the good actions which God hath commaunded , admit of some thing at mans commaund , which is not lawfull , 7 Qu: yet houlding the fayth , & building faythfully in the mayn things of the Gospell , and it may be repenting also of what he hath done at his admission : is no communion lawfull with him in those very things , which if they were done by another after the same manner were heavenly dutyes ? May not his fault be an humayn infirmity , in an externall ordinance ? May not some faultes of his enterance be circumstantiall personall actions by which his calling is not abolished .

This Quaere is in effect comprehended in the former , Ans: in whose answers it hath also been answered . But for more full satisfaction I further ad ; that I may not partake in the sinns , though of hum●yn infirmity , 1 Tim: 5 & of persons otherwise go●ly : whether those sin●s be in the work done , or in the vnlawfull calling of the doer : of which we here speak , and not of any personall , or circumstantiall action , as is in vayn insinuated . And he that breaks down the partition wall which an vnlawfull especially an antichristian calling sets vp in the Ch: , Numb : 16. not making conscience of partaking therwith in duetyes how heavenly soever in themselves , makes way for all Babylonish confusion : neyther is Israel now to be blamed for communicateing with Corah in the heavenly duety of burning ince●se to the Lord , to whom onely a lawfull outward calling was wanting : he so ministering by an Anti-mosaicall , as do the men of whom we speak , by an Anti-Christian calling . And for the ministers repenting of what he hath done at his admission , it may well be called ( as truely being ) a supposition , but of an impossibility , and contradiction . He cannot repent of his sin , which is his re●●eaving authority from the Bishop to preach , but he must forsake , & renounce the same authority , as he receaved it , which if 〈◊〉 indeed & truth , he ceaseth to be a minister of the Church of England .

And thus it appeareth , how this Authour is so far from leading a good conscience by the hand a●●e promiseth , as that he doth not so much as poynt out with the finger any passible way into publique communion with the parrish assemblyes as they stand : but rayther haveing framed a plot of ministery , & other devise in his study , sends men by doubtfull suppositions to seek they know not what , nor where . It remaynes we now come to his removall of the barrs which I in my book set in the way : the first whereof is , that , such a parrishional minister is a branch of the prelacy / as receaving power from it / by which it doth administer / and therefore all communion with it to be avoyded by Gods people .

His answer is , that in proper , & accurate speach the minister , whom he formerly described , is no branch of the prelacy , nor doth receave his power of ministering from any prelate .

The question is not whether the minister which he describeth , or rather Supposeth , be a branch of the prelacy , & so minister or no : but whether the ministery of the parrish assemblyes , being partes of the Diocesses , and Provinces , be such or no.

He addeth , that the power of right he ( that is his supposed minister ) had before ever he had to do with any prelate , which power is from God by the Church : but a power of externall legall abillity to do that , which from God by the people he had formerly right to do , this he may be sayd to receav from the prelate .

He looseth himself in the labyrinth of his own devise : for even his supposed minister had to do with the prelate , both for license to preach & orders of ministery before this supposed right conveyed to him by the people , as appears in his Quae : 3. 4. & 5 compared together . 2. None of the parrish assemblyes have in theyr hands , as Churches , power of right to chuse theyr ministers , nor are the Lords free people in that case : but do , on the contrary , stand in subjection & bondage spirituall to the prelate , and patron , by whose appoyntment they must receave them , will they , nil they . Indeed some of them do by favour , or mony get ius patronatus into theyr handes , & so do agree amongst themselves what person they will present vnto the Bishop for theyr Clark : but this they do not as a Church , neither will , or may the Bishop so receave him from them , or appoynt him over them , but as a patron , ( which right any one profane person may have & enioy as well as they ) : nor , that such a person may be ordeyned a minister in , & of that Church , Act. 6 , & 14 accordeing to the order Apostolicall : but that being before , or first , a minister at large of the Bishops makeing , and ordeyning , he may by the same episcopall authority , in way of licence , or institution conveyed , be determined to that particular parrish , according to the Popish order . So that if there were any thing in the distinction between the power of right , & of freedom , he hath the power of right , or authority by the Byshop at the first , in his ordination : & the legall ability or freedom afterwards by the patron , & prelate presenting , & appointing him to his place : & so the parrish , as a Church onely receaves him so appoynted by others . But the distinction is more subtile then sound : & i● not a distinction without a difference , yet a division of things inseparable in this kynde . No man hath externall spirituall power of right , to minister the holy things of God , but by a lawful calling : & no man haveing a lawful calling wants external spiritual power of ability or freedom to minister them : & of this power we speak , as being that which the Bishops as the spirituall governers of theyr Prov: & Dioc : do confer . I know a man may be restreyned by viol●nce , or other bodily impediment from the vse of this spirituall freedom , but then he is restreyned from the vse of his power of right also . Whosoever hath the one hath the other by the same act , & whosoever hath a lawfull calling , hath both . Of his great mistakeing ( vpon which notwithstanding he builds the weight of his answer , both in this , & the former parte of the book ) which is that the Bishops Provinciall , & Diocesan authority & administrations are civile , & derived from the king , I shall speak hereafter .

He ads that it cannot stand with my plea , that such a man preaching diligently , & professing that to be his mayn office should in this work be a branch of the prelacy , & d●●t by his power receaved by him . For. 1. this is not any parte of the prelates power ( as he is a prelate ) to preach the word . Which he also would prove by an affirmation in my book , which is ( though he weaken the evidence of the truth thereof in relateing it ) that the prelates office / and order is founded vppon theyr usurpation of the rights / and libertyes wherewith Christ the Lord in his word hath endowed his Church ( the Elders for theyr government / and the people for theyr liberty ) for the calling of officers / & censureing of offenders . Power therefore ( sayth he ) of preaching can be no parte of it .

First that which he admits in myne affirmation hath enough in it to overthrow his consequence . For if it belong to the prelates to call ministers , & that in calling them , they give them power & * * Book of ordering of Preists . authority ( though no absolute charge ) to preach according to the order of that Church ; then followeth it vndeniably , that those ministers thus preaching do therein excercise the prela●es power : & that it may be sayd of the ministers , and Bishops , Mat. 10 , 40 , as Christ sayd of his disciples & himself , that whosoever receaves them which are sent , receaves them which send them . In submitting vnto , or withdrawing from him that is sent by the king , in a work of his office , men do submit vnto , or withdraw from the king himself , & his authority ; so is it in all estates , & subordinations , whether Ecclesiasticall , or civile ; as every one that dimms it not in himself , may see by the light of nature .

And if vnto this be added , that , as the whole nation is devided into two provinces vnder the two Arch-Bishops / and the Provinces into ●●ndry ●●o●eses vnder the Bishops / and they into theyr severall parrishes vnder the ministers thereof / so the Arch-Bishops / and Bishops do share out vnto the parrish preistes in theyr ordination / & other assignementes / a parts of theyr charge , to wit / so much as concerns the ordinary service of the parrish : as vnto theyr chancelours , commissaryes , and Arch-deccors on other parts for inferiour government reserveirg to themselves the Lordship ever both for the best advantage of theyr own honour , and profit , it will then evidently appear , ( as that the part is a branch of the whole ) , that the parochial ministery is a branch of the di●●es●n & provinciall p●●lacy . By which ministery we are not to vnderstand ( as doth myne opposite ) the work of preaching , or any other work whatsoever , but the office , & power exequuted , & vsed in these works . For if we will exactly weigh things in a just ballance , we must consider of these three distinct poynts in the ministery . 1. The office . 2. The power . 3. The workes . The office is the very state , & function conferred vpon a man by his calling : from which office ariseth immediately power , & charge to minister , and to perform the workes of that office : in the performance of which workes the office is exequuted , and power vsed . And if preaching diligently & faythful●y were the pastours mayn office , then should Apostles , Prophets , & Evangelists , have the same mayn office with pastours , for they all do that work of diligent preaching , 1 Cor: 16. 10. one as we ●as an other : besides that this work is lawfully performed by him that hath no office at all , Quae : 1 , & 2. & therefore cannot be the Pastours office mayn , or mean .

2ly , It followeth not because the office of the prelates is founded vppon theyr vsurpation of the Churches rights in calling of officers , & consureing of ●fferders● , that therefore power of preaching is no parte of theyr office . Men may by theyr office have power to do more then the very things vppon which theyr office is founded : otherwise the parochiall ministery should be very slightily founded , considering how many trifles , and superstitions the ministers have not onely power but charge also to perform . By this mans reasoning theyr office should be founded vppon the wearing of a surplice , makeing a crosse , &c. for these they have power to do , yea not power to leav vndone , by theyr office .

There are among men many lawfull offices or orders , & those lawfully founded , and yet not so perfitly but that some evil actions are ( through humayn fraylty ) done in & by them : so on the contrary is the office of prelacy vnlawfull , & vnlawfully founded , and yet not so absolutely , but that the good work of preaching may be and is performed in , and by it . Which preaching being also an inferiour work of that office , and order ( which is principally set vp for government ) : and that wherwith the Bishops do litle trouble the Churches , it ma● well be excluded from the foundation of theyr office , though a work thereof : ( as there are also many doctrines of Christian religion , Heb. 6. ● . besydes those which are properly called the foundations thereof ) & though a work good in it self , yet in the extent of theyr power to preach when and where they list in theyr provinces , and diocesses , exorbitant , and antichristian ; & so a parte of theyr usurpation , whether of the foundation , or building , it matters not : a parte of which power they also share out vnto the ministers in theyr severall parrishes . An other argument he bring vpon an affirmation in my book , ( p. 29 ) that preaching is no natural , or necessary parte of the parochiall ministers office .

This myne assertion in the first place he reprocheth as an intemperate speach proceeding from an impotent sicknes of mynde , which yet ( sayth he ) may be vsed agaynst my selfe .

If I were sick of any such impotency of mynde , as he in his potency of mynde pronounceth , I should surely fynde him a phisition of no value : which brings no other medicine then a reproch to cure me withall . Onely he insinuates a reason agaynst that I say , which is , that , preaching the word is expresly mentioned in the ministers ordination . And is it not also mentioned in the ordination of a Mas-preist , of whose office notwithstanding it is no necessary or naturall parte ? yea is it not evident that one , and the same ordination serves both for a Mas-preist , & parochiall minister , being given , by a popish Byshop ? and so by consequence , that there is one , & the same office of both , though exercised in some different workes ? So also is ministring the disciplyne of Christ , as the Lord hath commaunded , expresly mentioned in his ordination : & is it therefore a necessary work of the Parochiall minister ? or is he any more then the Bishops mans man in publishing his court censure ? The Bishop also expresly bids his ordeyned one , Receav the H : Ghost . Doth he therefore so receav it ? Or know we not that it is Antichrists guise , and that not a litle advantageable to the mistery of his iniquity , to keep the formes of good wordes without the substance of things , & so vnder the name of Christ to subvert Christs truth , and ordinances ? I would to God the notorious ignorance , and vtter inability to preach the gospell in the greatest parte , by farr , of the parochiall ministers , to the destruction of so many 1000 soules for which Christ dyed , did not cry out vnto God , and men agaynst both that Church , Prelacy , and ministery , that preaching is no necessary parte , or work of theyr office . There is but one order , or office of preisthood in that church : & how can that be a naturall , or necessary parte of that office , which the most of those officers want , this especially being by the constant practise of the puqlique governers , & according to the constitution , and state of that Church , ministery , and government ; the publique lawes thereof also both ecclesiasticall , and civile approveing it ; as otherwise , so by appoynting homilyes to be read by such as are vnable to preach .