Wherefore in this saying if you say to the purpose you then affirme the Third generall poinct that I noted in you at the beginning of this my last Replie That euery soule in England is conuicted in conscience But here I maruaile that you say Maister Hus and other of the holy Martirs did heare and say Masse till their dying day Also that others did acknowledg the Popes supremacie I aske you do you meane that they held and vsed the Popish Masse according to all the abominations that are in it If you thinke so then surely neither Hus nor any of the rest were holy Martirs For therein are found errors plainly fundamentall which of themselues abolish from Christ They are not to be compared to our publique errors now in England The like I say of the Popes supremacy If you thinke any of the Martirs acknowledged it in the large and ample meaning thereof as the Popish Doctors do set it downe Then verily neither were they any Martirs The book of Acts and Monuments whither you send vs affirmeth not that they held these errors in the largest and grossest sort It may be therefore they held many and greeuous errors of ignorance both in the Popish Masse in the supremacy which might neuerthelesse stand with Christ crucified And so they might be and were holy Martirs But I affirme that according to the damnable grossenes of the very Papists they neither did nor could hold them Therefore in these instances you say nothing to vs nor against the question in hand Further you sayd before in the beginning of your defence of this Exception “ pag. 29. That Maister Cranmer Ridley Latimer and the rest of the Martirs then neither had themselues nor ioyned in spirituall communion with such as had the Prelacy and Ministery now pleaded for Now I see you make no conscience of vntruthes yea you are bold to auouch open and knowne falshoods Did not Maister Cranmer hold him selfe for Archbishop still and that he vvas by the Pope vniustly and vnsufficiently deposed and by Queene Mary forcibly restreined from it Did he euer repent of holding that Office till his death Also did not Ridley stand vpon his right to the Bishopricke of London though ready to dye Latimer though he renounced his Bishoprick yet he kept his Ministery and neuer repented him of it Philpot neuer misliked his Archdeaconry Yea vvhen he refused bloudy Bonner yet he appealed to his ordinary the Bishop of Winchester The like minde is to be seene in Bishop Farrar And generally vvhosoeuer vvere Ministers then of the Prelates ordination they neuer renounced it though they dyed Martirs Thus appeareth your bold vntruth in this behalfe Further in your Sixt ansvver Pag 32. First you vvill not see vvhat I meane in saying That these outvvard orders be not of the foundation simply I meant not at all of the very ‡ 1 Cor. 15.2 3.4 Rom. 4.25 1 Cor. 3.10.11.12.13.14 foundation neither are they Secondly you aske if our outward orders vnder Christ be not fundamentall aswell as the Iewes vnder the Law I aunsvver neither vvere the Ievves outvvard orders of the very foundation vvithout vvhich they could not be saued Thirdly you aske how Corah c. differing from Moses and Aaron only about the Priesthood and Ministery were separated from and damned I annsvver not that the matter vvas fundamentall but the manner vvas rebellious vvith consciences a thousand times conuicted and so donne vvith a high hand against God himselfe But novv this considered Hovv vainely doe you charge me in your entrance into this Exception pa. 29. That I and others of my mind goe about to iustifie these matters of order in controuersie by Cranmer Ridleys and Latimers example and their congregations then For shame do you not see the contrary that I call them errors I onely iustifie by their example that these corruptions abolish vs not from Christ as theirs did not And that I trust is sound Which thing also you might haue remembred if you had ben so charitable by that vvhich I vvrot in * In the next treatiâ—e follovving of the comparison of the Ministery vvith Mariage Auns to your first Reason another place Then in your first aunsvver Pag 30. Hovv vainely do you aske vs for Scriptures to proue these orders seeing I expreslie called them errors The like in your Second vvhere you load vp Scriptures to disproue them Also thirdly you charge an vnconscionable vntruth on me if you meane this aunsvver vnto me that I should graunt and cannot deny that all outward ceremonies gouernement are arbitrary at mans pleasure I only said that our state holdeth that generall opinion Not that I my selfe held it If you meane them vvrite to theÌ„ and speake to them if you meane me you do me foule iniury Fourthly whether they are Popish shiftes or no let our state vvhich maintaineth these things aunsvver you Your Fift is aunsvvered in the first poinct of my explication noted before pag 35. To your Sixt in pag 32. vve aunsvvered before in the Second poinct of my explication pag 35. Your seuenth in pag 34. is also against the state of our Church and not against me Fr Io. his Aunswer to M. Iacobs 2. Reply to the 2. Excep PItie not me but pitie your self Mr. Iacob and your Churches estate Your self who are miserably weak and yet foolishly wilfull as all may see by this Reply Your Churches estate which is such as by the word of God cannot be approved to have Christ your Prophet Priest and King Therefore still you tell vs your Church holdeth Christ to haue left written what is needfull for your inward and meer spirituall belief and obedieÌ„ce but that for the outward Church-order he hath not so done but left it arbitrary to be appointed and abrogated agayne at the liking of the Churche and Magistrate As if Christ had abolished the * Exod. 20.4.5.6 second coÌ„maÌ„dement which directly concerneth the outward worship and order of the Church as the ‡ Exod. 20.3 first doth our inward and spiritual belief Or as if the Scripture did not every where teach that “ Col. 2 3.5.8.19-23 Esa 33.22 Heb. 3.1.2.3 2 Ioh ver 9. Epist to Timoth. Tit. Cor. c. he hath fully furnished the Church not onely for inward faith but also for outward order and obedieÌ„ce Eyther therefore you must approve the outward order and worship of your Church to be ordeined by Christ in his word or els you have not him for your Prophet Priest and King in that estate Chuse which you will The liberty you speak of is nothing els but a cloke of licenciousnes or in deed meer Antichristian slavery howsoeuer you account it liberty That the word of God forbiddeth it I have showed both here and in my * Pag. 30 former answer against which you can say nothing Now therefore when this will not serue the turne you begin to coÌ„ment and make notes vpon your owne explication that
3.12.15 amōgst many other which plainly proveth Ansvver that many errors so they be not of obstinacy may be built by a Christian vpon the fundation Christ Iesus yet be a true Christian still For which see further Maister Iacobs answer in pag. 192. Againe there are errors simply fundamētall which of their owne nature cleane abolish frō Christ such are the errors of the Arians concerning the Deitie of Christ of the Anabaptists concerning his humanitie of the Papists cōcerning Iustification by workes praying to trusting in Saincts and such like which directly raze the very foundation But that any one or all of the errors in the churches of Englād are of this force as you would seem to hold by all your 9. Reasons is most impious and vngodly to affirme And as Maister Iacob very well noteth in his answer to every one of them You therby overthrow the Martyrs in Queene Maries dayes from being christians who held the very same corruptions in their ministery worship c. which is now held in England But say you the Martyrs saw ne further Then you confesse against your selves that our errors doe not simply abolish from Christ as you every where affirme most vngodly especially in defence of your 7. Reason But that if men in these things see no further they are in the same estate with the Martyrs Now if you would have your Reasons hold you must prove the churches of England all conuicted in conscience which I hope you will not go about to doe Thus much concerning the nature of our errors whether they be of obstinacie or against the fundation directly which is the Second note I desier to be observed The Aunswer This second note of his is as foolish as frivolous as contumelions as the former See it here in his chaunging of the question between vs in his lessening of theyr corruptions in his mismatching of things vnequall in his abusing our difference of judgement and reviling off vs in his perverting the Scriptures and example of the Martyrs c. The Question between vs is not as he pretendeth but thus First concerning them VVhether the good doctrines of the Church of England being joyned together vvith theyr Antichristian errors and corruptions do make theyr Assemblyes and people in that estate to be true Churches and Christians Then concerning vs VVhether notvvithstanding the good doctrines professed in theyr Church vve may and ought to separate from theyr Antichristian Ministery vvorship confusion c. That thus the question standeth between vs themselves cannot deny though they seek to alter and turne from it here and every where Therefore do we also desier thee good Reader to mynd it well and not to be carryed away with the view of theyr good doctrines alone from the question and matter in hand but alway to have an especiall regard therevnto Notwithstanding if the question were as here he pretendeth perthen both his owne and all Mr Iacobs defence of the Church of England is even thus also quite ouerthrowen For now it appeareth that both of them do vnderstand theyr Argument following as if it were thus propounded Whatsoever is sufficient to make a particular man a true Christian and in state of salvation that is sufficient to make a company so gathered together to be a true Church Mr Iacobs Argument as it is novv vnderstood by themselves notwithstanding the multitude of errors and corruptions retayned among them But the whole doctrine as it is publikly professed and practised by Law in England is sufficient to make a particular man a true Christian and in state of salvation viz. such a one as in simplicity of heart beleveth and embraceth it And the publik Assemblyes of England are in theyr estate companyes so gathered together that is they do in simplicity of heart so beleev and embrace Therefore it is sufficient to make the publik Assemblyes of England true Churches notwithstanding the multitude of theyr errors and corruptions The Argument then being thus propounded as by this note of his it must needs be marke I pray you what followeth herevpon 1. That as it hath ben propounded hitherto it concludeth not the Question but is lame both in the Proposition and Assumption as I have noted more particularly hereafter Pag. 4. 10. 12. 13. 93. 97. 99. 106. 2. That in theyr estate we must mynd not theyr good doctrines alone but theyr errors and corruptions withall Of which there is never a word in all theyr Argument See it Pag. 3 4. 63. 171. 172. 3. That the falsehood both of the Proposition and Assumption is now so manifest as the very propounding of them thus is sufficient to refute them But for this also see further Pag. 5. 11. 12. 13. Now to speak here but of the latter braunch of the Assumption onely let them tell vs iff themselues think theyr Assemblyes and members thereof do in simplicity of heart beleev and practise the good doctrines of theyr Church Nay will they say that the Prelates the chief officers and pillars of theyr Church do so embrace them Not to speak of the many thousands of theyr Church who do not so much as know the doctrines of truth retayned and 〈◊〉 them So far are they from professing and practising them in syncerity And yet are they aswell as the best members of theyr Church partakers of theyr Sacraments Ministers Governours copartners of theyr Worship Assemblyes procedings c. 4. Finally mynd that the Argument and Replyes following speak of the profession and practise of all theyr Assemblyes and members thereof as they stand according to Law Pag. 3.6 But here he speaketh onely of such among them as do in simplicity of heart beleev and embrace theyr good doctrines and therefore neyther of all theyr Assemblyes nor of all the members of them See then here how insufficiently they have reasoned and how deceitfully they have dealt all this while Besides the question being of a visible Church he speaketh onely of such as may belong to the invisible Which is not to the poynt in controversy For the profession and practise according to Law spoken of in the Argument may be knowen and discerned of men the simplicity of the heart here spoken of God onely kooweth Thus with wynding in and out they have lost both the question and themselves too I feare if they returne not in tyme and with simplicity of heart vnto the Lord. The nature and force of theyr corruptions derived from Antichrist the deadly enemy of Iesus Christ is purposely handled in the discourse following in the 1. 2. 3. 6. 7. and 9. Reasons The Apostle saith that even * 1. Tim. 4.1.2.3 the forbidding of Meats and Mariage is a departing from the faith Mr Beza speaking particularly of the Church of England and but of fower or five off theyr corruptions viz plurality of benefices licences of Non-residency licences to marry and to eat flesh saith that ‡ Bez. Epist 8 the Antichristian Church hath not
false Church And contrarily Thirdly I aske Is not the Hierarchy and Church constitution of Antichrist the most detestable anarchy of Sathan that ever was And doth not Sathan far more commonly and readily part with his false doctrine then with it when he must needs part with the one 2 Thes 2.9 and yet can retayne the other He is subtill and of long experience he can mynd and knoweth full well that so long as he holdeth his owne constitution of a Church he can quickly vppon any opportunity bring in his doctrine agayne even with a trice For why He hath both the people ready for the receyving of it being yet still in the confusion and bondage of Antichrist and his owne Ministery also to be imployed in the publishing and serving thereof theyr Offices Callings Ministrations Maintenance being all ready at hand and fit for the purpose Whereas on the contrary when the false constitution is abolished then false doctrine wanteth both hee woonted place of receipt and her nimble wings by which she should spread and fly abroad And here I could alledge for proof hereof the prefer Ministery and estate of the Church of England which being of Antichrist Sathans graundchild and he now having spyed his tyme and found some opportunity beginneth apace by this meanes to bring in agayne such doctrines of his as had for a tyme ben suppressed As namely Free-vvill Auricular Confession Christs soule to descend into Hell The Church of Rome to be a true Church c. Witnesse the Books and publik Sermons of Bilson Bancroft Hooker Androes Harsenet Barret and other the Priests and Prelates of that Church the Marchants of these and the like wares off the Beast in Court City Countrey Vniversity and where not The same thing you may mynd also thus So long as the house standeth still and is furnished with servants and Ministers it is ready for the implements and furniture though removed for a tyme to be brought in agayne and soone to be set vp in theyr woonted place And if you would see an example of these things yet in memory look but at the Churches estate in K. Edwards and Q. Maryes dayes compared together The popish constitution of the Church being not abolished in King Edwards tyme how soone was the Popes doctrine yea and his supremacy in Queen Maryes dayes spread and acknowledged throughout the Land Yet the same doctrines of truth were in K. Edwards tyme published and receyved which now are in England And very like also that it was then with more zeale and love of the truth thē now it is specially considering the generall coldnes of men and the cruell persecution of the truth to which this age synce is come Mynd further that the Offices houses and maintenance of the Fryers and Nunnes being before in the time of K. Henry the eight quite taken away they were not able in all Q. Maryes raigns to reare them vp agayne No albeit they iudged them lawfull and necessary aswell as the other poynts of Popery and did also very earnestly desier and labour to have them reestablished So great a matter it is to have a thing abolished in the whole constitution thereof Even as when an house is rased and pulled downe to the very foundation And here vpon this occasion let me also aske Whether if the Callings and Livings of the Prelates and Priests together with the Idoll Temples and confusion of all maner people in the body of the Church now had in England were so dealt with as the Abbats Monks Abbeyes and Nunryes then were there would not fewer Iesuites and Seminaryes come into the Land Popery lesse increase treason against her Maiesty be lesse attempted and finally all the meanes and hope for the full replanting of Antithrists religion agayne in that Church be vtterly removed and taken away Let this Scribe then go and perswade such as himself that the outward constitution of the Church is but as the tithing of Mynt Annise and Commin c. Whosoever have theyr 〈◊〉 exercised to discerne good and evill will playnely see that notwithstanding any thing he pretendeth yet it is and ought to be accounted among the waighty matters of the Law of God Yea that it is of far other importance and consequence then most men think or will yet be perswaded albeit even experience the Mistresse of fooles might in all this tyme and tryall have taught them sufficient if ynough were ynough for men In cases of Religion Now for his Reason here any may see by that which hath ben sayd that it is very frivolous and of no waight at all The Proposition or first part hath nothing for the ground of it but that which is in question and neyther is alway true nor can be yeelded vnto for very great and waighty causes here before declared Vnto which adde these also 1. That many errors in doctrine are and may be far lesse then the errors of the outward constitution when they are truly compared together 2. That the true outward constitution of the Church alway implyeth both a separation of the people from the World and the joyning of them together in the fellowship of the Gospell and both these to be voluntary Which particulars being considered with the former will teach him not barely to set downe but duly to prove the Proposition in his next Reply The Assumption or second part of the Reason is in some fence true in some sence false and in both against himself and their Churches estate When Churches are set in the constitution and way of Christ if afterward they fall into some errour of doctrine they are notwithstāding for the former to be reputed true Churches vntill being admonished they refuse to heare the voyce of Christ and to yeeld to the truth Thus the Assumption is true and of vs confessed by the example of the Churches of the Iewes c. But when theyr case cometh to be such as they will rather abide in errour then obey the truth and voyce of Christ this so wilfull persisting simply overthroweth such a company from being a true Church in such estate And thus the Assumption is false and so proved to be by the example of the said Churches And both wayes it is agaynst him and theyr Church as will yet further appeare by that which is now to be spoken of his question wherein he would be resolved He asketh VVhat if a company of Arrians Anabaptists or Papists should be gathered and established in a true outvvard constitution and still retayne theyr fundamentall errors before named VVhether then their outvvard constitution should make them a true Church Yea or no. I aunswer 1. Not onely false constitution but false doctrine also retayned make a false Church If it were so then that they could have a true constitution as he supposeth yet by reason of theyr false doctrine they should be a false Church 2 I aske also of him Whether these companyes of whom he speaketh