●irst . THe Judgement of the Court was earnestly craved and desired by R. Mayo and his Councellors , against E B. upon a verdict on record in the Court formerly given by an injust jury ( as my former account of the former proceeding declareth . ) And E. B. was called ● answer for himselfe , and shew what reason he could that Judgement ●ould not be given against him , who did appear , and answer in the ●ar of the Lord , saying , that he was come before their judgement seat , ●ith great boldnesse , because he had the Lord on his side , and Truth ●n his side , and the witnesse of God in all Consciencies on his side , to ●●stifie him that he had done R. Mayo no wrong , but had spoken the ●ruth of him ; And for this cause judgement ought to be arrested , and ●ot given against him , because ( said he ) the Law condemnes no man ●or speaking the Truth , and he had spoken nothing but the Truth , con●erning R. Mayo , as he was alwayes ready to prove that R , Mayo had ●eld forth damnable Doctrine and Error ; and this was sufficient reason , ●hat judgement ought to be arrested and not given , nor he condemned ●or speaking the Truth , And he referred himselfe to the Court , and ●o the witnesse of God in them all , whether they would condemn ●im or justify him ; but and if they did passe judgement upon him , it ●as onely for speaking the Truth , and not for any wrong done by him ●nd it should lye upon themselves and be their burden , though he ●ight unjustly suffer in this life by unjust judgement , yet theirs would ●e the judgement and the suffering in the life to come , when God did ●●●eward every man according to his work , and he would leave it upon ●hem , and to this purpose he spoke unto them . Then R. Mayos Coun●ellors and the Court pleaded , that there was a verdict by jury against ●im , and that the Court was to go upon the verdict , which appeared ●pon record against the defendant , to which E. B. replyed it was true , ●n unjust verdict they had against him ; but what then ? he would ●pply himselfe , and his cause to the Judge in the sight of the Lord , if ●ossibly he might be convinced of the unrighteousnesse of the verdict , ●nd might not he then justly mitigate in the judgement , and deferre it , ●nd deny the verdict ? and he did appeal to their Consciencies , that it was an unjust verdict , for the jury had brought the matter to a wrong ●ssue , and had not determined and judged according to the Truth and ●nnocency of the matter , nor brougth it to a Lawful issue , but had damnified him falsely , before they found any matter of fact against him , or the Tru●h of the matter was not searched into , nor the Doctrine ●as not tryed nor determined of by the jury which he had charged and ●roved in Court against R. Mayo , which Doctrine was damnable and error ; but of the Doctrine the Jury had not judged whether it was sound and true , or damnable and error , which the true issue of the matter stood upon ; but the Jury had unjustly damnified him ( for speaking maliciously as they said ) before any matter of fact truly found , and made appear according to equity , and that was injust , and therefore again , judgement ought to be arrested upon that reason , because they had not truly tryed the matter , whether R. Mayos sayings , charged and proved against him , were damnable Doctrine and Error , or whether they were not so , which was the true cause to be tryed , but they had condemned him for speaking such words , not trying and determining whether the words were true or false words , and till that was tryed , and his words proved false words ; he could be no Transgressor , this was the substance and intent of his words , then R. Mayos Councel again replyed , that he might then blame the Jury , but according to the verdict upon record against the defendent the Court was to proceed ; then the Recorder of the Court said reasonably to this purpose , that the Jury was Judges of matter of fact , and he was judge in matter of Law ; and if any thing could be objected , or error discovered in the businesse as in matter of Law , by what appeared upon record , to that he would harken , for R. Mayo had in his Replication , laid in that E B. spoke the words charged against him without any such cause by him in his plea alledged , &c. Whereupon T. Moor gave divers Arguments as in matter of Law ; and also produced the judgement of one Judge and three Lawers in writing under their hands , shewing divers sound reasons , wherefore judgement ought to be arrested in this cause , shewing clearly according to Law , that the words charged against E. B. ( to wit , ) saying R. Mayo held forth damnable Doctrine and Error , ( which is reckoned his offence , and wherefore the Jury gave verdict against him , and the Priest , and his Councellors begged judgement , ) are not actionable in Law ; instancing out of Cookes Institutes , particular causes of the like nature , which could not bear an action , and much as to that purpose was spoken , and shewed under the four mens hands as afore said , which were just exceptions in point of Law , against the verdict upon record , wherefore judgement ought to be arrested , and not passed in this cause against the defendant , but to all what was shewed and spoken to that purpose R. Mayos Councels replyed , the time was now past , to aledge these things , for the Jury had given their verdict upon oath against the defendant , wch was upon record , and thereupon waved all the reasons that could be given , though never so sound , and begged the judgement of the Court as afore said against him , but then E. B. returned to the naked Truth , and came again to the simplicity and innocency of the matter , and waved all the multitude of Arguments , that could be spoken about points and formalities . of the Law , pleading that whereas the Court had given him liberty according to his right and birth right priviledge , that he might plead his own cause , and he instanced the time of his alledgement wherein he did say peradventure he might not plead his cause in the formalities and punctilios in the course of Law , yet he could plead the justness and simplicity of the Truth in the matter , and the Court then had said , that would serve , and be sufficient ; and said E. B. the Court having thus spoken formerly ; must I now be condemned for the want of a form and punctilio in Law , wanting no part of Truth on my side , nor manifestation of it , if they did , might not he say they had as it were betrayed him ? though yet he could not say so , and at this Argument some of the Court seemed to be highly offended , as if he reflected upon them , wronging and retorting upon their former kindnesse to him , which he did not , but spoke simply and innocently in the matter , onely to manifest Truth , and to perswade them to do Truth and Justice , alwayes keeping close to the Truth of the cause , and still affirmed ( as lawfully he may ) that the particulars ( which is declared in my first account ) charged and proved against R. Mayo the Plantiffe in open Court , are damnable Doctrine and Error , and that he would justifie , if there he were pleading for his life , as it was but for his liberty at most , he would , nor could in Conscience say no lesse ; and if they would condemne him , and judge him in an hundred pounds for speaking the truth , he would bear it in patience and suffer , as for righteousnesse sake , and he doubted not in the Lord , but to have the peace and presence of the everlasting Father , with him , if he suffered all his dayes , to this purpose he spoke , and thus shewed great courage in the Lord against all unrighteous judgement , looking onely to the Lord , and above all the World and suffering in it , as if he mattered nothing of all what they could do against him , saying when they had done all that could be against him ; the Law whereby he might proceed against them was the Law of Christ , and he might pray for his Enemies , and blesse them that persecute , and say the Lord forgive them , when they had done the evil they could , still affirming that he had spoken the Truth concerning his adversary ; Then R. Mayo being sitting upon the bench , he made some answer , seeming to justify his Doctrine formerly delivered by him , and charged against him to be damnable , wch he repeated , and would have vindicated , and said ; that the light which Christ lighteth every man withall , John 1.9 . is carnall and darkness . 2. And that he did exhort the people in his Sermon , to follow and obey a light which is not Christ , nor the light of the Gospel . 3. The Apostle Paul did exhort the Saints to follow and obey a light , which was not the Light of the Gospel . 4. Christ was not that word that David walked by , when he said thy word is a light , &c. 5. A man may be a righteous man , and not a godly man ; He seemed a little to vindicate these things , but to no purpose , as to men of understanding in the things of God ; for he brought not one scripture to prove his Doctrine at that time , though some of the Court his friends bid him : so its manifest he continues in ignorance and blindness still , and his own folly cannot reprove him , nor make him ashamed : Then T. Moor said , he would take in hand to prove to all people , in the steeple house , or any other publique place , where R. Mayo would meet him , if he would give him a meeting , that he was guilty of holding forth damnable Doctrine and error : and he should maintain it in Argument against him , at any time and place where he would meet him , that the particulars held forth by him , and proved in Court against him , are damnable doctrine and error , then John Feilder spoke to the Judges , that R. May● should come off the bench , for it was against Act of Parliament , that any Priest sould sit upon the bench in any Judicatory : and I say it was also unseemly , that the plantiffe and Accuser should sit upon the bench as if he was Judge in his own cause , and the Defendant , and accused stand as at the Barr : but the Court caused R. Mayo to come down off the bench , who did with shame , and his practise shewed , he is truly such a one as Christ cryed wo against who loved the Chief-seats , and uppermost rooms in the Assemblies , Mat. 23. But R. Mayo the Priest seemed to speak something as if he would give T. Moor a meeting with 20. people as such a number , but before he had ended his words as to that , the Court stopped him , and his own friends would not suffer him to speak further to it : then he sell upon the matter in hand , much desiring he was and craved to have judgement by the Court against E. B. and produced the opinion in writing of Serjeant Maynard to this purpose , that if the word , were true , he deserved deprivation of his place , &c. and therefore the words spoken against him were actionable , &c. some controversy arose about the meaning of the words : ( if the words be true ) and by ( if the words be true ) we understood and said he meant , if that it was true , that he was guilty of preaching damnable doctrine and error : then he disserved deprivation , &c. but R. Mayo and his Councel , would have given some other meaning upon the words , for their own advantage , and what the true meaning of Serjeant Maynard is , remains in his own brest , the words seemed doubtful .

And now I come to some more particulars of R. Mayos damnable Doctrines , charged against him , and perferred to be proved in open Court , whereby his wickednesse , and E. Bs. guiltlesseness may more appear : first it was charged , that R. Mayo had affirmed , that the Devill is the power of God . 2ly . That the Gospel was not the power of God , a rose-cake is as much the power of God . 3ly . R. Mayo affirmed , if one man killed and murthered another , he did it by the power of God : These things were charged upon R. Mayo , and not denyed by him , but he went to justify them in open Court , and affirmed that the Devil is the power of God , and said he would prove it by Scripture , and brought that Scripture Acts 8 , 9 , 10. where the unclean Spirits and poor bewiched , people of Samaria , whom Simon Magus the Scorcerer had bewiched , said of him this man is the great power of God , as you may read : and this was his proof , that the Devill is the power of God : and here all may see R. Mayos error and damnable doctrine , and wickednesse , and ignorance , and blasphemie , who hath brought the Testimony of poor bewitched people , and unclean Spirits , that know not God , but were wholly without him in the World , to prove what he affirmed , ( to wit ) that the Devil is the power of God , and its the same Spirit in him that affirmes it , as it was in the bewitched people , that said the Sorcerer was the great power of God , who are his Witnesses and Testimonie of what he affirms , and he may as well say , Christ hath a Devil , and bring the Pharisees words , who said thou hast a Devil : and this is the same in nature with his words : but the whole Court saw his folly and ignorance , and he was sensible of his own blindnesse , and might be of the deceit of his own heart . And is not this damnable Doctrine and Error , and of the Devil to affirm , and endevour to vindicate that the Devil is the power of God ? was ever the like heard , or held forth by sober men ? may not he and all his people be ashamed of his doctrines : Christ said the Devil was out of the Truth , and there was no Truth in him , and was a murtherer , and a Lyar from the beginning , and abode not in the Truth , and all the holy Prophets and Apostles gave their Testimony against the Devil and his Works , and did distinguish between Christ , who is the power of God , and the Devil who is against him , for the Apostle was sent to turn from Satans power , from the Devil , to the power of God , Acts 18. Here the Apostle makes them two , and shews they were not one , but contrary one to the other : and he called the Devil the adversary of their souls , the roaring Lyon that went about seeking whom he might devour , and the Devil made war against Christ , and tempted him to evill , and persecuted the Woman , and the remnant of her seed : and Hell was prepared for the Devill and his Angels , Mat. 25.41 . search through the Scripture , and see what is spoken of the Devil , and see if the Devil and the power of God be one , and the same as R. Mayo holds forth , or whether they are not distinguished to be contrary one to the other , through the Scripture , and Christ is called the power of God , and the power of God made the world , and upholds all things : and if the Devil be the power of God as is affirmed by this wicked man , then the power of God is out of the Truth , and abode not in it , but is a murtherer and a lyar , and there is no Truth in it , and is the adversary of souls , and the roaring Lion that seeks to devour souls , and the power of God made war against Christ , and tempted him to evil , and persecuted the Saints , and the seed of God , and made war against them , and Hell is prepared for the power of God , and must go into the lake , according to this doctrine ; and if his doctrine be true , then the power of God is the Devil , and made the world , and upholds it , and Christ is the Devil , or else R. Mayos doctrine is damnable and error ; but this doctrine is damnable and error , and of the Devil as all men may behold and see , for the Devil and the power of God is contrary one to the other , and are not one but two distinct ; Blasphemy and error in the highest nature is this his doctrine ; and the Scripture saith Christ was made manifest , to destroy the Devil , and the works of the Devil : now if the Devil be the power of God , as R. Mayo saith , then Christ was manifest to destroy the power of God and his works , which he also affirmed as may be proved against him , Oh! error and damnable doctrine in the highest nature , which is held forth publiquely in the open Court ! may not the Court be ashamed of this their Minister , and the Jury also , who hath given verdict against E. B. for speaking Truth ? for is not R. Mayo guilty of holding forth damnable doctrine and error ? let the light in all mens Consciences judge , and let them tremble to give judgements in this cause , against a man for speaking the Truth , least the Lord God bring judgement , and wrath upon them , and all men behold their shame , if they condemn the innocent , and justifie the ungodly 2. R. Mayo affirmed that the Gospel was not the power of God , but a rose cake was as much the power of God .

Answ And this is damnable Doctrine , for if the Gospel be not the power of God as R. Mayo saith , then the Gospel is not to be believed for salvation , nor cannot convert Sinners to God , nor is to be preached to save souls , for nothing can save , nor convert sinners but the power of God . And the Apostle said the Gospel is the power of God , Rom. 1.16 . but R. Mayo hath said quit the contrary , that the Gospel is not the power of God , and the Gospel is everlasting , and converted and saved Sinners , and the Gospel the power of God was preached to Abraham , before the Scriptures were written , and was preached to all the Saints by the Apostles , and if any preached another Gospel , then the power of God , that Paul preached , let him be accursed , saith the Apostle : but a rose cake is a dead thing and without life , and cannot convert Sinners , nor save souls , nor is everlasting , nor the power of God : is any upon earth so blind , to believe that a dead rose cake is as much the power of God as the Gospel , and to be equal with the Gospel , as R. Mayo saith ? is not this the greatest blindnesse that ever was uttered by a man , professing the Ministery of Christ his blindnesse may be felt , and it is damnable Doctrine and error , to hold forth that the glorious Gospel of Christ is no more the power of God , then a dead rose cake , which cannot p●●ce people to the heart , as the Gospel did the Jews , and Gentiles , its error , and contempt against the Gospell , and scornful blasphemous words against God , and Christ , and the Gospel , to make it of no more esteem then a rose cake , as this man hath done : and is it not time for people , to turn from such a man , whose error and damnable doctrine is thus fully manifest , and his wickedness in persecuting a man , and begging judgement of a hundred pound against him , for saying his doctrine is damnable and error , which is nothing but the Truth against him ? but all just men will see his shame , and the unjustnesse of that Jury that passed on the matter , who gave such unreasonable dammage , for truth speaking , having no respect to the just cause , nor to the danger they run their own soules into and some knows it before this , who God suddenly after cut off by judgement , and took his life from the earth , which may be a warning to the rest of them all to repent .

R. Mayo affirmed that if one man killed and murdered another , he did it by the power of God . Ans. And this is damnable doctrine and error , for all murder is of the Devil , and he is a murderer from the beginning . John 8.44 and murder is of him and from him , and not by the power of God ; for the power of God in Christ , and Moses for bad all murder and the Apostles said murder was a work of the flesh , and murderers should not enter the Kingdom of God . but were without the gate , to be nodden in the wine presse of the wrath of God : search the scriptures and see what Testimony all the servants of God gave of murder , and shewed that it is 〈◊〉 the Devil , and not by the power of God , as R : Mayo saith : and if it be 〈…〉 saith , that it is by the power of God , then murder is no sinne ; for what the power of God leads to do , and doth , is no sinne , and then people may be justified in murdering and killing : for what the creature doth by the moving of the power of God , God condemns him not in it , but justifies him , and is not ●●is ●●●nable doctrine and errour ? Can any man be so blinde as not to see it ? the Lord will judge these wicked doctrines , and confound them : but one named that scripture to prove his doctrine , and would have vindicated that if one man murder another , he did it by the power of God , mentioning where Christ said to Pilate , Thou could have no power against me except it were given thee from above , not minding the last words , He that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sinne ; and by this he would have proved , That murder is by the power of God : And it was asked further , if the power of God murdered Christ ? Or did the Jewes murder him by the power of God ? but to this no answer w●● given : so this is written as a further account of Richard Mayo his false d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 s , that are damnable , and errours in the highest degree , as all spiritual 〈◊〉 may judge , and how can the Court justly comdemn Ed. Burrough , except t●●● will proceed wholly against reason and equity , and against God , and the 〈◊〉 in their own consciences , for to all mens sight and knowledge that fears God Richard Mayo is guilty of holding forth damnable doctrine and error , and if they condemn Ed. Burrough in an hundred pounds for so affirming ( and nothing 〈◊〉 they have against him ) then the Lord shall condemn them , and their false judgement everlastingly , and all sober men shall see their folly and wickednesse , and that they become also guilty of Richard Mayo's sin : but concerning of them I hope better , whom I verily believe , may shew moderation in the ●●d , and clear the innocent , that God may blesse them , and not act against 〈◊〉 and their own consciences , which if they do so , the Lord shall lay it to their charge , and it shall be their burden when God ariseth to judgement . One thing more at the last the Judge spake , thus , If Edward Burrough the Defendant would in the least confesse he was sorry , and had wrongd Rich. Mayo , he would perswade R. Mayo , and he thought he could prevail with him to acquit and discharge the sute , and clear Ed. Burrough , and end the matter , to which E. B. replied , if his life were to be taken away for it , he could not do it : for to keep his conscience clear and free from offences to God , is of more price with him then all outward liberty or things , and asked R. Mayo if he would confesse . That the light which he exhorted people to follow , were the light of the Gospel , it so , then some mistake would be found between them ; and more might be said , but R. Mayo would not acknowledge that . So then Ed. Burrough alwayes affirmed himself clear , and that R. Mayo was guilty of preaching damnable doctrine and errour .

And whereas it was alleadged in Court against Ed. Burrough That Rich. Mayo Plantiffe saith in his Replication , That Ed. Burrough the Defendant spoke the Words ( thou holdect forth damnable doctrine and errour ) of his own wrong and malice , &c. without any such cause by him alleadged in his plea , and as if Ed. Burrough had shewed no just cause yet , wherefore he spake the words against R. Mayo Defendant .