Bishops over Bishops and their Diocesses of Bishops over Ministers and their Churches and of Ministers ouer their owne Congregations Leaving vnto them not with stāding the Superioritie of the other Pastors that maine and Substantial office of the Pastor which is enough to define and denominate a Pastor And therfore they may make such Pastors as are over whole Prouinces but two such as are over whole diocesses but 26. and yet hold also without any absurditie that their are also as many Pastors besyds as ther are Ministers of a particuler Congregation And though it should be graunted that herein they were deceaued in making Provinciall and diocesme Pastors yet the sorteing of vnproper Pastors with true or the subiecting of true Pastors vnto other sorts of Pastors doth not necessarily make the true Pastors fals soe long as vnder them they performe the name and substantiall duties of true Pastors which all the Ministers of our Church Assemblies doe or by the lawes ought to doe 2. If any hould that the Ministers of perticular Congregations onely are Pastors thē they may without any absurdity hould that they Arch Bishops and Bishops are generall Cōmissioners vnder the King to see that the Pastors doe their duties and in that regard may also Metaphorically and in another sence bee called Pastors as Princes themselves are soe called in good and approued Authors and what absurdity can follow vpon this Or what if they which hould the Ministers of perticular Congregations to bee Pastors could not tell what to make of the office of Arch Bishops and Bishops what 's that to the purpose are not our Ministers and Teachers therfore Pastors because they which shall hould them to bee soe cannot tell what to make of the Calling of Arch Bishops and Bishops 3. Though this should bee yelded vnto him that all Pastors are equall and that the Pastors of perticular Congregations are the highest ordinary Ecclesiasticall officers yet should this make nothing to the confirming of his conceit That our Ministers are not therfore true Pastors and Teachers because then Arch Bishops and Bishops should be excluded for this doth not exclude them from being Commissioners and Visitors in causes ecclesiasticall vnder the King over the Pastors and Churches of such and such Prouinces and Diocesses which is to giue thē their principall honour due 4. Concerning the Teachers office not to contende needlesly with him about the nature and quality therof but to suppose a Teacher in that sence which hee meaneth This may reasonably bee held That some of our Ministers whether Priests or Deacons so called or whether Parsons Vicars Curats or Stipendaries are Pastors and some Teachers That so many of them as haue and vse the gift not onely of doctrine and instruction but of Exhortation are Pastors That those which wanting the power of Exhortation and yet haue vse the gift of instruction and doctrine are such Teachers as hee meaneth And therfore herein also if it should bee yealded vnto him That it were fit that every Congregation should haue both theis offices and that the Teacher should be the Pastors Assistant yet it doth not follow but that in want of sufficient men for both theis offices in every Congregation some may inioy one and some an other For if the Churches of their owne way and constitution may bee without both Pastors Teachers and that for a long time till men may be chosen vnto that office Why may not a Church much more in the like necessity retaine a Pastor without a Teacher or a Teacher without a Pastor Can hee proue by any colour out of Gods word That one cannot bee called vnto or execute the office of a Pastor vntill hee haue a Teacher to assist him or that hee cannot execute the office of a Doctor except hee do it as an actuall assistant of some Pastor If not then is this a most frivolous demaunde when hee askes to whome our Teachers are adioynd for the worke of their Ministery nether doe the places hee quoteth viz. Eph. 4.11 Rō 12.7 proue any such matter 5. As idle and impertinent is that demande which followeth whether the Teachers spoken of Eph. 4.11 must first bee Deacons then Priests promise obeidience to Prelats be silenced and deposed at their pleasures For what if noe such matters bee required of Teachers by Paul either in that or any other place doth it thervpon follow that their submission to such things makes them noe Teachers may not Magistrats others also require some things of Teachers not required by the Apostles but they must needs thervpon become no Teachers But what repugnauncie is their in theis matters to the office of a Teacher To be a Deacon in the intent of our lawes what is it but as himselfe out of our booke of ordination hath in effect published it To read the Seriptures Pag. 31. to pray in the Church to Catechise the Iōger sort to baptize to preach if the Bishop shal think him sitt what is it to bee a Priest or Presbyter in our law hath not himself also taught vs viz. Pag. 32. To haue authoritie to Preach the word and to Minister the holy Sacramentes in the Congregation wher hee shal be appointed what obeidience doe they promise to Prelates in the intent of the lawe but onely in things that they shal judge honest and lawfull and not repugnaunt to the word of God what is it to bee sylenced and deposed but to forbear to Minister publiquly as themselues doe also forbeare vpon the Magistrats pleasure for the Bishops pleasure soe far as they proceede according to the lawes is the Magistrats pleasure otherwise it is but a personall fault And wherein Imarvaile doe any of these acts so oppugne the office of a Teacher that they cannot stand together wher doth Paul forbid any of theis acts vnto the Teacher or if hee should doth euery Act forbidden to a Teacher make him noe Teahcer Fr. Iohn pag. 14. Wheras some alledge that the people were to hear the Scribs and Pharesees sitting in Moses Chayre it is to bee noted that they were Leuits and Priests and therfore had the true offices appointed by Moses This therfore is nothing for a fals Ministery such as theirs is proued to bee further to bee a Pharefye was not to haue a new kinde of Ministery but to bee of a speciall Sect amongst the Iewes that pretended more strict observances of the law and might bee of any Tribe Lastly though the were corrupt yet did the hould that very true Minister must bee from heauen and this haue the forward Preachers acknowledged as T. C. pag. 83. Answere Here absurdly and Childishly hee goeth about to answer such an objection as noe body ever made against any thing contained in the former Argument This Argument onely is vsed in generall to shewe that some corruptions in Ministers and Churches are not of that nature that men should therfore seperate from all
therfore will stand him in noe steed whether it bee true or fals and therfore I leaue it to their maintenance from whom hee saith hee borroweth it THE FIFT REASON TAKEN OVT OF THE offer of Conference EXAMINED Fr. Iohn IF the Propositions propounded to bee maintained in the offer of Conference bee true To avoid tediousnes I forbeare to set them downe as M Iohnson hath done but thou shalt discern what they are afterward in the Answer then is it not lawfull to heare or haue any speciall Communion with the present Ministery of the Church Assemblies of Englande But those Propositions are true Ergo It is not lawfull to haue any Speciall Communion with the same Answere The Consequent is fals doth not follow from the said Propositions 1. Though it should be graunted That all matters meerely Ecclesiasticall lawfully imposed vpon any Church are such as may bee concluded necessarily from the written word of God Yet in a true constituted Church some matters meerely Ecclesiasticall may bee imposed through humaine frailty that cannot so bee concluded 2. Though all humaine ordinances vsed onely or specially in Gods worship whervnto they are not necessary of themselues were simply vnlawfull Yet is not every such humaine ordinance of that nature that it maketh the Church and Ministery wher it is vsed to bee a fals Church and Ministery much lesse those Churches and that Ministery wherin it is not vsed but injoined onely 3. Though it were generally graunted of all That every true visible Church of Christ is such a Spirituall body politick as is specially instituted by Christ or his Apostles in the new Testament Yet it will not thence follow That those Churches and Ministeries are not to bee communicated withall that haue any thing in or appertaining to the constitution therof not instituted by Christ or that such Churches are not true visible Churches 4. Though every true visible Church of Christ or ordinary Assemblie of the faithfull hath by Christs ordinance power in it selfe immedialy vnder Christ to elect and ordaine deprive and depose their Ministers and to execute all other Ecclesiasticall Censures Yet will it not follow from thence That all they are fals Churches and not to bee communicated with all That doe not or by the lawes of man are not suffred to vse that power Nether is it sure the meaning of them who offer the Conference To maintaine That they are no true visible Churches of Christ that cannot vse that power but are therein subject to others for one may by Christs ordinance haue a power to doe that which yet in regard of man he hath noe power to doe 5. Though the Pastor of a perticuler congregation should be yealded to bee the highest ordinary Ecclesiasticall officer in any true constituted visible Church of Christ Yet cā it not hence bee concluded That those Pastors are fals Pastors who are outwardly by mans lawes subjected to a Superior Ecclesiastical officer The Father ordinary is the highest officer in the family yet if the Magistrate subject the father in some matters appertaining to the family to another Though therin it may bee hee may doe the father some wrong yet doth not the father therby become a fals father or the family a fals family Admitte then that this prerogatiue due to Pastors to haue noe Spirituall officers superior vnto them yet is it not so essential vnto him that without the Actuall vse and possession of it hee cannot bee a true Pastor And yet take a true visible Church in that sence which the officers of the conference doe viz. for a perticuler ordinary Assembly or Congregation And then in our owne Churches The Pastor is the higest ther being noe Ecclesiasticall Officer in any such Churches a boue him 6. Graunt this That it is the office of every true Pastor to teach and Governe Spiritually one Congregation immediately vnder Christ Can it from hence bee concluded That they are noe true Pastors which governe more congregations then one or which are subject in some outward things to some others besids Christ 7. Admit That the offices of Provinciall and diocesan Bishops were contrary to the word of God must it needs ther vpon follow That those Ministers and Churches which are vnder them by the lawes of man are fals such especially who obey them onely in things which they judge honest and lawfull and who vnder this subjection doe no more then they would doe if they were not subject at all vnto the Bishops A man must therfore bring a better head wit with him then M. Iohnsons That by the Propositions of the offer of Conference how harsh soeuer they may seeme to bee can conclude it vnlawfull to joine and communicate with our Church Assemblies For the profe of this consequent he bringeth nothing out of our owne writings but onely to giue his reader therby a vomit some of his owne Coleworts not twise but twise twenty times sodden To which wee giue him leaue to looke an Answer from some as idle headded as himselfe THE SIXT ARGVMENT TAKEN OVT OF DIvers Treatises Answered This Proposition being a whol leaf in his booke I forbeare any further anser downe there being in effect little difference in the matter from that which hee hath formerly brought Fr. Ihon. IF the is Assertious bee true That that Church calling for which the Scripture giue noe expresse warrant is meerely vsurped and vtterly vnlawfull That as it is not lawfull to bring in any strange doctrin so is it not lawful to teach the true doctrine vnder the name of any other function then is instituted by God c. But the aforesaid Assertions are true Therfore it is vnlawful to haue communiō with that Ministery Answere This Argument being a collection out of our writers doth not differ from the former as himselfe graunteth and therfore needs noe further Answer The Consequent is fals and hee proues it not by any of our owne writers as hee ought to doe but stil brings vs profes out of his owne musty Aumbry The Assumption therfore borrowed out of our owne writers will doe him noe pleasure THE SEAVENTH REASON TAKEN OVT OF THE twelue Arguments viz. the tenth EXAMINED Fr. Iohn IT is a sinne against Christ the sole head of the Church to haue spirituall communion with those Ministers which in their Administratiō of divine things do either by word or deed solemly professe and yeald a spirituall homage to an vsurped spirituall Authoritie in the Church But so do the Ministers of the Church Assemblies of England Ergo It is a sinne to haue communion with the same Answere The Proposition is fals And hath noe ground from that Proposition in the 12. Arguments vnto which hee would match and forth of which hee would draw it The Proposition there is this It is a sinne against Christ the sole head of the Church for any one of his Ministers especially in the administration of divine things either by words or signes
seeing hee saith nothing throughout this in effect that hee hath not all ready saide in some one or other of his former bookes Fr. Ioh. pag. 8. The Ministery of Pastors and Teachers spoken of Eph. 4.11 The 2. Arg. is the ordinary and perpetuall Ministery giuen by Christ to his Church and such as the Princes of the Earth nether may nor ever shall bee able to abolishe seing Christ hath appoynted it to continue to the end of the worlde But the Prelacie Preesthood and Deaconrye of the Church of England is not the ordinarije and perpetuall Ministery giuen by Christ to his Church but such as the Princes of the Earth may and ought to abolish out of their Dominions Rev. 17 16 1. Tim. 2.2 Rom. 13 4. with 1. Kin. 23.3 deu 12.2 Psa 72.1 Therfore the Preesthood Prelacie and deaconrye of the Church of England is not the Ministery of Pastors and Teachers spoken of Eph. 4.11 Answere Idenye the Assumption Vnderstanding by Prelacie Preesthood and deaconrye The ordinary Ministery of our Church Assemblies against which hee propounds to himself to Dispute And aunswer That it is the ordinary and perpetuall Ministery giuen by Christ to his Church and such as the Princes of the Earth are bounde by Gods Lawes to maintaine and protect by their Authoritie And if their bee any corruption in and aboute the same which they ought to abolish that yet they are accidentiall and personall and not soe Essentiall as that they doe Distroy the Ministery The places of Scripture anexed to the Assumptiō for the proofe therof are all abused and profaned for not on of them doth any way soe much as colourablye proue either of the Clauses in the Assumption but only they proue in generall That the Idolatry and Idolatrious Ministery of Antechrist is to be abolished Soe that the man in his symplicitie takes it as graunted That our Ministerye is such an Idolatrious Ministery which is the maine matter in Controuersy and in effect the generall question of his whole booke Fr. Iohn pag 9. The Office of Pastors and Teachers ordayned by Christ in his Testament The. 3. Arg. are such as did or could stand with the offices of the Apostels Prophetes and Euangelists But the offices of the Prelates Priests or deacons of the Church of England are not such as did or could stand with or vnder the offices of Apostles Prophets and Euangelists which if any deny let him shew the Countrary by the Scriptures Light hath no fellowship with darknes nor Christ with Antichrist And suppose the Apostles were a liue in their Persons and were in England It were worth the knowing whether they and the ordinances giuen by them should giue place to the Prelates and their Canons and whether they should be suffred to preach c. without subscribing and conforming Their Canons vrge all vpon paine of Excommunication ipso facto Therfore they are not the Pastors and Teachers ordained by Christ in his nue Testament Answere 1. What a shamelesse man is this to affirme That our Ministery nether did nor could stand with the offices of the Apostles c. and for proofe therof bid vs If we deny it shew the contrary by Scriptures Doth not the burden of prouing by the very lawe of Common Reason ly vpon the accuser If I should in like manner reproch his Ministery say it is a Ministery that standeth vpon Sorcery witch croft and Coniuration and for proofe therof bid him If hee deny it shew the countrary by Scripture were I not worthy at least to bee laughed out of the Scholes This is a sufficient justification of our Ministery that such Malitions aduersaries therof whoe woulde seeme soe expert in the Scriptures are no better able by Scripture to proue their vnchristian accusation 2. It is true that light hath noe followship with darknes nor Christ with Antichrist Yet ther is no light in men in this life but it is mingled with some darknesse and the best Christians that are or euer haue bene since the Apostles times may be infected with some points of Antichristianisme Many of the late Martyrs since the revealing of Antichrist were worthy lights and renoumed Christians and yet the light of many of them was mingled with more darknesse and their Christianitie with more Antichristianisme then can be founde in our Ministery 3. Our Bishops haue as good reason to make the like supposition against him and as much worthy the inquirie that were if the Apostles c. were a liue now in their owne Persons where hee liueth and should professe the Church Assemblies in Englande to be true Churches and their Ministery in generall to be a lawfull Ministery and their worship for substaunce to bee a true worship whether M. Iohnson and his Church would suffer them to be soe much as priuate members of their Society much more to preach c. 4. Though our Bishops should herein be soe impious as to advance in such a manner their owne Authority and ordinances aboue the Apostles Yet what is that to proue that the Preesthoode and Deaconry of the Ministers of our Church Assemblies who many of them in theis pointes are meere patients and esteeme of theis things as burdens cannot stand with the offices of Apostles c. doth M. Iohnson think that none of our Ministers in England would suffer the Apostles to preach in their Cures without wearing a Surplice If they might haue their owne wils or should this any whit derogate from their Ministery that the Bishops therin would not suffer them to haue their will 5. It is besids the present question and a needlesse thing to spend time in justifying the Canons herein If the Bishops therin haue gonne too far it may seeme to bee the fault of the Parsons rather then of the Prelacie it selfe and therfore to make and vrge such Canons and Traditions as are a fore saide doth not proue but that for all that the Prelacie in of it selfe might stand well enough with the offices of the Apostles c. for those offices may of themselues If their bee noe other impediment stand well one with an other which in the actions therof doe not but by accident only one overthrowe or oppugne the other Fr. Iohn pag. 9.10 The offices of true Pastors The 4. Arg. and Teachers are by the ordinaunce of Christ set in the Church and imployd in the Ministery of the word Sacraments Church Gouerment soe as they may not with their Ecclesiasticall functions receaue Cyvill offices and callings nor take vpon them princely Titles and dignities Eph. 4.11 1. Pet. 5.1 Rom. 12.2.4 Luk. 12.14 and 22.25 1. Cor. 12.5.8 1. Tim. 4.13.15.16 2. Tim. 2.4 But the officies of Prelates Priests and Deacons of the Church of England are not soe but by their owne Constitution we set in the Church and imployd in the Ministery soe as they may also receaue Cyvill offices and Callings as to be Iustices of Peace c.
offices of such Prelats Priests and Deacons as are Ministers of our Church Assemblies For most of those which haue such offices are and are bound to be members of true visible Churches And cannot in their Estate they being in all points answerable to the lawes be members of a falce Church They are all such excepted as haue speciall dispensations bound to one particuler Congregation and may not by law haue more Cures then one but admitting of a seconde the first is voyd Yea the Prelats thēselues though in regard of their Prelaticall office they are Gouernors of whole Prouinces diocesses yet it is possible for them not withstanding to be members in their Estate of a true visible Church and bee bound as are the Prelats of Scotland to one particuler congregation for the speciall Ministery and Gouerment therof And though the other Ministers may haue in that estate pluralitie of benefices and Cures yet it doth not follow that therfore they are such as in their estate cannot be members of a true visible Church excepte they haue thē indeede yea though they should be pluralists indeede yet for ought hee hath proued to the contrary they may bee membres of true visible Churches and may each bee bound to one particuler Congregation for the Ministery and Gouerment therof But what man except hee were halfe frantick wold reason thus Our Ministers may bee Pluralists therfore they neither are nor can be true Pastors and Teachers Is not this rather one of the honors then blemishes of our Ministers That they may be pluralists and yet are not If by our lawes their owne Assemblies were established If by the same lawes their Pastors and Teachers might bee non residents or pluralists or worse would they think hemselus euer the worse for this would they not rather thinke themselus the better that they are not soe bad as by mans lawe they might bee Fr. Iohn The Offices Condition and Gouerment of Pastors and Teachers The 7. Arg. are such as noe way impaire the Authority and Supremacy of the Syvill Magistrate But the offices Condition and Gouerment of Prelates Priests Deacons are such as doe many waies impaire the Authoritie Supremacie and dignity of Kings and all other Magistrats both in Civill and Ecclesiasticall Causes For the Prelates will haue their presence voice and Authority to be at Parlaments for enacting of lawes and Statuts for the Common wealth They are Rulers of whol Prouinces and diocesses in the Ecclesiasticall causes therof In Civill State and dignity some of them are aboue all and all of them aboue some of the Nobles Iustices and other Magistrats of the Lande Themselues their Courts and officers handle and determine sundry Civill Causes and affaires appertaining to the Magistracie They inflict Civill Mults and punishments In their forbidden times they giue licence to Mary The beneficed Priests sweare Canonicall obeidience to the Prelats All the Priests and Deacons are exempt from the Magistrats Iurisdiction in diuers things appertaining vnto them and answerable onely or cheifly to the Prelats and their officers Therfore they are not the onely Pastors and Teachers spoken of Eph. 4.11 Answere The Assumption is falce nether doe the instances proue the same 1. The Prelats claime their voices in Parlament not as diuine ordinaunces appartaining to their Prelateship but as an honor annexed to the same by the Civill Magistrate 2. Their Authority in Causes Ecclesiasticall ouer Prouinces c. is either such as the Civill Magistrate himselfe may execute and administer in his owne person if hee please or such as is not for them as they are Magistrats to execute The first sort they administer only by vertue of the Magistrats owne Commission and therin they cannot impair either his dignity or Supremacie much lesse in the other part of their Authoritie which belongeth not to the Magistrats themselues to execute especially when they vse it not nether without their consent lycence and approbation 3. That all are aboue some and some aboue all of the Nobles and Iustices c. is a free and voluntary honour graunted vnto them by the Civill Magistrate and held in tenure from him and not claimed as I thinke as belonging to their Episcopall function by diuine right 4. Their Courts determine noe other Civill causes then the Civill Magistrate and his lawes do permit or if they doe the falt is in the Parsons and not in the Prelatship further they inflict Civill punishments giue lycences exacte Oathes c. by Authority from the Magistrat whose subsistutes therin they are And therfore the Prelates neither in theis nor in any of the former instances can bee saide to impaire the dignity Authoritie or Supremacie of the Civill Magistrate when herein they doe all things in and by the protection of his Authoritie much lesse can other inferior Ministers who haue noe dealing in the aforesaid matters Lastly if all our Ministers be exempt from the Magistrats Iurisdiction in some things appertaining vnto them but wherin I knowe not this very exemptiō it selfe is an act of the Magistrats Iurisdiction depends onely vpon his pleasure how can it thē any waies impair the same hytherto hee hath dealt by Syllogismes such as they are now for a conclusion of this first Argument hee shoots at rouers as followeth Fr. Iohn To this end diuers other reasons might be aledged for example If they say that Arch Bishops haue the Pastors then they haue but two If Lord Bishops then but 26. and what office then haue the Arch Bishops amongst them If the other Priestes then what office haue the Arch Bishops and Bishops seing God hath or dayned noe higher ordinary Ecclesiasticall office as some of them-selus acknowledg If they say the deacons haue the Pastors office the same absurdity followeth as in the former besids that the works of the deacons office are opposed to the worke of the Ministery Act. 6.2 with Eph. 4.11 Rom. 12.8 If they should say they haue the Teachers office it would be known which of their officiers haue it amongst them and to whom they are adioyned for the worke of Ministery as Teachers are to Pastors and what office the rest haue whom the accompt not to haue the Teachers office whether the Teacher spoken of Eph. 4.11 must first bee deacons and then Priestes and permit obeydeince to the Prelates and that also is to their ordinaires and be sylenced and deposed at thtir pleasure Answere Here hee thinkes hee hath knitt such Gardian knotts as cannot be vntide without a sword or a bill but the Simplicitie of the man here in is to bee laughed at for 1. though some should say that either our Arch Bishops or Bishops haue the Pastors office yet ther in they doe not exclude the other Ministers from that which is the substance and effect of that office though they should from the name No nor frō the name neither but should therin onely make degres of pastours viz. of Arch
Apostasie Because it is a Ministery that was not set by Christ in his Church This doth hee most grosly runne round in a circle as if I should proue that his Ministery is vnlawfull because hee is a Schismatick and that hee is a Schismatick because his Ministery is vnlawful The 2. Reason wherby he proues his Proposition followeth Fr. Iohn 2. If the Prelates of the Church of England haue such offices and Gouerment as be speciall parts of Antichrists Apostasie then the Ministery ordained by them thervnto must needs bee the Ministery of that Apostasie But the Prelats of the Church of England haue such offices and gouerment as bee speciall parts of Antichrists Apostasy Therfore the Ministery ordained by them is the Ministery of Antichrists Apostasie The consequent is manifest because the fruit must needs bee as the tree is Mat. 7.16 and who can bring a clean thing out of filthinesse Iob 14.4 The Assumption is proued 1. Whosoever besids Christ haue such offices and Gouerment wherby the claime to bee spirituall Lords the haue the offices and Gouerment which are speciall parts of Antichrists Apostasy and are indeed very Antichrists themselues But such are the Prelats of the Church of Englande Therfore the haue such offices and Gouerments as are speciall purts of Antichrists Apostasy The Proposition is proued by those places of Scripture which teach that there is but one spirituall Lord the Lord Iesus The Assumption is proued by the lawes and Statutes of the land wherin they are called Lords Spirituall and in their Canons they take vpon them to prescribe their owne ordinaunces to the Ghurch for the worship of God and binde the spiret and couscience to the acknowledgement and approbation therof and to giue the holy Ghost 2. The offices and Gouerment of such Bishops as are ouer Diocesan and Prouinciall Churches and exercise Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction ouer all the Ministers and people therin are speciall parts of Antichrists Apostasie But such are the Prelates of the Church of Englande Ergo They haue such offices and gouerment as bee specially parts of Antichrists Apostasie Answere 1. I deny the cōsequent of the Proposition of the 1. Sillogisme The officers gouernors of Antichrists Apostasy may haue ordained some things that are Christian Nether doth the saying of Christ or Iob proue the consequent for though it should be graunted vnto him that the gouernors of Antichrists Apostasy haue ordained this Ministery yet doth it not follow that it is therfore a propre meere fruit of Antichrist but may be an dentall effect as are many other things which hee ordaineth agreable to Christs owne ordinaunces so that hee must proue that our Ministery ordained by the Pope or Bishops doth as properly flowe from the nature of their office and gouerment as figs from a fig tree or grapes from a vine or filthy water from a foule fountaine The contrary wherof is in this case most euident For leaue the bare names and tytles and consider our Ministery in all the essentiall parts and offices therof and it is a possible either for a Presbythery or for any perticuler Church such in constitution as their owne to ordaine the like Ministery in all points and respects with all the defects and faults therof 2. Concerning the first profe of the Assumption The Proposition may bee denied It being one thing to bee and another to make claine to bee for euery one is not that which hee claimeth to bee The Instances alledged to proue the Assumption either are fals or proue it not The lawes may giue their titles to men which they doe not claime Neither doe either their Canons or practis shew that they prescribe their owne ordinances for worship or propound to binde mens consciences to the acknowledgement of any such matter The professe the contrary and vrge their owne ordinaunces onely vnder the name of things indifferent Though therfore in error of iudgement they may and happily doe commande such ordinances of their owne as are diuine worship and in such a manner as it bindeth conscience which M. Iohnsons owne Church in many cases may doe except they think themselues priviledged from error yet they protesting against any such power and authority they cannot be saide therin to arrogate the office of Spirituall Lords in that sence at least in which Christ is said to bee the only Spirituall Lord. And though in their ordination of Ministers they vse as a ceremoniall speech to say Receaue the holy Ghost and therin peraduenture offer some force vnto the Scripture vnto which the allude yet they disclaime al actuall power and authority of giuing the person or gifts of the holy Ghost vnto men It shall bee needlesse in this controversie to spend time in the defence of the calling of Bishops any further then the necessity of the argument requires Onely for the further clearing of the truth in the differences of them of the Seperation not only from the Bishops but from the other sort of Ministers also which doe not approue of their callings I offer theis pointes vnto them to consider of advisedly 1. Whether the Supreame Magistrate haue not power to ouer see and Gouerne all the severall Churches with in his dominions yea whether hee bee not bound so to doe 2. Whether for his further helpe and assistance herein hee may not make choise of graue learned and reuerent men to assist him in the same gouerment 3. Whether by vertue of his power theis persons thus called to assist the Supreame Magistrate may not lawfully try the gifts of all the severall Ministers with in his dominions and giue publique approbation of the worthy inhibit those which they finde vnworthy frō the execution of their Ministery whether they may not visit the severall Ministers and Churches conuent them before them examine them how they haue behaued themselues in their places and punish the blame worthy 4. Whether for the more easy and orderly Gouerment of the said Churches so far forth as appertaineth to him hee may not devide his kingdom as ours is into Provinces assigning over each of them vnder himself some speciall Magistrat for learning and experience to oversee and gouerne all the perticuler Churches there and whether hee may not subdevide those Provinces into Diocesses assigning also to them other more inferior officers vnder him and his provinciall officers to over see the severall Churches with in such and such a precincte 5. Whether it doe destroy the nature of a Ministeriall or a perticular true visible Church that many of them should appertaine vnto one Provinciall or Diocesame gouerment though in that respect they should bee held and reputed but for one Provinciall or Diocesame Church 6. Whether Antichrist hauing vsurped the Kings Supremacy and taken into his hands this authority and corrupted the same hath made it now vnlawfull for the Magistrate to execute the same in manner and forme a fore saide or whether the Iurisdiction a fore saide doe not
directly and properly belonge to the Civill Magistrate and not to Antichrist But by vsurpation And whether his vsurpation of this office can make it a part of his Apostasie in those places where it is restored againe to the Supreame Magistrate 7. Whether the Supreame Magistrate recerving this his right from Antichrist and together with it happily taking also to himselfe some thing also that belonges to the Kingdom of Antichrist executing the same either in his owne person or by others together with his owne lawfull right whether I say this doe destroy his owne lawfull right and whether the subiect is ever the lesse bounde to subject themselues vnto the same right either in his owne person or his substitute Hither to hee hath indevoured to proue the Proposition of the first Argument wherby hee would confirme the Assumption of his 2. reason and now hee sets vpon the profe of the Assumption Namely That the present Ministery of the Church Assemblies of Englande is the Ministery of Deacons and Priests ordained by the Prelats ther vnto This hee saith is proued by the Canons constitutions obseruation of our Church And this hee confirmeth first by a longe tedious and idle rehersall of the forme of ordination of our Ministers bestowing cost to print in a manner our whole booke of ordination 2. By certaine of the late Canons pressing subscription conformity and an acknowledgement of the lawfulnes of the calling of Bishops and of their ordination 3. By certaine sharpe speeches of some Martyrs and of some others of our owne Nation against the Arch-Bishops Bishohs other of the cleargy of their times In the relation of which pointes hee spends some 5 leaves wherin still hee runs in a circle begging one of his arguments to proue an other So that one of his Arguments are as good as all and all no better then one This may suffice for answere 1. That if all particulars mentioned in the booke of ordination should bee strictly and precisely practized as alwayes they are not yet ther is not one clause in the whole forme of ordination by him cited that doth necessarily argue them which are so ordained to bee true and proper Priests and Deacons But if ther were and if also the Ministers ordained were anointed with oile if their crownes were shawen and they had power giuen to offer the abhominable Idole of the Masse yet this is not sufficient to argue that their Ministery is the Ministery of Priests c. except in their Ministery they should execute the same If their owne Church should ordaine one to the Ministery of a Pastor and should in their ordination require him only to preach the worde sincerely and to administer the Sacraments according to Christs institution and yet in his practis and execution hee should do nothing but sing Masse and Mattens and they should accept of this Ministery and no other at his hands would any that is in his wits say that this mans Ministery is the Ministery of a Pastor because hee was in formality of words ceremonies ordained to that office how much lesse can any say that our Ministery is the Ministery of Priests when they doe not only execute any such office but the clean contrary and when in their ordination not so much as any parte of a Priests office properly so taken is assigned vnto them but only the name and not so much as their name in their orders written in Latin which are to interpret the meaning of the English worde 2. Though the Ministers should doe all things required by the canons and should bee every way answerable vnto them And though the Testimonies of our Martyrs and others were yealded to bee true yet must hee streiue hard that can from either or both argue that our Ministers are indeede Priests except in a Metaphoricall and borrowed speech The other Arguments wherby hee proueth the maine Assumption of the 2. Reason viz. That the Ministery of the Church Assemblies of England is the Ministery of Antichrists Apostasy followe Fr. Iohn The Ministery of the Prelacie professing it selfe to bee Christs The 2. Arg. and yet standing in such an estate as it doth not obey Iesus Christ in his ordinance of Ministery worship and gouerment of the Church as their Prophet Priest and King is the Ministery of Antichrists Apostasy Such is the present Ministery of the Church Assemblies of Englande Ergo It is the Ministery of Antichrists Apostasy Answere To the Proposition I answer That not onely the Ministery of the Prelates but of a Presbytery or any Church whatsoever that stands in such an estate is the Ministery of Antichrists Apostacie And not onely the Ministery of the Prelats but any other Ministery els vpon earth may stand in such an estate as that it may in diuers and sundry Perticulers of ignorance or infirmity disobey Christ in his owne ordinances of Ministery worship and gouerment of the Church and in that respect and so far forth bee the Ministery of Antichrists Apostasy yet bee also the Ministery of Iesus Christ Hee proues the Proposition by 19. places of Scripture to as much purpose as if by as many Testimonies hee should proue that it is day lighte at high noone Except hee meane That that is the Ministery of Antichrists Apostasie doth not in euery perticuler obey Christ in his owne ordinances of Ministery But which his 19. proofes haue no more force to proue it then to proue that their is a man in the moone as any may see that hath nothing els to doe but to examine them 2. I deny the Assumption The Ministery of our Church Assemblies though it bee ordained by the Prelats and bee subject vnto them yet it is not their Ministery but the Ministery of Iesus Christ They preaching his worde administring his Sacraments And it doth if it bee answerable to the law obey Christ in all the maine essentiall parts of his owne ordinaunce of Ministery c. And in all other points for ought hee can proue to the contrary as far as the Lord hath revailed the truth vnto them which exercise the same But saith hee the Assumption is evident by that which hath bene said in the 1. Reason and their Constitution it selfe shewes it in that they are so farre from obeing Christ in his ordinances of Ministery c. as that they execute the Ministery and gouerment of an other Arch Bisschop L. Bishop then Christ of an Arch-Deacon Parson Vicar c. as also in their reading prayers out of a booke and observing other humaine inventions and in their Church Gouerment according to Canons Courts c. which were neuer appointed by Christ To omit that here againe hee begs his first reason to proue his seconde If the Assumntion haue noe better evidence the evidence is fals as I haue made it evident in the Answer to the first reason Nether hath hee there or els where in any of those other of their wrightings which hee sends
vs vnto pag. 40. proued that our Ministers do not obey Christ in his ordinance of Ministery worship and Gouerment yea though it should be graunted that they execute the Ministery and Gouerment of other Arch Bishops and L. Bishops besids Christ And though they should bee Arch Deacons Parsons Vicars reading stinted prayers c. For all this may bee donne yea and they may sinne some way in doing all this and yet they may obey Christ in all the maine essentiall and substantiall pointes of his Ministery worship and Gouerment Fr. Iohn The Ministery of Christians which is opposed against and exalted aboue the holy things Ministery ordinances of Christ The 3. Arg. is the Ministery of Autichrists Apostasie 2. Thes 2.3.4 with 1. Ioh. c. Such is the Ministery of their Church Assemblies Ergo It is the Ministery of Antichrists Apostasie The Assumption is euident 1. Aman may peaceably receaue or administer their holy things in their manner by vertue of their Deacoury or Priesthoode receaued from their Prelats But if any doe administer or receaue the holy things of God by the offices of Pastors and Teachers entred into and executed according to the Testament of Christ they are reviled and persecuted 2. Their Prelacie Priesthoode and Deaconry is the very meanes of thrusting away and keeping out of the Church the Ministery and order which Christ hath appointed which some of themselues hereto fore haue acknowledged and written Answere 1. The Ministery of our Church Assemblies being answerable to the lawes is not a Ministery exalted in any thing aboue the Ministery of Christ but the very same in nature and qualitie though in some accidents it may differ In which difference if ther bee any sinne it is of ignorance or infirmitie in the Ministers which may in as high or a higher degree befall vnto the best Ministers that ever were since the Apostles times 2. The holy things which they administer are the holy things of Iesus Christ and not of their owne by vertue of that Priesthoode and Deaconry which they haue receaued they may not administer any other holy things but what Christ Iesus requireth The other things which they administer are iudged by them which administer them onely things indifferent and matters of order wherein if they which vse them be deceaved it is but such an error as worthy Martyrs of Iesus Christ haue bene subject vnto and not sufficient to make their Ministery an Antichristian Ministery 3. The Prelats doe not persecute any true Pastors and Teachers so much for Ministering any of the holy things of Christ as for refusing to conforme to some speciall ordinances of their owne which they doe not hould to bee holy things but matters of order which by reasons they haue indevoured to proue to bee so wherein the practis of Prelats is noe more extreame then their owne who censure as farr as they can in all extremity all them whoe doe not in al points conforme and agree to their owne orders ceremonies and Church policie 4. It can never bee proued that the admittance of this Ministery is a hindrance of a better but rather it is a meanes to keepe out a wors and away in time to bring in a better if a better bee to be brought in for by yealding to some things that may be bettered is so wished and indeavored a dore is opened to Minister many holy things which otherwise should bee shut And if it bee as lawfull for vs to conjecture as for him Their general Schisme and rent from this Ministery hath bene one maine and principall meanes to vphoulde it as it is Fr. Iohn The Ministery which is such as in the nature and condition therof it pertaineth not to any body or estate either civill or ecclesiasticall but only to the body or kingdome of Antichrists Apostasie The 4. Arg. Such is the Ministery of their Church Assemblies Ergo It is the Ministery of Antichrists Apostasie The Assumption is clear in as much as their Prelacie Priesthood and Deaconry is such that the Civill State may bee perfect without them and the Church of Christ may bee compleat without them onely the body and Kingdome of the Romish Antichrist cannot bee full and furnished in all the offices therof without them Answere For Answere to the Assumption 1. Concerning the Prelacie though it bee not any Ministery of any of our Church Assemblies and therfore Idly vrged in this and all the other Arguments this may bee saide 1. That the principall and most honorable parts therof is onely vsurped by Antichrist and doth not appertaine to him but to the Iurisdiction of the Supreame Magistrats and States 2. That the State of a Christian common wealth cannot bee perfect without some generall visitors and overseers of Churches 3. That though a perticuler Church or congregation may bee compleat without them yet for the necessary vnion and agreement of the severall Churches in Christian Provinces and Kingdoms it is fit and agreable to reason and noe wayes repugnant to Gods word that vnder the Supreame Magistrate ther should bee other Governors to protect and incorrage those Ministers and Churches which doe their dutie and to punish those which shall offende Wherin if either through warrant of humaine lawes or some personall corruption they shall in some things passe their bounds they doe no more then any other officers either Civill or Ecclesiasticall through frailtie infirmitie may doe 4. That the kingdome of Antichrist cannot be furnished in all the offices therof without the Authority of Civill Magistrats and therfore this seemes to make as much against the calling of civill Magistrats as Bishops 2. Concerning the Ministery of our Priests and Deacons such as it is or by lawe ought to be in our Church Assemblies the Church of Christ cannot bee compleat without it yea it is noe Church without it Nether can the kingdome of Antichrist stand before it Nether will hee ever proue the contrary Fr. Iohn The Ministery which is such as the body of Antichrist the man of sinne The 5. Arg. cannot without it be compleat in all the members and canonicall functions therof is the Ministery of Autichrists Apostasie Such is the Ministery of the Church Assemblies of Englande It is the Ministery of Antichrists Apostasie The Assumption is proued by the Canons Pontificall and estate of the Romish Antichrist Answere This Argument is but the taile of the former therfore needs noe further Answer it being cut of in the answer to the former The Canons Pontificall State of the Romish Antichrist doe manifest the countrary which haue and doe curse and persecute with sworde and fier such a Ministery as is the Ministery of our Church Assemblies if it bee in all points to the intent of the law Fr. Iohn The Ministery of Deacons Priests and Prelates which accounts it selfe to be Christs and yet indeed is such as the Kings and Rulers of the Earth may and ought to suppresse
onely that which they iudge lawfull being as ready as any of the seperatiō to suffer rather then practis approue or assent vnto any thing which they judge vnlawfull and vnwarrantable Obj. But suppose they had some other lawfull calling yet they also retaining this vnlawfull calling of the Prelats this were but to halt betweene two opinions and to set their threshould by Gods threshoulds and their posts by Gods posts Ans How can such bee said to retaine the vnlawfull calling of the Prelats which protest against the same professe that they preach not by that but by another calling But if ther bee any such that exercise their Ministery by another calling besids that of the Prelats they therin refuse obeidience and conformitie to what soever in the Prelats calling they judge vnlawfull and so doe not joyne an vnlawfull and a lawfull calling together but reject the corruptions retaine the good and supplie the defect with another calling and this is the worste that can bee made of it But this is not to joyne mans Treshoulds to Gods c. but clean contrary to seperate them as much as may bee And how can they bee saide to halt betweene two opinions when so far onely as the truth in their iudgement and opinion is established by publique lawes they imbrace it acknowledging their subjection to the same lawes and contrarily wher they judge that the law swerves from the truth they take another course But still hee begs this which is the maine controversie that our Ministers haue receaued an vnlawfull calling from the Prelates In the next place hee labors to proue by reasons that howsoever some pretend another calling yet it is evident that the execute all the duties of their Ministeries by virtue of their calling taken from their Prelats But what of that This will stand him in noe steed vnlesse it bee given him of almes That every Ministery executed by virtue of a calling taken from the Prelats is an vnlawfull and an Antichristian Ministerie For proue it hee cannot And if wee should except this also bee given him That our Ministery is executed ONLY by virtue of a calling taken from the Prelats and not by any other power or virtue besids taken either from God or man But let vs see his reasons 1. They cannot stand publique Ministers except they receaue of the Prelats the Priesthood and Deaconry a foresaid 2. They are excommunicated ipso facto if they affirme that they whoe are made Bishops Deacons and Priests are not lawfully made vntill thie haue some other calling 3. The people haue not the liberty of the Churches of Christ nor power in this their estate to chose and submit vnto the true and lawfull Ministery appointed by Christ 4. Without and against the peoples consent they are by the Prelats a lone silenced depriued and degraded from exercisiing any Ministery in those Assemblies Theis reasons doe not proue That they exercise their ministery ONLY by virtue of a calling receaved frō the Prelats and therfore whether true or fals are nothing to the purpose and vnworthy any further Answer After this hee fetcheth another Rode out and laboureth to proue that our Ministers ought not to suffer themselues to bee silenced and deposed from their publique Ministery no not by lawfull Magistrats which is not onely fals and seditious as shall appeare afterwarde but idle and impertinent to the present controversie for if it were true that Ministers ought not to doe in this case as ours doe yet this doth not argue any corruption in the calling of their Ministery but a weacknesse onely in the Persons that execute it in yealding further from their owne right then they neede to doe But let vs consider the perticulers that hee objecteth against our Ministers in this respect Obj. The Apostles being true Ministers of Christ would not at the commandement of lawfull Magistrats leaue to preach much lesse should true Ministers at the appointement of vsurping Prelats Nether did the Apostles make their imediate calling from God the ground of their refusall but this That they ought to obey God rather then man which is a duty required of all Ministers and Christians Ans 1. Wher hee distinguisheth between silencing depriving by Prelats and lawfull Magistrats it is in our case wher the Prelats doe it by Authority and commission from lawfull Magistrats a distinction without a difference 2. Though the Apostles did not assigne their imidiate calling from God as the ground of their refusall in so many letters and sillables yet that which they doe assigne is by implication and in effect the same with it for it is as much as if they had said God himselfe hath imposed this calling vpon vs and not man therfore except wee should rather obey man then God wee may not forbeare this office which hee hath imposed vpon vs. For opposing the obeidience of God to the obeidience of man hee therin pleads a calling from God and not from man otherwise if they had receaved a calling from man there had bene incongruitie in the answer considering that in common sence and reason they ought so far forth to obey men forbidding them to exercise a calling as they exercise the same by virtue of that calling els by this reason A Minister should not ceas to preach vpon the commandemēt of the Church that hath chosen him but should be bound to giue them also the same answer which they Apostles gaue which were absurd So that by this grosse conceit of M. Iohnsons their should bee no power in any sort of men whomsoever to depose a Minister from his Ministery but that notwithstāding any comandement of Church or State the Minister is to continue in his Ministery But for the further answer of this his ignorant conceit plainly tending to sedition wee are to know That though the Apostles Prophets and Euangelists preached publiquely where they were not hindred by open violence And did not nor might not leaue their Ministery vpon any humain Authoritie and commandement whatsoever because they did not enter into or exercise the same vpon the will and pleasure of any man whatsoever yet they never erected and planted publique Churches and Ministeries in the face of the Magistrate whether they would or noe or in dispite of them But such in respect of the eye of the Magistrat were as private and invisible as might bee Neither were some of the Apostles onely forbidden so as others should bee suffered to preach the same Ghospel in their places but the vtter abolishing of Christian Religion was manifestly intended in the silencing of them But our Churches wherof wee are Ministers are noe private secreat Assemblies such as hide themselues from the face of a persecuting Magistrat and State But are publique professing their worship doing their religion in the face of the Magistrate and State yea and by his contenance authoritie and protection And wee are set over those Churches not onely by a calling of
from the 12. Arguments And therfore they are noe wise guilty of his schisme nor doe any wayes herein this place patronize the same THE THIRD REASON TAKEN OVT OF THE TWELVE Arguments the London Ministers exceptions and the Abridgement c. EXAMINED Fr. Iohn IF such bee the State of the Ministery of the Church Assemblies of England as they are bound in their Ministration vnto such things as the vsing of them in Church Service in manner and forme prescribed is a will-worship a giving of specially honour to Antichrist and his members a performing of honours more then Civill even Religions onely to a humaine power a warranting of the like vse of Iewish Turkish Paganish or Popish observations a doing of Scysmaticall Actions an hauing of Spirituall Communion with Papists in the Misteries of their Idolatry and Superstition Amingling of prophane things with divine an vsing of vnlawfull things in divine worship An administring of Sacraments that are not of divine institution A solemne acknowledging of Speciall homage to the Spirituall vsurped authoritie of Lord Bishops an vsing of humaine Traditions in Gods worship as necessary to salvation an apparent meanes of the damnation of many Soules An observing of a lieturgy which in the wholl matter and forms therof is too like vnto the masse booke c. Then is it not lawfull to communicate with the Ministers in their Ministery But such is the estate of the Ministery of the Church Assemblies of Englande Therfore it is not lawfull to communicate with them therin Answere M. Iohnson thinks surely that in this Argument hee hath out of our owne writings for ever disgraced our Ministery But whether here or in the Arguments following he deale faithfully with our writers I know not his bad dealing in this kinde wee haue discoured in part before and doth most evidently appeare in one perticuler following wherein hee most shamfully and lewdly as a man void of all common honesty and grace maketh the Ministers of Lincolne to affirme See pag. 98. That the Prelats are reveiled to bee great Antichrists and their Ministery and constitution to bee great troublers of the Church at this day and that it cannot but bee very sinfull and hurtfull to retaine or communicate with them The Devill himselfe would haue bene a shamed in this open manner to haue tould such a ly and therfore hee is to bee trusted no further then hee is seene And herein his lewdnesse is the more to bee suspected That wher hee rehearseth many harsh bitter and vnsauory speaches against our Ministery and worship as written by some of our selues that retaine communion with the Ministery and worship of our Church Assemblies Hee doth not quote the perticuler places but onely refers vs to the Authors in generall as though we had nothing els to doe but to reede ouer wholl bookes to finde out his Allegations or that wee must take them vpon his word to bee faithfully reported But let vs suppose that our men haue so written yet ther is noe consequent in the Proposition For what if our Ministery were bound to say Masse to sing Mattins To worship the Virgin Mary To acknowledge the Popes Supremacie c. yet for all that it might bee lawfull to Communicate with our Ministers in their Ministery Except that in the execution of their Ministery they submitted vnto that which they were bound vnto It being one thing to bee bound and another thing to fulfill the bonde he might contrarily with as much witt and vnderstanding haue reasoned thus If this bee the estate of the Ministery of the Church Assemblies of Rome that they are bound in their administration to the renouncing of Antichrist and all his Idolatry offices and will-worship to conforme onely in their Ministery to the Gospell of Iesus Christ and to such or dinances as are agreable to the same then it is lawfull to communicate with them in their Ministery and worship M. Iohnson would quickly discerne the inconsequence of this Proposition And why because in the execution of their Ministery they fulfill not this bound And yet hee cannot deny but that they are by a stranger bond even a divine bond bounde vnto this then our Ministers to the contrary The consequent hee saith is proued by the Ministers of Lincolneshire Abridgement pag. 17. But to passe by his depraving of them before touched noe such matter can bee concluded from the words which hee here citeth yea though hee had dealt faith-fully in the citation of them For though it should bee graunted that some act of spirituall fornication should bee donne in our Ministery That wee are to seperate from Idolators and Antichristians and to bee as vnlike them as may bee in their religious observations Though God doe beare a detestation of Idolatry and all the Inticements therof as vnto speciall whoredome Though wee ought to bee a shamed of the monuments of Idolatry and cast them away with detestation Though wee should bee in some danger by them to bee corrupted in Religion by conforming vnto Idolators in their Ministery and worship Though keeping communion with such Ministers should be a speciall meanes to harden them in their sins Though the Prelats were revealed to bee great Antichrists Though the Godly learned haue constantly taught that Christians are bound to forsake and cast of the Ministration Ceremonies and religious customes of Pagan Iewes Antichristian Idolators and Hereticks and carefully to shum all conformity with them therin Yet it doth not therupon follow That if the Ministers of our Church Assemblies bee bound as a foresaid that then it is not lawfull to communicate with them in their Ministery M. Iohnson therfore must bee put to this paines To proue this consequent For further profe of the former consequent he bringeth six Reasons more out of his owne ould and fusty horn of store which proue the consequent just a baculo ad augulum To which it shall bee needlesse to giue aunswer they being profes clean besids the purpose of theis reasons which is to justify their schisme by grounds taken from our owne writings The Consequent then of the Proposition being evidently fals The Assumption though it should haue never so much ground from our owne writings wil stande him in noe stead THE FOVRTH REASON TAKEN OVT OF THE ADMOnitions to the Parlament EXAMINED Fr. Iohn IF the Offices of Arch Bishops Arch Deacons Lord Bishops Suffraces Parsons Vicars c. bee Antichristian and contrary to the Scriptures then the people of God may not communicate with them in their Ministery Ergo The first is true The later also Answere The Consequent is fals and hee goeth not about to proue it by any thing taken out of our owne writings but by a stale profe that hath bene answered before and therfore it requires noe answer onely thus much of free bountie That the offices of Arch Bishops c. quatenes tales are not of the essence of the Ministery of our Church Assemblies but meere Accidents The Assumption