A free disputation against pretended liberty of conscience tending to resolve doubts moved

Answ. There is some-thing true in this; there is a two-fold judgement, one saving, and Christian common to all by which both shepherd and sheep believe; and its true of this, that the ⟨p. 24⟩[…] ⟨p. 25⟩[…] ⟨p. 26⟩sheep are no more to stand to the judgement of shepherds, th•• the shepherds to the judgement of the sheep in point of Christian believing, which (sure) is common to both shepherd and sheep: for the alone authority of God speaking in his word. And so the Doctor believes not as a Doctor but as a Christian. But secondly, there is another judgement that is ministerial, official, and authoritative, and this is terminated not on Christian believing, but supposeth a ministerial believing; that what the shepherd teacheth others God revealed to him first, and is put forth in a ministerial and official judging either in Synods, or in public Pastoral Sermons and authoritative, but ministerial publishing the will and mind of Christ. Mal. 2. 7. They shall seek the Law from his mouth. Heb. 13. 7. 17. That way the people depends upon the Ministerial judgement of Synods and Pastors: but its most false that Pastors depends on their Ministerial judgement who are sheep, and that there is a like and equal power in shepherds and sheep, and its false, that though the Church believes she errs not, and doth not err, yet the Church may not command and in Synods Ministerially and with all authority rebuke, such a pervert souls. Act. 15. 22. And that Doctors may not as the Heralds and Ministers of Christ rebuke men sharply [Greek or Hebrew] that they may be sound in the faith, Tit. 1. 12. For Pastors and Synods teach fundamentals of faith ministerially to the people, and by hearing of them is faith begotten in the hearers, and they may command, exhort, rebuke with all long suffering, 2. Tim. 4. 1, 2. 2 Tim. 2. 14. stop their mouths, Tit. 1. 11. and authoritatively enjoin them silence. Act. 15. 22, 23, 24, 25. Act. 6. 4. Though they cannot by reason of an erroneous conscience or a conscience burnt with an hot iron acquiesce to the determination of a Synod; Yea though they be unruly, vain talkers and deceivers, they must be commanded to be silent. Nor must the Church and Angels of the Church of Thyatira, Ephesus, or Pergamus suffer Jezebel to seduce, not ravening wolves to devour the flock, nor their word to eat as a Canker;

Answ. There is some-thing true in this; there is a two-fold judgement, one saving, and Christian common to all by which both shepheard and sheep beleeve; and its true of this, that the ⟨p. 24⟩〈…〉 ⟨p. 25⟩〈…〉 ⟨p. 26⟩sheepe are no more to stand to the judgement of shepheards, th•• the shepheards to the judgement of the sheepe in point of Christian beleeving, which (sure) is common to both shepheard and sheepe: for the alone authoritie of God speaking in his word. And so the Doctor beleeves not as a Doctor but as a Christian. But secondly, there is another judgement that is ministeriall, officiall, and authoritative, and this is terminated not on Christian beleeving, but supposeth a ministeriall beleeving; that what the shepheard teacheth others God revealed to him first, and is put forth in a ministeriall and officiall judging either in Synods, or in publick Pastorall Sermons and authoritative, but ministeriall publishing the will and mind of Christ. Mal. 2. 7. They shall seeke the Law from his mouth. Heb. 13. 7. 17. That way the people depends upon the Ministeriall judgement of Synods and Pastors: but its most false that Pastors depends on their Ministeriall judgement who are sheepe, and that there is a like and equall power in shepheards and sheepe, and its false, that though the Church beleeves she erres not, and doth not erre, yet the Church may not command and in Synods Ministerially and with all authoritie rebuke, such a pervert soules. Act. 15. 22. And that Doctors may not as the Heraulds and Ministers of Christ rebuke men sharply 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 that they may be sound in the faith, Tit. 1. 12. For Pastors and Synods teach fundamentals of faith ministerially to the people, and by hearing of them is faith begotten in the hearers, and they may command, exhort, rebuke with all long suffering, 2. Tim. 4. 1, 2. 2 Tim. 2. 14. stop their mouthes, Tit. 1. 11. and authoritatively enjoyne them silence. Act. 15. 22, 23, 24, 25. Act. 6. 4. Though they cannot by reason of an erroneous conscience or a conscience burnt with an hot iron acquiesce to the determination of a Synod; Yea though they bee unruly, vaine talkers and deceivers, they must be commanded to bee silent. Nor must the Church and Angels of the Church of Thyatira, Ephesus, or Pergamus suffer Jezabell to seduce, not •avening wolves to devoure the flock, nor their word to eate as a Ca•ker;

For this judgement authoritative as it is in the head of the Church (Christ) as in the fountain and only Law-giver, so it is Ministerially only and by way of office in the Elders, as the will and mind of the King is in the inferior Judge, the Ambassador or Herald, not in the people. And the people are obliged ⟨p. 27⟩to obey those that are over them in the Lord, who watch for their souls, as those who must give an account. But there is no ground to say the shepherds are obliged to stand to and obey the ministerial and official judgement of the people: and of this it is said, he that heareth you (Ministers of the Gospel, not the people) heareth me, he that despiseth you despiseth me. And this is more then a privilege of order and honour, which one Christian hath above another in regard of eminency of graces, gifts, and of wisdom, experience, and age, it is a privilege of office to speak in the name of the Lord, and yet it is inferior to a privilege of law, because the Lord only imposeth laws upon the Conscience, for it is a middle judgement less then Legislative, Supreme and absolute over the Conscience, this is in none save only in the King and head of the Church, and is Royal and Princely; Yet is it more (I say not more excellent, it not being saving of it self as in believers) than a privilege of mere honour and order, for though it lay no more bands on the Conscience to obtain faith because it is holden forth by men, it having no influence on the Conscience because of men, whose word is not the formal object of faith, yet hath it an official authority from Pastors (which is not merely titulary) so as they may ministerially and officially command obedience to their judgement as far as it agrees with the mind of Christ, no farther: and when it is disobeyed may inflict censures, which private Christians cannot do, and putteth these who disobey under another guiltiness, then if private Christians did speak the same word, to wit not only in a case of disobedience to the second command, but in a state of disobedience to the fifth command formally, as not honouring father and mother where as to disobey that same word by way of Counsel in the mouth of a brother, though it be the breach of the fifth command also, Yet not in such a manner as when we refuse to hear the messenger of the Lord of Hosts;

For this judgement authoritative as it is in the head of the Church (Christ) as in the fountaine and onely Law-giver, so it is Ministerially onely and by way of office in the Elders, as the will and mind of the King is in the inferiour Judge, the Ambassadour or Herauld, not in the people. And the people are obleiged ⟨p. 27⟩to obey those that are over them in the Lord, who watch for their soules, as those who must give an account. But there is no ground to say the shepheards are obleiged to stand to and obey the ministeriall and officiall judgement of the people: and of this it is said, he that heareth you (Ministers of the Gospel, not the people) heareth me, he that dispiseth you dispiseth mee. And this is more then a priviledge of order and honor, which one Christian hath above another in regard of eminencie of graces, gifts, and of wisdome, experience, and age, it is a priviledge of office to speake in the name of the Lord, and yet it is inferiour to a priviledge of law, because the Lord onely imposeth lawes upon the Conscience, for it is a middle judgement lesse then Legislative, Supreme and absolute over the Conscience, this is in none save onely in the King and head of the Church, and is Royall and Princely; Yet is it more (I say not more excellent, it not being saving of it selfe as in beleevers) than a priviledge of meere honour and order, for though it lay no more bands on the Conscience to obtain faith because it is holden forth by men, it having no influence on the Conscience because of men, whose word is not the formall object of faith, yet hath it an officiall authoritie from Pastours (which is not meerely titularie) so as they may ministerially and officially command obedience to their judgement as far as it agrees with the mind of Christ, no farther: and when it is disobeyed may inflict censures, which private Christians cannot doe, and putteth these who disobey under another guiltinesse, then if private Christians did speake the same word, to wit not onely in a case of disobedience to the second command, but in a state of disobedience to the fift command formally, as not honouring father and mother where as to disobey that same word by way of Counsel in the mouth of a brother, though it be the breach of the fift command also, Yet not in such a manner as when we refuse to heare the messenger of the Lord of Hoasts;

and his judgement as a messenger of God is public and binds as public to highest obedience to the fifth command, but as it is a judgement of faith common to the Doctor with other Christians, it binds as the mind of God holding faith in the second Commandment what we are to believe.

and his judgement as a messenger of God is publique and bindes as publike to highest obedience to the fift command, but as it is a judgement of faith common to the Doctor with other Christians, it bindes as the minde of God holding faith in the second Commandment what wee are to believe.

1. 1Remove. 16.Remov. 16.
2. 2[…]〈…〉

Answ. Here is a mere fluctuation and Scepticism even in fundamentals and the faith of them, for all interpretation of Scripture is rejected, there is no distinction in fundamentals or no fundamentals, for in principles of faith, that Christ is God and man, and dyed for sinners, the Scripture is most plain, and what need then of our interpretation?¹ then let Arians and Socinians believe him to be God man and to die for sinners in their sense, the Familists in a contrary sense, the Georgians in another contrary sense, the Papists in a third, the Protestants in a fourth, and so as many heads, as many faiths, every sect, and man must have some sense, else his faith is non-sense, and if he err from the sense of the Holy Ghost, the Scripture is no Scripture, if it be believed in a sense contrary to the Scripture to him who so believes; and so his faith is no faith, but a vain night-fancy, and seeing the word of God gives us but one faith, and one truth, and one Gospel, if interpretations be left free to every man, these Libertines gives us millions of faiths with millions of senses, and so no faith at all.

Answ. Here is a meere fluctuation and Septicism even in fundamentals and the faith of them, for all interpretation of Scripture is rejected, there is no destinction in fundamentals or no fundamentals, for in principles of faith, that Christ is God and man, and dyed for sinners, the Scripture is most plaine, and what need then of our interpretation?¹ then let Arrians and Secinnians beleeve him to be God man and to die for sinners in their sense, the Familists in a contrary sense, the Georgians in another contrary sense, the Papists in a third, the Protestants in a fourth, and so as many heads, as many faiths, every sect, and man must have some sense, else his faith is non-sense, and if he erre from the sense of the Holy Ghost, the Scripture is no Scripture, if it be believed in a sense contrary to the Scripture to him who so believes; and so his faith is no faith, but a vaine night-phancie, and seeing the word of God gives us but one faith, and one truth, and one Gospel, if interpretations be left free to every man, these Libertines gives us millions of faiths with millions of senses, and so no faith at all.

1. 1[…]〈…〉

Secondly, They give us two decisions, one made by God, and another by the Church contrary to Gods, that has no rule but every mans private judgement and free fancy, as if the decision of controversies made by the Church in Synods which we suppose is not divided from that of Gods, were some other thing then the decision of the Holy Ghost speaking in the word and declared by the Church in a ministerial way, and if it be any other than this, it is not to be received, nor a lawful decision ⟨p. 29⟩ministerial of a Synod, but to be rejected.

Secondly, They give us two decisions, one made by God, and another by the Church contrary to Gods, that has no rule but every mans private judgement and free phancie, as if the decision of controversies made by the Church in Synods which we suppose is not divided from that of Gods, were some other thing then the decision of the Holy Ghost speaking in the word and declared by the Church in a ministeriall way, and if it be any other than this, it is not to be received, nor a lawfull decision ⟨p. 29⟩ministeriall of a Synod, but to be rejected.

Thirdly, if there be no need of a decision to expone the word, because the word is clear, & if we wrong the word of God if we think our words are clearer that Gods, it is true, if we had eyes to see and apprehend the mind of God in his word, without an interpretation, then all ministry and preaching of the Gospel is cried down by this, what have any to do to expone the first principles of the Oracles of God to the Hebrews c. 5 • or what need they teach, exhort, preach in season and out of season? What needeth the Eunuch a teacher, or Cornelius Peter, or Saul Ananias to teach them? had they not the Scriptures? if Timothy, the preachers that speak the word of the Lord to the Hebrews, Philip, Peter, Ananias think their words clearer than the word of God, they do a great injury to the word of God; or if they believed their words were clearer than the words of Isaiah and the Prophets; and they did that which was not necessary, if they opened and expounded the Prophets and decided controversies; for they should have acquiesced to the decision of God as it lieth in the Scripture, and not have preached but read the Prophets, and left it free to the hearers to put on the words of Scripture, what interpretation and sense they thought best.

Thirdly, if there be no need of a decision to expone the word, because the word is clear, & if we wrong the word of God if we think our words are clearer that Gods, it is true, if we had eyes to see and apprehend the minde of God in his word, without an interpretation, then all ministerie and proaching of the Gospel is cried downe by this, what have any to doe to expone the first principles of the Oracles of God to the Hebrews c. 5 • or what need they teach, exhort, preach in season and out of season? What needeth the Eunuch a teacher, or Cornolius Peter, or Saul Ananias to teach them? had they not the Scriptures? if Timothie, the preachers that speake the word of the Lord to the Hebrews, Philip, Peter, Ananias think their words clearer than the word of God, they doe a great injurie to the word of God; or if they beleeved their words were clearer than the words of Esaiah and the Prophets; and they did that which was not necessary, if they opened and expounded the Prophets and decided controversies; for they should have acquiesced to the decision of God as it lyeth in the Scripture, and not have preached but read the Prophets, and left it free to the hearers to put on the words of Scripture, what interpretation and sense they thought best.

Fourthly, That no Confessions ought to be but in express words of Scripture, ¹shall free all one and consequently all Churches from obedience to that which Peter commands. 1 Pet. 3. 15. Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you, with ••eeknesse and fear. When Stephen Acts 7. and Paul Acts 26. were accused of heresy and speaking against Moses and the semple, they made a confession of their faith not in words of Scripture, but in deductions and necessary consequences drawn from Scripture and applied to themselves, and these in Nehemiahs time who wrote and sealed or subscribed a Covenant, did not write and seal the express Decalogue and ten Commandments, […] the words of the Covenant of Grace. I will be thy God and the God of thy seed, but entered into a curse and into an Oath to walk in Gods Law which was given by Moses the servant of God and to observe and to do all the Commandments of the Lord our God and his judgements and his statutes and that (say they) we would not give our daughters to the people of the Land, nor take their ⟨p. 30⟩daughters for our sons, and if the people of the Land bring ware or victuals on the Sabbath day to sell, that we would not buy it of them. & Nehemiah c. 10. v. 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34. &c. compared with Nehe. c. 9. v. 38. Which words are not a confession nor Covenant in express Scripture, save that they are historically inserted in the Cannon of the Scripture by the Holy Ghost. In which sense the law and decree of Nebuchadnezzar Daniel 6. And of other heathen Kings as Daniel 3. 29. 30. Ezra. 1. 2, 3. c. 7. 11, 12, 13, 14. &c. Are Scriptures; but they are not the express words of the Law, for there is nothing in the express Law touching the Sabbath, of not buying ware and victual from the heathen of the land that Nehemiah speaks of, which warranteth us to enter in the like Covenant, and make the like Confession of faith to defend and stand to the Protestant Religion, and that Christ was God and man, and man in one person, and that we shall not buy ware or victuals from the Anabaptist and Familists of England who trample on the Sabbath day though these be not express words of Scripture.

Fourthly, That no Confessions ought to be but in expresse words of Scripture, ¹shall free all one and consequently all Churches from obedience to that which Peter commands. 1 Pet. 3. 15. Be readie alwayes to give an answere to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you, with ••eeknesse and fear. When Stephen Acts 7. and Paul Acts 26. were accused of heresie and speaking against Moses and the semple, they made a confession of their faith not in words of Scripture, but in deductions and necessary consequences drawne from Scripture and applyed to themselves, and these in Nehemiahs time who wrote and sealed or subscrubed a Covenant, did not write and seale the expresse Decalogne and ten Commandements, 〈…〉 the words of the Covenant of Grace. I will be thy God and the God of thy seed, but entered into a curse and into an Oath to walke in Gods Law which was given by Moses the servant of God and to observe and to doe all the Commandements of the Lord our God and his judgements and his statutes and that (say they) we would not give our daughters to the people of the Land, nor take their ⟨p. 30⟩daughters for our sons, and if the people of the Land bring ware or victuals on the Sabbath day to sell, that we would not buy it of them. & Nehemiah c. 10. v. 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34. &c. compared with Nehe. c. 9. v. 38. Which words are not a confession nor Covenant in expresse Scripture, save that they are historically insetted in the Cannon of the Scripture by the Holy Ghost. In which sense the law and decree of Nebuchadnezzar Daniel 6. And of other heathen Kings as Daniell 3. 29. 30. Ezra. 1. 2, 3. c. 7. 11, 12, 13, 14. &c. Are Scriptures; but they are not the expresse words of the Law, for there is nothing in the expresse Law touching the Sabbath, of not buying ware and victual from the heathen of the land that Nehemiah speakes of, which warranteth us to enter in the like Covenant, and make the like Confession of faith to defend and stand to the Protestant Religion, and that Christ was God and man, and man in one person, and that we shall not buy ware or victuals from the Anabaptist and Familists of England who trample on the Sabbath day though these be not expresse words of Scripture.

1. 1That Confessions ought to be only in express Scripture words is another false principle of Libertines.That Confessions ought to be onely in expresse Scriture words is another false principle of Libertines.

It is true, Libertines say men have made Apologies and confessions of faith for their own defence as Steven and Paul but they enjoined not these by authority and command as a rule of faith upon others, and wrote them not as a fixed standard of the faith of others, and that warrants no Church to impose a faith upon others.

It is true, Libertines say men have made Apologies and confessions of faith for their own defence as Steven and Paul but they injoyned not these by authoritie and command as a rule of faith upon others, and wrote them not as a fixed standard of the faith of others, and that warrants no Church to impose a faith upon others.

Answ. 1. This will prove that as one man accused of heresy may publish a confession of his faith which may clear his innocency and the soundness of his faith to others and remove the scandal according to that of 1 Pet. 3. 15. And by the same reason, Independents, Libertines, Familists, Antinomians, Anabaptists and all the Sects of England, upon the same ground that the Albigenses went upon, should by some Confession and Covenant give an account of their faith and hope with meekness and fear. And what particular persons are obliged to do that Churches when they are slandered as unsound in the faith are obliged to do: and so I look at a form or confession of faith as a necessary Apology for clearing of the good name of a Church defamed with Heresies, and new sects, but for the imposing of this Confession upon others, these others are either Neighbour-Churches, or their own Members.

Answ. 1. This will prove that as one man accused of heresie may publish a confession of his faith which may cleare his innocencie and the soundnesse of his faith to others and remove the scandall according to that of 1 Pet. 3. 15. And by the same reason, Independents, Libertines, Familists, Antinomians, Anabaptists and all the Sects of England, upon the same ground that the Albigenses went upon, should by some Confession and Covenant give an account of their faith and hope with meeknesse and feare. And what particular persons are obleiged to doe that Churches when they are slandered as unsound in the faith are oblieged to doe: and so I looke at a forme or confession of faith as a necessary Apologie for clearing of the good name of a Church defamed with Heresies, and new sects, but for the imposing of this Confession upon others, these others are either Neighbour-Churches, or their own Members.

As concerning neighbour-Churches they have no Authority over them. Yet may they declare that Familists who say Christ is not come in the flesh are the Spirit of the Antichrist, and for these, of their own Church, if they go out from them and separate to an Antichristian side, after the example of the Apostles and Elders they may command them to abstain from such and such heretical opinions, and after they have convicted them as perverters of souls, proceed to excommunication against them as refusers to consent to the form of wholesome words: as may be proved from Math. 18. 15, 16, 17. &c. Rom. 16. 17, 1 Thes. 2. 13, 14, 15. And other Scriptures as Reve. 2. 1, 2, 3. v. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. Now that it is not sufficient that they be put to subscribe a confession of faith in only scripture words is clear, 1. because the Jews will swear and seal the old Testament in their own sense, but their sense makes the old Testament to be the word of man, not the word of God. The Sadducees acknowledged the five books of Moses to be the word of God, yet because they denied the resurrection of the dead, Christ argueth them Math. 22. 45. Ignorant both of the power of God asserted in the books of Moses and of the scriptures, especially of that scripture which God spake out of the bush to Moses; I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, &c. Exod. 3. 6. Yet would the Sadducees have sworn and subscribed all the book of Exodus as the undoubted word of God, but when they denied the resurrection, sure these words I am the God of Abraham &c. making the Covenant of grace to dye when Abraham dyed, and Abraham to have perished in soul and body as they expounded it, was not the word of God, and Papists will subscribe the old and new Testament and the three Creeds, the Nicene Creed, the Creed of Athanasius, and that which commonly is called the Apostles Creed. Yet as they expound the word and these Creeds, we say they transform the word of God into the doctrine of devils and most abominable Idolatry, The greatest heretics that were, Arrius, Nestorius, Apollinaris, Macedonius, the Treithite acknowledge the scripture to be the word of God, and will swear and subscribe the word of God and contain themselves intra sacra scripturae locutions, within the words of scripture.

As concerning neighbour-Churches they have no Authoritie over them. Yet may they declare that Familists who say Christ is not come in the flesh are the Spirit of the Antichrist, and for these, of their own Church, if they goe out from them and separate to an Antichristian side, after the example of the Apostles and Elders they may command them to abstaine from such and such hereticall opinions, and after they have convicted them as perverters of souls, proceed to excommunication against them as refusers to consent to the forme of wholesome words: as may be prooved from Math. 18. 15, 16, 17. &c. Rom. 16. 17, 1 Thes. 2. 13, 14, 15. And other Scriptures as Reve. 2. 1, 2, 3. v. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. Now that it is not sufficient that they be put to subscribe a confession of faith in onely scripture words is cleare, 1. because the Jews will sweare and seale the old Testament in their own sense, but their sense makes the old Testament to be the word of man, not the word of God. The Sadduces acknowledged the five books of Moses to be the word of God, yet because they denyed the resurrection of the dead, Christ argueth them Math. 22. 45. Ignorant both of the power of God asserted in the books of Moses and of the scriptures, especially of that scripture which God spake out of the bush to Moses; I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, &c. Exod. 3. 6. Yet would the Sadduces have sworn and subscribed all the booke of Exodus as the undoubted word of God, but when they denyed the resurrection, sure these words I am the God of Abraham &c. making the Covenant of grace to dye when Abraham dyed, and Abraham to have perished in soule and bodie as they expounded it, was not the word of God, and Papists will subscribe the old and new Testament and the three Creeds, the Nicene Creed, the Creed of Athanasius, and that which commonly is called the Apostles Creed. Yet as they expound the word and these Creeds, we say they transforme the word of God into the doctrine of devils and most abominable Idolatrie, The greatest hereticks that were, Arrius, Nestorius, Appolliuaris, Macedonius, the Treithite acknowledge the scripture to be the word of God, and will sweare and subscribe the word of God and containe themselves intra sacra scripturae l•cutiones, within the words of scripure.

But their faith is not the saith of the scripture, and this makes ten thousand ⟨p. 32⟩and millions of faiths where as the word faith there is but one faith. For Arrius hath one faith, Apollinaris another, Nestorius another, and every heretic a faith according to the sense that he falsely puts on the scripture, and all may swear one Confession of saith in Scripture-words.

But their faith is not the saith of the scripture, and this makes ten thousand ⟨p. 32⟩and millions of faiths where as the word faith there is but one faith. For Arrius hath one faith, Apollin•ris another, Nestorius another, and every heretick a faith according to the sense that he fallely puts on the scripture, and all may sweare one Confession of saith in Scripture-words.

Arminians say, ¹no man after he hath received a decree of a Synod is longer obliged to it, nor upon any other condition, but in so far and so long as he judgeth in his conscience that it is true.²

Arminians say, ¹no man after he hath received a decree of a Synod is longer oblieged to it, nor upon any other condition, but in so farre and so long as he judgeth in his conscience that it is true.²

1. 1Roman. Vindi. l. 2. c. 6. 135. 13.
2. 2[…] post quam acceptavit decretum, […] illo ••• tius quam ea lege, quatenis & quamdia […] in […] indicat ill deff••• rum.〈…〉 post quam acceptavit decretum, 〈…〉 illo ••• tius quam ea lege, quatenis & quamdia 〈…〉 in 〈…〉 indicat ill deff••• rum.

Answ. This is mere Scepticism, and to make the conscience whether erroneous, or not erroneous to be a bible and a rule of faith. For though the erroneous conscience say, it is service to God to kill the innocent Apostles John 16. 1. Yet the sixth commandment lies upon these murderers with equal strength, thou shalt not kill, otherwise they are nor guilty of murder. For if a Synod decree to kill Peter and John, because they preach that the Son of Mary is the Messiah, is bloody persecution: Then so soon as Scribes and Pharisees in their erroneous conscience (for Libertines make exceptions of no consciences, an erroneous more than another, nor erring in fundamentals more than of another) shall judge it service to God to kill the Apostles they are loosed from the sixth commandment and no longer obliged to this (thou shalt not murder.) So the author of the tractate called Armini.¹ Where mens scope is any way to remove controversies, there is there no care or little at all of the trueth of God, and where the external peace of the Common-wealth is heeded precisely, there peace of conscience is of none or of little value, the truth is not there persuaded, but crushed.

Answ. This is meere Scepticisme, and to make the conscience whether erroneous, or not erroneous to be a bible and a rule of faith. For though the erroneous conscience say, it is service to God to kill the innocent Apostles John 16. 1. Yet the sixt commandement lyes upon these murtherers with equall strength, thou shalt not kill, otherwise they are nor guilty of murther. For if a Synod decree to kill Peter and John, because they preach that the Son of Mary is the Messiah, is bloody persecution: Then so soone as Scribes and Pharisees in their erroneous conscience (for Libertimes make exceptions of no consciences, an erroneous more than another, nor erring in fundamentals more than of another) shall judge it service to God to kill the Apostles they are loosed from the sixt commandement and no longer oblieged to this (thou shalt not murther.) So the authour of the tractate called Armini.¹ Where mens scope is any way to remove controversies, there is there no care or little at all of the trueth of God, and where the externall peace of the Common-wealth is heeded precisely, there peace of conscience is of none or of little value, the truth is not there perswaded, but crushed.

1. 1Ancient bonds of Liberty of Conscience. […] Apol c. 25. 291.Ancient bonds of Liberty of Conscience. 〈…〉 Apol c. 25. 291.

Ans. ¹The learned and renowned professors of Leiden answer the end of Synods is not by any means good or bad to remove controversies but to bury them by the power of the word. 2. Only external peace separated from truth should not be intended, but conjoined with truth and peace of conscience. 3. The end of Synods is not effectually and actu secundo to silence heretics and gain-sayers of the truth, nor is it Christs scope in convincing the Sadducees that the dead must rise Math. 22. to persuade the truth, so as there shall never be on earth Sadducee again who denies the resurrection, for in Pauls and in the Apostles time the Sadducees still denied the resurrection, ⟨p. 33⟩after the Synod of Jerusalem Acts 15. There arose many that said we must keep the Law of Ceremonies, but the end of Synods is to do what may actu prime, remove controversies and silence Heretics by clearing scripture, and truth, but the end is not to remove obstinacy that is not the scope of Synods nor of preaching, nor of the scriptures, but of all these are in the event as God blesseth them and concurreth with them: the end of Synods is not to oppress or deprive ministers, the end of despised and obstinately refused truth is such.

Ans. ¹The learned and renowned professors of Leiden answer the end of Synods is not by any means good or bad to remove controversies but to burie them by the power of the word. 2. Onely externall peace separated from truth should not be intended, but conjoyned with truth and peace of conscience. 3. The end of Synods is not effectually and actu secundo to silence hereticks and gain-sayers of the truth, nor is it Christs scope in convincing the Sadduces that the dead must rise Math. 22. to perswade the truth, so as there shall never be on earth Sadducie again who denies the resurrection, for in Pauls and in the Apostles time the Sadducies still denyed the resurrection, ⟨p. 33⟩after the Synod of Jerusalem Acts 15. There arose many that said we must keep the Law of Ceremonies, but the end of Synods is to doe what may actu prime, remoove controversies and silence Hereticks by clearing scripture, and truth, but the end is not to remove obstinacy that is not the scope of Synods nor of preaching, nor of the scriptures, but of all these are in the event as God blesseth them and concurreth with them: the end of Synods is not to oppresse or deprive ministers, the end of despised and obstinately refused truth is such.

1. 1The end of Synods is not to remove heresy, by any means good or bad […] to civil heresy so effectually as these heresies shall never be heard of in the world again.The end of Synods is not to remove heresie, by any means good or bad 〈…〉 to ciuil heresie so effectually as these heresies shall never be heard of in the world againe.

Armini. ¹Synods should not aim at setting up their own authority which in matters of faith is none at all, such decisions are the heart of Popery, and makes all religion without Synods to be uncertain.

Armini. ¹Synods should not ayme at setting up their own authoritie which in matters of faith is none at all, such decisions are the heart of Poperie, and makes all religion without Synods to be uncertain.

1. 1Remon. c. 25. Apol. 294.