did somtime ioyne and cōmunicate This therfore he saith maketh for them and against vs most notably 1 But first let him tell vs if many “ As that of Leu 10. Num. 16.1 c. Esa 1.11 12 13 14 15. Zeph. 1.12 1. Cor. 11.19 thinges which are verified sometimes of the members of a true Church may not also fitly be applyed and alleadged against a false Church and yet not iustifie their estate and constitution neither make for them but against them altogeather Otherwise he condemneth at once all the Martirs heretofore who vsually alleaged this * Mat. 15.9 very Scripture against the false worship of the Romish Church as him selfe cannot he ignorant Yet in his learning it seemeth the Papistes might well haue aunswered the Martirs againe that this Scripture was verified of them that were of the true visible Church and therefore made for them and against the Martirs most notably 2 Secondly when he saith this Scripture is verified of such as were of the true visible Church with whom Christ and his Apostles communicated Let him also tell vs whether he meaneth that Christ and his Apostles communicated with them in their vaine traditions If he thinke they did that very “ Mat. 15.2 Chapter sheweth the contrary besides that the whole Scriptures testifie that Christ was altogeather free from sinne which hee could not haue bene if he had ioyned with them in those their inuentions If they did not as it is without all question then what doth this helpe those men who all of them ioyne and communicate with the false worship of these assemblies 3 Thirdly we aunswer that his note is not worth the noting being nothing at all to the purpose for the question in hand For first who knoweth not that in the Iewish Church the doctrine publiquely professed practised by their law did not appoinct or ratifie any of those vaine traditions but vtterly forbid them Wheras contrarily the very doctrine publiquely professed and practized by law in England appoincteth and ratifieth the false worshiping of God by the inuentions of men Secondly those vaine traditions aforesaid were the personall sinnes of some particuler men in the Iewish Church not publiquely established by law nor generally receiued and practized in that Church * Luk. 1.5 6 8 9 10. 2.21 22 23 24 25 27.36 37 38 39 Mat. 15.7 8.4 and 15 2. Ioh. 10.34 Zachary and Elizabeth Simeon Anna Mary Ioseph and Christ himselfe and his Apostles with many others kept the ordinance of God giuen by the hande of Moses and obserued of that Church Neither did they ioyne or pollute them selues with that vaine worship aforesaid whereas in the church of England the false worship thereof deuised by men euen by that man of sinne is not the personall sinne of some particular men in it but is publikelie established by law and generally receyned and practised in these assemblies of all the members thereof So then this scripture maketh nothing for them but against them most notably Nowe whereas in the margent he wisheth the Reader to marke a contrarietie with our selues by comparing this and our 6. Reason together we also referre it to the Reader to iudge whether there be not euen an harmonie with this and a confirmation of it Hetherto of the defence of our second Reason H. IACOB his 2 Reply to the 2. Reason TO this your defence of your Second Reason I say you haue answer in your last Exceptiō pag. 22. You aske what Propositiō I doe deny I answer I distinguish your Aflumption as being a fallacie called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cōcluding a thing simply from that which is after a sort like vnto that Reason which I framed against you in Pag. 22. A man hath a woodden legg an eye of glasse c Therefore hee is no true man Cranmer Ridley c. held asmuch as wee after mens precepts Ergo they worshiped in vaine Geneua holdeth her wafer cakes in the Supper Ergo Geneua worshipeth God in vaine Euen so your Assumption runneth Our doctrine say you Pag. 35. appoincteth Gods worship by mens precepts This is false vnlesse you meane it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after a sort not simply For our doctrine appoincteth not all Gods worship by mens precepts nor the chiefest part of it as the preaching of the Gospell of life Sacramentes and Prayers c. So that it concludeth nothing in that sence Therefore here you play the false Sophister not the Christian and conscionable Disputer Thus you haue answer enough to this in the aunswer to your last Exception though you would not see it Further I noted Secondly * Pag. 35. That this your Scripture of Mat. 15. Yeeldeth the offenders to be of a visible Church with whom Christ did communicate though they held also traditions of men Therfore it affirmeth nothing against vs. Is not this true Why then doe you not admit it We neuer denyed but this Scripture condemned our corruptions But this onely wee affirme it disanulleth not our Churches Euen as Christ here condempned the Iewes corrupt traditions but hee meant not thereby to disanull their Church Therefore all this is not against our purpose but not ably for vs as is before obserued 1. Concerning your First aunswer in Pag. 36. I know this Scripture may be applyed against false worshippers which are no true Church But it proueth not I say all them to whom it may bee applyed to bee no true Church Therefore you abuse it against vs Except you had first proued vs no true Church nor Christians which yet is in question 2. Where in your Second answere * Pag. 37. you say That this helpeth vs not except we say that Christ communicated with the Pharisies in these traditions like as wee doe in the vaine traditions now For shame leaue this folly I say againe I seeke not to iustifie our partaking in our traditions but I renounce it in sobrietie asmuch as you yea better then you doe Yet I say this place shall admit those who doe in simplicitie partake of them to be true Christians neuerthelesse like as it admitteth the Iewes then 3. In your Third aunswer “ Pag. ibid. You deny that those Jewish traditions of wasshings c. were with them receiued generally or by Law in their Church Whereto I aunswer That they were generally receiued as Marke in his 7. Chapter and 3. verse doeth testifie and that they were rebuked who vsed them not which is sufficient to make it their Churches doctrine practize though no expresse law commaunded it But I suppose verse 5. where they say Why walkest thou not after the tradition of the Elders he meaneth the ordinances of their Forefathers which were to them as lawes besides the lawe of Moses What else is their Thalmud which is till this daye euen like to the Canon lawe of Poperie and the Alcoran of Turky Some also vnderstand this of the ordinances of the Elders that is their
in the mouthes of his weakest seruantes except they haue authoritie from earthlie Princes Which doctrine is against the Kinglie power of Christ and these scriptures Mat 28.18 Actes 3.23 1 Cor. 1. 27. Psal 2.6 9 10 12. Esai 9.6 7. Zach. 4.6 and 6.12.23 Dan. 2.44 and 7.27 and 9.25 Mich. 5.7 Mat. 28.20 1 Cor. 14.27 with 1 Thes 4.8 Phil. 2.6 12. 1 Tim. 6.13 14.15 Rene. 1.5 and 14.12 and 17.14 19 16. and 20.4 3 That the true visible Church of Christ is not a separated companie of righteouse men and women from the Jdolaters and open wicked of the world but may consist of all sortes of people good bad Which doctrine is contrarie to the paterne of Christs Church throughout all the scriptures Gen. 4.26 with 6.2 Exod. 4.22 23. Leuit. 10.10 and 20.24 25 26 Psal 24.3 4. Ezra 6.21 2 Chron. 11.13 16. Nehem. 10.28 Eze. 22.26 with 44.23 Zeph. 3.4 Mat. 3.10 12. Act. 2.40 41 42. and 19.9 Rom. 12.1 8. 2 Cor. 6.17 18. 1 Pet. 2.9 10. Reu. 14.9 12. and 18.4 and 21.27 and 22.14 15. c. 4 That they may mainteyne this error of their confused order and mixture of all sortes of persons togeather they peruert the Parable of the tares Mat. 13.24 teaching that all are the Church Which doctrine is against the trueth of the scriptures yea against our Sauiours owne interpretation in the 38. verse who teacheth that by the field is meant not the Church but the world in which his Church is milatāt And as therin there is the good seede the righteous the Children of the Kingdome So there are also tares hipocrites the childrē of the wicked who as they are often espied in this life by the righteous seruauntes of God so shall they in that great day be perfectlie seuered from the godly by the Angels of God verse 38.43 This their doctrine also is against the heauenlie orders mentioned Matt. 18.8 9 15 16 17. 1 Corint 1.26.29 Actes 2.40.41 47. and 5.26 27 28. and 19 9. and 5.4 7. 2 Cor. 6.17 18. Leuit. 18.29 1 Tim. 6.5 2 Iohn verse 6.11 Reuel 2. and 3. and 14.9.12 and 18.4 and 20.4 5 That the people may tollerate and ioyne with open iniquitie in the Church vntill by the Magistrate it be redressed which doctrine is contrary to these riptures 2 Cor. 10.4 5. Mat. 28.21 Acts. 2.40 3.23 and 4.19 and 9.26 and 19.9 1 Tim. 5.22 Deu. 5.32 6 That the guiftes of interpretation and application of the Scriptures are a sufficient and lawfull calling to the ministerie c. Which doctrine is both false and Anabaptisticall contrarie to the scriptures Heb. 5.4 Rom 12.6 7 8. Leuit. 22.25 Ezek. 44.8 9 c. Num. 1.51 and 3.10 38 and 16.40 and 18.2 3 4. Act. 1.20.26 and 14.23 and 13.2.3 7 That the Church may yeelde obedience vnto other lawes cannons and traditions officers and offices then God hath prescribed in his Conenant Which doctrine is contrarie to Gen. 49.10 Mal. 6.24 Iohn 10 4 5. Ren. 14.4 and 22 18 19. Heb. 3 1 c 8 That the Church may read other mens wordes vppon a booke and offer them vp to God as their owne prayers and sacrifices in the publique Assemblies Which doctrine is contrarie to the scriptures Esai 29.13 14. Rom. 8.26 1 Cor. 14.15 Mat. 6.6.9 and 15.9 Mar. 7.7 Ephe. 4.7 8. 1 Pet. 2.5 9 That it is lawfull to ioyne with the Ministerie of dumb and Jdoll Priests and to receiue the Sacramentes at their handes Which doctrine is contrarie to Mal. 15.14 and 7.19 and 24.24 25. Iohn 10.1.5 Num. 16 5 9 24 26 39 40 c. 1 Tim 6.5.2 Iohn verse 6.11 10 That it is lawfull for a Minister of Christ to cease preaching forsake his flock at the Commaundement of a Lord Bishop Which doctrine is contrarie to 1 Cor. 9.16 Esay 62.4 6 7. Ier. 48.10 Zach. 11.17 Iohn 10.11 12 13. Actes 4.18 19 20 and 5.29 Amos 7.12 13 14 15. 2 Tim. 4.2 11 That the Church of Christ hath not alwayes power to binde and loose to receiue in and to cast out by the Keyes of the Kingdome Which doctrine is contrarie to Mat. 18.17 18. Psal 149.9 1 Cor. 5.4 5.12 Num. 5 2 3. 12 That it is lawfull for the people of God to heare notorious false prophetes in their Ministerie Which doctrine is contrarie to Deut. 18.15 Mat. 17.5 and 7.15.2 John verse 10.11 1 Cor. 10.18 Gala. 1 8 9. Reuel 14 9 10 11. and 18.4 John 10.96 13 That it is the Church and house of God the body and kingdome of Christ where he reigneth not by his own Ordinances Officers but the highest Ecclesiasticall authoritie is in the handes of strange Lordes and Antichristian Prelates who also gouerne by Romishe Cannons and not according to the lawes of Christes Testament Which doctrine and practise is condemned by Luke 19.14 27. Iohn 15.14 Rom. 6.16 Luke 22.25 26. 1 Pet. 3.2 Thes 2 3.4 Iohn 3.35.36 Reuel 9.3 and 14.9.10.11 and 19.14.15 14 That there may be a prescript Leiturgie and sett fourme of seruice in the Church framed by man which doctrine is contrarie to Deut. 5.8 Esai 29.13 14. Mat. 15.9 and 7.6.7 Gal. 3.15 Iohn 4.24 Rom. 8.26.27 Ephe. 4.7.8 15 That an Antichristian Prelate notwithstanding his dignitie as it is called spirituall may be a Ciuill Magistrate and obeyed of the people as their lawfull gouernour Which doctrine is contrarie to Rom. 13.1 c. Mat. 20.25 26. Mar. 10.42 43. Luke 22.25 26. Reuel 14.9 10 11. and 17.18 16 That men may giue the titles of Christ Jesus vnto these sonnes of men and his mortall enemies to call them their Arch and Lord Bishops Reuerend Fathers c. Which doctrine is contrarie to Mat. 23 8 9 10. Esai 42.8 and 48.11 Pro. 17.15 and 24.24 Esai 5.20 2 Cor. 6.14.17 17 That it is lawfull for a Minister of Christ to be mainteyned in his ministerie by the goods of wicked and vnbeleeuers by Iewish and Popishe tythes and offeringes Which doctrine is contrarie to Prou. 27.26 27. 1 Cor. 9.13 14. Phil. 4.10.18 Gal. 6.6 Rom. 15.27 Heb. 7.12 These are the 17 poinctes which were mentioned before in the proofe of this reason which the aduersarie hath left altogeather vnanswered as he hath done also their owne Cannons Articles and Iniunctions which are to be seene in their printed bookes And thus is he driuen againe againe whether he will or not to yeeld vs the cause That which he addeth in the next place of their not wholy denying the trueth nor fundamentally nor obstinately peruerslie and desperatlie any parte thereof is answered before in the defence of our second Exception and of our sixt and seauenth Reasons Nowe when he next saith That they are not herein like those Iewes Act. 19.9 whom Paule separated from which he did not from all other Iewes Actes 13.14 and 16 3 and 21 23 24 26. and 3.1 Firste wee aske What if they be not in all respectes like vnto those
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
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