distinction be not true then M. Sm. is a deceiver properly so called who to make things serve his hereticall humour and hide his blasphemies against our reading of the holy scriptures in the Church hath digged thus deep to find a pit whereinto to fell the righteous though himself by Gods iudgement be fallen into the same And here by the way I will briefly note M. Smyths methode in contriving of his book for the advantage of his cause The three offices of Christ in prophesie preisthood and Kingdome he reduceth vnto two 1. kingdome and 2. preisthood comprehending prophesie vnder the preisthood as a branch of it Deut. 33. 10. Rev. 1. 6. with 1 Cor. 14. 31. Act. 2. 17. 18. Whereas by the same ground of Deut. 33. 10. he mought have made the kingdome also a branch of the preisthood for the Preists were to teach Iaakob Gods judgements and Israel his law as well in cases of controversie plea and strife which M. Smyth maketh actions of administring the Kingdome as in other doctrines of exhortation and comfort But I find in the scripture that Moses not Aaron the Preist is made a figure of Christ as a Prophet and Prophets there were many in Israel of other tribes then Levi seing then Moses the Prophets caried types of Christs prophesie Aaron and the Priests of his priesthood David and the kings of his kingdom I would not now confound the priesthood prophesie in Christ any otherwise then the priesthood and kingdome but keep a like distinction in them al as in Christ the head so in the Church his body Againe as in heavenly order the 1. manifestatiō of mans syn and miserie by the law of his justice happines by the gospel also the 2. work of mans redemption by sacrifice 3 the conservation of this grace wrought for the Church against al enemies are three distinct things one following another so Christ in his administratiō observed this order distinction first teaching the Church as a Prophet above three yeares then offring up himself as a Preist sacrifice to his father for his Church and lastly rising ascending into heaven to the right hand of God there to reign as king until al his enemies be made his footstool Now M. Smyth maketh prophesie one with the Priesthood because he would have these two to be Gods worship the kingdome he speaketh of first and excludeth al the actions of it from Gods worship Whereas the Gospell is called the word of the kingdome and Christ when he preached or prophesied is sayd to preach the kingdome of God and the doctrines which he taught were the secrets of the kingdom and the Apostles in their sermons preached expounded and testified the kingdom of God Wherefore they be deep waters which M. Sm. hath found that the actions of administring the kingdome should not be worship and yet the preaching of the gospell or prophesying shal be worship and that in the highest degree properly so called If he followed not fansy in these things rather then sound judgement let the prudent iudge Like vanity he sheweth in this that having made the scriptures to be the matter of our worship now he makethnot them to be the matter also of Gods worship in Israel but beasts incense oil fat c. and the form of our worship to be the spirit but the forme of theirs to appear in honey leven fyre salt What had not they the written word of God for a ground of their religious actions as well as we have the written word had not they the good spirit of God to instruct them as we have had they not praying prophesying singing c. by the spirit as we How is it then that this man maketh the matter and form of Gods worship in Israel to consist in such carnall things There is a depth of abomination herein which is the ground of his anabaptising heresie For wheras th'Apostle magnifieth the Iewish Church above the Gentiles in many respects this proud Gentile disgraceth them extremely saying that their Ministerie worship government was carnal that faith and repentance was not required to the matter that is the people of that Church but onely a carnall holynes with many such like vituperies which out of his carnal hart he uttereth against them But for their worship which we have in hand let him shew if he can what one thing we have which they had not before vs. He maketh the parts of our worship to be three praying prophesying singing all these they had and vttered them by the spirit as the scriptures every where manifest and though they had many carnal rites with these as sacrifices incense c. yet was not their worship carnal for we have also some carnall rites as washing with water in baptisme the eating of bread wine in the Lords supper have we therefore a carnall baptisme a carnall supper if not neyther had they a carnal worship though carnall rites were adjoyned unto their worship But as God whom they worshipped was a spirit so worshipped they him in spirit and with faith exspecting that promise which God made vnto them of salvation by Christ as Paul testifyed of the whol body of that Church that the twelve tribes instantly serving or worshiping day and night hoped to come vnto it shewing further that the gentiles are of the same or one joynt body with them fellow-heyres and partakers of the promise in Christ. M. S. having shewed as he thought the matter and form of the Iewes worship inferreth vpon it thus Hence it followeth sayth he that the worship that beginneth in the book or translation commeth not originally from the spirit but from the letter or ceremony and so is not properly of the new Testament but of the old 2 Cor. 3. 6. If this followeth upon the former description of their worship and ours I think it comes a great way behind that few wil be able to see it For did the matter of their worship the beasts incense oil c. proceed out of the book or did the form seen in fyre and salt come from the book any otherweise then our praying preaching and ministring of the sacraments dooth or must doe Did they look on a book when they kindled fyre on the altar or cast salt on the sacrifice if not how followeth this halting inference That the worship performed in reading the scriptures proceedeth originally from the spirit even from God whose spirit is in his word and who hath commanded it to be read and that such reading is not the ministerie of the letter spoken of 2 Cor. 3 6. shall through Gods grace anon be proved in handling the second point of the scriptures Here next followeth to be considered Mr Smythes allegories opening the worship of the new testament by the type in the old Their Church Ministery worship government
the book be to him that readeth of the nature that an image is to him that gazeth who would not plead for them both alike to be used or rejected But what if an other would come and say that words or speaches are in the nature of trumpets or bells and therefore in the nature of ceremonies and so by consequent as the silver trumpets golden bells in the Law were ceremonies ended by Christ so speaking or preaching of the word is likeweise ceremonial men now must be all taught by the spirit Hath not this as good a colour against the audible voice as the other against the visible writing For as the sound of the voice affecteth the eare and understanding of the hearer so the sight of the letter affecteth the eye understanding of the reader and as far dooth a book differ from an image in this respect as a man from a bell A bell when it soundeth in the eare yeeldeth no distinct articulate voice for the edifying of the hearer but a man when he speaketh is vnderstood of the hearers his reanable voice dooth edify so an image when it is looked vpō affoardeth a man no edification no not if it were an image sent frō heaven unlesse it had a voice withall but a book when it is read informeth the mind and feedeth not the eye onely as dooth a picture An image picture hath a mouth speaks not no spirit or breath of life is in thē but the book of God is theopneustos inspired of God his spirit life is in it it is not a dumb teacher but speaketh testifyeth the mind of God and by that which is there written the spirit speaketh to the Churches Wherfore a mayn difference is to be put between livelesse pictures Gods lively oracles in his book so in all writings And if M. S. continue in this mind that a book and an image are both of a nature I could with he would set out no more books but images in their sted so should lesse harm come unto mens soules then now dooth by reading his hereticall writings But if books and writings be in nature of ceremonies reading as he sayth ceremonial wherof he giveth this reason for as the beast in the sacrifices of the old testament was ceremonial so was the killing of the beast ceremoniall how is it that he sayd before of reading that it is a lawful ecclesiastical action dooth not the lying tongue vary incōtinently For shall we have legall ceremonies the shadow of things to come whose body is in Christ to be used as lawful ecclesiasticall actions may we not then have pictures images of cherubims c. for ecclesiastical use as we have the holy scriptures which by M. S. religion are in the nature of images ceremonies In another place he sayth As musicall instruments and playing vpon them was typicall because it was artificial so reading of a book was typicall also because it is meerartificial So then the playing on the organs and the reading of the scriptures are both of a nature both types and ceremonies so abolished How near these reasons groūds do reach to Iudaism Familism I leave unto the wise to judge and future things wil shew more for as yet the wandring starrs have not run al their course Of the Original scriptures AFter his censure of books in general to be of the nature of images M. Sm. cometh to fight against the use of Gods scriptures in his worship beginning even with the Originals the Hebrue and Greek as they were written by the prophets Apostles Wherin he is fallen into a higher degree of error or of frawd then when we had controversie with him for then his plea was no translation for it is apocrypha but onely the canonical scriptures are to used in the church in tyme of Gods worship Now he wil out with canonical scripture also for the reading of it he thinketh was a ceremonie ended by Christ thus see we fulfilled the saying of the Prophet they proceed from evil to worse And first to prove them ceremonies he layeth these grounds The holy Originals sayth he signifie and represent to our eyes heavēly things therfore the book of the law is called the similitude of an heavenly thing Heb. 9. 19 23. Holy scriptures or writings began with Moses Exo. 24 4. and 31. 18. Ioh. 1. 17. 2 Cor. 3 7. Before Moses holy men prophesied out of their harts and received and kept the truth of doctrine by tradition from hand to hand 2 Pet. 2 5. Jude ver 14 15. Deut. 31 24. When Moses had written the law he caused it to be put by the ark in the most holy place as a witnesse against the people Deut. 31 26. therefore the Apostle caleth it the handwriting in ordinances which was contrary to us which Christ nayled to his crosse Col. 2 14 Eph. 2 15. Hence it followeth that the holy Originals the Hebrue scripture of the old testament are ceremonies 2 Cor. 3 3 7 Num. 5 23. 24. by necessarie consequent The book or tables of stone typed unto the Jewes their hard hart void of the true understāding of the law 2 Cor 3 3. Hebr. 8. 10. Ezek. 36 26 27. 2 Cor. 3 14 15. The ynk wherwith the letters were written signified the spirit of God 2 Cor. 3 3 Heb. 8 10. with Exod. 31 18. The letters written or characters ingraven signifieth the work of the spirit who alone doth write the law in our harts by proportion also Deut. 9 10. with Heb. 8 10. Reading the words of the law out of the book signifieth the vttering of the word of God out of the hart by proportion See also 2 Cor. 3. 2. 3. 6. 1 Cor. 12 7. The writings of the old testament being ceremonial are therefore abolished by Christ onely so far forth as they are ceremonial Col. 2. 14. 20. Gal. 4. 9. The thing signifyed by the book viz the law of God the new testament remayneth 2 Cor. 3. 11. 7. Heb. 8. 6. 7. 13. Here first may be observed how M. Sm. professing to treat of the originall scriptures in which both old and new testament both law and gospel are written unto vs taketh one part onely to weet the law or old testament and from it will conclude against the whole body of the scriptures and this fallacie he often useth in his writings But if all he here sayth were graunted that the writings of Moses were abolished by Christ Yet will it not therevpon follow that the writings of the other Prophets and of the Apostles also are typicall ceremoniall and abolished Nay rather the contrary would follow thus that as circumcision and the passeover c. were figurative shadowes ended by Christ no more to be used but baptisme and the Lords supper instituted by Christ in sted of the former are continually to be
common to the Churches of all ages If this be so how ended Christ the ceremonie of book-worship where none was to end If there were no proper worship in the synagogues but exercises of an other nature then Christ reading in the synagogue read not worship and shutting the book there shut not up book worship nor caused it to exspire and so M. Sm. hath lost his dream Agayn if Christ by shutting the book there signified an end of reading and the reading that there was as M. S. even now sayd was such as is common to the Churches of all ages then Christ hath ended all manner reading whatsoever in the Church even that which is common to all ages or else the allegorie will turn to a fansie so all reading must be abolished out of the Church that would the Divil faine bring to passe But the reason of ending reading is slight that because Christ shut the book and gave it to the Minister therfore he ended the work of reading He used not to do such weighty matters by dumb signes without word of signification And if the closing of the book were such a mysterie what was the taking and opening of the book nothing proportion will cary it to be the beginning as well as shutting should be the end But they be vain speculations to gather from mute actions an otherthrow of morall lawes permanent and needful for the the Church in all ages Neyther was this the first or the last time of Christs reading thus for as his custome was sayth the scripture he went into the synagogue and stood vp to read neyther was it a decent thing that he having received the book shut should redeliver it open their books being long rolls or volumes not bound vp like ours Finally this argument against reading hath like weight of truth as the Papists have for their vanities who allege for prayer in a strange tongue that Christ prayed Eli Eli lama sabachthani which the people that heard him vnderstood not and that he preached out of S. Peters bote to signify how in S. Peters chaire his doctrine should alwayes be stedfastly professed Such trifles must be brought wher sound proofs are wanting 2. Because reading words out of a book is the ministration of the letter 2 Cor. 3. 6. namely a part of the Ministerie of the old testament which is abolished Heb. 8. 13. 2 Cor. 3. 11. 13. and the ministerie of the new testament is the ministerie of the spirit 2 Cor. 3. 6. This scripture of the 2. Cor. 3. M. Sm. often allegeth for his purpose pag. 1. 7. 13. 19. and 20. he thought belike it would sound well in simple folks eares that the reading of scriptures should be the ministerie of the letter But the ignorance evil of the allegation is great and fitted for Satans policie to draw men from reading the book of God For if reading be the Ministration of the Letter there spoken of then is it the ministration of death damnation as the Apostle there calleth it vers 7. 9. and then the Papists have doon best of al forbidding the people to read the scriptures least they should gather out of them errors and so death and damnation And who can comfortably read the scriptures if that be the ministerie of the letter and so death But out vpon such a slanderous interpretation it is farr from the Apostles meaning He calleth the Law the letter figuratively because it was written with letters graved on stones he intendeth not the books of the Prophets wherin both law and gospel was written alwayes to be read for instruction comfort salvation to the people The law vvas first spoken and aftervvards vvritten by Moses the gospel of Christ vvas also first spoken and aftervvards vvritten by his Apostles If vvriting and reading made the other the letter then maketh it this the letter also and so the vvord of life shal be the ministration of death The lavv if it had never been vvritten but onely spoken yet had it been the ministration of death for all Israel hearing it vvere afrayd and death seised vpon their consciences and this by hearing Gods lively voice from heaven not by hearing the stony tables read for it is not manifest that ever they vvere read unto them but onely put and kept in the ark for a testimony Deut. 10. 1 5. and when the 10. cōmandements were read out of the book there was no such feare and the glorie of Moses face terrified the people when he spake and talked with them for which he put a veil vpon him but of reading out of a book at that time wherto the Apostle here hath reference there is not a word So it was not reading onely but speaking also without book which was the ministration of the letter to the Iewes and as Paul here calleth the law the letter so elswhere he calleth it the voice of words It is not therefore the writing but the thing written which he intendeth And if M. Sm. should fall to the heresie of iustification by the works of the law and teach this in prophesie out of his hart though he never read line in the holy Bible yet should he be a minister of the letter and of damnation to his disciples Of this letter Paul sayth it is the ministration of death but of the scriptures Christ saith serch them for in them ye think to have eternal life Of this letter Paul sayth it is the ministerie of condēnation but of the holy letters in Gods book he sayth they are able to make one wise unto salvation through the faith vvhich is in Christ Iesus The law is called the letter not letters as the scripture is called by a similitude for a letter is an outward visible thing appearing to the eye of an other that looketh on whereas the thing whereon it is written whither paper or stone is not moved or changed therby Such is the doctrine of the law to the professor of it It maketh him seem a fayre hypocrite before men they look and see the commandments of God written on his forehead on the fringes of his garments and on his dore posts but his hart and mynd are stony stil. For the law renueth no man but syn that is in us taketh occasion by the law and worketh in us al manner transgression of the law and so death But the Gospel is the spirit that renueth quickneth by faith in Christ and changeth the stony hart into flesh and writeth there the lawes of the most high Thus by the letter is not meant the holy scriptures which are Gods instrument for our renovation but the external work of the law upon a man in which sense Paul also mentioneth circumcision in the letter Rom. 2. 29. meaning outward circumcision of the flesh to be seen and read of men where to take it as this man
doth 2 Cor. 3. of reading the scriptures were to follow the devouring words of the deceitful tongue 3. Because upon the day of pentecost and many yeares after the churches of the new testament did use no bookes in time of spiritual worship but prayed prophesied and sang psalmes merely out of their harts Act. 2 4. 42. and 10. 44. 48. and 19 6. 1 Cor. 14 15 17 26 37. 4. Because no example of the scripture can be shewed of any man ordinarie or extraordinarie that at or after the day of pentecost used a book in praying prophesying and singing psalmes if yea let it be don and wee yeeld Nay it is not in mens power to yeeld to the truth though it be shewed them or though their own writings convince them it is in God that shevveth mercy First M. Smyth holdeth that such reading as vvas in the Ievves synagogues was common to the churches of all ages Secondly he sayth the scriptures are to be read in the church and to be interpreted Col. 4. 16. compared with Luk. 24 27 1 Cor 14 27. and 12. 10 by proportion 2 Pet. 3. 16. If these assertions and these places alleged let the reader look and examine them prove that the scriptures are to be read in churches as in deed some of them doe we need fight no longer the enemie unawares hath yeilded the feild His florish that he maketh how the churches of the new testament used no books because no example can be shewed is a deceitful argument For when there is a ground from God to doe the thing we are to suppose men did it although it be not expressly written And this adversary granteth the scriptures were to be read and we are sure that the churches were to be taught by the men of God and Paul sayth that al the scripture is profitable to teach to improve to correct to instruct in righteousnes that the man of God that is the minister of the new testament as wel as of the old may be absolute made perfect unto al good works Wherfore as the Preists and Levits which were to teach Israel taught them by reading expounding the scriptures so doubtlesse did the ministers in the Apostles dayes upon the same ground and proportion though their particular form of administration be not expressed That cavil of spiritual worship which as a leprosie overspreadeth al M. Smyths book is before taken away Praying never was by reading out of a book prophesying singing psalmes being extraordinary gifts of the spirit were also uttered by the spirit without a book Al this notwithstanding the scriptures were read and expounded to the people so must be stil and this though it be not proskunesis adoration supplicatiō or worshiping of God in the strict sense yet is it latreia his worship or service in general 5 Because none of the bookes of the newe Testament were written many yeres after the day of penticost at the least 7. yeares and the Churches al that time could not use the books of the new Testament which they had not But they could use the books of the prophets which they had wherin both old newe Testament were conteyned And Peter cōmended the Churches for taking heed vnto them as to a light that shined in a dark place 6. Because the Churches of the Greeks had no books to use that they might use lawfully for they understood not hebrue and the septuagints translation ought not to be used or made the Apostles made no Greeke translatiō c. If they had no books to use they were blamelesse if they used none But they had the Greek translation which was lawful to be made and used in the Iewes synagogues as anon shall be shewed when the Septuagints work cometh to be scanned 7 Because as in prayer the spirit onely is our help and ther is no outward help given of God for that kind of worship so also in prophesying and singing 1. Cor. 11. 4. and 14. 16. God never gave books to read for prayers unto him but pre pared mens harts and bended his ear And as every man knew the plague and consequently the benefit in his owne hart so was he to pray supplicate unto God who heard in heaven and was mercifull and did as he knew every mans wayes and hart But as in praying men speak their minds to God so in preaching God speaketh his mind to us and this he doth by his scriptures and by gifts unto men for teaching and applying them ordinarily to his Church Prophesying and singing hath often been performed by the spirit without book both in the old Testament and in the new If any now have such gifts it were folly to say they must read them out of a book Reading the scriptures is for ordinary teaching which by extraordinary gifts was never destroyed and things coordinate ar not contraries 8 Because it is against the nature of spirituall worship for when we read we receive matter from the book into the hart when we pray prophesy or sing we utter matter out of the hart unto the ear of the Church Ezek 2. 8. 19 and 3. 1. 4. Rev. 10. 8. 11. If Ezekiel a Preist under the law prophesyed without a book and yet reading the book of the lawe and expounding it was their ordinary service every sabbath as before is manifested all men may see that these two may stand together in Gods worship and not one throw out an other as M. Sm. would have it Neyther is it against the nature of spiritual worship to read Gods book in the eares of the Church for if it be worship in them to heare the spirit speak out of the Ministers hart it is worship also in them to hear the spirit speak out of the holy book And it cannot be deneyed but Gods spirit speaketh there and that which commeth out of the hart of man must be tried by that book and accordingly accepted or refused As for the Minister himself when he readeth out of Gods book and when he speaketh by gift of the spirit the meaning of the scripture to the people he serveth God in them both having Christ himself for an example Luk. 4. 17. 21. 9. Because upon the day of Pentecost fyerie cloven tongues did appear not fyerie cloven books Act. 2. 3. and alwayes there must be a proportion betwixt the type and the thing typed Upon the day of Pentecost the fyerie law was given in books Deut. 33. 2. Exod. 24. 4. 12. upon the day of Pentecost the fyerie gospel was given in tongues Act. 2. 3. Mat 3. 11. Act. 1. 5. the book therfore was proper for them the tongue for vs. In deed if any fyerie bookes had appeared at the giving of the law M. Smyths allegorie would have had some light but when as no such thing was seen but
us with synn for using our English Bibles in the worship of God he thought that the teachers should bring the originals the Hebrew and Greek and out of them translate by voice His principal reason against our translated scripture was this No Apocrypha writing but onely the Canonical scriptures are to be used in the Church in time of Gods worship Every written translation is an Apocrypha writing is not canonical scripture Therfore every written translation is unlawful in the Church in time of Gods worship Why he counted every translation apocrypha and what he meant therby appeareth by these words of his a written translation sayth he or interpretation is as wel as much an human writing as an homilie or prayer written read The like impietie he hath also printed in his book saying A translation being the work of a mens wit learning is as much and as truly an humane writing as the Apocrypha so commonly called writings are and seeing it hath not the allowance of holy men inspired but is of an hidden authoritie it may be iustly called Apocrypha c. And therfore not to be brought into the worship of God to be read That this point of the translation was the onely difference as it is known to al that then heard his publik protestatiō so his words in writing shew it Translations written sayth he are not refreyned in the case of scandal for we desired that they might be refreined for our sakes that we might keep communion it would not be yeilded So if we would have layd aside our translated Bibles communion they say should have been kept with us Now for the true differences on our part at that time and stil they are thus We agree with M. Smyth herein that Onely canonical scripture is to be used in Gods worship that no apocryphal writing is to be used in Gods worship But we disagree deney that every written translation is an Apocryphal writing affirming that the Scriptures in English and other languages rightly translated out of the Originals are Canonical so to be read in the Church in the worship of God After much time spent about this controversie he manifested other differences touching the ministerie and treasurie and soon after published this book of Differences wherin having his latter thoughts as he thought better then his former he retracted a former book of Principles c and al other his writings so farr forth as they were overthwarted by this his last book He also acknowledged the ancient brethren of the separation as he calleth us are to be honoured that they have reduced the Church to the true primitive and Apostolik constitution which consisteth in these three things 1 The true matter which are Saincts onely 2 The true forme which is the uniting of them togither in the covenant 3 The true propertie which is a communion in al the holy things and the power of our Lord Iesus Christ for the mainteyning of that communion To this blessed work of the Lord wherin those ancient brethren have laboured I know not sayth he what may more be added I think rather there can nothing be added And was he now setled in his course nothing lesse for the strange womans pathes are moveable they cannot be known Soon after this God stroke him with blindnes that he could no longer find the door of the Church out of which he was gone by schisme and which he had assaulted with error Our entring in by the covenant of God with Abraham to the faithful and their seed hath been as a brazen wal whereagainst he hath runn himself to his utter ruine if God in mercie raise him not up And now as a man benummed in mynd he cryeth out against us contrary to his former fayth and confession Loe we protest against them sayth he to bee a false Church falsly constituted in the baptising of infants and their own unbaptised estate And agayn We protest against them that seeing their constitution is false therfore there is no one ordinance of the Lord true among them Thus wine sheweth it self in M. Smyth to be a mocker strong drink to be raging whiles he having drunk the wine of violence proclaymeth open warr against Gods everlasting covenant The defense of which grace being already in the hands of two worthy soldiers of Christ Mr Clifton whom he hath printed against and Mr Robinson whom he next threatneth I leave vnto them not doubting but God their strength will teach their hands to fight and their fingers to battel in so good a cause against this enemie But because he still vrgeth his former quarrels of the scriptures and Ministerie I purpose with Gods grace to set against him in these desiring the Lord my Rock to gird me with strength and to make my way entyre Touching the first namely the vse of translated scriptures in the worship of God M. Smyth thus summeth vp the difference in the forefront of his book 1. We hold saith he that the worship of the new testament properly so called is spirituall proceeding originally from the hart and that reading out of a book though a lawful ecclesiasticall action is no part of spiritual worship but rather the invention of the man of syn it being substituted for a part of spiritual worship 2. We hold that seing prophesying is a part of spirituall worship therefore in time of prophesying it is vnlawfull to have the book as a help before the eye 3. We hold that seing singing a Psalm is a part of spirituall worship therefore it is vnlawful to have the book before the ey in time of singing a Psalm Here first let the reader observe that the mayn and true difference which was between M. Smyth and us about the translation is not mentioned but is brought in after as by the way in hādling these matters and other points never controverted between vs are made heads of the differences In which doing M. Smyth hath graced the very portch of his building with imposture and frawd 2. In saying of himself and his brethrē We hold c. he giveth the reader to vnderstand vnlesse he meant to delude him that they whom he dealeth against hold the cōtrary wheras he neither dooth nor is able to produce any proof hereof against us neyther I dare say can he tel what we hold of these points Thus secondeth he his fraud with injurie and maketh these two as Iachin Boaz the pillars for to bewtifie the temple of his book Now because his whol battel against the translated Scriptures is cheefly out of this bulwark of spiritual worship wherin he hath intrenched himself and flyeth therto at al assayes when other shifts fayle him I wil begin with it as himself also dooth and come to Translations anon OF WORSHIP Wheras the word Worship is diversly used somtime more largely somtime more straightly by reason wherof
practised so the writings of the old testament if they were shadowes ended by Christ yet the writings of the new testament given insted of the other are never to be abolished Secondly let it be considered what M. Sm. hath here left unto vs not ceremoniall and unabolished the thing signifyed sayth he by the book viz the law of God and the new testament but where is this to be had not in letters written with ynk on paper or parchmēt for all these he sayth are ceremoniall and so abolished but written in mens harts as in books with the spirit as with inck and so to be uttered by men out of their harts If Satan can but perswade this point he will bring out of mens harts as out of the bottomlesse pit a smoke of heresies insted of the fyrie law of God who shall control him For mens harts now are the same which Gods book was of old and as Israell fetched their lawes doctrines worship and services from the scriptures written with inck so Christians now must fetch their lawes doctrines worship c. from the harts of men as from the tables of the lavv and vvhat is from thence uttered is to be counted as written with inck of Gods spirit For the hevenly things themselves are as much yea more to be honoured esteemed credited then the book which was but a type and similitude of heavenly things H. N. the enemie of Gods scriptures can shew no stronger ground for his familisme wherein he reprocheth scripture learning then this which is here layd by M. Smyth But the scriptures and reasons which he hath brought be farr from proving so deadly an error For the book of God as alwayes so stil signifieth and representeth to our eyes heavenly things although some figurative extraordinary vse thereof be abolished for it signifieth and teacheth vnto vs the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven And as the book of the lavv was a witnesse against Israel when they walked rebelliously and with a stiffe neck so is it a witnesse to this day against all Christians that walk in like sort But such in Israel as had the word neer vnto them in their mouth and in their hart for to do it the book of the Law was a witnesse for them a sure testimony giving wisdom to the simple a perfect law converting the sowl and the statutes of the Lord therein were right unto them and rejoyced the hart the commaundement of the Lord was pure and gave light unto the eyes even so to all faithful Christians now the writings of the Prophets Apostles is a sure word to which they do wel to take heed as to a light shining in a dark place by it they beleeve and so come to life and by it their joy is made full Agayn M. Sm. erroneously substituteth one extraordinary use of some part of the scripture for the ordinary uses of the whole Moses wrote in a book the old testament or covenant of works summed vp in Exod. 20. 21. 22. and 23. chapters which book was read in the peoples eares and sprinkled with blood as the people also was for a sanction or confirmation of the Testament in which action there was an extraordinary and figurative vse of the book for that time which now is abolished by Christs blood which hath confirmed the new testament and abrogated the old The holy histories prophesies psalmes parables c. were never thus sprinkled with blood but onely that book wherein the conditions of the covenant were written Wherefore there were besides this other ordinarie permanent perpetual uses of the scriptures by reading them privatly and publikly for the teaching exhorting comforting reproving of the people according to their daily need occasion that every child of God might have knowledge of the certainty of the word of truth for to answer words of truth to them that sent unto him as Solomon sayth And therfore as at the publik solemn assemblie of al Israel in the sabbath year the law was read unto them al that they mought learn fear God and keep al his words they their children so at their particular assemblies in their synagogues throughout every citie both Moses and ⸫ the Prophets that wrote after him were read every Sabbath day and this from old time even unto Christs dayes on earth who himself in his own person and action allowed and sanctified this holy custome and commended by his Apostles al the scriptures fore written unto his disciples and gave them also other scriptures for like end and use warned them that no man should presume above that which is written Wherefore it is a deceit of Satan for mans ruine to seek to make the scriptures generally wholly ceremonial and abolished because of that extraordinarie use of them at the sanction of the law at mount Sinai But the counsel of God unto his people is seek in the book of the Lord and read search the scriptures for in them ye think to have eternal life As for the law of God to be written in mens harts by the spirit this taketh not away the use of the law written in books with ynk for in Israel when the bible was read every Sabbath David had the law of God within his bowels whereby he declared righteousnes in the great congregation and as he so every other righteous mans mouth spake of wisdom his tongue talked of judgment the law of his God being in his hart as Moses commanded yet ceased not the reading of the law out of the book So at this day true Christians in wose harts Gods law is written are not no though they be ministers extraordinarily furnished with grace to leave the reading of the law written in books any more then they did in Israel and Christs Apostles have written the word even with paper and ynk as they spake it with voyce to meet with their dotage that dream ynk and paper to be meerly ceremoniall As for al hypocrites they are now as heretofore stony harted and the outward letter written with ynk resembleth their hypocrisie But whereas M S. having cited Deut. 31. 26. inferreth therfore the Apostle caleth it the handwriting in ordinances which was contrary to us which Christ nayled to his crosse Col. 2. 14. Eph. 2 15. he mismatcheth the places for Paul speaketh of worldly rudiments the outward services of the Law which elswhere he caleth also beggerly rudiments such as was circumcisió the observing of dayes moneths c. which ordinances were as an handwriting or obligation against the Iewes witnessing that they were debters unto God synners miserable under the curse unlesse they saw and learned Christ in them by whom the obligation is cancelled and curse done away For by circumcising thēselves they acknowledged as by a bil of their hand that they were born in
onely a voice of words was heard as Moses telleth vs we should beware of such clowdy collections The fyerie law mentioned Deut. 33. 2. hath plain reference to Gods promulgating of the law by voice out of the midds of fyre Exod. 19. 18. 19. 20. 1 18. Deut. 4. 11. 12. Afterwards those other lawes were written by Moses in a book Exod. 24. 4 and God himself vvrote the ten words on tables of stone not then at Pentecost but 40. dayes after Deut. 9. 9. 10. Even so the fyery doctrine of the gospel was first uttered by voice and afterwards written in books Luk 1. 1. 3. Act. 1. 1. c. Ioh. 20. 30. 31. The book then was not proper to them as M. S. feighneth but common also with vs. God by Moses first spake then wrote to his Church Christ by his Apostles first spake then wrote also to the same Church and though the son of thonder wanted no gift of utterance by voice yet Christ bad him write when if he had pleased he could have sent him to speak And blessed is he that readeth and they that heare the words of that prophesie and keep those things vvhich are vvritten therin but cursed is he that despiseth reading of the Lords book and dissvvadeth the Church from that use thereof by colourable reasons causing the blind to goe out of the vvay and all people should say Amen 10. Because as all the worship which Moses taught began in the letter outwardly and so proceeded inwardly to the spirit of the faithful so contraryweise all the worship of the N. Testament signified by that typicall worship of Moses must begin at the spirit and not at the letter originally 2 Cor. 3. 6. 8. 1 Cor. 12. 7. or els the heavenly thing is not answerable to the similitude therof The true and proper worship which Moses taught Israel was the worship of God in spirit and truth Deut. 5. 7. 8. and 6. 4. 5. 6. though he led them herevnto under veiles and shadowes and by the covenaÌ„t of works brought them to Christ who doeth both that covenant and shadowes away as the wise did vnderstand Psal. 32. 1. 2. with Rom. 4. 4. 5. 6. 7. Psalm 40. 6. and 51. 6. 16. c. vvith Heb. 10. 8. 9. Their spiritual vvorship proceeded from the spirit and hart unto God 1 King 8. 22. 23. 33. 35. 38. c. Ezra 9. 5. 6. c. Nehem. 9. 5. 6. c. Of the legal worship M. Smythes inept allegorizing therof is spoken before also his abuse of that scripture 2 Cor. 3. 6. is already manifested vvith his aequivocation about this vvord worship that the reader may be vvearied to have the same things oft repeated Onely novv the falshood and snare of these reasons against reading Gods vvord being discovered let him learne to bevvare of Satans deceipt For the mouth of an heretik is a deep pit like the strange vvomans he with whom the Lord is angrie shal fall therin After this M. Sm. feighneth 4. obiections for bookworship as he termeth it and then frameth ansvvers as he seeth good but ever and anon retyring to his old skonce of spiritual worship thinking therby to vvard off all blovves Though it be a vvearynes to follovv such an empty clovvd yet for help to the vveak I vvil briefly shew his vanity Reading in the old testament was commanded by Moses Deut. 31. 9-13 was amplified by David 1 Chron. 16. 25. was practised by Josiah 2 ChroÌ„ 34. 30. by Ezra and Nehemiah Neh. 8. 8. and 9. 3. allowed by our Saviour Christ Luk. 4. 16. by the Apostles Act. 13. 14. 15. and reported as a thing of ancient approved continuance Act. 15. 21. To this hs answereth First the reading commanded by Moses was onely once every 7. yere Deut. 31. 10. 11. and therefore it was no part of ordinary worship and there is no commandement in Moses given eyther to the Preists or Levites for ordinary reading of the law in the tabernacle Secondly hence it foloweth that reading in the old testament was no part of the worship of the tabernacle or temple or of the service performed by the preists therin c. Thirdly therfore reading was of another nature performed in the utter court or synagogue or elswhere eyther by the Levites or any other learned men of what tribe soever Math. 23. 2. Luk. 4. 16. Act. 13. 14. and 15 21. Deut. 31. 9 -11 1 Chron. 16. 4. 7. 37. 39. 15. 1. 8. 28. 13. 2 Chron. 34. 14. 30. 31. Neh. 8. 9. and so no part of worship properly so called but onely a ceremonial ground or foundation of inward or outward spiritual worship common to the Churches of all ages Lastly it is not deneyed but that reading now is to be used in the Church onely we say it is not a part of spiritual worship or a lawful meanes in time of spiritual worship M. Smyth cannot see any commandement in Moses for ordinary reading of the law in the tabernacle and no marvel for neyther could all the Sadducees see any doctrine in Moses that taught the resurrection of the dead but Christ could find it by necessary consequence Moses commanded the feast of boothes to be kept seven dayes to â—he Lord mentioning but holy convocations sacrifices M. Sm. I dare say will not gather reading out of this commandement But Ezra the Preist and all Israel with him saw it here implyed and practised it by reading the book of the law of God every day from the first day unto the last when they kept this feast If every seventh day was to be sanctified in Israel all things be sanctified by the word and prayer and in the synagogues they sanctified the Sabbathes by reading the scriptures reason mought teach us that the tabernacle was not behind the synagogues in holynes And where findeth M. Sm. a commaundement to read the law in the synagogues yet was it commanded or els it was will worship and vanitie The ordinance for Levi to teach Israel Gods law was commandment ynough both to read and preach it as they did dayly and they were not so dul or carnal but they could wel perceive this to belong to their charge and ministerie But here M. Sm. sayth that the reading in Israel was no part of worship properly so called forgetting himself it seemeth when elswhere he sayth that the worship that beginneth in the book is from the letter or ceremonie and so is not properly of the new testament but of the old and againe that book-worship is Iudaisme and so Antichristian and idolatrie now vnder the New testament and againe that Christ shut the book in the synagogue to signifie that that ceremonie of bookworship or Ministerie of the letter was now exspired Thus fighteth he against himself one while they had book worship an other while it was no
proper part of the worship of the old testament vvith M. Smyth because he was neither Preist nor Levite Hovvbeit before he vvould needs persvvade us by a mystical interpretation that Christ having by the use of the book fulfilled the law of reading he shut the book to signifie that the ceremonie of book-worship was now exspired So svveet an accord harmonie is in his vvriting Wel Christs action here is excluded from being a part of Gods vvorship But M. Smyth though he vvere neyther Priest nor Levite of the old testament nor Apostle Prophet Evangelist Pastor nor teacher no nor member of the church of the nevv testament he and his followers having dischurched themselves and dissolved their communion yet he in that estate preached and anabaptised himself and then anabaptised others and this in him was the worship of God or els of the divil properly so caled And hath not this man behaved himself like a proud Korah that without al office would presume to do these things which he counteth proper worship and yet censureth Christs action in reading preaching of the word to be no proper part of worship because he was neyther Preist nor Levite Shal the word out of Christs mouth read and applied with al grace of the spirit which he had without measure be no proper part of Gods worship and shal the word which Mr. Smyth uttereth out of his hart be proper worship And of what nature may we think was that exercise performed by Christ and the Doctors in the temple was it none of Gods worship He was I am sure in his fathers busines among the teachers of the word whom he heard whom he asked whom he answered with such understanding as astonied al that heard him If M. Smyth esteme his own teaching or prophesying used in his synagogue to be the worship of God and this of Christ and the teachers of Israel in the temple to be not his worship he is worthy of al true Christians to be holden Anathema But reading sayth he is serching the scriptures which is not worship But reading say I as Christ now did is proclayming the word of God unto the people and if preaching be worship reading in this sort is worship not proskunesis supplication or prostrating unto God but latreia a worship or service of God in the spirit in the gospel as before hath been manifested Secondly sayth M. Smyth Christ had the Originals the Hebrue text of Esay the Prophet and read or interpreted out of it for it is doubtful whither he uttered the Hebrue words or spake the sense of the Hebrue in the Syriak dialect and therefore from hence reading a translation cannot be concluded but eyther reading or interpreting the Originals How it maketh for translations I shewed before against M. Smyths frawd and to that we have no answer but by-matters brought as clowds to darken the light And if we had alleged this for the Originals yet Mr. Smyth would not have allowed it as before hath been shewed He doubteth whither Christ spake in Syriak or not but if he so did preached or prophesied in that common language as before I have shewed it most likely and preaching or prophesying be properly worship and instituting worship in a common tongue Be as unlawful as sacrificing a dog as M. Smyth before affirmed wil not he be found a blasphemer of Christ as one that speaks not by the spirit of God calling Iesus execrable Thirdly sayth he hence cannot be concluded that manner of preaching now used that a man shal take his text and then divide it into parts analysing it rhetorically and logically collecting doctrines and uses from every member c. of his text al this while he hauing his book before his eye to help him at al assayes a thing whereof I am assured the holy scripture yeeldeth no warrant that it may be counted a part of spiritual worship For though the scripture may be so handled and that for very profitable use yet that is rather a scholastical lecture then an Ecclesiastical worship it is rather an inquisition and serching of the holy spirits intent and purpose then prophesying If the scriptures may be so handled and that for very profitable use surely Mr. Smyths schisme and charge of idolatrie layd upon us had very unprofitable use and wicked end For his owne conscience can testifie for us if it be not feared that we never pleaded for other use of the scriptures then was in Israel where Christ read the text and after taught from and applyed it where the law was read the sense given and the people caused to understand the reading where lectures were of the law prophets in their synagogues every sabbath and other such like exercises But because we did thus out of our translated English bibles of him called apocrypha he accused us of idol-latrie that is the worship or service of idols we mainteyned it to be theo-latrie that is the worship or service of God because it was Gods word not mans though written in English This point is now sought to be shifted off and a nue question made whither reading the scriptures in the Church may be caled worship which I have cleared before His sophistical distinction of scholastical lecture and ecclesiastical worship we heard not of til now and it serveth him in no stead for every such lecture in the Church to Christs scholars is the latreia or service of God not of Idols and is a manifestation of the holy spirits intent as of old was in prophesying The teacher most properly doth then inquire serch when he prepareth himselfe privatly by reading studie and meditation to expound the scriptures in publik Were not the voices of the Prophets in Israel a manifestation of the spirits intent But when they were read in the synagogues their voices were heard as the scripture teacheth Act. 13. 27. Lastly sayth M. S. if we must needs be tied to this example of Christ which J see no reason for seeing reading was of the old testament then the example of Christ shall bind also thus farr as that the book shal be layd aside so soon as the text is read and the book that is used shal be the originals which is nothing for vocal but for mental reading or for interpreting which I never have thought to contradict c. No man that I know tieth to follow this particular example We doubt not but men may teach without any book But that it is lawful by Christs example here to read open and apply the scriptures as by other examples of him also to preach without reading The mayn thing is left and new questions set on foot We know wel he at first contradicted not mental reading as he calleth it or interpreting out of the originals though now he writeth against the use of the originals also as before we have seen so fast he
runns on in error His cōceipt of mental reading as it hath no groūd frō Christ here nor any prophet or Apostle to be the ordinary way of reading or interpreting scripture so mind we it to be a far more vncertayn and erroneous course let the man make as many Querees after it as he will Having answered these few objections as we see he afterwards questioneth whither the hearers may have their translations or the originals to read or search in time of prophesie Which he deneyeth Of this point though it was not controverted between us yet I wil speak what I mind about it Not condemning it as dooth he nor iustifying it as it is abused by some but shewing the mean which I take to be best His first reason is that the Prophets and Apostles wrote books but never divided them into chapters or verses Henry Stephen first made the verses of the N. Testament whereupon he concludeth that the hearers could not serch their bookes in time of hearing I deney the consequence for in reading the law expounding it comparing words with that which went before and after the hearers mought serch and see though it were with more difficultie Secondly the Hebrue bibles that we have are all divided into chapters and verses as also into other sections noting where the lecture of the law began and ended and the lecture of the Prophets answerable to it Whither the first writers did this or the Church after them I wil not dispute but that thus they might doe I make no doubt For God hath left to the discretiō of the Church and Ministers what quantitie of scripture to read and teach of And this was the practise in th' Apostles dayes for it was not possible that every sabbathall the law and prophets should be read over the Hebrue letters and marginall notes are sufficient records of the antiquitie of them The Churches practise in the books of the Prophets sheweth us our libertie in the Apostles writings which cannot be read over at once And long before Henry Stephens time the Greek copies of the new Testament had chapters and sections though otherweise then we now have And Matthewes gospel parted into 68. chapters or titles and 355. sections was in a manner as easie for the readers to serch as it is now with us and so the rest His second reason is that th' Apostles in citing scriptures quote not chapter and verse but onely say it is written by Zacharie by Jeremie the scripture sayth c. This reason dependeth on the former and is there answered in part Further I observe the Apostles speak diversly sometime naming no book at all sometime naming the book as the Psalmes sometime a part of the book as the second psalme and how they particulated matters in their doctrine is not set down the summonely of things is recorded The argument therfore concluding thus it is not written that they quoted chapters therefore they did it not is not of force negatively But if if be true which Hilarie an ancient writer recordeth that the seventie Greek interpreters did number and order the Psalmes and we find that sometimes the Apostles quoted what Psalm in nōber they alleged it may warrant us such like use of humane labours for help of our memorie His third reason is of like nature that no mention is made of any hearer that had his book c. yet mought it be say I though it were not mentioned they used to dispute in their synagogues after the lecture was ended and that by the scriptures and the hearers serched the scriptures dayly for trial of doctrine Who now can say that the hearers had or used no books in the synagogues His 4. reason is that serching quotations hindreth attention for the mind and affections are distracted from hearing by seeking the places c. This I grant to be amysse in all that so use their books for diligent eare shoud be given to all that is spoken Howbeit this abuse may not abolish the lawful use for as by turning of leaves many hinder thēselves in time of hearing so many againe attentively hearkning and comparing things spoken with the matters before and after in the chapter are not hindred at all but greatly furthered by looking on their books And for this matter I rest with that rule given by th' Apostle for all things to be doon unto edification seemlily and with order 1 Cor. 14. 12. 40. His last reason is that manuscripts being few and very dear there being yet no printing found out all could not have or bring their bookes but there is onely one kind of true aad profitable hearing eyther all to have bookes and serch or none If God have left it to the wisdom and discretion of his people when and how to use the scriptures so it be not to confound actions or hinder their good I wil not bring their libertie into bondage nor prescribe a law where God hath given none Though written copies were dear yet were they many many had them not all for all now have not That such as have not books or cannot read should prejudice other that have can there is no reason It is not therefore for us to walk by example in this case but by general ground and equitie from Gods law who permitteth us free use of the scriptures for our edification according to which if men use them in private or publik they do well Thus am I at an end about the mayn cōtroversie of the scriptures which for the readers good I have beaten out and explaned shewing the true differences which he handled covertly for his best advantage Wherein the judicious may discern how Mr. Sm. hath been up and down wavering like a reed shaken of the wind sometimes seming to allow translations sometime bitterly writing against them that as easie it is to know the way of a serpent upon the rock as the way of a man with his mineon error A DEFENCE OF CHRISTS MINISTERIE in the church against the contradiction of M. Smyth VNto the former battel against the scriptures M. Sm. addeth strife about the ministerie affirming that the triformed presbyterie as he calleth it consisting of three kind of Elders viz. Pastors Teachers Rulers is none of Gods ordinance but mans devise and that lay elders so called are antichristian That other point being an idol of his own invention which he would have had worshiped in our church I have more largely dealt against this latter being a thing oft discussed heretofore and no new thing by him alleged I wil the more briefly answer M. Smyth a while before both agreed in judgment with us and wrote in defence of this ministerie which now he oppugneth but that his first fayth and labours he retracteth in this book and sithence is fallen into further error about the covenant between God and his people So by degrees he is come to undermine the
A DEFENCE OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES WORSHIP AND MINISTERIE used in the Christian Churches separated from Antichrist Against the challenges cavils and contradiction of M. Smyth in his book intituled The differences of the Churches of the Separation Hereunto are annexed a few observations upon some of M. Smythes Censures in his answer made to M. Bernard By Henry Ainsworth teacher of the English exiled Church in AMSTERDAM Imprinted at Amsterdam by Giles Thorp in the yere 1609. The chief things handled in this treatise OF worship pag. 5. c. The Iewes worship scanned pag. 11. c. Prophesying or preaching whither it be worship pag. 16. c. Singing of Psalmes pag. 21. Of scripture or books in general pag. 22. Of the original scriptures pag. 24. c. The hand-writing of ordinances Coloss. 2. pag. 28. Whither Christ Luk. 4. ended the law of reading p. 31. Whither reading be the ministratioÌ„ of the letter 2 Cor. 3. pag. 32. Of the law and gospel given in books tongues p. 37. Of the coÌ„mandements to read the scriptures p. 39. 41. c. Of translations of holy scripture pag. 45. c. Of the 72. Interpreters in Israel and whether they synned in translating the Bible pag. 51. c. ArgumeÌ„ts against the use of translations in Gods worship answered pag. 57. c. Arguments for the use of translations c. mainteyned p. 69. c. Of the Hellenists or Iewes that â—pake Greek p. 73. c. Of the Ministerie and Eldership pag. 88. c. Reasons against 3. sorts of Elders refuted pag. 89. c. Reasons for 3. sorts of Elders defended pag. 97. c. Of the Treasurie pag. 114. Observations upon M. Smythes censures against Church government by the Eldership pag. 118. c. IT is true of an haeretik which Solomon sayth in parable a foolish woman is troublesome experience hereof wee have in this adversary whom I deal against For he not content to manifest with mouth nor to write with pen nor to print in publik once his owne follyand shame with calling vpon us to justific our proceedings or repent of them dooth in an other book the second time require an answer and fretting in himself that we passed over his vanitie with silence he biddeth us battel with the third alarme in his book The character of the beast lately published Wherin to shew how near he is allyed to those which say who is like unto the Beast who is able to warr with him he requireth nay chargeth yea challengeth us as he saith to the defense of our errors vawnting moreover against us that we are guiltie in our consciences of our disabilitie to defend them and therefore subtilly draw back and pretend excuses triumphing also over vs as they that hitherto in craftines have withdrawn from the combat in the matter of the translation worship and presbyterie Thus hath he lifted up his horne on high and spoken with a stif neck as if even the mightie were afraid of his majestie and for fear fainted in themselves In regard of which insolencie all men I think may see it is now time if ever to take up sheild and sword against him and hew his hornes that so have pushed the flock of Christ wherof not long since he professed himself to be a member with us though now having left the truth to folow leasing he maketh open warr with the saincts And wheras among other swelling words of vanitie he sayth Loe we protest against them to have a false worship of reading books we protest against them to have a false government of a triformed Presbyterie we protest against them to have a false Ministerie of Doctors or Teachers c. I have taken in hand to set forth our iust defense in these particulars and to shew the frawd and malignitie of this boaster leaving the other point about the constitution of our Church in baptising of infants to others that have already begun to convince his heresie therin And this which I have undertaken is rather for others who may be troubled with his writings then for his own sake who yeeldeth smal hope of good seing he procedeth so fast in evil and out of a proud hart hath stirred up strife Wherin also such hath been his ficklenes as no constancis is in his mouth For not to speak of three sundry books wherin he hath shewed himselfe of 3. several religions in this one book which J deal against he sayeth and unsayeth and contrarieth his own grounds for to shift and hide his blasphemies that litle needed him so earnestly to have caled for an other mans sword to peirce the bowels of his errour when his own hand fighteth against himself and the spear which he tosseth turneth into his hart I had much rather have folowed more coÌ„fortable meditations in the peaceable practise of the truth theÌ„ thus to coÌ„teÌ„d with those that seek strife that fight against the faith which themsevles once professed having found such by experience to be above others most malignant enemies but truth oppugned may not be for saken and wolves that would ravin must be beaten from the fold least the sheep be devoured or scattered Now therefore I being to encounter this false Prophet doe humble my self under the good hand of God whose power is made perfect in mans infirmitie whose mercie susteyneth in violence of the enemie whose truth is a sheild and buckler He blesse these my labours unto his people that the righteous may see and reioyce and all iniquitie may stop her mouth Amen A DEFENCE OF THE HOLY SCRIPTVRES AND WORSHIP OF God used in the Christian Churches of the Separation against the calumnies of M. Smyth THe book intituled The differences of the Churches of the separation which we are chalenged by the Author to answer carieth in the very name therof a delusion of the Reader For if he look for plaine differences what they affirme and we deny he shal not find them expressed if he take the differences to be implied as that whatsoever Mast. Smyth affirmeth we deney and what he deneyeth we affirme then is the Reader much abused we injured who hold in that book truth error to be unequally mixed Seing then neyther expresly nor implicitly the Reader can see the Differences what are they but delusions The many questions which he asketh in the end conteyning the summe of al his book manifest the Authors frawd for if he know dare say wherin we differ what need he desire our direct answer It became him to refute not for to fish with hooks of demands wherin we would differ from him Ther was one onely difference between M. Smyth and us when first he began to quarrel though synce he have increast them and increaseth dayly with deadly feud and open opposition as al men may see That difference was this He with his followers breaking off coÌ„munion with us charged
himselfe calleth and esteemeth prophesie to be worship in the proper sense he is taken in the snare which he set for the righteous and if any be idolaters for such things himself is one and principall Or how ever it be for that all men may see how he hath sought to abuse vs by his aequivocation to shrowd himself in a conceited fansie Yet one thing more I will observe touching the sacraments which M. Sm. speaketh not of in this place but elswhere in that book sayth thus The publishing of the covenant of grace and the putting to of the seales is onely one concrete action or part of worship for the publishing of the covenant giveth being to the seales otherweise breaking bread and baptising are but putting of seales to a blank Here first I note by the way how M. S. acknowledgeth the Lords supper and baptisme to be seales of the covenant of grace as in another place also he calleth them yet now being put to his shifts for defense of his anabaptisme he is driven thus to say I deney that baptisme is the seal of the covenant of the new testament Thus the windie clowd carieth himself to and fro and rather then he will forgoe his error he wil contradict that which before he had well written though it may be also confirmed by the testimony of the holy ghost who calleth cir cumcision the figure of our baptisme a seale of the righteousnes of faith Rom. 4 11. But to the point in hand if the publishing of the covenant and the putting to of the seal as baptising with water breaking giving taking eating of bread c. be one concrete that is one joynt action or part of worship as I grant it is taking worship generally why is not the reading and expounding or preaching of the word also one conjoyned action and part of worship especially seing they were joyned together in Israel as Nehem. 8. 8. They read in the book of the law of God distinctly and gave the sense c. If the Preists and Levits then whose office was to teach Iaakob Gods judgements and Israel his law did thus teach with reading and if it be true that th'Apostle sayth Moses of old time hath in every citie them that preach him he being read in the synagogues every Sabbath and if Christ himself first read the text of scripture and after that preached from it have wee not as good ground to say that reading and preaching is one joynt action and part of worship as preaching and baptising But it was Satans policie to disgrace the reading of Gods book and seek to thrust it quite out of the worship of God that men mought prophesie as now they use to speak out of their harts and honour that as Gods proper worship and so the serpents word if it were mixed with the Lords mought the more easily be unespied the scriptures being absent But God hath joyned his word together with his spirit that his people should not be deceived by such as walk in the spirit and ly falsly Singing of Psalmes M. Sm. wil have to be the third part of worship because praying and singing Psalms are put together sayth he in the same sense that is as parts of worship 1 Cor. 14. 15 17. Iam. 5. 13. Act. 16. 25. And prophesying and psalmes are coupled together for the same purpose 1 Cor. 14. 26. Here agayne M. S. omitteth the needful distinction of Psalmes and singing of them For some Psalmes are written in the Bible as canonical scripture given to the Church for to be read expounded and sung which M. S. himself granteth even of the translation saying It may be read in the Church and sung in tunes And this singing is with harmonie of voices An other kind of Psalm there is which one man vttereth in the Church and others hear him of which sort the Apostle speaketh 1 Cor. 14. 26. when ye come togither as every one of you hath a Psalm or hath doctrine or hath a tongue or hath a revelation or hath interpretation let all things be done to edifying This kind is far inferiour to the other as being uttered by men subject to err as wel in singing as in teaching and it is to be tried by the psalms in scripture and other authentik books This was an extraordinary gift as strange tongues and the like Yet M. S. loving to handle things confusedly that his error might lesse appeare speaketh here of singing Psalms as of one sort and nature Again that he might make all serve his own fansie he describeth singing of Psalms to be the shewing of our thanksgiving to God by the manifestation of the spirit Philip. 4. 6. 1 Cor. 14 15 17. Wheras we find in the scripture many Psalms directly penned for doctrine and instruction to the Church as othersome are for thanksgiving to God yea matter of all sorts historie of things past prophesie of things to come rebuke threatning comfort lamentation and what not is mixed in songs of the scripture and why such Psalms might not by the spirit be suggested to Christians in Pauls time as wel as thanksgivings I know not any reason at all So that his reasons of prayer song mentioned togither are insufficient to prove them both of one nature properly as before is noted of prophesie rather we are to distinguish praying singing prophesying as three severall gifts and works of the spirit and all of them Gods worship and service in the Church according to their severall kinds and nature But it seemeth strange vnto me that M. Sm. should now both allow of the scriptures to be sung in tunes in the Church and also make the singing by gift of the spirit a part of Gods proper worship in the new testament and yet he his disciples to use neither of these in their assemblies If it be an ordinary part of worship why perform they it not but quarrel with vs who accounting it an extraordinary gift now ceased do content our selves with joint harmonious singing of the Psalmes of holy scripture to the instruction and comfort of our harts and praise of our God Separating our selves as the holy Ghost willeth vs from such as dote about questions and strife of words whereof cōmeth envie contention and many other euils OF THE SCRIPTVRES HAving ended the point of worship with the nature parts of it it remayneth now to see how this thing is applied by M. S. against reading of the scriptures And first in the generall touching all manner writings he sayth that books or writings are in the nature of pictures or images and therfore in the nature of ceremonies and so by consequēt reading in a book is ceremonial If M. Sm. can prove books images to be both of a nature both alike ceremonies he may be a Proctour for the Pope who hath brought images into the Church for laie mens books And if
part of worship if properly so called help not here at a need M. Sm. wil be found a calumniator both of vs and of Israel and of Christ himself For he would have his reader think that we whom he opposeth made arguments for bookworship which here he answereth wheras we never spake or thought of reading to be worship in such a sense as he would draw it vnto nor othervveise worship then reading vvas in the synagogues by Christ himself neyther vvas there controversie about worship at all but onely whether it were Gods word or mans that we read in the Church in the worship of God But now to cloak his blasphemous error he hath dived into his wit to bring out a distinction of properly so called so cogging the reader with the die of deceit and calumniating vs. And hath he not also injuried Israel in charging them vvith book worship and belyed Christ himself that he should use and finish a ceremonie of book worship when yet here he granteth it vvas of another nature it vvas no part of worship properly so called it vvas that vvhich is coÌ„mon to the Churches of all ages As one tossed in the sea of error so reedeth this adversary to and fro and staggereth like a drunken man The second objection he forgeth thus Reading is commanded in the new testament Col. 7. 16. 1 Thes. 5. 27. and a blessing promised therto Rev. 1â—5 and the coÌ„mandement is that it be practised in the church therfore it is a part or meanes of the worship of the new testament The summe of his answer hereunto is Not everie thing performed in the Church is a part of spiritual worship for al the parts of publik administration of the kingdom ar done in the Church and yet cannot be said to be parts of spiritual worship properly so caled chap. 1 and 2. Properly so called is a common vizar of deceit puld off before as here it shal be agayn For M. Smyth divided the whole leiturgie of the church into actions of the kingdom and of the Preisthood of the saincts chap. 1. and 2. The actions of administring the preisthood he made to be actions of concord and union and of these generally he sayth they be actions of spiritual worship properly so called The actions of administring the kingdom he made to be actions of opposition difference plea and strife and of them generally he sayth they are not actions of spiritual worship properly so caled Now here and often he deneyeth reading of the scriptures to be such spiritual worship therfore it is no action of the preisthood therfore no action of concord or union So when the Preists and Levites read the law in the synagogues and at their solemn feasts we may not say they did any action of the preisthood and when Christ read the prophet Esaias Luk. 4. we may not say he did an action of concord or union when Paul would have his Epistle read in the churches of Colosse Laodicea and Christ would have the Revelation read of al we must not understand them to meane reading as an action of concord or union in the church for then it must be an action of the preisthood and consequently worship properly so called which M. Sm. wil by no meanes admit of for he hath limited their bounds and if any read the scriptures in the church as an action of concord and union he wil draw it as by the haire of the head along these grounds to be antichristian idolatrous so setteth he his mouth against heaven Yet reading he granteth but it must be of an other nature and what is that trow we He is loth to speak of the preisthood it is no part and in handling the actions of the kingdom he specifieth it not onely there he sayth that bookes of al sorts may be produced for finding out of the truth and he quoteth among other Act. 7. 22. and 17. 28. 1 Cor. 15. 33 Tit. 1. 12. Where the learning of the Aegyptians and testimonies of the hethen poets are alleged and further he nameth particularly translations dictionaries histories chronicles commentaries c. Behold here what place this man alloweth the reading of the scriptures yea even of the Originals they must not be read but by way of opposition difference plea and strife they must not be read but where when and as histories chronicles commentaries books of hethen poets and al other like may be read and produced so they are tollerable otherweise there is no place allowed them though elswhere he esteemeth better of them then of other writings But in the actions of the preisthood in the actions of concord or union to read them is idolatrie What haeretik professing Christ could more have sought the disgrace of Gods holy book then thus to shut it quite out of Gods worship allowing it no other place by these his wicked grounds then Iulian the Apostata Christs deadly enemy would and did allow it though he esteemed worse of it in his blasphemous writings For eyen he in cases of opposition plea and strife alleged the testimonies of holy scriptures among other writings but in his worship of his Gods he would none of them No marvel though God have stroken this man like Elymas with the blindnes of Anabaptisme it is a just recompence of his former error that as he would have deprived the church of the use of the scriptures the instrument of Gods covenant so himself now should be deprived of the covenant with Abraham and his seed and become an alien from the common wealth of Israel But let us proceed with his answer Moreover sayth he when he commandeth his Epistles to be read in the churches his meaning is not strictly literal that is that the very words which he wrote should be repeated verbatim out of the book but his meaning is that the sense of the words or meaning of the Apostle should be related whither by reading the very words by expounding the meaning by interpreting or translating c. Loe here the shifts of haeretiks Paul willeth the church to read his Epistles yea chargeth them in the Lord to read them to al the brethren and writeth to them again to keep the instructions taught by his Epistle M. Smyth sayth the meaning is not strictly literal that the words which he wrote should be repeated but the sense ralated As if Paul waÌ„ted fit words to set down his meaning they that should read could tel it better He that readeth must read words as they ar written specially in Gods book Epistles from the holy Ghost wherein no one word is vaine idle or unprofitable no word misplaced or out of order and he that shal presume to add or diminish or change the order in reading Gods writings doth wickedly and is neer unto the curse If things in reading be difficult God hath given gifts unto
known before the Apostles time as Tullie testifyeth and the poets taxed the people for it And if they understood not Greek is it likely that Paul would have written his Epistle to the Romans in Greek as he did seeing he misliked speaking and consequently writing in an unknown tongue 1 Cor. 14. 6. 18. 19. M. Sm. having spent his strength though in vain to heap syn upon Israel for translating the bible procedeth unto arguments against reading translations in time of worship Where first I wil give the reader advertisement how contrary this enemie is to himself and then I wil come to his frawd against the truth Of the scriptures set over into other languages commonly caled translations he thus affirmeth A translation is as much and as truly an humane writing as the apocrypha so commonly caled writings are Againe he sayth Translations are not the pure word of God and so contrary to Eccles. 12. 10. Mat. 15 9. Agayn that translations of scripture and written sermons upon the scripture are equally humane in respect of the work equally divine in respect of the matter they handle These and the like blasphemous opinions he sought to infect our church withal for which he was resisted these laboured he by word and writing to confirm with sophistical reasons the pillars of al heresie Yet even in this same book he pulleth down this his former uncouth building it being the nature of error as the foolish woman to destroy her howse with her own hands For afterwards he writeth thus The translation agreable to the originals is a secondary scripture yet much inferiour to the originals So then it is not apocryphal unlesse he use a fallacie in this word scripture for we understand hereby as Christ himself did holy scripture inspired of God as 2 Tim. 3. 15. 16. It may be read sayth he in the church and sung in tunes Then say I it is not as the apocryphal so commonly called writings are for their very name signifying hidden teacheth that they are not to be read in the publik church Jt may sayth he be expounded in the church But so say I may not homilies be nor apocryphal writings And if M. S. in his synagogue doe read and expound such scriptures to his people he maketh thē with himself notorious idolaters Exod. 20. 4. 5. 2 Tim. 3. 16. 17. Eccle. 12. 10. The matter of it sayth he agreable to the originals is inspired to weet of God But the matter say I of the Apocryphal books as Iudith Tobie c. though exactly translated is not inspired vnlesse of the Divil for lyes and fables are in them both the translations I mean and the original Greek copies Jt may be made a ground of our faith sayth he and an instrument to try doctrine by Then is it say I not apocryphal but Canonical for it is made a canon that is a rule of our faith and walking But far be it that humane apocryphal writings should have such vse in the Church of God Wil M. Sm. ground his faith upon this that ther are seven holy Angels which present the prayers of the Saincts and that lying Raphael of the kinred of Azarias is one of them wil he ground his faith upon this that the smel of the hart and liver of a fish perfumed on the coles wil so drive away the Divil that he shal never come againe any more or wil he have his disciples to try their religion by such crooked instruments no marvell though they be led with him into the ditch when they try his doctrine by that which they professe to be as much and as truly an humane writing as the Apocrypha comonly so called writings are For it argueth that eyther they use the Bible but for a shew and colour seing they esteme so vily of it or else that they honour the base borne apocrypha as inspired of God Which is the very syn snare that they have sought to bring upon us Now let vs examine his arguments 1 Thes. 5. 21. Try all things keep that good thing But no man ignorant of the tongues can trie whither the translation be fit or good therfore no man ignorant of the tongues can strictly keep or read a translation in time of worship Here first M. Sm. striking at the translation mysseth that and hitteth onely the ignorant reader of it for if one have skil of the tongues know it to be truely translated this reason maketh nothing against his reading but for it So M. Sm. playes the sophister to argue against a holy thing because of the ignorances infirmities of some men He mought thus have cavilled against reading the law in Israel that no man blind of sight as was Ahijah the prophet could trie whither the original scriptures were truly written or not Secondly if he proceed further as he hath begun hereafter he may come with like reason thus Try al things keep the good thing but no man ignorant of the tongues can trie whither the interpretation of scriptures which the minister giveth in preaching the word or any text that he allegeth in his doctrine be fitt or good then mind what conclusion the Divil wil make hereupon in a simple mans conscience to draw him to doubt of and consequently to forsake and despise not onely al reading but also preaching of the word because he being ignorant of the tongues cannot judge or trie whither that which is read or taught be true according to the original scriptures And thus he falleth into the snare of Satan which Mr. Sm. here hath set in secret Thirdly this reason overthwarteth that which elsewhere the man granteth that the translation may be made the ground of our faith and an instrument to try doctrine by This being so how dooth Pauls counsel Trie al things c. make against translations Rom. 14 23. 1. Tim. 1. 4. 7. Heb. 11. 6. whatsoever cōmeth not from faith is syn but no man ignorant of the tongues can of faith use the translation seing he cannot examin it whither it be good or bad and so beleve or refuse it Therefore it is not of faith in him and so it is syn for him to use it before the eye in time of worship Like sophistrie and impietie is in this argument as in the former for it concludes not the thing unlawful in it selfe but onely in him that is ignorant of the tongues and his faith it seeks to shake For ther is no faith without Gods word and where to have this word he cannot tell If it be set over from the originals to his mother tongue in writing he cannot trie whither it be good or bad if the Minister translate or interpret it by voice the poor man is as much uncertain or more whither the teacher speak true or false Thus can he neyther read nor hear of sayth if M. Smyths engine once take
him But eyther he must look for enthusiasmes or revelations from heaven vvhich some Anabaptists have dreamed of or els he faleth to profanenes or desperation And it is not M. Sm. distinction of worship properly so called that here vvil comfort the troubled sovvl for he must doe al especially his ecclesiastical religious actions of fayth and not his proper vvorship onely Yea the serpent wil build more on this rotten foundation and assault him also that hath skil in the tongues and trouble him saying though thou hast knowledge of Hebrue and Greek yet hovv canst thou tel vvhither this that thou readest be the pure vvord of God There be many Ievvish fables and humane traditions that have been vvritten in Hebrue and in Greek also and vvhither God spake or vvrote these things as novv thou readest them thou knovvest not and therfore canst not of faith make this book a ground of thy religion and vvorship And if thou vvilt credit M. Smyth loe he telleth thee that as Antichrist hath polluted al Gods ordinances so hath he violated the original scriptures Do not thou therfore build thy fayth upon the scriptures any longer but beleev that which M. Smyth and his like shal prophesie out of their harts for so he sayth holy men prophesied before Moses time and indeed so some prophesyed in Ezekiels time though they vvere blamed for it books are in the nature of pictures and images and therfore ceremonies and reading a book is ceremonial and reading Prophesies in the time of the law was a type of prophesying and reading the words of the law out of the book signified the lettering of the words of God out of the hart and Christ fulfilled the law of reading and shut the book in the synagogue to signifie that the ceremonie of book-worship or ministerie of the letter was now exspired and finished and now the worship of the new testament must proceed originally from the hart and spirit Wherfore lay aside the scriptures and hear what men shal prophesy out of their harts orif that like thee not exspect thou revelations and visions from heaven Thus M. Sm. as a snare on Mispah a net spred upon Tabor hath layd in his book such a groundwork against the script as fitteth the Divils purpose to intāgle mens sovvls although to deceive the birds withall he hath strewed some wheat at the mouth of the pit as that translations may be made the ground of our faith an instrument to trie doctrine by c. so breathing out of one mouth both hot and cold A translation made verbatim from the originals is absurd by reason of the difference of the dialects therfore unlawful seing it edifieth not 1 Cor. 14. 26. a translation paraphrastical or a paraphrast if it be lawful in time of worship to be read then why not a written sermon These are but blocks to make the blind stumble Gods word may be set over into English for the most part word for word without absurditie and where our language wilnot bear the strict proprietie of the original phrases we are warranted by the Apostles allegations of scriptures in an other tongue to use such words as the language wil affoard to expresse the other withall Though tongues differ one from another in proprietie of speeches yet God hath sanctified them all for instruments to convey his word and law unto us and this in writing as well as in speaking Dan. 2. 4. c. Act. 1. 4. 8. 9. 11. 15. 23. Rev. 1. 11. 19. Written sermons are the works of men Gods book set over into English though with some diversitie of phrase is Gods book and word stil for as hath been shewed it is not the letter or sound but the thing signified meant by them which properly is Gods word and which we are so to reverence But M. Sm. having granted that the translation may be read in the Church made a ground of our faith c. and now asking why a written sermon is not also lawful in Gods worship eyther alloweth humane writings to be read in the Church as wel as Gods writings translated which is a notable error or els he cavilleth against the truth contrary to his cōscience And in his reasoning dealeth like a false coyner who because the gold of the common wealth is not so fine perhaps as the gold of Ophir or Vphaz sayth to the merchant if such course metal may be taken for mony then why not brasse or copper A paraphrast commentarie or exposition upon a chapter which conteyneth more of the contents of the originals and the holy Ghosts meaning is vnlawful to be read in time of worship therefore a translation of a chapter which conteyneth lesse is unlawful also to be read in time of worship First by Mr. Sm. grownd layd in the beginning a paraphrase comment or any humane writing may be used in the administration of Christs kingdome in like sorte as the scriptures which is erroneous Secondly he addeth more to his error in teaching here that a cōmentary hath more of the contents of the holy Ghosts meaning then the text it self in English or othertrāslatiōs His cōclusiō therfore bringeth forth vanitie and his belly hath prepared deceit No cōmentary in the world made by an ordinarie man conteyneth the meaning of God so as the text it self in a faithful translation of the book or chapter dooth Thirdly Mr. Sm. confesseth that the matter of the translation agreable to the originals is inspired but not the writing or character If the thing written be inspired of God then is it canonical scripture 2. Tim. 3. 16. then not apocryphal nor an humane work as a commentarie then conteyneth it more of the contents of the originals then any mans exposition As for his exception of the writing or character it is but vanitie for the Apostles had the matter of their writings by inspiration frō God as for the writing or character that was not inspired but Gods word was written in such characters words phrases as the hethen Greeks philosophers and Poets had used long before Lev. 22. 22. Mal. 1. 8. 13. 14. Mat. 22. 37. Rō 12. 1. 2. Ps. 119. 45. 103. 1. God wil be served with the best we have But ther is no one translation the best we hav seing the Lord may in time of worship minister better to him that administreth if he understand the originals if he understand not the originals he hath it not at all for it is an other mans work and therefore no one translation written may be read in time of worship M. Sm. is like one of them that hunteth the sowles of Gods people setting reasons as hayes to intangle No one translation sayth he is the best we have seing the Lord may in time of worship minister a better as good a reason against reading the translated
scriptures tures as if he should have sayd unto an Israelite no one sheep of thy pasture is the best thou hast seeing the Lord may in time of worship minister a better as he did the ram to Abraham therfore no one sheep of thym may be offred for sacrifice Mal. 1. 8. Nay his reason against translations hath not so good a colour as this for it is certaine that God once ministred a ram to Abraham for sacrifice but it was never heard that God so ministred an other translated book to read then that which was brought to be read The gift of interpreting or expounding by voyce is of an other kind and not properly reading wherof we intreat But let us follow M. Sm. in his circle see whither he wil lead us No translated bible may be read in Gods worship for God may minister a better what then shal I bring the original bible look on that exspecting what interpretation God wil give me to speak seeing I may not read Not so neyther sayth M. S. the holy original scriptures are not to be reteyned as helps before the eye in time of spiritual worship So then neyther is that the best sacrifice yet but I must exspect the Lord to minister a better If neither the translated bible nor the original be the best where then is the word that is best to be read or uttered to the people In a mans owne hart that must be the book out of which M. Sm. wil have Gods lavv to be read in his vvorship al other books are as images and ceremonies abolished ended by Christ. Though he plead here against translations colourably yet he aimeth at Gods book generally even as his holy Prophets and Apostles vvrote it But the vvickednes of this engine is before discovered Also for translations this further I say the scriptures in English are the best for to read unto English eares better then eyther Hebrue or Greek which they cannot hear And seeing it is needful the scriptures should be read the translation is best Yet so as no Christian is tied to the words of the book but if he know any error in print or tralation or any better words to expresse Gods mind he is to do all things for the best unto the church giving the sense togither with his reading as the practise was in Israel Nehem. 8. 8. But he that withdraweth corn the people shal curse him sayth Solomon how much more deserveth this mā the curse of Gods people that hath sought to withdraw from them in al their publik worship the whol scriptures and book of God whereby the true corn and bread of their sovvles is broken unto them Deut. 16. 16. 1 Chro. 21. 24. Eph. 4. 8. Rom. 12. 3. we must worship God with our own not with another mans with that which cost us somthing not with that which cost us nothing But for one ignorant of the tongues to read the translation and offer it to God is to offer to God an other mans labour not his own that which cost him nothing but is an other mans cost therfore it is unlawful Al vvisdoms vvords are playn and straight but M. Smyths are rough and crooked Who ever said before that men read translations and offred them to God He mought as vvel have sayd vve minister the sacraments unto God For if he mean the last end is the glory of God so is it of al a Christian mans actions Did Paul vvhen he charged that his Epistle should be read unto al the brethren the saints mean they should read and offer it unto God Or had it been for them to except as this man here cavilleth we must worship God with our own not with an other mans with that which cost us something not with that which cost us nothing but this Epistle cost us nothing it is another mans cost and paynes therfore it is unlawful to read it and offer it to God If this reason had been ridiculous in them vvhy they vvould not read Pauls Epistle even so is it here in M. Smyth for vve read the bible vvhich is Gods Epistle unto us in no other manner nor to no other end then they read Pauls letter vvhich vvas part of holy scripture in the church and the book costeth us as much as that cost them And David vvhich vvould not offer burnt offrings wtihout cost vvould he not read or be at the reading of the book of the lavv in the church because it cost him nothing but had been vvritten by Moses and freely given unto Israel Never vvas ther heard more childish sophismes But vvhat if a man translate a book or chapter or text himself and vvriteth it this is his ovvn cost I think then he may read and offer it to God or els M. S. cavilling is litle vvorth Reading a translatiō is not cōmanded nor was ever practised by Christ the Apostles or primitive churches in time of worship so being devised by mā is the account of vain worship Mat. 15. 9. and wil-worship Col. 2. 23. and so a kind of idolatrie and therfore the translation is self before the eye in time of worship an idol and so hath a curse denounced against the use of it in time of worship Rev. 22. 18. Exod. 20. 4. 5. Though they curse yet thou wilt blesse sayth David to God against his enemies and so say I against this adversary who curseth the reading of the scriptures as a wil-worship which God hath blessed so maketh he himself by his blasphemie a child of the curse And by his own mouth let him be judged for thus he writeth in his book Mat. 28. Christ commandeth to goe teach al nations and therefore al nations may have the holy scriptures translated into their own vernacular tongue that thereby they may learn the truth Then further he addeth The translation agreable to the originals may be read in the church and sung in tunes may be expounded in the church may be made a ground of our faith c. From whence I reason if Christ commanding the Apostles to teach Mat. 28. did therby intimate a commandement or permission of translations to learn the truth by and such translations may be read expounded in the church made a ground of our faith then we al other Christian churches that have made and used translations to this end are not idolaters neyther have used wil-worship nor incurred the curse but it hangeth over M. S. own head if he prevent it not by repentance Writing and reading the law is a part of preaching the law Act. 15. 21. Deut. 33. 10. with Nehem. 8 7 8 Mat. 28. 19. with 1 Thes. 5 27 Eph. 3 4 Col. 4 16 Rev. 10 10 11. with Rev. 1 19 and 22. 18. Preaching must be in al languages therefore writing and reading must be in al lāguages being a part of preaching of
Evangelists or Prophets extraordinarie on whose foundation Christs Church is builded should come to that corrupt estate which some of these Angels were come into Rev. 3. 1. 15. Hath it al likelihood that such as were officers of all the Churches in generall should be intitled Angels of particular Churches But it seemeth M. Sm. thinketh the name Angel must needs import some zelous or godly person wherin he is mistaken For the Angels are the starrs in the firmament of the Church and of these starrs or Angels many are cast by the Dragons tayl from heaven to earth and some have the key of the bottomlesse pit some Angels hold the wind of Gods spirit from blowing on the earth So that the Angels or starrs in the book of Revelation usually signify the ministers of the Churches whither good or evil Who rather in likelihood haue the title of angels or messengers given unto them both from the like title given by God himself to the Preists of Israel Mal. 2. 7. and by the Iewes common phrase who called him that was cheif ruler in their Synagogues Sheliach tsibbur that is the Legate or Messenger of the congregation which name Sheliach the Rabbines use for Maleach an Angel and the Chaldee paraphrast putteth Meshammesh that is a Minister in the sted Now Christ used to speak familiarly and to the understanding of the people so I doubt not but he dooth here And although it be questionable whither there may be moe pastors then one in a Church yet see I no likelihood of moe then one here though many Elders For the Pastor both by his name gift imployment hath special charge of the flock in such things as Christ writeth of to these Churches And as Archippus in the Church at Colosse is in special charged to take heed to his Ministerie to fulfil it though it is to be thought there were moe Elders with him as in al other Churches so mought Polycarpus the Pastor in Iohns time of the Church in Smyrna as writers record be written to in special to look to his Ministerie and so the other Pastors the Angels in their severall Churches that by them Christs mind mought be signified to the congregations This course God taketh usually his messengers the watchmen are to hear the word at his mouth and give the people warning from him Ezek. 3. 17. Things that concerned the whole Church of Israel were first spoken from God to Moses from Moses to the Elders from them to the people Exod. 19. 3. 7. and Exod. 12 1 3 21. God doth nothing but he reveleth his secret to his servants the prophets Amos. 3. 7. So in this Revelation God gave it to Christ Christ to an Angel properly so called the Angel to Iohn and Iohn writeth to the Angel of the church the Minister that by him it may come to al the Congregation Thus have we heard the reasons and arguments whereby M. Sm. laboureth to manifest that the triformed presbyterie as he calleth it consisting of three kinds of Elders Pastors Teachers Rulers is none of Gods ordinance but mans device and Antichristian wherein what weaknes or vanity rather hath appeared the judicious reader may discern how litle cause this chalenger had to cry out the second time for an answer with loe we protest against them to have a false government of a triformed presbyterie But Christ who hath set these for officers in his church and holdeth al the starrs in his right hand wil rescue deliver them from the hand of aliants whose mouth talketh vanitie and their right hand is a right hand of falshood OF THE TREASVRIE THe last point of difference from us Mr. Smyth setteth down thus We hold that in contributing to the church treasurie there ought to be both a separation from them that ar without and a sanctification of the whole action by prayer and thanksgiving Of these other points about the Deacons office he speaketh after in his book Wherein if he would have his readers think we differ in al he notably abuseth both them and us But of the two points mentioned in his article I will breifly intreat First for the separatioÌ„ froÌ„ theÌ„ vvithout thus he writeth There ought to be a separation in almes and contribution to the treasurie as wel as in other parts of our spiritual coÌ„â—union Act. 4. 32. 5. 13. 2 Cor. 6. 17. Act. 2. 42. Heb. 13. 16. 2 Cor. 8. 7. therfâ—â—e they that are without if they give any thing must lay it a part severally from the treasurie it must be imployed to common use Mat. 27. 6. 7. How M. S. gathereth his proposition froÌ„ those scriptures how farr he wil stretch them I cannot tel the first place Act 4 32. mentioneth coÌ„munitie of al goods among the saincts the second place Act. 5. 13. sheweth how no other man durst joyn unto theÌ„ the third place 2 Cor. 6. 17. requireth Gods people to come out and separate from unbeleevers and touch no unclean thing If he match these things thus togither as if the goods of unbeleevers ar uncleaÌ„ not to be touched or received of the Saincts he misseth of Pauls intent for upon this ground that the earth is the Lords and the plentie of it the Apostle proveth it lawful for Christians to partake with unbeleevers at their table in whatsoever things is set before them so that meat drink clothing or money may be received from them neither are these or any like outward things the unclean things that he forbids to touch 2 Cor. 6. 17. Consequently if we may goe to their table we may hav them at ours if in our povertie we may receiv releef of theÌ„ in their povertie we may and should releev them wherfore there is that coÌ„munion in these carnal things permitted which in spiritual things as prayer sacraments c. is unlawful though it be sayd Act 2. 42. they continued in the Apost doctrine fellowship breaking of bread prayer yet he that shal gather we may have no more communion with an unbeleever in eating drinking then in prayer mistaketh quite We know that to the defiled unbeleeving no thing is pure as Paul sayth but unto the pure al things are pure and if an idol caÌ„not defile Gods creature so but a Christian may use it so it be not with offence neither can the idolater In some outward things I observe difference between the Iewes state and ours They went not in to nor ate with men uncircuÌ„cised Act. 10. 28. 11 3. we go in to men unbaptised eat with them 1 Cor. 10 27. They did not eat of al meats set before theÌ„ by infidels Dan. 1. 8. we do eat of al that is set before us by such 1 Cor. 10. 25. 26 27. They admitted not an uncircumcised into the temple Eze. 44 9. Act. 21 28 29. we
forbid not any unbaptised to come into our assemblies 1 Cor. 14. 23 25 Notwithstanding his I find amōg them that Solomon asked received outward things as timber for the temple of Huram King of Tyre king Darius gave of his owne revenues towards the tēple worship of God it was not refused In Israel I find not that any admitted into the publik place of the word and prayers was forbidden there if he would to contribute neither any such law made by Christ. Rather the ground layd by the Apostle sheweth the contrarie if the Gentiles sayth he be made partakers of their spiritual thinges their duetie is also to minister unto them in carnal things Rom. 15. 27. Vnbeleevers are admitted to the ministerie of the word in Christian assemblies so made partakers of our spiritual things if then there they wil give of their carnal things upon what ground may we refuse them It is alleged how 2 Cor. 8. 7. the communion of almose is called a grace and in Heb. 13. 16. a sacrifice I acknowledge it thus to be in the saincts whither they give it in publik or private For when he sayth to do good and to communicate forget not for with such sacrifices God is wel pleased he meaneth it not onely of publik contribution in the church but of private distribution to any at any time Paul brought almose and offrings to his nation Act. 24. 17. and himself received such a sacrifice from the Philippians Philip. 4. 18. And if any one Christian in private had sent him the like had it not been a sacrifice also Wherfore the Almose of the Saincts are sacrifices though one give to another in secret yea if a Christian releev an unbeleever in povertie and distresse it is a sacrifice and sweet odour to God If therfore upon this ground we may not receiv it of unbeleevers in the publik Church because it is in the saincts a communion of grace and sacrifice how may we receiv it of such in private But sayth M. Sm. they that are without if they give any thing must lay it apart several from the treasurie it must be imployed to common use Mat. 27. 6. 7. This position I wil not absolutely condemn neyther can I yet grant it for the proof is insufficient For wheras the Iewes Mat. 27 would not put Iudas wages into their treasurie it was not because he was one without for Iudas was a Iew no strāger unto them but because it was the price of blood therfore they mought not put it into the treasurie This teacheth us that goods gotten by violence extorsion murder theft or other like evil way may not be put into the treasurie though the members of the Church do offer them But this is no more for those without then for those within And for common use of al unbeleevers gifts I suppose this example wil not bear it out For if in the povertie and distresse of Christs church they which are not of the same minister releif thereunto which if they doe not it shal be one reason of their condemnation at the day of judgment hath not the church libertie to use injoy these benefits for themselves seing the earth is the Lords and the plentie thereof must they needs bestow it for the behoof of strangers as was Iudas hire I am otherwise minded for the reasons before rendred Howbeit concerning these things if any shall better inform us by the word of God we shal be willing to receiv it For the latter branch that it should be sanctified with blessing or thanks giving to God we do wel approve upō that general ground of thanks unto God for al his benefits and as any do give or send more special releef so more special thanks to be rendred therfore as we are directed 2 Cor. 9. 12 15. Albeit for the manner of performing this thing as whither a special prayer is to be made before the contributiō a special thanksgiving after or whither in the general prayers of the Church it is to be sanctified among other the publik actions there may be some question and I wil not contend let every one use herein the wisedom that God giveth them Onely I do observ how M. Sm. himself makes a quere at what time of the Lords day and after what manner the treasurie is to be collected which sheweth in him no certaintie for the form of this busines I doubt not but as he so we al may be to seek for the most covenient māner order of doing many things wherein if any lust to be contentious I say with the Apostle we have no such custome neither the churches of God A FEW OBSERVATIONS UPON SOME OF M. SMYTHES Censures in his answer to M. Bernard Mr Smyth in his late book caled Parallels censures c. seeks occasion to censure some things which I had written in answer to Mr. Bern. but cheifly insisteth upon the question of ecclesiastical goverment wherabout he chargeth me with antichristianisme If it were not for others that may stumble at this reproch I would bear it in silence minding my adversarie so fickle and unconstant as he holdeth almost to nothing that himself hath written and I would restin Gods work who as already he hath made this man like unto a wheel so if he repent not in due time will make him †like stubble before the wind For from the faith which he defended in that his book he presently after in great mesure fel away himself The constitutiō of our Church in which estate himself then professed to be with us he writeth of it thus I am bould to pronounce c. our true constitution to be the most honorable and bewtiful ornament of our Church more glorious then our true Ministerie worship and goverment Contrary to this a few dayes after he setts out The character of the Beast wherin having dissolved forsaking his former true and glorious constitution he exclaimeth against us as before I haue shewed as having a false Church falsly constituted and therfore no one ordinance of the Lord true among us Thus Wormwood fell from heaven Agayn in this answer to Mr. Bernard he acknowledgeth the apostate Church of the 10. tribes in the old Testament to be a Church falsly constituted and so the Churches of Antichrist in the N. Testament contraryweise in his Character of the Beast seking shifts for his anabaptisme he sayth Israels apostasie did not destroy the true constitution of the Church but Antichrists doeth c. I leave these and other like flowers of contradiction for others to gather that deal in that controversie Onely because his answer to Mr. Bern. seemeth to be written in defence of our cause and so may be taken of posteritie I would have the reader take notice that the silver there is mixt with drosse and the wine with the gal of
aspes As where Mr. Sm. sayth that to the constitution of the typical Church meaning the church of Israel there was not required true holynes but ceremonial cleannes This is a false and blasphemous assertioÌ„ injurious to Gods holy majestie as making him to constitutea Church of hypocrites it is evidently overthrown by the covenants made between God and them Gen. 17. Exod. 19. 5. 6. 8. Exod. 20. and 21. c. and 24. 3. 4. 7. 8. Levit. 19. 2. with 1. pet 1. 15 16. Deut. 5. 1. 2. 3. and 26. 17. 18. 19. and 29. 10. 11. 12. 13. c. So when he sayth the Israelites did worship to repentance we doo worship from repentance therfore they might and did worship therby to reconcile themselves to God we being reconciled to God and accepted in Christ doe proceed to offer to the Lord the calves of our lips the best grace we have with us first men declare their repentance and then we receive them into our coÌ„munioÌ„ to worship with us with theÌ„ first men were received into typical coÌ„munioÌ„ and then they were trayned up to repentance and faith in Christ c. These the like distinctions Mr. Sm. hath fetched out of his own hart not from the word of God for although ther be differences many between them and us as touching outward rites and services ended abolished by Christ as the Epistle to the Ebrues sheweth yet as touching the substance of their religion worship constitution c. as touching repentance faith reconciliation to God c. ther was no such differences as Mr. Sm. feighneth They had the law to shew them their fyn and to bring them to Christ so have we Mat. 5. 17. Rom. 3 30. 31 and 7. 7. 12. 21. c. Iam. 2. 8. 9. 10. 11. We have the gospel to shew us our righteousnes by Christ without works of the law so had they Heb. 4. 2. Levit. 26 42 45. with Luk. 1. 54. 55 72. 73. Deut. 30. 1. 12. 13. 14. with Rom. 10. 5. 6. 8. Gen. 15. 6. Psal. 32. 1. 2. with Rom. 4. 6. c. 1 Cor. 10. 1. 2. 3. 4. Hebr. 11. Onely in the manner of administration the Law gospel ther be differences manifested Also when he sayth that the Iewes moral uncleannes did not pollute their ceremonial communion that their real wickednes did not pollute their ceremonial or typical CHURCH worship and communion but lawfully they might have typical communion in typical worship that were typically clean though they were wicked in deed these assertions manifest M. S. to be not onely a typical but a real seducer and deceiver of minds in deed who would make us beleeve that if a man in Israel had but touched his own wife lying in her child-bed or put aapart for her disease if he came to worship in â—â—e tabernacle and had not washed and clensed himself according to the law he polluted the Church and communion of the Saincts but though he had committed adulterie with his neighours wife and came into the tabernacle in his syn to worship without repentance yet he polluted not the Church but lawfully mought have communion in the word prayer sacrifices c. which unclean doctrine is evidently condemned by these and many other like scriptures Levit. 4. 2. 3. 13. 14. 22. 23. 27. 28. 35. Levit. 6. 2 7. Num. 15. 22. 23. 24. 27. 29. 30. 31. Levit. 19. 17. Levit. 18. 29. 30. Iosh. 22. 16. 17. 18. 20. But upon these and like rotten grounds M. S. hath now sought to build his towr of Anabaptisme which the breath of the Lord wil throw down upon his head Although therfore the cause which M. S. then had in hand was good and many good things are in that book yet the dead flyes have caused to stink and putrified the ointment of the apothecarie as in these so in other points which the wise must observe Leaving therefore those things I come to the matter which he maketh against me and in his foresayd book of Parallels pag. 67. hath thus inveighed But Mr Ains steppeth up with a new kind of Antichristianisme never heard of before and he teacheth us if we wil beleeve him that Christs ruling power is in the Eldership and that the Pope and Prelates ar not Antichrists for taking into their hands the power of the multitude but the power of Christ. Here first Mr S. maketh his owne collection to be my assertion I sayd not neyther would say thus absolutely Christs ruling power is in the Eldership my words are these Counterp pa. 176 We acknowledge Christ to have ordeyned a Presbyterie or Eldership and that in every Church for to teach and rule them by his owne word and lawes That which I wrote I plainely confirmed by scriptures in the margine which the reader may serch and judge of neyther hath this adversarie taken them away or sayd ought against them or yet set them downe in his book where he printed my words for his reader to take notice of That which I have written is further confirmed for the substance of it by Mr Sm. himself in the very same book of Parallels the last page but one where he hath set down this argument The goverment of the primitive Apostolik institution was by a college of Pastors or presbyterie The goverment of the English assemblies is by an antichristian Prelate and his officers Therfore The goverment of the English assemblies is not the primitivs Apostolik goverment The maior is evident c. Agayn in this very passage where he treateth of popular goverment he is driven into such straits as force him to say We dispute not whither the Elders must rule or not but we dispute who hav the negative voice c. and a little after yet we say the Elders are to lead and govern al persons and causes of the Church Who now wil not wonder at this mans malice to charge me with Antichristianisme for my writing and himself in the same book to write as he hath doon And were iâ— in deed Antichristianisme as he sayth which I have stepped up with yet he overlasheth with his tongue in calling it a new kind neverheard of before considering what he had heard before of M. Bernard if not of others as the opinion of those that he caleth Puritans But let us turn the edge of his own argument against himself thus The goverment of the primitive Apostolik institution was by a college of of pastors or presbyterie This M. S. himself defendeth But popular goverment by the multitude is not the goverment by a college of Pastors or presbyterie Therfore popular goverment by the multitude which yet M. Sm. would also plead for is not the goverment of the primitive Apostolik institution Agayn his argument helpeth me thus The goverment of the primitive apostolik institution is not Antichristianisme The goverment which J plead for in answer to M.
do in deed though yet they professe so much as any forehead might blush to say the Pope claims not the power proper to Christ alone And what if I would presse Mr Smythes words as much for the Pope on the other hand namely that he claimeth to be ministerial Bishop under Christ in that he dooth many actions propre to the Church it is but the misinterpretation of his ministerial office not understanding how farr it extends c. and hereupon conclude that properly the Pope is not Antichrist for challenging the Churches ruling power propre to it self would not this plea be as good as Mr Smythes And thus the Pope mought be freed from being Antichrist properly at all or els Mr. S. pleading is but litle worth Agayn for Papal Bishops among the Protestants however they utter not such speeches of their power being curbed through fear of the civil magistrate yet their Lordly jurisdiction which they challenge and usurp over many parishes and provinces togither with the names of blasphemie upō their foreheads as Lords-spiritual Archbishops c. do prove them toincroch upō Christs kingly power and usurp the same though neyther they nor the Pope nor Belial himself wil say so much Next for the goverment by Elders which I proved by scriptures Mr Smyth neyther answering nor once mentioning the scriptures quoted seeketh to blind his reader with a Wee say and a general disclayming of myne error as he calleth it without conviction And let the reader observe his manner of disputing against me At the first he sayd to me This of you deney M. Ains which I think you doe not I say you are therein departed from the faith Behold how his own hart checked him when he began his invective against me it told him that I denyed not the truth But he proceeds and after he had shewed his own faith he comes vpon me with an other Jf and conceles his owne thought saying If you hold any other faith it is not the faith of Christ. After drawing to an end he concludeth a gainst me thus I doe therfore vtterly disclaim this your error Mr. Ains as one part of Antichristianisme in your Church First let us see what mine error is and then how it is convinced Is it mine error to hold that Christ hath ordeyned a Presbyterie in everie Church why the scriptures which I cited proue it to be truth and mine adversary hath nothing to say against it but yeeldeth it himselfe in the last leaf of his book as before I shewed Or is it mine error to hold that this Presbyterie is to teach and rule the Church by Christs owne words lawes This seemeth in deed to be the scandal which Mr. Sm. stumbleth at would thus spurn away The power ministerial of the Elders sayth he is rather a leading power then a ruling power neyther ar the Elders in al the new Testament to my knowledg caled rulers Archontes but overseers leaders elders prohistamenoi wherby the holy ghost would teach that their power is not to rule but to lead and direct I doe therfore vtterly disclaim this your error c. I answer that Mr. Sm. dooth sophisticate dally with the word Rule whiles he maketh it to answer onely to the greek word Archein which signifieth to rule and reign as Princes Mark 10. 42. Rom. 15 12. wheras he knoweth or may know that other vvords also are fitly translated Rule as poimainein Rev. 2. 7. and proistasthai Rom. 12 8. and he savv before his eyes hovv I alleged for teaching and ruling 1. Tim. 5. 17. vvhere this later vvord is used Which he not knovving as it seemeth hovv to translate better and yet not vvilling to brook the vvord Rule sayth they are not caled Rulers archontes but prohistamenoi He might as vvel have sayd neyther ar they caled Overseers but Episcopoi nor Leaders but hegoumenoi nor Elders but Presbyteroi and so have bleared the simple readers eyes vvith al Greek vvords to spoil Christs Ministers of their authoritie and to make men beleeve they stand but for ciphers If he be so ignorant of the Greek tongue as he pretendeth that he vvil neither allovv Prohistamenoi to be translated Rulers vvhich so many Greek authors vvil allovv nor give us an other English vvord for it I vvil leav him to his ignorance or frowardnes rather and referr the reader to 1 Tim. 3. 4. 5. 12. where this same Greek word is applied to the ruling or governing of a howse and of children which the Apostle after in 1. Tim. 5. 17. and other places applieth to the ruling of the Church by Elders So that Mr Sm. may as well teach househoulders they must not rule their howses or children as that Elders must not rule the Church because they be not called Archontes princely-rulers but prohistamenoi rulers standing before or over them Again if this reason of Mr S. be good it hath broke the neck of his popular government for it is this If Elders be not called Archontes Princes or Princely-rulers then are they not to rule the Church of God But Elders are not called Archontes Therefore c. Which I return upon himself thus If the multitude of brethren be not called Archontes then are they not to rule the Church of God but the multitude of brethren are not called Archontes if they be let M. S. shew where yea I might add that they are not called Overseers nor Leaders nor Elders nor prohistamenoi Therfore neyther are they to rule the Church and so it is to be without rule or government of man at all which if M. Sm. doe hold it wil be found that himself deneyes the faith For however it be true that onely Christ himself who is the Archon or Prince of the kings of the earth is properly the Archon or princely-ruler of the Church and imperiall power perteyns to him alone yet he hath given ministerial power and authority to his servants poimainein proistasthai to feed rule govern go before and direct his Church and who so refuseth them whom he hath sent and set refuseth him Wheras I further added of the Elders set to teach and rule that vnto them all the multitude the members the saincts ought to obey and submit themselves as the scriptures teach Heb. 13. 17. 1. Pet. 5. 5. this wholsom doctrine Mr. Sm. before misliked and kicked against in answering Mr. Bern. seeks to turne it away with this peremptorie and perverse answer To the place Heb. 13. 17. J say the Apostle doth not intend to teach that the whol body of the Church must yeeld to the voice of the Elders in every thing that they lyst O notable cavil who sayth they must yeeld to every thing the Elders lyst Is this a fit answer to casshier the government of the Elders Then away also with his popular goverment for I say no scripture intendeth to teach that eyther minister or
member must yeeld to the voice of the multitude in every thing they lyst If so then Aaron had been blamelesse for making the golden calf because it was the peoples lyst and they importuned him thereto Exod. 32. 1. 22. 23. But M. S. proceedeth saying nor that the Eldership hath in their hands the power of Christ to rule contrarie to their liking I answer the Elders are to teach and rule the Church by Christs own word and lawes as I have expressed And herein I presuppose that both the Elders wil teach and rule according unto godlynes the people wil obey the godly doctrines directions of their Elders without mislike or discontentment For Christs sheep wil hear his voice his kingdom is peaceable his subjects loyal and obedient Now whiles I speak of the ordinary power that the Elders have to teach and rule the Church as Christ hath constituted it in peace it is but from a contentious humour to obiect that they have not power to rule contrary to the peoples liking as if there could be no rule but when the Elders and brethren are at warr one with another Of the Church it is written the multitude of them that beleeved were of one hart and of one sowl yet none I think doubteth but ther was rule goverment amōg them And of such quiet rule spake I though M. Sm. would disturb it with his exception which he mought also have alledged against the Presbyteries authoritie to pray preach and administer the sacraments seing these ar no more to be done contrary to the peoples liking then rule and goverment for God hath caled us in peace So for ought that is yet sayd the government by Elders standeth fast The last battry foloweth But sayth M. S. the intent of the Apostle is to show that all the particular members in all their affaires must submit themselves to the instruction and guidance of the Elders For although Christ hath placed the Elders as stewards over the servants yet he hath not appointed them as Lords over his spowse wife Your argument therfore sayth he is a fallacian a coniunctione divisione thus Al the particular members must obey the elders in their lawful instructions and their wholsome admonitions severally Ergo the whole body must ioyntly obey the voyce of the Elders Here M. Sm. running himself into a fallacie by dividing those that are joyned togither of the Lord would bear himself out in his evil by blaming an other first but without al equitie as the judicious reader may easily perceiv For his reason is to this effect Jf Elders be stewards over the servants and not Lords over the wife the church then is not the church to obey or submit unto them Where learned the man this logik Is there no obedience or submission thinks he but unto Lords Then is there no obedience ecclesiastical which the church may yeeld to any save unto Christ for he is the onely Lord. But this man is blinded with his erroneous conceipt For as in civil goverment we are to obey and submit not onely to the King as unto the superior but also to the governours that are sent of him so in goverment ecclesiastical we are to obey and submit not onely to the King Christ but to the Elders his ministers sent of him to the one we submit as to the Lord and King to the other as to servants and ministers set over us by the Lord. Agayn I would fayn know whither Mr. Sm. thinketh the Elders to be Lords over the particular members If he say yea I abhor his pride for it is injurious to Christ the sole Lord of al every one in the church if nay then I detest his sophistrie for by the same reason that he disswadeth the whol flock from obedience he mought also disswade each particular member which yet he dooth not but yeeldeth the contrary Now that the Apostle intendeth not onely the particular mēbers but the general flock also is apparant First by his reason which he annexeth for they watch for your soules as they that must give accounts Al good Elders I ween do watch as well for the publik church as for the private members and shal give account for the whol If then the Apostles reason be of weight the vvhol flock as vvel as the particular sheep must obey and submit to such as vvatch over them Secondly the Apostle sayth elsvvhere to the Elders of an other church take heed to al the flock wherof the holy ghost hath made you overseers poimainein that is to feed rule govern guid direct and doe al other duties of good shepheards unto the church of God Novv these vvords flock church mean not particular members but the general company under charge guidance And if the holy Ghost have set Elders and shepherds over the whole flock can any man doubt but they must teach rule and direct the whol if they must doe this by authoritie from God is not the whol flock bound to be taught ruled directed by them in the Lord What perverting of the scripture then is this that when the Apostle writing to a whol church to obey and submit unto their guides it should be restreyned unto particular members for to obey Such doctrines fitt rather the confusion of Babylon then the holy order goverment of Sion But it seemeth the stinch of this restreynt went up into the nose of the man himself as he wrote it for presently he seeketh to sweeten the yll savor with these flowers that Al the saincts shal yeeld obedience to the Elders in things commanded by God and the Elders shal al of them obey the voyce of the church in things commanded of God He might also have added that both Elders and people should obey the voyce of any particular person in things commanded by God For if the whol church doe syn and any one make it known unto them and shew them the law of God they are bound to obey him submit to his good coūsel in the Lord. But what is this to the purpose The question is into whose hands Christ hath committed the ordinarie teaching guiding governing and ruling of his saincts here on earth The scriptures teach and we accordingly have long since professed that it is into the hands of the Bishops or Elders This is that which I defend in my answer to M. Bernard for this if for any thing M. S. also inveigheth against me being indeed against himself also herein For besides the testimonies fore alleged out of his book he hath further in the same book written thus Christ is not their king seing he onely ruleth by his own lawes and officers and not by Antichristian Lords and lawes c. And agayn You refuse Christs testament and his kingdome and will not have him to reign over you in his own offices and lawes which is contrarie to these places Luk.
19. 27. Apoc. 14. 9. 10. 11. Loe here the truth which I defend confirmed by my adversaries owne penn for this is the onely thing which I plead that Christ ruleth his people onely by his own lawes and officers as mine opposite himself granteth yet see what an outcrie he maketh against me as teaching such Antichristianisme as was never heard of before But by his former dispute against the Presbyterie himselfe is found to be one of those enimies that wil not have Christ to reign over them by his own offices and lawes Wheras he putteth the question thus how farr the sheep must obey the Elders which ar shepheards that is not the point between Mr. Bern. and me neyther medle I with it yet if any be desirous to know my mind in general it is So farr as the shepheards doe teach rule and direct the sheep in the wayes of Christ by his owne word and lawes so farr at they al jointly and every one severally bound to obey and submit to their shephards and no further For although this be the ordinary way of teaching and governing the Church yet if extraordinarily it fal out that the shepheards walk and lead awry and the sheep go aright then is neyther the whol flock nor any one sheep to follow or obey them unlesse they wil fall togither into the ditch Neyther wil that reason which M. Sm. so laboureth about namely that the Ministery is not by succession but by election of the church make ought against me unlesse the man thinketh this consequence good If Elders be chosen by the Church then are they not to teach and rule the Church by Christs word and lawes The contrary rather is true For if the Church be authorized and commanded of Christ to chose and set Elders over them for to teach and rule them by his own word and lawes and are also commanded to obey and submit themselves unto their Elders then are the Elders to teach rule them by Christs word and lawes and the Church is therin to obey But the first is true as the scriptures and reasons forealleged prove Therefore alsothe latter No more wil that similitude of a body which as all parables will easily be perverted being streyned beyond the purpose of the holy spirit help ought against the truth I defend For as God hath disposed the members every one of them in the body at his own pleasure given them severall faculties so as all the members have not one work and as the eye for seing the ear for hearing the mouth for speaking c. doo administer not for particular mebers onely but for the whol body even so the Church hath many members with diversities of gifts and diversities of offices or ministeries which they are to attend unto and execute for the whol body the whol not the particular members onely as this man fansieth are to obey and submit unto these distributions administrations being al of the Lord as the Apostle teacheth And as al the members of the body have not the gift of speaking seeing smelling c. but these are bestowed on special members for the use of al so in the church al are not prophets or al teachers or al governours c. but to one is given the word of wisdome to another the word of knowledge c. unto the administration of which gifts by the due offices or members al the body is to submit and obey in the Lord. So that a wonder it is any man should have the face to blame me with Antichristianisme for disclayming that position which M. Bernard imputed unto us namely that the power of Christ that is avthoritie to preach to administer the sacraments and to execute the censures of the church belongeth to the whole church yea to overy one of them or for affirming some special authoritie to be committed to the Elders for reaching and ruling the church by Christs own word and lawes unto whom the other brethren are to obey alwayes in the Lord. What would it be but a mere confusion and abuse of the holy ordinances of the gospel if every one in the church should administer perform the works of al Christs ministers which they may if the power and authoritie perteyneth unto them for who may abridge the saincts of these things And most strange it is that M. S. if any thing may be strange in him would thus inveigh against me when in handling this very poynt against M. Bern. he writeth thus Wherefore I say unto you that the gifts of preaching administration of the sacraments and governing are given unto some men but the offices and officers indued with these gifts are given unto the church c. If but some men in the church have the gifts of preaching administration of sacraments governing wil M. S. blame me for deneying this position of M. Bernard that Christs power and authoritie to preach administer the sacraments c. belongeth to every one in the church Have they authoritie to preach or govern which have not the gifts of preaching or government I leave the judgment of this controversie to every wise hart And this I hope may suffice for clearing my self of Antichristianisme in that which I wrote about church goverment being the mayn thing which M. Sm. hath wrested against me Other things there are which he girdeth at breifly and which I omit to strive with him about whom I see to be set upon debate And how adversarylike he dealeth with me in mangling corrupting and depraving my answers for his advantage they that compare them with his book may see Let this one be an instance To an objected error against us I thus answered Neither is this position set down in our words to my knowledge neither doth Mr. Bernard take away but confirm rather the thing that we hold for he granteth that they offend God which may and doe not ordinardie having meanes offred live in a church rightly constituted we grant that many of Christs subiects for want of meanes doe not live in a true constituted church If therfore he were not a caviller he would not have reckned this among our errors This my answer M. S. of his liberalitie hath set down in his book thus M. Ains answering M. Bern. pag. 173. vseth these words Neither is this position set down in our words to my knowledge if therfore M. Bern. were not a caviller he would not have reckned this among our errors Thus having dealt more injuriously with my words then the unjust steward did with his Masters reckning in abating more then half of my writing without so much as any note or mark to intimate of further matter in my answer which he maketh almost senselesse he procedeth to charge me with forsaking the defence of the truth and then runns on to justifie that he had written to Mr. Bernard which I knew not of But for his