wonder what law of man, or what patent, ought to oblige me to make a lie, in calling good, evil, and evil, good? I wonder what law of man can secure me, in so doing, from the just judgment of God, that will make me account for every idle word? And to lie is something more. Surely Christians should be ashamed that such laws, manifestly crossing the law of God, should be among them.

If it be said, We ought in charity to suppose that they have these virtues, because the king has bestowed those titles upon them, or that they are descended from such as deserved them;

I answer, Charity destroys not knowledge: I am not obliged by charity, either to believe or speak a lie. Now it is apparent, and cannot be denied by any, but that those virtues are not in many of the persons expressed by the titles they bear: neither will they allow to speak so to such, in whom these virtues are, unless they be so dignified by outward princes. So that such as are truly virtuous, must not be styled by their virtues, because not privileged by the princes of this world; and such as have them not, must be so called, because they have obtained a patent so to be and all this is done by those who pretend to be his followers, that commanded his disciples, Not to be called of men, Master; and told them, such could not believe, as received honour one from another, and sought not the honour which cometh

from God only. This is so plain, to such as will indeed be Christians, that it needs no consequence.

Fourthly, As to those titles of Holiness, Eminency and Excellency, used among the Papists to the pope and cardinals, &c. and Grace, Lordship, and Worship, used to the clergy among the Protestants, it is a most blasphemous usurpation. For if they use Holiness and Grace, because these things ought to be in a pope, or in a bishop, how come they to usurp that peculiarly to themselves? Ought not holiness and grace to be in every Christian? and so every Christian should say, Your Holiness, and Your Grace, one to another. Next, how can they in reason claim any more titles, than were practised and received by the apostles and primitive Christians, whose successors they pretend they are, and as whose successors, (and no otherwise) themselves, I judge, will confess any honour they seek is due to them? Now if they neither sought, received, nor admitted such honour nor titles, how came these by them? If they say they did, let them prove it if they can: we find no such thing in the scripture.

The Christians speak to the apostles without any such denomination, neither saying, If it please Your Grace, Your Holiness, Your Lordship, nor Your Worship; they are neither called, My Lord Peter, nor My Lord Paul; nor yet Master Peter, nor Master Paul; nor Doctor Peter, nor Doctor Paul; but singly Peter and Paul; and that not

only in the scripture, but for some hundreds of years after so that this appears to be a manifest fruit of the apostacy. For if these titles arise either from the office or worth of the persons, it will not be denied, but the apostles deserved them better than any now that call for them. But the case is plain, the apostles had the holiness, the excellency, the grace; and because they were holy, excellent, and gracious, they neither used nor admitted of such titles: but these having neither holiness, excellency, nor grace, will needs be so called, to satisfy their ambitious and ostentatious minds, which is a manifest token of their hypocrisy.

Fifthly, As to that title of Majesty, usually ascribed to princes, we do not find it given to any such in the holy scripture; but that it is specially and peculiarly ascribed unto God, as 1 Chron. xxix. 11. Job xxxvii. 22. Psalm xxi. 5. and xxix. 4. and xlv. 3. and cxiii. 1. and cxvi. 6. Isa. ii. 10. and xxiv. 14. and xxvi. 10. Heb. i. 3. 2 Pet. i. 16. and many more places. Hence saith Jude, ver. 25. "To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty," &c. not to men. We find in scripture the proud king Nebuchadnezzar assuming this title to himself, Dan. iv. 30. who at that time received a sufficient reproof, by a sudden judgment which came upon him. Therefore in all the appellations used to princes in the Old Testament, it is not to be found, nor yet

in the New. Paul was very civil to Agrippa, yet he gives him no such title: neither was this title used among Christians in the primitive times. Hence the Ecclesiastical History of the Reformation of France, relating the speech of the Lord Rochefort, at the assembly of the estates of France, held under Charles the Ninth, in the year 1560, saith, That this harangue was well remarked, in that he used not the word [Majesty] invented by flatterers of late years. And yet this author minded not how his master Calvin used this flattering title to Francis the First, king of France; and not only so, but calls him Most Christian King, in the epistle to his Institutions; though by his daily persecuting of the reformers, it was apparent, he was far from being such, even in Calvin's own esteem. Surely the complying with such vain titles, imposed and introduced by antichrist, greatly tended to stain the reformation, and to render it defective in many things.

Lastly, All these titles and stiles of honour are to be rejected by Christians, because they are to seek the honour that comes from above, and not the honour that is from below: but these honours are not that honour that comes from above, but are from below. For we know well enough what industry, and what pains men are at to get these things, and what part it is that seeks after them,

* Eccles, Hist. 1. 4, p. 445.

to wit, the proud, insolent, haughty, aspiring mind. For judge, Is it the meek and innocent Spirit of Christ that covets that honour? Is it that Spirit that must be of no reputation in this world, that has its conversation in heaven, that comes to have fellowship with the sons of God? Phil. iii. 20. Is it that Spirit, I say, that loves that honour, that seeks after that honour, that pleads for the upholding of that honour, that frets, and rages, and fumes, when it is denied that honour? Or is it not rather the lordly insulting spirit of Lucifer, the prince of this world, he that of old affected and sought after this honour, and loved not to abide in the submissive low place? And so all his children are possessed with the same ambitious proud mind, seeking and coveting titles of honour, which indeed belong not to them. For let us examine, * Who they are that are honourable indeed? Is it not the righteous man? Is it not the holy man? Is it not the humble hearted man, the meek spirited man? 1 Sam. ii. 20. And are not such those that ought to be honoured among Christians? Now of these, may there not be poor men, labourers,

Hierom, in his epistle to Celant, admonisheth her, That she was to be preferred to none for her nobility, for the Christian religion admits not of respect of persons; neither are men to be esteemed because of their outward condition, but according to the disposition of the mind to be esteemed either noble or base; he that obeyeth not sin, is free; who is strong in virtue, is noble. Let the Epistle of James be read.