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
nothing for your purpose For you speak not of perfect knowledg but of sound knowledg that Epithete doth not argue the quantity or perfect measure but the quality or true condition of knowledg which I do avouch by the former groundes to be a true convertible signe of sanctification so of a Saynt Pure affection also is another true token of Sanctification Matt. 5.8 1. Tim. 1.5 Tit. 1.15 which pure hart or affection is not a hart voyde of sinn but of hipocrisy for that you object of Paul Rom. 7.18.21 it is nothing to overthrow his pure affection For though he had sinne yet he know nothing by himself whereof he had not repented Continuall practise of Holy dutyes also is a true signe of a Saynt or a Sanctified person Psal 119.101.102.106.112 And although Ecclesiastes saith that ther is no man without sinne vet that hindreth not but that some may continualy practise their dutyes sith this is the summe of al that by repentaÌ„ce faith which are the continual practise of the Saynts a man doth alwayes performe his duty the speech of Eclestastes is the sentence of the law not of the gospel But heerin is your monstrous fraud and abhominable dissembling manifested that vnder these doubtful termes of sound knowledg pure affection practise of duty allwayes you would bleare mens eyes that they should not see the truth VVhat doe you think that any of vs would be so absurd as to say that perfect knowledg love obedience without any imperfection or fault are the signes of Sanctification And yet wee say that sound knowledg a pure hart and continual practise of Holy dutyes are the most infallible tokens of true Saynts and men truly Sanctified But you are wholly transformed as I perceave into vayne jangling In the next place I doe acknowledg that your fix affirmatives are somthing to the purpose But neverthelesse you have mingled much chaffe with the wheate wherfore breefly in all that which you write page 85. 86. 87. 88 Concerning this matter I doe observe these particulars Namely 1. That although an outward calling profession and baptisme to the faith be part of the signes of Saynts Namely visible markes outwardly yet they must be thus qualified els they are nothing but pictures or images resembling shadowing Sanctification superficialy For they must be true inward also True calling profession baptisme inward calling profession baptisme are the infallible tokens of Sanctification and Saynts The inward must be discerned by the outward the truth must be judged by the word He that is so called so professeth is so baptised as the word teacheth that is to say He that is called and Seperated from the VVorld Antichristianisme all false wayes knowne vnto him he that professeth that true faith taught in the New Testament of Christ which is but one he that is baptised into that true faith after that true manner Christ hath prescribed I must needs say that he is truly called truly professeth is truly baptized and so he by reason of his outward true calling true profession of the true faith and true baptisme is discerned judged to be inwardly called inwardly to have faith to be inwardly baptized that truly A company of men thus called professing baptized are Saynts But if half ot but some of them only be thus the rest impenitent obstinate in sinne it cannot possibly be that they should joyntly together be a true Church being light darkenes righteousnes impenitency Christ and Belial or being joyned together those former called professing baptized doe forsake their righteousnes partake with the wicked in their sinnes and so shal receave of their plagues How then can that mixt company be called Saynts yea they are as accessary to fearful sinne before the Lord before men judging according to the rules of Gods word which is the touchstone of al truth according wherevnto all our judgments must be squared as by a canon rule of direction 2. The better part visible signes of Gods favour and presence Gods good pleasure acceptation are excellent respects in the Church But they are not demonstrative proper adjuncts of saynts sufficieÌ„t to cause a mixt company to be al saynts in definition But you speak of a mixt company one way wee vnderstand a mixt company another way You define a mixt company to be of men that are truly Sanctified and men openly wicked profane I for my part doe abhorre to call such a Company Saynts Nay I should rather and that truly call such a mixt Company a false Church and all of them visiblie Antichristians Neyther doe I any whitt quayle that you say all divines say-so I know ther is oâ—â— namely Iohn the divine the rest of the Apostles that teach the contrary if the divinity of your divines be contrary to the divinity of the Apostles Iohn that worthy divine I reject it I abhorre it I wish it cast to the bottomlesse pit from whence it came For know you Mr. Bern. that the worser part somtyme giveth denomination to the thing If a peck of wheate be intermingled with an hundreth quartar of chaffe it is not a heape of wheate but of chaffe if a pint of wine be mingled with a gallon of lees it is the lees of wine not wine you know in Logick conclusio sequitur deteriorem partem Now a company of wicked men having some few Saynts known only to the Lord among theÌ„ for being mingled with the wicked in Spiritual communion they cannot be judged Saynts by the rule of Gods word to man particularly certaynly as your assemblies of England are cannot be al caled Saynts in any colour of truth For then al the men of England are Saynts seing they al are joyned together into one Ecclesiastical body which I suppose you cannot nor dare not say the Scripture ever intended so to give them denomination but you must vnderstand that we acknowledg the visible Church a mixt company in the Lords account estimation in our general comprehension For so wee learne that the visible Church consisteth of wheate tares Mat. 13. The Lord he knoweth that the Church hath Hypocrites in it we are informed so by the scriptures ther were but twelve Apostles one of them was a Devil but eight persons in the Arck cursed Cham was one but foure persons in the beginning Runagate Kain was one but stil we deny that open wicked impenitent persons can be called Saynts bicause of the communion presence of some elect ones who are only known vnto the Lord being of one ecclesiastical body with the wicked Neither can a wicked company be called Holy or Saints truly in respect of the visible signes of Gods favour or presence For then the Papists Anabaptists Familists Arrians among them Exod. 3.5 the ground was caled Holy Mat. 4.5 Ierusalem is caled the Holy cittie typicaly
discerne a true serpent from a â—alfe yet bicause new adversaries arise dayly with new shifts cavils therfor it is not amisse to discover their forgeries also that at the length it may evidently appeare that the truth hath devoured error as Moses Serpent did the Enchanters So desiring every one that loveth the Lord the truth especiaâ—ly Mr. Ainsworth Mr. Bernard to judg wisely of my course not to take any thing in the evil part which is a strong fruite of the flesh I cease wishing the truth may be honoured though men be shamed Amen IOHN SMYTH A LETTRE WRITTEN TO MAISTER Ric. Bâ—â—nard Minister off worksop by Ioh. Smith Pastor off the Church at Ganesburgh The First Section MAister Bernard I have sufficient reasons that have moved mee to breake silence in respect of you by this Lettre to attempt a further tryall of your pretended Zeale for the truth faith of Christ I have long tyme observed the applause yeelded you by the multitude Likewise I have taken notice of your forwardnes in leading to a Reformation by publique proclamations in Severall pulpits out of that Text off Daniell 3.16.17.18 As if you had meant contrary to the Kings mynd to have caryed all the people in the country after you against the Ceremonies Subscription afterward having lost your vicaridge of worksop for refusing Subscription or conformity I have observed how yow revolted back vppon Subscription made to the Prelate of york have reentred vppon your said vicaridg Againe I have noted your vehement desire to the parsonage of Sawenbâ—e your extreme indignation when you were defeated of it Further your earnest desire to have been vicar of Ganesburgh al this after your subscription besides I have carefully weighed with my self your Readines to embrace this truth wee professe First at Sr. VV. Bowes his howse when it was opposed by some adversaries after that your acknowledging of it before many witnesses at one tyme before one or two witnesses at divers tymes aledging Naamans speech for your continuance in your Ministerie 2. King 5.18 as if therby you meant to reserve libertie to sinne against your conscience And now of late I have considered your covenant made with one hundreth people a thing of such note observation as that the whole country ringeth of it but alas againe you have revolted from al this tâ—uth only excepting your opposition against the dumb ministers have not only rejected it but set your self against it hinder divers from it both in your putpits writings proclame against it as error schisme yea beginne to justifie all the corruptions of the ministerie worship government of the assemblies all this with a high hand Al these things many more I have noted in you all the forward professers yea the verie ennemies also have observed the same In al which particulars two things may be mynded your inconstancy apostacy misconstre not the word for how can I judg it otherwise seing you have acknowledged the truth now reject it oppose it your inconstancy in falling of on so often as you have done now allthough these general reasons might have moved any of the Prophets Teachers of our Church for the truths sake to have delt with you to have discovered you to the simpler sort whome you seduce yet I have attempted it vppon two private groundes wherein I am especially interessed to this busines one is certayne aspersions by you personally cast vppon mee Another is certayne particular oppositions directed against some of my writings For the First you may remember that at Broxtow when you returned from Mr. Hildersham before certaine competent witnesses you vttered wordes tending to this purpose that in defence of the truth wee professe I chose out asitt adversary viz Mr. Rich Clifton to deale withall a man that could not dive into the depth of my arguments that I refused to deale with you in that respect This speech savoreth verie strongly of pride which vice take you heed of especialy it conteyneth also an vntruth manifesteth contempt against a man of better hability then your self in the judgment of them that know you both besides the wrong that you doe mee as if I knowing the cause wee testife to be weake bad durst not adventure it to the trial of your sufficiency diving wit but in good earnest Mr. Bernard tel mee is your dealing vpright in this point Doe not you remember that you have in your handes had in your handes at that instant when you vttered those wordes my answer writteÌ„ in one Columne to certayne doubts objections you made written in another Columne which I desired you to answer wherto as yet I have receaved no answer from you Surely you may pretend holines zeale for the truth but this dealing these speeches declare no such matter yea rather they do manifest the corruptioÌ„ of your hart This your speech dealing is one reason that moveth mee in Special to deale with you that your mouth may be stopped in that behalf although it be stopped already sith you answer not my writing that is in your handes for Mr. Richard Clifton I assure my self as you shal find shortly to your litle credit he wil approve his sufficieÌ„cy to be Superior to your diving witt A Second reason that in particular leadeth me to medle with you in this matter is your oppositions against some truths which I have expressed in some of my writings Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the first Section The place of Daniel mentioned in the beginning of this Section is Dan. 3.16 O Nebuchadnezzar wee are not careful to answere thee in this matter 17. Behold our God whome wee serve is able to deliver vs froÌ„ the hote fiery fornace he will deliver vs out of thyne hand o King 18. But if not be it knowne to thee o King that we wil not serve thy Gods nor worship the golden jmage which thou hast set vp This place of Scripture Mr. Berâ—aâ—â— handled oft tymes in several places in so much as every man conceaved that he would have been a ring leader to reformation For the circumstances being considered that this Scripture was handled when the King vrged Subscription conformity throughout the whole land when divers of the forwardest preachers were silenced himself then endaungered to leese his vicâ—â—ridg that then he should thus p each was enough to have brought him within the compasse of petty-rebellion in stirring vp the myndes of the people against the Kings proceedings besides the shew of the text might aford that he compared the King to Nebuchadnezzar Subscription to the Kings commaundement of worshipping the golden jmage Refusal of Subscription to the Refusal of worshipping the golden jmage the parts of Subscription to the golden jmage the Ministers refusing Subscription to the three persons that refused to worship the golden image their
to the covenant Christ the promises as a freholder hath to his lands possessions Esa 9.6 Vnto vs a sonne is given the chruch is the spouse of Christ so hath powre to Christ the covenant promises the Church is the body of Christ the body hath a real possession title powre to the head all the helps therof For the faithful are flesh bones of Christ Eph. 5.30 these things are manifest to them that wil vnderstand if any man be ignorant let him be ignorant But it may be Mr. Bern. you wil say that powre to bind lose are no properties of the Church but only priviledges For shame say not so Surely this plea argueth that either you got litle Logick in the vniversity or that you have forgot it or if you remeÌ„ber it you either carelesly neglect it or wilfully pervert the vse of it to seduce your followers I pray you tel me in good sooth what difference is there betwixt a priviledg a propertie Is not a priviledge according to the notation of the word privata lex a private law wherin one person or state is interessed The King hath certaine previledges or prerogatives as to pardon condemned persons to dispence with his law a negative voice in parliament c. I would faigne know of you whither these be not properties such as the Kings Queenes of the nation only have title to no other but consider wel with your self what relation ther is betwixt a priviledg the person that is interressed in the priviledg Is it not the relation of the subject the adjunct A priviledg therfor is an adjunct to the priviledged person Now al adjuncts are either proper or common adjuncts but a priviledge is not a common adjunct as I am sure you wil confesse or els you want reason therfor it is a proper adjunct It it be a proper adjunct it is a propertie so your distinction is senselesse vnscholler like you may aswel say that pepper is hot in working cold in operation as to say that the true Church may be without her priviledges but not without her properties Therfor I doe heer before the L. attach you as a deceaver of the people in teaching thus contrary to al learning true vse of reason that the powre of the Lord Iesus Christ given to the church one part whereof consisteth in binding losing is only a priviledg not a propertie of the true Church that the true Church may want it It is as impossible for the true Church to want Christs powre as for a man to want reason Mr. Ber. answer now or els yeeld to the truth you cannot for shame denie the one of them Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the seaventh Section In this Section I write prove that the powre of binding losing is given to the whole multitude not to the principal members therof Mr. Bern. in his book intituled the Sep. Schisme pa. 88. calleth it the A.B.C. of Brownisme to hold That the powre of Christ that is authority to Preach to administer the Sacraments to exercise the censures of the Church belongeth to the whole Church yea to every one of them not the principal members therof Mr. Ains answering Mr. Ber pa. 174. Saith that Mr. Ber. may put this opinion if he please in the Criss-crosse-rew of Bernardisme he himself being the first that ever he heard to vtter such a position afterward pa. 175. 176. 177. 178. Expoundeth what that auncient Church whereof of he is teacher holdeth concerning it Wel Let vs handle these things largely to ful satisfaction herein I professe befor the Lord befor the whole world that if I do not prove evidently my assertion that the powre of binding losing is given to the whole multitude not to the principall members therof I wil acknowledg the Churches of England yea the Churches of Rome yea the Greek Churches also to have a true ministery to be true churches of Christ For if the ministerie the holy things with the ministerie come by succession from the Apostles handes through the churches of Rome the Grecians that ther are no ministers but such as are made by theÌ„ froÌ„ theÌ„ successively our whole cause of Seperation lyeth in the dust we must disclaime our Schisme which we have made our heresies which we hold but if it be proved that the true ministerie commeth not by succession from the churches of Rome or the Grecians that the holy things are not given to the ministery by sucessioÌ„ but are giveÌ„ first to the body of the church the faithful yea though they be but two or three that both the ministerie and all the powre that the ministerie hath doth â—â—ow from the Fountayne Christ Iesus through the body of the Church 〈◊〉 the Presbytery then is your Church ministerie false so are the Churches of the East West much more then we those Churches only which raise vp their Ministerie from the Election aprobation ordination of a faithful people are the true Church of Christ having the true Ministerie of Christ you with the rest of Gods people in Babylon must seperate joyne together walk in the Lords ordinances as we other true Churches doe or els woe be vnto you from the Lord Therfor in this particular I would supplicate the Kings Majestie my Soveragne Lord on earth the Lords of the Parliament The Gentlemen that susteyne the person of the commons in the nether howse al the learned men of the Land to confider to search out this point For it being throughly cleered may breed peace infinite good to the whole nation whereas it being suppressed choked darkened neglected draweth with it al the contentions and controversies amongst them that professe Christ in the whole earth For my part Mr. Ber. I wil endevour according to my poore hability to discover what I have conceaved and doe vndoubtedly beleeve from the Scriptures and doe make the beginning of my inquisition after this manner which I desire the gentle reader to weigh consider of with his best attention Christs visible church which is his Kingdom hath in it a spiritual powre and jurisdiction by the confession of al that professe Iesus Christ which powre is of two sortes 1. The powre of Christ himself who is the Lord King of his Church Mat. 28.18 and he is the Fountaine of powre being the head of the Church which is his body Eph. 1.22.23 For as the head is the Fountaine of life sense motion powre to the whole body as the Mr. of the howse is the original of al oeconomical powre So is Christ the original of al spiritual life sense motion powre to the Church which is his body family This is evident in regard of this powre which is inherent in Christ the church which
his Ministeriall powre extraordinarily from heaven VVhy you confesse that powre of binding and losing was given before Christs ascension but now you would prove by this place Ephes 4. that the powre of binding losing is given after Christs assension and that these gifts and this powre are given together is not this to contradict your self hereby you see the weakenes of your reason For you must distinguish betwixt the powre of binding and losing which the Disciples had committed vnto them before Christs ascension and betwixt the gifts of the day of Pentecost But what are those gifts mentioned in that place of Ephes 4.8.11.12 and vnto whome are those gifts given I will declare it vnto you and so your mouth shal be â—â—opt These gifts which are said to be given to men are those foure sorts of Officers which the Apostle mentioneth vs 11. Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastors Teachers for the two last are one office These officers with their gifts are said to be given to men who are these men vnto whome these officers with their gifts are giveÌ„ are they not the Church is not the office of an Elder Pastor or Teacher the L. gift to the Church This place you see therefore is most pregnant against your opinion as may appeare thus That which is given by Christ to the Church is in the powre possession of the Church The officers offices of the Church are given to the Church Ergo the officers offices of the Church are in the powre possession of the Church Wherfor I say vnto you that the gifts of preaching administration of the Sacraments Governing are given vnto some meÌ„ but the office officers indued with these gifts are given vnto the Church who have powre to appoint them to their office who do receave both their office powre to administer in their office from the Church vnto whome the office powre of Christ is given primarily being the next Lord therof vnder Christ the Monarch And for your similie of the parts receaving their properties from God not from the body it is perversly applyed For this is the true vse and application of the similie as the head communicateth all the powre facultie which any part hath from it self to that part by the body so the head Christ communicated his powre to the parts and officers of the Church by the body of the Church which is Christ mysticall I confesse some parts of the body have some special properties and qualities which they receave not from the head as the Stomach hath the quality Chilificandi the liver Sangnificandi c. not from the head but the powre and faculty to vse the property it hath from the head So some members of the Church have special gifts given them of God but the powre of vsing those gifts they have from the head Christ by the meanes of the body which is the pipe that from the Fountaine conveigheth all powre Ecclesiastical to every officer The Fifth of your 9. reasons against popularity is that the Scripture doth not lay the Government vppon the people nor reproveth them for sussering abuse of Holy things but vppon the governors civil Ecclesiastical Ezech. 22.26 1. Sam. 2 17. 1. King 13. Mat 23. Revel 2.1.8.12.18 3.17.14 I answer breefly from the Type to the truth concerning matters of the Old Testament Seing now the Saynts are all of them made Kings and Preists vnto God Revelat. 1.6 Or as the Apostle Peter saith Basileion hierateuma 1. Pet. 2.9 a Kingly Preisthood Therefore now in the New Testament the Saynts succeede in the place of the Kings and Preists of the Old Testament in Ecclesiasticall causses and as they were burdened with Government and reproof for profanation of holy things so are the Saynts the members of the visible Church now burdened with Government Ecclesiasticall and reproof for violating the Holy things committed to their custody fidelity therfor I reason from your owne confession against you thus If Kings Preists in the Old Testament were chardged with Government and blamed for violation of holy things Then in the New Testament the Saints who are Kings Preists are chardged with government blamed for violation of Holy things But Kings Preistts in the old Testament were chardged with government blamed for violation of Holy things Therfor the Saints in the new Testament are chardged with government ecclesiastical blamed for violation of Holy things And thus you see Mr. Ber. how your owne weapon entreth into your owne bowels concerning the places of the Revelation that the Aungels of the seaven Churches were chardged with government blamed for abuse of the Holy things not the body of the Church I say herein you vtter foule vntruths For Chap. 1. vs. 4-7 the Apostle witeth to the 7. Churches of Asia wisheth grace peace to the Churches all the members of the Churches Chap. 2.11 at the end of every Epistle the Apostle maketh application of every Epistle to al that have eares to the particular Churches wher for I wonder at your shamelesse ignorance that should thus falsely belye the Scriptures abuse the reader To turne the point of this reason of yours also vppon your self I say thus If Iohn chardgeth the whole Churches with gouernment abuse of holy things though the message be sent to the aungel to be published to the whole church then the whole churches are charged therwith viz with government violatioÌ„ of holy things But Iohn chardgeth the whole Churches with the government abuse of Holy things though the message be sent to the Aungel of every Church to be published to the whole Church Therfor the whole Churches are chardged with the government violation of the holy things Thus much breefly concerning your fifth reason heer you make a digression to prove vnto vs that Matt. 18.17 Tell the Church must be expounded Tel the Governors For confirmation whereof you bring vs seaven reasons which I will handle in order Your first reason to prove that Tel the Church is Tel the Governors is this for that otherwise Christ could not be vnderstood for if he had brought in a strange course not heard of before nor then practised no man could vnderstand his meaning Seing therfor before then after the practise was to tel to the Elders or governors therfor tel to the Church is tel to the Governors or Elders A las for you Mr. Bern. this is borrowed stuffe yet stark naught For it is but froth chaffe what is the chaffe to the wheat Do not you think that the whole Gospell is a mystery which was kept secreat from the beginning of the world is not the visible Church of the new Testament with all the ordinances thereof the cheef principal part of the Gospel therfor seing this ordinance of telling the Church is a part of the Gospel it was
you see they vanish away as chaffe before the wind your matter is false not bad as appeareth evidently if you wil not be blind To proceed pag. 116-122 of your book you describe vnto vs the true forme of the Church inwardly to be the Spirit Faith Love outwardly the word profession the Sacramēt of the L. Supper these things say you are in your assemblies Ergo you conclude your Church hath a true forme I answer have not the Papists the word preached do not they make profession live as strictly as you do not they communicate in the L. Supper so by consequent have Love Faith the Spirit yet you say they are false Churches wanting the true forme even so are you although you do al that they doe much more for so you are much bettered in doctrine vse of the Sacrament but in profession practise I suppose you are inferior to many of them bicause rejecting Christ in his offices as hath been said especialy in his Kingdom it is impossible in that constitution communion you should aright vse the word make profession partake in the Sacrament or have the true visible Love Faith Spirit of Christ For a false matters vncapable of a true forme it is impossible that the body of Antichrist should have the true Spirit of Christ or the true covenant new Testament of Christ invested vppon them invisibly I hope wel am perswaded of millions among you but I speake of your visible politique body Ecclesiastical in that mixture of persons subordination of Ecclesiastical officers communiō Spiritual in the Holy things which by Law is established supported in your Ecclesiastical assemblies But pag. 121. you bid vs note this what viz that corruptions doe not hinder men from being a true Church before men no more then the corruptions of the hart do hinder a man from being an elect one invisiblie to the Lord I suppose bicause you bid vs in the margent of your book note this that you account it a matter worth noting and I surely think it a note worth nothing For although corruptions of matters accidentall make not a false Church yet corruptions essential of matters essential make a false church namely if the matter be false or the forme false yea I avouch that if a truly constituted Church detected of corruptions accidental convinced impenitent therin do so continue they become a false Church as hath been proved already before in the 8. Section for impenitency inward or outward maketh a false Christian Church inwardly or outwardly according to due proportion Furthermore pag. 122-128 you bring vs three true visible properties of your true Church as you say 1. continuance in the vse of the word Sacraments prayer 2. the holding forth of the truth against the enemyes thereof 3. mutual care for the welfare each of other al these you say you have among you so you say you must needes be a true Church I answer Seing your matter and forme is false your propertyes cannot be true For they arise necessarily from the vnion of the matter and forme or from the forme induced vppon the matter seing therefore the first is already proved the latter also must needs follow but let vs examine these things particularly I denie therfor in the first place that you have wel propounded the propertyes of the true Church For the first and principal essential property of a true Church is interest and title to al the Holy things which is extant in divers particulars as parcels of that general and whole property therfore a people declaring their faith and repentance by Seperating themselves from all vncleanenes by resigning themselves wholy to the Lord to become his people have God for their Father Christ for their King Preist and Prophett and so with Christ have title to all the meanes of Salvation and this title consisteth in the VVord Sacraments Censures Prayers Almes and al other parts of Spirituall visible communion whatsoever even as when the soule is induced vppon the matter viz when the breath of life is breathed into the nosthrils of dust of the Earth Genes 2. then ther is a man with a reasonable and Religions Soule So when a company of faithful people are invested with the New Testament of Christ then ther is in them title to al the holy things of God whatsoever This is evident by that which I have before manifested in the seaventh Section whither the Reader is to be referred wherfore Mr. Bern. to apply this vnto your Church I avouch that seing you are a false matter of a Church and have a false forme or covenāt induced vppon you as hath been shewed before therefore you have no true title to the meanes of Salvation but in vsurping the VVord Sacraments Censures Prayers Almes c. you therein incurre the reproof of the Prophet saying Psalm 50.16 what hast thou to doe to declare myne ordinances that thou shouldest make my covenant into thy mouth seing thou hatest to be reformed and hast cast my wordes behind thee And as the Prophet speaketh Esay 1. 11-18 your worship is iniquity I cannot beare it I am weary of it I hate it Therefore you may plead as long as you will the Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord yet I say vntill you intertayne Christs true Kingdome Preisthood Prophecy you are but vsurpers of all that visible communion in the Word Sacraments Prayers c. which is among you For it doth not follow that bicause you have the Word Sacraments Censures prayers c. therefore you are a true Church neither are the vsing of these true propertyes of a true Church But the title to them is the true propertie of a true Church For the Papists and all Antichristians and Heretiques vse the Word Sacraments Censures prayers but they are not therfor a true Church as I know you will confesse But heer you wish vs againe pag. 122. to observe well Lett vs heer what it is that you wish vs to observe well Namely the true VVord preached and the true Sacraments administred are the true propertyes to a true Church And that you have those things as you say well VVhat is the true word and what are the true Sacraments is not the true word the true doctryne of the word the true doctryne of the New Testament but you have rejected the whole doctryne of Christs Kingdome in a manner and have advanced all that false doctryne of the Antichristian hierarchy which is taught and commaunded by Law to be taught in your Church And you in your pulpits proclayme all them Heretiques or Schismatiques that teach and erect the Church Ministerie VVorship and Government according to the paterne of Christ his New Testament And so you have abrogated and disanulled the VVord of God by your traditions and Antichristian devises Againe VVhat are true Sacraments is the breaking of bread and
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
Puritanes are the most likely to be Gods people but to say certainly this or that Puritane hath saith or feareth God I cannot doe by any warrant out of the word of God that I see For know you that ther is only one true forme of a visible Church Eph. 4. ther is one body in this body ther is one only true faith for the Apostle faith the â—aith is one but none of you al are meÌ„bers of this body which is a communion of faithful men Seperated from al vncleanes walking in the obedience of al Gods ordinances therefor none of you al are of the true faith which is found only in the true body You shal see Mr. Be. how many things I chardg you al with 1. You are mingled with al the abhominable people of the land coÌ„trary to these scriptures 2. Cor. 6.17 Apoc. 18.4 2. You cal God Father jointly with al the people of the Land whoÌ„ are brethreÌ„ of you members of the same Church with you with is vntrue if you take your selves to be faithful For they are of their Father the Devil 3. You make Christ a Mediator to you al in common with al the profane people of the land which is contrary to Apoc. 8.2 Ioh. 17.9 4. You make al the wicked people of the land members of Christ members of your selves in the seales of the covenant if you challendg your selves to be Faithful which is contrary to 1 Cor. 6.15 10.16.17 5. You refuse Christs Testament his Kingdome will not have him to raigne over you in his owne Offices Lawes which is contrary to these places Luk. 19.27 Apoc. 14 9-11 6. You vtterly reject the censures of admonition in the thre degrees therof contrary to Mat. 18 15-17 Heb. 10.24.25 7. You suffer your selves if you challendg to be Gods people to be deprived robbed of the powre of Christ to chose your own officers contrary to Act. 6.5 14.23.1 tim 3. toto 5.21 6.13.14 8. You reject the truth we by our testimony offer vnto you yea you persecute it by slaunders by lyes by raylings though many of you have been enlightened by it how then can we account you faithful certainly but we must certainly know theÌ„to be Faithful with whome we pray For whatsoever is not of Faith is sinne I pray you miconstrue me not For although I dare not say you have Faith of a certainty yet I hope wel of many of you in particular but to tel you plainly I hope better of many that never knew this truth then of you some of your Disciples whome I know by their owne confession to have beeÌ„ inlightened with it yet now oppose against it look to your selves your estate is fearful if our gospel be hid saith the Apostle it is hid to them that perish 2. cor 4.3 when certaine were hardened disobedient speaking evil of the way before the multitude as you doe Paul departed from them Seperated the Disciples Act. 19.9 so doe wee to you and therefore our practise is warrantable Therefore consider these things that I write for I professe before the Lord that this truth which wee testifie vnto you is as cleer and evident vnto vs as the noone day and observe it well that those among you that have been enlightened with it and now quench it shall grow from evill to worse and shal have Gods hand out against them so as every man shal say the Lord is avenged of them except they returne againe and so I leave this point Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the eleventh Section Mr. Bern. Sep. Schis pag. 152. Saith that those men have lost the feeling of former grace all true charity that say thus viz That they cannot say certainly by any warrant off Gods word that any of vs hath eyther Faith or feare of God he nameth Mr. Smyth in the margent Againe pag. 58. he writeth thus viz one of them writeth that certainly he cannot by the word be perswaded that any of vs hath eyther true Faith or feare of God naming Mr. Smyth in the margent I write in this Section thus that particularly certainly I cannot say by any warrant of Gods word that I see that this or that person hath Faith feare of God among you yet I say also That I verely beleeve generally that God hath his people among you that they are in al likely hood the persons that are miscalled Puritanes Heer I wish the conscionable reader to consider Mr. Bern. evil dealing whither ignoraÌ„tly or maliciously I know not I speake generally specially Generally I doe certainly beleeve that the Lord hath his people in England Specially I say certainly particularly I know not who they be yet in likelyhood they are the Puritanes so called now Mr. Bern to make the Lords truth odious his owne part good perverteth this speech off myne in 3. particulars 1. he leaveth out the good that I say viz that I certainly beleeve Gods people to be in the LaÌ„d that in likelyhood they are the Puritanes 2. in his speach he leaveth out this word particularly knowne to mee 3. he in one of his speeches viz pa. 59. transporteth the word Certainly to the beginning of the Sentence as if I were certainly perswaded that none of the Land feared God or had Faith I beseech the Gentle Reader to marke his fraud evil dealing so to trust him according to his desert as also to consider what I say therefore to read the beginning of this Section where my words are manifest al that I entend is this That visibly certainly particularly I cannot say any one to have Faith or feare of God in the Churches of England which are False Churches buc generally certainly invisibly I beleeve ther are thousands viz a remnant according to the Election of grace See for this Rom. 11.3.4 compared with 1. King 19.10 Revel 18.4 Mr. Bern. I will not desire the Lord to reward you according to your workes as Paul did but I desire the Lord to give you eyes to see a hart to acknowledg this your sinne I desire all men to take notice of Mr. Bern. deceiptfull dealing in this one particular and accordingly to judg of the rest of his deaâ—â—â—s Further pag. 152. Mr. Bern. accounteth this one of our errors to hold that None of the Ministers of England may be heard and pag. 155. He reckeneth this as another of our errors to desend it to be vnlawfull to joyne in praver with any of the assemblies Seing the assemblies Ecclesiastical are false Churches and the members of the assemblies members of false Churches how can the members of true Churches have communion with them in that estate and standing For Christ and Antichrist the members of Christ and the members of the strumpet cannot bee mingled together and as it is impossible that oyle waters should mingle so cannot the
the reader to take notice of that the alledging of them by Mr. Ber. argueth an ill mynd seing he confesseth them to be of smal force against our cause The first reason against sep may be framed thus That way is not the truth which teacheth to renounce the constitution ministery worship Government of the English assemblies Ecclesiasticall as false so in respect thereof to seperate from them al spiritual communion with them to entertayne the true constitution ministery worship and Government of the Apostolique institution The way of the seperation teacheth thus much Ergo the way of the seperation is not the truth I answer if the scriptures approve this which we teach of you of our selves then is your arg worth nothing now whither the seperation be the truth or not I refer me to the scriptures wherby I desire that which I have written may be examined if it bee sound sound let it be intertayned if not follow the truth whatsoever it be whereas you say heer that men in seperating from you must cast of the word which begat them I deny it you are a slaundeter herin For we retaine al truth that you have we reject only your Antichristianisme for acknowledging your Faith repentance baptisme false I say it is necessary but vnderstand that we speak of your things that are visible leave things invisible to the Lord for that objection you make from our owne confession that we say our Seperation is only for corruptions I say it is truth but yet know that your corruptions are essential and effential corruptions corrupt the essence of things make them false viz. when the matter is essentially corrupted or the forme c. as a mule procreated of an horse an asse Now such is your Church Ministery worship Government as is already proved sufficiently The 2. reason against Sep is framed thus That way is not the truth which teacheth the professors thereof to entertayne and joyne with open wicked obstinate sinnes sinners The Seperation Teacheth men so to doe Ergo The Seperation is not the truth I answer That the truth may be the truth though men that professe it walk never so wickedly in it neither doth it follow bicause the Churches of the Seperation walk corruptly therfor the Seperation is not the truth you know Mr. Bern. that this is but sophistry hereby you might prove the Doctryne of Christ not to be the truth bicause the Corinths had contentions incest fornication dronkennes heresy among them what say you to your selves who have as many thousand obstinate sinnes sinners in the land as ther be men of the Seperation among vs is your way therfor error For the force of this argument therfor I referre mee to your owne conscience to every indifferent mans censure VVel Let vs see what obstinate sinnes sinners are in the Separation the sinnes are these as you recken them vp 1. vnthankfulnes 2. spiritual vncharitablenes 3. abusing the Scriptures 4. Obstinacy in schisme 5. Rayling scoffing 6. false opinions or Brownisme the persons persisting in these sinnes are you say obstinate wicked Let vs handle these things in order 1. Vnthankfulnes to God that regenerated vs by the word among you vnto the Church of Englād our mother that bare vs in calling her an harlot I answer what truth the Lord hath wrought inwardly in vs we do thankfully aknowledg I for my part do professe that in your assemblies I receaved the seedes of true faith invisible which if I had dyed not knowing the Seperation should I doubt not through Gods mercy have been effectual to my justification salvatiō in Christ but this was so invisibly judging according to the inward feeling of my hart not according to the outward censure of the word For though I could truly judg so of my self out of myne owne feeling yet I deny other men could so judg of me judging truly according to the Scriptures this I suppose none of the Seperation wil deny This is the thankfulnes which we can yeeld do yeeld to God dayly but for our visible conversion we learned it not from you therfor we deny any thākfulnes to be due vnto you for it neither do we acknowledg the church of England our mother therin but we say she is barrē beareth no children vnto the L. in respect thereof 2. Sinne you impute to vs is spiritual vncharitablenes apearing first in censuring 3. sorts of persons among you 1. The ignorant as blinded by the God of the world 2. judging them that know the Seperation do not yeeld vnto it as fearfull persons worldlings 3. such as tasting of it falling back are censured as Apostates by vs wel Mr. Bern. if the way of the Seperation be the truth as it is proved to be then I know not why it is vncharitablenes thus to censure you For it is but the censure of the holy Ghost in the scriptures in censuring of you herein wee manifest no more vncharitablenes toward you then the Scriptures teach take heed you do not blaspheme the scriptures censure through vs. Secondly our vncharitablenes appeareth say you in our vngodly desire to have the word vtterly extingnished among you Egyiptian darknes to come over you rather thē it should be preached by your false ministery I āswer you by making a demaund which is this of two sinnes viz of murther or adultery which is to be chosen I suppose you wil answer neither of them that truly so say I for this particular if it be demaunded whither wee would that the word should be vtterly extingnished or preached by your false ministery I make answer wee would neither of them but wee desire both that your false ministery were dissolved that the word might by the Kings commaundement or allowance or permission bee preached throughout his dominions by men fitted therto wherefore in this point I challendg you for an vncharitable slaunderer of vs and heer you digresse to prove that the word may bee preached without a true constitution of a Church that preaching is more necessary then a true constitution I confesse it vnfeynedly most hartily neither came the contrary into the thoughts of the brethren of the Seperation I suppose For certainly the true constitution must bee taught men must bee brought to the faith before the Church can bee constituted this is it which wee must labor for that first the word be preached by men of able gifts that men bee taught converted to the Faith then they bee established into the new Testament of Christ but you have done doe practise the contrary First you have established thē into an Antichristian communion constitution jumbling together al the people of the Land of what Religion or condition soever then you set over them a false ministery then teach them stil to
to the Apostles their Successors the L.Bbs. neither can you with any good conscience say that they clayme Christs Kingly powre but only they are Antichrists as the Pope is for two causes 1. For clayming that powre Ministeriall which Christ hath given to the body of the Church 2. For enlarging that ministerial powre beyond that compasse which Christ in his word hath determined Thirdly you say Neither that ruling powre of Christ which the Puritanes say is in the presbytery do we say is in the multitude For we acknowledg Christ to have ordeyned a presbytery or Eldership that in every Church for to teach rule them by his owne word lawes vnto whome al the multitude the members the Saints ought to obey submit themselves as the Scriptures teach confut of Mr. Bern. pag. 176. VVee say Christs ruling powre is originally fundamentally in the body of the Church the multitude we acknowledg further that the Elders receave by delegation powre from the body of the Church which powre ministerial in the hands of the Elders is not so large as that which is in the body but it is rather a leading powre then a ruling powre neither are the Elders in al the new testament to my knowledg called Rulers archontes but overseers leaders Elders prohistamenoi wherby the holy Ghost would teach that their powre is not to rule but to leade direct I do therefore vtterly disclaime this your error Mr. Ains as one part of Antichristianisme in your Church but you had need expound it wel for the satisfaction of the brethren of the Seperation least you here in destroy your constitution before you be aware VVhat we hold concerning the Presbytery I have delivered partly in that which before I have written in answer to Mr. Bern. partly in that which I lately published concerning the differences of the Churches of the Seperation in the second part the first Section Chap. 5. 6. wherfor if you hold that Lordly vsurped Antichristian powre of your Eldership to be that ruling powre which the word of God warranteth it shal be your part to justifie it to rebuke al that gainst and it for herein wee vtterly disclayme your judgment practise we maintaine that the powre of the Eldership is a leading directing overseeing powre ministery or service both in the Kingdom Preisthood of the Church that the negative voice the last definitive determining sentence is in the body of the Church wherto the Eldership is bound to yeeld that the Church may do any lawful act without the Elders but the Elders can do nothing without the approbation of the body or contrary to the body The eighth Section In the next place followeth your second position which is this in your copie In holding that one sinne of one man publiquely obstinately stood in not reformed by a true constituted Church doth so pollute it that none may communicate with it in the holy things of God til the partie offending be by the Church put out after lawful conviction you say is error I say it is the most comfortable holy truth wee hold in our walking one with another in communion of Gods ordinances This truth ariseth from the former ground that al the members of the Church have powre to the censures of admonition excommunication to bind lose For observe I pray you that every brother is bound to admonish his brother for a fault he observeth in him if he reforme not he must take one or two witnesses admonish him if he reforme not yet he must bring the matter before the Church suppose the Church consist of 12. persons as at Ephesus Act. 19.7 The matter being before the Church the eleven deale with the twelvth discover his sin convince it to his conscience he refuseth to â—eer them but despiseth the admonitions I say if they retaine him stil in communion they consent to his sinne For as the civill Magistrate in pardoning willfull murther consenteth to it bicause the murtherer should die Even so the Church suffering the vnrepentaunt persone among them consent to his sinne and are polluted with it and consent to all the profanation and violation of the Holy things committed by that vnrepentaÌ„t person For God hath commaunded the church to watch over their brethren if they do not they hate their brother in suffering sinne to rest vppon him God hath commaunded that no vncleane person should medle with the Holy things if they doe they profane polute the Holy things offering violence to the Lords ordinances But it may be you wil say that by this meanes we assume to our selves a kind of perfection puritie in that we wil have no sinners among vs I answer that you must distinguish betwixt our persons our communion we confesse our persons severally every one of vs to be subject to sinne that we doe sinne dayly bicause of our sinning nature the Lord hath appointed the ordinances of the visible Church as helps meanes to subdue this sinning nature of ours especially these ordinances of admonition excommunication which are to be vsed administred vppon al by al as occasion is offered Now this is the perfection puritie of our communion that we suffer no vnrepented sinne no vnrepentant sinner among vs but either we cast out the sinne by repentance or the sinner vnrepentant by excommunication that our coÌ„munion may be pure holy the church without spot or wrinckle that we may be a new lump dayly vnleavened the leaven being purged out of vs continually oh Mr. Ber. if you knew but the comfort powre of the L. ordinances of admonition excommunication as we do blessed be our good God in some measure that growth reformation which is in some of vs thereby you would be so wonderfully ravished with the powre of Gods ordinances that you would acknowledg the Church to be terrible as an armie with banners yet amyable lovely comely beauteful in so much as Christ himself saith that the love of the church is faire that she woundeth his hart with one of her eyes in regard of the beautyful holy communion which is dayly maintayned in her by vertue of the censures but your confused assemblies al the members of them not only omit but reject yea oppose al these holy ordinances which Christ hath given to his Church therby you proclaime to all the world that you are of Belial that is without the yoke of Christs ordinances you cast away from you these cordes bandes wherwith wee are bound one to another knit faster faster vnto Christ our head therfor you living thus without the yoke out of the Lords Holy order having broken these bandes cast the cordes froÌ„ you mingling your selves vnto joyning with al manner of profane persons that violate al Gods ordinances how can we have any
fellowship communion agreement concord or part with you Answer to this now Maister Bernard and seduce your hearers no longer with vanityes Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the eighth Section Mr. Ber. in his book intituled the Sep. Schisme pa. 103. hath these wordes viz that ouâ— seaventh error should be to hold That the sinne of one man publiquely obstinately stood in being not reformed nor the offender cast out doth so pollute the whole congregation that none may communicate with the same in any of the Holy things of God though it be a Church rightly constituted til the party be excommunicated In this eighth Section the position is thus vttered by you by mee justified viz That one sinne of one man publiquely and obstinately stood in and not reformed by a true constituted Church doth so pollute it that none may communicate with it in the Holy things of God til the partie offending be by the Church put out after lawfull conviction Afterward expounding this truth I say that if the Church hold this obstinate impenitent convicted person in communion they consent to his sinne as the civil magistrate suffering wilful murther consenteth vnto it Mr. Ains confutat of Mr. Bern. pag. 178.179 doth first renounce this truth denyeth it to be either their judgment or practise referring vs to the confession of their faith Art 26. wher their judgmeÌ„t is that none is to Seperate for offences but by due order to seek redresse yet afterward affirmeth that if the Church will not rebuke nor cast out a man obstinate and impenitent in wickednes but plead for him against such as call vppon them for judgment then are all such abettors of the wicked sinner themâ—elves and that in a high degree now not that one mans sinne but the sinne of them al polluteth them Wel Mr. Ains you I wil not differ about this point for wither it be his sinne consented vnto by them or their sin which is a consent approbation to his sinne or both I regard not The truth is the truth that that one sinne polluteth them al by contagion as the leaven leaveneth the whole lump although Mr. Bern. hath not so plainly directely propounded it as he might yet let it not be denyed for it is the truth he doth chardg vs withal giving a true exposition I tell you true Mr. Ains you deny the truth if you deny the position but indeed your denyall your affirmation contradict Heer Mr. Bern. for your sake I wil performe two things First I wil confirme this truth which we defend against you that joyne with open knowne sinners in the communion of your false Church Secondly I wil refel your cavils against this truth of God wherin wee walk For the first point I wish you to remember what hath been proved vnto you in the former Section viz That Christs ministerial powre is given to the body of the Church which if it be true as it is proved to be the vndoubted truth of God then this second position followeth necessarily therevppon therefore is to be embraced for the truth of God in like manner For every consequent necessarily deduced from the Scripture is as wel as truly the word of truth as that which is in plaine termes expressed noted downe in nomber of wordes For even as the branches of the tree doe as truly proceed from the root as the great graines or body of the tree are al of one kind nature doth root body graynes braunches So a necessary consequent growing by true discourse out of the Scripture is aswel as truly the word of truth as the position or doctryne or sentence is whence it was raised wherfor I frame an argument from the former ground afteÌ„r this manner If they that have Christs ministerial powre to reforme obstinate convicted sinners or to excommunicate theÌ„ do neither reforme them nor cast them out froÌ„ among them but suffer them stil in communion consenting therby to their sinn then the persons so suffering consenting to sinne are polluted by contagion of the sin impenitent wicked sinner But it may fal out that a Church true in the constitution having Christs ministerial powre yet afterward declining may neither reforme an obstinate convicted sinner nor cast him out of their communion but may suffer him stil in communion therby consenting to his sinne Ergo a Church truly constituted having Christs Ministeriall powre of reformation or excommunication suffering and consenting to sinne sinners convinced are polluted by infection of that sinne and of that impenitent obstinate convicted sinner And so by necessary consequent I conclude after this manner If a Church truly constituted be all of them polluted by consent as is already declared then they do violate and profane all the Holy things of God wherin they pertake For to the vncleane nothing is cleane as the Apostle testifieth Tit. 1.15 the Prophet Esa 1.12 But a Church truly constituted may grow to polution by consenting to obstinate sinne sinners as is already declared Therfor a Church truly constituted may grow to the violation manifest profanation of al the Holy things of God From this evident truth I proceed reason after this manner To that Church company or communion of men we may not joyne in Spirituall communion that violateth or profaneth the holy things of God But a Church truly constituted may grow to the violation manifest profanation of al the Holy things of God Ergo to a Church truly constituted growne to polute violate the holy things of God we are not to joyne in communion Thus you se Mr. Ber. the evidence of this truth manifested vnto your conscience if the Lord vouchsafe you mercy to see the truth Like arguments may be drawne from many places of Scripture as from Mat. 13.33 compared with 1. Cor. 5.6 an argument may be framed thus As the whole lump the feast of the passeover was leavened with a litle leaveÌ„ so one open knowne sinne polluteth the visible Church the holy things therof for you must vnderstand that the Apostle doth not cal vnknowne sinne leaven but by leaven he vnderstandeth sinne openly knowne convinced vnrepented els ther could be no communion for men on earth But the Apostle our Saviour saith out of the law that a litle leaven leaveneth the whole lump feast of the passeover Therfor one sinne convinced vnrepented polluteth the visible church the holy things therof therevnto may no man joyne Againe from persons ceremonialy poluted so defiling the Sanctuary of the Lord as appeareth Nomb. 19.13.20 Hag. 2.14 I reason thus As persons ceremonialy poluted vnclensed entering into the Sanctuary of the Lord or medling with the holy flesh or pottage did polute the Sanctuary the holy flesh pottage the rest So the visible Church of the new Testament morally poluted impenitent in sin medling with the holy things
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
is a monstrous body like vnto the body of Nebuchadnetzars image Daniel 2.32 3. this monstrous body cannot be vnited to the true head Christ by his Spirit but the people of the assemblies being for the most part the seed of the Serpent must needes be knit together and vnto their head Antichrist by the Spirit of Antichrist the Spirit of Sathan All this I speak of their visible communion and of that politique body Ecclesiasticall which is called their Church For otherwise I doe acknowledg vnfeynedly and doe vndoubtedly beleeve that the Lord hath his thousands among them even a remnant according to the Election of grace Thus have I proved vnto you Mr. Bernard positively that the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England in their present constitution and walking are not the true churches of the primitive Apostolique institutioÌ„ but are in their outward visible politique subsistence the churches of Antichrist framed after the shape of the popish asseÌ„blies though much refined from the venemous drosse of popery now in the second place it remayneth that I deale anaskeuasticos with you answering those things which you alledg for your Churches to prove them true The great maine pillar of your building is this that seing your Church hath not a false head false matter false forme false properties therefore it is not a false but a true Church To these 4. particulars I answer distinctly First you have a false head in that you worship God in a fantastical Christ of your owne devising in that you shape him a Kingdom Preisthood Prophesy of your owne invention making him a mediator intercestor to al the profane people of the Land causing him to offer vp other worship worshippers to his Father then he hath taught in his new Testament purchased by his blood by this meanes dealing with Christ as somtyme the Iewes did putting a reed in his hand a crowne of thornes vppon his head kneeling downe vnto him as to a King bidding him prophecy yet smite him vppon the face spit at him presently crucify him For whereas you frame him a Kingdom Subjects Officers Lawes a government after your owne invention or rather out of the Propes decretals decrees hereby you seem to make him a King but indeed you Crucifye him againe and tread vnder foote the blood of the Testament which he hath purchased established at so high a rate Secondly your church hath a false matter For seing you do al this indignity to Christ the head of his true Church do you think that he wil entertaine you for the true matter of his Church the true subjects of his Kingdom the true members of his body the faithful Servants of his howse his chast true welbeloved Spowse wife either you must repent reforme your selves of al that vild indignity which you offer vnto Christ or els he wil never receave you for the matter of his Church the Subjects of his Kingdom the members of his body the Servants of his howse his espowsed wife For Christ wil not take a wife of fornication children of fornication Hos 1. he wil not have the Servants of Antichrist to be his howsehold Servants Mat. 6.24 nor wil he take the members of an harlot make them the members of Christ 1. Cor. 6.15 the Subjects of his vtter enemy Antichrist cannot possibly be the true faithful Subjects of Christs Kingdom Luk. 19.27 But in the pa. 111-116 of your book you make a distinction of matter as No matter True matter False matter they are no matter of a church say you which do not professe Christ as Iewes Turks Pagans They are true matter that professe Christ to be the Sonne of God the Sonne of Mary the only Saviour of man False matter say you is contrary to the true Further this true matter of the Church you say is good bad good matter you say as it seemeth to me is men walking vprightly in this profession of Christ bad matter are men walking wickedly this you illustrate by the matter of mariage for she may be a true wife though a bad one also by the similitude of subjects to a King who may be true though bad ones breaking his lawes a true tradesman though vnskilful in his professioÌ„ for your selves you say you are true matter of Christs church though not good matter bicause you professe Christ truly as is said before wel Mr. Ber. I yeeld the general distinction of matter but I deny the particular application of it to your selves I say you are false mater how therfor do you prove vnto vs that you are â—â—ue matter by 4. reasons wherof the first is for that you beleving this forsaid truth you beleeve the summe of the gospel I deny it vtterly the summe of the gospel is this that Iesus Christ the Sonne of God the Sonne of Mary is the only King Preist Prophet of his Church governing Sacrificing making intercession prophecying after that holy manner according to those rules which he hath prescribed in his Testament Now to beleeve truly concerning the person of Christ to beleeve falsely concerning his office as you doe is not to beleeve the whole gospel but only a peece of it So that this is the doctrine alone by which the Apostles did gather a people to make them a Church disciples of Christ the profession herof admitted men as true matter of a Church this only differenceth the true Church from Iewes Turkes Pagans Papists al other Antichristians Heretiques viz Iesus Christ God and man King Preist Prophet mediator of his owne Testament Therfor your second third fourth reasons fal flat to the ground the first being vnderminded as you see but ther is one thing that I wonder at that you should hold the Papists to be false matter of a Church for holding justification by workes therby denying Christs Preisthood hold your selves to be true matter of the Church denying Christs Kingdom in the true frame ministery worship government of his Church what is not Christs Kingdom as pretious as his Preisthood is it not as horrible impiety to deny Christs Kingdom the ordinances therof as to deny his Preisthood the vertue therof or is Christs Preisthood more fundamental then his Kingdom or justification by workes more pernitious then to deny Christ to raigne as King to refuse his regiment wel if the papists be false matter by your owne confession for the one you must needes also be false matter for the other For I am confident that Christs Kingdom is as pretious an office as his Preisthood even as the Kingdom in the old Testament was as excellent as the Preisthood now Mr. Bern. what is become of the Church seing your matter is false as you may perceave by this description what shall your similies of a bad wife a bad subject of a bad artificer help you
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
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