Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n holy_a read_v scripture_n 8,342 5 5.9261 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

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

There are 6 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

committeth against his brother now to hate his brother by suffering sinne to rest vppon him not to admonish bring him to repentance is a greevous sinne of one man against his brother so it is a very greevous hatred for a man to suffer the whole Church vnreformed from sinne therfor by this place or Christ you gaine nothing but rather leese the cause which is hereby confirmed viz that til a man doe his duty to the vtmost to his brethren he cannot offer his gift now his vtmost duty is either to bring him to repentance or to leave him impenitent al them that justifie his sinne in their impenitēcy so in the violation of the holy things For they being al poluted with his sinne have deprived themselves of title powre to the holy things so vsing them doe violate them al that partake with them therin partake with sinne shall receave of their judgments The place 1. Cor. 11.28 is also against you For the Apostle willeth the Corinths to examine themselves how they have performed their duty to God their brethren in the first second table finding themselves to be cleere then to eate drinck otherwise finding our selves to faile in that commaundement Mat. 14 15-17 wee are poluted by contagion cannot eate drinck without hurt judgment bicause we have not judged our selves aright But your last place Mr. Ber. is somthing to the purpose viz. 2. Cor. 12.21 13.1.2 compared together for I wil help to vrge your argument then give you an answer Your argument may thus be framed If the Corinths might without sinne have communion with the Church of the Corinths after they were once twise admonished did not repent then may we have communion with persons obstinate impenitent in the holy things without sinne in vs. But the Corinths had communion with the Church of Corinth poluted with sin after once twise admonition without sinne Ergo we may have communion with persons obstinate in sinne in the holy things without sinne in vs. This is the force of your reason wherto I answer that you must prove your minor For it is weake the places of Scripture do not confirme it For you must know that the latter Epistle to the Corinths was the second admonition as may be seen 2. Cor. 13.2 before the despising of the second admonition they could not be judged obstinate impenitent in sinne now for the ful sufficient confirmation of your minor you should prove vnto vs two things First that the Corinths did despise Pauls second admonition in this his second Epistle Secondly that if they did despise this his second admonition the faithful among the Corinths did keep communion without sinne with that poluted obstinately impenirent company now bicause I know this is to hard a task for you I will therefore conclude that this argument of yours is insufficient to prove your purpose Your last least reasō wherby you endevour to prove it lawful to vse the holy things though obstinate impenitent sinners be present in communion is that Gods commaundement must be obeyed absolutely another mans sinne cannot dissolve the bond of allegiance betwixt God man which our position seemeth as you pretend to dissolve seing we say that a man must not keep communion in the holy things if wicked men be present in communion with vs To this argument I answer thus viz that God indeed commaundeth vs to pray heare the word communicate in the Sacraments but he also prescribeth both the persons wherwith the manner how we must performe these actions prayer hearing the word partaking in the Sacraments are actions of communion ther is in the preformance of them a manner of doing modus agendi to be observed wee must therfor respect two things in performing these actions of Religion First that our communion be such as it ought to be for I may not keep communion with Iewes Turks Pagans Papists but with Christians viz true Christians such as the new Testament describeth ought to be members of the visible Church which is the mystical body of Christ Secondly that the actions of our communion be performed after that holy manner order as the new Testament of Christ teacheth as that prayer be conceaved not read out of a service book that prophecy come out of the hart not be read out of a book as Homilies be that baptisme be administred simply as Christ teacheth without Godfathers the crosse questions to infants that the L. Supper be vsed sitting not kneeling finaly that al the parts of worship be clensed according to the primitive institution not vsed with those polutions which the man of sinne hath cast vppon them breefly we must worship God with the meanes he hath apointed as the 2. cōmaundemēt teacheth after the māner he hath taught as the third commaundement informeth otherwise ther is idolatry committed in violating the second commaundement worshipping God by other meanes then he hath ordemed profanation of the name of God in violating the third commaundement when his ordinances are not so vsed as he hath prescribed So that to speak directly to your objection the bond of alleageance betwixt God vs is preserved kept inviolable by our position for we teach that men must pray heare the word receave the Sacraments but in a true visible communion of Sains as the Lord hath appointed not with al manner of persons as theeves mu●derers witches conjurers Papists Atheists Dronkards perjured persons c. as in your Church nor after your manner which is devised by man as Ieroboam devised in Israel but as the Lord hath in the new Testament taught vnto vs. And heer Mr. Bern. you take vppon you to reduce the places of Scripture which wee alledg for Seperation from your assemblies to certaine topical or categorical heads so give them answer according to your fashion as thus the places that forwarne Gods people to Seperate vnder the law are thus to be taken 1. From idols of false Gods as Israel from heathenish Gods 2. From Idols of the true God as Indah from Israels calves 4. From persons ceremonially polluted The places vrging Seperation vnder the Gospel are thus to be taken 1. From lewes not receaving Christ but rayling against him 2. From Gentils without Christ 3. From Antichrist vnder the shew of Christ persecuting Christians 4. From familiar companying with excommunicates or wicked men But say you what are al these places to vs who are not vnder any of these heads of reference I answer you Mr. Ber. that your Church is respectively vnder al these topical places which you mention excepting the first For 1. you make Idols of the true God in setting vp your own inventions making Christ a King Preist Prophet as you jmagine 2. you ought much more to Seperate from persons morally vncleane if the lewes ought to
I desire may be embraced if not I require an answer of them to whom it is specially directed to conclude this first point Mr. Bern. seing your VVorship for the most part is book-worship I conclude it to bee Iewish and so false VVorship Now I come to answer your cavils which are conteyned pag. 146-151 First you referre vs to the treatise in the end of your book I referre you for answer partly to Mr. Ains partly to the book intituled the differences of the Churches of the Seperation For I doe acknowledg that in the Old Testament Psalmes Prayers Prophecies were read out of a book yet further I answer three things 1. that it will not follow that seing it was so in the old Testament therfor it must be so in the new nay contrary it was so in the old Testament therefore it must not be so in the new This is the true manner of reasoning or thus In the Old Testament they had Psalmes Prophecyes Prayers read out of a book which was the Type the manifestation of the Lettre Therefore in the new Testament wee must have Psalmes Prophecyes Prayers brought out of the hart which is the Spiritual book of the New Testament wherein the Lord doth write his Lawes Heb. 8.10 which is the truth the manifestation of the Spirit 2. it will not follow that if it were granted that reading the Prayers Prophecyes Psalmes of Scripture out of the Originall tongs the Hebrue and Greek were lawfull that therefore the reading of the Apocrypha translations which are the workes of men is Lawful For theone is interpretation of a Language or Tong that is the vttering of matter from the knowledg of the Tongs and the gift of interpreting the other is reading wordes out of a book which a child of eight yeeres old may doe 3. neither will it follow that if it were found lawfull to read the English translation of the Scriptures therefore it shal be lawful to read your English Masse-book your book of Homilies and Articles your book of Canons For then why may you not read also Mr. Perkins vppon the Creed Henry Smyths Sermons or any other good Catechisme Commentary or Sermon book Secondly you prove your worship true by two reasons 1. Say you you worship no False God 2. you worship the true God with no False worship For you preach the true word admister the true Sacraments pray such prayers as are agreeable to the Scripture the forme of prayer taught by Christ if any things els be prescribed it is not imposed as worship Or if it were prescribed as a part of worship it doth not therefore follow that all the worship is False well I answer That Israell in Ietoboams tyme and after and when Aaron made the Calfe did not worship worship a false God yet their worship was false So may your worship be false though you worship the true God that hath revealed himself in the old Testament but their worship is not true by your owne confession therfor your consequent is not good that seing you worship the true God your worship must needes be true if the meanes wherby you worship be a false meanes devised by the wit of a man not taught in the word of God I say your worship is false so that place of Mat. 15.1 importeth that whosoever worshippeth God by any invented meanes taught by mans precept worshippeth God invayne Such is an image as the second commaundement teacheth now the meanes of your worship are false as first your false Church which is an Idol 2. your stinted devised imposed literal service book which is an Idol 3. your false Christ which is not your King Preist Prophet which is one of our Idols For though you truly beleeve concerning his person yet your Faith is false your doctryne false concerning his offices mediation therfor these meanes of your worship being false meanes they must needes be false worship therfor seing your doctryne is much of it false your communiō false your worship stinted book worship it followeth that your word is not the true word your Sacraments the signes of your false Faith communion are not true your prayers are not true whereas you plead that other things besides the word Sacrament prayer are not imposed as worship I answer what doe they then in your worship wil you mingle that which is no worshis worship together either they are worship or els let them be cast out of your worship further whereas you alledg that though some parts of your worship he false yet al shal not be false I grant it if your Church were true your ministery true but seing your Church ministery be false therfor though you do preach the true word administer the true Sacraments pray true prayers yet they can not be true worship offered vp in a false Church by a false ministery for the falsehood of the Church ministery doth essentially corupt the worship if al that is set vppon the table be either poisō or poysoned meate I say such is your worship For death is in your worship as Coloquintida was in the pot So that you see the distinction of true false doth most properly aperteyne to your worship as it doth also to your ministery Church as hath been shewed In the next place you declare vnto vs out of Philip Mornaeus the order of the worship of the old Testament out of the Scripture the parts of the worship of the new Testament out of Iustinus Martyr the order of worship in his tymes which I wil not contradict yet I plead that seing your Church is false your ministery false your service book a false meanes of worship therfor though al that you alledg were true it doth not follow that your worship is true wheras you plead that reading Col. 4.16 is cōmaunded as a part of worship I wish you to read the book intituled the differences of the Churches of the Seperation you shall have your answer and thus much for this Section The eleventh Section The next position is your third which is this viz. 3. In maintaining that it is not lawful to heare any ministers amongst vs whatsoever they be no● to joyne in prayer with such as feare God among vs I for my part hold both vnlawful bicause your ministers are false ministers your people of false Churches Now how can wee who are the Church and body of Christ have any Spirituall communion with you who are the ministers and subjects of Antichrist 2. corinth 6 14-16 But heer you would needes have vs beleeve that ther be many that feare God among you that they are particularly known vnto vs for my part I do beleeve generaly that God hath his people in Babylon even among you who are Babel that is confusion I do also beleeve that those who are miscalled by the name of
you give the Holy Ghost the lie imputing error vnto the word of truth But you wil say if men be not subjects of Christs Kingdome ther is no salvation for them I deny that wil you condemne al the Iewes Turkes Papists in the world yet I say they are no subjects of Christs Kingdome which is the true visible Church I pray you therfor be as good to vs as you are to your sel●e in that censure wherfor we must remember to distinguish betwixt the visible Church which is Christs Kingdome the Catholique Church whi●● is invisible The visible Church hath in it a visible communion visible sensible ordinances for men to walk in a visible fayth expressed in the outward declarations thereof in confession profession of the truth this visible Church must we joyne to live in this is the sheepfold wherin Christ foldeth his sheep into this sheepfold both sheep shepheard must enter by the dore not clyme vp another way as theeves robbers doe Of al those that live continue in this true visible Church we are bound to beleeve holmes fayth election in particular Eph 1.1.4 Now the Catholique Church which is invisible is the comprehension of al the elct in al ages places whose persons are vnknowne to vs such secreat things the L. hath reserved to himself concealed from our knowledg therfor we are not to search after them but must walk in that way which he hath taught in his word wher so much of his wil as is fit for vs to know is revealed now I would have you manifest to me two things concerning this point one is that the Catholique Church is Christs Kingdome another is that al that are on t of the visible Church are condemned I for my part hold the contrary viz First that the visible Church truly constituted is the only Kingdome of Christ which he at the day of judgment shal give vp into the handes of his Father 1. Cor. 15.24 that therfor they who are not members of Christs true visible Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdome Secondly notwithstanding that ther are many who are no members of the visible Church therfor no subjects of Christs Kingdome who notwithstanding aperteyne to the L Election are within the compasse of the Catholique Church out of which ther is no salvation Now Mr. Bern. if you have any thing to object against this truth let vs have it I pray you that we may receave instruction reformation from you you assume great dexteritie in diving into mens arguments I pray you dive into the bottome of this point discover the error therof if you be able if not lay your hand vppon your mouth give glorie to God confesse your ignorance errors Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the Fourth Section In this Section Mr Bern. saith that it is error to hold that those that are not of a true constituted Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdome In his book intituled the Seperatists Schisme pag. 80. 81. He affirmeth the same thing in these words viz That such as are not of a particular constituted Church to wit such a one as theirs is are no subjects of Christs Kingdome Mr. Ainsworth answering Mr. Bernard pag. 173. vseth these wordes Neither is this position set downe in our wordes to my knowledg if therefor Mr. Bern. were not a caviller he would not have reckoned this among our errors Although Mr. Bern. oppugneth this truth Mr. Ainfw forsaketh the defence therof yet I stil defend it as the vndoubted truth of God First therfor I wil expound the true meaning thereof then also answer Mr. Bern. cavils cautions I say not therfor as Mr. Bern. ignorantly vaynly captiously conce●veth that whosoever is not actually a joyned member of a true visible Church not living in communion with that church is no subject of Christs Kingdome but I say thus they that are not of a true constituted Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdom now it is one thing to be in a true church as a member therof actual walking in presence cōmuniō therewith another thing to be of a true church which one may be eyther as yet actually vnjoyned or being a joyned member actually yet absent in regard of bodily presence that one vnioyned actually may yet be of a true visible church I declare by divers particulars as first one that by violence is deteyned from a true constituted church yet may be of it in desire wil affection purpose though actually vnioyned the Lord accepting the wil for the deed when it cannot be performed Againe when as yet ther is no true visible church established actually a man may be of it in that he would be joyned vnto it if it ●ad any real existence So the Martyrs in Q. Maryes dayes may be said to be of a true visible church both for that they would have actualy joyned to the true cōstituted church if it had beē established as also for that they in wil purpose desired so to do although violently they were deteyned by imprissonment Further they that are of the true saith which is professed in the true Church may be said to be of that true church which faith is not a thing invisible but visible sensible as namely a man Seperated from all false churches professing the true visible faith of the church holding it vnlawful in regard of some corruption which he seeth in the true church to joyne therevnto may yet be said to be of the true church Lastly if some brethren though but two or three walk together in holy communion they are a true Church although perhaps they have not solemnely entred covenant yet ther communion in holy exercises is a declaration that they have contracted together though weakely corruptly yet truly So that these particulars being wel weighed may sulficiently informe you of my meaning but Mr. Bern you have in your book quoted this point otherwise then I have propounded expounded it in my lettre that in two particulars viz 1. in saying a particular constituted Church 2. in adding these wordes Such a one as theirs is For ther is asmuch difference betwixt a true constituted Church a particular constituted Church as ther is betwixt a man this man or that man the one is species theother individinum it is evident that a man may be of a true constituted Church yet not of a particular constistuted Church as may be perceaved by the 4. particulars before mentioned Againe in adding these wordes viz such a one as theirs is after a scoffing vprayding disdainful manner he seeketh to draw into hatred abhomination the true Church of Christ but the tyme wil come when the Lord wil reward every man according to his workes In the second place let vs consider of Mr. Bern. cavils cautions which are 4. in nom
al false Churches the members of them are without Ther is one only faith truth Eph. 4.5 as in the Old Testament so in the New the true church ministerie worship government is but of one kind al the Churches or assemblies of the Edomites Ammonites Moabites Ishmaelites Israelites Samaritanes the rest were false churches hada false ministery false worship false government only the Iewes had the true Church Ministerie VVorship Government with them So in the New Testament al Churches or assemblies of men whatsoever professing Christ as Abbayes Monasteries Nunries Colleges Cathedrals Seminaries Rectories Parishes c. not Seperated from the Antichristians worldlings are false Churches so without only the Seperated Churches are the true Churches are within you should have answered this Section of my lettre Mr. Bern. before you had printed your book if you had dealt ingeniously plainly but seing you cānot answer for I take it so bicause you doe not answer for your book declared that ther is no wil wanting let vs see what you object your objections are three First the two places of Scripture 1. Cor. 5.12 Eph. 2.12 you say are ment of such as never made so much as an outward profession of Christ Iesus at al your argument is this No Scriptures directed against pagans can truly be applyed against Antichristians These places are directed against pagans vic Eph. 2.12 1. Cor. 5.12 Ergo these places cannot be truly applyed against Antichristians I deny your Major Mr. Bern. you have not proved it at al Let the reader judg whither your speeches be oracles that they must be believed bicause you vtter them but herin your fraud and evil conscience or palpable ignorance appeareth that you leave out your Major which you should have confirmed propound only your minor For that these places are vnderstood of Pagans I deny not but that they are only to be vnderstood of pag●●● that they ●●nnot be vnderstood of Antichristians I deny 〈◊〉 I prove the ●●ntrary evidently to your conscience the conscience of al men after this manner That which the L. hath taught vs to doe we may lawfully doe But the Lord hath taught vs to apply against Antichristians places of Scripture directed against pagans Ergo places of Scripture directed against pagās may by vs be applyed against Antichristians The Major is evident The minor is proved by the consideration of these Scriptures ●evel 11. ● 18.2.7.21 where the holy ghost applyeth against the Antichristians matters Scriptures spoken literally of Sodom Egipt Babylon which were all pagans Ag●●●● If Antichristians be in condition eyther equal to or worse then pagans thē by proportion Scriptures directed against pagans may be applyed against Antichristians But Antichristians in the Lords account are in a condition equall you worse then pagans For so Christ saith Mat. 11.22 that it shal be easier for Tyrus Sidon the Sodomites then for Chorazin Bethsaida Capernaum Ezech. 16 44-52 Iudah Sodom Samaria are sisters in sinne punishment Iudah hath justified Sodom Therfor Scriptures directed against pagans may be applyed by proportion eyther of equality or superiority against Antichristians Now for your further instruction in this point Mr. Bern. consider that in the new Testament the phrases speeches titles priviledges benefites of the Church of the Iewes considered as the true Church are ordinarily applyed to the visible Church of Christ in the new Testament contrariwise the phrases speeches titles priviledges judgments pronounced agaist the Gentils in the old Testament are customabley applyed against the false Churches Antichristians in the new Testament Hence it is that the true visible Church of the new Testament is called the holy Cittie Temple Tabernacle the new Ierusalem the like the false Church is called the Gentils Egipt Sodom Babylon c. the reason whereof is bicause that the Church of the Iewes was a type of the Churches of the new Tastament so the assemblies of the Gentils were types of the false Churches of Antichrist as you may see through the whole book of the revelation in divers particulars which point if you had eyther vnderstood or attended you could not thus frivolously have objected to vs this one particular that speeches vnderstood of pagans may not be applyed against Antichristians I pray you what vse do you make of the prophesies of the old Testament against Nineveh Babylon Elam Madai the rest VVhat vse can you make of the judgments threatned inflicted vppon the Gētils if not this that Christ the Apostles make Mat. 11.22.24 12.41.42 2. Pet. 2 5-7.15 Iude. 7.11 Heer I know you will say that you are not Antichristians so though these places may be applyed against Antichristians yet not against you that particular wee will see afterward in his proper place in the meane tyme thus much we have gayned that places af Scripture directed against pagans may as wel be applyed against Antichristians as places of Scriptrue spoken to the true Church of the Iewes may be applyed to the true Church of the new Testament Secondly you object that wee cannot prove laying aside the forge●●s of our owne braynes that this scripture phrase without may be applied vnto you as to a people without VVell wee wil lay aside our owne devices so let vs trye what wee can doe Arg. 1. Churches that are in condition equal or worse then assemblies of pagans are without Revel 11.2 Antichristian Churches are in condition equal or worse then assemblies of pagans Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 2. False Churches are without Antichristian Churches are false Churches Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 3. Dogs Enchanters VVhoremongers Murtherers Idolaters they that love or make lyes are without Revel 22.15 Antichristian Churches are assemblies of such persons Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 4. The habitation of Devils the hould of al foule Spirits cages of every vncleane hateful byrd are without Antichristian Churches or Babylon are such Reuel 18.2 Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 5. The vtter court which must not be measured by the goldē reed but which is given to the Gentils that persecute the Holy Cittie is without Antichristian Churches are that vtter court Revel 11.1.2 Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 6. The Serpent his seed or aungels are without Revel 12.9.10 Gen. 3.15 Antichristian Churches are the Serpent his seed aungels Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Now Mr. Bern. I have proved by playne Scripture that Antichristian assemblies are without I know you wil not denye it but you wil plead that your Churches are not Antichristian assemblies therfor you account that one of our errors pag. 109. viz our 8. error as you summe thē that position therfor viz your Churches are false Churches shal be proved vnto you fully in the Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the 10.
covenant to walk in all Gods wayes standing in confusion with every abhominable liver subject to al the Antichristian orders officers set over them deprived of the powre of Christ for ther mutuall help edification ther is no true Church But the parish assemblie of worksap is such go it is no true Church The Major is manifest by these Scriptures compared together Math. 15.9 Apocal. 14 9-11 Ephes 1.1.4 2. Corinth 6 14-18 Math. 28.20 5.19 Apocal. 18.4 Math. 5.24 The Minor you dare not deny I assure my self For you have at least five or six hundreth communicants you account not past 30. or 40. of them faithful al of you submit to Antichrist his lawes courts dayly especially your self who cap knee runne ride after Antichrists officers courts feeing him with your money yea you plead for them write your peny pamphlets for them and yet once yon wrote against them and lost your vicaridg in your testimonie against them but bicause you could not buy and sell except you receaved the mark of the beast now you are content to yeeld to all yea to plead for all that you may t●affique with your marchandize Secondly for your self I hold you to be no true minister of Christ For your Church being false how can your ministerie be true For if the Fountaine be bitter the streame cā not be sweet your Church is false your ministerie which ariseth out of your Church as astreame from a Fountaine is false also Thirdly your worship which commeth from a false Church a false ministerie cannot be true but is false in that double respect but particularly I except these things against your worship 1. That it is qualified with your false ministerie 2. That it is offered vp in a false Church 3. That it is offered vp to God in the behalf of al your people which are many of thē I presume lewd persons al of them subjects of Antichrists Kingdome this I except against your conceaved prayers Against your service book I except thus besides the former 1. It is devised invented by the man of sinne 2. That it is imposed vppon you your people of necessity 3. That it is stinted limited the Spirit therby quenched 4. That it is read vppon a book 5. That it is corrupt in all the particular errors objected by the Puritans All these 8 particulars are contrary to these Scriptures compared together Roman 8.26 Math. 15.9 Apocal. 5.8 8.3 1. Thessal 5.19 Apocal. 9.20 16.13.14 Act. 16.18 19 13-16 Math. 24 23-26 1. Corinth 12.7 and 2.4 and 14.15.26 Ierem. 23.16 Deut. 13.3 Col. 3.16 Iam. 5.13 Ioh. 4.24 Mr. Ber. I would not have you passe by these things lightly but weigh them wel and let vs have your answer vnto them Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the tenth Section This Section consisteth of three maine branches which Mr. Bern. handleth from pag. 109. to the 150. of his book called the Sep. Schis Heer therfor I must endevor two things First to prove by vndeniable arguments drawne from the Scriptures that 1. the assēblies Ecclesiastical of England are false churches 2. the Ministers administring the holy things to these Ecclesiastical assemblies are false Ministers 3. the worship performed by the ministery people in the communion visible to be a false worship Secondly Mr. Bern. objections cavils must be refuted wher the reader must be advertised that in performing this latter part I shall not endevour to handle all things that Mr. Bernard propoundeth for ther is much truth by him propounded which I with him consent vnto only the points of difference shal be discusted the rest omitted In the first place therfor to deale as they say positively Kataskeuasticos I prove that al the Ecclesiastical assemblies of the Land as they stand established by law are false Churches that is to say not framed or constituted according to that presidēt which Christ hath left for the constituting of the Churches of the new Testament but are framed according to the invention of man even that man of sinne Antichrist the Archenemy of Christ The first Argument from Mat. 3.6 Iam. 2.18 Rom. 1.7 1. Cor. 1.2 Eph. 1.1 Mat. 28.19 From these places of Scripture compared together I collect an argument which may thus be framed The true Churches of Christ were established of men that did repent beleeve and shew their faith by their workes that were Saints faithful visiblie of these only The assemblies Ecclesiastical of England are not established only of such persons but of al sorts of persons even the most profane of the Land being compelled by law to submit therto Ergo the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not the true established churches of Christs institution Heer it may be considered that before the Churches of the new Testament were established the gospel was preached vppon the publishing of the gospel men were converted to the faith of Christ being made the Disciples of Christ so many of them whither Iewes or Gentils as gladly receaved the word were baptized added to the Church continued in the Apostles doctrine fellowship breaking of bread prayer this was the constitution walking of the Churches of the Apostolique institution therfor the Churches of England being raised by compulsion without procedent teaching conversion to the faith making of them Disciples of Christ being newly hardly drawne from the Egipsian darknes of most palpable Antichristianisme being many of them brutishly ignorant prosessed Papists vild Atheists witches conjurers theeves dronkards blasphemers al of them submitted to Antichristian Lords Lawes to Popish Sacrificing Preists for their ministers were not newly ordeyned to a stinted devised corrupted Popish service book or worship they in this their constitution walking cannot be accounted the true established Churches of the Apostolique institution but rather are yet ●emayning in the gulfe of Antichristianisme The second Argument from 2. Cor. 6.17 Revel 18.4 Act. 19.9 2.40.47 5.13 1. Timoth. 6.5 From these such like places of Scripture compared together truly expounded may be collected an argument framed after this manner True Churches of the Apostolique institution consisted of a people seperated from ●●eleevers whether Iewes or pagans or other The Ecclesiastical assemblies of England consist not of such a Seperated people but are compounded of a mixt people which for the most part are as bad as Iewes or Pagans viz persons notoriously wicked Ergo the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not the truly constituted Churches of the Apostolique institution Heer it wil nothing availe them to alledg as they are accustomed that they are neither Iewes nor Pagans For I have already proved that persons that submit to Antichrist his abhominations are in the Lords account equal to Pagans being called in the book of the Revelation Egiptians Sodomites Babylonians Gentils the Apostle willeth the Disciples to Seperate
false Churches Ergo. The worship offered vnto the L. in those Ecclesiasticall assemblies is a false worship The ground of this argument is this that al the Ecclesiastical actions performed by a false Church are stayned with the false constitution of the church For God wil not have every communion of men worship him but he wil be worshipped by such a company of people as he hath described in his new Testament as in the old Testament no man or company of men might worship or be accepted visibly but such as were circumcized Gen. 17.14 Exod. 12.48 Deut. 23 1-4 Act. 21.28 2. King 17 25-28 Ioh. 4.22 So in the new Testament no man or communion of men visiblie can be accepted of the L. but such as are described in the new Testament viz. men Seperated from al the abhominations of Antichrist 2. Cor. 6.17 gathered into the name of Christ Iesus Mat. 18.20 being made Disciples have receaved baptisme whereby they are counited into Christ Mat. 28.19 If any communion of men otherwise constituted viz men not Seperated not gathered together not gathered into Christs name not made Disciples not baptized truely with the baptisme of the new Testament if any such company of men do worship God ther worship is not accepted of God but as the L. sent Lyons among the Samaritanes for persuming to worship him in the land of Israel they being an vncircumcized cōpany 2. King 17.24.25 as the L. punished the vagabond Iewes exorcists by the violence of an evil Spirit for naming the L. Iesus being an vnbeleeving vnbaptized company Act. 19 13-17 even so wil the L. be avenged on al them that joyning together to worship God have not Seperated themselves or calling vppon the name of the Lord do not depart frō iniquity 2. Cor. 6.17 2. Tim. 2.19 neither wil it serve to say that the worship is true bicause it is true conceaved prayer or true preaching or thanksgiving For true worship must be defined not only in the matter but cheefly in the forme For otherwise among the Antichristian papists Heretiques ther is true conceaved prayer preaching thāks giving els in the old Testament ther was true Sacrificing among the Babylonians whē they Sacrificed an oxe to the God of Israel Dan. 6.25.26 whereas it was manifested that no Sacrifice could be accepted that was offered with straunge fire Levit. 10.1.2 there for the Sacrifices of the Babylonians must needes be abhominable though the matter was true bicause the forme which cheefly consisted in the fire was false So though the matter of the worship of the new Testament be true viz conceaved prayer preaching praising God yet bicause it proceedeth not from the true fire which is alwayes living vppon the Altar Levit. 6 9-13 at Ierusalem that is in the true Church and Tem●●e of God bicause it is not inflamed by the true Spirit of Christ the true visible annoynting which is only in the true body the true Church Ephes 4.4 For there is one body and one Spirit Therefore the worship is not true worship visibly what it may be inuisibly I dispute not nor doe not censure at all but leave to the Lord and to every conscience The Second Argument The worship that is offered vp vnto the L. by a false Ministerie is a false worship cē not visibly be judged true or accepted The worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is offered vp by a false ministery as hath been proved already Ergo the worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is a false worship cannot visibly be judged true or accepted The ground of this Argument is the same with the former wherefore as in the old Testament the worship that was performed in Israel by the Preists of Ieroboams devising which were not of the Linage genealogie of Aaron was a false worship could not be accepted visibly or be judged as accepted judging by the rules of the word 1. King 12 31-33 and as the incēse which Azariah the King of Iudah would have offered could not be accepted or so judged bicause it was not offered by the true Preists the Sonnes of Aaron 2. Chron. 26 16-22 and the King was punished with Leprosy for his presumption So al the worship which is offered vp vnto the Lord by a false ministery is visibly to be judged abhominable bicause Christ only offered vp to his Father the worship of the worshippers which his new Testament hath described no other Rev. 8.3.4 cōpared with Revel 5 8-10 11.1 stil let it be remembred that I dispute not nor censure not the invisible things of the Lord. The third Argument Iewish that is literal stinted imposed book-worship is false worship The worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is Iewish that is literal stinted imposed boom-worship Ergo the worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is a false worship The ground of this argument is the Analogie and proportion which ther is betwixt the type and the truth the shadow and the substance the lettre and the Spirit the Old Testament with the ordinances therof the new Testament with the ordinances there of For seing the old Testament was a type of the new therfor the Church ministery worship government of the old Testament were types of the Church ministery worship government of the new Testament therfor the worship of the old testamēt being lyteral beginning in the lettre as was carnal circumcision Rom. 2.29 did type forth the worship of the new Testament to beginne in the Spirit Ioh. 4.23.24 For the Lettre was a type of the Spirit Col. 2.17 Seing therfor that Reading the Law was a typical ordinance of the old Testament therfor literal stinted manifesting the letter book-worship it followeth that it is now abolished by Christ the thing signified by the literal Reading is now to be retayned in the new testament which is vttering matter out of the hart called the manifestation of the Spirit the demonstration of the Spirit the ministring of the Spirit the like by which phrases of Speech the Holy Ghost would teach vs that seing we are fet at liberty from the bondage of the law which was a Schoolmr to leade to Christ we are not therfor againe to be intangled with the yoke of bondage in any thing no not in this matter of stinted literal book worship which is flat ludaism● but we being placed in the liberty of the Spirit are to vse our gifts in Gods worship as the spirit giveth vtterance as we see the Apostles practised vppon the day of Pentecost when the promise of the Spirit was fulfilled vppon them as we see the Church of Counth practised 1. Cor. 14.15.16.26 12 7-●1 He that desireth to know further of this particular of book-worship let him read the book lately published intituled The differences of the Churches of the Seperation wher this point is largely discussed which if it be the truth