A DEFENCE OF THE CHVRCHES AND MINISTERY OF ENGLANDE Written in two Treatises against the Reasons and Obiections of Maister FRANCIS IOHNSON and others of the separation commonly called BROWNISTS Published especially for the benefitt of those in these partes of the lowe Countries MIDDELBVRGH By Richard Schilders Printer to the States of Zealand 1599. THE PVBLISHER TO THE CHRISTIAN READER ABout Three Yeeres since Maister Iacob hauing some speach with certen of the separation before mentioned concerning their peremptory vtter separation frō the Churches of England was requested by them briefly to sétt down in wryting his Reason for defence of the said Churches And they would either yeild vnto his proofes or procure an answer vnto the same Wherevpon the Argument following this Preface was set downe in wryting by Maister Iacob which the said parties did send to Maister Fr. Iohnson being then prisoner in the Clinke in Southwark who made an answer vnto the same conteyning 3. Exceptions and 9. Reasons in denyall of the Assumption Wherevnto Maister Iacob Replyed Afterward Maister Iohnson defended his said Exceptions and Reasons And finally Maister Iacob Replyed againe As by the particulars themselues appeareth Now hauing weighed and considered with my selfe the great ignorance and errors wherewith those of the separation aforesaid are and haue bene lately carried awaye namely to affirme That all that stande members of the Churches of Englande are no true Christians nor in state of saluation And such like most vngodly sentences which would grieue any Christian soule once to thinke on much more to publish to the view of the world And weighing likewise withall the greate weakenes of manie Christians among vs who through want of experience or due consideration of things as they are may easelie by their delusions be drawne away into those errors with them I haue therefore Aswell in hope of reclaiming of the said parties from their said extremities which now I iudge the most of them for want of meanes see not As also for the staying of others from running into the same grieuous excesse with them now published this discourse to the view of the world which hath line buryed in the hands of some few Many being desirous of it who by reason of the largnes in wryting out of the same could not obteyne it Wherevnto I am so much the rather induced For that the Reasons herein by Maister Iacob alleadged haue by Gods blessing reclaymed many from their former errors and satisfied others who haue bene doubtfull and subiect to fall into the same In the examining of which Discourse I shall desire the Reader to obserue a few notes for his better proffiting in the same 1. And First among the rest to note this as a token of the strange and obstinate dealing of Maister Iohnson and others of them viz. That heretofore vntill such time as the Argument hereafter mentioned was framed aganst them they neuer denyed That the doctrine and profession of the Churches of England was sufficient to make those that beleeued and obeyed them to be true Christians and in state of saluation But alwayes held professed and acknowledged the contrarie As by the publike confessions of themselues namely Maister Barrow Maister Penry and Maister Iohnson himselfe in this discourse mentioned in Pag. 81. appeareth But nowe they seing That if they should acknowledge the said Doctrines and profession to be sufficient to saluation That then this conclusion would of necessitie follow that those that hold and practize thē are a true * Which yet Maister Penry confessed see Pag. 82. Church And so their own former iudgements should be crossed Rather I say then they would be drawne to that They nowe stick not to deny their owne confessions which they thinke to be the saifest way for them and like vnnaturall children so vehemently hate contemne and dispise their mother who bare them nourished and brought them vp from whose brests they sucked that sweete milke of the meanes of euerlasting life and saluation if euer they had any tast of it at all Beeing notwithstanding not abashed nowe in a desperate manner in the hardnes of their heart to affirne * Which appeareth generally by denying the Assumption of Ma. Iacobs particularly in these pages 13. 62. 63. 64. That none by the doctrine of the Churches of England can be a true Christian or saued But that they all worship God in vaine Are abolished from Christ Are Babilonians Idolaters departers from the faith worse then Infidels And such like most vnchristian sentences making them all one with the Church of Rome c. Which impious affirmations would cause any Christian heart to lament and bleed for grief Whose vnchristian sentences and false and deceiptfull Reasons the very naming whereof were sufficient to refute them are most plainly taken awaye and cleane ouerthrowne by these brief Replies of Maister Iacob vnto euery of them vnto which I referre yow Onely this I adde with all which I would desire might be noted That if they continew in their former confessions That the doctrines and profession of the Churches of England are sufficient to saluation As they ought it being the very truth Then are they all in a most grieuous schisme in so peremptorily condempning and separating from such true Christians and Churches And if they deny it as they haue begonne to doe Then doe they runne headlong into an intollerable sinne and extremitie without all warrant of Gods word And besides giue iust occasion to be called fearfull * Which name they vniustly giue to those that iustly for this their extremity forsake their fellowship Apostates in so wholy falling and that aduisedly for aduantage sake as it seemeth plainely to appeare from so notable a truth which before they imbraced and acknowledged 2 Secondly I would desier the Reader not to be carried away with the multitude of corruptions from the Question or matter in hand viz. Whether the good doctrines of the Churches of England are sufficient to saluation in them that in simplicitie of heart beleeue and imbrace them notwithstanding the multitude of errors and corruptions which Maister Iohnson repeateth to the contrarie But to haue an especiall regard vnto the same Which is the maine poinct that hath and doeth altogeather deceiue them viz. To haue an eye to the corruptions in the Ministerie worship and gouernement of the Churches of England But neuer to looke vnto the nature and force of them whether simply of their owne nature they ouerthrow faith and Christianitie or whether they be held of obstinacy and a conuicted conscience or not Therefore I pray you marke and examine the errors which they reckon vp and I desire the same also of them for whose good especially I published this Treatise And after due consideration see if those errors are simplie of that nature which before we haue noted If they be not as Maister Iohnson nor all the men in the world shall euer be able to proue they are Then doe
out of the pure word They knew that euery visible Church might did erre in somewhat Onely it meaneth that a visible Church might not erre in any poinct that of necessitie is requisite as their wordes expresse It resteth then that you shew that the pure word is not preached in our assemblies by law sufficiently to saluation which yet you doe not nor can doe Therefore you say nothing For I for my part know well that our Churches faile from the pure word in sundrie lesser points which though they be errours yet are they not Fundamentall neither doe they in their ovvne nature abolish from Christ Thirdlie the Article hath according to Christes ordinance But you saye that we preach in strange and false functions such as are not Christes ordinances This is false too Our ordinarie Preachers are true Pastours as touching the substance of Pastorall calling as I haue often aunswered you albeit they haue a wrong ordination from the Prelacie See my defence of this poinct as also of that concerning the confusion of our people in my other writing long since deliuered to you touching the †In my aunswer to the 1. reason of that treatise following in the end of this booke comparing of the condition of a Ministerie with Mariadge Now this ordinance of Christ to haue a true Pastor to a faithfull people is sufficient for the being of a true Church though not for the perfection of it Contrarie to the which you haue nothing but words Lastlie the Article requireth due administration of Sacraments But our practize say you herein is not due or intier because there concurre diuers corruptions withall as stinted prayers exhortations Epistles Gospels Crossing in Baptisme c. I answere all these simplie of them selues doe not abolishe our Sacraments If you thinke they doe say so and you shal be refuted If nay Then this very Article signifieth so much That corruptions and faultes might be in the Sacraments but nothing amisse that of necessitie is requisite Novve all these 4. poinctes I haue omitted say you True in wordes I haue but in sence I expresse them all and euery one when for breuities sake I comprehended all in this generall clause of this Article according to all that is of necessitie requisite How say you haue I not herein conteyned and signified all these your exceptions and that accordinge to the meaning of the Article If I haue as it is most true then doe you vnconscionablie abuse me in saying I pretended to repeate our description in the Article and yet leaue out diuers perticulars of speciall moment And let this therefore be first obserued I haue omitted nothing materiall in that Article Yea let this be here noted that in all this you haue moste fondlie abused your penne and tounge Yet will you still demaund how our practise agreeth with our profession in that 19. Article Still I answer you with that similitude of a foolish and importinate Tēnaunt against his Landlord If I haue held possession and my aunestors before my time out of minde indeed the King laying claime to it hee may call for my euidence because * Time prescribeth not against the Prince nullum tempus occurrit Regi But against my fellow subiects possession inheritance so longe without interruption is of it selfe euidence in lawe good enough except the plaintif can bring better to the contrary Therefore it were absurd and sencelesse before any Iudge in England for a Tenaunt to put such a Landlord to shew his euidence in such a case Euen so as absurd it is for you seeing at first you were of vs and now are gone out from vs to put vs to proue our selues to be such as heretofore you neuer doubted of If now you doubt and contradict it shew you your reason as better euidence or els all men wil condempne your folly Where you put me to proue all our offices of the Hyerarchie their ceremonies c. What needeth it I neuer tooke it vpon me Except first you doe shew that these corruptions all or any of them absolutely in their own nature doe abolish vs all cleane from Christ make vs vnpossible to be saued which vntill you doe still I say I see not any peece of reason in all these your words And lastly where you say it is an impudent vntruth that I say we see not that any thing necessarie is wanting in our Church And to this end you quote to conuince me The Admonition T. C. his Replies Demonstration Declaration and the Defence of Discipline c. This is indeed too bold an vntrueth a wilfull peruerting of your allegations None of all these doe graunt any thing to be wanting with vs that is necessary to the being of a Church simply nor to the being of a true Ministery or Sacraments But onely to their well and conuenient being How honest then are you to falsifie your own witnesses so openly Maister Iohnsons 2. Exception against the former Assumption with Maister Iacobs Replies to the same EXCEPTION 2. SEcondly let them tell vs whether they hold professe Iesus Christ to be the Prophet Priest and King of his Church to be obeyed in his own ordinance onely and in no other And if they doe then let them shew vs how their practize agreeth with this profession H. JACOB his 1. Reply to the 2. Excep TO this Second Exception That Christ is our Prophet Priest King I aunswere The booke of Articles our Ministers now and Congregations generally doe hold and professe the same our practize being answerable likewise thervnto euen as before time Maister Cranmer Ridley Latimer and such like with their Congregations did then viz. That Christ is our Prophet Priest and King and to be obeyed in his own ordinances onely and in no other This I say we generally professe and practize Howbeit this note with all we hold Christs ordinance to be of two sortes written or vnwritten the first necessary the second arbitrary The firste touching doctrine that is touching faith and the inward opinion only such as these The doctrine of God his Nature his Persons his Properties of the Messias Christ Iesus of Iustification of Sanctification of the Resurection c. Wherein standeth the †1. Cor. 3.12.23 foundation of sauing faith All these must be in the writen word or els to bee none of Christes The second touching outward orders in the Church which are truly called accounted Christs own also although particularly deuised and appoincted by the Church whom Christ hath authorized therevnto euen as it shal be thought most fit and profitable for the present times places and persons such we hold all outward gouernement and ceremonies to bee because they be not simply of the foundation neither written nor certen nor perpetuall but at the arbitrarie appoinctment of the Church and Magistrate and yet to be Christes owne neuerthelesse who hath left this libertie for the Church to vse Thus we hold
3 3 11. c. and 17 1 2 3 4 5. and 14.8 9 10 11. the spirituall Babilon notwithstanding any truthes she holdeth yet is so vnsanctifyed and abominable as shee is become a cage of all vncleane and hatefull birdes and that all her children and Marchants that will not departe out of her shall receyue of her plagues and damnation and drinke of the wine of Gods wrath yea of the pure wyne which is powred into the cup of his wrath and be tormented in fire and brimstone before the holy Angells and before the Lamb for euermore Loe here their fearfull estate which this man will needes accompt holy and acceptable before God H. JACOB his 2. Reply to the 5. Reason IN this your defence of your Fifth Reason you mislike that J call it an absurd comparison Where you affirme that the golden vesses of the Jewes were as available to sanctifie the Babilonians as the truthes of the Gospell which wee hold are to sanctifie vs. In deed your owne wordes be holden and receiued in the spirituall Babilon By which termes you meane vs of England I trow But marke sir Is not this grosse sophistery againe Is not this childish vanitie open beggerie and crauing of that which is the whole question that is That our Churches are spirituall Babilon and as deepely infected in Babilonish impietie as those old Caldeans If they were so infected I graunt in deed your Reason would follow But seeing it is the question And seeing we professe our selues true Christians by those truthes of the Gospell which we hold and as by Gods grace we are indeed Say I not well that this is an absurd Comparison Yes Maister Iohnson it is a most * To match those outward vessells of no sanctity of them selues with our inward doctrins of saluation impious absurd sencelesse comparison void of common reason And it inwrappeth Maister Cranmer Maister Ridley c. within the same Iniurions Yea irreligious consequence likewise All that you haue of allusions and alluding betwene the Tipicall and spirituall Babilon are meere delusions and vaine cauils Proue vs first to be spirituall Babilon Or els you fight with your shadow So that still I say those Scriptures quoted of Dan. 5. c. As also all the rest here packed togeather in your Margen they are miserably and desperately abused according as I rightly referred you to my censure to your First Reason which for all your wordes you haue not refuted The very same I say of your other Two scriptures towards the end Pro. 9.17 c. Reu. 18.1 c. As for Ezek. 43.8 I answered it before †Pag. 34. in your First Reason Maister IOHNSONS VI. Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON VI. THe Samaritans those counterfett children of Abraham Jsaack and Iacob did publiquelie professe that most excellent doctrine of the Messias to come the trueth of which doctrine howe powerful it was to saluation the Scriptures testifie yet doeth our Sauiour Christ repute them false worshippers of God because their worship was a mixt worship framed after the inventions of men and traditions of their Forefathers Therefore sayth Christ vnto them Yee worship that which ye knowe not we worship that which we knowe for saluation is of the Iewes By which wordes of Christ it plainely appeareth that although at that time some professed such truthes which otherwise were auaylable vnto saluatiō yet none that were false worshippers of God could truely challendge vnto them selues in such estate the benefite of those truthes but they onely which were the true Church and people of God to whom the Oracles of God were committed and to whom the Couenantes and seruice of God did appertayne such as were at that tyme not the Samaritans but the Jewes and they whiche helde the faith of the Iewes wherevppon not the Samaritanes but the Iewes were then by Christ accounted the true worshippers of GOD and heires of saluation John 4.22 compared with verse 20.25 29. and with 2. King 17 24. In the like manner the people of these Ecclesiasticall assemblies standing subiect to a counterfett Ministerie and worship of God being also commingled togeather of all sortes of people Though they professe some truthes which otherwise are auailable to saluation yet can not in such estate by the word of God he deemed true Christians or true Churches Neither can so standing challendge vnto them selues the benefit of those true doctrines which they professe because God hath not made his promise vnto anie false Church or worshippers of him neither committed vnto anie such his holy things to witt his word prayer Sacramentes Censures c. But he hath made his promise committed these things only to his true Church and people which worship him aright and yeeld obedidience to his Gospell keeping whatsoeuer he hath commaunded them Wherevpon it followeth that such people onely are true Christians and true churches of Christ to whom the promises holy things apperteyne and not to the people and Ecclesiasticall assemblies of England neither anie such abiding in false worship or false constitution of a church as is aforesaide H. JOCOB his 1. Reply to the 6. Reason THis your 6. Reason is The Samaritans beleeuing that Messias should come Iohn 4.25 were as neare saluation as we of England are But they were false worshippers for all that Ergo so are we for all our holy doctrines beleeued according to that Booke of Articles I deny the Proposition The Samaritans might knowe by hearsay and beleeue the Messias should come and Baalam did know it Nom. 24.17 and the Deuils doe now know and beleue Iam. 2.17 Yet none of these beleeued in him It followeth not therefore that they were as nigh saluation as wee of England In a worde there is a Reason manifest These Samaritans ioyned Heathenish Idols with the God of Israel 2. Ki. 17. which wholy destroyed the trueth in them though they did reteyne some memoriall amongst them of Messias to come Wherfore here take the Second Answer to the First Reason before * Pag. 25. But I will help them with an Obiection surely one fitter then all these Obiection The Isralites vnder Ieroboam at Dan and Bethell serued not Pagan Idols but the true God after their own deuises which yet resembled the ordinances of Ierusalem 2. King 12.32 Amos. 4.4 Howbeit they were false worshippers only for their false Ministery and outward false worship for all that they beleeued in the God of Ierusalem otherwise rightly Ergo so are wee of England only for our false Ministerie and outward worship Answere To this wee aunswere also what additions of deuices and how grosse Idolatrie they held it appeareth not But surely it seemeth farre grosser and filthier then the worst is with vs But yet this appeareth cleerelie that the conscience of euery of them euen of the simpliest must needes be conuicted that Ierusalem was the only place and Arons line the
only Priests †My meaning was the Leuits were not of Aarons line but the Priests only Leuits Therfore they could not be indeed true worshippers nor within the couenant nor neere to saluation when they all openly rebelled and forsooke them desperatly whom the Lord had so expresly chosen Now our assemblies throughout England haue not their consciences so conuicted in the Hyerarchie and Ceremonies Ergo wee may be in the coueuant which they were not for all our corruptions F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 6. Reason THis our 6. Reason he neither propounded as we did nor aunswereth directlie and soundlie vnto anie part of it But that the nakednes of his answere and light of the trueth may better appeare we will propound the Reason more shortlie in a Sillogisme thus The people and assemblies whose Ecclesiasticall constitution is such as to them in that estate the Couenantes holy things and seruice of God doe not apperteyne they can not in such constitution by the worde of God be deemed true Christians or true Churches whatsoeuer truthe they professe besides But such is the Ecclesiasticall constitution of the people and assemblies of Englande as vnto them in that estate the Couenauntes holy things seruice of God doe not apperteyne Therefore the people and Assemblies of England can not in that constitution by the word of God be deemed true Christians or true Churches whatsoeuer truthes they professe besides The Proposition none will denie The Assumption is proued thus The people and Assemblies whose Ecclesiasticall constitution is such as they worship God after a false manner neuer appointed by him self nor approued in his word their constitution is such as vnto them in that estate the couenaunts holy things and seruice of God doe not apperteyne But such is the Ecclesiasticall constitution of the people and Assemblies of England as they worship God after a false manner neuer appointed by him selfe nor approued in his word Therefore the Ecclesiasticall constitution of the people and Assemblies of Englande is such as vnto them in that estate the Couenaunts holie things and seruice of God doe not apperteyne The Proposition was proued by the example of the Samaritans and Christes speach and sentence of them in such estate Ioh. 4. and 2 King 17 Whervnto he answereth nothing to anie purpose saue that what he saith is against him selfe For where he graunteth That the Samaritans and Balaam knewe and beleeued the Messias should come yea and that the Deuills knowe and beleeue there is a God and that Iesus is the Christ the holy one of God Who seeth not that most excellent truthes may be acknowledged and yet they which so professe be not therefore in their estate true Christians or true Churches to whom the Couenauntes holie things and seruice of God apperteyne Where next he saith The Samaritans beleeued not in the Messias it will be heard for him to prooue it seeing he taketh beleefe in Christ so as it is had in the spirituall Babylon and her daughters and seeing also the Samaritans professed and beleened not onely that the Messiah should come but euen he which is called Christ that when he came he would declare vnto them all things Jn so much as when Jesus was come had spoken but to a woman of Samaria the scripture witnesseth that manie of the Samaritans of that citie beleeued in him for the saying of the woman which testified he hath tolde me all thinges that euer I did Ioan 4.25 26 29 30 39. Thirdly where he saith The Samaritans ioyned Heathenish Idolls with the God of Israell which wholy destroyed the trueth in them which they held By this againe it is euident euen in his owne confession Both that such things may be ioyned with the doctrines of trueth as in that estate they which professe those truthes can not be iudged true Christians or true churches to whom the promises and holy things of God doe belong And that therefore also the * See further for the answer of this in Pag. 4. Proposition of his principall and maine Argument first propounded is not generall but of necessitie admitteth limitations So as then his maine defence falleth to the ground as alreadie we haue noted both in the beginning of this writing in the answere to that Proposition afore saide and againe in the defence of our Fourth Reason a little before Moreouer in that he sayeth the Samaritans ioyned Heathenish Idols with the God of Israell 2. King 17. If he meane that they worshipped the Idols them selues 2. King 17. sacrificing to them and accompting them to be Gods as well as the God of Israell and so brake the First commaundement as before he affirmed in his answere to our First Reason then we take it that here againe hee is deceyued as there we haue shewed The scripture saieth Pag. 30. they worshipped sacrifized to the Lord God of Israell So as their sinne was against the Second commaundement in that worshipping the true God they did it in and by those Images as also by other deuices of their owne and traditions of their predecessours That this was their estate and sinne besides that it appeareth in that chapter alleadged it is also most plainlie sett downe first by them selues in that booke of Ezra Ezra 4.1 2. where they speake vnto the Iewes of the captiuitie that builded the Temple saying We will buylde with you for wee seeke the Lord your God as ye doe and we haue sacrificed vnto him since the tyme of Esar Haddon King of Asshur which brought vs vp hither Then also betweene Christ and the woman of Samaria Joh. 4. where it is manifest that the “ Ioh. 4.20 21 22 23 24 25 29 30. contention betweene the Iewes and the Samaritans was not whether onely the true God was to be worshipped but both of them agreeing in that whether the solemne place of his worship was in Ierusalem or in the mount of Samaria c. Lastlie by this mans owne confession when he sayth in this place Pag 49. that the Israelites vnder Ieroboam at Dan and Bâ—thel serued not Pagan Idolls but the true God after their owne deuices For the scripture testifieth “ 2. King 17.28 32 33. that the Samaritans worshipped the same God and after the same maner that the Nations did which were caried from thence Nowe the nations that were carryed from thence were the tenns Tribes that fel away from Iudah to Ieroboam which likewise feared * 1. King 12.27 28 29 30 31. with 2. King 17.32 33 40 41. the Lord serued their Jmages that is God in and by their Images as nowe also the Samaritans did that were come in their steede Hetherto of his answere which may seeme to concerne the Proposition of the latter Sillogisme The Assumption was shewed by this that these assemblies being commingled togeather of all sortes of people they haue also for the worship of God among them a counterfett
light of conscience nature togeather wherewith a liuely sauing faith cannot possibly stand Now the Papists in this do departe from the faith also but that is only in some sorte or in parte because they forbid these things not absolutly but vnto some sometimes They that departe thus from the faith may bee true Christians notwithstanding yea they are certenly if they be no worse in any thing els albeit you deny it here most fondly without all sence To which end you most vnlearnedly and vngodly apply those scriptures Scriptures abused A litle leauen leueneth the lump A few dead flyes make the oyntment to stincke and a little poyson bringeth death Will you haue no tainte of euell in a Christian but it quencheth the life of God in vs needes Is it not possible your selues might hold some such errors and yet remayne true Christians notwithstanding Then if Papists were no worse but in those errors only they might be true Christians notwithstanding But Martion and Tatianus doe wholy departe from the faith not but that they beleued some truthes but in that they “ The same did Corah Da than and Abyram likewise See before in answer to the 2. Exception the a Reply presumptuously quenched the instinct of nature conscience as I haue said Here then it appeareth how wicked a sclaunder it is that you say I runne into the Papistes tents and fight with their weapons doe iump with the Remists annotations on 1. Tim. 4.1 2 3. Iudge now by this that I haue said whether I doe or no. And note that I saye that they be either Apostates or departers from the faith not onely who fall totally as you sclaunder me that I saye but also who fall fundamentally that is eyther the first way or second as I haue afore saide And so doe these grosse Heretikes whom you mention 1 Arius Seruetus Papistes c. 2. Martion Tatianus Iudas Corah Balaam the Apostate Israelites c. Thus then your questions and demaundes about the Papistes and their errors I passe by as more vayne then pertinent Onely note withall if this reason of yours were good it maketh Maister Cranmer Ridley c. to be departers from the faith no true Christians Maister IOHNSONS VIII Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON VIII IF the Apostle accoumpted them denyers of the faith and worse then infidels and consequently no true Christians who though they held other truthes of the Gospell yet prouide not for their household Then what will he accoumpt of them who though they professe some truthes of the Gospell yet are not true worshippers of God but execute or submit vnto a false ministerie worship and gouernment ecclesiasticall Which to be th' estate of the Ministerie and people of these assemblies appeareth as aforesaid But the first is true 1 Tim. 5.8 Therefore c. H. IACOB his 1. Reply to the 8. Reason THis your Eight Reason is thus much viz. Like as it is for a professor not to prouide for his houshold so is it to hold the Hierarchy c. But that is to deny the faith and to bee worse then an infidel Ergo so are we in England Those very answers to the last Reason doe fully and flatly satisfie this also Either against the Assumption namely that it is not meant simply of denying the faith nor * I meane Fundamentally as in the last Reason before I haue shewed wholy but in this poinct only Or els the propositiō as being meant of such as neglect their families against the light of their consciences and the manifest instinct of nature F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 8. Reason FOr answere of our said Eight Reason he referreth vs to those answers of his to the last Reason which he saith doth fully and flatly ' satisfie this also for the proposition and Assumption But this which he saith we haue in the defence of that Reason declared to be altogeather vntrue Therefore yet we haue receiued no answere either to that Reason or this That thus it standeth we referre the Reader for it vnto that which is said in defence of that Reason aforesaid wishing the Reader moreouer to obserue both there and here in his answer to the Reason following that the power of the truth so preuaileth against them as they cannot but graunt that they departe from and deny the faith in their ministerie worship and gouernement ecclesiasticall as appeareth in their Canons booke of Common prayer Articles Iniunctions persecutions c. All which beeing mentioned vnto them as proofes thereof in these seuerall reasons when now they should defend these particulers if they would maintaine their standing behold they are as mute as a fish therein and not that onely but in their aunswer to the next Reason following graunt vnto vs that in these things we may and ought to separate from them Which is directly to yeeld vs the cause Thus soundly they answer vs and dispute for themselues H. JACOB his 2. Reply to the 8. Reason TO this your Eight Reason and defence thereof I aunswer as before If you take the Apostle to meane such neglecters of their houshold as deny the faith not Fundamentally nor against the instinct of nature but only against conuenient Christian prouidence and no otherwise Then I deny your Assumption If the Apostle meane of such as neglect their families against the light of confcience natures instinct then I deny the Proposition This I say because the Apostle may very well meane both these but in a diuerse measure and proportion of sinne but then this concerneth not vs Euen so as I haue said to your former Reason Note also if this were a true Reason it maketh Maister Cranmer c. denyers of the faith and no true Christians also For maintenance where of you haue here not one poore word at all Touching that you say we cannot deny but graunt that wee departe from and deny the faith in our Ministerie I haue told you how in my answer to your 7. Reason Also see my Replies to your 2. Exception Maister IOHNSONS IX Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON IX THey which teach othewise and consent not to the wholsome wordes of our Lord Iesus Christ and to the doctrine which is according to godlines are by the rule of the Apostle to be separated from and therefore cannot in that case by the word of God be deemed true Christians 1. Tim. 6.3.4 5. But that so it is with the ministers and people of these assembles in regarde of their ministerie worship and Church constitution appeareth by the Seauentene poincts of false doctrine c. which are already set down and by the proofes before alleadged out of their own cannons Articles Iniunctions c. Therefore the Ministers and people of these assemblies in regard of their ministerie worship and Church constitution are by the rule of the
Apostle to be separated from neither can in that case by the word of God be deemed true Christians H. IACOB his 1. Reply to the 9. Reason THis your last Reason is Separat frō thē that teach otherwise then the truth 1 Tim. 6 3 4 5. We holding those Articles doe teach diuerse thinges in the Hyerarchie c. that be otherwise then is truth Therefore we must be separated from and consequently we are no true Christians This is a falacy also Separate from such Ergo separate wholy See my 1. and 2. Reply afore to the third Exception also the Answer to the two last Reasons of all the 7. and 8. We graunt therefore so farr forth as we hold otherwise then trueth so farr separate from vs but not any farther at all not wholly or absolutly And so the Apostle heere meaneth Wherefore briefly Because you proue vs not wholy to deny the trueth nor fundamentally nor obstinatly peruersly and desperatly any parte thereof like those Iewes Act. 19.8 whom Paul separated from which he did not from all other Iewes Act. 13.14 and 16.3 and 21.23 24 26. and 3.1 Therefore you ought not wholy to separate from vs Neither to condemne vs wholy as abolished from Christ no more then Maister Cranmer and Ridley were with their Congregations in King Edwards time And thus our Assumption in the beginning standeth firme The doctrine in the booke of Articles is sufficient to make a true Christian The contrarie whereof is such a Paradox Conclusion as hath not bene heard of till this day All reformed Churches in Europe doe and haue alwayes held otherwise Themselues * Mai. Barrow Mai. Penry Mai. Iohnson heretofore haue acknowledged and professed it The holy Martirs that liued in King Edwardes dayes and died in Queene Maries dayes must bee otherwise cut of from Christ who were true Christians by vertue of this doctrine and the practice thereof or verily not at all But now it is wonder what extreame passion hath driuen them to this deniall Surely they see that it conuinceth flatly as indeed it doth their peremptorie separation And therefore rather then they would seeme to haue erred in so mayne poinct wee cannot but thinke that meere desperatnes hath driuen them to it Neuerthelesse all this we leaue to the Lorde with the iudgment thereof who hath the hearts of all men in his hand not only to search the seacrets but also to turne and dispose them euen as it pleaseth him F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 9. Reason VNto our Nineth Reason aforesaide he answereth That it is a Fallacy separate from such Ergo separate wholy But howe shewes he any fallacie to be in our Reason Hee bids vs see his answere aboue to our third Exception also his answeres to the two last Reasons of all Well we haue seene them and finde nothing there but against him self as there hath bene shewed So this Reason then as the rest also still standes vnanswered and stronge against them And that we may not doubt but him selfe also seeth it to be so how soeuer he seemeth to pleade to the contrarie before therefore nowe he graunteth it and so yeeldes vs the cause both in expresse wordes and by not defending the 17. poinctes of false doctrine wherewith they were charged neither their owne Cannons Articles Iniunctions c. alleadged against them In expresse wordes whē he sayth they graunt that so farr foorth as they holde otherwise then trueth so farre we may and ought to separat from them Loe here what the euidence of the trueth against which they haue struggeled so longe hath now at length drawne from them The trueth is mighty and preuayleth But he addeth that we must not separate from them any further then as before not wholy or absoluteiy and so saieth he the Apostle “ 1. Tim. 3.3 here meaneth Well but let vs here knowe what this mā him self meaneth hereby If he meane that we must not for their other defectiō forsake the truthes which they holde We answere that we doe it not as him selfe knoweth and in this sence also his meaning should come nothing neare the Apostles meaning Themselues say they haue separated from the Papists yet he neither ean nor will say that they haue forsaken the “ As that ther is a God that there is three persons in the Godhead that Iesus Christ is the Sauiour of the worlde that God made heauen and earth that there shal be a resurrection of the iust and vniust truthes which the papistes held notwithstanding that they haue made separation from them But if he meane that because of the truthes which they professe therefore we should not separate from them then First he contradicteth him selfe hauing graunted that we must separate from them so far foorth as they hold otherwise then trueth Secondly he condemneth their owne practze in their separation from the Papistes notwithstanding the truthes they professe Thirdly in this sence also his meaning should come nothing neare the Apostles meaning Thus therefore it is euident both that there is no fallacie in our reason but that it is plaine and forceable against them And moreouer that he hath directly in expresse wordes yeelded vs the cause and acknowledged our separation from their assemblies ministerie worship c. And as he doeth this in expresse wordes so also he sheweth it in deed in that he leaueth without all defence as vnlawfull and to be separated from their Ministerie Worship and Gouuernement Ecclesiasticall the 17. poincts of false doctrine obiected against them and their Canons Articles Iniunctions c. mentioned both here and more particularly in the First and Second Reasons going before Which thing we wish the Reader well to obserue And because we are fallen againe into mention of the 17. poinctes of false doctrine to the end that the Reader may yet more see the deceitfulnes of his dealing and insufficiencie of all his answeres heere and before therefore it shall not bee yrke some to sett downe here before the Readers those 17. poinctes of false doctrine aforesaide specially seeing they are but short They are these as followeth Poinctes of false doctrine deliuered and spread abroad by the Writings Sermons and practise of the forward Preachers of the Parish assemblies of England with answeres to the same 1 That though the open notorious obstinate offenders be partakers of the Sacramentes yet neither the Sacramentes nor the people that ioyne with them are defiled thereby Which doctrine is contrarie to the trueth of God in these scriptures 1 Cor. 10 17. Hag. 2.14 15. 1 Cor. 5.6 and 10.28 2 Cor. 6.15 18. Gal. 5.9 Mat. 18.8 9 15 16 17 18 19. Exod. 12.43 Leuit. 15.4 5 6 7 31. and 11.24 and 23 45 46. and 19.17 Num. 5.2 3. and 19.21 22. Iosua 11.12 Ezra 6.21.22 Ier. 3.1 2 That the planting or reforming of Christes Church must tarrie for the Ciuill magistrate and may not otherwise be brought in by the word spirite of God
Christ be not a company of people called and separated out from the world by the worde of God and ioyned togeather in fellowship of the Gospell by voluntary profession of the faith and obedince of Christ And whether the present ecclesiasticall assemblies of this Land be such or no. 5 Whether the Sacraments beeing seales of the righteousnes which is by faith may be deliuered to any other then to the faithfull and their seed or in any other ministery and manner then is appoincted by Iesus Christ the Apostle and high Priest of our profession And whether they bee not otherwise administred in the Cathedrall and parishionall assemblies of England at this day 6 Whether their booke of Common prayer with the Feastes Fasts and Holy dayes stinted prayers and Leiturgy prescribed therein and vsed in these assemblies be the true worship of God commaunded in his word or the deuise or inuention of man for Gods worship and seruice 7 Whether all people and Churches without exception bee not bound in Religion only to receiue and submit vnto that ministerie worship and order which Christ as Lord and King hath giuen and appoyncted to his Church Or whether in Religion any may receiue or ioyne vnto another ministery worship and order deuised by man for the seruice of God And consequently whether they which ioyne to the present ecclesiasticall ministerie worship and order of these cathedrall and parishionall assemblies can bee assured by the word of God that they ioyne vnto the former appoincted by Christ and not to the latter deuised by man euen the man of sinne for the worship and seruice of God Vnto these questions and the particulers thereof for the causes aforesaid we desire their direct answer with proofes of their answers from the scriptures according to which word if they speake not as wee said before so we say againe with the “ Esa 8.20 Prophet Esay It is because there is no light in them And now to conclude whereas this man being not able to answer our Reasons as hath bene declared yet would in the ende of his writting fasten vpon vs some strange passion yea and meere desperatnes for separating from them and answering of them as we haue done We leaue it the godly and discrete Reader to iudge by that which hath bene said on both parts whether it bee not themselues which are taken with a strange passion and driuen there unto by meere desperatnes when as to mainteyne their estate they will haue the scriptures to fall as hath bene * See the answer to our second Exceptiō and 7. Reason c. seene in their answeres before yea and exalt the Church and Magistrate aboue Christ himselfe euen flesh and blood aboue God blessed for euer But for this and oll their vnrighteous dealing against the truth and people of God we leaue them to the Lord who searcheth the hearts tryeth the raynes euen to giue euery man according to his wayes and according to the frute of his workes That is to them that by continuance in weldoing seeke glorie and honor and immortalitie eternall life But vnto them that are contentious and disobey the trueth and obey vnrighteousnes indignation and wrath Jer. 17.10 with Rom. 2.6 7 8. H. IACOB his 2. Reply to the 9. Reason IN this your defence of the last Reason you mislike that I say it is a fallacy and you say I shew none Marke what I say Euery one of your Reasons I say euery one is a very proper fallacy and an artificiall parte of Sophisterie as by my seuerall answers to them may appeare Your First Reason is called in the scholes Fallacia ab co quod est secandum quid ad simpliciter prouing a thing to be simply by that which is but after a sort The Second is the very same The Thirde Fallacia aequinocationis A fallacie of Ambiguity The Fourth is the very same The Fift is petitio principij a begging of the question The Sixth the very same fallacie that was in the First and Second Reasons The Seauenth Eight and Ninth haue all the Fallacy of Equiuocation and if you will the same with that in your First Second and Sixt Reasons also Further where you say that here I graunt you the cause it is very absurd The Apostle 1 Tim. 6.3 4 5. saying separate frō such hath a two fould sence Either such as teach otherwise then the trueth fundamentally and then separate wholly Or not fundamentally but erring only in poincts lesse then the foundation and theise diuersely also Either presumptuously obstinately and of a desparate conscience and then if that apeate separate from such wholly Or els erring in simplicitie and of ouersight and former preiudice from such separate not wholly but only from the very error or errors in no wise from their Christian communion and societie seeing theise are true Christians Seing therefore our corruptions of the Praelacie and Ceremonies be of these latter sort which thing hetherto you haue not nor cannot ouerthrowe and withall you must vtterly ouerthrowe Maist Cranmer and the rest of the Martirs their Christianitie likewise Therefore wee in England by the grace of God are still true Christians and you ought so to acknowledge vs as you will answer vnto God All which you may doe and yet touch no parte of our Ecclesiasticall corruptions at all to giue allowance vnto them And in all this there is no contradiction with my selfe it is but your distempered conceipt that seemeth contrarie Neither is our absolute departure from the Papists hereby anie whit impeached Wee haue iustlie forsaken them cleane because by their very profession doctrine wee cannot esteeme them true Christians neither in case of saluation while they so remaine but indeed very Antichristes as the scripture proueth Which thing also if you say of vs you say falslie it is our present question and you doe not proue it nor euer can doe As for your 17. poincts of false doctrine which you most falsly lay to our chardge what haue I to doe with them I list not to meddle at this prsent but with that which wee haue in hand namely to iustifie that our publike booke of Articles of Religion so farre forth as that it erreth not fundamentally As it doth not conteyneth sufficient to make a true Christian Against the which hetherto you haue brought nothing worth the hearing as we haue seene After you would proue vs to be like those Iewes Act. 19.9 whom Paul separated from But without all good reason They were not so many but they were casely certified of the truth that Paul preached but how infinitly many moe are there in this land that know nothing of this controuersie 2. Secondly Paul was better able to conuince them by the scriptures and did more effectually and apparantly then you doe or can our whole Realme 3. Thirdly how many learned are there in this lande that haue many probable and seeming reasons and alleadge them publish
bringeth to cure it but it hath no other effect saue onely to manifest to vs so much the more that the soare of their Assemblies cannot be healed In our former answere we first tooke 3. Exceptions against them comparing together their profession and practise then we alleadged 9. Reasons directly concluding the falshood of the Assumption H. IACOB BEfore I examine this your answer I would desire you and all others to note that all your Exceptions and Reasons with your defence of them hereafter following doe consist of these three generall pointes 1. That euerie person in England holding our publik faith is no true Christian 2. That all the Christians and Churches in King Edwards time and namelie Maister Cramner M. Ridley M. Hooper M. Latimer M. Philpot M. Saunders M. Rogers M. Taylor c. were all lims of Antichrist and no true Christians 3. That euery soule in England is convicted in conscience that the Praelacie is vnlawfull and vntollerable The First of these is our maine question and the grounde of all our reasoning which you gainsay The Second though it be not expreslie spoken yet it is directlie euidently and vndeniably concluded by all euery of your arguments against vs. As in the seueralls hereafter we shal see The Third you are driuen vnto for defence of your former Assertion which else falleth to the grounde And this you affirme flatly in your defence of your 1.6 and 7. Reasons Nowe my desire is that all men would take notice of these your 3 Assertions and consider indifferentlie vvhether they proceede from an honest a sober or a Christian minde And you M. Iohnson if you list hereafter to say any more defende these 3. pointes directly and plainly that your ansvveres may be briefer and more certen then now they are Novve I come to the particular examination of your former answerere First you say You omitted the Proposition before not for the soundnes of it but only because you would see howe I meant it Why He that hath but halfe an eye may see the meaning of those vvordes where is no darknes nor doubtfulnes of sence at all What fault finde you in it nowe Forsooth first a want in the Assumption then vntruethes both in the Proposition and Assumption of my Sillogisme There wanteth you say that I should expresse in the Assumptiō That our Assemblies be companies gathered togeather in the doctrines ordinances which we all by lawe publiquely professe and practise Who but a wrangler would not vnderstand that I meant so much Nay doe not my expresse wordes imply asmuch vvhen I say We by lavve publiquely professe and practise them Then are not our Assemblies vvhich are by lavv gathered together in this profession povver Fy for shame these are sencelesse cauilations But because vvhat in me lyeth I vvould not haue you any more to stumble at a strawe I haue to satisfie you vvithall Not that the Argumēt is vnsound without this addition But because the Reader may see howe you will play at a smal game rather then sit out vt aiunt novve added those words to the Assumption aforesaid in a contrarie letter which you desire viz. and our publike assemblies are therein gathered togeather Secondly you say that my proposition meaneth that what soeuer is held togeather and ioyned with that which otherwise might make a true Christian or a true Church Yet notwitstanding they are so to be reputed as if there were no such additions or comixtures O strange dealing in all my writing I haue no such worde no silable no letter sounding to that sence I haue directly contrary in my answere to your Fourth Reason as your self noteth there Yet yow M. Iohnson with out al shame in the view of the world doe Father on me this foule vntruth and most sencelesse errour in your first entrance Further where as it seemeth you reproue my Proposion requiring to to haue it set thus Whatsoeuer is sufficient to make a particuler man a true Christian and hath nothing added with it distroying the foundation of faith That is sufficient to make a company so gathered togither a true Church You must know Mr. Iohnson that that were an idle vaine addition for wheresoeuer there are any such things added distroying faith there whatsoeuer else seemeth sufficient indeed it is not sufficient to make a true Christian Wherefore nodum in scirpo quaeris this is to finde a knot in a rush Thus much concerning the trunes of my Proposition The Assumption examined by the Exceptions and Reasons following Lastly you come to deny my Assumption or rather to maintaine your denyall heretofore giuen Where first note that by denying my assumption yovv affirme the first generall poinct noted in this beginning That euery particuler person in England holding our publike faith here is not true Christian Which O Lorde who would not tremble to thinke on Euen that which this man aboue two yeares a goe affirmed and now againe aduisedly and wilfully defendeth I take heauen and earth to record this day whether this be not desperate madnes yea or no. But let vs examine your exceptions and reasons against my Assumption more particularly we shall see what stuffe it is Your first exception against the same is as followeth Maister Iohnsons I. Exception against the former Assumption with Maister Iacobs Replies to the same EXCEPTION I. FIrst let here be considered the 19. Article of that doctrine and booke which is alleaged by themselues for their defence and see if their profession and practize be not contrary one to an other Yea whether euen by their owne doctrine and confession conteyned in that booke it be not monifest that they haue not a true visible Church of Christ The words of the Article are these The visible Church of Christ is a Congregation of faithfull men in the which the pure word of God is preached Artic. 19. and the Sacraments be duely ministred according to Christs ordinance in all those things that of necessitie are requisite to the same These are their owne wordes and doctrine Now if they cannot proue their Assemblies to be such they may see that their own witnesses euen their own doctrine book alleadged giue verdict against thē If they can proue them to be such where and what are their proofes touching the particulers mentioned in this their owne discription of a visible Church of Christ H. IACOB his I. Reply to the 1. Excep THis his first Exception is the 19. Article of this very book which we alleage wherein a visible Church is discribed to be a Congregation where the pure word is preached and Sacramentes ministered according to all those thinges that of necessitie are requisite Now this discription he reiecteth not but our practise saith he is contrary and therefore we haue no true visible Churches nor Christians I answer wherin is it contrarie in what things that of necessite are requisite doth not all this Christian world see
these be most vnnaturall additions and very manie The like doe I affirme of these externall corruptions in the Church Which my sentences you goe not about to refute but onelie with wordes with bare yea and nay and no more Mr Iohnsons I. REASON against the former Assumption with Mr Iacobs Replies to the same Hauing before noted 3. Exceptions out of their doctrine and booke alleadged we nowe proceede to shewe the weakenes of their Assumption aforesaid by these 9. Reasons following REASON I. THat which ioyneth Christ and Antichrist togeather can not make a true Christian 2 Cor. 6.14 15 16. with Ezech. 43.8 and 2. Kings 17.33 34 40 41. Bvt that doth the doctrine and booke alleadged as may be seene by comparing the 35. and 36. Articles with the rest And furthermore it appeareth both by their profession which is to be seene in their booke of Cannons set foorth anno 1571. and in other their Articles Jniunctions Aduertisements c. published at other tymes and by their practize also which is to be seene in their Ministerie Worship and Church gouernement euen to this day Therefore c. H. IACOB his 1. Reply to the 1. Reason THis your first Reason is thus That which ioyneth Christ and Antichrist togeather can not make a true Christian But that doth this Booke Ergo c. I say you must mende your vnproper speache that Christ and Antichrist is there ioyned togeather you meane Christ and some outward ceremonies and orders of Antichrist then so speake and say not Christ and Antichrist simply Which things yet we thinke to be Christes own as we * Pag. 12. 18. 19. shewed in the Second Exception before Therefore this reason is answered as the last Exception before The Swanne is blacke of his bill Ergo the Swan is blacke and my brother hath a wodden legge Therfore my brother is a wodden man So here this booke ioyneth Christ and some orders of Antichrist Therefore it ioyneth Christ and Antichrist togeather which are most fonde conclusions Furthermore the scriptures alleadged 2 Cor. 6. Ezek 43. 2. Kings 17. are wholy mismatched the ioyning there forbidden is vnto such idolatrie as can not stande by any meanes with Christian faith and breaketh most directlie the First commandment Our transgression your selues do iudge to be but against the Second and such as hath stood and may stand togeather with true faith as in Maister Cranmer c. * Namely the Idolaters in those places spoken of They did not so much as professe the written lawe to be their rule neither for outwarde orders nor their inward doctrines of faith But your selues knowe we professe and practise that namely so as is shewed before in the Seconde “ Pag. 11. 1. 18. Exception Therfore to applie those scriptures in this vnto vs is your great sinne euen against the third Commaundment which is your common custome as all doe see and pitie viz. To take the name of God in vaine by misusing his worde F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 1. Reason HIs answere here is First concerning the Proposition of this reason then concerning the Assumption Concerning the Proposition First he saith Our speach is vnproper that Christ and Antichrist is there amongst them ioyned togeather Secondly he taketh vpō him to expound our words and meaning to be thus Christ and some outward ceremonies and orders of Antichrist To this we answere First that it is meete that we not he expound our owne meaning whiche togeather with the proprietie of the speech will afterwards appeare in our defence of the Assumption against his answere thereto His answere therefore concerning the Assumption is this First That the things among them which we charg to be of Antichrist they thinke to be Christes owne For proofe whereof here ferreth vs to his answere to our Second exception going before whether also we referre the Reader for answere to him againe Secondly forgetting him selfe he graunteth that in deed they be orders of Antichrist yet that they are but as the blacknes of the Swannes bill to the rest of the body Well then by his owne confession they are of Antichrist and therefore not Christes owne as before he saide and laboured to prooue Thus at once both he contradicteth him selfe and ouerthroweth that which he answered * Pag. 1◠before to our Second exception This were sufficient to manifest their deceiptfull and euill dealing But that it may more fullie appeare specially seeing bee would dazell the peoples eyes with these mincing wordes of some outward ceremonies orders of Antichrist comparing them with the blacknes of the swans bill as if they were but a fewe and of small moment Therefore will we reckon vp some of their Antichristian enormities and abhominations for it vere infinite to nomber them all And then let the Reader iudge of his inswere and their estate whether it be not more like the blacke Rauen with a white bill then the white Swanne with a blacke Sorie we are that we should thus trouble the Reader or our selues specially considering that alreadie we haue mencioned diuers of the particulars following But seeing we are constreyned herevnto by their slie and colourable answere in this place therefore can we not but doe it for the clearer manifestation of the trueth better discouering of their deceiptfulnes In which respects we intreate the Reader also to take in good parte and duely to weigh the repetition and recapitulation following Antichristian abominations yet reteyned in England 1 The cōfusion of al sortes of people in the bodye of their Church euen the most polluted and their seede beeing members thereof 2 The offices and callinges of Arch L. Bishops 3 Lord Bishops 4 Suffragans 5 Prelates Chauncellours 6 Deanes 7 Subdeanes 8 Prebendaries 9 Cannons 10 Petty cannons 11 Chaunters 12 Virgerers 13 Pistlers 14 Gospellers 15 Queristers men and boyes 16 Organistes 17 Organ Flowers 18 Arch deacons 19 Subdeacons 20 Deacons or half priests 21 Priestes 22 Parsons 23 Vicars 24 Curates 25 Vagrant Mercinarie Preachers 26 Churchwardens 27 Clerkes and Sexions 28 Chaplaynes 29 Doctors of Diuinitie 30 Bachelours of Diuini 31 Doctors and 32 Proctors in the Prelates courtes 33 Commissaries 34 Officialls 35 Registers 36 Summoners with the rest of that Antichristian and viperous generation 37 Their Ministration of the word Sacramentes gouernment of their church by voriue of the offices aforesaid 38 The titles of Primate Metropolitane Lordes grace Lordship c. ascribed to the Prelates 39 The inferior Prelates swearing obedience to the Metropoliticall seas of Cāturburie York 40 The inferiour Ministers when they enter into the Ministerie promising obedience to the prelats their ordināces and when they are inducted to benefices confirminge it with their oath 41 The Deacons and Priests presentations to a Lorde Bishoppe by an Archdeacon 42 Their receyuing of orders of the Prelates or their Suffraganes 43 Their Pontificall or Booke of consecratinge Bishops and of ordering Priestes Deacons taken
deceiptfull and sophisticall Therefore I must distinguish euen so still as I did before and my distinction is good cleerelie discouering all your fraude What say you against it First you say Are not their outward callings and ceremonies false Antichristian and accursed aswell as the rest of their worship seruice Aswell Forsooth I trow not that is not as much Their inwarde impietie and false faith against Christ the onely all-sufficient Sauiour is farre more accursed and diuelish then their bare outward orders separated from the rest of their faith But whosoeuer ioyneth simply and indifferently either to Thukish or Popish Assemblies doeth ioyne with their whole and worst abominations which haue no communion or coherence with Christ in deede Neither can we also if we ioyne therein The case is not like when we reteyne and vse some of their outwarde orders in our Assemblies And here you note that I graunt Some thinge may be ioyned vnto our Christian faith in England which would vtterly destroy it Most true And here I note your most vncristian and false dealing with me in affirming otherwise of me As I haue expressed in the beginning about the taking of my First maine Proposition there Which see further in pag. 4. Lastlie my reference to the answere of your First Reason is a fit and full Refutation of you here Neither is your Defence any thing against it as there appeareth Also this your Reason includeth Maister Cranmer Ridley c. to be no true Christians neither as hath bene often alleadged Maister IOHNSONS V. Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON V. AS the golden vessels taken out of the Lords house and had vsed in Babilon of the Caldeans did not therefore make the Babilonians true Iewes touching the faith Nor their banquets wherin they vsed them to be anie of the Lords Feastes spoken of Leuit. 23. but they still remayned Babilonish people and banquets notwithstanding So the truthes of the Gospell vessels as it were of the Lords house holden and receyued in the spirituall Babilon whereof that other was a type doe not make the people so standing to be true Christians Neither their Ministery and constitution to be Christes appoincted in his Testament But they still remaine the people Ministery and constitution of Babilon notwithstanding See the proofes hereof in Dan. 5.1 2 3 4. compared with Prou. 9.17 18. and Reuel 17.4 5. and 18.4 with 14.8 9 10.11 H. JACOB his 1. Replie to the 5. Reason Your Reason is this THe materiall vessells of Ierusalem were of the like power and vertue to sanctifie the Heathen Babilonians As the holy christian doctrines in that Booke are to sanctifie vs that holde togeather with them some Popish ceremonies and orders as indifferent things But those vessells were not sufficient to sanctifie those Babilonians Ergo Neither these truthes of the Gospell can sanctifie vs. An absurd comparison The Proposition is most false and so the scriptures quoted Dau. 5.1 2 3 4. compared with Pro. 9.17 18. Rom. 17.4 5. and 18.4 with 14.8 9 10 11. are as idely and vainely applied See the Answere to the allegations in the First Reason before F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 5. Reason THis he sayth is an absurd comparison So belike if his graue iudgment might goe for good payment the manifold allusions which in describing the spirituall Babilon the Spirit of God “ Reu. 17.18 and 15. compared with Iere. 50.51 Cap. Isay 13. 14. and 21. 47. maketh to-the materiall Babilō of the Caldeans were to bee accompted absurd allusions and comparisons As also the often alluding and likening togeather the * Isa 66.20.21 Zach. 14.20.21 1 Cor. 5.7.8 and 10.2 3 4. Col. 2.1.12 He. 13.15 16.1 Pet. 3.20.21 Reu. 15.3 and 21.20 c. holy things of the Lawe with the holy thinges of the Gospell and the “ 2. Tim. 3.8.9.1 Cor. 10.6 c. Heb. 12 16.17 Iude vers 11. Reu. 2.14.20 and 20.8 9. transgressions then with the transgressions now which are so often vsed in the Scripture Are in his account absurd allusions and similitudes Secondlie he sayth the Proposition is most false Which we answer is most true and most plainely taught and declared in the fift of Daniels prophesie vers 1 2 3 4. and Leuit. 23. as we alleadged before when we first propounded the reason Wherevnto we yet haue receyued no aunswere So soundly he defendeth his cause Thirdly he saith The scriptures quoted Dan. 5.1 2 3 4. compared with Pro. 9.17 18. Reuel 17.4 5 18 4. and 14 8 9 10 11. are idely and vainely applyed But howe shewes he this to be so as he saith Verie profondlie I warrant you For he bids vs see the answere to the allegations in the First Reason And this is all the proofe he bringes Well wee haue seene his answere to the allegations there and finde First that those scriptures here alleadged are not so much as once mencioned there Secondlie that his answere to the allegations there set downe is most friuoulous and of no weight but against him selfe as there we haue declared Lastlie in his propounding of our Reason otherwise then we had done which in deede is a thing verie ordinarie though nothing commendable in them it seemeth that being not able to answer anie parte of our Reason as we had set it downe yet he thought to helpe him self by this exception that the Materiall vessells of Ierusalem were not of the like power and vertue to sanctifie the Heathen Babilonians as the true doctrines receyued among the spirituall Babilonians are to sanctifie them But hee shall finde if he will consider and compare togeather the Scriptures heere alleadged that the golden vessells being holy to the Lorde and taken out of his Temple did asmuch sanctifie the Caldean Babilonians and their Feastes As the holy doctrines vessels as it were of the Lordes Temple had among the spirituall Babilonians doe sanctifie them and their constitution That is neither of their Estates and Assemblies are sanctified thereby at all For saith not the Lorde “ Eze. 43.8 That the setting of mens postes and thresholds howe much more of Babilons enormities by his Postes Thresholdes that is by his truthes and ordinances is so farre from sanctifying as it defileth his holy Name yea is abomination in his fight and setteth a wall betweene him and them that doe it Saith not the scripture also †Prou. 9.17 18. 20.17 that the true doctrines in the false church are amonge them as stollen waters and hid bread which though they be sweete pleasaunt yet there also is the mouth filled with grauell and the guestes of those feastes and assemblies are so farre frō being sanctified by those truthes in that estate as they are before God euen dead men and in the deapth of hell To conclude this poinct hath not an Angell from heauen proclaimed it with a loude voice that “ Reu. 18 1 2
Ministerie and seruice deuised by mans which he rightlie vnderstandeth as we also doe of their Hierarchie and other abominations before rehearsed which deceiptfully heare againe he would smother vp vnder the name of ceremonies Touching which flight of his sufficient is said before in the handling of our First Reason But what nowe saith he here concerning the Assumption or proofe of it Doeth he denie it No. What then doeth he say for their counterfet Hierarchie worship c. Surely nothing but this That their Assemblies in England haue not their consciences conuicted in these as the people vnder Ieroboam could not but haue their consciences conuicted then touching their worship and Priesthood But first if this were so is this anie iust defence of their Ministerie worship or estate that they yet see them not to be vnlawfull as it could not be but they vnder Ieroboam saw theirs to be If this were a sufficient reason might not the grossest Papist plead likewise for their Ministerie worship and estate as also the Vsurers extortioners and persecutors for them selues and their wickednes By this reason God should not haue sent Lyons among the Samaritans because “ 2. King 17.26 yet they knewe not the maner of worshipping the God of Jsraell neither had their consciences conuicted therein But Christ hath taught vs otherwise * Luk. 12.48 that euen that seruaunt which knoweth not his Maisters will and yet committeth things worthy of stripes shal be beaten though with fewer stripes then he that knoweth and doeth it not And euen of those Jsraelites aforesaide the Lord him selfe testifieth “ Hos 4.6 that they were destroyed for lacke of knowledge So then neither can this peoples ignoraunce which he pleadeth be a sufficient defence for their estate Or if it could yet it seemeth they of Israell aforesaid might aswell haue alleadged for them selues seeing the Lorde witnesseth of them “ Hos 4.1 that there was no knowledge of God in the lande And thus the obiectiō also here brought by him selfe remayneth still vnaunswered Nowe where hee sayeth that Aarons Line were the only Priests and Leuites hee is also mistaken herein In deede Aarons Line onely were the Priestes but the Leuites were generallie of the Tribe of Leuie though not of Aarons lyne But to let this passe We would knowe of him a sufficient reason why the true worship and ministerie appointed by Christ in his Testament should not be aswell knowne vnto them in these dayes as in the defection of Israell He sayth They could not but knowe that Ierusalem was the only place and Aarons lyne the onely Priestes Haue not these the scripture asmuch as the other had Or hath not Christ * Heb. 3.1 2 3 4 5 6. the Sonne bene as faithfull in the house of God and as plainly set downe his will for his true worship and Ministerie in the time of the Gospell as Moses the seruant was and did for the time of the Law Yea and haue not “ Witnes the publike Treatises Sermons Admonitions Complaintes Supplications Demonstrations to the Parliamēt besides the bandes and sufferings of many in this behalf these by the word bene made manifest to the consciences of men in these dayes And euen to the high Court of Parliament representing the whole body of the Land as the other were to the Israelites in the time of their defection Finally doeth not this Land stand in as open rebellion against and forsaking of the true Ministerie worship and order appoincted by Christ to his church nowe as the other did then if not more open and greeuous not onely for the causes aforesaide but because also they haue “ Witnes the Pōtifical Portuis Canons Constitution of the Popish their assemblies cōpared togeather receyued and still reteyne a false ministerie worship and confusion of the man of sinne that sonne of perdition and capitall enimie of the Lord Iesus Christ And yet moreouer least they should lacke anie thing of the other and not euery way farre exceed them doe also * Witnes their Actions Statutes c. persecute vnto bandes exile death such as beare witnes to the trueth of Christ against their abominations aforesaide By this then it appeareth that the aduersarie heere neither hath iustified their estate in respect of the Apostate Israelites nor answered the obiection which him selfe framed against their present constitution which therfore we will here set downe as he propounded it The Obiection was this The Israelises vnder Jeroboam at Dan and Bethell serued not Pagan Idols but the true God after their owne deuises which yet resembled the ordinances at Ierusalem 1. King 12.32 Amos 4.4 How be it they were false worshippers only for their false ministery outward false worship for all that they beleeued in the God of Ierusalem rightly Therefore so these of England onely for their false Ministerie and outward worship This is his owne Obiection and Reason vnto which hee hath giuen no sufficient aunswere as before hath bene shewed So that it still remayneth vpon himselfe as a testimonie against their present estate This we neither did nor needed to propound as a seuerall Reason amongst those which we set down because it is of like nature with those wee mentioned amongest ours in the Second and Sixt Reasons before alleadged H. JACOB his 2. Reply to the 6. Reason IN this your defence of your 6. Reason you say That the Proposition of your last sillogisme They that worship God after a false manner pag. 50. are are no true Christans is proued by the example of the Samaritans and that I answer nothing against it First I say there you sophisticate againe And it seemeth you can doe nothing else in argumentation For your Proposition is Aequiuocall and ambiguous If you meane they that worship God after a false manner that is totally or els Fundamentally Then I cleerely graunt it and that the Samaritans doe proue the same seeing they erred Fundamentally But your Assumption touching vs is then vtterly false You bring not a sillable or one letter to proue either of these Two against vs in all your writing neither can you but bare begging of the controuersie which is infinite ofte If you meane in your Proposition They that serue God after a false maner that is in part not Wholly nor Fundamentally As namely in the Hyerarchy and externall ceremonies as Cranmer c. Then I say and avouch confidentlie in the presence of God that such may be true Christians though vnperfect in many things Yea infinite such haue bene are and may bee hereafter true Christians The contrarie whereof is no lesse then horrible blasphemie against God and his Saincts wherfore your Proposition is shewed to be againe sophisticall as also those were in your Third Exception and First and Second Reasons Secondly where you say the Samaritans proue it and I say nothing against it Marke you First I said the Samaritans might knowe by
papistes religion which make them in their estate to be departers frō the faith and consequentlie false christians and false Churches If there be as he can not denie it then of what weight is his answer to defende the present constitution of these people and assemblies for whom he pleadeth seeing there are diuers other thinges besides these that doe and may cause that they may not be deemed true Christiās or true Churches in that estate Many a Seruetus Sabellius Arius the Anabaptistes c. heretikes heretofore haue and at this day doe reiect these three aforesaid are they therfore in their estate to be accounted true Christians or true Churches So then his manner of reasoning heere for their defence is as if the Adulterers to iustifie their course of life should alleadge thus We are noe 1. Blaspemers 2. no Persecutors 3. No Murtherers as such and such are therefore we departe not from the way of life but our estate and course of life is good and such as may be continued in But the scripture teacheth otherwise sayinge b Iam. 2.10.11 Whosoeuer shall keepe the whole Lawe and yet fayleth in one poincte is guiltie of all For he that sayed Thou shalt not commit adulterie saied also Thou shalt not kill Nowe though thou doest no adultery yet if thou killest thou art a transgressour of the Lawe and contrariwise So that what soeuer sinnes the Adulterer be farre from yet as c Pro. 6.32 Salomon saith Hee that committeth adulterie with a woman fayleth in heart and destroyeth his owne soule The same is the case of all spirituall Adulterers likewise who what so euer sinnes they be farre from yet in the worship of God runne a d Num. 15.39 whoring after their owne inuentions e Pro. 5.20 embracing the bosomes of strange women f Reuel 17.4 drinking of their cup of fornications Thirdly let him shewe vs sufficient warrant frō the scriptures why setting these three aside the other popish Hyerarchie and abominations receyued amongst them can not bee iudged to make them in such estate departers from the faith and therfore false Christians and false Churches whatsoeuer truthes they should hold beside If he cannot as who seeth not that it can not be donne then by this also it appeareth that his answer◠here is of no force for defence of their estate but against it as we haue declared before g Num. 16.12 c. Corah Dathan Abyram and their partakers were farre from the Abominations of the Heathen they helde also al the poinctes of faith that Moses and Aaron held differing onely from them and departing only from the faith in a matter concerning the Priesthood whereof also they h verse the. 3. shewed their reasons why they were so perswaded yet will he not denie we suppose but that they departed from the faith and were in this estate neither to be accounted true Israelits nor their assemblies true Churches with which communion might be kept If he should the scripture it selfe would witnesse against him herein Numb 16.26 Nowe compare case with case and tyme with tyme and the estate of these people and Assemblies of England wil bee found farre more grieuous as we haue already shewed both in the defence of our Second Exception before and in i In the answer to Master Hildersam and in the 9. Reasons concerning not hearing the Ministers of these assembties other Treatises to which yet we haue receiued no answer To conclude this poinct if their Abominations in England were farre fewer then they are yet so longe as they reteyne that poysonfull leauen of their Hyerarchie and worship wee must tell them as the Scripture saith and experience teacheth That “ 2. Kings 4.39.40 a litle poyson bringeth death vnto the whole pot of pottage A * 1. Cor. 5.6 litle leauen leaueneth the whole lump And a “ Eccle. 10.1 few dead flyes cause the oynctment of the Apothecarie to stinke and putrifie Although indeed their abominations are not a few but swarme in aboundance amongst them some whereof wee haue rehearsed before in the defence of our First Reason where the Reader may take a view of them Now in the next place fearing belike that the euidence of the scripture we alleadged could not by these shiftes of his be auoyded but that still the reason deducted from thence stood strong against them as we haue shewed it doeth therefore he would haue vs now passe by them and not apply this scripture to them Nota. or their mother Church of Rome but vnderstand it of Martion the heretike and Tatianus of whom he saith that they absolutelie condemning mariage and certen meates might indeed euen therin wholie fall from the faith somewhat like to Baalam Iudas and those Apostate Israelites lately spoken of namely for hauing their consciences conuicted and seared with an whote iron And thus sayth he are they in no comparison with them of England Well But first if his former answer were of any weight it might be asked why then the followers of Martion and Tatianus might not likewise haue defended them thus said that their departure from the faith was but in some poincts not wholy from all Secondly we answer that if this scripture was verified as he graunteth in Martion and Tatianus for their condemning of mariage and meates then we must needes also thinke it verified in the Romishe whoore and her apostate children whiche are falne into the verie sinnes that are heere mentioned Teh Apostle mentioneth Martion and Tatianus no more then he doeth the whoorish Babilon and the children of her Fornication but comprehendeth heere all such who so euer they be as shall fall into this Apostasie Nowe moreouer if the “ 1. Tim. 4.1 2 3. wordes of this scripture be duely weighed either other scriptures or the estate of the Romish Harlott and her children compared therewith it wil be founde as liuely to describe these as either Martion or any other that euer were in the world First when the Apostle sayeth that this shal be in the latter tymes who seeth not that it doeth most directly poinct at the Romish whoore though we doubt not but Martion also and Tatianus which liued twelue hundreth yeares since or thereabouts may also be comprehended therein Secondly when it is saide they shall departe from the faith thereby signifying that once they held the faith howe plaine is this of the Romish harlot which in the “ Rom. 1.7 Apostles time was the beloued spouse of God and since is falne into Apostacy and become the Mother of whoredomes and abominations of the earth as the * 2. Thes 2.3 and Reu. 17.1 2 3 4 5. scriptures in other places witnesseth Thirdly whē it is said they shall giue heede to spirits of errour and doctrines of Deuils how fitly agreeth this to the Romish Babilon which as the scripture els “ Reu. 18.2 where testifieth is become the habitation of Deuils
Jewes are they not therefore to be separated from So in deed he would conclude in this place But then let him tell vs if Corah Dathan and Abiram the Apostate Jewes vnder Ieroboam the Corinthians Papistes c might not alleadge some particular exception wherein they were not like to those Iewes Act. 19. Might not therefore separatiō be made from these The scripture teacheth otherwise Numb 16.25 26. 2 Chrō 11.14 2 Cor. 6.17 Reu. 18.4 Secondly cōsider the place it selfe Act. 19.9 cōpare it with their estate practise in England see if there be not now as great and iust cause to separate from thē as frō the other Are not these now hardned against the trueth Let their writings against it their imprisonning banishing and killing for it giue euidence Doe they not disobey it Let their constitution and practize be witnesse Speake they not euill of the way of God before the multitude Let the Sermons of their Ministers in the pulpit the speaches of the Prelates in their Courtes beare record Therefore saith that “ Actes 19.9 Actes 2.40 Scripture Actes 19 they are to be departed and separated from Wherevnto also may be added in this case that which Peter saith Act. 2 Saue your selues from this froward generation Thidly were he obiecteth That Paule did not separate frō all the other Iewes as he did from these Acts 19. and sheweth it by Act. 13.14 and 16.3 21 23 24 26. 3.1 we answer that the Apostles had good and iust cause so to doe For first the Jewes * Rom. 9.4 Leuit. 20.22 24 26. Luk. 1.6.8 c. were the people of God separated from the world and set in the true waand order of God Secondly * Luke 24.47 Act. 1.8 and 13.46 Christ commaunded the Apostles when he sent them to preach his Gospell throughout the worlde that they should first preach it to the Iewes Thirdlie the Iewes ministerie ceremonies being the ordinances of God him selfe and giuen in writing by Moses the man of God “ Act. 15.21 and 21.30 21 22 23 24 25. Heb. 8.5 13. 9.1 c. were therefore nowe when they should cease to be buried with honor These things considered we see the Apostles had iust cause so to doe as they did in those places mentioned But what is this to the assemblies of England which neuer yet were separated from the world nor set in the way and order of Christ but stande in the * Reue. 13.16 17. and 18 2. 2 The. 2.3 4 8 confusion and defection of Antichrist whose ministerie also and worshippe were neuer the ordinances of God But * Reue. 17.2 4 and 18.3 and 9.3 c. taken out of the whores Cup of Babilon for which likewise God neuer gaue Comaundement to goe vnto them but to “ Reue. 18.4 with 17.9 1 Tim. 6 3 5. departe from them as being daughters of the greate Babilon that mother of whoredomes and abominations of the earth Againe euen from those Iewes notwithstanding the reasons aforesaid yet when they put from them the trueth and would not receyue it the Apostles departed and separated thē selues yea and shooke off the dust of their feete against them teaching others to doe so likewise Actes 13.46 51. and 18.6 28 25 26 27 28. and 20.40 and 19.8 9. To that of Maister Cranmer Ridley c is answered before And hetherto of their generall Assumption which was this That the whole doctrine as it is professed and publiquely practised by lawe in Englande is sufficient to make a particular man a true Christian Which wee haue shewed to be vntrue both by the Exceptions and Reasons aforesaid which still stande firme against them as is manifest by this our defence Touching the conclusion And now let the godly Reader trying all things by the word of trueth iudge whether we or they holde Paradoxes Touching that he saith of the reformed Churches he is deceyued if he thinke they allowe their present estate and church constitution Both their publique profession and practise witnesse the contrarie as wee haue declared at large in “ In the answers of Ma. Carthwrights reasons of Maist Hildersams letter c. other treatises which yet remayne vnanswered wherevnto we referre the Reader in this behalfe Where he sayth That we our selues heretofore haue acknowledged and professed it to wit their general Assumption aforesaid to be true he is also deceyued therein we haue alway * You maie speake it with shame enough testified the contrarie both by our profession and practise and were and are therefore cast into prison appoincted to exile and put to death besides many other iniuries grieuances inflicted vpon vs for this verie cause In deed we haue acknowledged and doe acknowledge that they professe diuers excellent truthes but that the whole doctrine as it is publiquelie professed and practized by law in England doeth make them in that estate true Christians neuer anie of vs that we know of did once acknowledge And therfore till he shew vs the contrarie we must needes thinke that he falsely burtheneth vs all and specially such of vs as he hath mentioned here in particular To that which he next addeth of the Martirs in Queene Maries dayes is answered already in the defence of our Seconde Exception and First Reason wherevnto may be added for more euidēce of the trueth the particular speaches testimonies of the holy Martirs them selues both then and in former tymes As of Maister Bradford who “ Actes monuments 2. vo in his conference with Peter Henth speaking of the dayes before Queene Marie saide The tyme was when the Pope was out of England but not all popery And moreouer “ In his firste speach with D. Harpsfielde Archdeacon That the scripture knoweth not any difference betweene Bishops and Ministers which men call Priestes And that the scripture speaking of Bishops can not be vnderstood of Bishops that minister not but lord it Also of Maister Hooper who held and “ Hooper on the eight commandment published that a Bishop should be Bishop but of one Citie and that till the Magistrates bring them to this poinct it shal be as possible to heare a Bishop wade godly and simply through the scripture in case of Religion as to driue a Cammell through the eye of a needle And agayne he sayth The primitiue Church had not such Bishops as be nowe a dayes And againe What blindnesse sayth he is there befell in the world that can not see this palpable yll that our Mother the holy Church had at the beginning such Bishops as did preach many godly Sermons in lesse time then our Bishops horses bee a brideling And John Bale an exile for the testimonie of Jesu writing vpon the Reuelation * Bale in his booke called The Image of both churches vpon Reu. 13.1 and 17.3 affirmeth moreouer That the names of Blasphemy written vpon the Beastes head Reuel 13. and
Prelacie and humane ceremonies men may be true Christians Then these witnesses are sufficient that your deniall hereof is a strange and vnusuall opinion that is a Paradox Finally to trie vs you propound a many of questions But I leaue all this superfluous stuffe to your selfe to be pondered First let vs cleare this present question and your Reasons here about Till then wee haue no leasure to meddle further The Lord of his mercy open your eyes to see your extremitie whereby you doe greatlie hinder not helpe the trueth which you would seeme to suffer for That you may indeed shewe your self as becometh a Christian Pastor not impossible to erre but no louer of error * Not a striueâ— for victorie but a loues of â—â—th 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not regarding your own but the praise of Christ in all things AMEN FINIS A SHORT TREATISE CONCERNING THE TRVENES OF A PASTORALL CALLING IN PASTORS MADE BY PRAELATES Against the Reasons and Obiections of Maister FRANCIS IOHNSON with others of the separation commonly called Brownistes 1599. An Argument shewing the trunes of a Pastorall calling in Pastors made by Prelates Taken from a familiar comparison gathered out of the confessions of Maister Iohnson and others of the separation aforesaid The Argument of Comparison is this AS a couple of ignorant people not contracting but meaning to marry and yet thinking that vnlesse a Priest marry them their marriage is nothing wheras indeed their publique accepting each of other maketh the marriage Now beeing married though “ As themselues hold vnlawfully by a Priest yet their marriage is true and lawfull notwithstanding EVen so a Christian people meaning to haue a sufficient man to their Pastor yet thinking that vnlesse a Prelate doe make him he is no Pastor at all neither can be theirs Notwithstanding he being made a Pastor though “ As they also doe acknowledge vnlawfully by the Prelate yet by their mutuall accepting and ioyning togeather hee is now verely a Pastor yea their Pastor true and lawfull H. IACOB Against the said Argument were brought Seauen Reasons by Maister Iohnson and others which doe hereafter follow togeather with Maister Iacobs Replies to the same REASON I. F. Iohns FIrst infidels idolaters prophane and godles persons may marry togeather with consent and choyse of each other notwithstanding their prophanenes and their marriadge is therein lawfull But it standeth not so with the choyse of Ministers in the Church For 1. prophane and godlesse persons such as these assemblies consist of 2. neuer rightly gathered togeather according to Gods holy ordinance 3. remayning in subiection and bondage to their false and Antichristian officers courts consisting of all sorts of people c. are not capable of chusing or ioyning vnto a true Minister in this estate as infidels may marry in the same estate There fore the comparison will not hould neither is such choice of a Minister by such people lawfull But these assemblies consist of such people c. Ergo c. H. Iacob THe strength of this Reason standeth in these last wordes But these assemblies consist of such people 1. prophane godles persons 2. neuer rightly gathered togither according Gods ordinance 3. remayning in subiection and bondage to their false and Antichristian officers courts Ergo c. These three accusations auaile nothing at all Accusa ∣ tion 1 The first Accusation is from our question for we speake of a Christian people but he of assemblies coÌ„sisting of prophane and godles persons If he say our assemblies all wholy are such That is false If he say some are Of them we speake not If he say in all euery one of our assemblies there are some yea many open prophane and godles persons 1. It is too bold a saying without knowledge to speak so of all 2. If it were true yet it were false to saye our assemblies consist of such or to thinke that whole companies of Christians by such commixtures are made vnholy prophane and godles which is contrary to these scriptures Mat. 23 2 3. Luke 2.21 22. 1.6 Act. 21.23 26. 1 Sam. 2.17 and cap. 1. verse 3.9 Reuel 2.20 21 and 3.1 4. 1 Cor. 3.3 Gal. 3.1 2. 4.11 16. and 5.4.9 Accusa ∣ tion 2 The second Accusation that our assemblies were neuer rightly gathered togeather at the first according to Gods ordinance I denie it especially touching many famous Congregations in the Land where the gospell was not vnknowen before the Queenes commaundiment came to vrge theÌ„ to receyue this doctrine And if the maner of receyuing it then in those hard and doubtfull times and hazardous beginnings were not so perfect nor so exact as should haue bene yet we may see by the example of “ 2 Chro. 30.17 18 19 20. Hezechias and * 2 Chro. 33.15 16 17. Manasses and †Zepha 1.4 5. and 3.1 Ier. 3.6 c. and 4.1 c. and 5.1 c. Iosias reformations That God imputeth it not to such godly and zealous restorers the pillers and ground of the trueth in those dayes If you say the vntaught people then suddenly receyuing the gospell by commandement not by hearing could not beleeue at the first though they professed and therefore at the firste were no true Christians nor Churches I answer 1. Though many receiued the Gospell for the commandements sake yet who can say That nowe they all generally wanted all knowledge and all faith The word then hauing bene in many places taught very many bookes scattered much conference daily consultations and disputations vsed and the blood of the Martirs hauing preached so loud and so lately before 2. It was not so sudden There was “ From Nouember the 17 till Midsomer following more then halfe a yeare for the people to heare learne and consider before the commandement came So that it can not be counted meere force and compulsioÌ„ that at the beginning of our Queenes reigne brought vs to the trueth 3 I would know They condemne not I hope all reformation commanded and compelled by the Magistrate 2 Chro. 34.32 33. and 33.16 and 15.13 Seeing therefore the assemblies thus openly aduisedly submitted to the proclaimed trueth who seeth not but they coÌ„fessed therein their former errors and professed their present faith and vndertooke a newe life from that which before they led though happely not so formallie nor so perfectly as were to haue bene wished Obiection But they receiued all togeather Papistes Atheistes ignorant men all dissolute liuers into one communion and fellowship Answer Indeed all who after this aduizement and notice takeÌ„ submitted to receyued this doctrine these were all receyued in And therefore no open professed Papistes Athistes nor other Heretikes As for ignorant men it is not possible but many will scape among the rest in so great and so generall reformation of a publike state And so questionles it was in Hezechias Manasses and Iosias reformation 2. Chron. which we noted
before The notorious dissolute wicked some were reclaimed all vndertook another profession a new appearance of Christianitie And no doubt the like is to be thought of these as before I obserued touching the ignorant men Now all this was done not intollerablie doubtlesse though I graunt weakely corruptly And very like euen to your owne receiuing into your Church at this time nay more tollerable and more lawfull then yours who to furnish onely one congregation haue receiued many knowne bad men and very ignorant yea and still retaine men full of contention bitter strife 1 Cor. 3.3 In a word this I answer That which disanulleth not a Church gathered and settled That disanulleth it not in the gathering and beginning But such mixtures doe not disanull a Church gathered and setled as appeareth aboue in the scriptures quoted against the First AccusatioÌ„ Mat 23. Luke 2. c. Therfore such mixtures did not disanull our Churches then in their beginning Accusa ∣ tion 3 The Third Accusation is our Assemblies remayne in obedience to the false Antichristian officers c. Let this be our generall sinne yet there is diuersitie of sinnes All are not of like detestation before God nor of like coÌ„sequence against vs. I say not that any sinnes are veniall but I say All sinnes by their nature are mortal yet doe they not al alike abolish vs from Christ nor depriue vs of the glory of God Now this sinne of outward church orders is not of the most heynous nor extreamest disobedience There are sinnes against the * 1 Cor. 15.3 3. 4. RoÌ„ 4.25 1 Cor. 3.10 11 12 13 14. foundation and there are sinnes that stande with the foundation ibid. wherein men liuing and dying ignorantly without perticular repeÌ„tance may be saued Such were the sinnes of the Iewish church and estate in Christes time and after as “ Beza in Acts 15.20 some thinke euen till their Temple and Citie were destroyed though they did personally hate and persecute Christ Such also was the sinne of the auncient declyning Bishops Epiphanius Augustine Chrisostom Leo of Rome c. No lesse was in ours of late Cranmer Ridley Hooper c. in King Edward dayes and no greater is now in ours presently especially touching our Churches Ministers too generally If you say we are all conuicted nowe and sinne against our coÌ„scieÌ„ces as they did not in those times It is vtterly false a palpable vntrueth Whosoeuer knoweth any thing in our church estate generally must needs see it that this poinct touching the Hyerarchy is not acknowledged euen of ignoraÌ„ce in a thousand to one many holding not of the simplest this present gouernement to be th' only true right kinde but all men almost to be indifferent lawful very few indeed scarse to be found that see it to be meerly nought or as you terme it wicked intollerable And in King Edwards time whosoeuer considereth shall finde that the godly learned ProtestaÌ„ts then were not vtterly ignorant of this poinct of reformation and yet sinned not against their conscience in bearing with the times neither were abolished from Christ And surely touching the Iewes they were all generally more conuicted then that Iesus was the Christ then we are now that the Prelacie is of Antichrist yet they remayned a church stil because generally indeed they were not plainly conuicted Thus theÌ„ this our sinne is * See the 2. sortes of fundamental sinnes in the 2. Reply to your 7. Reason before pag. 48. no way fundamentall it destroyeth not faith Christianity in our whole assemblies Therfore they remaine Christian people still as I affirmed not all godles prophane as he vncharitably speaketh O beware of rash and hasty iudging euen of one brother Rom. 14.3 4 13. how much more of such so many whole assemblies professing Christ in EnglaÌ„d Woe be vnto him which curseth where God curseth not Num. 23.8 As also indeed that blesseth where God blesseth not We desire you not to blesse vs in our euil but we warne you not to curse vs in our good which indeed turneth vs not to any furtherance but to a great hinderance and stumbling block stopping vs froÌ„ that sinceritie which els we should dravve nearer vnto Blessed is he that iudgeth wisely that is without affection partialitie euen of him that is despised Better it is and more Christian like euen to offende in too much compassion and patience especially towardes so many hundreth thousands by whom we know nought saue good in this poinct then to offend in too much rigor and seueritie vniust anger Mat. 5. â—2 Howbeit this were not indeed to offend as hath bene aboue shewed And briefly in twoo words thus I conclude it farther that That faith religioÌ„ taught in the booke of Articles published 1562. maketh the people that beleeue and obey the same true Christians such as so liuing and dying may be saued But our Church doeth so holde that faith Therefore they are true Christians The Proposition onely is doubted I had thought none so desperate as to deny it but lately I vnderstand they haue denyed it Howbeit for answer I referre them partly to that which here hath bene said before and especiallie to that which is replied to their Answer in the former Treatise which being well weighed I doubt not but all indifferent and Christian mindes will acknowledge our publique church assemblies in England to be true Christians REASON II. F. Iohns SEcondly the Priest doth not celebrate or pronounce any marriage without the married first giue their consent But the Prelats make Ministers without before the peoples consent Therefore the comparison holdeth not H. Iacob FIrst it is very vaine to make this any matter viz. the peoples coÌ„senting either before or after the Prelats ordeyning For whether before or after it is in nature and value all one They in their ignoraÌ„ce hauing respect only to the Prelats act And if it were so that the Priest should sometymes marie a couple the Maide being meerly enforced and denying consent yet not striuing nor resisting and a while after shall willingly agree and like Out of question there is now true wedlock betweene them Euen so the case is betwixt the Church and the Minister 2. But what will they except here against those Pastors amoÌ„gst vs that were first chosen by the people they first professing their consent and are after instituted inducted by the Praelat Many are thus called amongst vs the most haue the peoples consent euen togeather at their first inducting at least wise they haue soone after by the peoples submitting mainteyning them euen presently 3. Lastly in a word where he saith the Praelats make Ministers without and before the peoples consent We “ Beza in Act 14.23 Fenner against Bridges Pag. 148. affirme that they make not the Pastor at all indeed and in truth but only supposedly It is the Churches consent that maketh him