doctrine Now if you cannot prooue your Assemblies to be such you may see your own witnesses euen your owne doctrine and book giue verdict against you If you can prooue them to be such where and what are your proofes touching the particulars mentioned in this your owne description of a visible Church H. IACOB his 1. Reply to the 1. Excep THis your first Exception is the 19. Article of this very book vvhich vvee alleadge vvherein a visible Church is described to be a Congregation where the pure word is preached and Sacraments ministred according to all those things that of necessitie are requisite Novv this description you reiect not but our practise say you is contrary and therefore vve haue no true visible Churches nor Christians I ansvver vvherein is it contrarie in vvhat things that of necessitie are requisite doth not all this Christian vvorld see and confesse that our publique practise is agreeable to our profession in that book Nay say you but proue you your assemblies to be such and if you can proue them where and what are your proofs if you doe not you are confuted A vvorthy confutation sure and very Clerklike As if my Tenaunt should denie me rent for my house and land yea and goe to Lavv vvith me for the fee simple vvhich he hath holden in ferme of me these 40. yeares and I haue hetherto quietly enioyed from my Auncestors time out of minde Novv he suing me at lavv for that vvhich I thus possesse saith proue your right to this land vvhich you haue if you can vvhat and vvhere be your proofes let me see them Or els I your Tenaunt vvill haue it This vvere goodly dealing vvere it not and very lavvfull EueÌ„ so doe you asking proofes of vs for that vvhich vve possesse haue possessed before you made any question about it nay you your selues held part of this possession of vs and vvith vs till yesterday vvhen you began first to lay claime in this sorte to the vvhole Novv your reason is let vs prooue it to be ours where be our proofs Or els you will not accknowledg vs any longer see I pray you your owne equity If this suffice not to make you desist I leaue it to the Iudges to giue sentence Secondly note further Our Article saith A Church is where the word is preached and Sacraments ministred according to all things that of necessitie are requisite Where vveâ— plainly insinuate that many errours may be added and truthes wanting in a visible Church but nothing which is absolutely necessarie Now what doth our practize in Preaching or Sacraments want that is absolutely necessarie without which there cannot be any true preaching or Sacraments at all shevv it vs because vve see it not our selues I assure you vntil then your first reason hath no reason in it Fr. Io. his Aunsvver to M. Iacobs 1. Reply vpon the 1. Excep HOw fit or vnfit the description is I neither did nor doe examine Onely because it is your owne profession and your practise is coÌ„trary vnto it I did from hence take the first Exception requiring of you to proue your Assemblies to be such or els to know that your owne doctrine is a witnes against your selues Now in your Reply haue you according to the particulers of that description iustified your Church assemblies Nothing lesse Let this therefore be first obserued But what then haue you done First pretending as if you repeated our exception and your owne description you leaue out diuers particulers of speciall moment there expressed As first where the visible Church is described to be a congregation of faithfull men you leaue out these wordes of faithfull men belike knowing that your Congregations which are holds of all foule spirits and cages of euery vncleane and hatefull bird Reuel 18.2 cannot therefore iustly be accounted congregations of faithfull men Secondly where the description speaketh of the Sacraments to be duely ministred you leaue out this word duely because it crosseth your womens Baptisme priuate Communion receiuing of the most prophane and their seed among you c. Lastly where in the description it is required both for preaching the pure word and due administration of the Sacraments that they be don according to Christes ordinance you leaue out these words according to Christes ordinance belike because this clause quite overthroweth both your Antichristian Prelacy from whih al the inferior Ministers among you receiue power and authority to preach and minister the SacrameÌ„ts and your Preisthood and Deaconry wherein you all administer and your stinted imposed prayers exhortations crosses in the forehead questions to Infantes vse of the same wordes in English in ministring the Lords Supper which the Papists vsed and still vse in Latine not retaining the words of Christes institution and such like Thus hauing left out such particulers as were of speciall moment against you yet you demaund vvherein your paactize is contrary to your profession and description of a visible Church in vvhat things that of necessitie are requisite We aunswer in all the particulers of that description aforesayd For first your Church-assemblies are not congregations of faithfull men but a confusion of all manner of people though neuer so wicked and prophane The ‡ D. VVâ—iâ—g booke pag 176. and 178 Prelates and Formalists affirm that your Church is full of Atheistes Papistes Idolaters Drunkards Whoremongers and such like The * Sermon on Rom. 12 pag. 65. and 66. Demonstration in the preface forward Preachers likewise that in your Church are svvarmes of Atheists Idolaters Papists erronious and heretical Sectaries Witches Charmers Sorcerers Murtherers Theeues Adulterers Lyars c. Finally that a man may be any thing among you sauing a sound Christian These things being so as both your estate and writings beare witnes iudge your selues whether your Assemblies can be accounted Congregations of faithfull men or no which is the first point of the description aforesaid Secondly in the same description is required That the pure vvord of God be preached according to Christes ordinance But with you are allowed besides the word of God the Apocrypha books and in steed of preching the word the reading of Homilies as may appeare in that ‡ Book of Articles published Anno 1502. book of Articles alledged by your self Yet who knoweth not that in those bookes are diuers vntruths errors contradictions blasphemies and such like So farre are they from being the pure word of God or agreeing therewith Moreouer when and where the word is preached among you it is done by vertue of a false office and calling never appointed by Christ And the Ministers that preach it do in your constitution alway stand subiect to be silenced suspended excommunicated and degraded by the Prelates and Ordinaries to whom when you are made Priests you promise and when you enter vpon a benefice you sweare Canonicall obedience Neither are you suffered any further to preach the word and truth of God then agreeth
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
further nor otherwise D. B. The publisher to the Reader Section 2. Novv having vveighed and considered vvith my selfe the great ignorance and errors vvherevvith those of the separation aforesaid are and have bene lately carried avvaye namely to affirme That all that stande members of the Churches of Englande are no true Christians nor in state of salvation And such like most vngodly sentences vvhich vvould grieve any Christian soule once to thinke on much more to publish to the vievv of the vvorld And vveighing likevvise vvithall the greate vveakenes of manie Christians among vs vvho through vvant of experience or due consideration of things as they are may easelie by theyr delusions be dravvne avvay into those errors vvith them I haue therefore Asvvell in hope of reclaiming of the said parties from their said extremities vvhich novv I iudge the most of them for vvant of meanes see not As also for the staying of others from running into the same grievous excesse vvith them novv published this discourse to the vievv of the vvorld vvhich hath line buryed in the hands of some fevv Many being desirous of it vvho by reason of the largnes in vvriting out of the same could not obteyne it VVhere vnto I am so much the rather induced For that the Reasons herein by Maister Iacob alleadged haue by Gods blessing reclaymed many from their former errors and satisfied others vvho have bene doubtfull and subiect to fall into the same In the examining of vvhich Discourse I shall desire the Reader to observe a fevv notes for his better proffiting in the same 1. And First among the rest to note this as a token of the strange and obstinate dealing of Maister Iohnson and others of them viz. That heretofore vntill such time as the Argument hereafter mentioned was framed against them they neuer denyed That the doctrine and profession of the Churches of England vvas sufficient to make those that belâ—eued and obeyed them to be true Christians and in state of salvation But alvvayes held professed and acknovvledged the contrarie As by the publike confessions of themselves namely Maister Barrovv Maister Penry and Maister Iohnson himselfe in this discourse mentioned in Pag. 167. 168. appeareth But novve they seing That if they should acknovvledge the said Doctrines and profession to be sufficient to salvation That then this conclusion vvould of necessitie follovv that those that hold and practise them are a true * * VVhich yet Mr. Penâ—y coÌ„fessed see Pag. 168. Church And so theyr ovvn former iudgements should be crossed Rather I say then they vvould be dravvne to that They novve stick not to deny their ovvne confessions vvhich they thinke to be the faifest vvay for them and like vnnaturall children so vehemently hate contemne and dispise theyr mother vvho bare them nourished and brought them vp from vvhose brests they sucked that svveere milke of the meanes of euerlasting life and salvation if euer they had any tast of it at all Beeing notvvithstanding not abashed novve in a desperate manner in the hardnes of theyr heart to affirme ‡ ‡ VVhich appeareth generally by denying the Assumption of Mr. Iacobs particularly in these Pages 29. 139. 140 141. That none by the doctrine of the Churches of England can be a true Christian or saved But that they all worship God in vayne Are abolished from Christ Are Babilonians Idolaters departers from the faith worse then Infidels And such like most vnchristian sentences making them all one vvith the Church of Rome c. VVhich impious affirmations vvould cause any Christian heart to lament and bleed for grief VVhose vnchristian sentences and false and deceiptfull Reasons the very naming vvhereof vvere sufficient to refute them are most plainly taken avvaye and cleane ouerthrovvne by these brief Replyes of Maister Iacob vnto every of them vnto vvhich I referre yovv Onely this I adde vvith all vvhich I vvould desire might be noted That if they continevv in their former confessions That the Doctrines and profession of the Churches of England are sufficient to salvation As they ought it being the very truth Then are they all in a most grievous schisme in so peremptorily condempning and separating from such true Christians and Churches And if they deny it as they have begonne to doe Then doe they runne headlong into an intollerable sinne and extremitie vvithout all vvarrant of Gods vvord And besides give iust occasion to be called fearfull * * VVhich name they vniustly give to those that iustly for this theyr extremity forsake their fellovvship Apostates in so vvholy falling and that advisedly for advantage sake as it seemeth playnely to appeare from so notable a truth vvhich before they imbraced and acknovvledged The Aunswer All that the publisher hath published here is eyther some foolish conceits of his owne or some frivolous cavils and malicious calumniations against the truth and vs that professe it His conceits of his ovvne knovvledge and our ignorance of his ovvne strength others vveaknes of reclayming and satisfying many by publishing this discourse of the force and plainenes of Mr. Iacobs Replyes c. I omit according to the rule which saith * Prov. 26.4 Aunsvver not a foole according to his foolishnes least thou also be like him But his cavils and calumniations against the truth and vvitnesses thereof being also objected by Mr Iacob in his Replyes I have aunswered in the Treatise following according to the counsell of the same Wisdome which saith †Pro. 26.5 Aunsvver a foole according to his foolishnes least he be vvise in his ovvne eyes The Aunswer therefore to that which here he obiecteth of our assertions and sentences of our former and present acknovvledgement of the Church of England her profession doctrines members Assemblyes c. see it in the Treatise following Pag. 7. 16. 20. 22. 33. 60. 63. 73. 82. 86. 94. 103. 106. 116. 120. 147. 158. 162. 170. 177. 188. 196. 200. c. And here note withall 1. That in all these things we are still of the same mynd as heretofore Mr Barrovv Mr Penry my self and the rest of vs have ben So far are we from crossing denying or any way altering our former judgement and confession as he falsely pretendeth For which see Pag. 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 2. That we do not hate contemne and despise theyr Church which he calleth the Mother that bare vs c. but inasmuch as we have ben members thereof heretofore in which respect she was then in deed our Mother but now do see her to stand in adulterous estate we do therefore plead vvith her that she may take away her fornications out of her sight and her adulteryes from between her brests And we go out of her that we may not partake in her sinnes and that we receyve not of her plagues Both which things we do at the commaundement of God and by warrant of his word wherein he hath straitly charged all his people thus for to walk Hos
3.12.15 amōgst many other which plainly proveth Ansvver that many errors so they be not of obstinacy may be built by a Christian vpon the fundation Christ Iesus yet be a true Christian still For which see further Maister Iacobs answer in pag. 192. Againe there are errors simply fundamētall which of their owne nature cleane abolish frō Christ such are the errors of the Arians concerning the Deitie of Christ of the Anabaptists concerning his humanitie of the Papists cōcerning Iustification by workes praying to trusting in Saincts and such like which directly raze the very foundation But that any one or all of the errors in the churches of Englād are of this force as you would seem to hold by all your 9. Reasons is most impious and vngodly to affirme And as Maister Iacob very well noteth in his answer to every one of them You therby overthrow the Martyrs in Queene Maries dayes from being christians who held the very same corruptions in their ministery worship c. which is now held in England But say you the Martyrs saw ne further Then you confesse against your selves that our errors doe not simply abolish from Christ as you every where affirme most vngodly especially in defence of your 7. Reason But that if men in these things see no further they are in the same estate with the Martyrs Now if you would have your Reasons hold you must prove the churches of England all conuicted in conscience which I hope you will not go about to doe Thus much concerning the nature of our errors whether they be of obstinacie or against the fundation directly which is the Second note I desier to be observed The Aunswer This second note of his is as foolish as frivolous as contumelions as the former See it here in his chaunging of the question between vs in his lessening of theyr corruptions in his mismatching of things vnequall in his abusing our difference of judgement and reviling off vs in his perverting the Scriptures and example of the Martyrs c. The Question between vs is not as he pretendeth but thus First concerning them VVhether the good doctrines of the Church of England being joyned together vvith theyr Antichristian errors and corruptions do make theyr Assemblyes and people in that estate to be true Churches and Christians Then concerning vs VVhether notvvithstanding the good doctrines professed in theyr Church vve may and ought to separate from theyr Antichristian Ministery vvorship confusion c. That thus the question standeth between vs themselves cannot deny though they seek to alter and turne from it here and every where Therefore do we also desier thee good Reader to mynd it well and not to be carryed away with the view of theyr good doctrines alone from the question and matter in hand but alway to have an especiall regard therevnto Notwithstanding if the question were as here he pretendeth perthen both his owne and all Mr Iacobs defence of the Church of England is even thus also quite ouerthrowen For now it appeareth that both of them do vnderstand theyr Argument following as if it were thus propounded Whatsoever is sufficient to make a particular man a true Christian and in state of salvation that is sufficient to make a company so gathered together to be a true Church Mr Iacobs Argument as it is novv vnderstood by themselves notwithstanding the multitude of errors and corruptions retayned among them But the whole doctrine as it is publikly professed and practised by Law in England is sufficient to make a particular man a true Christian and in state of salvation viz. such a one as in simplicity of heart beleveth and embraceth it And the publik Assemblyes of England are in theyr estate companyes so gathered together that is they do in simplicity of heart so beleev and embrace Therefore it is sufficient to make the publik Assemblyes of England true Churches notwithstanding the multitude of theyr errors and corruptions The Argument then being thus propounded as by this note of his it must needs be marke I pray you what followeth herevpon 1. That as it hath ben propounded hitherto it concludeth not the Question but is lame both in the Proposition and Assumption as I have noted more particularly hereafter Pag. 4. 10. 12. 13. 93. 97. 99. 106. 2. That in theyr estate we must mynd not theyr good doctrines alone but theyr errors and corruptions withall Of which there is never a word in all theyr Argument See it Pag. 3 4. 63. 171. 172. 3. That the falsehood both of the Proposition and Assumption is now so manifest as the very propounding of them thus is sufficient to refute them But for this also see further Pag. 5. 11. 12. 13. Now to speak here but of the latter braunch of the Assumption onely let them tell vs iff themselues think theyr Assemblyes and members thereof do in simplicity of heart beleev and practise the good doctrines of theyr Church Nay will they say that the Prelates the chief officers and pillars of theyr Church do so embrace them Not to speak of the many thousands of theyr Church who do not so much as know the doctrines of truth retayned and 〈◊〉 them So far are they from professing and practising them in syncerity And yet are they aswell as the best members of theyr Church partakers of theyr Sacraments Ministers Governours copartners of theyr Worship Assemblyes procedings c. 4. Finally mynd that the Argument and Replyes following speak of the profession and practise of all theyr Assemblyes and members thereof as they stand according to Law Pag. 3.6 But here he speaketh onely of such among them as do in simplicity of heart beleev and embrace theyr good doctrines and therefore neyther of all theyr Assemblyes nor of all the members of them See then here how insufficiently they have reasoned and how deceitfully they have dealt all this while Besides the question being of a visible Church he speaketh onely of such as may belong to the invisible Which is not to the poynt in controversy For the profession and practise according to Law spoken of in the Argument may be knowen and discerned of men the simplicity of the heart here spoken of God onely kooweth Thus with wynding in and out they have lost both the question and themselves too I feare if they returne not in tyme and with simplicity of heart vnto the Lord. The nature and force of theyr corruptions derived from Antichrist the deadly enemy of Iesus Christ is purposely handled in the discourse following in the 1. 2. 3. 6. 7. and 9. Reasons The Apostle saith that even * 1. Tim. 4.1.2.3 the forbidding of Meats and Mariage is a departing from the faith Mr Beza speaking particularly of the Church of England and but of fower or five off theyr corruptions viz plurality of benefices licences of Non-residency licences to marry and to eat flesh saith that ‡ Bez. Epist 8 the Antichristian Church hath not
any thing more intolerable yea that the retayning of these is not a corruption of Christianity but a manifest defection from Christ Now if fower or five of theyr corruptions yea if two of them be a manifest departing from the faith of Christ what may we think of theyr whole Hierarchy and multitude of Antichristian abominations retayned among them besides Yet this mans conscience is so feared as he feareth not to say though they were thrice as many as they are yet they are not to the purpose for which they are vrged that is to convince the Antichristian constitution of theyr Church and to warrant separation therefrom Which is as much as if he should say more plainely Let the Apostels say of it what they will and let Christ himself commaund vs never so straitly to separate from such and to towch no vncleane thing at all 1. Tim. 4.1.2.3 2 Thes 2.3 Rev. 18.4 2 Cor. 6.17 Yet it is to no purpose if D. B. and Mr Iacob with theyr consorts agree otherwise The Anabaptisticall perfection then whereof he dreameth he may well apply to himself and his fellowes who will be perfit and holy in theyr way if theyr owne faucyes perswade them so albeit they stand in never so many knowen errors and those also of Antichrist yea and peremptorily condemne all such as partake not in theyr sinnes but separate from theyr Antichristian worship and Ministery as Christ hath commaunded The way aÌ„d coÌ„stitutioÌ„ of our Church is according to the TestameÌ„t of Christ Weakly in deed aÌ„d with much imperfectioÌ„ do we walk therein by reasoÌ„ of sinne that doth so compasse aÌ„d cleave fast vnto vs. Neyther was there ever in the world any Churches or Christians whose case was not such Nor can we ever look for other vpon the earth Even the Prophets and Apostles have thus acknowledged of themselves Esa 64.6 9. Psal 19.12.13 and 103.10 Iob. 9.30.31 Hab. 3.1 Rom. 7.14 c. 1 Cor. 13.9.12 Heb. 12 1. Iam. 3.2 1 Pet. 4.17.18 1 Ioh. 1.8.9.10 and 2.1.2 But should we therefore be perswaded to abide in knowen errors or to iustify such Churches as stand in the way and constitution of Antichrist Common sence might teach to reason otherwise and to discerne between things that differ so much as these doe one from another For our difference of judgement in some things if it were as he saith yet it would nothing availe them The * Act. 11. 15. and 21. Chap. Rom. 14. ch 1 Cor. 8. and 10. chap. Phil. 3.15.16 Christians in the Primitive Churches differed in iudgement amoÌ„g themselves in divers waighty things some concerning Iudaisme some concerning Paganisme c. And synce that tyme “ See the Acts and Mounuents c. the Martyrs in Queen Maryes dayes and former ages did in sundry things and those of great moment and concerning Antichrists religion differ in judgement one from another Should these therefore have approved and taken part with the Iewish Heathnish or Popish Churches in theyr other errors wherein they did joyntly see and witnesse the truth against them Or will he say there was therefore no equity in theyr dealing because they did it not Or that they were so vvholy given and bent theyr vvits and mynds so much to look into the estate of other men and other Churches and to apply the Scriptures to them as they seldome or never lookt into theyr ovvne estate or applyed the Scriptures to themselues Yet thus absurdly and vnconscionably doth this man reason against vs. Off which more hereafter Now for the particulars here mentioned the first which is of swearing by a book is an impudent vntruth so far as ever I knew or heard of any among vs. Not onely some but all of vs hold it simply vnlawfull to sweare by a book It is * Deut. 6.13 the Name of the Lord onely by which all men ought to sweare Thus we do all professe and practise In deed about the ceremony of laying the hand vpon the book thereby to signify that we do take the oath there hath ben question some thinking that it might be so done as †Gen. 24.2.3.9 Abrahams servant when he took an oath put his hand vnder his Maisters thigh and persware vnto him onely by the Lord God of heaven and earth or as Abraham did himself lift vp his hand to the Lord when he sware or vowed vnto him as we read Gen. 14.22 Others thinking that because it hath ben superstitiously abused and still may nourish in the ignorant the error of swearing by the book that therefore it should not be done 1. Thes 5.22 And notwithstanding this difference yet all of vs for the reasons last alleadged think it better to be left then retayned still and some other ceremony free from such pollution and daunger as the lifting vp of the hand to heaven or such like to be vsed instead thereof For probates of vvils taking of administration suing c. some it may be think that the things themselves being in theyr nature meerly Civill and the ordering of them being put over to the Doctors and Professors of the Civill Law they might thus far be admitted And this so much the rather because if all the Popish Hierarchy and Canons were quite abolished out of the Land as they ought to be Yet an order for these things notwithstanding were still to be had and such as are skilfull in the Civill Law might be employed thereyn aswell as any other of the Common wealth being by the Prince and Magistraeâ—s appoynted therevnto Others thinking that inasmuch as these causes Courts aÌ„d Officers are now in theyr estate committed to the Prelates whose functions are meerly Antichristian that therefore they should not be admitted at all Yet here agayne all of vs agree in this that the whole Hierarchy with whatsoever belongeth thereto is wholy to be abandoned and refused and no spirituall communion to be had therewith at all For shutting vp of shops on Holy dayes and Festivall dayes c. as he doth Popishly terme them What if some think that our bodyes goods and lands being subiect in the Lord as they ought to the Magistrates that therefore they may at theyr appointment then shift by theyr shops as they do on the Queens day or such like solemnityes And others think that forasmuch as theyr Holydayes both are popish dayes and popishly vsed for theyr divine worship that therefore they should not shut vp theyr shops on these dayes more then any other Yet all agree in this that these dayes though the Prince commaund it never so straily are no more to be set apart or vsed for publik worship then any other of the sir week-dayes Also that they need not leave theyr work any more on those dayes then any other whatsoever These are the particulars he nameth If he could have mentioned any other of greater moment you may be sure they should not have ben omitted Let him know then that we â—o and ought
to account it among the mercyes of God towards vs that our difference in judgement is but such specially considering that there is so great a mostery of iniquity in the religion of Antichrist throughout al the parts thereof as iff it were possible the very elect should be deceived that we are as it were but newly and as per weakly come out of that spirituall Babylon that the particulars here obiected were never publikly debated and disenssed among vs that as the Primitive Churches so ours have ben exercised not onely with many other questions and controversyes but with sundry perverse hypocriticall contentious and fantasticall spirits which have much troubled vs and caused the truth to be evill spoken of they creeâ—ing in at first vnder a show of Holones and so for a tyme continewing vntill God by one meanes or other discovered them and in his tyme cast them out from among vs finally that than the best on earth know here but in part 1 Cor. 13.9.12 and therefore no marvell if discerning but according to the measure we have receyved and this measure bring divers in every one our judgements many tymes and in sundry things differ vntill God reveale more and further Besides that even by this meanes we might learne to beare one with another and if any will yet be contentious that they might know we have no such custome nor the Churches of God The vse then that we are to make of such difference of judgement is not that we should therefore abide in knowen errors our selves or approve knowen evill in others or joyne with any false worship and Ministery in the service of God or refuse any truth revealed vnto vs wherein we do all agree in one but that being delivered out of the power of darknes which is in the Kingdome of Sathan and Antichrist we should walk together as children of the light holding forth the truth wherevnto we are come joyntly and faithfully agaynst all adversaryes thereof and wayting with pacyence till God reveale further for the more vniting of our mynds wherein any shall yet differ one from another And this doth the Scripture teach aÌ„d warrant vnto vs Phil. 3.15.16 Rom. 14.5.6 But now if any erring in theyr judgement do not so rest in peace but will needs proceed further to spread theyr difference among the brethren to vrge and pursue the practise thereoff to disquyet the rest that are contrary mynded to refuse communion with the Church vnles they would ioyne or consent vnto them therein then are such being first convinced and remayning obstinate to be further proceded withall by the Church as the case and theyr cariage shall requier And that so as if any be found but to be contentious they are euen therefore to be reproved and if they cease not to be cast out and removed from the Church For which see 1 Cor. 11.16 Gal. 5.12 Math. 18.17 Rom. 2.8 Iam. 3 13-18 Thus we are perswaded and thus we walk and practise Now let the Reader iudge how frivolous this his obiection is seing there may be sundry things wherein the brethren of the same Church may differ in iudgement among themselves and yet notwithstanding walk togeather in the same faith testimony and fellowship wherein God hath vnited theyr mynds none of them being contentious to disquyet the Church or the members thereof and all being ready to receyve the truth which God by his word shall further make knowen whatsoever it be And this I dare boldly say that whosoever shall not thus hold and walk they shall not onely condemne the Apostles and Primitive Churches together with the Martyrs whose examples I alledged before but shall fynd by experience that neyther any Churches neyther so much as two or three men shall ever be able to keep fellowship any while together among themselves Note also that when such please themselves most in theyr contentions and confusions thinking they do God service therein even then they do most displease him who is the God not of confusion but of peace as we see in all the Churches of the Saints 1 Cor. 14.33 This I thought needfull to write being thus occasioned concerning this poynt I could also put him in mynd of the manifold and vnreconciliable difference of iudgement which is in theyr Church and the members thereof between the Prelates Reformists Newters and Ambo-dexters with the like But I will not stand vpon it Mynd but here what Mr Iacob professeth openly in the Treatise following Pag. 69. viz. that the things vvhich the State of theyr Church holdeth to be Christs ovvne he holdeth to be Antichrists Then which what can be more contrary Will they now therefore affoard that favour to the Papists Anabaptists and other Antichristians which they would should be affoarded to themselves namely That as they would be accounted true Christians through theyr faith in Christ notwithstanding theyr errours which they must acknowledge are infinite many euen in theyr Church-constitution so they should account of the aforesaid Antichrists and others in the like case Or will he now say that euen common sence and humanity vvould requier them to graunt this When he is at leysure to write such an other Preface in defence of Mr Iacob and himself as he hath done this in defence of theyr Churches then it will be tyme ynough to impresse this thing a litle better in theyr mynds In the meane tyme this may suffice to shew how senceles and vnreasonable theyr reasoning and dealing is By the marks of the Beast spoken of Reu. 14. we vnderstand the defection and constitutions of the man of sinne spoken of 2 Thes 2 3-12 1 Tim. 4.1.2.3 And that for these causes 1. Because these Scriptures speak of one and the same estate aÌ„d apostasy of Antichrist 2. Because the Beasts marks are in “ Rev. 14.9.12 this place of the Revelation directly opposed to the commaundements of God and faith of Iesus So that as Gods commaundements for his people so the ordinances of Antichrist also for his are as signes and marks by which such as receyve or refuse them may we ll be discerned and knowen Exod. 13.7.9.10.12.16 and Deut. 11.18 vvith Rev. 14.9.12 3. Because the Apostle to Timothy nameth in particular the forbidding of meats and Mariage which are part of Antichrists constitutions as vndoubted marks of that departure from the faith 1. Tim. 4.1.3 4. Because the many particulars concerning the apostasy of the Man of sinne mentioned in the Epistle to the Thessalonians are such as are both opposed to the ordinance of Christ and evident marks of the defection and body of Antichrist 2. Thes 2 3-12 Towching which and other Scriptures viz. 1. Ioh. 4.1.3 and 2 Ioh. ver 7.9.10 Dan. 7.8.25 Rev. 13.11 describing also the marks of the Beast Antichrist I have written in * A treatise of the Min. of the Char. of Engl. Pag. 7. 12. 26. c. another Treatise more purposely which may there be seen Here I will onely
annexe the testimony of one of the Martyrs a good while synce when Antichrist as yet was but a litle discovered in respect as synce that tyme he hath ben One of the Articles against Iohn Claydon who was burned at London in Smithfield in the yeare 1415 was this That the Bisshops licence for a man to preach the vvord of God is the true character of the Beast that is Antichrist Where marke that albeit a man preach the word of God yet he sayth the Bishops licence so to do is the Beasts marke Act. and Monum edit 5. Pag. 588. b. Thus much I thought to write here also concerning this poynt Yet if D. B. or Mr Iacob for him who do both of them receyve and carry daily the Beasts marks in theyr foreheads and hands and therefore may well have sure knowledge thereof can shew them any better from the word of God I shall willingly heare it And seing that here he wisheth we knew the marks of the Beast a litle better we do also entreat him if his leasure and ability will serve to make them a litle better knowen vnto vs. But I doubt it will now be found in him and the rest of them at this day as Mr Ridley that faithfull Martyr found and complayned in his tyme saying I feare me nay it is certayne the World that wanteth the light of the Spirit of God for the world is not able to receyve him sayth Iohn neyther doth nor shall know the Beast nor his marks though he rage cruelly and live never so beastly and though his marked men be in number like the sand of the sea Act. and Mon. 5. edit Pag. 1618. b. To conclude this matter then may I not well returne theyr ovvne speach vpon themselves and say Surely they are for the most part so wholy given and bend their wits and mynds so much to look into the estate of other men and other Churches and to apply the Scriptures to them as they seldome or never look into their owne estate or apply the Scriptures to themselues But let them look vnto it it will be theyr decay in the end That all errors are alike is a fancy of his owne We did neuer imagine it We know and professe otherwise To give but one instance The Iewes the Arrians the Papists the Mungrell-protestants the Lutherans the Anabaptists c. do all of them at this day erre very greatly concerning the Person or Office of Iesus Christ who is “ 1 Cor. 3.11 the onely foundation of the Church Yet we know theyr errors are not all alike Some are greater some lesser some in one poynt some in another But this we say that all theyr errors are such as every faithfull Christian ought to eschew them and to witnes the contrary truth against them vnto death as they will aunswer to God at that day His obiection likewise of all the commaundements of God to be obeyed alike c. is of his owne coyning I do not think that ever he heard it of any of vs or that he did ever see it in any of our writings If he did he may shew it We know that Christ speaking of the dutyes of the first Table sayth This is first and the great commaundement Mat. 22.39 And that therefore the duâ—â—es of the second table must alway give place to the first as to the greater Math. 10.37.39 Luk. 14.26 Act. 20.24 Except when the mercy commaunded in the second is to be preferred before the ceremonyes required in the first and such like Hos 6.6 vvith Mat. 12 1-7 Luk. 13.14.17 We acknowledge also there is difference in the commaundements of the first Table when they are compared together one with another And in the commaundements likewise of the Second And consequently therefore in the dutyes required in both for our obedience These things are so well knowen as they may learne them of very children Note withall that we are bound to keep not onely the greatest of the commaundements of God but even the very least notwithstanding any perswasion prohibition or persecution to the contrary because they are all from one and the same God with commaundement to obey them all and every one and that vnder payne of damnation Therefore also Christ sayd The Second is like to the first and great commaundement Math. 22.39 Now iff any in this sence do say that all the Scriptures and commaundements of God are fundamentall and to be obeyed alike it may well be vnderstood according to that saying of our Lord Iesus before alledged Mat. 22.38.39.40 Otherwise there is difference to be put as is aforesaid in the dutyes both of the two Tables themselves and of the severall commaundements of each of them His inserting of these two words the Scriptures and fundamentall when he saith that all the Scriptures and commaundements of God are fundamentall and to be obeyed alike I will not now further stand vpon It seemeth he did it for some evasion Which I doubt not but his next Reply if he be not already at a Non plus will make more manifest Till then let this suffice which hath ben said The place of 1 Cor. 3.12.15 both he and Mr Iacob do misvnderstand and misalledge The Apostel speaketh not there of any false doctrine or errors built vppon the foundation but of the entising speach of mans wisdome and vayne eloquence off words By which it came to passe that although they taught nothing but the truth and so buylt vpon the foundation Iesus Christ yet they did it vnworthily and not as became the simplicity of the Gospell of Christ That this is the true and playne meaning of the Apostles speach appeareth thus 1 Cor. 2. 3 chap. 1. First by comparing together the second and third chapters of this Epistle Where all may see that he speaketh not a worde of any error or vntruth that was taught but of the simplicity on the one hand and of the ostentation of speach and humane wisdome on the other which was vsed by the Teachers of Corinth in theyr building vpon the foundation that is in theyr teaching of the truth of Iesus Christ 2. Secondly for that the very terme * 1 Cor. 3.10 here vsed by the Apostle concerneth directly the maner of teaching or building vpon the foundation not the matter taught or built vpon it His words are these Let euery man take heed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hovv he buildeth vpon it The word which he vseth here is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hovv for the manner not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvhat for the matter 3. Thirdly because for the matter taught the Apostle doth els where give another rule concerning all teachers of errors and false doctrine though they should be Angels from heaven viz. to give them no countenance at all neyther to have any communion with them but to separate from them and hold them accursed 1 Tim. 6 3.4.5 Gal. 1.8.9 Rom. 16.17.18 2 Ioh ver 10.11 Rev. 22.18.19
of themselues raylers murmurers malicious covetous presumptuous lascivious hypocriticall vnstable discontended and such like persons alledgeth the Prophecyes Scriptures examples which were before of them in Enochs tyme of the vnbeleuing Iewes the Sodomites evill Angels Cain Balaam Corah c. Iud. Epist vvith Gen. 3.1 and 4 3-16 and 19 1-25 Numb 14. and 16. and 22. chap. c. Now in these as in the rest and many other so alledged in the Scriptures may divers differences be observed Yet are they all notwithstanding fit and pertinent for that wherevnto they apply them Neyther can any be ignorant but that there will be difference eyther of time place cause sexte persons things maner or such like circumstance in any allegations and yet they be pertinent nevertheles It is not materiall then though some differences might be noted between the case of England and theyrs of whom those Scriptures speak seing notwithstanding they do fitly prove that for which they are alledged Let the Reader also mynd here an old Popish shift whereby they labour to turne away the evidence of any Scripture that is vrged against theyr corruptions viz by noting some difference between theyr case and such as the Scriptures alledged speak of This you may see every where in theyr Rhemish notes on the New Testament and in all the rest of theyr books and defence of theyr Church and religion But now further to make the abuse of his lips yet the more manifest marke that the very Scriptures here mentioned by himself speak not onely of the vvhole body and povver of Heathen and Antichristian religion as he pretendeth but of every particular ordinance and vncleane thing belonging therevnto For thus they speak expressely Tovvch no vncleane thing Keep all myne ordinances and all my iudgements Be ye cleane Partake not in her sinnes c. By all which is most plainely forbidden all maner of partaking not of the whole onely but of every parcell of Antichrists or any other false worship whatsoever As to the second difference which he noteth here of theyr vvilfulnes rebellion obstinacy partaking vvith the lavvfull and good things vsed among them c. it is handled and answered in the Treatise following Pag. 42. 43. 88. 108. 130. 132 161. 170. 171. 175. 180. The particulars which he citeth out of the Evangelists towching the Iewes are the speaches and testimony of reproof given vnto them by Christ whē now he threatned to take away from them his kingdome because of those sinnes and other the like among them Mat. 21.43 This man himself knoweth we never doubted but true Churches might fall into errour and the members thereof walk corruptly in which respect they are subiect to be reproved And yet notwithstanding the Church constitution and functions be lawfull and ioyned withall vntill they refuse the voyce of Christ and will not be reclaymed Rev. 2. and 3. Math. 21. and. 23. Act. 2. and 13. and 17. and. 28. chap. Wherevnto when once they come then are all taught to separate and save themselves from such a froward generation Act. 2.40 and 13.46.47 19.9 Esa 8 12.-16 Now if we may separate from such as have ben true Churches when they so fall into sinne and persist as is aforesayd notwithstanding that otherwise they professe many Doctrines of truth how much more may and ought we to separate from all false Churches which stād in the apostasy of Antichrist that Man of sinne howsoever they professe some truth withall 2 Thes 2 3-12 vvith Rev. 18.4 Ezech. 16.44 But of the difference both of the estate and dealing with true Churches and false compared together as also of the weaknes and falsehood of this māner of reasoning which here he vseth I have other where spokē sufficiently both in this Treatise following to which he referreth vs Pag. 92. 161. 195. and in another already published viz. A Treatise of the Ministery of England Pag. 45. 61 62. Note withall that none of the Evangelists neyther any other Scriptures do shew that Christ or the Prophets did at any tyme communicate with the Iewes in any evill but alway reproved them Whereas it is not possible that any should communicate with the Church of England though it be in theyr best things even of the Ministery of the Word Sacraments Prayer etc. but they must needs partake in evill As namely with the Hierarchy Leiturgy confusion and other sinnes of Antichrist that sonne of perdition Let him shew the contrary in any one thing among them iff he can And of this also see more hereafter Pag. 170. 171. 180. Finally let him tell vs if he have said any thing here which they in K. Henry the eight his dayes might not have alledged when the Popes supremacy with much of his religion besides was cast out of the Land and yet they oppugned the truth in many things and became drunken with the blood of the Martyrs notwithstanding D. B. his Preface to the Reader Section 5. Obiection But vnto the examples of these Churches me thinkes I heare already that common aunsvver and last refuge of theyrs vvhich is this Those Churches say they were in a true outward constitution And therefore were the true Churches of Christ notwithstanding those grosse errors which they held in other poincts of doctrine and practise But contrariwise say they the Churches of England have a false outward constitution and therefore they are no true Churches of Christ notwithstanding theyr truthes of doctrine c. Ansvver So the outvvard constitution is the maine poinct on vvhich they vvholy depend and for vvhich they vvholy condempne the Churches of England from being true Christians in state of salvation VVhich I doubt not plainly to take avvay 1 And first concerning the constitution of the Ievvish Churches If vve should examine the same vve should finde that it vvas as greatly altered and corrupted as is the constitution of the Churches of England Tvvo high Priests having by simonie crept in at once vvhich vvas vnlavvfull and contrarie to Gods ordinance notvvithstanding their gloses in their other ‡ ‡ 9. Reasons vvritinges to allovv them to be lavvfull by * * 2 Chrō 24 2.3 Zadok and Abimelech and by ††2 King 24.18 Seruiah the chief Prieste Zephaniah the Second vvhich make against themselues For there vvas never but one high Priest as they confesse * * Ansvver to Mr Hild. Pag. 50. Ergo not tvvo as here vvere the rest vvere indeed inferior to him And yet amongst those there vvas a chiefly also vvho vvere called sometimes Second Priests or Priests of the Second order 2. King 23.4 and sometimes chief Priests Math. 27.1 These Scriptures being compared vvith those in the margin by them cited doe make it more plaine Novv if the chief offices vvere so corrupted and altered through couetousnes as the Histories make mention It is not likely that the inferior offices did remaine sound but vvere asmuch or more altered The Priests generally being such couetous
Church of England be not off the the very same stampe with Mr Hookers for the Church of Rome Thus what by the Prelates and theyr Proctors on the one hand and these Pharisaicall dawbing Reformists on the other theyr case is come to be such as all may iustly feare least the end of that Church will be to look back not onely in part but euen wholy to the Romish Egypt and Sodom and to wallow agayne in the same myer from which they would seem aâ— this tyme to hâ—â—â—e â—en washed For it is just with God to make such eate the fruit of there owne way and to fill them with theyr owne devises Prov. 1.31 And what other thing do the books pretences practise and declining of all sorts both Ministers and people among them â—â—rtend Yet Lord thou God of power and Father of mercy work better things for them and among them if it be thy will To that which D. B. pretendeth next of keping communion vvith them in things lavvfull it being likewise objected by Mr Iacob I haue answered in the Treatise ensuing Pag. 88. 170. 171. 180. Here onely I aske First what one lawfull thing they have that we have not Secondly in what one thing which he counteth lawfull we can have communion with them in that estate and not sinne against God by partaking withall in the apostasy of the man of sinne Of all other things it is most like he will say that we might heare many comfortable truths taught by theyr Preachers and many good prayers conceyved by them Yet such is their case as we can not do this neyther but we must needs partake with the Ministery of Antichrist all theyr Preachers even the best being Priests and Deacons so made by the Prelates Of which see more in the latter Treatise following Pag. 188. c. Not to speak here any further of it or of theyr Book-worship taken out of the Popes Masse-book according to which they administer the Sacraments marry bury pray c. or of the compulsion of all maner people even the most wicked to be members of theyr Church or of theyr Church discipline being in the hands of the Prelates and by the Canon Law or finally of the severall offices entrance ministration maintenance of theyr whole Hierarchy To none of which can any joyne or submit in any part of Gods worship but they must needs partake in evill even in the sinnes of Babylon and of Antichrist that sonne of perdition Such is their constitution and such is the standing of all that continew therein Of his last pretence tovvching diversity of judgement by reason whereof he would perswade to keep communion with them I have spoken * In the Ansvver to Section 3. here a litle before To which now I will adde this onely that his collection herevpon viz. that we should therefore keep communion with the Ministery and confusion of Antichrist for of what els speaketh he if he speak to the poynt in question is most absurd and vngodly And will not Hooker think you for his Christian Papists and some such as Hadrianus for the Anabaptists perswade likewise And what then are we the nearer Or what will these men do in the end hereof Ier. 5.31 This then is not rightly to vse that diversity of judgement wherevnto in many things all Churches and Christians in deed are continually subiect here on earth but ignorantly to abuse it But herevnto it may be ‡ Da. Buck. this man was driven eyther by weaknes of iudgement in himself or by eagernes of contention and malice agaynst vs of whome he hath sometymes ben but now for his revolting from the truth and so persisting is according to the * 1 Cor. 5.4.5.11.12.13 1 Tim. 1.19.20 Mat. 18.17.18.20 Scriptures and ordinance of Christ cast out from among vs and delivered vnto Sathan for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. Which mercy the Lord Almighty vouchsafe him in Christ from whom he hath declined vnto Antichrist And this is all the harme I wish vnto him or any such even theyr repentance and salvation in Christ Iesus Hitherto of the Preface prefired to Mr Iacobs book Which I have answered somewhat largely from poynt to poynt rather for the satisfying of others then for any waight I judged to be in it my self Now it is tyme that I returne to Mr Iacob himself and deale with him in particular by whom I am spoken vnto and challenged by Name almost in every page of his book As if he had forgotten the old Proverbe which sayth Let not him boast himself that girdeth his harness as he that putteth it off Here then seing that this discourse came first from him to the view of the world and that also without my aunswer to his last Reply let the Reader call to mynd that which is written He that is first in his ovvne cause is iust then cometh his neighbour and maketh inquiry of him Prov. 18.17 So as he now having told his owne tale first and seming to some no doubt to be iust therein it is nedefull that I therefore come in the next place and make inquiry of him Which I do in the Treatise following submitting it now to the judgement of others to be examined of all by the word of God 1 Cor. 2 12-16 1 Thes 5.21 By it therefore do thou ChristiaÌ„ Reader try all things therein and keep that which is good Have no prejudice I pray thee eyther of Mr Iacob or my self but heare vs both speak and then consider what is spoken on eyther side from poynt to poynt And the Lord give thee vnderstanding in all things There is but one way of truth to life eternall And that is in no other but the Lord Iesus Christ Ioh. 14.6 who hath said I am the vvay the truth and the life If therefore the Churches of England as now they stand be in that good and old way prescribed by Christ wherein the Primitiue Churches were planted by the Apostles then doubtles then are in the way of truth that leadeth vnto life Yet this hath not Mr Iacob shewed in all his discourse Ier. 6.16 But now on the contrary if the Churches of England in theyr estate have in the Ioynes off the Church of Rome and with it departed from that auncyent and good way of Christ and do even vnto this day stand in the apostasy of Antichrist and that in theyr publik Ministery worship ordinances confusion of people c. then can they not so standing be assured by the word of God that they are in the way of truth which leadeth vnto life but in the by-wayes of errour which cary headlong to death and perdition 2 Thes 2.3.10.12 1 Tim. 4.1.3 Rev. 13.11 17.1.2 22.18.19 vvith Exod 20.4.5 For which cause all the people of God are bound to separate from them and not to partake in any of theyr sinnes least they receyve also of
their plagues Rev. 18.4 And if it be well mynded Mr Iacob himself howsoever he pretend otherwise yet in deed yeeldeth thus much when he is driven to confesse that theyr constitution is such * Pag. 37. 61 69. 70. 84. 154. as they stand in error and that of Antichrist against the Second commaundement in vayne vvorship departing from and denying the faith in their Ministery c. But for these and all the rest thou mayest see and I pray thee good Reader well to mynd the Arguments Replyes and Aunswers following From the reading whereof I will not not now any longer hold thee The God of peace tread Sathan vnder thy feet and by his word and Spirit lead thee into the way of truth to the conservation of thy soule vnto life eternall And if thou reapest any fruit of my labours give prayse vnto God and pray for me the weakest of his servants and vnworthyest of the witnesses of Iesus The grace of our Lord Iesus Christ be with thy spirit Amen Thyne in Christ Fran Iohnson AN AVNSWER TO M. H. IACOBS ARGVMENTS AND REPLIES concerning the Churches and Ministery of ENGLAND Chap. 1. Of the Title of Maister Iacobs Book which is thus A DEFENCE of the Churches and Ministerie of ENGLAND FRAN. IOHNSON his Aunsvver THe defence of the Churches and Ministery of England were an enterprise worth the taking in hand if Maister Iacob effected in deed what the Title of his Book pretendeth in show But he that readeth his book and mindeth it well shall find him promise mountaines and performe molehils Let the sequell shew it Now I would that Maister Iacob should speak himself without stammering what Churches and what Ministerie of ENGLAND he defendeth All or some only It is a poynt needfull to be knowen and mentioned All may see it would giue great light for deciding the controuersy betwen vs. And who would not think he should readily declaer it Yet he flies from it every where Therefore that he may not alway so doe but may be drawen to answer directly vnto it as also for the Readers better help and more clearing of the truth I wil particulerly and as plainely as I can describe how the Churches and Ministerie of England are to be considered And thē expect his aunswer If I be mistaken or if maister Iacob and such as liue in that Church who therefore haue better occasion to know it can do it more fully and plainely I shal willingly heare it In the meane time this is my iudgment First for the Churches to consider them as followeth 1 In respect of the Conuocation-house which consisteth of the Prelates and some other of the Priests assembled togeather with them And so they haue but one Church in the Land And that when there is a Parliament or like occasion I take it also that out of this Church the Prince the Nobles and people are excluded Saue that when they haue determined their matters they haue for some of them the consent of the Parliament 2 According to the number of their Archbishops and so they haue two Metropolitan Churches vnder which all the rest are subiect and cōprised 3 According to the number of their Arch and Lord Bishops and so there are about 26. Churches comprehending all within their seuerall Diocesses Hither also I referre the Cathedrall Churches 4 According to the ecclesiastical Courts of the Archbs. Lordbs Chancelors Archdeacons Commissaries and Officials vnder which all the other Ministers and people stand subiect and so according to the number of those Courts there may be some 200. Churches or thereabout 5 According to the number of the Parish assemblies of which all stand mēbers and so ther are many thousād Churches in the Land Hitherto of the Churches The Ministery may be considered two wayes Eyther more generally as they are all Priests or Deacons or more particularly as they are superiour or inferiour Superiour as Archbishops Lordbishops Suffraganes Deanes Archdeacons and the rest of that sort Inferiour as Parsons Vicars Curates Stipendary Preachers Houshold Chapleynes and the like Then in al these consider fower things 1. their office 2. their entrāce 3. their Administration 4. their maintenance This for the Ministerie Now let M. Iacob tell vs in his next 1. whether he defend all these Churches and Ministerie of England or but some of them 2. If not all but some only which then they are that he defendeth and which he leaveth as vtterly vnlawfull without all defence 3. For those he defendeth let him show in what place and pages of his book we may find the defence of them For whether it be that I perceyue it not or that he doth it not of this I am sure for my self that I cannot find in al his book so much as any one of them defended As others find let thē speak And to put al out of doubt let M. Iacob shew it Lastly if he will be intreated let him tell the cause why his book being entituled A defence of the Churches Ministerie of England came not out Cum priuilegio Yea why it was printed beyond sea and not in England It is a shrewd token cōsidering the title that his Defence euen at home amōg his neighbours is accoūted very weak and simple For the name Brownists by which we are reproched in the forefrōt of his book note these things 1. That in like manner long since by the Priests and Pharisees were the Apostles and Primitiue Churches termed * Act. 24.5 a sect of Nazarites and at this day by the Papists are the Professors of the Gospel called Calvinists Zuinglians Huguenotes and the like 2. M. Browne from whose name this byword was first taken vp is a member and Minister of M. Iacobs Church not of ours yet holding as we heare in his iudgment the truth we professe but for his practise stāding in the apostasy and false worship wherein they are So then not we but M. Iacob and such like may fitly be called Brownists inasmuch as in their iudgment they hold the things we stand for to be good yet in their practise like Browne are other men walking with the Church of England in her euill way 3. For our selues we acknowledg with the disciples in the Primitiue Churches and the faithful in al ages since that we are ‡ Act. 11.26 Christians striuing now for our time and estate against the remainder of the abominations of Antichrist to keep the commaundements of God and faith of Iesus Therefore doth it not trouble vs that by M. Iacob or any other we are thus reuiled for the name of Christ It is inough for vs that the †1 Pet. 4.14 spirit and truth of God which on their part is euil spoken of is on our part glorified But yet let him and all such take heed vnto it in time Now I proceed to his maine and maimed Argument Which is as followeth Chap. 2. M. IACOBS ARGVMENT as it is novv propounded and printed by vvhich
three generall pointes 1. That euerie person in England holding our publique faith is no true Christian 2. That all the Christians Churches in King Edwards time namely Maister Cranmer M. Ridley M. Hooper M. Latimer M. Philpot M. Saunders M. Rogers M. Tailor c. were all lims of Antichrist and no true Chaistians 3. That euery soule in England is conuicted in conscience that the PraelaÌ„cie is vnlawfull and vntolerable The First of these is our maine question and the ground of all our reasoning which you gainsay The second though it be not expresly spoken yet it is directly euidently and vndeniably concluded by all and euery of your arguments against vs. As in the seueralls hereafter we shal see The third you are driueÌ„ vnto for defence of your former Assertion which els falleth to the grounde And this you affirme flatly in your defence of your 1. 6. and 7. Reasons Now my desire is that all men would take notice of these your 3. Assertions and consider indifferently whether they proceed from an honest a sober or a Christian minde And you M. Iohnson if you list hereafter to say any more defend these 3. pointes directly and plainly that your aunswers may be briefer and more certain then now they are And novv I come to the particular examination of your former aunsvver First you say You omitted the PropositioÌ„ before not for the soundnes of it but only because you would see how I meant it Why He that hath but half an eie may see the meaning of those wordes where is no darknes nor doubtfulnes of sence at all What fault finde you in it now Forsooth first a want in Assumption and then vntruthes both in the Proposition and Assumption of my Sillogisme There vvanteth you say that I should expresse in the AssumptioÌ„ That our Assemblies be companies gatherd togeather in the doctrines ordinances which we all by lawe publiquely professe and practise Who but a wrangler would not vnderstand that I meant so much Nay doe not my expresse wordes implie asmuch when I say We by law publiquelie professe and practise them Then are not our Assemblies which are by law gathered together in this professioÌ„ power Fy forshame these are sencelesse cauilations But because what in me lieth I would not haue you any more to stumble at a strawe Not that the Argument is vnsound vvithout this addition But because the Reader may see hovv you vvil play at a small game rather then sit out â—â—aâ—unt I haue to satisfie you withall now added those wordes to the Assumption aforesaid in a contrarie letter which you desire viz. and our publique assemblies are therein gathered together Secondly you say that my proposition meaneth that whatsoeuer is held togeather with that which otherwise might make a true Christian or true Church Yet notwithstanding they are so to be reputed as if there were no such additions or commixtures O strange dealing in all my writing I haue no such word no sillable no letter sounding to that sence I haue directly contrarie in my aunswer to your fourth ReasoÌ„ as your self noteth there Yet you M. Iohnson without all shame in the view of the world doe Father on me this foule vntruth most sencelesse errour in your first entrance Further whereas it seemeth you reproue my Proposition requiring to to haue it set thus Whatsoeuer is sufficient to make a perticular man a true Christian and hath nothing added with it destroying the foundation of faith That is sufficient to make a companie so gathered together a true Church You must know M. Iohnson that that were an idle vaine addition for wheresoeuer there are any such things added destroying faith there whatsoeuer els seemeth sufficient indeed it is not sufficient to make a true Christian Wherefore nodum inscirpo quaeris this is to finde a knot in a rush Thus much concerning the trunes of my Proposition The AssuÌ„ption examined by the Exceptions Reasons follovving Lastlie you come to deny my Assumption or rather to maintaine your deniall heretofore giuen Where first note that by denying my assumption you affirme the first generall point noted in this beginning That euerie particular person in England holding our publique faith here is no true Christian Which O Lorde who would not tremble to think on Euen that which this man aboue two yeates agoe affirmed and novv againe aduisedly and wilfully defendeth I take Heauen and Earth to record this day whether this be not desperate madnes yea or no. But let vs examine your exceptions and reasoÌ„s against my Assumption more particularly wee shall see what stuffe it is Your first exception against the same is as followeth Fr. Iohnson his 3. Aunâ—wer VVHat M. Iacob Doth your mouth so runne ouer as you could not but eueÌ„ at first speak vntruth and forge deceit When your beginning is so bad it is an ill token the end will not be very good You would here father vpoÌ„ me three things which I neuer imagined as they are by you collected Therefore to cleare the truth and sâ—op your mouth I will declare what my mind is and hath ben concerning them For the first your wordes are That euerie person in England holding your publique faith is no true Christian Touching this point I mind the estate of your people two waies The one concerning their severall persons considered a part from the constitution of your Church the other concerning their estate and standing in that constitution Concerning the former of these that is considering them apart from the constitution I acknowledge that in diuers of them there appeareth such knowledg and faith of the gospel with the frutes thereof as they may well be thought in regard of Gods election in Christ to be heires of saluation and in that respect to be true Christians God pardoning vnto them their standing vnder Antichrist which they doe not see or mind But withall I feare least many mo heretofore were pertakers of this grace then be now since your Antichristian estate and the vnlawfulnes to abide therein hath bin discouered Concerning the latter that is in respect of their estate and standing in that constitution of your Church I am perswaded whosoeuer so stand holding your publique faith and multitude of Antichristian abhominations withall they cannot by the word of God be iudged true Christians as touching their outward estate in that church of yours but stand all subiect to wrath God imputing this their sinne vnto them And that all therefore who will be assured of Gods mercie and saluation ought with speed to goe out of your Church it still remaining in Antichristian estate To make this matter more plaine take out of Israell an example in Abiiah the sonne of Ieroboam If you consider him as standing with the rest in that apostasie and Church-constitution of Israell he is subiect to like condemnation with them in that estate But if you consider him apart from it as there is found
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
His 1. Reply to the 7. Reason folloing The Papists forbidding of mariage and meats if they had done no vvorse doth not make them departers from the faith totally No more could their Hierarchy and ceremonies simply Neither doe these things make vs the Protestants to be such These and many mo you haue in your first Reply besides an hundred the like in the second not only sounding to that sence but directly and necessarily implying it And whereas you have sometimes the contrary as I noted * His 1. Reply to the 4 Reason follovving els where that doth but so much the more shew your inconstancy and contradiction of your self Shall I therefore now turne vpon you your owne words and say O strange dealing vvithout all shame in the vievv of the vvorld to father on me this foule vntruth c. Yet I am glad M. Iacob the truth prevaileth so much with you nill ye will ye as you are driuen to confesse that this assertion is a foule vntruth and senceles errour For herevpon it followeth first that your Proposition is not generall and therefore your whole Argument faulty and to no purpose at al for the question in hand secondly that of necessity there should be some clause ānexed to your Proposition touching the Antichristian abhominations among you if you would haue your Reason good for the estate of your Churches But you account such addition would be idle and vaine I easily beleeue you are so minded But why I pray you thinke you so Is it because you did not at first mind it or because now you see it would discouer to euerie man the vanitie of your Reason Howsoeuer it must be expressed And if your self either know not how to doe it or be vnwilling I will show it Mark now therfore Hovv Mr Iacobs Argument should be propounded Whatsoeuer is sufficient to make a particular man a true Christian and in state of saluation that is sufficient to make a company so gathered together to be a true Church of Christ though they retaine vvithall in their constitution the Hierarchy Leiturgy and confusion of Antichrist But the vvhole doctrine as it is publikly * Book of Articles published Anno 1562 professed and practised by Lavv in England is sufficient to make a particular man a true Christian and in state of saluatiō And the publik Assemblyes of England are in their estate companyes so gathered together Therefore it is also sufficient to make the publik Assemblyes of England true Churches of Christ though they retaine vvithall in their constitution the Hierarchy Leiturgy and confusion of Antichrist Or thus rather If the vvhole doctrine as it is publikly professed and practised by Lavv in England be sufficient to make a particular man standing member of that Church which retaineth the Hierarchy Leiturgy and confusion of Antichrist yet notvvithstanding to be a true Christian and in state of saluation as tovvching his estate and standing in that Church then is it also sufficient to make a company so gathered together and consequently the Church of England to be a true Church of Christ as towching the estate and constitution thereof But the former say you is true Therefore also the latter But the former say I is false Therefore also the latter Thus M. Iacob should your Argument be framed in right forme of reasoning for the estate of your Church and for the question between vs. Which now being done who is so simple as cannot plainely see the falshood of both the Propositions in the former and of the Assumption in the latter and consequently the vanity of your Reason every way If you still hold otherwise then must we still call vpon you for proof Bare saying will not serue we looke for due proof Mind further that now as your case standeth you are to approve the estate of your Church and the members thereof not only as they retaine the abominatiōs of Antichrist but as they withstand also the contrary truth and way of Christ which hath ben a long time made known and offered vnto them Otherwise he that hath but half an eye may see you defēd not the present estate of the Churches of England as the title of your book pretendeth In that you say wheresoeuer there are any things added destroying faith there whatsoeuer els seemeth sufficient in deed is not sufficient to make a true Christian you are againe mistaken There may be in the constitution of a Church things added destroying faith and yet so much truth be held and taught as to some particular men cōsidered apart from the constitution is sufficient to make them true Christians and in state of saluation the other being not imputed vnto them by the Lord. Thus I doubt not hath * Thus haue I spoken to you Mr Iacob many tymes Yet see hovv you haue novv dealt vvith me contrary to your knovvledg God saued some in the most popish Churches and many mo in yours from time to time Yet notwithstanding this doth not iustifie the estate either of their or of your Church neither doth it warrant any to abide therein But it argueth partly the riches of Gods mercie partlie the greatnes of his power who as at first he brought light out of darknes so in the worst times and euen in the darke kingdome of Antichrist saueth them that are his But of this besides that already spoken there will be occasion to speak more ‡ In the handling of the second Exception and 7. Reason folloing hereafter Your bad dealing about the first rest of the general points aboue named I haue declared before In deed your self may tremble to think thereon as on your Antichristian estate also in that Church You I say M. Iacob who cannot be ignorant of both these things howsoever you haue advisedly if not also vvilfully now written otherwise Mind therefore if you haue not here took heauen and earth to record against your self and whether this be not desperate madnes yea or no. But let vs proceed to your Replies vpon the Exceptions and Reasons heretofore alledged against your Assumption And let the Reader mind without partialitie as before God which of vs haue the truth and accordingly let him walke in all good conscience before God and men Chap. 4. The first Exception against the Assumption aforesaid Fr. Iohnson FIrst consider the 19. Article of that doctrine and Book which by your self is alleadged for your defence and see by it if your profession and practize be not contrary one to an other Yea see if it be not manifest euen by it that you haue not a true visible Church of Christ The words of the Article are these Artic. 19. The visible Church of Christ is a Congregation of faithfull men in the which the pure vvord of God is preached and the Sacraments be duely ministred according to Christs ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same These are your owne words and
Church of England the abominations aforesayd concerning the outward order and gouernment of the Church whatsoever trueths they hold besides yet can they not by the word of God be deemed truely to hold the Lord Iesus their Prophet Priest King in such constitution of a Church Neither therefore can they in this estate by the vvord of God be accounted true Christians nor the true constituted Churches of Christ And this is all the question between vs. 7. Lastly let the godly and indifferent Reader iudge whether it will not follow vpon your aunswer in this place First that the Scriptures are not sufficient for the building vp and guidance of the Church here on earth Which is contary to 1 Tim. 3.15 2 Tim. 3.16 Deut. 12.32 1 Cor 4.6 Rev. 22.18.19 Secondly that the man of God can not by the Scriptures be made absolute and fully furnished to euery good worke Which is contrary to 2 Tim. 3.17 1 Tim. 3.15 Pro. 2.1.9 Psal 119.105.113 Thirdly that Christ himselfe in vvhome the treasures of vvisdome and knovvledge are hid yet was so foolish carelesse and vnfaithfull as having an house and kingdome which is his Church he hath not in his word appointed vnto it any Offices Lawes and Orders for the due governing and ordering thereof Which is contrary to Col. 2.3 Heb. 3.1.2.3 Esay 33.22 Ephe. 4.11.12.13 1 Cor. 11. 12. 14. Rom. 12.3.4.5.6.7.8 Mat. 28.20 1 Tim. 6.13.14.15 Finally that the Hierachy Worship Sacramēts Traditions Canons and vvhatsoeuer constitutions of Antichrist concerning the outvvard orders and gouernement of the Church being appointed by the Church and Magistrate are to be accounted Christes ovvne Which is contrary to 2 Cor. 6.14.15.16 Psa 94.20 119.21.113.128 Rev. 9.1.2.3 14.9 11. O shameles impietie This doubtles is that strange passion and meere desperatenes wherewith you do hereafter vniustly charge vs which we will not here prosecute as it deserveth but exhort you onely to take heed least that vvo come vpon you which is written VVoe vnto them that speake good of euill and euill of good which put darkenes for light and light for darknes that put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter VVo vnto them that are wise in their owne eyes and prudent in their owne sight Esay 5.20.21 H. Iacob his 2 Reply to the 2. Excep IN this your defence of your second Exception it pittieth me to see your extreame folly which is the more miserable because it appeareth to be not of weaknes but of wilfulnes You would know of vs if we hold Christ to be out Prophet Priest and King if we professe to obey him in his ordinances in no other I ansvvered vve do cōstantly professe so as vve professe so vve practise But to make our profession and practise in this poinct more manifest I noted hovv our state meaneth Christ to be our Prophet Priest and King and hovv he is to be obeyed viz. That the vvritten vvord ought of necessity to shevv vs our invvard and meer spirituall beleif and obedience As for the outvvard Church order our state holdeth that it is arbitrary to be appoincted and abrogated againe at the liking of the Church and Magistrate And that the worde no vvhere forbiddeth this libertie Where note in this explication tvvo thinges First it is foule vvrong to our Churches and to my vvordes to say as you do That they meane no outward orders at all be matters of faith or constant in the Scriptures Nay it vvas neuer doubted but to preach to pray to administer Sacraments c. though external yet are perpetuall things and necessarie and vnchangeable by the Scriptures My expresse vvords and our Churches meaning is That any reasonable kinde of Church-gouernement and rites and orders are arbitrary and changeable no matters of faith nor written in the Scriptures And yet still Christ to be our onely and absolute King and Prophet neuerthelesse Whosoeuer doth vrge vpon our Churches further or on my wordes doth slaunder and cauill and malitiously depraue them and nothing else Secondly note in my explication that I iustifie not this opinion of our state but I say Thus to beleeue and practise simply destroyeth no mans saluation in Christ which you denying generally and vehemently in your sixt aunsvver you deny directly Maister Cranmer c. to haue held the foundation or to be saued vvherein you openly professe and proclaime that second generall poinct vvhich in the beginning I charged you vvith That all Churches and Christians here in King Edvvards time and namely Maister Cranmer Ridley Latimer Hooper Philpot Saunders Rogers Tailor c. held not Christ their Prophet Priest and King and so consequently they vvere lims of Antichrist for they bare his marke euen to their deaths and no true Christians Alas to see hovv malice and preiudice hath blinded you Is there not greater cause for vs to cry and say against you O shamelesse mouth O vnchristian hart vvhich termes you vainely charge vpon me Is this you that white the Toombs of those Martirs yet in fine condempne them for no true Christians nor their Assemblies for Churches You adde a clause They that professe and practise as doth the Church of England c. If you meane hereby to put a difference betwene those good mens holding this opinion and our Churches now Yea betwene your owne lately and ours novv speake out vvhat is it You can imagine none but this Those good men Maister Cranmer Ridley c. and your selfe of late held these very same errors of the outvvard Church order vvhich vve do But they and you did it seemeth of simplicity vve malitiously they of ignorance vve of plaine obstinacy and hauing a convicted and seared conscience vvhereby they and you might be true Christians for all these errors but vve novv cannot be so If this be your meaning then you graunt vs our Assumption against vvhich all your dispute here is bent You graunt it I say That the whole doctrine as it is by law in England is sufficient to make a particular man a true Christian Secondly we now erre not in these poincts of simplicity but of wilfulnes and malice Say you so Speake that plaine then Our whole assemblies all and euery of our assemblies of wilfulnes and of a conuicted conscience Are you sure of this Doe you know euery mans hart and conscience so well If you do then you say somwhat indeed But you are then neere as wise as God himselfe to know mens hearts so perfectly whose faces you neuer saw You will say you know diuers whome you dare say are convicted in conscience That is much also to affirme But if you do that serueth not your turne vnlesse all be so conuicted Christ knew a great many in the Church of the Iewes yea of the learnedst and cheifest in authority that were conuicted in conscience that he was the Christ who blasphemed in denying him and yet the Assēblies then were not conuicted they still were true Churches
in such case as Ieroboams was who altered but the outward ordinances of the Church as taking them to be things arbitrary at the pleasure of man Some of them I doubt not wil think you do them foule iniurie And if anie be done vnto you it is done by your self I say no more In the fourth likewise who is it of your owne Church that will not think you offer yet more iniurie both to the State and your self To the State in that you make them maintainers of Popish shifts To your self in that thus you bewray you are at a Non plus and yet yeeld not to the truth Did not your self in your first Replie vse these as good and soūd reasons And now they are convinced to be Popish have not a word to speak in defence of them but put vs over to the State for an aūswer Babell is sore wounded when all her best Physitians do thus give her over For the fift you referre vs to the first point of your explication before Which is aunswered For the sixt you referre vs to the second Which also is aunswered Neither is there any thing of waight in either of the places whither you send vs for aunswer of the particulars here conteined Let others mind if you will not what I said in the fifth and sixth aunswer before and see if your explications have any thing against them to any purpose The seventh you confesse to be against the state of your Church This I wish the Reader to marke And then having minded what I aunswered in the * pag. 34 seaventh place let him consider how wofull the estate of your Church is But now M. Iacob why defēd you not your Church seeing this is against the verie state of it by your owne confessiō Is not your book called A defence of the Churches and Ministery of England Why do you not then performe what the title of your book doth promise A worthie Champion sure you are to defend a Church that leave it thus in extream miserie without anie succour at all At first you seemed as if you would strike all downe afore you in defence of your Churches and Ministerie Now lo you can be content to leave them on the plaine field to shift for themselves so your self may have hope to scape by running away Before you told vs of the defence of your Churches Now you think it inough to say It is against the state of our Church and not against me Yet tell vs Mr. Iacob are you not a member of that Church And is not that then which is against the state of your Church also against you Otherwise it must needs be that your Church hath a strange estate or that you are a straunge member thereof Can the hand or eye say I am not of the bodie Or that which is against the state of the bodie yet is not against me Yet such is your aunswer as sencelesse as absurd Besides that thus whiles you think to pull your owne neck out of the collar you plunge both your self and your Church deeper in And note withall Howsoever you and such like disagree from the state of your Church in anie thing yet in this you can all agree well ynough to conspire against Christ and against his Church But so it hath ben of old Manasseh * Esa 9.20 21. and Ephraim though they were each against other were both against Iudah The Pharises and Sadducees though adversaries one to another yet ‡ Mat. 2◠15.23 Act. 5.17 handed togeather both of them against the Lord Iesus Hitherto of the seaven particulars I obiected Which all of them remaine vntaken away And thus far of the second exception and your Replies against it In which I have staied the longer because the discussing hereof will more plainelie and without all question end the controversie between vs. Chap. 6. The third Exception against Mr. Iacobs Assumption aforseid Fr. Iohnson Thirdly shew by Scripture how the 36. Article of your doctrine and book alledged agreeth with the Gospell of Christ and true Christianitie The wordes of the Article are these as followeth The Book of consecration of Archbishops and Bishops and ordering of Priests and Deacons doth conteine all things necessary to such consecration and ordering neither hath it any thing that of it self is superstitious or vngodly And therefore whosoever are consecrated or ordered according to the Rytes of that book we decree all such to be rightly orderly and lawfully consecrated and ordered Also how it agreeth with the Gospell and true Christianitie That the Apocrypha books and Homilies are enioined to be read in the Church by the Ministers diligently and distinctly As may be seen in Art 6 and 35. of that doctrine and book aforesaid H. Iacob his 1. Reply to the 3. Excep YOur third Exception is this That the 36. Article of ordaining Bishops Priests and Deacons Also the reading of Apocrypha bookes and Homilies in the Church agree not with true Christianitie Ergo the Assumption aboue is false that is the vvhole doctrine of that booke of Articles is not sufficient to make vs true Christians I aunsvver you should have said those poincts destroy vtterly true Christianity Ergo c. Els the Argument follovveth not But then vve denie flatly the Antecedent or first part of the Reason But your Reason you vvill say shall goe as you have put it Then marke these reasons even as good as yours and all one An Ethiopian is vvhite of his teeth therefore he is a vvhite man A Svvanne is black of his bill Fr. Io. therefore a Svvann is black * Note that Mr. Iacob hath added this since he received aunswer to the former It was not in the copy before Such also are almost all his notes in the Margent and some alteration in his Replies specially in his first Reply to the Seaventh Reason following Let the Reader observe this dealing My Brother hath an eye of glasse or he hath a vvodden legge therefore my brother is no true man Fr. Ioh. his Aunswer to Mr. Iacobs 1. Reply to the 3. Excep VVHat the third Exception is you see Have you now as was before required of you shewed these things by the Scriptures Not at all First then marke that although wee call neuer so much for proof and evidence from the Scripture yet you neuer bring it but labour to put it off with other shifts and deuices As if our consciences were to be built vpō your fancies and not vpō the written word of God But what do you say to our demaund First you tell vs these thinges do not vtterly destroy true Christianitie Next you graunt notwithstanding that they agree with it as black doeth with white that is they are cleane contrarie vnto it For this your similitudes doe import Where you alledge That these things destroy not true Christianity we answer that euen that Hierarchy worship cōstitution and gouernement which you professe and practise as appeareth
by those and other your Articles and Iniunctions in our former answer alleadged to which yet we haue receyued no aunswer being directly Antichristian doe vtterlie destroy true Christianitie so as the people and Churches so professing and practising can not * Nota. in that estate by the word of God be iudged true Christians or the true constituted Churches of Christ Your similitudes are not against vs but against your selues in asmuch as coÌ„paring the doctrines of the Gospel which you professe with the whitenes of an Aethiopians teeth and your Antichristian Ministerie worship Courtes and coÌ„fusion of people with the blacknes of an Aethiopians body this and such like similitudes doe fitly declare your estate And the approving of your Churches black constitution by some white doctrines of the Gospel professed among you is as if you should reason thus An Aethiopian is white of his teeth there fore he is a white man A blacke Rauen is white of her bill therefore a blacke Rauen is a white biâ—d Now when you had received this aunswer and saw these comparisoÌ„s turned vpon your self then you devised another being not able to maintaine the former And this last you have published in your printed book as if it had ben in your written coppie which I aunswered where it was not at all The abuse is great not to me only but to the Reader inasmuch as these things were by you so published as if your last comparison neither were nor could be aunswered Let the Reader note this maner of dealing for such as it is The similitude now added to the rest is this My brother hath an eye of glasse or he hath a woodden legge therefore my brother is no true man I aunswer that after your woonted maner you take for graunted that which you should prove viz that your Church in that constitution is as a man with an eye of glasse or woodden legge This I denie to be your case Prove it so to be if you can The Scripture describeth the false Church in their constitution specially touching the Ministerie not vnder the similitude of men vvith woodden legges or the like but vnder the similitude of ‡ Rev. 9.7.8.9.10 13.11 19.20 Locusts whose forme is like vnto horses prepared to battell with crovvnes on their head like gold vvith faces of men heare of vvomen teeth of Lyons habergions of yron vvings like charets tayles of scorpions and stings in them to hurt vvithall Now I would know of you Mr. Iacob whether these be men with woodden legges or monsters with mens faces In like manner whether the Churches which in their constitution chiefly of Ministerie do resemble these be like to men with some defects or to beasts with some resemblance of men Either therefore must you pâ—ove the constitution of your Church to be a true one as the man you speake on is which all may see you cannot do or this comparison fitteth not your turne We must mind and beleev what the Scripture teacheth not what you would beare vs in hand without any proof But it may be you would be vnderstood of the man of sinne spoken of 2 Thes 2. or of the whorish woman mentioned in the Revelation 2 Thes 2.3 Rev. 17.1 If that be your meaning it is against your self and so applie it If you meane otherwise it fitteth not your case as I shewed before And thus the comparison applied to your estate is woodden that is absurd and glassie that is brittle such as will not bide a blow H. Iacob his 2. Reply to the 3. Excep YOur Third Exception is That the 16. Article of consecrating Bishops and Priestes and the 6. and 35. Article of Apocripha and Homilies doe not agree with the Gospell What then Ergo our Churches profession and practise differ Most false For our Churches doe professe that these things doe agree vvith the Gospell vvell enough Also their practise is thereafter Or doe you conclude Ergo our Churches holde not Christ to saluation In deede so I tooke your purpose at the first but novve in plaine categoricall termes you auouch it That these things being directly Antichristian doe vtterly destroy true Christianity So then Cranmer Ridley Latimer c. were verie Antichrists and no true Christians As before also I trowe you affirmed Surely this grosse and wicked absurditie I could not open better then by this similitude This man hath a wodden legge an eye of glasse his nose deformed adde also if you will both his armes not naturall but framed to him of wood or what you will Ergo this is no true man Yes Sir for all this he is a true man For as much as all this concernes not the very life and being of a man though these be most vnnaturall additions and verie many The like doe I affirme of these externall corruptions in the Church Which my sentences you goe not about to refute but onely with words with bare yea and nay and no more Fr. Iohnson his aunswer to Mr. Iacobs 2. Reply to the 3. Exception YEt suffer me that I may speak and when I have spoken mocke on You say your Churches professe that the consecrating of Bishops and Priests the 6. 35. Articles of Apocrypha books and Homilies do agree with the Gospel well ynough and that your practise is thereafter Marke now what followeth herevpon The Apocrypha books to speak first of them have * Iudith 9.2.3.4 compared with Gen. 49.5.6.7 Ester Apocrypha 12.5 with Ester Canonicall 6.3 Est. Apocr 15.9.10 with Ester Canon 5.2 Ecclesiasticus 46.20 with Esa 57.2 Eccles 12.7 contradiction to the Scriptures ‡ Tob. 6.6.7.8 8.2.3 with 3.7.8 magik “ 1 Tob. 12.12.15 compared with 1 Tim. 2.5 blasphemy †Esdras 14.21.22.23 c. 2 Mach. 2 4-8 Tobit 5.11.12.13 with 12.15 1 Machab. 6.4.8.9.16 with 2 Machab. 1 13-16 and 9.1.5.7.9.28.29 fables ♣ 2 Machab. 12.44.45 14.41.42 Ecclesiastic 46.20 48.10 errors c. Therfore your Church by your owne confession professeth all these to agree with the Gospell well ynough practiseth thereafter A verie Christian professioÌ„ and practise in deed well beseeming the daughters of Babylon that mother of all abomination The like may be said of your blasphemies in the book according to which you consecrate Prelates and ordeine Priests receiving other Lordbishops Priests in office of Ministery besides Iesus Christ to whoÌ„ this * 1 Cor. 12.5 Eph. 4.5.11.12 Heb. 7.23.24 1 Pet. 5.4 honour doth onely beloÌ„g And not that only but ordeining your Priests with further blasphemy when the Prelats say to every of you kneeling at their feet to be ordained Receive the holy ghosts whose sinnes thou doest forgive they are forgiven whose sins thou dost retaine they are retained These things being so to omit manie other that might be alleadged out of those and the rest of your books how can we but think as we do of the estate of your Church Would you
have vs beleev that Magik lyes blasphemy contradiction to the Scriptures agree with the Gospell well ynough or that they destroy not true Christianitie I meane so as I expressed in my former aunswer that is so as the people and Churches thus professing and practising cannot by the word of God be iudged in that estate true Christians or true constituted Churches of Christ And more yet when withall there be found manie abominations directly Antichristian yea and blasphemous as I have noted of your Hierarchy worship c. Will you make Christ and Antichrist accord togeather It * 2 Cor. 6.14 cannot be If you will not receive it then prove by Gods word either that these things are not directly Antichristian nor blasphemous or that being so yet they do not vtterly destroy true Christianitie so as before is declared For Maister Cranmer Ridley Latimer c. is aunswered alreadie Pag. 8. 40. The grosse absurdity of your comparison of a man with a woodden leg the like referred to your estate I have showed in the end of my former aunswer Against which if you can say any thing let vs have it in your next Reply And remember withall that the body of your Church besides the shamefull confusion it standeth in hath a number of moÌ„strous and deformed heads on whose foreheads are written †Rev. 17.8 with 14.11 names of blasphemy viz your Archbishops Lordbishops Priests c. Which by the confession of the best among you were never borne in Sion but in Babylon by descent the sonnes of Anak and Nimrod mightie hunters â—f Gods people as their estate and practise in all ages even vnto this day doth testifie These and other abominations heretofore mentioned you would still conceale and in steed thereof take for graunted that your Church in her constitution is as a body which hath the life being of a man not of a beast Now this you know we deny and you should prove But that you let alone as being all to hard And I perceive alreadie that rather then you will do it you will leave your woodden legg to shift for it self as you have left your Aethiopians teeth and Swannes bill Let the Reader judge whether of vs it is that goeth about to refute onely with words with bare Yea Nay and no more And hitherto of the three Excepttons gathered out of your owne doctrine against the Aâ—sumption of your maine Argument Now follow some other Reasons brought against the same with your Replies and my Aunswers therevnto Chap. 7. The first Reason against Mr. Iacobs former Assumption Fr. Iohnson THat which ioyneth Christ and Antichrist togeather can not make a true Christian 2 Cor. 6.14.15.16 with Ezech. 43.8 and 2 Kings 17.33.34.40.41 But that doth the whole doctrine as it is publikly professed and practised by law in EnglaÌ„d As may be seen 1. By the Book alledged coÌ„paring the 35. and 36. Articles with the rest 2. By your profession to be seen likewise in your other books of Articles Canons Iniunctions Advertisements c. 3. By your practise as witnesseth your Ministery Leitourgy and Church-gouernement even to this day Therefore c. H. Iacob his 1. Reply to the first Reason THis your first Reason is thus That which ioyneth Christ and Antichrist togeather cannot make a true Christian But that doth our Booke c. Ergo. I say you must mende your vnproper speach that Christ and Antichrist is there ioyned togeather you meane Christ and some outvvard ceremonies and orders of Antichrist then so speake and say not Christ and Antichrist simply Which things yet we thinke to be Christs owne as wee ‡ Pag. 28.35 shewed in the Second Exception before Therefore this reason is aunsvvered as the last Exception before The Svvanne is blacke of his bill Ergo the Svvan is blacke and my brother hath a vvodden legge Therefore my brother is a vvodden man So here this booke ioyneth Christ and some orders of Antichrist Therefore it ioyneth Christ and Antichrist togeather vvhich are most fonde conclusions Furthermore the Scriptures alleadged 2 Cor. 6. Ezek. 43. 2 Kings 17. are vvholy mismatched the ioyning there forbidden is vnto such idolatrie as can not stande by any meanes vvith Christian faith and breaketh most directly the First commaundement Our transgression your selves doe iudge to be but against the Second and such as hath stood and may stand togeather vvith true faith as in M. Cranmer c. * Namely the Idolaters in these places spoken of They did not so much as professe the vvritten Lavv to be their rule neither for outvvard orders nor their invvard doctrines of faith But your selves knovv vve professe and practise that namely so as is shevved before in the ‡ Pag. 28.35 Seconde Exception Therefore to apply those Scriptures in this vnto vs is your great sinne euen against the third Commaundement vwhich is your common custome as all doe see and pittie viz. To take the name of God in vaine by mifusing his worde Fr. Iohson his aunsvver to Mr. Iacobs 1. Replie to the 1. Reason YOur answer is first concerning the Proposition then concerning the Assumption For the PropositioÌ„ you say the speach is vnproper that Christ Antichrist is among you ioyned togeather Then you take vpon you to expound our meaning to be thus Christ and some outvvard ceremonies and orders of Antichrist To this we answer First that the speach is fit and proper Secondly that it is meete that we not you expound our owne meaning Which togeather with the proprietie of the speach will now appear in that which followeth Concerning the AssumptioÌ„ first you say the things amoÌ„g you which we charge to be of Antichrist you think to be Christs ovvne for proof whereof you refer vs to your Reply to the Second exception before whither also we refer your self and the Reader for answer againe Then forgetting your self you grauÌ„t that in deed they be orders of Anticrist yet that they are but as the blacknes of the Swannes bill to the rest of the body So by you owne confession they are of Antichrist and therefore not Christes owne as †Pag. 28. before you said and laboured to prooue Thus at once you both contradict your self and ouerthrow that which you answered before to the Second exception This were sufficient to manifest your deceitfull and euill dealing But that it may more fullie appeare specially seing you would dazell the peoples eyes with these mincing wordes of some outvvard ceremonies orders of Antichrist comparing them with the blacknes of the Swans bill as if they were but a few and of small moment therefore will wee reckon vp some of them for it were infinite to nuÌ„ber them all By which the Reader may better see and iudge both of the sleightnes of your aunswer and of the black constitution of your Church Sory we are that we should thus trouble the Reader or our selues specially considering that alreadie we haue mentioned diuers
c. Esa 1.11.12.13.14.15 Zeph 1.12 1 Cor. 11.19 many things which are verifyed sometymes of the members of a true Church may not also fitly be applyed and alleadged against a false Church and yet not iustify their estate and constitution neither make for them but against them altogeather Otherwise you condemne at once all the Martyrs heretofore who vsually alleadged this †Mat. 15.9 very Scripture against the false worship of the Romish Church as as your self cannot be ignorant Yet in your learning it seemeth the Papists might well have aunswered the Martyrs againe that this Scripture was verifyed of them that were of the true visible Church and therefore made for them and against the Martyrs most notably 2 Secondly when you say This Scripture is verifyed of such as were of the true visible Church with whom Christ and his Apostles communicated tell vp whether you meane that Christ and his Apostles communicated with them in their vaine traditioÌ„s or no. If you think they did that very Chapter sheweth the contrary besides that the whole Scriptures testify that Christ was altogeather free from sinne Mat. 15.2 which he could not have bene if he had ioyned with them in those their inventions If they did not as it is without all question then what doth this helpe you who do all of you ioyne and coÌ„mmunicate with the faâ—se worship of your Assemblyes 3 Thirdly I answer that your note is not worth the noting being nothing at all to the purpose for the question in hand For first who knoweth not that â—e the Iewish Church the doctrine publiquely professed and practised by their Law did not appoint or ratifie any of those vaine traditions but vtterlie forbid them Wheras contrarilie the verie doctrine publiquelie professed and practised by law in England appointeth and ratifieth the false worshipping of God by the inventions of men Secondlie those vaine traditions aforesaid were the personall sinnes of some particuler men in the Iewish Church not publiquelie established by law nor generallie received and practised in that Church ‡ Luk. 1.5.6 8.9.10 2.21.22.23.24.25.27.36.37.38.39.41.46 Mat. 5.17 8.4 15.2 Ioh. 10.34 Zachary and Elizabeth Symeon Anna Mary Ioseph Christ himself and his Apostles with manie others kept the ordinance of God given by the hande of Moses and observed of that Church Neither did they ioyne or pollute themselves with that vaine worship aforesaid whereas in the Church of England the false worship thereof devised by men even by that man of sinne is not the personall sinne of some particular men in it but is publiquelie established by law and generallie received and practised in your assemblies of all the members thereof So then this scripture maketh nothing for you but against you most notably Now whereas in the margent you wish the Reader to marke an open contrariety comparing this and the Sixt Reason togeather we do also referre it to the Reader to iudge whether there be not even an harmonie with this and a direct confirmation of it H. IACOB his 2 Reply to the 2 Reason TO this your defence of your Second Reason I say you have aunswer in your last Exception page 57. You aske what proposition I do deny I answer I distinguish your assuÌ„ptioÌ„ as being a fallacie called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concluding a thing simply from that which is after a sort like vnto that Reason which I framed against you in pag. 57. A man hath a woodden legg an eye of glasse c. Therefore he is no true man Cranmer Ridley c. held asmuch as wee aftet mens precepts Ergo they worshipped in vaine Geneva holdeth her wafer cakes in the Supper Ergo Geneva worshippeth God in vaine Euen so your Assumption runneth Our doctrine say you Pag. 82. appoincteth Gods worship by mens precepts This is false vnlesse you meane it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after a sort not simply For our doctrine appoincteth not all Gods worship by mens precepts nor the chiefest part of it as the preaching of the Gospell of life Sacramentes and Prayers c. So that it concludeth nothing in that sence Therefore here you play the false Sophister not the Chistian and conscionable Disputer Thus you have ansvver enough to this in the ansvver to your last Exception though you vvould not see it * Pag. 82. Further I noted Secondly That this your Scripture of Mat. 15. Yeeldeth the offenders to be of a visible Church vvith vvhom Christ did coÌ„municate though they held also traditions of men Therefore it affirmeth nothing against vs. Is not this true Why then do you not admit it We never denyed but this Scripture condemned our corruptions But this onely vvee affirme it disanulleth not our Churches Euen as Christ here condemneth the Ievves corrupt traditions but hee meant not there by 〈…〉 their Church Therefore all this is not against our purpose but notably for vs is before observed 1. Concerning your First ansvver in Pag. 83. I knovv this Scripture may be applyed against false vvorshippers vvhich are no true Church But it proueth not I say all them to vvhom it may bee applyed to bee no true Church Therefore you abuse it against vs Except you had first proved vs no true Church nor Christians vvhich yet is in question 2. Where in your Second answere * pag. 83. you say That this helpeth vs not except we say that Christ communicateed with the Pharisies in these traditions like as wee doe in the vaine traditions now For shame leave this folly I say againe I seke not to iustify our partaking in our traditions but I renounce it in sobrietie asmuch as you yea better then you do Yet I say this place shall admit those vvho doe in simplicitie partake of them to be true Christians neverthelesse like as it admitteth the Ievves then 3. In your Third aunsvver “ pag. 83. 84 You deny that those Iewish traditions of washing c. were with them received generally or by Law in their Church Whereto I aunsvver That they vvere generally received as Marke in his 7. Chapter and 3. verse doeth testify and that they vvere rebuked vvho vsed rhem not vvhich is sufficient to make it their Churches doctrine practize though no expresse law coÌ„manded it But I suppose verse 5. where they say why walkest thou not after the traditions of the Elders he meaneth the ordinances of their Forefathers which were to them as lawes besides the lawe of Moses What els is their Thalmud which is till this day euen like to the Canon lawe of Poperie and the Alcoran of Turky Some also vnderstand this of the ordinances of the Elders that is their present Gouernours and then doubtlesse it was lavv And though Zachary Elizabeth Symeon Anna Mary Ioseph Christ and his Apostles did not actually ioyne in these corruptions yet they vvere generall no doubt and by lavv never the lesse and a number of the Ievves simply vsed them and yet fell not from God
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
to proceed with them in the faith and order of Christ and to ‡ Gal. 5.12 1 Cor. 5.7.11.13 cut off and cast out such troublesome leauen from among them Now this being duelie weighed it is nothing for but altogeather against the having of communion with the Assēblies of this Land which are not set in the way and order of Iesus Christ as were those Churches of Galatia but in the Apostasie and confusion of Antichrist as hath ben at large declared before in the defence of the former Reasons where also that of Maister Cranmer Ridley c. is answered H. IACOB his 2. Reply to the 3. Reason TO this your Defence of your Third Reason I answer First it is too impudent a cavillation “ That you charge me to giue the H. Ghost the lye in denying your Assumption I meant not your Assumption but that which I had made briefer conteining the effect of yours This was the Assumption denyed by me But a Galatian is a false Christian. As he that hath but halfe an eye may see Secondly to cease needles strife I deny therefore your Proposition Though a Galatian ‡ that is so holding it as the worst did or els this is a sophisticall aequiuocatiō holding Circumcision cannot be a true Christian yet an English Christian holding the Hierarchye c. may The Reason of this denyall I gave you then but that you would not see it Namelie because such Galatians held Iustification by the workes and ceremonies of the Law Gal. 5.3.4.5 Rom. 10.3.4 Act. 15.1 Like the Papists who by their ceremoniall and morall workes doe hold the same and so doe erre Fundamentally But our Churches and state hold not the Hierarchye so but onely as an indifferent thing in it self This blasphemous opinion of Circumcision maketh it infinitelie worse though once it was ordeined of God then our indifferent opinion of the Hierarchye though in deed it were never but nought Thirdlie and lastlie you have no where cleared Maister Cranmer Ridley Latimer and the rest of those holy Martyrs from being abolished frō Christ if the Hyerarchie be simply worse then Circumcision so held as those Galatians did hold Gal. 5.2.3.4.5 Fr. Iohnson his Answer to Mr Iacobs 2. Reply to the 3. Reason IS it of simplicity or of impudency or of both Mr Iacob that thus you do write Your simplicity is more then Dunsicall to say you denyed not my Assumption but one of your owne For with whom I pray you do you dispute With your self or with me Your impudency is to shamefull not onely to give the holy Ghost the lye but when it is shewed you yet not to acknowledge it Therefore to hide it if possibly you could you say when you denyed the Assumption you meant not myne but one of your owne made briefer c. Yet even thus appeareth that you can not say otherwise but to deny my Assumption which I proved by Scripture were to give the holy Ghost the lye Now that you did it before your owne words here againe will testify against you For you say Your Assumption made briefer conteyneth the effect of myne Then in denying your owne it must needs be that you denyed myne in deed and effect and so now by your owne confession it is true as I said that you gave the lye to the holy Ghost who by Paul affirmeth it Gal. 5.2.4 Simple Sir Priest Had you no more wit nor better defence then to aunswer thus as he that hath but halfe an eye may see you do nothing els but impudently cavill Is this the Christian and conscionable disputing you speak of Or is it the deep and Cler klike skill in argumentation which every where you will beare vs in hand is lockt vp in the chest of your brest Content your self Mr Iacob to keep hereafter within your line and strive no longer against the truth but for it Secondly you say to cease needles strife you deny the Proposition But if your former denyall of the Assumption was good why do you not stand to it If it were evill why do you not confesse it If your mynd be in deed to cease needles strife then shew it in deed not in word onely The Proposition which now vpon better advisement you chuse to deny I have proved before Against it you except Pag. 90. that although a Galatian holding Circumcision cannot be a true Christian yet an English Christian holding the Hierarchy c. may But you should say thus Mr Iacob if you aunswer me He that submitteth to a false Ministery worship and gouernemēt of the Church devised by Antichrist the man of sinne c. is a true Christian in that estate For these were the words I vsed in my Argument and proof thereof But you delight to aunswer your owne words and Arguments not myne Yet why prove you not then from the Scripture that which you say towching Antichrists Hierarchy c. Will you have vs beleev it on your bare word Mynd also that now you confesse the whole doctrine as it is publikly professed and practised by Law in England is not sufficient to make a Galatian a true Christian that should with all submit to Circumcision which once was Gods owne ordinance Had I not cause then think you to deny the Assumption of your mayne Argument Yea and to put you in mynd of the defects and lamenes both of your Proposition and Assumption And where you say the Galatians could not be true Christians because they held Iustification by the works and ceremonies of the Law like the Papists who by their ceremoniall and morall works do hold the same and so do erre Fundamentally Whereas your Churches and State you say hold not the Hierarchy so but onely as an indifferent thing in it self 1. First what say you to the †Damianus a Goes de fide Religione et moribus Aethiopion Pag. 63. c. Ethiopian Churches which togeather with the Gospell hold and vse at this day the ceremonies of the Law Circumcision c. onely as things indifferent and therefore condemne not the Churches which vse them not at all Are they in this constitution by the word of God now to be judged true Christians and true Churches Or may not any separate from people so walking to keep the faith of Iesus without such commixtion By your marginall note it seemeth you are so mynded Let vs have your reasons and proof in your next Reply 2. Or how will you prove for your Churches that it is as you say viz that you hold as a thing indifferent your Hierarchy c. Do you not see that such as hold and walke otherwise are imprisonned banished cōdemned killed among you Is this to hold things as indifferent What then I pray you may be your holding of the other poynts of Religion among you which you count not indifferent 3. And what say you to your forbidding of Meats and Mariage at certayne tymes which the Apostle calleth Doctrines of
Devills Doth your Church hold them as things indifferent Or will not this prove a blasphemous opinion even in your owne judgement 4. Mynd withall how the Dispensations given by your Prelates for eating of flesh in tymes forbidden runne stil among you as they did and do among the Papists with this clause fana conscientia that is with a safe conscience and your Excommunications with this clause Ad salutem anioâ—e that is for the salvation of the soule Doth not this shew that your Churches hold not these things as you pretend but agree with the Papists therein Or hold you matters of conscience and salvation for things indifferent 5. Likewise for your Ministery and book of common prayer c. hold you them as matters indifferent or as necessarie for the service of God and salvation of your soules 6. And what say you to the blasphemy magik errors lyes in the Apocrypha books retained among you for the service of God Count you them also for indifferent things 6. Finally towching the Popish opinion of works whereof you speak know you not how they hold that their works merit not for the work sake but for Christs being dyed with his blood Yet notwithstanding this colour the point being well considered it doth highly dishonour Christ and derogate from his office of sole Mediation In like maner the Hierarchy c. that is the governement worship confusion and Ministery of Antichrist retained among you whatsoever you pretend for them yet being duly weighed do as towching your Church constitutioÌ„ abolish the governement and MediatioÌ„ of Christ except you could prove him to be Mediatour of another Testament then his owne Behold what your Indifferent opinioÌ„ will prove when it comes to be throughly scanned As you like it you may hold it still To end this point let the Reader note and not forget it how your self do here in playne termes confesse that your Hierarchy that is your Churches governement Ministery c. was never but nought This suites yll with the title of your book and gives small encouragement for any to serve God by such Ministery worship c. For Mr Cranmer Ridley Latimer c. Pag. 40.41 I have cleared them before froÌ„ your hasty censure Now onely let the Reader observed how this is alway the foot of your song Mr Cranmer Ridley Latimer c. As if their errors were better warrant for you then Gods word for vs. CHAP. 10. The fourth Reason against M. Iacobs AssumptioÌ„ aforesaid Fr. Iohnson THe doctrines of faith conteined in that Book alledged would not make him a true Christian who holding them should also still execute or joyne vnto the Ministery of Mahomet that open Antichrist and enemie of Iesus Christ 2 Cor. 6.14 c. Therefore neither can they make him a true Christian that holding them yet doth still execute or joine vnto the Ministery and worship of the man of sinne the covert Antichrist and enemie of Iesus Christ H. Iacob his 1. Reply to the 4. Reason THis your 4. ReasoÌ„ is Mahomets Ministery and Antichrists Ministery are both bad alike But the good doctrines of our booke of Articles cannot save a man that ioineth also to Mahomets Ministery Ergo the good doctrines of that booke cannot save a man that ioineth also to Antichrists Ministery which thing we in England doe I deny neither the Proposition nor Assumption And yet the Argument is too bad It is a fallacie of Equivocation as we call it Wee must therefore distinguish Mahomets Ministerie and Antichrists Ministerie have a doubtfull meaning If you meane the whole function and exercise of publique worship performed in Mahomets or Antichrists assemblies that is in the Turkish or Popish Churches Then I graunt your whole Argument is * Both are nought alike as touching abolâ—shing vs from Christ. true But that wee doe so in England which comes in the CoÌ„clusioÌ„ Or that any ChristiaÌ„ amongst vs thinketh so That I vtterly deny And thus indeed that Scripture alleadged 2 Cor. 6.14 is rightly vnderstood But if you meane by Ministerie the outward manner of calling to the Ministerie and some outward ceremonies vsed by Mahomet or the Pope Then I flatly and absolutly deny your Assumption and your Scripture is answered before in the First Reason For I affirme and it is manifest That such errors being ioined with the good doctrines of that our Book doe not destroy faith and true Christianitie as before was shewed in the Second Exception Fr. Iohnson his Answer to Mr Iacobs 1. Reply to the 4. Reason Here Mr Iacob the light of the trueth doeth so dazell your eyes as you freely confesse you cannot deny any whit of the Reason And yet forsooth the Argument is too bad But why so There is you say an Equivocation in it and therefore you will distinguish I answer There is no equivocation at all in the words they are all plaine to him that hath a single eye and will vnderstand the trueth Therefore your distinction here is idle and frivolous Yet let vs see between what things you do distinguish It is between the whole function and exercise of publique worship performed in the Turkish or Popish Assemblies and between the outward maner of calling to their Ministery and the outward ceremonies vsed amongest them An absurd distinction towching the matter in hand For first who knoweth not that these latter are of the very same nature with the former Are not their outward callings and ceremonies false Antichristian and accursed before God aswell as the rest of their woship and service Or hath God in his worde giuen any commaundement more for these then for the other Secondly who seeth not that the Argument here is not of whatsoever thing vsed among the Turkes and Papists but of the Ministerie and worship which they have devised and executed As in particular of the publique offices of Ministery reteined among them of their maner of calling and entrance into them of their administration of them of their stinted imposed Liturgie their ecclesiasticall governement Canons proceedings c. All which in the Church of England are taken out of * Rev. 17.4.5 2 Thes 2.3.4.7.8.9.10.11.12 that golden cup of abominations wherewith Antichrist that man of sinne hath made the Nations of the earth to be drunken As may appeare by comparing their Pontificals Canons and constitutions togeather If you will needes be otherwise minded then prove the particulars aforesaide by the Testament of Christ And marke here that you graunt the doctrine of faith conteined in your booke of Articles cannot make him a true Christian who holding them doth withall receive and ioyne vnto the publike worship performed in the Turkish or Popish Assemblies This you say you graunt as most true WherevpoÌ„ it followeth even by your owne confession 1. That such things may be ioined with the doctrines of faith receiued among you as in such estate you cannot be deemed true Christians or true Churches Neither the truths which you
‡ Rev. 18.1.2.3.4.11 c 17.1.2.3.4.5 14.8.9.10.11 the spirituall Babylon notwithstanding any truthes she holdeth yet is so vnsanctifyed and abominable as shee is become a cage of all vncleane and hatefull birdes and that all her children Marchants that will not depart out of her shall receive of her plagues and damnation and drink of the vvine of Gods vvrath and be tormented in fire and brimstone before the holy Angells and before the Lamb for evermore Loe here your fearfull estate which you notwithstanding will needes accompt holy and acceptable before God H. Iacob his 2 Reply to the 5. Reason IN this your defence of your Fifth Reason you mislike that I call it an absurd comparison Where you affirme that the golden vessels of the Iewes were as available to sanctify the Babilonians as the truthes of the Gospell which wee hold are to sanctify vs. In deed your ovvne vvordes be holden and received in the spirituall Babylon By which termes you meane vs of England I trow But marke sir Is not this grosse Sophistry againe Is not this childish vanity open beggerie and craving of that which is the whole question that is That our Churches are spirituall Babylon and as deepely infected in Babylonish impietie as those old Caldeans If they were so infected I graunt in deed your Reason would follow But seeing it is the question and seing we professe our selves true Christians by those truths of the Gospell which wee hold and as by Gods grace wee are in deed Say I not well that this is an absurd Comparison Yes Maister Iohnson it is a most †To match those outvard vessells of no sanctity of themselves with our inward doctrines of salvation impious absurd and senceles comparison and void of common Reason And it inwrappeth wrappeth Maister Cranmer Maister Ridley c. within the same iniurious you irreligious consequence likewise All that you have of allusions and alluding betweene the Typicall and spirituall Babylon are meere delusions and vaine cavils Prove vs first to be spirituall Babylon Or els you fight with your shadow So that still I say those Scriptures quoted of Dan. 5. c. As also all the rest here packed togeather they are miserably and desperately abused according as I rightly referred you to my censure to your First Reason which for all your wordes you have not refuted The very same I say of your other two scriptures towards the end Prov 9.17 c. Rev. 18.1 c. As for Ezech. 43.8 I answered it before †Pag. 71. in your First Reason Fr. Iohnson his Aunswer to Mr Iacobs 2. Reply to the 5. Reason HAve you said any thing here first Mr Iacob but denyed the Conclusion If you have shew it If not confesse your owne childish vanity and open beggery c. For which the name of Sophistry is to good though otherwise it be bad ynough and the cognisance of all your Replies Now that this you say is but the denyal of the Conclusion thus I shew That which I conclude towching your Churches is this that they are not constitute according to the ordināce of Christ but according to the apostasy of Antichrist that is that your Churches in their estate are spirituall Babylon This I say is that which I have concluded heretofore and still do throughout my Reasons Exceptions Aunswers and now of purpose have I set it downe at the beginning of this treatise Pag. 3. Your denying of this then what is it els but the denyall of the Conclusion But this now being proved you are driven nill ye will ye plainely to graunt that in deed my Reason will follow Well Mr Iacob though it were long first yet thus you yeeld now at length Better late thrive then never Abide but by this and I trow you will not now any longer stand member or Minister of your Assemblies in that estate neyther condemne vs any more for separating from them Next howsoever it were for the question between vs yet the Proposition of the Comparison cannot but be true which in your first Reply you said was most false and now you would passe by because you can say nothing against it Yet mynd Mr Iacob that in denying it you did there agayne give the lye to the holy Ghost whose doctrine it is in these Scriptures Dan. 5.1.2.3.4 Levit. 23. chap. Prov. 9.17.18 By all this then you may see it is your owne dealing that is most impious absurd sencelesse c. thus to strive as you have done against so cleare a truth and everie where in your Replyes to fight against God and his word Which even here againe you cease not to do whiles you call such allusions and comparisons as the Scripture vseth between the typicall and spirituall Babylon meer delusions and vayne cavils How I matched together on the one hand the vessells of the Lords Temple and the truthes of the Gospell on the other The Caldean and spirituall Babylon may be seen in my former aunswer Which may suffice for any thing you say here both your marginall note and all the rest I could tell you further if it needed that Babel in English is confusion And that such is the estate of your Church even a confusion of all sorts of people good and bad Besides that your tounges are divided and your language confounded as it was in * Gen. 11.9 Babel of old whiles the Prelates the Reformists your self and the like as Neuters between both speak some one thing some another towching your Hierarchy worship Canons c. some †The Prel Formal that they are of God and to be kept and obeyed for conscience sake some ‡ The Sekers of Reform that they are of Antichrist and to be removed and witnessed against vnto death though every haire of the head were a life some ♣ Mr Iacob the like that they are neyther of God neyther of Antichrist simply fundamentally indifferently c. And thus as men confounded in your selves by the just judgement of God your toungues are divided you know not your selves what to make and account of these things or one of another I could also put you in mind that as the Caldean Babylon was so the spirituall Babylon is notorious for false worship towards God and for persecution of his people keping them in thraldome and captivity See M. Iacob◠Repl. before And that now the estate of your Church is such viz worshipping God after a false maner never prescribed by himself kept in subiection to your Antichristian Prelats and persecuting the people of God by prisonment exile death c. it is so evident as when you are called vpon to shew warrāt for these among you your vsuall aunswer is no other but after this sort * Pag. 37. Let the State which mainteyneth these things aunswer for them †Pag. 70. For my part I never thought other but our Church corruptions are against the Secōd
Secondly vvhere you say out of Iohn 4. That it is manifest there was no contention between the Iewes and the Samaritans whether onely the true God was to be worshipped There appeareth †no vvord of any such thing A bold assertion Our Sauiour indeed noteth vers 21. One difference betvvene them that vvas but about the place of vvorshipping on occasion of the vvomans vvordes But that there vvas no difference betvvene them in the observing of the First commandement he saith not The contrary you savv before proved in 2. King 17.30.31 3. Thirdly you vrge my confession That the Israelites vnder Ieroboam served not Pagan Idols but the true God after their owne devices And you would prove it too by 2 King 17.28.32.33 Seeing the Samaritans worshipped after the manner of the nations that dwelt there before they came who were the Tenne tribes that Ieroboam drew away I aunsvvere First it is great shame that you make this my confession vvhen I expressely bring it in as your Obiection Pag. 105. vvherevnto I set myne ansvver that the Idolatry vnder Ieroboam seemeth farre grosser anb filthier then the vvorst is vvith vs vvhich I make manifest by the scripture not onely 1. King 12.28 vvhere Ieroboam erected visible Idols and very filthy ones even calues and brute beasts vvhich if they vvere but to vvorship God by yet vvho vvould compare our Ecclesiasticall orders to them which ♣ 〈◊〉 viz. the generall state we professe are but indifferent things for order and comelinesse onely Further I alledge 2 Chron. 11.15 where Ieroboam is said to appoinct Priests for the high places for Divels and for the Calves that he had made So I confesse little to your aduantage Secondly if the Samaritans worshipped as they did indeed like the Tenne tribes before them then you are cleane gone For though Ieroboam at the First had not ioined in the Heathenish Idolatry Yet Ahab did 1 King 16.32.33 and his Sonne Ahaziah had further Baalzebub the God of Ekron Yea the Israelites as they of Ierusalem afterwards were Idolaters much alike 2 King 17.19 But wee read of the Ievves vnder Ahas 2 Chro. 28.23 and Manasses and Amon. 2 King 21. and 23.4.5.10.11.12.13 That they vsed the very Pagans Idolatrie Yea it is expressed 2 King 17.8.11.16.17 That these Ten Tribes vsed the very same Therefore the Samaritans doing as the Israelites did held such grosse Idolatry as could by no meanes stand with the true seruing of God Finally as before is noted 2 King 17.29.30.31 doeth expresse this grosse Heathenish Idolatrie of the Samaritans Pag. 109. Surely it appeareth more grosse and worse then the Israelites before them And therefore you are greatly deceived both here and in the defence of your First Reasō before Pag. 67.68 where you expreslie mainteine these Samaritans to holde no Heathnish Idolatrie but onely to cleave to the God of Israell in an outward devised corrupt worship They acknowledged him I graunt but him only I deny as hath ben proved Pag. 68. Further you affirme in your defence of your First Reason That they professed the written law to be the rule both for their inward beliefe and outward manner of worship Where you vvould prove it For that the Apostate Israelites did so of whom Ezeck speaketh Ezek. 43.8 First this followeth not because the Heathnish Samaritans vvere further from sincerity then the naturall Israelites commonly Secondly Israell it selfe in this vvretched Apostasie helde not the vvritten lavv for their rule seeing professedly they left this rule and did constantlie vvorship Calves and sacrifized at Dan and Bethel Thirdly Ezechiell shevveth euen there cap. 43.7.8 they kept not this rule but departed therefrom and that as appeareth professedly and constantly Which most of all is scene in Ahab Ahaziah Ahas Manasses and Amon as is before noted Pag. 71.110 Wherefore in these your sayings Maister Iohnson you are intollerably too blame and foully deceaued As for example They professed that vvhich they did in 2 Kinges 17.29.30.31 vvas that after the rule of the vvritten Lavv Next you oppugne me for that I alleadged our Assemblies throughout England haue not their consciences conuicted in the Hierarchy and ceremonies you say If this were so is it any iust defence of your Ministery worship Pag. 107. estate c. I tell you it is a iust defence for our Ministerie vvorship and estate to be as touching the substance and foundation of Christianitie sound and acceptable to God Refute it if you can I know it is no iust defence of our vvhole Ministery estate and manner of vvorship vvhich I neuer intended much lesse professed to iustifie Where you vvould snatch at an aduantage about Aarons line my meaning vvas that they of Aaron were only for Priests and their brethren of Leui only for Leuites But you passe this and you set your self in earnest to prove vs all conuicted in conscience about our Hyerarchy and ceremonies So that here you auouch openly Pag. 5. that third generall poinct which I obserued in my very beginning aboue for the which you haue this Reason Have not wee the scriptures as much as the Apostate Isralites had Or did not Christ as fully and plainly sett downe our Ministery and worship in the Gospell as Moses in the Law I aunswer this is true as touching the word it self In the Gospell we are taught as plainly and as fully for the word it self as the Iewes were in Moses But it is not yet so plaine for our vnderstanding and vse Why Because wee haue had a discontinuance of the ‡ The Pastors of the Churches since have had many corruptions mixed in their callings they have not ben pure simple ever since or at last vve cannot prove it othervvise by any records novv extant simple offices of Pastours Teachers and Elders for the space of a Thousand Three hundreth or a Thousand Four hundreth Yeares and a continuance of the Prelacie all this while hetherto Also for that many auncient and late learned and Godly Christians haue beleeued it at least conuenient if not necessary in the Church And they haue expounded the Scriptures so that they carry no small ambiguity in this matter in infinite Thousands iudgement Thus it hath pleased God in his prouidence to suffer this mistaking amongest Christians thus longe thus vniuersally Whereby it commeth to passe that infinite Thousand consciences are not easely conuicted though they bee mistaken in this case With the Iewes it vvas not so in this matter that vve talke of As Moses and the Prophets vvere most plain that Ierusalem must be the onlie place of solemne worship Arons line the onely Priests no Calues nor any visible kinde of Image or meanes to worship God in So also they constantly and perpetually practized that course euen from Moses till the Apostacie of Ieroboam When any sqared from this course these vvere not onely rebuked expreslie by Gods voyce in his Prophets from time to time but
to deny it Remember it is ‡ Of this see Before Pag. 7. 8. one thing for men to say such may be accounted true Christians being considered apart from the Church constitution wherein they stand and another to say such as towching their Chur-constitution are to be accounted true Christians 3. Thirdly set the Reader mynd how vnder the terme of externall ceremonies you would still hide the impiety of your false worship and most filthy heap of your Antichristian abominations 4. Fourthly set you downe by the word of God what is fundamentall and see if I prove not the Antichristian errors among you to be such They subvert Christs office they are doctrines of Diuels Col. 2.8 1 Tim. 4.1.2.3 Rev. 14 9-12 2 Thes 2 3-12 marks of the Beast lyes and vnrighteousnes of Antichrist the mystery of iniquity the apostasy of the sonne of perdition c. Consider now with your self what will follow herevpon 5. Fiftly although your errors were not fundamentall yet for the Proposition it skilleth not so as your constitution be such as is there spoken of Eyther therefore must you prove your constitution to be otherwise or els both the Proposition and the Assumption stand firme against you as I have proved for both 6. For Mr Cranmer c. whose errors you oppose more vnto vs then any word of God I have aunswered alreadie and shewed how their case and yours is not alike Pag 40. 41. Besides that I doubt not but some erring in fundamentall points as divers of the Martyrs have done may yet be partakers of salvation Of which point see more in the second Exception * Pa. 44. c before and the “ The answer to Mr Iacobs 2. Reply to the 7. Reasō next Reason hereafter following 7. Lastly concerning your confident auouch in the presence of God know you not that the Fryers and Monks for their callings and all false worshippers for their service of God will auouch as much and as confidently as you do here Yea and alledge that it is no lesse then horrible blasphemy against God and his Saints to say the contrarie Is this therefore of any waight for their defence No more then for yours To turne your owne words then vpon your self you bring not a syllable or one letter in all your writing neither can you for warrant of your estate neither against that I have said to the contrary but bare begging of the controversie which is infinite often and meer sophisticall dealing everie where rife throughout your Replies Of the third Exception and first and second Reasons enough is said before in the handling of them All the Sophistry you have will not prove them sophisticall If you think good you may trie your skill once againe Yet remember how you are foyled alreadie and know that still you shall fynde the light of the truth to shine and the power thereof to prevaile against you as alway it hath and will against all adversaries whōsoever For the Samaritans whose example proveth the Proposition I noted first that most excellent truths may be acknowledged and yet they which so professe not be in their estate true Christians or true Churches to whom appertaine the couenants c. This you passe by as if you saw it not Belike that your Reader might the lesse mind it Next I required proof for that you said The Samaritans beleued not in the Messias Now in stead of proof you bring vs it might be if it were so let it be howsoever c. But Ifs and And 's cannot be received for proof Speciallie when such evidence is shewed for their faith in the Messiah as may be seen in Ioh. 4.25.26.29.30.39 Where you say you hold your faith and doctrine by the word professedly as the publik ordinance of your Church sheweth I neither heare you prove it nor see the ordinance of your Church shew it The contrarie I have declared before and occasion there will be to speake of it againe In the meane tyme tell me whether you hold by the word professedly your faith and doctrine towching the Hierarchy the forbidding of meats and mariage and the other particulars mentioned before Pag. 63. c. Tell me also whether your Churches faith and doctrine for Christs descension into Hell be held by the word professedly among you viz That Christs soule went downe into Hell whiles his body lay in the grave I know Mr Iacob for your part you will not sticke to say your Churches doctrine is not thus For so I remember you have aunswered D. Bilson now Prelate of Winchester ‡ in a treatise which you wrote against him concerning this point But how do you shew it in that book of yours H.I. his treatise of Christs suffrings descending into Hell Pag. 172. 173 Thus forsooth The Articles of the Synod holden in K. Edwards tyme have thus As Christ dyed for vs and was buried so also it is to be beleeved that he went downe into Hell For his body lay in the grave vntill the Resurrection but his spirit gone out from it was with the Spirits which were deteined in prison or in Hell and preached vnto them as the place of Peter testifyeth But your Synod holden synce in the yeare 1562. you say correcteth it and hath thus onely As Christ dyed for vs and was buried so we are to beleve also that he descended into Hell Which you translate thus that he went vnto the Dead The rest following in the Article of the former Synod your latter doth not mention Herevpon you gather thus It repeateth and ratifyeth part of the foresaid Article in expresse words but part of it euen * Not all all and every whit that conteineth this doctrine expressly of Christs going down to the Hell of the damned it cutteth of it putteth out it casteth away Therefore you conclude that the publik sentence of your Churches yea the Law of the Land confirming the same is against this opinion of Christs descending into Hell But in earnest Mr Iacob do you think this reason is good Then for your learning marke this which followeth as good as yours and all one The Letany ♣ See the Books of Cōmon Prayer Ordering Priests c. printed in K. Edw. tyme. in K. Edwards tyme ran thus From the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable enormityes good Lord deliver vs. But your Letany synce in this Queens tyme correcteth it not mentioning this clause at all It repeateth and ratifyeth part of that Letany in expresse words but part of it even all and every whit of the clause aforsaid concerning the Bishop of Rome and his enormityes to be prayed against it cutteth of it putteth out it casteth away Look in all your books of Common prayer now published and you shall fynd it as I say Therefore by your Logick it will follow that the publik sentence of your Churches yea the Law of the Land confirming the same is against this that
abhominations of the earth Rev. 17.5 For now I would know of you who are so deep a Clerke how Antichrists Church and Religion should iustly be accounted a mystery of iniquitie and truely be said to speak Lies in hypocrisy also prively to bring in Damnable heresies and to haue a Shevv of godlines if they did absolutly and vvholy departe from the faith and not onelie frō some points thereof But over and above all it seemeth by this reason that not onelie the Apostles were mistaken in giuing vs markes how to know false teachers and false religions But also Christ himselfe when he said †Mat. 7.15 Bevvare of false Prophetes vvhich come to you in sheepes clothing but invvardly are ravening vvolves And againe †Mat. 24.23.24 If any shall say vnto you Loe here is Christ or there beleeve it not For there shall arise false Christs and false Prophets and shall shevv great signes and vvonders so that if it vvere possible they should deceive the very elect Now if they should totally depart frō the faith what sheepes clothing I pray you should they have to come in Or how should either themselves be said to come in the name of Christ affirming their Religion to be Christs and shewing signes and wonders to draw men therevnto Or the elect be in such vnspeakable danger to be deceived by them This might suffice to shew the falsehood and impietie of your answer But yet I will note a few things mo therein First it being graunted that the popish forbidding of Mariage and meats so they were no worse doth not make them depaxters frō the faith totally yet tell vs if holding never so manie truthes besides and yet forbidding these they could by the word of God truely be said in that estate to hold the faith of Christ and to be true Christians 1 Tim. 4.1.3 If they could not as the Apostle * testifieth then is your answer in this respect also nothing to the purpose but against your self both for the popish forbidding of meats and mariage and for the English Hierarchy and other abominations among you received from the Papistes which vnder colour of this answer you would defend Next see in Bales Votaries and in the Acts and monuments c. what abominable filthines the forbidding of mariage and what fowle superstition the forbidding of meats hath wrought in the kingdome of Antichrist And tell me then what man fearing God durst once open his mouth for such divelish doctrines and estate Againe where you say The Papists fall from Christ in other poincts besides the aforsaid Namely 1. The Papall supremacie 2. The sacrifice of the Masse 3. Iustification by vvorkes vvhich England novv is far from Tell vs first whether in this sence the Papists can for these be said to depart from the faith totally If they can not what weight is there in this for defēce of your estate that the Papists could not alledge for themselves viz that in these poincts they depart from the faith but not absolutly and wholy Secondly tell vs whether there are no other poincts but these three in the Papists Religion which make them in their estate to be departers from the faith and consequentlie false Christians and false Churches If there be as you can not deny of what weight then is your answer to defend the present constitution of your people and assemblies seeing there are divers other things besides these that do and may cause that you can not be deemed true Christians or true Churches in that estate Many “ Servetus Sabellius Arius the Anabaptistes c. heretikes heretofore have and at this day do reject these three aforsaid Are they therefore in their estate to be accounted true Chrestians or true Churches Thirdly your manner of reasoning heer for your defence is as if the Adulterers to justify their course of life should alledge thus We are 1 no Blasphemers 2 no Persecutors 3 no Murtherers as such and such are therefore we depart not from the way of life but our estate and course of life is good and such as may be continued in Yet the Scripture sayth * Iam. 2.10.11 whosoever shall keep the vvhole Lavv and yet faileth in one poinct is guiltie of all For he that sayed Thou shalt not commit adulterie saied also Thou shalt not kill Novv though thou doest no adultery yet if thou killest thou art a transgressour of the Lavv and contrariwise So that whatsoever sinnes the Adulterer be far from yet as Salomon saith cōmitting adultery vvith a vvoman he fayleth in heart and destroyeth his owne soule Prov. 6.32 The same is the case of all spirituall Adulterers who whatsoever sinnes they be farre from yet in the worship of God runne a vvhoring after their owne inventions embracing the bosomes of strange vvomen and drinking on their cup of fornications Num. 15.39 vvith Prov. 5.20 and Rev. 17.4 Ier. 4.18 Fourthly shew vs sufficient warrant from the Scriptures why setting these three aside the Hierarchy and other popish abominations received among you can not be judged to make you in such estate departers from the faith and therefore false Christians and false Churches whatsoever truthes you hold besides Num. 16.1.2 c. Corah Dathan Abiram and their partakers were far from the Abominations of the Heathen they held also the poincts of faith that Moses and Aaron held differing onelie from them and departing onely from the faith in a matter concerning the Priesthood whereof notwithstanding they * vers 3. shewed their reasons why they were so perswaded Yet will you not deny I trow but they departed from the faith and were in this estate neither to be accounted true Israelits nor their assemblies true Churches with which communion might be kept If you should the Scripture is witnesse against you Num. 16.26 Now compare case with case and tyme with tyme and you shall find the estate of your people and Assemblies to be far more grievous As hath ben shewed alreadie in the Second Exception before and in other Treatises to which we have yet received no answer viz The ansvver to Maister A.H. The 9. Reasons concerning not hearing the Ministers of these assemblies of England To conclude this poinct if your Abominations in England were farre fewer then they are yet so long as you reteine that poisonfull leaven of your Hierarchy and vvorship we must tell you as the Scripture saith and experience teacheth That †2. King 4.39.40 a little poison bringeth death vnto the whole pot of potage A 1 Cor. 5.6 litle leaven leaveneth the vvhole lump And Eccl. 10.1 a fevv dead flyes cause the oynctemēt of the Apothecarie to stinke and putrifie Although indeed your abominations are not a few but swarme in abundance among you Some whereof see before Pag. 63. c. In the next place fearing belike that the evidence of “ 1 Tim. 4.1.2.3 this Scripture could not by these shiftes of yours be avoided
a true Reason it maketh Maister Cranmer c. denyers of the faith and not true Christians also For maintenance whereof you have here not one poore vvord at all Tovvching that you say we cannot deny but graunt that we departe from and deny the faith in our Ministery I have told you hovv in my ansvver to your 7. Reason Also see my Replyes to your 2. Exception Fr. Iohnson his Aunswer to Mr Iacobs 2. Reply to the 8. Reason NOw that all your shifts fayle you come with Ifs and And 's If the Apostle meane this and If he meane that c. As if the Apostles * words were not playne 1 Tim. 5.8 so as the meaning may easily be discerned of anie that is not wilfullie blynd Read and mynd in all such cases and Scriptures that which is written Prov. 8.9 with Act. 28.26.27 But you say the Apostle may very well meane both such as neglect their houshold against convenient Christian providence and such as do it against the light of conscience and natures instinct If the first then you deny the Assumption that is the Apostles owne saying And thus againe you give the holy Ghost the lye If the latter then you deny the Proposition And then you must prove that thus they do it For who knoweth not that such will not for this case any more then you for yours confesse that they do it against light of conscience c. Nay will they not say as stiflie as you that this concerneth not them And moreover is not that also which is light in one mans conscience often darke in another mans by one meanes or other See it in an example One of your professors in London runneth to all your Sermons and Lectures from place to place throughout the City every day and every houre By this meanes he neglecteth his familie You tell him he doth it against light of conscience and natures instinct He denyes it and saith he doth it not so but as being perswaded in his conscience that he must first seek the kingdome of God and that then all outward things shal be cast to him and his Herevpon in a blynd zeale he doth as aforesaid Now tell me Is not this man notwithstanding within compasse of the Apostles rule here spoken of Yet will he stand against it for his case as stiffe as you for yours yea and alledge for himself more colour and show of Reason then you do or can for your Hierarchy c. So then both the Proposition and Assumption stand firme against you and therefore also the whole Reason Now here againe being loth belike to give them any rest you call for Mr Cranmer c. As if they were your Pages to wayte at your heeles on every call and to serve your turne at every need whether they will or not Never were poore men in all the world I think made such a stale But they serve you accordingly They let you commaund and go without For every where you commaund their names and yet alway go without their fellowship As I have shewed before in particular Pag. 40. 41. Towching your graunt let the Reader note here againe that you yeeld you depart from and deny the faith in your Ministery c. You say you have before told vs how But what you have said before is there aunswered and taken away And besides for vs it is sufficient that it is done Look you vnto it how you do it It may be some of you do it of ignorance some of knowledge against the light of your owne consciēces some for feare of men some for love of the world some of contention or vaine glory some for their profit pleasure ease honour quyetnes or the like Thus I deny not but in the maner of doing there may be among you in these respects a divers measure and proportion of sinne But this concerneth not vs but your selves to look vnto and that greatlie Chap. 15. The Ninth Reason against Mr Iacobs Assumption aforesaid Fr. Iohnson THey which do otherwise teach and condiscend not to the wholsome words of our Lord Iesus Christ and to the doctrine which is according to godlines all such by the rule of the Apostle are to be separated frō and therefore cannot in that case by the word of God be deemed true Christians 1 Tim. 6.3.4.5 But such is the case of all the Ministers and people of the Church of England in their ministery worship and Church constitution As appeareth both by the severall points of their false doctrine * Points of false doctrine els where noted and by the proofes “ Pag. 61. 63. 135. c. here before alledged out of their owne Canons Articles Iniunctions c. Therefore all the Ministers and people of the Church of England in their Ministery worship and Church constitution are by the rule of the Apostle to be separated from neither can in that case by the word of God be deemed true Christians H. Iacob his 1. Reply to the 9. Reason THis your last Reason is Separate from them that teach otherwise then the truth 1 Tim. 6.3.4.5 We holding those Articles do teach diverse things in the Hierarchy c. that be otherwise then is truth Therefore we must be separated from and consequently we are no true Christians This is a fallacy also Separate from such Ergo separate wholy See my 1. and 2. Reply afore to the third Exception also the Aunswer to the two last Reasons of all the 7. and 8. We graunt therefore so farr forth as we hold otherwise then trueth so farr separate from vs but not any farther at all not wholy or absolutly And so the Apostle here meaneth Wherefore briefly Because you prove vs not wholy to deny the trueth nor fundamentally nor obstinatly perversly and desperatly any part thereof like those Iewes Act. 19.9 whom Paul separated from which he did not from all other Ievves Act. 13.14 16.3 21.23.24.26 3.1 Therefore you ought not vvholy to separate from vs Neither to condemne vs vvholy as abolished from Christ no more then Maister Cranmer Ridley were vvith their Congregations in King Edwards tyme. And thus our Assumption in the beginning standeth firme The doctrine in the booke of Articles is sufficient to make a true Christian. Cōclusion The contrary vvhereof is such a Paradox as hath not ben heard of till this day All reformed Churches in Europe doe and have alvvayes held othervvise Themselves †M. Barrow Mr. Penry Mr. Iohnson heretofore have acknovvledged and professed it The holy Martyrs that lived in King Edvvards dayes and dyed in Queene Maries dayes must be othervvise cut of from Christ vvho vvere true Christians by vertue of this doctrine and the practise thereof or verily not at all But now it is vvonder vvhat extreame passion hath driven them to this denyall Surely they see that it conuinceth flatly as indeed it doth their peremptory separation And therefore rather then they vvould
First I alledged all the reformed Churches For who knoweth not but they all hold CoÌ„munioÌ„ with vs as Churches of God yet you dare either deny this or vtterly peruert it You tell vs of your Answers to Maister Cartwright Mr. Hildersam that are vnanswered If they be like to this your answer here verely they doe wisest in yeelding silence to such friuolous wandring wordes Secondly I alleadged your selues to haue acknoledged heretofore That our publique doctrine allowed would did make many of vs true Christians You too shamefully deny it And say you are for witnessing against it imprisoned banished c. Whereto I answer that if for these things you are troubled I know none can pittie you And because you say none of you euer acknowledged it I will therefore repeat your owne words Mr. BARROW in his last answer in writing to Mr Gifford intituled A fevv obseruations to the reader of Mr. Giff. last Reply Sect. 4. saith thus The next calumniations whereby Mr Gifford indeuoreth to bring vs into hatred with the whole Lande is That we condemne all the persons both men and women of England which are not of our minde and pluck them vp as tares wherein me thinkes he doeth vs open wrong if not against his owne conscience yet against our expresse writngs every where c. Have we not commended the faith of the English Martyr and 〈◊〉 thousand notwithstanding the false offices and gâ—â—â—â— corruptions in the worship they exercised not doubting but the mercy of God through their syncere â—aith to Iesus Christ extended and super abounded above all their sinnes seene and vnseene And what now should let that we should not have the same hope where the same pretious faith in syncerity and simplicity is found So that they neither neglect to search out the truth nor despise the truth when they see it c. Aftervvard in the same Section The faithfull servants of Christ denying the whole constitution and government of this Church of England may iustly deny the people whilest they remaine in that constitution to be members of a true constituted Church yet hereby not condemne them with any such peremptory sentence as Maister Gifford suggesteth Nota from Christ to cut them of from Gods election or from Christ Mr PENRIE in his confession of faith published in writing a litle before his death saith thus The trueth of doctrine touching the holy Trinitie touching the Natures and Offices of Christe Iustifying faith Sacramentes Eternall life and the rest established by her Maiesties Lawes and professed by her selfe their Honors and such as haue knowledge in the Assemblies of this land I acknowledge from my heart to be such as if I mainteined not the vnitie and held not the communion of the same doctrine with them in these poincts I could not possibly be saved For out of the communion of the true profession which her Maiestie hath established in these and the like truthes there is no hope of saluation lâ—ft But ioyne notwithstonding with the publique worship in the assemblies of this Land I dare not for the former causes I doe moreouer willingly confesse That many both of the Teachers also of the Professors within these Parish assemblees haue so embraced this truth of doctrine established and professed in this Land as the Lord of his infinite goodnes hath graunted them the fauour to shew outwardly many tokens whereby in regard of the Lordes election I professe before men and Angels that I iudge them to be meÌ„bers of that body whereof the sonne of God Christ Iesus is the head Onely herein the Lord be mercifull vnto them as to my self in regard of my sinnes That they are not vnder that outward forme of gouernement that Christ hath left c. And in his examination before Master Fanshaw lately published by your selves in print he confesseth the Churches of England to be the true Churches of Christ And what say you Maister Iohnson Have you not affirmed this thing your self to me and to Maister Philips namely towching your owne selfe when you were of vs That then you doubted not but you were a true regenerate Christian By vertue of what doctrine By extraordinarie reuelation Nay but by our publique doctrine of our Church when you stoode and continued a publique Minister of the same If you beleued so of your selfe and that truely vvhat letteth but you may beleeue the like of many Thousands novve Further vvhere you say my applying of the Martyrs is answered before Let the Reader iudge You shevv here that some of them misliked the Hyerarchie But it maketh stronger against you seeing for all that they themselves refused not to communicate and partake vvith them as true Christians as Hooper Bale Bradford c. After vvhere you say though the reformed Churches your selves and the Martyrs had thought otherwise then you now do yet all this is no so und proof against you Yes in deed that novv you hold a Paradoxe those vvitnesses are sufficient for that vvhere vnto may be added the vvhole Churches iudgment and practize vvith all the auncient learned Fathers these 1300. or 1400. yeares Chrysostome Epiphanius Nazianzen Hierom. Austen Ambrose c. They all have thought that vnder the Prelacie and humane ceremonies men may be true Christians Then these witnesses are sufficient that your denyall hereof is a strange vnusuall opinion that is a Paradox Finally to trie vs you propound a many of questions But I leave all this superfluous stuffe to your self to be pondered First let vs cleare this present question and your Reasons hereabout Till then we have no leasure to medle further The Lord of his mercy open your eyes to see your extremitie whereby you do greatly hinder not helpe the truth Not a Firâ—â—â— for victorie but a lover of truth which you would seem to suffer for That you may indeed shew your self as becometh a Christian Pastor not impossible to erre but no lover of error * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not regarding your owne but the prayse of Christ in all things AMEN Fr. Iohnson his Aunswer to Mr. Iacobs 2. Reply to the 9. Reason AS if your bare word were proof ynough still you say but never prove that this Reason is a fallacy Yea and all the Reasons before in your schoole-learning are likewise But the best is you are not the greatest Clerk the schooles have knowen Every of the Reasons is proved before to be true direct sound and strong against you And in all your Replyes against them what els have you done but played the Sophister and that notablie Apply therefore to your self what you speake here And of all these things now let the Reader iudge It seemeth verie absurd vnto you that I say you do here graunt vs the cause But what if the absurditie be found in your self Marke then first your owne words before Pag. 156. ‡ We graunt say you so far forth as we hold otherwise then truth so
constitution of your Church aswell as the other if not also more They are publiklie authorised among you aswell as the other whether you respect the Prelates and Clergy in the Conuocation house or the whole body of the Land in the Parliament They are generallie receyved professed and practised of all the people in every Parish and Cathedrall Church throughout the Land aswell as the other Yea and more too your selves being witnesses One of your owne Prophets Mr Giff. Di. of the strife of the Church Pag. 100. writing of your estate saith There be thousands which be men and women growen that if a man aske them how they shall be saved they cannot tell Neither can your felf deny this to be true How do they then know and professe the faith of your book of Articles Or will you say they are as ignorant of your Service-book and of your Prelates other Articles Iniunctions Courts c. vnto which they ioyne and submit dayly Either therefore you must meddle with the false doctrines and other publik books of your Church aswell as with that book of Articles whereof you speak or els you meddle not at all with the question between vs neither defend your Churches estate The question between vs is Whether the truths you professe together with the false doctrines and abominations of Antichrist retained among you do make you true Churches and I true Christiās in that estate If you keep not to this point you may make as faire a plea for the Church of Rome and all other Hereticks whilest you meddle not with their errors and false doctrines but looke onely at the truths they professe Mynd but the Papists profession concerning Christ and his full and sufficient satisfaction for all our sinnes whereof I spake before Pag. 47. And consider now with your self how well and soundlie you have defended your Churches estate How your doctrine and constitution erreth fundamentally I have declared before Pag. 22. 114. 147. But now though you have no list to meddle with your Churches doctrine yet let vs see in your next Reply if your list will be to deale with your owne Your owne I say which I had from your self and take to be private to your self I had it from you in a Conference which passed “ between you and me April 3. 1597 in the presence of divers that can witnesse it Yet for more certainty and better remembrance I desired and obteined of you to write it downe your self So you gave it me then vnder your hand in writing which I have with me yet to shew Thus it is word for word A power borrowed from Antichrist to excommunicate may externally be committed vnto a people vsed by them who have power to excommunitate from Christ Henry Iacob When you had thus set it downe I desired your proof of it from the Scriptures But none could be had I could not obteine that at your hands Therevpon I tooke the paper and wrote vnderneath your assertion thus This is against the Scriptures 1 Cor. 5.4.5 compared with 2 Cor. 6.14.15.16.17 Ezech. 43.8 Mat. 18.17.18.19.20 1 King 18.21 Fran Iohnson It is a good while Mr Iacob synce this passed between vs and like that you have had leysure ynough to consider of it all this tyme. Therefore in your next I hope you will have some list to meddle with this doctrine of your owne though you have none at all for your Churches Yet for the doctrines of your Church also because I am fallen into the mention of them againe let me put you in mynd of two things mo Mat. 13.24 c. The first is towching the parable of the tares spoken of before Pa. 158. of which because it is straungelie and daylie perverted among you for the maintenance of your confused and wicked estate therefore will I here in particular adde a word or two more besides that which I annexed before for the further explication of this point and conuiction of your error As first that you do consider with your selves if with this parable agree not also the Apostles doctrine where he calleth the Church the house of God and saith that in this house are not onelie vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and earth and that as some of them be for honor so some be also to dishonor from which therefore if anie purge himself he shal be a vessel vnto honor sanctifyed and meet for the Lord and prepared to every good work 1 Tim 3.15 5.24.25 6.3.4.5 2 Tim. 2.16.17.18.19.20.21 3.5 Next that howsoever the parable be vnderstood by anie whether of 1 the generall estate of the Church from the beginning of the world to the end thereof how Sathan alway hath his tares his wicked ones sometymes more open sometymes more secret even as God alway hath his righteous children and servants vntill the day of that finall and everlasting separacion Mat. 13.35.40 2 Or the particular estate of the Church in the tyme of Antichrists apostasy wrought by Sathan vntill the discovery and full abolition thereof 2 Thes 2 3.-14 3 Or the Churches continuall being and cōversing in the world with the children of the wicked Which they must needs do or els they must go out of the world as the Apostle affirmeth 1 Cor. 5.9.10 Howsoever I say the parable be vnderstood whether of these or any the like yet doth it no way make for the receiving or reteining of the knowen wicked whosoever they be in the body of the Church The scope of the parable by these interpretations also leading to no such thing but onelie to comfort and instruct the godlie how to carry themselves with patience and wisdome in such estate of things in the world And the Apostle whose doctrine doubtles is not contrarie to Christs teacheth expressely in that place to the Corinthians and the other mentioned before both that the Church is a distinct body separated from the world not partaking in their evill wayes and that if anie of the Church will not so walk but commit iniquity and repent not that then they be so far from being suffred to grow or remaine any longer in the Church as they be forthwith cast out of it and delivered vnto Sathan the Prince of the world and children of disobedience even the Enemy that soweth the tares here spoken of And thus also was the Apostles practise For both which that is both his doctrine and practise herein see these Scriptures 1 Cor. 5. chap. 2 Cor. 2 6-11 6 14.-17 Act. 19.9 Ro. 16.17 Ephes 2.1.2 Gal. 5.12 2 Thes 3.6.14 1 Tim. 1.20 6.3.4.5 2 Tim. 2 16-21 3.5 4.14.15 Tit. 3.10 Heb. 10.38.39 To conclude then albeit that such having crept into the Church do both before and after their excommunication as do also the other of the world who never received the faith offend and trouble the Church and children of the kingdome yea and do often flourish also in outward
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
ecclesiasticall offices 2. the maner of calling vnto the offices 3. a great part of the works wherein these false offices are imployed 4. the maintenance or livings whereby they are maynteined in their offices All which I will be bound to prove by the Lords help to be derived not from Iesus Christ but from the kingdome of Antichrist his great enemy And therefore forasmuch as I can not be partaker of the former holy things of God but I must be subiect vnto the power of Antichrist in these officers and knowen by those marks whereby his subiects are noted therefore I am enforced bound to seek the comfort of the word and Sacraments where I may have them without the submitting of my self vnto any ecclesiasticall power in Religion save onely vnto that which is derived from Christ Iesus the Lord in whom all fulnes of power dwelleth Col. 1.19 and from whom all those must derive their power and office vnto whom the Saincts of God are to submit their consciences to be wrought vpon in Religion Againe seing the aforenamed 4. enormityes of this Church are marks which properly belong vnto the Kingdome of the Beast that is the Romane Antichrist we dare not have any communion and fellowship with them nor be knowen by them least we shovld be partakers of those most fearfull most dreadfull iudgements which are denounced by the Spirit of God against all those that have communion with any of the irreligious inventions of the Beast Rev. 14.9.10 These are the things together with the want of Christs true order which I especially mislike and the speciall causes why I dare not ioyne with the Assemblyes of this Land c. Thus was his aunswer In which you may see how he professeth your Church offices and estate to be such as he dare not ioine therewith both because they are not derived from CHRist IEsus the LOrd of his Church and for that they belong to the kingdome and body of Antichrist and are marks of that Beast against which and all that partake therewith God hath denounced most fearfull iudgements in his word Vnto these most playne declarations of his mynd I might adde many mo out of his letters and other writings But what needeth it whenas the laying downe of his life in testimony against the Antichristian estate of your Church is and will be alway as a thousand witnesses against you whatsoever you pretend otherwise And now Mr Iacob let me vpon this occasion aske you this question whether you think Mr Barrow Mr Greenwood Mr Penry c. dyed Martyrs and witnesses of the truth against your Antichristian estate or whether you account them evill doers iustlie deserving to be put to death The thing is a publik actiō and cōcerneth the publik state of your Church which you would seem to defend Therefore is it needfull that you declare your mynd fullie and plainlie therein which yet I think you will be loth to do You love so to walke in darkenes and yet would seem to defend your Church when in deed you do nothing lesse Next you alledge myne owne acknowledgement to Mr Philips and your self for the approbation of your estate Of which being also obiected before I have spoken already Pag. 41. To it therefore I refer you Yet before I end this point I will note here three things more for the Reader to observe The first is towching Mr Barrow Mr Penry and my self that seing you spare not to wrest our words whose meaning all men know and our owne practise proclaymeth we can not therefore look for any other at your hands but that you will much more pervert the Scriptures and word of God about the meaning whereof men make so manie doubts and controversyes from tyme to tyme. The second is towching your owne words in these Replyes That whereas in the Conclusion of your first Reply Pag. 156. you sayd we our selves acknowledged your Assumption to be true now in the Conclusion of your second Reply Pag. 167. you chaunge your owne words and say we acknowledged your publik doctrine would and did make many of you true Christians By which you cleare vs and contradict your self For if your Assumption were true then not onelie many but all and every member of your Church should thereby be deemed true Christians as towching their outward estate even all your Prelates Priests Dumbe dogs Non-residents Thieves Coniurers c. Which you may speak with shame ynough Sure I am none of vs did ever acknowledge it and I trust never shall The third is concerning some things spoken to me in the presence of others at one tyme by Mr Philips whom here you name and at another tyme by your self Of Mr Philips when once he had speach with me about our cause I asked If her Maiesty should permit both that way wherein the Prelates and you now are and the way wherein we are to be free for all men to walke in eyther of them as they should be perswaded In which of the two then he would walke himself as being perswaded it was the truth of God Wherevnto he aunswered that then he thought he should walke in the way wherein we are Of your self also among other things once I asked this Whether you were so mynded for the Ministery which Christ hath appointed in his Church as you thought you ought and would dy for it God assisting you To which you answered Yea. Therevpon presentlie I asked agayne Whether you were so mynded for the Ministery of the CHurch of ENgland as you thought you ought would also dy for it To which you answered No. If now Mr Iacob I would presse conclusions out of Mr Philips words and your owne as you do out of myne and others might I not gather from your selves far better then you do or can anie thing from vs that in your consciences you see your Churches estate and Ministery to be vnlawfull and none of Christs at all But I spare you The Martyrs whom next you alledge I shewed to be against you by their owne testimony Vnto this you answer That it maketh stronger against vs seing although they misliked the Hierarchy yet they themselves refused not to communicate and partake with them then as true Christians as Hooper Bale Bradford c. But are you in deed so simple as not to perceyve that this is of no moment at all What if the Papists should so answer when we bring against them the testimonie of the auncient Martyrs towching the Masse the Hierarchy Auricular confession and other corruptions of that Church Or are you ignorant that * See before Pag. 44.45 Iohn Hus Iohn wickleffe William Swinderby and manie other of the Martyrs in elder tyme did in these things communicate with the Popish Church vnto their dying day If this aunswer then be frivolous for them in such case how should it not be likewise in yours Besides that you may by this reasō perswade aswell to communicate with the Popish
tyme and after as †Beza in Acts 15.20 some thinke even till their Temple and Citie were destroyed though they did personally hate and persecute Christ Such also was the sinne of the auncient declyning Bishops Cyprian Epiphanius Augustine Chrisostome Leo of Rome c. No lesse was in ours of late Cranmer Ridly Hooper c. in King Edwards dayes and no greater is now in ours presently especially towching our Churches Ministers too generally If you say we are all convicted now and sinne against our owne consciences as they did not in those tymes It is vtterly false and a palpable vntruth Whosoever knoweth any thing in our Church estate generally must needs see it that this poinct towching the Hyerarchy is not acknowledged even of ignorance in a thousand to one many holding and not of the simplest this present governement to be th' only true and right kinde but all men almost to be indifferent and lawfull very few indeed and scarce to be found that see it to be meerly nought or as you terme it wicked intolerable And in king Edwards tyme whosoever considereth shall finde H. Iâ— that the godly learned Protestans then were not vtterly ignorant of this point of reformation and yet sinned not against their conscience in bearing with the tymes neither were abolished from Christ And surelie towching the Iewes they were all generally more convicted then that Iesus vvas the Christ then vve are now that the Prelacy is of Antichrist yet they remayned a Church still because generally indeed they vvere not plainly conuicted Thus then this our sinne is * see the 2. sortes of fundamentall sinnes in the 2. Reply to your yâ—â—â—eason before Pag. 142 Fr. Io. See the aunswer thereto in the same treatise Pag 144.147 no way fundamentall it destroyeth not faith Christianity in our vvhole assemblies Therefore they remaine Christian people still as I affirmed not all godles prophane as you vncharitably speak O beware of rash hasty iudging even of one brother Rom. 14.3.4.13 how much more of such anb so many whole assemblies professing Christ in England Woe be vnto him which curseth where God curseth not Num. 23.8 As also indeed that blesseth where God blesseth not We desire you not to blesse vs in our evill but we vvarne you not to curse vs in our good vvhich indeed turneth vs not to any furtherance but to a great hinderance and stumbling block stopping vs from that syncerity vvhich els vve should dravve nearer vnto Blessed is he that iudgeth vvisely that is vvithout affection and partialitie even of him that is despised Better it is and more Christianlike even to offend in too much compassion and patience especially tovvardes so many hundreth thousands by vvhom vve knovv nought saue good in this poinct then to offend in too much rigor and severity and vniust anger Mat. 5.22 Hovvbeit this vvere not indeed to offend as hath ben above shevved And briefly in twoo vvords thus I conclude it farther that That faith and religion taught in the booke of Articles published 1562. maketh the people that beleeve and obey the same true Christians such as so living dying may be saved But our Church doeth so holde that faith Therefore they are true Christians The Proposition onely is doubted I had thought none so desperate as to deny it but lately I vnderstand you haue denyed it Hovvbeit for ansvver I referre you partly to that vvhich here hath bene said before especiallie to that vvhich is replyed to your Answer in the former Treatise which being well weighed I doubt not but all indifferent Christian mindes will acknowledge our publique Church assemblies in England to be true Christians Fran. Iohnson his Aunsvver YOu have now ten tymes reproched me and are not ashamed Whatsoever your self or others do think of your Churches estate God forbid that I should eyther iustify it or take away myne owne innocency in witnessing the truth against it Heare therefore and I will aunswer you once againe I will open my mouth for the truth against him that pleadeth for Baal The strength of the Reason standeth not as you ignorantlie suppose in the truth or falshood of the particulars you mention but in this that it is not so vvith choyse of Ministers in the Church as it is vvith choyse of parties in mariage For Infidels Idolaters godles persons c. may in that estate marry togeather but they are not in that estate capable of choosing and ioyning to a true Minister And therefore your Comparison doth not hold Yet the particulars do all of them availe much against you whatsoever you pretend to the contrary The first is directlie to the question For although now having seen my aunswer you speak of Christian people yet your comparison which was given me to aunswer spake at first of ignorant persons and those also such as might marry togeather Now you cannot deny but ignorant persons be they never so prophane and godles may marry one with another Yet have they not power in such case to chuse a Minister It is your self then that keep not the point but chop and chaunge the termes of your Argument as you think may best fit your turne And yet all this chaunging of your hew will avayle you nothing at all vnles you could prove 1. That your people in that Church-constitution are true Christians 2. That your Ministers so made and received are true Pastors But neither of these can you do For the first let the Reader see the former treatise where this point is purposelie handled And mynd here that your self confesse some of your Assemblies are all and wholy prophane godles persons Of which you say you speak not Yet tell vs whether you think such Assemblies be true Churches such people true Christians and their Ministers hauing like ordering of the Prelates and acceptance of the people true Pastors or not For the latter this is the treatise and place where you should prove it if you could But behold you do nothing lesse In the Comparison Pag 186. Nay even here you yeeld that your calling received from the Prelates is vnlawfull Yet this is the onelie maner of calling that your Church constitution appointeth That which you speak of your Assemlies not being all and wholy profane and godles persons is nothing to the purpose You might easilie have seen if you had mynded the words of my Reason that I sayd expresselie your Assemblies consist of all sorts of people that is some better some worse Yet seing the best among you remaine in confusion with the worst and all of you in bondage to Antichrist that even for this cause also you can not in that estate be deemed true Churches having power to chuse such Officers as Christ hath appointed for his Church And where you say whole companyes of Christians are not by such commixtures made vnholy prophane and godles it is wholy from the questioÌ„ The point is not
them be yet remayning in your worship Hierarchy confusion Canons Licences Dispensations Rev. 14.9.10.11 Exod. 20.4.5 Excommunications c. with ♣ which no man may have spirituall communion vnder payne of eternall wrath that if it be the will of God her Highnes may be his instrument to suppresse and abolish these also and to establish the whole truth of God according to his word And further that she may take to her owne Civill vses the Lordships and possessions of the Prelates and other Clergy as God hath foretold and appointed should be done with them Rev. 17.16 19.17.18 And as King Henry the eight her Maiestyes Father of famous memory did with the Abbats Monks Fryers Nunnes and with their possessions and revennewes Which happy worke by what Princes soever it be done as certaynly will come to passe for the Lord of hostes hath spoken it it will greatlie redound to the glory of God the honour of themselves the free passage of the Gospell the peace of the Church and benefit of the whole Cōmon wealth The Lord therefore hasten and accōplish it Yea true and strong is the Lord who hath spoken and will performe it Rev. 17. 18. 19. chap. This is our mynd which you desier to know concerning reformatiō commaunded and compelled by the Magistrate Where note withall that it is the work of God onelie to adde to his Church such as he will save And therefore that it is not in the power of Princes or anie Man whatsoever to perswade the conscience and make members of the Church but that this must be left to God alone who onelie can do it Act. 2.47 11.21 Gen. 9.27 1 Cor. 12.13 14.24.25 Zach. 8.23 Ier. 32.38.39.40 Princes may and ought within their Dominions to abolish all false worship and all false Ministeryes whatsoever and to establish the true worship and Ministery appointed by God in his word commaunding and compelling their subiects to come vnto and practise no other but this Yet must they leave it vnto God to perswade the conscience and to adde to his Church from tyme to tyme such as shal be saved But with you in these things you know it is quite contrary Thus then neyther the examples of the aforesayd Kings of Iudah are in your case fitlie alledged neyther is it of anie waight if all your people and Assemblies in the Land willinglie openly advisedly submitted to whatsoever was proclaymed at the beginning of her Highnes reygne Vnles you could prove that Religion worship Ministery c. then proclaymed and still vsed to be by God prescribed in his word Which still you take for graunted when it is the very thing which we denie and you should proue if possibly you could And what if here I should put you in mynd how you might more fitlie alledge for your case the keeping of the Statutes of Omry and the like Micah 6.16 But I will leave this for your next Reply And then also tell vs what truth it is you speak of that was proclaymed at the beginning of her Maiestyes raygne whereof the people had such aduizement notice as you pretend from November 17. to Midsomer following For the book of Articles * heretofore so much pressed by your self Pag. 3. c was so far frō being proclaymed then as it was not agreed vpon till the yeare 1562. Which was at least fower or five yeares after the tyme you speak of here Now to proceed you tell vs that no open professed Papists Atheists nor other Hereticks were then receyved into your communion c. But how can we beleev you when D. Whitgift your Archprelate of Canterbury a man of as great reckning and of more experience in your Church then Mr Iacob tels vs the cleane contrary yea and prints it too even then when he writeth in defence of your present estate viz †Whitg book Pag. 176. 178 639. 643. that now the Church is full of Papists Atheists Drunkerds whoremongers c. Even the Prelates themselves I perceive do in some things deale more syncerelie then you Mr Iacob and are nothing so shameles Yet I know that some others of your coat which seek reformation deale herein as plainelie as the Prelates and far more faithfullie then you For example they confesse and publish that you have ‡ Sermon on Rom. 12. swarmes of Atheists Idolaters Papists erroneous and hereticall Sectaryes the Family of love and such like Another spareth not to avouch more particularly ♣ State of the Church of England between Diot Tert. c. that some Doctors of the Arches be the same men they were in Queen Maryes tyme. Others also speaking of your Ecclesiasticall courts write thus ‡ Ad◠to the Parliament God deliver all Christians out of this Antichristian tyranny where the Iudges Advocates and Proctors for the most part are Papists c. Thus your owne men of all sorts beare witnes against you But to let their testimony alone who knoweth not that the whole Land being polluted with most Popish and wicked Idolatry in Q. Maryes dayes they were all straightway after without repentance or the word preached going before received into the body of your Church and constreyned to become members thereof Who with their seed vnto this day do so remayne and are commonlie called the Church of England Neither will that clause of open professed be anie starting whole for you as it may be you dreame All know well ynough it is no matter how open and professed they be so as they will be conformable to come to Church once a moneth and heare your Divine service book Did Mr W. Smith your great acquaintance never tell you Mr Wroth Iustice. how ‡ one of the Cōmissioners themselves when he was called before them said vnto him Come to Church and be a Divell if thou wilt That which you say of ignorant men received in a generall reformation if you meane of some having far lesse knowledge then others being also vnable eyther well to expresse their owne mynd or to defend the truth against an adversary I deny it not Otherwise know that all who are received members of the Church being of yeares are to be such as in their measure lesse or more have learned Christ and do willinglie submit to his Gospell having heard and knowen the grace of God therein Ephes 4.7.20.21 2 Cor. 9.13 Col. 1.5.6 Act. 2.41 17.3.4 Esa 44.5 Zac. 8.20.21.22.23 And so questionles it was in the time of Hezechiah c. For which see these Scriptures 2 Chron. 29.31 30.2.3.4.11.12.13 2 King 23.2.3 2 Chron. 15.15 Besides that the Iewes did long before Hezekiahs time vpō knowledge enter covenant with the Lord to have him to be their God and they to be his people Exod. 19.7.8 Deut. 29.10.11.12.13 For the notorious dissolute and wicked you plead that some were reclaymed all vndertook another professiō and a new appearāce of Christianity c. Which how false
2.14.15.16 Rev. 2.9 Another vntruth is that you say the sinne of your Bishops now is no greater then of the auncyent declining Bishops and them in K. Edwards tyme Whereas many wayes it is incomparably greater as I have shewed before Pag. 40. 41. 129. 133. 148. 162. 175. 177. 183. 203. Another is in that you say your sinne is no way fundamental The contrarie whereof see proved before Pag. 22. 73. 114. 147. And another when you charge me as if I held all among you to be godles and profane when I have alway thought and professed otherwise Yea even here I said your Church coÌ„sisteth of all sorts that is both good and bad better and worse some making coÌ„scieÌ„ce of their wayes according to the knowledg they have some not c. For which also see further before Pag. 7. 20. 21. 41. 78. 103. 168. 178. Finallie it is â—either vntrue also when you say this poynt towching the Hierarchy is not acknowledged in your Church even of ignorance in a thousaÌ„d to one Or if it be true it is a shame for you and all the Ministers of your Church who have not in this cleare light of the Gospell by the space of fourty yeares together made knowen vnto the people so great a point of Antichristianity as the Hierarchy is Which is the verie sinewes and strength of the Popes Religion As I feare wofull experience will teach you further if yet you do not see and feel it ynough But of this also I have spoken before in the Preface Section 6. Lo here the ornaments of your Reply and Defence of your estate The very naming whereof is sufficient to shew your folly and your Churches miscrie Yet least you should please your self in this course as also for the satisfying of such as desier further handling of these things I have spoken of them before more particularly As namely of sinnes fundamentall Pag. 22. 32. 44. 46. 51. 73. 114. 147. Of the Scriptures which here you alledge in the margent Pag. 51. and in the Preface Section 3. Of the Iewes Church Pag. 84. 161. 195. 197. in the Preface Section 5. Of the auncient Bishops Pag. 129. 162. 183. 203. Of them in K. Edwards dayes Mr Cranmer c. Pag. 8. 40. 41. 48. 49. 67. 77. 162. 182. Of your Churches estate and conviction Pag. 3. 7. 16. 27. 33. 42. 43. 53. 60. 61. 63 73. 78. 82. 94. 101. 103. 108. 120. 130. 131. 132. 135. 147. 155. 157. 171. 180. 188 194. 196. 200. c. Your caution against rash hasty iudging of any is very good and needfull We do together with you exhort all to beware of such dealing and to take heed they †iudge righteous iudgement as Christ hath commauÌ„ded And therefore that they be careful to search out and help forward the iudgment Ioh. 7.24 given by the Apostles and Prophets on the Whore of Babylon and all her Daughters Rev. 18.20.21 and 17.1.5.6.7 with Ier. 51 61-64 Neither let any think that this is to curse where God blesseth or to lay an hindrance and stumbling block before any but that it is in deed to reward Babylon as she hath rewarded vs and to beare witnes to the truth and syncerity of the Gospell Rev. 18.6 14.6.7.8 2 Thes 2.8 that it may the more be brought to light and received of the elect to eternall life To such we know Christ with all his ordinances is precious but in deed to them which be disobedient he is a stone to stumble at and a rock of offence even to them which stumble at the word being disobedient to the which thing they were also ordeined 1 Pet. 2.7.8 Take heed therefore you blesse not your selves in your disobedience of anie truth of Christ promising your selves peace though you walk according to the stubbernes of your owne hearts so adding drunkenes vnto thirst For such blessing God hath threatned to curse Deut. 29.19.20 Zach. 11.5.6 Malach. 2.2 For our selves we judge not any man It is the word of God that iudgeth which shall also judge in the last day Ioh. 12.48 By it therefore let every man trie and examine his wayes of what place or calling soever he be first for the worship he performeth vnto God and then for all the other actions of his life that he may so please God in this life as he may in the next be partaker of the glorie that shal be revealed Neither let anie be daunted with the reproches and afflictioÌ„s which accompanie the truth and witnesses thereof Even Christ himself the Prince of our salvation was consecrate through afflictions and he hath promised if we suffer with him we shall also raigne with him Heb. 2.10 Rev. 2.10 Rom. 8.17.18 2 Tim. 2.12 Therefore also we say with the Prophet as you do here and wish it might sound in the eares of all men as a trumpet Blessed is he that iudgeth wisely of the poore even of him that is despised c. Psal 41.1 To conclude your one word whereof you told vs a litle before is now become two words and all litle ynough For if your reason be good all me your self if a man might not after your example in two words conclude the Papists also to be true Christians thus That faith and religion taught in the Creeds commonly attributed to the Apostles the Nicene Councell Athanasius c. maketh the people that beleev and obey the same true Christians such as so living and dying may be saved But the Popish Church doth so hold that faith Therefore they are true Christians c. If your reason be good what will you say to this If you say they professe in word but do in deed both in their Church-constitutioÌ„ and practise denie it such also is your case Besides that the question is not whether anie among you may be saved by the truth you hold For we doubt not but eveÌ„ in the Popish Church God saveth his by the truth there held But the question is whether you or they can in your estate and Church-constitution be deemed by the word of God true Christians or true Churches such as none may separate from your worship and Ministery established among you And here I can tell you that even some of your selves have acknowledged and openly avowched your Churches case to be such Demonstration in the Preface as “ a man may be any thing among you but a sound Christian Yet I suppose you will not say they were desperate for saying so And if I be not deceived your self also have ben like mynded with them heretofore Sure I am you had need cleare these things very well and in anie case take heed you become not desperate therein Neither two nor three of your words will help the matter It is the word of God that must decide it between vs. Whatsoever you have replyed in the former Treatise I have there answered And now I leave it to all indifferent and Christian mynds to acknowledge your
publik Church asseblyes for such Christians as in that estate they are found to be by the word of God If by it either you or anie other can prove them to be true ones I have done If not then I wish you and all others to yeeld to the truth and no longer to strive against it Hitherto of the first Exception against your Comparison Chap. 3. The Second Reason or Exception against Mr Iacobs Comparison Fran. Iohnson THe Priest doth not celebrate or pronounce any marriage without the married first giue their consent But the Prelate make ministers without and before the peoples cōsent Therefore the Comparison holdeth not H. Iacob his Reply FIrst it is very vaine to make this any matter viz the peoples consenting either before or after the Prelats ordeyning For whether before or after it is in nature and value all one They in their ignorance having respect only to the Prelats act And if it were so that the Priest should sometymes marie a couple the Maide being meerly enforced and denying consent yet not striving nor resisting and a while after shall willingly agree like Out of question there is now true wedlock betweene them Even so the case is betwixt the Church and the Minister 2. But what will you except here against those Pastors amongst vs that were first chosen by the people they first professing their consent and are after instituted and inducted by the Prelat Many are thus called amongst vs and the most have the peoples consent even together at their first inducting at least wise they have soone after by the peoples submitting mainteyning them even presently 3. Lastly in a word where you say the Prelats make Ministers without before the peoples consent Beza in Act. 14.23 Fenner against Bridges Pag. 148. We affirme that they make not the Pastor at all indeed and in truth but onely supposedly It is the Churches consent that maketh him truly whether before or after the Bishop that skilleth not If any thinke Imposition of hands to be simplie necessarie to the being of a Minister that is also an error and can not be proved Fr. Io. his Aunswer BEcause I see you need it Mr Iacob I will deale very liberallie with you I graunt that your peoples consenting whether before or after the Prelates ordeining is in nature and valew all one c. that is of no valew or force at all Whether you respect the Law of God which knoweth no such jugling of people and Prelates or the Law of your owne Church which appoynteth no such election by the people at all And thus too it is a very vayne thing for you to make this any matter viz our peoples consenting eyther before or after the Prelates ordeyning Yet remember that your Cōparison which I answered spake of people that had made choyse of a Minister before he came for ordination to the Prelate Therefore it was and is ynough against the Comparison to shew that the Priests can not celebrate mariage before the partyes consent ech to other Whereas the Prelates make Ministers both before and without the peoples consent yea and without their knowledge commonly It is vayne then in you to count such exception vayne I mynd also how deceitfully you passe by that clause without the peoples consent Therefore to discover your fraud and to see what better answer you can give in your next I will propound the Reason also thus The Priest doth not celebrate any mariage without the maryed first give their consent But the Prelates make Ministers without the peoples consent Therefore the Comparison holdeth not Your case of a Mayde being meerly enforced and denying consent yet not striving nor resisting is meerly absurd and ridiculous Can it possibly be that one should both be meerlie enforced denying consent and yet not strive nor resist As soone may you make Fier and Water agree together as these two For to be enforced yea meerlie enforced must needs imply a striving or resisting against it Els what needed there or how should there be said to be anie forcing But you say if afterward she agree there is true wedlock True in deed if they both agree But then it is not by reason of anie thing done before which was sinfull altogether but by vertue of the present mutuall willing consent they having liberty and power to marrie together according to Gods ordinance But with your people and Assemblyes it is far otherwise seing you have not liberty or power in your estate to call a Minister according to the ordinance of Christ Which I have proved both in the first Reason before and in the rest hereafter following 2. To your demaund about Ministers first chosen by the people afore they are instituted by the Prelates I aunswer that if your people had power in your estate to chuse a Minister which they have not yet the receiving of institution and induction by the Prelates afterward being never ordeined by God were at least to set your thresholds by Gods thresholds that is your inventions by Gods ordinances Which were in very deed to commit abomination against the Lord and to defile his holy Name and you in so doing become so far from having him present with you as even by this meanes you set a wall between him and your selves Ezech. 43.8 And not so onely but do also rebell against the Lord and turne away from him in receiving an other Ministery for the administration of his holy things thē he by his word hath ordeined in his Church Ios 22.29 Let the Reader note here besides how you speak onelie of the institution and induction by the Prelates and closely passe over the Prelates first ordeining of them Priests and Deacōs Without which they are in your Church no Ministers at all neyther capable of anie benefice though the people should never so much make choyse of any Where you say most of your Ministers have the peoples consent at their first inducting or at least soone after by the peoples submitting mainteyning them even presently First I aunswer as before that your peoples consent in your estate is of no moment Secondly if this reason of yours be good then your dumbe Priests Non-residents and most Popish Ministers in the worst tymes and places are to be accounted true Pastors aswell as the best among you because vpon their inductiō the people submit to their Ministery and mainteyne them even presently For who knowes not that when once a Priest is presented by the Patrone and inducted by the Prelate to a benefice your people do and must joyne to his Ministery and for his maintenance give him their tithes c. will they nill they Adde herevnto that even the maintenance belonging to your Ministery is such as was never ordeyned by Christ and therefore neither to be received by the Ministers nor given by the people Which I prove thus 1. Your Ministrrs are mainteyned by Tithes which is Iewish and ceased with “
the Levitical Priesthood Or if you will Popish derived from the Iewes Heb. 7.12 which comes all to one end 2. Your maintenance is such as by it all maner Ministeryes once received in the Land might be mainteyned were they never so Popish or otherwise never so impious in anie respect 3 You are bound so to mainteyne the Ministers you have whatsoever they be and that also whether you will or not 4. On the contrarie the maner of maintenance now ordeined by Christ for his Ministers is such 2 Cor. 9.14 as belongeth but to them which preach the Gospell and must come from the people of love and duty in that behalf 1. Thes 5.13 Gal. 6.6 Rom. 15.27 1. Timoth. 5.17 1 Cor. 9.7 c. 3. Lastly you say in a word but a shrewd word that the Prelates make not the Pastors at all in deed and in truth but onely supposedly And now in your printed book for more certainty you affirme it with consent of others whom you note in the margent But for this point it needeth not For we yeeld it most willingly Yet note withall that thus you do both give the cause and condemne at once all your Ministery as vnlawfull such as may neither be received nor joyned vnto See it for plainenes sake in a Syllogisme thus Witnes your Articles Canons Iniunctions Statutes c. Your Law and Church admitteth no other Ministery as lawfull among you but that which is receyved from the Prelates But this say you is none at all in deed and in truth Therefore all the Ministery admitted amoÌ„g you by your Law Church is none at all in deed and in truth A very sound defence of your Ministerie such as all the Prelates and Priests in the Land may well thank you for with cap in hand At least wise if you could draw them to be thus mynded And here let me put you in mynd how once you wished vs to set downe nothing in answer vnto you but that which is the doctrine of our whole Church If your self have kept this rule it is well If not how will you aunswer it That which you have added concerning Imposition of hands I admit with these cautions 1. That it is not to be neglected where it may well be had Hebr. 6.2 Act. 6.6 and 13.3 2. That in Churches alreadie established it be done by the Eldership and where people first come into the order of Christ by the fittest among them being therevnto appointed by the rest of the Church 1 Tim. 4.14 Numb 8.10 And thus much of the second Exception Chap. 4. The third Exception against Mr Iacobs Comparison Fran. Iohnson THe people can not chuse their Minister vnles the Prelate do either before or after make him a Minister But a couple may chuse and take each other in marriage whether the Priest will or no. Therefore the Comparison holdeth not H. Iacob his Reply 1 VVE deny your saying the people can not chuse They can chuse They have power in Christ as being ChristiaÌ„s though they know not their right therein The ignorance of this simply doth not cut vs of from Christ nor from this holy priviledge no more theÌ„ the blind Papists have lost their right power of marrying together without a Priest because they are ignoraÌ„t of it 2. Againe where you say But a couple may chuse each other whether the Priest will marry them or no Marke That we speake of blind Papists that thinke that the Priest is the whole absolute and necessarie marriage maker If you say even such have right and power to marry though they be farre from knowing it and farther from practizing Then graunt the like in chusing a Minister to our Christians for so the Comparison importeth Els if you meane those words of others that be men of knowledge Then you fight with your shadow you touch not our question Fran. Iohnson his Answer YOu do still take for graunted that which is denyed viz that your people have power in Christ to chuse their Ministers c. I proved before that seing your people stand in AntichristiaÌ„ servitude to the Prelates their Canons Courts confusion c. they have not in that estate neither can have whiles they so remaine the liberty and power of Christ either to chuse them Ministers or to performe anie other action belonging to the Church of Christ And further that they can not in that estate by the word of God be approved true Christians For which see the former Treatise In that you graunt the peoples choyse to be an holy priviledge you condemne both your Church which rejecteth it and such of your people as seem to vse it whereas in your estate they do nothing els but profane it Why also do not such of you as know these things deliver everie man his soule from that slaverie wherein ye stand vnder the Prelates that so you might enioy and practise the priviledges and holy things of God as Christ hath given them to his Church 2. To that you pretend of such as be blynd and ignorant thinking thereby to help your self I answer that we speak of your people as now they stand in your Church-constitution For so you know the question is Now whether they be ignorant or whether they have knowledge it skilleth not for the matter in hand This we alledge that none at all of your people or assemblyes have in your estate the liberty and power which Christ hath given to his Church as the other haue for mariage So we have towched the question directly But in deed the fault is Mr Iacob Iren. adversus Valem lib. 1. cap. 1. that your Comparison and Arguments hold together like ropes of sand as “ Irenaeus said of the Valentinians Let the Reader note withall 1. How you match together and put as in an eaven ballance the blynd Papists and your Christians A worthy defence of your estate 2. How here you pretend to speak of such as be ignorant other where of Christians having knowledge of Christ feare of God faith c. Thus turning your self into so manie shapes and colours as a man can not tell where to have you or what to make of you Quo teneam vultus mutantem Protea nodo Chap 5. The fourth ReasoÌ„ or ExceptioÌ„ against Mr Iacobs CoÌ„parison Fran. Iohnson IF anie that by the word of God are not capable of marrying togeather as Brother and Sister c. do notwithstanding consent to take each other for man and wife yet are they not therefore lawfull man and wife So if a people and some man that by the word of God can not chuse take each other as Pastor and Church in their estate such as now is in this â—aâ—d do notwithstanding consent so to accept each other yet are they not therefore lawfull Pastor and Church H. Iacob his Reply THis is wholy presumed and from the Question also Like to the first Reason and hath the same answer as is made
to the first accusation there You reason against people not capable of a Pastor And we speake of true Christians which are alwayes capable You do ill therfore in comparing this action to mariage betwene brother and sister who indeed can not marry Happely you may likelyer compare it to a couple that have lived both of them wantonly Afterwards they marrie togeather and this marriage it selfe they vse not soberly nor temperatly Howbeit for all this I professe these two are truly man and wife notwithstanding Now even so our Churches and Ministers c. Fr. Ioh. his Answer KNowing the question Mr Iacob you might well see if you were not blynd that this is directly vnto it And so in deed it is like the first Reason that is it sheweth the folly of your Comparison and is such as you can not aunswer True it is that we speak of people not capable of a Pastor that is of yours in your Church-constitution And if you speak as you say you do of true Christians which are alwayes capable then speak you not of your people or Assemblyes in your estate And so it is your self that fâ—â—ht with your shadow and towch not the question but still presume that which you should prove viz that standing in Antichristian bondage to the Prelates and their procedings yet notwithstanding you are by the word of God to be judged true Christians having the liberty and power given by Christ to his Church whereof he is the head Till you prove this we must needs think that the comparing of your chusing a Minister in your estate to a brother and sister or such like that can not lawfully marry togeather c. is good and pertinent Your owne comparing of it to a couple that have lived wantonly and afterwards marry together yet vse not their mariage soberly c. descryeth that your self see the wicked and vnlawfull estate of your Ministers and people as now they stand howsoever you labour to hide and excuse it as much as you can And besides if you would describe your estate as it is in deed you should compare it to such as both had and do still live wantonlie and wickedly in adultery and vncleannes whom God will judge Let all such therefore among you as feare God delay no longer but with speed forsake your adulterous wayes and turne vnto the Lord that by his grace you may be “ maryed to him in righteousnes and judgement in mercie and compassion Hos 2 19.2â— and not still run a whoring after your owne inventions and abominations of the man of sinne whom the Lord will destroy Rev. 17 1-6 2 Thes 2.3.4.8 Numb 15.39.40 Ier. 4.18 Chap. 6. The fift Exception against Mr Iacobs Comparison Fran. Iohnson THe Priests joyning of the parties doth not make them Man and wife at all but onely the parties mutuall consent But contrarily in the present ecclesiasticall constitutioÌ„ of England the Prelats ordinatioÌ„ maketh the Minister and not the peoples choyse at all H. Iacob his Reply THe second Proposition we here flatly deny It is answered in our last words against the 2. Reason Fr. Ioh. his Answer YOu have an hard forehead Mr Iacob that can flatly deny so cleare a truth But for proof thereof besides your Churches-constitution I cite your books of Articles CanoÌ„s IniunctioÌ„s Statutes togeather with the consent of your whole Church and your book of ordering Priests and Deacons c. All which are so many proofs of the second Proposition and witnesses of the truth which you shame not to deny Is it not your Churches expresse Law that no other be receyved for Ministers but such as are made Priests or Deacons by the Prelates Yea that every one must to this end have his Letters of Orders vnder the Prelates hand and seale that ordeined him Can anie among you though he have the consent of all your people be Parson or Vicar or as you speak one of your Pastors not having the Prelates ordination and institution On the contrarie having these of the Prelate is it not sufficient for him though all your people stand against him Yea must not all the people whether they will or not receive and joyne vnto his Ministery being by the Prelate so ordeined and instituted as aforesaid The truth hereof is so well knowen and yll practised through the whole land as it is straunge any man should have the face to deny it But what wil not Mr Iacob deny when he knoweth not what to aunswer and yet hath not an heart to yeeld to the truth It must needs be a weak and bad cause that can not otherwise be mainteined then by such impudent denyals Your Aunswer to the second Reason before is there taken away and proved to be both against your self and against the Law and constitution of your Church Mynd it better next tyme. Chap. 7. The Sixt Reason or Exception against Mr Iacobs Comparison aforesaid Fran. Iohnson IF a woman consent to a man that is another womans husband they are not therefore Man and wife So if a people consent to a false Minister they are not therefore true Church and Minister H. Iacob his Reply THis is answered as before in the Fourth Reason It carrieth some likelyhood indeed and some reason against Pluralities but nothing any further Fr. Ioh. his Aunswer NEyther the fourth Reason nor this nor any other of them are yet answered Let others judge And now your self are driven to confesse that this hath both likelyhood and reason against your Pluralityes Which is in deed to yeeld vnto it For tell me if your Pluralitie-men have not as well as the rest among you both the some calling by the Prelates which your Church appointeth and like acceptance of your people who joyne vnto them and mainteine them as you alledged before Pag. 208. The ReasoÌ„ then hath waight not onely against your pluralists but against all your other Ministers too seing they have all of them one and the same false Ministery received from the Prelates and executed vnder them Vnto which you may adde that the Ministery of all among you is such as Christ never set in his Church whether you look at your Offices from the hyest Prelate to the lowest Priest or at your Entrance according to your Churches Canons and Book of ordinatioÌ„ or at your Ministration by your Book of common praier and other your Canons and Injunctions or finally at your maintenance by Tithes Chrismes Offerings c. When you have well mynded these things you shall find this Argument reach a great deale further then to Pluralityes even to all the Ministers of your Church in your estate Make a tryal search the Testament of Christ throughout and if you can shew it to be otherwise If not give glorie to God and yeeld to the truth Chap. 8. The Seuenth Reason or Exception against Mr Iacobs Comparison aforesaid Fran. Iohnson AS when a man and woman have consented each to other if the man do