out of the Popes Pōtificall where their abuse of scripture to that ende their Collects Pistles c. may be scone 44 Their making and being made Priestes with blasphemie the Prelates saying to them whom they make Priestes Receiue the Holie Ghoste whose sinnes ye forgiue they are forgiuen c. 45 Their confoundinge of Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall offices and authoritie in Ecclesiasticall persons 46 Their reteyning and vsing in their publike worshippe the Apocrypha Bookes whiche haue in them diuers errours vntruethes blasphemies contradiction to the canonicall scriptures 47 Their stinted prayers and Leitourgie taken out of the Popes Masse booke with the same order of Psalmes Lessons Collectes Pater Nosters Pistles Gospels Versicles Responds c. 48 The Crosse in Baptisme 49 The Hallowed Ponte Questions to the Infants at Baptisme 50 The Godfathers and Godmothers promisinge that the childe doeth beleeue forsake the Deuill and all his workes c. 51 Weomans baptizinge of children which main teyneth that heresie that the children are damned which dye vnbaptised 52 Their howselinge of the sicke and Ministring the communion to one alone 53 The Ministring it not with the wordes of Christes institution but with other taken out of the Popes Portuis 54 Their selling that Sacrament for two pence to all commers 55 The receyuing of it kneeling which maketh it an Idoll and nourisheth that heresie of receyuinge their maker of worshipping it c. 56 Their Ring in Mariadge making it a Sacrament all signe and Mariadge an Ecclesiasticall action thereby nourishinge the Popishe heresie that Matrimonie is a Sacrament 57 Their praying ouer the dead makinge it also a parte of the Ministers duetie and nourishinge the heresie of prayer for the dend 58 Their churching or purifying of Women then also abusing that Scripture The Sunne shall not burne them by day nor the Moone by night 59 Their Gang weeke and prayinge then ouer the corne and grasse 60 Their forbidding of mariage in Gang weeke in Aduent in Lent and on all the Ember dayes which the Apostle calleth a doctrine of Deuils 1 Tim. 4.1 2 3. 61 Their Sainctes Angells and Apostles dayes with their prescript seruice 62 Their fastes and abstayning from fleshe on their Eaues on Frydayes Saturdayes Ember dayes and all Lent through 63 Their dispensations from the Prelates courts of Faculties to eat fleshe at these tymes Which dispensations also haue this wholesome caluse in them sana conscientia that is with a safe conscience plainelie shewing that they make it a matter of conscience This is another doctrine of Deuills noted in the scripture before alleadged 1 Tim. 4. 64 Their Dispensations in like manner to marry in the tymes among thē forbidden which are noted before 65 Lycenses from the same authoritie to marrie in places exempt 66 Dispensations also from thence for Boyes and ignoraunt fooles to haue benefices 67 Dispensations likewise for Nonresidents 68 For hauing Two Three Foure or more benifices euen tor quot that is to saye as manie as a man will haue and can gette 69 Tollerations 70 Patronages of and presentatiō to benefices with buying and selling of aduousons 71 Their institutions into benefices by the Prelates their Inductions Proxes c. 72 Their suspensations absolutions degradations depriuations c. 73 The Prelates Chauncellours and Commissaries courtes hauing power to excommunicate alone to absolue 74 Their penance in a white sheete 75 Their commutation of penance and absoluing one man for another 76 The Prelates confirmation or Bishoping of children to assure thē of Gods fauour by a signe of mans deuising 77 The standing at the Gospell 78 The putting off the cap and making a legge when the worde Iesus is read 79 The ring of peales at burials 80 Beadmen at buriah hyred Mourners in mourning apparell 81 The hanging mourning of churches heerses with black at burials 82 Their absoluinge the dead dying excommunicate before they can haue as they say christia buriall 83 The Idoll Temles 84 The Popish vestiments as Rochet Horned cap Tippet the Surplise in parishe Churches Cope in cathedral churches 85 The visitations of their Lord Bishops and Archdeacans 86 The Prelates Lordlie dominion reuenues and retinew 87 The Priestes maintetenance by Tithes Chrismes offrings c. 88 The othes ex officio in their ecclesiasticall courts making men sweare to accuse them selues 89 The Church Wardens othe to present to the Prelates all the offences faultes and defaults committed in their Parishes against thir Articles and Iniunctions 90 The Prelates rulinge of the Church by the Popes cursed canon lawe 91 Finally their imprisonning banishing such as renounce and witnes against these abominations a foresaid and the rest yet retayned among them Thus being constreyned we haue repeated and reckoned vp diuers of the Antichristian enormities still remayning practised in their church By which the Reader may better see and iudge both of the sleightnes of their answere in this place and of the blacke constitution of their church As also comparing these and the booke by him alleadged togeather it may hence appeare that our speach is proper and fitlie declaring their estate when we saide they ioyne Christ and Antichrist togeather And therfore his answere in this place to be friuolous and of no weight Next he commeth to the proofe of our Proposition which was confirmed by these scriptures 2 Cor. 6.14 15 16. with Ezek. 43.8 2 King 17 33 34 40 41. The Proposition which we proued by these Scriptures was this That which ioyneth Christ and Antichrist togither can not make a true Christian. Nowe let euen the aduersaries them selues iudge Whether these Scriptures doe not so euidentlie proue this Proposition as none can denie it but such as are Wilfully blinded and striue against the light of their owne cōsciences But what saith he of these scriptures here alleadged Forsooth That they are wholy mismatched And why so Because the ioyninge there forbidden is vnto such Idolatrie as can not stande by any meanes with Christian faith and breaketh most directlie the First commandement whereas their transgression is but against the Seconde and may stande with true faith as he supposeth in Cranmer c. First this answere of his concerneth our Assumption whereas those scriptures were the profe of the Proposition But to let this passe let vs consider the answere it selfe howe worthy and clerk like it is These scriptures he saith forbid ioyning to such Idolatrie as can not stande with Christian faith and breaketh most directlie the First commaundement 1. Jf this were so what then Doe they not therfore forbid ioyning to Antichristian idolatrie and that false worship which breaketh the second cōmaundement 2 Secondlie he can not denie but as we iudge of their way and estate so it is a transgression against the Second commaundement Nowe Samuell saith Rebellion is as the sinne of witchcraft and transgression is wickednes idolatry 1 Sam. 19. See then what advantage he getteth by his owne answere 3.
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
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