Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n church_n old_a testament_n 6,574 5 8.1314 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A12557 Paralleles, censures, observations Aperteyning: to three several writinges, 1. A lettre written to Mr. Ric. Bernard, by Iohn Smyth. 2. A book intituled, the Seperatists schisme published by Mr. Bernard. 3. An answer made to that book called the Sep. Schisme by Mr. H. Ainsworth. Whereunto also are adioyned. 1. The said lettre written to Mr. Ric. Bernard divided into 19. sections. 2. Another lettre written to Mr. A.S. 3. A third letter written to certayne bretheren of the seperation. By Iohn Smyth. Smyth, John, d. 1612. 1609 (1609) STC 22877; ESTC S103006 171,681 180

There are 20 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

al false Churches the members of them are without Ther is one only faith truth Eph. 4.5 as in the Old Testament so in the New the true church ministerie worship government is but of one kind al the Churches or assemblies of the Edomites Ammonites Moabites Ishmaelites Israelites Samaritanes the rest were false churches hada false ministery false worship false government only the Iewes had the true Church Ministerie VVorship Government with them So in the New Testament al Churches or assemblies of men whatsoever professing Christ as Abbayes Monasteries Nunries Colleges Cathedrals Seminaries Rectories Parishes c. not Seperated from the Antichristians worldlings are false Churches so without only the Seperated Churches are the true Churches are within you should have answered this Section of my lettre Mr. Bern. before you had printed your book if you had dealt ingeniously plainly but seing you cānot answer for I take it so bicause you doe not answer for your book declared that ther is no wil wanting let vs see what you object your objections are three First the two places of Scripture 1. Cor. 5.12 Eph. 2.12 you say are ment of such as never made so much as an outward profession of Christ Iesus at al your argument is this No Scriptures directed against pagans can truly be applyed against Antichristians These places are directed against pagans vic Eph. 2.12 1. Cor. 5.12 Ergo these places cannot be truly applyed against Antichristians I deny your Major Mr. Bern. you have not proved it at al Let the reader judg whither your speeches be oracles that they must be believed bicause you vtter them but herin your fraud and evil conscience or palpable ignorance appeareth that you leave out your Major which you should have confirmed propound only your minor For that these places are vnderstood of Pagans I deny not but that they are only to be vnderstood of pag●●● that they ●●nnot be vnderstood of Antichristians I deny 〈◊〉 I prove the ●●ntrary evidently to your conscience the conscience of al men after this manner That which the L. hath taught vs to doe we may lawfully doe But the Lord hath taught vs to apply against Antichristians places of Scripture directed against pagans Ergo places of Scripture directed against pagās may by vs be applyed against Antichristians The Major is evident The minor is proved by the consideration of these Scriptures ●evel 11. ● 18.2.7.21 where the holy ghost applyeth against the Antichristians matters Scriptures spoken literally of Sodom Egipt Babylon which were all pagans Ag●●●● If Antichristians be in condition eyther equal to or worse then pagans thē by proportion Scriptures directed against pagans may be applyed against Antichristians But Antichristians in the Lords account are in a condition equall you worse then pagans For so Christ saith Mat. 11.22 that it shal be easier for Tyrus Sidon the Sodomites then for Chorazin Bethsaida Capernaum Ezech. 16 44-52 Iudah Sodom Samaria are sisters in sinne punishment Iudah hath justified Sodom Therfor Scriptures directed against pagans may be applyed by proportion eyther of equality or superiority against Antichristians Now for your further instruction in this point Mr. Bern. consider that in the new Testament the phrases speeches titles priviledges benefites of the Church of the Iewes considered as the true Church are ordinarily applyed to the visible Church of Christ in the new Testament contrariwise the phrases speeches titles priviledges judgments pronounced agaist the Gentils in the old Testament are customabley applyed against the false Churches Antichristians in the new Testament Hence it is that the true visible Church of the new Testament is called the holy Cittie Temple Tabernacle the new Ierusalem the like the false Church is called the Gentils Egipt Sodom Babylon c. the reason whereof is bicause that the Church of the Iewes was a type of the Churches of the new Tastament so the assemblies of the Gentils were types of the false Churches of Antichrist as you may see through the whole book of the revelation in divers particulars which point if you had eyther vnderstood or attended you could not thus frivolously have objected to vs this one particular that speeches vnderstood of pagans may not be applyed against Antichristians I pray you what vse do you make of the prophesies of the old Testament against Nineveh Babylon Elam Madai the rest VVhat vse can you make of the judgments threatned inflicted vppon the Gētils if not this that Christ the Apostles make Mat. 11.22.24 12.41.42 2. Pet. 2 5-7.15 Iude. 7.11 Heer I know you will say that you are not Antichristians so though these places may be applyed against Antichristians yet not against you that particular wee will see afterward in his proper place in the meane tyme thus much we have gayned that places af Scripture directed against pagans may as wel be applyed against Antichristians as places of Scriptrue spoken to the true Church of the Iewes may be applyed to the true Church of the new Testament Secondly you object that wee cannot prove laying aside the forge●●s of our owne braynes that this scripture phrase without may be applied vnto you as to a people without VVell wee wil lay aside our owne devices so let vs trye what wee can doe Arg. 1. Churches that are in condition equal or worse then assemblies of pagans are without Revel 11.2 Antichristian Churches are in condition equal or worse then assemblies of pagans Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 2. False Churches are without Antichristian Churches are false Churches Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 3. Dogs Enchanters VVhoremongers Murtherers Idolaters they that love or make lyes are without Revel 22.15 Antichristian Churches are assemblies of such persons Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 4. The habitation of Devils the hould of al foule Spirits cages of every vncleane hateful byrd are without Antichristian Churches or Babylon are such Reuel 18.2 Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 5. The vtter court which must not be measured by the goldē reed but which is given to the Gentils that persecute the Holy Cittie is without Antichristian Churches are that vtter court Revel 11.1.2 Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 6. The Serpent his seed or aungels are without Revel 12.9.10 Gen. 3.15 Antichristian Churches are the Serpent his seed aungels Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Now Mr. Bern. I have proved by playne Scripture that Antichristian assemblies are without I know you wil not denye it but you wil plead that your Churches are not Antichristian assemblies therfor you account that one of our errors pag. 109. viz our 8. error as you summe thē that position therfor viz your Churches are false Churches shal be proved vnto you fully in the Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the 10.
I desire may be embraced if not I require an answer of them to whom it is specially directed to conclude this first point Mr. Bern. seing your VVorship for the most part is book-worship I conclude it to bee Iewish and so false VVorship Now I come to answer your cavils which are conteyned pag. 146-151 First you referre vs to the treatise in the end of your book I referre you for answer partly to Mr. Ains partly to the book intituled the differences of the Churches of the Seperation For I doe acknowledg that in the Old Testament Psalmes Prayers Prophecies were read out of a book yet further I answer three things 1. that it will not follow that seing it was so in the old Testament therfor it must be so in the new nay contrary it was so in the old Testament therefore it must not be so in the new This is the true manner of reasoning or thus In the Old Testament they had Psalmes Prophecyes Prayers read out of a book which was the Type the manifestation of the Lettre Therefore in the new Testament wee must have Psalmes Prophecyes Prayers brought out of the hart which is the Spiritual book of the New Testament wherein the Lord doth write his Lawes Heb. 8.10 which is the truth the manifestation of the Spirit 2. it will not follow that if it were granted that reading the Prayers Prophecyes Psalmes of Scripture out of the Originall tongs the Hebrue and Greek were lawfull that therefore the reading of the Apocrypha translations which are the workes of men is Lawful For theone is interpretation of a Language or Tong that is the vttering of matter from the knowledg of the Tongs and the gift of interpreting the other is reading wordes out of a book which a child of eight yeeres old may doe 3. neither will it follow that if it were found lawfull to read the English translation of the Scriptures therefore it shal be lawful to read your English Masse-book your book of Homilies and Articles your book of Canons For then why may you not read also Mr. Perkins vppon the Creed Henry Smyths Sermons or any other good Catechisme Commentary or Sermon book Secondly you prove your worship true by two reasons 1. Say you you worship no False God 2. you worship the true God with no False worship For you preach the true word admister the true Sacraments pray such prayers as are agreeable to the Scripture the forme of prayer taught by Christ if any things els be prescribed it is not imposed as worship Or if it were prescribed as a part of worship it doth not therefore follow that all the worship is False well I answer That Israell in Ietoboams tyme and after and when Aaron made the Calfe did not worship worship a false God yet their worship was false So may your worship be false though you worship the true God that hath revealed himself in the old Testament but their worship is not true by your owne confession therfor your consequent is not good that seing you worship the true God your worship must needes be true if the meanes wherby you worship be a false meanes devised by the wit of a man not taught in the word of God I say your worship is false so that place of Mat. 15.1 importeth that whosoever worshippeth God by any invented meanes taught by mans precept worshippeth God invayne Such is an image as the second commaundement teacheth now the meanes of your worship are false as first your false Church which is an Idol 2. your stinted devised imposed literal service book which is an Idol 3. your false Christ which is not your King Preist Prophet which is one of our Idols For though you truly beleeve concerning his person yet your Faith is false your doctryne false concerning his offices mediation therfor these meanes of your worship being false meanes they must needes be false worship therfor seing your doctryne is much of it false your communiō false your worship stinted book worship it followeth that your word is not the true word your Sacraments the signes of your false Faith communion are not true your prayers are not true whereas you plead that other things besides the word Sacrament prayer are not imposed as worship I answer what doe they then in your worship wil you mingle that which is no worshis worship together either they are worship or els let them be cast out of your worship further whereas you alledg that though some parts of your worship he false yet al shal not be false I grant it if your Church were true your ministery true but seing your Church ministery be false therfor though you do preach the true word administer the true Sacraments pray true prayers yet they can not be true worship offered vp in a false Church by a false ministery for the falsehood of the Church ministery doth essentially corupt the worship if al that is set vppon the table be either poisō or poysoned meate I say such is your worship For death is in your worship as Coloquintida was in the pot So that you see the distinction of true false doth most properly aperteyne to your worship as it doth also to your ministery Church as hath been shewed In the next place you declare vnto vs out of Philip Mornaeus the order of the worship of the old Testament out of the Scripture the parts of the worship of the new Testament out of Iustinus Martyr the order of worship in his tymes which I wil not contradict yet I plead that seing your Church is false your ministery false your service book a false meanes of worship therfor though al that you alledg were true it doth not follow that your worship is true wheras you plead that reading Col. 4.16 is cōmaunded as a part of worship I wish you to read the book intituled the differences of the Churches of the Seperation you shall have your answer and thus much for this Section The eleventh Section The next position is your third which is this viz. 3. In maintaining that it is not lawful to heare any ministers amongst vs whatsoever they be no● to joyne in prayer with such as feare God among vs I for my part hold both vnlawful bicause your ministers are false ministers your people of false Churches Now how can wee who are the Church and body of Christ have any Spirituall communion with you who are the ministers and subjects of Antichrist 2. corinth 6 14-16 But heer you would needes have vs beleeve that ther be many that feare God among you that they are particularly known vnto vs for my part I do beleeve generaly that God hath his people in Babylon even among you who are Babel that is confusion I do also beleeve that those who are miscalled by the name of
although a false constitution be a sinne yet it is not Idolatry you must manifest it to me to be a sin of another commaundemēt if you plead that otherwise I stil hold it to be a sinne of the Second commaundement viz to worship God in a constitution of an humane invention even as it was in the Church of Ieroboams in vention as it is in a popish parish assembly as it is in the English assemblies now further to prove vnto you that a false constitution of a Church is an Idol I use these places 2. Cor. 6.16 VVhat agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols The faithful who have made a covenant with God are heer cailed the temple of God thervnto are Idols opposed signifying that an assembly of men who are vnfaithfull though some faithful mē be among them who are commaunded to come out to be Seperated endevoring to worship God after ther fashion are an Idol therfor if the temple of Ierusalem now stood the Iewes assembled to worship God ther after the fashiō of the Old Testament that assemblie was an Idol So are the assemblies of Turkes Idols So are the assemblies of Papists Idols as Abbayes Monasteries c. Such are al churches framed of a false matter or having a false covenant 1. Ioh. 5.21 Babes keep your selves from jmages Zach. 11.17 The Apostle who wrote the Revelation forseing through the Spirit of prophecy the abhominable Idolatryes of Antichrist which would grow vp in the Church giveth the Churches a caution especially to take heed of those Antichristian Idolatryes now the Idolatryes of Antichrist are not heathenish paganish but of another nature viz not false Gods but meanes invented by men to worship the true God in or by Hence I gather thus VVhatsoever meanes is devised out of a mans brayne vsed as a meanes to honour God in or by is an Idol A devised constitution of a Church is of that nature Ergo an Idol For further amplification whereof consider that as a false minister wherof afterward is an Idol minister Zach. 11.17 So a Church of a false constitution is a false Church that is an Idol Chuch as it was vnlawful yea flat Idolatry for a Priest of Ieroboams devising to offer Sacrifice to the L. So is it also Idolatry to offer vp service to God in a Church of a false constitution Col. 2.23 Mat. 15.9 Wil-worship vayne-worship is forbidden in these two places namely such worship as is offered to God after the wil precept of man whose wisdome is enmity to God But a false constitution of a Church is after the will precept of man even invented devised go it is forbidden but wil worship vayne worship is a transgression of the second commaundement go it is idolatry so that false Church wherin or wherby it is offered vp to God an Idol These things are manifest to him that wil not blindfold himself I pray you consider of the particulars by mee alledged if you find a truth in them embrace the truth lead on your people with you to the truth if not let vs heer from you an answer that we may see our errors wee wil can reforme so cannot you so long as you stand as you doe ther is no way to reforme but to Seperate as we have done already Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the third Section I published a litle Methode not long since intituled Principles inferences concerning the visible Church in the tenth page of the book I write thus visible Churches constituted according to the devise of men are Real Idols Mr. Bern. in the beginning of his third Section chargeth vs to hold That an erroneous constitution of a Church is a real Idol in his book intituled the Seperatists Schisme pag. 79 hath these wordes They hould our constitution a real Idol so vs idolaters pag. 152. of the same book he writeth thus that our Church viz the Church of England standeth in an adultrous estate accounting this as an error that wee defend Mr. Ainsw in the answer to Mr. Bern. pag. 172. faith that a false constitution of a church set vp in stead of a true what is it better then a very Idol Heer let vs consider the difference agrement betwixt Mr. Ains me he saith a very Idol I say a real Idol I cal a false constitution a real Idol For that in existence being it is an Idol Mr. Ainsw calleth a falsely constituted Church a very Idol bicause it is indeed truly an Idol heer is litle difference except it be in wordes but for the further cleering of my position viz that a falsely constituted Church is a real Idol two things must be discovered 1. what an Idol is 2. what Real is For the first vnderstand that most properly an Idol is contrary to an ordinance apoinred by God in matter of Religion So the Apostle willeth the brethren to keep themselves from jmages or Idols 1. Ioh. 5.21 the Lord himself in the Second Commaundement forbiddeth vnder the phrases of making worshipping jmages al inventions of men in matter of Religion Exod. 20.4.5 Now matter of religion especially subsisteth in Religious worship or religious government For the Saynts are made Kings Preists vnto God as Kings they excercise a regiment as Preists they performe their Sacrifices Revel 1.6 1. Co. 6 1-9.1 Pet. 2.5 therein they performe homage to the Lord submit their consciences to be wrought vppon seing the conscience must bow only to the Lord not to man otherwise then in the Lord therfor in matter of Religion the conscience is not to yeeld to any thing devised by man but must alwayes have the Lord for the leader Governor therein hence then it foloweth that whosoever substituteth any devise of man any thing taught by the precept of man Mat. 15.9 Esay 29.13 any will worship or any ordinance of the world in matter of Religion setteth vp that which is contrary to the Lords ordinance contrary to the Lords wil contrary to the Lords wisdome I would fayne learne whither this be not an Idol or jmage So that Idols are of two sorts 1. A false God 2 A false meanes to honor or submit or doe homage to the true God in or by as a false or devised tyme place person instrumēt action if the●be any thing of the like consideration therfor a false or devised tyme may be caled an Idol day as 1 King 12.33 the month which Ieroboam appointed for the worship of his Calves is called the month which he had forged of his owne hart that is an Idol moneth so by consequent the 15 days of that moneth an Idol day So in the old Testament the place where God was to be worshipped was the Tabernacle or Temple Deut. 12 5-8 therfor the high places in iudah also Dā Bethel in Israel were Idol places bicause
they were places forged out of the harts of them that first appointed them such were al the places dedicated by the hethen to worship their Gods in which therfor were commaunded to ●he rased downe Deu 12.2.3 so likewise a shepheard or minister framed according to the devise of man is called a foolish or Idol Shepheard Zach. 11.17 Such were Ieroboams Preistst 1. King 12.31 the false Apostles 2. Cor 11 13-15 who are therefor called the ministers of Sathan In like maner Gideons Ephod judg 8.27 Michaes Ephod Teraphin● molten jmage Iudg. 17.4.5 The brasen Serpent 2. King ●8 4 being instruments of idolatry might justly have been called Idol instruments so forth for actions Thus we see the first point what an Idol is by consequent that Idols are infinite in nomber that they are not only 47. as Mr. Bern. fayth Marlorat reckeneth them againe that Mr. Bern. question is answered which he maketh pag. 152. What Idol worship wee Saith Mr. Bern I answer that Mr. Bern. doth both worship an Idol worshippeth in or by Idols The Idol which he worshippeth is a false Christ who is neither a King to him seing he submitreth not to his kingdome ordinances thereof nor a Preist seing he yeeldeth not to his true Ministerie nor a Prophet seing he receaveth not the Holy doctryne which he teacheth but yeeldeth to a Kingdom Preishood Prophecy erected established according the doctryne commaundements of men as shal be sufficiently cleered heare after hath been o●t tymes already done The Idols wherein wherby he worshippeth is 1. his owne false Church 2. his owne false standing as a meber of the false church 3. his owne false Ministery 4. his owne false parish Church or Idol Temple 5. his service book 6. his Lords the Prelates their courts ministers wherin wherto he submitteth Generally look how many Prelates Preists Deacons Parishes Temples Service books Surplices Crosses Holy dayes Courts Ecclesiastical Officers in these Courts ther are in the Land So many Idols there are that wee may say as Esay said in his tyme of Iudah Esay 2.8 their land is ful of Idols so this question of yours Mr. Bern. is answered Now the second point to be manifested is VVhat is Real I opposed Real to mentall as may be seen Princip Inferenc pag. 9. 10. Mental or intellictual is that which hath his being in the mynd or vnderstanding as the frame of the English Churches conceaved in the mynd I called a mental Idol Real is that which hath an existence being out of the mynd conceipt as the Parish Church of worksop whereof Mr Bern. is vicar is a real Idol having existence being not only in the mynd conceipt but also in deed truth Now Real is eyther Natural or Moral or Artificial or Political Natural as a man Moral as vertue Artificial as a howse Political as a Cittie or common wealth whereas I called a falsely constituted Church a real Idol I intended it a real Politique Idol For so a Church is a politie Cittie or common wealth Revel 11.2 18.2 VVherefore as the true Church is the Holy Cittie the new Ierusalem that commeth downe from God out of heaven Revel 21.2 Even that true Politie common wealth of Israel Eph. 2.12 So the false Church is Babylon Egipt Sodom that Cittie Politie common wealth or Sinagogue of Sathan so a Political Real Idol therfor the English assemblies being proved to be false Churches are real Idols Let vs in the next place consider what Mr. Bern. saith to these things First he saith the Scripture never taketh an Idol in this sense I have both in this Section of my lettre also in this Parallele shewed him already that an Idol is so taken in the Scripture but for further evidence I use this argument That which is contrary to a true Church is an Idol A falsely constituted Church is contrary to a truly constituted Church Ergo A falsely constituted Church is an Idol The Major is true by natural reason as also by the consideration of the nature of contraries For as light is contrary to darknes vertue to vice white to black fire to water So is true contrary to false a true Church to a false Church The major is the Apostles owne argument 2. Cor. 6.16 his wordes are what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols whence I reason thus That which is contrary to the Temple of God is an Idol That which is contrary to the true Church is contrary to the Temple of God For the true Church is the Temple of God Ergo That which is contrary to the true Church is an Idol Herevppon it followeth that seing the Apostle opposeth an Idol to the temple of God as he opposeth light to darknes Christ to Belial seing the Temple of God is the true Church therfor an Idol in that place is a false Church now Mr. Bern with al your learning avoyde this place I wil yeeld you this particular Further A false Christ is an Idol A false Church is a false Christ Ergo a false Church is an Idol The Major is vndeniable The Minor is proved two wayes First by the contrary thus A true Church is true Christ as may be collected from these two places 1. Cor. 12.12 Gal. 3 16. Therfor a false Church is a false Christ Secondly it may be proved by Christs owne wordes Mat. 24.24 ther shal arise false Christs false Prophets that is to say false churches false Ministers which professe teach doctrynes of the Lord Iesus falsely both of his person offices as the Arrians the Lutherane vbiquitists the Papists the Anabaptists c. Thus you see wee have proved vnto you now this second tyme that a falsely constituted Church is a real Idol But bicause you cannot soundly answer therfor blasphemously you scoffe at the doctryne of the constitution of the true Church wee doe constantly bouldly defend that out of a Church truly constituted when a man can may joyne therto no ordinance of God can be accepted neyther preaching nor praying nor Sacraments nor any other religious action what the Lord accepteth in secreat that we dispute not but what the word of God teacheth vnto vs to be acceptable that wee speak of And tel me Mr. Bernard can ther be a true ministery a true baptisme a true faith true prayer true preaching or administring the L. supper true excommunication in the church that is falsely constituted did the L. accept of the Sacraments Sacrifices of the Church of Israel constituted by Ieroboam that author of Idolatry doth not the Lord say vnto that people in that false Church Lo Ammi Lo Ruhamah No People No Pitie Hosea 1.6.9 is not the Lord as severe now against a Church falsely constituted in the New Testament as he was against the false Church of the ten tribes in the old Testament or do you
you give the Holy Ghost the lie imputing error vnto the word of truth But you wil say if men be not subjects of Christs Kingdome ther is no salvation for them I deny that wil you condemne al the Iewes Turkes Papists in the world yet I say they are no subjects of Christs Kingdome which is the true visible Church I pray you therfor be as good to vs as you are to your sel●e in that censure wherfor we must remember to distinguish betwixt the visible Church which is Christs Kingdome the Catholique Church whi●● is invisible The visible Church hath in it a visible communion visible sensible ordinances for men to walk in a visible fayth expressed in the outward declarations thereof in confession profession of the truth this visible Church must we joyne to live in this is the sheepfold wherin Christ foldeth his sheep into this sheepfold both sheep shepheard must enter by the dore not clyme vp another way as theeves robbers doe Of al those that live continue in this true visible Church we are bound to beleeve holmes fayth election in particular Eph 1.1.4 Now the Catholique Church which is invisible is the comprehension of al the elct in al ages places whose persons are vnknowne to vs such secreat things the L. hath reserved to himself concealed from our knowledg therfor we are not to search after them but must walk in that way which he hath taught in his word wher so much of his wil as is fit for vs to know is revealed now I would have you manifest to me two things concerning this point one is that the Catholique Church is Christs Kingdome another is that al that are on t of the visible Church are condemned I for my part hold the contrary viz First that the visible Church truly constituted is the only Kingdome of Christ which he at the day of judgment shal give vp into the handes of his Father 1. Cor. 15.24 that therfor they who are not members of Christs true visible Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdome Secondly notwithstanding that ther are many who are no members of the visible Church therfor no subjects of Christs Kingdome who notwithstanding aperteyne to the L Election are within the compasse of the Catholique Church out of which ther is no salvation Now Mr. Bern. if you have any thing to object against this truth let vs have it I pray you that we may receave instruction reformation from you you assume great dexteritie in diving into mens arguments I pray you dive into the bottome of this point discover the error therof if you be able if not lay your hand vppon your mouth give glorie to God confesse your ignorance errors Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the Fourth Section In this Section Mr Bern. saith that it is error to hold that those that are not of a true constituted Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdome In his book intituled the Seperatists Schisme pag. 80. 81. He affirmeth the same thing in these words viz That such as are not of a particular constituted Church to wit such a one as theirs is are no subjects of Christs Kingdome Mr. Ainsworth answering Mr. Bernard pag. 173. vseth these wordes Neither is this position set downe in our wordes to my knowledg if therefor Mr. Bern. were not a caviller he would not have reckoned this among our errors Although Mr. Bern. oppugneth this truth Mr. Ainfw forsaketh the defence therof yet I stil defend it as the vndoubted truth of God First therfor I wil expound the true meaning thereof then also answer Mr. Bern. cavils cautions I say not therfor as Mr. Bern. ignorantly vaynly captiously conce●veth that whosoever is not actually a joyned member of a true visible Church not living in communion with that church is no subject of Christs Kingdome but I say thus they that are not of a true constituted Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdom now it is one thing to be in a true church as a member therof actual walking in presence cōmuniō therewith another thing to be of a true church which one may be eyther as yet actually vnjoyned or being a joyned member actually yet absent in regard of bodily presence that one vnioyned actually may yet be of a true visible church I declare by divers particulars as first one that by violence is deteyned from a true constituted church yet may be of it in desire wil affection purpose though actually vnioyned the Lord accepting the wil for the deed when it cannot be performed Againe when as yet ther is no true visible church established actually a man may be of it in that he would be joyned vnto it if it ●ad any real existence So the Martyrs in Q. Maryes dayes may be said to be of a true visible church both for that they would have actualy joyned to the true cōstituted church if it had beē established as also for that they in wil purpose desired so to do although violently they were deteyned by imprissonment Further they that are of the true saith which is professed in the true Church may be said to be of that true church which faith is not a thing invisible but visible sensible as namely a man Seperated from all false churches professing the true visible faith of the church holding it vnlawful in regard of some corruption which he seeth in the true church to joyne therevnto may yet be said to be of the true church Lastly if some brethren though but two or three walk together in holy communion they are a true Church although perhaps they have not solemnely entred covenant yet ther communion in holy exercises is a declaration that they have contracted together though weakely corruptly yet truly So that these particulars being wel weighed may sulficiently informe you of my meaning but Mr. Bern you have in your book quoted this point otherwise then I have propounded expounded it in my lettre that in two particulars viz 1. in saying a particular constituted Church 2. in adding these wordes Such a one as theirs is For ther is asmuch difference betwixt a true constituted Church a particular constituted Church as ther is betwixt a man this man or that man the one is species theother individinum it is evident that a man may be of a true constituted Church yet not of a particular constistuted Church as may be perceaved by the 4. particulars before mentioned Againe in adding these wordes viz such a one as theirs is after a scoffing vprayding disdainful manner he seeketh to draw into hatred abhomination the true Church of Christ but the tyme wil come when the Lord wil reward every man according to his workes In the second place let vs consider of Mr. Bern. cavils cautions which are 4. in nom
Therfor Christs ministerial powre commeth not by succession to the Pope Bbs. or Presbytery primarily but is given to the body of the Church The sixth Argument If Christs ministerial powre commeth by succession to the Pope Bbs. or Presbytery Then the office of the Deacons widowes are lost sith succession in them is interrupted lost for as in the old testament a Preist came of a Preist a Levite of a Levite so an Elder maketh an Elder a Deacon ordeyneth a Deacon a widow must ordeyne a widow But the office of the Deacon widow is not lost for none of Gods ordinances are perisht but may be had or els Gods truth mercy to his Church fayleth who hath said that he wil be with his Church to the end of the world Therfor Christs ministerial powre commeth not by succession to the Pope Bbs. or Presbytery primarily but is given to the body of the Church The seaventh Argument That doctryne which destroyeth it self is false The doctryne of succession viz that Christs ministerial powre commeth by succession to the pope Bbs. or Presbytery destroyeth it self Therfor the doctryne of succession is a false doctryne The minor I manifest thus If the papists say truly that al ecclesiastical powre floweth from Christ to the Clergie though the pope then why doth the college of Cardinalls make a pope by Election why doth not one pope make another pope before his death Therfor Election overthroweth the succession of the popes office For the pope cannot both give Christs Ministerial powre to the Clergie of Rome take the same ministerial powre from the Cardinals by Election but when the pope is dead then is Christs ministerial powre dead also in the popes person thus doth successiō overthrow it self in the pope by consequent in the rest For Christs ministerial powre being once interrupted in the pope can never be recovred againe but is vtterly lost so the Church is abolished For if the presbytery be lost the Church is lost if the bbs be lost the presbytery is lost if the pope be lost the bbs be lost if the pope be dead the pope is lost if the pope be lost Christs ministerial powre is lost for if it be said that the pope hath his powre by Election from the Cardinals thē succession is destroyed so you may see evidently that succession destroyeth it self seing Election must needes be interposed Therfor indeed ther is no true succession but that of the old Testament viz by descent genealogie this succession which is pleaded for by ordination of precedent presbytery bbs pope is mans invention destroyeth it self therfor is a meer Antichristian devise But heer certayne objections must be answered for the further manifestation of the matter of succession for sactisfaction therein The first Objection Alchough the Ministeriall powre of Christ be not given to the pope so perisheth not with him yet it is given to the bbs who are the Successors of the Apostles in that Ministeriall powre and in the dispensation of it to the Ministerie and Church Seing therefore that ther is a certayne and vndoubted Succession of bbs from the Apostles dayes hetherto one ordeyning another successively therefore though succession be interrupted in the Pope whose ministerial heads hip we renounce yet it is continued in the Bbs. who are the Apostles successors in dispensing this ministerial pow●e to the ministerie Churches Answer to the first Objection This objection dependeth vppon an vncertanity viz That ther hath been a succession of Bbs. one ordeyning another successively frō Peter Paul Iames through the Church of Rome the Greekes therfor I answer that except they can shew the courte rowles that I may so speak of the vndoubted successive ordination from Peter Paul Iames c. I shal say vnto al the Bbs. of England as Nechemjah said to the Preists that could not shew ther succession from Aaron by Genealogie Nehem. 7 64.65 Bicause their successive ordination is not found they shal be put from their Bishopricks they shal not administer in the Bbs. office til their arise vp one as with Vrim Thummim to divine vnto vs the truth of this matter For we wil not beleeve the records of the Church of Rome who also are defective in this particular for though they have the succession of Popes yet not of other Bbs. Further the vanity of this objection appeareth in this that hereby they are vrged for the justifying of this Antichristian devise of succession by ordination to go to the throne of Antichrist the popedome to fetch their ministerie thence as if the true ministerie off Christ could be in the false Church of Antichrist hereby also they do acknowledg Rome to be the true Church their Sacrificing Preisthood a true Ministerie orders a true Sacrament the Eucharist a true propitiatory Sacrifice for the quick dead prayers for the dead a thousand such abhominations which are necessary dependances therevppon They must also acknowledg themselves Schismatiques from the Church of Rome are never able to answer the popish bookes the petitions of the Papists to the King who object these and the like things against them The Second Objection Although the pope Bbs have not Christs ministerial powre given to them by succession yet the presbytery may have that powre by delegation from Christ when their shal arise a company of true faithful teachers who standing out against the popedome prelacy al the abhominations therof also renouncing al the corruptions of their ordination refining both the doctryne of faith the true calling of ministers from the drosse of Antichristianisme doe yet notwithstanding retayne the truth which they in the seate of Antichrist had as in the faith so in the ministery For Antichrist had not ●●●erly abolished but only corrupted the Lords ordinances Answer to the second Objection This objection dependeth vppon the former grounds namely that the Church of Rome is a true Church though corrupt having a true ministerie though corrupt c. of the rest For otherwise how can they plead ther ministery to be true from the Bbs. except they do acknowledg also the Bbs Ministery to be true receaved frō the Popedome the popish ministerie to be true for otherwise they must maintaine that a true ministerie commeth from a false ministerie which is as impossible as to bring light out of darknes So that this Objection is also answered in the former already needeth no further answer yet neverthelesse I say vnto the point that al the refining of the world can not bring a true ministery out of a Sacrificing Preisthood Or a true presbytery out of a false Antichristian prelacy For as it was impossible for the preists of the Old Testament to ordeyne true Ministers of the New Testament So much more is it impossible for the false popish Sacrificing preisthood to ordeyne true ministers of Christs true Church For the Sacrificing
were not Apostles they Elected Deacons Act 6 Now Election is the very essence of a true Minister The Church admonisheth an Elder Col. 4.17 deposeth false Apostles Reve. 2.2 preacheth prayeth worshippeth wanting Elders Act. 13.22.23 whereas you say that Ministers only make Ministers I answer it is the ground of Succession which I have formerly overthrowne I say that the body of the Church hath in it al ministerial powre immediately from Christ your slender stuffe hath prevailed nothing against this truths of the Lords the vniversity may make a Doctor a Bachelor a Maister yet ●t not any such thing but a compound body having a charter from the King for that pu●pose a corporation may make a Major Sherifes yet the corporation is not a Major or a Sheriffe So the Church may make Ministers yet the Church it self is not properly an Elder or Deacon or VVidow but a body politique having powre to produce such workes by verue of the charter which Christ hath given vnto it And thus Mr. Ber. I have done with you for this point but Mr. Ains steppeth vp with a new kind of Antichristianisme never heard of before he teacheth vs if we wil beleve him that Christs ruling powre is in the Eldership that the Pope Prelates are not Antichrists for taking into their hands the powre of the multitude but the powre of Christ Heer in the first place we must remember that the powre of Christ which we speak of is a ministerial delegated powre given to man that the question is who is the first subiect of this ministerial powre who receave it immediately from Christ I say the body of the Church is the first subject of it I say that whatsoever the Eldership hath it hath from Christ through the body of the Church by the Churches disposition this if you deny Mr. Ains which I think you do not I say you are therein departed from the faith The body of the Church having al her powre from Christ retaineth keepeth it intire to it self doth not so delegate it to any officers as that she leeseth it is deprived of it neither doth she delegate any powre to her officers but that which she formerly receaved from Christ her head husband Lord For Christ giveth not a double ministerial powre one immediately to the body of the Church which she hath keepeth another mediately to the Eldership by the Churches disposition which the church hath not at al but is only a conduit pipe to conveigh it to the Eldership if you hold such a matter declare it vnto vs out of the word of God we wil receave it when we see it in the meane tyme we hold that whatsoever the Elders have they have it from the Church by delegation that the Church hath it in ther owne hands receaved it from Christ by vertue of the covenant God maketh with it in Christ giving Christ for King Preist Prophet to the Church therfor the Church hath from Christ the head al powre al the members officers of the Church have al their powre from the body which they hold vse in the body not Seperated from the body The Elders as it were the hands are conjoyned to the Church as to the body The body of the Church is conjoyned to Christ the head The body hath no powre devided from the head the hands have no powre divided from the body So a company of men have no powre Seperated from Christ an Eldership hath no powre Seperated from the Church but as all powre floweth from the head to the body then to the hāds through the body which is first in the body before it come to the hands So al powre Ecclesiastical or ministeriall is derived from Christ to the Church then through the Church to the Elders which is first in the Church before it come to the Elders And as when the hands are cut of the body stil retaineth the powre intire though it wāt hands the powre of the hands is s●●● in the body So when the Eldership is deposed the Church stil retaineth the powre of the Eldership though it want an Eldership as the hands can do nothing contrary vnto the liking of the whole body but the actions of the hands are by consent of the body So the Eldership can do nothing contrary to the liking of the Church but the actions of the Elders must be by consent of the Church as those hands are worthy to be cut of that rebel against the body wrong it or endaunger it So are these Elders worthy to be cut of from the Church that rebel against the Church wrong it or endaunger it This is the faith which I hold Mr. Ains if you hold any other faith it is not the faith of Christ but let vs see what your book wil aford vs. First you say Christs ruling powre which the papists say is in the pope we say not is in the body of the congregation the multitude but in Christ himself that the Pope is Antichrist not for taking into his hands the powre of the multitude but of Christ to rule governe the Church as head of the same confutat of Mr. Bern. pag. 175. You know Mr. Ains that the Pope doth not assume that powre which Christ as King hath in his owne hands reserved to himself but the pope claymeth to be a ministeriall head vnder Christ having a Ministerial powre given vnto him by succession from Peter although it cannot be denyed but that he doth many actions which are proper works of Christs powre Monarchical proper to himself yet that is but the misinterpretation of his ministerial headship not vnderstāding how far that ministerial headship which he challengeth extendeth it is not his proper clayme to Christs office therfore properly the Pope is not Antichrist for challendging Christs Kingly powre proper to himself but for assuming Christs Ministerial powre delegated to his Church although I do not deny but the Pope enlargeth the delegated powre further then Christ hath prescribed in his word So that the Pope is Antichrist in two respects 1. For clayming that powre which Christ hath given to the body of the Church 2. For extending that ministerial powre beyond the compasse which Christ hath limited in the word Secondly you say Christs ruling powre which the Protestants say is in the Bbs. the Prelates we do not say is in the multitude but in Christ himself that the Bbs. are very Antichrists for assuming Spiritual jurisdiction aperteyning to Christ alone confut of Mr. Bern. pag. 175. Heer also you cannot be ignorant Mr. Ains that the Prelates do not challendg that Monarchical powre which is properly inherent in Christs person but renounce it vtterly as confidently as you do but they only challendg that Ministerial powre which Christ as they say hath delegated
committeth against his brother now to hate his brother by suffering sinne to rest vppon him not to admonish bring him to repentance is a greevous sinne of one man against his brother so it is a very greevous hatred for a man to suffer the whole Church vnreformed from sinne therfor by this place or Christ you gaine nothing but rather leese the cause which is hereby confirmed viz that til a man doe his duty to the vtmost to his brethren he cannot offer his gift now his vtmost duty is either to bring him to repentance or to leave him impenitent al them that justifie his sinne in their impenitēcy so in the violation of the holy things For they being al poluted with his sinne have deprived themselves of title powre to the holy things so vsing them doe violate them al that partake with them therin partake with sinne shall receave of their judgments The place 1. Cor. 11.28 is also against you For the Apostle willeth the Corinths to examine themselves how they have performed their duty to God their brethren in the first second table finding themselves to be cleere then to eate drinck otherwise finding our selves to faile in that commaundement Mat. 14 15-17 wee are poluted by contagion cannot eate drinck without hurt judgment bicause we have not judged our selves aright But your last place Mr. Ber. is somthing to the purpose viz. 2. Cor. 12.21 13.1.2 compared together for I wil help to vrge your argument then give you an answer Your argument may thus be framed If the Corinths might without sinne have communion with the Church of the Corinths after they were once twise admonished did not repent then may we have communion with persons obstinate impenitent in the holy things without sinne in vs. But the Corinths had communion with the Church of Corinth poluted with sin after once twise admonition without sinne Ergo we may have communion with persons obstinate in sinne in the holy things without sinne in vs. This is the force of your reason wherto I answer that you must prove your minor For it is weake the places of Scripture do not confirme it For you must know that the latter Epistle to the Corinths was the second admonition as may be seen 2. Cor. 13.2 before the despising of the second admonition they could not be judged obstinate impenitent in sinne now for the ful sufficient confirmation of your minor you should prove vnto vs two things First that the Corinths did despise Pauls second admonition in this his second Epistle Secondly that if they did despise this his second admonition the faithful among the Corinths did keep communion without sinne with that poluted obstinately impenirent company now bicause I know this is to hard a task for you I will therefore conclude that this argument of yours is insufficient to prove your purpose Your last least reasō wherby you endevour to prove it lawful to vse the holy things though obstinate impenitent sinners be present in communion is that Gods commaundement must be obeyed absolutely another mans sinne cannot dissolve the bond of allegiance betwixt God man which our position seemeth as you pretend to dissolve seing we say that a man must not keep communion in the holy things if wicked men be present in communion with vs To this argument I answer thus viz that God indeed commaundeth vs to pray heare the word communicate in the Sacraments but he also prescribeth both the persons wherwith the manner how we must performe these actions prayer hearing the word partaking in the Sacraments are actions of communion ther is in the preformance of them a manner of doing modus agendi to be observed wee must therfor respect two things in performing these actions of Religion First that our communion be such as it ought to be for I may not keep communion with Iewes Turks Pagans Papists but with Christians viz true Christians such as the new Testament describeth ought to be members of the visible Church which is the mystical body of Christ Secondly that the actions of our communion be performed after that holy manner order as the new Testament of Christ teacheth as that prayer be conceaved not read out of a service book that prophecy come out of the hart not be read out of a book as Homilies be that baptisme be administred simply as Christ teacheth without Godfathers the crosse questions to infants that the L. Supper be vsed sitting not kneeling finaly that al the parts of worship be clensed according to the primitive institution not vsed with those polutions which the man of sinne hath cast vppon them breefly we must worship God with the meanes he hath apointed as the 2. cōmaundemēt teacheth after the māner he hath taught as the third commaundement informeth otherwise ther is idolatry committed in violating the second commaundement worshipping God by other meanes then he hath ordemed profanation of the name of God in violating the third commaundement when his ordinances are not so vsed as he hath prescribed So that to speak directly to your objection the bond of alleageance betwixt God vs is preserved kept inviolable by our position for we teach that men must pray heare the word receave the Sacraments but in a true visible communion of Sains as the Lord hath appointed not with al manner of persons as theeves mu●derers witches conjurers Papists Atheists Dronkards perjured persons c. as in your Church nor after your manner which is devised by man as Ieroboam devised in Israel but as the Lord hath in the new Testament taught vnto vs. And heer Mr. Bern. you take vppon you to reduce the places of Scripture which wee alledg for Seperation from your assemblies to certaine topical or categorical heads so give them answer according to your fashion as thus the places that forwarne Gods people to Seperate vnder the law are thus to be taken 1. From idols of false Gods as Israel from heathenish Gods 2. From Idols of the true God as Indah from Israels calves 4. From persons ceremonially polluted The places vrging Seperation vnder the Gospel are thus to be taken 1. From lewes not receaving Christ but rayling against him 2. From Gentils without Christ 3. From Antichrist vnder the shew of Christ persecuting Christians 4. From familiar companying with excommunicates or wicked men But say you what are al these places to vs who are not vnder any of these heads of reference I answer you Mr. Ber. that your Church is respectively vnder al these topical places which you mention excepting the first For 1. you make Idols of the true God in setting vp your own inventions making Christ a King Preist Prophet as you jmagine 2. you ought much more to Seperate from persons morally vncleane if the lewes ought to
covenant to walk in all Gods wayes standing in confusion with every abhominable liver subject to al the Antichristian orders officers set over them deprived of the powre of Christ for ther mutuall help edification ther is no true Church But the parish assemblie of worksap is such go it is no true Church The Major is manifest by these Scriptures compared together Math. 15.9 Apocal. 14 9-11 Ephes 1.1.4 2. Corinth 6 14-18 Math. 28.20 5.19 Apocal. 18.4 Math. 5.24 The Minor you dare not deny I assure my self For you have at least five or six hundreth communicants you account not past 30. or 40. of them faithful al of you submit to Antichrist his lawes courts dayly especially your self who cap knee runne ride after Antichrists officers courts feeing him with your money yea you plead for them write your peny pamphlets for them and yet once yon wrote against them and lost your vicaridg in your testimonie against them but bicause you could not buy and sell except you receaved the mark of the beast now you are content to yeeld to all yea to plead for all that you may t●affique with your marchandize Secondly for your self I hold you to be no true minister of Christ For your Church being false how can your ministerie be true For if the Fountaine be bitter the streame cā not be sweet your Church is false your ministerie which ariseth out of your Church as astreame from a Fountaine is false also Thirdly your worship which commeth from a false Church a false ministerie cannot be true but is false in that double respect but particularly I except these things against your worship 1. That it is qualified with your false ministerie 2. That it is offered vp in a false Church 3. That it is offered vp to God in the behalf of al your people which are many of thē I presume lewd persons al of them subjects of Antichrists Kingdome this I except against your conceaved prayers Against your service book I except thus besides the former 1. It is devised invented by the man of sinne 2. That it is imposed vppon you your people of necessity 3. That it is stinted limited the Spirit therby quenched 4. That it is read vppon a book 5. That it is corrupt in all the particular errors objected by the Puritans All these 8 particulars are contrary to these Scriptures compared together Roman 8.26 Math. 15.9 Apocal. 5.8 8.3 1. Thessal 5.19 Apocal. 9.20 16.13.14 Act. 16.18 19 13-16 Math. 24 23-26 1. Corinth 12.7 and 2.4 and 14.15.26 Ierem. 23.16 Deut. 13.3 Col. 3.16 Iam. 5.13 Ioh. 4.24 Mr. Ber. I would not have you passe by these things lightly but weigh them wel and let vs have your answer vnto them Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the tenth Section This Section consisteth of three maine branches which Mr. Bern. handleth from pag. 109. to the 150. of his book called the Sep. Schis Heer therfor I must endevor two things First to prove by vndeniable arguments drawne from the Scriptures that 1. the assēblies Ecclesiastical of England are false churches 2. the Ministers administring the holy things to these Ecclesiastical assemblies are false Ministers 3. the worship performed by the ministery people in the communion visible to be a false worship Secondly Mr. Bern. objections cavils must be refuted wher the reader must be advertised that in performing this latter part I shall not endevour to handle all things that Mr. Bernard propoundeth for ther is much truth by him propounded which I with him consent vnto only the points of difference shal be discusted the rest omitted In the first place therfor to deale as they say positively Kataskeuasticos I prove that al the Ecclesiastical assemblies of the Land as they stand established by law are false Churches that is to say not framed or constituted according to that presidēt which Christ hath left for the constituting of the Churches of the new Testament but are framed according to the invention of man even that man of sinne Antichrist the Archenemy of Christ The first Argument from Mat. 3.6 Iam. 2.18 Rom. 1.7 1. Cor. 1.2 Eph. 1.1 Mat. 28.19 From these places of Scripture compared together I collect an argument which may thus be framed The true Churches of Christ were established of men that did repent beleeve and shew their faith by their workes that were Saints faithful visiblie of these only The assemblies Ecclesiastical of England are not established only of such persons but of al sorts of persons even the most profane of the Land being compelled by law to submit therto Ergo the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not the true established churches of Christs institution Heer it may be considered that before the Churches of the new Testament were established the gospel was preached vppon the publishing of the gospel men were converted to the faith of Christ being made the Disciples of Christ so many of them whither Iewes or Gentils as gladly receaved the word were baptized added to the Church continued in the Apostles doctrine fellowship breaking of bread prayer this was the constitution walking of the Churches of the Apostolique institution therfor the Churches of England being raised by compulsion without procedent teaching conversion to the faith making of them Disciples of Christ being newly hardly drawne from the Egipsian darknes of most palpable Antichristianisme being many of them brutishly ignorant prosessed Papists vild Atheists witches conjurers theeves dronkards blasphemers al of them submitted to Antichristian Lords Lawes to Popish Sacrificing Preists for their ministers were not newly ordeyned to a stinted devised corrupted Popish service book or worship they in this their constitution walking cannot be accounted the true established Churches of the Apostolique institution but rather are yet ●emayning in the gulfe of Antichristianisme The second Argument from 2. Cor. 6.17 Revel 18.4 Act. 19.9 2.40.47 5.13 1. Timoth. 6.5 From these such like places of Scripture compared together truly expounded may be collected an argument framed after this manner True Churches of the Apostolique institution consisted of a people seperated from ●●eleevers whether Iewes or pagans or other The Ecclesiastical assemblies of England consist not of such a Seperated people but are compounded of a mixt people which for the most part are as bad as Iewes or Pagans viz persons notoriously wicked Ergo the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not the truly constituted Churches of the Apostolique institution Heer it wil nothing availe them to alledg as they are accustomed that they are neither Iewes nor Pagans For I have already proved that persons that submit to Antichrist his abhominations are in the Lords account equal to Pagans being called in the book of the Revelation Egiptians Sodomites Babylonians Gentils the Apostle willeth the Disciples to Seperate
themselves from brethren walking inordinately from persons excommunicate from converteous persons al other that either teach false doctrine or deny the powre of Godlines indeed though inword they professe the same 2. Tim. 3.5 Tit. 1.16 2. Thes 3.6 1. Cor. 5.11 The third Argument from Mat. 28.19.20 Act. 19.4.5 10.48 Mat. 18.20 The true Churches of the Apostolique institution were by baptisme gathered into the covenant or new Testament of Christ The Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not by their baptisme conunited into the New Testament of Christ but only into the constitution ministery worship government into that faith doctrine which is by law established in the Land Ergo the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not the true Churches of the Apostolique institution The ground of this argument is this that the Apostles baprized men in definitely into the whole new Testament of Christ al the ordinances thereof which was not stinted or limited at the pleasure of men vnder certaine canons injunctions articles or Ecclesiastical constitutions but was large even as large as the whole word of truth then inspired or written by the Apostles Prophets whereas the assemblies of England do neither them selves professe the true saith of Christ conteyned in the new Testament their faith being stinted limited vnder certaine devised articles convocatiō howse Synodical decrees or constitutions wherevnto al the ministers of the lād are bound to Subscribe which is the faith of the whole nation neither therfor do they baptise into the new Testament of Christ indefinitely simply but respectively definitely into that faith doctrine which is taught in their stinted book of articles wherto they subscribe which they beleeve teach wherof the body of that Church is wherin wherto they are by baptisme admitted receaved their faith therfor being devised stinted or false therfore their baptisme false therfor their covenant false therfor the forme of their Church false therfor the Church it self a false Church For how can that be a true Church which hath a false faith covenant forme The fourth argument from Mat. 18 18-20 Marc. 13.34 Ioh. 20.23 Mat. 16.19 These places other like Scriptures afoard an argument which may be framed after this manner The true Churches of the Apostolique institution had Christs powre ministerial in the body of the Church The Ecclesiastical assemblies of England have not Christs ministerial powre residing in the body of the Church Ergo the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not the true Churches of the primitive Apostolique institution The Major or first part of this Argument hath been largely proved in the seaventh Section and in the Paralleles Censures Observations therto aperteyning whither the Reader is to be referred where this particular is handled affirmatively and negatively The Minor or second part of the argument is evident in it self For the powre Ecclesiastical of the assemblies is resident in the hands of certaine Archb. Lordb. Archdeacons Chancellors Commissaries Officials and other Ecclesiastical Superintendents which have powre over thousands or hundreths of Parish Ecclesiastical assemblies and the Ministers in them which have powre Ecclesiastical one over another to suspend excommunicate and absolve them according to their canons decrees and decretals the Prelate in his diocese or jurisdiction having absolute powre to interdict one or more Parish Churches from having any prayers or Service they have no powre to come into the Parish Church or Temple to worship whiles the interdiction with the Bbs. seale cleaveth vppon the Church dore c. divers particulars of like nature which doe evidently declare that the parish assemblies have no powre at all of themselves but are meerly and wholly subject and in bondage to the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy and subordination of Clergie-men having Superintendency Superiority jurisdiction over them as their proper Spirituall LL. to Whome they dayly yeeld Spirituall homage and Subjection in their oaths off Canonicall obedience and actions of like Servitude The fifth Argument from 1. Timoth. 2.5 Heb. 9.15 Gal. 3.15.16 Iohn 17.9 These places of holy Scripture other of like nature may asoard an argument which may thus be framed The true Church of the primitive institution Apostolical had Christ Iesus for their mediator that is for their King Preist Prophet The assemblies Ecclesiastical of Englād have not Iesus Christ for their Mediator that is their King Preist Prophet Ergo the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not the true Churches of the primitive institution Apostolical The Minor or second part of the Argument may be confirmed by divers particulars as 1. Christ is not their King seing he onely ruleth by his owne Lawes and Officers and not by Antichristian Lords and Lawes such as are their Prelates and the Officers Courts and Canons 2. Christ is not their preist to ratifie vnto them by his blood that ordinance of Church Ministery VVorship and Government which they retaine among them which is not Christs Testament but the Testament of Antichrist the vtter enemy of Christ neither doth he prostitute the blood of his Testament to establish such a worship as their service book affoardeth or such a Ministery as their Clergie is from the ArchP to the ParishP or such a Government as their Ecclesiasticall Hircarchy or such a people for his body as are compounded of the Serpents seed a viperous brood of wicked men of all sorts 3. Christ is not their Prophett to teach them by the false Prophetts the instruments of Antichrist which dayly by their doctrine set vp Antichrists Officers Lawes oppugne the true New Testament of Christ in the true constitution Ministerie VVorship Government taught in his word Seing therfor Christ is not their King Preist Prophet how is he their Mediator Seing his mediation consisteth not in the execution dispensation of these their offices of King Preist Prophet The sixth Argument from Eph. 1.22.23 1. Cor. 12.27.12 Gal. 3.16 Eph. 5.23 From these places of Scripture compared together truly expounded may an argument be drawne framed thus The true Church of the Apostolique primitive institution hath Christ for the head and is a true body vnto the true head Christ truly vnited by the Spiritt of Christ The ecclesiastical assemblies of Englād are not a true body vnto Christ the true head truly vnited by the Spirit of Christ Ergo the ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not the true Churches of the primitive Apostolique institution The Minor or second part of the Argument may thus be confirmed in the three parts therof 1. Christ is not their true head seing they deny all his offices though they hold the doctryne of his nature and persons soundly as is plainly proved before in the fifth Argument 2. the assemblies as they stand in confusion with all the vngodly and vitious persons of the Land vnder the Antichristian Lords and Lawes Ecclesiasticall can not be a true body vnto Christ but
you see they vanish away as chaffe before the wind your matter is false not bad as appeareth evidently if you wil not be blind To proceed pag. 116-122 of your book you describe vnto vs the true forme of the Church inwardly to be the Spirit Faith Love outwardly the word profession the Sacramēt of the L. Supper these things say you are in your assemblies Ergo you conclude your Church hath a true forme I answer have not the Papists the word preached do not they make profession live as strictly as you do not they communicate in the L. Supper so by consequent have Love Faith the Spirit yet you say they are false Churches wanting the true forme even so are you although you do al that they doe much more for so you are much bettered in doctrine vse of the Sacrament but in profession practise I suppose you are inferior to many of them bicause rejecting Christ in his offices as hath been said especialy in his Kingdom it is impossible in that constitution communion you should aright vse the word make profession partake in the Sacrament or have the true visible Love Faith Spirit of Christ For a false matters vncapable of a true forme it is impossible that the body of Antichrist should have the true Spirit of Christ or the true covenant new Testament of Christ invested vppon them invisibly I hope wel am perswaded of millions among you but I speake of your visible politique body Ecclesiastical in that mixture of persons subordination of Ecclesiastical officers communiō Spiritual in the Holy things which by Law is established supported in your Ecclesiastical assemblies But pag. 121. you bid vs note this what viz that corruptions doe not hinder men from being a true Church before men no more then the corruptions of the hart do hinder a man from being an elect one invisiblie to the Lord I suppose bicause you bid vs in the margent of your book note this that you account it a matter worth noting and I surely think it a note worth nothing For although corruptions of matters accidentall make not a false Church yet corruptions essential of matters essential make a false church namely if the matter be false or the forme false yea I avouch that if a truly constituted Church detected of corruptions accidental convinced impenitent therin do so continue they become a false Church as hath been proved already before in the 8. Section for impenitency inward or outward maketh a false Christian Church inwardly or outwardly according to due proportion Furthermore pag. 122-128 you bring vs three true visible properties of your true Church as you say 1. continuance in the vse of the word Sacraments prayer 2. the holding forth of the truth against the enemyes thereof 3. mutual care for the welfare each of other al these you say you have among you so you say you must needes be a true Church I answer Seing your matter and forme is false your propertyes cannot be true For they arise necessarily from the vnion of the matter and forme or from the forme induced vppon the matter seing therefore the first is already proved the latter also must needs follow but let vs examine these things particularly I denie therfor in the first place that you have wel propounded the propertyes of the true Church For the first and principal essential property of a true Church is interest and title to al the Holy things which is extant in divers particulars as parcels of that general and whole property therfore a people declaring their faith and repentance by Seperating themselves from all vncleanenes by resigning themselves wholy to the Lord to become his people have God for their Father Christ for their King Preist and Prophett and so with Christ have title to all the meanes of Salvation and this title consisteth in the VVord Sacraments Censures Prayers Almes and al other parts of Spirituall visible communion whatsoever even as when the soule is induced vppon the matter viz when the breath of life is breathed into the nosthrils of dust of the Earth Genes 2. then ther is a man with a reasonable and Religions Soule So when a company of faithful people are invested with the New Testament of Christ then ther is in them title to al the holy things of God whatsoever This is evident by that which I have before manifested in the seaventh Section whither the Reader is to be referred wherfore Mr. Bern. to apply this vnto your Church I avouch that seing you are a false matter of a Church and have a false forme or covenāt induced vppon you as hath been shewed before therefore you have no true title to the meanes of Salvation but in vsurping the VVord Sacraments Censures Prayers Almes c. you therein incurre the reproof of the Prophet saying Psalm 50.16 what hast thou to doe to declare myne ordinances that thou shouldest make my covenant into thy mouth seing thou hatest to be reformed and hast cast my wordes behind thee And as the Prophet speaketh Esay 1. 11-18 your worship is iniquity I cannot beare it I am weary of it I hate it Therefore you may plead as long as you will the Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord yet I say vntill you intertayne Christs true Kingdome Preisthood Prophecy you are but vsurpers of all that visible communion in the Word Sacraments Prayers c. which is among you For it doth not follow that bicause you have the Word Sacraments Censures prayers c. therefore you are a true Church neither are the vsing of these true propertyes of a true Church But the title to them is the true propertie of a true Church For the Papists and all Antichristians and Heretiques vse the Word Sacraments Censures prayers but they are not therfor a true Church as I know you will confesse But heer you wish vs againe pag. 122. to observe well Lett vs heer what it is that you wish vs to observe well Namely the true VVord preached and the true Sacraments administred are the true propertyes to a true Church And that you have those things as you say well VVhat is the true word and what are the true Sacraments is not the true word the true doctryne of the word the true doctryne of the New Testament but you have rejected the whole doctryne of Christs Kingdome in a manner and have advanced all that false doctryne of the Antichristian hierarchy which is taught and commaunded by Law to be taught in your Church And you in your pulpits proclayme all them Heretiques or Schismatiques that teach and erect the Church Ministerie VVorship and Government according to the paterne of Christ his New Testament And so you have abrogated and disanulled the VVord of God by your traditions and Antichristian devises Againe VVhat are true Sacraments is the breaking of bread and
of the Church of Rome as one light is inflamed of another is of the same nature office therfor a false ministerie neither can it suffice to say that as it is most true I do willingly confesse the ministerie of England is much Refined Reformed from the drosse of popery For Refine Sugar as long as you wil it is Sugar stil in nature Refine light as oft as you please from brimstone light to a tallow light from tallow to Rosen from Rosen to wax from wax to Venice Turpentine from that to the most pretious subject that can be devised yet the light is of the same nature with the brimstone light So Refine the ministery by Succession of ordination as long as oft as you wil yet it is stil of the first nature til it be Refined to nothing that is til it be abolished extinguished a true ministerie can never be raised vp againe For who can bring a cleane thing out of that which is vncleane The third Argument The true ministerie hath a true vocation calling by election approbation ordination of that faithful people wher he is to administer The ministery of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England hath not the true vocatiō calling by election approbation ordination of a faithful people where thy doe administer Ergo the ministery of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is not the true ministery which Christ hath placed in his Church The Major or first part of this argument is evident by these Scriptures compared together Act. 6 2-6 and 14.23 1. Timoth. 3.10 and 4.14 also it is evident by that which was observed proved and answered concerning the seaventh Section of this Lettre The Minor or second part of the argument is evident in it self For it is apparant that the ministery of England is called by Successive ordination made by a Prelate his chaplin in his owne chappel with Subscription to the abhominations of Antichrist conteyned in the 3. articles with the oath of Canonical obedience to the Antichristian prelacy their Spiritual LL. jurisdiction courts canons by giving the holy Ghost apishly blasphemously abusing the words of Christ Ioh. 20.22.23 giving therby to the Preist ordeyned powre to remit retayne sinnes which Christ hath given only to the body of the Church not to the ministers by Successive ordination as Sacrificing powre was propagated by Genealogie in the old Testamēt from Preist to Preist then the preist thus ordeyned is inforced vppon a parish with the Patrons presentation the Lord B. his institution the Archdeacons induction his owne tolling of a bell taking hold of the Ring of the Church do●e contrary to the liking of al the bad men in the parish if he be a reformist contrary to al the Puritanes in the parish if he be a Formalist with the liking of al the goodfellowes in the parish if he be a dumbdrincking-swagge ring Preist if this be the true vocation of Christs true Ministers taught in his Testament then are the ministers of England true if not then is their Ministery false for this point I appeale to every good conscience vpright hart in England if any man be made minister any other way he is not made according to law his ministery is voyd by law a mullity in England I dispute only against the ministery established by law if ther be any other ministery besides or contrary to law which you Mr. Bern. will plead for let it be discribed confirmed by the rules of Christs Testament when we know it we wil then acknowledg it if the Lord Iesus in his new Testament wil give approbation vnto it otherwise this we hold for the present cōcerning the ministery of the assemblies Ecclesiastical of the land The next point to be handled is the answering of your objections reasons cavils which you bring against this doctryne which we teach for the ratefying of your ministery to be true I tel you Mr. Bern. you had need bring good ground or els you your Fellow ministers wil be found False Prophets Theeves and Robbers Math. 7.15 Iohn 10.1 That which you alledg for your selves is conteyned from the pag. 128-146 of your book the first point wherof is this that you say your ministery is true bicause you convert Soules I answer two things 1. that you convert no man to that true visible faith taught in the new Testament of Christ wherby mans conversion must be judged but you do pervert men from it dayly as evident experiēce teacheth For your books against the Seperation your preaching Sermons against the way of the Lord your conferences disputations perswasions for men to forsake the truth to continue stil with you in the communion of your Antichristian abhominations or having forsaken you to returne back againe into Egipt these the like courses of yours most frequent to the best Reformists of the land plainly manifest that you convert none at all to the faith of Christs new Testament but you pervert al that you possibly can from the same Now what you do in secreat betwixt the L. the soules of them that heare you he only that seeth in secreat knoweth in particular particularly certainly we know not nor enquire not See more of this point in that which is written before in the lettre to Mr. S. at the end of this book 2. let it be granted that you do convert mē even to the true visible faith of the new Testament I say this is no proor sufficient of the truth of your ministery that is to say that you are those true Pastors mentioned Eph. 4.11 Act. 20.28 1. Pet. 5 1-3.1 Tim. 3.2 Tit. 1 6-9 For these officers were givē to the true church which Church was established befor these officers were these officers were occupied about the feding that is teaching guiding of those particular Churches wherto they attended the Churches therfor consisting of Saints already converted to the faith of the new Testament how doth conversion argue a true ministerie of Pastor or Elder or Bb. which converteth not as his proper work but only feedeth that is edifieth buildeth vp men converted by teaching guiding them in the wayes of the Lord See more of this point also in the letter to Mr. S. at the latter end of this book in that which is written before which I desire may be considered but heer you object that the Apostle that is one sent proveth his calling by the seale of his ministerie viz. conversion see Rom. 4.14.15 1. Cor. 9.2 2. Cor. 3 1-3 13.3.5 that it cannot be proved that Iesus Chr. doth worke by false meanes it is our owne grant I answer that if your argument be framed into forme it is this He that converteth Sou●es is an Apostle as Paul 2. Cor. 3 1-2 The Ministers of England convert Soules
false Churches Ergo. The worship offered vnto the L. in those Ecclesiasticall assemblies is a false worship The ground of this argument is this that al the Ecclesiastical actions performed by a false Church are stayned with the false constitution of the church For God wil not have every communion of men worship him but he wil be worshipped by such a company of people as he hath described in his new Testament as in the old Testament no man or company of men might worship or be accepted visibly but such as were circumcized Gen. 17.14 Exod. 12.48 Deut. 23 1-4 Act. 21.28 2. King 17 25-28 Ioh. 4.22 So in the new Testament no man or communion of men visiblie can be accepted of the L. but such as are described in the new Testament viz. men Seperated from al the abhominations of Antichrist 2. Cor. 6.17 gathered into the name of Christ Iesus Mat. 18.20 being made Disciples have receaved baptisme whereby they are counited into Christ Mat. 28.19 If any communion of men otherwise constituted viz men not Seperated not gathered together not gathered into Christs name not made Disciples not baptized truely with the baptisme of the new Testament if any such company of men do worship God ther worship is not accepted of God but as the L. sent Lyons among the Samaritanes for persuming to worship him in the land of Israel they being an vncircumcized cōpany 2. King 17.24.25 as the L. punished the vagabond Iewes exorcists by the violence of an evil Spirit for naming the L. Iesus being an vnbeleeving vnbaptized company Act. 19 13-17 even so wil the L. be avenged on al them that joyning together to worship God have not Seperated themselves or calling vppon the name of the Lord do not depart frō iniquity 2. Cor. 6.17 2. Tim. 2.19 neither wil it serve to say that the worship is true bicause it is true conceaved prayer or true preaching or thanksgiving For true worship must be defined not only in the matter but cheefly in the forme For otherwise among the Antichristian papists Heretiques ther is true conceaved prayer preaching thāks giving els in the old Testament ther was true Sacrificing among the Babylonians whē they Sacrificed an oxe to the God of Israel Dan. 6.25.26 whereas it was manifested that no Sacrifice could be accepted that was offered with straunge fire Levit. 10.1.2 there for the Sacrifices of the Babylonians must needes be abhominable though the matter was true bicause the forme which cheefly consisted in the fire was false So though the matter of the worship of the new Testament be true viz conceaved prayer preaching praising God yet bicause it proceedeth not from the true fire which is alwayes living vppon the Altar Levit. 6 9-13 at Ierusalem that is in the true Church and Tem●●e of God bicause it is not inflamed by the true Spirit of Christ the true visible annoynting which is only in the true body the true Church Ephes 4.4 For there is one body and one Spirit Therefore the worship is not true worship visibly what it may be inuisibly I dispute not nor doe not censure at all but leave to the Lord and to every conscience The Second Argument The worship that is offered vp vnto the L. by a false Ministerie is a false worship cē not visibly be judged true or accepted The worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is offered vp by a false ministery as hath been proved already Ergo the worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is a false worship cannot visibly be judged true or accepted The ground of this Argument is the same with the former wherefore as in the old Testament the worship that was performed in Israel by the Preists of Ieroboams devising which were not of the Linage genealogie of Aaron was a false worship could not be accepted visibly or be judged as accepted judging by the rules of the word 1. King 12 31-33 and as the incēse which Azariah the King of Iudah would have offered could not be accepted or so judged bicause it was not offered by the true Preists the Sonnes of Aaron 2. Chron. 26 16-22 and the King was punished with Leprosy for his presumption So al the worship which is offered vp vnto the Lord by a false ministery is visibly to be judged abhominable bicause Christ only offered vp to his Father the worship of the worshippers which his new Testament hath described no other Rev. 8.3.4 cōpared with Revel 5 8-10 11.1 stil let it be remembred that I dispute not nor censure not the invisible things of the Lord. The third Argument Iewish that is literal stinted imposed book-worship is false worship The worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is Iewish that is literal stinted imposed boom-worship Ergo the worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is a false worship The ground of this argument is the Analogie and proportion which ther is betwixt the type and the truth the shadow and the substance the lettre and the Spirit the Old Testament with the ordinances therof the new Testament with the ordinances there of For seing the old Testament was a type of the new therfor the Church ministery worship government of the old Testament were types of the Church ministery worship government of the new Testament therfor the worship of the old testamēt being lyteral beginning in the lettre as was carnal circumcision Rom. 2.29 did type forth the worship of the new Testament to beginne in the Spirit Ioh. 4.23.24 For the Lettre was a type of the Spirit Col. 2.17 Seing therfor that Reading the Law was a typical ordinance of the old Testament therfor literal stinted manifesting the letter book-worship it followeth that it is now abolished by Christ the thing signified by the literal Reading is now to be retayned in the new testament which is vttering matter out of the hart called the manifestation of the Spirit the demonstration of the Spirit the ministring of the Spirit the like by which phrases of Speech the Holy Ghost would teach vs that seing we are fet at liberty from the bondage of the law which was a Schoolmr to leade to Christ we are not therfor againe to be intangled with the yoke of bondage in any thing no not in this matter of stinted literal book worship which is flat ludaism● but we being placed in the liberty of the Spirit are to vse our gifts in Gods worship as the spirit giveth vtterance as we see the Apostles practised vppon the day of Pentecost when the promise of the Spirit was fulfilled vppon them as we see the Church of Counth practised 1. Cor. 14.15.16.26 12 7-●1 He that desireth to know further of this particular of book-worship let him read the book lately published intituled The differences of the Churches of the Seperation wher this point is largely discussed which if it be the truth
body of Christ and Antichrist the members of the one body and of the other be made one Brasse Iron Silver Gold cannot possibly be mingled with clay or earth No more can the members of the true Church and the members of the false Church but in al the parts of Spirituall communion as prayer prophecy praysing God the Sacraments the persons that partake in them are commingled make one body 1. Cor. 5.9.11.2 Thes 3.14 1. Cor. 10.15.17 2. Cor. 6 14-18 Therfor whosoever shal mingle with false ministers or members of false Churches therin offer as shameful indignity to Christ as it is to take the members of Christ make them the members of an harlot 1. Cor. 6.15 And heer Mr. Bern. pag. 153-156 indevoureth to prove it 1. Lawfull to heare their Ministers 2. to be vnlawfull to heare vs 3. to be lawfull to pray with them that are Faithful among them For the first you say who ever heard that to heare the word should be a sinne yes I have heard it in these places of Scripture Deut. 13.3 Math. 7.15 1. Timoth. 6 3-5 2 3.5-6 againe you say you have converted by the word go you may bee heard I deny that ever you converted men visibly to the Faith of the New Testament I regard not what you doe invisibly for I cannot see it nor know it what say you to them that convert in popery shal they be heard or doe you think they convert none invisibly Visibly I am assured they convert not the like I say of you Further you plead that the Scripture commaundeth to heare the word pronounceth them blessed that heare it and maketh it a marke of Gods Child so to doe I grant it if it be preached in the Lords true ordinance els men are forbidden to heare it pronounced accursed that heare it and are marked for the Servants of Antichrist for so doeing Revellat 14 9-11 Moreover you say Christ forbiddeth not to heare the Scribes and Pharisees true for they were members of the true Church of the Old Testament and their communion Typical was not polluted by Typicall vncleannes for ought that is mentioned to my knowledg but you say Paull rejoyced that Christ was preached though of contention with a purpose to encrease his afflictions Well Paull rejoyced not that false Ministers in false Churches preached Christ or that Christians heard them so doe neyther doth Paull speak of visible sinnes but of invisible affections which he by the Spiritt discerned to bee in the Teachers even as Peter discerned Ananias and Sapphyras dissembling And what is this to your purpose who are both false Ministers in false Churches Antichristian convinced Heretiques except you can and doe make answer which when you have done then c. For the Second you say wee are not to bee heard bicause as Brownists wee speake our owne fantasies visions of our owne harts and are obstinate Wel Mr. Bern. I say no more for this point but this that every Godly mynded man give sentence whither you or wee have the truth the tyme wil come when secret things will come to light your selves doe approve al that wee professe in substance except the Seperation the Lord judg betwixt you vs you say againe that wee convert none but are our selves converted by you I say al that come from you to vs are by vs converted to the truth from your errors false wayes you doe not convert one man visibly to the faith Besides I demaund when you Seperated from Rome who converted you from Rome Finally wee condemne no man among you only wee declare what you are visibly in the account of the Scriptures by reason of your false Church standing they that see the truth to be the truth yeeld not to it woe be vnto them take heed you be not of them who have seen it to be the truth have confessed it so to be yet write your bookes against it if it be so woe be vnto you from the Lord I say from the Lord except you repent you shal grow worse and worse as for them that sinne through ignorance their is a Sacrifice for their sinnes Lett willfull scorners looke to them selves For the third you say that if wee hold you the children of God wee may pray with you For so Christ hath taught vs to say our Father Well I deny not but those among you that apertayne to the Lords Election have God for their Father but I say they are in visible vnknowne to vs certainly particularly therefore wee cannot have visible communion with them For whatsoever is not of faith is sinne I may have visible communion with one that is a reprobate in the Lords account as Peter had with Iudas I may not have visible communion with one that is Elect in the Lords invisible Electiō bicause he is not visibly faithful to me as namely with thousands of you in the assemblies bicause I cannot possibly know them certainly particularly The twelfth Section The next particular of yours is the thirteenth in nomber viz. 13. That a company truly fearing God if any open wicked joyne with them are not capable to choose them a minister over them which is a truth though you hold it error I manifest it in this manner First you cannot approve to vs certainly that you truly feare God Secondly you cannot convince that they who suffer wicked men in communiō with them truly doe feare God bicause they live in confusion with the wicked from whome they ought to be Seperated that therfor in that confusion estate they have no title to choose them a minister Thirdly let it be graunted for disputation sake that some fearing God doe consent with open wicked in chosing a minister I say that Minister so chosen by the good bad is no true Minister For that mixt people are not the true Church Seing the holy Ghost testifyeth 2. Cor. 6.17 that God wil receave only those that are seperated to be his people that seing those supposed faithful have the Spirit of God the open wicked have the Spirit of Satan they cannot possible combine together except you wil say that the holy Spiritt and sathan can combine seing then those contrary persons cannot conjoyne how can they in common choose them a minister or if they doe how is he a true Minister seing they that choose him are not a true Church I pray you Mr. Ber. in your answer dissolve vs this knot if you can that we way receave instruction Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the twelfth Section Mr. Ber. Sep. Schisme pag. 151. Saith that this is one of our errors to hold That our congregations as they stand are all every of them vncapable before God to chuse thē Ministers though they desire the meanes of Salvation In the beginning of this Section I say that a company truly fearing God if any open wicked joyne with
for their God so are the Church of the new Testament Mr. Bern. this point is cleerer then can be denyed al the world can never be able to overthrow it the vnderstanding feeling whereof I do ●artily wish vnto your soule to al the vpright harted of the Land The Fifth Argument They that are the true matter of the Church of the new Testament shall be invested with the true forme of the new Testament they that have true matter forme have the true property which ariseth from the vnion of matter forme that is Christs ministerial powre to assume al the meanes of their edification to Salvation so by consequent the ministery Two or thre Faithful people are the true matter of the true Church of the new Testament therfor have the true forme or covenant of the new Testament induced vppon them so being a Church subsisting of true matter forme have the true property arising from the vnion of the matter forme viz the powre of our L. Iesus Christ to assume vse al the meanes of their edification to salvation so by consequent have powre to assume the ministery Ergo two or thre Faithful people being a true Church may create that is Elect approve ordeyne their owne officers And this may suffice for the proof of this point The Fourtenth Section And so I passe to another point which is you Fourtenth viz. 14. That baptisme is not administred among vs simply into the Faith of Christ but into the faith of the Bbs. or the Church of England This point you say is also erroneous let vs consider of it I pray you seriously I would know into what Faith they are baptized if not into the Faith of the church of England they are members of the Church of England they professe the Faith of the Church of England are they not then baptized into that Faith of the Church wherof they stand as members of which Faith they make profession are they baptized into one Faith and do they professe another Faith or do you think that the Faith of Christ the Faith of the Church of Engeland are not one me thinkes Mr. Bern. you lay a fowle imputation vppon your Church in holding that the Faith of the Church of England is not the faith of Christ that baptisme is not administred into the Faith of the Church of England respectively but into the faith of Christ simply I dare say your Lords the Prelates wil cō you litle thank for this geare but let vs consider of your Faiths The Prelates Church of England have one Faith wherto they Subscribe The Puritanes their Faction have an other Faith for they wil not Subscribe to the Prelates Faith Christ wee of the Seperation have a third Faith for we wil Subscribe neither to the Bbs. Faith nor the Puritanes Faith but to the Faith of Christ indefinitely comprehended in the Holy Scriptures Heer now are thre Faiths thre Churches so thre baptismes But the time Faith is one the true Church is one the true baptisme one Therfor you we have not both the true Faith Church baptisme but we approve vnto you our Faith church baptisme to be true therfor your Faith Church baptisme is false so certainly it is For whosoever have stinted their covenant limited their repentance abridged their Faith have a false Faith Covenant Repentance but you in your assemblies have your Covenant Faith repentance at the wil of the Prelates you dare not covenant and practise al that you know but walk in violating of the whole Kingdom of Christ are mingled among al the refuse of the Land in your Church worship communion of holy things therfor your Repentance Faith Covenant is false your church false your Ministerie false your worship false your baptisme false the Lords Supper false al false heer give me leave to advertise you to look to your selves that know the wil of God doe not nor dare not practise as you know I wish you consider your own doctryne that whosoever liveth in any open knowne sinne hath no grace but you live in open known sinnes For you know you should reforme many things which you doe not nor cannot seing you want the Censures how then can you perswade vs that your repentance is true that your faith is true you plead you have a true ministery bicause you conuert soules you convert soules a pace do you not when you convert them to your falfe repentance false Faith false Church false Ministery false VVorship false Government is this the conversion wherby you would prove your ministery not only to live in your false repentance covenant Faith Church vnder your false Ministery Government but to reject oppose the truth that with such slaunderous lying courses as we heare of you you must affoard vs better evidences of your Faith repentance of your true ministerie or els we hold them al false Consider what I say Mr. Bern. the Lord give you vnderstanding in al things Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the Fourteenth Section Against this Section of my Lettre Mr. Ber. taketh exception in two particulars pa. 252. of the Sep. Schisme accounting them both errors 1. that baptisme is not administred into the Faith of Christ simply but into the Faith of Bbs. or Church of England so say I 2. That our Faith and repentance is a false Fayth and a false repentance so say I of their visible Fayth not speaking of things secreat Mr. Ainsw confutat of Mr. Bern. pag. 159. accounteth both those imputations of Mr. Bern. vncharitable collections and caluminations Seing Mr. Ainsw doth renounce them I wil therefore vndertake the defence of them vnto whom they aperteyne and heer I wish the Reader to observe whither it lay not vppon mee justly to answer Mr. Be●n whose whole book in the essential parts of it was directed against this lettre of myne as may evidently be perceaved as in the whole tenor of it so especially in these two particulars against which he excepteth in this Section Now for the first let vs consider the intendment of the baptizer How the Ministers of the Church of England intend their baptisme How the law of the Land intendeth baptisme how the service-Service-book intendeth directeth baptisme how the parents Susceptors or Suretyes do demaund baptisme consent to baptisme administred vppon the conceaving of these particulars the baptisme must be censured now if al these intend definitely that Faith which is by law established in the Land that the partie is baptized into that Faith which they intend it wil follow necessarily that baptisme is administred not simply indefinitely into the Faith of Christ but particularly definitely into that Faith which the Bbs. the Church of England do teach professe For which consideration an argument may be framed thus Into that
faith are the members of the Church of England baptized which the Law establisheth which the Prelates Ministers teach which the Church of England professeth which the minister baptising intendeth wherto the parents witnesses or Susceptors consent which the service-Service-book expresly mentioneth But the law doth not establish the Prelates ministers do not teach the Church of England doth not professe the baptizer doth not intend the parents Susceptors doe not consent to the Servicebook doth not mention the Faith of Christ simply but the Faith of Bbs. or Church of England Ergo The members of the Church of England are not baptized into the Faith of Christ simply but into the Fayth of the Bbs. or Church of England which is the false Fayth of the baptizer of the Suertyes or parents and so the Faith of the baptisme For the second point let vs consider the faith repentance of the Church of Englād I meane of the faith that is visibly professed expressed in the fruites of repētance amōg them therby we shal know the tree The faith of that Church is not a true faith which teach professe a false mediator the repentance of that Church is not a true repentance which practise according to that false doctryne But the assemblies Ecclesiastical of England with the teachers professors of them teach and professe a false Mediator For they teach that Christ is a Mediator of all that false Church Ministery VVorship and Government established in the Land Sacrificing and making intercession for them in the dayly practise al those abhominations Ruling and Governing them by all the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy and by the courts canons Ecclesiastical which are the inventions of the man of sinne Teaching Prophesying vnto them by those Antichristian Prelates Preists Deacons which raigne in the Land so practising according to this false Faith practise a false repentance Ergo the Faith of the Church of England of the teachers professors therof the repentance of them is not true but false But it wil be objected against both these assertions that although one thing be intended in baptisme yet the Lord may admit of accept another though they professe preach falsely yet the Lord he can doth no doubt work mervaylously besides al that we can think or speak Truth I yeeld it most willingly blessed be the Lord for his infinite vnspeakeable mercy therein but we dispute not what God can do of his powre or wil do of his mercy things vnknowne vnto vs but we speake of things revealed and manifested vnto vs according whervnto we must walk judg of matters according to that which we see according as the word judgeth according as the Church members of the Church of England teach professe practise visibly which is seen discerned of vs we are to passe our censure but we judg no man before the tyme we doe not clyme vp into Gods judgment seate our Faith is visible our repentance is visible our charity visible our Spirit visible our baptisme visible our preaching visible our covenant visible our Church visible our judgment visible things that are revealed aperteyne to vs our Children that say we is false in the assemblies Ecclesiastical Secreat things aperteyne to the Lord these we leave to the Lord we medle not with them this I desire may once for al be remembred pondered so I end this matter The Fiftenth Section The next point is your Fourth wherin you do vs open injury viz. 4. In holding that Princes have no more to do in ecclesiastical causes then one of you in a particular congregation these are your wordes Mr. Ber. I challeng you in this particular imputation to be either a malicious or an ignorant slaunderer For eyther you know not what we teach concerning Princes Authorityes so slaunder vs ignorantly or if you know our judgmēt in that matter you slaunder vs malitiously Remember that the Prophet in the Psalmes complayneth that his enemyes digd pits for him laid snares grinnes nets in his way to catch him ynawares to bring evil vppon him are you now become such an enemy vnto vs doe you think by calling into question the Supremacy of Princes imputing therin treason to vs to catch vs in a snare cause vs to fal into the pit if this be your course thus to hunt the Soules of men look vnto your self therin you manifest litle grace to me but let vs heer the cause you impute to vs. you say we hold that princes have no more to do in ecclesiastical causes then one of vs in a particular congregaciō I say for myne owne part I think I may say it for al the brethren of our Church that herin you do shamefully belie vs I wil therfor manifest what we hold teach concerning Princes Supremacy 1. First wee teach hold according to the Scriptures that Princes civil Estates are the Lords blessed ordinance Rom. 13.2 2. Secondly that every Soule ought to be subject vnto the civil Magistrates of what estate condition soever they be Rom. 13.1 Tit. 3.1 1. Pet. 2.13 3. Thirdly that we must absolutely submit vnto the civil Magistrate eyther to do his lawful commaundements or to suffer his vnlawful punishments by consequence from the former places 4. Fourthly that it is vnlawful for any subject to make insurrection or rebellion against the civil Magistrates by consequence from the former places 5. Fifthly that it is the Magistrates office to be the keeper of both the tables of the cōmaundemēts both to abolish Idolatry al false wayes also to forbid punish al vnrighteousnes as also to commaund cause al men within there Dominions to walk in the wayes of God being fitted prepared therevnto and that by the examples of David Iosaphat Hezechiah Iosiah Nehemiah Roman 13.4.5 Psalm 101. toto and 132. 2-5 6. That a Prince hath powre in a particular visible Church to punish any wickednes any one committeth and to cause that visible Church to assume practise any truth Gods word teacheth ex praecedentibus now this is more authority then any one particular member hath 7. VVee teach notwithstanding that Princes if they wil be saved must bee members of a true visible Church must walk ther in the obedience of Gods Commaundements ordinances submitting to the censures for the reformation salvation of his soule as well as to the preaching to the VVord administration of the Seales of the covenant prayers c. bicause God hath appointed but one way to save the Soules of Princes and Subjects 8. If civil Magistrates be by censures cast out of the true visible Church yet they are stil to be accounted Gods ordinance stil to bee obeyed in the L. stil to be submitted to in regard of their punishment no rebellion or insurrection to be made against them by any of the Church whatsoever but prayer
Kingdome of Antichrist by your writings against the truth by your vntruth vttered of mee others You have now two writings of myne in your hands this theother you know of wherein our cause is discovered which I have especially directed to you for your good I beeseech yo● in the name of the L. look to your self search into this truth I wonder you should not see it it is clearer to mee then noone day or if you see it as it seemeth you once did by your confession then I wonder much more that you who seem so holye as you doe should dare to continue in your evil way if you have any thing to say in answer to this theother writing let vs heer from you take heed of wresting misconstruing my writings you shal gaine nothing by it I assure you at my handes set your conscience vppon the wrack before the Lord examine your hart what hindereth you from the truth know this that if any sinister respect hinder you you therein shal find litle peace to your conscience declare lesse thankfulnes to God know it would bee the greatest honour ever befel you to be one of the Lords witnesses it wil be the greatest disgrace that can possible light vpp on you to be found one of those that fight against the lamb Iesus Christ in resisting his truth the witnesses thereof assure your self Gods truth wil prevaile in despight of al the gainsayers remember that our cause is the same in a manner with the Puritane cause onely they dare not practise as wee doe remember that the Lord hath had those that have spilt ther blood in this testimonie ther blood testimony hath stirred vs vp to this our witnesse consider that this truth prevayleth daily shal prevayle it was opposed in the Queenes dayes it hath prevayled standeth in despight of al the gainsayers consider that though the Prelates you with your fellow Preists oppose against it yet it hath growne to this head as you see what are you Mr. Bern. to oppose against it you are a simple man in comparison of them that have delt against it have taken the foyle All the Oxford Doctors Mr. Hildershā Mr. Iacob Mr. Bredwel Mr. Giffard could not with ther writings overthrow this truth doe you think that you can batter it with your mediocrity nay you are to yong to deale against this cause al your rage wrath choller revendge shal never bee able to daunt vs or to diminish the credit of Gods truth you had need more then any mā I know in your way to walk in this way with vs For you have so many vagaries to froe so many rebellious courses so many distempered affections speeches that so long as you are not vnder the L. yoke vnhampered by the L. ordinances the censures of the Church you shall find litle rest to your Soule wee for our part care not for your help for our gaine wil be litle by you if any thing at all but wee respect your own good God hath no need of you you see he can work his work without you Let these things work vppon you take heed you bee not deceaved by the applause of the multitude nor by the Prelates fayre wordes nor by his angels Remember that if you receave not the love of the truth God may deliver you over justly to beleeve lies to your owne overthrow think not much that I write thus vnto you I doe it out of compassion and love to you vnto whome I wish so well David was content to bee smitten by the righteous and flatterie I think overthroweth you your Parasites have robbed you of your wisdome beleeve mee I speak the truth So requiring your answer to both my writings I bid you farewell Heer endeth the letter which was written to Mr. B. divided into 19. Sections with the Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to every particular Section therof Thus have I Mr. Bern. passed through the substantial part of your book which con●erneth the cause it self which although you have placed in the last place namely from gag 78. forward yet I thought meet to make answer to it in the first place bicause it is the most material part of your book and heerin you have vsed a notable peece of Sophistical Rhetorick first to draw our persons into dislike with your readers and so to prejudicate forstal ther myndes against our cause For so it falleth out customably that the person being dislliked the cause cannot bee entertayned wherfor after you had collected al your superficial stuffe al the accidental conjectures which you heape vp in your book from pag. 21. to 78. and had cast them in the Readers way whereat he might stumble thē you come from pag. 78. to the end to the matter varnish that also as wel as you can therby thinking vtterly to pervert your Reader from the truth well Mr. Bern. I have through the mercy of God answered al the substantial points of your book not omitting one to my knowledg that is worth answer but especially I have labored to manifest the mayne cause of our Seperation the first fondacion rock of truth which is that Christs ministerial powre is given to two or thre Faithful ones who are the true seed of Abraham to whome the promises the covenant of the New Testament Christ al the holy things are given For this is the groundwork Foundacion of the L. truth this I beseech al the land al the faithful of the land especialy to look vnto if they yeeld this ground they must needes Seperate if they deny this ground then ther is no footing for them but in Succession the Popes chayre So that heer is the controversy heer is the state of the Question whither the holy things with Christ be given originally to the body of the Church to the Faithful or whither the holy things with Christ bee given to the Ministery originally that the Church hath al from the ministery that is the point of succession I beseech you Mr. Bern. all the honest harted people of the Land to waygh determine this point in their owne harts then your book wil be found to be but froth now having answered your mayne matter I come to answer your probabilities against the Sep. schisme From the pag. 21-44 you propound 7. Likelihoods that the way of the Seperation is not the truth which probabilities may be framed into these formes of reasoning The first Likelyhood against the Sep. is thus framed Novelty is not the truth The Seperation is Novelty go not the truth For answer to this argument I ask whither Luthers Calvins opinions were false bicause they were new For popery had the prescription of a thousand yeers against Calvin but Calvin hath not had the prescription of an hundreth yeeres against the Seperation nay I suppose not above fifty yeeres
may not the Prelates reason against the Puritane thus or the papists against the Protestants wherfor although I wil not scoffe at this argument yet I pity your simplicity in it but I alter your argument and frame another after this manner against you Antiquity is the truth The Seperation is true antiquity go the truth the reason of this Argument is for that we approve the Doctryne and practise of seperation from the beginning out of the writings of the Holy Apostles and on the contrary I reason thus against your Protestancy Novelty is not the truth The ministery worship government of the protestant churches of England are Novelty go Not the truth that al these things are novelty I prove bicause they are not of the primitive Apostolique institution as I have sufficiently proved in the former Treatise Thus much for your first Likelyhood The second Likelyhood against the Sep. is thus framed They that in some things agree with auncient Heretiques Schismatiques are Heretiques Schismatiques their opinions heresy Schisme The Sep in some things agre with auncient Heretiques Schismatiques Ergo they are Heretiq Schismatiq their opinions heresy Schisme I answer by this arg I can prove you Mr. Bern. to bee an Heretique and Schismatique except you will renounce the Deity and Trinity the fall of Adam redemption by Christ c. For I can prove that Heretiques yea most vild Heretiques have held these opinions with you if my argument be not good against you neither is yours good against vs besides you should counting vs to agree with auncient Heretiques Schismatiques have proved two things 1. that they were indeed in truth Heretiques and Schismatiques for holding the points that wee hold 2. you should have set downe the particulars wherin we agree with them but you have done neither of them therefore fayle in your proof and so let this Likelyhood also passe as a matter not worth taking vp The third Likelyhood against the Sep. is framed thus That is not the truth the Teachers professors wherof somtyme do give straung expositions therby do wrest the Scriptures The Teachers professors of the Seperation doe straungely expound wrest the Scriptures somtyme Ergo the Seperation is not the truth I answer First do you expound no Scripture straungely to the Papists do not they instantly defend against you al that you shamefully wrest those two places of Scripture Mat. 16.18 vppon this rock wil I wil build my church 1. Cor. 11.24 this is my body yea a hundreth more besides if therfor the argument be good for you against vs it is good for the Papists against you but the argument is naught For may not a company of men have the truth somtyme through ignorance misinterpret so pervert the Scripture it may be so vndoubtedly except you wil say that men professing the truth have in them as the Pope saith he hath in Scrinio pectoris the infa●ibility of expounding Scriptures as the Apostles Prophets had in writing Scripture except you wil say that men have the perfect ful knowledg of the Scripture but secondly what are the Scriptures wee do straungely expound wrest I require you Mr. Bern before the Lord to produce the places of Scripture that I do wrest pervert eyther I wil acknowledg my sinne or els justifie them to be truly expounded in the meane tyme the reader may se that this is but simple stuffe the Papists can take it vp every whit aga●nst you The 4. Likelyhood against the Sep. is framed thus They that are not approved by the Reformed Churches have not the truth The Sep. is not approved by the Reformed Churches Ergo The Seperation is not the truth I answer That seing the Seperation have published the confession of their Faith wher in they have by name desired the approbation of the vniversities of the Reformed Churches either by writing or silence the said Christian vniversities have not disalowed that their confession though long since published their silence is therfor in al equity to be accounted their consent Mr. Iunius his silence what is it els to be esteemed but consent but suppose that al the men vppon earth should disalow the Seperation if the Reformed Churches of Corinth Rome Thessalonica Galatia the scaven Churches of Assa the Mother Church of Ierusalem planted by Christ Iohn Baptist the Apostles all of them being of one the same primitive Apostolique constitutiō if I say the Seperation have the allowance approbation of these Apostolique Churches it shal be sufficient for them therein they shal rest contented by my consent In the meane season you for get that your Church is vtterly disalowed by the reformed Churches in regard of your prelacy which is one of the cheef abhominations among you in many other particular which I shal not need to relate but remember for a conclusion for this point The stone which the builders refused is become the cheef corner stone I appeale vnto your consciences if you do not think the Churches of the Seperation better then your owne then tel me how you can stay in a worse knowing a better The 5. Likelyhood against Sep may be framed thus Whatsoever Mr. Whittakers Mr. Perkins Mr. Bredwel Mr. Willat Mr. Allison Mr. Cartwright Mr. Iames Mr. Rogers Mr. H. Smyth saith of the Seperation is true These forsaid learned men say the Sep. is not the truth Ergo The Seperation is not the truth I make another argument like vnto this which shal be your answer VVhatsoever Herod Pontius Palate Annas Cayphas the learned Scribes Pharisees Tertullus the Oratour and all the Lerned men of the Church of the Iewes say is true that is true These persons al of them with one consent say that Christian Religion is Heresy and schisme as you may see in the History of the Gospel acts Ergo Christan Religion is Heresy schisme If this argument be faulty then is yours faulty much more but I wil reason thus for the Seperation against you whatsoever Christ the Apostles the Holy Scripture 〈◊〉 the Primitive Apostolique Churches collected of the Iewes Gentils do allow or disalow is to be allowed or disallowed The seperation is allowed the Church ministery worship Governmēt of the English assemblies is disallowed by these forsaid persons Ergo The sep is to be allowed you are to be disalowed The minor of this argument is proved in this book which I present to every honest hart of the Land to be measured by the golden reed But mee thinks Mr. Bern. should blush at his Logick The 6. Likelyhood against Seperation may be framed thus They have not the truth that are judged of the Lord. The seperation is judged of the Lord. Ergo The Seperation hath not the truth againe They have the truth that are prospered by God in their course The English
Protestants are prospered in their course Ergo The English Protestants have the truth I answer That this is false doctrine For the wiseman saith Eccles 9 1-3 That prosperity or adversity are no signes of love or hatred Ierem. 12.1 2. that the wicked are in prosperity and 1. Pet. 4.17 judgment beginneth at Gods howse This your reason therfor is most absurd false is fit to breed Atheisme overthrow the whole truth of the Scriptures but let vs see what judgments are vppon the Seperation you frame them thus If Mr. Bolton that Apostated did hang himself if Mr. Harison Mr. Browne did differ one fel back if Mr. Barrow Mr. Greenwood for calling you serpents generations of Wipers were martyred by the persecuting Prelates if Mr. Iohnson pronounced excommunication against his brother if the Church excommunicated the Father if Mr. Burnet died of the Plague if Mr. Smyth was delivered twise from the Pursivant was sick allmost to death doubted of the Seperation for 9. monethes space then the Seperation is not the truth But al these things befel Mr. Bolton Mr. Browne Mr. Harison Mr. Iohnsons Mr. Burnet Mr. Smyth Ergo The seperation is not the truth I answer The Churches of England have had thousand thousands of such accidents as these are befalling their Officers and Leaders and yet as it were folly in vs to alledg them against you as the Papists doe so it is no wisdom but weaknes of judgment in you to mention them in your book against vs VVhat is it good reasoning to say Iudas hanged himself Christ was Crucified for blasphemy Demas embraced the world Nicholas the Deacon proved an Heretique Paull and Barnabas fel out Paull chardged Peter and Barnabas with dissembling Peter denyed Christ All the Apostles were put to death for heresy Ergo the Christian Religion is 〈◊〉 bee false yours false yet this is your goodly reason if this bee a good argument wher is your Faith 〈◊〉 But in this Likelyhood you have a sting at me in particular Mr. Ber. charging me with divers vntruths which I wil manifest 1. That I doubred 9 months I acknowledg but that ever I did acknowledg the seperation for truth seperated from the English assemblies then returned againe vnto them which you say I do vtterly deny I appeale to the towne of Ganesbrugh those ther that knew my footesteps in this matter therfor herein I indite you as a publique slaunderer 2. VVhereas you say I became satisfied at Coventree after conference had with certayne Ministers and herevppon kneeled downe and praised God I answer I did not conferre with them about the seperation as you they know wel inough in your consciences but about withdrawing from true Churches Ministers and VVorship corrupted VVherein I receaved no satisfaction but rather thought I had given instruction to them and for kneeling downe to praise God I confesse I did being requested to performe the duty at night after the conference by the Ministers but that I praised God for resolution of my doubts I deny to death and you therein are also a slaunderer I praised God for the quiet peaceable conference such like matters desired pardon of the L. for ignorances errors weaknes of judgment any disordered caryage if the ministers that heard my prayers praises of God did misconstiue my meaning let them look vnto it 3. VVhereas you impute an absurdity to mee as yet vnanswered viz that I should affirme the spit whereon the passeove was rosted was the Altar I say seing the passeover was a sacrifice Marc. 14.12 that every sacrifice hath an altar either the spit was the altar or els it had no altar Now ●el me which is the Likeliest of the two if this be a reasonable speech that the wooden crosse was the Altar whereon Christ was sacrified why may not by a good reason the spit be the altar of the passeover the sacrifice was not slayne vppon the altar but it was burnt vppon the altar so that was not the altar wherevppon the passeover was killed but wherevppon it was burnt or rosted Mr. Bern. I doe confidently affirme against you that the spit was as much the altar to the passeover as the crosse was an altar to Christ let me heare what you in your best Logick can say against it The 7. Likelyhood against the Sep. is framed thus The truth increaseth in short space into a multitude The Seperation doth not increase but is kept vnder Ergo the Seperation is not the truth I answer you Mr. Bern. that this is but a popish argument Christ saith his Flock is but a litle Flock but how very many yeeres hath the cause of the Seperation had il successe Forsooth 20. or 30. yeeres alas as Mr. Be. what increase hath the Prelacy gotten in the world this hundreth veeres they say that is the truth against the Presbytery what increase hath puritanisme gotten this 20. or 30. yeeres in England yet they say that is the truth against the Prelacy is not the cause of the Reformists almost dead and buryed but know Mr. Bern. that the cause of the Seperation being the same in the mayne groundes and essentiall parts with the Reformed Churches it hath had infinite increase ever since Luthers tyme and whereas you object heer that wee leave our country without leave I answer that you know the Law of the Land doth banish vs all and if Abraham did lawfully passe from one country to another people I●se no reason that wee may not doe so though Israel could not get from Egipt nor Iudah from Babylon being deteyned by violence in captivity yet the Lord in working ther deliverance declareth that he will have his people depart wher they may freely professe it without let or disturbance besides you doe pervert the Prophet Ezechiell his speeeh Cap. 3.6 For was not Ionas sent to Nineveh were not the Iewes caryed into captivity were not the Apostle sent to al Nations did al the Corinths speak with straunge Tonges is it vnlawful to send men to convert the Pagans but the meaning of Ezechiell is that though the Iewes vnderstand his preaching yet they wil not beleeve the straungers viz them of Tyrus Sidon as Christ saith would sooner beleeve him then the Iewes for a Prophet is not without honor save in his owne country so the place is misconstrued by you Finally whereas you object that the L. leaveth a curse behind vs in the Land I say that is an argument that it is the truth we professe which bicause it is not intertained doth therfor prove the savour of death vnto death and hardeneth the hart of that people where it hath been offered and is refused thus much breefly of your froth In the next place you bring vs reasons of more force then bare probabilityes wherby you confesse that your 7. Likelyhoods are of litle force which I desire
beast that is are by the Authority of the Romane Empyre established Revel 16.15 out of the mouth of the false Prophet that is are by Authority of the Pope of Rome established out of the mouth of the Dragon that is are by the Authority of Sathan himself established For ther is not a minister in England Elected by that faithful people wher he administreth but is chosen by a profane mixt people if he be chosen law doth not allow such election he is approved ordeyned by Antichrist himself comming but of the mouth of the false Prophets the Prelates of the Land 2. Againe from that ministerie which is not of the Apostolique institution but of mans invention must all the good Christians make Seperation Deut. 13.3 Math. 7.15 ● Timoth. 3.5 Revel 14.9.2 Corinth 11 13-15 Rever 2.2 The Ministerie of England is not of the Apostolique institution but of mans invention Therefore all good Christians must make Seperation from the Ministerie of England The Major is proved thus as in the old Testament Moses commaundeth not to harkē to false Prophets Ezechiah endevoreth to draw the people from Ieroboams Preist So in the new Testament Christ willeth to take heed of false Prophets Paull willeth to turne away from such a woe is threatned by Iohn to al that receave the beasts mark from his Ministers Thirdly you worship is not of the Apostolique primitive institution but is invented by man so is Antichristian as may be proved thus Act. 2.4.11.42 10.46 19.6 Rom. 8.26 1. Cor. 12.7 14.15.26 1. The true worship of the Apostolique institution proceeded meerly from the Spirit having no outward help of devised formes of prayers exhortations psalmes Ceremonies The worship of the English assemblies proceedeth out of the Servicebook in devised formes of prayers exhortations psalmes other Ceremonies Therfor the wors his of the English assemblies is not the true worship of the Apostol●que institution but is invented by man The major is manifest by the places alledged For vppon the day of Pentecost the Apostles had the holy Ghost given them in the shape of fiery cloven tonges thervppon they spake as the holy Ghost gave them vtterance manifesting the Spirit to the hearets so was it with the Gentils afterward when the holy Ghost came vppon them since that tyme all the churches of the Apostolique institutiō worshipped afther the same manner for al Churches worshipped after one manner 1. Cor. 16.1 14.36.37 11.2 16. wher note that if devised formes of prayers psalmes exhortations were Gods ordināces the Apostles would have delivered them to the Churches they should have receaved vppon the day of Pentecost fiery bookes as wel as fiery tongs The minor is evident needeth no proof Ergo. 2. Againe From that worship which is invented by man not of the Apostolique institution mustal the good Christians Seperate Col. 2 20-23 Mat. 15.9 Levit. 10.1.2 compared with Act. 2.3 The worship of the English assemblies is invented by man not of the Apostolique institution Therfor from the worship of the English assemblies ought al good Christians to Seperate The major is proved thus For seing the worship of the assēblies is wil worship vaine-worship devised by man not kindled with the true living fire which came downe from heaven vppon the primitive Church but with such a straunge fire as Nadab and Abihu offered withal therfor it is idolatry so to be Seperated from 4. Fourthly the Government of the assemblies is Antichristian by the confessiō of thēselves therin can no good Christian joyne except it be lawful for a good Christian which is or ought to be a subject of Christs Kingdom which is visible Church to submit to the vtter enemie of Chr. to his authority which what is it els but to bee a traytor against the L. Iesus yet for further proof I reason thus from these places Act. 14.23 20.28 Phillip 1.1 1. Pet. 5 1.-4 1. The Government of the primitive Apostolique institution was by a Colledge of pastors or presbytery The Government of the English assemblies is by an Antichristian prelate his Officers Therfor the Government of the English assemblies is not the primitive Apostolique Government The major is evident thus For the Apostles instituted Elders by the election of the Saints to oversee the Church feed the Flock of one particular visible Church only as is manifest among the Ephe●ians Philippians Hebrues al Churches The minor is evident For the Prelates ther officers are not those Christian Bishops of the Apostolique institution elected by placed over one particular Church of the Saynt but are a devised ●yrannical Lord●hip ●uling hundreths of parishes by ther owne devised Canons Ergo. 2. Againe From the Government which is devised by man in the Church so is Antichristian which is not of the Apostolique institution must al good Christians Seperate Luk. 19.27 1. Cor. 7.23 Revel 14.9 The Government of the English assemblies is not of the Apostolique institution but is devised by man Antichristian Therfor from the Government of the English assemblies must al good Christians Seperate The major is manifest by the places alledged for seing Christ Iesus only must reigne in the harts of the faythful by his own● officers lawes therfor good Christians must only submit to his officers if they submit to any new officers devised by man Christ saith he wil have thē slayne they are the Servants of men obeying the Antichristian beast have a woe threatned against them Thus brethren have I written vnto you according to your request Mr. K. his direction proofes of those two points which you expect that in 4. mayne transgressions in the English assemblies viz in the constitution ministerie worship Government of them I pray you brethren keep the copie I send you safe let Mr. K. have a transcript of it if it please him to answer I will be ready to explane matters more fully if ther be any ambiguity to confirme matters doubtful that especialy for your establishment in the truth which now blessed be the Lord is so evident that al the men vppon earth with ther learning can never be able to obscure it Brethren I beseech you grow in grace in the knowledg of our Lord Iesus Christ to whome bee praise in his Church throughout all generations Amen Your Brother in the Fayth Iohn Smyth The Printer to the Reader Though in this treatise ther be divers Lettes either wanting or superfluous or displaced or changed by reason whereof some words are corrupted yet bicause English men can easily help that fault I thought it needlesse to put them in these Errata Only these foure great oversights I desire may be corrected pag. 41. Lin. 1. for Church by the Presbytery read Church to the Presbytery pag 75. Lin. 44. after the last words read So in the New Testament pag. 128. Lin. 32. For Religion is c. read Religion is heresy if this argument be false then is yours false pag. 128. Lin. 34. For is so read become The lesser faults I desire the Reader to pardon