any argument of Prelaty from Aaron, as being the type of Christ. In the latter he can forbeare no longer, but repents him of his rash gratuity, affirming, that to say, Christ being come in the flesh, his figure in the high Priest ceaseth, is the shift of an Anabaptist; and stiffly argues that Christ being as well King as Priest, was as well fore-resembled by the Kings then, as by the high Priest. So that if his comming take away the one type, it must also the other. Marvellous piece of divinity! and well worth that the land should pay six thousand pound a yeare for, in a Bishoprick, although I reade of no Sophister among the Greeks that was so dear, neither Hippias nor Protagoras, nor any whom the Socratick schoole famously refuted with out hire. Here we have the type of the King sow'd to the typet of the Bishop, suttly to cast a jealousie upon the Crowne, as if the right of Kings, like Meleager in the Metamorphosis, were no longer liv'd then the firebrand of Prelaty. But more likely the Prelatss fearing (for their own guilty carriage protests they doe feare) that their faire dayes cannot long hold, practize by possessing the King with this most false doctrine, to ingage his power for them, as in his owne quarrell, that when they fall they may fall in a generall ruine, just as cruell Tyberius would wish,
When I dye, let the earth be roul'd in flames.
But where, O Bishop, doth the purpose of the law set forth Christ to us as a King? That which never was intended in the Law, can never be abolish't as part thereof. When the Law was made, there was no King: if before the law, or under the law God by a speciall type in any King would foresignifie the future kingdome of Christ, which is not yet visibly come, what was that to the law? The whole ceremoniall law, and types can be in no law else, comprehends nothing but the propitiatory office of Christs Priesthood, which being in substance accomplisht, both law and Priesthood fades away of it selfe, and passes into aire like a transitory vision, and the right of Kings neither stands by any type nor falls. We acknowledge that the civill magistrate weares an autority of Gods giving, and ought to be obey'd as his vicegerent. But to make a King a type, we say is an abusive and unskilfull speech, and of a morall solidity makes it seeme a ceremoniall shadow. Therefore your typical chaine of King and Priest must unlink. But is not the type of Priest taken away by Christs comming? no saith this famous Protestant Bishop of Winchester; it is not, and he that saith it is, is an Anabaptist. What think ye Readers, do ye not understand him? What can be gather'd hence but that the Prelat would still sacrifice-
