be delivered to Satan and cast out frō among them verse 4.5.13 he did not purpose that the Elders should deliver and cast him out publikly the people privately all being gathered togither for that busines When he would have them purge out the old leven that they might keep the passover with unleavened bread verse 7.8 he meant not that the Ministers should purge the leven and keep the feast publikly the church privately neyther did the type of the Passover in Israel teach them such a thing No nor the judging of malefactors in Israel for when the Magistrates gave sentence of death and the people stoned wicked persons at the gates of the cities the rulers fact was not then publik and the peoples private the scripture teacheth us not thus to distinguish nor reason it self but that the execution was a part of the publik judgement The Apostle writeth in 1. Cor. 5. to all the Church blaming their neglect of the Censure even as in 1. Cor. 11. he writeth to al reproving their abuse in the Lords supper Wherfore if mē wil they may misapply this distinctiō to all church actiōs as to Sacramēts prayers election of officers and the like making them publik in the Elders and private in the church or people and so as the Papists doo also in other cases give all lay men but a private spirit as they use to speak and the ministers onely a publik We find not that Christian people are more excluded from being publik members of the body and actors with their ministers in the Kingdom of Christ then they are in the Preisthood and prophesie And we know no reason why the Pastor himself if he consent not with the Church in casting out such an incestuous person may not be sayd to have a private judgment as wel as an other man But by such popish distinctions the clergie were severed from the laitie and so the people by degrees turned out of al. And what now doo these our Opposits allow the people if they see their Elders to corrupt judgment therfore doo dissent frō thē they make it but the dissent of particular persons judgment from the publik of what sexe or condition soever they be the Christian Magistrate when he is a member of the Church not excepted touching ecclesiastical proceedings and it is to be regarded they say as there shal be cause they mean I trow as the Elders themselves shall see cause And so if a church have 3. or 4. officers and they corrupted with heresie or other vice the whole congregation of people of what condition soever any persons be can pass no publik ecclesiastical judgment upon them by this doctrine as for their private judgement or censure the Elders themselves wil regard it as there shal be cause If this be not a Prelacie which the Elders would usurp I know not what is But of these things see after in this Treatise pag. 22 23. 3. Come wee to reproches disgracings of the truth and way of God and wee shall see among the Papists how they disdeyn that the people should medle in matters of religion and judging of controversies They complayn of them for their ignorance unrulynes disobedience unto government they say the Protestants reason as Chore Dathan and Abyram did Nū 16. when they rebelled against Moses Aaron the Ministers of God saying that there needeth here in the Church no head to govern it because Christ is alwayes with it And did not those wicked men sayth the Papist in their rebelliō against Moses Arō vse the same reasō when they told thē to their face let it suffice you that al the multitude is holy they have God present with thē And why then take you upō your selves the rule over the people of our Lord As who would say having no need of any other ruler God being with them c. The very same reproches doo our Opposites now cast upon us advancing the Elders disgracing the people by intimating their simplicity errour charging us as oppugners of government and abusing against vs the example of Corah Dathā and Abiram as we have often heard with greif telling us we goe upon their grounds and the like For which we wish they may find repentance and mercy with the Lord least he turn the evil upon their own heads as Moses then did upon the Levites For unto them it seemed a smal thing that the God of Israel had separated them from the multitude of Israel to take them neer unto himself to doo the service of the Tabernacle to stand before the Congregatiō and to minister vnto them but they sought the office of the Preist also so these our opposers are not contēt with their office to be separated unto the gospel of God to stand and minister before and unto the Congregation but wil needs be the Congregation it self and take more authoritie then is given them from heaven wherof see after in this book pag. 17.21.22.23 c. 4. What enmitie and persecution the Papists have raysed against the withstanders of their heresies I need not speak al nations have felt of their cruelty Neyther would I here mention our opposite brethrens hard measure to us but that themselves have printed and seek to defend it cease not stil to prosecute their purposes against us Although themselves have lately professed practised publikly mainteyned the truthes which now they oppugn and persecute and bringing innovation into the Church would needs obtrude their errours upon our consciences eyther in judgment or in practise or in both Yea breaking the peace which thēselves had devised agreed unto and confirmed because their brethren would not agree to the undoing of themselves and their families for the satisfying of their wills as is after manifested in this treatise pag. 123 c. If the Lord should reward them according to their works herein towards us their account wil be heavy but my prayer shal be against their evils 5. Wheras many Treatises have been written in defense of the truthes we mainteyn these our Opposers answer them not neyther yet are they silent nor wil give rest unto others but urge aad provoke more writing stil. For the Churches power now in controversie our Apologie bringeth nine reasons these have answered onely one of them which is the sixt drawn from Mat. 18.17 all the other they let stand And yet what clamours have we heard because their exceptions against that one are not by us refuted So in our other articles of differences the scriptures and reasons set down in our Apologie and other books they pass by without answer If they can make any colourable exception they spare it not otherwise for want of argument they fall to asking of questions seeking if they can to insnare us Of which things the reader may see after in this book pag. 45 c. 51. c. 59 c. 23
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
church the church what should be answered before the magistrate We with signification as before that we would rather suffer wrong then sue at law yet could not hinder them of seeking for their particular right if in so doing the churches right were called in question that then some certayn appointed should answer for the same 3. Those our brethren before they went to the Iudges intreated the help of the Burgemasters the cheif of the City who laboured by perswasion with our Opposites to put the matter to the arbitrement of good men chosen by both sides but they stil peremptorily refused 4. When it was brought before the Iudges they also at first both perswaded unto and nominated two indifferent men to hear the case but when our opposers came before them they refused to stand to their arbitrement The Iudges the second time appointed them with a mulct or forfeit upō those that refused their arbitrement but our adverse partie persisted in their refusal as before and urged sentence of the Magistrates and pleaded that they which build on another mans ground are by law to loose their building which plea they made because the assurance of the ground was made in the name of one man onely now among them whose name was used but in trust for any other might have had the same as wel as hee as was proved before the Magistrate by sufficient witness Now unto these Arbiters appointed did our brethren willingly referr the cause and to them inquiring of the differences were those Articles exhibited which it seemeth those Libellers or their Scribe by some means that wee know not of procured a copy of and so printed them What cause now have these our opposers to find such fault with our giving out those articles which we were constreyned by them selves to doo unless we should have suffred the truth to have bene troden down They rather have cause to acknowledge their own stiff refractary cariage who would not yeild to any good counsel given them by our brethren by Arbiters or by Magistrates til law forced them therunto and so have occasioned many wayes our cōmon adversaries to rejoyce 3. But we have not sayth the Advertisement as we ought handled and justified the causes for which we separated which were annexed at the end of the Treatise on Mat. 18.17 but have gone about also to possess the world with other matters So after they urge agayn this point that we leav the Treatise unanswered which was purposely written upon that occasion and argument I answer 1. We handled and justified the causes for which we separated by word of mouth in much disputing before we left them and this for them was as we ought and sufficient according to the Apostles practise Act. 1◠8.9 And now we are by their importunacie caled to handle and justifie them before the world in writing which whither we doo as we ought the sequel shal shew to the judicious reader 2. It is not we but they which have gone about to possess the world with other matters for the things we charge them with themselves in effect acknowledge and as wel as they can doo defend them But their declaration against us in the Treat on Mat. 18. is defective and the 7. points they article now against us are superfluous and injuriously wrested against us as our answers to them shal manifest The controversie in deed began upon the exposition of Mat. 18.17 but so as we have heard in times past Anabaptists begin controversie upon Mat. 28.19 who have reasoned both from that and al other scriptures against the baptising of infants so these opposites from Mat 18.17 and al other scriptures that we could bring reasoned against the power of the people in judging syn synners We formerly professing the Church there to be Elders and people joyntly they now striving that it is not so but the Elders onely we knew it must be eyther the name or the power of the church that they would have And we never thought them so vayn as to make such a styrr for a name or title we held therfore to the power which Christ hath given to his church for judging of them that are within 1. Cor. 5.4.12.13 Of this when we pressed them they first gave this answer that the Elders had the rightful power to excommunicate though without and against the consent of all the people but not the able power even as David had rightful power to put Ioab to death but was not able because others were too hard for him 2. Sam. 3.39 To which we answered in matters of this life which are external men may be hindred by outward force but in the spiritual administration of the Church not so Gods word by which they administer is not in bonds 2 Tim. 2.9 But if one man onely have the power from Christ he may use it against all the world So upon better consideration a week after they affirmed the Elders to have both rightful power and able power to excommunicate though without and against the consent of all the people And thus was ful power put in the Elders hands of the people they sayd their power and right was as in Israel and in the primitive churches But being asked what that was answer was made it was to be inquired So the poor people are left to seek their right wher they can find it the Elders have ynough they have found that they sought for As Paul to disswade the Corinthians from their errour in denying the resurrection shewed them the dangerous consequences of the same as that if ther be no resurrection of the dead then Christ is not risen then the Apostles preaching was vayn then the Churches fayth was also vayn c. so I held it my duty to shew the people the consequences of the former error which though at first it may seem smal yet is it as a strong fort in the mouth of a country which if the enemy win the whole land is soon lost For if all the power of receiving in and casting out were given to the Elders then our Church which was first gathered and constituted did receiv in and cast out members without Elders was not planted by the power of Christ neyther had they authoritie to set up Elders if they could not agayn vpon desert depose them and if they had not power to judge their brethren much less could they judge their Elders And here came in the gathering of the church by vertue of popish baptisme and of receiving the ministery from Rome as wel as the baptisme and the like which our opposites were and must necessarily be driven unto for defense of their errour And as for the first gathering of this church they sayd an error in the doing overthroweth not the action for Isaak erred in blessing Iaakob in sted of Esau yet the action did stand To which we answered that it was doon by a person
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
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
doo teach us Heb. 8. 9. 10. chapters Gal. 4.1.2.3 c. Heb. 12 1â— 28. 4. Their last observation hath two branches the 1. that the power of receiving in cutting off in Jsrael was to be performed according to order and not to weaken but to stablish thhe Elders authoritie This we willingly graÌ„t neither ever doubted of But we observ withal a deceyt which they couch under this name Elders which usually in the old Testament is given to Magistrates which are also caled in respect of their autoritie Lords Princes Judges yea and Gods 1. Sam. 23.12 Num. 21.18 22.7.8 Deut. 19.17.18 Exod. 21.6 Psal. 8 2. and by the Apostles they are caled â—owers or Autorities and Glories or Dignities Tit. 3.1 2. Pet. 2.10 But the name Elders now in the Church of Christ is given to the Ministers 1. Pet. 5.1 who are forbidden to exercise autoritie or to be as Lords over Gods heritage or to be caled by such stately titles Mat. 20.25.26 1. Pet. 5.1 Luk. 22.25.26 They streyn therfore too farr vvhich wil proportion the authoritie and power of the Elders that should stand and minister to the Church as did the Preists and Levites with the autoritie of the Elders the Magistrates that late and judged in the gates 2. The second branch of their observation is that we must not be strangers from the policie of Jsrael Ephe. 2.12 c. I answer by politie they mean not I hope the inward faith which Israel had but the outward order of administring in that Church otherweise they reason neyther properly nor to the question in hand Yea in this very place the Apostle distinguisheth the politie from the covenants of promise And so I deny that wee are bound now to keep the politie of Israel neyther dooth the Apostle mean any such thing For he putteth the Ephesians in mind of their estate being paynims when they were uncircumcised without Christ without Israels politie without covenaÌ„ts of promise without hope without God But now in Christ they were united brought neer but wherunto to circumcision nay he sayth elswhere if they were circumcised Christ should profit them nothing or to the ordinances of worship in the Temple nay for he sayth we have an aultar wherof they have no authoritie to eat which serv in the tabernacle Or were they now to goe up as did the Tribes to the earthly Ierusalem where thrones of judgment were set thrones for the howse of David nothing so for Christ was to destroy both Citie Sanctuarie so to force the Iewes to an end of their politie But now the Ephesians were come unto the Father by one Spirit and unto Christ who abrogated through his flesh the hatred that is the law of coÌ„mandements which stood in ordinances and was faithful as Moses in al his house and to be citizens with the Saincts and howshold of God which are built not upon Moses politie that is doon away but upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets that is the doctrine which they taught of Christ and of the ordinances of his Testament which is a kingdome that cannot be shakeÌ„ as was the coÌ„mon-wealth of Israel according to the flesh Look therefore what politie the Apostles have taught and taken from the Law or Moses the Prophets foretold should continue under the Gospel so much wil we reteyn the rest we leav to Iewes Iewishly affected And these are the things which they have answered to the first objection in the Letter which whither they have proved the Elders now under the Gospel to be the Church which is to judge of syn and synners and to have power as the Church in their own hands let al indifferent men judge as also what cause they had to conclude that we oppose against Jsrael Moses and the Prophets and to cry out against us as they doo that such is our error and so great is our transgression and iniquitie But because of the printed copie they set upon us afresh with many observations and questions and by matters with longsomnes ynough wheras a few sound arguments would much better have cleared the controversie and contented the reader They observ 1. that the scriptures of the old Testament are quoted in our Article as wel as of the new 2. That Mat. 18. is to agree with the other scriptures cited 3. That it must be understood with proportion to the manner in Jsrael 4. That therfore their understanding is according to the ancient faith and not ours who would make them strangers from Jsrael and would perswade them that Christs doctrine in Mat. 18.17 is a new rule c. I answer these are in effect the things we heard before and which in my answers I have partly granted partly refuted 1. The proportion they speak of is a disproportion concluding from Magistrates authoritie in the Commonâ—wealth to Ministers in the Church which is against Christs doctrine Mat. 20.25.26 And if they wil not learn it of Christ they may learn it of Cato an alien from the common wealth both of Israel and of Christ who yet sayd to such Jt becomes yow to be mindfull of your condition that yow are not Magistrates but Ministers 2. It is a mayn pillar of Poperie to proportion the Church now in the outward politie to Israel The Rhemists would have the the see of Rome in the new law to be answerable to the chair of Moses Cardinal Bellarmine maketh his first argument for the Popes judging of controversies from the Preist Judge that was appointed in the Law Deut. 17. And as Moses sate as Prince of the Church and gave answer to al doubts arising about the Law of God Exod. 18. so by proportion he wil have now in the papacie And in deed for show the papists proportion to have one supreme court above al to end weighty causes and appeals more resembleth Israel then dooth these mens Eldership in every particular Church 3. It is an argument that others except papists have disclaymed D. Bilson whose learning and goodwil hath holpen the prelacie as much as any mans and whose understanding of Mat. 18.17 these our opposites in some points doo now follow he confesseth that to reason from the Magistrate to the minister from the sword to the word from the law to the Gospel c. the leap is so great that cart-ropes wil not tye the conclusion to the premisses D. Whitakers D. Iunius and others refuting the Papists disalow the reasons drawn from the law and magistracie of Israel which these our opposers make their cheifest bulwark M. Cartwright answering D. Whitgift sayth the argument is not good from civil government to ecclesiastical When Bellarmine allegeth the civil Monarchies to justify the ecclesiastical Iunius answereth the exaÌ„ple is altogither unlike of temporal empire and spiritual ministery between these there is not neyther
implieth authority that it is proportionably answerable to the taking away by death c that it is a special use of the keyes given by Christ to the Apostles that the force herof is such as therby a man is not onely cast out of that particular Church wherof he was a member but is cutt off excluded from all churches vpon earth as on the contrary by baptisme wee are entred into communion with al Churches of Christ in the world By these things compared togither we may observ 1. that the church elders may by their sole authoritie give judiciarie sentence that a man shal be excommunicated answerable to the Magistrates in Israel that gave sentence a man should be put to death 2. That the Elders may also by authoritie in particular deliver a man to Satan by the power of Christ which is proportionably answerable to the taking away by death which in Israel themselves grant was to be doon by the hands of the people Thus doo the Elders now chalenge by proportion in the Church that which belonged both to Magistrates and people in the cōmon wealth But because they fear the people they shape them this deceitful proportion that their avoyding the excommunicate person is the executing or putting in execution as they ambiguously speak of the sentence answerable to the peoples stoning of a malefactor in Israel how fitly let al that have understanding judge For whether the people avoid him or not the man is judged and delivered to Satan and so cut off from the church as on the contrary when one is baptised by the minister whether the people keep company with him or not he is made a member of the church and as a man beheaded in Israel was surely dead whether the people refreyned from touching him or no. 2. Agayn they give no more to the people of that Church wherof he is a member then to the people of all other churches that are bound to avoid the excōmunicated person as wel as they 3. Yea they give hereby their people no more power then the Pope dooth to his marked servants for he also wil have the people avoyd such as he dooth excōmunicate and if this be the boasted right and libertie of the people they had as much in the greatest bondage of poperie as now when they are caried thus blindfold by propertions But they tel the people that if any can except against the Elders proceedings they shal be heard I answer First before whom and unto whom shal any man except against the Elders is it not before and unto the Elders themselves And is it meet that they should be judges in their own cases In Israel when any complayned of wrong in the Synagogues or Cities ther was an higher Court to control unruly Elders and to help the oppressed But now 2. or 3. Elders in a Church bearing themselves upon their forged authoritie from Mat. 18.17.20 may be lawless and who shal let them in their proceedings Secondly how should the people except when by these mens doctrine they are not bound to be present at the hearing and deciding of the controversie wil it not be a just blame upon them if they except against a matter which they have not heard discussed Thirdly when the party accused shal except against the Elders proceedings as commonly he wil doo for if he acknowledged himself to have synned he should not need to be excōmunicated may the people now require to hear the case debated between the Elders and him nay they plead in their Treatise on Math. 18. saying But where hath the Lord appointed a rule of further proceeding beyond that of the Elders governours for hearing the brethrens causes and judging between a man and his brother c. And agayn the Elders also are the Churches officers c. so as when they have heard examined admonished and iudged according to the word of God it is to be estemed as doon by the Lord and the Church c. Thus let the mā except what he wil the judgm t is at an end the Lo hath doon it the Church hath doon it because the Elders have doon it and it must be presupposed that they have doon it according to the word of God though the man except never so much and though the scriptures foreshew of judges that were wolves not sparing the flock and latter dayes abundantly confirm the same And thus when a Naboth is condemned by wicked Elders if any except on his behalf they wil take him in a snare that reproveth in the gate perhaps he shal hear it sayd by what authoritie doo you speak are you one of the Church spoken of in the 1◠of Matthew for the Elders have power to deal with him also that shal except and can easily bring him within the compass of a contentious person or an oppugner of goverment and cast him likeweise out of the Church that a man sometime were as good take a Lion by the paw as except against the Elders proceedings Next folow their many questions and other matters imputed unto us wherein we observ how when arguments fayl them for their own cause they seek to darken the truth by casting clowds before the readers eyes 1. First they ask whither in Jsrael the Lord abridged the people of their right and libertie c. I answer No but these men that by wrested proportions give the ministers of the church the power that Magistrates Preists and people had in Israel doe abridge the people of their right as before is manifested And for the further clearing of it seing ther were diverse governours in Israel as the Preists and Levites in the Temple the ministers in the synagogues the Elders or Magistrates at the gates of the cities and these also divers and of unequal power as before is shewed I ask of them agayn whither now the Eldership of every church be proportionable in power and goverment unto al those governours and if not unto al unto which of them 2. Secondly they ask whither the people have any more right and authoritie in the churches goverment now then the people of Jsrael had in those dayes I answer they should not seek to intangle by ambiguitie of terms First we give not to the people goverment as before I have shewed but a right and power to observ and doo al the commandements of Christ touching his prophetical preistly and kingly office by the Elders teaching guiding and governing of them in the Lord. 2. The goverm t in Israel was diverse by Magistrates in the gate by Preists in the sanctuarie by ministers in the synagogues To the Magistracie al Christians are to be subject now as they were then for it is an humane ordinance tending to civil peace and concerneth al men whither within the church or without indifferently The external Preisthood of Israel is accomplished in Christ and now abolished Heb. 7.
excoÌ„munication Fourthly if some would thus cavil against Moses lavv which requireth the hands of al the people to stone a wicked man and ask whether women also and children must be present cast stones he might have as good colour for his question as have these if not better For these say in Jsrael such as would not hearken to the Preists judges were to dye by the hands of the people and the proportion that they cast for the people now is that they shal put the sentence in execution by avoiding the excoÌ„municated persons Now I think they wil have women yea and children also to avoyd excoÌ„municated persons so then by proportion women children in Israel must cast stones at malefactors Yea this may be further urged against them by reason of a pregnant note which they give in their Treatise on Mat. 18 that that is such a church as where women may speak are to be heard in their cases and pleas as wel as men but it is not permitted to women to speak in the Churches of the saincts c. wher eyther they aequivocate with this word speak using it in divers senses a coÌ„mon practise of such as would deceiv or they must permitt women to have voices and suffrages as wel as men in al their churches of Elders and so by their proportion women were to cast stones in Israel For if women are to do execution now why not then also 5. Now wheras they intimate to the reader as if we vvould have al men examine rebuke admonish in the presence of the Elders they doo but labour the disgrace of the holy order in the church wher the Minister as the mouth of the congregation propoundeth examineth and carieth matters and then the people if there be defect or default may speak in due order but if in matter or manner they transgress they are to bear their rebuke Al things in the publick judgments of the church being caried holily peaceably and by the government of the Elders even as in elections of officers in prophesie or any other thing wherin men have libertie for to speak And when the Ministers cary things well we commonly find it as in Act. 15.12 that al the multitude keepeth silence otherwise strife and sometime disorder dooth often arise by the evil dealing of the Elders 6. It is also to be observed how these our opposites wil require by their proportion from Israel children to stone their parents wives their husbands and servants their maysters by avoiding their coÌ„munion yet wil they not have theÌ„ to be of that church which is to hear examine judge of the causes why their parents c. should be stoned and excoÌ„municated not bound to be present at the trial of their case Did ever any coÌ„mon wealth in the world require such execution at the hands of wives children and servants and yet teach them so little to honour and regard their parents as not to think themselves bound to hear their case tried but upon the Elders report to stone their own fathers husbands maisters which doo take it on their death that they are innocent Against 1. Cor. 12.21 26. which was by some alleged they except 1. that the Apostles purpose is not to speak of cases and pleas about syn and of the manner of dealing therin but of the diversity of gifts and functions given for the help and service of all to the building up of the body of Christ. I answer 1. the Apostle speaketh generally of the diversities of gifts Ministeries and operations in the church as they are given to to every man to profit with all and nameth in particular the gifts operations and ministeries and among the rest the governours or governments and ther is no church action which the Apostle purposeth not in that his dispute to comprehend their first exception therfore is not true 2. Neyther dooth it agree with it self for if he speak as they confess of the diversity of gifts and functions given for the help and service of all to the building up of the body of Christ then can he not but speak of cases and pleas about syn seing they are to be judged by the gifts and functions of the church they are for the help and service of all they help to build up the body of Christ. Vnless they would have us think that the Elders prelacie which they strive for is none of those gifts or functions nor for the help and service of all nor for the building up of Christs body but of Antichrists this we wil grant them to be true 2. Secondly they except the Apostle sheweth it by the similitude of the natural body and faculties and applieth it to the feeblest members even the yongest children newly baptised vers 13 â—22 to whom he appointeth not the cases of syn to be brought to judgment and censure as we hereupon would inferr I answer in thus speaking they injurie us and the truth it self Would we inferr that the judgmeÌ„t of syn should be brought to infants newly baptised because we say not the Elders onely but the church is to judge as Paul teacheth And would th'Apostle also inferr think they that infants should rebuke and judge unbeleevers because he sayth when the whole church is come togither in one if al prophesie and ther come in one that beleeveth not he is rebuked of al is judged of al. And did Iosua also mean that the yongest children newly circumcised threw stones at Achan because he sayth al Jsrael stoned him we had not thought wise men would ever have made such inferences And what vveight is in their reasoning from infants that if other besides Elders may judge synners then infants if not infantes then no other but Elders Might not men thus elude al Pauls arguments As when he sayth the manifestation of the spirit is given to every one to profit withal they to conclude therfore the yongest children newly baptised can manifest the spirit to the profit of others We have bene all made to drink into one spirit therfore infants also were partakers of the Lords supper Jf one member be had in honour all the members reioyce with it therfore even the sucking babes for they also are members But did not these men think to find babes of us that they have given such an answer to our allegations 3. Thirdly they except that this similitude might likewise be applied to Jsrael which we grant Also we acknowledge that it may not eyther then or now pervert Gods ordinance about the Elders hearing c. They say the governours are set in the Church for that use I answer not the governours onely this is that which they should prove They are to govern the Church in al actions but not to doo them alone Also they say al members have not fit gifts for examining of persons deciding of questions c.
I answer that is true for infants as they excepted have not But that onely the Elders have fit gifts for such purposes is untrue the scripture and dayly experience tells us the contrary yea some other meÌ„bers may have fitter gifts then the Elders And they theÌ„selves that now are officers had they not gifts fit to examine judge decide c. before they were choseÌ„ into office or did their election give them gifts which had none fit before 4. Fourthly they wil have this scripture direct against us in that it sheweth how some have a more cheif place then others as the head and eyes hands in the body This is not against us at all for we grant so much But they say we litle regard it who in cases of controversie wil look where the greatest number of people is though they may be of the most simple and wil have them to be the church and to have the power c. as if the multitude should stil be folowed and that ther were no difference of gifts of office or other respect at al to be had I answer 1. they keep their wont in abusing us before the world we look not in any case to the greatest number eyther of people or Elders but in al cases we look to Gods law and testimonie as we are commanded vvhich vvhen it is shevved by vvhom soever al ought to yeild unto We knovv neyther the multitude neyther yet the mightie or Rabbies are stil to be folowed there are differences of gifts and offices in the church yet no mans gift or office no not though he vvere an Angel from heaven may cary us from the vvritten vvord by vvhich the Godly people tried even the Apostles doctrine and vvere commended Although therfore the Church hath that libertie vvhich al societies that have none to exercise dominion or authoritie over them have namely that the greater number overswayeth the lesser when al accord not yet the faithful are not so to look unto or folow the greater number as to decline from the least of Gods commandements This we may see in the 12. tribes of Israel where the greater nuÌ„ber even ten of the tribes fel to false worship and they caried away with them not onely the tribute of two hundred thowsand lambs and ramms which were due yerely from Moab to the Kings of Iudah were wrongfully chalenged and taken by the Kings of Samaria but caried away also the title of the Church being usually even by al the Prophets named Jsrael wheras Iudah and Benjamin were Israel as wel as Ephraim and the rest yea in deed they were the onely Israel of God as the scripture counteth Israel Yet did not the faithful respect this greater number but left them with their title and usurpation and went to the lesser part which was the better 2. But is it not strange that these our opposites wil object these things to us when in some things they doo the same and in their new establisht hierarchie much worse For in their popular election of officers which they stil allow if it may continue must not the greater number of voices cary the thing And yet there is no action of the church that needeth more wisdom government or circumspection then this And therfore many precepts are left for the careful and holy performance of it 1. Tim. 3. 5. Tit. 1. And wil not the Papists now cast the reproches on their own faces as they that would have the multitude stil folowed as if there were no difference of gifts c. 3. And touching their hierarchie the Eldership they wil not I think deny but the greater number of voices among them must prevayl Now that being so a Church having a Pastor and a Teacher that are learned and 3. or 4. ruling Elders which are as unlearned as the other of the people taken of trades men and the like these 3. or 4. Rulers whose power they have proportioned with the Princes of Israel shal by their number of voices cary matters though it be against Pastor Teacher and 500 brethren Yea these may excommunicate or depose the Pastor and Teacher and cast out of the brethren but none can excommunicate them or depose them joyntly from their offices The utmost that we can find these men to allow the Church in these exigents is when they have doon al they can to separate from them and this power any man hath in the church of Rome But I hope every one that â—avoureth the things of God aright wil abhorr such an unruly prelacie For if these Elders prove such as Paul foretold of greevous wolves not sparing the flock but speaking perverse things to draw disciples after theÌ„ as the Church hath had woeful experience of now so many hundred yeres what havock miserie wil not they bring upon Gods people And if we add unto this their other opinioÌ„ of Gods covenant to continue with a Church though they fall into so many horrible synns idolatries blasphemies as the Romish synagogue hath doon which now they plead for to be stil the true church of Christ what wil not a presumpuous Eldership doo and yet bear out themselves with this that they are the true church and al that leave them for what cause soever are schismaticks 4. Let the reader also observ their manner of pleading when they speak of the Elders proceedings they annex according to the Law of God but speaking of the people they annex though in error and though never so erroneously caried and though they be of the most simple as if they would perswade men that the Elders usually through their wisdom and godlynes walked aright and the people through simplicitie and errour went astray Wheras if eyther the scriptures be searched or humane histories or the present state of churches be looked upon we shal see the greatest errours heresies schismes and evils to have both arisen and been continued by the Elders preists and learned Rabbines in al ages even Christ himself found no greater enemies then the high preists scribes and rulers of the people which turned to his reproch then wherof his church now is made partaker so that they sayd dooth any of the Rulers or of the Pharisees beleev in him but this people which knâ—w not the Law are cursed John 7.48.49 5. Neyther if it were true dooth their supposition that the Elders wil judge according to the law bear out their supremacie which Christ hath forbidden For besides that one man may judge according to law both the princes of Israel and the princes of other nations were bound to the lawes prescribed yet may not the ministers now by proportion have princelike authoritie 1. Pet. 5.3 The philosopher could say They that bid the Law bear rule doe bid God to bear rule by his own voice but they that bid man bear rule meaning without law doo bid
consciences of the Church But they allege further the Elders are to have maintenance for the doing of it and of the other duties c. I answer let them then excōmunicate alone as wel as try the case alone seing they have maintenance for both and let the people be bound to come to neyther no nor to the Pastours ministring of the word and sacraments if this reason be good because he is more worthy maintenāce than the ruling Elders as th'Apostle sheweth But then they say men must leav their trades women their families children their scholes servants their work and come to hear and judge cases that fall out between brother brother I answer 1. First they restreyn things too much when they say between brother brother for what if it be a publick case of heresie or idolatrie as that mentioned Deut. 13 12 13 14. c. wil they say women children and servants were then or are now bound to leav their callings come togither to trie out the matter 2. Secondly many cōtroversies between neighbours are for civil things of this life such are not church matters nor there to be heard but by Magistrates or arbiters chosen 3. Thirdly for doubtful cases ecclesiastical people are to inquire the law at the Preists mouth and to ask counsel of their Elders severally or joyntly who are to have their meetings apart for such and other like ends so many things may be composed without trouble of the Church 4. Fourthly when apparant synners so convicted by witnesses are to be judged by the Church ther is no time more fit then the sabbath day wherin all men are bound to leav their own works tend to the Lords of which sort this is Or if that day suffice not they may take any other for them convenient for unto publick affayrs the Church is to be assembled 1. Cor. 5.4 Act. 14.27 15.4 30. 21.18 22. Against this I know they except saying who can shew such an ordinance of God find we such a course used in Jsrael on the Sabbath dayes Did they not meet on the Sabbath in the temple and synagogues for Gods worship c. and the Elders sit in the gates on the week dayes to hear controversies c. I answer for this later point they bring not any one scripture to confirm it yet wil I not strive ther about for I think it is true Sure I am the Ievves canon lavves so declare Jt is not lawful they say to judge on the Sabbath or on a festival day yea further that matters of life and death may not be judged on the evening of the Sabbath or on the evening of a festival day least the accused be found guilty and it be impossible to kyl him on the morow I account civil controversies of things perteyning to this life as Paul caleth them to be of our own works which by the law are to be doon in the six dayes and therfore think it not lawful for Magistrates to keep courtes or Assises to judge and execute malefactors on the Sabbath And this among other things sheweth a mayn difference between the Eldership of the Church and the Magistracie of Israel But for ecclesiastical works by preists or people they were to be doon on the sabbaths as circumcision kylling slaying cutting and burning of sacrifices which was very laborious work and even a breach of the sabbath in outward shew but that the different nature of the action made it blameless Now the church judgments are the Lords works not ours and therfore fittest to be doon on the Lords day they belong to Christs kingly office and therfore are holy as the works of his prophetical and preistly office These our opposites themselves compare the casting out by excōmunication with the contrary receiving in by baptisme Al churches baptise on the Sabbath and also excommunicate on the Sabbath why should not the cause be heard as wel as the judgment executed on that day We find ecclesiastical controversies were disputed on the Sabbath dayes in Israel as the Apostles practise sheweth Act. 13.44.45.46 17.2.3 18.4 It was lawful on the Sabbath to heal the body and is it unlawful to heal the sowl It was lawful to save a sheep from dying in a ditch and is it not lawful to save a sowl from death and cover a multitude of synns Seing therfore the Sabbath is to be sanctified by the word of God and prayer and al that the church ministers are to doo belongeth unto these as th'Apostles teach us Act. 6.4 we think it is too Pharisee like to carp at church judgments on the Sabbath and then servants which are the Lords freemen and al other resting from their own works may attend to the Lords without such inconveniences as these would cast in their way And hitherto of the first point in controversie The second point of difference in the Letter 2. WE had learned that every true Church of Christ hath this power to cast out obstinate synners from amongst them this not onely when it hath officers but also when it wanteth them but now we were taught that a people without officers have not power to cast out obstinate synners Which doctrine amongst other evils overthroweth the constitution of the Church that so taught for it was gathered and constituted by Christians without officers receiving in the repentant and casting out the disobedient wheras by this opinion they had power from Christ to doe neyther for they that cannot cast out cannot receiv in one power is for both With this they joyn out of the printed copy 6. The 33. article in our Confession which our Apologie also confirmeth pag. 45. professeth that people being come forth of the Antichristian estate c. are willingly to joyn togither in Christian communion and orderly covenant and to unite themselves into peculiar and visible congregations c. These have pleaded that al are bound to communion by vertue of their baptisme received in the Church of Rome or other Antichristian assemblies These things are confirmed by Mat. 18.17 20. with 28.20 1. Cor. 5.4.5 and 12.27 1.2 Rom. 12.5 Heb. 12.22.28 Mat. 5.14 Phil. 1.1.5 Act. 2.41.42.47 17.4 The latter is also confirmed with sundry scriptures and reasons expressed in our foresayd Apologie Against this their former profession these men now thus write 1. Where find we in the scriptures that God hath thus layd upon the people without officers to excōmunicate where is the precept for it which be the examples of it or what are the grounds requiring bearing it out I answer 1. First as their manner is they would put others to prove that which by others and themselves hath been proved and approved and is not as yet by them or any taken away It is easy for any to dispute and trouble men after this manner 2.
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
be one in substance concerning faith in Christ unto salvation Hâ—b 11. sheweth also great differences between their condition and ours touching the clear manifestation of Gods grace and the outward politie of the Church Heb. 9. 10. 12. Gal. 4. Finally these things we never intended or extended to any further rights or liberties of the people now then we find evidently taught us by the doctrine and practise of th'Apostles that if in any thing we miss as easily we may in the application of those legal types yet the doctrine confirmed by other playn scriptures remayneth sound and good And such differences between Israel and us we also have put in our more ancient writings Discover pag. 40. 60. Their last note is in effect one with the first shewing how Christ and th'Apostles reasoned wel from the civil state of Israel which we grant Yet I hope they wil not deny but it is possible for other men to reason amyss and to make yll proportions from the common wealth of Israel as doo the Papists and as before is manifested that these our opposites have doon The 7. article 7. We held that the baptism of Rome was as true baptisme as circuÌ„cision in the Apostasie of Israel was true circumcision and needed not to be renounced and repeted Now we were taught that the baptism aforesayd is an Idol and we know al Idols c are to be renounced and rejected Isa. 30.22 and an Idol is nothing in the world 1. Cor. 8.4 so then such baptism is nothing I answer our former profession and writing hath been that circumcision in the Apostasie of Israel could be no true sacrament no true seal of the covenant of Gods favour unto them also that baptism delivered in the false church is no true seal of Gods covenant or true sacrament Mr. Iohnson himself hath defended this very same that in that estate of their Apostasie it could not be a true Sacrament and so for the baptism in Rome not a true but a false sacrament So the contrarietie must be thus heretofore we held it to be a false sacrament but now we were taught it is an Jdol Between these I hope al men of judgment which know what an Jdol meaneth wil think ther is no contradiction But is not this good conveyance for them to say as true baptism as circumcision in the Apostasie of Jsrael was true circumcision wheras we professed of that baptisme as also of that circumcision that it could not be a true sacrament unto them but a false Wil not the judicious reader see that they cast a myst before mens eyes to disgrace the truth which themselves formerly professed As for the consequences I have before answered them and shewed how though the Idol be put away ther need no repeting again of the outward washing and have proved that Antichrist hath turned the Lords baptisme into an Idol as the Iewes did the brazen serpeÌ„t by burning incense to it and that the most conscionable in our own nation have so professed and the Vniversitie of Cambridge printed that the church of Rome transformeth the sacraments yea even Christ and God himself into Jdols But these our opposites are gone from the truth and from themselves herein into the tents of our common adversaries M. Gifford and others who would have concluded hereupon a new outward washing but were refuted by Mr Barrow And Mr Iohnson once professed that he thought he should never have seen any more absurd writing then M. Giffards though now he reasoneth like him He also told the Oxford Doctors that to hold the popish church to be a true church having a true ministerie and true sacraments or els that they are unbaptised and must admitt of the Anabaptists rebaptisation are nought els but gross errours and notorious absurdities Yet loe how he now presseth us with the same things and passeth over our reasons rendred heretofore without answering them as is meet Of the conditions of peace by our Opposites refused and broken HItherto wee have heard the particulars wherin they are gone from their former profession again the articles which they have insinuated against us Now foloweth the peace which notwithstanding the former things wee desired to reteyn with them The first 1. Before our parting we offred that notwithstanding our differences of judgmeÌ„t we would continue togither if our former practise might be reteyned but this was refused Their answer hereto is Which is as if they should say they would have continued with vs if wee would have continued in errour and evil so found and acknowledged by us suffering the ordinance of God touching the Eldership to be troden under foot the Elders to be despised and abused by the people and the whole Church to be continually subiect to contentions and scandals Our reply Here first observe how they can not deny but thus we offred them and yet they would bear the world in hand we left them for their understanding and exposition of Mat. 18 17. They might have kept their vnderstanding both of that and other scriptures if the Churches practise had not been altered Secondly how doo their people yet bear themselves others in hand that their practise is not changed but all things continue with them in that respect as before Eyther their Elders dissemble with them or they with others according to the Philosophers doctrine that in such changes it behooveth men to feighn and counterfeyt the contrary Thirdly the answer is evil injurious to the truth people of God for his ordinance touching the Eldership is not troden vnder foot the Elders despised c. by the holy order of the Church judging synners as the Apostle teacheth and governed in all actions by the officers which was our former practise These are but contumelies such as Papists and lovers of Prelacie have layd upon the saynts heretofore and upon such pretenses have excluded the people from choosing their ministers for avoyding such tumults and uprores as the primitive Church they say was afflicted with Fourthly what if some persons have miscaried themseves as can not be denyed have not some of the Elders also doon the like And shall the Church because of the abuses tyrannies heresies which their Elders have in all ages brought in refuse to have any moe Elders no more may the Elders refuse to have the people to hear and judge causes of publick syn with them because of the disorder and unrulynes of some whom the people have been as willing to reprove and censure as the Elders themselves As for the Church subject continually to contentions and scandals c. it is most true by the Elders means for to let pass what we have seen among our selves let all histories be looked it wil appear the Church hath never more abounded with contentions and scandals then when al power was in the Ministers hands and the people excluded Yea
also shewed like reason of our dislike it being both unlawful for vs to practise syn as it were with the right hand and righteousnes with the left no likelihood of our peace but of greif and dayly dissentions 6. Touching the motion made by the Church of Leyden for coming first to the Elders as Church governours c. and for admonition being caried according to the alteration practised and agreed upon wherupon these our opposites now observ against us for not yeilding therto how greatly we oppugned the ordinance of God touching the Elders hearing and judging of causes c. this rightly weighed wil shew how greatly we are by them abused For first it was such a course as neyther the Church at Leyden would bind themselves to walk in neyther did these our opposites or we think it to be according to the order of God Secondly they tel us not wherfore we desire them in their next to tel us whither themselves would sincerely have practised these things according to the true intendement of the Church of Leyden that motioned them Thirdly for the cariage of admonition spoken of it was found out and by M. Iohnson himself publikly acknowledged that the controversie between us was therin closely implied and yeilded unto them when upon dispising the admonition of the Elders the parties were to be excommunicated This being thus manifested with what conscience could we yeild to practise errour privily brought in under hand and deny to practise the same thing publickly professed Would not al men and even they thēselves have blamed us for such dissimulation Fourthly for comming to the Elders first as governours vve did then and doo novv yeild it the brethrens duty in doubts so to come for counsel advise but for to bind all men in most manifest synns vvhich the Church should judge to come first to the Elders onely and so to lay it on the brethren as for not doing it they should be excōmunicated and yet both sides acknovvledge it is not the order of God vve told them this vvould be to deal worse then the Pharisees vvhen none of vs vvalked in that vvhich vve professed to be the right vvay but leaving that vvould stablish our ovvn traditions and cast out men for not observing them These vveighty reasons they overpass and bear the vvorld in hand how greatly we oppugned Gods ordinance touching the Elders vvhē vve but oppugned the Elders traditiōs least they should be advanced above the ordināce of God Next folovv their reasons vvhy they vvould not stand to their former agreement vvith us nor have spiritual fellowship as they write with us in such estate walking 1. Because they could not find warrant for it in the word of God I answer if they acknowledge no warrant found for our peaceable parting here nor dismissing to an other Church what remayned but eyther we must yeild to their errors which for the reasons foreshewed we might not or ells part from them as we did the causes of the division being in them both by broaching errour and refusing peace 2. Their second reason is because we refused as they say disobeyed and spake evil of the truth and way of God I answer first this is to take that for granted which is the question betvveen us Secondly if this reason be good and the truth be vvith us as vve doubt not of it then they grant us that vve had just cause to leave spiritual fellovvship vvith them vvhich departed from and spake evil of and persecuted the truth and vvay of God vvherin themselves once walked with us Howbeit if we would have lived at Leyden all had been peace is it more lawful trow we to speak evil of and disobey the truth there then at Amsterdam 3. Their third reason is because we refused to continue cōmunion with them though we might be suffred to walk in peace with protestation in our difference of judgment I answer this having been first offred by us to them and they refusing it as before they grant it cōmeth upon their own heads if any weight be in it Secondly we have shewed sundry reasons from scripture why we might not so walk have never yet heard from them any like reasons to warant us to protest against a synful practise and yet to practise it dayly If our own harts and mouthes condemn us God is greater 4. Their 4. reason is because some of us professed we would not deal in causes by way of protestation neither when we were with them nor from them I answer first the different mind of some few is not of weight to break the agreement with us al. Secondly this might have fallen out also occasionally if we had lived at Leyden where they would have had peace with us So it is our living in this city that was in deed the onely true cause vvhy they stood not to their agreement the other are but pretenses 5. Their 5. reason is because we went not from one Church Pastor to another so to live and remayn but purposed when we had joyned unto them presently to return and live here in this town apart from them I answer this was in deed that which troubled them they could not indure us in the same city by thē Yet they cannot deny but it was promised we all should live and remayn there unless it were to the apparant undoing of us and our families And were not these loving brethren that had rather we and our families should be undoon then they would want of their wills For what reason much less necessity can they shew why we must goe from one church and pastor to an other and may not continue in the place and state wherin God had called us with as many officers already among our selves as the Church of Leyden had and one a Teacher of the word They tel us afterward that the very naming of going to another Church Pastor caryeth weight of reason with it belike because he is a Pastor that sayth it for word of God shew they none that binds men to goe to another Church where ther is a Pastor and no Teacher but forbids them to remain in their own cōmunion and church where ther is a Teacher and no Pastor Especially when without the apparant undoing of men their families they can not remove their habitation 6. Their 6. reason is because by such walking of ours great reproch would come upon us all with much dishonur to God c. I answer it can not be avoyded but offenses wil come but woe unto them by whō they come Yet greater reproch as we alwayes feared is come by their refusing peace with us unless it were upon unlawful unreasonable conditions then vvould have been by our peaceable parting vvhich vve often and instantly desired 7. Their last reason is because they thought there should alwayes be somwhat in such cases used as wherby the Lord might work upon our consciences
once had been onely in consideration and in their second letter as also appeareth they gave us certayn Reasons of their dislike Vnto which reasons of theirs we gave no answer as they both write before their parting And the causes were 1. For that they continued not long togither after they came to our hands 2. We had upon occasion of the motion made for a double practise propounded another course both more fit and warrantable as we thought then that for the bringing of things first to the Elders as appears in our letter Vnto which course though we do not bind our brethren yet may we safely say so farr as we remember that there never came complaynt of sin to the Church since we were officers but we took knowledge of it before eyther by mutual consent on both sides or at least by the party accused with whose christian modesty and wisdom we think it wel sorteth that being condemned by two or three brethrē he should not trouble the Church or hazzard a publique rebuke upon himself without counselling with them who ar set over him and who eyther are or should be best able to advise him Thirdly and which was the cheif cause we were without all hope of doing good when they once misliked the motion which made it Whilest they liked it we had hope though it were with hard measure to the other and so did further it to the utmost of our power but when they layd it down we knew all our labour would be lost in endeavoring their second listing of it Lastly where Mr Iohnson affirmeth that at the first treating of the matter we conceived that those by them dismissed should remayn at Leydē with us notwithstanding their want of meanes of living it may wel be as he sayth though we well remember it not And therin all men may see how we were even overcaryed with a vehement desire of peace with them and amongst themselves and how farr wee were from being partiall towards them with whom we agreed in the things in controversie Yea the truth is we were boldest with thē both because we would prevent all jealousy in the other and preserve in them all the interest we could for the common peace and also because we were wel assured of Mr Ainsworths great moderation upō whom the rest did much depend But howsoever we conceived at the first it is certayn that both they and we conceived otherwise in the agreement And therfore when one amongst them made exception that we should not dismisse thē back which came unto us to live a distinct congregation in the same city with them it was presently answered both by Mr Iohnson and Mr Studley that that concerned not them but that they would leave it unto us though that appeared afterwards to be the onely thing for which they broke off their purpose and promise And here the work of Gods providence is to be observed that they who would have no peace with their brethren abyding in the same city with them are about to leave it themselves and to settle their abode els where Which thing that it might well come to passe in short time they were by us put in mind of before hand if God gave them not agayne to reunite which by a peaceable parting might hav been furthered Which how much better had it been they had admitted of all things considered then thorough extreme streytnes in themselves not to medle with the mayn cause thus to have made their brethren their adversaries and themselves yea and us all a by-word to the whole world Iohn Robinson William Brewster This is the record of our brethren of Leyden touching our troubles Wheras our opposites object unto us that we refused to trie if by writing among our selves we could have come to better accord c. I answer first we had by a twelv moneths dispute tried if we could have come to accord but were further off in the end then at the beginning Secondly things were brought to that pass that the practise of their errours was established the truth in publik doctrines inveighed against the opposers of their errours compared to Korah Dathan and Abiram the Lords supper of a long time not administred among us occasions sought against sundry persons to cast them out of the Church peace by us offred by them refused peace by them selves propounded and confirmed and by them agayn broken open warr proclaymed against us as against men that refused disobeyed and spake evil of the way and truth of God c. was this an estate for us to continew in togither and goe to writing which would prove we knew not how many moneths or yeres work For loe to a letter of mine of 3. pages they have given an answer of 70. and if they continue thus to multiplie what volumes shal we have in the end and when shal vve have an end It is rather to be feared that vve suffred things to depend too long for vvhen the Apostles found Christians liberty to be indangered and bondage to be brought upon them though privily they gave not place by subjection for an howr that the truth of the Gospel might continew with them Gal. 2.4.5 Thirdly it vvas a vvay vvhich they alvvayes mislyked and in our former troubles vvhen heretofore M. Smyth and others having debated their causes in conference proffered vvritings then M. Iohnson himself vvith the rest vvithstood and refused that course But novv that vvhich they blamed in others they commend in themselves so partial are they in al things When they like of a thing it must be good vvhen they mislike it must be evil We vvish they vvould shevv more sinceritie And novv as vve desire the Christian reader not to be offended at the truth because of our infirmities who cannot walk in it as we ought nor to stumble for the troubles and dissentions which Satan rayseth among Gods people so wee desire these our opposite brethren to return into the right way from which they are estrayed and putting away al love of preeminence and of their own aberrations to receiv agayn the love of the truth and of brotherly concord that the name of God be no more evil spoken of by the wicked and that the harts which ar wounded by these dissentions may be healed and refreshed The Lord look upon the afflictions of Sion wipe away her tears forgive her iniquities take away her reproch restore her joy and comfort her according to the dayes that she hath seen evil Amen Finis Faults escaped in the printing Pag. 6. line 11. for that read than pag. 46. two lines before the end for uncirsed read uncircumcised pag. 70. line 23. for wholy read holy pag. 112. line 42. for wod read word * 3. Ioh. 9.10 †C. aper venerabilem Extrav qui sunt sil legit “ Hierarc l. 4. c. 3. l. 2. c. 3. * T. Dorm Proof of certayn articles denyed by M. Iewel fol. 7. * Heb. 10.