and without Law So mine opposite hath the Israelites own erroneous judgment to help him I have the Lords judgment his Prophets against both him and them He then referreth us to his former book where he shewed diverse respects how on their part they brake the covenant but the Lord brake it not on his part but called them to repentance c. To which book of his I gave answer and have in this also before shewed how he yieldeth me the mayn ground namely that the covenant of grace is conditional onely if men repent and beleeve Which seing the scripture witnesseth that Israel did not 2 King 17. 13. 14. 15. 16. they remayned still without the true God without teaching Priest and without Law til the Lord cast them out of the land and scattred them among the heathens which were without God and without Law before them And now what could their circumcision Passover sacrifices c availe them but seale up their further judgment who had rejected the true God but falsly reteyned and abused the signes of his favour to their condemnatió Touching Ier. 3. 8. GOD testifieth of adulterous Israel J put her away and gave her â— bill of divorce Ier. 3. 8. Then was she no longer his wife nor he her husband but the covenant of her spirituall mariage was disanulled even on Gods part also Yet the Israelites kept circumcision the signe and seale of his covenant but by usurpation not by right so it was in their abuse of it no true signe or sacrament unto them To this he answereth that the Prophet spâ—kâ— this in Josiahs dayes at which time Jsrael was caried captive into Assyria So this place is not to the point of the question of their state from Ieroboams time all the while they abode in the land Answ. First he takes it for granted that by the bill of divorce is meant their putting out of the land which though I should grant him as I will not deny it but leave it to further consideration yet it is to the question in hand touching their circumcision which they stil reteyned and were upon repentance received to the Passover without any new circumcising in the flesh Ezr. 6. 21. and he himself urgeth this very place of Ezr. 6. against the Anabaptists to prove they need not baptise againe the same by as good right doe I urge against him Yea and suppose that I erred in judging of their estate while they were in the land yet this their estate after is ynough to prove my cause namely that Circumcision and so baptisme usurped by false churches or by them that are no church as Israel now were no people need not be repeated Wheras he pleadeth if Rome be not the true church have not the true baptisme we are to be baptised againe Now that in Ezr. 6. was many yeres after Israels captivitie or divorce for it was after Iudahs captivitie and returne after 70. yeres When Gyrus to whom the Lord God of heaven had given all the kingdomes of the earth proclaimed the peoples returne throughout all his kingdome At what time as those that had been caried to Babylon returned Ezr. 2. to the number of 42. thowsand and moe so after in Darius dayes Ezr. 6. when the children of Israel which were come out of captivitie kept the Passover with joy for that the Lord had turned the hart of the King of Assyria unto them all such as had separated themselves unto them from the filthynes of the heathen of the land to seek the Lord God of Israel did eat with them Ezr. 6. 21. So they of Israel that had been captived in Assyria and returned to the Lord were received without any new circumcising as they were also before in Ezekias dayes 2 Chron. 30. Which example being in the dayes of Ezra and other prophets written in the scriptures for our instruction is a sufficient ground for us now to doe the like whom the Lord hath brought out of the Antichristian Babylon and Assyria that we may eat the Lords supper and injoy other his ordinances without any new baptising with water The bill of divorce he expoundeth to be the putting of them out of the land of Canaan as out of the Lords house or presence from Hos. 9. 3. 15. 17. 2 King 13. 23. A woman divorced is termed hee sayth one that is cast out or thrust forth out of her husbands house Ezek. 44. 22. Thus some think excommunicats to have a bill of divorce c. and then also they are not to be esteemed as put out of the covenant of the Lord but from his house and family til they repent So as upon their repentance they ought to be received againe into the Lords house without any new baptising of them againe which yet should be if they had been put out of the covenant of the Lord. For baptisme is the signe of our entrance thereinto c. Answ. By this it appeareth he takes the bill of divorce for no putting out of the covenant but out of the house out of the land of Canaan onely Which if it be so then the mariage of Israel was no taking into the covenant but into the land of Canaan And this agreeth well with the Anabaptists who hold that Israels covenant was not the covenant of grace but a carnal covenant promise of the land of Canaan It is knowen that the bill of divorce disannulleth the covenant of mariage as appeareth in the Law in Deut. 24. First by the name Câ—rithuth that is Cutting-off secondly by the libâ—â—ty thereupon following that she may marry another man thirdly by the just cause therof which is whordome Math. 19. 9. fourthly by the consequent therof that a man having so put away his wife for whordome he also may without danger of adulterie marie an other woman which cannot be unless the covenant of mariage be disanulled Mat. 19. 5. 9. Fiftly it is confirmed by the copie of the bill of divorse used in the common wealth of Israel as appeareth by their ancient records in these words Jn such a day of the week c J N. the son of N. have voluntarily c dismissed left and put away thee even thee N. the daughter of N. c. which hast been my wife heretofore but now J dismiss thee and leave thee and put thee away that thou mayst be free and have power over thyne own soule to goe away to be maried to any man whom thou wilt c. Sixtly it is testified by the Apostle writing to the Israelites the strangers scattred throughout Pontus Galatia c 1 Pet. 1. 1. and saying to them Which in time past were not a people but are now the people of God which had not obteyned mercie but now have obteyned mercie 1 Pet. 2. 10. Wherby it is evidently proved that their divorce was from the Lord and from being his people or partakers of his mercie in
Christ. Now wheras he gathereth from Ezek. 44. 22. that a divorced woman is called Gerusha that is Cast out or thrust forth which he expoundeth from her husbands house he might have seen better in the Law of Moses to which the Prophet there hath reference where the like commandement is given in Levit. 21. 14. which a litle before in vers 7. is explained by God himself Gerusha meishshah that is cast out or put away from her husband according to which Law and phrase Israel was divorced and cast out not onely from the Lords house and land but from the Lord himself Moreover he might have seen in Deut. 24. 1. the bill of divorce in the womans hand and her sending out of her husbands house to be distinct things one folowing upon an other Againe a woman may of her self goe out of her husbands house play the whore in an other mans house yet is she not therby divorced as for example Michal Davids wife was by her father Saul adulterously given to Phalti 1 Sam. 25. 44. so she was out of Davids house and had an other husband in whose house she remayned yet David that had not given her a divorce required her as his wife and she was taken by Abner from her second husband 2 Sam. 3. 14. 15. 16. Wherfore the bill of divorce or of cutting off is not from the house onely but disanulleth quite the covenant of mariage so as they cannot without a new mariage be reunited And the Lord as if he purposely would prevent all such vaine pleas for Israel useth in Ier. 3. 8. both the word put how away and the word divorce and this also in the forme plural thus and I gave unto her the bill of her divorces or of her cuttings-off as if he would teach us that whatsoever divorce or cutting off belonged to such an adulterous wife he had given unto her and so not from the land but from the Lord also she was divorced As yet further appeareth by Hos. 2. 2. plead with your Mother plead for she is not my wife neyther am I her husband but if he had onely put her out of the land he was her husband stil contrary to that which the Prophet teacheth And contrary to the Apostle who writing to the dispersed of Israel which had not obteyned mercie but now have obteyned mercie 1 Pet. 2. 10. hath reference to that Prophet who promised I wil have mercie on her that had not obteyned mercie and I wil say to them which were not my people Thou art my people and they shall say thou art my God Hos. 2. 23. His applying this divorce to excommunication is as strange Excommunicates he wil have to be as put out of the house and church but not out of the covenant Wheras excommunicates are by our Saviours doctrine as heathens and publicans Mat. 18. 17. and heathens are not in the covenant Againe by Pauls doctrine excommunication is the delivering to Satan 1 Cor. 5. 5. 1 Tim. 1. 20. what that meaneth we may learne by the contrary in Act. 26. 17. 18. I send thee to open their eyes and to turn them from darknes to light and from the power of Satan unto God that they may receive forgivenes of synns c. Wher the power of the Gospel is shewed in turning men from Satan to God wherupon they repenting and beleeving receive forgivenes of synns so on the contrary when men syn and joyn obstinacie with it and wil not repent they are by the power of Christ delivered from God unto Satan againe that is are of the world where Satan is prince and in that estate deprived of the promise of the forgivenes of their synns til they turne againe unto the Lord. Where he sayth upon their repentance they may and ought to be received it is true so ought the Turks and heathens for God as he never made absolute covenant but conditional so he never gave absolute bill of divorce but conditionall for who so repenteth and beleeveth in Christ shal be saved And wheras he sayth if they had been put out of the covenant of the Lord they should be baptised againe it is marvel how he could not see himself herein to be a very Anabaptist or that which is worse For if a man be baptised in the true church as was Simon Magus and fall from the faith of Christ to become a Iew or a Turk or a paynim and for his obstinacle blasphemie be justly excommunicated this man he thinketh doth continue stil in the covenant of grace for he is but cast out of the church or house not out of the covenant Who ever heard such doctrine that the covenant of grace should be continued to most wicked synners excommunicated for turning to Iudaisme or Paganisme Much lesser syn it were to err with the Anabaptists and baptise againe then to hold such an heresie If he hold it not but would grant that such are out of the covenant then he sayth they should be baptised againe when they returne and so he that hath so busily set a snare to catch us in Anabaptistrie is fallen himself into it or into a worse Now to deliver our soules from both these extremities we are to observe the difference between the reveiled covenant made with every particular visible church and the unreveiled estate which is in Gods secret counsel touching all the members of the catholik church the company of those that are predestinated unto life for many are out of the covenant reveiled which yet are Gods elect As the Ephesians whiles they were heathens dead in synns were to all mens judgment without Christ without God in the world and strangers from the covenants of promise Eph. 2. 1. 12. who after they were called to repentance and faith were no more strangers and forreyners but fellow-citizens with the Saincts and of the houshold of God Ephes. 2. 13. 19. in which estate they were in Gods counsel before being chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world Ephes. 1. 4. On the contrary many reprobates enter into the covenant of the church visible and as Simon Magus doe beleeve and are baptised Act. 8. 13. they beleeve for a while and in time of tentation fall away Luke 8. 13. Hereupon it cometh to pass that the church not knowing certainly who are elect and who not but judging every tree by the fruits that appeare receiveth into the covenant and baptiseth all that profess to repent and beleeve in Christ unfeynedly yet afterward seing them to break the covenat and forsake Christ and wil not be reclaymed casteth them out and delivereth them to Satan in which estate they cannot be sayd to continue in the covenant or in the state of salvatiō though the election of some of them standeth sure with God Who when he of his grace giveth them repentance they are restored againe to the church and then it appeareth that they fell for a time but are raysed againe of
God And because when they were first baptised they were not baptised into that particular church onely but are counted baptised into the catholike church and into Christ his death and burial Rom. 6. 3. 4. therfore though they renew the covenant yet their baptisme is not renewed for then it is manifested to the judgment of man that the seed of God though for the time it was not seen remayned in them and therfore their syn was not unto death 1 Joh. 3. 9. And this the Apostle teacheth us from God saying This is my covenant unto them when J shall take away their synns As concerning the Gospel they are enemies for your sake but as touching the election they are beloved for the fathers For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance Rom. 11. 27. 28. 29. Where we see that while mens synns are not by promise of God taken away they are not in his covenant as is confirmed also by Heb. 8. 10. 12. And in that Gods gifts and calling concerning his elect are without repentance they are to be restored into the covenant when they turne unto the Lord without any repeating of their outward baptisme Where he addeth this reason For baptisme is the signe of our entrance into the covenant and the Lords seale of his so receiving and admitting of us as circumcision was unto the Iewes Though it may in some sense be admitted which he sayth yet not as he intendeth and urgeth it For first Abraham was in the covenant of grace and justified by faith in Christ before he received circumcision Gen. 15. 6. Rom. 4. 3. And after that he received the signe of circumcision a seale of the righteousnes of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised Genes 17. Rom. 4. 10. 11. Secondly the children of Abraham were borne in the covenant and holy 1 Cor. 7. 14. Ezr. 9. 2. and borne unto the Lord Ezek. 16. 20. but were not circumcised til the eight day Levit. 12. and such infants as dyed before the eight day died not out of the covenāt not to speak of the women in Israel which were in the covenant without circumcision in the flesh Thirdly Moses sayd to men women and children ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God c. that thou shouldst enter or pass into covenant with the Lord thy God Dent. 29. 10. 11. 12. 13. Yet all which had been borne within 40. yeres before were uncircumcised and so continued till Moses was dead Ios. 5. 2. 7. By all which it appeareth that men may otherweise enter into the Lords covenant then by Circumcision or by baptisme now come in sted therof How much more then if they have been baptised before and fallen from the covenant may they enter into it againe without a new baptising with water His other tautologies I omitt being before answered But he thinks to have help from Jer. 3. 12. 13. 14. where God calleth Israel to returne unto him and he will not cause his anger to fall upon them and sayth Turne o backsliding children for I am maried unto you and I will take you one of a citie and two of a familie and will bring you to Sion Where amongst many observations these are the chief 1. That God dealt otherweise herein then a man doth with his wife whom he putteth away and she become another mans as he shewed in Jer. 3. 1. 2 That these words The Lord thy God are words of the covenant Genes 17. 7. 3ly That he sayth J am maried unto you which the best writers expound to be the covenant of grace 4. That he would take them one of a citie and two of a familie teaching that they should not stay one for an other though the body of the people should remaine obstinate yet if a few returned he would receive them which sheweth the stability and eternitie of his covenant as Gen. 17. 7. which he performeth if but a fewe be made partakers of that grace as Rom. 11. 1. 5. Answ. He erreth himself and causeth to erre in not observing the scope of this scripture nor the conditions propounded and in not distinguishing the times past present and to come nor the covenant of the Law and the covenant of grace The scope of this scripture Jer. 3. 6. c. is to shew 1. the transgressions of Israel and Iudah under the covenant of the Law 2. the punishments inflicted for the same 3. and a promise of another covenant of grace which God would make with them in Christ. Israel played the harlot Ier. 3. v. 6. God called her to repent but she repented not v. 7. then God put her away and gave her a bill of divorces v. 8. yet Iudah her sister feared not but played the harlot also and dissembled so that Israel justified her self more then Iudah v. 8. 9. 10. 11. Then God seing them bothe to be covenant breakers promiseth of his grace a new covenant to be made with them in Christ which he proclaimeth first to Israel if they repent acknowledge their synns and turne unto him v. 12. 13. and so speaketh of his mariage with them to weet with the remnant of them one of a citie and two of a family whom he would bring to Sion v. 14. unto whom he would give faithfull pastours v. 15. not as under the Law and rudiments therof for the most excellent signes therof even the Ark of the covenant of the Lord should not be remembred or visited any more v. 16. But Ierusalem the Lords throne the Christian Church should be for the Gentiles of all nations v. 17. and for the Iewes and for the Israelites walking togither v. 18. Then sheweth he the signes and fruites of his grace in them manifested by their calling upon God as their Father in Christ v. 19. their weeping and supplication for their former synns v. 20. 21. the Lords promise of mercie to them that returne and their acceptation of his mercie offred v. 22. shewed by their humble confession of their synns and just punishments v. 23. 24. 25. The same argument is in Jer. 31. both touching Israel Iudah where after many promises he speaketh of a new Covenant with Israel and Iudah not like the covenant made with their fathers when he brought them out of Egypt which they brake though the Lord was an husband unto them but a covenant that he would write his Law in their harts and forgive their iniquitie which Paul expoundeth to be the new Covenant or Testament now confirmed by Christ Heb. 8. 8. c. Now to apply these promises which concerned future times graces in Christ to that present time whē they were in their synns unrepentant unbeleeving unforgiven under the bill of divorce and put away from the Lord is quite to mysse of the mark which the prophet aymeth at For though he speaketh to Israel as a body or corporation which continueth through many ages yet not those persons then
a new Temple altar preisthood and signes differing from Christs as in deed he hath doen. And that idolatrous house erected for the worship of the true God not onely the Israelites but the Prophet Amos calleth the house that is the Temple of their god Am. 2. 8. as Paul calleth the house wherin Antichrist sitteth the temple of God 2 Thes. 2. yet this man blameth me for comparing that Temple with Ieroboams idol temples which Israel builded when he forgat his Maker Hos. 8. 14. how justly let men of judgment consider 2. His 2. exception is about Babylon and the Beast that I make them one with the Church of Rome and distinguish not Babylon from Sion This I have before cleared shewing that the church of Rome is the whore of Babylon Rev. 17. and I distinguish it from Sion which he confoundeth with Babylon being himself in that blame which he would impute unto me And to teach that God calleth us out of any civil state or goverment I have formerly proed to be erroneous and seditious contrary to the Apostles Rom. 13. 1 Pet. 2. 3. That Antichrists Apostasie and the church of Rome with him is much worse then Ieroboams and Israels with him I constantly affirme and let the synns of them both be compared and it wil soon appear Did Ieroboam pray unto creatures as the church of Rome doth to innumerable even all Saincts and Angels and some mere fictions Did Ieroboam hold any of those manifold blasphemous heresies now holden in the church of Rome Nay let the very Babylonians of old be taken and I wil undertake to prove that the church of Rome is not behinde them but in respect of the light of the Gospel revealed by Christ much worse 4. I grant that in Pauls time the church of Rome was set in the way of God and soon after fell into apostasie but where he chargeth me to say that the ordinances of God stil reteyned in that church are stollen he wrongeth me For I acknowledge not this church now to be that which was in Pauls time but a counterfeit arisen since a theif partner with Antichrist in robbing the church as the Babylonians robbed the Temple and abusing the ordinances therof to their perdition But then he objecteth Jf the church of Rome should repent c. they should not reteyn the baptisme and other ordinances of God which she hath but must part with them seing they are stollen goods And here he insulteth asking the Anabaptists how they can ever be thankfull ynough to me for thus pleading their cause c. Answ. If the Babylonians should have repented and joyned to the church of God at Ierusalem they there might have had an holy and lawful use of Gods vessels altars c which before they had stollen and abused so may these spirituall Babylonians have at this day if God give them grace to repent joyne unto Sion Here then the Anabaptists wil conne mine opposite but little thank for his gratulation 5. He calleth it my like errour and iniquitie to match baptisme and the other ordinances of God in the church of Rome with the feasts worship and sacrifices of the heathen who were without Christ and without God c. These assertions he sayth are miserable and Anabaptistical Answ. But why then doth he not refute them by the word of truth I could as easily call his assertions miserable and Papisticall but he would take that for no sound conviction And had he but related mine own words in that 85. page of my book the reader might have seen how little cause he had to exclaime â— I spake not generally of the heathens feasts worship and sacrifices as he would intimate to his reader but distinctly of those which had been ordeyned of God differing from other of their own devisings 2. I sayd the heathens kept Gods ordinance as well as Rome with their sacrifice of the Mass. He telleth his reader I match the baptisme c in Rome with the worship and sacrifices of the heathen Is this good dealing so to change my words But sundry such injuries I must beare And why may we think doth he in sted of the Lords supper now turned into a Romish mass put baptisme But because he thinketh that he hath colour to plead for one sacrament more then for an other In handling that point of their baptisme I instanced this other seale our Lords supper and an other ordinance of God Excommunication both which he passeth over yea every where when it cometh in his way he shunneth it throughout his book as in this place He knew well it was as a red hot yron that would burn his fingers But of it we shal speak more when we come to handle their baptisme 3. To his reason I answer the heathens were in deed without Christ and without God Eph. 2. and so are these Romish Antichristians or els the Apostle hath not given us a true rule to discerne Antichrist by that he denyeth both the Father and the Son 1 Joh. 2. 22. The hethens reteyned the knowledge of the true God in some mesure as their writings manifest and worshiped ignorantly the true God whom th'Apostles preached Act. 17. 23. so the Antichristians ignorantly worship the true God whom we preach and beleeve and as ignorantly by stocks and stones and prayers in an unknowen tongue like Parrats as did the heathens of old The hethens reteyned a knowledge of Christ the Redeemer figured in the sacrifices ordeyned of God so the Antichristians reteyn a knowledge of Christ in name and signified in the sacraments but as impiously doe they abuse them by holding they conferr grace ex opere operato by the work doen and other iniquities mixed with them as did the heathens and by beleeving and worshiping a Christ made of bread they surpass the heathens in ignorance and idolatrie Finally had mine opposite read Mr. Bezaes larger annotations on Eph. 2. as he read him on 2 Thes. 2. he might have seen the Antichristians very litle inferiour to the heathens without God even in Mr. Bezaes judgment which yet I suppose he would not have called miserable and Anabaptisticall as he doeth in me Touching the state of Israel in my discourse as he calleth it he confesseth I have many truthes which he also holdeth yet some sleightes errors c also mixed which he instanceth Seing he yeildeth the rest for truthes I referr the reader to the things there written which being observed he may the better judge of our controversie As first that we both agree The covenant between God man was alwayes conditional by the Law if they did his commandments they should live by them if they continued not in all things written in the Law to doe them they were cursed By the Gospel he that beleeveth in the Son of God hath everlasting life and he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life And all the figurative covenants that
made an Idol of Iachin 2 Chron. 3. 17. they should have repented of their idolatry but let the pillar stand And it is the great syn of the papists that they keep their Masse and their popish Christening and doe not put them away as they are idols and restore them to their ancient truth as they were Christs ordinances Obj. When Israel fell into defiction the Prophets that blamed their idolatries did then also reprove them for not observing religiously such of the ordinances of God as were still remaining among them Amos. 8. 5. with 2. 8. 11. 12. 5. 4. 5. Ier. 17. 21. 27. with 2. 20. 28. 7. c. Ezek. 20. 7. with v. 12. 13. So far were they from accounting Gods ordinances reteyned in apostasie to be idols and detestable things c. Answ. So we blame the papists and all hereticks for not observing religiously Gods ordinances whether reteyned among them or omitted by them Yet were not the prophets so farr from counting Gods ordinances abused by them detestable things as he would pretend Jncense was Gods ordinance yet in Esa. 1. 13. he sayth Incense is an abomination unto me Sacrifices were Gods ordinances yet in Esa. 66. 3. he sayth Hee that killeth an Oxe is as if hee slew a man hee that sacrificeth a Lamb as if he cut off a doggs neck hee that offreth an oblation as if he offred Swines blood he that burneth incense as if he blessed an Jdol For these and the like reprehensions the prophets were counted blasphemers and persecuted and killed by the Iewes yet were there not halfe so many corruptions in their sacrifices as are in baptisme and the Lords Supper now among the Antichristians though mine opposite counteth me a blasphemer for speaking of them but as they are And what would he say to the Passover and all the sacrifices that apostate Israel offred were they not detestable things through their abuse When for offring them as they did they were by Gods law to be cut off as murderers and sacrificers to Divels Lev. 17. 3. 4. 7. Deut. 32. 17. compared with 1. King 12. 28 33. 2. Chron. 11. 15. 13. 9. 15. 3. And was that Passover now a true sacrament and signe of Christ unto them and seale of the forgivenesse of their syns If not then neither was their circumcision for Gods people have not one sacrament true and another false unto them in the same synfull estate 4. Baptisme sayth he in the defection of Christian Churches is as circumcision was in the Apostasie of Jsrael But circumcision in that estate was not an idol or lying signe c. but the Lords ordinance a true signe had before their defection and still continuedin their apostasie as hath also come to pass in the Christian Church concerning baptisme Gen. 17. 7. 14. and Lev. 12. 2. 3. with 2. King 13. 23. 2. Chron. 30. Ier. 9. 26. Ezek. 23. 32. 24. 26. 29. 32. Also Mat. 28. 18. 19. Rom. 6. 3. 4. with 2. Thes. 2. 4. Rev. 11. 1. 2. 19. Answ. As baptisme is answerable to circumcision so is the Lords Supper to the Passover all of them Gods ordinances in themselves but abused by the idolarrous Israelites and by the Antichristians to their further judgement Yet nothing so farr abused in Israel as in the church of Rome Did ever the Israelites beleeve the paschal lamb to be the very naturall body of Christ and worship it for their maker Or did they ever add so many abominations to circumcision as Antichristians doe to baptisme or did they beleeve that the circumcising by the worke doen took away all their synns If they had then I would prove against all men that they had turned Gods sacraments into abominable idols If they did not then he hath made no equall comparison But take them as they were I deny their facraments to have been true signes of forgivenesse of sinns unto them in that their estate And where is his proof for this Hee citeth many Scriptures but not one that confirmeth this point in hand It is true they had the outward cutting of their foreskin and so had the Canaanites of Sichem Gen. 34. 24. but God instituted the signe of circumcision to be the seale of the righteousness of faith Rom. 4. 11. Now one of the Scriptures which he bringeth for proof sayth All the house of Jsrael were uncircumcised in the heart Ier. 9. 26. If they had true faith their hearts had been therby purified Act. 15. 9. and consequently circumcised But they were not circumcised in heart by faith in Christ therefore their circumcision could not seale up to them the righteousnes of faith and so was to them a lying signe through their abuse of it Paul sayth If thou be a transgressor of the Law thy circumcision is made uncircumcision Rom. 2. 25. They transgressed and continued in transgression though God called them to repentance by all his prophets yet they beleeved not in the Lord their God but rejected his statutes and his covenant that he made with their fathers and his testimonies which he testified against them and followed vanity and became vaine c. and left all the commandements of the Lord their God and made them molten images c. that the Lord removed them out of his sight 2. King 17. 13. 18. and he gave them a bill of divorce Jer. 3. 8. and yet they continued circumcision which could not be to them in their idolatrous and unrepentant estate a seale of the righteousnesse of saith or forgivenesse of their synns unlesse we will contradict all the Scriptures Deut. 29. 18. 21. Mat. 3. 7. 10. 1. Cor. 6. 9. 10. Gal. 5. 16. 21. Rom. 8. 1 8. Rev. 22. 15. 5. The covenant of God sayth he is an everlasting covenant which God continueth and respecteth even in the times of apostafie yea and when he chastiseth the transgression thereof c. Otherweise the ground and continuance of Gods covenant and of the seale thereof should depend on mans work and merit and not frecly and wholly on Gods grace and mercie Answ. The first is ambiguous and deceitfull Gods covenant is everlasting and continued in times of apostasie but unto whom Not to the unrepentant or unbeleeving that are hardened in their sinns as were the Israelites but to them that repent beleeve and turne to the Lord Levit. 26. 15. 40. 41. 42. 45. Deut. 29. 19. 20. Prev 1. 23. 33. Ezek. 3. 18. 21. 18. 10. 13. 21. 22. 23. 24. 26. 27. 28. The second is untrue for though God damneth unrepentant and unbeleeving synners as in justice he needs must because they are not in Christ yet doth not the covenant or seale depend on mans work or merit For it is Gods work grace through Christs merits onely that men doe repent beleeve and return unto him Act. 11. 18. Eph. 2. 4. 5. 8. 9. And there is no covenant between God and man but conditionall for without faith and holines no man shall
sayth the use of gold and silver for idols is forbidden very wel and is not the use of water bread and wine for idols forbidden also The use of gold to make the images of Cherubims was commanded Exod. 25. 18. but if the Gentiles had made themselves golden Cherubims they had been idols and syn to them for God commanded them not So water bread and wine are commanded the Christian church in her sacraments but to the Antichristian church God commandeth not these til they repent turne to Christ then and not before may they use them for holy signes Psalm 50. 16. 17. Prov. 21. 27. 9. 13. 17. 18. In this his tenth errour or exception is also answered which is about the very same thing but that he delyteth in multiplication 11 Touching the relation which is the mayn thing in a sacrament that it should seale up unto them the forgivenes of synns and as they blasphemously say quite take away synns and conferr grace so it is a vaine idol and nothing But the Sacraments in their relation are not onely seals but signes also Gen. 17. 11. Rom. 4. 11. c. Now by their assertion the baptisme aforesayd sheweth nothing at all to the mind and so is a vaine idol and nothing and that which it sheweth to the eye is but as the gold and silver of the heathens idols which if it were true then in deed there should be nothing of Gods ordinance nothing of a true sacrament c. And can they then blame the Anabaptists c. Answ. That there is no true relation in the popish baptisme is sufficiently proved the persons being Antichristians out of the covenant and without promise in that estate That they have the true material things of washing with water in the name of the Father c I have alwayes granted though these materials are abused by them to idolatrie as the Iewes abused their sheep and bullocks to abominable sacrifices That of the gentiles silver and gold is true also touching the matter which is Gods good creature further comparison I made not though he corrupted my words Object Whether think they that the baptisme received in the truest Churches doe seal up to hypocrites the forgivenes of their synns If they think not whether they wil say that the baptisme of those churches hath not the relation which is the mayn thing in a Sacrament Jt is generally held that Simon Magus who was baptised by Philip was an hypocrite and that his baptisme did not seal up unto him the forgivenes of his synns wil they therfore say that the baptisme ministred by the Euangelists had not the relation c Besides that thus the relation of the sacramentes should depend wholly upon man and not upon the Lord or his ordinance at all Answ. To passe over his forme of writing how he asketh questions when he should prove or convince I answer his question is from the matter in hand and so is deceitfull We speak of the outward visible church of Christ and ordinances belonging therto also of the visible Antichristian church and ordinances there abused He leaveth this and runneth to hypocrites which men can not discerne and whom therfore we must leave unto God among other secrets Deut. 29. 29. To reason from the one of thâ—se to the other would bring all confusion for hypocrites are lawfully admitted into the Church as was Iudas Simon Magus and many other if upon this ground open Antichristians idolaters unbeleevers may be admitted also then the church and the world shal be one confused Babel To his question I answer baptisme in true Churches administred as th' Apostles and Euangelists did â—ealeth up to all the forgivenes of their synns unto the judgment of man and they should greatly syn and profane Gods ordinance to baptise any other Simon Magus when he was baptised it is testified that he beleeved Act. 8. 13. so by the ordinance of Christ he was to be baptised Mat. 28. 19. neyther knew they him to be an hypocrite when he was baptised til afterward Thus are we bound by the rule of love to beleeve that all rightly baptised in the Christian church have the seale of forgivenes of synns and are buryed with Christ by baptisme and that by one spirit we are all baptised into one body Rom. 6. 3. 4. 1 Cor. 12. 13. And so mine opposite beleeving the church of Rome to be Christs true church and to have his true baptisme was bound also to beleeve them all to be of one body and one spirit with himself til they manifest to him the contrary which seing they have not doen by all their idolatries heresies impieties it is not to be thought that ever people which wil call themselves Christians could doe it As for us we know the covenant of Christ is not with Antichrist or his whoreish church though therin God hath many elect but we know that his covenant is with the true Christian church and all the members of it although therin be many hypocrites and reprobates both which are manifested in time by their fruits We walk by the rules reveiled to us of God secret things are not for us to judge of until they be manifested Where he concludeth that thus the relation of the sacraments should depend wholly upon man and not upon the Lord at all it is a calumniation without all colour of proof The relation is by mutual consent the Lord offring his son Christ for salvation to all repentant beleeving synners we by grace having obteyned faith doe therby apprehend Christ for our saviour as in the word so in the sacraments His next demaund about our selves and our baptisme had in Rome is a thing againe and agayn answered without running into Anabaptistrie whither he would so sayn drive us 12. These men erre not a litle when they say that popish baptisme hath not the relation of a sacrament to them but is a vaine idol and nothing because they say of it that it quite taketh away synns Shall mens erroneous sayings and opinions make a nullity of Gods ordinances signes and seales Can not God be true though they be lyars c. Answ. Here is an other repetition of that which he forealleged in his 6. reason or errour which I there refuted Mens erroneous sayings opinions and doings doe disanull to themselves all Gods promises signes and seals which are onely conditionall if men repent beleeve and obey which grace God giveth to all that are Christs And if men beleeve not nor obey and so be damned their damnation impeacheth not Gods truth at all but confirmeth it for he hath sayd of such that they shal be damned Mar. 16. 16. Joh. 3. 36. Obj. Besides the relation in a sacrament there is also to be regarded the commandment of God who hath appointed it to be observed in the church As Christ who was without syn c yet in obedience to the Law was circumcised and baptised c. Therfore it
should be syn in the church of Rome if they should reject baptisme and not keep it Which doth plainly evince that it is not a vaine idol and nothing for then it were not syn but their dutie to cast it away and not to keep it at all but that it is the Lords ordinance c. Answ. The first is true for without the word and commandment of God it could be no seale of his covenant or have any relation at all therto The second is a deceytful reason concluding from the holy commandment of God to the unholy keeping of it in Rome It should be syn in them to reject baptisme the Lords supper professedly it is syn in them to keep them as they doe profanely It were better for a man never to be baptised or eat the Lords supper all his life then to communicate with the church of Rome in eyther of these as they profane them for we may not doe evil that good may come therof Rom. 3. 8. So his plaine eviction that it is not a vaine idol in their abuse of it is but a plaine fallacie let him apply it to the other Sacrament and it wil appear Antichrist hath transformed the Lords supper into an abominable massing sacrifice and therin worshipeth a wafer cake for his maker and redemer this he durst not deny to be a notorious idol But his reason if it be good wil prove it no idol thus It should be syn in the church of Rome if they should reject the Lords supper and not keep it Which doth plainly evince that the Lords supper in Rome though changed by them into a wicked Mass is not an idol for then it were not syn but their duty to reject it The refutation herof is this Rome and all nations syn that doe not beleeve aright in Christ and keep all his ordinances The more that they openly renounce Christ or any of his ordinances the more they shal adde unto their syn Yet in that they keep them not aright but have changed the truth of God into a lye and his holy ordinances into idols they are also great synners for which if God give them not repentance they are under wrath and damnation 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. Of this point I have spoken before in answer to his 6. reason for the church of Rome His 13. and last errour is but a repetition of former matters about the brazen serpent Gods ordinances and creatures considered in themselves c to which I have before answered shewing that it helpeth the Papists no more to clear them of idolatry herein then the heathens of old who made idols of creatures and ordinances which in their own nature and first institution were good and holy And hitherto of his errours wrongfully imputed unto us To these by his figure of repetition and multiplication he hath added from the former grounds Contradictions Abuse of scriptures Uaine distinctions and Anabaptistical assertions all which being but the same things turned and repeated and by me before cleared I count it needless labour to make the same answers againe to his empty calumniations Of Circumcision in Israel THe reason why we repeat not the outward work of baptising with water againe such as have been baptised in false churches is the example of the Israelites who after their falling from God and from the Church and after the Lord had given them the bill of divorce when they repented and turned to the Lord were admitted to the Passover without any new cutting or circumcising in the flesh 2 Chron. 30. Ezr. 6. And because I denyed them in such estate to have true circumcision which is the signe and seale of the righteousnes of faith Rom. 4. 11. mine opposite as his manner is chargeth me with very erronious and ungodly assertions and maketh a longsome discourse of the state of Israel and of words and phrases used concerning them And unto ten lines of mine in Animadv pag. 70. he giveth an answer of above 30. pages in his Christian plea pag. 65. to pag. 96. to blinde his reader with many words I wil briefly shew the insufficiencie of his answers And first that Israel after they departed from the Lord his Temple altars sacrificers and church and made new Temples altars sacrificers signes and a new church of their own divising that Israel I say from that time was not a true church I have before shewed my reasons in handling the state of the church of Rome Mine opposites first colourable reason is from such scriptures as stil name them the Lords people and the Lord to be their God and to remember the covenant of their fathers Abraham c 2 King 9. 6. c. and 13. 22. 23. Answ. I have heretofore answered that this Argument They are called the Lords people therfore they are his true church is not to be granted For 1. Things are named in scripture sometimes as they have been before though they be not so still as Abigail is called the wife of Nabal though he were then dead and she maried to David 1 Sam. 30. 5. Solomon was begotten of Uriahs wife wheras she was then Davids Mat. 1. 6. Jesus was in the house of Simon the Leper Mat. 26. 6. so named because he had been a Leper c. 2. They were so called in respect of their profession that they would be so estemed and named though in deed they were without the true God 2 Chron. 15. 3. as O thou that art named the house of Jakob c. Mic. 2. 7. 8. Thirdly in respect of their calling unto him and his covenant afterward though for the present they were none of his as Jn that day J wil marie thee Jsrael unto me for ever c. Hos. 2. 18. 19. 20. 23. Thus the Gentiles were called Christs sheep because they should after be brought into his fold Ioh. 10. 16. and God had much people in Corinth an heathenish citie Act. 18. 10. 1 Cor. 12. 2. And the Jewes to this day are Gods people and beloved not for their present state which is cursed but for the promise that they shal hereafter be graffed againe into Christ Rom. 11. 11. 20. 23. 25. 26. 9. 4. with Esa. 59. 20. 21. Ezek. 34. 23. 30. Hos. 3. 5. Fourthly in comparison with the Philistines and other heathens they were called the people of the Lord because they never renounced their God in name and professedly but pretended the contrary Fiftly that God did not presently cast them off in respect of calling them to repentance and of their dwelling in the land or as the scripture sayth in 2 King 14. 27. of putting out the name of Israel from under heaven For his covenant was to punish them by degrees Levit. 26. 16. 18. 21. 24. 28. 33. and at last if they repented not to scatter them among the heathens til their uncircumcised harts should be humbled and they rued their former syn and then
out of it had the bill of divorce were not the people or wife of the Lord their circumcision could be no seale from God unto them of forgivenes of synns eternal life in that estate That which after he prosequuteth touching the heathens state I have answered before And as for his other exceptions or repetitions touching Israel they are such as are before answered and it is not a thing so necessarie to be insisted upon touching their estate before they were cast out of the land seing their circumcisiō in the ages folowing when th'Apostle testifieth they were not a people or partakers of Gods mercie 1. Pet. 2. and when all doe acknowledge they had the bill of divorce Ier. 3. was not repeated when they came againe to the Lord Ezr. 6. 21. Here therfore I will end and leave the things that have been controverted to the discreet censure of the judicious reader THat it may appeare how it is no new thing that we teach touching the Sacraments and the falshood of them in the church of Rome I will here annex a few things out of the Theses of Zach. Ursinus Doctor of Theologie in Heidelberg which are added at the end of his Catechisme set forth by D. Pareus among the Miscellanea Catechetica Of the Sacraments Theses publickly disputed at Heidelberg the 23. of August anno 1567. 1. God from the beginning hath adjoyned signes or rites unto the promise of grace which in the Church are usually named Sacraments 2. And Sacraments are signes of the eternal covenant between God and beleevers that is to say they are rites commanded of God unto the church and added unto the promise of grace that by them as by visible and sure testimonies God may signifie and testifie that unto them that use these symbols in true faith he communicateth Christ and all his benefits according to the promise of the gospel and so may confirme in them the confidence of the promise and that the church may by these visible notes be discerned from all other sects c. Gen. 17. 11. Exod. 20. 10. 31. 14. Ezek. 20. 12. Deut. 30 6. Col. 2. 2. 11 1 Cor. 5. 7. Ioh. ◠19. Heb. 8. 9. 10. Mar. 16. 16. c. 3. Rites which are not commanded of God or not instituted to this end for to be signes of the promises are no Sacraments 8. The lawfull use of the sacraments is when they that are converted to the Lord doe keep those rites which God cōmanded to those ends for which they were instituted sacraments of God Proof That onely is the lawful use which agreeth with the divine institution And the institution comprehendeth these circumstances of persons rites and ends If these therefore be violated the signes are abused Esai 1. Jer. 7. Psal. 50. 9. In this use the things signified are alwayes received togither with the signes Mark 16. 16. 10. But out of the use instituted of God which is not without conversion unto him the ceremonies have no respect of a sacrament neyther are Gods benefits signified by them received with the signes Proof The signes of the covenant confirme nothing to them which keep not the covenant or which substitute other things in their place or which referr them to another end But Sacraments are signes of the covenant wherby God bindeth himself to give us forgivenes of synns and life eternal freely for Christs sake and bindeth us to shew forth faith new obedience Therfore they confirme not Gods grace to those which use them without faith and repentance or that use other rites or to an other end then God hath instituted Moreover it is superstitious and idolatrous to attribute the testimonie of Gods grace eyther to the outward work without the promise or to a work divised of men Therfore this abuse of the Sacramentes hath not Gods grace joyned with it neyther confirmeth it to any as it is sayd in Rom. 2. 25. Circumcision profiteth if thou keep the Law but if thou be a transgressor of the Law thy circumcision is made uncircumcision 11. The godly doe receive the signes unto salvation the wicked unto condemnation but the things signified can onely the godly receive unto salvation 1 Pet. 3. 21. 1 Cor. 10. 16. Esa. 66. 3. 1 Cor. 11. 17. 12. Yet in the elect though they have received the sacrament unworthily the fruit foloweth at length after they are converted Proof The promise and the signes of the promise which hath the condition of faith added to it are confirmed whensoever the condition is performed And such is the promise which is signified and confirmed by the sacraments Therfore whether faith which beleeveth the promise and signes cometh eyther in the use or after the use the promise and things signified are received Ezek. 16. 69. Objections against the Theses of the Sacraments and the solutions of them by D. Zach. Vrsinus in publik disputation Anno. 1567. Object 4. against part of the tenth position The papists sacraments are doen without regeneration And yet they are Sacraments Therfore they may be without mens conversion to God Answ. The second proposition may be denyed touching them that are not converted For to such the sacraments are no sacraments that is signes of grace especially seing they turne them into mere idols But they are made sacraments unto them that is signes of grace when the Papists are converted And if they never be converted they never become sacraments unto them Instance to an absurditie They that deprave the wordes and the forme of the institution they overthrow the substance of baptisme The Papists doe the first therfore also the latter Wherupon their baptisme is no baptisme and we which were baptised in the papacie must be baptised againe Answ. For the first they doe overthrow the substance of baptisme namely to themselves and to those which 〈◊〉 unto 〈◊〉 and are not converted but not unto those which acknovvledging their errours are converted and doe joyne themselves unto the Church of Christ. Object 6. against the twelft position That which brings condemnation brings no fruit The unworthy usurpation of the sacrament brings condemnation by the 11 position Therefore it brings no fruit Answ. I grant all before conversion but after it the unworthy usurpation becometh worthy Jnstance Condemnation foloweth not conversion The fruit of the sacrament received unworthily is condemnation by position 11. Therfore the fruit foloweth not those that are converted Answ. We grant it touching condemnation But we speak here of the fruit of the sacrament unworthily received which before conversion vvas condemnation because of the unworthy receiving but after conversion it is changed into a good and saving fruit Hitherto Ursinus Whereunto I will adde this saying of Mr. Calvin in his 111. Sermon upon Deuteronomie on Deut. 18. 22. And what sayth he is to be sayd of their sacraments Jt is evident that they be mere witcheries in the Popedome so as Jesus Christ is driven a great way off by them and men make
God and in time were rejected of God some given over to Mohometisme some to poperie Yet God hath preserved his litle Church fled into the wildernesse Rev. 12. and saved his elect also in false Churches I compare these not with the Gentiles at this day but with the Gentiles before Christs comming whiles sacrificing was lawfull as I am taught of God Rev. 11. and 17. and 18. with the old Babylonians Aegyptians In those times Tyrus was an harlot Esa. 23. 16. Niniveh was an harlot Nahum 3. 4. and so other nations then by like equitie were harlots and Rome likewise at this day Who knoweth not that a woman which is divorced from her husband as Israel was from God for whordome and followeth that trade still may still be called a harlot I deny not but in a large kind of speech Rome at this day may be sayd to have been once maried to Christ in respect of the Christian church that once was there but so all the Gentiles were in respect of the covenant with Noe. Neither doubt I to say that the Iewes even now do goe a whoring from their God for Moses and the prophets so speake of them yet actually there is now no covenant between God and them The out-cries which he maketh unto the Anabaptists to hearken and to the Reformed Churches to hang downe their heads c. I omit as the gall of bitternes which ran too fast out of his pen. To prove them the same Church which was in Pauls time hee citeth Moses prophesies of Israel Deut. 32. which were the same people their seed wheras he should rather have looked on 2. King 17. 24. 34. and compared these with the men of Babylon Cuthah c. that came and possessed the Lords land and received some part of Israels religion with their owne old idolatrie for so I shewed the present estate of this Popish church And the example of other churches that were in Corinth Ephesus looked upon at this day will confirme it About my answer for the godly fathers of the Iewes and wicked fathers of these Antichristians which the holy Ghost maketh to be Gentiles Sodomites Egyptians c. Rev. 11. 2. 8. 18. he sayth If J mean this of the citie of Rome J speak not to the point if of the church of Rome then he objecteth Ezek. 16. 3. thy father was an Amorite c. Answ. His distinction between the citie and church of Rome serveth him in no sted It was true in Pauls time when the citie was heathen and a Christian church in it But now the city is Christian Rome the Empire is an ecclesiastical empire as I shewed before from Mr. Iunius own grant The Amorites were not those fathers for whose sake the Iewes are loved but Abraham Isaak and lakob out of whose loynes the Iewes naturally came But this church of Rome now is not the child of that primitive church eyther in nature or in grace In place she succedeth them and so the Mahometists in place succeed other Christian churches planted by th Apostles And in pretence she is the same Christian church but as Satan in pretence is an Angel of light But the strangers sayth he that came to Jsrael in times of sinceritie or of apostasie were of the church of Jsrael as well as the Iewes though not of the same natural posteritie 2 Chron. 15. 9. 30. 25. 5. 6. 7. Lev. 16. 29. Num. 9. 14. Answ. But the strangers that wasted Israel and dwelt by force in their land though they were taught how they should fear the Lord by a Priest yet were not that church of whom Moses wrote 2 King 17. 24. 27. 28. So the Gothes Vandals Saracens c which overcame Italie Spaine c and dwelt there though the priest of Rome taught them his religion are not the ancient church of whom Paul wrote Besides he hath streyned things too farr for diverse Christians are at this day apostate and become Iewes can we say of them as Paul doth of the natural Iewes As touching the election they are beloved for the Fathers Rom. 11. 28. I understand that speech of the Iewish nation in generall not of particulars which perish through unbeleef as also of the natural Iewes who refused the gospel for the time and stil doe and not to concerne their proselytes which they beget to their apostasie For there is a special regard to the Iewes because they were natural branches though now broken off as th'Apostle sheweth Rom. 11. 21 24. Obj. The many changes of the Romane state and troubles by the Gothes Uandals c these specially concerne the Romane state touching the citie Empire c wheras our question is onely of the church of Rome Answ. As the state of the Empire is changed yet in some respect is the same for the Beast was and is not and yet is Rev. 17. 18. so is the church and ministerie therof it was and is not and yet is A man may speak to the Bishop of Rome now as Ezekiel did to the heathen king of Tyre Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God c. Ezek. 28. 13. to weet in his predecessor Huram which had been a proselyte in the church of Israel 2 Chron. 2. as the Hebrewes R. D. Kimchi Sol. Iarchi upon Ezek. 28. and some Christian writers doe expound it So I may say to the Pope Thou hast been a Christian Bishop a starr in Christs right hand because such was the Bishop of Rome in Paules time But mine opposite himself holdeth the Pope and his hierarchie now to be the Man of syn the son of perdition and thought it most strange in me that I should ask when ever Christ was maried to that Beast Now it is as strange that hee pleadeth for the whore of Babylon the Antichristian church He would exclude the hierarchie or ministerie because of their apostasie I also for the same doe exclude the church for the preists and people of Rome are of one faith and religion if the one be cut off from Christ so is the other It can not be denyed but they all have the mark of the Beast upon them for to take Mr. Iunius own exposition The marke of the beast sayth he is their Chrisme by which in their sacrament of Confirmation they â—oke servile unto themselves the persons and doings of men c. and as for the signe left by Christ of which Chap. 7. 3. and the holy sacrament of Baptisme they make void c. Obj. He cannot shew that ever the church of Rome ceased to be since it was first planted but it hath continued stil eyther in sinceritie or apostasie even to this day Nor can he shew that the Lord hath yet put them out of his covenant or given thm a bill of divorse or that they have lest off to baptise in his name Answ. Neyther can he shew that the Ministerie ever ceased in that church but hath
stil continued eyther in synceritie or apostasie or that the Lord put the ministers out of his covenant or that they have left off to baptise in Christs name Yet he now excludeth the ministers from being Christs he makes them Antichrist the Beast the Man of sin the son of perdition c. and is offended that I should speak of their mariage with Christ. And Mr. Iunius maketh them accidents ulcers and no members of the body as we have seen 2. Neither can he shew that the churches of the Gentiles ceased to be after their first planting Gen. 9. but continued still either in sincerity or apostasie even till the Apostles time and sacrificed still unto God and in his name Let him shew when old Babylon was divorced from God and it wil as soon appeare that this new Babylon is divorced also Object The Papists plead that Rome standeth not where it did on the seven hills and the Pope sits on the other side the river on the hil Uaticâ—ne c. Jn like sort is the answer for the church of Rome and the changes in religion and state c. Answ. Is this a fit comparison the change of place and the change of religion If it be then as a man going from England to India is the same man still so if hee goe from the religion in England to the religion of the Indians which is Paganisme he is of the same religion that he was still Or to keep neerer the poynt in hand the Bishop of Rome at this day notwithstanding al changes of his faith and state since the Apostles time is a true Christian Bishop still then he is not Antichrist the Man of syn spoken of in 2. Thess. 2. as mine opposite sayth he is Object Many of those people that made the invasions became Christians themselves and so the Church was increased Not to speak how the very catalogue of the Bishops of the Church of Rome giveth evidence against him Or wil he say that though there were Bishops of that Church yet there was not a church whereof they were Bishops Answ. So many of the Babylonians Cuthims c. that invaded Israel were taught the manner of the God of Israel and feared the Lord and had Priests of Israel which sacrificed for them 2 King 17. â—4 25. 27. 32. 33. But what sayth the Scripture Every one that is joyned to Babylon shal fall by the sword their children also shal be dashed to peeces c. Esa. 13. 15. 16. And God will cut off from Babylon name and remnant son and nephew Esa. 14. 22. The catalogue of Bishops if it will doe him any pleasure serveth for the Pope the Man of syn the great Antichrist to prove him a true Christian Bishop successor of Peter whom they falsely put the first in their catalogue Now he will not have the Hierarchy to be the church noâ— of the Church but accidents ulcers gangrenes and I know not how vile but the people the church that turned from paganisme to the Pope or fell with him from Christianity to popery they are the Temple of God the Church of Christ in the covenant of grace How great partialitie is this in men to magnifie the people for their faith and religion and to despise the Bishops and ministers that are the chiefe teachers and maintainers of the same faith religion making them accidents hang-bies scabs ulcers gangrenes and all that bad is So his questions of the time when the Church ceased are answered with the like when the ministery ceased Let the yeare be named when the true Christian ministery was abolished out of the church of Rome and Antichrist the Man of syn come in the place I will answer in the same year the people that were fallen with him to the same idolatries heresies and to worship him as God in the Temple of God ceased to bee the true Christian Church and became a synagogue of Antichrist Object His esteeming of the state of the church of Rome in apostasie to be but as the state of the Isâ—â—â—elites Edomites and as Adonisedek with his Amorites and Jebusites in Jerusalem is disproved and contradicted by himselfe when he maketh them like Jsrael and Iudah in their apostasie Animadv p. 84. Answ. It is not contradicted by my selfe neither can it be disproved by any For my selfe my words in the place which hee quoteth are these She the Church of Rome fell into apostasie soon after Pauls time for then the mystery of iniquity did work many Antichrists were gone out whiles the Apostles lived For which their apostasie like Jsraels when they would not repent as Christ threatned some that were new fallen into such sins the candlestick the Church was removed the Church of Rome as Paul forewarned for unbelief was cut off among others and for a punishment of their apostasie God delivered the East Churches into the hands of Mahomet and the West Churches into the hands of that false horned Beast Antichrist even as Israel and Judah of old for their like syns were delivered into the hands of the Assyrians and Babylonians By which I shew that as the Christians that fell to Mahometisme ceased to be Gods true Churches so they likewise that fell to Antichristianisme He could not deny the first nor disprove the latter for Paul sayth of the Antichristians God shal send them strong delusion that they should beleeve a lie that they all might be damned c. â— Thess. 2. 11. 12. For the Ismaelites and Edomites they were Abrahams naturall seed so can no man prove the Church of Rome at this day or any one in it to be the naturall seed of the Christians of Rome in Pauls time The Ismaelites and Edomites were fallen from Abrahams faith the Church of Rome at this day is much more fallen from the Apostles faith taught to the church of Rome by him Whosoever will bring them both to the triall it will soon appeare but this triall mine opposite every where shunneth Melchisedek was king of Ierusalem in Abrahams time Gen. 14. and then none doubteth but there was a true church Adonisedek was king of Ierusalem in Iosuahs time Ios. 10. both kings both of the same citie by name the one King of justice the other Lord of justice as pretending to be the successor of Melchisedek and not more departed from his faith then the Pope is from Pauls Obj. Mr. Junius knew that there dwel Jewes in Rome who are not of the Church and that the natural posterity of the Saints may become Jewes Turkes Pagans and sayth the church may at length cease to be a church when God ceaseth to call it back and takes away the evidence of their holy mariage that is the holy Scripture out of the hand of the adulteresse Answ. So Mr. Iunius knew that there dwelt Gentiles in Israel who were not of the Church Deut. 14. 2â— But it is well that neither dwelling in the place nor being of