false Church And contrarily Thirdly I aske Is not the Hierarchy and Church constitution of Antichrist the most detestable anarchy of Sathan that ever was And doth not Sathan far more commonly and readily part with his false doctrine then with it when he must needs part with the one 2 Thes 2.9 and yet can retayne the other He is subtill and of long experience he can mynd and knoweth full well that so long as he holdeth his owne constitution of a Church he can quickly vppon any opportunity bring in his doctrine agayne even with a trice For why He hath both the people ready for the receyving of it being yet still in the confusion and bondage of Antichrist and his owne Ministery also to be imployed in the publishing and serving thereof theyr Offices Callings Ministrations Maintenance being all ready at hand and fit for the purpose Whereas on the contrary when the false constitution is abolished then false doctrine wanteth both hee woonted place of receipt and her nimble wings by which she should spread and fly abroad And here I could alledge for proof hereof the prefer Ministery and estate of the Church of England which being of Antichrist Sathans graundchild and he now having spyed his tyme and found some opportunity beginneth apace by this meanes to bring in agayne such doctrines of his as had for a tyme ben suppressed As namely Free-vvill Auricular Confession Christs soule to descend into Hell The Church of Rome to be a true Church c. Witnesse the Books and publik Sermons of Bilson Bancroft Hooker Androes Harsenet Barret and other the Priests and Prelates of that Church the Marchants of these and the like wares off the Beast in Court City Countrey Vniversity and where not The same thing you may mynd also thus So long as the house standeth still and is furnished with servants and Ministers it is ready for the implements and furniture though removed for a tyme to be brought in agayne and soone to be set vp in theyr woonted place And if you would see an example of these things yet in memory look but at the Churches estate in K. Edwards and Q. Maryes dayes compared together The popish constitution of the Church being not abolished in King Edwards tyme how soone was the Popes doctrine yea and his supremacy in Queen Maryes dayes spread and acknowledged throughout the Land Yet the same doctrines of truth were in K. Edwards tyme published and receyved which now are in England And very like also that it was then with more zeale and love of the truth thē now it is specially considering the generall coldnes of men and the cruell persecution of the truth to which this age synce is come Mynd further that the Offices houses and maintenance of the Fryers and Nunnes being before in the time of K. Henry the eight quite taken away they were not able in all Q. Maryes raigns to reare them vp agayne No albeit they iudged them lawfull and necessary aswell as the other poynts of Popery and did also very earnestly desier and labour to have them reestablished So great a matter it is to have a thing abolished in the whole constitution thereof Even as when an house is rased and pulled downe to the very foundation And here vpon this occasion let me also aske Whether if the Callings and Livings of the Prelates and Priests together with the Idoll Temples and confusion of all maner people in the body of the Church now had in England were so dealt with as the Abbats Monks Abbeyes and Nunryes then were there would not fewer Iesuites and Seminaryes come into the Land Popery lesse increase treason against her Maiesty be lesse attempted and finally all the meanes and hope for the full replanting of Antithrists religion agayne in that Church be vtterly removed and taken away Let this Scribe then go and perswade such as himself that the outward constitution of the Church is but as the tithing of Mynt Annise and Commin c. Whosoever have theyr 〈◊〉 exercised to discerne good and evill will playnely see that notwithstanding any thing he pretendeth yet it is and ought to be accounted among the waighty matters of the Law of God Yea that it is of far other importance and consequence then most men think or will yet be perswaded albeit even experience the Mistresse of fooles might in all this tyme and tryall have taught them sufficient if ynough were ynough for men In cases of Religion Now for his Reason here any may see by that which hath ben sayd that it is very frivolous and of no waight at all The Proposition or first part hath nothing for the ground of it but that which is in question and neyther is alway true nor can be yeelded vnto for very great and waighty causes here before declared Vnto which adde these also 1. That many errors in doctrine are and may be far lesse then the errors of the outward constitution when they are truly compared together 2. That the true outward constitution of the Church alway implyeth both a separation of the people from the World and the joyning of them together in the fellowship of the Gospell and both these to be voluntary Which particulars being considered with the former will teach him not barely to set downe but duly to prove the Proposition in his next Reply The Assumption or second part of the Reason is in some fence true in some sence false and in both against himself and their Churches estate When Churches are set in the constitution and way of Christ if afterward they fall into some errour of doctrine they are notwithstāding for the former to be reputed true Churches vntill being admonished they refuse to heare the voyce of Christ and to yeeld to the truth Thus the Assumption is true and of vs confessed by the example of the Churches of the Iewes c. But when theyr case cometh to be such as they will rather abide in errour then obey the truth and voyce of Christ this so wilfull persisting simply overthroweth such a company from being a true Church in such estate And thus the Assumption is false and so proved to be by the example of the said Churches And both wayes it is agaynst him and theyr Church as will yet further appeare by that which is now to be spoken of his question wherein he would be resolved He asketh VVhat if a company of Arrians Anabaptists or Papists should be gathered and established in a true outvvard constitution and still retayne theyr fundamentall errors before named VVhether then their outvvard constitution should make them a true Church Yea or no. I aunswer 1. Not onely false constitution but false doctrine also retayned make a false Church If it were so then that they could have a true constitution as he supposeth yet by reason of theyr false doctrine they should be a false Church 2 I aske also of him Whether these companyes of whom he speaketh
although theyr Church receyve them yet is Mr Iacobs defence as sound for them then as it is now Neyther may any for these or the like separate from theyr Church worship or Ministery if you will beleev him Yet note that for proof of this assertion you must let them take day For as yet they can shew you none And what now if any of the errors which the Church of England at this day retayneth be fundamentall What will Mr Iacob say to that Then agayne he is at a flat Non plus and all his book is not worth a rush save that it yeelds vs the cause and graunts theyr Church to be a false Church aÌ„d theyr people to be no true ChristiaÌ„s in that estate For this therefore see what is sayd in the Treatise hereafter following Pag. 22. 114. 147. 148. What also if D. Bilson should aunswer Mr Iacob for that poynt of Christs descension into Hell as he aunswereth vs for theyr Church corruptions that though it be an error yet it is not fundamentall yea and that they in K. Edvvards dayes held it Mr Cranmer Ridley Latimer c. Would Mr Iacob take this of his word or think it a sufficient warant for the holding thereoff or bynd others to be likewise mynded c. But to let this passe let Mr Iacob mynd well the estate and practise of theyr Church but in such particulars as I have named hereafter Pag. 63. 64. 65. and then let him aunswer as before God Are they lawfull or vnlawfull Are they of Christ or Antichrist Of God or the Divell Lead they to heaven or hell May they be found in the Word and Churches of God or in the Popes Churches Canons Portuis Pontificall May they any maner way be approved and communicated withall or are they not wholy and with detestation to be refused and abhorred For aunswer hereof I will wayte till Mr Iacob reply agayne And in the meane tyme I will now aunswer what he and his Prefacemaker have already published Where first I desier the Reader in both of them and in Bridges Bancroft Bilson Hooker Sutcliff and all such writers of that Church to mynd these three things 1. That all theyr reasoning and perswasions are no other but such as may lead men eyther backe agayne to Popery or the ready way to Atheisme or at least to receyve whatsoever religion the Prince pleaseth so themselues account it not to be fundamentall Thus are they all blynd guydes Thus do they all teach to continew in sinne Thus do they shut vp the kingdome of heaven before men neyther entring in themselues nor suffring them that would enter to come in 2. That they do even set themselues to carpe at the truth it self and at the mayntenance and practise thereoff To which end they vse they care not what objections and abuse they care not whom 3. That they never do so much as offer to bring proof from the Scripture for theyr estate and practise See the particulars afterward rehearsed Pag. 63. 64. 65. And mynd iff there be any of them all that in any book they have written have brought warrant for them from the word of God Onely D. VVhitgift made an assay for some of them but he was so taken downe by Mr Cartvvright as he was glad to lay downe the bucklers which synce that tyme neyther himselff nor any other durst take vp And now Sutcliffe himselff can tell them iff Mr Cartwright have the better hand of D. Whitgift that then the Church of England is no true Church of Christ and that there is iust cause to departe and separate from it Sut. Engl. b. Pag. 228. These things noted I do now come to Mr Iacobs book and first to the Preface which his fellow and frend at a need hath prefixed before it Where I will for more evidence of the truth and stopping of theyr mouths first set downe his owne words as I do also Mr Iacobs afterward in the book it self and then make aunswer vnto them He that made or wrote the Preface subscribeth his Name thus D. B. And thus he beginneth it The Publisher to the Christian Reader Section 1. ABout Three Yeeres since Maister Iacob having some speach vvith certen of the separation before mentioned concerning their peremptory vtter separation from the Churches of England vvas requested by them briefly to sett dovvn in vvriting his Reason for defence of the said Churches And they vvould either yeild vnto his proofes or procure an ansvver vnto the same VVherevppon the Argument follovving this Preface vvas set dovvne in vvriting by maister Iacob vvhich the said parties did send to Maister Fr. Iohnson being then prisoner in the Clinke in Southvvark vvho made an ansvver vnto the same conteyning 3. Exceptions and 9. Reasons in denyall of the Assumption vvherevnto Maister Iacob Replyed Aftervvard Maister Iohnson defended his sayd Exceptions and Reasons And finally Maister Iacob Replyed againe As by the particulars themselves appeareth The Aunswer These two letters Geuev Scot. Allobrog Disc Pag. 7. D. B. I fynd to be set for Doctor Bancroft now Prelate of London in a * shameles book of his not long synce sparsed abroad In which respect as also considering many as godles things here agayne published albeit some might think it were therefore to be ascriâ—ed vnto him yet for other causes partly appearing in the book partly knowen of the man I thinck this Preface was not made by him but rather by another †Daniel Buck D. B. a Scrivener of London a man that hath turned his coat and forsaken the truth as often as †Doct. Pernâ— D. P. the old turne coat did if not also oftner He it was that by letters desired of me to aunswer Mr Iacobs Argument as here is said being himself at that tyme separated from the false worship and Ministery of England to which vomit he is now againe returned wallowing in that â—â—yer from which then he was washed Then also he could say himself thought Mr. Iacobs Argument was frivolous and of no waight and that his desier with some others was to have it answered for the stopping of Mr Iacobs mouth who thought it vnaunswerable Herevpon I made answer vnto it and as there was occasion by Mr Iacobs doubled Replyes have aunswered agayne and agayne I have also for sundry causes consulted with others therein and namely with Mr Henry Ainsvvorth Teacher of our Church my work-fellow to the kingdome of God approved in Christ At London 1593. and Mr Daniel Studley another off our Elders who hath given vp his life for the Name of our Lord Iesus Christ being first * adâ—udged to death afterward exiled c. And now vnto thee good Christian Reader I exhibit the whole Treatise conteyning beside that which was published before my aunswer also to Mr Iacobs second and last Reply that thou mayest try the matter by the word off God and as it agreeth therewith so to receyve it and no
AN ANSWER TO MAISTER H. IACOB HIS DEFENCE of the Churches and Ministery of England By Francis Iohnson an exile of IESVS CHRIST Though myne Adversary write a Book against me would I not beare it vpon my shoulder would I not bynde it for crovvnes vnto me Iob. 31.35.36 Printed in the Yeare of our Lord. 1600. The Title and inscription of Mr Iacobs book because there is often relation vnto it hereafter both in the Preface and in the Book it selff therefore I thought good here to insert it at first Thus it was word for word as followeth A DEFENCE OF THE CHVRCHES AND Ministery of England Written in two Treatises against the Reasons and obiections of Mr Francis Iohnson and others of the separation commonly called Brownists Published especially for the benefit of those in these parts of the lovv Countries MIDDELBVRGH By Richard Schilders Printer to the States of Zealand 1599. To the Christian Reader grace and peace from our Lord Iesus Christ THere came out of late good Reader two books from one Mayster Henry Iacob a Priest of the Orders of the Prelates The first was agaynst his Lord Mr D. Bilson now Prelate of Winchester concerning Christs suffrings and descending into Hell The latter agaynst me by name and others like mynded tovvching the Church and Ministery of England Now although the Prelates could not well be offended at him for publishing the former agaynst the doctrine of theyr Church senig * In K. Edvv tyme about 50. Yeares synce long before him Mr Carlill a learned man had both publikly disputed in Cambridge and printed a book agaynst that error of Christs descension and that with great approbation of the most godly and learned at that tyme Yet belike fearing the worst and knowing the hatred of the Prelates how deadly it is he did presently after send forth his other book in defence of the Churches and Ministery of England So as whatsoever displeasure his Lords the Prelates conceyved agaynst him for the former there was now some hope that they might sooner be appeased vpon view of the latter Or howsoever it should fall out yet what like lyer way could he take to make all sure on his side then by the first book to get the forward Preachers and professors to take his part agaynst the Prelates and by the other to have both them and the Prelates themselves to stand with him agaynst vs Yet I heare some of his owne coat give out that he hath dealt very simply in publishing so weak and raw a Treatise against vs. And true it is in deed that his Treatise is such In the publishing whereof no wisedome hath he shewed at all vnles it be in this that he hath thus let all the world see that against the errors of the Church of England there is plenty of Scripture to be had and vrged but not a jote to be found for defence of theyr VVorship Ministery constitution c. For if you mynd it †Yet I deny not but he hath scattered some errors also in that book in his book against Bilson about the question of Christs suffrings and descending into Hell you shall see proof after proof readily brought from the word of God And on the contrary in his book against vs not onely no such proof but in stead thereof eyther his owne assertions and comparisons obtruded vnto vs as oracles or the Names of Mr Cranmer Mr Ridley and other dead men opposed to the word of the living God or putting over his cause to the State to be defended himself being not able to speak one poore word in defence thereof c. Such is his latter book and such are the grounds of it A very great and straunge difference between two books set out by one and the same man the one straight after the other and both of them in matter of Religion If I had first published these Replyes and Aunswers which passed between vs no doubt but many would have had a prejudice thereof and all would have thought I had done it purposely to shew the weaknes of that cause and falsehood of that Ministery c. But now when he a member of that Church yea a Minister of it even a Priest of the Prelates creation hath first published them albeit the same thing be done yet it is both without all prejudice and pretended by him for defence of the Churches and Ministery of England Be it that he hath not done it so well as many would have it yet it is the best he could And what if he thought by this meanes eyther to stirre vp some others more able herevnto or at least to shew his owne good will Doubtles where there is want of ability a mans good will is to be accepted And why should any then misinterpret so good a meaning If any of the Prelates or others of that Church like it not they may learne by his example iff not to lay theyr hand on theyr mouth yet to try if they can plead the cause any better For worse I suppose they would be ashamed to do it I had thought in this case I should never have seen any more absurd writing then Mr Giffards and Bredvvels But now to Mr Iacob may they well give place And iff any can be found of all the Priests in England more sencelesse then these let such for theyr worthynes as standerd bearers be Prelates of theyr chiefest Seas And as for Mr Iacob seing he hath done his best let all men be content to beare with his simplicity who otherwise might well note his folly for vndertaking ius how the defence of that which yet in deed he leaveth altogether naked and helples By the title of his book it seemeth he thought to carry away the simple Reader who eyther could not or would not mynd what should follow after it In the book it self he thinketh his plea to be very good if he can say for the Ministery and other abominations of theyr Church They are errors but not fundamentall sinnes against the Second commandement but not vtterly abolishing from Christ c. And this is the summe of his whole book A plea which he counteth vnaunswerable Yet in deed no other but such as openeth a wide doore for all maner errors and sinnes to be receyved and nourished amonge them which themselves shall presume not to be fundamentall c. So that now theyr Church is ready when they please to entertayne agayne the offices of Abbats Monks Fryers Nonnes Cardinals c. the doctrines and practise of Auricular confession Prayer in an vnknovven toungue Prayer for the dead Seven Sacraments Holy vvater holy ashes holy palmes holy bread Creame spittle oyle and salt in Baptisme Consubstantiation Deniall of the cup to the lay people Denyall off vvarres and Magistracy in Christians Denyall of Mariage in Ministers c. For these and many mo errors of the Papists Lutherans Anabaptists it is like they hold not to be fundamentall And therefore
Note also that of the teachers spoken of to the Corinthians the Apostle saith themselues shal be saved 1 Cor. 3.15 albeit theyr vvork of affected eloquence do burne and vanish away as smoke Whereas contrarily of the teachers of erroneous doctrine he saith They haue not God neither serve the Lord Iesus but are accursed For proof whereof see the Scriptures here alleadged before 4. Finally because the Apostle writing els where to the same purpose and to the same Church of Corinth doth himself playnely declare that this is his meaning As namely in 1. Cor. 1.12.13.17.19.20.21 2 Cor. 2.17 4.2 11.3.4.5 6 For which cause it may well be thought that the Spirit of God in this place did in great wisdome and of purpose compare theyr entising speach and vayne eloquence to vvood hay and stubble which are combustible aÌ„d cannot abide the tryall of fier that whereas they did much glory in this course they might euen by this resemblance now see and consider the vanity thereof and how vnworthy it was to be suted with the foundation which is Iesus Christ As on the contrary he resembleth the teaching of the Gospell in simplicity and playne evidence of the Spirit to gold and silver which will abide the fier and to precious stones which are of great valew to teach them by this comparison that albeit such maner of teaching seemed base in outward shâ—â—â— and were of small account with men yet it is in deed precious such as will endure the tryall and is accepted with God as being the right handling of the word and sutable with the foundation Iesus Christ Thus much I thought to write here for the clearing of the true sence and meaning of this Scripture Which by reason of misunderstanding is perverted not onely by the Papists to mainteyne theyr feyned Purgatory but by many Protestants also partly to vphold such errors annd doctrines as they hold against the word of God partly to defend theyr estate notwithstanding that such errors and false doctrines be retayned among theÌ„ Now by this which hath ben said the Reader may see both how ignorantly this Scripture is misapplyed by Mr Iacob and his Scribe and that being disappoynted hereof they have not so much as the apperance of any one Scripture to alledge in defence of theyr Church-estate But it comes well to passe as * Beza in 1 Cor. 3.10 one sayth of Purgatory-fyer that theyr Church constitution is built of stubble wood and hay so as the flame of God being now kindled agayne there is no marvell that in our memory it is for the most part already set on fyer For Mr Iacobs aunswer in Pag. 192 As also for the exceptions he bringeth here of errors simply fundamentall c. of the Martyrs of the Church of Englands conuiction obstinacy c. For these I say because they are all borrowed from Mr Iacobs Replyes following whither himself referreth vs I have there purposely handled them and therefore will I not here stand vpon them but thither refer the Reader for them As namely for Mr Iacobs Reply in Pag. 192. to the aunswer therof in Pag. 203. c. For the exception of errors simply fundamentall c. to Pag. 22. 51. 114. 144-147 c. For that of the Martyrs to Pag. 8. 29. 40. 41. 44. 46. 54. 67. 79. 162. 182. For the Church off England theyr conviction obstinacy c. to Pag. 42. 53. 78. 103. 108. 126. 127. 130. 131. 132. 140. 161. 174. 175. 203. c. Finally for these and all such like to the whole Treatise following where Mr Iacob this mans Rabbi both speaketh himself and is aunswered agayne Yet before we proceed vnto it let vs see what the third note is which he would further have here to be observed D. B. His Preface to the Reader Section 4. 3. Thirdly I vvould desier the Reader to observe the vvresting and misaplying of certen places of scripture vvhich partly in this Treatise and also in other their vvritings they alleadge for their absolute and peremptory separation from the Churches of England VVhich I haue thought not amisse here to sett dovvne that thereby the Reader and themselues vppon better consideration off the ende and scope of the holy Ghost in these places may see hovv they vvrest and misapply them cleane contrary from the true and naturall sence thereof The scriptures vvhich they alleadge for theyr separation are these Then the sonnes of God saw the daughters of men Gen. 6.2 Yee shall keepe therefore all mine ordinances and all my iudgments and doe them that the land whither I bring you to dwell therein spew you not out therefore shall ye bee holy vnto mee for I the Lord am holy and I have separated you from other people that you should be mine Lev. 20.22.26 So the children of Israell which were come agayne out of captiuitie and all such as had separated themselves vnto them from the filthines of the Heathen of the land to seeke the Lord God of Israell did eate c. Ezra 6.21 Departe departe yee goe out from thence and touch no vncleane thinge goe out of the middest of her be ye cleane that beare the vessels of the Lord. Esa 52.11 Fly from the middest of Babell and departe out of the land of the Caldeans Ier. 50.8 And fly out of the middest of Babell and deliuer euery man his soule from the fierce wrath of the Lorde Ier. 5â— 6.45 Come not yee to Gilgall neither goe ye vp to Bethauen Hos 4.15 Come to Bethell and transgresse aÌ„d to Gilgall and multiply transgression c. Seeke not Bethell nor enter into Gilgall and goe not to Beersheba Amos. 4.4.5 Saue your selues from this froward generation Act. 2.40 And when certen were hardned and disobeyed speaking euell of the way of God before the multitude he departed from them and separated the Discipels c. Act. 19.9 Therefore come out from among them and separate your selues saith the Lorde and touch no vncleane thing and I will receive you 2 Cor. 6.17 And I heard another voice from heaven saying goe out of her my People that ye be not partakers in her sinnes and that ye receyve not of her plagues c Rev. 18.4 These are the very mayne grounds on vvhich theyr separation is builded vvhich being duly vveighed vvith the scope of the text you shall very easely finde that not one amongest them all vvill hold in proportion vvith this time nor beare the separation they gather from them First because either they concerne such times and states as the people that liued in them vvere professors of or subiect vnto open grosse Infidelitie either HeatheÌ„ or AntichristiaÌ„ Idolatry not in some particuler customes outvvard ordinances but in the vvhole body and povver of Heathen Antichristian religion such as could not possibly stand vvith true faith and religion at all VVhich can not be said of these times present standings vvithout open vntruth 2. Or els
were true Churches when they fell into those errors as were the Churches of Galatia when the errors about Circumcision and the Law crept in among them Or whether they were Hereticks Sectaryes or the like such as were Hymeneus Philetus Alexander the Apostates of Rome c. falling from the true faith and Churches of God when they came to be gathered and established as he fancyeth If they were of the former sort then they are to be estemed and admonished as true Churches till by despising the voyce of Christ the Kingdome of God be taken from among them Gal. 1.2 vvith 5.2.4 Mat. 21.33.43 1 Cor. 1.2 vvith 15.12 Rev 2. 3. chap. If of the latter then are they no true Churches at all but false and detestable Synagogues of Sathan whatsoever truth in constitution or otherwise they shall pretend Rev. 2.9 Act. 20.30 Col. 2.8.23 2 Thes 2.3.7 1 Tim. 1.19.20 6.20.21 and 2 Tim. 2.17.18 and 3.5.6.13 and. 4.14 Heb. 10.38.39 2 Pet. 2.1.2.3 In de ver 18.19 Rev. 13.11 17. 18 chap. 3. In a true constitution must alway be mynded a calling by the word of God a separation from the world a joyning together in the fellowship of the Gospell and that by a voluntary profession thereof and submission therevnto Now these things considered how is it posible that the Arrians Anabaptists or Papists retayning theyr errours should yet be gathered and established in a true outward constitution Can the light of truth have communion with the darkenes of falsehood Or can Christ in his constitution agree with Belial in the errours of Arians Anabaptists Papists c. 2 Cor. 6.14.15.16 4. Finally if he will not heare our aunswer nor the Scriptures testimony let him yeâ— heare Mr Iewell a Prelate of theyr Church resolve his question in this maner * Ievvels Reply to Harding Pag 99 VVithout Christ the Church is no Church neyther hath any right or clayme vvithout his promise noâ— any promise vvithout his vvord Now this D. B. affirmeth himself that these of whom he speaketh are vvithout Christ For he sayth †Before in Sect. 3. theyr errors do of theyr ovvne nature cleane abolish from Christ Therefore by his owne assertion and Mr Iewels layd together they can be nâ—â—eue Church whatsoever faith or constitution they should pretend neyther have they anâ— right in such estate to his blessing Which yet is promised to them that are in the true waâ— and constitution of Christ Mat. 28.20 2 Cor. 6.17.18 Lev. 26.11.12 Thus then appeareth that he doth both ignorantly fever the doctrine wholy from the Churches constitution and that yet when they are considered apart as some tymes and â— some respects they may be each of them that is both the doctrine and constitution according as they are true or false avayle directly to the ouerthrowing or making of the Church to be likewise true or false so as hath ben declared before His crafty putting of faulty here for falâ— will nothing help him but bewrayeth his corrupt dealing the more Els let him shew in his next if he can whether ever there were true Church that stood in false constitution Neyther is the obiection of the Iewish constitution answered at all but remayneth of force against them still And that so much the more as the Churches of England remayne both in falâ— constitution and in false doctrine for both which they are vnder the wrath of God and all â—ound to separate from them And whosoever will not so do it remayneth a grievous sinne vpon theyr heads for which they must answer to God in that day when he will cast the Beast and false Prophet with all such as have ben seduced by them into vtter destruction to have their part in the lake which burneth with fyer and brimstone which is the second death 2 Thes â— 10.11.12 Rev. 14.9.10.11 17.1.2 19.20.21 21.8 D. B. his Preface to the Reader Section 7. Lastly concerning our corruptions As we cannot iustifie them to be no corruptioÌ„s but must needes acknowledge that there are many yet remaining in our land which vvere left by that man of sinne are as thornes vnto our sides vvhich vve hope God will in time abolish Iudg. 2.3 So dare vve not runne into your extremities to condempne our Churches for such corruptions but waight the appointed time of God for the redresse thereof Yet in the meane time so longe as those most excellent truthes and doctrines of salvation for which God make vs thankfull are still reteyned and held as soundly as by any Church vpon the face of the earth the other errors not simply ouerthrovving the same beeing not held of obstinacy and being also for the most part of great controversie and disputation among the learned So long I say communion in things lavvfull is to be kept with them as before is noted in the example of other Churches Othervvise it vvill come to passe by reason of the * * Mat. 25.13 10.23 dieuersitie in opinions and iudgementes vvhich by the corruption of our nature vve remaine in in this tabernacle as hath ‡ ‡ Lev. 4. Psal 19.12 bene in all ages and * * 1 Cor. 13.9 12. shal be so long as this life of imperfection indureth that no communion can euer bee had vvith any Church liuing no nor any one Christian vvith another Which to affirme vvere most absurd and vngodly These observations beeing considered I doubt not but the Lorde vvill adde a blessing to this vvorke That such as are simple hearted and have exceeded in eagernesse of zeale may see theyr extremitie in so rashly and vnadvisedly separating from and condempning the Churches of England sometymes theyr Nurses and Mothers as before is noted Whereby God may have the glory themselves the comforte euen the salvation of theyr soules through Christ D. B. The Aunswer Now at length D. B. yeeldeth the cause himself So great is the truth and so greatly it prevayleth against every oppugner thereof To omit that he confesseth they cannot justify theyr corruptions and yet they can abide in them he sayth also they must needs acknovvledge that they have many corruptions remayning vvich vvere left by that man of sinne vvhich are as thornes vnto theyr sides Blessed be God which maketh the enemyes themselues bring glory and testimony to his truth They are so convinced as he sayth plainely they must needs acknovvledge it Now therefore let him name them in his next or confesse those to be of them which I have noted hereafter Pag. 63. c. Till then I will onely inferre this herevppon that seing they are such as himself here graunteth them to be viz corruptions of the Man of sinne and thornes to theyr sides even therefore are all bound to separate from them as being condenmed by the word of God For hath not the Lord commaunded all his people wholy to leave the Man of sinne with all his corruptions not to partake in any of his
in him some goodnes towards the Lord God of Israell he may be counted a true Israelite finding mercy at the Lords hands 1 King 14.1.5.13 By this you may see what my mind in this first point is and alway hath ben And if you doe marke wheresoeuer I speak of the members of your Church to be vnder wrath in Antichristian estate no true Christians or iointly together no true Churches or the like I speake it still with this caution in respect of such estate or constitution as they stand in vnder Antichrist To which end you may euerie where in my aunswers minde these and the like clauses In that estate In that constitution In respect of the Ministerie and constitution of the Church Being subiect to Antichrist Being so considered Being Antichristian and other of like sorte For the second your words are That all the Christians and Churches in King Edvvards tyme and namely M. Cranmer M. Ridley M. Hooper M. Latimer M. Philpot M. Saunders M. Rogers M. Tailor c. vvere all lims of Antichrist and no true Christians Now as touching this matter although you may easily see what my minde is by that I haue said concerning the other going before yet for this in particular know also that I am thus minded viz. That al the christians and churches in King Edwards time and namely M. Cranmer M. Ridley c. stood as touching the outward constitution of that church in Antichristian estate Yet considering the mercie of God vnto thē and their faithfulnes in those things which in that time of ignorance were reuealed inasmuch as afterward they loued not their liues vnto death but in many waightie pointes resisted vnto blood striuing against Antichrist I hold them in this respect true Christians and now to be at rest with the Lord. And tell me your self M. Iacob whether you iudge not thus of Arnoldus de villa noua Iohannes de rupe scissa Iohn Wicleff Iohn Hus Ierome of Prage Sauanarola Dominicus Siluester Thorpe Swinderby Bilney c. the faithfull witnesses of Christ in their seuerall ages and therefore in this respect true Christians whereas yet notwithstanding as touching their ministerie and Church-constitution wherein they were they stood in Antichristian estate some of them being Friers some popish Priests some saying Masse some communicating in it c. vntill the day they were martyred and put to death For the third your wordes are That euerie soule in England is conuicted in consciēce that the Prelacie is vnlawfull vntolerable Touching this likewise I neuer did nor can affirme as you haue set downe Only this I know and affirme for the generall state of the Land that a greater light is risen vnto them in these daies but they loue darknes more then light Also that many times and sundry waies hath ben shewed and convinced vnto them that the Prelacie Priesthood Leiturgy c. are Antichristian and therefore vnlawful and vntolerable Finally that the * VVitnesse their Acts in Parlament against vs. Their presēt estate practise c. vniuersal face of the Realme hath refused the truth by vs professed and retaineth still the Antichristian abhominations aforesaid For which I feare their iudgment will be the heauier Ioh. 3.19 and 15.22 Act. 13.45.46 This is that which I haue bin and am perswaded touching these particulars The latter branch of the first of these is our maine question and the ground of all our reasoning which I haue proued by many arguments both from the word of God and your owne mens writings Vnto which M. Iacob you haue not giuen one word of sound aunswer in all your booke but continually fly from the point in question as knowing I feare in your self that there can be no iust defence of your Churches estate in this behalf And touching all three your self could not but know that my iudgment therein was as I haue declared you and I haue so oftē had speach together thereabout Yet behold to make the truth of God and my defence thereof more odious to the world and so to preiudice your Readers iudgment you haue here at first vniustly and falsly fathered vpon me these three assertions being not able to shew them in my words or writings any where Remember you not how the enemies of Gods grace delt of old with the Apostles Rom. 3.8 blaming them vniustly as if they had taught vve should doe euil that good might come thereof Or mind you how the Papists Anabaptists and the like doe at this day charge vs though falsly that vve make God the author of sin whiles we maintaine against them the truth touching Predestination Freewill c. In like manner deale you with me See Mat. 26 60.61 vvith Ioh. 2 19.21 Act. 6.13.14 And thus at first you become a false witnes both in peruerting the sence of my words and in altering diminishing and adding vnto them Euerie of which you know is to beare false testimony not only against me but in this case euen against the truth it self That all men take notice both of these positions and of our dealing therein I also am content and desirous My aunswers I confesse are somewhat long partly because I would make the truth manifest euen to the most simple partly for that I would more fully discouer your manifold shifts and leaue you no statting hole any where In your replies which may well be pinned vp in a narrow roome seeing they haue nothing of waight in them I desire more sound and vpright dealing together with demonstration of your cause from the Scripture That I haue cause thus to desire these three points following which I wish the Reader to obserue in your Replies will testifie First that you being to proue your cause and Argument Three things to be noted by the Reader in Mr Iacobs Replyes neuer proceed though you be still called vpon to make due proof thereof but put ouer all proof vnto me and busie your selfe in aunswering after your fashion the Exceptions and Reasons I brought against your Argument Secondly that in aunswering my Reasons and Exceptions finding them all to heauy you neuer directly refute them as they were propoūded but some times leaue most waightie points in them wholy vnaunswered somtimes labour to wash your hāds of the matter and to turne ouer the plea from your selfe that haue vndertakē it to the state of your Church on whom you leaue it somtimes transforme them into other shapes framed by your self and so aunswer not me but fight with your owne shadow and thus euerie foot yeeld the cause by necessary consequence Thirdly that in steed of Gods word which is very rare with you in all this dispute you presse vs with the authoritie of Man neuer going about to approue your Church-estate by the Scriptures which onely must end this controuersie but alway leading vs to the view and errors of the Martyrs For let it be minded whether euery of your Replies haue not this for their foundation
with the Articles IniuÌ„etioÌ„s Aduerticements and Caueates in that behalf prouided If any preach the word of God any further they are subiect to be sileÌ„ced banished and put to death That these things accord with the ordinaÌ„ce of Christ or with your owne description of a visible Church I suppose your self will not for shame affirme it Lastly in your description it is required That the Sacramentes be duely ministred according to the ordinance of Christ in all things that of necessity are requisite to the same Now by the ordinance of Christ in the administration of the Sacraments there are necessarily required 1. A lawfull Minister 2. A lawfull people 3. A lawfull administratioÌ„ according to the Testament of Christ In al which your practise is contrary to the ordinance of Christ and your owne description aforesayd Your Ministers all of them are either Prelates Priestes or Deacons which among you is a step to the Priesthood none of which Christ hath ordeyned in his Testament for the work of his Ministerie Your people are not separated from the world See Iohn 15.19 17.14 1â— but stand in confusion with it and in subiection to the Antichristian Prelates and Prelacie and therefore cannot be deemed a true Church of God and the people of Christ vnto whome in such estate the SacrameÌ„ts which are seales of the couenant of grace doe apperteine and may be administred 1 Iob. 4 â— 5 Act 2 40. and 19 9. Rev. 18.4 and 14.9 Finally your administration is according to the inventions and precepts of men with sâ—inted prayers exhortations Epistles and Gospels and besides these in Baptisme crossing on the forehead and questions to the infant in the Lords supper translating and vsing out of the Masse book other words theÌ„ the words of Christes institution and such like as may be seen at large in your book of common prayer which is picked and culled out of the Masse book full of abominations as * Admonition to the Parlament your selues haue confessed heretofore These things we haue ben forced thus to mention at large both because you twise demaund as if you knew not your selves wherein your practise is contrarie to that description aforesaid and because you blush not to affirme that all the ChristiaÌ„ world seeth and confesseth your practise to be agreable to your profession in that book Whereas the contrarie is most true Touching which what your selues haue heretofore written to the contrarie See in the Admonitions to the Parliament Replies of T. C. against D. Whitgist Demonstration of Discipline c. And what the reformed Churches professe to the contrarie see in the French Belgicke and Heluetian Churches in the Harmonie of confessions SeÌ„ct 10.11 Thus also appeareth what iust cause we had to put you to proue your assemblies to be such as your selues describe visible Churches to bee Which seeing you haue not yet done and seeing your practise is contrary to your profession as now at your request we haue shewed in the particulars aforesayd If you still be minded as before we do also still aske where and what are your proofes touching the particulars mentioned in your owne description of a visible Church Your similitude of a Landlord and Tenaunt is against your selues so worthy and Clerklike is your Reply If any haue vsurped or otherwise made a false claime never so long to a peece of land or other possession may they not iustly be called vpoÌ„ to shew their title and bring forth their euidence Let the Iudges giue sentence If you deny your claime to be such shew your euidence from the Apostles writings Let vs froÌ„ thence see your evidence for the offices of Archbs Lord bs Archdeacons Priests ParsoÌ„s Vicars c. For your entrance into these offices according to your Canons and book of ordering Priests c. For your administration by your scinted imposed Leiturgy and by your Popish Canons Officers proceedings c. For your maintenance by Tythes Chrisomes Offerings c. For your confused communion of all sortes of people though never so wicked in the body of your Church c. Let vs I say see evidence for these from the Apostles writings if you denie your claime to be such as we haue noted Otherwise if you speake not according to this word ‡ Esay 8. â—â— it is because there is no light in you neither any right to that you challendge Where you say vve held part of your possessioÌ„ vvith you hertofore If you meane that we with you receiued the beastes mark and drunke of the cup of Babels abominations we deny it not but acknowledg Gods mercy that passing ouer our sinnes hath giuen vs grace and strength “ Rev 18.4 2 Cor. 6.17.18 Act. 2.40 at his coÌ„maundement to forsake that way of Antichrist and to come out of that spirituall Babylon to the saluation of our soules Which mercy we wish also to you that being saued from that froward generation you may become the sonnes and daughters of the Lord almighty Touching your Article Preaching Sacraments MinistratioÌ„ c Ynough is said before Onely where you say you see not your selues vvherein you faile touching Preaching or Sacraments in things necessary It is too impudent vntruth as your ‡ AdmonitioÌ„ to the Parlament T. C. his replies in defeÌ„ce thereof DemoÌ„stration of discipline Defence of Ecclesiasticall discipline c. former writings doe and will alwaies testifie to your face which we will not stand here to relate That shall suffice which we haue touched before which till it be aunswered the Exception hath both reason and weight in it whatsoever you doe or can pretend to the contrary H. Iacob his 2. Reply to the 1. Excep HEre is much adoe to no purpose You obserue 4. pointes in our Article omitted by me wherein our practise is contrarie to our profession First our Article requireth a visible Church to be an assemblie of faithfull men But our ossemblies say you are not so This is false they are so you shall neuer proue in vs the contrary more then appeareth was in the Church of the Iewes both Auncient and in the time of Christ and yet they than were the true Church As I haue elswhere in this book sufficiently proued and shewed against you That which you bring of D. VVhitgift and other writers amongst vs of the prophanesse of many in our assemblies you depraue their meaninges vtterly for though they graunt very many such to be amongst vs yet they say not that all our assemblies are such nor our whole assemblies Neither denie they our assemblies to be companies of faithfull men or vtterly to be separated from Nay the contrary do they euen that onely they ought to be reformed Therefore you too grosly abuse them Secondly The Article requireth the pure word of God to be preached But say you the Apocrypha books and reading of Homilies and other errors are allowed in our practise Yea surely and in our profession too as your self obserueth
testimonies of theirs if the case were not as cleare as the Sunne at noone day But you say I depraue their meanings vtterly Why so I pray you Because they say not that all your Assemblies are such nor your vvhole Assemblies though they graunt very many such to be among you that is manie of your Church to be Atheists Papists Drunkards Whoremongers Thieves Murtherers Witches c. Alas M. Iacob it pittieth me to see your extreame follie and evill conscience Your follie that see not how both they and you giue the cause in this graunt and therby also testifie that I do not at all deprave their meanings Is it possible that your Church-assemblies should be full of such knowen vngodly persons and yet be Congregations of faithful men It never entred into my thought much lesse did I ever say it that your whole Assemblies are such I know and willingly accknowledg many of your Church not to be so for which I praise God Alwaies I except your publike worship and Idolatrie wherein all even the best among you are inwrapped This I said that your Assemblies are not congregations of faithful men but a confusion of all manner of people though never so vvicked And this you see do your owne men testifie Adde herevnto that both they and your self graunt your Assemblies herein ought to be reformed If they be already Congregations of faithfull men what reformation would you haue in this behalf But if their estate herein be such as they ought to be reformed why are you so shamles and foolish thus to speake as you do in all this matter Besides your folly you bewray an evill conscience in asmuch as you denie that thing the light whereof doth so shine in your conscience as even whiles you would shift it of you are constrained to acknowledg it whether you will or not Where you speak of your owne men that they deny not your Assemblies to be companies of faithfull men or vtterly to be seperated from it is to no purpose at all saue against your selfe For first though they speak it not in these very syllables yet the thing it self necessarily followeth vpon their words It is without question that the heathen Poets did themselues worship Idols yet notwithstanding sometimes they so spake in their writings as Paull doth * Act. 17.28.29 from thence conclude that not Idols but the true God onely is to be worshipped Had it now ben of waight for any of them to have alleadged against the Apostle that theit Poets did not deny Idols to be worshipped Yet you think it sufficient to withstand the truth with any such pretence Let this once spoken serve for aunswer to all your reproches wherewith you burden me many times for the collections which I deduce necessarily from your owne and other mens writings Secondly you are to know that it is not materiall against me whatsoever your men doe graunt or denie But against you it is who abide in the same Ministerie and of the same Church with them For that which you speak of the Church of the Iewes both auncient and in the time of Christ referring vs to another place hereafter in this book for proof of your comparison look you there also for aunswer therevnto And hitherto of the first point of your Article and profession differing from your practise and constitution For the second if you professe to preach the pure vvord of God as this Article requireth and yet againe both in profession and practise as here you acknowledg preach the impure and lying writings of Men such as be the Apocrypha books and your Homilies what is or can be more contrarie If your Article meane othervvise as you pretend it is full of deceit Neither shall any ever know what your profession is if your Articles doe thus crosse one another and your practise also agree with the worst But to cleare this point I aunswer furthermore 1. that it is a point of necessitie requisite that Gods vvord onely be taught For which see these Scriptures Deut. 4.2 and 12.32 Psal 119.113 Prov. 30.5.6 Esa 8.20 and 59.21 Ier. 23 16.28 Ioh. 5.39 Col. 3.16 1 Tim. 6.3.4.5 and 2 Tim. 3.16.17 Gal. 1.8.9 Rev. 22.18.19 Thus by your owne exposition of this Article the Assumption of your maine Argument falleth and your Churches remaine in false constitution which is the question betweene vs. See the third Exception follovving In the aunsvver to Mr Iacobs 2. Reply 2. The Apocrypha books maintained in the Church which you say is both your profession and practise overthroweth the truth of Christian religion and bringeth in Iudaisme Popery Atheisme and what not 3. Even in the Church of Rome where these books also are received yet withal the pure word is so preached among them by Law as no doubt to some is sufficient co salvation For proof whereof see the Rhemes Testament in their note vpon 1 Tim. 2.5 Yet this hindreth not but that their Church maintaineth false doctrine as in that place also may be seen and standeth in false constitution Neither therefore can this help you It resteth then that you show the pure worde only to be preached among you by Lavv and that also according to Christes ordinance which yet you doe not neither can doe And therefore it is your self that say nothing but that you both professe practise errors Now it is well the truth so shineth in your heart as you confesse your Churches faile from the pure vvord in sundry lesser points Yet I pray you reckon vp these points in particular that by the worde of God it may be seen whether they be lesser or greater then you would beare vs in hand Then tell vs in whose power it is in your Church to redresse them Also why they are not redressed seeing you know them and haue ‡ Rev. 2.16.17 3.3 Mat. 18.15.16.17.20 1 Cor. 5.4.5 Lev. 4.13 2 Cor. 10.4.5.6 rules given by Christ for such cases if your Churches be his Lastly why you for your part abide in knowen errors and keepe not the truth and commaundements of Christ As touching that you say though they be errors yet they are not fundamentall neither doe in their owne nature abolish from Christ the fit place of handling this point followeth in the second Exception and seventh Reason to which places I referre it Yet in the meane time because here we are treating of the Apocrypha books tell me whether in retaining them you retaine not such errors as your self account fundamentall c. For example the book of Tobit teacheth that †Tob. 12.12.15 Angels doe present and bring to memory our prayers before the Lord. Now this honour you know is peculiar to Christ who “ 1 Tim. 2.5 onely is the Mediator of Intercession That Apocrypha doctrine therefore is blasphemous and an error in your sence as I take it fundamentall Adde herevnto that * 2 Mach. 12.43.44.45 offring vp of a sinne offring to God for
the dead to make reconciliation for them thereby spoken of in the book of Machabees And according to your second sence of fundamentall that ‡ 2 Machab. 14.41.42 commending of vvilfull murther taught in the same book of Machabees Not to speak of the Magick in the “ Iob. 6.6 book of To bit for healing any that is troubled with a Divell or evill spirit by a perfume made of a fishes heart and liuer These sweet doctrines with other the like do those books affoord But it skils not so long as with a bold face notwithstanding you can beare it out and say still your errors are not fundamentall c. Is this your conscience Mr. Iacob Will you thus still plead for Baall But to proceed in the third place you speak of those words according to Christs ordinance Where first marke that these words in your Article are to be referred to all the particulars going before So as to maintaine your Argument you must proue your Assemblies to be so gathered the pure vvord so preached anh the Sacraments so administred among you as Christ hath ordeined Thus might you more perswade vs and defend your selues better in one half sheet of paper then in a thousand such frivolous pamphlets as you sparse abroad to no purpose at all except it be to lay open your owne nakednes so much the more Whereas I alledged that vvhen and vvhere the vvorde is preached among you it is done by vertue of a false office and calling never appointed by Christ this you say is false too Often have I heard you say so but never could I heare you proue it To help you therefore I will show you the way how to doe it if any such thing could be And that is thus first syncerely as before God to reckon vp all the offices of Ministery which your Church by Law enjoyeth and then to note the Scriptures which teach that Christ ordained those offices in his Church secondly to show the manner of entrance into your severall offices prescribed by Law and then to name the places of Scripture where such calling is appointed by Christ This you see is a plaine and ready way touching these two points to stablish the conscience and to confound your adversaries not with show of words but with substance of matter I hope it will do you some pleasure Mr. Iacob that I haue showed you so good a way All the thanks I aske for it is that you would walk vprightly in it Now if you list not take the paines or find the way all to hard for your Archbs Lordbs Archdeacons Parsons Vicars Stipendaries and the rest of your Priests and Deacons yet at least for your self show it in defence of your owne office and calling first when you were made Priest and Deacō by the Prelates and thē when you became an House-Priest in the countrey and since a Mercenary-Priest in the citty Now I heare your Lords the Prelates haue commaunded you silence and you as an obedient childe of such reverend Fathers do readily submit to their Antichristian authority Yet let this be no excuse to put of the clearing of the former matter but seeing you haue so much the more leasure do it the more soundly and speedily Doubtles it would give great light in this case Next you say your ordinarie Preachers are true Pastors as touching the substance of Pastorall calling but whom meane you by ordinary Preachers c. Your Prelates I remember are by Law your Ordinaries Doe you meane it of them your treatise shewes it not Tell vs then who they be of whom you speak 1. whether all or some onely of your Preachers 2. whether you have any extraordinarie Preachers that have some other office 3. what you judge of those that are not in the number of the ordinary Preachers you speak of whether they also be true Pastors 4. what you account according to the Scripture the substance of the Pastorall calling whereof you speak All these points you see must be cleared afore we can vnderstand what you speak or whereof you affirme So mysticall or rather in deed so fearefull and deceitfull is your manner of speach Touching the question what is substantiall in the Ministery if you put it over to me to declare as your manner is I have already showed my judgment and reasons in †A treatise of the Minist of the Churches of Engl. p. 83. 84. 85. another treatise Which you may either refute or approue your Ministery according to those particulars or if you can do neither of these yeeld to the truth against which you have so long strugled in vaine In vaine I say for proof whereof marke what followeth next in your Reply Your self confesse that even the Preachers for whome you plead have a wrong ordination from the Prelacy Thus your owne mouth M. Iacob is witnes against your self that al your labour is in vaine Shall I yet make it more plaine vnto you Marke then Your maine defence is from ‡ See before pag 3. and 6. the doctrine of your Church as it is publiquely professed and practised by Lavv. Now your Law admitteth no other ordination but that of the Prelacy And this your self here confesse is vvrong In what case now your Ministery standeth let others judge And take you heed you please not your self any longer in such vnrighteousnes The “ 2 The. 2.12 end thereof is fearefull But besides this estate of your Ministery you confesse here also for the body of your Church that you have a confusion of people that is in deed though you speak it not in word a spirituall Babylon For Babel is in English confusion Thus both for Ministery and people you give the cause having wearied your self in the defence of Babylon all in vaine Which is and will be the fruit of your and all other mens labours in this case So the * Ier. 51.58.64 Scripture hath foretold Your other writing ‡ See the next treatise follovving at the end of this touching the comparing of the condition of a Ministery vvith Mariage long since deliuered was also long since aunswered Vnto which I have not yet received any Reply not so much as words which is the most I look for from you at any time Where next you graunt it is Christs ordinance to haue a true Pastor to a faithfull people hold you there M. Iacob and you overthrow at once all your Churches and Ministery For you neither have proued neither ever will that so you have Begging of the question though you vse it never so often is nothing but words not any proof at all After this you come to that clause of your Article which requireth due administration of the Sacraments according to Christs ordinance First mynd that divers other particulars were related wherein you faile besides those you have here mentioned See them in my ‡ Before Pag 15. 16. 17. former aunswer Now if the corruptions of the
Iewes * Mal. 1.6.7.8.12.13 Amos. 4.4.5 Esa 1.12.13 polluted the table of the Lord and made their oblations to be in vaine yea if the abuses in Corinth about the Sacrament made that ‡ 1 Cor. 11.20 it was not the eating of the Lords supper what then shal be thought of the heynous abominations of Antichrist retained among you in the Sacraments Your distinction of simply abolishing is but leaven of your owne borrowed from your Prelates and by them from the Papists We plainely affirme that your abuses and corruptions are such as the Sacraments among you are not duely administred according to Christs ordinance and that it cannot be showed by the word of God that they seale vp Gods covenant of grace to your Church and the members thereof in that estate Now see that according to your promise you refute this And prove that notwithstanding all your corruptions mentioned yet Christ acknowledgeth your Sacramēts for his also that the good things and ordinances of Christ wanting among you are not of necessitie requisite In the meane time know that none can partake in the administration of your Sacraments but they must needs withall partake in your sinnes before rehearsed Which the Lord hath most straitly forbidden Rev. 18.4 and 14.9.10.11 Exod. 20.4.5 Psal 119.21 Mal. 1.7.8.13.14 2 Cor. 6.17 Amos. 4.4.5 and 5.5 Ephes 5.11 The particulars of your Article you say you omitted for breuities sake Let others beleev you that will for mine owne part I neither do nor can beleev it You have here taken paines to write an whole book and in it a multitude of words to no purpose Is it likely then that for brevity sake you would omit the most speciall points of the Article which may be written in a line or two at the most Nay M. Iacob these clauses of faithfull men duely according to Christs ordinance are so ful and pregnant against you as you thouht it no wisdome to mention them at all but rather in silence to bury them vnder some generall terme or as your self speak to comprehend them in a generall clause This in deed was the best way to darken the truth and help your self if any way you could But any that mind your manner of dealing may easily see that if these clauses had made but a tenth part so much for you as they are fully against you then you would have ben so far from omitting thē as we should have had them noted downe in greater letters then the rest For your Article it self if the meaning of it were to comprehend those points in your generall clause why then did it so particularly mention them besides Were the framers of your Article so ignorant or carelesse think you as in a brief descriptiō of such a waighty matter they would commit so many vaine and needles tantologies Nay rather they judged all these particulars absolutely needfull specially that Christs ordinance be had and observed and that also in all things of necessitie requisite How say you is not this the meaning of the Article How fondly then and how vnconscionably have you abused not onely your pen and tounge but even your Church and book of Articles whereon you seeme for to rely How just cause also have I then still to demaund where and what your proofes be touching the particulars of your owne description of a visible Church Your parable of a Landlord and a Tenaunt besides that it is popish and against your selues as hath ben shewed it is also false You have not had possession time out of minde as you pretend It is but yesterday since this your Samaritane and misceline religion began viz since King Henry the eight Now also Christ the King and Lord of his Church doth by his servants lay claime to his owne right and disclaimeth your false worship and Ministerie So your owne saying is against your self Nullum tempus occurrit Regi No time doth preiudice the King If you plead your right by any more auncient date as from Christ and his Apostles the evidence may soone be shewed from their writings If you doe it not all men of wisdome will not onely condemne your folly who take vpon you the defence of so bad a cause but will also perceive the impietie of your Churches estate for which no warrant can be shewed frō Apostolik writ For our going out from among you when before we had held part of possession with you I brought warrant from the worde of God which you touch not at all That it lieth vpon you yea and that your self have taken it vpon you to approve your Hierarchy Leiturgy confusion of people c. appeareth not onely by the title of your book which is called A defence of the Churches and Ministery of England but by reason also that you began the first Argument and continew to replie Wherevpon you are bound to proue what is denied or in this case put vnto you to be proved We then in aunswer to your Argument noting the falshood of your Hierarchy worship c. it is your part now to approve them by the word of God or to convince that they abolish not your constitution from being Christs If you cannot doe this confesse it and give glory to God That your case is thus hath ben often shewed by vs both in other writings and in these aunswers to your self And of this point there will be occasion afterward to speak againe Touching the impudent vntruth wherewith you were charged first you sayd your selves see not wherein you faile touching Preaching or Sacraments in things necessary I alledged your owne men as witnesses to convince you therein The Admonition T. C. his replies the Demonstration c. Now you aunswer that none of all these do graunt any thing to be wanting vvith you that is necessary to the being of a Church simply nor to the being of a true Ministery or Sacraments but onely to their vvell and convenient being By which bold assertion of yours you both prove and persist in the impudent vntruth laid to your charge For hearken now and you shall heare themselves testifie thus much The first Admonition in the Preface sayeth thus In a fevv vvordes to speake vvhat vve meane Either must vve have a right Ministery of God Admonitiō to the Parliam first and second and a right government of his Church according to the Scriptures set vp both vvhich vve lack or els there can be no right Religion nor yet for contempt thereof can Gods plagues be from vs any vvhile differred And againe in the treatise it self are these words We in England are not yet come to the outvvard face of a Church agreable to Gods vvord Or as it is written in the margent of divers of those books we are scarce come to the outvvard face of a Church c. Take which of these you please the best is bad ynough Touching the Ministerie in particular the same book and men say thus We have an
and ceremonies onely and no more doth abolish vs from Christ and that this can not stand togeather with true faith like as the Pagans idolatrie against the First commaundement cannot Then I deny it vtterly you haue no proofe in the world for it And this inwrappeth Maister Cranmer Ridley c. in the same course Your excuse here in Pag. 67. That Cranmer Ridley c. forsooke all the corruptions they saw This belongeth to many Thousands in England now no lesse then to them Yea surely there are infinite that know not so much of the corruptions as those learned men did which yet are not ignoraunt of redēption by Christ c. Yea your self Maister Iohnson though a man of learning yea knowing our corruptions and misliking them a long time before you forsooke vs yet I think you stood not abolished from Christ all that while I pray be so good to poore men as you may yea to vs now also aswel as to your self and them in those times Where you say in Pag. 67. That since that time we are convicted by the Scriptures If you meane some fevve that here and there you could pick out and do sinne still speake to them threaten them throvv out your damnatory sentence against them But smite not all whosoever comes neare you Beware how you iudge least you be iudged The heart belongeth to God therefore censure not every mans conscience too hastily 4 Fourthly you vvould prove in your Third Exception before noted Pag. 67. That both the breach of the first cōmaundment and of the Second also is forbidden I have told you before Pag. 69. 70. hovv it is true and hovv not Nothing at all to serue your turne 2 Cor. 6.14 That vvhich you say Pag. 67. touching your first Scripture 2 Cor. 6.14 c. in that sence and manner as I sayd it is true and not othervvise That vvhich of your Second Scripture Ezek. 43.8 Pag. Ibid. you say VVho seeth not but it speaketh directly of the breach of the Second Cōmaundement ioyning together in the worship of the true God their inventions with Gods ordinances Ezec. 43 8◠I say it is most manifest that he speaketh not of the breach of the Second cōmandment onely but also of the first wherin men haue their inventiōs also The Prophet sheweth vers 4. and 7. That God returned to his Temple againe vvhence he vvas departed for the abominable idolatries that had ben there cōmitted before to shevv that he vvould restore Ierusalem and the Temple and vvorship of God againe He meaneth this literally of the returning of the Iewes after Babylons captiuity and of the reedifying of the Temple and the appointing againe of Gods holy vvorship there Also spiritually he may meane the erecting of the Christian Church vvhen they should not fall to such impieties as the Ievves had done novv in that time before for the vvhich he had departed away from them Nowe if we aske what were those Idolatours in Ierusalem and in the Temple before Ezekiels time for the whiche the Lord forsooke them it is manifest in Ahas in Manasses Amon and in the Kings after Iosiah That the Iewes idolatrie was verie Heathenish not onely against the Second but against the First commandment also in ioyning the Heathen gods with the true God of Israell in their Diuine seruice and Worship Therefore this place of Ezekiell is as I say not of the breach of the Second commandement onely simplie as our church corruptions are but ioinctlie touching the breach of the First also The very same is that your third scripture pag. 67. 2 Kings 17.33.34.40.41 of the Samaritans Idolatrie wherein because you are large 2 King 17. I vvill deferre to explaine it till your Sixt Reason follovving vvhere is a proper place for it Lastlie in pag. 68. you agrauate the breach of the Second Commandment as being spirituall whordome c. But I would haue you to knovv Things may be mismatched to cruelly asvvell as too gently There is a sinne both vvayes vvhen things are not called by their proper and right names It is true in some sence euery breach of the Secōd cōmandment is spiritual vvhordome as euery vvanton vvord euery light gesture countenance euery immodest thought in a Woman is Adulterie yet vvho so shall angerlie continuallie so call a Woman vvhore harlot or bande that but thinketh or looketh or speaketh too vainly shall doe her great vvrong incurre the iust daūger of lavv Neither can she nor ought shee in such case be diuorced as an Adulteresse ought And thus it appeareth true still that you sinne against the Third Commaundement in misapplying of Scriptures In the ende in pag. 69. vvhere you say To the proofe of your Assumption I answere never a word which most of all required answere This I tell you that it is your fancie and not my meaning heere to ansvver to your Proposition first and then to your Assumptiō to say nothing Nay if you had not dreamed you might easily haue perceived that all my first words viz. where I say your speach here is vnproper c. are bent directly against your Assumptiō the proof thereof although at this time I expressed not those termes Secondly I shevv that your scriptures applyed to proue the Proposition are altogither vnfitt and intollerably abused if you meane them in that sence as your Assumption must be meant that is to say as they touch vs. This a verie childe might haue seene Maister Iohnson So that your marginall scoffe at my sound and scholler-like dealing doeth light on your self and bewrayeth eyther your deepe skil or your ouerflowing charitie As for the rest that I should iustifie our corruption it is no part of my minde neither belongs it to our present cause so to doe Fr. Io. his Aunsvver to Mr. Iacobs 2. Reply to the 1. Reason IN deed you are the people that haue skill and wisdome must dy with you Yet let vs a litle examine this your wise handling of the matter Being taken here with manifest contradiction you say you spake the one in the person of your whole Church and State the other in your owne If it were so yet thus you yeeld both that there is contradiction in your speach and that in stead of defending your Church you are driuen your self to contradict it And who can give the cause more cunningly Even your selfe Mr Iacob are drawen now at length to confesse you do the same thing we do that is contradict the assertion of your Church towching Christs ordinances Now albeit this were ynough to show the simplicity and weaknes of your defence yet still I vrge the contradiction to be yours And I proue it because in the †Pag. 28. first place your words are we hold we practise c. and in the “ latter we thinck vve shevved c. For who will otherwise iudge * Pag. 61. but this word We includeth your self for one among the rest
here confessed them to be * Pag. 37. errors and †Pag. â—1 69 orders of Antichrist ‡ Pa. 70.71 sinnes against the Second commaundement c. Every sinne you know doth of it self and of it owne nature make subject to the curse Deut. 27.26 Psal 119.21 Rom. 6.23 So if there were no other thing yet even by your owne confession the curse of God hangeth ouer your heads And how wofull then is your estate Mynd withall that when your self can not deny but your corruptions are of Antichrist and it is certayne that Antichrists Church even through the corruptions of their constitution is abolished from being Christs you had need cleare this poynt well or els you leaue your Church in a miserable taking euen in this behalf Help it now if you can Your stale obiection and abuse of Mr Cranmer and the rest of the Martyrs is aunswered before Pag. 8. 40. 41. That the speach is both true and proper when I say you ioyne Christ and Antichrist together I need not further prove seing your self can not deny but all the abominations of Antichrist before rehearsed with many mo Pag. 63. c. are still retayned in your Church And tell me Mr Iacob May not I aswell say you haue not Christ but some truths of Christ as you say you haue not Antichrist but some corruptions of Antichrist Or if I say so will you then graunt that the speach is proper Your comparison of a white Swan with a black bill I perceyve you can not defend Therefore you leave it and betake your self to another of a maymed man vvith a vvoodden legg Which yet fitteth not your estate neyther as may be seen before Pag. 59. 61. You must put the case of a deformed boast vvith the likenes of a mans face womans heare lyons teeth Rev. 9 7-2 horses body c. And then may all see plainely that although this have the likenes of some parts of a man yet it is not therefore a true maÌ„ but a monstrous beast notwithstanding Yea although you ioyne your dead woodden legge to the foresayd living parts thereof yet still it is no other but as it was even a very beast That it liveth will nothing help you for beasts have their life aswell as men haue theirs And you will not deny I suppose but Antichrist the man of sinne hath now lived and â—aged as a fierce and cruell beast by the space of many hundred yeares 2 Thes 2.3 Rev. 13.11 one after another If your comparison then be meant of this beastly man as to pleasure you withall I will not deny but it may very well yet still your woodden leg will help it to go for no other but as it is a maÌ„ of sinne and a monstrous beast Next you come to the Scriptures by which I proved the Proposition and pretend as if you would make a direct aunswer and yet in deed do nothing lesse Aunswer me therefore in your next Whether do those Scriptures proue the Proposition or not If they do why do you not graunt it If they do not why do you not say so and shew it And tell we why you handle them as if they had ben brought to prove the Assumption and yet in deed leave vntowched that which was brought for the proof thereof Such ignorant and double dealing yll beseemeth a man professing so deep skill and syncerity as you do Yet least you please your self therein any longer I will note the folly and falsehood of your aunswer in the particulars 1. To the first you say you neuer denyed it to be true after a sort Now that which there I sayd was this ‡ Pag. 66. that these Scriptures forbid ioyning to Antichristian Idolatry and that false worship vvhich breaketh the second commaundement And such even †Pag. 70. here you graunt your Church corruptions to be So by your owne confession these Scriptures forbid to joyne vnto them Expound your after a sort as you please and alter my words after your manner as you think good All will not help Sure I am you do thus giue the cause For those Scriptures forbid not to ioyne to the true worship and Churches of God And all your minesing speaches when you say they forbid the breach of the Second commaundement but not principally directly of purpose c. what are they but so many testimonyes of your miserable halting and deceitfull dealing For if it were as you say were it not ynough to make you detest those sinnes and never to partake with them any more Hath not God to the Second coÌ„maundement annexed this severe threatning ‡ Exod. 20.5 I aâ—ielours God vvill visit this iniquity c. Doubtles God foresaw how the breach of this coÌ„maundement would be finally regarded and lessened among men professing the true God and therefore here annexed the threatning after the SecoÌ„d not after the First going before And tell me further if you could not thâ—â— plead for the popish Orders confession to Priests extreme Vnction prayer in an vnknovven toungue Purgatory c. To end this point then I say againe as I have shewed †pag. 67. 68 alreadie that the immediate purpose of “ Ezec. 43.8 2 King 17.32 c. two of these places is a-against the false worship which breaketh the SecoÌ„d coÌ„maundement proving such worship and worshippers to be reiected of God And the reasons vsed in the * 2 Cor. 6.14 c. third Scripture are aswell against the breach of the SecoÌ„d as the First convincing every such estate against whether commaundement soever it be to be in that case as cannot stand and accord with Christ and his Church The Scripture it self and the arguments deduced from thence in my former aunswer are so evident as I need not bring any further proof vnles you brought other maner Reply against them then yet you do 2. For the second you bid me make much of it Therefore to pleasure you I meane so to do To begin withall here you say directlie you never thought other but that your Church corruptions are against the Second coÌ„maundement And did you never think other in deed How is it then that you plead for your Churches retaining and practising of them yea holding of them to be Christs owne that is holding the transgressions of the Second commaundement to be Christs ordinances More speciallie for your owne part how is it that you were made Deacon or Priest of the Prelates Or being made in ignorance as many be that yet knowing these things since you will still execute those offices vnder them And submit to their Iniunctions Canons Articles c. Yea even to this day partake with all the Antichistian filth and corruption of your Church which you know to be against the Law of God Have you for gotten or do you not regard the ‡ Eâ—o 20.5 heavy sentence anâ—ered to the Second coÌ„maundement Or is it onely against some and not
whither you refer vs for it though there the Reader shall finde you aunswer not the severall Scriptures here alledged for proof of it In the meane time let this be noted that here againe you graunt your Church corruptions are against the Second commaundement Therefore may none that feare God and will be assured to escape his wrath bow downe vnto them Exod. 20.5.6 Deut. 5.9.10 and 6.10.11 and 28.15.16 c. Psal 106.29 Next where I speak of your breach of the second coÌ„maundement as being spirituall whoredome you except against it as if I mismatched things otherwise then they are in deed But how can that be seing the Scriptures ‡ Pag. 68. there alledged prove that which I said Or will you say your case is not spirituall whoredome which God in that commaundement hath straitlie forbidden and severelie threatned to punish This then being so it is your self Mr Iacob that mismatch things otherwise then in deed they are For your case is not as you would pretend by your similitude like a wanton word a light gesture or contenaunce or an immodest thought of a woman But I will tell you what it is like Even as when a woman vnfaithfull to her husband is found to commit filthynes with other men after whom she goeth a whoring Now such a one whatsoever smooth speach countenance or excuse she pretend yet is in deed an whore and for this cause to be divorced That your case is such your going a whoring after Antichrist whose ordinances Hierarchie worship confusion c. are retained among you testifies to your faces Fitly therefore do we applie the Scriptures against you and your selves it is that sinne against the Third commaundement in misapplying of them as I shewed sufficientlie in my former answer against which you can say nothing To the proof of the Assumption you yeeld now at length Neither can I otherwise thinke of your aunswer seing I have proved my speach to be proper and the Scriptures fitly alledged and you refuse to iustify your owne Articles and estate Yet least you should againe cavill and delude the Reader I aske you Have I not concluded the question in a Syllogisme Why then do you not aunswer directlie to some part of it Have I not proved the Proposition by Scripture and the Assumption by your owne Writings and practise The Conclusion then must needs be true vnles one of the Propositions could be disproved which you are so far from as you never go about to do it The marginall note then is no scoffe but a iust reproof of your ignorance which in deed deserveth much more But I spare you and leave it to others to iudge whether you do any thing els in all you say but winde in and out to hide the truth and blinde the Reader if you could The Scriptures which I alledged for proof of the Proposition you handle as if I had brought them for proof of the Assumption Who is it now think you that is in a dreame Agayne your owne Books profession and practise by which I proved the Assumption you towch not at all Nay you say plainely it is no part of your mynd to iustify them Whether it be for that you see they can not possibly be iustifyed or because you want skill in your self or charity towards your Church for the doing of it let others inquire Sure I am that thus you give the cause For this belongs directly vnto it as all may see that have any vnderstanding and your self I suppose will not deny when you have called your wits a litle better togeather Chap. 8. The second Reason against Mr Iacobs Assumption aforesaid Fr. Io. THat which appointeth and ratifyeth the worshipping of God in vaine that cannot make either true Christians or true Churches But the doctrine publikely professed and practized by law in England appointeth and ratifieth the worshipping of God in vaine Therefore c. Of the trueth of the Proposition none can doubt And the Assumption is thus proved That which appointeth and ratifyeth the worshipping of God by the precepts of Man that appointeth and ratifyeth the worshipping of God in vaine This Christ affirmeth out of Esay the Prophet Mat. 15.9 with Esay 29.13 But the doctrine publiquely professed and practized by law in EnglaÌ„d appointeth and ratifieth the worshipping of God by the precepts of man This appeareth by the 35. and 36. Articles of the book alledged and by their other books of Articles Canons Iniunctions Common prayer their Holy dayes Fasting dayes Censures Hierarchy c. All which are the precepts of men and authorised by Law in England Therefore the doctrine publiquely professed and practized by law in England appoincteth and ratifyeth the worshipping of God in vaine And consequently cannot make a particuler man a true Christian nor the assemblies so gathered together true Churches H. IACOB his 1. Replie to the 2. Reason THis your Second Reason is This booke and others appoincteth and ratifyeth the worshipping of God in vaine Ergo c. 1. This also hath answere in the third Exception Pag 57. 2. Also note I pray you this Scripture Mat. 15. is verified of such as were then of the true visible ♣ Marke his open contrariety with hiÌ„self granting this in Reas 6 Church with vvhom Christ and his Apostles both in Christs tyme and after his death did sometimes ioyne and communicate This therefore maketh for vs and against you most notably FR. Io. his Aunswer to Mr. Iacobs 1. Reply to the 2. Reason THe Reason is as you see it propounded before Nâ—w what propositioÌ„ do you deny Not any at all What defence then bring you of your book of Common prayer and the particulars therein of your books of Articles and Iniunctions of your Prelacy and other Ministery receyved froÌ„ then according to your popish Pontificall of your Canons and Excommunications c. Surely none neyther What then do you answer Not a word but that you refer vs to your answer before in the last Exception whither also we refer the Reader with this note that there he shall finde nothing either for answer of any proposition of this argument or for defence of your worship Prelacy Ministery and Church gouernement called into question Is not this then a worthie and Clerck like answer Have you not may we thinke good proof for your present estate and Church-constitution which thus leave it altogeather without defence even when it most needeth and as it were beggeth your help and succor if you could affoard it any Yet now having no aunswer to any part of the Argument you bid vs note that this Scripture Mat. 15. here alledged is verifyed of such as were then of the true visible Church with whom Christ himself and his Apostles both in Christs tyme and after his death did sometyme ioine and communicate This therefore you say maketh for you and against vs most notably 1 But first tell vs if ‡ As that of Lev. 10.1.2.3 Num. 16 1.
Disciples who also were Iewes observed them not and therefore the Pharisees complained Thus you see they were not received of all the Iewes as heretofore I shewed not onelie in the Disciples but in divers other by name Pag. 84. Of whom you cannot denie but it is true They were the personall sinnes of some not the publik established Law neither generallie received and practised in that Church as I noted yours to be in your Assemblies that is of all the members thereof Neither is there anie comparison between yours and theirs as besides that which I have shewed before may appeare even by the vvaterpots here mentioned by your self Of the lawfull or vnlawfull vse whereof I need not stand to speak it being evident that they were no waie so vnlawfull or of such nature as your corruptioÌ„s are Let this then which hath ben said suffice to shew how true and pertinent my aunswers be That there is no contrariety between anie thing spoken here and in the sixt Reason following the Reader may see And that it is your self who do evill and defend it too there need no other witnes but the title and contents of your book togeather with your estate Concerning the thing which here you obiect I have proved alreadie that * Mat. 15.9 this and ‡ See before Pag. 83. other Scriptures being spoken of vaine worshippers in the true Church have ben and may be alledged much more against all vaine worship in the false Church whether it be yours or the Papists or anie other whatsoever And saie your self if the Martyrs have not both ben perswaded that the Iewes were a true Church and yet alledged this Scripture against the Papists as against a false Church Are these contrary I pray you that they need be reconciled Then do you reconcile them for the Martyrs For sure I see no need of it Chap. 9. The third Reason against Mr Iacobs Assumption aforesaid Fran. Iohnson IF the whose doctrine as it is publiquelie professed and practized by Law in England be not sufficient to make a Galatian a true Christian that should with all submit vnto Circumcision Then much lesse is it able to make him a true Christian that together with it submitteth vnto a false Ministerie Worship and Governement of the Church devised by man even the man of sinne But the first is true Therefore also the latter The consequence of the Proposition is good because Circumcision was once the holie ordinance and appointment of God himself to his Church and people whereas the Ministerie Worship and Governement aforesaid never was so but is mans device in religion even Antichrists that capitall enemie of Iesus Christ The Assumption is proved Gal 5.2.3.4 where the Apostle speaketh of them that held not onelie such trueths of the Gospell as are in that book of Articles but more then those Yet if they should withall submit to Circumcision he saith they vvere abolished from Christ Christ vvould profit them nothing H. Iacob his first Reply to the 3. Reason THis your Third Reason is from the more to the lesse negatiuely to this effect A Galatian vsing Circumcision is a likelier Christian then one of our Englâ—sh holding the Hierarchy and other traditions But a Galatian is a false Christian Ergo An English professor is much more We ansvver We denie the Assumption Galatians vvere then true Christians and their Assemblies true Churches Gal. 1.2 Therefore this Reason is nought If you obiect The Apostle saith such are abolished from Christ. That is in deed some amongst them as held Moses ceremonies necessarie absolutlie to salvation as Act. 15.1 And that †Gal. 5.3 4.5 Rom. 10.3.4 Iustification vvas by the morall vvorkes of the lavv Novv the Churches of Galatia generallie vvere not such but held the saving faith sound doubtles though manie amngest them vvere tainred vvith that infection by reason of some mischeuous teachers that vvere crept in and too vvell interteined among them Hovvbeit vvith the Church Communion vvas kept and therefore so vvith vs you ought to deale If you say vve are vvorse Christians then those grosest Galatians It is vtterly false prove it if you can and it must dravve in Maister Cranmer c. vvith vs also If you say there are many amongst vs as bad or vvorse then those vvorst Galatians you may say it but prove it you cannot Also if it vvere so yet this disgraceth it destroyeth not the Church like as hath ben sayd of the Galatians Fr. Io. his Ansvver to Mr Iacobs 1. Reply to the 3. Reason YOur first answer is that you deny the Assumption Which in plaine termes is asmuch as if you had given the holy Ghost the lye who by the Apostle Paule affirmeth it Gal. 5.2.3.4 As in the proof of the Assumption was shewed before But for the more evidence of the truth I will set this downe in a Syllogisme thus If a Galatian submitting to Circumcision though he hold all the truths of the Gospell professed in EnglaÌ„d withall yet be notwithstanding abolished from Christ and falne from grace Then is he not in this estate a true Christian But the former is true as the Apostle testifieth Gal. 5.2 3 4. Therefore also the latter And yet the former you deny that is the Assumption Therefore you give the lie to the holy Ghost who affirmeth it Next you aunswer that the Galatians vvere then true Christians and their Assemblies Churches Gal 1.2 Therefore say you this Reason is nought But you may not thus runne away with the matter and deceive your self and your simple favourers The question is not Whether any Galatians vvere true Christians or any of their Assemblies true Churches For who ever doubted of that But this is the question Whether a Galatian holding all the truths of the Gospell novv professed in England and vvithall submitting to CircuÌ„cisioÌ„ vvere in that estate a true Christian Or putting the case that there were whole Assemblies consisting of such Whether those AsseÌ„blies then in that case were by Gods word to be deemed the true Churches of Christ The Apostle testifieth and saith No You say Yea. Now whether of you two it is meet wee beleeve let all men iudge But what is it then will you say that the Apostle termeth the assemblies of the Galatians true Churches Gal. 1.2 You shew the reason your selfe the light of the truth is so cleare and manifest There were but some of the Galatians that were infected with this error of Circumcision True in deed and of such onelie is the supposition made in the case aforesaid But the Churches of Galatia generally were not such but held the saving faith sound This also is most true they being set in the way and order of Christ And therefore although there sprang vp some heretikes and schismatikes among them which is the †1 Cor. 11.19 Act. 20.30 lot and triall of the Church of God in all ages yet was there not cause to break Communion with those Assemblies but
hold be avayleable vnto you 2. That therefore the Proposition of your first and maine Argument is not generall but admittet limitation and so your greatest defence is of no weight as is shewed †before 3. That your answer to the Second Exception is of no force howsoever here and every where you refer vs to it Pag 5. For which also we refer the Reader to what is said in that place in defence of that Exception And for the allegation of 2 Cor. 6.14 vnto that which is said concerning it in defence of the First Reason Pag. 67. H. Iacob his 2. Reply to the 4. Reason IN this your defence of your 4. Reason you renew your Sophistrie and that which is worse you will not be told of it Is it because of the goodnes of your Reason that I deny no Proposition Nay it is for the badnes of it because all is nought all deceitfull and sophisticall Therefore I must distinguish euen so still as I did before and my distinction is good cleerelie discouering all your fraude What say you against it First you say Are not their outward callings and ceremonies false Antichristian and accursed aswell as the rest of their worship seruice Aswell Forsooth I trow not that is not as much Their inwarde impietie and false faith against Christ the onely all-sufficient Sauiour is farre more accursed and diuelish then their bare outward orders separated from the rest of their faith But whosoeuer ioyneth simply and indifferently either to Turkish ot Popish Assemblies doeth ioyne vvith their vvhole and vvorst abominations vvhich haue no communion or coherence vvith Christ in deed Neither can vve also if vve ioyne therein The case is not like vvhen vve reteyne and vse some of their outvvarde orders in our Assemblies And here you note that I graunt Some thinge may be ioyned vnto our Christian faith in England which would vtterly destroy it Most true And here I note your most vnchristian and false dealing vvith me in affirming othervvise of me As I have expressed in the beginning about the taking of my First maine Proposition there Which see further in pag. 6. Lastlie my reference to the ansvvere of your First Reason is a fit and full Refutation of you here Neither is your Defence any thing against it as there appeareth Also this your Reason includeth Maister Cranmer Ridley c. to be no true Christians neither as hath bene often alleadged FR. Iohnson his Aunswer to Mr Iacobs 2. Reply to the 4 Reason SOphisticall distinctions all men know are the woonted refuges of bad causes That yours is such I shewed before Now as it was so you leave it still even idle and frivolous It was between the whole function and exercise of publik worship performed in the Turkish or Popish Assēblies and between the outvvard calling to the Ministery and ceremonies among them The first thing I brought against it was this Who knoweth not that these latter are of the very same nature vvith the former Now this you passe by like a smooth Priest as if you saw it not And that which followeth after you say is the first of my answer Look againe and see if you speak truth and leave this dealing Yet what say you now to that which I asked next vvhether the one vvere not asvvell as the other false Antichristian and accursed Your answer is they are not asvvell that is not asmuch But is not this meer Sophistry Is not Antichrists forbidding of Meats and Mariage asvvell Antichristiā and accursed as his Masse Supremacy Iustificatiō by works c. Yet in the “ Mr Iacobs Replyes to the 7. Reason seventh Reason following you say they are not asmuch Doth not he that stealeth but one horse steale asvvell horseflesh as he that stealeth five of six though he steale not as much When you say in the sixt Reason †Mr Iacobs 2. Reply to the 6. Reasō The Samaritans accompted the Idols of the Heathen to be Gods asvvell as the God of Israel do you meane that they counted them as much Or if Mr Iacob be deemed a learned man asvvell as Mr Cartvvright shall we think it asmuch By your leave I deny it Asvvell properly taken respects the quality of a thing Asmuch the quantity Yet so you confound them as all one Thus traveling with a distinction you have brought forth confusion Pag. 95. 96. 97. Further where your words and myne were before of the rest of their vvorship and service now you change them into these their invvard impiety and false faith against Christ Belike you see your cause to be very bad when you will not keep eyther my words or your owne but chaunge them every foot as you do But now if after all this chopping and chaunging I graunt all this which you say what are you the nearer Be it as you say that the one of these is more accursed and divelish then the other as all sinnes are not equall but one more grievous then another yet evē this maketh against you and thus you give the cause For now you can not deny but they are both of them accursed and divelish though the one more the other lesse Can you then as you stand in that constitution which is accursed and divelish yet be reputed for true Christians and true Churches If the Papists for to justify their outward constitution should thus alledge That the Turks invvard impiety or vvhole publik vvorship vvere more accursed and divelish then that outvvard constitution of theirs would this any whit help them Nay should they not thus yeeld their owne case to be accursed and divelish though the other to be more Behold then how well you defend your Church and how cūningly you yeeld the cause Where in the next place I asked if God in his vvord hath given any cōmaundement more for the latter mentioned before then for the other Pag. 96. At this you are as mute as a fish you have not a word to speak for your self Now seing Gods word approveth neyther but condemneth both seing also both of them are of Antichrist that sonne of perdition is it not evidēt that they are of the same nature and that the one asvvell as the other is false Antichristian and accursed before God It skilleth not then for the question in hand whether of them be more or lesse They that have the least of Gods curse will fynd it heavy ynough howsoever you flatter your self and speak peace to others when there is no peace To the second point by which I shewed your distinction to be idle and frivolous you answer not a word neyther Vnles it be that you yeeld to it in those words where you confesse you retayne vse some of their outward orders in your Assemblyes For if you meane it of the particulars †Pag. 96. there mentioned then you yeeld vnto it except you had shewed by the word of God that having communion with Antichrist in
knovvledge So then your peoples ignoraunce which you plead can be no sufficient defence for your estate Or if it could yet it seemeth they of Israell might aswell have alleadged it for thēselves seeing the Lord witnesseth of them * Hos 4.1 that there vvas no knovvledge of God in the land And thus the Obiection also here brought by your self remayneth still vnaunswered Where you say Aarons Line vvere the onely Priests and Levites you are also mistaken therein In deed Aarons Line onely was the Priests but the Levites were generally of the Tribe of Levi though not of Aarons line But to let this passe We would know a sufficient reason why the true vvorship and Ministery appointed by Christ in his Testament should not be aswell knowne vnto you in these dayes as in the defection of Israell You say They could not but knovve that Ierusalem vvas the onely place Aarons line the onely Priests Well then Have not you the Scriptures asmuch as they had Or hath not ♣ Heb. 3.1.2.3.4.5.6 Christ the sonne ben as faithfull in the house of God and as plainly set downe his will for his true worship and Ministery in the tyme of the Gospell as Moses the servant was and did for the tyme of the Law Yea and have not * VVitnes the publik Treatises Sermons Admonitions Cōplaintes Supplicatiōs Demonstrations to the Parliament beside the bandes sufferings of many in this behalfe these by the word ben made manifest to the consciences of men in these daies and even to the high Court of Parliament representing the whole body of the land as the other were to the Israelites in the tyme of their defection Finally doeth not this Land stand in as open rebellion against and forsaking of the true Ministery worship and order appoincted by Christ to his Church now as they did then if not more open and greevous not onely for the causes aforsaid but because you have also †VVitnes the Pontifical Porruis Canons and Constitutiō of the popish your assemblies compared together received and still reteine a false Ministery worship and confusion of the Man of sinne that sonne of perdition and capitall enemie of the Lord Iesus Christ And yet moreover least you should be behind them in any thing and not every way farre exceed them do also ‡ VVitnes your prisons gallovves Statutes c persecute vnto bandes exile and death such as beare witnes to the truth of Christ against your abominations By this then is manifest that you have neither iustifyed your estate in respect of the Apostate Israelites nor answered the Obiection “ pag. 105. here framed by your self against your present constitution So that it also still remaineth vpon you as a testimony against your present estate We indeed neyther did nor needed propound it as a severall Reason amōg those we set downe because it is of like nature with those which we have already mentioned in the Second and Sixt Reasons here before alleadged Pag. 82. and 104. H. Iacob his 2. Reply to the 6. Reason IN this your defence of your 6. Reason you say That the Proposition of your last syllogisme They that worship God after a false manner Pag. 106. are no true Christians is proved by the example of the Samaritans and that I answer nothing against it First I say there you sophisticate againe And it seemeth you can doe nothing else in argumentation For your Proposition is aequivocall and ambiguous If you meane they that vvorship God after a false manner that is totally or els Fundamentally Then I cleerely graunt it and that the Samaritans doe prove the same seeing they erred Fundamentally But your Assumption touching vs is then vtterly false You bring not a syllable or one letter to prove either of these tvvo against vs in all your writing neyther can you but bare begging of the controversie which is infinite ofte If you meane in your Proposition They that serve God after a false maner that is in part not wholly nor Fundamentally As namely in the Hierarchy and externall ceremonies as Cranmer c. Then I say and a vouch confidently in the presence of God that such may be true Christians though vnperfect in many things Yea infinite such have ben are and may be hereafter true Christians The contrarie whereof is no lesse then horrible blasphemy against God and his Saincts wherefore your Proposition is shewed to be againe sophisticall as also those were in your Third Exception First and Second Reasons Secondly where you say the Samaritans prove it I say nothing against it Marke you First I said the Samaritans might knowe by hearsay and yet not faithfully beleeve in the Messias You cannot be ignorant that there is a great difference between an obscure rumor which some of them might receiue from their neighbour Iewes and yet not haue it constantly beleeued and held publiquely among them as their cōmon faith If thus the Samaritans beleeued the comming of Messiah they are in no cōparison with vs we holde our most holy faith and doctrine by the worde professedly as the publique ordinance of our Churchs sheweth But furder let it be howsoeuer they held the comming of Messiah yet I answered The Samaritans ioyned Heathenish Idols wih the God of Israell which wholly destroyed the trueth in them And this is the very truth indeed howsoeuer you vvill not yeld it For you say that they broke not the First commaundement they worshipped not the Idols themselues nor sacrifised to them c. This is proued apparantly false in the Text. 2 kings 17.29 30 31. Every nation made their Gods and put them in the houses of the high places which the Samaritans had made euery nation in their Citties wherein they dwelt 2 King 17. For the men of Babel made Succoth-Benoth and the men of Cuth made Nergall and the men of Hamath made Ashima And the Auims made Nibhaz and Tartak and the Sepharuims burnt their children in the fyer to Adramdech Anammelech the Gods of Sepharuim Therefore they vvorshipped the Idols of the Heathen and sacrifized to them and accompted them to be Gods asvvell as the God of Israell And so broke the First commandement and therefore they touch not vs in this question As the like I †pag. 71. haue truely and vvell declared before against your First Reason Your proofes ‡ pag. 107. that the Samaritans brake not the First commandement are nothing 1 That of Ezra 4.1.2 that they sought the Lord as the Iewes did c. vvas their counterfeit hypocrisy and false brag yea their divelish cōspiracy against the worship of the Ievves God Do you beleve their vvordes here in this place that they are true indeed I graunt as I noted before out of 2 Kings 17. they had a mixed vvorship something of the Ievves God but very much and as by the Chapter seemeth most of the Heathens Gods Pag. 107. 2.
seem to have erred in so mayne a poinct vve cannot but thinke that meere desperatnes hath driven them to it Neverthelesse all this vve leave to the Lord vvith the iudgement thereof vvho hath the hearts of all men in his hand not only to search the secrets but also to turne and dispose them even as it pleaseth him Fr. Iohnson his Aunsvver to Mr Iacobs 1. Reply to the 9. Reason TO this Reason you answer It is a fallacy Separate from such Ergo separate vvholy But how shew you any fallacy therein You bid vs see your Replyes to the third Exception and tvvo last Reasons of all Well we have seen them and finde nothing there but against your self as hath ben shewed So this Reason and the rest stand still vnanswered and strong against you And that we may not doubt but your self also see it howsoever you seem to plead the contrary before therefore now you graunt it and so yeeld the cause both in expresse words and by not defending the points of false doctrine wherewith you were charged neyther your Canons Articles Iniunctions c. In expresse words when you say you graunt that so farr foorth as you hold othervvise then trueth so far vve may and ought to separate from you Loe here what the evidence of the truth against which you have strugled so long hath now at length drawen from you The trueth is mighty and prevaileth But you adde that vve must not separate from you any further then as before not wholy or absolutly and so say you the Apostle “ here meaneth 1 Tim. 6.3 ◠First of all let vs know what your self meane hereby If you meane that we must not for your other defection forsake the trueths which you hold I aunswer that we doe it not and this your self know well ynough And in this sence your meaning comes nothing neare the Apostles You say your selves you have separated from the Papists yet you neither can nor will say that you have forsaken the truthes which the Papists hold As that there is a God that there be three persons in the Godhead that Iesus Christ is the Saviour of the world that God made heaven and earth that there shal be a resurrection of the iust and vniust c. But if you meane that because of the truthes which you professe therefore we should not separate from you then first you contradict your self having graunted that we must separate from you so farr foorth as you hold otherwise then trueth Secondlie you condemne your owne practise in your separation from the Papists notwithstanding the truthes they professe Thirdlie in this sence also your meaning comes nothing neare the Apostles meaning Thus therefore is evident both that there is no fallacy in the Reason but that it is playne and forceable against you And that you have directlie in expresse words given vs the cause See the particulars before Pag. 63 c. and acknowledged our separation to be lawfull from your * Ministery worship Assemblies c. because in these you hold otherwise then truth And as in expresse words you yeeld it so in deed you shew it in that you leave without all defēce as vnlawfull and to be separated from your Ministery worship Church-governement Doctrine Canons Articles Iniunctions c. mentioned both here and more particularlie in the First and Second Reasons before which thing we wish the Reader well to observe And because we are fallen againe into mention of your false doctrine to the end that the Reader may yet more see the deceitfulnes of your dealing and insufficiencie of all your answers therefore it shall not be yrkesome to set downe here some such poincts of false doctrine as heretofore have ben obiected against you They are as followeth 1. That though the open notorious obstinate offenders be partakers of the Sacraments yet neyther the Sacramentes False doctrine in the Church of England and in the defenders thereof nor the people that ioine with them are defiled therby Which doctrine is contrary to the trueth of God in these Scriptures 1 Cor. 10.17 Hag. 2.14.15 1 Cor. 5.6 10.28 2 Cor. 6.14.15.16.17.18 Gal. 5.9 Mat. 18.8.9.15.16.17.18.19 Exod. 12.43 Levit. 15.4.5.6.7.31 11.24 13.45.46 19.7 Num. 5.2.3 19.21.22 Iosua 7.11.12 c. Ezra 6.21.22 Ier. 3.1 2. That the planting or reforming of Christs Church must tarrie for the Civill Magistrate and may not otherwise be brought in by the word and spirit of God in the testimony of his servantes except they have authoritie from earthlie Princes Which doctrine is against the Kinglie power of Christ and these scriptures Mat. 28.18.20 Actes 3.23 1 Cor. 1.27 Psal 2.6.9.10.12 Esa 9.6.7 Zach. 4.6 6.12.13 Dan. 2.44 7.27 9.25 Mich. 5.7 1 Cor. 14.27 with 1 Thes 4.8 Phil. 2.6.12 1 Tim. 6.13.14.15 Rev. 1.5 12.11 14.12 17.14 19.16 20.4 3. That the true visible Church of Christ is not a separated company of righteous men and women from the Idolaters and open wicked of the world but may consist of all sortes of people good and bad Which doctrine is cōtrary to the paterne of Christs Church throughout all the scriptures Gen. 4.26 vvith 6.2 Exod. 4.22.23 Levit. 10.10 20.24.25.26 Psal 24.3.4 Ezra 6.21 2. Chron. 11.13.16 Nehem. 10.28 Eze. 22.26 with 44.23 Zeph. 3.4 Mat. 3.10.12 Act. 2.40.41.42 19.9 Rom. 12.1.8 2 Cor. 6.17.18 1 Pet. 2.9.10 Rev. 14.9.12 18.4 21.27 and 22.14.15 c. 4. To mainteine this error of their confused order and mixture of all sortes of persons togeather they pervert the Parable of the tares Mat. 13.24 teaching that all are the Church and that they may be retained and communicated withall in the Church Which doctrine is against the trueth of the scriptures yea against our Saviours owne interpretation in the 38. verse who teacheth that by the field is meant the world in which his Church is militant here on earth And as therein there is the good seed the righteous the Children of the Kingdome so there are also tares hypocrites the children of the wicked who as they are often espied in this life by the righteous servauntes of God and being discovered are here cast out of the Church in the Name and by the power of Iesus Christ so shall they in that great day be perfectlie severed from the godly by the Angels howsoever here in the meane tyme making profession of the truth and having a show of godlines they be suffred to grow together with the good seed and be with the vpright of heart reputed mēbers of the Church on earth Note also that the Church because it is the Temple House kingdome of God on earth wherein he dwelleth by his spirit and ruleth by the scepter of his word as also the gate of heaven through which he bringeth vs into his kingdome of glory after this life is therefore by Christ in this place called the Kingdome of heaven though yet it
far separate from vs. Now you hold otherwise then the truth in all the particulars †before rehearsed towching your Prelacy Priesthood Sacraments Book of common prayer Pag. 63. c. confusion of people c. Thus far therefore you graunt we may and ought to separate from you And further we do not at all For there is not anie truth you hold which we also hold not with you So then in expresse words you yeeld vs the cause And yet further you yeeld it againe in that you do not defend by the Scripture your Hierarchy worship doctrines Canons Articles Iniunctions c. received and ioined vnto by all in your Church How absurd then and vngodlie is your denyall of so manifest a truth And how distempered is your brayne that can not perceive so plaine a contradiction with your self Your two fould sence of the Apostles words is a silly fiction of your owne head without anie ground or proof at all If you will have vs think otherwise bring warrant for the particulars of your distinction from the book of God But I pittie you Mr Iacob For I see you are brought to a low ebbe Who knowes not that this is the very last refuge of all ennemyes of the truth when they are pressed with evidence of Scripture so as they can not avoid it then to faine distinctions and to cast about for the sence as if that were hard and obscure which in deed is most plaine and easy Look in Bellarmine Bilson Whitgift Bridges and whosoever els have written against the truth if their dealing be not such This then doth not aunswer the Argument but proveth it rather to be vnaunswerable Tim. 6.5 As for the words The Apostle saying from such separate thy self if now you would know from whom Himself telleth it as plaine as may be If any man teach otherwise and consent not to the wholsome words of our Lord Iesus Christ and to the doctrine which is according to godlines c. from such separate thy self vers 3. But such is your case in particular As hath ben proved in your Prelacy and the other abominations of Antichrist yet taught and mainteyned among you Therefore are we bound by this rule of the Apostle to separate our selves from you Els should we aunswer it to God at that day Of your continuall vayne distinctions of fundamentally wholy presumptuously simply c. ynough is said alreadie in the handling of the for mer Reasons As also of Mr Cranmer and the rest of the Martyrs Whom here you set before vs againe as coleworts not twise but ten tymes sodden Leave this vsage of them Mr Iacob for they have left you long synce See before Pag. 40.41 Next you tell vs we may ioyne with you and yet towch no part of your ecclesiasticall corruptions at all to give allowance vnto them Prove this and you say somewhat But I doubt we shall find you as slow in proving as you are rash in speaking Mind but these particulars following which I will name for example Can we receive your Priesthood from the Prelates or execute it vnder them Can we ioyne to your Service book or anie part of your worship and Ministery Can we receive the word or Sacraments from your Ministers in that constitution Can we remaine members of your confused Assemblyes Can we stand subiect to your Prelates and their Courts Canons censures c. Can we I say do these or anie of them and yet towch no part of your ecclesiasticall corruptions at all to give allowance vnto them In your next Reply Mr Iacob declare vs this riddle if you can And in the meane tyme I will attribute it to your distempered conceit that you do thus every foot forget and contradict your self and yet discerne it not But what will you say too if such as ioyne with you in anie part of your worship suppose it be the best become thereby partakers of your whole worship and constitution even of the worst things that are among you therein To make it plaine and certaine vnto you mynd these proofs In Israell †1 Cor. 10.18 they that did eate of the sacrifices as “ 2 Sam. 1.4.5 the people might were thereby partakers of the whole Iewish religion yea even of the altar Vnto which yet they might not come at all but the Priest onelie Lev. 1. chap. c. Numb 18.7 Luc. 1.9.10 In Corinth the Christians that abhorred Idols and Idolatry yet when after the sacrifices were offred * 1 Cor. 10 14-22 8.4.10 they sate but in the Idol Temples to eat of the meats that had ben sacrificed which in †1 Cor. 10.25.26.27 other places they might have done became thereby partakers of the whole Idolatrous wprship though they were not present at it but as they thought abhorred it In like maner they which connnunicate in anie part of your worship become thereby partakers and guiltie of the whole though it may be neither you nor they so think So false it is which here you give out that we may ioine with some of your worship and Ministery and yet towch no part of your Ecclesiasticall corruptions at all to give them allowance For the Papists to omit that you aunswer not what I obiected you see and graunt readily that they are no true Christians but very Antichrists c. Yet for your selves though your Hierarchy Leitourgy confusion of people false doctrines c. be meerlie Popish and Antichristian you will not see and acknowledge it Take heed least when you see yet you wink with your eyes and though you vnderstand yet you harden your heart because you will not be converted and healed Esa 6.9.10 Act. 28.26.27 For the question between vs let the Reader iudge how I have proved it and how you have quitted your self and your Churches Where you say the points of false doctrine in your Church are most falsly laid to your charge all may see here againe you have an hard forehead to deny anie thing and yet are so sottish you can prove nothing But you say you list not meddle with them at this present I easily beleev you They are so pregnant against you as it is no marvell if you have no list to do it Otherwise you shew list ynough to medle with anie thing that you think may cary any show against vs. But you must mynd the point is not what you list but what you ought to meddle withall You have taken vpon you the defence of your Churches in the estate wherein now they stand Therefore must you aunswer aswell for the false doctrines as for the true mainteined in your Church Els would the Papists iustify their case against you well ynough For this cause then must you aunswer aswell for your Book of cōmon prayer and other your books of Articles Canons Iniunctions c. as for that book of Articles which was published in the yeare 1562. For they conteine the doctrine and
do it from all And for your resistance whether it be such as you speak of or not we leave to the Lord who knoweth the hearts and wayes of all men It sufficeth vs as it did the Apostles and must do the servants of God in all ages that the Reasons of separation include and belong vnto you all even all your Churches Ministers and people in that estate As I haue declared before throughout this Treatise Towching the conclusion Therefore vntill you prove the contrarie which will never be mark what I say the Paradox still remaineth vpon you and your Church Towching the reformed Churches some of * your selves men of far better iudgement and learning then Mr Iacob have confessed and published In the first Admonition to the Parl. that you have all the best reformed Churches throughout Christendome against you And further that you have an Antichristian Hierarchy and Popish ordering of Ministers straunge from the word of God and the vse of all well reformed Churches in the world Yet you like blind Bayard sticke not boldlie to say to the contrarie that all men know they hold communion with you as Churches of God First then reconcile your self Mr Iacob with your fellow Reformists at home And then your Churches Hierarchy and constitution with the Ministerie and constitution of the reformed Churches abroad And remember here that the Ministery of those Churches is not esteemed sufficient by yours As the Priesthood of Rome is The proof of both which you may see in the answer to Mr A.H. Pag. 96. With whether of these then I pray you do you hold communion Or do you not in deed halt as newters between both Mynd further that Mr Beza whose iudgement you know is worthilie reverenced and approved in all the reformed Churches speaking but of fower or five of your corruptions affirmeth that in the Antichristian Church there is nothing more intolerable Bez. Epist. 8. yea that your case being so it is not a corrupcion of Christianitie but in deed a manifest defection from Christ His owne words I noted before Pag. 73. Now when themselves do thus witnes and write of your estate how should anie think that they hold communion with you as the Churches of God vnles you could prove they do also hold it the Church of God which standeth in manifest defection from Christ I know in deed that you have long deceived them by the Apology which you published for your selves against the Papists In which you concealed from them all your corruptions and abominations By meanes whereof not hauing knowledge of the truth of your estate they have therevpon for a tyme thought much better of it then it doth deserve or will beare As even some among them alreadie vpon better information synce have acknowledged But of this matter and of your dealing therein Reason 6 I have written alreadie †in the answer to Mr T. C. And therefore for these things I do still refer you as I did The Answer to Mr Hild. such as it is now is published And so may the answer to Mr Cartw. be in tyme speciallie seing you do thus provoke therevnto In the meane tyme divers copies thereof are abroad in mens hands In which as also in the ‡ other Treatise A â—revisâ—o â—f the Minist of Engl. Pag 67. 68. 69. I have noted in sundrie particulars the testimonie of the reformed Churches against your present estate You Mr Iacob may account of these or anie other our writings as you please Your toungue is no sclaunder Yet till we be answered and that soundlie from the word of God all men of conscience will see and mynd how you bring nothing at all in defence of your Churches and Ministerie but frivolous and wandring words Next followeth our owne acknowledgement to be discussed For towching that bloody mind and speach of yours when you say if we be troubled for witnessing against your Church estate none can pitty our imprisonnement banishement c. I leave you and it vnto God a See the like before Pag. 112. who seeth and will iudge Onelie let the Reader note here “ againe that not the Prelates alone but you also the forward preachers and professors have wittinglie and willinglie your hand in our blood Mr Barrow is the first you name Whom together with Mr Greenwood you †At Tyâ—um by London in the yeare 1593. Apr. 6. killed in time of Parliament that the ages present and to come may know it was done with knowledge of the whole Land In all his speach there is not one word that the members of your Church are true Christians in that estate He testifyed vnto death and sealed with his blood that you do all stand in Antichristian estate I think your self will not be so shameles as to deny it Now in his speach here alledged by your self marke fower things which all do shew it is against you 1. That speaking of the Martyrs false offices and corruptions he deemeth them saved notwithstanding through the mercy of God which superabounded above their sinnes c. By which is evident that he thought them vnder the wrath of God in respect of their false offices corruptions had not the mercy of God superabounded above those their sinnes For mercy you know presupposeth misery and superaboundance thereof a great measure of sinne 2. He intimateth as if he thought that these their sinnes were vnseen of them as doubtles they were of manie of them yea and of all of them as towching that measure of knowledge which God hath synce by his word revealed therein 3. He declareth that he was far from cutting of all among you as Mr Gifford suggested from Gods election or from Christ Where marke that he speaketh of Gods election vnder which we also trust that manie of you are not of your present outward estate In his Disco of the false Church Ref. of Mr Giff. Conferen c In respect whereof here he saith the servants of Christ may iustlie deny you in that constitution to be members of a true constituted Church A case very wofull and miserable Yet adde herevnto that which ‡ els where often he testifyed that your Ministery worship estate are Antichristian c. For which cause he could not ioine with you in such estate but separated from you and witnessed this against you vnto death himself so signifying at the very tyme and place of his execution So far was he from iudging you to be in that estate true Christians To make the case yet more plaine know that we dare not condeÌ„ne them of the Church of Rome with any such peremptorie sentence as Mr Giffard accuseth vs to cutt them all from Gods election or from Christ Doth it therefore follow that in the constitution of there Church we iudge them true Christians Nothing lesse Yet thus you shame not to reason 4. He asketh what now should let that we should not have the same hope as of the Martyrs
where the same pretious faith in syncerity and simplicitie is found So as they neyther neglect to search out the truth nor despise the truth when they see it c. We also aske and say the same But now if you say this is your case both we and your owne works deny it For proof whereof see the differences between you and the Martyrs before specifyed Pag. 40. 41. At Thomas a Waterings by London 1593. May 29 Mr Penry whom you ♣ martyred also the same yeare his speach followeth In which likewise note fower things not one of them for you as towching the question in hand 1. The true doctrines established by Law and professed by her Maiesty their Honours and such as have knowledge in your assemblies he acknowledgeth to be such as if he did not mainteyne and hold them likewise he could not possibly be saved We also are like mynded And to put you out of all doubt we tell you further that if we did not hold and mainteine the true doctrines professed in the Church of Rome towching the onely true God the holy Trinity the Mediator Christ the Resurrection Life eternall c. we could not possibly look to be saved Yet do we not therefore approve their Assemblies to be true Churches or the members thereof true Christians in their estate 2. He separated from your Church as remaining in Antichristian cōstitution and professeth here that he durst not ioine with the publik worship of your Assemblies The causes thereof he mentioneth in the same confession which you conceale Of which see further in his aunswer to Mr Fanshaw hereafter following 3. He confesseth that manie of the Teachers and professors in your assemblies have so embraced the truth of doctrine established and professed in the Land as the Lord hath given them to shew outwardly many tokens whereby in regard of the Lords election he iudged them members of that body whereof Christ is the head and prayed God herein to be mercifull to them as to himself in regard of all his sinnes that they are not vnder that outward forme of governement which Christ hath left in the Church Now marke here 1. that this is no other thing then as we alway did and still do professe likewise Of which see before Pag. 7. 41. 2. That he speaketh but of some not of all the members of your Church Whereas your Assumption and Conclusion are of your whole publik Assemblies and so of every member of your Church as towching their outward stāding therein 3. That the perswasion he had of such among you was as himself noteth in regard of the Lords election not of their estate in your Churches constitution For towching this which is the question between vs here he prayed God to be mercifull to them as to him self in respect of all his sinnes Now I suppose you will not denie but his sinnes as also the sinnes of all Gods people deserve in their owne nature the curse of God if they were not forgiven in Christ So that by praying thus he acknowledged the estate of all even of the best among you to be such as for this verie cause you are everie one subiect to Gods wrath because you are not vnder that outward forme of Governement which Christ hath left in the Church Consider withall that even for Papists we may pray thus that the Lord would be mercifull to them in this that they are not vnder that outward forme of governement which Christ hath left in his Church and yet not hereby iustify them to be a true Church in their estate but rather the quite contrarie For Christ his Church wheresoever and among whomsoever it be is vnder Christ his governement not vnder Antichrists Neither have anie people promise of salvation in such estate 4. By all this it appeareth that he spake of them as iudging them to be members of the invisible and Catholick Church which conteyneth all Gods elect not onelie among you but among the Lutherans Anabaptists Papists and all other people whatsoever Now what is this to the poinct of the question controverted which is not of men as they belong to the Catholick invisible Church but as they stand members of some particular visible Assemblies in this or that constitution 4. His speach in examination before Mr Fanshaw why do you not set it downe in his owne words as you did the other before Belike you see your self it is against you howsoever you would pretend otherwise That all may know it thus it was Mr Fanshaw asked him this questiō Do the Martyrs teach you that there is no Church in England Mr Penry answered If you meane by a Church as the most do that publik professiō wherby men do professe salvation to be had by the death and righteousnes of Iesus Christ I am free from denying any Church of Christ to be in this Land For I know the doctrine of the holy Trinity the natures and offices of the Lord Iesus free iustification by him both the Sacraments c. published by her Maiestyes authority and commaunded by her Lawes to be the Lords blessed and vndoubted truths without the knowledge and profession whereof no salvation is to be had These are his words By which you may see he saith no other thing here then what he spake in his Confession before obiected So as the answer given for it may serve for this also Or if that please you not you may mynd it thus If he had ben demaunded by Mr Fanshaw whether there were no Church of Christ in Rome and had answered thus If you meane by a Church that publick profession whereby men do professe Christ Iesus by nature to be truly both God and man that one eternall Priest and Redeemer which by his sacrifice and death vpon the crosse hath reconciled vs to God and payed his blood as a full and sufficient raunsome for all our sinnes c. as the Papists do publikly professe Rhem. Annot. on 1 Tim. 2.5 then am I free from denying any Church of Christ to be in Rome If I say to this question he had thus aunswered would you have concluded vpon his words that he acknowledged the Church of Rome to be the true Church of Christ or the members thereof to be true Christians in their constitution Or do you see for the Church of Rome but not for your owne that such conclusion can not be pressed out of his words But yet further for the more clearing of this matter let vs marke what Mr Fanshaw next asked and he aunswered towching the estate of your Church and his separation from it Vpon his former aunswer Mr Fanshaw said thus vnto him Seing you acknowledge that her Maiesty hath established the truth in so many waighty points seing she hath commaunded the true Sacraments to be administred what mislike you in our Church and why will you not be partaker of these truths and Sacraments with vs Mr Penry answered I mislike 1. the false
A treatise of the Ministery of Engl. in answer to M. A. H. whether the better sort among you do by such commixture become godles persons like the rest but whether your Assemblies in such commixture can be deemed true constituted Churches of Christ The Scriptures you alledge are therefore misalledged and fit not your purpose at all Yea they are direct against you as I have ◠els where proved at large Now note but these things brieflie In Mat. 23.2.3 Christ speaketh of such as sate in Moses chayre that is in the offices and functions which God by Moses had ordeyned Deut. 33.8.10 Neh. 9.4 with Ioh. 1.19.24 Now what is this to your false Ministerie which God never appointed The same is to be mynded in those other Scriptures of 1 Sam. 1.3.9 2.17 In Luk. 1.6 2.21.22 mention is made of Gods ordinances and offices then obserued after the Law of Moses vvithout reproof Is not this then directlie against your Antichristian ordinances and offices which are not according to the Law of God but after the Apostasy of Antichrist and therefore all the observers of them to be reproved In Act. 21.23.26 we read that the Legall ordinances were for a tyme permitted to the Iewes being zealous of the Law and so observed of the Apostle himself being also a Iew. Which was the honour of their buriall But what proportion is there between those ordinances of God and the enormities of Antichrist Nay if we may not now keep those ceremonyes of Moses once Gods commaundements how far ought we to be from keeping the abominations of Antichrist by God most straitlie forbidden Gal. 5.2 vvith Rev. 14.9.10 18.4 In Rev. 2.20.21 3.1.4 1 Cor. 3.3 Gal. 3.1.2 4.11.16 5.4.9 the Scripture speaketh of true Churches and people set in the way and order of Christ What is this to your Assemblies and people standing in the apostasy of Antichrist But you will say these Scriptures shew in these Churches some corrupt men opinions and actions What then 1. This was not the estate of those Churches but the personall aberratiōs of some therein 2. Though true Churches planted in the order of Christ be subiect to corruption yet this doth not iustifie anie false Churches in Antichristian constitution Though Iudah being the true Church of God had her enormities yet Israel in apostasy was no wife but an harlot Hos 2.2 4.15 vvith 2 Chrō 15.17 If you mynd not this difference you may plead for Rome at this day and all the false Churches in the world as you do for your owne 3. Although bad men vnder a show of holines creep into the Church till afterward in tyme they be descryed yea although many hypocrites both enter and continew in the true Church yet this nothing approveth the confusion of such Assemblies as are cages of every vncleane and hatefull bird even of knowen wicked persons Atheists Persecuters Rev. 18.2 Whoremōgers Drunkards Vsurers Idolaters c. 4. When anie such are espyed in the true Church there is Christs power to cast them out if they repent not Mat. 18.17 1 Cor. 5.4.5.11.12.13 But such being cōmon and notorious in your and the like Churches yea and still remaining vnrepentant yet you have not the power of Christ to remove them but all the ecclesiasticall power and iurisdiction among you is in the Prelates and their Officers which is meerlie Antichristian 5. Even in true Churches when such persons and corruptions are not redressed or removed they do in tyme leaven the whole lumpe and Christ in iustice removeth his Candelstick and taketh his kingdome away from among them See it in such Churches as are spoken of in these Scriptures here noted by your self Mat. 21.42 43. Rev. 2.5.16.22.23 1 Cor. 5.6 Gal. 5.9 And if iudgement begin at the house of Christ what shal be the end of the Synagogues of Antichrist These things I thought brieflie to note partlie to shew that these Scriptures approve not your estate partlie that the Reader may alway mynd to put difference between true Churches and yours with all other false ones whatsoever And let it be noted withall how you seek out the verie Scribes and Pharisees with the corruptest tymes and people by them to colour your vngodlie estate if possiblie you could Whereas the true feare of God would teach you to make choise of the Prophets and Apostles with the purest tymes and people for examples to walk in their steps But for the further handling of these things I refer you to other treatises where they are more fullie spoken of The answer to Mr A.H. c. Now I will annexe for more clearing of this question a brief description of a true visible Church which hath power frō Christ to chuse to it self such Officers as he hath ordeined in his word Thus therefore I describe it A true visible Church of Christ is * a company of faithfull people †by the word of God called out separated from the world the false wayes thereof ′ gathered and ioyned together in fellowship of the Gospell “ by a voluntary profession of the faith obedience of Christ * Mat. 18.17.20 Ephes 1.1 Act. 1.15 Ezech. 36.38 †Ioh. 15.19 17.14.16 Lev. 20.26 Act. 2.39.40 19.9 Rom. 1.7 2 Cor. 6.17 Rev. 18.4 “ Mat. 18.20 Phil. 1.5 Act. 1.15 2.41.47 17.4 Esa 60.4 “ Esa 44.5 2 Cor. 9.13 Act. 2.41 Psal 110.3 Rom. 1.8 16.19 This I take to be a true description If it be not shew the errour by the Scriptures If it be compare herewith your Cathedrall and Parish Assemblies and if you can prove them or anie of them even the best among you to be such And hitherto of the first of the particulars before mentioned For the second it is needfull that you both name those many famous cōgregations you speak of and that you shew how they were rightlie gathered and ioined together according to Gods ordinance Otherwise who can know whereof you speak or what to think in particular cōcerning them If by Congregations where the Gospell was not vnknowen before the Queens cōmādement came to vrge them you meane the persecuted Churches that were in Q. Maryes tyme this helpeth not your cause but maketh against it directlie For they were then separated from the rest of the Land and voluntarily submitted to the Gospell of Christ and enioyed th◠true and lawfull offices of Pastors Elders Deacons neyther stood in subiection to the Antichristian Prelacy and other Clergy of the Land but renounced and forsook it None of all your Assemblies were ever such eyther at the beginning of her Maiestyes raigne or at anie tyme synce If you obiect that even they of that persecuted Church when this Queen came submitted to the Prelacy and Clergy aforsaid I deny it not But note withall that such as did so made thereby defection from the way of Christ wherein they were before And the rest that would not so do were eyther cast