and govern the Church in her publick affaires which is the work of the Officers but as they are partakers of Christs kingly anoynting by his spirit common to the head and the members and so Kings by participation and indowed with kingly power for the coÌ„quering and subduing of the power of sin and Sathan not onely in themselves but in their brethren also by the sword of the spirit the word of God which they are to minister unto them as all other graces in their order And this meaning being held it may safely be taught that they are over one another that is to watch one over another and so as kings to conquer their spirituall enemies one in another mutually But I wil rather insist vpoÌ„ mine own words for or to one another as being most fit to shew that coÌ„munioÌ„ of the saints in this grace as in the rest which he also in all equity should have done And thus I will prove this royall coÌ„munion of the saynts And for them that make themselves merry herewith let them suffer me to speak and when I have spoken let them mock on And first it must be observed that the place and scriptures which M. Iohnson notes in our Confession to prove Christ the onely King of his Church prove him as wel and that truely to be the onely Preist Prophet of his Church And if notwithstanding his sole prophecie and preisthood peculiar to him as the head the saynts may be Prophets and Preists as members by coÌ„munication they may also be Kings by coÌ„munication notwithstanding his peculiar imperiall power And so the scriptures testifie that he hath made vs kings and preists unto God even his Father and so our Father But it wil be answered that Christ hath made vs Kings to resist subdue and conquer our spiritual enemies Sin Sathan this world and our worldly lusts by the sword of the spirit the word of God and the work of the spirit in and by the same I grant it and therupon conclude that since Gods people are also by the same weapons and means to resist and subdue the power of sin in their brethren they are also kings in the same respecâ— unto them The saynts are Christians and that for and in respect one of another as members vnder Christ one of another and therfore Kings For to be a Christian for another is nothing els but by participation of Christs annoynting to be a Preist Prophet and King for another Ad vnto this that whatsoever grace any member of the body hath received it is for the use and edification of the rest and so in order to be administred by him as a good disposer of the grace of God And must this royal grace then which the saynts have received find no time nor place for the dispensation of it vnto others When a brother comes to subdue and maâ—e conquest of some spiritual enemy or sin appearing in his brother eyther privately or publiquely in his place and order he dooth this as a fellow member and Christian and so by one of his three states and indowments of preist prophet or king for he hath no office wherein he administreth but by neyther of the two former therfore by the latter and as a king and so made by Christ. Lastly the people are by M. Iohnsons own graunt to choose their officers as also upon just occasion to depose them And this as the former they doo not as Preists or Prophets and therfore by their kingly indowment from and vnder Christ. And thus much to prove the saynts in their coÌ„munion as Preists to offer up the prayers one of another and Prophets to instruct one another so also partakers of the kingly dignity of Christ as his meÌ„bers for the suppressing and conquering of sin appearing one in another in that order which Christ hath left And where do I in al this as is imputed to me advance the people as others do the Prelates and make them Idols Do I give them power to prescribe and appoint other formes of Gods worship offices of Ministery canons ceremonies or holy dayes then Christ hath prescribed and appointed to bind the conscience by urging subscription ex animo to their own inventions or to loose conscience by dispensations to sin as of pluralities non residencies and the like or that one man should set up and pul down ministers and excommunicate and absolve both ministers and people by his sole authority If another man should thus have charged Mr IohnsoÌ„ when he mainteyned the same libertie of the brethren if nor greater which I now do though it may be not under the same terms he would have pronounced it blasphemy in him B passing by his terms of provocatioÌ„ and reproach I come to another exception which is that I make the order of saynts superiour unto the order of officers to wit in it self as I there explayne my meaning and not in respect of government as he traduceth me I know that he which guideth ordereth and directeth another is in that his art and work superiour vnto him that is so guided ordered and directed So is the Pilote in guiding the ship superiour and above all the passengers in it though the King and his Councell so is the Physition in ordering the kings body as is also the meanest guide in leading and directing him and his army Royall in unknown places So are the officers superiour to the Church in their art or work of government which is the opening and applying of the scriptures to the use and direction of the Church but as this is done by them in an order of service and not of Lordship so I judge and call them inferiour And so in my book I make them equall in their persons as saynts superiour in the word they minister and in the place of God not so in their order of servants wherin they minister but inferiour My reasons there brought to prove mine affirmation bycause he here medles not with I also forbear in this place to confirm onely a few words of one of them upon which the next and last exception dependeth Which is that the order of Church-officers is inferiour to the order of the saints bycause their order is an order of service and servants unto the saynts the Church I know Kings may be sayd to serve their people and so to become their servants but this is onely in respect of their love towards them and care for them but not in respect of their order which is a Lordship and Kingship by which they reign over their people as their servants and subjects The like may be sayd of Christ himself as that he served his disciples and became as a servant c. And for that it must be considered that as in the things wherin he did thus serve and become as a servant he did in his love make himself inferiour to his disciples and preferred
who had power from God to give the blessing and the action was also confirmed by the evidence of Gods spirit afterward but this people upon our opposites doctrine had no authority from God to doo as they did neyther could they shew any confirmation of the work by God if our former grounds fayl us The sentence given in the end by the Elders that leaned to the Pastors error was not that discourse they speak of at the end of the Treatise on Mat. 18. for that was privately penned afterward by the Pastor himself but a breif and yet large approbation of the things which the Pastor had shewed to be the truth and a promise that by the grace of God they would so practise Vpon which sentence giving we on the contrary approved our former profession published and shewed sundry reasons which hereafter shal be set down why we could not yeild to their new vowed practise And because they alwayes sought to extenuate the controversie as if it were but a strife about words or about the meaning of Mat. 18.17 We purposely prevented it signifying expressly before we parted that we would bear with them in their understanding of Mat. 18.17 so as they would yeild the point in controversie which was about the Churches power from other scriptures shewing it also by an other case that if we had to deal upon John 1. with an Arian that denyes the godhead of Christ if he would plainly and sincerely yeild to the truth of that doctrine though he thought it not proved by Iohn 1 where yet it is evidently proved we would bear with him therin And this we still offer unfeighnedly to these our opposite brethren let them yet directly and plainly renounce the error it self touching the power of the church now ingrossed into the Elders hands and the other errours that necessarily flow from the same and we wil bear with their judgement concerning Mat. 18.17 though we think of it otherweise that doo they Moreover seing we offred much more which concerneth not onely Mat. 18.17 but al other scriptures that we would notwithstanding our difference of judgement have continued together if our former practise might have been reteyned and themselves in their Advertisement can not deny this how doo they then bear the world in hand that the breach among us vvas for the understanding of Math. 18.17 Touching their Treatise on Mat. 18.17 the causes why I have not answered it are 1. When others heretofore as namely Mr. Smyth wrote against the truth which they formerly professed we al thought best not to answer til the second and third time we were excedingly provoked for we considered how the coÌ„mon adversary would rejoyce at our intestine troubles The same I minded here and these men should if they were not partial have doon the like 2. I had experience in former dealing vvith M. Smyth of his unstayednes that vvould not stand to the things vvhich himself had vvritten I mind the like in these Opposites vvho are not setled for the constitution of their Church and Ministerie upon any ground that I knovv of unless it be popish succession Their former vvritings about the Church and ministery and their present estate wil not stand togither Seing those books are unanswered by others they should answer them if they can themselves and shew us by Gods word what is allowable vvhat disallovvable in them Till they doo this vvho vvould vvillingly deal vvith them 3. Ther are 9. reasons in that our Apologie to confirm the povver of the Church novv in question the foresaid Treatise dealeth but against one of them leaving the rest there and vvhatsoever is vvritten of that argumeÌ„t in other our books unansvvered what reason have they to cal so upon others to write when so much is already written If they yeild us the cause upon the other reasons we wil not strive about the meaning of one scripture as before vve shevved 4. The meaning of Mat. 18.17 is handled by Mr. Robinson against Mr Bernard vvhose book our opposites so much respected and the false gloses upon that text sufficiently refuted vvhy doo not these men ansvver the things there vvritten but cal styl for more as if al men must leav other studies to folovv them in their hunting for preeminence 5. I have had intelligence of Mr. Robinsons further purpose to ansvver in particular that their treatise as occasion shal be given And in deed I for the love and respect that I have alvvayes had to these novv opposite brethren have desired their conviction rather by others then by my self vvho are both better able to perform it and are likely to be more regarded then I and to doo it vvith less publik scandal to the vvorld vvho desire nothing more then to see us that vvere so neerly joyned to sharpen our penns one against another Thus have I been stayed hitherto though novv as the things in that Treatise are repeted in this their Advertisement I shal discover also the insufficiencie of their reasons there alleged Novv as the Advertiser shevveth by examples of troubles in â—hurches heretofore that the godly vvise should not be offended at these dissensions accordingly doo I desire all syncere harted for to vvalk And further that he himself vvith others vvould look into the 3. particulars that he allegeth 1. For the troubles in Corinth the Apostle composeth by shevving the Church their place in Christ above their ministers 1. Cor. 3.21.22.23 vvhich might also if it vvere vvel observed end the strife that is novv among us 2. The contention about Easter as it vvas evil in it self being about mens traditions so vvas it as ill caried For they learned not to redress things as Paul before taught 1. Cor. 3. but contrarivveise as Hierom after telleth us by setting up one Elder about others that the seeds of schismes might be taken away Which humane vvisdom furthering the mysterie of Antichrist so far prevailed that about this their Easter strife Victor Bishop of Rome determined to have excoÌ„municated the East churches and had doon it but that Irenaeus blamed him and stayed it Thus ambition having vvrung the povver first out of the vvhole Churches hands into the Elders onely and then out of the Elders hands joyntly into ones alone began to vvork factions and styrrs in the churches vvorse then ever before 3. The troubles vvhich they speak of in the English church at Frankford in Q. Maryes dayes is even a picture of our present calamities and vvorthy of perpetual remembrance For there vvhen M. Horn the pastor vvith his felovv Elders vsurped authority above the church they vvere vvel vvithstood by the body of the congregation among vvhom vvere sundry men of vvisdom and learning And to appease that strife by the Magistrates counsel they agreed upon articles vvhich directly overthrovv the errors so stood for by these our opposers For thus the printed Discourse of the troubles of that church sayth The Discipline
c. The reasons pressed by our cōmon adversaries Mr Some Mr Giffard Mr Bernard and others touching the baptisme and church of Rome other like matters these men now take up against us The answers published by Mr. Barrow and Mr Robinson they pass by as if they knew them not yea their own former answers and writings they take not away and yet which is most strange they ceass not to press us with the same things I might wel have stayed my pen upon these considerations at least until our Opposers had given themselves further answer and manifested what of their former profession they wil stil abide by but their importunacie wil not suffer me to be silent Wherfore humbly craving the Lords asistance for the defense of the faith once given to the Saincts for my brethrens good if it may be who are thus fallen into errour and evil I have written this answer to their ADVERTISEMENT so farr as it concerneth me labouring by the word of God to reduce them agayn into the right way Their straying from it is a reproch to the world a scandal to the weak dangerous to their own souls and to me most dolorous and my soul shall weep in secret for them remembring our former amitie concord in the truth And I shal yet labour for their good both by prayer unto God and by the utmost of my poor indevours otherweise so long and so farr as I may The principal things handled in this treatise THe Occasion of publishing this controversie and the state therof pag. 1. c. Articles agreed of by the English Church at Frankford in Q. Maries dayes touching the Churches power contrary to our Opposites errors pag. 8.9 A defense of the Letter which Mr. Iohnson hath answered and published pag. 10. c. The first point of difference about the power of the Church and Eldership pag. 12. c. The 2. of the Churches power to receiv in and cast out members when it hath no Elders pag. 45. c. The 3. of the Churches power for election and deposition of their ministers pag. 51. c. The 4. of executing a ministery without lawful caling pag. 59. c. The fift of the Baptisme in the Church of Antichrist pag. 67. c. Of the Church of Rome and whither it be stil Gods true Church pag. 76. c. Mr. Iunius his judgment of the Church of Rome tried pag. 68. c. The 6. of using the help of other Churches in hard controversies pag. 107. An answer to the 7. articles objected by Mr. Iohnson to us pag. 110. c. Mr. Robinsons answer to Mr. Iohnsons exceptions against his book pag. 111. c. Of the conditions of peace by us desired by our opposites refused pag. 123. Of the Agreement by our opposites propounded made and ratified and by them again broken pag. 127. c. The Testimonie of the Elders of the Church at Leyden touching the foresayd agreement and breaking therof pag. 123. c. An Animadversion to Mr Richard Clyftons Advertisement Of the occasion of publishing this controversie and of the state therof AS they that styrr up warrs and strife impute the cause unto others which lyeth on them selves so these our opposers which wil needs bid us battel yet begin it as occasioned by us thereunto They object 1. our private letters and 2. printed Articles as reasons moving them to print against us But how vveighty motives these are on their part let the discreet reader judge by these our answers 1. I wrote no such letters to any til they had printed their first book and so possessed the world with the strife 2. Mine were private to freinds brethren their 's publick even to enemies also 3. They did it of their own proper wil and motion I was provoked sundry wayes by letters from abroad and freinds at home For example one writeth to me thus Because it is doubted by some not onely whither Mr Jo. his practise with you be answerable to his writing but also whither in his writing ther be not a discoherence he being so intricate that many cannot apprehend his meaning my earnest desire is and the desire of many others among us that you would afford us this favour to signify to us by your letter the certaynty c. Another writeth to my freind thus we not knowing wel to send a letter unto M. A. thought good to write unto you to intreat him to write unto us concerning the differences that be amongst you c. Those that come over of M. J. his side say they hold no more concerning the Eldership then M. A. hath written against M. Smyth others say to the contrary we doo therfore intreat M. A. to certifie us of the truth c. Vpon these and the like motives there and here by some that went over to their freinds I have written as I was necessarily occasioned privately of the differences between us making account my letters would come to our opposites hand as is fallen out for which I am not sory save so farr as hereby they occasion their own evils to be further manifested which I had rather if so it pleased God they were hid and buryed by repentance 4. Themselves have doon the like and even this Advertiser wel knowes who wrote to a freind in Engl. perswading against us that saying of the Apostle Receiv him not to house neyther bid him God speed 2. Joh. 10. which letter if we would have sought occasion as they have we might ere this have printed with the answer By this al may see how partial these men are which advertise the world of our writing coversly when themselves if it be a fault are guilty of the same 2. Touching the printed Articles so often spoken of in their Advertisement as we had no hand in or knowledge of the publishing of them so must we now shew the reason of giving them out as we did being even against our wills forced therunto by the frowardnes of these our Opposers First for the Scornful that printed those articles they bear the world in hand as if the Congregation wherof I am and my self had sued others at the law for the meeting howse wheras the contrary was publikly agreed in our Church that we would rather bear the wrong than trouble the Magistrate with our controversie neyther have we ever commenced such a suit 2. But wheras two of our brethren and a widow were cheif owners of the building they sought first in private freindly manner to come to agreement with their opposite brethren but could not then they desired to put it to the arbitrement of indifferent citizens but the other party refused wherupon our brethren signifyed to vs that they must seek help of the Magistrate for the estate of some of them was such as they could not bear the loss and dāmage And asked us if the churches right were caled in question for our adversaries plea was the
reformed and confirmed by the authoritie of the church and magistrate Art 38. The ministers and seniors severally and jointly shal have no authority to make any maner of decrees or ordinances to bind the congregation or any member therof but shal execute such ordinances and decrees as shal be made by the congregation and to them delivered 44. The ministers and seniors elect have authoritie as the principal members of the congregation to govern the sayd congregation according to Gods word and the discipline of the church and also to cal togither and assemble the sayd congregation for causes and at times as shal to them seem expedient Provided alwayes that if any dissention shal happen between the ministers and seniors or the more part of them and the body of the congregation or the more part of it and that the sayd ministers and seniors in such controversie being desired therto wil not assemble the congregation that then the congregation may of it self come togither and consult and determine as concerning the sayd controversie or controversies and the sayd assembly to be a lawful congregation and that which they or the more part of them so assembling shal judge or decree the same to be a lawful decree and ordinance of sufficient force to bind the whole congregation and every member of the same 46. Item in case some doo depart out of the sayd congregation that yet not withstanding those which stil remayn if they be the greater part to be a lawful congregation and that which they or the more part of them shal decree to be a lawful decree of force to bind the whole body ministers seniors deacons and every other member or members therof without exception 53. If any of the congregation be offensive c. to any of the brethren so that the offense be private he is first brotherly to admonish him alone If that doo not prevayl to cal one or 2. witnesses If that also doo not prevayl then to declare it to the ministers and Elders to whome the Congregation hath given authoritie to take order in such cases according to the discipline of the Church 54. Ther be 3. degrees of ecclesiastical discipline first that the offender acknowlege his fault and shew himself penitent before the ministers and seniors The 2. that if he wil not so doo as wel his original crime as also his contempt of the ministers c. be openly declared by one of the ministers before the whole congregation c. The 3. that if he remayn stil obstinate before the whole congregation after a time to him by the whole congregation limitted to repent in he then shal be openly denounced excommunicate which excommunicatiō seing it is the uttermost penaltie of ecclesiastical power shal not therfore be executed until the matter be heard by the whole Church or such as it shal specially appoint ther unto 62. If al the ministers and seniors which have authority to hear and determine c. be suspected or found parties or if any appeal be made from them that then such appeal be made to the body of the congregation the ministers seniors and parties excepted and that the body of the congregation may appoint so many of the congregation to hear determine the sayd matter or matters as it shal seem good to the Congregation 65. That the Ministers and Seniors and every of them be subiect to ecclesiastical discipline and correction as other private members of the Church be 67. If any controversie be upon the doubtful meaning of any word or words in the discipline that first it be referred to the ministers seniors And if they cannot agree therupon then the thing to be brought and referred to the whole congregation These and the like things were agreed of by that church to suppress the exorbitant power which the ministers then chalenged wherby the reader may see 1. what the learned and most conscionable of the church of England held heretofore which if they had continued in would have freed them of al antichristian prelacie the bane of so many churches 2. That this opinion of the churches power above the Elders is not new or first professed by us as some doo reproch us 3. And that these Advertisers which now oppose against us if they had looked upon the examples which themselves alledge might have seen their errours resisted by others against which the Lord hath now caled us also to witness He vouchsafe to be with us in this busynes and guide my hart and hand to defend his truth Of the Letter by M. Iohnson answered and published and by H. Ainsworth now defended Wherin the Articles of difference between both parties are set down and discussed THree things are to be treated of 1. The points wherin they are gone frō their former profession 2. The points wherin they now charge us to differ from our former profession 3. The conditions of peace which they refused For an entrance into this controversie M. Iohnson gives 5. observations First that wee left them upon two particular matters concerning the Churches government and the exposition of Mat. 18 17. doo not directly keep to them as we ought nor answer the things printed I answer this their beginning is ambiguous and fraudulent The churches government is somtime taken largely sometime strictly sometime it is spoken of Christ upon whose shoulders the government is and hereof ther was no controversie Sometime it is spoken of the ministerial ruling and governing the church by Elders neyther of this doe we make any question but hold as heretofore that Christ governeth his church outvvardly by their ministration Sometime men use it generally for the whole outward politie power and as many cal it discipline of the Church and about this in part our cōtroversie was But I wil manifest the frawd We in our published writings distinguish the government and the power acknowledging government to be by the officers but power in the whole body of the Church And for this point of power are 9. reasons set down wherof one is drawn from Christs speech Mat. 18.17 tel the Church Apol. pag. 62.63 Between these two is the matter so conveyed as while we plead for the churches right and power we are sayd to oppugn goverment and when we yeild the Elders to govern they therby would inclose the whole power in their hands as in the furder handling of these things shal appear But if a church have one minister onely he is to teach and govern them by the word of God yet is not any one man a Church neyther hath the power of a Church Yea this distinction is in one particular by themselves acknowledged in the same book it is they say undenyable that to give voices in election is not a part of government or a duty peculiar to the governours of the church but an interest power right and libertie that the saincts and people out of office
deceyt The whole Church is a kingdom of Preists that is of ministers who are to be guided and governed by their Officers caled also ministers in more special manner for the holy and orderly practise of the power And thus the Prophets foretold the state of the Christian Church saying strangers shal stand and feed your sheep and the sonns of strangers shal be your plowmen and dressers of your vines but ye shal be named the Preists of the Lord men shal say unto you The Ministers of our God Where the Officers of the Church are coÌ„pared to pastours husbandmen as the new testament also coÌ„firmeth vvhich should be of the converted Gentiles and the Church it self is the Lords preisthood and his Ministers Sixtly they ask whither we in the Churches goverment as the Anabaptists in the sacraments would not make them aliens from the coÌ„mon wealth of Jsrael c. I answer this was in their fourth observation before and there is by me answered I trust without absurdity or ungodlynes errors or evils all which they here insinuate against us for to fyll up their mesure But here agayn the reason deceiveth the reader for in sted of coÌ„mon-wealth or politie they bring in one body one Lord one faith of theirs and ours c. Ephe. 2. c. Al this we grant but the outward politie goverment we deny to be the same it being changed by Christ both for Citie Sanctuarie Dan. 9.26 There was alwayes one Lord faith of the Church but not alwayes one politie The kingdom and preisthood were first executed by one person as in Melchisedek afterward these functions were divided Kings might not doo the Preists work Also the civil government in Israel was changeable somtime without a King sometime with one yea sometime by hethen Kings as Nebuchadnezar Cyrus c to whom the Israelites were bound to be subject but not so in their sacraments that ther is no just consequence to be drawn froÌ„ the one of these to the other We rather may ask of our opposites whether they as the Papists would not draw us froÌ„ the testament of Christ vvho was faithful as Moses in al his house to the Ievvish politie novv abolished And let them tell us vvhether ther may be novv Archbishops over other Bishops and Ministers as in Israel there were Archpreists over other Preists and Levites or a superior court to hear the appeals from particular synagogues cities now as was then and whether the ministers of the Church now may be captayns of politik armies as Benajah son of Iehojada the cheif Preist was general of the feild in Ioabs room Such orders have been heretofore in Israel Seventhly they ask why we speak not of our selves what we pleaded to be the church spoken of Mat. 18 17. c. I answer because our plea is already set forth in sundry books as the Discovery the Reâ—itation of M. Gifford the Apologie the Treatise of the Ministerie against M. Hildersh the Answer to White c. And I ask of them agayn why they answer not the things already published in so many treatises but fish for more matter by subtile questions as if men had nothing ells to doo but answer al things that they write and demand and to let them range at wil without orderly answering as is meet They say some of us taught it to be the whole church alleging to that end Num. 15.33 27.2 and 35.12 I answer first we taught then no otherweise then as them selves taught heretofore with us Secondly we alleged many other scriptures and reasons both from the Prophets and Apostles though it please them to omitt those and cull out these against which they think they have more colour to contend For hereupon they thus argue 1 Jf this rule be found in the book of Numbers c. then it is not a new rule first given in Mat. 18.17 I answer they wrong us and would deceiv the reader we alleged not those scriptures to prove the rule to be the same then and now but to give light unto the question by shewing what was the peoples right then under the law and under the Magistrate which may be more but can not be less now under the gospel where the church ministery hath not the power of Magistracie over Gods heritage The Apostle applieth many things from Aarons preisthood to Christ yet he maketh Christs preisthood not to be after Aarons order but Melchisedeks should men now thus carp at his allegations Then they say those scriptures speak of civil goverment which we except about the Elders but they suppose we wil not give to the people civil authoritie I answer first them selves grant that the people have as much right and power now as they had in Israel but we deny they can never prove that the ministers now have as much authority over the people as had the Princes of Israel so our reasoning is good though theirs be naught Secondly for civil authoritie as we never chalenged it so neyther should it be objected to them but that they wil have it to be no new rule Then say we it must be left to the Magistrate and ministers may not intrude into their place And seing they thus urge it let them if they please clear them selves whither they think not that the Elders of the church may have civil authoritie also as had the Elders in Israel Thirdly they say that by these and the like scriptures it is certayn sinners in Jsrael were brought before the congregation of Elders I answer if they mean Elders onely as they must if they reason to the matter in hand I deny it and ther is no weight in their proof For it is also certayn that Paul imposed hands on Timothee 2. Tim. 1.6 but elswhere it appeareth others also imposed hands as wel as he 1. Tim. 4.14 So the Apostles and Elders came togither about a controversie Act. 15.6 but the whole Church came togither also verse 22.23 Titus was left to ordeyn Elders Tit. 1.5 but was he to doo it himself alone The keyes were promised to Peter Mat. 16.19 but were they meant to him onely In Rev. 2.1 Iohn wrote to the Angel or Messenger of the church but by Rev. 1.11 2.7 it is plain the whole church was intended So in Israel the law sayth in a case of mariage let her goe up to the gate to the Elders Deut. 25.7.8.9 but the practise of this sheweth that the people were also interested with the Elders Ruth 4.2.7.9.11 Jn Exod. 5.1 Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh but by Exod. 3.18 we may gather that the Elders of Israel went with them also So in the place cited Num. 15.33 they brought him to Moses and to Aaron and to al the Congregation the people are here meant with the Magistrates for God then
beast so commended unto us by these men as doon in the name of the Lord. And as for the Office of ministerie to which they say now it is given M. Iohnson himself haâ—h set down heretofore 33. reasons and differences proving by many scriptures that the popish preists office is not the Christian Pastors office Yea he affirmed the hierarchie of Antichrist to be the most detestable anarchie of Satan that ever was and what now wil imposition of sacrilegious hands in the name of the Lord doo good unto such a detestable ministery 4. Fourthly they say they find not precept example or ground in scripture binding them to the repetition of that ordination I answer it is very true no scripture bindeth men to repete or doo agayn such abominations And we pray them shew us where is there precept example or ground to keep the preisthood and indeleble character of Antichrist But be it as they say what then wil become of their own Ministery for some of them have both received given vnto others reordination are they not in as evil case by their own grounds as the Anabaptists with their rebaptisation They unjustly insinuate Anabaptistrie against us very often but themselves are in like actual transgression with the Anabaptists if their doctrine be true and yet manifest not their repentance nor tel us by vertue of which ordination they doo now administer 5. Fiftly they say the Preists and Levites in Jsrael being clensed of their vncleannes reteyned stil their places and their children after them did minister without a new anoynting or new imposition of hands c. I answer then belike the Romish preists must keep their Antichristian preisthood still for so the Preists in Israel did theirs Otherweise if they must have a new office how can they doo it by their old ordination Even in Rome it self when a Preist is promoted to a Bishops office he is new anoynted both hands head the holy Ghost agayn given him the pastoral staff the ring the Gospel is also given him to goe preach to the people committed to him c. and he hath a new imposition of hands besides that he had before 2. If the Preists children caled of God did in Israel minister without imposition of hands upon them at al as they suppose yet this wil make nothing for Antichrists hierarchie caled of the Divil with greasing shaving imposing of hands to sacrifice blasphemously for the quick and dead that they should now minister by vertue of this office and calling in the Church of Christ. Neyther might Baals Preists or Chemarims administer in Gods temple Their reason therfore from the Lords own Ministerie is altogither unfit the hethenish Flamins or Druides are fitter matches for Belials clergie And this M. Iohnson himself acknowledged when he wrote against M. Hilderdersh thus Jf Jupiters Preist Act. 14.13 or if Mahumets Preists now in Turkye should by the lawes of their nations be injoyned and therupon should execute the Ministerie of Gods word sacraments and censures would it follow therfore that such Preists had the substance of the Pastors office And why then should this Preisthood of Antichrist have more privilege then those seing the word of God hath layd this duty no more vpon it then upon the other but hath left them al with their followers and adherents under the curse Psal. 119 21 128. Rev. 9 3. 14.9 10 11. Thus he then wrote but now we find an other maner of plea. 6. Sixtly they say That they find in scripture some officers admitted with it some without it This I find not They allege Act. 13.1.2.3 where Paul and Barnabas had it It is true yea Paul had imposition of hands twise Act. 9.17 13.3 but where is the scripture that sayth some had it not They say we read not that the other Apostles had what then dooth this proov they had it not So we may also conclude the other Apostles were never baptised for we read not that they were We read not say the Anabaptists that children were baptised in the Apostles dayes wil these men now conclude therfore they were not baptised But doo not they know that arguments thus drawn negatively from scripture are generally blamed for insufficient 7. Seventhly they say that some churches hold it not of necessity to be had c. I answer that is nothing to such as hold it and have Elders to doo it But they diminish the state of the question for when the Apostle speaketh of Jmposition of hands Heb. 6.2 dooth he mean the outward ceremonie onely or the doctrine of the ministerie caling ordination signified by the sign I hope the reformed churches deny no principle of religion such as that is So in this case spoken of were it onely the outward signe I would not contend But they compare the baptism of Rome and the Ministerie of Rome togither no new baptising into the church therfore no new ordeyning unto the ministerie but as al come out of the Apostasie baptised Christians so some doo come ordeyned ministers Wherfore if these be alike they bring with them in their account the substance of a true office and of a true caling Otherweise if a new office and caling be given them I assure my self they that say Receiv the Teachers office c. may impose hands even as they that say J baptise thee into the name of the Father c may put on water Now these mens testimonie heretofore hath been strong against the Office or ministerie it self with the caling administration c. And now let them shew by the word that a new caling into a new office which men had not before may be by the ordination or imposition of hands given by Antichrist unto a false office with a false calling 8. Thus say they we shew our keeping of coÌ„munion with all other churches c. I answer this reason is good if communion be kept in the light not in darknes let Gods word therfore try the case Yet let these men say whither they know not that the ministers made in these reformed churches are not admitted in Engl. without a new ordination by the Prelates And that al Scholars admitted into Geneva must expressly detest the Popish hierarchie so caled as a Divilish confusion which hierarchie consisteth of Bishops Preists and Ministers and they that say it is not by divine ordination are by the Council of Trent accursed Is not here good communion Yea let me further tel them how the learned and better sort in England have disclaymed coÌ„munion with that Romish clergie D. Fulk in the Answ. of a true Christian to a counterfeyt catholik sayth Although al godly men wish more severitie of discipline to be used in receiving them that come out of heresies to serv in the Church then is commonly practised in England yet you are highly deceived if you think we esteem your offices of
up in the place of Christ and his precious blood which it is not pretending to give grace and wash away synns which it dooth not but it is a lye in the right hand of al that so receiv it and the saying of the Apostle is verified in it an idol is nothing in the world 1 Cor. 8.4 Yet I hope they think not that the Apostle is contrarie to the Prophet who sayth their idols are silver and gold the work of mens hands Psal. 115.4 an idol then for the matter and workmanship is somthing but for the relation unto God or divine grace it is nothing and thus th'Apostle meaneth as his next words shew ther is no other God but one So Popish baptisme as touching the material thing is somwhat the salt the water the oil are God creatures the outward action is the work of the hands of an idolatrous Preist and this work remayneth as did the work of the Idolaters circumcising in Israel but as touching the relation which is the mayn thing in a sacrament that it should seal up unto them the forgivnes of synns and as they blasphemously say quite take away synns and conferr grace so it is a vayn idol and nothing for neyther doo the true Sacraments in Christs church work any such effect to Gods own people and as for that Antichristian synagogue it is not appointed to salvation but to condemnation by the just sentence of God Rev. 17.11 18.8.20.21 2. Thes. 2.11.12 Therfore it wil not help them to say that baptisme in it self considered is Christs ordinance for the brazen Serpent was in it self Gods ordinance at first and a sacramental signe of their redemption by Christ yet they that burnt incense to it made it an Idol and therfore as Nehushtan a peece of brass it was destroyed Yea this is acknowledged of the popish baptisme by the most learned and conscionable of our own Land M. Perkins sayth and proveth it The Church of Rome transformeth the sacraments to Jdols by teaching that they conferr grace ex opere operato by the work doon c. To this effect sayth he the Preist is appointed to pray that the nature of waters might conceiv the vertue of sanctification that God would make the water fruitful by the secret admixtioÌ„ of his godhead that having coÌ„ceived sanctification a new creature may spring out of the immaculate womb of the divine fountayn that it may be living water c. Yea further he sheweth that God himself Christ being worshiped in at or before an image is presently transformed into an idol But what need I insist upon other men even Mr Iohnson himself hath pleaded the Prelates and Preists which administer baptisme to be Jdol shepheards the sacraments to be not true but false and citeth against them their own testimonies to prove that Christ himself is made an idol among theÌ„ Yet loe how he now inveigheth against us for saying that the baptisme in Antichrists synagogue is an Idol But now as Satan hath begun to perswade Antichrists christening to be Christs true baptisme although the scripture plainly sayth what concord hath Christ with Belial so he wil not cease there but justify the cursed Mass by like reason to be the blessed Supper of our Lord. For it is the same church that injoyeth these 2. sacram ts the same preists minister them both in the same Babylonish unknown language both of theÌ„ having Christs institutioÌ„ abused by the man of syn and as water is in their baptisme so bread and wine is in their mass as in baptism they use the name of the Father the Son the holy Ghost so in the Mass they use Take eat this is my body c. Now why should one of these sacraments be true and not an other Al that are not Antichrists bondmen detest his Mass as a monstrous idol let them that lyst honour his baptism Agayn excoÌ„munication is Gods ordinance as wel as baptisme and these our opposits say that by it a man is cut off from communion with al churches of Christ upon earth having his synns also bound in heaven as on the contrary by baptisme we are entred into communion with al churches of Christ in the world This Excommunication the church of Rome useth as wel as baptisme and hath power from Christ to doo it as wel as to baptise wherupon it wil folow if we be bound to communion with them that they baptise we are also bound to avoyd the communion of them that they excommunicate Now for asmuch as these our Opposites themselves besides al other that have separated from the church and doctrines of Rome have many curses and Anathemaes layd upon them by the council of Trent and Popes Bulls what ar they the better for being baptised in their infancie now that they are excommunicated in their mans age They told us before and sayd we have not yet learned it as we should that by our baptism we ar bound to communion and now let them also teach us whither by their excommunication we ar not bound to shun their communion Or if they wil not answer us let them answer the Papists who plead that their Apostate preists being divided and cut of from the church and excommunicate may not lawfully minister the sacraments And wheras M. Iewel complayned we have been cast out by these menâ— being cursed of them as they use to say with bâ—l book and candel Harding answereth To be excommunicate ye have deserved c. neyther were ye by excommunication put from vs til ye had by contumacie severed your selves from the Church and shewed your selves desperate and incorrigible And what wil they say to the Synedrion the representative church of England whose excoÌ„munications ipso facto if they be of the Lord doo forbid al Christians to coÌ„municate with these men that thus plead for Antichrists baptisme yea they wil tel M. Iohnson in his own words that it is a fearful syn their Church being a true Church to contemne their excoÌ„munication If they answer their excoÌ„munications are unjust therfore they are of no weight this wil not salve the sore For 1. al excoÌ„municated wil say they are cast out unjustly shal their own sayings be accepted if not then neyther these mens til their particular causes be cleared In the mean time men wil more regard the church then him that is cast out of the Church and according both to Christs doctrine the doctrine of the Church of England he should be estemed an hethen and publican 2. Agayn many have been cast out for contemptuous refusing to come unto the Bishops synedrion they have left those Bishops Ministers Consistories Churches as being al false and Antichristian unto whom no church duty of admonition c. did belong And now that these men have changed their mind and count it a true Church and
beat the path for al licenciousnes For although the scripture sayth he that committeth syn is of the Divil and we know that whosoever is borne of God synneth not but he that is begotten of God keepeth him self and that wicked one toucheth him not notwithstaÌ„ding men may be as prophane as Esau as filthy in life as Sodom as idolatrous and synful as the Aegyptians and Babylonians and yet if they wil but cal theÌ„selves Christians and be outwardly baptised they may be blamed in words and separated from by men but yet justified as Gods true Church they and their seed in his covenant of grace sealed with baptisme which is to remission of synns and what need they care for more Who wil feare his estate or amend his life for the doctrine of such men as pul down with the left hand build up with the right Is not this rather to strengthen the hands of the wicked that he should not return from his wickednes by promising him life Moreover this acknowledging al that profess Christ and are baptised to be true Churches having the true baptisme of God wil necessarily draw unto a general communion with al such societies wher men think actually no evil is committed as may fal out ofteÌ„ in the sermons of Friers Iesuits and other false Prophets for with true visible Churches and members of Christ who may not communicate so it be not in euil And thus Christians may come to that vanity coÌ„fusioÌ„ vvhich was among the Hethens of whom an ancient Doctor noteth that though they had infinite and contrary opinions about the Gods and their religion yet al of them kept communion togither in their Temples and sacrifices Wheras Mr. Ioh. referreth us to his first writings in answer to M. Iacob pag. 7. 13. and 47. as having then written somwhat tending this way which now he pleads for the Reader may see by comparing them how farr they differ There touching England he distinguisheth between their Church estate in respect wherof he is perswaded they cannot be judged true Christians and the personal estate of some considered apart from their Church constitution that they may wel be thought in regard of Gods election to be heyrs of salvation and in that respect true Christians so in pag. 13. 47. touching the Church of Rome and some Gods elect in it Although in pag. 146 he is perswaded whosoever lives dyes a Papist and member of that Church of Antichrist in the knowledge profession and maintenance of that religion in the parts therof can not of us be esteemed to live and dye in the estate of salvation Now what is that to his preseÌ„t plea for the Church baptisme of Rome but rather the contrary And for us we never disputed with any touching Gods elect which we leave unto himself who onely knovveth those that are his We deny not but ther may be of the elect in al false Churches even as Satan hath his reprobates in the true Churches I hold it presumption for any to limit God by how smal means or mesure of faith and knovvledge he vvil save a man Who dares deny but God had many elect among the Hethens after he had separated Israel from them Yea God expresly sayd vven he made Israel his peculiar people that yet al the earth was his vvhich are the vvords of the covenant generally Wherfore vve leave Gods secret counsels to himself as he vvilleth us and doe consider onely the visible state of Churches by the rules of Gods Lavv and promises Finally in that very book vvhich he mentioneth hovv sharply doth M. Iohns inveigh against his opposers and against M. Hooker that pleaded for the Church of Rome because of some truthes there reteyned saith that what by the Prelats and their Proctours on the one hand and the Pharisâ—ical dawbing reformists on the other all may justly fear least the end of that Church wil be to look back not onely in part but even wholly to the Romish Egipt and Sodom and to wollow agayn in the same myre from which they would seem al this time to have been washed When the Prelats and Reformists shal see what the same man now writeth himself for that Romish Egypt what wil they say but that even he also is come to dawb with them for company and fear a further fall Of their judgment of the Church of Rome translated out of M. Iunius To countenance their cause the more they set it out with the name and judgment of a learned man now deceassed Against whoÌ„ themselves wrote heretofore when they would have been loath to stand to his judgment But what wil not men doo for help in time of need The thing borrowed from him is in deed his own judgment rather then proof of argument I shal therfore the more breifly touch it yet not medling with the author who I hope is at rest in the Lord but with these his translators The Church of Rome wherof they treat is properly they say the company which is at Rome as Paul wrote Rom. 1. abusively it is al the Churches on earth cleaving to it and the doctrine constitution therof They treat of the first but would have men by proportion understand the same of the later I answer A Church ther was at Rome in Pauls time beloved of God caled Saints whose faith was published through the whole world A Church or peece rather of a Church ther is at Rome now loathed of God caled Divils whose whordoms abominations are famous through al the earth In deed and truth ther is a great Citie spiritually caled Sodom Aegypt and Babylon Rev. 11.8 16.19 dispersed over the world under the name of a Christian Catholik Church whose cheif place throne is Rome As for the congregation of Saints that was there in Pauls time it is gone long since and the Man of syn with his worshipers come in the place Between these two ther is no just proportion for what concord hath Christ with Belial 2 Cor. 6.15 The Church of Rome considered as a subiect they say hath 2. parts Pastours and the flock of Christ for which Church th'Apostle of old gave thanks to God Rom. 1 8. Neyther doo we deny this subiect to be at Rome eveÌ„ at this day because we trust ther is God caling persons caled the caling it self yet in her which togither in one giveth being to a Church I answer First I deny that God is there caling as in his Church but the man of syn sitts there as God calling all to worship him and his calling is by the working of Satan and in al deceivablenes of unrighteousnes among them that perish and the persons caled are deluded to beleev lyes 2 Thes. 2.9 10 11. Al these togither give being to Antichrists church but not to Christs And we are sure God caleth out of her such
now opposite I sought to nourish peace it may be more then I should which now they thus return upon me and I therfore shal bear and make use of it for hereafter 6. Of their reasoning with them when they came from Leyden it is not to the point in hand Yet how unwilling they were even to admit of it all present then did see and the Elders of the church of Leyden as occasion is can testifie But I forbear to insist upon particulars which are not so profitable for the readers 7. Finally they ask why we did not desire the counsel and help of the Dutch French churches I answer first these our opposites with us had before dealt with them against their errors in this and other points so farr as we could and ended with them What reason had we now to call for them to defend that errour which our whole church had condemned Secondly they could not discuss the coÌ„troversie in our English tongue to the understanding of our Congregation novv troubled no nor of al our Elders Thirdly these that thus object did not to my remembraÌ„ce desire any such thing if they had I should not for my part have refused so absolutely as did they But thus have they turned every stone to see if they could find any colour for vvithstanding the help of the Church of Leyden vvith vvhat vveight and equitie let the prudent judge Of the 7. articles which they obiect unto us as contrarie to our former profession They pretend more sound and better observations that they could send and spread out against us Let us bring them to the trial 1. WHeras say they wee had learned and professed that Christ was the onely King and Lord of his Church and had left unto it among men but a ministerial government and that all the multitude of the members the saincts ought to obey submit to the Eldership in every Church Now we have lately been taught that the people as Kings have power one over an other and that the saincts being Kings are superior to their officers because the order of Kings is the highest order or estate in the Church and so an order superiour unto and above the order of the officers or Eldership Also that the church may in relation to the officers being servants therin be called a Lord c. I answer first our former profession touching Christ the onely King and Lord we hold it firm in all points as before and never had so much as a thought to reason against it Secondly for the ministerial government of the Church by the Officers we never disputed against it but doo stil acknowledge the whole Church and every member is to submit unto their ministration in the Lord. Our coÌ„troversie was about the Churches power as we have before manifested Thirdly for the people being Kings we neyther taught nor doo teach otherweise then as we alwayes professed namely that they are a royal Preisthood made by Christ unto God both Kings and Preists and that reign on the earth not one over an other as they speak but one with another in the fellowship of the faith of Christ. That every Christian is a King and Preist unto God to spie out censure and cut down syn as it ariseth with that two edged sword that proceedeth out of Christs mouth These things heretofore both we and they professed which now they would injuriously turn to be against Christ the onely King and against the ministerial goverment of his officers such collections as we think our common adversaries that make conscience of their words would be ashamed for to make Touching Mr. Robinsons book which they allege I have desired himself to answer which he was willing to doo and hath written as foloweth Mr Robinsons answer Because Mr Iohnson hath in his Answer touching the division expressly taxed my book against M. Bernard I think it meet to insert a breif answer to his exceptions as followeth He there writeth thus Wheras we had learned and professed that Christ was the onely King and Lord of his Church and had left unto it among men but a ministerial government and that al the multitude of the members the saincts ought to obey and submitt to the Eldership in every Church Now we have lately been taught that the people as Kings have power one over another and that the saincts being Kings are superiour to their officers because the order of Kings is the highest order in the Church c. Also that the Church may in relation to the officers being servants therein be caled a Lord c. And for this he quoteth my book p. 217 225. adding that I advance the people one above another as Kings intitle them with kingly and lordly power in the outward policie and affayrs of the church by which as the Prelates on the one hand so the people on the other hand become idols Acknowledging the former and latter part of that he sayth we have formerly professed I except against the midle clause of the sentence in sundry respects First in that he drawes the question which is about the power of Christ in the Church common to all to the government and guydance of the Church in the use of this power which is peculiar to the officers which may also more clearly appear to him that reades the places he quotes in the margent wherein he concludeth though more covertly a double vntruth the one that because the government of the Officers is onely ministerial and not Kingly therefore there is no Kingly power left vnto the Church or communicated with the Saynts for the suppressing of sin the other that because the Officers are the onely governours of the Church and so by vs acknowledged therefore they onely have the power of Christ. And thus he would closely wrap up the Churches power in the officers government and not be seen in it For the clearing then of the difference between government and power it must be considered that by government may eyther be vnderstood the wholâ—â—â—â—â—ensation of Christs Kingly office whither inward or outward whither by himself or vp others and so this power we speak of is comprehended vnder it as a part thereof Or it is taken more strictly for the guidance and ordering of the Church in her Publique affayres and the administration and exequution of them and so it apperteyneth to the Officers and is clean another thing then the power in question For the proving of this difference The Apostle Paul wrytes to the whole Church of Corinth to excommunicate the incestuous man by the power of the Lord Iesus Christ. This Power he would have the whole Church to vse but yet would not have the whole Church to become governours nor to take vpon them government but the officers onely by which it appeareth that government and power are divers things I do further adde what if the whole Eldership
theÌ„ before himself as in giving his life a ransome for many in being as he that serveth at the table wherat his disciples sate in which respect he expressly teacheth theÌ„ to be greater theÌ„ himself and in washing their feet as they sate at supper so was not his order an ord of service in it self but of headship and kingship which if our Ch â—officers could prove their order to be we would then acknowledge it in deed superiour to the order of saynts But their order being merely an order of servaÌ„ts me thinks coÌ„mon sense should serve to judge the same inferiour to the order of the Church whose servants under Christ they are I ad in my book pag. 225. that the officers being by their order servants the Church may in that relation be called a Lord not for the governing of them in the outward policie and affaires in the church as he injuriously collects but as they are for the Churches use and service which he conceals though I expresly so note in the same place as also that the same Church-servants are Church-governours the gogernment of the Church being a mere service And for the thing If the officers be to be called servants to the Church what is the Church to be called to the officers A servant is a relative and must have a correlative and I would know by what name he would call it if not by the name of Lord Mayster Mistress or the like And if he deny this he takes away from men the use of coÌ„mon reason and understaÌ„ding Let the servants know yea though stewards as are the Church-officers add so betrusted with the goverment in a special maÌ„ner that the wife of their Lord and Mayster is a degree above theÌ„ and so to be acknowledged by them least they not onely wrong her but provoke him to wrath Lastly because he imputes new doctrine to me I wil note down the doctrine of some few others both more ancient and more worthy of respect then my self Musculus in his CoÌ„mentaries vpon 1. Cor. 3 22 23 24. Let no man glorie in men for all are yours c. sayth thus Is it not absurd that the greater to wit the Church should glory in the less to wit the officers the Lord or mayster in the servant And in this sense sayth he further the perversnes of the false Apostles is noted who when they wer servants of the Church did make of a Mistress or dame a servant and of servants Lords And agayn the foolishnes of the Church is taxed who when they were Lords of their Ministers gloried in their servants Bullinger upon the same place vers 21. sayth thus So great is the dignity of them that beleev that God hath subjected all things unto theÌ„ It is therfore great folly if the Lord of thinges subject himself to the things c. Pareus professor of Heidelberg in his CoÌ„mentaries upon the same scripture reproving the churches glorying in Paul Câ—phas c. and quoting 2 Cor. 4.5 we preach not our selves but Christ Iesus the Lord and our selves your servants for Iesus sake sayth thus It is not meet that the Lord should glorie in his servant wee are your servants Therefore c. All these and many moe call the Church expresly a Lord in the very same relation with me and yet I suppose never man chalenged them for making an Idol of it or setting up a Lordly government neyther would Mr. Iohnson me had he not been immoderately jealous for the officers dignity Iohn Robinson The 2 Article objected We professed heretofore that Christ gave the power of receiving in cutting off to the whole body togither of every Christian congregation not to any one or more members sequestred from the whole c. Now we have been taught that in cases of question and controversie the greater part of the people are the Church though al the Elders and other brethren be against them c. and so have the power to receiv in cut off c. I answer ther is no contradiction in these things we hold stil in all points according to the article alleged neyther ever taught we the people onely to be the Church sequestred from their officers but the officers governing and the people governed to be the Church which hath the power to use in holy order But if these officers fal into heresie or wickednes themselves or to abett wickednes in others and wil not be reclaymed by any holy means the Church can use then may they by the Church which chose them be deposed as unworthy of their places yea and excommunicated and so al other impenitent sinners and this by the voices of the most of the congregation if al consent not aswel as members or officers are received in by the voices of the most if some doo dissent for ther is one power for them both And these our opposites must eyther manifest that if one or 2 officers or members doe dissent in a controversie ther is a sequestration of them from the whole and the Church then hath not the power of Christ to receav in and cutt off or els al may see that this is a colourable accusation of theirs no contradiction of ours For if the consent of al every one be not necessaryly to be had they dissenting through their ignorance frowardnes or the like theÌ„ the most voices must prevayl But how farr their new doctrine that the Elders are the Church is both from our former professioÌ„ and from equitie I have before shewed The 3 Article We wrote heretofore that the Elders have the reyns of government coÌ„mitted to them now we are taught that the governmeÌ„t of the church is not Aristocratical yea the people as Kings have the power c. I answer we differ not from our former profession but they deceiv the reader by turning government into power which we in our publik profession heretofore distinguished and so doo still giving the government of the whole Church and all the actions of it unto the officers the power to the whole body and so to the officers with the people as joyntly Kings and Preists of which things we have spoken before We never held the Church to be a mere Aristocratie as they speak intending that the cratos or power should be in the hands of a few neyther shal these men ever prove it And in the book which they cite in the very same place though they dissemble it we shew the Church not the Elders onely to have Christs power to judge al within the same and that the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven are committed to the whole Church as the Protestants have heretofore testified against the Papists That these men doo but feign contradiction and would blind the reader by confounding the Churches power and goverment as one The 4. article Wee professed hertofore that no sacraments should be