false Churches Ergo. The worship offered vnto the L. in those Ecclesiasticall assemblies is a false worship The ground of this argument is this that al the Ecclesiastical actions performed by a false Church are stayned with the false constitution of the church For God wil not have every communion of men worship him but he wil be worshipped by such a company of people as he hath described in his new Testament as in the old Testament no man or company of men might worship or be accepted visibly but such as were circumcized Gen. 17.14 Exod. 12.48 Deut. 23 1-4 Act. 21.28 2. King 17 25-28 Ioh. 4.22 So in the new Testament no man or communion of men visiblie can be accepted of the L. but such as are described in the new Testament viz. men Seperated from al the abhominations of Antichrist 2. Cor. 6.17 gathered into the name of Christ Iesus Mat. 18.20 being made Disciples have receaved baptisme whereby they are counited into Christ Mat. 28.19 If any communion of men otherwise constituted viz men not Seperated not gathered together not gathered into Christs name not made Disciples not baptized truely with the baptisme of the new Testament if any such company of men do worship God ther worship is not accepted of God but as the L. sent Lyons among the Samaritanes for persuming to worship him in the land of Israel they being an vncircumcized coÌ„pany 2. King 17.24.25 as the L. punished the vagabond Iewes exorcists by the violence of an evil Spirit for naming the L. Iesus being an vnbeleeving vnbaptized company Act. 19 13-17 even so wil the L. be avenged on al them that joyning together to worship God have not Seperated themselves or calling vppon the name of the Lord do not depart froÌ„ iniquity 2. Cor. 6.17 2. Tim. 2.19 neither wil it serve to say that the worship is true bicause it is true conceaved prayer or true preaching or thanksgiving For true worship must be defined not only in the matter but cheefly in the forme For otherwise among the Antichristian papists Heretiques ther is true conceaved prayer preaching thaÌ„ks giving els in the old Testament ther was true Sacrificing among the Babylonians wheÌ„ they Sacrificed an oxe to the God of Israel Dan. 6.25.26 whereas it was manifested that no Sacrifice could be accepted that was offered with straunge fire Levit. 10.1.2 there for the Sacrifices of the Babylonians must needes be abhominable though the matter was true bicause the forme which cheefly consisted in the fire was false So though the matter of the worship of the new Testament be true viz conceaved prayer preaching praising God yet bicause it proceedeth not from the true fire which is alwayes living vppon the Altar Levit. 6 9-13 at Ierusalem that is in the true Church and Temâ—â—e of God bicause it is not inflamed by the true Spirit of Christ the true visible annoynting which is only in the true body the true Church Ephes 4.4 For there is one body and one Spirit Therefore the worship is not true worship visibly what it may be inuisibly I dispute not nor doe not censure at all but leave to the Lord and to every conscience The Second Argument The worship that is offered vp vnto the L. by a false Ministerie is a false worship ceÌ„ not visibly be judged true or accepted The worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is offered vp by a false ministery as hath been proved already Ergo the worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is a false worship cannot visibly be judged true or accepted The ground of this Argument is the same with the former wherefore as in the old Testament the worship that was performed in Israel by the Preists of Ieroboams devising which were not of the Linage genealogie of Aaron was a false worship could not be accepted visibly or be judged as accepted judging by the rules of the word 1. King 12 31-33 and as the inceÌ„se which Azariah the King of Iudah would have offered could not be accepted or so judged bicause it was not offered by the true Preists the Sonnes of Aaron 2. Chron. 26 16-22 and the King was punished with Leprosy for his presumption So al the worship which is offered vp vnto the Lord by a false ministery is visibly to be judged abhominable bicause Christ only offered vp to his Father the worship of the worshippers which his new Testament hath described no other Rev. 8.3.4 coÌ„pared with Revel 5 8-10 11.1 stil let it be remembred that I dispute not nor censure not the invisible things of the Lord. The third Argument Iewish that is literal stinted imposed book-worship is false worship The worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is Iewish that is literal stinted imposed boom-worship Ergo the worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is a false worship The ground of this argument is the Analogie and proportion which ther is betwixt the type and the truth the shadow and the substance the lettre and the Spirit the Old Testament with the ordinances therof the new Testament with the ordinances there of For seing the old Testament was a type of the new therfor the Church ministery worship government of the old Testament were types of the Church ministery worship government of the new Testament therfor the worship of the old testameÌ„t being lyteral beginning in the lettre as was carnal circumcision Rom. 2.29 did type forth the worship of the new Testament to beginne in the Spirit Ioh. 4.23.24 For the Lettre was a type of the Spirit Col. 2.17 Seing therfor that Reading the Law was a typical ordinance of the old Testament therfor literal stinted manifesting the letter book-worship it followeth that it is now abolished by Christ the thing signified by the literal Reading is now to be retayned in the new testament which is vttering matter out of the hart called the manifestation of the Spirit the demonstration of the Spirit the ministring of the Spirit the like by which phrases of Speech the Holy Ghost would teach vs that seing we are fet at liberty from the bondage of the law which was a Schoolmr to leade to Christ we are not therfor againe to be intangled with the yoke of bondage in any thing no not in this matter of stinted literal book worship which is flat ludaismâ— but we being placed in the liberty of the Spirit are to vse our gifts in Gods worship as the spirit giveth vtterance as we see the Apostles practised vppon the day of Pentecost when the promise of the Spirit was fulfilled vppon them as we see the Church of Counth practised 1. Cor. 14.15.16.26 12 7-â—1 He that desireth to know further of this particular of book-worship let him read the book lately published intituled The differences of the Churches of the Seperation wher this point is largely discussed which if it be the truth
beast that is are by the Authority of the Romane Empyre established Revel 16.15 out of the mouth of the false Prophet that is are by Authority of the Pope of Rome established out of the mouth of the Dragon that is are by the Authority of Sathan himself established For ther is not a minister in England Elected by that faithful people wher he administreth but is chosen by a profane mixt people if he be chosen law doth not allow such election he is approved ordeyned by Antichrist himself comming but of the mouth of the false Prophets the Prelates of the Land 2. Againe from that ministerie which is not of the Apostolique institution but of mans invention must all the good Christians make Seperation Deut. 13.3 Math. 7.15 â— Timoth. 3.5 Revel 14.9.2 Corinth 11 13-15 Rever 2.2 The Ministerie of England is not of the Apostolique institution but of mans invention Therefore all good Christians must make Seperation from the Ministerie of England The Major is proved thus as in the old Testament Moses commaundeth not to harkeÌ„ to false Prophets Ezechiah endevoreth to draw the people from Ieroboams Preist So in the new Testament Christ willeth to take heed of false Prophets Paull willeth to turne away from such a woe is threatned by Iohn to al that receave the beasts mark from his Ministers Thirdly you worship is not of the Apostolique primitive institution but is invented by man so is Antichristian as may be proved thus Act. 2.4.11.42 10.46 19.6 Rom. 8.26 1. Cor. 12.7 14.15.26 1. The true worship of the Apostolique institution proceeded meerly from the Spirit having no outward help of devised formes of prayers exhortations psalmes Ceremonies The worship of the English assemblies proceedeth out of the Servicebook in devised formes of prayers exhortations psalmes other Ceremonies Therfor the wors his of the English assemblies is not the true worship of the Apostolâ—que institution but is invented by man The major is manifest by the places alledged For vppon the day of Pentecost the Apostles had the holy Ghost given them in the shape of fiery cloven tonges thervppon they spake as the holy Ghost gave them vtterance manifesting the Spirit to the hearets so was it with the Gentils afterward when the holy Ghost came vppon them since that tyme all the churches of the Apostolique institutioÌ„ worshipped afther the same manner for al Churches worshipped after one manner 1. Cor. 16.1 14.36.37 11.2 16. wher note that if devised formes of prayers psalmes exhortations were Gods ordinaÌ„ces the Apostles would have delivered them to the Churches they should have receaved vppon the day of Pentecost fiery bookes as wel as fiery tongs The minor is evident needeth no proof Ergo. 2. Againe From that worship which is invented by man not of the Apostolique institution mustal the good Christians Seperate Col. 2 20-23 Mat. 15.9 Levit. 10.1.2 compared with Act. 2.3 The worship of the English assemblies is invented by man not of the Apostolique institution Therfor from the worship of the English assemblies ought al good Christians to Seperate The major is proved thus For seing the worship of the asseÌ„blies is wil worship vaine-worship devised by man not kindled with the true living fire which came downe from heaven vppon the primitive Church but with such a straunge fire as Nadab and Abihu offered withal therfor it is idolatry so to be Seperated from 4. Fourthly the Government of the assemblies is Antichristian by the confessioÌ„ of theÌ„selves therin can no good Christian joyne except it be lawful for a good Christian which is or ought to be a subject of Christs Kingdom which is visible Church to submit to the vtter enemie of Chr. to his authority which what is it els but to bee a traytor against the L. Iesus yet for further proof I reason thus from these places Act. 14.23 20.28 Phillip 1.1 1. Pet. 5 1.-4 1. The Government of the primitive Apostolique institution was by a Colledge of pastors or presbytery The Government of the English assemblies is by an Antichristian prelate his Officers Therfor the Government of the English assemblies is not the primitive Apostolique Government The major is evident thus For the Apostles instituted Elders by the election of the Saints to oversee the Church feed the Flock of one particular visible Church only as is manifest among the Epheâ—ians Philippians Hebrues al Churches The minor is evident For the Prelates ther officers are not those Christian Bishops of the Apostolique institution elected by placed over one particular Church of the Saynt but are a devised â—yrannical Lordâ—hip â—uling hundreths of parishes by ther owne devised Canons Ergo. 2. Againe From the Government which is devised by man in the Church so is Antichristian which is not of the Apostolique institution must al good Christians Seperate Luk. 19.27 1. Cor. 7.23 Revel 14.9 The Government of the English assemblies is not of the Apostolique institution but is devised by man Antichristian Therfor from the Government of the English assemblies must al good Christians Seperate The major is manifest by the places alledged for seing Christ Iesus only must reigne in the harts of the faythful by his ownâ— officers lawes therfor good Christians must only submit to his officers if they submit to any new officers devised by man Christ saith he wil have theÌ„ slayne they are the Servants of men obeying the Antichristian beast have a woe threatned against them Thus brethren have I written vnto you according to your request Mr. K. his direction proofes of those two points which you expect that in 4. mayne transgressions in the English assemblies viz in the constitution ministerie worship Government of them I pray you brethren keep the copie I send you safe let Mr. K. have a transcript of it if it please him to answer I will be ready to explane matters more fully if ther be any ambiguity to confirme matters doubtful that especialy for your establishment in the truth which now blessed be the Lord is so evident that al the men vppon earth with ther learning can never be able to obscure it Brethren I beseech you grow in grace in the knowledg of our Lord Iesus Christ to whome bee praise in his Church throughout all generations Amen Your Brother in the Fayth Iohn Smyth The Printer to the Reader Though in this treatise ther be divers Lettes either wanting or superfluous or displaced or changed by reason whereof some words are corrupted yet bicause English men can easily help that fault I thought it needlesse to put them in these Errata Only these foure great oversights I desire may be corrected pag. 41. Lin. 1. for Church by the Presbytery read Church to the Presbytery pag 75. Lin. 44. after the last words read So in the New Testament pag. 128. Lin. 32. For Religion is c. read Religion is heresy if this argument be false then is yours false pag. 128. Lin. 34. For is so read become The lesser faults I desire the Reader to pardon
not truly as I have expounded vnto you before in respect whereof also the Lord is said to see no iniquity in Iacob nor transgression in Israel Nomb. 23 21-seing that people at that present was typically Holy so typically without imputation of iniquity in respect of their typical communion And for the Parable Mat. 13. of the wheate tares I doe constantly avouch that though you al divines with you doe expound it of open wicked impenitent persons Saints supposed in communion together yet the parable is wrested from the true purpose of Christ who doth not intend to teach that for then he should teach contrary to himself who by the parable of the Leaven declareth that one wicked persone defileth the whole lump Mat. 13.33 compared with 1. Cor. 5.6 Exod. 12.18 And wheâ—eas in the conclusion of this point pag. 88. you would prove that bicause the auncient Church of the Seperation have as you say wicked men among them therfor the parable Mat. 13. is truly expounded in that sense of a mixture of good bad I say for that point as the parents of the blind man said they are auncient enough lett them answer for themselves And thus have I ended this parallele with you Mr. Bern. concerning Mr. Ainsworth who renounceth this Holy truth of the Lords which I have thus clered I say hereby he renounceth the saith in this particular renounceth the Apostles testimony who saith they went out from vs they were not of vs for had they been of vs they would have continued with vs 1. Ioh. 2.19 The seaventh Section Now followeth you fifth position which you also perswade your selfe to be an error and which being wel expounded I account the vndoubted truth viz. 5. That the powre of binding losing is given to the whole multitude not to the principal members therof These are your wordes I hold maintayne out of the word that a coÌ„pany of faithful people Seperated from al vncleanenes joyned together by a covenant of the L. are a true Church yea though they be but two or three So Adam Hevah were a Church so Lot his wife his daughters were a Church So Noah his family in the Ark were a church So the twelve men at Ephesus were a Church Act. 19.7 So in Q. Maries dayes the Martyrs seperated were a church if but two or thre of them lived together That this is a truth I prove vnto you thus 2. Cor. 6 16-18 with whome God maketh his covenant to be ther God whome he receaveth to be his people they are a Temple that is a Church vnto him vs 16. But two or three faithful people comming forth from the vnbeleevers being Seperated touching no vneleane thing are Gods people God with them maketh his covenant they are his sonnes daughters he is their Father vs 16.17.18 Therfor two or three faithful people are the Temple and Church of God The Premisses are evidently delivered in the Scripture therfor the conclusion foloweth necessarily Mat. 18.20 wher two or thre are gathered together into my name ther am I in the mids of them In the mids of whomsoever Christ doth dwel walk they are a true Church of Christ Even his Temple Tabernacle habitation as these Scriptures teach being compared together Mat. 28.20 2. Cor. 6.16 Levit 26.11.12 But among two or three gathered together by love into the name of Christ by faith Christ is present to dwel walk Mat. 18.20 2. Cor. 6.16 compared together Therefor two or three faithful people are the Temple Church of God I could alledg other Scriptures but two or three witnesses are sufficient Remember for this point that the covenant made with Adam Abaham Isaac Iacob al the faithful is made with any faithful people in the world as if two or three faithful people should aise vp in the dominions of the Turk or Pope or Iewes or Pagans joyne together to walk in the faith the Lord maketh his covenant with them he is their God they are his people they are his Temple he walketh ther he is their Father they are his sonnes daughters Christ is their King they are his Kingdome even a Kingdome of Preists c therfor whersoever in the Scripture the covenant is made with any it is to be vnderstood as made with Abrahams childreÌ„ according to the faith therfor with two or three faithful people any were in the world This being premised as the ground of our whole cause we having departed from al the profane of the Land having seperated touching no vncleane thing 2. cor 6 17 We are Gods people his temple his Church he dwelleth walketh among vs he hath given to vs made with vs his covenant Heb. 8.10 although we were but â—ew in nomber yet the Lord chose vs to be his Wee being now the Church of God wee have the powre of the L. Iesus Christ given vnto vs For we have himself out owne by title possessioÌ„ vse that by vertue of the covenaÌ„t God made with vs for so God is our God our Father only in Chr. through him al the promises of God in Christ are yea Amen Christ therfor is ours Christ he is our King our Preist we are his Kingdome we have his powre that this is so I prove vnto you by these Scriptures Marc. 13.34 Christ ascending vp into Heaven for that is his going into a farre country as may be perceaved by Luk. 19.12 with Mat. 28.18 Eph. 4.8 gave authority to his servants leaving his howse that is his Church according to his bodily presence now what authority is this that Christ gave vnto his servaÌ„ts that is evident by other places of scriptures 1. Cor. 5. the powre of our Lord Iesus Christ which the Corinths had that is the powre of admonition excommunication the powre of binding losing a powre to administer Christs Kingdome al the ordinances therof Mat. 16.19 The powre of binding losing is given to Peter Ioh. 20.23 The powre of binding losing is given to al the Apostles Marc. 13.34 The powre of Christ it given to his Servants 1. Cor. 5.4 The powre of Christ is in the hands of the Corinths Now let vs make collections gather instructions out of these places the truth wil most evidently appeare The Pope saith out of the 16. of Mathew that the powre of binding losing is giveÌ„ to Peter his successors the popes of Rome that al the Bbs. Preists in the world the whole Church vniversal receaveth binding losing from him Nay say the English Prelates out of the 20. of Iohn Christ gave the powre of binding losing to al the Apostles their successors the Lord Bbs. of EnglaÌ„d that al the Preists people in the Land receave binding losing from them in their severall
Therfor Christs ministerial powre commeth not by succession to the Pope Bbs. or Presbytery primarily but is given to the body of the Church The sixth Argument If Christs ministerial powre commeth by succession to the Pope Bbs. or Presbytery Then the office of the Deacons widowes are lost sith succession in them is interrupted lost for as in the old testament a Preist came of a Preist a Levite of a Levite so an Elder maketh an Elder a Deacon ordeyneth a Deacon a widow must ordeyne a widow But the office of the Deacon widow is not lost for none of Gods ordinances are perisht but may be had or els Gods truth mercy to his Church fayleth who hath said that he wil be with his Church to the end of the world Therfor Christs ministerial powre commeth not by succession to the Pope Bbs. or Presbytery primarily but is given to the body of the Church The seaventh Argument That doctryne which destroyeth it self is false The doctryne of succession viz that Christs ministerial powre commeth by succession to the pope Bbs. or Presbytery destroyeth it self Therfor the doctryne of succession is a false doctryne The minor I manifest thus If the papists say truly that al ecclesiastical powre floweth from Christ to the Clergie though the pope then why doth the college of Cardinalls make a pope by Election why doth not one pope make another pope before his death Therfor Election overthroweth the succession of the popes office For the pope cannot both give Christs Ministerial powre to the Clergie of Rome take the same ministerial powre from the Cardinals by Election but when the pope is dead then is Christs ministerial powre dead also in the popes person thus doth successioÌ„ overthrow it self in the pope by consequent in the rest For Christs ministerial powre being once interrupted in the pope can never be recovred againe but is vtterly lost so the Church is abolished For if the presbytery be lost the Church is lost if the bbs be lost the presbytery is lost if the pope be lost the bbs be lost if the pope be dead the pope is lost if the pope be lost Christs ministerial powre is lost for if it be said that the pope hath his powre by Election from the Cardinals theÌ„ succession is destroyed so you may see evidently that succession destroyeth it self seing Election must needes be interposed Therfor indeed ther is no true succession but that of the old Testament viz by descent genealogie this succession which is pleaded for by ordination of precedent presbytery bbs pope is mans invention destroyeth it self therfor is a meer Antichristian devise But heer certayne objections must be answered for the further manifestation of the matter of succession for sactisfaction therein The first Objection Alchough the Ministeriall powre of Christ be not given to the pope so perisheth not with him yet it is given to the bbs who are the Successors of the Apostles in that Ministeriall powre and in the dispensation of it to the Ministerie and Church Seing therefore that ther is a certayne and vndoubted Succession of bbs from the Apostles dayes hetherto one ordeyning another successively therefore though succession be interrupted in the Pope whose ministerial heads hip we renounce yet it is continued in the Bbs. who are the Apostles successors in dispensing this ministerial powâ—e to the ministerie Churches Answer to the first Objection This objection dependeth vppon an vncertanity viz That ther hath been a succession of Bbs. one ordeyning another successively froÌ„ Peter Paul Iames through the Church of Rome the Greekes therfor I answer that except they can shew the courte rowles that I may so speak of the vndoubted successive ordination from Peter Paul Iames c. I shal say vnto al the Bbs. of England as Nechemjah said to the Preists that could not shew ther succession from Aaron by Genealogie Nehem. 7 64.65 Bicause their successive ordination is not found they shal be put from their Bishopricks they shal not administer in the Bbs. office til their arise vp one as with Vrim Thummim to divine vnto vs the truth of this matter For we wil not beleeve the records of the Church of Rome who also are defective in this particular for though they have the succession of Popes yet not of other Bbs. Further the vanity of this objection appeareth in this that hereby they are vrged for the justifying of this Antichristian devise of succession by ordination to go to the throne of Antichrist the popedome to fetch their ministerie thence as if the true ministerie off Christ could be in the false Church of Antichrist hereby also they do acknowledg Rome to be the true Church their Sacrificing Preisthood a true Ministerie orders a true Sacrament the Eucharist a true propitiatory Sacrifice for the quick dead prayers for the dead a thousand such abhominations which are necessary dependances therevppon They must also acknowledg themselves Schismatiques from the Church of Rome are never able to answer the popish bookes the petitions of the Papists to the King who object these and the like things against them The Second Objection Although the pope Bbs have not Christs ministerial powre given to them by succession yet the presbytery may have that powre by delegation from Christ when their shal arise a company of true faithful teachers who standing out against the popedome prelacy al the abhominations therof also renouncing al the corruptions of their ordination refining both the doctryne of faith the true calling of ministers from the drosse of Antichristianisme doe yet notwithstanding retayne the truth which they in the seate of Antichrist had as in the faith so in the ministery For Antichrist had not â—â—â—erly abolished but only corrupted the Lords ordinances Answer to the second Objection This objection dependeth vppon the former grounds namely that the Church of Rome is a true Church though corrupt having a true ministerie though corrupt c. of the rest For otherwise how can they plead ther ministery to be true from the Bbs. except they do acknowledg also the Bbs Ministery to be true receaved froÌ„ the Popedome the popish ministerie to be true for otherwise they must maintaine that a true ministerie commeth from a false ministerie which is as impossible as to bring light out of darknes So that this Objection is also answered in the former already needeth no further answer yet neverthelesse I say vnto the point that al the refining of the world can not bring a true ministery out of a Sacrificing Preisthood Or a true presbytery out of a false Antichristian prelacy For as it was impossible for the preists of the Old Testament to ordeyne true Ministers of the New Testament So much more is it impossible for the false popish Sacrificing preisthood to ordeyne true ministers of Christs true Church For the Sacrificing
preisthood of Aarons Family was the Lords ordinance sometyme but the popish Sacrificing preisthood in the mayne substantial parts therof is not only mans device but infinitely impious blasphemously derogating from the honour dignity of Christs Sacrifice preisthood which is aparabatos intransitive Heb. 7.24 according to the order of Melchisedech seing the popish Sacrificing preisthood is in the very essence of it false how can the English prelacy preisthood Deaconry which issued from that Romish preisthood be any other but a sacrificing preisthood although the English prelates have cast away that essential Sacrificing property or forme rather of the Romish preisthood have reduced it to a better temper yet that wil not serve the turne for al that they have in their prelacy preisthood Deaconry they had frō Rome or els where If from Rome then their prelacy preisthood Deaconry is absolutely Romish no other if elswhere then their Succession is gone If both from Rome els where let them declare that Ridle vnto vs. The third Objection The presbyters may have ordination or imposition of hands from the Romish preisthood yet not their office For that may come from heaven or by some extraordinary meanes even as the Lord raised vp some men extraordinarily in these last tymes to restore the truth of doctryne to reduce things to the Apostolique primitive institution as amongst others Hus Luther the rest Answer to the third Objection It is straunge that a man shal have imposition of hands from one his office from another Besides it is contrary to the nature of Succession wherein the partie that ordeyneth giveth the office ministeriall powre to him that is ordeyned for that it the thing that is pleaded that Christs ministeriall powre commeth by Succession through ordination of precedent presbyters It contradicteth their owne ground therefore to say that imposition of hands is from a popish preist and the true office from some other meanes But let vs inquire what that other meanes may be To say that Christs Ministeriall powre is from heaven is not denyed but the question is What is the instrument or meanes which Christ hath appointed to conveigh that Ministeriall powre vnto man kind And who are they that first receave it from Christs hand out of heaven Or what is proton dektikon the first subject of this ministerial powre We say the Church or two or three faithful people Seperated frō the world joyned together in a true covenant have both Christ the covenant promises the ministerial powre of Christ given to them that they are the body that receave from Christs hand out of heaven or rather from Christ their head this ministerial powre you say not so but this ministerial powre commeth by succession from the ministery which is the first subject of this powre that al this powre is derived from man to man from the Apostles hands through al the Preists hands of Rome the Prelates hands of England to you Mr. Bern. your line pedigree of Preisthood is lineally descended from Peter or Paul c. to you through so many generations of popish preists as have succeded from Peters person to your person Even as Annas Cayaphas descended lineally from Aaron only this is the difference that the succession of Annas Cayaphas was by genealogie or generation yours is by succession of ordination or imposition of hands therfor bicause you see that you fal vnder this foule absurdity that your Preisthood must be of necessity of the same kind that the popish preisthood is you have invented a new trick to say that it commeth from heaven extraordinarily with Hus Luther and the rest of those glorious witnesses which the Lord in these last tymes raised vp to the destruction of the man of sinne VVhich if it be so Then say I shew your succession from Luther Hus Prage c. Or els Nechemiah will putt you from your preisthood The fourth Objection But every King in his dominions is appointed by Christ to be a head ministerial to the Church al the Preists of that country do receave their ministerial powre from the King by the ordination of the Bbs. vnto whome the King hath committed the dispensation of that powre so that the King being the Lords Lieftenant in his owne dominions hath this ministerial powre from Christ the Bbs. from the King the Preists from the Bbs. the Church from the Preists Answer to the fourth Objection If the King of every country hath Christs ministerial powre given to him immediately from heaven that the Clergie of that nation have Christs ministerial powre from the King then these consequents folow which are intolerable absurdities 1. The King of every country is a person civil Ecclesiastical having al civil ecclesiastical powre that immediately from Christ 2. The King of every country can preach administer the Sacraments exercise Spirituall jurisdiction excommunicate c. 3. The King of every country can make ordeyne Ministers 4. The King of every country is a Pope or Patriarch in his owne territories and Dominions How these points wil agree with the Analogie of faith let every man judg so give sentence whither this objection conteyne any the least shew of truth in it yea or nay Now what authority the Lord hath given every King in his owne dominions I leave to be descussed in his proper place viz in the 15. Section of this lettre to Mr. Bern. The fifth Objection But the ministery is now extraordinarily raised vp For as in the first planting of the Churches the Lord Iesus vsed the extraordinary ministery of Apostles Prophets Evangelists to publish the Gospel to the world to plant Churches so after the Apostacy of Antichrist in the restoring of the truth the Lord vseth the same extraordinary ministerie not indued with those extraordinary gifts which they had but apointed by the L. for the same purposes viz the planting of true Churches the revealing of his truth Answer to the fifth Objection First the Ministers of England namely you Mr. Ber. among the rest do not chalendg to be Apostles Prophets Evangelists but you say you are true presbyters or Pastors of particular true visible Churches therfor this objection helpeth you nothing if it were yeelded you Secondly you cannot maintayne your ordinary ministerie as succeding by ordination from these supposed Apostles Evangelists Prophets for then you must acknowledg the prelates of England to be Apostles Prophets Evangelists whereas they doe challendg no such thing But only maintayne themselves to be ordinary Bbs. the ordinary Successors of the Apostles neither do they intend to make you ministers as Apostles but as Bbs. Thirdly ther is none of the Reformists that ever I heard of that vndertake as Apostles Prophets Evangelists to ordeyne Elders Finaly how can any of you be Apostles Prophets or Evangelists who stand members of
themselves from brethren walking inordinately from persons excommunicate from converteous persons al other that either teach false doctrine or deny the powre of Godlines indeed though inword they professe the same 2. Tim. 3.5 Tit. 1.16 2. Thes 3.6 1. Cor. 5.11 The third Argument from Mat. 28.19.20 Act. 19.4.5 10.48 Mat. 18.20 The true Churches of the Apostolique institution were by baptisme gathered into the covenant or new Testament of Christ The Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not by their baptisme conunited into the New Testament of Christ but only into the constitution ministery worship government into that faith doctrine which is by law established in the Land Ergo the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not the true Churches of the Apostolique institution The ground of this argument is this that the Apostles baprized men in definitely into the whole new Testament of Christ al the ordinances thereof which was not stinted or limited at the pleasure of men vnder certaine canons injunctions articles or Ecclesiastical constitutions but was large even as large as the whole word of truth then inspired or written by the Apostles Prophets whereas the assemblies of England do neither them selves professe the true saith of Christ conteyned in the new Testament their faith being stinted limited vnder certaine devised articles convocatiō howse Synodical decrees or constitutions wherevnto al the ministers of the lād are bound to Subscribe which is the faith of the whole nation neither therfor do they baptise into the new Testament of Christ indefinitely simply but respectively definitely into that faith doctrine which is taught in their stinted book of articles wherto they subscribe which they beleeve teach wherof the body of that Church is wherin wherto they are by baptisme admitted receaved their faith therfor being devised stinted or false therfore their baptisme false therfor their covenant false therfor the forme of their Church false therfor the Church it self a false Church For how can that be a true Church which hath a false faith covenant forme The fourth argument from Mat. 18 18-20 Marc. 13.34 Ioh. 20.23 Mat. 16.19 These places other like Scriptures afoard an argument which may be framed after this manner The true Churches of the Apostolique institution had Christs powre ministerial in the body of the Church The Ecclesiastical assemblies of England have not Christs ministerial powre residing in the body of the Church Ergo the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not the true Churches of the primitive Apostolique institution The Major or first part of this Argument hath been largely proved in the seaventh Section and in the Paralleles Censures Observations therto aperteyning whither the Reader is to be referred where this particular is handled affirmatively and negatively The Minor or second part of the argument is evident in it self For the powre Ecclesiastical of the assemblies is resident in the hands of certaine Archb. Lordb. Archdeacons Chancellors Commissaries Officials and other Ecclesiastical Superintendents which have powre over thousands or hundreths of Parish Ecclesiastical assemblies and the Ministers in them which have powre Ecclesiastical one over another to suspend excommunicate and absolve them according to their canons decrees and decretals the Prelate in his diocese or jurisdiction having absolute powre to interdict one or more Parish Churches from having any prayers or Service they have no powre to come into the Parish Church or Temple to worship whiles the interdiction with the Bbs. seale cleaveth vppon the Church dore c. divers particulars of like nature which doe evidently declare that the parish assemblies have no powre at all of themselves but are meerly and wholly subject and in bondage to the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy and subordination of Clergie-men having Superintendency Superiority jurisdiction over them as their proper Spirituall LL. to Whome they dayly yeeld Spirituall homage and Subjection in their oaths off Canonicall obedience and actions of like Servitude The fifth Argument from 1. Timoth. 2.5 Heb. 9.15 Gal. 3.15.16 Iohn 17.9 These places of holy Scripture other of like nature may asoard an argument which may thus be framed The true Church of the primitive institution Apostolical had Christ Iesus for their mediator that is for their King Preist Prophet The assemblies Ecclesiastical of Englād have not Iesus Christ for their Mediator that is their King Preist Prophet Ergo the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not the true Churches of the primitive institution Apostolical The Minor or second part of the Argument may be confirmed by divers particulars as 1. Christ is not their King seing he onely ruleth by his owne Lawes and Officers and not by Antichristian Lords and Lawes such as are their Prelates and the Officers Courts and Canons 2. Christ is not their preist to ratifie vnto them by his blood that ordinance of Church Ministery VVorship and Government which they retaine among them which is not Christs Testament but the Testament of Antichrist the vtter enemy of Christ neither doth he prostitute the blood of his Testament to establish such a worship as their service book affoardeth or such a Ministery as their Clergie is from the ArchP to the ParishP or such a Government as their Ecclesiasticall Hircarchy or such a people for his body as are compounded of the Serpents seed a viperous brood of wicked men of all sorts 3. Christ is not their Prophett to teach them by the false Prophetts the instruments of Antichrist which dayly by their doctrine set vp Antichrists Officers Lawes oppugne the true New Testament of Christ in the true constitution Ministerie VVorship Government taught in his word Seing therfor Christ is not their King Preist Prophet how is he their Mediator Seing his mediation consisteth not in the execution dispensation of these their offices of King Preist Prophet The sixth Argument from Eph. 1.22.23 1. Cor. 12.27.12 Gal. 3.16 Eph. 5.23 From these places of Scripture compared together truly expounded may an argument be drawne framed thus The true Church of the Apostolique primitive institution hath Christ for the head and is a true body vnto the true head Christ truly vnited by the Spiritt of Christ The ecclesiastical assemblies of Englād are not a true body vnto Christ the true head truly vnited by the Spirit of Christ Ergo the ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not the true Churches of the primitive Apostolique institution The Minor or second part of the Argument may thus be confirmed in the three parts therof 1. Christ is not their true head seing they deny all his offices though they hold the doctryne of his nature and persons soundly as is plainly proved before in the fifth Argument 2. the assemblies as they stand in confusion with all the vngodly and vitious persons of the Land vnder the Antichristian Lords and Lawes Ecclesiasticall can not be a true body vnto Christ but
then they do administer baptisme the L. Supper more purely or rather lesse corruptly yet they have the same truths Sacraments that you have even the Scriptures baptizme the L. Supper 4. The Popish ministers many of them performe their office Faithfully in many things as Faithfully as you do the best you do not performe al the parts of the true ministery the worst of you are as bad as â—he worst popish preist 5. The popish ministers some of them live conscionably according to their rule the best of you do no more the worst of you are as vild beasts as the grossest shavelings in Rome 6. As the Popish ministers convert none visibly to the true Faith and new Testament of Christ vet I doubt not but that thousands are by them converted saved what Mr. Be. wil you condemne al the men that have lived from Gregory the great til the councel of Constance to this day vnder the dominions of the pope For shame do not so So though the forwardest ministers of England convert many invisibly to life Salvation by Christ yet you ordinarily say that the Formalists convert none the dumb ministers cannot convert bicause they cannot preach none of you al convert a man visibly to the true Faith taught in the new Testament of Christ but with al your might pervert men from it 7. Finally the popish ministers are approved by their people aswel as the best or worst of you are according to the dispositions of the people Seing therfor that al these things are as evident pregnant for the popish ministers as for you therfor either they are true ministers if you be true or els bicause they are fals as you say yet have al these forsaid qualifications therfor these qualifications make not a true ministery So that you see Mr. Ber. that you argument is weak to prove your ministery true you must seek out a better definition of a true ministery according therto shape your ministery if you wil have it true In the next place you with an objection answer would prove that although your ministers have a false entrance viz ordination of the Bb. yet may be true ministers namely by two reasons 1. For that none were ever ordeyned but by ecclesiastical persons as Apostles Evangelists Bbs. 2. a false entrance cannot make a false ministery as in mariage I answer First if it were yeelded you that ther could be no true ministers made without ordination of Apostles Evangelists Bbs. yet bicause your L. Bbs. are not those true Apostles Evangelists Bbs. of the primitive institution but rather the Servants of Antichrist as your forwardest professors preachers instantly affirme therefore ther ordination is Antichristian and so your ministery is false in the entrance but Secondly I deny it to be true which you affirme for ordination by procedent Elders For I have proved vnto you by many vndeniable reasons that the whole ministeriall powre of Christ is given to the body of the Church whereby as in the first constituting of Churches so in the rising of Churches from Antichristianisme the body hath powre to al the Holy ordinances of Christ for ther mutual edification to life Salvation whereof the true ministery is a principal therefore the Church hath powre to enjoy the true ministery you confesse the Church wanting officers hath powre to elect her officers which is the principal Act. 6. 14. why not to approve ordeyne which are but the inferior lesse principal Further you may read Act. 1. that before ther were any Apostles actually in office the Church did chose Mathias into the rome of Iudas that by a commoÌ„ consent wherfor this first exception of yours is nothing Your Second exception is as weake that seing a faulty entrance into mariage which is one ordinance of God doth not disanul it why should a faulty entrance into the ministery disanul it I say the violating of accidental circumstances through ignorance shall not disanul any of Gods ordinances For then their should be no true having of any ornance of God whatsoever Seing it is impossible wee should perfectly strictly keep all every circumstance therto aperteyning but the wilful breach of essential parts of the ordinance doth corrupt the ordinance make it false as for example The matter or forme being false the ordinance cannot possible be true A man marieth a mayde that is 6. yeer old or a woman marieth an Evnuch the mariage is false for the matter is false A man taketh a woman not as his wife but as a concubine as the yonger brethren the geÌ„tlemen of Venice doe this is no true mariage bicause it wanteth the true forme of mariage so your Churches assume them ministers suppose they be the true pastors described in the word as I am perswaded your Puritanes so endevour I say bicause your churches or Ecclesiastical assemblies are false your ministery is not true For a true Minister a false Church cannot mary together Further if your Church ministery were true yet if you should be presented by a Patron ordeyned by a Prelate inducted by an Archdeacon contrary to the wil of the Church the mariage is false bicause the calling is false So then you see Mr. Ber. how litle your similies help you wherein notwithstanding you by your disciples are thought Specialy to excel and to have the prehemenence over your fellow Preists And heer you bring a flourish out of the 10. of Iohn to prove your ministers true ministers what Mr. Bern. in good sooth doe you plead this for all your Ministers of England Speak plainly double not with God man doe you in your conscience think that al the ministers of England eveÌ„ your dumb Preists whome you have excluded by your covenant your grosse nonresidents idle bellyes the Cathedral or Collegiate Preists your double benificed men that al these every one of them doe enter in by the dore have entrance by the porters opening know their sheep by name lead theÌ„ by sound doctrine holy life save many destroy none Speak plainly Mr. Ber. to this point seek no shifts yet these are the only men alowed by Law in your ministery For be he never so dumb idle non resident wicked yet if he subscribe weare the geere do read the Service book wil do homage to his Spiritual Lords their Courts if he be amicus curiae if he be conformable obedient al is wel is not this even so this you know in your conscience Mr. Bern. therfor pag. 143. Lin. 7.8 you speake warily you say The propertyes of a true Shepheard agree wel with Ministers in England you dare not say with al the Ministers of England Therefore by your owne conscience al the Ministers of England are not true Shepheards your Lords the Prelates wil con you litle thank for this but let
seales of the covenant 9. If the faithfull either doe not Seperate themselves from the wicked or not Seperate the vnbeleevers from them if they still mingle with them they forfeite the covenant they consent to all the sinne of the vnbeleevers to all their prophanation of the Holy things seing God hath given them power to reforme themselves and to keepe all wicked persons from among their communion by the censures of admonition and excommunication Apoc. 18. 4 Eph. 5.7.11 1. Cor. 5.6 Mat. 13.33 1. Cor. 12.17.22 Levit. 17.19 Mat. 22.39 Mat. 18.15.17 10. If Kings and States forbid the faithfull to vse any of these helps and meanes which God hath given and commaunded them to vse they are to lose their lives rather then to forbeare bicause they are bound to obey God rather then men Act. 4.19 Deut. 12.32 11. If Princes and States commaund the Church and faithfull to entertaine any other ordinances then these before rehearsed they are not to obey but rather to leese their lives 1. Tim. 6.13.14 Mat. 16.24.25 Apoc. 22.18.19 Mr. S. these are the very grounds and principles of our cause which is the Lords truth there are divers other particulars which I thincke not fitt to relate vnto you They may be after discovered vnto you vppon occasion Now I come to answere your reasons for your Church and ministerie First you say you have a true church your reason is for that you have the word truly preached and the Sacraments duely administred I confesse that wheresoever these thinges are found there is a true Church but I denie the word to bee truly Preached and the Sacraments duely administred in any parish Church of England which I manitest vnto you after this manner 1. First the people pertakinge in the seales of the covenante in prayer and in the communion of Holy thinges are not a people Seperated from all the vnbeleevers open sinners of the Land but stand still in conlusion with them submittinge to all the false Government of the Prelates c. Such a people so standinge have no title to the covenant to Christ to the promises see the first ground supra 2. Secondly this people so mingled with the wicked of the Land cannot be a true Church seinge it is impossible for them to be conjoyned combyned together into one bodie as the true Church is For as two disparate seeds viz of an horse and an asse doe not produce either an Horse or an Asse but a mule Genes 36.24 So of the two contrarie seeds of the VVoman and of the Serpent Genes 3.15 can not proceede a true Church but some thing of another nature viz a false Church VVherefore in the false Church cannot the word be truly preached the Sacraments duely administred 3. Thirdly there is one only true forme of a visible Church Ephes 4.4 One bodie which bodie is called Christ 1. Corinth 12.12 Galat. 3.16 This one body hath one Spirit Ephes 4.4 This one body guided by this one Spirit hath one Lord. Ephes 4.5 VVhich Lord is Christ the onely Lawgiver It hath also one faith which is the faith expressed in the writings of the Apostles it hath also one Baptisme whereby men are admitted into this faith submitted vnto this Lord baptized into this Spirit incorporated into this bodie and so have one God and Father one hope of life everlastinge to whome the promises and covenant is given Now in the assemblies of England there are divers Faythes one off the Puritanes so miscalled another of the Prelates a third of the Papistes that come to Churche a fourth of the ignorant persons go they cannot be one they denye themselves to be of the same body with Papists Atheists Prelates witches conjurers theves murtherers blasphemers drunckerds vsurers c. Therfor they are not the true body of Christ the true Church of God therfore all the holy things are profaned when they are ther administred how then can they be said as you plead to be truly administred in the assemblies of England 4. Add herevnto that the most forward Preachers Professors of the Land do not practize according to that which they know the Lord requireth to be practised viz in admitting of al to the Holy things good bad in neglecting the censures vtterly in setching the Ministers calling from the prelates whome they hold Antichristiā in submitting to their Ecclesiastical jurisdiction which is vnlawful therby yealding their consciences to other Lawgivers then Christ For their cannōs Christs lawes are contrary how can we say that they that thus doe sinning against their consciences in this manner are Seperated from al sinne touch no vncleane thing so how can they be said in that constitution the true Church so how can the word be said truly preached the Sacraments duely administred in that estate Thus Mr. S. you see your Church is proved not to be true your signes of a true church therfore not to be found in your assemblies Your second point foloweth viz that your ministerie is a true ministerie I pray you how can ther be a true miuisterie where is a false Church doth not the true ministerie arise out of the true Church can there be a true ministerie a false Church I know not how these things can stand together But let vs heare your arguments to prove your true ministerie First you say ther is a true ministerie bicause men are converted thereby I answere conversion is no signe of a true ministerie For Prophets Preists Apostles Evangelists ordinary Prophets Pastors private men private women have converted Iohn 4.39 Phillip 1.14.15 1. Cor. 14.24.31 Act. 9.1 11.19.21 Ergo conversion apertaineth not only to ministers nither is it a proper effect or adjunct of a true ministerie Secondly let your argument be framed after a true forme it wil be this whosoever converteth soules is a true Pastor The ministers of the church of England convert soules go they are true Pastors I make another argument whosoever converteth soules is an Apostle 1. Cor. 9.2 The ministers of England convert soules go they are Apostles The like arguments may be made to prove the ministers of England Priests extraordinary Prophets evangelistes yea Christ himselfe Mat. 11.5 Ierm 23.22 Malach. 4.6 Act. 8.12 Now Mr. S. judge whither your Argument be good to prove a true ministerie yea or nay Thirdly I would know whither you thinke that the Ministers of the Romish Church are true Ministers yea or nay but it is manifest Apoc. 18 4. that Gods people are in Rome how came they thyther ther they are converted how was Luther Husse Ierom of Prage the waldenses converted how were they converted in King Henrie the 8. tyme answere this if you can I pray you Fourthly it is not the worke of the Officers of the Church to convert soules but to sede edifie them being convertedia Pastor doth not make shepe but fedeth guideth tendeth his shepe the members of the true Church are al
vs exclude your dumb Preists idle bellyes and al the rable of the conformists if you wil which are 9. parts of 10. and then I think you are excluded your self among them I wil plead only against the best minister that standeth by Law in your assemblies 1. he entereth not in by the dore seing the dore is only in the Sheepsold that is in the true Church seing you are a False Church as is proved your dore cannot be true 2. The porter that is as you say Gods Spirit but I think rather the porter to be the watchman that is the whole Church Mat. 13 33-37 he openeth not to you for you convert none to the true visible Faith of the new Testament or if you did it doth not prove your true Pastorship seing Shepheards do not make sheep but feed them it should only prove that you are Spiritual Fathers that convert men which private persons doe as you have heard 3. he doth not know them nor is knowne of his Sheep For of 300 perhaps he wil not acknowledg above 30. to be sheep the rest he thinketh goates the goates wil not acknowledg him as Shepheard but hate fly from him 4. he doth not lead them by sound doctryne to perfection◠but by False doctryne perverteth them from the truth which blasphemously he proclaymeth dayly in his pulpit to be Brownisme Schisme Heresy c. 5. he doth not lead them by Godly life for if the cheef part of Godlines be the true worship of God how doth he lead them in Godlines that leadeth them vp downe in your False Church Ministery VVorship Government blind fold like the men of Sodom that sought Lots dore Therefore I dare in the true feare of the Lord cal the best of you al a Spiritual theef a robber yea a VVolf that cometh to kil rob and destroy not that you so entend to doe or that you do so wilfully yet I would have you Mr. Bern. Look wel to your self for I dare not cleare you from sinninge against your conscience who have acknowledged the truth but for that you do so indeed by necessary consequent For seing you are in a False Church Ministery and vse a False worship submit to a False Government you must needes by defending al this Falsehood teaching it to others perswading them to the obedience therof perswade them to al these abhominations of Antichrist so do rob them kil them raven them like wolves theeves robbers For men may rob kil destroy ignorantly as Paul did when he was a Pharisee as I my self did when I was one of your Preists as many do in popery except you wil say that they al do sinne against their conscience Act. 3.17 1. Tim. 1.13 And heer you have a fling at our ministers wil needes have them no Lawful ministers you dare not say false this you endevour to prove bicause that we are not made Ministers by Successive ordination First Mr. Be. I tel you bicause of your importunity in this particular of ordination by Succession that if it must needes be which we deny vtterly that we have it if you have it for we were made Preists by your prelates why then do you condemne our ministery say you why do you condemne the ministery of the Church of Rome say I For if you may have a true ministery yet condemne the ministers of the Church of Rome from whence yours came then may we have a true ministery yet condemne your ministery whence ours cometh this I speake not for that I plead it but to stop your mouth For I vtterly renounce your orders which I had from Wickā prelate of Lincolne when I was chosen Fellow of Christs College in Cambridg I receaved doe retayne my ministery from that particular Church wherof I am Pastor which hath the whole powre of Christ ministeriall delegated to her from Christ her Husband when he contracted with her Secondly you neieher can nor do prove Succession in the new Testament For that which you alledg for the Succession of the old Testament I say it was typical is abolished by Christ For do you think this is a good argument one Preist begat another in the old Testament therfor one minister must ordeine another in the new Testament why may you not plead after this manner Therfor one Preist may beget another Preist in the new Testament wheras you say that Preists did consecrate preists which consecration was ther ordination I deny it vtterly I prove the contrary that during the captivity of Babilon ther were many priests borne none consecrated only for their admission in to the preists office it was requisite that they should shew their Genealogie Nehe. 7.64 65. but their ordination was their generation or byrth though I deny not but when they entered into the performance of their office ther were some rites performed which was no part of their ordination but I would know of you what is ordination is it any thing but the declaring of the partie elected approved to be in office by prayer for him a chardg given vnto him can none do this but a precedent officer Againe for the old Testament I say God created the first Preist viz Adam then til Aaron men begat Preists for the eldest in the Family were the Preists Moses who was the yonger brother no preist ordeined Aaron his Sonnes after that Preists begat preists til Christs tyme then Christ appointed officers in the Church Apostles made Evangelists Evangelists Apostles ordeyned Bbs. Deacons al this I confesse Mr. Ber. what is this to Succession in the new Testament I shew you plainly that the Church Elected Mathias ther being yet no Apostles Act. 1. ther being Apostles the Church elected Deacons Act. 6. Elders Act. 14. seing they performed election which is the contract why may they not performe all For ordination is nothing in respect of Election as you may see in al Societyes corporations whatsoever The contract which is the mutual consent of a man woman for mariage maketh man and wife before God Election which is the mutual consent of the pastor his Flock maketh a man pastor of his Flock So that in this particular Mr. Bern. you show your willfullnes and blindnes asmuch as in any thing in your book although I doubt not but it is the best that can be pleaded for Antichrist thus much for the second part of this Section The third part of this Section is that your worship is a false worship wherin as I have dealt in the two former points so wil I deale in this viz first prove the position Secondly answer your cavils To prove your worship a false worship I vse these Arguments following First Argument The true worship of the L. cannot possiblie be offered vp in a false Church The Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are