(2.) Altho' there is no truth whatsoever, when once controverted, but it becomes the word of Christ's patience, and so ought to be the word of our testimony, Rev. v. 10. xii. 11.; truth and duty being always the same in all ages and periods of time, so that what injures one truth, in some sense, injures and affects all; _For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all_, Jam. ii. 10. Yet at the same time it is pretty evident, that the church of Christ in this world is a passing church, still circulating through ages and periods of time, so that she seldom or never turns back under the same point, there being scarcely a century of years elapsed without an alteration of circumstances; yea and more, I suppose that there is no certain book that has or can be written, that will suit the case of one particular church at all times, and in all circumstances: This pre-eminency the holy scriptures only can claim as a complete rule for faith and manners, principle and practice, in all places, ages and times. (3.) These things premised, let it be observed, That the primitive witnesses had the divinity of the Son of God, and an open confession of him, for their testimony; our reformers from Popery had Antichrist to struggle with, in asserting the doctrines of the gospel, and the right way of salvation in and through Jesus Christ: again, in the reigns of James VI. and Charles I. Christ's REGALIA[19], and the divine right of presbytery became the subject-matter of their testimony. Then in the beginning of the reign of Charles II. (until he got the whole of our ancient and laudable constitution effaced and overturned) our WORTHIES only saw it their duty to hold and contend for what they had already attained unto.--But then in the end of this and subsequent tyrant's reign, they found it their duty (a duty which they had too long neglected) to advance one step higher, by casting off their authority altogether, and that as well on account of their manifest usurpation of Christ's crown and dignity, as on account of their treachery, bloodshed and tyranny. And yet as all these faithful witnesses of Christ did harmoniously agree in promoting the kingdom and interest of the Messiah, in all his threefold offices, they stood in defence of religion and liberty (and that not only in opposition to the more gross errors of Popery, but even to the more refined errors of English hierarchy) we must take their testimony to be materially all and the same testimony, only under different circumstances, which may be summed up thus; "The primitive martyrs sealed the prophetic office of Christ in opposition to Pagan idolatry.--The reforming martyrs sealed his priestly office with their blood, in opposition to Popish idolatry.--But last of all, our late martyrs have sealed his kingly office with their best blood, in despite of supremacy and bold Erastianism. They indeed have cemented it