up in the place of Christ and his precious blood which it is not pretending to give grace and wash away synns which it dooth not but it is a lye in the right hand of al that so receiv it and the saying of the Apostle is verified in it an idol is nothing in the world 1 Cor. 8.4 Yet I hope they think not that the Apostle is contrarie to the Prophet who sayth their idols are silver and gold the work of mens hands Psal. 115.4 an idol then for the matter and workmanship is somthing but for the relation unto God or divine grace it is nothing and thus th'Apostle meaneth as his next words shew ther is no other God but one So Popish baptisme as touching the material thing is somwhat the salt the water the oil are God creatures the outward action is the work of the hands of an idolatrous Preist and this work remayneth as did the work of the Idolaters circumcising in Israel but as touching the relation which is the mayn thing in a sacrament that it should seal up unto them the forgivnes of synns and as they blasphemously say quite take away synns and conferr grace so it is a vayn idol and nothing for neyther doo the true Sacraments in Christs church work any such effect to Gods own people and as for that Antichristian synagogue it is not appointed to salvation but to condemnation by the just sentence of God Rev. 17.11 18.8.20.21 2. Thes. 2.11.12 Therfore it wil not help them to say that baptisme in it self considered is Christs ordinance for the brazen Serpent was in it self Gods ordinance at first and a sacramental signe of their redemption by Christ yet they that burnt incense to it made it an Idol and therfore as Nehushtan a peece of brass it was destroyed Yea this is acknowledged of the popish baptisme by the most learned and conscionable of our own Land M. Perkins sayth and proveth it The Church of Rome transformeth the sacraments to Jdols by teaching that they conferr grace ex opere operato by the work doon c. To this effect sayth he the Preist is appointed to pray that the nature of waters might conceiv the vertue of sanctification that God would make the water fruitful by the secret admixtioÌ„ of his godhead that having coÌ„ceived sanctification a new creature may spring out of the immaculate womb of the divine fountayn that it may be living water c. Yea further he sheweth that God himself Christ being worshiped in at or before an image is presently transformed into an idol But what need I insist upon other men even Mr Iohnson himself hath pleaded the Prelates and Preists which administer baptisme to be Jdol shepheards the sacraments to be not true but false and citeth against them their own testimonies to prove that Christ himself is made an idol among theÌ„ Yet loe how he now inveigheth against us for saying that the baptisme in Antichrists synagogue is an Idol But now as Satan hath begun to perswade Antichrists christening to be Christs true baptisme although the scripture plainly sayth what concord hath Christ with Belial so he wil not cease there but justify the cursed Mass by like reason to be the blessed Supper of our Lord. For it is the same church that injoyeth these 2. sacram ts the same preists minister them both in the same Babylonish unknown language both of theÌ„ having Christs institutioÌ„ abused by the man of syn and as water is in their baptisme so bread and wine is in their mass as in baptism they use the name of the Father the Son the holy Ghost so in the Mass they use Take eat this is my body c. Now why should one of these sacraments be true and not an other Al that are not Antichrists bondmen detest his Mass as a monstrous idol let them that lyst honour his baptism Agayn excoÌ„munication is Gods ordinance as wel as baptisme and these our opposits say that by it a man is cut off from communion with al churches of Christ upon earth having his synns also bound in heaven as on the contrary by baptisme we are entred into communion with al churches of Christ in the world This Excommunication the church of Rome useth as wel as baptisme and hath power from Christ to doo it as wel as to baptise wherupon it wil folow if we be bound to communion with them that they baptise we are also bound to avoyd the communion of them that they excommunicate Now for asmuch as these our Opposites themselves besides al other that have separated from the church and doctrines of Rome have many curses and Anathemaes layd upon them by the council of Trent and Popes Bulls what ar they the better for being baptised in their infancie now that they are excommunicated in their mans age They told us before and sayd we have not yet learned it as we should that by our baptism we ar bound to communion and now let them also teach us whither by their excommunication we ar not bound to shun their communion Or if they wil not answer us let them answer the Papists who plead that their Apostate preists being divided and cut of from the church and excommunicate may not lawfully minister the sacraments And wheras M. Iewel complayned we have been cast out by these menâ— being cursed of them as they use to say with bâ—l book and candel Harding answereth To be excommunicate ye have deserved c. neyther were ye by excommunication put from vs til ye had by contumacie severed your selves from the Church and shewed your selves desperate and incorrigible And what wil they say to the Synedrion the representative church of England whose excoÌ„munications ipso facto if they be of the Lord doo forbid al Christians to coÌ„municate with these men that thus plead for Antichrists baptisme yea they wil tel M. Iohnson in his own words that it is a fearful syn their Church being a true Church to contemne their excoÌ„munication If they answer their excoÌ„munications are unjust therfore they are of no weight this wil not salve the sore For 1. al excoÌ„municated wil say they are cast out unjustly shal their own sayings be accepted if not then neyther these mens til their particular causes be cleared In the mean time men wil more regard the church then him that is cast out of the Church and according both to Christs doctrine the doctrine of the Church of England he should be estemed an hethen and publican 2. Agayn many have been cast out for contemptuous refusing to come unto the Bishops synedrion they have left those Bishops Ministers Consistories Churches as being al false and Antichristian unto whom no church duty of admonition c. did belong And now that these men have changed their mind and count it a true Church and
children that dwel with their adulterous mother that is to abhorr her syn with speech and signe to cal her back from evil absteyn themselves from it and in al things cleav to their father betake theÌ„selves into his closet c. I answer thus it appeareth that these our opposites are returned to acknowledge the whore of Rome to be their mother whom they feign to be as woman which lyeth in a deadly sort swollen with waters of the dropsie or with poison which had long agoe given up the ghost if God by the imposition of his grace c. had not nourished and kept her warm Now to leav their mother thus on her sick bed as they have doon disclayming al Christian dutie unto her which is due to a true Church in corruption is but the part of unnatural children Whiles God dooth nourish keep her warm wil they quite abandon her let them return and cherish her also and al her members and see if ther be any baulm to heal her wounds and to comfort her As for us we have been taught of God that in respect of him she is dead long agoe in her syns Rev. 20.5 with Ephes. 2.1 having been the marked whore worshiper of the Beast from which death she is not risen to live reign with Christ. Although to this world she liveth and reigneth in pleasure til at one day death otherwise also come upon her she be burnt with fire Rev. 18.7.8 And then shal we be so far from mourning at her funeral as we shal rejoyce with the heavenly multitude and sing Hallelujah when God hath given Sodoms judgment on her and we see her smoke rise up for evermore Rev. 19 1.2.3 Finally to back M. Iunius judgment they cite Amandus Polanus Bart. Keckerman who sayd that Antichrist shal sit in the temple of God not Jewish but Christian c. and as a rotten apple is an apple but corrupt so that Church is corrupt c. I answer they may I confess cite diverse men that were mistaken in judging of that rotten church which wil help these our opposites nothing who have seen and acknowledged better now goe back Bernard was a learned man in his time and is counted a Sainct and he playnly reproved many Romish abominations and sayd the beast in the Revelation which hath a mouth speaking blasphemies occupieth Peters chaire yet himself doted overmuch upoÌ„ the bewty of that harlot when he wrote thus at an other time to her Leman the Pope Thou art the great sacrificer the cheif Preist thou art Prince of Bishops heyr of th'Apostles thou art in primacie Abel in government Noah in patriarchship Abraham in order Melchisedek in dignity Aaron in authoritie Moses in judgship Samuel in power Peter in anoynting Christ. It is not therfore to be marveiled at though wise godly men be mistaken for in many things we syn all Jam. 3 2. But I have shewed how the scriptures doo judge of this sorceress and could also allege many learned mens judgements but I wil goe no further then our own country Mr Cartwright speaking of the baptising of children sayth Jf both parents be Papists or condemned heretiks c. their children cannot be received to baptisme because they are not in the covenant c. And agayn Jf the corruption be such as destroyeth the foundations as in the Arians which overthrow the person of Christ as in the Papists which overthrow the office of Christ they being no Church ought to have no priviledge of the church Mr Perkins writeth thus As for th'Assemblies of Papists understanding companies of men holding the Pope for their head and beleeving the doctrine of the council of Trent in name they ar caled Churches but in deed they are no true or sound members of the catholik church for both in their doctrine in their worship of God they rase the very fouÌ„datioÌ„ of religioÌ„ And agayn Jt is no more a church in deed then the carkesâ— of a dead man that weareth a living mans garment is a living man though he look never so like him And agayn he hath a treatise and Assertion that A reprobate may in truth be made partaker of all that is conteyned in the religion of the church of Rome and a Papist by his religion cannot goe beyond a reprobate and bringeth 4. arguments for proof hereof and endeth with this Corolarie that A man being indued with no more grace then that which he may obteyn by the religion of the Church of Rome is stil in the state of damnation D. Fulk answering the counterfeit Catholik saith Jt is evident that the true Church decayed immediatly after the Apostles times and telleth the Papist yow cry the Catholik Church the Catholik Church when yow have nothing in deed but the Synagogue of Sathan Agayn The Church of Antichrist is founded upon 7 hills Rev. 17. upon the traditions dreames fantasies and devises of men c. Therfore sayth he in no wise may she be called the city of God but Babylon the mother of fornication Sodom Aegypt where our Lord is dayly crucified in his members D. Willet answering Bellarmin sayth We deny utterly that they are a true visible Church of Christ but an Antichristian Church and an assembly of Heretiks enemies to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Agayn he sayth 2. Thes. 2. he shal sit in the temple of God that is the visible Church that which sometime was the true visible Church as the Church of Rome and after should be so takâ—n reputed and chalenged as it is at this day by the Papists c. He shal sit in the Temple of God that is take upon him the name title of the Church and yet an adversary unto it And agayn The Turk is out of the Church and so in truth is the Pope but yet he challengeth to him and his the name of the Church M. Bale compareth the Pope and Turk togither thus So glorious are the pretenses of Romish Pope Mahomet that they seem unto them which regard not these warnings the very Angels of light and their Churches most holy congregations being very divels with the very dregs of darknes The Pope in his Church hath ceremonies without number none end is there of their babling prayers their portases bedes temples altars songs howrs bells images organs ornaments Iewels lights oilings shavings c. that a man would think they were proctours of paradise On the other side Mahomet in his Church is plenteous also in holy observations they wash themselves oft frequent their temples pray 5. tymes in the day they reverently incline they lye prostrate on the ground they fervently cal to God they absteyn from wine they abhor idols c. But unto what end this holynes leadeth the sequel declareth Daniel maketh these two but one because they are both of one
be delivered to Satan and cast out frō among them verse 4.5.13 he did not purpose that the Elders should deliver and cast him out publikly the people privately all being gathered togither for that busines When he would have them purge out the old leven that they might keep the passover with unleavened bread verse 7.8 he meant not that the Ministers should purge the leven and keep the feast publikly the church privately neyther did the type of the Passover in Israel teach them such a thing No nor the judging of malefactors in Israel for when the Magistrates gave sentence of death and the people stoned wicked persons at the gates of the cities the rulers fact was not then publik and the peoples private the scripture teacheth us not thus to distinguish nor reason it self but that the execution was a part of the publik judgement The Apostle writeth in 1. Cor. 5. to all the Church blaming their neglect of the Censure even as in 1. Cor. 11. he writeth to al reproving their abuse in the Lords supper Wherfore if mē wil they may misapply this distinctiō to all church actiōs as to Sacramēts prayers election of officers and the like making them publik in the Elders and private in the church or people and so as the Papists doo also in other cases give all lay men but a private spirit as they use to speak and the ministers onely a publik We find not that Christian people are more excluded from being publik members of the body and actors with their ministers in the Kingdom of Christ then they are in the Preisthood and prophesie And we know no reason why the Pastor himself if he consent not with the Church in casting out such an incestuous person may not be sayd to have a private judgment as wel as an other man But by such popish distinctions the clergie were severed from the laitie and so the people by degrees turned out of al. And what now doo these our Opposits allow the people if they see their Elders to corrupt judgment therfore doo dissent frō thē they make it but the dissent of particular persons judgment from the publik of what sexe or condition soever they be the Christian Magistrate when he is a member of the Church not excepted touching ecclesiastical proceedings and it is to be regarded they say as there shal be cause they mean I trow as the Elders themselves shall see cause And so if a church have 3. or 4. officers and they corrupted with heresie or other vice the whole congregation of people of what condition soever any persons be can pass no publik ecclesiastical judgment upon them by this doctrine as for their private judgement or censure the Elders themselves wil regard it as there shal be cause If this be not a Prelacie which the Elders would usurp I know not what is But of these things see after in this Treatise pag. 22 23. 3. Come wee to reproches disgracings of the truth and way of God and wee shall see among the Papists how they disdeyn that the people should medle in matters of religion and judging of controversies They complayn of them for their ignorance unrulynes disobedience unto government they say the Protestants reason as Chore Dathan and Abyram did Nū 16. when they rebelled against Moses Aaron the Ministers of God saying that there needeth here in the Church no head to govern it because Christ is alwayes with it And did not those wicked men sayth the Papist in their rebelliō against Moses Arō vse the same reasō when they told thē to their face let it suffice you that al the multitude is holy they have God present with thē And why then take you upō your selves the rule over the people of our Lord As who would say having no need of any other ruler God being with them c. The very same reproches doo our Opposites now cast upon us advancing the Elders disgracing the people by intimating their simplicity errour charging us as oppugners of government and abusing against vs the example of Corah Dathā and Abiram as we have often heard with greif telling us we goe upon their grounds and the like For which we wish they may find repentance and mercy with the Lord least he turn the evil upon their own heads as Moses then did upon the Levites For unto them it seemed a smal thing that the God of Israel had separated them from the multitude of Israel to take them neer unto himself to doo the service of the Tabernacle to stand before the Congregatiō and to minister vnto them but they sought the office of the Preist also so these our opposers are not contēt with their office to be separated unto the gospel of God to stand and minister before and unto the Congregation but wil needs be the Congregation it self and take more authoritie then is given them from heaven wherof see after in this book pag. 17.21.22.23 c. 4. What enmitie and persecution the Papists have raysed against the withstanders of their heresies I need not speak al nations have felt of their cruelty Neyther would I here mention our opposite brethrens hard measure to us but that themselves have printed and seek to defend it cease not stil to prosecute their purposes against us Although themselves have lately professed practised publikly mainteyned the truthes which now they oppugn and persecute and bringing innovation into the Church would needs obtrude their errours upon our consciences eyther in judgment or in practise or in both Yea breaking the peace which thēselves had devised agreed unto and confirmed because their brethren would not agree to the undoing of themselves and their families for the satisfying of their wills as is after manifested in this treatise pag. 123 c. If the Lord should reward them according to their works herein towards us their account wil be heavy but my prayer shal be against their evils 5. Wheras many Treatises have been written in defense of the truthes we mainteyn these our Opposers answer them not neyther yet are they silent nor wil give rest unto others but urge aad provoke more writing stil. For the Churches power now in controversie our Apologie bringeth nine reasons these have answered onely one of them which is the sixt drawn from Mat. 18.17 all the other they let stand And yet what clamours have we heard because their exceptions against that one are not by us refuted So in our other articles of differences the scriptures and reasons set down in our Apologie and other books they pass by without answer If they can make any colourable exception they spare it not otherwise for want of argument they fall to asking of questions seeking if they can to insnare us Of which things the reader may see after in this book pag. 45 c. 51. c. 59 c. 23
who had power from God to give the blessing and the action was also confirmed by the evidence of Gods spirit afterward but this people upon our opposites doctrine had no authority from God to doo as they did neyther could they shew any confirmation of the work by God if our former grounds fayl us The sentence given in the end by the Elders that leaned to the Pastors error was not that discourse they speak of at the end of the Treatise on Mat. 18. for that was privately penned afterward by the Pastor himself but a breif and yet large approbation of the things which the Pastor had shewed to be the truth and a promise that by the grace of God they would so practise Vpon which sentence giving we on the contrary approved our former profession published and shewed sundry reasons which hereafter shal be set down why we could not yeild to their new vowed practise And because they alwayes sought to extenuate the controversie as if it were but a strife about words or about the meaning of Mat. 18.17 We purposely prevented it signifying expressly before we parted that we would bear with them in their understanding of Mat. 18.17 so as they would yeild the point in controversie which was about the Churches power from other scriptures shewing it also by an other case that if we had to deal upon John 1. with an Arian that denyes the godhead of Christ if he would plainly and sincerely yeild to the truth of that doctrine though he thought it not proved by Iohn 1 where yet it is evidently proved we would bear with him therin And this we still offer unfeighnedly to these our opposite brethren let them yet directly and plainly renounce the error it self touching the power of the church now ingrossed into the Elders hands and the other errours that necessarily flow from the same and we wil bear with their judgement concerning Mat. 18.17 though we think of it otherweise that doo they Moreover seing we offred much more which concerneth not onely Mat. 18.17 but al other scriptures that we would notwithstanding our difference of judgement have continued together if our former practise might have been reteyned and themselves in their Advertisement can not deny this how doo they then bear the world in hand that the breach among us vvas for the understanding of Math. 18.17 Touching their Treatise on Mat. 18.17 the causes why I have not answered it are 1. When others heretofore as namely Mr. Smyth wrote against the truth which they formerly professed we al thought best not to answer til the second and third time we were excedingly provoked for we considered how the coÌ„mon adversary would rejoyce at our intestine troubles The same I minded here and these men should if they were not partial have doon the like 2. I had experience in former dealing vvith M. Smyth of his unstayednes that vvould not stand to the things vvhich himself had vvritten I mind the like in these Opposites vvho are not setled for the constitution of their Church and Ministerie upon any ground that I knovv of unless it be popish succession Their former vvritings about the Church and ministery and their present estate wil not stand togither Seing those books are unanswered by others they should answer them if they can themselves and shew us by Gods word what is allowable vvhat disallovvable in them Till they doo this vvho vvould vvillingly deal vvith them 3. Ther are 9. reasons in that our Apologie to confirm the povver of the Church novv in question the foresaid Treatise dealeth but against one of them leaving the rest there and vvhatsoever is vvritten of that argumeÌ„t in other our books unansvvered what reason have they to cal so upon others to write when so much is already written If they yeild us the cause upon the other reasons we wil not strive about the meaning of one scripture as before vve shevved 4. The meaning of Mat. 18.17 is handled by Mr. Robinson against Mr Bernard vvhose book our opposites so much respected and the false gloses upon that text sufficiently refuted vvhy doo not these men ansvver the things there vvritten but cal styl for more as if al men must leav other studies to folovv them in their hunting for preeminence 5. I have had intelligence of Mr. Robinsons further purpose to ansvver in particular that their treatise as occasion shal be given And in deed I for the love and respect that I have alvvayes had to these novv opposite brethren have desired their conviction rather by others then by my self vvho are both better able to perform it and are likely to be more regarded then I and to doo it vvith less publik scandal to the vvorld vvho desire nothing more then to see us that vvere so neerly joyned to sharpen our penns one against another Thus have I been stayed hitherto though novv as the things in that Treatise are repeted in this their Advertisement I shal discover also the insufficiencie of their reasons there alleged Novv as the Advertiser shevveth by examples of troubles in â—hurches heretofore that the godly vvise should not be offended at these dissensions accordingly doo I desire all syncere harted for to vvalk And further that he himself vvith others vvould look into the 3. particulars that he allegeth 1. For the troubles in Corinth the Apostle composeth by shevving the Church their place in Christ above their ministers 1. Cor. 3.21.22.23 vvhich might also if it vvere vvel observed end the strife that is novv among us 2. The contention about Easter as it vvas evil in it self being about mens traditions so vvas it as ill caried For they learned not to redress things as Paul before taught 1. Cor. 3. but contrarivveise as Hierom after telleth us by setting up one Elder about others that the seeds of schismes might be taken away Which humane vvisdom furthering the mysterie of Antichrist so far prevailed that about this their Easter strife Victor Bishop of Rome determined to have excoÌ„municated the East churches and had doon it but that Irenaeus blamed him and stayed it Thus ambition having vvrung the povver first out of the vvhole Churches hands into the Elders onely and then out of the Elders hands joyntly into ones alone began to vvork factions and styrrs in the churches vvorse then ever before 3. The troubles vvhich they speak of in the English church at Frankford in Q. Maryes dayes is even a picture of our present calamities and vvorthy of perpetual remembrance For there vvhen M. Horn the pastor vvith his felovv Elders vsurped authority above the church they vvere vvel vvithstood by the body of the congregation among vvhom vvere sundry men of vvisdom and learning And to appease that strife by the Magistrates counsel they agreed upon articles vvhich directly overthrovv the errors so stood for by these our opposers For thus the printed Discourse of the troubles of that church sayth The Discipline
have Very wel sayd wherupon we inferr also that to give voices in deciding of controversies and judging of synners is not a part of government but a power and right that the saincts out of office have The Elders are to teach direct and govern the church in election of officers they are to doo the like in judging excommunicating wicked persons and in all other publik affairs Of the exposition of Mat. 18.17 and why their Treatise was not particularly answered I have spoken before the special things therin are in this treatise repeted and so shal be here answered 2. Their second observation I like wel yeild unto that men may change and redress according to Gods word things that are amyss but withal I would have them 1. plainly to acknowledge wherin they erred and what they stablish for truth and 2. to take away by Gods word the reasons wherupon they builded before Which wither these our opposers have doon as they ought I leav it for the discreet reader to judge by their writings compared with those which were published heretofore to the contrary 3. The third for the churches goverment by the officers is that which we alwayes have and stil do yeild to as even now I shewed As for our former practise altered and as he sayth by me acknowledged towching the order and manner of the practise in one particular I grant it but for the power of the Church wherof we treat I deny it There never was such a practise in my dayes as wherby the Elders should be esteemed the Church and to have the povver of the same 4. The 4. observation is that our exceptions are such as the Anabaptists would object in much like manner Yet dooth he not shew this so to be and I know for their successive Ministerie they are neerer the Anabaptists than wee both for it and other points they build upon the very grounds of poperie as after shal be manifested But what doe vve except is it not from our former Articles and Apologie confirmed by scriptures from vvhich these are departed in penning also vvherof these that thus vvrite had a principal hand So they doo hereby not onely joyn vvith our cōmon adversaries vvho intvvite us vvith Anabaptistrie but impute weaknes to their ovvn former vvritings and cause vvherin more strength of truth hath appeared then ever they shal be able to pul dovvn hovvsoever they may assayl it The 5. observation is a mist cast before the readers eyes a collection of 7. things vvherin they vvould make men beleev vve are gone from that vve held heretofore The errour vvherof I vvil shevv hereafter vvhen as order requireth I have examined the ansvvers that they make for themselves to these our Articles vvhich novv next folovv The first point of difference in the Letter 1. Wheras we had learned and professed that Christ hath given the power to receiv in or to cut off any member to the whole body togither of every Congregation and not to any one or moe members sequestred from the whole now wee have been lately taught that the Church which Christ sendeth to for the redress of synns Mat. 18.17 is not to be understood of the whole body of the Congregation but of the Church of Elders And it being granted of al that with the Church is the power the Elders being the Church have the power and so not the whol body of the congregation togither And in the copie vvhich Lavvne printed The 24. Article of the Confession of our faith confirmed in our Apologie pag. 60.62.63 professeth that the povver to receiv in or to cut off any member is given to the whole body togither of every Christian Congregation Mat. 18.17 c. These have pleaded for the Eldership to be the Church Mat. 18. and to have both rightful power and able power to excommunicate though without against the consent of the body of the Congregation The scriptures to confirm our former doctrine and practise are in our Confession Psal. 122.3 Act. 2.47 Rom. 16.2 Mat. 18.17 1. Cor. 5.4 2. Cor. 2.6.7.8 Levit. 20.4.5 24. 14. Num. 5 2.3 Deut. 13.9 The reasons in our Apologie are nine the first referring to proofs of former positions the other 8 confirmed by sundry arguments doctrines practises gathered from the Prophetical and Apostolical scriptures For ansvver hereunto their Advertisement telleth vs many things First of their Treatise published on Mat. 18.17 touching vvhich I also have spoken before Neyther is this point of the Churches power therin plainly handled but closely caried neyther is ther any thing at al sayd to take avvay the other 8. reasons in our Apologie Let the reader compare the writings and judge There be also things formerly written both by others and by them selves touching this of Mat. 18. and things lately published against M. Bernard about it to these they give no answer at al yet cal they upon us to write more 2. Secondly they carp at this phrase the Church of Elders and would have it the Congregation or Assemble of Elders saying that so men might sooner perceiv the vanitie of our error And that I my self elswhere shew the word is sometime used for an Assemblie of Elders I answer 1. If they wil rase the word Church out of the Bible as unfit they may doo so in Mat. 18. and in this controversie or els they must give us leav to keep wonted known words which help men to discern the truth of matters 2. Neyther shew they any one scripture for the phrase they would have the Congregation of Elders neyther did I ever shew or could see the word Church so to mean in al the new Testament but in the old which now is changed I have observed it in some few places 3. But be it Church or Congregation I wil not much contend yet I know their eyes wil dazel that look hereby to discern in our doctrine eyther vanity or error Albeit I confess these our opposites have the Papists on their side for so Card Bellarmine expoundeth this Tel the Church that is the Prelate or the Congregation of Prelates Stapleton interpreteth the Church Mat. 18. to be the Ministers 3. Thirdly they observe that the scriptures of the old testament are quoted for our 24. Article as directly carying us for this matter to the Church of Jsrael which now we would not be brought unto c. I answer the first is true for the scriptures cited doo shew that the people were interessed in those publike actions with their magistrates and therfore there is no reason that now there ministers should claym the whole power to themselves The latter is untrue for we did consider and decide the matter between us by the scriptures of the old Testament compared with the new and so are stil ready to doo But alwayes with observing the differences between the state of the church then now which are many as the Apostles
doo teach us Heb. 8. 9. 10. chapters Gal. 4.1.2.3 c. Heb. 12 1â— 28. 4. Their last observation hath two branches the 1. that the power of receiving in cutting off in Jsrael was to be performed according to order and not to weaken but to stablish thhe Elders authoritie This we willingly graÌ„t neither ever doubted of But we observ withal a deceyt which they couch under this name Elders which usually in the old Testament is given to Magistrates which are also caled in respect of their autoritie Lords Princes Judges yea and Gods 1. Sam. 23.12 Num. 21.18 22.7.8 Deut. 19.17.18 Exod. 21.6 Psal. 8 2. and by the Apostles they are caled â—owers or Autorities and Glories or Dignities Tit. 3.1 2. Pet. 2.10 But the name Elders now in the Church of Christ is given to the Ministers 1. Pet. 5.1 who are forbidden to exercise autoritie or to be as Lords over Gods heritage or to be caled by such stately titles Mat. 20.25.26 1. Pet. 5.1 Luk. 22.25.26 They streyn therfore too farr vvhich wil proportion the authoritie and power of the Elders that should stand and minister to the Church as did the Preists and Levites with the autoritie of the Elders the Magistrates that late and judged in the gates 2. The second branch of their observation is that we must not be strangers from the policie of Jsrael Ephe. 2.12 c. I answer by politie they mean not I hope the inward faith which Israel had but the outward order of administring in that Church otherweise they reason neyther properly nor to the question in hand Yea in this very place the Apostle distinguisheth the politie from the covenants of promise And so I deny that wee are bound now to keep the politie of Israel neyther dooth the Apostle mean any such thing For he putteth the Ephesians in mind of their estate being paynims when they were uncircumcised without Christ without Israels politie without covenaÌ„ts of promise without hope without God But now in Christ they were united brought neer but wherunto to circumcision nay he sayth elswhere if they were circumcised Christ should profit them nothing or to the ordinances of worship in the Temple nay for he sayth we have an aultar wherof they have no authoritie to eat which serv in the tabernacle Or were they now to goe up as did the Tribes to the earthly Ierusalem where thrones of judgment were set thrones for the howse of David nothing so for Christ was to destroy both Citie Sanctuarie so to force the Iewes to an end of their politie But now the Ephesians were come unto the Father by one Spirit and unto Christ who abrogated through his flesh the hatred that is the law of coÌ„mandements which stood in ordinances and was faithful as Moses in al his house and to be citizens with the Saincts and howshold of God which are built not upon Moses politie that is doon away but upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets that is the doctrine which they taught of Christ and of the ordinances of his Testament which is a kingdome that cannot be shakeÌ„ as was the coÌ„mon-wealth of Israel according to the flesh Look therefore what politie the Apostles have taught and taken from the Law or Moses the Prophets foretold should continue under the Gospel so much wil we reteyn the rest we leav to Iewes Iewishly affected And these are the things which they have answered to the first objection in the Letter which whither they have proved the Elders now under the Gospel to be the Church which is to judge of syn and synners and to have power as the Church in their own hands let al indifferent men judge as also what cause they had to conclude that we oppose against Jsrael Moses and the Prophets and to cry out against us as they doo that such is our error and so great is our transgression and iniquitie But because of the printed copie they set upon us afresh with many observations and questions and by matters with longsomnes ynough wheras a few sound arguments would much better have cleared the controversie and contented the reader They observ 1. that the scriptures of the old Testament are quoted in our Article as wel as of the new 2. That Mat. 18. is to agree with the other scriptures cited 3. That it must be understood with proportion to the manner in Jsrael 4. That therfore their understanding is according to the ancient faith and not ours who would make them strangers from Jsrael and would perswade them that Christs doctrine in Mat. 18.17 is a new rule c. I answer these are in effect the things we heard before and which in my answers I have partly granted partly refuted 1. The proportion they speak of is a disproportion concluding from Magistrates authoritie in the Commonâ—wealth to Ministers in the Church which is against Christs doctrine Mat. 20.25.26 And if they wil not learn it of Christ they may learn it of Cato an alien from the common wealth both of Israel and of Christ who yet sayd to such Jt becomes yow to be mindfull of your condition that yow are not Magistrates but Ministers 2. It is a mayn pillar of Poperie to proportion the Church now in the outward politie to Israel The Rhemists would have the the see of Rome in the new law to be answerable to the chair of Moses Cardinal Bellarmine maketh his first argument for the Popes judging of controversies from the Preist Judge that was appointed in the Law Deut. 17. And as Moses sate as Prince of the Church and gave answer to al doubts arising about the Law of God Exod. 18. so by proportion he wil have now in the papacie And in deed for show the papists proportion to have one supreme court above al to end weighty causes and appeals more resembleth Israel then dooth these mens Eldership in every particular Church 3. It is an argument that others except papists have disclaymed D. Bilson whose learning and goodwil hath holpen the prelacie as much as any mans and whose understanding of Mat. 18.17 these our opposites in some points doo now follow he confesseth that to reason from the Magistrate to the minister from the sword to the word from the law to the Gospel c. the leap is so great that cart-ropes wil not tye the conclusion to the premisses D. Whitakers D. Iunius and others refuting the Papists disalow the reasons drawn from the law and magistracie of Israel which these our opposers make their cheifest bulwark M. Cartwright answering D. Whitgift sayth the argument is not good from civil government to ecclesiastical When Bellarmine allegeth the civil Monarchies to justify the ecclesiastical Iunius answereth the exaÌ„ple is altogither unlike of temporal empire and spiritual ministery between these there is not neyther
ought neyther can a proportion or comparison be rightly made 4. It is an argument that is yet hid and by our opposites themselves unmanifested how the proportion they speak of shal be shaped For in Israel ther were Magistrates in the cities Preists and Levits in the Tabernacle and Ministers in the Synagogues Let them shew us who now are proportionable to the Magistrates who to the Preists and who to the Ministers in the synagogues The Magistrates also were of sundry sorts as Elders Heads Judges Officers The Judges agayn differing both in number and power In all the cities throughout the tribes were Judges which the Iewâ—doctors call the lesser Sanhedrin or Session and say it consisted of 23. Iudges and Officers which they say were weaponed and executed the Iudges sentences In the cheif City Ierusalem were also Iudges and Preists for the weightiest and hard causes this they caled the great Sanhedrin or Session and it had 71. Iudges of whom first Moses was cheif and sucsessively one caled Nasi the Prince next whom they place Aâ—beth diâ—â— the Father of the judgment hall besides other officers as two Scribes to write the causes of the condemned the absolved Shâ—lcâ—â—h â—â—th din the Messenger or Angel of the Court even as ther was also in other cases Sheliaâ—h â—sibbur the Messenger or Angel of the Church or Congregation in the synagogues wherunto it may be thought that in Rev. 2.1 c. hath allusion Agayn they make an other court of three for lesser strifes and mony matters caled dâ—ies mâ—â—monoth the lower Synedrion of 23. judged matters of life and death diâ—â—i nephashoth the high Senate of 71. judged weightiest matters of state of warrs of a Tribe of a False prophet of appeals brought c. Also among the Preists and Levits ther were divers orders and functions some chief some inferior some ministring in the sanctuary by course some overseers and judges some Musicians some Tresurers some Porters c. In the synagogues ther were alwayes lecturers and preachers of the law and prophets in every citie and in Ierusalem it self were many synagogues besides the Temple there Now they that would proportion their power with Israel showld shew whither they mean al these fore-spokeÌ„ or but some They should tel us to whoÌ„ the Pastor is proportionable to whome the Teacher to whom the ruling Elders And seing they wil have that rule in Mat. 18. to be as it was in Israel they should tel us to which of those Synedrions or Preists or Rulers Christ sendeth Whiles these things are not cleared but we are told generally of a pâ—oportion with Israel we are led as in the clowds and know not into what errours we may fall 5. They referr us in the beginning of their Treatise on Mat. 18.17 to a place in Mat. 5.22.23 c where Christ they say teacheth the offending brother how to cary himself as in Mat. 18.15 c. he dooth the brother offended that in both places Christ sheweth to whom the offender may be brought viz to the Church or Congregation Mat. 18.17 to the Synedrion or sitting of Elders Mat. 5.22 which must be eyther all one with the other or ells how should his hearers then understand him or these things then be observed or these two places be reconciled I answer Christ might farr better be understood then then our opposites may now his words are cleare but not to the purpose that they cite them Christ there speaketh not of men judging on earth but of Gods judging in heaven For men had not power to condemn to hel fyre there spoken of neyther could they by Moses law condemn a man to death for unadvised anger as Christ there God would doo neyther was every maÌ„ that caled his brother Raka to be brought to the Synedrion at Ierusalem the lesser courts in the cities could hear and end such matters The Iew Doctors say that such as bring an evil same on their neighbours were to be judged by the Court of 3. or by that of the 23. but for the high Synedrion both they and Moses law shew it was for the more weighty and difficult cases Our saviour in Mat. 5. interprets the law otherweise then did the scribes They sayd whosoever killeth shal be culpable of judgment that is he should dye by Gods law and further then outvvard actual murder they went not But Christ sheweth 3. kinds of kylling otherweise then with the hand the least wherof even unadvised anger should be punished with death by God and as it did increase and shevv it self in evil speeches so should their punishment be increased in hel which he setteth down by allusion to the sundry civil judgments in Israel And so he procedeth to teach men the true keeping of the law by love and reconciliation without which they should be cast into the prison of hel how ever such synns were not punishable by men But in Mat. 18. Christ speakketh of judgments on earth in this life and that not of the civil punishments by the Magistrates sword but of binding and loosing by the word of God to be performed by the Church that is as Paul sheweth the ecclesiastical assembly gathered in Christs name Wherfore the church in Mat. 18 17. is not the Synedrion in Mat. 5.22 as these would have it Or if it be then is it meant of the Magistrates and not of the church ministers unto whom these would now draw it For were the Ministers and preachers of the law in the synagogues judges in the synedrion Sheliach Isibbur Angelus ecclesiae the messenger of the Congregation was he the cheif of the synedrion as the Pastor vvho they say is Angelus ecclesiae is now cheif in the Eldership If Christ must needs speak to the understanding of the Ievves and order his Church like their coÌ„mon vvealth ther must be more then one court or Synedrion and he could not give that to 2. or 3. gathered any vvhere in his name vvhich belonged to the Senate of the Realm 6. So vvheras they say we would perswade them Christs doctrine in Mat. 18.17 is a new rule which Jsrael had not I think it wil be good for them to yeild unto this persvvasion For the Elders in Israel to vvhom they referr us by Psal. 82. Josh. â—0 4.5.6 Num. 35 12.24.25 29. Deut. 19.11.12.16.17 and other like places being Magistrates that had povver of life and death if Christ sendeth unto such the Ministers of the Church I hope vvil not intrude into their places Wherfore eyther let them acknovvledge the nevv Testament to have nevv rules and ordinances and that the kingdome being changed aswel as the Preisthood there must needs be a change of the law therof also or els let them leave it to the Magistrate vnto vvhom it belongeth Next this they
implieth authority that it is proportionably answerable to the taking away by death c that it is a special use of the keyes given by Christ to the Apostles that the force herof is such as therby a man is not onely cast out of that particular Church wherof he was a member but is cutt off excluded from all churches vpon earth as on the contrary by baptisme wee are entred into communion with al Churches of Christ in the world By these things compared togither we may observ 1. that the church elders may by their sole authoritie give judiciarie sentence that a man shal be excommunicated answerable to the Magistrates in Israel that gave sentence a man should be put to death 2. That the Elders may also by authoritie in particular deliver a man to Satan by the power of Christ which is proportionably answerable to the taking away by death which in Israel themselves grant was to be doon by the hands of the people Thus doo the Elders now chalenge by proportion in the Church that which belonged both to Magistrates and people in the cōmon wealth But because they fear the people they shape them this deceitful proportion that their avoyding the excommunicate person is the executing or putting in execution as they ambiguously speak of the sentence answerable to the peoples stoning of a malefactor in Israel how fitly let al that have understanding judge For whether the people avoid him or not the man is judged and delivered to Satan and so cut off from the church as on the contrary when one is baptised by the minister whether the people keep company with him or not he is made a member of the church and as a man beheaded in Israel was surely dead whether the people refreyned from touching him or no. 2. Agayn they give no more to the people of that Church wherof he is a member then to the people of all other churches that are bound to avoid the excōmunicated person as wel as they 3. Yea they give hereby their people no more power then the Pope dooth to his marked servants for he also wil have the people avoyd such as he dooth excōmunicate and if this be the boasted right and libertie of the people they had as much in the greatest bondage of poperie as now when they are caried thus blindfold by propertions But they tel the people that if any can except against the Elders proceedings they shal be heard I answer First before whom and unto whom shal any man except against the Elders is it not before and unto the Elders themselves And is it meet that they should be judges in their own cases In Israel when any complayned of wrong in the Synagogues or Cities ther was an higher Court to control unruly Elders and to help the oppressed But now 2. or 3. Elders in a Church bearing themselves upon their forged authoritie from Mat. 18.17.20 may be lawless and who shal let them in their proceedings Secondly how should the people except when by these mens doctrine they are not bound to be present at the hearing and deciding of the controversie wil it not be a just blame upon them if they except against a matter which they have not heard discussed Thirdly when the party accused shal except against the Elders proceedings as commonly he wil doo for if he acknowledged himself to have synned he should not need to be excōmunicated may the people now require to hear the case debated between the Elders and him nay they plead in their Treatise on Math. 18. saying But where hath the Lord appointed a rule of further proceeding beyond that of the Elders governours for hearing the brethrens causes and judging between a man and his brother c. And agayn the Elders also are the Churches officers c. so as when they have heard examined admonished and iudged according to the word of God it is to be estemed as doon by the Lord and the Church c. Thus let the mā except what he wil the judgm t is at an end the Lo hath doon it the Church hath doon it because the Elders have doon it and it must be presupposed that they have doon it according to the word of God though the man except never so much and though the scriptures foreshew of judges that were wolves not sparing the flock and latter dayes abundantly confirm the same And thus when a Naboth is condemned by wicked Elders if any except on his behalf they wil take him in a snare that reproveth in the gate perhaps he shal hear it sayd by what authoritie doo you speak are you one of the Church spoken of in the 1◠of Matthew for the Elders have power to deal with him also that shal except and can easily bring him within the compass of a contentious person or an oppugner of goverment and cast him likeweise out of the Church that a man sometime were as good take a Lion by the paw as except against the Elders proceedings Next folow their many questions and other matters imputed unto us wherein we observ how when arguments fayl them for their own cause they seek to darken the truth by casting clowds before the readers eyes 1. First they ask whither in Jsrael the Lord abridged the people of their right and libertie c. I answer No but these men that by wrested proportions give the ministers of the church the power that Magistrates Preists and people had in Israel doe abridge the people of their right as before is manifested And for the further clearing of it seing ther were diverse governours in Israel as the Preists and Levites in the Temple the ministers in the synagogues the Elders or Magistrates at the gates of the cities and these also divers and of unequal power as before is shewed I ask of them agayn whither now the Eldership of every church be proportionable in power and goverment unto al those governours and if not unto al unto which of them 2. Secondly they ask whither the people have any more right and authoritie in the churches goverment now then the people of Jsrael had in those dayes I answer they should not seek to intangle by ambiguitie of terms First we give not to the people goverment as before I have shewed but a right and power to observ and doo al the commandements of Christ touching his prophetical preistly and kingly office by the Elders teaching guiding and governing of them in the Lord. 2. The goverm t in Israel was diverse by Magistrates in the gate by Preists in the sanctuarie by ministers in the synagogues To the Magistracie al Christians are to be subject now as they were then for it is an humane ordinance tending to civil peace and concerneth al men whither within the church or without indifferently The external Preisthood of Israel is accomplished in Christ and now abolished Heb. 7.
I answer that is true for infants as they excepted have not But that onely the Elders have fit gifts for such purposes is untrue the scripture and dayly experience tells us the contrary yea some other meÌ„bers may have fitter gifts then the Elders And they theÌ„selves that now are officers had they not gifts fit to examine judge decide c. before they were choseÌ„ into office or did their election give them gifts which had none fit before 4. Fourthly they wil have this scripture direct against us in that it sheweth how some have a more cheif place then others as the head and eyes hands in the body This is not against us at all for we grant so much But they say we litle regard it who in cases of controversie wil look where the greatest number of people is though they may be of the most simple and wil have them to be the church and to have the power c. as if the multitude should stil be folowed and that ther were no difference of gifts of office or other respect at al to be had I answer 1. they keep their wont in abusing us before the world we look not in any case to the greatest number eyther of people or Elders but in al cases we look to Gods law and testimonie as we are commanded vvhich vvhen it is shevved by vvhom soever al ought to yeild unto We knovv neyther the multitude neyther yet the mightie or Rabbies are stil to be folowed there are differences of gifts and offices in the church yet no mans gift or office no not though he vvere an Angel from heaven may cary us from the vvritten vvord by vvhich the Godly people tried even the Apostles doctrine and vvere commended Although therfore the Church hath that libertie vvhich al societies that have none to exercise dominion or authoritie over them have namely that the greater number overswayeth the lesser when al accord not yet the faithful are not so to look unto or folow the greater number as to decline from the least of Gods commandements This we may see in the 12. tribes of Israel where the greater nuÌ„ber even ten of the tribes fel to false worship and they caried away with them not onely the tribute of two hundred thowsand lambs and ramms which were due yerely from Moab to the Kings of Iudah were wrongfully chalenged and taken by the Kings of Samaria but caried away also the title of the Church being usually even by al the Prophets named Jsrael wheras Iudah and Benjamin were Israel as wel as Ephraim and the rest yea in deed they were the onely Israel of God as the scripture counteth Israel Yet did not the faithful respect this greater number but left them with their title and usurpation and went to the lesser part which was the better 2. But is it not strange that these our opposites wil object these things to us when in some things they doo the same and in their new establisht hierarchie much worse For in their popular election of officers which they stil allow if it may continue must not the greater number of voices cary the thing And yet there is no action of the church that needeth more wisdom government or circumspection then this And therfore many precepts are left for the careful and holy performance of it 1. Tim. 3. 5. Tit. 1. And wil not the Papists now cast the reproches on their own faces as they that would have the multitude stil folowed as if there were no difference of gifts c. 3. And touching their hierarchie the Eldership they wil not I think deny but the greater number of voices among them must prevayl Now that being so a Church having a Pastor and a Teacher that are learned and 3. or 4. ruling Elders which are as unlearned as the other of the people taken of trades men and the like these 3. or 4. Rulers whose power they have proportioned with the Princes of Israel shal by their number of voices cary matters though it be against Pastor Teacher and 500 brethren Yea these may excommunicate or depose the Pastor and Teacher and cast out of the brethren but none can excommunicate them or depose them joyntly from their offices The utmost that we can find these men to allow the Church in these exigents is when they have doon al they can to separate from them and this power any man hath in the church of Rome But I hope every one that â—avoureth the things of God aright wil abhorr such an unruly prelacie For if these Elders prove such as Paul foretold of greevous wolves not sparing the flock but speaking perverse things to draw disciples after theÌ„ as the Church hath had woeful experience of now so many hundred yeres what havock miserie wil not they bring upon Gods people And if we add unto this their other opinioÌ„ of Gods covenant to continue with a Church though they fall into so many horrible synns idolatries blasphemies as the Romish synagogue hath doon which now they plead for to be stil the true church of Christ what wil not a presumpuous Eldership doo and yet bear out themselves with this that they are the true church and al that leave them for what cause soever are schismaticks 4. Let the reader also observ their manner of pleading when they speak of the Elders proceedings they annex according to the Law of God but speaking of the people they annex though in error and though never so erroneously caried and though they be of the most simple as if they would perswade men that the Elders usually through their wisdom and godlynes walked aright and the people through simplicitie and errour went astray Wheras if eyther the scriptures be searched or humane histories or the present state of churches be looked upon we shal see the greatest errours heresies schismes and evils to have both arisen and been continued by the Elders preists and learned Rabbines in al ages even Christ himself found no greater enemies then the high preists scribes and rulers of the people which turned to his reproch then wherof his church now is made partaker so that they sayd dooth any of the Rulers or of the Pharisees beleev in him but this people which knâ—w not the Law are cursed John 7.48.49 5. Neyther if it were true dooth their supposition that the Elders wil judge according to the law bear out their supremacie which Christ hath forbidden For besides that one man may judge according to law both the princes of Israel and the princes of other nations were bound to the lawes prescribed yet may not the ministers now by proportion have princelike authoritie 1. Pet. 5.3 The philosopher could say They that bid the Law bear rule doe bid God to bear rule by his own voice but they that bid man bear rule meaning without law doo bid
consciences of the Church But they allege further the Elders are to have maintenance for the doing of it and of the other duties c. I answer let them then excōmunicate alone as wel as try the case alone seing they have maintenance for both and let the people be bound to come to neyther no nor to the Pastours ministring of the word and sacraments if this reason be good because he is more worthy maintenāce than the ruling Elders as th'Apostle sheweth But then they say men must leav their trades women their families children their scholes servants their work and come to hear and judge cases that fall out between brother brother I answer 1. First they restreyn things too much when they say between brother brother for what if it be a publick case of heresie or idolatrie as that mentioned Deut. 13 12 13 14. c. wil they say women children and servants were then or are now bound to leav their callings come togither to trie out the matter 2. Secondly many cōtroversies between neighbours are for civil things of this life such are not church matters nor there to be heard but by Magistrates or arbiters chosen 3. Thirdly for doubtful cases ecclesiastical people are to inquire the law at the Preists mouth and to ask counsel of their Elders severally or joyntly who are to have their meetings apart for such and other like ends so many things may be composed without trouble of the Church 4. Fourthly when apparant synners so convicted by witnesses are to be judged by the Church ther is no time more fit then the sabbath day wherin all men are bound to leav their own works tend to the Lords of which sort this is Or if that day suffice not they may take any other for them convenient for unto publick affayrs the Church is to be assembled 1. Cor. 5.4 Act. 14.27 15.4 30. 21.18 22. Against this I know they except saying who can shew such an ordinance of God find we such a course used in Jsrael on the Sabbath dayes Did they not meet on the Sabbath in the temple and synagogues for Gods worship c. and the Elders sit in the gates on the week dayes to hear controversies c. I answer for this later point they bring not any one scripture to confirm it yet wil I not strive ther about for I think it is true Sure I am the Ievves canon lavves so declare Jt is not lawful they say to judge on the Sabbath or on a festival day yea further that matters of life and death may not be judged on the evening of the Sabbath or on the evening of a festival day least the accused be found guilty and it be impossible to kyl him on the morow I account civil controversies of things perteyning to this life as Paul caleth them to be of our own works which by the law are to be doon in the six dayes and therfore think it not lawful for Magistrates to keep courtes or Assises to judge and execute malefactors on the Sabbath And this among other things sheweth a mayn difference between the Eldership of the Church and the Magistracie of Israel But for ecclesiastical works by preists or people they were to be doon on the sabbaths as circumcision kylling slaying cutting and burning of sacrifices which was very laborious work and even a breach of the sabbath in outward shew but that the different nature of the action made it blameless Now the church judgments are the Lords works not ours and therfore fittest to be doon on the Lords day they belong to Christs kingly office and therfore are holy as the works of his prophetical and preistly office These our opposites themselves compare the casting out by excōmunication with the contrary receiving in by baptisme Al churches baptise on the Sabbath and also excommunicate on the Sabbath why should not the cause be heard as wel as the judgment executed on that day We find ecclesiastical controversies were disputed on the Sabbath dayes in Israel as the Apostles practise sheweth Act. 13.44.45.46 17.2.3 18.4 It was lawful on the Sabbath to heal the body and is it unlawful to heal the sowl It was lawful to save a sheep from dying in a ditch and is it not lawful to save a sowl from death and cover a multitude of synns Seing therfore the Sabbath is to be sanctified by the word of God and prayer and al that the church ministers are to doo belongeth unto these as th'Apostles teach us Act. 6.4 we think it is too Pharisee like to carp at church judgments on the Sabbath and then servants which are the Lords freemen and al other resting from their own works may attend to the Lords without such inconveniences as these would cast in their way And hitherto of the first point in controversie The second point of difference in the Letter 2. WE had learned that every true Church of Christ hath this power to cast out obstinate synners from amongst them this not onely when it hath officers but also when it wanteth them but now we were taught that a people without officers have not power to cast out obstinate synners Which doctrine amongst other evils overthroweth the constitution of the Church that so taught for it was gathered and constituted by Christians without officers receiving in the repentant and casting out the disobedient wheras by this opinion they had power from Christ to doe neyther for they that cannot cast out cannot receiv in one power is for both With this they joyn out of the printed copy 6. The 33. article in our Confession which our Apologie also confirmeth pag. 45. professeth that people being come forth of the Antichristian estate c. are willingly to joyn togither in Christian communion and orderly covenant and to unite themselves into peculiar and visible congregations c. These have pleaded that al are bound to communion by vertue of their baptisme received in the Church of Rome or other Antichristian assemblies These things are confirmed by Mat. 18.17 20. with 28.20 1. Cor. 5.4.5 and 12.27 1.2 Rom. 12.5 Heb. 12.22.28 Mat. 5.14 Phil. 1.1.5 Act. 2.41.42.47 17.4 The latter is also confirmed with sundry scriptures and reasons expressed in our foresayd Apologie Against this their former profession these men now thus write 1. Where find we in the scriptures that God hath thus layd upon the people without officers to excōmunicate where is the precept for it which be the examples of it or what are the grounds requiring bearing it out I answer 1. First as their manner is they would put others to prove that which by others and themselves hath been proved and approved and is not as yet by them or any taken away It is easy for any to dispute and trouble men after this manner 2.
say our controversie was about a Church established with officers things concerning people without officers are left to further consideration I answer true it is they sought alwayes to hide their errors and to put off things which pressed them to further consideration and the Elders having gott the Churches power into their hands they lysted not to scan the peoples right But we were necessarily drawn to controvert this point two wayes first because their errour did eat out the very constitution of the Church wherof they vvere as shal after be manifested Secondly because it vvas by themselves acknovvledged that vvhatsoever povver the people hav before is not to be takē away by their officers this therfore vvas an argument that manifested the evil vvhich lurketh in their nevv doctrine And vvho can soundly discuss any question if they look not to the foundation as Christ sayd to the Pharisees from the beginning it was not so 6. Finally vvheras vve shevved hovv their doctrine overthroweth the constitution of their Church as being vvithout povver from Christ they say First it were worth the knowing by whom the first man or two men of this church were received in and by what power I ansvver it is true they say and pray them therfore to shevv by vvhat povver their church began if they vvould have men acknovvledge it for true and planted by the povver of Christ Othervveise they must renounce their estate and begin a nevv As for ours it is shevved in our published vvritings vvhich if they can let them disprove as in Treat of the ministerie against M. Hildersh p. 73.74 Apologie p. 44.45.46.47 2. Secondly they say by our baptisme as also by accord in the truth we ar bound to communion in any thing lawful as God giveth occasion and opportunity I answer 1. they here turn from the question we speak of constitution of a particular church they tel us of communion by baptism and accord in the truth which extendeth to al churches in the world and to Saincts that ar not gathered and constituted into any particular church We speak of a church with power to receiv in and cast out though it have no officers they touch not this point unless they closely grant us the question to the overthrow of their opinion For if they yeild such power and practise to be a lawful thing in the communion of al such as ar baptised or doo accord in the truth they refute themselves if not al men may see how they seek to divert from the matter in hand 2. Secondly by their baptism they mean not onely the true baptisme in Christs church but the false baptisme in Antichrists as the article expresseth and after we ar to scan which if it be according to the scriptures which they cite the one baptisme that by one spirit baptiseth al into one body then are they returned into the cōmmunion and body of Antichrists synagogue if the church of Rome be it are bound to communicate even with Friers and Iesuites in any thing lawful as God giveth occasion and that is I suppose to hear them when they preach nothing but the truth or to pray with them when they in spirit pray to God in Christ c. I would be loth to wrong them their own words lead me to this if I gather amyss let them pardon me shew their meaning plainly for he that dooth truth cōmeth to the light 3. Thirdly without baptisme there may be a Church entred into covenant with God one with an other as all Israel passed into the covenant renued by Moses when al the men under 40. yeres old were uncirsed besides al the women 3. They thirdly say it is playn and undenyable that to chuse or give voices in election is not a part of goverment c. but an interest power right and libertie that the Saincts out of office have and should use c. I answer 1. First this is playn and undenyable so long as it pleaseth them not to deny it but if they change their mind in this point to morow as they have doon in the former about the peoples power to excōmunicate then we shal hear as we did before wher find we in the scriptures that God hath thus layd on the people without officers to make electiō where is the precept for it which be the examples of it c. They tel us it is playn but not one scripture is brought to shew it yet is it needful seing they know the Papists and other Prelates deny such elections without officers The Prelates wil shew them sundry examples wher it was doon by the counsel direction and government of officers as Act. 1.15.21 22. 6.2 3. 14 23 1. Tim. 3 1. 14.15 Tit. 1.5 but not one place where a people without officers attempted such a work Wherefore wee wish our opposites not to deal so slenderly as to tel men it is playn and undeniable so to leav it for we make no doubt but the sound proof of this point wil disproov their former errour 2. Secondly we have upon their bare word that to give voices in election of officers is no part of government we pray them in their next to shew whether then to give voices for deposition of unworthy officers be a part of government as also how they prove that to give voices for the reciving in and putting out of members in the Church is a part of government more than the other 3. Thirdly the reader may observ their covert cariage of this point whiles they speak but of giving voices in election but what say they about giving power of administration to the ministers who must doo that or how had these men that but by the people And if the people have power in the name of Christ to say to the elected Pastor Take thou authority to preach the word c. or in any other terms to give him pastoral office which had none before I hope they wil not deny but if that Pastor afterward proov a Wolf the same people may put him out of al his pastoral office and if they have that power why also may they not put him quite out of the fold and Church by the power of Christ that is excommunicate him And if it be not lawful for a people to give authority of Ministerie unto a man how then do these administer which renounced some of them their former office and preisthood given by the Prelates and as private men received a nue caling and ordination others from private estate were constituted Elders by the people Is this Ministerie now from heaven or from men 4. Lastly they say seing their doctrine overthroweth not the constitution of the Church of Jsrael nor of the primitive Churches it cannot therfore overthrow the constitution of their church or of any that is accordingly built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets c. I answer this in
deed is the surest argument of al save that it is a fayr begging of the quaestion For the thing they should prove is that their constitution is according to Israel or Apostolik For if Israel or the primitive Churches before they had officers did or might receiv in and cast out members and if the people might set up and depose officers by power from God then are these mens errors overthrown If not but that the thing is unlawful for any then or now so to doo then is the constitution of their Church overthrown as that which did grow up to such estate without power from heaven and they are to let it fal and be rooted up and come to a better if they can find it according to the scriptures Whether therfore our exception or their defense be more vayn frivolous as they speak let the prudent judge The 3. point of difference in the Letter 1. WE had learned that every Christian congregation hath power and coÌ„mandement to elect and ordeyn their own Ministerie according to the rules of Gods word and upon such default in life doctrine or administration as by the rule of the word depriveth them of the ministerie by due order to depose them from the ministerie they exercised yea if the case so require orderly to cut them of by excommunication But now it is by some mainteyned that the Congregation can neyther put into office nor put out of office unless they have officers to doo both and can neyther for heresie or other wickednes excommunicate or depose their Eldership With this they joyn the first out of the printed copy which is as the former These things are confirmed in our Articles by Act. 6.3.5.6 14.23 15.2.3.22.23 2. Cor. 8.19 1. Tim. 3.10 4.14 5.22 Num. 8.9.10 1. Cor. 16.3 Tit. 1.5 c. Eph. 4.11.12 1. Cor. 12.7.8.14.15.28 Levit. 8. ch Rom. 16.17 Phil. 3.2 1. Tim. 6.3.5 Ezek. 44.12.13 Mat. 18.16 And in our Apologie by 7. reasons deduced froÌ„ the Scriptures Hereunto they say 1. That the church may excommunicate an officer as wel as any other member I answer they yet touch not the point We speak of the churches ministerie or Eldership in general they tel us of one in particular who because ther ar other ministers he may be censured by them Bur if a church have onely one minister and he prove a wolf they can neyther put him out of office nor excoÌ„municate him by their doctrine 2. Secondly they say if al the officers jointly transgress and so persist then the church which did chuse theÌ„ may also depose and refuse them from being their officers any longer and may separate themselves from them But that the people may excommunicate al their officers they desire to see it shewed from the word I answer though they can not deny the Article yet they seek covertly to cary the reader aside The article speaketh of chusing and ordeyning and so putting into office they answer onely of chusing the other they pass by But let them shew ever any church where men were chosen and not also ordeyned and put into office or that God committed the beginning of such a work to any people and not the ending also And why wil they sever the things God hath joyned In the law the church had authoritie to make them that is as the Greek version sheweth constitute or ordeyn which word Paul useth Tit. 1.5 Judges and officers in al their cities and not to elect them onely 2. The article speaketh of deposing from ministery and putting out of office they answer onely of deposing and refusing from being their officers any longer That is to say as men that have left the church of Rome have deposed the Pope for in separating from him he is their officer no longer But is he not trow we a Pope stil And shal not an Eldership when the people have doon al this that they speak of reteyn a ministery stil The separation which they tel us of is thus opened by their own comment that it implieth the power we have over our selves wheras excommunication implieth power and authoritie over others Thus they allow not the body of the Church power and authority over their heretical Eldership though it be but 2. or 3. wicked men to cast them out of the Church in Christs name and power or to depose them from office but from being their officers Even thus they themselves hâ—ve deposed al the Bishops of England long agoe But whether this be not to aequivocate with the word depose let wise men jâ—dge for a litle after they ask whether it can be shewed by any scripture that any did ordeyn or depose officers but Governours Now wheras our 〈◊〉 Apologie is confirmed by many scriptures reasons deduced from them they answer them not as is meet they should seing they wil abrogate their former profession and bring in a new neither doo they as they then wrote must be doon shew some other manner of entrance into the ministerie ordeyned by Christ but thus they labour to confute themselves 1. The particuculars of the 23. Article of our Confession being found true in the churches of Jsrael and of the Gentlies since Christ the exception made hereabout can not be of weight against this or any other Church established according to the word of God as those were but must be also against those Churches withal What to make of this their answer as yet I cannot tell my slendernes coÌ„prehendeth not the depth of it That the particulars of that 23. article were found true in the Churches of God I doubt not of it that is the thing we stand for That exception should be made by us hereabout against this or any Church established according to the word of God as these were is farr from our thought What is it then that they have sayd but an ostentation of the name of Jsrael their mayn colourable argument which yet is against them not for them at all as our CoÌ„fession and Apologie sheweth In Israel the whole Congregation was assembled at the ordination of their ministers and the childreÌ„ of Israel imposed hands upon them This rule we folow but these our opposites wil not allow churches unless they have ministers before to doo thus they wil rather have their ministerie from the great Antichrist of Rome as after shal be manifested for which they have no shew in the scriptures For did Israel ever take Egyptian or Babylonian preists to minister in their sanctuary or did the primitive churches ever take any Bishop of the Antichrists that were in there time set them by vertue of their Antichristian ordination over the flock of Christ why then doo these men so ofteÌ„ tel us of Jsrael and the primitive churches unless they think their very names would make us afrayd But they except against Num. 8.9.10 saying by the children of Jsrael c. are
multitude of them could not perform it which order al churches now are bound to keep for ever And this which I have sayd the words of the text in their natural sense doo confirm the sonns of Jsrael shal put their hands upon the Levites shewing that they did it not by title of Magistracie but as Israelites So also in the other case when the Elders imposed hands on the syn offring Levit. 4 14 15. it was not a work peculiar to the ecclesiastical Elders for afterward King Hezekiah with the Congregation layd their hands upon the sacrifices Which thing also he did not by peculiar right of his kingly office but as he was principal of the Church of Israel for when they had no King the Church might doo it by the next cheif mēbers an unbeleeving King reigning over them might not doo it Also if any people returning from captivity had wanted Magistrates they were not deprived therby of offring sacrifice for their publik syn For if every private man might impose hands on his own sacrifice as Levit. 1.3.4 how can we think that the whole company synning the cheif fathers might not have imposed hands according to that rule Lev. 4.15 Yea the word Elders dooth not alwayes though often mean Magistrates or ministers by office but sometime ancient in yeres The other things which they allege about the varietie of phrase as they doo not disprove the thing forespoken so make they nothing for them They say such as are caled Elders Lev. 9.1 are caled children of Jsrael Lev. 9 3. this is true for who ever doubted but the Elders were sonns of Jsrael as wel as the other people But if they bring it to prove the Elders or Officers onely to be there intended I deny it the whole chapter after manifesteth the publick church to be meant For when Aaron had offred his own syn-offring and burnt-offring then offred he the peoples syn-offring and their burnt-offring and their peace offrings and after lifted up his hands to the people and blessed them This was one of the most publik assemblies and who would ever dream that the Elders onely were here expiated by sacrifice and blessed of the Preist they might even as wel say the Elders onely did keep and eat the passover cōparing Exod. 12.3 with Exod. 12.21 where one verse sayth al the congregation and an other al the Elders The next exception of the Septuagints translating the sonns of Jsrael in Greek the Eldership is not of weight though the translators should have minded as doo their Commenters But they purposed not hereby to exclude the people any more then in 1. Sam 8.4 they would exclude the Elders where when the original text sayth the Elders of Jsrael came to Samuel they translate it in Greek the men of Jsrael So the Elders of Jabesh 1. Sam. 11 3. the Greek caleth the men of Jabesh Of like weight are their observations about the word Church or Congregation which being but once turned in Greek the synedrion they skore it up as making for their Eldership but though it be once twise and thrise turned laos plethos ochlos that is the people and multitude they can let them places pass and say never a word Moreover touching this place in hand Num. 8 10. the Greek version as wel as the Hebrue it self sayth the children of Jsrael shal impose their hands vpon the Levites so that their exception here standeth them in no sted Finally they observ the clauses in the article according to the rules in Gods word and by due order c. which as they bind them to shew by scriptures that the people not being in office may choose their officers as is proved there in Apol. p. 46.47 so they bind us to shew like rules practise or warrant of ordination deposition and excommunication I answer first if a man would except as they doo he might ask them how they prove that people without officers may by due order choose any into office for in the scriptures which they stand upon al things were doon by the counsel ordering and goverment of the officers even the election it self Act. 6.2.3 1.15 22. 14.23 c. Secondly their new devise of having their ordination successively frō Rome is neyther according to the rules in Gods word nor by due order nor by any example in Israel no though Rome were as true a church as they now plead her to be For that the ministers of one particular church should ordeyn officers for an other church is more unorderly then when every church ordeyneth them in it self the Apostles and Evangelists had their offices in al churches so have not Pastors Magistrates are limited within their own precincts and the Maior or Bailive of one corporation hath no jurisdiction in another So should al ministers be bounded within their own charges and not chalenge catholik authoritie in al churches as dooth the lawless usurping man of syn Antichrist Thirdly the scriptures and reasons in our Articles and Apologie serv also for the ordination and deposition of ministers though it please these men to pass them over in silēce because they are too heavy for them to lift In our Apologie pag. 43. there are 6. arguments and in pag. 47. six other arguments confirmed by scriptures as the reader may see til our opposites answer thē we think it needless to set down more Fourthly we hold it necessary that al church actions be orderly caried eyther by the officers if ther be any or by the Magistrates as in Israel or by the Fathers of families or the most excellent in gifts requested therunto by the congregation this we firmly mainteyn against al popular confusion and disorder whatsoever And M. Iohnson himself hath expressly defended this truth heretofore against M. Iaakob that where people first come to the order of Christ imposition of hands is to be doon by the fittest among them being therunto appointed by the rest of the church alleging Num. 8.10 though now he useth for defense of his contrary error the Iesuites answers For even so dooth Bellarmine turn away the reasons of the protestantes saying the people did never ordeyn nor create ministers nor give them any power but onely named and designed them Act. 1. 6. The 4. point of difference in the Letter 4. WE had learned that none may execute a ministery but such as are rightly caled by the Church wherof they stand Ministers unto such offices and in such manner as God hath prescribed in his word But now these wil execute a ministerie which have not rightly been caled by the Church wherof they stand ministers according to their own account and doctrine which hold as before that a people without officers have no warrant from God to make or depose Ministers With this they joyn out of the printed copy 3. The 29. article of our Confession as also our Apologie
Bishops Preists Deacons any better then the state of lay men but farr worse for we judge them to be nothing ells but Antichristianitie heresie and blasphemie And therfore we receiv none of them to minister in our church except they forswear your religion and so their admission is not an allowing of your ordering but a new caling unto the Ministerie Thus wrote M. Fulk but now these our opposites to shew how they would keep coÌ„munion with Rome allow of their ordering as of their baptising which they plead to be true baptisme as after shall appear Yet let them shew us whither al the hierarchie of Antichrist as Popes Cardinals Archbishops Bishops Friers Monks Iesuits Seminaries Preists Parsons Vicars with the rest of that crew be all of them to be admitted true Ministers into a Christian church by vertue of the Imposition of hands had in that kingdom of the Beast and if not al which of them must be reordeyned and vvhich not Themselves have acknowledged that the Ministers of Antichrist are the spirits of Divils Rev. 16 13.14 let them now if they can manifest them to be the Ministers of Christ. 9. We thought best say they to stay and consider further c. if we find it ought to be doon we can doe it at any time c. Then say I they should have stayed the practise of admitting such a teacher to administer til they had been resolved whither his office and ordination had been of God or no. But first they let him administer then they inquire of the lawfulnes the Godly heretofore did not so in a case of doubt but stayed the administration of some preists til they had assurance from God Ezr. 2.62.63 10. The church say they did chuse him into office and we by prayer commended him to God for his grace and assistance in the ministration therof Which we did without imposition of hands at that time as both our selves had before doon at our first growing into order and as the French and Dutch churches also did c. I answer things are darkly set down by saying first the church did then and we they occasion us to ask what church they mean their own particular or some other If their own whether they chose him to an office that had none before or chose him from a false office to a true or chose him being already a true officer to be theirs as they admitt the members of an other Church to be a member of theirs by prayer If the last were not how stands their comparison between baptism ordination If they did so then they abuse the reader with the example of their own ordination before For they had renounced their former Ministerie as false and received a new by the election and ordination of the people though at the first without that sign spokeÌ„ of who gave them a ministerie which they never had The outward sign at that time was not used onely because ther were not Elders before now ther were Elders which imposed hands at the same time on others It is a known fallacie to pretend that for a cause which is not the cause Moreover let them say whither theiâ— Teachers former election were not as holy as his ordination and why then they repâ—te one and not an other 11. Observ say they how these and their partakers can hold that the people having no office may excoÌ„municate and some of them that they may also minister the sacraments and yet can except against such as are in office if they doo but make question of a ceremonie c. I answer the first wee hold but as themselves heretofore did upon what ground they have left it is before discussed The second as touching us so farr as I know is a slander a mere untruth I know not one among us that holdeth men without office may minister the sacraments The third if it be as they say a question but of a ceremonie and not of the very substance of the ministerie to be reteyned as their baptisme I wil profess to cease striving thereabout though I think they err in it yea and repent that I have striven so farr But if it be in deed more then a ceremonie as I suppose the things forespoken wil manifest let these men take heed how they so dissemble for Woe vnto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord. Of the Anabaptists objections we have spoken before And now let him that readeth consider what weight ther is in their later thoughts compared with their former judgments confirmed by so many reasons as the publik writings shew Let him also note how for this later point which they count but a ceremonie they say many things as we have heard but for the former their own ministerie which is a matter of substance and most neerly concerns them they say nothing but turn aside as if they saw it not And for this also let the reader observ Mr Iohnsons own words in answer to Mr HildershaÌ„ who can bring a clean thing out of filthynes Is it possible that a lawful ordination should be had from the ministers Apostasie of Antichrist Mat. 7.16 2. Cor. 6 14 15 16. with 2. Thes. 2.3 And if he be loth to stand to his former assertions let him yet shew what comfort or assuraÌ„ce any can have of the ordination in the Papacie that it is froÌ„ heaveÌ„ considering the Preists have their authoritie from the Bishops the Bishops from the Pope the Popes as their own writers Chroniclers doo record have been divided by schismes 2 or 3 Popes at once one cursing and condemning another and among the successors one repealing the acts of an other And among the rest one shee Pope Ioan an harlot And among many schismes one which was the 22. dured fourtie yeres wherin the Antipopes so rent their Babel-church into factions that the cheifest and learnedest of the clergie could not discern which of them was the true successor of Peter as they use to speak but some clave to one Pope some to another Had these noâ— power from Christ to make ministers in his church or are not they strangely caried that had rather derive their Ministerie by uncertayn succession froÌ„ such beasts then from the Lords true Church and people And may we think that when God bring the Iewes agayn to the fayth as he hath promised that they wil goe to Antichrists throne for to erect a ministerie for them These and the like things considered may shew what soundnes is in their doctrine and practise that fetch their ordination from Rome as they doo their baptisme Finally let me admonish the reader that The man of syn who boasteth himself to be the Bishop of the whole world as also to have the Princedom or soveraygntie of al the world and may not onely order and degrade preists but set up and depose Princes so exalting himself above
to them the scripture may be applied they say they are Christians and are not but doo lye and are the synagogue of Satan and if this vvill help them let them make the most of it It is sufficient for the matter in hand if in respect of Christ and his covenant and in comparison vvith Christs true Churches that synagogue be condemned as the great whore the beast that came up from and shal again goe down into the bottomless pit vertheless but that comparisons are odious it might easily be proved that though Antichrists Church pretend to be Christs so in name is better than Turks and Pagans yet in deed those miscreants are in some things to be justified in comparison of them For Iewes and Turks are not so gross as to worship the Queen of heaven and Images of Wood and of stone as doo the Antichristians The Iewes are not so vayn as to pray to Abraham and the Prophets though they be in deed saynts in heaven wheras the popish Church prayeth dayly to S. Nicolas S. Martin S. Sylvester S. Benedict S. Dommik S. Antonie and all other their own canonized and deified Saincts of whom they know not but many may be Divils in hel And Bp. Bale observeth that they have doon as their old predecessors the idolatrous preists did by the ancient Romās they have set us up a sort of lecherous Gods to be worshiped in our temples to be our advocats and to help us in our needs Yea the Hethens would marvel as Tullie telleth us that any should be so mad as to beleeve that that thing which he eateth is his God yet Antichristians beleev that they eat their God and maker when they eat their blasphemous Sacrament of the altar which before they eat they worship with divine honour At Canterburie were kept the clowts that Thomas Becket did occupy to wipe of his sweat and to blow his nose on which were kissed as holy relicks and thought to be wholsome for sick folks Was ther ever may we think more foolish idolatry among any paynims Wherfore they are in many respects worse than the very Hethens and it is true which a learned man hath sayd that their Church is like their Transubstantiatiō accidents without the true and proper subject Their allegation of 2 Thes. 2.4 that the Man of syn should sit as God in the Temple of God is before answered and is but the misunderstanding of a phrase that if they would contend they might as wel prove the Divil which appeared to the Witch of Endor was Samuel because the scripture phrase sayth that Samuel sayd to Saul c. 1 Sam. 28 14.15 c. Neyther is Ezek. 43.7.8 fitly joyned with 2 Thes. 2. they should set the type from Bels Temple in Babylon where the vessels of Gods true Temple were holden captive or from the Samaritans Temple builded by Sanballat on moūt Garizim whither the Apostate and wicked Iewes used to flee And wheras they cite Zach. 6-12 13 it is direct against them for it sheweth not that the Branch Christ should build the Temple of the Lord and then leav it for the man of syn to be worshiped there as God but that Christ himself should also cary the glorie and sit and rule upon his throne and be a Preist upon it and this we see accomplished in the Christian Church warring against the Beast for out of the true temple and from Gods throne there doe come plagues upon the Beasts throne and upon al his worshipers and God contineweth stil in his temple which the beast blasphemeth And of this temple speaketh Paul in Eph. 2 11. where the true God dwelleth by his spirit verse 12. So 2 Cor. 6 16. confirmeth this saying what agreement hath the temple of God with idols but these would make agrement which wil have the Adversarie the idol shepheard there to sit where also he is worshipped as God And in the words next before what concord hath Christ with Belial 2 Cor. 6 15. by Belial we may understand Satan or his eldest son Antichrist the Hebrue word being taking from 2. Sam. 23.6 where Belial the company of wicked ones is opposed to Davids howse the father and type of Christ Sibylla prophesying of Antichrist calleth him Belial in the Greek termination Belias Now that which Paul dooth most vehemently deny these would affirm in making such concord that where Belial sitteth as God and is so worshipped there Christ also sitteth blesseth him and his worshipers with the one true baptisme sealing up unto them the forgivenes of synns and life eternal For so we have heard it pleaded that the baptisme which the Antichristians have and use in Rome is the true the one baptisme spoken of Eph. 4 5. How fitly may we put Mr Iohnson here in mind of his own words cited from a Commenter on Dan. 11.34.35 of the wily whelps that seek how to agree Belial with Christ Jdols and the true worship in spirit thrusting the Pope and Christ both togither into one poke Wheras they end their divers respects with a true church there and a false Church there they conclude not the question but closely turn it away They should prove her that is the whore to be Christs true spowse and Church if so they could For there ther may be a true Church though she be none of it even as God had his people in Babylon and there he was a Sanctuarie or Temple unto them but the Babylonians were not the men neyther was Bels temple the Lords But it may be they mean her self by there for presently they prove it as Paul sayd of one and the same womā she is dead alive in divers respects 1. Tim. 5 6. A fit cōparison for Paul meaneth that she was alive in this natural life but dead as touching spiritual life in God and this is very true in Antichrists synagogue for she liveth in pleasure and sayth in hart J sit being a Queen c. but as touching life with God she is dead and appointed to damnation We acknowledge therfore with them that things are often in the scriptures spoken in divers respects without observing wherof men shal err infinitely but it is evil for men to make other respects then God maketh the scriptures may easily be misapplied as a litle after they bring us the respect of Abraham unrighteous in himselfe but righteous by faith Rom. 4.3.5 I hope they wil not apply this to that son of perdition in 2 Thes. 2. for that were a most wicked comparisō Yet thus they have shuffled togither many scriptures wherby the simple may be deceived for to shew things diversly spokē which none doubteth off but how soundly they have proved Antichrists Church to be Christs let the judicious Reader give setēce And let al that feare God mind whither such doctrines wil not
beat the path for al licenciousnes For although the scripture sayth he that committeth syn is of the Divil and we know that whosoever is borne of God synneth not but he that is begotten of God keepeth him self and that wicked one toucheth him not notwithstaÌ„ding men may be as prophane as Esau as filthy in life as Sodom as idolatrous and synful as the Aegyptians and Babylonians and yet if they wil but cal theÌ„selves Christians and be outwardly baptised they may be blamed in words and separated from by men but yet justified as Gods true Church they and their seed in his covenant of grace sealed with baptisme which is to remission of synns and what need they care for more Who wil feare his estate or amend his life for the doctrine of such men as pul down with the left hand build up with the right Is not this rather to strengthen the hands of the wicked that he should not return from his wickednes by promising him life Moreover this acknowledging al that profess Christ and are baptised to be true Churches having the true baptisme of God wil necessarily draw unto a general communion with al such societies wher men think actually no evil is committed as may fal out ofteÌ„ in the sermons of Friers Iesuits and other false Prophets for with true visible Churches and members of Christ who may not communicate so it be not in euil And thus Christians may come to that vanity coÌ„fusioÌ„ vvhich was among the Hethens of whom an ancient Doctor noteth that though they had infinite and contrary opinions about the Gods and their religion yet al of them kept communion togither in their Temples and sacrifices Wheras Mr. Ioh. referreth us to his first writings in answer to M. Iacob pag. 7. 13. and 47. as having then written somwhat tending this way which now he pleads for the Reader may see by comparing them how farr they differ There touching England he distinguisheth between their Church estate in respect wherof he is perswaded they cannot be judged true Christians and the personal estate of some considered apart from their Church constitution that they may wel be thought in regard of Gods election to be heyrs of salvation and in that respect true Christians so in pag. 13. 47. touching the Church of Rome and some Gods elect in it Although in pag. 146 he is perswaded whosoever lives dyes a Papist and member of that Church of Antichrist in the knowledge profession and maintenance of that religion in the parts therof can not of us be esteemed to live and dye in the estate of salvation Now what is that to his preseÌ„t plea for the Church baptisme of Rome but rather the contrary And for us we never disputed with any touching Gods elect which we leave unto himself who onely knovveth those that are his We deny not but ther may be of the elect in al false Churches even as Satan hath his reprobates in the true Churches I hold it presumption for any to limit God by how smal means or mesure of faith and knovvledge he vvil save a man Who dares deny but God had many elect among the Hethens after he had separated Israel from them Yea God expresly sayd vven he made Israel his peculiar people that yet al the earth was his vvhich are the vvords of the covenant generally Wherfore vve leave Gods secret counsels to himself as he vvilleth us and doe consider onely the visible state of Churches by the rules of Gods Lavv and promises Finally in that very book vvhich he mentioneth hovv sharply doth M. Iohns inveigh against his opposers and against M. Hooker that pleaded for the Church of Rome because of some truthes there reteyned saith that what by the Prelats and their Proctours on the one hand and the Pharisâ—ical dawbing reformists on the other all may justly fear least the end of that Church wil be to look back not onely in part but even wholly to the Romish Egipt and Sodom and to wollow agayn in the same myre from which they would seem al this time to have been washed When the Prelats and Reformists shal see what the same man now writeth himself for that Romish Egypt what wil they say but that even he also is come to dawb with them for company and fear a further fall Of their judgment of the Church of Rome translated out of M. Iunius To countenance their cause the more they set it out with the name and judgment of a learned man now deceassed Against whoÌ„ themselves wrote heretofore when they would have been loath to stand to his judgment But what wil not men doo for help in time of need The thing borrowed from him is in deed his own judgment rather then proof of argument I shal therfore the more breifly touch it yet not medling with the author who I hope is at rest in the Lord but with these his translators The Church of Rome wherof they treat is properly they say the company which is at Rome as Paul wrote Rom. 1. abusively it is al the Churches on earth cleaving to it and the doctrine constitution therof They treat of the first but would have men by proportion understand the same of the later I answer A Church ther was at Rome in Pauls time beloved of God caled Saints whose faith was published through the whole world A Church or peece rather of a Church ther is at Rome now loathed of God caled Divils whose whordoms abominations are famous through al the earth In deed and truth ther is a great Citie spiritually caled Sodom Aegypt and Babylon Rev. 11.8 16.19 dispersed over the world under the name of a Christian Catholik Church whose cheif place throne is Rome As for the congregation of Saints that was there in Pauls time it is gone long since and the Man of syn with his worshipers come in the place Between these two ther is no just proportion for what concord hath Christ with Belial 2 Cor. 6.15 The Church of Rome considered as a subiect they say hath 2. parts Pastours and the flock of Christ for which Church th'Apostle of old gave thanks to God Rom. 1 8. Neyther doo we deny this subiect to be at Rome eveÌ„ at this day because we trust ther is God caling persons caled the caling it self yet in her which togither in one giveth being to a Church I answer First I deny that God is there caling as in his Church but the man of syn sitts there as God calling all to worship him and his calling is by the working of Satan and in al deceivablenes of unrighteousnes among them that perish and the persons caled are deluded to beleev lyes 2 Thes. 2.9 10 11. Al these togither give being to Antichrists church but not to Christs And we are sure God caleth out of her such
be one in substance concerning faith in Christ unto salvation Hâ—b 11. sheweth also great differences between their condition and ours touching the clear manifestation of Gods grace and the outward politie of the Church Heb. 9. 10. 12. Gal. 4. Finally these things we never intended or extended to any further rights or liberties of the people now then we find evidently taught us by the doctrine and practise of th'Apostles that if in any thing we miss as easily we may in the application of those legal types yet the doctrine confirmed by other playn scriptures remayneth sound and good And such differences between Israel and us we also have put in our more ancient writings Discover pag. 40. 60. Their last note is in effect one with the first shewing how Christ and th'Apostles reasoned wel from the civil state of Israel which we grant Yet I hope they wil not deny but it is possible for other men to reason amyss and to make yll proportions from the common wealth of Israel as doo the Papists and as before is manifested that these our opposites have doon The 7. article 7. We held that the baptism of Rome was as true baptisme as circuÌ„cision in the Apostasie of Israel was true circumcision and needed not to be renounced and repeted Now we were taught that the baptism aforesayd is an Idol and we know al Idols c are to be renounced and rejected Isa. 30.22 and an Idol is nothing in the world 1. Cor. 8.4 so then such baptism is nothing I answer our former profession and writing hath been that circumcision in the Apostasie of Israel could be no true sacrament no true seal of the covenant of Gods favour unto them also that baptism delivered in the false church is no true seal of Gods covenant or true sacrament Mr. Iohnson himself hath defended this very same that in that estate of their Apostasie it could not be a true Sacrament and so for the baptism in Rome not a true but a false sacrament So the contrarietie must be thus heretofore we held it to be a false sacrament but now we were taught it is an Jdol Between these I hope al men of judgment which know what an Jdol meaneth wil think ther is no contradiction But is not this good conveyance for them to say as true baptism as circumcision in the Apostasie of Jsrael was true circumcision wheras we professed of that baptisme as also of that circumcision that it could not be a true sacrament unto them but a false Wil not the judicious reader see that they cast a myst before mens eyes to disgrace the truth which themselves formerly professed As for the consequences I have before answered them and shewed how though the Idol be put away ther need no repeting again of the outward washing and have proved that Antichrist hath turned the Lords baptisme into an Idol as the Iewes did the brazen serpeÌ„t by burning incense to it and that the most conscionable in our own nation have so professed and the Vniversitie of Cambridge printed that the church of Rome transformeth the sacraments yea even Christ and God himself into Jdols But these our opposites are gone from the truth and from themselves herein into the tents of our common adversaries M. Gifford and others who would have concluded hereupon a new outward washing but were refuted by Mr Barrow And Mr Iohnson once professed that he thought he should never have seen any more absurd writing then M. Giffards though now he reasoneth like him He also told the Oxford Doctors that to hold the popish church to be a true church having a true ministerie and true sacraments or els that they are unbaptised and must admitt of the Anabaptists rebaptisation are nought els but gross errours and notorious absurdities Yet loe how he now presseth us with the same things and passeth over our reasons rendred heretofore without answering them as is meet Of the conditions of peace by our Opposites refused and broken HItherto wee have heard the particulars wherin they are gone from their former profession again the articles which they have insinuated against us Now foloweth the peace which notwithstanding the former things wee desired to reteyn with them The first 1. Before our parting we offred that notwithstanding our differences of judgmeÌ„t we would continue togither if our former practise might be reteyned but this was refused Their answer hereto is Which is as if they should say they would have continued with vs if wee would have continued in errour and evil so found and acknowledged by us suffering the ordinance of God touching the Eldership to be troden under foot the Elders to be despised and abused by the people and the whole Church to be continually subiect to contentions and scandals Our reply Here first observe how they can not deny but thus we offred them and yet they would bear the world in hand we left them for their understanding and exposition of Mat. 18 17. They might have kept their vnderstanding both of that and other scriptures if the Churches practise had not been altered Secondly how doo their people yet bear themselves others in hand that their practise is not changed but all things continue with them in that respect as before Eyther their Elders dissemble with them or they with others according to the Philosophers doctrine that in such changes it behooveth men to feighn and counterfeyt the contrary Thirdly the answer is evil injurious to the truth people of God for his ordinance touching the Eldership is not troden vnder foot the Elders despised c. by the holy order of the Church judging synners as the Apostle teacheth and governed in all actions by the officers which was our former practise These are but contumelies such as Papists and lovers of Prelacie have layd upon the saynts heretofore and upon such pretenses have excluded the people from choosing their ministers for avoyding such tumults and uprores as the primitive Church they say was afflicted with Fourthly what if some persons have miscaried themseves as can not be denyed have not some of the Elders also doon the like And shall the Church because of the abuses tyrannies heresies which their Elders have in all ages brought in refuse to have any moe Elders no more may the Elders refuse to have the people to hear and judge causes of publick syn with them because of the disorder and unrulynes of some whom the people have been as willing to reprove and censure as the Elders themselves As for the Church subject continually to contentions and scandals c. it is most true by the Elders means for to let pass what we have seen among our selves let all histories be looked it wil appear the Church hath never more abounded with contentions and scandals then when al power was in the Ministers hands and the people excluded Yea
to consider our estate and to repent and yeild to the truth and way of God which we had refused oppugned I ansvver first this manifesteth their minds to be farr from peace vvith vs vvhatsoever they pretended unless vve vvould yeild to their innovation and prelacie Secondly this reason if it be good serveth asvvel for them that should live at Leyden as at Amsterdam unless they vvould permit us there to oppugn the truth and vvay of God as they intitle their errours Thirdly this evil being fouÌ„d in theÌ„selves that they doo not onely refuse oppugn the truth offred but forsake speak evill of and persecute the truthe and vvay of God vvhich they had long imbraced vvalked in the judgement vvhich they give upon us is most just upon their ovvn heads by the sentence of our Saviour And vve could doo no less vvith these our merciless brethren that vvould nourish no peace vvith us unless eyther vve made shipvvrack of a good conscience or would consent to the undoing of our estates and families but leave them as we did by the Apostles warrant for causing division and offenses contrary to the doctrine which we had learned Rom. 16.17 If their new doctrines be good I shal acknowledge we have greatly synned but if they be the high way to Antichristian promotion and a bereaving of the Church of her right power as we are verily perswaded and doo trust we have so proved it then have they given sentence against themselves and except they repeÌ„t their condemnation shal be just Notwithstanding al their former reasons they after allege that they reversed not their agreement concerning such as would goe and live with the Church at Leyden but onely about such as purposed to return and live here c. I answer by this al may judge whither the fear of God or fleshly policie did more prevayl in them For such of us as would have lived at Leyden they pretend they could find warrant for it in Gods word but shew none they would let them there refuse speak evil of their pretended way of God without leaving any thing to work vpon their consciences c. and yet have peace with them as Christian brethren Onely at Amsterdam these things might not be suffred The Pope himself permitteth Iewes which never received his religion to live in the same citie with him where he is Prince but these our adverse brethren would not indure that wee though we never received their innovations should live in one city with them where they were but strangers What should we have found if they had been Princes of the State Secondly they plainly reversed the agreement as before was shewed when some of our brethren desired their testimonial for to goe to Leyden they refused to give it And we could not tel before we came thither tried whether there would be meanes found for our living there or no. But strange and unheard of cruelty was in these men that would bind us there to remain though we and our families should be undoon being but strangers themselves in this city with us would take upon them so imperiously to banish us the town which the Lords of the city never offred I wish they may find more mercie with the Lord at the day of Christ then they have shewed unto us And wheras they object that when we left them we went not to Leyden to ioyn our selves to that Church according to the agrement c. I answer there never was such agreement that of our selves we should goe but that by them we should be dismissed and this they refused to doo yea and publikly reversed the covenant that themselves had devised and twise confirmed besides that we of our own mind did never desire but onely for peace sake consented to that agreement as before I shewed Neyther was it ever agreed that such onely as would remayn there should goe but it was general for us al. But these their cariages shew what dominion such Elders would exercise over Gods heritage and how unpossible it was for us to have peace with them that would thus turn and wind say and unsay agree of a thing to day and break it to morow Our sowles were wearied with their turnings of devises Finally for our not remayning with them til there was an answer of their Letter from Leyden I answer we taryed with them a good while after their foresayd letter wheras we might upon their breaking of their own solemn agreement added to al their former evils justly have forsaken them Neyther could the Church of Leyden as it seemeth tel what to advise us and therfore gave no answer to their Letters or to ours and because they would have no hand in the breach between us thought better to be silent seing unto what extremitie things were brought And the agreement between the Churches being disanulled articles of warr and discord being proclaymed to us and written of to them delayes onely sought to work our dissipation we know no vvord of God that bindeth us to suffer our selves to come into such bondage vvith men that dayly in their publick doctrines and prayers inveighed aginst the truth they formerly professed vvounded the consciences of the brethren and sought al occasions to dravv men from the right vvay and practise of the Gospel What should vve doo but shake off the dust of our fâ—et against such authors of errours and peace breakers Albeit in these our great troubles and strayts we doubt not but many things through our ignorance and frayltie might be doon amyss for vvhich vve have and doo alvvayes humbly ask mercy of God that even our secret synns may be forgiven us And touching the Church of Leyden vvhose help they refused to desire or consent to havâ— dâ—sired though novv for their advantage as they think they speak of them and have printed some of the passages betvveen them I have desired their Elders testimonie upon this occasion that the ages present and to come may have true information of these matters vvhich is as folovveth The testimonie of the Elders of the Church at Leyden THough we much rather desired to have been mediatours of the peace of our brethren then witnesses of their strife yet may we not because that which we desired could not not be effected by us with draw from that which both may and ought by us to be doon We therfore being desired therunto by Mr. Ainsworth and occasioned by that which both Mr Iohnson and he have writteÌ„ and taking the evils which have befallen others as matter both of humbling and warning to our selves doo signify what we know and have found in our dealings thereabout And first Our special â—alling to intermedle in this vncomfortable busynes was a letter sent vnto vs by some 30. of the brethren there In which mentioning in the beginning of it their long and greevous coÌ„troversy they signified how they had oft desired of the Church to