nothing for your purpose For you speak not of perfect knowledg but of sound knowledg that Epithete doth not argue the quantity or perfect measure but the quality or true condition of knowledg which I do avouch by the former groundes to be a true convertible signe of sanctification so of a Saynt Pure affection also is another true token of Sanctification Matt. 5.8 1. Tim. 1.5 Tit. 1.15 which pure hart or affection is not a hart voyde of sinn but of hipocrisy for that you object of Paul Rom. 7.18.21 it is nothing to overthrow his pure affection For though he had sinne yet he know nothing by himself whereof he had not repented Continuall practise of Holy dutyes also is a true signe of a Saynt or a Sanctified person Psal 119.101.102.106.112 And although Ecclesiastes saith that ther is no man without sinne vet that hindreth not but that some may continualy practise their dutyes sith this is the summe of al that by repentaÌ„ce faith which are the continual practise of the Saynts a man doth alwayes performe his duty the speech of Eclestastes is the sentence of the law not of the gospel But heerin is your monstrous fraud and abhominable dissembling manifested that vnder these doubtful termes of sound knowledg pure affection practise of duty allwayes you would bleare mens eyes that they should not see the truth VVhat doe you think that any of vs would be so absurd as to say that perfect knowledg love obedience without any imperfection or fault are the signes of Sanctification And yet wee say that sound knowledg a pure hart and continual practise of Holy dutyes are the most infallible tokens of true Saynts and men truly Sanctified But you are wholly transformed as I perceave into vayne jangling In the next place I doe acknowledg that your fix affirmatives are somthing to the purpose But neverthelesse you have mingled much chaffe with the wheate wherfore breefly in all that which you write page 85. 86. 87. 88 Concerning this matter I doe observe these particulars Namely 1. That although an outward calling profession and baptisme to the faith be part of the signes of Saynts Namely visible markes outwardly yet they must be thus qualified els they are nothing but pictures or images resembling shadowing Sanctification superficialy For they must be true inward also True calling profession baptisme inward calling profession baptisme are the infallible tokens of Sanctification and Saynts The inward must be discerned by the outward the truth must be judged by the word He that is so called so professeth is so baptised as the word teacheth that is to say He that is called and Seperated from the VVorld Antichristianisme all false wayes knowne vnto him he that professeth that true faith taught in the New Testament of Christ which is but one he that is baptised into that true faith after that true manner Christ hath prescribed I must needs say that he is truly called truly professeth is truly baptized and so he by reason of his outward true calling true profession of the true faith and true baptisme is discerned judged to be inwardly called inwardly to have faith to be inwardly baptized that truly A company of men thus called professing baptized are Saynts But if half ot but some of them only be thus the rest impenitent obstinate in sinne it cannot possibly be that they should joyntly together be a true Church being light darkenes righteousnes impenitency Christ and Belial or being joyned together those former called professing baptized doe forsake their righteousnes partake with the wicked in their sinnes and so shal receave of their plagues How then can that mixt company be called Saynts yea they are as accessary to fearful sinne before the Lord before men judging according to the rules of Gods word which is the touchstone of al truth according wherevnto all our judgments must be squared as by a canon rule of direction 2. The better part visible signes of Gods favour and presence Gods good pleasure acceptation are excellent respects in the Church But they are not demonstrative proper adjuncts of saynts sufficieÌ„t to cause a mixt company to be al saynts in definition But you speak of a mixt company one way wee vnderstand a mixt company another way You define a mixt company to be of men that are truly Sanctified and men openly wicked profane I for my part doe abhorre to call such a Company Saynts Nay I should rather and that truly call such a mixt Company a false Church and all of them visiblie Antichristians Neyther doe I any whitt quayle that you say all divines say-so I know ther is oâ—â— namely Iohn the divine the rest of the Apostles that teach the contrary if the divinity of your divines be contrary to the divinity of the Apostles Iohn that worthy divine I reject it I abhorre it I wish it cast to the bottomlesse pit from whence it came For know you Mr. Bern. that the worser part somtyme giveth denomination to the thing If a peck of wheate be intermingled with an hundreth quartar of chaffe it is not a heape of wheate but of chaffe if a pint of wine be mingled with a gallon of lees it is the lees of wine not wine you know in Logick conclusio sequitur deteriorem partem Now a company of wicked men having some few Saynts known only to the Lord among theÌ„ for being mingled with the wicked in Spiritual communion they cannot be judged Saynts by the rule of Gods word to man particularly certaynly as your assemblies of England are cannot be al caled Saynts in any colour of truth For then al the men of England are Saynts seing they al are joyned together into one Ecclesiastical body which I suppose you cannot nor dare not say the Scripture ever intended so to give them denomination but you must vnderstand that we acknowledg the visible Church a mixt company in the Lords account estimation in our general comprehension For so wee learne that the visible Church consisteth of wheate tares Mat. 13. The Lord he knoweth that the Church hath Hypocrites in it we are informed so by the scriptures ther were but twelve Apostles one of them was a Devil but eight persons in the Arck cursed Cham was one but foure persons in the beginning Runagate Kain was one but stil we deny that open wicked impenitent persons can be called Saynts bicause of the communion presence of some elect ones who are only known vnto the Lord being of one ecclesiastical body with the wicked Neither can a wicked company be called Holy or Saints truly in respect of the visible signes of Gods favour or presence For then the Papists Anabaptists Familists Arrians among them Exod. 3.5 the ground was caled Holy Mat. 4.5 Ierusalem is caled the Holy cittie typicaly
though it occupie the place or a natural part So an Hypocrite or one that continueth not to the end possesseth only a rome in the visible Church is not indeed a true member You wil demaund then why we receave Hypocrites among vs wherto I answer we cannot discerne an hypocrite therfor we are to judg of men according to that we see measuring them by the word of God That which is concealed from vs wee are not to prie into VVherfor our judgment must alter chang as occasions varie so the Scripture speaketh of a righteous man forsaking his righteousnes Ezech. 18.24 VVhereas in truth the gifts calling of God are without repentance Rom. 11.29 Breely therfor to deliver vnto you the truth I hold concerning this point 1. The visible Church consisteth of an outward inward communion 2. The inward communion is knowne only to God So are the members therof 3. The outward visible communion is 〈◊〉 discerned by men So are the members thereof 4. VVee aâ—â— to judg men for the present to be both of the inward outward communion if they manifest to vs an ourward 〈◊〉 faith ◠〈◊〉 afterward men Apostate finaly then wee chandg our mynd say they were â—ever of vs for had they been of vs they would have continued with vs. Now Mr. Bern. I pray you answer vs this which wee thus justifie out of the word if you can if you cannot yeeld to the truth embrace the faith wee shal rejoyce 〈◊〉 you with you Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the sixth Section Mr. Bern. in his book intitâ—led the Seperatists Schisme pa. 83. hath these wordes viz Their fifth error is that only Saynts that is a people forsaking al knowne sin of which they may be convinced doing al the knowne wil of God increasing abiding ever therin are the only matter of a visible Church In this Section Mr. Bern. saith thus It is an error to teach That only Saynts as Mr. Smyth defineth them by 4 properties are the only matter of a visible Church Mr. Ainswortht confutation of Mr. Bern. pag. 174. Saith that he denyeth this position disclaymeth the errors which Mr. Bern. gathereth from them referring him to them that hold it then Mr. Ainsworth sheweth what he holdeth that Saynts by calling are the only matter of a true visible Church yet that many be called few chosen Let the reader consider the exposition that I have given to this position in this section of my lettre then let him give his verdict the exposition is summarily thus much viz that seing the visible Church consisteth of an ontward inward communion they that are only of the outward visible communion as hypocrites are no true members of the visible Church but only in reputation account before men Now I demaund of Maister Bernard againe with what face or good conscience he durst thus â—â—â—se the VVorld to publish this position barely without my expoâ—â—â—ion or not to answer that which I brought for the confirmation thereof but naâ—â—dly to set it downe then only to object against it Herein you bewray to mee a mynd willing to hyde the truth to deceave the VVorld to draw the Lords truth into detestation which whither it be not the quality of a false Prophettâ— I leave to the judgment of the Godly mynded And whither hereby you doe not verefie Christs speech that you come to rob kill to destroy that therfor you are a theef a robber Ioh. 10.1.10 But bicause you are so importunate with your objections reasons let vs heer what they are First you say my description of Saynts is a proper description of the invisible members of Christ Iesus that it excludeth Hypocrites from being true matter of the visible Church I answer two things namely 1. that an Hypocrite may performe al these 4. properties mentioned in the description of Saynts for he may 1 Forsake all knowne sinne 2. doe al the knowne wil of God 3. grow in knowledg grace 4. continue to the end yet be an Hypocrite to the Lord in secâ—eatâ— doe you think Mr. Bernard that all that die thus qualified in the estimation of men are indeed saved with the L I confesse to mee they are vndoubtedly saved but are they so to the Lord make a direct answer to this particular you shal be compelled to see confesse your 〈◊〉 Vâ—â— 2. I answer more properly thus when I define Saynts I must define them not as they are in shew for the present but as they are indeed truth Now truth is so eyther before men or before God before men that is true somtyme which is false before God before God that is true somtyme which is false before men That is true before men which is proved by two or three witnesses Mat. 18.16 He therfor is a Saynt before men in truth that continueth to the end in faith repentance the fruites thereof He is a Saynt before men in â—hew appearance for the present that for the present bringeth forth fruites worthy amendement of life For a righteous man may forsake his righteousnes Ezech. 18.14 I am not therefore to define a Saynt as he is in shew for the present but as he is indeed for ever in the judgment of men neither do I define a Saynt as he is in the Lords knowledg which is not revealed to men but as he is revealed to be judged by the word of God I wil declare this by instances for your further information satisfactioÌ„ Stephen Damas Tertullus Stephen continued to the end Demas embraced the world fel back from the truth Tertullus never came to the truth for ought that is revealed I say Stephen was a true member of the visible Church who continued to the end Demas was no Saynt nor no true member of the visible Church indeed but only in shew Tertullus was no Saynt nor true member of the visible church so much as in shew or appearance what Tertullus was in secreat to the Lord I dispute not nor regard not what Demas was what Stephen was in the Lords counsel it doth not aperteyne vnto vs we must judg according to that we see know I say still with the Apostle continuance is a true propertie of a Saynt member of the visible Church indeed truth of the ful compleat communion thereof 1. Ioh. 2.19 Your second Objection reason is that by this my definition of Saynts or the matter of the visible Church so determined I exclude the members of the visible Church of the old Testament as Hezechiah David Ichosaphat Moses c. VVho committed suffered knowne sinne yea the Corinthians 2. Cor. 12.21 Also the Churches of Asia Revel 2 20.21 VVho did not amend yet were Saynts true matter of the visible Church I answer First to that of the old Testament objected by you I say your
Resolution courage to the Resolution of those three The Prelates that vrged Subscription conformity to the accusers of the Iewes I would therfor know of Mr. Bernard whither his mynd be now altered from that he held when he Preached these Sermons vppon this text if yea then I demaund whither feare of affliction love of his living reputation with the world have not caused that in him whither a man should beleeve him rather now he is a formalist then before when he was a reformist The place of Naaman the Assirian is this 2 King 5.18 When I bow in the howse of Rimmon to worship the Lord be mercifull vnto thy Servant in this point By this place Mr. Bern. intended to sinne against his conscience for he did acknowledg this truth wee now professe divers tymes was vppon the point of Seperation with some of his people with him yet loving the world prefermēt as Naaman is thought to doe he chose rather to stay stil in his vicaridge against his conscience then to leese it to follow Christ with a good conscience do you not remember Mr. Bern. what you said to mee Mr. Rob. Southw comming together from w that speaking of the daunger of walking in this truth of Christ we now professe you said you could easely die vppon the tre for the truth but you could not withour great horror think of being burned as the Martyrs were in Q. Maryes dayes that all the jorney you were casting how to dispatch your estate to get away with safety I speake this to prove vnto you the world that you were as forward to the truth of Christ with vs then as you were before to the cause of the Reformists yet as then so now you have wholly I feare finally apostated from it the L. be merciful vnto you in these your sinnes wherevppon this followeth that if ever you come to the truth of Christ wee professe you can not be admitted into the office of Elder in the Church but therein you must beare your iniquity bicause you have apostated fearfully from the truths you did acknouwledg therein giving Suspition of your constancy faythfulnes for the tyme to come whither you be a worthy Minister of your owne Church lett the Reformists judg who have betrayed their cause into the Prelates handes so shamefully as you have done wherfor be it knowne vnto you first that wee reject you Seconbly that the Reformists have just cause to reject you whither then wil you goe but to your LI. the Prelates to whome you have sworne your Can. obediēce vnto whome you have now at the last fuly returned as it were a dog to the vomit a swine to wallow in the myre But your covenant Mr. Bern. is beyond all the endevors of al the reformists of the land that you should cull out an hundreth persons of so many paris hes so far distant to enter covenant together not to heare the dumb Ministers to watch one over another to admonish one another c. And therevppon to receave the Lords Supper What was not the covenant the Church of England large enough but you must enlarge it thus Did not your conscience tel you then that the dumb ministery was vnlawful that you sinned in not admonishing your brethren therfor went to seek out an hundreth brethren where your proctor or agent could find them That al your parish were not your brethrē being not of your covenant though of the covenant of the Church of Englād or that you had two sorts of brethren one of a general nature viz all the people of the parish another of a Spiritual nature viz Those hundreth persons of your covenant yet that you admitted both those sorts of your brethren to all the holy things among you excepting the particular covenant I pray you with your logick or divinity justifie vnto vs these things But now all this is forgotten the Prelate of york hath so bewitched you with his flatterie eloquence aungels that your covenant is profaned cast in the dust men of your covenant must shift for themselves you have deceaved them like the staffe of reed you justifie your wonted speeches you love the world ease with all your hart therfor I say vnto you with the Apostle The love of the Father is not in you I do therfor Proclame you vnto the whole land to be one of the most fearful Apostates of the whole nation that excepting VVhyte Claphā you have no Superior nor equal that I know or remember who have thus often confessed witnessed much truth now not only have fallē from it but have so childishly yet most slaunderously written against the cause of the Lord to blaspheme the name of the Lord his Tabernacle them that dwell in Heaven as if bicause your sinnes werē not known Sufficiently to the world your would with inck paper publish them to al men ages to come that they might remain in record agaist you vppon the file at the day when the Lord shal recompense every man according to his worke But Mr Bernard ther is yet one other thing that I must discover to the world namely that you have written a book against the Prelates wherein you have proved by divers arguments that their authority is Antichristian this book some of your Frends have seē read though you durst not print it your self yet you would have been content a Frend should have caused it to be published vnder the vizard of an vnknowne Author is not this so Mr. Bern then tel mee with what face or conscience you can Subscribe to the Prelacy you can plead for the Prelacy is not this to build that which you have destroyed Surely all these things compared together do plainly convince your deep Hypocrisy yet in your pulpit among the simple sort you would seem a brother to the Sonnes of Thunder but I desire the Lord to open the eyes of his people that they be no longer deceaved by such Pharisaical Hypocrits as your deedes manifest you to be even in the indifferent censure of those that love you best Now therfor to conclude this Parallele of your Famous or rather infamous acts compare your resolurion against Subscription conformity with your Subscription to the Prelate of york your acknowledgment of the truth with Naamans presumptiō to sinne your covenant with your confirmity your book against the Prelates your book against the Seperation therevppon it will follow that you are as chandgable as the Moone as mutable as Proteus as variable as the Chamaeleon And whereas you object aganst me pag. 37. 73. that before I came to the truth I wrote against it was distracted to fro before I saw it cleered to my judgmēt conscience I must needes acknowledg it so to be which was my greater sinne the weaknes of my
ber pag. 81. First he saith the Scripture never setteth forth any of Gods people by this marke say you so Mr. Bern is not the Scripture plentiful in declaring vnto vs that the L. addeth dayly to the Church such as should be saved Act. 2.47 that they that gladly receaved the word were baptized added to the Church continued therin Act. 2.14.42 doth not the Apostle teach that ther is one faith one body one baptisme one Lord but one Eph. 4. And that they that are not of this faith body baptisme Lord are without the faith without the body that is the Church without the true baptisme without this true Lord King Iesus Christ so are none of Gods people visible none of Christs Kingdome none of Christs body none of his faith baptisme Are not true faith prayer baptisme the Lords Supper the true church plaine pregnant do monstrative proper adjuncts of Gods visible people how can you with any face of truth or a good conscieÌ„ce of your judgment knowledg say that to be of a true visible church is no note of Gods visible people out you say further that he synneth which doth not live in a true coÌ„stituted Church ordinarily when he can hath meanes offered nay we say further then so that he synneth that doth not seek meanes to live in a true constituted Church not only he that vseth not meanes offered so to doe wherfor we say that which you say more also but I pray you what meaneth your ordinarily living in a true constituted church doe you hold that ther are two sorts of meÌ„bers conversers in the true church some ordinary some occasional or extraordinary do you think that to be of a true chuch to live in a true church are one thing we say that members of true churches are al ordinary of one kind consideration further we say that it is one thing to be of a true church or a member of a true church another thing to live in the true church a man may be a member of a true church potentialy actualy as I have already declared in the 4. former particulars but al this is nothing to that which I affirme for I say thus that he which is not of a true visible Church is no subject of Chr. Kingdom that is he is not vnder the visible dominion Lordship of Chr. in his church which is his Kingdom I do not say that he is invisiblie none of the L. people for a man may be one of the L. people in election grace invisiblie yet not in the true visible church which is Chr. visible Kingdom againe take an instance to exemplifie the mater al we that are of the seperated churches in these contryes are of the common wealth of England therfor subiects of the King of England our Soveraigne Lord on earth though we are not actually vnder the execution of his lawes courts officers by reason of banishment that we may submit to Chr. ordinance c. So a true seperated Christian is a subject of Chr. visible politie Kingdom which is his church eyther actually or potentially although by banishment that is by vndeserved communication by imprissonmeÌ„t by other occasions he be actualy absented seperated from the presence therof wherfor Mr. Bern. I doe in this section indite you before the L. the world as one that of purpose so maliciousty perverteth my meaning slaundereth this excellent truth of God doth not your conscieÌ„ce tel you may you not read it in the copy of my lettre that I distingnish betwixt Gods people which are of two sortes visible subjects of Ch. visible church which is his Kingd invisible ones known only to the L. certaynly particularly further this doctryn of myne you say is contrary to 4 places of Scripture pa. 81. the first place is Gal. 3.7.9 the Apostles wordes are these They which are of saith are the children of AbrahaÌ„ vs 7. they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham which scripture proveth my doctryne or rather the L. truth I say that faith heer is oposed to the works of the law that faith signifieth a visible faith For the Apostle Iames saith Iam. 3 21-24 Speaking of the same matter viz of Abrahams faith that it was made perfect by works for if Abrahams faith had not been manifested by his workes it had been invisible it would not have been discerned by maÌ„ therfor in the same place vs 14. the Ap. speaketh directly of a visible faith this place of the Ap. therfor confirmeth my assertioÌ„ plainly that they that are not of a true constituted Church are no subjects of Chr. Kingd bicause they do not by their workes shew their faith _____ but if they have faith they have it with God not with man who can judg only by the fruites The second place is 1. Ioh. 3.14 where the Apostle speaketh thus VVee know we are traÌ„slated from death to life bicause we love the brethren VVho are the brethren are not they that cal God Father who can cal God Father but they that have Christ for their Lord Mr. for their Elder brother To whome is Christ Lord Mr. but to them that are subjects of his Kingdome So that this place also maketh most evidently for the confirmation of this truth of God which I defend But you Mr. Bern. dreame of am visible faith of an invisible Kingdome of an invisible brotherhood or consanguinity whereas Christ saith directely that they which doe the wil of God are his brethren of his Fraternity Marc. 3.35 what have we to do with things invisible hidden secreat Deut. 29.29 I avouch that you cannot prove to me by any rule of Gods word certaynly that those that are not members of a true constituted Church are subjects of Christs Kingdome invisible as you I am sure intend it Further what is the love of the brethren wherof the Apostle speaketh is it not a visible love testified in the performance of the visible â—utyes of love Christ faith Ioh. 14.25 if ye love me keep my commaundements obedience is the true touchstone of the love of God 1. Ioh. 3.17 whosoever hath this worlds good seeth his brother need chutteth vp his compassion from him how dwelleth the love of God in him So the visible dutyes of brotherly love are the true touchstone of brotherly love but the principal visible dutyes of brotherly love are the dutyes of admonition consolation supportation patience 1. Thes 5.14 Exhortation edification vs. 11. among theÌ„ admonition is most excellent Mat. 18 15-17 compared with Levit. 19.17 they therfor that altogether omit these visible dutyes of admonition in the degrees thereof injoyned by Christ the Apostles how can they be said to love the brethren but al they that live out of a true constituted Church wholy omit the visible dutyes
fellowship communion agreement concord or part with you Answer to this now Maister Bernard and seduce your hearers no longer with vanityes Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the eighth Section Mr. Ber. in his book intituled the Sep. Schisme pa. 103. hath these wordes viz that ouâ— seaventh error should be to hold That the sinne of one man publiquely obstinately stood in being not reformed nor the offender cast out doth so pollute the whole congregation that none may communicate with the same in any of the Holy things of God though it be a Church rightly constituted til the party be excommunicated In this eighth Section the position is thus vttered by you by mee justified viz That one sinne of one man publiquely and obstinately stood in and not reformed by a true constituted Church doth so pollute it that none may communicate with it in the Holy things of God til the partie offending be by the Church put out after lawfull conviction Afterward expounding this truth I say that if the Church hold this obstinate impenitent convicted person in communion they consent to his sinne as the civil magistrate suffering wilful murther consenteth vnto it Mr. Ains confutat of Mr. Bern. pag. 178.179 doth first renounce this truth denyeth it to be either their judgment or practise referring vs to the confession of their faith Art 26. wher their judgmeÌ„t is that none is to Seperate for offences but by due order to seek redresse yet afterward affirmeth that if the Church will not rebuke nor cast out a man obstinate and impenitent in wickednes but plead for him against such as call vppon them for judgment then are all such abettors of the wicked sinner themâ—elves and that in a high degree now not that one mans sinne but the sinne of them al polluteth them Wel Mr. Ains you I wil not differ about this point for wither it be his sinne consented vnto by them or their sin which is a consent approbation to his sinne or both I regard not The truth is the truth that that one sinne polluteth them al by contagion as the leaven leaveneth the whole lump although Mr. Bern. hath not so plainly directely propounded it as he might yet let it not be denyed for it is the truth he doth chardg vs withal giving a true exposition I tell you true Mr. Ains you deny the truth if you deny the position but indeed your denyall your affirmation contradict Heer Mr. Bern. for your sake I wil performe two things First I wil confirme this truth which we defend against you that joyne with open knowne sinners in the communion of your false Church Secondly I wil refel your cavils against this truth of God wherin wee walk For the first point I wish you to remember what hath been proved vnto you in the former Section viz That Christs ministerial powre is given to the body of the Church which if it be true as it is proved to be the vndoubted truth of God then this second position followeth necessarily therevppon therefore is to be embraced for the truth of God in like manner For every consequent necessarily deduced from the Scripture is as wel as truly the word of truth as that which is in plaine termes expressed noted downe in nomber of wordes For even as the branches of the tree doe as truly proceed from the root as the great graines or body of the tree are al of one kind nature doth root body graynes braunches So a necessary consequent growing by true discourse out of the Scripture is aswel as truly the word of truth as the position or doctryne or sentence is whence it was raised wherfor I frame an argument from the former ground afteÌ„r this manner If they that have Christs ministerial powre to reforme obstinate convicted sinners or to excommunicate theÌ„ do neither reforme them nor cast them out froÌ„ among them but suffer them stil in communion consenting therby to their sinn then the persons so suffering consenting to sinne are polluted by contagion of the sin impenitent wicked sinner But it may fal out that a Church true in the constitution having Christs ministerial powre yet afterward declining may neither reforme an obstinate convicted sinner nor cast him out of their communion but may suffer him stil in communion therby consenting to his sinne Ergo a Church truly constituted having Christs Ministeriall powre of reformation or excommunication suffering and consenting to sinne sinners convinced are polluted by infection of that sinne and of that impenitent obstinate convicted sinner And so by necessary consequent I conclude after this manner If a Church truly constituted be all of them polluted by consent as is already declared then they do violate and profane all the Holy things of God wherin they pertake For to the vncleane nothing is cleane as the Apostle testifieth Tit. 1.15 the Prophet Esa 1.12 But a Church truly constituted may grow to polution by consenting to obstinate sinne sinners as is already declared Therfor a Church truly constituted may grow to the violation manifest profanation of al the Holy things of God From this evident truth I proceed reason after this manner To that Church company or communion of men we may not joyne in Spirituall communion that violateth or profaneth the holy things of God But a Church truly constituted may grow to the violation manifest profanation of al the Holy things of God Ergo to a Church truly constituted growne to polute violate the holy things of God we are not to joyne in communion Thus you se Mr. Ber. the evidence of this truth manifested vnto your conscience if the Lord vouchsafe you mercy to see the truth Like arguments may be drawne from many places of Scripture as from Mat. 13.33 compared with 1. Cor. 5.6 an argument may be framed thus As the whole lump the feast of the passeover was leavened with a litle leaveÌ„ so one open knowne sinne polluteth the visible Church the holy things therof for you must vnderstand that the Apostle doth not cal vnknowne sinne leaven but by leaven he vnderstandeth sinne openly knowne convinced vnrepented els ther could be no communion for men on earth But the Apostle our Saviour saith out of the law that a litle leaven leaveneth the whole lump feast of the passeover Therfor one sinne convinced vnrepented polluteth the visible church the holy things therof therevnto may no man joyne Againe from persons ceremonialy poluted so defiling the Sanctuary of the Lord as appeareth Nomb. 19.13.20 Hag. 2.14 I reason thus As persons ceremonialy poluted vnclensed entering into the Sanctuary of the Lord or medling with the holy flesh or pottage did polute the Sanctuary the holy flesh pottage the rest So the visible Church of the new Testament morally poluted impenitent in sin medling with the holy things
of God polute defile the same But the L. avoucheth by the mouth of his holy Prophets that persons ceremonialy vncleane vnclensed entering vnto the Sanctuary or medling with holy flesh or pottage polute defile them Therfor the visible Church of the new testament morally poluted impenitent in sin dealing with the holy things do profane them therfor no man with good conscience can joyne with that profanation Finally as in the old testament the King Magistrates suffering sin vnpunished were poluted therwith by consent So in the new testament the visible church who are Kings Spiritualy have committed vnto them the judgments of the L. the ministerial powre of Christ suffering sinne vnreformed among them are polluted thereby But in the Old Testament the Kings and Magistrates by your owne confession Mr. Bernard pag. 94. were poluted with sinne vnreformed in the common wealth Therfor in the New Testament the visible Church who are Kings Spiritualy having committed vnto them the judgments of the L. the ministerial powre of Christ suffering sinne vnreformed among them are poluted therby so no communioÌ„ to be had with them least partaking with them in sinne by consent we receave of their plagues Now you se evidently proved by testimonies of Scriptures by direct consequents from the same that it is vnlawful for any man to joyne to a Church that was truly constituted now growne to profane violate the holy things of God by consenting to sin wicked obstinate convinced impenitent sinners that therfor much more is it vnlawful to joyne to your false churches which never were truly constituted since the defectioÌ„ of Antichrist but remaine in the gulfe of Antichristianisme vnto this day the first point therfor being manifest the second foloweth to be enterprised which is to answer the objections cavils which you make against this comfortable truth of the L. I cal it a comfortable truth bicause herin consisteth the true comfort of churches Christians publiquely privately that they neither live in nor consent to any known sin in themselves or other For otherwise seing sinnes corruptions break out dayly in the best Churches Christians herin is our comfor that we give no allowance to them no not so much as by our presence in that communion wher open known sinne is suffered as it is most plentifully and abundantly in your false Churches and in other Churches that are of a true constitution In your objections against this truth the first thing that I reprove is that you do falsely interpret consent to sin for a man may consent to sin though he in judgment affection contenaÌ„ce action do declare his dislike of it as for exaÌ„ple Ely did al this to his sonnes that poluted the L. Sacrifices coÌ„mitted adultery with the weomen that came to sacrifice 1. SaÌ„ 2.22.23 for he should have proceded to the vtmost that the word of God had required at his haÌ„ds viz to have put his soÌ„nes to death which bicause he did not he was poluted with their sinnes by conseÌ„t therfor the fearful judgmeÌ„t of God befel him which whsooever heard both their eares tingled 1. Sa. 3.11 so except a maÌ„ do by al meÌ„ anes save himself from the froward generation by Seperating himself as the Apostle practised counselleth Act. 2.4 19.9 2. cor 6.17 he cannot be fre fro the contagion of their sin 〈◊〉 the profanation of al the Holy things of God For these places doe evidently declare thâ—â— Paul the Apostles not only commaund to seperate from the Gentils but froÌ„ the Iewes who were the true Church of God now growing obstinate in sinne so practised themselves commaunding the Disciples training them vp by his example so to do so teaching vs to follow his example herein In the next place you proceed to declare by divers reasons such as they are that to joyne to the holy things when obstinate impenitent sinners partake in them is no sinne your first reason is For that in the old Testament ther was no Sacrifice appointed for this Ergo it is no sinne I deny the antecedent I declare the contrary by the examples of the tribe of Bemjamin consenting to the sinne of adultery committed vppon the Levites concubine Iudg. 19. 20. of the tribes of Israel fearing lest wrath should fal vppon them for suffering their brethren to make another altar to forsake the true worship of God as they suspected Iosh. 22. of Achans sin which brought wrath vppon the whole congregation VVherefore in the law the Lord did appoint a Sacrifice for the whole congregation aswell as for any particular person Levitt 4.13 A Second reason of yours is For that in the Old Testament the Godly are never reproved for being present at the ministration of holy things though wicked men were present but the Prophets reprove the Preists only for not Seperating the cleane from the vncleane wherto I answer that their communion was typical therfor persons typically cleane though wicked in their lives might come to Sacrifice yet not pollute others as I have already sufficiently declared in the former Section besides whereas the Prophets reprove the Preists the Saints in the new Testament succeed the carnal Preists as Spiritual Preists therby it followeth that the Saints in the new Testament are polluted by not distinguishing seperating the cleane from the vncleane see these places of Scripture Ezech. 22.26 compared with Revel 1.6 11.1 Iude vs 23.2 Cor. 6.17 But stil some may object that in the old Testament they did pray preach praise God yet notwithstaÌ„ding the faithful herein were not defiled if the wicked did joyne with them in communion thereof therfor now vnder the new Testament though meÌ„ do joyne in communion with open known sinne suffer known sinne yet may be saynts vnpolluted in communion this is the very pith warrow of your second abjection Mr. Bern. wherto I make answer many waies First I deny him to be a Saynt or that he ought to be esteemed a Saynt of vs that is impenâ—tent in any knowne sinne Knowne I say to him For I may know it to be a sinne yet bicause he knoweth it not so to be he cannot be accounted impenitent though he live in it sith ignorance is a sinne whereof a man repenteth generaly so in his generall repentance of sinnes done of ignorance that particular sinne is included Secondly I am to judg of another according to that which I know according to the rule of the word therin wherfor if i know any of my brethren to live in any sinne knowne to me I must admonish him prove it to him to be sinne require his repentance if he repent not to take withnesses theÌ„ to admonish him before withnesses so to convince it againe to his conscience if he repent not then to tel it to the Church wher
also he is to be admoniâ—hed convinced openly if then he repent not to mee he is a Heathen Publicane no Saynt what he is in the L. account to himself in secreat I know not nor regard for it aperteyneth not to me Lastly for the consequence of the argument viz That seing in the Old Testament the faithful were not defiled joyning in prayer preaching praising God with open known sinners therefore wee in the New Testament so doing are not defiled I deny vtterly yea and I deny the Antecedent in some sence also It shall not be vnprofitable therefore fully to discussce both the Antecedent and the consequence of this Objection The Antecedent is thus to be expounded conceaved of namely That the L. required one thing outwardly in the communion of the Church another thing inwardly in the hart for acceptation before God If any circumcized Israelite or proselyte clensed according to the purification of the Sanctuarie did joyne in prayer preaching praising God no man could justly refuse his outward communion in these actions seing he was outwardly cleane according to the dispensation of those tymes For vs in the new Testament ther are required other visible actions for our outward clensing which were not then required of the carnall Israelites for their outward clensing if they did declare their inward repentance by Sacrifices for their sinnes general Speciall by clensing themselves with those rites ceremonies which were appointed by the Lord for those infant tymes of the Church they were to be judged holy by al men so communion might be had with them without sinne but if they were not clensed according to the purification of the Sanctuary they were not visibly cleane therfor communion could not be had with them without sinne so Hezechiahs prayer importeth 2. Chron. 30 18-â—â— the Prophets declare plainly NoÌ„b. 19.31.20 Hag. 2.14 yet heer also cautions must be remembred viz That this ceremoniall vncleanenes must be made known vnto others for otherwise how could it polute others if it were vnknowne to them Furthermore it cannot be denyed but that the Sonnes of Belial very vild wicked men did deale with the holy things in the old Testament but yet I say it cannot be proved but they were visiblie cleane according to the dispensation of those tymes the Lord did not then require men to proceede with their brethren in the thre degrees of admonition so to bring them to the acknowledgment of their sinne repentance That is the Lords dispensation for the new Testament But the L. order for those tymes was 1. reproof for sinne Levit. 19.17 2. The partie reproved was to offer a Sacrifice which if he did he was clensed from hys sinne visiblie Levit. 4.23 3. If he wilfully refused to harken he was to be promoted to the Magistrate put to death for his presumption Levit. 15.30.31 Deut. 17.12 This was the L. aeconomie for those tymes when this order was violated then al communion was defiled whiles it was observed all was wel in the visible communion Let any man declare the contrary if he be able breefly therfor to make a ful answer to the objection if the faithful did keep communion with persons visiblie vncleane according to the vncleanenes of the old Testament knowne vnto them I say they were polluted with their vncleanenes by consenting therto to the violation of the Lords order appointed for those tymes if men were the children of Belial yet were clensed according to the dispensation of the Old Testament their visible clensing did intitle them to the ordinances of the old Testament before men though before God their consciences were impure wherfor both the Antecedent consequent of the argument are weake and vnsound so this truth of God remayneth firme that impenitency in sinne defileth the communion of the visible Church as in the old Testament Your third reason is for that the Prophets did not Seperate who did know the meaning of the L. for this thing nor taught not the people so to do I answer as in the new Testament so in the old ther ought not to be Seperation til the vtmost meanes be sought for redresse of things The vtmost meanes for reforming abuses in the Old Testament was the Magistrates authority in whose hands the powre of reforming was Hence it is that the Prophets alwayes reproove the Kings for the wickednes of the Land but the Lord did never teach bicause he thought it not meet ther being but one true Church that when the King neglected his duty the people should forsake the Holy things of God Seperate but stil they ought to depend vppon the Lord for redresse of things but now in the New Testament the Lords administration in this particular is otherwise 1. Visible Churches may be infinite so ther is a possibility of enjoying the Lords ordiâ—ances though a man forsake the communion of one Church 2. the fulnes of tyme being come the nonage of the Church being past the Lord hath now revealed his whole wil pleasure hath set vs at liberty whereas in the old Testament they were in bondage vnder worldly ordinances 3. The Saints now in the new Testament are answerable to the Kings in the old Testament having powre Ecclesiastical in their hands but not civil to reforme the abuses that arise in the visible Church 4. Therfor we are in the new Tament to vse al meanes appointed by the Lord for reformation before wee Seperate al the meanes I say whatsoever If then ther be no reformation what then I answer Seperation is then lawful why The reasons are these 1. The visible Church cealeth to be a time Church being obstinate in sinne from a false Church Seperation is lawful 2. the Lord hath commaunded to come out â—â—om among persons obstinate in sinne so the Apostles practised 2. Cor. 6.17 Act. 19.9 2.40 3. bicause the Lord hath said that if we pertake with them in their sinnes we shal receave of their plagues 4. bicause if but two or thre faithful ones being Seperated joyne together they are a true Church vnto Christ where the Lords presence acceptance is But in the Old Testament they were necessarily tyed to the Kingdome Preisthood Temple for the worship obedience of God but now in the New Testament al things are free the bondage is gone Mr. Bern. I would have you note this wel lay it vp in your hart for your instruction reformation for in this particular I know you al that feare God in the land are scandalized from the truth not vnderstanding the difference between the New Testament the ordinances thereof the Old Testament with the ordinances thereof Summarily therefor to deliver the truth The Church Ministery VVorship Government of the Old Testament were so constituted by the Lord as that no Seperation could be made from them seing they were al by Succession
you see they vanish away as chaffe before the wind your matter is false not bad as appeareth evidently if you wil not be blind To proceed pag. 116-122 of your book you describe vnto vs the true forme of the Church inwardly to be the Spirit Faith Love outwardly the word profession the Sacramēt of the L. Supper these things say you are in your assemblies Ergo you conclude your Church hath a true forme I answer have not the Papists the word preached do not they make profession live as strictly as you do not they communicate in the L. Supper so by consequent have Love Faith the Spirit yet you say they are false Churches wanting the true forme even so are you although you do al that they doe much more for so you are much bettered in doctrine vse of the Sacrament but in profession practise I suppose you are inferior to many of them bicause rejecting Christ in his offices as hath been said especialy in his Kingdom it is impossible in that constitution communion you should aright vse the word make profession partake in the Sacrament or have the true visible Love Faith Spirit of Christ For a false matters vncapable of a true forme it is impossible that the body of Antichrist should have the true Spirit of Christ or the true covenant new Testament of Christ invested vppon them invisibly I hope wel am perswaded of millions among you but I speake of your visible politique body Ecclesiastical in that mixture of persons subordination of Ecclesiastical officers communiō Spiritual in the Holy things which by Law is established supported in your Ecclesiastical assemblies But pag. 121. you bid vs note this what viz that corruptions doe not hinder men from being a true Church before men no more then the corruptions of the hart do hinder a man from being an elect one invisiblie to the Lord I suppose bicause you bid vs in the margent of your book note this that you account it a matter worth noting and I surely think it a note worth nothing For although corruptions of matters accidentall make not a false Church yet corruptions essential of matters essential make a false church namely if the matter be false or the forme false yea I avouch that if a truly constituted Church detected of corruptions accidental convinced impenitent therin do so continue they become a false Church as hath been proved already before in the 8. Section for impenitency inward or outward maketh a false Christian Church inwardly or outwardly according to due proportion Furthermore pag. 122-128 you bring vs three true visible properties of your true Church as you say 1. continuance in the vse of the word Sacraments prayer 2. the holding forth of the truth against the enemyes thereof 3. mutual care for the welfare each of other al these you say you have among you so you say you must needes be a true Church I answer Seing your matter and forme is false your propertyes cannot be true For they arise necessarily from the vnion of the matter and forme or from the forme induced vppon the matter seing therefore the first is already proved the latter also must needs follow but let vs examine these things particularly I denie therfor in the first place that you have wel propounded the propertyes of the true Church For the first and principal essential property of a true Church is interest and title to al the Holy things which is extant in divers particulars as parcels of that general and whole property therfore a people declaring their faith and repentance by Seperating themselves from all vncleanenes by resigning themselves wholy to the Lord to become his people have God for their Father Christ for their King Preist and Prophett and so with Christ have title to all the meanes of Salvation and this title consisteth in the VVord Sacraments Censures Prayers Almes and al other parts of Spirituall visible communion whatsoever even as when the soule is induced vppon the matter viz when the breath of life is breathed into the nosthrils of dust of the Earth Genes 2. then ther is a man with a reasonable and Religions Soule So when a company of faithful people are invested with the New Testament of Christ then ther is in them title to al the holy things of God whatsoever This is evident by that which I have before manifested in the seaventh Section whither the Reader is to be referred wherfore Mr. Bern. to apply this vnto your Church I avouch that seing you are a false matter of a Church and have a false forme or covenāt induced vppon you as hath been shewed before therefore you have no true title to the meanes of Salvation but in vsurping the VVord Sacraments Censures Prayers Almes c. you therein incurre the reproof of the Prophet saying Psalm 50.16 what hast thou to doe to declare myne ordinances that thou shouldest make my covenant into thy mouth seing thou hatest to be reformed and hast cast my wordes behind thee And as the Prophet speaketh Esay 1. 11-18 your worship is iniquity I cannot beare it I am weary of it I hate it Therefore you may plead as long as you will the Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord yet I say vntill you intertayne Christs true Kingdome Preisthood Prophecy you are but vsurpers of all that visible communion in the Word Sacraments Prayers c. which is among you For it doth not follow that bicause you have the Word Sacraments Censures prayers c. therefore you are a true Church neither are the vsing of these true propertyes of a true Church But the title to them is the true propertie of a true Church For the Papists and all Antichristians and Heretiques vse the Word Sacraments Censures prayers but they are not therfor a true Church as I know you will confesse But heer you wish vs againe pag. 122. to observe well Lett vs heer what it is that you wish vs to observe well Namely the true VVord preached and the true Sacraments administred are the true propertyes to a true Church And that you have those things as you say well VVhat is the true word and what are the true Sacraments is not the true word the true doctryne of the word the true doctryne of the New Testament but you have rejected the whole doctryne of Christs Kingdome in a manner and have advanced all that false doctryne of the Antichristian hierarchy which is taught and commaunded by Law to be taught in your Church And you in your pulpits proclayme all them Heretiques or Schismatiques that teach and erect the Church Ministerie VVorship and Government according to the paterne of Christ his New Testament And so you have abrogated and disanulled the VVord of God by your traditions and Antichristian devises Againe VVhat are true Sacraments is the breaking of bread and
wel to follow the Holy Ghosts prophecy Revel 17.16 even to make the whore of Babylon desolate and naked to eate her Flesh and burne her with fire and not to suffer her wares that is her vessels of wood Ivory Brasse Iron marble to be bought any more which I am perswaded shal in due tyme be accomplished that as the goodly buildings of the Abbayes Monasteries Nunries are already destroyed made barnes stables swineslyes jakes so shal it be done with al the Idol Temples when the howre of their visitation shal come whereas you object for the justifying of the vse of the Idol Temples that seing Antichrist sitteth in the Church of God that therfor when the Idol Temples were built the Church took possession of them to keep possession for the Lord in his creatures therby concluding a lawful vse of them now for the Church restored I answer you your ground is faulty therfor your building tottereth the place of the Apostle 2. Thes 2.4 wher it is said that Antichrist sitteth in the Temple of God is falsely by you conceaved interpreted for it doth not import that as you would have it Antichrists Church the true Church of Christ are one the same that the same company of men can be and are both the true visible Church of Christ at that same tyme the Church of Antichrist this is impossible for the true Church is not the false Church But this is the meaning viz either that Antichrist shal sitt in the consciences of men which is properly the Temple of God Or that Antichrist shall arise vp out of that company of men which once were the Temple of God as Rome was or that the Church being true in the constitution Antichrist shal foyst into it by litle and litle his false ministery VVorship and Government as experience teacheth he hath done For a true Church may have Antichristian ordinances retayned raised vp in it this being the true meaning of the Apostle how can you hence conclude soundly that the true Church tooke possession of the Temples which the false Church of Antichrist built Seing the true Church is not the false Church seing that the temples were built in the palpable darknes of grosse popery some of them perhaps dedicated to heathen Idols some of them to Antichristian Idols as ther Hee shee Saints al of them to Devils For if Ieroboams Preists were appointed for Devils 2. Chron. 11.15 if the Antichristian preists are the Spirit of Devils Revel 16.14 the worship of Antichristians the worship of Devils Revel 9.20 the Antichristian Churches the habitation of Devils Revel 18.2 then the Temples are dedicated to Devils not that they intended so to dedicate them but for that they are so indeed the Lord accounting that to be done to the Devil which is not done to him as he hath commaunded the Devill substituting himself in Gods place when men go a whoring after ther owne inventions Therefor the Apostle saith plainly that the Gentils Sacrifice to Devils 1. Cor. 10.20 to conclude this point therfor so to leave you to meditate vppon these things Seing the Gentils Sacrifice to Devils seing the Antichristians worship Devils seing Ieroboams preists were appointed for Devils yet al these intended to worship God even the true God then it followeth that though the Antichristians did intend to dedicate their Temples to the true God which yet is not granted neverthelesse they were dedicated to Devils therfor are to be raced downe converted to the habitation of Iim Zijm Satyres Shrich â—â—yles Raveas as the Prophet speaketh Esay 34 8-15 The eighteenth Section Your first point now commeth in the last place to be considered viz. 1. In seperating from al the reformed Churches you say we do il Let vs consider what we hold Surely we say the Churches are of two sorts false Churches such as yours of worksop is al others of like fashion 2. true Churches those also of two sorts pure wherin no open knowne sinne is suffered corrupt wherin some one or more knowne sinne is tolerated to the true Churches which are pure wee may wil joyne to the true Churches which are corrupt we cary our selves thus First we labor to discover their faults vnto them admonishing them to reforme which wee are bound to doe bicause they are our brethren Secondly if they wil not reforme after we have convinced their errors vnto them we depart from them lest wee should partake with their sinnes this is our judgment practise if you can reprove it let vs heer from you wee pray you Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the eighteenth Section Heer I desire the Gentle Reader not to be offended that wee endevouring to walk in the liberty of the gospel do not tie our selves to any Church or Churches whatsoever but only to the rules of Gods word therfor howsoever it may seem odious that wee Seperate from al churches yet the causses being indifferently considered the matter wil seme reasonable for we Seperate from al Churches vppon several reasons 1. From some such as are the English Churches we Seperate for the Falsehood of them that is a just cause in any indifferent mans judgment 2. from other such as are the Reformed Churches wee Seperate not for that they are false but for that being true they are corrupt herein our Seperation is not total but for a tyme til we have performed our dutyes vnto them wheÌ„ we have therfor admonished them of their corruptions they repent then we joyne in communion with them if they repent not wee leave them to the Lord we must needes keep our selves vnspotted take heed that we partake not with other mens sinnes The nintenth Section And now Mr. Bern. suffer me a litle to deale with you as with one of whome I have thought so wel as I have done it greeveth my Soule for you to see you so straungely seduced by Sathan so violently carryed in your boysterous robustious disposition against the truth the professors therof it hath greeved me heretofore to see you arrogant proud ambitious cariage preferring your self in place before men both more auncient holy learned then your self in the judgment of al that know you them it hath greeved mee to hear such calumnies as you have in the bitternes of your wrath vttered against divers of vs which I could relate to your eternal infamy but I spare you it hath greeved me to heare your formality that you are become an absolute conformitaÌ„t in judgment that you would be so in practise if some persons hindered you not it greeveth me exceedingly to see some Letters of yours wherein you your Disciples lying at the advantage take all things in the evil part pervert misconstrue mens writings manifesting therein much perversnes of Spirit it greeveth mee above all that you should support the
Protestants are prospered in their course Ergo The English Protestants have the truth I answer That this is false doctrine For the wiseman saith Eccles 9 1-3 That prosperity or adversity are no signes of love or hatred Ierem. 12.1 2. that the wicked are in prosperity and 1. Pet. 4.17 judgment beginneth at Gods howse This your reason therfor is most absurd false is fit to breed Atheisme overthrow the whole truth of the Scriptures but let vs see what judgments are vppon the Seperation you frame them thus If Mr. Bolton that Apostated did hang himself if Mr. Harison Mr. Browne did differ one fel back if Mr. Barrow Mr. Greenwood for calling you serpents generations of Wipers were martyred by the persecuting Prelates if Mr. Iohnson pronounced excommunication against his brother if the Church excommunicated the Father if Mr. Burnet died of the Plague if Mr. Smyth was delivered twise from the Pursivant was sick allmost to death doubted of the Seperation for 9. monethes space then the Seperation is not the truth But al these things befel Mr. Bolton Mr. Browne Mr. Harison Mr. Iohnsons Mr. Burnet Mr. Smyth Ergo The seperation is not the truth I answer The Churches of England have had thousand thousands of such accidents as these are befalling their Officers and Leaders and yet as it were folly in vs to alledg them against you as the Papists doe so it is no wisdom but weaknes of judgment in you to mention them in your book against vs VVhat is it good reasoning to say Iudas hanged himself Christ was Crucified for blasphemy Demas embraced the world Nicholas the Deacon proved an Heretique Paull and Barnabas fel out Paull chardged Peter and Barnabas with dissembling Peter denyed Christ All the Apostles were put to death for heresy Ergo the Christian Religion is 〈◊〉 bee false yours false yet this is your goodly reason if this bee a good argument wher is your Faith 〈◊〉 But in this Likelyhood you have a sting at me in particular Mr. Ber. charging me with divers vntruths which I wil manifest 1. That I doubred 9 months I acknowledg but that ever I did acknowledg the seperation for truth seperated from the English assemblies then returned againe vnto them which you say I do vtterly deny I appeale to the towne of Ganesbrugh those ther that knew my footesteps in this matter therfor herein I indite you as a publique slaunderer 2. VVhereas you say I became satisfied at Coventree after conference had with certayne Ministers and herevppon kneeled downe and praised God I answer I did not conferre with them about the seperation as you they know wel inough in your consciences but about withdrawing from true Churches Ministers and VVorship corrupted VVherein I receaved no satisfaction but rather thought I had given instruction to them and for kneeling downe to praise God I confesse I did being requested to performe the duty at night after the conference by the Ministers but that I praised God for resolution of my doubts I deny to death and you therein are also a slaunderer I praised God for the quiet peaceable conference such like matters desired pardon of the L. for ignorances errors weaknes of judgment any disordered caryage if the ministers that heard my prayers praises of God did misconstiue my meaning let them look vnto it 3. VVhereas you impute an absurdity to mee as yet vnanswered viz that I should affirme the spit whereon the passeove was rosted was the Altar I say seing the passeover was a sacrifice Marc. 14.12 that every sacrifice hath an altar either the spit was the altar or els it had no altar Now â—el me which is the Likeliest of the two if this be a reasonable speech that the wooden crosse was the Altar whereon Christ was sacrified why may not by a good reason the spit be the altar of the passeover the sacrifice was not slayne vppon the altar but it was burnt vppon the altar so that was not the altar wherevppon the passeover was killed but wherevppon it was burnt or rosted Mr. Bern. I doe confidently affirme against you that the spit was as much the altar to the passeover as the crosse was an altar to Christ let me heare what you in your best Logick can say against it The 7. Likelyhood against the Sep. is framed thus The truth increaseth in short space into a multitude The Seperation doth not increase but is kept vnder Ergo the Seperation is not the truth I answer you Mr. Bern. that this is but a popish argument Christ saith his Flock is but a litle Flock but how very many yeeres hath the cause of the Seperation had il successe Forsooth 20. or 30. yeeres alas as Mr. Be. what increase hath the Prelacy gotten in the world this hundreth veeres they say that is the truth against the Presbytery what increase hath puritanisme gotten this 20. or 30. yeeres in England yet they say that is the truth against the Prelacy is not the cause of the Reformists almost dead and buryed but know Mr. Bern. that the cause of the Seperation being the same in the mayne groundes and essentiall parts with the Reformed Churches it hath had infinite increase ever since Luthers tyme and whereas you object heer that wee leave our country without leave I answer that you know the Law of the Land doth banish vs all and if Abraham did lawfully passe from one country to another people Iâ—se no reason that wee may not doe so though Israel could not get from Egipt nor Iudah from Babylon being deteyned by violence in captivity yet the Lord in working ther deliverance declareth that he will have his people depart wher they may freely professe it without let or disturbance besides you doe pervert the Prophet Ezechiell his speeeh Cap. 3.6 For was not Ionas sent to Nineveh were not the Iewes caryed into captivity were not the Apostle sent to al Nations did al the Corinths speak with straunge Tonges is it vnlawful to send men to convert the Pagans but the meaning of Ezechiell is that though the Iewes vnderstand his preaching yet they wil not beleeve the straungers viz them of Tyrus Sidon as Christ saith would sooner beleeve him then the Iewes for a Prophet is not without honor save in his owne country so the place is misconstrued by you Finally whereas you object that the L. leaveth a curse behind vs in the Land I say that is an argument that it is the truth we professe which bicause it is not intertained doth therfor prove the savour of death vnto death and hardeneth the hart of that people where it hath been offered and is refused thus much breefly of your froth In the next place you bring vs reasons of more force then bare probabilityes wherby you confesse that your 7. Likelyhoods are of litle force which I desire
hold retayne that Antichristian constitution ministery worship government placed over them wholy to reject any reformation offered in this your disgression you â—unne out into another calumny viz that some of vs are so in dislike with your Church as that wee would rather intertayne popery then returne to you againe For my self I confesse my thoughts speeches have been are to this purpose that whensoever I returne to keep communion with the English asseÌ„blies acknowledging them true Churches their Ministery true then must I also of necessity acknowledg Rome to be a true constituted Church their ministery true For your Church ministery are of the same nature kind though of divers degrees of corruption yours being much refined from infinite drosse which is stil remayning with them Now if I should returne to succession so acknowledg the East churches of the Grecians and the VVest Churches of Rome her Daughters wherof England is one for Rome is the Mother-Church to be true Churches yet I would make my choise ther to joyne wher are fewest corruptions so rather returne to you then to Rome therefore herein I suppose also you are but a slaunderer in advancing a false report Psalm 15.3 wherefore brefly I say to desire your reformation the truth to be practised among you is neither hatred of you as you strongly plead nor any vncharitable desire to have the truth extinguished and popery intertayned as you most vncharitably suggest vnto your Reader Thirdly our vncharitablenes appeareth you say in this that we envy that good things prosper with you wretched man that you are thus to slaunder calumniate vs falsely I professe that I wish from my Soule that every Formalist in the Land were a Reformist that every Reformist were of the Seperation this is al the hurt that wee wish vnto you whereas you object that the Seperation this is al the hurt that wee wish vnto you whereas you object that the Seperation scoffe at your Religious exercises and your conversion I doe detest scoffing if I my self have at any tyme scoffed I doe proclayme my repentance for it vnto you the whole Land yet know that scoffing at Baals preists was lawfull in Elias if you cal scoffing an Eironie neither doe we scoffe at any thing that is good but at your irrecoverable stifnes in your corrupted courses neither is this eiâ—onie used as a mock to disgrace you but as a meanes to reforme you as Elias his eironie was againe you say wee pray not for your Ministers but wish discontentment that men may thereby come to the Seperation I answer wee pray for the Ministers and people that they may repent and yeeld to the truth and wee wish that men may bee discontented with their corrupt and evil wayes which is the high way to repentance but wee wish no man through discontentment of poverty or reproach or disgrace to fall from any truth as it seemeth you have done from Puritanisme to the Prelates faction conformity Further you vrge vncharitablenes in hasty excommunications for smal matters I answer not for others but for our particular Church of the Seperation that wee doe not vse excommunication as a matter of hatred but of love neyther doe wee excommunicate any man but for finne convinced and that after once and twise admonition and that is not hastily and whereas you teach vs not to excommunicate for every sinne wee doe practise your advertisement but if you wil have vs retaine in our communion any sinner willfully impenitent and peevishly obstinate sinne wee answer that wee abhorre your counsel and wee think such persons fitter for your Antichristian Synagogues then for the true Church of Christ which is a communion of Saints only Againe you censure the Seperation of vncharitablenes for excommunicating them that heer the word of your Ministers I deny it except they continue impenitent in that sinne and then indeed wee doe and the reason is bicause wee hold according to the truth that you are false Churches and false Ministers and that wee ought not to have any Spirituall communion with Idols and doe you think that impenitency in Idolatry is not worthy excommunication and doe you think that impenitency in Idolatry is not worthy excommunication and for that you say it is no sinne to heare the true word of any man I ask whither you think it lawfull to heare the Popish preists preach to pray with them if it bee vnlawful then you are answered and the Lord forbiddeth to heare false Prophets Deut. 13.3 the Apostle willeth to Seperate from such as teach false Doctryne 1. Timoth. 6 3-5 to reject an Heretique after once and twise admonition Tit. 3.10 and not to give entertayment to the false teachers 2. Iohn 10. Heer I omit your gibe of the annoyning which is the Holy Ghost that the Apostle saith the Faithful have to teach them all truth whereby the brethren of the Seperation presume as you say to teach wanting gifts referre you to the Apostles speech 1. Cor. 14. wher he willeth al the brethren to endevor to prophecy teacheth them that they may prophecy one by one wil you to remember that this gibe of yours falleth vppon Paul the Holy Scriptures the Spirit of God Christ Iesus the mediator or of the new Testament which hath established the exercise of Prophecy in the Church for all the brethren that have gifts ther is no man that doth beleeve but he can speak Finally this want of love which you impute to vs I wonder how it is bettered amoÌ„g you who persecute one another so hatefully as you do as the Prelates their factioÌ„ do devoure the reformists ther faction So as it seemeth you are blind at home though you can see so dragon-like abroad 3. Synne you impute to vs is misaledging wresting the Scriptures instances you give none onely you say that some have accused some of the principals of vs but doth it follow therefore that the accusation is true Christ was accused for blasphemy was hee therefore a blasphemer But if you meane that the Ministers in the conference the conference of Coventre with my self have accused mee thereof I answer it was before I knew the Seperation as you they can tel what is this to the Seperation but for their chardging me with wresting the Scriptures I answer that wherein I have wrested the Scripture it is of ignorance I doe not presently remember the particulars Let them bee produced to the world I desire no savor if it bee my sinne I will confesse it but neither doe I know it neither do you prove it only you say it whither you must be beleeved on your bare word that are so common a slaunderer in this your book I referre mee to the Censure of every man that is not partiall and doteth not vppon you 4. Synne you chardg vs with is
wilful persisting in Schisme joyned with contempt scorne of others I answer doe not you wilfully persist in your Schisme from Rome contemning scorning of them you will say they are in error wee say you are in error that the difference betwixt you vs is more then betwixt you them For your constitution ministery Government is one with theirs but wee are opposite vnto you in all these If it be no finne in you thus to deale with Rome it is no sinne in vs thus to deale with you but I deny vtterly that wee Schisme from you For ther can bee no Schisme from a false Church ministery worship Government except it be Schisme to depart out of Babylon Againe we do neither contemne nor scorne any man only we single the truth leave their corruptions errors refuse to build our Faith vppon men or Churches or false expositions of Scriptures we desire no man to come to vs further then wee have the truth which whither we have or not I referre it must doe to the conscience of every one that loveth the truth who shal live by his owne Fayth and dye for his owne sinnes 5. Synne you cast vppon vs is Rayling Scoffing and blaspheming this you exemplify in two particulars 1. Mr. Barrowes sharp speeches in the discovery 2. our approbation of it in him I answer First that Mr. Barrowes Scripture phrases whatsoever I doe approve justify them fitly to be applyed to your false Church Ministery worship Government til you have forsaken al that falsehood they doe deservedly lye vppon you Secondly The phrases which Mr. Barrow alledgeth borroweth els where I dare not either alow them or reprove them bicause I know not what particular motion of the Spirit guided him so to write but the things signified by those phrases declaring the Idolatry of your Church Ministery VVorship and Government I approve Thirdly that Mr. Barrow eironically vpbraydeth the preaching and VVorship of the assemblies following therein Elias his example I dare not censure that as an vngodly act of his though I doubt not but you doe performeÌ„ these Religious exercises in the honesty of your ignorance as I my self somtyme did Fourthly that he specially inveigheth against the Reformists he doth it not for that they are the worst men but for that by their doings the Lords truth is most hindered they being like the Pharisees aptest to deceave Finally I wil not vndertake the defence of Mr. Barrowes tartnes neither dare I absolutely condemne it seing the Prophet Esay is as sharpe against the true Church as ever was Mr. Barrow against your false Church whereas you alledg my writing vppon the Lords prayer before I saw the Seperation as a confutation or contradiction to Mr. Barrow I say you may aswel alledg against St. Paul his Pharisaical practises persecutions blasphemies befor he came to the truth as evidence to confute Christian Religion which afterward he embraced 6. Synne you lay vppon vs is our opinions the matter of our Schisme Brownisme as you call it which I have already cleered to be the vndoubted truth of God wherto I require youâ— answer or els I affirme before the Lord that you are not able that being convinced your mouth stopped either you must yeeld to the truth or els woe be vnto you from the Lord. And so lend my answer leaving your advertisements counsels of peace vntoucht as matters nothing perteyning to the cause of the Seperation they being like Apollos Oracles apt to bee expounded eyther way or like Delphos sword fit to be vsed for any purpose for they may fit eyther Papist Protestant Reformist or the Seperation An advertisement to the Reader It may happily be thought that this treatise by reason of the tartnes of some speeches phrases censures passed vppon Mr. Be. the ministers Church of England may passe the bounds of Christian wisdom charity especially considering that we of the Seperation cannot be ignorant what great offence ther is taken at Mr. Barrowes bitternes in his discovery that we know how greatly the forward preachers professors of the land desire to be mildly gently handled to have a charitable censure paste of them in respects of their Religious dispositions to the truth wel For Mr. Be. let him know for his part that he is fallen into a deep pit of Apostacy from his formerly seeming sincerity if men may be judged by that which is visible I see no reason why the forward preachers professors of the Lands should not esteem of him as they do of Mr. Merbury sith Mr. Be. is now fallen to his gracious Lords as wel as the other only Mr. Ber. case is somthing better in this respect that he wanteth some of Achitophels pollicy Rabsakeh his rayling of Tertullus Rhetotick to oppose the truth in respect whereof ther is hope that Mr. Be. sinning through infirmity simplicity weaknes of judgment violence of affection may by some sharpe effectual ingredients having vomited vp al his choler purged out al his evil humors be reduced eyther to as good or to a better constitution then wherin he formerly was â—o this purpose is al the sharpe phisick administred vppon him in this prescript so the Author doth intreath Mr. Ber. in his best love to interpret it to remember what Nathan said vnto David thou art that man what David answered Nathan I have sinned what comfort Nathan presently annexed The Lord hath put away thy sinne This condition we vnfeynedly wish to Mr. Be. our old kind frend for the forward preachers professors of the Land they must vnderstand that our censure must be is only according to that which is visible in their communion now in that respect seing the Church Ministery VVorship and Government of the English Ecclesiastical assemblies is judged proved false Antichristian how is it possible that wee should speake otherwise of them as they are ministers and members of that Antichristian body then as of false ministers false Christians what would they have vs speak as the false Prophets did Peace Peace where ther is no peace would they have vs proclayme The Temple of the Lord The Temple of the Lord to the Synagogues of Antichrist this were to deceave them to daube the wal with vntempered mortar but if the forward preachers professors of the Land do imagine that we condemne them as persons voyd of grace as excluded from salvation by Christ or the like censures we give them to vnderstand that the Scripture teacheth vs no such thing but rather forbiddeth such censures for we are not to judg before the tyme therfor concerning this particular we absolutely leave them to the Lord not doubting but he hath his thousands among them desiring them to remember that it is one thing to apply the Scripture to lay the salve to the
sore to denounce judgment against the sinne another to pronounce the sentence of absolution condemnation which Christ Iesus alone into whose hands the Father hath committed al judgment shal do which for any man to vsurp is to intrude into Christs throne seate of mercy justice But if ther be any in the assemblies either forward preacher professor that seeth this truth of the Seperation yeeldeth not in obedience to forsake that Antichristian way to walk in the truth let him know that seing his hart coÌ„demneth him God is greater then his hart blessed is he that condemneth not himself in that which he alloweth thus humbly hartily desiring the Lord to shew the light of his truth more more vppon the Land at the length vtterly to disperse al that myst darknes that overshadweth obscureth the truth I cease writing wishing all welfare to the vpright hearted Reader FINIS A Lettre written to Mr. A. S. By Iohn Smyth Aister S. beinge requested by Mr. H. your kind frend myne as also out of M myne owne inclination to doe you good whome I heare to be stronglie caried out of the true way in respect of the auncient acquaintance which I had with you in the vniversitie of Cambridge I thought good at this tyme in few lines to salute you hoping that you wil interpret this which I doe in good part I desier you would communicates this my writinge with Mr. B. our ould Frende with whomesoever els you shal see cause that you al whome I take to be the Lords people yet in Babilon may come forth of her that ye be not pertaker of her sinnes that ye receave not of her plagues you wrote to Mr. H. certaine reasons provinge your Church a true Church your ministerie a true ministerie this Letter Mr. H. hath lost so the particulars ther of he cannot perfectlie remember you wrote another Letter after vnto him wherin you triumphed before the victorie I have adventred in this writinge to declare vnto you both the insufficiencie of such your reasons for your Church ministerie as Mr. H. remembreth as also the substance of that truth which we professe for the which wee suffer bonds losse of goods banishment death according as the Lord allotteth to vs Mr. S. I pray you be perswaded that that which we do we doe it not rashlie nor vppon discontentment nor in pride or vppon any sinister respect no we cal God to record to our foules that the evidence of the truth workinge vppon our consciences through the Lords vnspeakeable mercie even contrarie to our rebellious nature hath mightelye convinced violentlie caried vs to this truth we professe practise heare our groundes then give sentence waigh al things indifferently cast prejudice into nether ballance examine what I say by the worde leane not to any mans opinion I dare adventure my credit that then the light of this truth wils shine in your hart then I pray you put it not away so with this preface I beginne to lay downe the groundes of our cause which is also the Lords everlastinge truth the groundes are these 1. The covenant the promise Christ is given to Abraham the Father of the faithful to al those that are of the faith of Abraham to no other as is plaine by these Scriptures Gen. 17.7 Levit. 26.9.12 Luk. 1.72.74 Rom. 4.10 12.23.24 Iohn 8.39.44 Mat. 3.9 Gal. 3.7.9.16 2 This covenant is not limitted at the pleasure of men but it is absolute no Prince nor State can either ad to it or take ought froÌ„ it or alter the least part of it but God giveth whole Christ al the promises the whole covenant on his behalf to the faithful the faithful on the other side promise to be Gods people wholly to deny themselves to obey God in every one of his precepts even the least though it cost them their lives GeÌ„ 17.1 Deut. 12.32 Mat. 22.32 Rom. 8.32 2. Cor. 1.20 Mat. 10 37-39 3. Two or thre faithful men have this covenant promises Christ given vnto them immediatlie from heaven not by meanes of any State Prince Priest Prelate whatsoever but whersoever two or thre faithful people arise in the world in what countrie or nation soever at what tyme soever there then the covenant promises Christ is theirs with them 2. Cor. 6.17.18 Mat. 18.20 28.20 Act. 4.12 Heb. 8.10 Apoc. 1.11 14.9 â—2 1. Pet. 1. 1 Act. 2.39 Aproc 17.13.14 4. These faithfull people whersoever they arise in the VVorld must be Seperated from the VVorld and from all vncleanenes whatsoever For the faithfull must not draw the yoake with vnbeleevers righteousnes can have no fellowship with vnrighteousnes light can have no communion with darknes Christ can have no concord with Behall that is with a Societie that is without his yoke the beleever can have no part with the vnbeleever and the Temple of God can have no agreement with Idols 2. Corinth 6.16.18 Apoc. 14 9-11 Deut. 22.10 7.2.3.6 Act. 19.9 Ephe. 5.7.11 5. A few faithfull people standing in confusion with vnbeleevers vnseperated from them being one bodie with them in that estatestanding are not a true church of Christ which I prove by divers reasons 1. The faithful have the Spirit of Christ the vnbeleevers have the Spirit of satan how can these two contrarie Spirits these two contrarie sorts of persons combyne together 2. Cor. 6.14.15.16 2. Ther is enimity put betwixt these two sortes of persons ergo they cannot combine together see Gen. 3.15 3. The covenant promises Christ is the faithfuls only how can vnbeleevers have any part in them 6. Seing the faithfull being but few have the covenant promises Christ therefore they have powre to all the meanes whereby they shall enjoy Christ as the word seales of the covenant the ministerie the powre of binding and losing for all these are parts of the covenant they are the promises they are the meanes of pertaking Christ Roman 3.2 and 4.11 Act. 6.5 and 14.23 Math. 18.18.20 1. Cor. 3.21.22 2. Pet. 1.3.4 1. Tim. 4.8 7. As they have the powre of all these things so they are commaunded to vse al these helpes and are bound to obey the Lord in using all these meanes for enjoying Christ therefore they are bound to vse the word the seales of the covenant the ministerie the censures for their owne mutuall good Deuter. 5.31.32.33 and 6.17 and 12.32 1. Corint 14.37 1. Tim. 5.21 6.13.14 Gal. 3.15 Iam. 1 19-22.1 Cor. 11.24 25. Act. 6.3 Heb. 13.17 Mat. 18.15.17 8. The faithfull must be Seperated from the wicked and vnbeleevers 2. Corinth 6.17 They must Seperate wicked men from among them by the censures 1. Corinth 5.13 Math. 18.15.17 2. Thessa 3.6.14 They must chose aprove ordeine their owne Elders Deacons Act. 6.3 14.23 1. Tim 3.10 6.13.14 As wel as vse the word and