such necessary or essentiall duety but a work casuall accessory and supererrogatory which may be done or vndone as the minister is able or willing without any such absolute necessity as is here pretended Herevpon then it followeth that since the preaching of the gospel is no necessary part or property of the office of ministery in the Church of England that that ministery cannot be of Christ as also that the conscionable and effectual preaching of some men is no iustification at all of the office which may and doth consist essentially without it and to which it is but casual accidentall but a commendation of the persons which besydes the natural and necessary parts of their office do so practise and preach And this consideration alone might suffice for answer vnto all Mr B. proofs for the legitimating of the ministery in the Church of England yet will I for the further discovering of them considering the confidence wherwith he propounds them descend to the particulars In his former book he layes down and proves by the scriptures these three sound and mayn grounds touching the ministery 1. that the Lord onely ordeyns offices in his Church 2. that he distinguisheth them one from another that one may not intrude into an others office 3. that he onely prescribes the dutyes to be done in every distinct office and so in the fourth place he comes to the qualification and gifting of men for their functions and so proceeds to other particulars But observe his dealings when he comes to apply and compare the ministery of England to and with these golden rules and by them generally and truely propounded to iustify it in the particulars he passeth them all by in silence as if he had vtterly forgotten them and speaks not one word eyther of the offices themselves or of the distinction of them one from another or the duties to be done in them but comes in the very first place to the guifts and graces of the persons And in so doing like the vnrighteous steward he doth wisely though nothing lesse then faythfully He knowes wel that he cannot fynd in the scriptures the least colour for the offices of Archbishops Bishops Suffragans Deanes Arch-deacons halfe Preists or Engl Deacons nor that the dutyes of celebrating marriage purifying women burying the dead reading the service book in manner and form are layd vpon the ministers of the gospel as dutyes to be done in their offices nor that the Provinciall and Diocesan officers may intrude into their office which are set over particular congregations and deprive them of the power of government nor the Deacons to administer the sacrameÌ„ts nor that any of them may intrude into the office of the civil Magistrate as they all do lesse or more in medling with matters of mariage divorce testaments or with iniuryes as they respect the body or outward man according to your and other mâ—ns exposition of Math. 18. making ministers Magistrates and Eâ—ders in the Church Elders in the gates These things he knew and therefore coÌ„ming to speak of the ministery in England and to apply these general rules to their particular estate he not so much as once mentions eyther the diversity of offices in the Church or their distinction one from another or the several dutyes to be done in them least in naming them he should as it could not have been otherwise have condemned that thing which he would so gladly iustify And this I desire the Reader to note not onely against him but specially against the Ministery he pleads for His Arguments to prove the Ministers of England true Ministers of Christ follow in order The first is because they are not Ministers of Antichrist and that he would prove by 4. Reasons 1. by their doctrine and oath against him 2. because they shew no obedience vnto him 3. because Antichrist himself disclaimeth them as no Ministers condemneth them as haeretiques 4. because Antichrists Ministers are sacrificing and mâ—ssing Preists which they are not Here Mr B. had he done faithfully should have cleared our Arguments by which in sundry treatises published for that purpose we have proved them in respect of their offices entrances administratioÌ„s the Ministers of aÌ„tichrist but thinking it easyer to strike then to fence he passeth by what we have written against them layes down certeyn colourable reasoÌ„s for them which I have summarily set down in order and vnto which I return this answer First and generally that there is one common errour in all his Arguments namely that there is no Antichrist but that great Antichrist the Pope as though there were no more Divils but Beelzebub because he is the cheif of the Divils I would know of this man what he thinks of the clergy in King Hen. 8 dayes that took the oath of supremacy and taught against the Pope opposing him being opposed by him or what he thinks of the Lutheran Ministers that disclaym the Antichrist of Rome as haereticall and are disclaymed by him yet do abhor from the reformed Churches and from al coÌ„munion with them for the mayn truthes they hold touching the sacrament and predestination The thing then is that there are degrees of Antichristianism orders of Antichrists that is of such as are adversaries vnto Christ. In Pauls time that man of sin adversary was got into the temple of God and in Iohns time many Antichrists were come into the world and yet there was then neyther Pope nor masse preist no nor Diocesan or Provinciall Prelate neyther There was in deed Diotrephes who sought for praeheminence to rob the Church of †the power of Christ and so was an Antichrist as there were many other impugning Christ the Lord otherwise but the great Antichrist of Rome was by many degrees and long continuance to be advanced to his throne And as there were lesser Antichrists before him by which he entred so are there also after him and those left behind him in the Church of Engl out of which he is driven And those are the Lord Arch bishops and Lordbishops with their orders and administrations vnto whom whilst the inferiour ministers do swear canonicall obedience they do by oath promise obedience vnto Antichrist and receive his mark and so ministring are the marked servants of Antichrist whom they obey whom they are also by doctrine to defend except their othes and words disagreed From whom if any of them do withdraw this their bounden and sworn obedience by denying subscription vnto his orders or conformity vnto his ceremonies them he silences suspends and deprives as schismaticall if not hereticall and vtterly vnworthy of their and their Churches service And these things the reader may apply to Mr B. 3. first severall Reasons Now to your fourth and last Argument viz that you are no masse-preists my answer is first that you haue the same office with masse preists though reformed of that massing and some
or can as Mr Ber. knoweth right well for the good graces of God in many wee do both know acknowledge them and it is our great grief though their owne fault that we cannot have communioÌ„ with the persons in whom so eminent graces of God are and if there be any of them which are sory for our departure from the assemblies we are much more sory so have more cause for their continuance in the same In which their estate whilst we withdraw ourselves from them we do in no sort condemn their persons which stand or fall to the Lord much lesse any good thing in them or truth amongst them It is one thing simply to condemn that which is good for evill and another thing to forbeare the vse of it in the concrete for the commixture of evil from which in that vse it is inseparable When Paul forbad the Corinthians to eat and drink in the Idol temples 1 Cor. 10. 20. â—1 he did not condemne meat drink Neyther did the same Apostle when he directed the same Corinthians to excommunicate the incestuous person and so to have no fellowship with him 1 Cor. 5. enjoyne them to renounce the fayth which that person professed or the baptisme which they with him had received And as a Church excommunicating an offender for some one scandalous sin and so refusing all communion with him cannot be chalenged for renouncing or reiecting the faith which that person professeth or any other personall good thing appearing in him so neyther may any person or persons forsaking a Church and all fellowship with it for some one or few iust causes iustly be accused as renouncing or disclayming the other good things there remayning Lastly let me ask Mr B. whether he disclayme one God subâ—â—sting in three persons one Lord Iesus God and man and withall the Christian vertues of zeale patience temperance humility meeknes and the like And why not he as well in refusing communion with the Church of Rome where these things are to be found as we in disclayming the Church of Engl. where the same and other the like good things are known to be Thus when a mans eyes are blynded by partiality towards himselfe and his mouth opened by mallice against his adversary it is mervaylous to see what vnequall judgment he will passe But least Mr B. in charging our beginning as he doth as accursed vncharitable vnnaturall and vngodly might seeme to curse where God curseth not he annexeth certayn portions of scripture which he also sets downe at large as though they made largely against vs and our separation and the end why he alleadgeth them is to prove that there is cause of reioycing in the Church of England The scriptures are these Rom. 15. 17. 18. Act. 10. 34. 35. Rom. 14. 17. 18. To which I do answer first in generall There may be oft tymes is cause of reioycing in the events and issues of things by a speciall hand of God determining them though the secundary meanes and instruments which the Lord vseth for the producing and bringing forth of these issues events as of light out of darknes be most accursed Wherein more or els hath a christian heart cause of reioycing then in the death of Christ And yet what can be imagined more abominable then the meanes and instruments of working it But to speak nearer Mr B. purpose If some Iesuite or other sent by the Pope into America amongst the Pagans and Infidels should there perswade any to beleeve confesse one God and his sonne Iesus Christ made man for the redemption of the world that they should also give vp their lives for these truthes there were cause of reioycing in theyr testimony and yet I suppose Mr B. knowing as he doth would be loath to have communion in the Iesuits Ministery More particularly The Apostle Rom. 15. 17 18. in commendation of his Apostleship layes downe the effects of it and how great cause of reioycing he had that God by his ministery had planted the Churches of the Gentiles whom he further describes by theyr obedience in word and deed And how serves this for the Church of England Thus. It serves first to exclude all those word Saynts for whom Mr B. pleads so much in his book Secondly it serves to shew what small cause there is of reioying for the English Churches being planted of such vniversally so still continuing as are indeed abhominable and disobedient to every good work reprobate The second Scripture is Act. 10. 34. 35. Of a truth I perceave that God is no accepter of persons but in every nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousnes is accepted of him And is it so What sacrilegious presumption then is it in the Church of Enland to compell God to accept of persons and to accept for his people servants such as neither fear him nor work righteousnes but the coÌ„trary to offer vp theyr persons sacrifices to him in the name of Christ in whome they have no portion to seale vp the covenant of his grace and peace vnto them in the sacraments with whom it never came into his hart to strike hand neyther hath he peace with them The third Scripture is Rom. 14. 17. 18. The kingdome of God is not meat not drink but righteousnes and peace and ioy in the Holy G. for whosoever in those things serveth Christ is acceptable to God c. Hence to let passe the drift of the Apostle in this place els where opened thus much must necessarily follow that where righteousnes and peace and ioy in the Holy Ghost are not nor men in those things serving Christ there the kingdome of God is not nor these men his subiects And where Gods kingdom is not there is the kingdome of Satan and they that are not the subiects of the one are the slaves of the other And so I leave it to the godly reader to iudge whither the assemblyes in England gathered at the first and at this day consisting of such persons for the most part as do not thus nor in these things viz righteousnes peace and ioy in the Holy Ghost serue Christ but the contrary can be rightly by the word of God accounted the kingdome of God Church of Christ. Thus the 3. Scriptures which Mr B. stretched out like a threfold coard to hold men in the assemblies are in truth and in their right meaning as a three stringed whip to scourge those that fear God out of them With such a renunciation of the truth must be interteyned much vntruth saith Mr Ber. as first thou must beleeve their way to be the truth of God then condemne our Church as a false Church when themselves have published that the differences betwixt vs and them are but corruptions Nâ—w corruptions do not make a false Church but a corrupt Church aâ— corruptions in a man make but a corrupt but no false man If we beare witnes of
officers onely pag. 94. 95. and to separate from them is as intollerable pag. 88. Miserable were the Lords people if these things were so but the truth is they are miserable guides that so teach 2 They which may forgive sins and sinners save soules gayne and turne men vnto the Lord to them are the keyes of the kingdome given by which they open the dore vnto such as they thus forgive gayne and save but all these things such as arâ— no ministers may do as these scriptures which I entreat the godly reader to consider do most clearly manifest Math. 18. 15. 2 Cor. 2. 5. 7. 8. 9. 10. Act. 8. 1. 4. with 11. 19. 20. 21. Iam. 5. 19. 20. 1 Pet. 3. 1. Iude 22. 23. Erroneous therefore derogatory is it to the nature of the gospel free donation of Christ thus to impropriate and ingro 〈…〉 the keyes whichly common to all Christians in their place and order 3. Lastly I do affirme with Mr Smyth that the twelve were as yet but disciples and not actually Apostles Designed in deed they were to the office of Apostles but not possessed of it A man may call such a woman his wife before they be actually maryed and such a child his heire though he be not for the present possessed of a foot of his inheritance nor like to be before the testators death and that this was the condition of the twelve I prove by these reasons If the twelve were called to the office of Apostles Mat. 16. then Christ called men to an office for which they were altogether vnfit vnfurnished which to imagine were impious against Christ. Now that they were vtterly vnapt to this office appeares in these particulars First they vvanted that Christian fortitude and courage vvhich vvas most needfull for that office Secondly they were ignorant of the nature of Christs kingdom not forecasting his death nor beleeving his resurrection vnfurnished also with the gift of tongues and so vtterly vnable to teach the gentiles for whose sake they received their commission in a speciall manner Mat. 16. 21. 22. 20. 20. 21. 26. 51. Mark 16. 11. 14. Luke â—4 21. Act. 2. 1. 2. 3. 4. Mat. â—8 19. Ephe. 3. 5. 6. 2. When Christ ascended on high he gave gifts to men viz. Apostles Evangelists c. Ephe. 4. 8. 11. And then and not before then was the Church capable of the office of Apostles who were to preach the gospel to all nations when the partition wall was broken down betwixt the Iewes Gentiles that the gentiles also which were formerly straungers forreigners might now be made citizens with the saints and of the househood of God Ephe. 2. 12. 19 And aâ— this particular I have now in hand seemeth to receive confirmation from the last scripture Mr Bernard bringeth for the Apostles commission which is Mark. 13. 34. where Christ at his departing into a straunge countrey sets his house in order gives his servants authority and appoints them their work so doth the expositioÌ„ application of the same scripture to the generall purpose if we coÌ„pare with this place that which he affirmeth in another argue him that brings it of a mind very vnsound and vnstable Here as all men see Mr Bern. allegeth it to prove that the cheif officers onely are by commission from Christ to medle in the publick affaires of the Church and in particular to redresse things amisse and to censure offenders but in his second book being pressed by an argument by Mr Smith taken from this scripture he fare and â—â—atâ—y denyes that the Lord in this place intends to set out any government of the Church at all and thus compared with himself he is like nothing lâ—sse then himself Now since Mr B. disclayms this scripture as not intended at all of the goverment of the Church that in his 2. better thoughts I have no reason to spend much time in answering him Onely I can not passe by one frivolous exception in his reply against Mr Sm. and another absurd collection of his owne Where Mr Smyth affirmes that every servant or disciple in the Church hath authority and that truely if he have the word of God he hath authority for the word caryes authority with it wheresoever it goes Mr B. excepts first that by servants are meant Officers which as it is true sometimes so is it otherwise for the most part espetially in the parables of this kind Mat. 25. 14. Luk. 19. 12. 13. to which this parable seemeth well to consort wherin since all have received some good thing or substance froÌ„ Christ to be dispensed for the good of the rest all should diligâ—tly faithfully imploy their labour in the same ever expecting the returne of the mayster all every one of them watching and the Porter specially according to that speciall charge layd vpon him to watch ver 34. 35. 37. but the exception I meane is that by servants cannot be meant the Church because the house is the Church and the authority not given to the house but to the servants in the house who are to look over others Mark here in the case of goverment the house must needs be the Church the Church and house are both one Christ speaking of the house or Church meanes the people excluding the officers and yet Math. 18. in the case of govermâ—t the officers are in Christs speach the Church or house for they are all one excluding the people But to the poynt as the officers are both the Lords servants in his house parts of the house and houshould also so are the people not onely the house or of the house and houshould as in the forenamed scriptures but the Lords servants in his house also The idle and senseles exposition Mr B. gives is of the Porters watching Where the mayster at his departure appoyntes every servâ—â—t his work and commaunds all to watch and the porter specially least he 〈◊〉 suddenly and fynd them sleeping Mr B. to ioyne all together for the holding out of Mr Smythes Argument makes the Porter Gods spirit as if the Holy Ghost were one of the servants and had a commaundement from Christ to watch least it should be found asleep at his comming And by this I hope it appeareth in the generall contrary to Mr B. affirmation that the power of Christ or keyes of the kingdom is not delegated or committed primarily much lesse solaryly or alone to the officers of the Church how soever they as the governours are to direct and as the minister to exequute in the vse of this power or of these keyes Of the particulars hereafter That which comes next into consideration is that the Apostles committed that theyr power received from Christ not to the body of the people but to the cheife ministers of the gospell and cheife officers of the Church First here let the reader observe how Mr B. interesses these
of you where your your fellow Ministers power of excommunication had been duetify as an obedient child in giving the rod of discipline into the hands of your reverend fathers alone and their substitutes Well Mr B. whomsoever the Lord Iesus meant by the Church Mat. 18. he never meant that the Archbishop of York the Archdeacon of Nottingham the Officiall of Southwel were the Church of Worksop and for this I vvill spare all Arguments and send you to your owne guilty conscience for conviction which as it condemns you in yourself which is also the case of many thowsands in the Land so do I earnestly wish both you and them to remember with fear and trembling the condemnation of him that is greater then your cōscience Ioh. 3. 20. So far are they from being the Church of Worksop as they are not so much as members of it nor of any other particular Church in the kingdome they are neyther the Pastours so called nor vnder the Pastors of any particular Church but with their tanscendent jurisdiction in their Provinciall and Diocesan Churches take their scope without orb or order and as clouds without rayn carryed about with the wind of ambition and covetousnes for the the greatest part To leave them and come to your reasons Mr B. by which you would prove that tell the Church is tell the governours But here behold the fruites of an vnstable mind This man in his former book laboured by many scriptures and reasons to lay downe the nature of the Churches government and in speciall to prove that the Church Math. 18. 17. to vvhich complaint of sinns was to be made was the cheif officers onely and this he affirmes also to be the iudgement and the practise of all reformed Churches But lo now in his second book he devoures the hallowed thing and labours vvithall his power to persvvade young divines seely country people as he speakes and as in truth they had need be both young and seely that are perswaded by him that the points of discipline and Church-government are not so apparant by the scriptures as that they can rightly iudge of them And to this end he brings in the variety of iudgements and contradictions of learned men some holding no government at all others that an externall government is to be had but of these some holding it alterable others constant and perpetuall and of these some to be in the Pope Cardinalls others in the body of the congregatiō some in the Presbytery with the peoples consent and others which he puts last as best and for which he brings sundry reasons referring the reader to the treatises written to that end in the Bishops his Lords And againe touching the punishment of offenders some he brings in holding excommunication but not suspension some holding both and some neyther And particularly for Math. 18. he musters in thick and threefold reasons and persons so reasoning and proving that the place and so of Lev. 19. 17. doth nothing at all concern discipline or ecclesiasticall censures but that Christs meaning there was onely to direct the Iewes how to carry things before the Synedrion in cases of bodily injury And thus he brings mens contrary opinions to darken the scriptures which are most playne like so many foul feet to trouble the pure fountaynes of living water that the thirsty may not drink of them And as a learned man in our age nation to discover the vanity of prognosticatours gathered together their contrary guesses of the wether and so presented them so this man to make the government of Christs Church as vncertayne as an Almanack sets together and so offers to the vvievv of the world the contrarieties of opinions concerning it Now if other men should take this course Mr B. doth in other points of religion and one lay down the differences that are about predestination the points depending vpon it some vtterly denying it others affirming it and of these some grounding it vpon Gods mere grace others vpō mans faith or workes foreseen an other about baptisme some denying it to all infants others ministring it to all others to such onely as are of Christian parents in a sort and others onely to them that are of beleeving parents at the least on the one side a third about the Lords supper in which point some hold transubstantiation others consubstantiation others onely a sacramentall vnion which some also will have merely rationall others reall also there could not be a playner way beaten for all Atheism to come into the world by nor a course devised by the Divell more pregnant to perswade the multitude that there were no certaynty nor soundnes in the scriptures But let God have the glorie of his truth and of the clearnes in it and let men bear the just blame and shame of their naturall blyndnes and in speciall let Christ have the honour of being as faythfull in his owne house as Moses was in his Maisters in setting orders and officers in it and let not vile flesh dare to flatter Princes and Prelates to mislead silly soules and to preach liberty and licentiousnes to the world make Christ Iesus an Idol King having a kingdome vpon earth without lawes or officers for the administring of it nor to make his redeemed Idoll subjects as whom it concerns little or nothing whether they be vnder Chrits lawes and officers or vnder Antichrists his professed adversary Now though I will not trouble my self and the reader about every stone that Mr. B. idely casts in the way yet such as may stumble the weakest passenger I will remove and so returne to my former task And in the first place I will answer certaine reasons in number six brought by Mr B. for the superiority of his Lord Bishops but those not backed with the scriptures as in other points when he thinks he speaks the truth his manner is The first is taken from the succession of Iames at Ierusalem of Peter at Antioch of Peter Paul at Rome of Mark at Alexandria I answer first that these were not Bishops set over certayn Churches here and there though vpon occasion they tarryed some good space in some certayne Churches but generall men Apostles and Evangelists without successours in their Offices so the Protestants do generally answer the Papists instancing them as you do now 2. I deny the very Apostles vsed any such Lordly and Papall authority as to exclude eyther the inferiour officers or people in Church affaires the contrary is most evident in the choice of officers Act. 1. 15. 23. 26. and 6. 1. 2. 3. 5. censuring of offenders 1 Cor. 5. and debating of other Church matters Act. 15. 2. 3. 4. 6. 7. 22. 23. 30. 21. 22. The 2. Argument is taken from 1 Cor. 12. 28. where say you three degrees are reckoned vp the first of Apostles the second of Prophets the third of Teachers But since the
for the punishment of offenders in it But this tedious matter is not yet ended For Mr B. marshals in eight fresh reasons to force all the reformed Churches in the world with vs to give over this hold of Mat. 18. pag. 224. 225. 226. of this his last book the best is they are of no great strength The first is a bare affirmation that the former exposition by me confuted is true His second Reason is bycause Christ hath erected no government in his Church for why he should adde by publick doctrine I see not except he would insinuate that Christ taught this point privately and in a corner but for this brings he no one scripture or reason as if his bare vvord vvere enough to stablish an Idoll King in his Church vvithout officers or lavves Where notvvithstanding in his former book pag 90. 91. 92. 93. he proves by many scriptures that Christ hath given officers for the government of his Church which no man denyes but himself In the third place he affirmes that Christ by the Church meanes not the Iewish Synedrion wherin I assent vnto his saying for reason brings he none Touching the nature of the Churches government which he gropes at in the fourth place I have spoken els where The 5. Reason followeth which comprehends vnder it many petty Reasons and amongst other the 6 7 and 8 in order which save for the shew in the margent of 8. distinct numbred Reasons might vvel enough haue ben spared The sum is that this 18. of Mat. is no perfect rule of discipline the reasoÌ„s are bycause neyther all sorts of sins are here brought in nor all the parts of discipline here comprehended And hovv do these things appear First bycause a man is here to proceed onely for trespasses or as it is better turned for offences against himself but not for sinne against God against the Magistrate or against an other But here you should have remembred Mr B. that sin being the transgression of the law is onely against God to speak properly and therefore David notwithstanding his defiling of Bath sheba and murdering of Vrijah confesseth that he had sinned against God onely But as the same transgression is so coÌ„mitted as man scandalizeth or takes offence at it so it is a sinne against him whether the deed done respect God or man yea man or beast publick or private person a mans self or others in the object and so he may forgive it after the order prescribed by Christ. And where by way of exception you demaund how one man can remit trespasses done against an other it is true it cannot be if by trespasses be meant personall injuries but considering the same trespasses as they are sinnes against God at which a brother takes offence so the brother offended may forgive them vpon the offenders repentance And asking how men can forgive rebellion against God you seem to haue forgotten yourself for in the very leaf next before going you both graunt and prove that not onely Ministers by vertue of their office but private persons also may bind and loose sinnes The thing it self you grant and for the manner of it it is as they save by manifesting and making knowne outwardly salvation and the forgivenes of sinnes To your third objection concerning the keeping secret of publick crymes against the Magistrate vpon the offenders repentance you answer yourself for if they be publick or of publick nature they may not be kept secret neyther are they capable of the order of secret dealing in them And here falles into consideration your seventh Reason which is that if discipline be grounded vpon Mat. 18. then the Church must iudge in civil affaires and enter vpon the bounds of the Magistrate And are you ignorant Mr B. that civil actions as they draw scaÌ„dalous sin with them may be censured ecclesiastically as may also religious actions be punished civily by the Magistrate which is the preserver of both tables so to punish all breaches of both specially such as draw with them the violation of the positive lawes of kingdomes or disturbance of common peace Take your own instance of murder The Magistrate is to punish it civilly in all his subjects whether the parties repent or no the Church is to censure it ecclesiastically in her members yea though the Magistrate pardon or passe by it except the parties delinquent repent for then they are to be forgiven And what vsurpation is here vpon the Magistracy you to suppress Gods ordinance do flatter the Magistrate and accuse the innocent Next you except that this of Mat. is a rule for sinnes private and more secret but not for publick and open sinne You might as well say that the patterne of prayer prescribed by Christ Mat. 6. is not perfect nor a rule for private prayer or for things concerning our selves onely bycause it teacheth vs to say Our father forgive vs our sinnes But who knowes not that generalls include their specialties vnder them The Lord Iesus in teaching his disciples to say forgive vs our sinnes ioyntly teacheth them in the same place to ask forgivenes eyther of their own sinnes or the sinnes of others severally as occasion serves so in teaching here all the degrees of admonition ioyntly he implyes also the dealing in any one of them severally if there be occasion And this exposition of Mr B. can I not fitlyer resemble then to the practise of some silly pursevant that being sent to attach some traytour or other malefactour dwelling in Barwick and so to bring him to the Court if he should meet the party by the way would refuse to medle with him and would say that he was sent to Barw to fetch him and would eyther bring him from thence or would let him alone And it seems if Mr B. might construe his coÌ„mmission he would so advise him But would not common sense teach a man that the nearer he met with the party he â—ought the more labour were spared and that he were to apprehend him where he found him So where Christ sends his disciples to deal with sinne a farre off as it were and in the first vtmost degree but if it be come nearer and be found in the 2. or 3. degree it is to be taken where it is found If it be secret and yet rest betwixt the brother offeÌ„ding offended it must there be dealt with if it become nearer the court and be wrought before two or three or more it must there and in that order be vndertaken the first degree is over and that labour spared if it be of publick nature or publikly coÌ„mitted the two former degrees are past and the labour in them spared the sin must be dealt with accordingly And the Church eyther by information from any brother or brethren or by immediate notice taken may convent or call for the offender that he which sinned publikly may publiquely be rebuled And this may serue for answer to the
them and therefore reproved neyther is it materiall if the scriptures do not expresly tax the whole Church for connivency every time they rebuked some persons in it It is sufficient they do it in some places and in some Churches there is the same reason of all neither hath one Church priviledge above an other or for one sin more then an other And this also may serve for answer to the 2. 3. of your twenty Reasons in your 2. book Onely you must take knowledg of your grosse oversight in the latter reason where the question being of the true matter of the Church you bring in Noah in the old world Lâ—t in Sodom vnpolluted as though the world and Sodom had been true matter of the Church Noah and Lot of the same religious communion with them The like ignorance you shew in the 8. Reason where you demaund why the fellowship in civil society should not be polluted as well as religious communion As though you had never read that the vnbeleeving husband is sanctified to the beleeving wife for civil society which is no way dissolved no not though the one party be a Turk Iew or Atheist And do you think Mr B. that religious communion may be held with such without pollution In the next scripture which is Gal. 5. 10. the Apostle no way acquites the Church of transgression but speaks vnder hope of their repentance which they were to manifest by avoyding cutting off such as had troubled and seduâ—ed them Gal. 1. 8. 9. and 5. 12. In Mat. 5. 24. 25. Christ commaunds that before a man offer his gift he reconcile himself vnto his brother True but where hatred is there is no holy reconciliation and where brotherly admonition is not and that to the reformation of the brother offending there is hatred as is manifest Lev. 19. 17. And if you would improve to the right vse this scripture it would drive you and others from your Corban till you had discharged the dutyes of mercy to your brethren which the Lord accepts above sacrifice Touching 1 Cor. 11. which is the next scripture I will speak something more largely bycause Mr B. thinks it most pregnant for the decyding of the controversy for that the Apostle speaking purposely of the pollution of the sacrament bids every man examine himself and not one an other and that vnder peyn of eating damnation to himself and not to an other if he come not reverently notwithstaÌ„ding there was much evil in the Church And is it so in deed that bycause men must examine themselves therefore not others what warrant then have you for your Eastershrift your examining the people before they communicate You I hope are to examine your self as well as others And might not your people tell you out of your own book that you have nought to do to examine them Might not the meanest of them say vnto you examine your self if I eat and drink vnworthily it shal be myne own damnation not yours Yea might not any vngodly person thus answer eyther officer or brother that should reprove him eyther publikly or privately This indeed is the common fashion in the Church of England and nothing more common and it is a received rule that every man shall answer for himself and every tub stand vpon his own bottom and brotherly admonition is accounted by the most but a precise curiosity of busy-headed people And in this you confirm them by your collection teaching the offenders to pull away the shoulder and to stop the â—are that they might not heare to make the hart hard as an adamant stone You do then erre Mr Bern. in expounding 1 Cor. 11. 18. exclusively It doth not follow that because I am bound to examine my self therefore not my brother that is not to observe him admonish him bring him to repentance for apparant sinne for of such an examination we onely speak leaving to a mans self the examination of the hart and of things secret You may as well argue thus We are to save our selves Act. 2. 40. to speak vnto our selves in psalmes c. Ephe. 5. 19. to teach and admonish our selves Col. 3. 16. to comfort our selves 1 SaÌ„ 30. 6. to edify our selves Iud. 20. and therefore neyther to save nor to speak to nor to teach nor to admonish nor to comfort nor to aedify others which is contrary to these amongst many other scriptures Iud. 23. 1 Thes. 4. 18. 5. 11. 14. Furthermore you your self pag. 120. of this book make and that truely the Lords supper a testimony of that visible communion of love amongst the members Except then there be that love which is there testifyed the Lords ordinance is prophaned and his name taken in vayn Now where admonitions are not for the purging gayning humbling and saving of the the offender Mat. 18. 15. 1 Cor. â— 5. 2. 6. 7. there is not true love but hatred Levit. 19. 17. And that true spirituall love required in the members of Christs body should be betwixt the servants of God notorious prophane persons eyther way passeth both myne vnderstanding affections And to conclude this point I would but desire you Mr B. to read the marginall note given in your authorized Bible printed at London 1603. vpon the 31. verse of this Chapter And thus you see how pregnant this scripture is to decyde the contreversie and to determine against you that except reformation of sinne be orderly sought and seasonably obteyned there can be no right or lawfull communion in the Lords supper And Paul in writing as he doth provokes as every man specially to look to himself so the whole Church together to see the reformation of the disorders amongst them ver 17. 18. 33. 34. Lastly for 2 Cor. 12. 11. it must be considered that the case was depending and in hand concerning such as had sinned and not repented and as the issue of things should be so were the godly to carry themselves towards them if they would be drawn to repentance by admonition they were to forgive them as 2 Cor. 2. 7. if not the Church was bound to judge and cut them of whether Paul came or no. 1 Cor. 5. 11. 12. 13. Wherein if they fayled God would punish their carnall security and want of zeal as he threatneth Rev. 3. 14. 16. 19. To proceed where you affirm that our position insinuates that the sinne of one dissolves the bâ—nd of alleageance between God and another it it is no thing so The sin and apostasie of others can no way hinder or praejudice our salvation or standing with God if wee discharge our duty towards them But here is the oversight that men coÌ„sider not that as God hath commaunded men to worship him receive the sacraments and to vse other his ordinances so he hath also called and separated vnto himself a Church a communion or fellowship of saynts and holy ones in amongst
of he is inferiour to the teaching Elders and deserves lesse honour then they For so the Apostle orders things RoÌ„ 12. 7. 8. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Now in making your Bishops Pastours Doctours you are double forgetfull of your self and double injurious vnto them and which is worse then both the rest you sin against the Lord his truth For the first in your former book you made your Bishops cheif officers in the Church and the successours of the Apostles and Evangelists and here you make them Pastours and Teachers which are the lowest orders of officers that Christ gave for the work of the ministery Ephe. 4. 11. 2. if your Bishops be Pastours and Teachers by their office what are you and the rest of your rank You and they have not the same office but you an office vnder them and so Pastours and Teachers being the lowest order that Christ hath left in his Church your order must needs be something vnder the lowest and of an others leavings then Christs 3. in making your Bishops the Pastours Teachers of the Church of England or the particular Churches in it you lay to their charge an accusation which they will never be able to answer at the day of the Lord which is their not feeding of so many thowsand sheep committed vnto them to be fedd and taught by them Lastly nothing is more vntrue and disagreable to the word of God then that your Provinciall and Diocesan Bishops are the Pastours and Teachers given by Christ to his Church There were no other ordinary officers left or appointed by the Apostles in the Churches but such as were fixed to particular congregations ordinarily called Bishops or Elders Act. 14. 23. 20. 17. 28. Phil. 1. 1. And if it can be shewed that by the word of God any other officers were left or appointed in the Church after the extraordinary officers Apostles Prophets Evangelists whose gifts and places vvere extraordinary besides such Bishops and Elders as vvere limited to particular Churches I vvill yeeld this vvhole cause in the point of the Ministery and so professe The other of Mr B. answer I mynd is about the power of Christ against sin Sathan Antichrist the want whereof Mr Ainsw and that truely objecteth against the English assemblyes Mr B. defence summarily is that there is in the Church of England the preaching of the word which is the power of Christ Rom. 1. 18. as also excommunication though not in every parrish yet in the Church of England in which is comprehended all parrishes and all superiour power over them For which let the Reader observe these particulars First a national Church since Christs death and the dissolution of the Iewish Church is amonstrous compound and savours of Iudaism Secondly if the mayn part of the power of Christ be to be administred in a particular congregation by the ordinary officers thereof namely the preaching of the gospell why not the inferiour part the censures also save that the Byshops to Lord it over all will keep this rod in their own hands Thirdly the Ministers whose judgments reasons you avouch both say and prove in the latter end of your book that this power is given to a particular congregation of faithful people Fourthly you your self lay it down as a mayn ground against popularity and withal sundry scriptures to prove it that Christ hath appoynted the same sorts of men in his Church for preaching administration of the sacraments and government Lastly it is apparant that the particular Church of Corinth gathered together in the name of the Lord Iesus had the power of the Lord Iesus for excommunication and so hath every other faythful assembly in the world as they had which since your assemblyes are not they may want this power without any great wrong the evil onely is that it resteth in a worse place then the worst parrish assembly the Bishops court or consistory I proceed Onely my desire is that the things which I have noted touching Christs kingly office be the more carefully observed by all the people of God and servants of Iesus in respect of that most direct opposition which in those latter dayes is made against it and the administration thereof For as in the first tymes after Christs comming in the flesh his prophetical office was directly impugned by Iewes and heathens so as it was †not lawful to speak in his name since that his preisthood by the masse-preisthood sacrifices in the popish Church so now in the last place doth Sathan in his instruments bend his force most directly against and with might and mayn oppose the sovereignty and crown of our Lord Iesus that he may not rule in his Church by his own officers and lawes The matter you say is not false and to shew this you note a difference between true matter false matter and no matter As you speak that which neyther any other nor yet your selfe can vnderstand of false matter so you call them no matter which make no profession of Christ at all â—â— Iewes Turkâ—s Pagans and all them true matter to wit visible which openly professe this â—â—yn truth that Iesus the sonne of Mery is the sonne of 〈…〉 Christ the Lord by whom onely and 〈…〉 they shal be saved Many greivous errours are bound vp 〈…〉 invective of Mr Bernards but for prophanenes this one surmounts them all For what can be spoken more prejudicial to the glorie of God or deragotory to the body of Christ hâ—â— that any person but pronouncing so many words how fil 〈…〉 ious soever he be in his life or what errours soever he mingle with this truth is notwithstanding true visible matter of the Church or a true member of Christs body visibly or so far as men can iudg and so must be received acknowledged Against this odious and prophane errour I wil first deal by some clear Arguments proving the contrary and then come to the allegations he makes for his vngodly purpose If all that professe this mayn truth Iesus the son of Mary c. be true matter of the Church then are most notable haeretiques true matter of the Church The Apellites Câ—rdoâ—â—ans and Marcioâ—â—â—es holding two contrary beginnings or Gods the one good the other evil the Macedonians denying the Holy Ghost to be God the Cerâ—â—â—hyans holding that Christ is not yet risen from the dead the Paternians affirming the inferiour parts of the body of man to be created of the Divill the Patricâ—â—â—â— holding so of the whole body the Novatians and Cathari denying repentance to them that sin the Nicholaitans holding community of all things the Swenk seldians and Enthusiasts denying the outward ministery wayting vpon the revelation of the spirit alone and with these many others as ill or worse then they professing notwithstanding this mayn truth as the most of them did and do Then are excommunicates true matter of the
person is Mr Nichols who in his Plea of the innocent expresly affirms that conferring with the particular persons in his parish after he had preached some good space amongst them about the meanes of salvation of 400 coÌ„municants he scarce found one but that thought and professed a man might be saved by his own wâ—ll doing and thaâ— he trusted he did so love that by Gods grace he should obteyn everlasting lâ—se by serving God and good prayers Now how do these agree together Mr B sayth that all professe salvation by Christ onely and alone Mr Nichols on the coÌ„trary affirms out of his own experience that not one of 400 so thinks and professes And if he and all the ministers in England should deny it we out selves by our own experience know what the fayth and perswasion of the multitude in most places is Now for your further reasoning that bycause a Bishop or two published this and some other mayn truthes vnto the world with the approbation of the Parliament and Convocation house and that some preachers here there do so teach therefore all the land so professeth where many thowsands do not so much as vnderstaÌ„d it what can be imagined more vayn Can men professe the truth they know noâ— What is this but the Papists implicit faith when men beleiv as the Church beleiveth though they know not what it is yea and worse then it also for as we see and know infinite multitudes beleive and vpon occasion professe the contrary But most vayn of all is it to affirm that bycause a few godly martyrs have sealed vp this the like truthes with their blood that therefore they that murdered them professe the same truth are true ChristiaÌ„s without any other change wrought in them for the most part then by the Magistrates sword and authority You affirm by way of answer pag. 249. of your second book that the Magistrates compulsion vnto goodnes is no hurt vnto it neyther makes men vnholy or lesse good if they have goodnes in them As it is not simply true you affirm that the compulsion of men to the faith doth not hurt it for if the causing the truth to be blasphemed be to hurt it then the coÌ„pelling of apparant wicked persoÌ„s to professe the same hurts it as it doth both them and the Church whereof they are so if the body of the land in the beginning of the Queens reign were good and holy at all the magistrates compulsion wrought it in men made them of persequuting Idolaters true Christians for other meanâ—â— intervening or coÌ„ming betwixt their professioÌ„ of the masse of the gospell had they none saving the Magistrates authority But here I am by necessity and in respect of the present matter in hand drawn into Mr B. 2. book and a great benefit were it to me if there I might find him though in both vnfound yet one and the same But a great trouble it is to walk with a drunken man and to be bound to follow him in all his vagaâ—ies so is it to deal with an adversary light headed dizzy with wrath vanity and errour whom a man must follow in all his staggerings and reelings to and fro and in all the forwards and backwards that he makes oft times going and vngoing again the same by-pathes There is no one thing wherevpon Mr B labours more in his former book and for which he brings more reasons and scriptures and those often repeated then to prove the Church of EnglaÌ„d or rather such particular Churches as have the word preached in them to be truely gathered after the suppressing of Popery and by the order of the Apostolick Churches both in respect of separation from Idolatours and Antichristian Papists pag. 108 as also by profession of the mayn truth and sum of the Gospell wherein they differed from Iewes Turks and Pagans as no matter and also from Papists as false matter of the Church pag 111. 112. 113. 116. And therefore having proved by a multitude of scriptures that the Apostolick Churches were gathered by free profession of fayth he concludes thus of them and of his own Church such as make this profession are true matter and so are wee for we all professe this fayth c. But now as though he had eyther forgotten what he wrote before or cared not how he crossed himselfe so he might oppose vs against whom he hath vowed such vtter emnity he suckes in his former breath and eats the words he had formerly vttered peremptorily affirming in his 2. book that in the reformation of a Church after Popery there is not required any such profession nor yet the word of God to go before their reformation but that the feare of the Magistrates sword is sufficient to recover them and to setle the people in order to the worship of God The ground vpon which he builds this his new and crosse opinion is the practise of Asa Ezechias Iosias and Nehemiah godly Kings and Princes of Iudah in the reformation of that Church after her Apostacy in the dayes of vngodly Idolatrous Kings therevpon taking it for graunted that the catholique visible Ch of Rome as it is called now is and that the national Church of England in Queen Maries dayes and before when Popery reigned was in the same estate with Iudah in her apostacy he concludes thence that as the Magistrates then without any voluntary profession did by force bring the people of the Iewes back from Idolatry to the true service of God so might King Edward and Queen Elizabeth by force bring back the people of England into covenant with God to be his true Church without any such profession of fayth as in the first planting of Churches is required We will then consider of this poynt at large as being both weighty in it self and having many others depending vpon it That Iudah was at the first and so continued by vertue of the Lords Covenant with her forefathers on his part faythfully remembred and kept though by her oft tymes broken the true Church of God and holy in the root till she was broken of for vnbeleif after the death resurrection and ascension of Christ fully published and confirmed by the Apostles I graunt with him but the same or the like things of the Church of Rome or of England in the respects layd down may I not acknowledg That there was at Rome a true Church beloved of God called saynts by giving obedience vnto the fayth is apparant but that eyther the city or Church of Rome consisting of many cities and countryes was ever within the Lords covenant and holy in the root as Iudah was may I neyther acknowledg neyther can he possibly prove So for England I wil not deny but there were at the first true Churches planted in it by the preaching of the gospell and obedience of fayth and these as the other Churches in every nation though in
no Papists in your kingdom I may say in your Parish or are Papists become no idolaters with you as Rome was right now no false Church nor Iesuites false subiects The face of your charity Mr B. is so full set towards Rome and Papists as no marvayl though you be so vnequall towards vs as you are The truth is you are in the most streyt bond of civil society with Popish idolaters that may be Ther is nothing more common amongst them of your Church then to ioyn in mariage with them neyther is there to my knowledge amongst all your canons any one against this prophane commixture Neyther is it any thing you speak of living vnder a Christian King or with a people professing Christ for idolaters may live vnder a Christian King and professe Christ too in a measure as both many others and all antichristiaÌ„ idolaters do Yea I have formerly manifested that you live not onely in civill but even in religious society with Papists and you your self graunt as much of Atheists in the beginning of your book and will you say that visible Atheists are true visible matter of the Church and capable by the word of God of true visible fellowship and communion with Christ and the true members of his body The scope of â—e scripture followeth which say you iâ— that the beleeving Corintâ—ians may have no fellowship with the infidels and vnbeleevers to their evill works but that they reprove condemn hate and avoyd them Belike then they might haue had fellowship with them in any good work and so if any of the heathen or infidell Corinthians would haue communicated with the Christian Corinthians in the sacraments or prayer they might not haue refused their fellowship or communion herein For by your exposition the Apostle onely forbids partaking with them in evill works the works of darknes Of which more hereafter And here in our names you frame an obiection the sum whereof is that if all the godly would separate from all the wicked then there should be no wicked of the Church Vnto which you answer sundry things but how sufficiently will appear in the particulars First you say God commaunds not his to separate wholly from all the wicked but from Infidels Gentiles Idolaters Iewes Turks Papists whose very societies are to be left as no people of God Well then I perceive all religious fellowship with Papists is vnlawfull and that their societies are no people of God And how agrees this with your other affirmations that Rome is a true Church Papists true Christians though under corruptions as it was true Iob though vnder soars baptism there a true sacrament and seal of the covenaunt yet here the societies of Papists are no people of God that is in no covenant with him Or how doth this separatioÌ„ thus wholly to be made from Papists agree with that you write pag. 91. of ioyning in prayer with such Papists as though they be of the Church of Rome yet sorrow for the abhominations and as are come out from it in their soules the best part though not so in their bodyes The distinction you put between Infidels and idolaters and men of prophane life wee shall consider of in due place for your speach of all the Church falling into the estate of infidelity and so â—â—dged of the Church eyther it is without sense or I which vnderstand it not Now to that you adde of separating from the private familiarity of the wicked living in the society of the godly and that if they will not be reformed other courses are to be taken with them as their sin of obstinacy deserves I answer these things First that as there is a case wherein private withdrawing from a brother is warrantable namely when his offence is private and he privately obstinate that his sinne eyther cannot be or is not yet made publick publiquely â—vinâ—â—d so to separate from men privately and that onely for publick offences is a course without ground either of scripture or rea son You say pag. 144. that alvin so expounds 1 Cor. 5. 11. and therevpoÌ„ do take an occasion to accuse our practise as Brownisticall vs of Luciferian schisme Pharisaicall pride As I leave your raylings to be iudged by the Lord so do I give the reader to vnderstand how you grossely abuse Calvins authority who expounds that scripture as all men know it is meant of excommunicates and of mens private cariage towards them with which publick separation is also to be joyned I suppose you your self will not deny it And where you speak of an other course to be taken with wicked men that wil not be reformed you should also shew what that course is and what is to be done if that course be not taken but you have thought it a point of your wisdome to be silent in these things least by opening them too particularly you should discover your own shame The course to be taken is the censuring of such incorrigible offenders by the particular congregation whereof they are being gathered together in the name of Christ by the power of Christ with which power divine and heavenly priviledge he hath furnished his Churches every one of them as well as that one of Corinth neyther doth any true Church of Christ want this power or neglect the vse of it without sinne And if any Church of Christ would neglect to vse this power against scandalous sin manifestly proved and coÌ„vinced would obstinately continue notwithstanding all good meanes vsed to the contrary this sower leaven vnpurged out the whole lump were levened and with leven might not the Passeover be eaten And as the Church if sin do arise is first to endeavour the casting out of the sinne by the sinners repentance and if that will not be in the last place to cast out the sinne and sinner together so if the Church do wickedly bear out and boulster iniquity amongst themselves such as are faithfull are first to quit themselves of that Church-sin by testifying against it and reproving it and in the last place to quit themselves of the Church if it remayn incurable Now here you bring in certayn differences distinctions of separation but without application The first I omit as being before handled so much as concerns the present purpose The 2. difference is between the wicked remayning amoÌ„g the godly the godly being of the felowship of the wicked this differece I acknowledg withall affirm that the latter part of it notes out the estate of your nationall Church wherein a few godly mynded in comparison live in the fellowship of a wicked and sinfull nation And if persons excommunicate by the Church be not of her fellowship then certaynly the number of the godly in your fellowship is very small since your nationall Church representative the convocatioÌ„ house whose Act also pag 147. you avouch to be the Act of all the Church so to be
and combyne together as they did may cease to be the true Church of Christ and may eyther become no Church by forsaking all profession of Christianity or a false Church by holding and professing themselves stil Christians in fellowship with God through Christ when being considered by the revealed will of God and testament of Christ they are in truth in deed neyther the one nor the other And considering what Iohn sayth that he which loveth not his brother and so consequently cares not for his welfare which issueth from the former as the stream from the spring is not of God nor of his children but of the children of the Divel and withall that you your self right now did place the form covenant of the Church in a great measure in the manifestation and testimony of love in the members each to other and so consequently of care ech for the welfare of other I see not how that Church can be accounted the houshould of God consisting of his children by the word of God or the body of Christ vnited coupled together of his members by your owne doctrine where this love of and care for each other is visibly and outwardly wanting But to passe over all other things the point vpon which Mr B. insists and which he would most gladly fasten vpon the reader is that the power of the censures and of excommunication termed by the name of discipline howsoever it be a thing necessary for the wel being of the Church yet is it no essentiall property nor of such necessity but that a true Church may be without it And this wanting scriptures or reasons to confirm it he affirms again and again and in the end illustrates by a similtude taken from a man who is not therefore a false man though he can neyther see nor gâ—e nor speak It is recorded of one THEODOTIVS that having denied Christ in persequution to lessen his sin he went about to lessen Christ and taught that he was mere man and not God so many in the case of Christs government that their own and other mens sinne may seem lesser in not vsing or submitting vnto it do labour to extenuate and make it lesse excellent or vsefull then it is and therevpon one telles vs it is not a part of Gods worship nor of religion another that it is a thing indifferent arbytrary changeable a third that it is not simply necessary for the true Church as Mr B in this place The vnsoundnes of whose affirmation illustration I will by and by manifest the Lord assisting me in the mean while I do desire the reader to observe with me these two things in his writings about this point The former is that in labouring thus earnestly to perswade as here he doth that the power of excommunication is not of simple necessity he in effect graunts that which all men know to be true namely that the Churches in England do want this power Now if here he answer as he doth in his 2. book that though the power of excommunication â—e not in every parish yet it is in the Church of England in which is comprehended all paâ—rishes and all superiour power over these Parishes in which is the power of Christ I reply these particulars First that he might thus answer though one Bishop alone had engrossed into his hands all this power yea a Papist might answer thus for the Popes sole authority over all the Churches in the world yea though he should communicate the same with no other person or persons 2. Let this mans shifting be well noted When both in this and the other book he pleads for the Ministery in the Church he passes by the Nationall Provinciall and Diocesan Ministery and speaks onely of the Ministery in some parishes where some honest zealous preachers are but now comming to plead for the power of Christ in the Church he takes the contrary course and passing by the parishes takes his flight to the Nationall Provinciall and Diocesan Ministery there to find comfort 3. the quaestion here as he himself puts it pag. 125. of this book is about particular congregations which he sayth there are with them having true matter true form and true properties whereof excommunication is one To this also adde that in the end of his book he aâ—oucheth the Ministers affirmation that this power is given to the particular congregations in the land 4. lastly I haue formerly manifested from Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. that this power and praerogative is given to a particular congregation besides which the new testament acknowledgeth none other visible Church and if that one particular Church or congregation aâ— Corinth gathered together into the name of the Lord Iesus Christ had the promise of his presence and that he would be in the mâ—ddest of them and were by this power of the Lord Iesus Christ to deliver to Satâ—n purge out iudge and put away wicked men from among them for fayling in which duety they were reproved by the Apostle then why not every other particular Church or congregation of Gods people as well as that one espetially since that as all other scriptures was written for our learning and that there is but one Church or body as there is but one Lord one that is in matter form and essentiall properties The 2. thing I desire may be noted is that Mr B doth if not deceiptfully yet vnfitly comprehend the power of the censures vnder the care for the welfare of the Church since this power may be full and intire where the care is eyther very little or not at all as it came to passe in the Church of Corinth which had this power alwayes amongst them but neglected the vse of it and therein the care for the welfare of the Church which they should have had for which neglect they were reproved by the Apostle Now for the similitude I do except against it in a double respect first for that God doth oft times deprive a man of the naturall power of seing going and speaking by naturall infirmities within or bodily violence from without but Christ never deprives his Church of this spirituall power of excommunication neyther can it be impeached by any outward violence onely Antichrist exalting himself against all that is called God and intruding himself into the throne of Christ doth deprive the Church of God and of Christ of this liberty and power and so all those Churches or congregations over whom he thus vsurpeth receive his mark are in that respect subject to his judgement 2. Mr B as I have formerly observed doth most vnaptly coÌ„pare the power of casting out offenders to the faculty of seing speaking and the like it is more fitly resembled to the want of power to void and purge excrements which is prodigious in nature so neyther the naturall nor spirituall body so constituted can possibly consist or
worship of God and being neyther the preaching of the word nor the sacraments nor prayer must needs be the true word of God so you must prove theÌ„ or els the truth of your assertioÌ„ is disproved Touching your discourse of the order of Gods worship before in and after the Apostles tyme I observe to let passe other particulars your errour in making the particular Synagogues of the Iewes as the particular Churches are now The Synagogues were not entyre Churches of themselves but partes or members of the nationall Ch neyther could they haue vse of the most solemn parts of Gods worship as were then the sacrifices neyther could the cheif Ministers in the Church execute their office in them but as they depended vpon the temple in Ierusalem so were the people to cary their offerings thither and there to enjoy these ministrations But particular congregations now do stand in no such dependancy they may enjoy within themselves the word sacraments and prayer which are the most solemn services in the Ch now and so by consequence all the rest In deed it is with your parrish assemblyes somewhat as it was with the Synagogues they cannot enjoy the Ministers by and from within themselves nor have the vse of ecclesiasticall government but must depend vpon their Ierusalems the Bishops Chappels and Consistories for these their most solemn and peculiar administrations Mr B in his 2. book to prove their worship true worship pretends 3 distinct ArgumeÌ„ts The first bycause it is according to the word of God 2. bycause it is not forbidden in the scripture 3. bycause it is after the manner of the worship of the true Churches of God set downe in the word An other man would have comprehended these three reasons in one and so might Mr Ber. have done well enough considering his confirmation of them wherein he brings not so much as one scripture or reason from scripture to prove their prescript leyturgy by man devised and imposed of which our mayn quaest on is to be according to the word of God c. onely in the 3. Argument he toucheth an obiection which he calles a conceyt of ours viz that it quencheth the spirit to which he gives a double answer First that it is agaynst known experience 2. that it is the groundwork of Mr Smith casting of reading the scriptures in the assembly Other things he speaks are not worth the insisting vpon let vs consider of his answers To the former of them touching known experience I do reply two things first that the experience of supposed good in a course or by meanes not warrantable by the written word of God is of all godly wise men to be suspected 2 though the experience of good be certayn yet must men take heed they honour not one thing for an other as the means of that good but they must put difference between that which is good and that which is evill in the same compound action Many do avouch they have wrought in them much hatred of murder treason and the like evils by a stage-play others that their devotion is much furthered by organ musick and the chaunting of quiresters yea by the prayers in a tongue they vnderstand not all these will alledge their knâ—wn experience But to leave these things The Apostle Paul 1 Cor. 14. testifyeth that a man speaking a strange language may â—diâ—y himself though not the Church and though he pray in a strange tongue without the vnderstanding or benefit of the Church yet that his spiâ—â—t may pray Might such a man therefore alledge his known experience for prayer in a strange tongue contrary to the Apostles expresse inhibition neyther is it any justification of the service book in the vse we speak of that people do in the reading of it find by experience their affectioÌ„s furthered God may doth therein honor the simple honest affectioÌ„s of his people so far as to receive the request of their heart which he seeth in secret covering in mercy the outward manner of putting vp the same wherein they of ignorance or infirmity fayl And that these stinted and devised forms do quench the spirit of prayer appears in that they deprive the Church minister of that liberty of the spirit of prayer which God would haue the vse stinting the Minister yea all the Ministers in the kingdom to the same measure of the spirit not onely one with an other but all of them with him that is dead and rotteÌ„ and so stinting the spirit which the Lord gives his Ministers for his Church and that so strictly as till the stint be out it may not suggest one thought or word otherwise or when it is out one more then is praescribed The manifestation of the spirit sayth the Apostle is given to every man to profit withall But in the reading of a praescript forme of prayer there is not the manifestation of the spirit of the minister given him to profit the Church withall but the manifestation of of the spirit of him that devised and penned the service book Now for M Ber 2 Answ namely that this conceipt of ours saying that set prayer quencheth the spirit is the groundwork of Mr Smithes casting of reading the scriptures in the assemblyes first he wrongeth M. Smyth who doth not deny the reading of the scriptures in the assembly but that the reading of them is properly a part of Gods worship 2. Not our conceipt but his own ill collection is the groundwork of his errour Let the indifferent reader iudge whither this consequence be good or no. Bycause the reading of the Apocrypha Prayers of the Bishops of Rome or of England or their Chapleyns for prayer quencheth the spirit or is not the true manner of prayer which Christ hath left therefore the reading of the Canonicall scriptures penned by the Prophets and Apostles for reading quencheth the spirit and is no part of Gods worship Other observations M Ber hath in his Answer some nothing to the purpose and others against himself as for example The Iewes in the ould Testament did meet together at set times commaunded by the Lord so did the Churches of Christ in the new or the first day of the week Ergo the Church of England doth wel in meeting at set times yea holy times not commaunded by the LORD and that farre more solemnly then on the first or LORDS day 2. The Iewes had preaching every Lords day in every Synagogueâ— therefore the Church of Engl is in good estate where there is no preaching or as good as none in one parish of ten on the Lords day or at other tymes 3. The Iewish Church had singing of the Psalmes of David and of other propheticall men and Christ himself did vse the same therefore the Church of England doth coÌ„mmendably in singing besides them the Apocrypha songs of men ful of errours and vanities as that the Saints and Angels in
haretiques may not be heard â—herefore vsurpers may You might as sensibly argue thus bycause a fornicatour must not be eaten with but iudged by the Church therefore a covetous person an idolatour a rayler may be eaten with and must not be judged contrary to the Apostles expresse writing In your 9. charge namely that we hold it not lawful to ioyn in prayer with any of you and in your comment vpon it you do vs a double injury first in saying we approve not of any of your praying for vs 2. That wee pray for you onely as wee do for Iewes Turks and Papists For as wee are perswaded we fare the better for the prayers of many amongst you and so both approve of and desire the same so do wee also pray for many as for the Lords people in Babylon and that they may at the Lords call go out of her and that as they are holy in their persons so they may be also in their Church communion and ordinances Now for the poynt it self first for your Reason by which you would prove it erroneous If say you wee hold any of you the childreÌ„ of God then our Saviour hath taught vs to ioyn with you in prayer and to say Our father with you You do wryte in another place of this book that a man justly excommunicated cast out is to be held a brother so consequently a child of God for the brethren of the Saynts are the children of God wherevpon if your Argument in this place and Position in the former place be good it must be lawfull to joyn in prayer with a man justly excommunicated I do answer then that it is true you say we ought to coÌ„municate both in prayer in al the other ordinances of God with all Gods children except they themselves hinder it or put a barre which we are perswaded they in the Church of Engl. do in chusing rather the coÌ„munioÌ„ of all the profane rowt in the kingdom vnder the Prelates tyranny then the coÌ„munion of Saynts which Christ hath established vnder his government So that it is not we which refuse them but they vs binding vs eyther to practise as we do or to coÌ„municate in one spirituall body with all the graceles persons and vile miscreants in the kingdom For as he which hath hold of any one member of the naturall body iâ— not separated from the body but holdeth the whole every member by cohaerence so he which is joyned in coÌ„munioÌ„ with one meÌ„ber of the Church is by cohaerence joyned with the whole Church and every member of it We do professe it is not in neglect of the graces of God which we acknowledge to be eminent in many that we deny coÌ„munioÌ„ with them but onely in conscience of the order which Christ hath set in testimony against the disorder which Antichrist hath brought into left in the world The order which the Lord hath set is that those which fear him should be of a true visible Church rightly gathered that any such should be out of the true Church or coÌ„mingled with all the prophane Atheists in a kingdom is a mayn part of Antichrists confusion Now if God hath set vs in the orderly coÌ„munioÌ„ of a Church we must not break our order for other mens disordered courses CoÌ„munion is a matter of order relation standing in the orderly combyning of the graces of God in two faythfull persons or more And how far order ought to praevayl with men in this case let these particulars manifest One of the Church coÌ„mits some notable sinne known to me alone which being dealt with by me he denyes and without two or three witnesses the Church may not proceed against him I must therefore still coÌ„municate with the Church and so with him as a meÌ„ber of it til God so far discover him as he can be orderly dealt with till the Lord lead him forth with the workers of wickednes And as I am to coÌ„municate with an vngodly man with whom I am orderly joyned in the Church till I can be orderly disioyned from him so by proportion I am to forbear communion with a godly man out of the Church vntill I be orderly joyned vnto him Further put the case a man be excoÌ„municated in mine absence vpon the testimony of tvvo or three witnesses and that I know he is injuryed am able to manifest his innocency to all men yet will I for order sake so am bound forbear communion with him for the praesent till his iÌ„nocency be by me sufficiently cleared Now if for order I must refuse coÌ„munion with him which is put out of the Church for weldoing by the sinne of others how much more with him that keepes out himself by his own default and sinne So that the holines of a mans person is not sufficient for coÌ„munioÌ„ but withall it must be ranged into the order of a Ch wherin both his persoÌ„ actioÌ„s must coÌ„byne vnder whose censure they must come whereas this other vnorderly course destroyes the censures which by Christs appointmeÌ„t do exteÌ„d to every brother whosoever These thinges I do desire the godly Reader indifferently and without offence to take knowledge of and to rest in this our defence if it be found according to the word of God if not to give vs knowledge by the same word of the contrary wherein we shall willingly rest and by the grace of God so practise Our 10. reckoned Errour is that ministers may not celebrate mariage nor bury the dead And this M. B affirmes we say but without scriptures First you that charge our opinioÌ„ with errour should so haue proved it by the scriptures or some Reasons from them 2. You speak against your own knowledge having seen our wrytings especially our Apology where in the 3. Petition to the KING and the fourth braunch of the sixth Position there are almost twenty severall scriptures and nine distinct reasons grounded vpon them to prove that the celebration of mariage and buryall of the dead are not ecclesiasticall actions apperteyning to the ministery but civill and so to be performed You your self M B both affirme and prove in this book from 1 Cor 12. 4. that the Lord onely praescribes the dutyes to be done in every distinct office of ministery in the Church And the Apostle testifieth that the scriptures being divinely inspired do make perfect and fully furnished the man of God or minister to every good work of his calling Now I suppose M. B will not be so ill advised as to goe about to prove that the celebration of mariage and buryall of the dead are duetyes praescribed by the Lord Iesus to be done in the Pastours office or that the scriptures lay this furniture vpon the man of God for the proper workes of his office They are then other spiritual Lordes then the Lord Christ that prescribe these
that bycause one thing is done that an other might follow vpon it that therefore the latter which is to follow is also done And for the poynt as it is the work of the spirit to lead men into all truth as all that are Christs or mēbers of his body have his spirit so doth it follow that all the members of the Church have the spirit given them of God to lead them into all truth though it have not his full work by reason of the cōtrary work of the flesh in this life wher all mē know but in part 3. That Mr. Bar holds every truth in the scriptures fundamentall that is as they expound it Pag 147. such as if it be not known and obeyed the whole religiō and fayth of the Church must needs fall to the ground Mr. Ainsworth hath set down his words from which no such collection can be made he directs them that worthily agaynst these deceivers which knowing acknowledging that they want many speciall ordinances of Christ and are burdened in stead of them with the inventions of Antichrist do notwithstanding encourage themselves and others by these distinctiōs that they haue the fundamentall truthes of the gospell and whatsoever is necessary to salvation and the like in a purpose to go on all their life long in disobedience For which men how much better were it to consider how it is written that whosoever shall break one of the least commaundments and teach men so he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven then thus to turn vpon them which reprove them for their vnfaythfulnes and misinterpreting their sayings most injuriously to spend thus many words as these ministers do in confuting their owne corrupt glosses Their fourth and last Argument is for that all the known Churches in the world acknowledge their Church for their sister and giue her the right hand of fellowship This Argum. hath been sundry tymes vrged by Mr. Ber. and so answered sundry tymes both by M. Ainsworth and my self in the former part of my book whether I must refer the reader contenting my self with a breif observation of such vntruthes and errours as these ministers are driven vnto in the prosecuting of this Argument as First that all the known Churches in the world are well acquaynted with their doctrine and liturgy to which they should also ad their book of ordination and canons Ecclesiasticall for their ministery and government then which nothing is more vntrue Beza which was specially interessed in these matters will hardly be perswaded of the true state of things touching dispensations pluralityes the power of excommunication in one man and the like It is most vntrue that God hath sanctifed the testimony of Churches for a principall help in the decyding of controversies in this kind It is though some help yet lesse principall yea the least of many 3. That Paul feared that without the approbation of Iames and Cephas and Iohn he should have run in vayn Paul feared no such thing for he was both assured of his calling from the Lord and had also taken long before that tyme good experience of the Lords blessing vpon his ministery both amongst the Iewes and Gentiles and knew right assuredly that his preaching was not in vayne His care was to take away from the weak all scruple of mynde or iealousy of contention amongst the Apostles he went vp to Ierusalem to confer with them 4 That Paul sought to win cōmendation and credit to the orders which he by his Apostolicall authority might have established by the iudgement of other Churches Whereas the Apostle Paul did by his Apostolicall authority appoynt those orders in all those churches he speaks of as the scriptures quoted testify 1 Cor 4. 7. 17. 16. 1. Besides the Church of England can win no great credit to her orders by the orders of other Churches considering how contrary she is in them to all other Churches departed from Rome whom alone in very many the resembleth Fiftly the testimony which Iohn Baptist gave of Christ is vnfitly brought for the testimony of one Church of an other For it was the proper and principall work of †Iohns calling to give witnes of Christ wherein also he could not erre It is not so with or between any Churches in the world Where it is further affirmed that there are cases wherein one Church is commaunded to seek the iudgement of other Churches and to account it as the iudgment of God for which Act 15. 2. is alledged as it is true that one Church is in cases to seek the judgement and help of an other so is it vntrue that the judgement of that other Church or of all the Churches in the world is to be accounted as the judgment of God Indeed the decrees of the Apostles at Ierusalem being by imediate infallible direction of the H Ghost were to be accounted as the judgement of God but for any ordinary eyther Churches or persons to challenge the like vnto their determinations were popelike praesumption To the Ministers demand in the next place Sayth Christ to any particular congregation of the faythful in our land Whatsoever they bind in earth is bound in heaven Mat. 18. 18. and sayth he it not also to the Churches of other nations I do answer that if Christ have so sayd to the particular cōgregatiōs who hath sayd it to the Praelates their substitutes or to any officer or officers excluding the body of the Congregation Even none but he whose work it is to gainsay Christ to subvert his order 2. If any of your parishes be such congregatiōs why do not you as faythful Ministers exhort thē to guide them in the vse of this power of binding loosing which Christ hath given them Or are not you content to suffer them to go on and your selves to go before them in the losse of this liberty yea in a most vile subjection to their and your spirituall Lords which have vsurped it And for the Argument it is of no force for neyther hath any one Church in the world that power over an other nor all the Churches in the world over any one which the meanest Church hath over any her member or members whomsoever One Church may forsake an other but juditially to censure or excommunicate it may it not The same answer for substance may serve for that which is objected from 1 Cor. 14. 32. Besides no Church can so fully discern of the estate of an other Church as it can of the proper members apperteyning vnto it Yea I ad that in this respect wee are better able to iudge of the Church of Engl then are any forreyn Churches notwithstanding our weaknes bycause they do not in any measure know the estate of it as we do Lastly as that saying
that the naked and simple truth is to be inquired after with an vnpartiall affection And then the Lord which gives a single heart to seek after it will give a wise hart to find it out Math. 7. 7. Onely let men take heed they be not as Pilate asking vvhat is truth and turning their backs vpon it when they have done nor having found it as Orpah did to Naomi forsaking her weeping And for my self as I could much rather have desired to have built vp my self and that poore stock over which the holy Ghost hath set me in holy peace as becoÌ„meth the house of God wherein no sound of axe or hammer or other toole of iron is to be heard then thus to enter the lists of contention so being iustly called to contend for the defence of that truth vpon which this man amongst others layes violent hands I will endeavour in all good conscience as before God so to free the same as I wil be nothing-lesse then contentious in contention but wil count it a victorie to be overcome in odious provocations and reproches both by him and others And so desiring as earnestly the Christian reader into whose hands this my defence shal come to manifest vnto me such errours in the same if by the word of God they may so be found as to receive from me such truthes as are therin coÌ„tâ—yned I leave the due trial to that alone touchstone coÌ„mit the blessing to the Lord who alone giveth wisdom is able to make wise to salvatioÌ„ CERTAYN OBSERVATIONS vpon the Epistle dedicatory Preface to the Reader FIrst I desire it may be observed by the reader how Mr Bernâ—â—ileth the worshipful personages vnder the wing of whose protection he shrowdeth his papers Christian Professors A title peculiar to some few in the land which favour the forward preachers frequent their sermons advance the cause of reformatioÌ„ Such persons are coÌ„monly called amongst themselves professors vertuous and religious thereby distinguished fro the body of the land which make no such profession and are therefore accounted and iustly prophane and without religion and that as roundly by Mr. B. as by any other in the Land But it seemeth he had forgot both his Epistle whom both he in it and others every where call Professors for distinction sake when he wrote his book for in it he makes all the kingdome professors at a venture and Christian professours I hope he meaneth Thus those whom he severeth in the Epistle he confounds in the book And let him wel consider how he can quit himself eyther from flatterie in the one or from vntruth in the other And where Mr Ber. in the body of the Epistle you seat your self in the middest between the schismatical Brownist as you charitably term him the AntichristiaÌ„ Papist the one snatching on the right haÌ„d and the other on the left it is something which you say and more belike then you are aware of Fitly may you be seated in the middest betwixt both being indeed a minglement compound of both and wel may both snatch at you and yet neither do you wrong if neyther require more then their owne Iustly may the Papists challenge from you that stinted service book devised Ministerie Antichristian Hierarchie and Babylonish confusion which you have stollen away from them as Rahel did her Fathers idols though she covered them never so close And iustly also may we chalenge from you such godly people as you fraudulently deteyn and such truthes of doctrine as you teach as being the peculiars of the true Church as the holy vessels were of the temple though violently with the people caried to Babylon and there kept But if you will still hault betwixt both as Israell did betwixt God and Baal and carry in your right hand many Evangelicall truthes with vs in your left many Antichristian devises with the Papists no marvell though both partyes remayne vnsatisfyed neyther must you be offended though the Papists for the truthes you hold with vs account you hereticks nor though we for the devises you reteyn with them call you Antichristian And so you see your midle standing betwixt them and vs more wayes then one And thus much of the Epistle dedicatory In the next place I come to the preface where amongst other iust complaynts of the iniquityes of the tymes you reckon and that worthily as the most daungerous Atheisticall security carnall living vnder a generall profession to which purpose you alledg 2 Tim. 3. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. and so instance in your English people This place of Timothy alone had you well weyed and throughly improved especially the fifth verse where separation from such persons as having a shew of godlines do deny the power thereof as you confesse the English people do is expresly commaunded it would eyther have stopped your mouth from reproching vs as you do for separation or els have opened the mouth of the most simple reader to reproue your vanity as God did the mouth of the asse to reprove Balaam The next thing I observe is how vauntingly you bring as chalengers into the lists Mr. Gyshop Mr Bradshaw D. Allison and other vn-named Ministers all which you say are vnanswered by vs. And no marveil for sundry of their writings never came to our hands and besides it were a more equall and compendious way for these men to take vp the defence of their Churches cause where their fellowes have forsaken it and left it desolate then thus to make new chalenges though in truth with the same weapons it may be new frubbished over wherewith the other have lost the field Yet are theyr books and by the grace of God assisting shal be answered in particular as they come to our hands and are thought worthy answering though in truth it were no hard thing for our adversaries to oppresse us with the multitude of books considering both how few and how feeble we are in comparison besides other outward difficultyes if the truth we hold which is stronger then all did not support it selfe The difference you lay down in the next place touching the proper subject of the power of Christ is true in it selfe being rightly vnderstood and onely yours wherein it is corruptly related and specially in the particular concerning vs as that where the Papists plant the ruling power of Christ in the Pope the ProtestaÌ„ts in the Byshops the Puritants as you terme the reformed Churches those of theyr mynde in the Presbytery we whome you name Brownists put it in the body of the CoÌ„gregatioÌ„ the multitude called the Church odiously insinuating against us that we do exclude the Elders in the case of goverment where on the contrary we professe the Byshops or Elders to be the onely ordinary governours in the Church as in all other actions of the Churches communion so also in the censures Onely we may not acknowledge them for Lords
of your owne hart But let vs heare your advise Quaere Whether it be an offence iustly given by thee or taken without iust reason of others thou not offending and they displeased the fault is their own and thou not chargeable therewith But you must vnderstand Mr B. that in the vnseasonable vse of things in themselves indifferent there is an offence both given taken and so a double sinn coÌ„mitted he that gives the offence sinns through want of charity and he that takes it through want or weaknes of fayth And so where actions simply good do onely hurt him that takes offence and actions simply evill him that gives it the vse of things indifferent agaynst expediency hurts harmes and destroyes both Rom. 14. 15. Now the parts of your secoÌ„d enquiry viz. whether men be offended in respect of what themselves know or butled by affection disliking of other mens dislike are insufficient For men do oft tymes take offence at things done and yet neyther in respect of their own knowledge nor of other mens dislike but merely through want of knowledg and vpon ignorance of their christian liberty And such were the weak brethren spoken of Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. and 9. which how they were to be tendered in their weaknes let the places iudge And for persoÌ„s partially affectionate or foolishly froward which is the mayn point in the 3. Quaere they are no way to be regarded as weak but on the contrary to be reproved as wayward contentious that folly and sinne may not rest vpon them Onely let men take heed they iudge not vncharitably of their brethren because they would practise vncharitably towards them as Nabal reviled David and his men as runnagates because he would deal churlishly with them and would shew them no mercy In the forth place it is demaunded What authority may do in things externall for outward rule in the circumstances of things How colourably you cary all the abominations in your Church vnder the shadow of circumstances and of how great moment even circumstances are in the case of religion I have formerly spoken let me onely ad thus much If a subject should vsurp the crown and exercise regall authority the difference were but in the circumstance of person which notwithstanding made the action high treason Or if a Preist comming to say his evensong should fall a sleep on his desk it were but a matter of circumstance in respect of tyme and place it might lawfully be done in another place and at another tyme yet there then it were a great prophaning of the service book What sway authority hath in the Church of England appeareth in the lawes of the land which make the goverment of the Church alterable at the Magistrates pleasure and so the Clergy in their submission to K. Henry 8. do derive as they pretend their ecclesiasticall jurisdiction from him and so exercise it Indeed many of the late Bishops and their Procters seeing how monstrous the ministration is of divine things by an humane authority and calling and growing bould vpon the present disposition of the Magistrate have disclaimed that former title and do professedly hold their eclesiasticall power and jurisdiction de jure divino so consequentâ—y by Gods word vnalterable Of whom I would demaund this one quaestion What if the King should discharge and expell the present ecclesiasticall goverment plant in stead of it the Presbytery or Eldership would they submit vnto the government of the Elders yea or no if yea then were they traytors to the Lord Iesus submitting to a goverment overthrowing his goverment as doth the Praesbyterian goverment that which is Episcopall if no then how could they free themselves from such imputations of disloyalty to Princes and disturbance of States as wherewith they load vs others opposing them But to the quaestion it self As the kingdom of Christ is not of this world but spirituall he a spiritual King so must the goverment of this spirituall kingdom vnder this spirituall King needs be spiritual all the lawes of it And as Christ Iesus hath by the merits of his Preisthood redemed as well the body as the soule so is he also by the scepter of his Kingdom to rule reign over both vnto which Christian Magistrates as well as meaner persons ought to submit themselves the more Christian they are the more meekly to take the yoke of Christ vpon them and the greater authority they have the more effectually to advance his scepter over themselves their people by all good meanes Neyther can there be any reason given why the merits of saynts may not as wel be mingled with the merits of Christ for the saving of his Church as the lawes of men with his lawes for the ruling and guiding of it He is as absolute and as intire a King as he is a Preist and his people must be as carefull to praeserve the dignity of the one as to enjoy the benefit of the other The next Quaere is Whether authority commaunding doth not take away the offence which might otherwise be given in a voluntary act This question is answered affirmatively by the Bishops their adhaerents and so with one voice they affirme in their books pulpits and other publik determinations but herein as palpably flattering the Magistrate as ever Canonist did the Pope What more was ever given to the Pope then that he might dispence with the morall law And what lesse is given to the King when by his authority I vse things indifferent with offence to my weak brother Is not love the fulfilling of the law And is it not against the law of love to vse things indifferent with offence which must the more carefully be avoyded coÌ„sidering the effects it drawes with it which are not onely the grief vvhich were too much but even the destruction of him for whom Christ dyed ver 5. 20. 1 Cor. 8. 11. Onely he which can strengthen the weak faith which is the cause of the offence can take away the offence and stablish him that is weak Rom. 14. 4. Men may and must vse meanes for that purpose and not nourish the weak in their weaknes but beare them they must in love and much love will have much patience Lastly for I passe over the 5. Quaere as comprehended in those which go before where you advise meÌ„ to studie agayn to study to be quiet and to follow those things which concerne peace it is needfull counsel and againe needfull considering what vnquiet spirits are to be found in all places Onely let men in their counsayls which you leave out ioyne with peace aedification and holynes as the scriptures teach and so separating the pretious from the vile they shal be to vs as Gods mouth and let their peace be in the word of righteousnes the ioy of the counselers of peace shal be vpon
fashion vs Mr B. and all others may see the dissimilitude betwixt them vs in the refutation of that supposed consimilitude A third evill for which Mr B. would bring our cause into suspition is The matter of defending our opinions and proving our assertions by strange and forced expositions of scriptures Where he also notes in the margent that the truth needs no such ill means to mainteyne it What the means are by which the Prelacy against which we witnes is mainteyned all men know The flattering of superiours the oppressing of inferiours the scoffing reviling imprisoning persequuting vnto banishment and death of such as oppose it are the weapoÌ„s of the Prelates warfare by which they defend their tottering Babel And were it not for the arm of â—lesh by which they hold and to which they trust they and their pomp would vanish away like smoke before the wynde so little weight have they or theyrs in the consciences of any But let us see wherin we mislead the reader by deceiptful allegations of scriptures 1. In quoting scriptures by the way that is for things coÌ„ming in upon occasion but nothing to the mayne poynt c. And wherefore is this deceiptfull dealing thus to alleadge the scriptures Because the simple reader is hereby made beleve that all is spokeÌ„ for the question controverted He is simple careles also that wil not search the scriptures before he beleve that they ar brought to prove if he any way suspect it which who so doth can not be deceived as is here insinuated It were to be wished we both spake and wrote the language of Canaan and none other and not onely to vse but even to note the scripture phrase soberly may be to the information and edification of the reader 2. By vrging commandements admonitioâ—s exhortations dehortations reprehensions and godly examples to prove a falsity What is falsity but that which is contrary to truth and so the word of God being truth whatsoever is contrary vnto any part of it whither commaundement admonition exhortation c. is false so far forth as it is contrary The similitude you take from a naturall child who for his disobedience is not to be reputed a false child but no good child is like the rest of the your similitudes The proportion holds not Men may have such children as ever were are and wil be disobedient to their dying day yet they remayn theyr children whether they will or no but if any of Gods childâ—en prove disobedient and will not be disclaymed he can dischilde them for bastards as they are and the true children of the Divil Ioh. 8. 44. 3. In alledging Scriptures not to prove that for which to the simple it seems to be alledged but that which is without controversy taking the thing in questioÌ„ for granted For this I take to be his meaning though he expresse it ill The instance he brings of one of vs cyting Act. 20. 21. to prove that all truth is not taught in the Church of England is I am perswaded if not worse mistaken by him For who would bring Pauls example to shew what the Ministers of England do and not rather what they should do what they do is knowne well enough and how both they in preaching the will of God and the people in obeying it are stinted at the Bishops pleasure 4 By bringing in places setting forth the invisible Church and holynesse of the members to set forth the visible Church by as being proper thereto as 1 Pet. 2. 9. 10. That the Apostle here speaketh not of the invisible but of the visible Church appeareth not by our bare affirmation which we might set gaynst Mr B. naked contradiction yea though he bring in D. Allison in the margent to countenance the matter but by these reasons 1. Peter being the Apostle of the Iewes wrote vnto them whose Apostle he was vvhom he knew dispersed through Pontus Galatia c. 1 Pet. 1. 1. But Peter was not the Apostle of the invisible but of the visible Church which he knew so dispersed where the invisible Church is onely knowne unto God 2 Tim. 2. 19. 2. The Apostle vseth the words of Moses to the visible Church of the Iewes Ex. 19. 6. which do therefore well agree to the visible Church vnder the gospell whose excellency graces and holynes do surmount the former by many degrees 3. Peter wrytes to a Church wherein were Elders and a flock depending vpoÌ„ them to be fed governed by them 1 Pet â— 1. 2. 3. which to affirm of the invisible Church is not onely a visible but even a palpable error 4. The Apostle wrytes to them which had the word preached amongst them Chap. 1. 25. And this Mr B. himselfe pag. 118. 119. makes a note and testimony of the visible Church and to that pupose quotes the former chap. v. 23. as he doth also this very chap. ver 5. which is the same with v. 9. 10. to prove the form of the visible Church And thus I hope it appeares to all men vpon what good groundes this man thus boldly leadeth vs with deceiptfull dealing in the scriptures And this instance I desire the reader the more diligeÌ„tly to observe as being singled out by Mr B. as a pickt witnes against vs countenanced by D. Allisons concurring testimony but especially because it poynts out the Apostolick Churches clean in contrary colours to the English Synagogues being vnholy and prophane and this is the cause why Mr B. and others are so loth to haue this Scripture ment of the visible Church 5. By inferences and references as if this be one this must follow and this Mr B. calles a deceiveable and crooked waye for the intangling of the simple To this I have answered formerly and do agayne answer that necessary consequences inferences are both lawfull necessary If Mr B. had to deale with a Papist agaynst Purgatory or with an Anabaptist for the baptizing of Infants he should be compelled except I be deceived to draw his arrowes out of this quiver And what are consequences regulated by the word which sanctifieth all creatures but that sanctified vse of reason wil any reasonable man deny the vse and discourse of reason If all the things which Iesus did had been written the world could not have conteyned the books if all the dutyes which ly vpon the Church to performe had been written in expresse termes as Mr B. requires a world of worlds could not contayne the books which should have been written Neyther are inferences references iustly made any way to be accounted wyndings but playne passages to the truth troden before vs by the Lord Iesus and all his holy Apostles which scarce alledge one scripture of three out of Moses and the Prophets but by way of inference as all that will may see But the truth is Mr Bern. hath
that can be brought but because they are yours which notwithstanding I am perswaded neyther you nor any other can satisfie And if Mr B. himselfe thus wryte and speak in private why blames he vs for our publique testimony Now if the Bishops be Antichristian and so the spirit of Divils Rev. 16. 14. why might not Mr Barrow affirm theyr Ministery and ministration to be of and by the Divill and what are they but eyther the tayl or some other lim of the beast And for theyr excommunications by name it is evident by this they are not of God for that the most religious in the kingdome make least account of them For theyr Luciferian pryde whereof Mr Barrow accuseth them it is apparant they burden the earth threaten the heavens with it for their hateful Symony both in giving and receiving they are so notorious as the best service Mr B. can do them in this case is to turn mens thoughts from those evils which every ey sees every heart abhorrs Towching the Ghost the Bishop gives in his blasphomous imitation of Christ Ioh. 20. 22. except contrary to the rule in nature nihil dâ—â— quod non habet he can give that he hath not it is not very likely he should give the Holy Ghost why then might not Mr Barrow call it an vnholy Ghost And for the Bible in the Bishops hands which he gives his Preists in ordination Mr Barrow calls it the libell not in contempt of the book but in reproof of the ceremony that iustly since the Lord never appointed the scriptures for any such vse nor any such ceremony in the ordination of his Ministers Christ and the Apostles would have such Ministers ordeyned as have the Bibles in their hearts the Bishops of England to supply this want give it into the hands of their Preists which they think sufficient though in truth the most of them are more vsed to handle a paire of cardes vpon an alebench then the holy bible Your Patrons Mr Barrow calles great Baals Lord Patrons and iustly in respect of that Lordly power they vse in obtruding their Clerks vpon the Parish assemblies your ministers yea all and every one of them Preists which is their proper name given them both in your book of ordination and coÌ„mon prayer your Deacons half-preists according to the nature of their office betwixt which the Deacons office in the new testament Act. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. there is no consimilitude For the other more harsh termes wherewith he enterteynes such persons and things in the Church as carry with them most appearance of holynes they are to be interpreted according to his meaning and a distinction vsed by Mr B. in another place is here to be applyed Which is that Mr Barrow speaks not of these persons and things simply but in a respect so so considered so no one terme given by Mr Barrow to my knowledg but may at the least be tolerated The Ministers as they receive the wages of vnrighteousnes oâ— counsayl to spiritual fornication are Bâ—lâ—â—mites in respect of thâ—ir office vowed to destruction Cananites as they plead for confusion Babylonish divines as they endeavour to stay Gods people in Egypt spiritually so called Egyptian inchaunters as they are members of the Hierarchy 〈◊〉 of the Divel by vertue whereof he bear great sway as the reformists amongst you have expresly testifyed And for your very divine exerciseâ— of prayer preaching sacrâ—â—â—tâ— suâ—ging of psalâ—s howsoever they be good holy in theÌ„selves or at leasâ— have much good in them yet in respect of the vnhallowed coÌ„munion forgâ—d ministâ—ry and superstitious order wherein these and all other things with you are ministred and exercised they are lyable to the heaviest censure Mr Barrow hath put vpon them And for the most forward preachers in the kingdom considering their vnsound and broken courses in denying that in deed and practise which in wâ—rd and writing they profâ—sse to be the revealâ—d will oâ— God and inviolable testament of Christ binding his Church for ever yea and practising the contrary in the face of the sâ—nne commiâ—tâ—â—g two evils forsaking the Lord the fountayne of lâ—ving water to dig themselves broken pitâ—s which will hold no water yea not onely refusing themselves to enter into the kingdome of God the Church but also hindering them that would persecuting them that do and lastly considering them in their vnconscionable defence for their own standings and practises as that onely the godly in the parish are of the Church with them that they hold and vse their ministery by the acceptation of the people and not by the Bishops that they obey the Bishops in their citations suspensions excommunications and absolutions aâ— they are civil magistrates and â—he like they do deserve a sharper medicine then happily they are willing to endure Yea the very personall graces of knowledge zeale pâ—â—ience the like manifested in many both ministers and people are most vniustly perverted and misused to the obduration and hardening both of the persons themselves others in most deceivable wayes wherein the deepest mistery of iniquity and most effectuall delusion of Satan that can be worketh as is by Mr Barrow and others clearly discovered But that Mr Barrow should say that the preaching of Gods word â—â—e spirits effectuall working should make men the children of hell and two fold â—orse then bâ—fore is a great slaunder and could not possibly enter into his or any other godly mans heart And so I leave these and the like more vnsavoury-seeming speaches of Mâ— Barrow to the wise and Christian readers charitable interpretation The last rank of Mr B. reasons followeth which respect the matter of our sepâ—â—â—tion by him called schisme which how materiall they are shall appeare in their place Our first errour according to his reckoning is They hold that the constitution of our Church is a falsâ— constitution And let vs see how strongly your answer forces vs from this our hold 1. Arg. They cannot prove this simply by any playne doctrine of scripture and that which they would prove is but onely respectively and so may any thing and their Church also be condemned 2. Arg. It is against the evidence of the scriptures which maketh the word externall profession and sacraments the visible constitution c. That you then affirm in the first place is that wee cannot prove this simply by any playne doctrine wherein you do half confesse that wee do it by iust consequence though not by playne doctrine wholly that respectively and so so considered as you speak your coÌ„stitution is false And thus you say any thing may be condemned But first it is not true that any thing may be condemned after this sort The constitutioÌ„ of the Ch Apostolike could in no coÌ„sideration be condemned neyther could ours to our knowledge being according to that pattern how weakly soever we walk in it Secondly
describing the Church to be a company of faithfull people yet do the divine scriptures speak otherwise which I will clearly manifest and therein also free the Parable Math. 13. which you bring in for proofes from that violence which you and others offer them forcing Christ clean against his will to plead for Antichrist And with the scriptures I do affirme against you that the Church of Christ is no such mingled meslyne or monstrous compound but a body simple vniform one proportionable in every mēber vnto the head informed by one spirit and called in one hope Ephe. 4. 4. And for wicked and vngodly persons so farr are they from being the true naturall members whereof the body consisteth as the whol of the parts as they serve indeed for no other purpose then to infect and corrupt the rest and if redresse be not had in time to eat out the very hart of the whole But before I come to the point in controversy I will lay down two cautions for the preventing of errour in the simple of cavelling in such as desire to contend First it must be considered that where the quaestion is about the visible or externall Church which is by men discernable and not of that Church which is internall and invisible which onely the Lord knoweth we speak here of visible and externall holynes onely whereof men may judge and not of that which is within and hid from mans ey For we doubt not but the purest Ch vpō earth may consist of good and bad in Gods ey of such as are truely faythfull and sanctifyed of such as have onely for a tyme put on the outside and vizard of sanctity which the Lord will in due tyme pluck of though in the mean while mans dim sight cannot pearce through it 2. I desire it may be remēbred that the question betwixt Mr B. and me is about the true and naturall members whereof the Ch is orderly gathered and planted and not about the degenerate decayed estate of the Church members for we know that naturall children may become rebellious the faithful city an harlot the silver drosse and the wyne corrupt with water the noble vine so planted whose plants were all naturall may degenerate into the plantes of a strange vine But as it were fond Phylosophy in the description of wives and children and their true naturall properties to make rebellion a property of a child because many children prove rebels against their parents or to make whoredome a property of a wife because many wives prove vnfaithful that way so is it as prophane divinity to make vngodly persons the true matter of the Church their profanenes a true property of the same because many seeming saynts at the first do so creep in and do afterwards discover their owne shame are oft times through want of zeal too long tolerated in the Church to the dishonour of God prejudice of the gospel And so I come to manifest by an induction of particulars that all the visible Churches gathered and planted by the Lords line level frō the beginning of the world were in their collection cōstitution simple vniform and vnmixt consisting of good alone in the respect in hand And first the Lord created a Church of Angels in heaven which wer all good holy without mixture til some by sin fell frō their first and originall estate so leaving their own habitation were cast down to hel After that God created a Church of mankind in Paradise consisting of two persons both holy good And thus the Churches of creation were gathered of angels and men without mixture Now if any man object that in these instances I fetch my beginnings too farr of my answer is that the Lord had hath the same ends and respects in the creating restoring of his Ch which are his own glory their happines And if it were the will of the Lord that persons notoriously wicked should be admitted into the Ch then should he ditectly crosse himself his own ends should receive into the visible covenāt of grace such as wer out of the visible estate of grace should plant such in his Church for the glory of his name as served for none other vse then to cause his name to be blasphemed Hereupon I frame an Argument thus That order for the gathering of Ch which directly crosses the mayne ende◠for which the Lord would have his Church gathered is not of God But the order for which Mr B. pleads which is that apparantly prophane persons may with the godly be gathered into the visible Church crosses the Lords ends of gathering Churches and therefore is not of God The former proposition is without controversie the latter is thus manifested The mayne ends for which the Lord gathereth and preserveth his Church vpon earth are that he might have a peculiar people separated vnto himselfe from all other peoples to call vpon his name in faith and to glorify him theyr heavenly father in their holy conversation whom he also might glorify in the end of their fayth the salvation of theyr soules But for wicked vngodly persons in the Church as they serve no no way for these ends but the cōtrary causing Gods name to be blasphemed and his wrath to come vpon their disobedience so to gather or admit them into the Church is vtterly to frustrate Gods ends and to gather for Satan rather then for God To proceed In the restoring of mankind planting the first Ch in the covenant of grace established in the seed of the woman there were onely saynts without any such mixture as Mr B. makes Now as all true churches from the begining to the end of the world are one in nature and essentiall constitution and the first the rule of the rest so the first being gathered of good matter not bad declares both Mr B. Church and opinion to be bad and not good And when in processe of tyme Cain which was of the evill one bewrayed himself he as a degenerate branch was broken of driven out of the visible presence of God Gen 4. 14. it is further imputed by Moses for sin to the sonnes of God that they maryed with the daughters of men Now if it were still be unlawfull for the godly to contract with the wicked in the civil covenant of mariage how much more in the religious covenant of the Church communion of Saints To discend lower God gave vnto Abraham and his family the covenant of circumcision Gen. 17. 10. which the Apostle Rom. 4. 11. calls the seal of the righteousnes of faith Now to affirm that the Lord would seale vp with the visible seale of the righteousnes of faith any visibly unrighteous faythles person were a bould chalenge of the most High for the profanation of his owne ordinance And the same covenant which God at
speach to the 2. person not saying what it but what you shall bind and loose c. In so saying you give the cause though you presently eat vp your own graunt For you affirm that by the Church ver 17. is meant the whole body of which Christ speaks in the third person and what say wee more But where you adde that the authoritie is not given till the 18. vers and that then Christ turns his speach to his Apostles it is your own devised glosse For first it is evident that Christ establisheth the power of binding and loosing in the hands of the Church speaking in the 3. person v. 17. that so firmely as what brother soever refuseth to heare her voice is to be expelled from all religious cōmunion Vnto this the 18. v. is added partly for explanation and partly for confirmation For where as the party admonished might say with himself well if the Church disclaim mee I shall disclaym it if it condemn me I shall condemn it again the Lord doth here back the Churches censures for her incouragement and for the terrour of the refractary despising her voice and that vnder a contestation that what she bindes and looseth vpon earth namely after his will he also will bind and loose in heaven And for the change of persons in the 17. and 18 verses it is merely grammaticall and not naturall It is common with the Holy Ghost sometimes for elegancy sometimes for explication sometimes for further inforcement of the same thing to and vpon the same persons thus to vary the phrase of speach in the first second or third person grammatically as the reader may take a tast in these particulars Psal. 75. 1. Is. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. c. Math. 5. 10. 11. 12. c. and in this very Chapt. v. 7. 8. Rom. 6. 14. 15. 16. 8. 4. 5. 12. 13. c. Your 3. Reason that bycause Christ speakes of a few two or three gathered together therefore he meanes the officers of the Church and not all the body is of no force if the body consist but of two or three as it comes to passe where Churches are raysed in persecution as the most true Churches are Yet if Christ do speak of two or three officers of a Church gathered together in his name he speaks against you where all the power of the keyes over many 1000. Churches are in the hands of two Arch-Prelates and from them delegated and derived to their severall vnderlings But the truth is that gratious promise which Christ here layes downe for the comfort of all his saints you do engrosse into the hands of a few Elders You might aswel affirme that onely two or three officers gathered together have a promise to be heard in their prayers and not a communion of two or three brethren for Christ v. 19. 20. speakes principally and expressely of prayer though with reference to the binding and loosing of sin which as all other ordinances are sanctified by prayer The very scope of the place and reason of the speach is this The Lord Iesus had v 18. enfranchised the Church with a most excellent and honourable priveledge now the disciples did already see with their own eyes and were more fully taught by their Maister that the Church should arise from small and base beginnings and that it was also by reason of persequution subject to great dissipation Math. 7. 14. 10. 17. 18. 22. 23. 13. 31. 32. least therefore their harts should be discouraged and they or others driven into suspition that the Lord would any way neglect them or his promise towards them for their paucity and meannes he most gratiously prevents and frees them from that jealousy telles them and all others for their comfort that though the Church or assembly consist but of two or three as such beginnings the true Church of God had and have though your English Church begū with a kingdome in a day Act. 16. 14. 15. 17. 34. 19. 7. yet that should no way diminish their power or prejudice the accomplishment of his promise And the reason hath been formerly rendred bycause this power for binding loosing being given to the fayth of Peter depends not vpon the order of office multitude of people or dignity of person but merely vpon the word of God And hence is it that Christ thus gratiously descends even to two or three wheresoever assembled in his name yea though it be in a Cave or Den of the earth of which most gratious and necessary priveledge you would bereave them Now in your 4. Reason out of v. 19 you do most ignorantly erre in the grāmaticall construction for you make a change of the person agayne where there is no change at all Christ speakes onely in the third person as the originall makes it plaine though the English tongue do not so distinctly manifest it to an ignorant man Christ sayth not whatsoever you two shall agree of shal be given to them that is to the Church but whatsover two of you shall agree of or consent in they two that so agree shall obteyne it of God Which words Mr B. you do most vnsufferably pervert to the seducing of the ignorant as if Christ had sayd if two or three of you officers or you two or three officers shall agree together of a thing whatsoever they that is the Church shall desire namely of the Officers for so you expound the words it shal be givē them where it is most evident that they which are to agree vpon the thing they are to ask it and that of God who will give it them And where the scripture sayth that the brother offended speaking indefinitely of any brother and so of the Officers themselves must complayn to the Church M B. on the contrary as if he would even beard the Lord Iesus tells vs the Church must complayn to the Officers Your 5. Reason followes with many litle ones in the womb of it which you bring forth in order to prove that Christ speakes here figuratively and that by the Church he means the governours The first is It agrees with the practise of the Iewish Church frō whence it is held that the manner of governing in the Church is fetched And is this the necessary proof you speak of whatsoever is so held is so in truth And yet in your second book as hath been shewed you bring in sundry men holding contrary things as if contraries could be true Well I confesse it is so held and that by many with whom I would gladly consent if the scriptures taught me not to hold otherwise It had been good here the authour had shewed vs what the government of the Iewish Church was and not thus sleightily to have passed over things of this moment For the purpose in hand thus much The Church of the Iewes was a nationall Church the Lord separating vnto himself the whole natiō
in cases to go before the rest I am perswaded least the holy things be polluted by notorious obstinate offenders And if the collections for the saynts which concernes the body be a Lords or first dayâ—â— work how much more the spirituall ordinances which respect the soule eyther for humiliation or comfort Yea I see not how the Church can compell any to forbeare their bodily labour in the six dayes wherein God hath given them liberty to work except it be vpon occasions extraordinary and as they may be constreyned to meet for any other part of publick worship Well then it must needs be that this Church of officers must receive and examine complaints reprove and censure offenders publiquely and with the knowledge of the whole body met together in publique assembly and this liberty in the exequution of excommunication you graunt the multitude pag. 92. of your book And surely there must be but one Church for the whole busines But this course is more vnreasonable then the other namely that the brethren must be gathered together to be spectatours whiles the officers alone sit vpon the thrones of David to heare and judge excluding the brethren from all communion with them though they be personally present For the communion of the Church stands not in this that men are present and see and heare what is done and receive proffite for so may they do which are without but in the mutuall relation and concurrence of the parts and is in this ordinance onely amongst them which are reproved or do reprove at least by consent if they see cause which are censured or do censure And besides it is against common sence that the officers should be the Church representative when the body of the Church which they represent is present as hath been formerly shewed to call the officers alone the Church or assembly which are both one when the people are assembled with them as necessary parts is to call one part of the Church the Church excluding an other part of it If the officers alone be the Church to be told and to admonish and judge the offender for there is one and the same Church for all these then it must follow that if the Officers admonish the Church also admonisheth and on the contrary that if the officers refuse the Church also refuseth to admonish an offendour but neither the one nor the other of these is true First the Elders observing sin may and ought to admonish the party sinning whether the Church observ it or no yea though the whol Church be otherwise minded yea any one of the Elders may admonish if he see cause both the rest of the officers the brethren also but this admonition cannot be the admonitioÌ„ of the Ch except we will say the Church may admonish where shee sees no sinne yea against her will yea which is most senseles except she may be sayd to admonish her self The second point needs no great refutation For who will say that if the officers refuse to admonish and make themselves accessary vnto sin by boulstering it vp that then the Church is also sayling and the whole lump thereby levened except the rest consent with them or fayl in their personall duties which notwithstanding might be sayd of them and imputed vnto them if by the Church were meant the officers If a brother privately considered may bind sin privately vpon the parties irrepentance then may the same brother as a part of the publik assembly bind for his part publiquely and so he brings the party impenitent privately bound to the Church holding him still bound vpon the continuance of his obstinacy but publiquely now with the whole communion as privately before by himself 〈…〉 th his witnes The consequent of this argum Mr B. graunts in his latter book pag. 200. vpon Mr Smythes vrging Mat. 18. compared with some other scriptures much what to this purpose but the Antecedent as he speaks he denyes or rather distinguisheth of these words binding and loosing which he vnderstands onely to be meant of personall wrongs against a man but not of sinnes at all against God But as this exposition conteyns in it two notable absurdities the first that other men may forgive injuries or wrongs done vnto me and secondly that a communion of faithfull men for so the words are which is the Church may medle with judging civile matters as are injuries otherwise then as they are sinns against God at which they take offence or scandalize so is it evidently convinced by the text when Christ speaks of binding and loosing in heaven whither injuries come not save as they are sinns against God Yea Mr B himself graunts in another place of this book viz pag. 223. towards the end that our saviour in this place speaks of binding and loosing spiritually and that not by the power of Christ given to Ministers but to coÌ„mon Christians where he also brings sundry reasons to prove that the binding and loosing there spoken of doth no way concern the Ministers or publique Officers but private persons notoriously crossing both his first book in the persons which he will there needs have officers and no private men and here private persons and no officers and his second in the thing which in the former place he will have merely of civil consideration but here graunts to be meant religiously The next reason I take from v. 19. where mention is made by Christ of prayer by which the censures there spoken of are to be sanctifyed both before and after they be exequuted Wherevpon I demaund whether the brethren present with the officers be part of the Church to which the offender is brought and by which he is judged in the communion of prayer or no It will not be denied thence it must follow that they are also part of the Church in receiving and judging of the complaint or els that they passe in and out and in agayn in respect of the communion during one and the same excercise and the sanctification of it They which are gathered in or into the name of Christ they are the Church spoken of Math. 18. and have the power of Christ for binding and loosing as is evident ver 20. Now as me thinks it should be strange to affirm that the brethren present with the Officers are gathered in or into any other name then the name of Christ so doth Paul drawing this rule into practise 1 Cor. 5. commaund that the multitude with the officers by not onely Mr B. but the Iesuites confession be gathered together in or into the name of Christ and that they so gathered do by the power of Christ deliver to Satan the offender for his humbling ver 4 5 〈…〉 Lastly if the officers without the brethren be the Church for the censures then are they the Church for the other publique ordinances of prayer preaching sacraments and the like and may minister them out of the
as appeareth in that it appointeth one set service in so many words to be sayd by all and every Minister to all and every parish person in it It appoints one set form of words wherein all persons without exception must be maryed all women without exception after child-bearing purified all children born in the kingdom baptized all sick persons visited and all dead persons buryed without exception How shall we then sever you in the things wherein you joyn your selves or put a difference where your selves put none And where further as loath to let fall the plea of the wicked you do adde that God called Israell his people after defection and their children in respect of circumcision his children Ezech. 16. 21. 22. I answer first that the Lord did not call them his children in respect of circumcision for the Scechemitcs were circumcised and yet were not Gods people not their children his children and 2. that the Prophet speaks of the first born which by right did in a speciall manner apperteyn to the Lord Exod. 13. 2. though he were most injuriously defrauded of his due Where you proceed and say that some in the Acts 19. 2. which were ignorant of the holy Ghost were called beleevers that is too grossely applyed to the ordinary gifts of the holy Ghost which is meant of such extraordinary visible giftes as wherewith God did for a time beautify the Church which these persons also there spoken of did afterwards receive by imposition of hands by Paul vers 6. For the Churches of Corinth and Pergamus with whose corruptions as with a buckler you would cover your selves it must be remembred that they and every person in them were in their coÌ„stitution separated by voluntary profession into covenaunt with the Lord and did with their covenant receive power and charge to reform such evills as might break out amongst them which if they neglected they brake covenant with God and so forfeyted on their part both their covenant and power provoking the Lord if they repented not to break with them shortly to remove their candlestick out of his place That which you adde the last and in deed the worst of all the rest is that the Church of Christ is set out even by the naming that is by the profession of the name Iesus Christ. Rom. 15. 20. But the Apostle intends no such matter but onely to magnify his Apostleship by this amongst other the notes of it that he had preached the gospell where before there had been no sound of it And if the naming of Iesus Christ set out a Church then are the Papists besides other haeretiques a true Church for they name Iesus Christ as oft as you and with as many courtesies But things are best discerned in their particulars and to them you discend saying that that congregation which is false hath a false head false matter false form and false properties which say you cannot be avouched against our congregations And what if but some of these be false and not all To make a thing true must concurre all the essentiall parts and properties but to make it false there needs not be all false some few will do it For the particulars You haue no false head bycause you hold Iesus Christ and worship no other God but the Trinity in vnitie The Papists also worship the Trinity in vnity and in word and in the generall confesse Christ their head and you in deed and in the particulars many of them do deny his headship Christ is the head onely of his body Col. â— 17. But the body of Christ consists not of the lims of Sathan of which your nationall Church was for the most part gathered compact after the generall apostasie of Antichrist and of such it consists at this day except you will deny that they are the lims of Sathan the eyes of whose minds he blâ—ndeth that the light of the gospel should not shine in them which do the lusts of the divell and are his children which commit sin which persequute the godly and cast in prison the servants of Christ. Now tell me not Mr Bern. of the wicked persons in the Churches of Corinth Thiatyra and the rest for these Churches were not gathered of any such outwardly and so appearing it is blasphemy against the Apostles so to affirm and if any appearing such were afterwards suffred it was a â—anker in the Churches which in tyme ate out the harts of them As therefore the Papists make the Church a monstrous body in setting two heads over it Christ the Pope so do you make Christ a monstrous head in vniting vnto him meÌ„bers of so contrary a nature And let the prophane world make as small account of it as they list it is certayn no false doctrine haeresy or Idolatry can more eyther displease or dishonour God and his Christ then wretched men in word professing his truth and name and in deed denying both him and them Further you have not Christ the head of your Church in the administration of his propheticall preistly and kingly office which I will onely point at referring the reader to such other treatises as do more fully confirm these things in speciall to Mr Ainsworth his arguments disproving the present estate constitution of the Church of England against which his playn proofs your idle exceptions Mr Ber. wil be as easily answered as read First then your Church admitteth not of the ordinance of prophesying or teaching out of office Rom. 12. 6. 7. which as I have formerly proved to be a perpetuall ordinance for the Church so how profitable it is both for the edification of them within and conversion of them without we find by experience and the scriptures declare 1 Cor. 14. 3. 24. 25. 2. You silence the Lord Iesus in your Church from revealing the whole will of his father A part of his word is vtterly excluded by your calender may not so much as be read in your Church but is justled out by the Apocrypha writings a greater part even the most of that which concerns the true gathering and governing of the visible Church though it may be read yet may it not be faithfully taught much lesse obediently practised notwithstanding any charge of the Prophets Apostles Christ himself Deu. 29. 29. Math. 28. 19. 20. Rom. 16. 25. 26. 2 Tim. 3. 16. 17. so that though you haue the whole will of God in your books as Papists haue yet in respect of the doctrine and obedience of a great part of it the book is sealed vp and may not be opened And to make vp the measure you have in stead of the canonicall scriptures of the holy Ghost mens Apocrypha scriptures the books of homilies and that of common prayers your popish canons and constitutions which are as well the doctrine of your Church as the canons of the
were to destroy her own essence being Secondly the true matter of the Church and true members of Christ are the same As Christ is called the foundation of the house they of the Church are the matter of the building as he is called the head of his body they are his members whom to excommunicate is to deliver vnto Sathan 1 Cor. 5. 5. whervpon I do necessarily inferre that if to excommunicate be to deliver to Sathan and that the Church may lawfully excommunicate wicked persons and that wicked persons be true matter and that true matter be true members of Christs body then may the Church lawfully deliver to Satan the true members of Christs body which I abhor to write And though your Ordinaries Mr B. be oft tymes so liberall of the true members of Christ as thus to deliver them to the Divel yet had the Ministers of Christ rather have their own members torn from their bodies then thus to dismemthe blessed body of the Lord Iesus The heynousnes of this fact shewes the vanity of your distinction the errour of your opinion and the falsity of your Church Lastly you do mistake the two scriptures which you bring to prove that a man iustly excommunicate is still called a brother in the scriptures and so to be held by the Church The Apostle in the former place 2 Th. 3. 15. speaks not of a man excommunicated noâ— worthy to be excommunicated neyther but of such a person as followes not his calling faithfully as he ought but being negligent in his own is to busy in other mens matters whom he wills the brethren to mark and no way to countenaunce in sucâ— walking but on the contrary to shew their dislike of it that he may see it and be ashamed of it and this he that reads over the chapter shall observe I suppose to be the Apostles meaning In the second place which is 1 Cor. 5. 11. his meaning is not that Christians becoÌ„ming fornicators covetous Idolaters and so continuing obstinate should still be reputed brethren notwithstanding but he speaks of a brother there as Ezechiel speaks of a righteous man chapt 18. 24. that turns away from his righteousnes and commits inâ—quity and doth according to all the abomination of the wicked c. and as truely may it be affirmed that the person Ezechiel speaks of is still to be reputed a righteous man as that he of whom Paul speaks is still to be accounted a brother Both the Prophet and Apostle speaks of such persons â—s were righteous and brethren reputatively before they did so bastardly degenerate And is it possible that Christ should charge his Ch to account an obstinate offender as an heathen and publican Mat. 18. and that Paul should come after and direct them to account him a brother Besides all the members of the Church are brethren and to become a member is to become a brother and so to be excommunicated out of the Church is nothing els but to be cast out of the Churches brotherhood Lastly the Apostle 1 Cor. 5. 11. names idolatours amongst the rest and will you haue idolaters your brethren Mr B why then did you in the former pag. exclude Papists and pag. 108. Idolatours vniversally A holy brotherhood it seems you will have brother idolater haeretique and what not The instance you bring of Symon Magus an hypocrite received by the Apostle by the Evangelist you should say Act. 8. makes stroÌ„gly against you if it be well considered what is written of him For after he was discovered by Peter not to have his heart right in the sight of God he was pronounced by him to have neyther part nor fellowship in that busines ver 21. Now if Philip had discerned thus much by him at the first do you think he would have acknowledged him for a partener in it or haue given the seal of the forgivenes of sinns of new birth and of salvation as you truely prove baptism to be pag. 119. to such a blank nay would be haue prophaned the Lords holy things vpon such a dog or swyne contrary to the expresse commaundement of Christ Math. 7. 6. Cease Mr B. to excuse your self by accusing the holy Apostles and Evangelists of Christ. And herevpon I do thus argue They that haue no right to the holy things of God in the Ch are not to be admitted into it neyther is the Church gathered of such persons rightly and truely gathered But men of lewd conversation have no right to the holy things of God in the Church and therefore the Church gathered of such persons is not truely gathered The former propositioÌ„ is clear bycause men admitted into the Church are admitted to the participation and coÌ„munion of the holy things of God in the Church The 2. also appeareth both by the scripture before named where Peter pronounceth that such as have not their hart right with God which no lewd persons hav or ever had haue no part in the holy things of God as also by Mr Bernards own graunt namely that wicked persons are to be cast out of the Church And what could there be in the world more ridiculous yea or wherein God were more plainly mocked then to gather a Church of such persons as are judged fit to be cast out of the Church And yet for this Church-gathering being indeed his own Mr B pleads both here and every where both in this and his other book In the next place come in certayn popular similitudes to colour over that rotten errour which can by no reason or scripture be made sound in number three which I will consider in order Two persons are lawfully marryed by publique profession and mutuall corâ—â—nt now though the wise perform not her covenant but prove vnfaithful yet is she still a true wisâ— till the bill of divorcement be given out I graunt it but see you not how you take the thing for granted which wee deny namely that your nationall Church is the true wife of Christ Since he divorced his ancient wife the nation of the Iewes he never maried nor will marry nation more much lesse which is more specially to be coÌ„sidered did he ever marry for his lawfull wife the prophane multitudes of vnhallowed Atheists wherwith as you confesse in the beginning of your book your Church aboundeth Hath Christ commaunded his people not to be vnequally yoked with vnbeleevers and will he yoke himself with them with Atheists other wicked persons which are in deed infidels unbeleevers whatsoever they professe in word though you in your 2 book Mr B. do with defiance avouch the contrary The same Apostle in an other place affirmeth that he which coupleth himself with an harlot is one body with her forbids the faithfull as a most impious thing to make the members of Christ the members of an harlot and will Christ make himself the head of harlots theves murtherers blasphemers and the like or
reformed Churches is the way of God But howsoever it be eyther with vs or them yet if that narrow way whereof Christ speakes that leads vnto life be the way of God then surely there are thowsands in your nationall Church many in every parish Ch in the kingdom which speak evill of the way of God yea hate and persequute it to the vtmost of their power and all them that endeavour in any uprightnes to walk in it Whereof you your self also Mr B. in former dayes haue had experience though for the opposing reviling and persequuting of vs you and they agreed well like Herod Pylate were made freinds Now if wee separate from all them which thus disobey and speak evill of the way of God wee know too well wee can have no cōmunion with any assembly in the Land Lastly you are greatly overseen in saying that Pauls separation was not from the Church nor members of the true Church It was from the Church of the Iewes the members of that Church with whom formerly he had held cōmanion as the true Church of God which for this their disobedience and vnbeleif were broken off and so afterwards in deed to be reputed One scripture more remayns to be considered of and that is Ioh 17 ver 6. 9. 14. 15. 16. whence wee beleeve and confesse that the true visible Church of Christ is gathered by separation from the world and the men of the world visibly Against this our exposition Mr B. excepts and will haue this place vnderstood of the elect onely that are ordeyned to life of invisible members of men as they are holy before God rating vs as egregious deceiptful abusers of this scripture in applying it to the visible members or Church But most vniustly as appeares by these three playne reasons First bycause Iudas was one of them whom the Father had given vnto Christ out of the world whom alone of all them so given him he had lost that the scripture might be fulfilled vers 6. 12. whence it is evident to all men that do not blinde their eyes that Christ here speakes of such a donation or gift as was visible or of such members as were visibly and in respect of men separated sanctified from the world vnto God and not at all of any invisible gift or members Secondly Christ speaks of such persons as the world hated bycause they were not of the world ver 14. but the wicked world doth not hate men as they are elect before God and invisibly or inwardly separated and sanctifyed but as they are outwardly such and so separated whether they be inwardly so or no. Lastly Christ speakes of such a chusing out of the world as he doth of a sending into the world ver 18. which sending as it was visible and externall so was the selection and separation spoken of And say not for shame Mr B. that the visible Church of Christ is to be gathered or consist of the men of the world visibly The Church and world are tvvo distinct yea two contrary states and bodyes though the body of your nationall Church were at the first gathered and hath over since consisted of the vvorld and all To conclude this light man being pressed by Mr Ainsworth in another place of his book vvith this scripture both affirms proves by many reasons that Christ here speaks of a mixt company vvhich the elect are not And hovvsoever his reasons be not onely vnsound but indeed vngodly vvherein he affirms Christ to haue been in respect of men the mediatour of Paul vvhylst he continued a persequutour and of others wicked in respect of men yea of Pylate and the soldiers pagans and infidels bycause he prayed for them vvhereas Christ prayer for them vvas no proper effect of his Mediatourship for his body except vve hold vniversall redemption and make the vvhol vvorld his body but a most perfect demonstration of his love tovvards his enemyes left also for a pattern vnto vs to the worlds end yet do they with that he there labours to prove by them compared with his affirmation of the contrary in this place manifest his great both weaknes and lightnes in the things he affirms And thus I return to the exposition of 2 Cor. 6. and in it to prove that the Apostles meaning is to forbid communion and fellowship not onely with wicked works but also with the wicked persons themselves that walk in them For which purpose I do ad this one onely consideratiō namely that the Prophet Isaiah from whom the Apostle borroweth this phrase come out from among them separate your selves and touch none vnclean thing and I will receive you doth not so properly speak of the departure or separation which the Preists were to make from the sinns of the Babylonians as frō their coastes and persons thereby teaching all Christians which are that spirituall house and holy Preisthood to offer vp spirituall sacrifices acceptable to God through Christ 1 Pet. ◠8. Rev. 1. 6. that their separation and departure must be spiritually as theirs was civilly not onely from the sinnes of spirituall Babylonians or other vnbeleevers and vnclean persons but even from their persons also and from all personall communion with them And as in the type he that touched a dead man or leper or him that had an issue upon him or other vnclean person or was by him touched was legally vnclean polluted as well as he that touched or was towched by any unclean thing whatsoever Levit. 5. 7. 11. so in the thing typed and truth he that toucheth or is touched by a man spiritually dead in sinns or that hath an yssue of sinne or spirituall leprosie running upon him he is spiritually polluted and defiled Now without touching cannot the numbers of the same body and one of another possibly consist But were it as wee would haue it that not onely the works but even the workers of wickednes were to be avoyded for their works sake yet doth Mr B. take a double exception against our interpretation of this scripture The former is that it serves not our turn except we prove them all to live in darknes in vnrighteousnes to be in league with the Divel c. I do answer that if light and darknes beleevers and vnbeleevers Christ and Beliall must haue no fellowship together then must the beleevers and they that are in Christ forbeare fellowship with all vnbeleevers men of Beliall so continuing incorrigible if any beleevers or Christians will notwithstanding still combyne with vnbeleevers and godles men it is their sinne thus to confound the order which God hath set in separating from the faithfull with whom he hath joyned them by joyning with the vnbeleevers vnfaithfull from whom he hath separated them yea I adde in doviding Christ from himself and vniting him with Beliall the Divill in his members what in them
Bishops of God which have obteyned the principall order and office in your Church for a lesse principall work namely government and are preferred to the highest first place not for the teaching of their Dioseces Provinces which were impossible though they desired it but for ruling of them You say they are the successors of the Apostles but the cheif work of the Apostles Ministery was the preaching of the gospel not ruling much lesse Lording wherein your Bishops office standeth The order which the Apostle Paul hath left is that those Elders which labour in the word and doctrine should have speciall honour and aboue them which are imployed in ruling but this order Antichrist hath subverted as being a course not onely too base and laborious but even impossible for him to honour his Ministers by as he desired and hath effected hath procured not double treble but an hundred fold greater honour to be ascribed to ruling and government then to preaching And this is not the least part of that confusion wherein you stand and against which wee testify 2. If the office of Ministery consist principally in preaching how can your office of Ministery or order of Preisthood be of Christ which coÌ„sists not at all in preaching as I haue shewed but may stand without it by the Canons Lawes of your Church not requiring it necessarily as any essentiall property for the being but onely admitting of it as a convenient ornament for the well-being commending in deed the person that vseth it but no wayes justifying the office which requireth it not Yea most evident it is that the Ministery of the Church of England considering it not onely in the state cariage of things but specially in the civil and ecclesiasticall lawes wherein it is founded consists more principally in the wearing of a surplice then in the preaching of the gospel To conclude this point as the examination of such with you as are to be ordeyned by the Bishop and his Chaplayn is no triall of their gifts of knowledge zeal or vtterance or that they are apt to teach but a devise like the poseing of schoolboyes without eyther warrant fro the scriptures or good to the Church so the onely examination which the word of God approves of is that just and experimentall knowledge which the Church by wise observation is to take of the personall gifts and graces of such men as the Lord rayseth vp amongst them manifesting themselves in the publick exercises of the Church in their places as there is occasion though you Mr Bern. be bold to abuse 1 Tim. 3. 7. to the justification of your letters testimoniall vnto the Bishop which any vngodly person may procure from other persons as ill as himself and thereby may find acceptance with some Bishop or other as evill as eyther of both The Apostle Peter directing the disciples or Church about the choice or nomination of one to be chosen into the room of Iudas tels them they must think of such a man as had companyed with them all the tyme that the Lord Iesus was conversanâ— among them And the same Apostle together with the rest by the same spirit directs the Ch afterward to chuse from among themselves seven men iustly qualified to take vpon them the administratioÌ„ of the Church treasury And vpon the same ground it was that the Apostles Paul Barnabas did not streightway vpon the gathering of the Churches of the Gentiles ordeyn them officers but a good space after even when the people had made good proof and tryall of the gifts and faithfulnes of such men as by their free choice and election the Apostles ordeyned over them And whom doth it concern so nearely to make proof or to take observation of them that are to be called into office as them that are to call or chuse them and to commit their soules vnto them Of which election it followeth we consider in the next place And the first thing I purpose about it is to sum vp and set together a few of Mr B. sayings which like so many waves driven by contrary winds do dash theÌ„selves asunder one against another First then he affirmeth pag. 133. and 138. that the Church iâ— tâ— separate and câ—â—se 〈…〉 amongst others for Ministers such as are found fit in so saying what doth he but graunt that the Church is before the Ministers They that chuse must needs be before the that are chosâ—nâ— How them do the Ministers make the Church 2. In his 2. book he reproacheth Mr Smyth as an impudent gaâ—nsayer of the tâ—â—t for saying that the Church did elect Mathias Act. 1. where the Lord did make the châ—ise and yet in the same book pag. 295. 296. he graunts that such examples of practise were then in vse for the peoples chusing Ministers and quotes this very scripture with some others for that purpose 3. he affirmeth in his former book that the guides and governours of the Ch were to chuse the Officers alledgeth to that end Act. 14. 23. Neyther remembring what he had formerly written in the same book namely that the rest of the congregation were to chuse the principall to be their mouth and to stand for the whole Church nor yet caring what he was to write in his 2. book to wit that the people were to chuse their ministers for which he also bringeth the same scripture Act. 14. 23. If this man had been in Iohn Baptists place the Iewes might well haue answered Christ that they had gone out to see a reed shaken with the wind But to leave his contradictions of himself to come to his oppositions against the truth And first it is erroniousâ—y written by him and the scriptures Act. 13. 1. 2. 14. 23. sinfully perverted to the justification of his errour that by the Church which is to chose officers â—s meant the guids and governours thereof That which I haue formerly noted out of both his books espetially his quoting the latter of these scriptures for the peoples liberty in chusing their ministers doth give great cause of suspition that in this case he thus writes for his purpose against his conscience and is in deed condemned of himself And for the other place which is Act. 13. 1. 2. I may as justly yea much more reprove Mr B. for bringing it for the governours chusing of Paul and Barnabas as he Mr Smyth for bringing Act. 1. for the peoples chusing of Mathias For first Barnabas Saul were Apostles as well as Mathias and therefore not to be called to their office by man but by God Gal 1. 1. and so were of the Holy Ghost as immediately separated by name as was Mathias by lot 2. Mathias was at that time first called to the office of Apostleship which before he had not but Paul and Barnabas were Apostles long before and at that tyme designed
and brethren with them are one the same publique body to be exercised in one and the same part of their publique communion and to make the officers publick persons and the brethren private in the cōmunion is to make a schisme in the Church and to make the brethren part of the cōmunion in the administration of the word sacraments prayer singing of Psalmes contribution calling of officers censuring of offenders or other Church action whatsoever private and the officers publik is to make it schismatical them in it schismatiks Thus much of the 9. errour objected The tenth foloweth which is that we say Their worship is a false worship For answer vnto this assertion Mr B refers vs to the end of this treatise and there then will wee attend for it yet somewhat will he say against it that is First that they worship no false God 2. that they worship the true God with no false worship We charge you not with the worship of any false God though wee shall see by by how in one particular you will defend your selves But the thing you should have endeavoured is to prove that your divine-service-book framed by man and by man imposed to be vsed without addition or alteration as the solemn worship of your Church is that true and spirituall manner of worshiping God which he hath appointed with which he will be worshiped in spirit trueth Of this you say little or nothing but bycause you seem to your self to say somewhat wee will see what it is The word you say preached is the true word the sacraments true sacraments the prayers we pray whether conceived or set and stinted are such as may be warranted by the word and agreable to the prescript form taught by our saviour Christ. The word preached in popery or in the most haereticall assembly in the world is the true word but the devises of men are not the true word eyther with you or them Yea the divels thēselues preached the true word when they affirmed and published that Iesus was that Christ the sonne of God the most High did they therefore perform vnto God true worship Of the sacraments I have spokē formerly have shewed that in the administration of them they cannot be reputed true It is the word of promise that makes the sacraments except then the parish assemblies joyntly considered in their members have right unto the spirituall promises of God the sacraments administred in and vnto them in that their estate cannot so be accounted true sacraments For your prayers I observe sundry things out of your own words which I may not passe over as first that you speak not properly no nor truely in saying you pray stinted prayers for you read them and who will say reading is praying you pray to God but will you say you read to God or if you so say and do is it agreable eyther to his ordinance or to cōmon reason Mistake me not as though I speak of inward prayer or of the lifting vp of the hart for I graunt a man may pray inwardly or lift vp the heart to God when he reads or preaches or sings or receives the sacraments of such prayer we neyther speak nor can discern but in our selves our speach then being of the outward act ordinance of prayer I do affirm and so marvayl if all reasonable men concurre not with me that the ordinance of reading cannot be the ordinance of praying 3. In your division of prayer wherin you make some conceived and some set and stinted you graunt that the prayers which are set and stinted are not conceived wherein you do as much as graunt that they are not of God nor according to his will The Apostle Iude directeth vs alwayes to pray in the holy Ghost and Paul teacheth that we cannot pray as we ought but as the spirit helpeth vs and begetteth in vs sighs vnutterable by the work of which spirit if our prayers be not conceived first in our hearts before they be brought forth in our lips they are an vnnaturall bastardly and prophane byrth Lastly if your stinted prayer be as you say agreable to the prescript forme of prayer taught by our saviour Christ then must none other form of prayer be vsed but a stinted or set form for none other form may be vsd but that which is agreable to the prescript form of Christ since Christ hath sayd after this manner pray Where you further add that nothing is imposed or done by you for the worship of God but the word read and preached and the sacraments and prayer I demaund of your first in worship or honour of whō are your holy dayes bearing the names of S. Michaels S. Peters S. Iohns day and the rest imposed and kept if in the honour of the Saynts Angels then are you not cleare as you make your selves from the worshipping of false Gods neyther can you exempt your selves from the number of them which in voluntary religion worship Angels if on the other side those dayes be appoynted and so kept holy in the worship and honour of God then do you and that by authority worship God by and put holines in other things then the word read preached and the sacraments and prayer yea and other things then ever came into the Lords heart to sanctify for his worship And so the place Math. 15. 9. and other scriptures to that purpose are truely though you say falsely alledged against you 2. I do demaund of you whether your Apocrypha books namely that which is placed betwixt both testaments causing the Iewes to think the new testament no better then the fables which are ioyned to it as a learned man of our nation hath observed and the other book of Homilies be enjoyned and vsed as parts of Gods worship It is evident they are so held And therefore it is that a great portion of the former is preferred in the most solemn assemblyes before the canonicall scriptures and the reading of them before the reading of the other which they justle out of their place And for the homilyes they are enioyned and so vsed in stead of the preaching of the word which is the principall part of Gods worship wherevpon it followeth that the Apocrypha wrytings of mē being preferred before one part of Gods worship which is the reading of the Canonicall scriptures and vsed in stead of an other part of Gods worship yea and that the principall part as is preaching are imposed and so vsed as partes of Gods worship So that it is not without good cause M Ber that M Ainsworth bids you prove the Apocrypha scriptures and books of Homilies the true word of God Nothing you tel vs is imposed and vsed amongst you for the worship of God but the true word of God read and preached and the sacraments and prayer now these being imposed and vsed for the
duties to be done by their men furnished by other scriptures then the divine scriptures the Bishops scriptures their Canons coÌ„stitutioÌ„s wherby they ar fully furnished indeed with ring surplus service-book and other preistly implements for the busines The Apostle Paul Eph 4. 8. 11. 12. teacheth that when Christ ascended on high he gave vnto men such gifts that is such ministeryes of the Church as should serve for the repayring of the saynts and aedification of his body till the work of grace were perfected in all his and so he makes the work of the ministery and the aedification of the body of Christ all one Now who will say that the celebration of mariage or buryall of the dead are in themselves matters of aedification or which further the vnity of fayth They serve for the generall administration of the world and so are lawfull amongst Turkes and Heathens as to eat and drink or to perform any other naturall or civil work and not for the speciall administratioÌ„ of the Church or body of Christ and therefore no works of the ministery which is peculiar vnto the Church The Church is a religious society and so the ministery which is given to the Church is a religious calling and so the proper works of the ministery must needes be workes of religion which if mariage or burying the dead were then were it vnlawfull for a faythful husband to communicate with his wife being an infidell or excommunicate in the dutyes of mariage or for a brother being a faythful person to ioyn with his brother being an infidell or excommunicate in the buryall of their dead father for with such persons religious communion may not be kept whereas the scriptures do coÌ„mend vnto vs these duties so performed both as lawfull and necessary Gen. 25. 9. 35. 29. 1 Cor. 7. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. These are then civill duties and so practised by the servants of God in all ages whose practise also for our learning is recorded in the scriptures and commended vnto vs accordingly Gen. 24. 50. 51. 58. 59. 67. 25. 34. Ruth 4 1. 2. 5. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Math. 27. 57. 59 60. Act. 8. 2. Whether it be an errour in vs as in the 11. place â—e are accused to hold that Ministers ought not to live of tythes and offerings but of the peoples voluntary contribution let the Reader considering what is answered both by Mr Aynsworth Mr Smyth and what is more fully written in the book before named judge But This sayth Mr B. is against the wisdome of God who alloweth a setled maintenance vnder the law and there is nothing against it in the gospel But say I as the Lord appointed vnder the law a setled maintenance by tythes offerings so did he a setled land of Canaan which was holy and a sacrament so did he also appoynt that the Levites to be maynteyned there should have no part nor inheritaÌ„ce with the rest of the Israelites their brethren And hath Gods wisdome so appoynted now If it had I feare many would not rest in it so wise are they for their bellyes And where you adde that there is nothing in the gospel against this ordinance â—â— the law the authour to the Hebrewes might have taught you that the law is abolished by the gospel in the sense we speak of and the old testament by the new in respect of ordinances whereof this was one If it be sayd that tythes went in vse and given by Abraham to Melchizedek Preist of the most high God before the law or old testament was given by Moses I do answer that so was circumcision ministred and sacrifices offered before Moses which notwithstanding were parts of the old testament and assumed by Moses into the body of it and so are abolished by the new To conclude this poynt since tythes and offerings were appurtenances vnto the preisthood and that the priesthood both of Melchizedek and Levi are abolished in Christ as the shadow in the substance and that the Lord hath or deyned that they which preach the gospell should live of the gospell we do willingly leave vnto you both your preistly order and maintenance contenting our selves with the peoples voluntary contribution whither it be it be lesse or more as the blessing of God vpon our labour the fruit of our ministery and a declaration of their love and duety The 12 and last errour imputed to vs is that your Churches as you call them ought to be raced downe and not to be imployed to the true worship of God Our mayn reason of this assertion being as you say by making equall Paganism and Antichristianism you endevour to weakeÌ„ by sundry exceptions As 1. that there is great difference between Antichristianism and Pagnism for this is the worshipping of a false God and without any profession of the true God but the other worship the true God hold many truthes of God Paganism was wholly without the Church but Antichrist sits in the Church of God c. 2. that we are to prove your Churches to have been built by Antichrist We do not make equall Paganism and Antichristianism in the degree though wee put not such difference between them as you do And first we do affirm that both the one and the other are not onely agaynst that 2. connaundement but the first also 2. that both of them may in their degree and for a tyme be in the Church as also that both of them may in tyme and in their degree destroy the true Church of Christ. 3. that as well the reliques ornaments and monuments of the one as of the other are by lawfull authority to be abolished and in the meane while to be forborn especially in the worship of God by all such as fear him his judgements denounced agaynst the same let vs heare what the scriptures teach in these cases The Apostle Paul writing purposely of that man of sin Antichrist testifieth that he is an adversary and exalteth himself agaynst all that is called God or that is worshipped so that he sitteth in the temple of God as God shewing himself that he is God And as Antichrist caÌ„not be rightly discerned of vs but in his oppsition vnto Christ exaltation above him so doth this his exaltatioÌ„ appear sudry wayes by which he doth translate vnto himself the honour due vnto God alone his sonne our Lord Christ as in dispensing with the morall law professedly bynding and loosing conscience devising and imposing forms of religion traÌ„sferring empires kingdoms al these doth this earthly God as he is called by the plenary power of the seat Apostolicall The same also it was which Iohn for saw in the Revelation namely that the Antichristians worshipped Divels Idols of gold and silver brasse stone wood which can neyther see nor hear nor walk agayn that they worshipped the beast which
of the Ministers must have a very favourable interpretatioÌ„ viâ— that the Church hath power to iudge of a man infallibly that he is in the estate of salvation so is their other affirmation that the discerning of the spirits and doctrine of such teachers as arise in the Church is such a gift as the true Ch never wanted as popish an errour as ever was broched in Rome For how then can the Church erre or how can it be deceived by false teachers or how could Rome come to that estate of apostasie wherein she now standeth Or may not a Papist plead thus with these men Rome was a true Church of God Now the true Church never wants the gift of discerning spirits doctrines therefore Rome neyther hath wanted nor doth nor ever shall want this gift and so by consequence cannot be faln from the truth as is praetended against her To conclude it is not truely sayd of these men that this judging of one Church by another is a matter of salvation The Ch of Ierusalem was ignorant of the calling of the Churches of the Gentiles as the scriptures testify And I would know what the Church of England judgeth of the Lutheran Churches as they are called It accounteth of them as of true Churches So do not they of their Churches whom they call Calvinists but on the coÌ„trary repute them as haereticall Wherevpon it followeth that eyther a true Church may erre in judging of an other Church or els that eyther the Church of England or the Lutheran Churches or both are not true Churches Howsoever therefore we do not make light account of the testimony and iudgement of other Churches as these Ministers accuse vs yet dare wee not make idols of them as they seem to do who wanting both the word of God and practise of other Churches for their warrant seek commendation by the testimony which some haue given of theÌ„ in respect of certeyn generall heads of doctrine in which wee our selves also do for the most part concur with them Thus much of the Ministers Arguments Now follow their answers to two mayn obiections made by vs against the whole body of their Church and their Parish assemblies The first is that it was not gathered by such means as God in his word hath ordeyned and sanctifyed for the gathering of his Church The 2. that they communicate together in a false and idolatrous outward worship of God which is polluted with the writings of men vidz with read stinted prayers homilyes catechismes and such like These objections have been els where prosequuted and the exceptions taken by the Ministers agaynst them particularly answered by Mr Ainsworth and therein their both corrupt weak dealing manifested I will briefly adde a few things Against the former objection they take five exceptions First that they might lawfully be accounted a true Church though it could not appear that they were at the first rightly gathered as the disciples might be assured of Christs bodily prasence amongst them when they saw felt him Ioh. 20â— 19. 28. though they could not have discerned which way or how he could possibly haue come in Belike then wee must beleeve that the Church of Engl was gathered miraculously as Christ came by miracle into the place where his disciples were assembled But the answer is that these men take the mayn quaestion for graunted which is that their nationall Church is for the present a true orderly gathered Church of Christ and that so sensibly as it may be seen and felt Secondly that they might be rightly gathered to the fellowship of the visible Church by other meanes then by the preaching of the gospell that is as they expound it by publique and ministeriall preaching for which they alledge our opinion though vnsound yet having force enough to stop our mouthes And do these men deal soundly who to prove a point in controversie bring the opinion of their adversaries which they condemn as vnsound The opinion is most sound that men out of office for so wee speak may convert men to God and that ordinarily otherwise they may not prophesie ordinarily nay to what end should they ordinarily instruct reprove and exhort privately such as are out of the way And where further they make it one thing for men to be soundly converted and an other thing for them to be lawfully made a visible Church they vse craft to cover errour They vse craft in speaking of sound conversion to conceal that prophane and hateful errour that a visible Church may be lawfully gathered of vnconverted persons For as our quaestion is about the externall or visible Church so do wee require for it onely externall and visible conversion or that which is seen and discerned of men leaving vnto God the judging and discerning of that which is sound or inward according to the difference which them selves truely put from the scriptures in an other place Now that it is a vile prophane errour to hold that men converted wicked viz so far as men can judge by outward appearance may lawfully be admitted into the visible CHVRCH I have shewed at large in the former part of the Book and could if need were shew the whole course of the scriptures against it Mat. 28. 19. 20. Act. 2. 40. 41. 46. 47. 4. 32. 8. 5. 6. 8. 37 9. 15. with 13. 42. 43. 14. 15. 16. 14. 15. 31. 32. 33. Of like nature with the former is that which followeth namely that men may by other meanes be lawfully made a visible Church then by the preaching that is by the opening or publishing of the gospel For which they instance in those which follow Christ and professed themselves his discipleâ— who yet were not all drawn by his word but some by miracles Ioh. 2. 23. 25. some by the report they heard of him Ioh. 4. 39. sâ—me by the desire they had to be fed by him Ioh. 6. 24. 26. that Christian Kings have by their lawes been meanes to bring men to the outward society of the Church vnto which men may be compelled Luk. 14. 23. It is not true that Christ in his life gathered any visible Churches These persons indeed which followed Christ were members of the visible Church but it was of the Church of the Iewes which Christ gathered not He lived and dyed the Minister of circumcision and gathered no distinct Churches at all from the Iewish Church Secondly neyther any of the things named nor all of them together without or besides the gospell are means sufficient lawfully to gather a visible Church Some of them as miracles may be meanes to confirm the gospel and the rest of them to draw men to the hearing of and outward submission vnto it but is alone is the hand of God as Mr Ber. truely writeth stretched out to sub duâ— people vnto him it is the seed of the Lords
and thanksgiving then their service book as their own practise both private and publique when they have liberty shewes they have and that so themselves judge see them learn to feare him that is a great King and whose name is terrible even the Lord of hostes To him through Christ the onely “ mayster and teacher of his Church be prayse for ever He even God the Father for his sonne Christs sake shew his mercy in all our aberrations and discover them vnto vs more and more keep vs in and lead vs into his truth giving vs to be faythfull in that wee have received whether it be lesse or more praeserving vs against all those scandalls wherewith the whole world is filled Amen CHristian Reader whilst I was printing my defence against Mr Ber Invective his reply came forth in a second treatise to which I have also given answer in all the particulars which are of weight And for that I have been occasioned by the one and other book to handle all the poynts in difference I entreat the to compare with this my defence such other oppositions especially as respect myself whither in print or writing till more particular â—nswer be given The principall scriptures brought on both sides for the present controversy expounded and applyed LEviticus 20. 24. 26. 11. 12. pag. 328. 329. Ieremy 23. 22. pag. 103. 377. The two parables of the feild and draw net Mat. 13. p. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. Math. 18. 17. Tel the Church p. 170. 171. 172. 177. 178. c. to 235. 238. 239. Math. 23. 1. 2. 3. pag. 433. 434. 435. 436. Mark 9. 39. pag. 77. Ioh. 10. pag. 385. 386. 387. 388. Ioh. 17. 6. 9. 14. 15. 16. p. 332. 333. 334. Act. 2. 40. p. 330. 331. Act. 13. 1. 2. p. 366. 367. Act. 1â— 2. 3. 4. 199. Act. 19. 8. 9. pag 331. 332. Act. 21. 18. pa. 200. Rom. 10. 14. pag. 380. 381. 1 Cor. 1. 11. pag. 190 191. 1 Cor. 5. pag. 158. 159. 190. 191. 239. 240. 241. 242. 1 Cor. 9. 1. 2. p. 11. 381. 382. 383. 1 Cor. 11. 18. pag. 252. 253. 1 Cor. 14. 1. 3. 22. 24. pag. 235. 236. 237. 2 Cor. 2. 6. pag 243. 206. 207. 208. 2 Cor. 6. 12. 15. 16. 17. 18. p. 322. 323. 324. 325. 326. 327. 328. 334. 335. 336. 337. Ephe. 4. 11. 12. pag. 159. 160. 162. 163. Phil. 1. 15. 16. pag. 119. 435. 1 Tim. 4. 6. pag. 378. Titus 1. 15. pag. 251. 1 Pet. 2. 9. 10. pag. 44. 45. Rev. 2. 3. pa 167. 168. 169. A TABLE OF THE PRINCIPAL matters conteyned in this treatise A OF Antiquity pa 32. 33. 50. The order of the separated Churches more ancient then that of the Ch of Engl p 40. 41. The Apostles coÌ„mission peculiar pag 147. 155. 156. Wherein ordinary Ministers succeed them pa 156. Neyther the Bishops of Rome nor Engl the Apostles successours p 405 364. Authority to be obeyed p 18. DiffereÌ„tly in things civil ecclesiasticall pa 29 30. B. The Church not constituted noâ— the members admitted by Baptism pa 283. 284. Baptism in Rome and Engl how true and how false p. 284 285. How Baptism is a note of saynt-ship of the Church p 110 See Sacraments Why wee reteyn the Baptism received in Rome and Engl not the Ministery pa 390 391. 392. 393. 394. 395. See Ordination C. Christs headship in a great measure denyed in the Ch of Engl pa 261. in the administration of his prophesy pag 262. 263. preisthood p 263 264 kingdome p 264 268. Christs kingdom and the government of it spirituall p 38. yet visible p 99. 110 The kingdom of Christ to be administred as solemnly publiquely as his prophesie or preisthood p 228 230. 350. Of the visible invisible Ch pa 105. 106 311 313. Of the gathering and constitution of the visible Church p 220 221. 292 233. See profession of fayth Who are true members of the visible Church pa 105 107. See saynts The Church no mixt company but simple and vniform p 112 121 337. Persons apparantly and visibly wicked no true members of the Church whatsoever in word they profess p 268 269 274 304 305 310. Where also Mr Bern plea for theÌ„ is disproved The constitutioÌ„ of the Church what it is and of how great account pa 73 77. 81 82 88 93 94. 95. 98. The Church superiour vnto the Officers p 200 201 217. how pa 218 219 220 223. The Officers are the Churches not the contrary pa 127 132 211. Churches are before Officers p 126. 127 211. 221. 366. 396 397 399. Without which the Ministers cannot exist p 393 294. The covenant of the L. makes the Ch in generall pa 283. 311 The Church of Engl vncapable of it p 311 313 319 221 322. 338 339 340. Two or three faithful people in the covenant of the gospell or of Abraham though without Officers are a Church p. 125 126 129 190. 423. Having interest in all the holy things of God within themselves iÌ„mediately vnder Christ pa 131. 132 See Ordination The Church may censure her Officers pag 213 220. The properties of the Church pa 341. 342 346. c. The Church to be gathered onely by the preaching or publishing of the gospel of salvatition received submitted unto pa 89 90 91 315 447 457 458 459. The Church of Engl not so gathered pa 89. 90. 91. 459. 460. Of repraesentative Churches and that the new testament acknowledgeth none such pa 194 198. and of repraesentations in religion pa 231. 302 303. 304. Of corruptions in the Church p 64 65 81 82 260. 337. how to be forborn born reformed pa. 15. 64. 68 16. No separation from a true Church p 247. How a Church ceaseth p 247. 248. 249. Of the differences betwixt the reformed Churches and vs and betwixt theÌ„ the vnreformed Church of Engl and that they both cannot possibly be rightly gathered and constituted pag. 41. 42 46. 47. 48. 52. 301. 453. 454. The Church of Engl agaynst which wee deal how to be considered p 319. 320. 339. Neyther the Church of Rome nor of Engl was ever a true Ch as was Iudah pa 277. 278. 299. 120. 121. Much lesse did they so continue in the height of Antichrists apostasie as did Iudah in her greatest defection but were dischurched 121. Mr Ber Reasons to prove Rome for the preseÌ„t a true Ch answered pag. 278. 279. 280. 281. 281. 282. 285. 286. 28â— The contrary proved pa 288. 289. 290. 291 The reformation by King Edward and Queene Elizabeth though much to be honored no way comparable to that by Hezechiah Iosiah and Nehemiah p 294. 295. 296. 297. 298 299. 300. The Church Math. 18. 17. not the Iewish Synedrion 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 182. 183. 184 185. 186. Not the Praesbytery or Ch officers but the officers people in the order set by Christ the officers governing and the people governed 186. 187. 190. 101. 192. 193. 194. 195
great mercy wisdome and holines separateth his Church and people vnto himself from the rest of the prophane world And as it is a certaine signe that a Minister is not called into his place if he be not in some measure qualifyed with such holy gifts and graces as serve to the ends of the Ministery to which he is called which you both affirme and confirm vndeniably pag. 132. 133. of this book so is it also in iust proportion a certayn and infallible argument that the nationall Church of England and so of the Churchlings vnder it is not called into covenant and communion with God being gathered of such persons in the body of it as are onely vtterly vnanswerable but clean contrarily affected to the ends of the true Church which are holynes and the glory of God And where you Mr B. would fasten the name of saynts vpon people vnworthy of it by a similitude drawn from a Minister a◠the first rightly called to his office but after shewing himself vnworthy of it whom you wil stil have called a minister I answer that if he were known to be vnworthy of it at the first or not known to be worthy he was not rightly called eyther to the office or by the name and if he afterwards shew himself vnworthy he is to be censured accordingly and so with the office to forfeyt the name though he hold both with you so it is with men in the generall calling of Christianity they that are vnworthy of it are never called of God to take it vpon them and if they prove vnworthy afterwards they are to be deprived of Christian society 2 Because of the profession of faith in Christ who maketh all true beleevers holy and sancts It is true you say that Christ makes all true beleevers holy and Saints but I deny that every profession of faith in Christ argues a true beleever A false dissembler is he and no true beleever that in word pretends faith in Christ and in deed denyes him 3. In respect of Baptisme by which externally the partie baptised is to be iudged to have put on Christ. Gal. 3. 27. to have remission of his sinnes Act. 2. 39. to be partaker of Christs death Rom. 6. 3. 4. Col. 2. 21. and to have assurance of salvation 1 Pet. 3. 21. All persons baptized neyther do in truth nor are by vs to be judged to haue put on Christ to haue remission of sinnes c. but onely such as to whom by vertue of the covenant of grace baptisme apperteyneth We must not conceive of baptisme as of a charme or think it effectuall to all it is put vpon but must judge it avayleable and of vse according to the covenant of promise which God hath made to the faithful and their seed and none otherwise And baptisme administred to any others is so farr frō investing them with any saynt-ship in that estate as it makes guilty both the giver and receiver of sacriledge and is the taking of Gods name in vayne 4 In respect of the better part though the fewer by many for thus the scripture speakes Deut. 1. 23. 24. 1 Cor. 6. 11. with 5. 1. 2 Cor. 12. 21. The scriptures never ascribe holines to a people for some fewes sake if the rest be vnholy and prophane I read in the scriptures that vncleane persons and things do pollute and vnhallow clean persons and things that a little leaven levens the whol lump but that clean persons or things should hallow persons or things which are vnclean or that a little sweet meal should make sweet a sower lump that read I not but the contrary confirmed by the forenamed scriptures And for the Ch of the Iewes of Corinth in which you instance as they were holy omitting other respects for the holy covenant into which the Lord had assumed the body of them Rom. 11. 16. so were the desperately wicked amongst them no true members of the body but as putrifyed and rotten parts to be cut off and cast out from the rest And where Paul writes to the Church at Corinth stiles them sayntes and advertises them to excommunicate the incestuous person what can be more vnreasonably affirmed then that the incestuous person was one of these Saincts as though Paul had written to him to cast out himself which must needs follow by Mr B. assertion and proofes of it 5. In respect of the visible signes of Gods favour promise and presence to be with his c. as Ierusalem was called the holy city Mat. 4. 5. But we deny your nationall Church to be that holy city the new Ierusalem coming downe from God out of heaven It is rather Babylon though much purged and repayred And Babylon cannot be Ierusalem nor was ever holy not withstanding the spoiles of Ierusalem and of the Temple also be found there as were in the civil Babylon many Israelites captived and with them the holy vessels the holy instrumēts yea the holy writings of the Prophets their persons also 2 Chron. 10. 18. Psal. 137. 1. 2. D. 9. 1 2. 6. In respect of Gods good pleasure who lookes not vpon his Church as the particular members thereof are but as he accepteth of them therefore it is sayd He saw none iniquity in Iaakob nor transgression in Israel Num. 23. 21. and yet Israel was then an vnbeleeving and stifnecked people Here you say and vnsay with one breath You graunt Israel to haue been an holy people and without iniquity as Balaam spake in the Lords acceptance according to his good pleasure and yet to have been at the same time an unbeleeving and stifnecked people which affirmation as it conteynes in it an apparant contradiction so doth it lay vpon God an vnsufferable imputation as though he took pleasure in the wicked or did accept of them It cannot be denyed but the people ever and anon rose vp in rebellion against the Lord and for instance in the Chapter next but one before going through impatiency of their ordinary food they murmured against God and against Moses Numb 21. 4. 5. But did things so continue No verily for the Lord sent fyery serpents amongst them and destroyed many of them and by his correction brought the rest to repentance ◠vers 6. 7. And now as at other times when they provoked him smit them with grievous plagues punishments and so causing them to passe vnder the rod and picking out the cheif rebels and fifting out the sinners to destruction and brought them againe into the covenant And thus much of your respects of Sainct-ship whereof some are not true in themselves others impertinent to your estate and the most flatly condemning it And though you Mr B. say it never so oft and all the divines in the world with you as here you speak that the visible Church is a mixt company as your very owne book of Articles affirms the contrary