you give the Holy Ghost the lie imputing error vnto the word of truth But you wil say if men be not subjects of Christs Kingdome ther is no salvation for them I deny that wil you condemne al the Iewes Turkes Papists in the world yet I say they are no subjects of Christs Kingdome which is the true visible Church I pray you therfor be as good to vs as you are to your selâ—e in that censure wherfor we must remember to distinguish betwixt the visible Church which is Christs Kingdome the Catholique Church whiâ—â— is invisible The visible Church hath in it a visible communion visible sensible ordinances for men to walk in a visible fayth expressed in the outward declarations thereof in confession profession of the truth this visible Church must we joyne to live in this is the sheepfold wherin Christ foldeth his sheep into this sheepfold both sheep shepheard must enter by the dore not clyme vp another way as theeves robbers doe Of al those that live continue in this true visible Church we are bound to beleeve holmes fayth election in particular Eph 1.1.4 Now the Catholique Church which is invisible is the comprehension of al the elct in al ages places whose persons are vnknowne to vs such secreat things the L. hath reserved to himself concealed from our knowledg therfor we are not to search after them but must walk in that way which he hath taught in his word wher so much of his wil as is fit for vs to know is revealed now I would have you manifest to me two things concerning this point one is that the Catholique Church is Christs Kingdome another is that al that are on t of the visible Church are condemned I for my part hold the contrary viz First that the visible Church truly constituted is the only Kingdome of Christ which he at the day of judgment shal give vp into the handes of his Father 1. Cor. 15.24 that therfor they who are not members of Christs true visible Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdome Secondly notwithstanding that ther are many who are no members of the visible Church therfor no subjects of Christs Kingdome who notwithstanding aperteyne to the L Election are within the compasse of the Catholique Church out of which ther is no salvation Now Mr. Bern. if you have any thing to object against this truth let vs have it I pray you that we may receave instruction reformation from you you assume great dexteritie in diving into mens arguments I pray you dive into the bottome of this point discover the error therof if you be able if not lay your hand vppon your mouth give glorie to God confesse your ignorance errors Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the Fourth Section In this Section Mr Bern. saith that it is error to hold that those that are not of a true constituted Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdome In his book intituled the Seperatists Schisme pag. 80. 81. He affirmeth the same thing in these words viz That such as are not of a particular constituted Church to wit such a one as theirs is are no subjects of Christs Kingdome Mr. Ainsworth answering Mr. Bernard pag. 173. vseth these wordes Neither is this position set downe in our wordes to my knowledg if therefor Mr. Bern. were not a caviller he would not have reckoned this among our errors Although Mr. Bern. oppugneth this truth Mr. Ainfw forsaketh the defence therof yet I stil defend it as the vndoubted truth of God First therfor I wil expound the true meaning thereof then also answer Mr. Bern. cavils cautions I say not therfor as Mr. Bern. ignorantly vaynly captiously conceâ—veth that whosoever is not actually a joyned member of a true visible Church not living in communion with that church is no subject of Christs Kingdome but I say thus they that are not of a true constituted Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdom now it is one thing to be in a true church as a member therof actual walking in presence coÌ„munioÌ„ therewith another thing to be of a true church which one may be eyther as yet actually vnjoyned or being a joyned member actually yet absent in regard of bodily presence that one vnioyned actually may yet be of a true visible church I declare by divers particulars as first one that by violence is deteyned from a true constituted church yet may be of it in desire wil affection purpose though actually vnioyned the Lord accepting the wil for the deed when it cannot be performed Againe when as yet ther is no true visible church established actually a man may be of it in that he would be joyned vnto it if it â—ad any real existence So the Martyrs in Q. Maryes dayes may be said to be of a true visible church both for that they would have actualy joyned to the true coÌ„stituted church if it had beeÌ„ established as also for that they in wil purpose desired so to do although violently they were deteyned by imprissonment Further they that are of the true saith which is professed in the true Church may be said to be of that true church which faith is not a thing invisible but visible sensible as namely a man Seperated from all false churches professing the true visible faith of the church holding it vnlawful in regard of some corruption which he seeth in the true church to joyne therevnto may yet be said to be of the true church Lastly if some brethren though but two or three walk together in holy communion they are a true Church although perhaps they have not solemnely entred covenant yet ther communion in holy exercises is a declaration that they have contracted together though weakely corruptly yet truly So that these particulars being wel weighed may sulficiently informe you of my meaning but Mr. Bern you have in your book quoted this point otherwise then I have propounded expounded it in my lettre that in two particulars viz 1. in saying a particular constituted Church 2. in adding these wordes Such a one as theirs is For ther is asmuch difference betwixt a true constituted Church a particular constituted Church as ther is betwixt a man this man or that man the one is species theother individinum it is evident that a man may be of a true constituted Church yet not of a particular constistuted Church as may be perceaved by the 4. particulars before mentioned Againe in adding these wordes viz such a one as theirs is after a scoffing vprayding disdainful manner he seeketh to draw into hatred abhomination the true Church of Christ but the tyme wil come when the Lord wil reward every man according to his workes In the second place let vs consider of Mr. Bern. cavils cautions which are 4. in nom
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
of love to the brethren seing they neyther know nor have brethrē vppō whome they may exercise these dutyes Therfor this place of the Apostle is pregnant invincibly strong against you The third place is 1. Cor. 1.1 Now what wordes Mr. Bern intendeth in this place I can not conjecture except they be these viz. in the second verse with al those that cal vpon the name of the L. Iesus Christ in every place whence it may seem he would gather that ther were some subjects of Christs Kingdome not of a constituted Church I do verely think that seing these persons that were absent frō the Church of Corinthus did call Iesus Christ Lord they did therfor acknowledg him for their Lord King therefor did apertayne to his Kingdome which is his visible Church happily they might be some brethren which did not dwel in Corinth but in some villages about Corinth that this is so the place afordeth evidently For he wrote both to the Church that was in Corinth to the brethrē that were in other places which were no doubt of the church of Corinth El◠how did that Epistle in the contents of it concerne them For seing the Apostle writeth this Epistle to them they had to doe with the matters wherof he taxeth the church for he taxeth them al indifferently seing he writeth indifferently vnto them al Herevppon it followeth that eyther these persons that were in other places were mēbers of the Church of Corinth or els if they were no members off that church the Apostle in vayne doth direct his Epistle to them taxing them off the corruptions off that Church Except it be said that the Apostle doth hereby interest other churches to deale with the Church of Corinth for their corruptiōs then Mr. Bern. gayneth nothing by it neither seing therby he confesseth that these other brethren were members of other true constituted churches The third place therfor is nothing to the purpose The last place is 2. Thes 3.15 count him not as an enemy but admonish him as a brother To passe by what some think of this place I say vnto you Mr. Bern that it hath not so much as a shew for your purpose The Apostle speaketh in this verse negatively affirmatively For he teacheth that they ought not to recken of an excommunicate as they account of an enemy but they are to admonish an excommunicate as they doe admonish a brother Therby teaching vs that an excōmunicate is in a midle condition neyther an enemy nor a brother but one that is vnder the censure of the church as a meanes ordeyned by God for his reformation how wil this place prove that an excommunicate is a member of Christs invisible Kingdome or if it should prove that some excommunicate are members of Christs invisible Kingdome how can you prove that this or that excommunicate is so do you know the Lords Elect certaynly particularly that are out of the church Or what doth this assertion of yours this place of Scripture against my assertion who say that such as are not of a true constituted church are no subjects of Christs Kingdome viz Of the Kingdome which he shal give vp into the hands of his Father in the day of his final judgment In the third place Mr. Bern. asketh what may be said of wicklife Hus Luther Bucer Melanchthō the Martyrs Gods people in England of Lot Iob the people in captivity in Mordecay his tyme wherto I answer as I have already done That Iob was a member of a true constituted church so a subject of Christs Kingdome So was Lot so were the people of the Iewes in captivity though violently deteyned from the Holy land Cittie Temple therfor Mr. Bern. in these three demaundes gaineth nothing except the estimation of ignorance folly be gaine to that of the Martyrs Hus Luther Gods people in England I say two things eyther that in affection desire they aperteyned to the true visible church being seperated from the false church or that they were of the invisible church of the invisible Kingdome which is vnknowne to man the members therof vnknowne disprove you this if you can In the last place you demaund whither Christs Kingdom be not Spiritual invisible also Ioh. 18.33 10.16 The two places of Scripture quoted by you do not prove that Christ hath an invisible Kingdome so invisible subjects knowne to vs For Ioh. 18. Christ saith my Kingdom is not of this world that is to say it is not begunne continued perfected by worldly meanes So Christ expoundeth himself afterward saying my Kingdom is not from hēce my subjects would fight for mee vs 36. meaning that his Kingdom is neyther erected nor supported by worldly meanes as by sword speare or shield in respect whereof the Apostle saith Rom. 14.17 The Kingdome of God is not meate nor drinck 2. Cor. 10.3.4 Though we live in the flesh yet we do not warre after the flesh for the weapens of our warfare are not carnal The second place is Ioh. 10. VVher Christ saith not as you dreame very ignorantly childishly that he hath an invisible Kingdome but that he hath sheep of two sorts some of the visible Church of the Old Testament which is one fold some of the visible Church of the New Testament which is another sold o◠the Iewes Gentils both which sorts of people shal in Christ Iesus the partition wal being taken away be joyned made one that so ther may be one sheepfold one shepheard but what is al this Mr. Bern. to disprove the truth of my position Again to answer your demaund I say that Chr. Kingdome is Spiritual invisible aswel as outward visible For when we say that Christs Kingdome is visible sensible we do not deny that it is also invisible Spiritual neyther are these two contraryes to be oposed as excluding one another For as a man is not only the body which is visible sensible but cheefly principally the soule which is invisible as the true Sacraments are not only the outward Elements but the inward grace also that most especialy So the visible Church which consisteth of men is not only the outward communion but especially cheefly the inward Spiritual fellowship which the Saynts have with Christ one with another The Apostle therfor saith both that ther is one body one Spirit Eph. 4. that al that are baptized are baptized into one body al that communicate are caused to drinck into one Spirit 1. Cor. 12.13 And as the Saynts are members of Christs body of his flesh of his bones Eph. 5.30 So they that are joyned to the Lord are one Spiritt 1. Cor. 6.17 we grant you therfor Mr. Bern. that Christs Kingdome is Spiritual visible but we deny that Christs Kingdome is only invisible or only visible he that doth plead to me that
the reader to take notice of that the alledging of them by Mr. Ber. argueth an ill mynd seing he confesseth them to be of smal force against our cause The first reason against sep may be framed thus That way is not the truth which teacheth to renounce the constitution ministery worship Government of the English assemblies Ecclesiasticall as false so in respect thereof to seperate from them al spiritual communion with them to entertayne the true constitution ministery worship and Government of the Apostolique institution The way of the seperation teacheth thus much Ergo the way of the seperation is not the truth I answer if the scriptures approve this which we teach of you of our selves then is your arg worth nothing now whither the seperation be the truth or not I refer me to the scriptures wherby I desire that which I have written may be examined if it bee sound sound let it be intertayned if not follow the truth whatsoever it be whereas you say heer that men in seperating from you must cast of the word which begat them I deny it you are a slaundeter herin For we retaine al truth that you have we reject only your Antichristianisme for acknowledging your Faith repentance baptisme false I say it is necessary but vnderstand that we speak of your things that are visible leave things invisible to the Lord for that objection you make from our owne confession that we say our Seperation is only for corruptions I say it is truth but yet know that your corruptions are essential and effential corruptions corrupt the essence of things make them false viz. when the matter is essentially corrupted or the forme c. as a mule procreated of an horse an asse Now such is your Church Ministery worship Government as is already proved sufficiently The 2. reason against Sep is framed thus That way is not the truth which teacheth the professors thereof to entertayne and joyne with open wicked obstinate sinnes sinners The Seperation Teacheth men so to doe Ergo The Seperation is not the truth I answer That the truth may be the truth though men that professe it walk never so wickedly in it neither doth it follow bicause the Churches of the Seperation walk corruptly therfor the Seperation is not the truth you know Mr. Bern. that this is but sophistry hereby you might prove the Doctryne of Christ not to be the truth bicause the Corinths had contentions incest fornication dronkennes heresy among them what say you to your selves who have as many thousand obstinate sinnes sinners in the land as ther be men of the Seperation among vs is your way therfor error For the force of this argument therfor I referre mee to your owne conscience to every indifferent mans censure VVel Let vs see what obstinate sinnes sinners are in the Separation the sinnes are these as you recken them vp 1. vnthankfulnes 2. spiritual vncharitablenes 3. abusing the Scriptures 4. Obstinacy in schisme 5. Rayling scoffing 6. false opinions or Brownisme the persons persisting in these sinnes are you say obstinate wicked Let vs handle these things in order 1. Vnthankfulnes to God that regenerated vs by the word among you vnto the Church of Englād our mother that bare vs in calling her an harlot I answer what truth the Lord hath wrought inwardly in vs we do thankfully aknowledg I for my part do professe that in your assemblies I receaved the seedes of true faith invisible which if I had dyed not knowing the Seperation should I doubt not through Gods mercy have been effectual to my justification salvatiō in Christ but this was so invisibly judging according to the inward feeling of my hart not according to the outward censure of the word For though I could truly judg so of my self out of myne owne feeling yet I deny other men could so judg of me judging truly according to the Scriptures this I suppose none of the Seperation wil deny This is the thankfulnes which we can yeeld do yeeld to God dayly but for our visible conversion we learned it not from you therfor we deny any thākfulnes to be due vnto you for it neither do we acknowledg the church of England our mother therin but we say she is barrē beareth no children vnto the L. in respect thereof 2. Sinne you impute to vs is spiritual vncharitablenes apearing first in censuring 3. sorts of persons among you 1. The ignorant as blinded by the God of the world 2. judging them that know the Seperation do not yeeld vnto it as fearfull persons worldlings 3. such as tasting of it falling back are censured as Apostates by vs wel Mr. Bern. if the way of the Seperation be the truth as it is proved to be then I know not why it is vncharitablenes thus to censure you For it is but the censure of the holy Ghost in the scriptures in censuring of you herein wee manifest no more vncharitablenes toward you then the Scriptures teach take heed you do not blaspheme the scriptures censure through vs. Secondly our vncharitablenes appeareth say you in our vngodly desire to have the word vtterly extingnished among you Egyiptian darknes to come over you rather thē it should be preached by your false ministery I āswer you by making a demaund which is this of two sinnes viz of murther or adultery which is to be chosen I suppose you wil answer neither of them that truly so say I for this particular if it be demaunded whither wee would that the word should be vtterly extingnished or preached by your false ministery I make answer wee would neither of them but wee desire both that your false ministery were dissolved that the word might by the Kings commaundement or allowance or permission bee preached throughout his dominions by men fitted therto wherefore in this point I challendg you for an vncharitable slaunderer of vs and heer you digresse to prove that the word may bee preached without a true constitution of a Church that preaching is more necessary then a true constitution I confesse it vnfeynedly most hartily neither came the contrary into the thoughts of the brethren of the Seperation I suppose For certainly the true constitution must bee taught men must bee brought to the faith before the Church can bee constituted this is it which wee must labor for that first the word be preached by men of able gifts that men bee taught converted to the Faith then they bee established into the new Testament of Christ but you have done doe practise the contrary First you have established thē into an Antichristian communion constitution jumbling together al the people of the Land of what Religion or condition soever then you set over them a false ministery then teach them stil to
think that the Lord accepteth of a false saith ministery baptisme prayer preaching excommunication the rest make these things agree Mr. Bern. if you can if you cannot cease your scoffing give glory vnto God I demaund of you do you think that God accepteth the prayers Religious exercises of the Papists the Arrians the Anabaptists the Familists or any other heretiques or Antichristians if not what is the true cause that God accepteth them not is it not for that ther is not that true communioÌ„ of the Saynts there the true Church the true spouse of Christ the Spiritual Temple where God hath provised his presence So then it followeth invincibly that a tiue constitution of a church that is a true communion of Saynts is that only lawful religious society or communion of men wherby God wil be honoured wherin he wil be served wherto he hath promised his presence acceptance as conventicles are vnlawful assemblies of men in civil states so are al false churches vnlawful ecclesiastical assemblies the actions therein performed vnlawful so abhominable in the sight of God the summe of all 〈◊〉 breefly thus much That communion of men wherto God hath given the covenant the Holy things the promises Christ for King Preist Prophett is only accepted their Ecclosiasticall actions only acceptable But a true visible church that is a communion of Saynts joyned together in the true covenant is that only communion of meÌ„ wherto God hath given his covenant his promises his holy things Christ for King Preist Prophet Therfor a true visible church that is a communion of Saynts their actions ecclesiastical as preaching prayers c. are only accepted by consequent on the contrary 〈◊〉 inserre thus That communion of men wherto God hath not given the covenant the holy things the promises Christ for King Preist Prophet is not accepted of God neither their actions ecclesiastical are acceptable A Church falsely constituted as in the old Testament was the Apostate church of the ten tribes in the new Testament is the churches of Antichrist is such a communion of men wherto God hath not given the covenant the holy things the promises Christ for King Preist Prophet Therfor a church falsely constituted is not accepted of God neither are their actions ecclesiastical as prayer preaching c. acceptable in the sight of God Herevppon I conclude not as Mr. Bern. blasphemously scoffeth that the Idol or Goddesse constitution but that the true constitution of a Church which is the Lords Holy ordinaÌ„ce is that which Sanctifieth al ecclesiastical actions that a false idolatrous Antichristian constitution of a church corrupteth polluteth stayneth al the ecclesiastical actions of that false church So saith the Apostle vnto the pure al things are pure but vnto them that are defiled vnbeleeving is nothing pure Tit. 1.15 this is my welbeloved sonne saith the Father from heaven in whome I am wel pleased Mat. 3.17 God heareth not synners but only the true worshippers Ioh. 9.31 Finally I avouch that a falsely constituted church is a greater more abhominable Idol then any Idol that possibly can be in a true church For a false worship Ministery government may be indeed in a true Church through ignorance the like occasions But a true ministerie worship government cannot possiblie be in a false Church For the true Ministerie worship Government are the Holy things of God which are not given to false Churches but only to the true Churches of Christ the true communion of Saynts a false Church being an Idol doth conveigh her idolatrous false constitutioÌ„ as a poison through all her Ecclesiasticall actions or workes off communion Breefly therefore to compare True False Idols Ordinances together Bonum quâ— communius eo melius Malum quo communius eo peius They are two maximes true in nature experience so also in Religion Truth ordinances the more common vniversal the better more excellent Falsehood Idols the more common generall the worse more pernitious For example a true Church better then a true worship then a true Ministery then a true government c. A false Church worse then a false worship then a false Munistery then a false government c. For a true Church is the first most noble vniversal in Religion from whence al the rest issue as a streame from the Fountayne a false Church is the first most ignoble general qualifying al the ecclesiastical actions of the Church with her owne falsehood idolatry Therfor I am bould to pronounce your false idolatrous Church constitutioÌ„ to be worse then your false Ministerie worse then your false worship worse then your false government c. on the contrary our true constitution to be the most honorable beautiful ornament of our Church more glorious then our true Ministerie worship government sith these latter issue do flow from the former as from the spring â—r Fountayne A true man may have a wooden legg an eye of glasse So a true Church may have a false ministery worship or government A man carved out of wood cannot possiblie have any truth of a man in him but al his parts limmes are wooden eveÌ„ as the image is of wood So a false Church can have nothing true in it but al is false idolatrous vsurped for what agreement hath Christ with Belial These things are playne enough to them that will vnderstand The fourth Section Your ninth position followeth viz 9. That those which are not of a true constituted Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdome This you hold error I hold it truth which I wil manifest vnto you most evidently The true Church in the Scripture is called the house of God Heb. 3.6 The Temple of God which the L. inhabiteth wherin he walketh 2. Cor. 6.16 The household of fayth Gal. 6.10 the body of Christ Eph. 4.15.16 The Kingdome of heaven of Christ of God Eph. 5.5 Mat. 3.2 Luk. 19.11.12 Act. 1.3 Further this true Church is but of one shape forme fashion or constitution Eph. 4.4 The body that is the Church is one that is of one shape For one in that place signfieth vnum specie not vnum numero for ther are many Churches in nomber but one true Church in the frame or constitution Let this therfor be set downe for an invincible truth that the true visible Church is the Kingdome of Christ wher Christ the King only ruleth raigneth in his owne lawes officers over his owne subjects al those that wil not be subiects to this King in this his Kingdome he accunteth his enemies wil have them slayne before his face Luk. 19.27 Hence then it followeth that those that are not members of a true constituted Church are not subjects of Christs Kingdome which you say is error wherin you see
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
preisthood of Aarons Family was the Lords ordinance sometyme but the popish Sacrificing preisthood in the mayne substantial parts therof is not only mans device but infinitely impious blasphemously derogating from the honour dignity of Christs Sacrifice preisthood which is aparabatos intransitive Heb. 7.24 according to the order of Melchisedech seing the popish Sacrificing preisthood is in the very essence of it false how can the English prelacy preisthood Deaconry which issued from that Romish preisthood be any other but a sacrificing preisthood although the English prelates have cast away that essential Sacrificing property or forme rather of the Romish preisthood have reduced it to a better temper yet that wil not serve the turne for al that they have in their prelacy preisthood Deaconry they had frō Rome or els where If from Rome then their prelacy preisthood Deaconry is absolutely Romish no other if elswhere then their Succession is gone If both from Rome els where let them declare that Ridle vnto vs. The third Objection The presbyters may have ordination or imposition of hands from the Romish preisthood yet not their office For that may come from heaven or by some extraordinary meanes even as the Lord raised vp some men extraordinarily in these last tymes to restore the truth of doctryne to reduce things to the Apostolique primitive institution as amongst others Hus Luther the rest Answer to the third Objection It is straunge that a man shal have imposition of hands from one his office from another Besides it is contrary to the nature of Succession wherein the partie that ordeyneth giveth the office ministeriall powre to him that is ordeyned for that it the thing that is pleaded that Christs ministeriall powre commeth by Succession through ordination of precedent presbyters It contradicteth their owne ground therefore to say that imposition of hands is from a popish preist and the true office from some other meanes But let vs inquire what that other meanes may be To say that Christs Ministeriall powre is from heaven is not denyed but the question is What is the instrument or meanes which Christ hath appointed to conveigh that Ministeriall powre vnto man kind And who are they that first receave it from Christs hand out of heaven Or what is proton dektikon the first subject of this ministerial powre We say the Church or two or three faithful people Seperated frō the world joyned together in a true covenant have both Christ the covenant promises the ministerial powre of Christ given to them that they are the body that receave from Christs hand out of heaven or rather from Christ their head this ministerial powre you say not so but this ministerial powre commeth by succession from the ministery which is the first subject of this powre that al this powre is derived from man to man from the Apostles hands through al the Preists hands of Rome the Prelates hands of England to you Mr. Bern. your line pedigree of Preisthood is lineally descended from Peter or Paul c. to you through so many generations of popish preists as have succeded from Peters person to your person Even as Annas Cayaphas descended lineally from Aaron only this is the difference that the succession of Annas Cayaphas was by genealogie or generation yours is by succession of ordination or imposition of hands therfor bicause you see that you fal vnder this foule absurdity that your Preisthood must be of necessity of the same kind that the popish preisthood is you have invented a new trick to say that it commeth from heaven extraordinarily with Hus Luther and the rest of those glorious witnesses which the Lord in these last tymes raised vp to the destruction of the man of sinne VVhich if it be so Then say I shew your succession from Luther Hus Prage c. Or els Nechemiah will putt you from your preisthood The fourth Objection But every King in his dominions is appointed by Christ to be a head ministerial to the Church al the Preists of that country do receave their ministerial powre from the King by the ordination of the Bbs. vnto whome the King hath committed the dispensation of that powre so that the King being the Lords Lieftenant in his owne dominions hath this ministerial powre from Christ the Bbs. from the King the Preists from the Bbs. the Church from the Preists Answer to the fourth Objection If the King of every country hath Christs ministerial powre given to him immediately from heaven that the Clergie of that nation have Christs ministerial powre from the King then these consequents folow which are intolerable absurdities 1. The King of every country is a person civil Ecclesiastical having al civil ecclesiastical powre that immediately from Christ 2. The King of every country can preach administer the Sacraments exercise Spirituall jurisdiction excommunicate c. 3. The King of every country can make ordeyne Ministers 4. The King of every country is a Pope or Patriarch in his owne territories and Dominions How these points wil agree with the Analogie of faith let every man judg so give sentence whither this objection conteyne any the least shew of truth in it yea or nay Now what authority the Lord hath given every King in his owne dominions I leave to be descussed in his proper place viz in the 15. Section of this lettre to Mr. Bern. The fifth Objection But the ministery is now extraordinarily raised vp For as in the first planting of the Churches the Lord Iesus vsed the extraordinary ministery of Apostles Prophets Evangelists to publish the Gospel to the world to plant Churches so after the Apostacy of Antichrist in the restoring of the truth the Lord vseth the same extraordinary ministerie not indued with those extraordinary gifts which they had but apointed by the L. for the same purposes viz the planting of true Churches the revealing of his truth Answer to the fifth Objection First the Ministers of England namely you Mr. Ber. among the rest do not chalendg to be Apostles Prophets Evangelists but you say you are true presbyters or Pastors of particular true visible Churches therfor this objection helpeth you nothing if it were yeelded you Secondly you cannot maintayne your ordinary ministerie as succeding by ordination from these supposed Apostles Evangelists Prophets for then you must acknowledg the prelates of England to be Apostles Prophets Evangelists whereas they doe challendg no such thing But only maintayne themselves to be ordinary Bbs. the ordinary Successors of the Apostles neither do they intend to make you ministers as Apostles but as Bbs. Thirdly ther is none of the Reformists that ever I heard of that vndertake as Apostles Prophets Evangelists to ordeyne Elders Finaly how can any of you be Apostles Prophets or Evangelists who stand members of
formerly hidden mystical now it was revealed plainly by Christ although happily the Disciples vnderstood not Christs meaning at that present yet after ward the Holy Ghost brought that many other necessary things which they eyther vnderstood not Christs meaning at that present yet afterward the Holy Ghost brought that many other necessary things which they either vnderstood not or forgot to their knowledg memory as the Scripture witnesseth But further I say that particular was obscurely signified by the Typical King and Preists in the Old Testament vnto whome the Government was committed as I have already more then once declared vnto you further the government was then given to al Christs Disciples by commission as I have already proved sufficiently to your conscience the conscience of all that love the truth in sincerity That of the excommunication of the blind man Ioh. 9.22 was a devise of the Iewes for ther is no warrant for it in al the law if it were the L. ordinance it typeth vnto vs thus much that the visible Church succeeding in the place of the typical Kings preists have in their hands the powre of excommunication And although Cloe made complaint to the Governor yet it is nothing to the purpose For Cloe complayneth of an whole Church to an Apostle not of a particular person to the Elders of a particular Church and doe you think that this is a good argument That seing a particular person complayneth to or informeth the Apostle of the state of the Church who had an infallible gift of instructing and directing of Churches therefore a particular person in the third place or degree of admonition must tell the Elders that therfor those Elders are the Church The argument is altogether inconsequent Your second reason that tel the Church is tel the Governors is Christs chandg of the person From the third to the second The force of your argument is this If Christ having spoken in the third person saying Tel the Church afterward turneth his speech to the second person saying whatsoever ye bind c. then tel the Church is tel the Elders But Christ chandgeth his speech from the third to the second person Therfor tell the Church is tel the Elders Mr. Ber. you were not wel advised in making this argument For it overthroweth your exposition most manifestly as thus If Christ calleth his Disciples the Church then tel the Church is tel the Disciples or the body of the Church But Christ calleth al his Disciples the Church For this commission of binding and losing is given to all the Disciples jointly as is already declared more fully in the former arguments Therfor tel the Church is tel the body of the Church al Christs Disciples not only the Governors Therfor this reason confirmeth the truth we hold not the error which you seek to defend by wresting the Scripture Your third reason that tel the Church is tell the Governors is for that Christ speaketh of two or three That is to say after your exposition of two or three Elders or governors not of the whole body I answer that your argument is without al force of consequence For to argue thus is to argue without reason or force of argument viz. Iff Christ speaketh of two or three then he speaketh of two or three Elders or Governors But Christ speaketh of two or three Ergot Christ speaketh of two or three Elders or Governors Further by this argument one Apostle could do nothing but ther must needes be two or thre so one Elder can do nothing but ther must needes be two or thre so your Prelates Monarchy in their dioceses falleth to the ground but your arguments grow ridiculous Now the reason why Christ speaketh of two or thre is for consolatiō to the Church Disciples of Christ teaching that if but two or thre of them at any tyme walk together in the faith truth of Christ those two or thre have title to Christ al his ordinances have promise of audience acceptance as also to instruct the Saynts to stand for the truth against multitudes though they be the smallest nomber which is three or two for Christ he wil not leave them destitute of his presence and asistance Your Fourth reasons that Tel the Church is Tel the Elders in this that the person is changed from the second to the third vs 19. if two of you shal agree c. whatsoever they shal ask c the force of the argument is al one with the second so hath receaved answer there but it seemeth you delight in nomber multitude yet for further evidēce I will show you the reason the frame whereof is thus to be conceaved Iff ther be a Grammaticall change of the person viz you they then ther is a Reall chandg off the person physicall viz The Governors The Church But ther is a grammatical chandg of the person you they Ergo Ther is a Real chandg of the person physicall viz The Governors the Church I deny your Major stil I avouch that the chandg of the person is by way of exposition teaching that they you are one namely whither they be two of Christs Disciples then living viz you or any other two or thre to the end of the world viz they Christ hath promised his powre presence acceptance to them For so he saith wheresoever two or thre vs 20. Mat. 28.20 Lo I am with you alwayes So that these two general circumstances of place tyme are for the consolatiō instruction of the Church if they be but two or three in al ages For not the multitude but the truth is respected of Christ al tymes places are indifferent for the Church of the new Testament which was otherwise in the old Testament For the Lord then promised his presence especially in the Temple vppon their Sabbaths to the special people but now the partition wal is broken downe now al tymes places persons are indifferēt for the church the Lord. Your fifth reason that Tel the Church is Tel the Governors is this that otherwise absurdityes cannot be avoyded that arise out of the text the absurdityes you suppose would follow are 1. confusion 2 carelesnes wherevppon follow pride contention 3. weomen childrē speaking in the Church 4. that the whole Church cā speak 5. Christs should crosse himself who giveth the powre to two or three Herevnto I answer the supposed absurdities either do not follow or if they do folow are no absurdities For the truth is not absurd First it doth not follow that ther must needs be confusion carelesnes pride or contention if a brother be promoted to the body of the Church for his offence after once twise admonition but rather the brethren vnderstanding that al are interessed in the busines wil be careful to dischardg their dutyes whereas by your fancy the
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
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
Seperate from persons ceremonialy vncleane 3. if the Apostles commaund Seperation from the Iewes members of that true Church of the old Testament refusing Christ rayling against him Then much more ought we to Seperate from you the members of false Churches refusing persecuting Christ in his members new Testament vnto death as they have felt 4. if Antichristims Gentils be in degree equall as they are in the Holy Ghosts account as I have formeâ—ly proved theÌ„ from you who are AntichristiaÌ„s visible members of false Churches ought Seperation to be made 5. although you are not excommunicate from the true Church whereof you never were yet you entertaine excommunicates from true Churches you are cages of every vncleane hateful bird if I must avoyd private familiar communion with excommunicate wicked persons then much more must I shun Spirituall holy communion with them except any man wil be so ridiculous as to say that the Hoâ—y Spiritual communion afordeth more liberty to sinne sinners then private civil communion in meate drinck c. so by your own confession al the places of Scripture alledged against you by vs may by just due proportion be applyed vppon you being as you stand in your constitution worship false Churches false worshippers persecuters of Christ his truth faithful witnesses To end al you say that it cannot be proved that it is sinn to heare the word preached to receave the Sacraments of one that hath converted him is called of the church wel Mr. Bern. I vnderstand your drift I wil give you an answer I say in your assemblies men do not convert to the true visiole faith of Christ taught in his word viz in the new Testament nor you ever converted man therto but pervert men from it as this book of yours al your railings against our testimony do plainly evince what you do invisibly the Lord knoweth every mans owne conscience can speak that feeleth but what say you of the Popish preachers do you think they convert none invisiblie what doe you gaine by this fancy neither they nor you convert to the faith or new Testament of Christ but they pervert meÌ„ from you you pervert men from the Seperation both hinder draw from the truth what you do invisiblie I seek not nor ought not to respect for visible walking yet know that we hold that ther are 7000. that are of the Lords Election in your false Churches So are ther in Rome it self Revel 18.4 whence did al the worthy witnesses of Christ arise as the waldenses Hus Prage Luther the Martyrs in Q. Maries dayes in EnglaÌ„d at other tymes in other places did they not come out of the bottomlesse pit of Antichristianisme being converted there yet I hope you wil not say that they might stil joyne to that ministery yet the ministers then had the calling of that church such as it was if therfor the argumeÌ„t be not good for them no more is it for you for you wil be proved to be AntichristiaÌ„ Ministers as truly in quality though not asmuch in quantity as they are this shal suffice for answer to this point The ninth Section Your next point wherto I will speak is the sixth in nomber which you hold error but I hold as a truth if it be wel conceaved it is this 6. That the word truly preached Sacraments rightly administred are no infallible tokens of a true Church I am sure you doe or may remember that proprium cum specie convertitur as the Logicians speak For example Every man is reasonablâ— every reasonable creature is a maÌ„ Now al I say is that the word truly preached the Sacraments duely administred are no properties of a true church For although this be true that whersoever the word is truly preached ex officio the Sacraments rightly administred ther is a true Church yet I denie the other viz That wheâ—soever ther is a true Church the word is truly preached the Sacraments are rightly administred For these two are not convertible but this I hold that a true Church powre to preach the word truly and administer the Sacraments duely are convertible and therefore that the powre of our Lord Iesus Christ given to the Church is an essential propertie of a true Church and therefore convertible with a true Church Now sometyme it falleth out that a true Church hath not the word ministerially preached nor the Sacraments administred namely when it wanteth Officers as it sometyme falleth out This point also is plaine enough if you have not loft your Logick therefore I leave it requiring your answer Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the ninth Section I cannot find in all Mr. Bern. book intituled the Sep Schisme any thing in opposition to this Section of my lette vnto him whereby I collect that he yeeldeth it as a truth it is not material to the point of Seperation any thing at al only the truth must be defended for the Author of truths sake that the Lord his truth may in all things be honored the summe of al this Section is thus much that as not the act of reasoning is the true propertie of a man but the faculty to reason Non ratiocinari sed rationale So not the actual preaching administring of the Sacraments but the powre of Christ to have vse al the holy things of God is the true property convertible in fallible token of a true Church For as every man although he be reasonable yet doth not actually vse reasoÌ„ at al tymes as namely being an infaÌ„t being a sleep being in a Lethargie or sincope So the true Church though it have alwayes powre to al the holy things yet actually it doth not vse the powre But I list not to speak much concerning this particular which is more Scholasticall then profitable the rather seing Mr. Bernard contendeth not about it The tenth Section The next position is according to your order the twelvth viz That every of our assemblies are false churches al our ministers false ministers our worship a faise worship you cal this en or I cannot beleeve you wherfor I declare them vnto you particularly in order after this manner But bicause your Wordes seem to import that you doe not defend all your assemblies to be true Churches all your Ministers true Ministers the worship of every assemblie to be a true worship for that I gesse by your covenant you exclude dumb Ministers the assemblies over which they are the worship offered vp by them Therefore I wil onely plead against your parish Church at worksap and your owne Ministerie and the worship offered vp by you for your people in the parish Church at worksap First for your assemblie I vse this reason to prove it no true Church wher the people are not Holy Elect faithful having not entered
them are not capable to choose them a minister over them afterward in the end of the Section I say such a mixt company are not a true Church a minister chosen by them is not a true minister Heer I desire that it may be observed that I doe not deny but men that are mixt may apoint one to preach the word vnto them but that which I say is that a mixt company of good bad is not a true Church that a man chosen by them to be their Minister is not a true minister If men desire instruction I deny not but they may appoint one to teach them that Magistrates in ther dominions may appoint men to preach the word to ther subjects for ther conversion that it is a lawful thing for the people to heare such men for men of gifts to preach to such a people this we see practised Act. 13.42 17 19-21 28.30 otherwise how is it possible that men should be brought to the knowledg of the truth Mr. Ber. if you think that we deny the lawfulnes of this you doe vs open wrong if his Matie should dissolve the parish Ecclesiastical assemblies the false ministery should coÌ„maund men of knowledg gifts to preach the word to his subjects I doubt not but al of vs would herein readily yeeld our selves to heare learne the truth at any such persons ourselves to teach the truth to such a people but to say that such a people are true Churches or such preachers the true Pastors of true visible Churches that wee deny that you shal never be able to prove but if after such preaching by such preachers the L. work with the people so as that they gladly receave the word repent beleeve desire to walk in the truth therevppon do promise to the L. each to other to walk in his wayes this promise maketh them a true Church then if they chose among them men able to lead seed them appoint such men to such office the men so chosen apointed are the true Pastors which the Scripture describeth but what is all this to your assemblies Ministers who as yet have not cast of the yoke of Antichristian bondage whose communion ministery is not dissolved but remayneth firme the same in nature though much bettered in degre with the Romane assemblies Ecclesiastical whereas you in this particular object to vs that two or three of vs Seperated from you gathered together into the new Testament of Christ assume powre to make Ministers a practise as you say farre from plaine evidence of Scripture or any practise of the Church these thousand yeeres I answer it is no mater for the practise of the Church these thousand yeeres for Gregory the great Bb. of Rome who lived a thousaÌ„d yeeres since hoysed vp Antichrist into the highest exaltation against God his Christ in a manner his Successors especially Boniface some other have maintayned enlarged that Antichristian Kingdom even to our dayes yet the mistery of iniquity is exalted in these particulars wherfor this allegation of yours is nothing to the purpose if you be a sound protestant For if prescription of a thousand yeeres bee good in any thing why not in al things if not in al things then in nothing And wheras you alledg that it is also far from plaine evidence of the Scripture I answer the evidence is plaine to them that wil vnderstand I would know what is plaine evidence of Scripture is not a true natural consequence plaine evidence is not this plaine evidence Math. 18.20 whersoever two or three shal be gathered together into my name I wil be in the midst among them this 2. Corinth 6.17 bee yee Seperated I will receave you bee your Father this Gallat 3.16 the promises are made to Abraham and to his seed So then they that are of Faith are blessed with Faithful Abraham Gallat 3.9 If Christ wil be present with two or three of his Disciples If God will receave them that are Seperated bee their God if the promises bee given to them that beleeve as Abraham beleeved Then Christ is their Christ God is their Father the promises are theirs and the ministery is theirs by plaine evidence then they may assume the ministery vse it as God hath appointed But for this point read the seaventh Section the Paral. Censur Observat therto aperteyning The thirteenth Section The next point to be handled is your seaventh in nomber viz. That a minister may be made without Elders ordinarily I meane for extraordinary courses are not now to be vsed for ought I see this point you blame as error Let vs see whether it be error or not I hold that a minister may be made without Elders more plainly I say that when the Church wanteth Elders the Church hath powre to Elect approve ordeyne her owne Elders also to elect approve ordeine her owne Deacons both men woemen For if you remember what was before spoken to your fifth position viz that the church hath the powre of Chr in it self viz that it hath Chr. the covenant al the promises given to it being yet but few in nomber that the Church hath these things in true title interest as her owne freehold then you shal see what wil follow hervppon namely that the Church hath powre to receave in members cast out members to receave in her Officers to dischardg theÌ„ of office the church hath powre to the preaching of the word to the administring of the seales of the covenant to binding losing which workes she cannot do herself being many therfor she appointeth fit persons therto viz such officers as Christ hath given to his Church which are the Elders stil notwithstanding reserving her powre to herself when occasion shal be offered these things are sufficiently proved already in answer to your fifth imputation but you have some thing perhaps to say for ordination that the Church hath not powre of it then belike al the promises are not given to the Church for if ordination be not given to the Church then the ministery is not given to the Church for it seemeth you make ordination a great part of the ministerie but know for your learning that ordination doth give nothing at al to the Minister For election is the verâ—e essence forme of the minister for in election powre to administer is given to the officer elect For when the Church choseth the minister doth not the Church in effect say we give the A. b powre to administer the word seales of the covenant censures in the behalf of the whole Church the minister Elect doth then actually possesse assume that powre delegated vnto him by the Church so when the Church choseth her Deacons doth she not in effect speake thus we give you c.d.e.f.
faith are the members of the Church of England baptized which the Law establisheth which the Prelates Ministers teach which the Church of England professeth which the minister baptising intendeth wherto the parents witnesses or Susceptors consent which the Service-book expresly mentioneth But the law doth not establish the Prelates ministers do not teach the Church of England doth not professe the baptizer doth not intend the parents Susceptors doe not consent to the Servicebook doth not mention the Faith of Christ simply but the Faith of Bbs. or Church of England Ergo The members of the Church of England are not baptized into the Faith of Christ simply but into the Fayth of the Bbs. or Church of England which is the false Fayth of the baptizer of the Suertyes or parents and so the Faith of the baptisme For the second point let vs consider the faith repentance of the Church of Englād I meane of the faith that is visibly professed expressed in the fruites of repētance amōg them therby we shal know the tree The faith of that Church is not a true faith which teach professe a false mediator the repentance of that Church is not a true repentance which practise according to that false doctryne But the assemblies Ecclesiastical of England with the teachers professors of them teach and professe a false Mediator For they teach that Christ is a Mediator of all that false Church Ministery VVorship and Government established in the Land Sacrificing and making intercession for them in the dayly practise al those abhominations Ruling and Governing them by all the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy and by the courts canons Ecclesiastical which are the inventions of the man of sinne Teaching Prophesying vnto them by those Antichristian Prelates Preists Deacons which raigne in the Land so practising according to this false Faith practise a false repentance Ergo the Faith of the Church of England of the teachers professors therof the repentance of them is not true but false But it wil be objected against both these assertions that although one thing be intended in baptisme yet the Lord may admit of accept another though they professe preach falsely yet the Lord he can doth no doubt work mervaylously besides al that we can think or speak Truth I yeeld it most willingly blessed be the Lord for his infinite vnspeakeable mercy therein but we dispute not what God can do of his powre or wil do of his mercy things vnknowne vnto vs but we speake of things revealed and manifested vnto vs according whervnto we must walk judg of matters according to that which we see according as the word judgeth according as the Church members of the Church of England teach professe practise visibly which is seen discerned of vs we are to passe our censure but we judg no man before the tyme we doe not clyme vp into Gods judgment seate our Faith is visible our repentance is visible our charity visible our Spirit visible our baptisme visible our preaching visible our covenant visible our Church visible our judgment visible things that are revealed aperteyne to vs our Children that say we is false in the assemblies Ecclesiastical Secreat things aperteyne to the Lord these we leave to the Lord we medle not with them this I desire may once for al be remembred pondered so I end this matter The Fiftenth Section The next point is your Fourth wherin you do vs open injury viz. 4. In holding that Princes have no more to do in ecclesiastical causes then one of you in a particular congregation these are your wordes Mr. Ber. I challeng you in this particular imputation to be either a malicious or an ignorant slaunderer For eyther you know not what we teach concerning Princes Authorityes so slaunder vs ignorantly or if you know our judgmēt in that matter you slaunder vs malitiously Remember that the Prophet in the Psalmes complayneth that his enemyes digd pits for him laid snares grinnes nets in his way to catch him ynawares to bring evil vppon him are you now become such an enemy vnto vs doe you think by calling into question the Supremacy of Princes imputing therin treason to vs to catch vs in a snare cause vs to fal into the pit if this be your course thus to hunt the Soules of men look vnto your self therin you manifest litle grace to me but let vs heer the cause you impute to vs. you say we hold that princes have no more to do in ecclesiastical causes then one of vs in a particular congregaciō I say for myne owne part I think I may say it for al the brethren of our Church that herin you do shamefully belie vs I wil therfor manifest what we hold teach concerning Princes Supremacy 1. First wee teach hold according to the Scriptures that Princes civil Estates are the Lords blessed ordinance Rom. 13.2 2. Secondly that every Soule ought to be subject vnto the civil Magistrates of what estate condition soever they be Rom. 13.1 Tit. 3.1 1. Pet. 2.13 3. Thirdly that we must absolutely submit vnto the civil Magistrate eyther to do his lawful commaundements or to suffer his vnlawful punishments by consequence from the former places 4. Fourthly that it is vnlawful for any subject to make insurrection or rebellion against the civil Magistrates by consequence from the former places 5. Fifthly that it is the Magistrates office to be the keeper of both the tables of the cōmaundemēts both to abolish Idolatry al false wayes also to forbid punish al vnrighteousnes as also to commaund cause al men within there Dominions to walk in the wayes of God being fitted prepared therevnto and that by the examples of David Iosaphat Hezechiah Iosiah Nehemiah Roman 13.4.5 Psalm 101. toto and 132. 2-5 6. That a Prince hath powre in a particular visible Church to punish any wickednes any one committeth and to cause that visible Church to assume practise any truth Gods word teacheth ex praecedentibus now this is more authority then any one particular member hath 7. VVee teach notwithstanding that Princes if they wil be saved must bee members of a true visible Church must walk ther in the obedience of Gods Commaundements ordinances submitting to the censures for the reformation salvation of his soule as well as to the preaching to the VVord administration of the Seales of the covenant prayers c. bicause God hath appointed but one way to save the Soules of Princes and Subjects 8. If civil Magistrates be by censures cast out of the true visible Church yet they are stil to be accounted Gods ordinance stil to bee obeyed in the L. stil to be submitted to in regard of their punishment no rebellion or insurrection to be made against them by any of the Church whatsoever but prayer
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
PARALLELES CENSVRES OBSERVATIONS Aperteyning TO THREE SEVERAL WRITINGES 1. A Lettre written to Mr. Ric. Bernard by Iohn Smyth 2. A Book intituled The Seperatists Schisme published by Mr. Bernard 3. An Answer made to that book called the Sep. Schisme by Mr. H. Ainsworth WHEREVNTO ALSO ARE ADIOYNED 1. The said Lettre written to Mr. Ric. Bernard divided into 19. Sections 2. Another Lettre written to Mr. A. S. 3. A third Lettre written to certayne Brethren of the Seperation By Iohn Smyth Mat. 24.23 Then if any shall say vnto you Lo heer is Christ or there beleeve it not Vs 24. For there shall arise false Christs false Prophets shall shew great signes wonders so that if it were possible they should deceave the very elect Vs 25. Behould I have told you before Mat. 7.15 Beware of false Prophets which come to you in Sheeps clothing but inwardly are Ravening wolves Vs 16. Yee shall know them by their Fruytes Ioh. 10.1 He that entreth not in by the dore into the Sheepfold but climeth vp another way he is a theef a robber Vs 10. The theef commeth not but for to steale to kil to destroy 2. Cor. 11.13 For such false Apostles are deceiptful workers transforme them selves into the Apostles of Christ Vs 14. And no marvayle for Sathan himself is transformed into an aungel of light Printed 1609. TO EVERY ONE THAT SEEKETH AFTER the truth in sinceâ—ity Salutations NOt every thing Gentle Reader which a man writeth privately sodaynly to his frend is fit to be published openly to the view of the world neyther did I think that this lettre written to Mr. Bernard in private vppon three dayes meditation should have been made publique in print to every mans eye censure which had I thought should have come to passe I would with better advyse leâ—sure so with more mature judgment have conceaved penned it But seing it is justly occasioned through Mr. Bernards importunity in his late published book intituled the Seperatists Schisme his slaunderous misconstructions misreports vp downe the country behind my back that this lettre of myne is strongly suspected of error bitternes rashnes vncharitablenes imputations of theÌ„ like nature by reason thereof my seâ— falleth vnder the hard vnknowne happily vndeserved censure of many well affected to the truth wheâ—eat I cannot but be much wounded both in myne owne soule inwardly in my good name outwardly which is alwayes better moâ—e to be esteemed then a good oyntment I thought it much more tolerable to adventure my self by exposing this vntymely byrth I meane this sodaynly conceaved penned lettre to the variable censures of the multitude theÌ„ by burying it in darknes silence like vnto one stil borne to superinduce a strong presumption of iustly imputed blame vppon my self by reason of this present lettre Therefore I doe earnestly intreat every one frend or other into whose handes this present writing may come to esteeme it as it is indeed even a sodayne private lettre of one freÌ„d vnto another not to respect it as it now falleth out to be a publique wriring proclaymed as it were vppon the house top I cannot nor may not with fidelity alter one sentence or word of it but as Mr. Bernard hath it copyed in his hands so have I published it word for word without any the least chandg to my knowledg least Mr. Bernard should say it is not the lettre he had from mee that his slaunderous collections aspersions cast vppon mee in respect of the lettre may be perceaved by them that read this lettre compare it with his book notes speeches And seing necessity enforceth the identity of this lettre without correction eyther of matter or wordes I beseech the Gentle Reader frendly favorably to construe all things interpret them in the better pâ—rt promising that if any eyther error in matter or tartnes of speech be manifested vnto mee as my sinne I shal willingly confesse repent it before the world And so vppon hope of a favorable construction I desire to advertise further that Mr. Bernard had in his hands this lettre of myne six or seven monthes before he published this his book intituled the Seperatists Schisme which book as may be perceaved by this letter compared therwith is principally directed in opposition reprehension thereof but how litle cause Mr. Bernard had so to doe may now appeare For he should have answered before he had opposed but that which he doth oppose is indeed answered already in the lettre by prevention anticipatioÌ„ that I shal not need to make answere a fresh to Mr. Bernard he being now twise answered once before his book was published now againe since by Mr. Henry Ainsworth Only I desire the reader to be advertised that ther are some particulars wherein Mr. Ainsworth hath lest mee the truth in the open playne field to shift for our selves In regard whereof as also bicause of Mr. Bernards misaledging misconstruing divers parts of my letter written vnto him I have thought meet not barely to publish this lettre but parallele-wise to compare Mr. Bernards book Mr. Ainsworths answer this my lettre together as also to annexe a few animadversioÌ„â— observations aperteyning therevnto that by this meanes the agrement difference being discovered the truth may appeare where it is Now although it be a greevous thing vnto me to raise vp adversaries against me without cause especially brethren of true Churches yet seeing I am necessarely interessed to defend the truth manifested in myne owne writings which I cannot possibly doe but by way of opposition theâ—for it commeth to passe that will I will I I must needes answer the opponent left I betray the truth which by due order I am particularly called singled out to defend Wherfor for more evidence sake I have caused this lettre written to Mr. Bern. to be divided into 19. Sections in every Section wher need required I have made parallels animadversions observations for severall purposes as the reader shal perceave in perusing theÌ„ Finally vppon perswasion of frends for further cleering of the truth I have annexed two other lettres the one written to Mr. A.S. a Minister of the Church of England conteyning certayne principall mayne groundes of our cause which I desire may diligently be considered of every one that is willing to see the truth the other written to ce tayne brethren of the Seperation for the confirming establishing of them in the truth against the assaults of Sathan transforming himself into an aungel of light therby the better to deceave the simple howsoever it be needlesse to publish any thing further for the cleering of the truth of our cause out of those mysts foggs which subtil disputers pleaders for corâ—uption have like jannes jambres those Egiptian jugleâ—s cast before mens eyes that they cannot readely
discerne a true serpent from a â—alfe yet bicause new adversaries arise dayly with new shifts cavils therfor it is not amisse to discover their forgeries also that at the length it may evidently appeare that the truth hath devoured error as Moses Serpent did the Enchanters So desiring every one that loveth the Lord the truth especiaâ—ly Mr. Ainsworth Mr. Bernard to judg wisely of my course not to take any thing in the evil part which is a strong fruite of the flesh I cease wishing the truth may be honoured though men be shamed Amen IOHN SMYTH A LETTRE WRITTEN TO MAISTER Ric. Bâ—â—nard Minister off worksop by Ioh. Smith Pastor off the Church at Ganesburgh The First Section MAister Bernard I have sufficient reasons that have moved mee to breake silence in respect of you by this Lettre to attempt a further tryall of your pretended Zeale for the truth faith of Christ I have long tyme observed the applause yeelded you by the multitude Likewise I have taken notice of your forwardnes in leading to a Reformation by publique proclamations in Severall pulpits out of that Text off Daniell 3.16.17.18 As if you had meant contrary to the Kings mynd to have caryed all the people in the country after you against the Ceremonies Subscription afterward having lost your vicaridge of worksop for refusing Subscription or conformity I have observed how yow revolted back vppon Subscription made to the Prelate of york have reentred vppon your said vicaridg Againe I have noted your vehement desire to the parsonage of Sawenbâ—e your extreme indignation when you were defeated of it Further your earnest desire to have been vicar of Ganesburgh al this after your subscription besides I have carefully weighed with my self your Readines to embrace this truth wee professe First at Sr. VV. Bowes his howse when it was opposed by some adversaries after that your acknowledging of it before many witnesses at one tyme before one or two witnesses at divers tymes aledging Naamans speech for your continuance in your Ministerie 2. King 5.18 as if therby you meant to reserve libertie to sinne against your conscience And now of late I have considered your covenant made with one hundreth people a thing of such note observation as that the whole country ringeth of it but alas againe you have revolted from al this tâ—uth only excepting your opposition against the dumb ministers have not only rejected it but set your self against it hinder divers from it both in your putpits writings proclame against it as error schisme yea beginne to justifie all the corruptions of the ministerie worship government of the assemblies all this with a high hand Al these things many more I have noted in you all the forward professers yea the verie ennemies also have observed the same In al which particulars two things may be mynded your inconstancy apostacy misconstre not the word for how can I judg it otherwise seing you have acknowledged the truth now reject it oppose it your inconstancy in falling of on so often as you have done now allthough these general reasons might have moved any of the Prophets Teachers of our Church for the truths sake to have delt with you to have discovered you to the simpler sort whome you seduce yet I have attempted it vppon two private groundes wherein I am especially interessed to this busines one is certayne aspersions by you personally cast vppon mee Another is certayne particular oppositions directed against some of my writings For the First you may remember that at Broxtow when you returned from Mr. Hildersham before certaine competent witnesses you vttered wordes tending to this purpose that in defence of the truth wee professe I chose out asitt adversary viz Mr. Rich Clifton to deale withall a man that could not dive into the depth of my arguments that I refused to deale with you in that respect This speech savoreth verie strongly of pride which vice take you heed of especialy it conteyneth also an vntruth manifesteth contempt against a man of better hability then your self in the judgment of them that know you both besides the wrong that you doe mee as if I knowing the cause wee testife to be weake bad durst not adventure it to the trial of your sufficiency diving wit but in good earnest Mr. Bernard tel mee is your dealing vpright in this point Doe not you remember that you have in your handes had in your handes at that instant when you vttered those wordes my answer writteÌ„ in one Columne to certayne doubts objections you made written in another Columne which I desired you to answer wherto as yet I have receaved no answer from you Surely you may pretend holines zeale for the truth but this dealing these speeches declare no such matter yea rather they do manifest the corruptioÌ„ of your hart This your speech dealing is one reason that moveth mee in Special to deale with you that your mouth may be stopped in that behalf although it be stopped already sith you answer not my writing that is in your handes for Mr. Richard Clifton I assure my self as you shal find shortly to your litle credit he wil approve his sufficieÌ„cy to be Superior to your diving witt A Second reason that in particular leadeth me to medle with you in this matter is your oppositions against some truths which I have expressed in some of my writings Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the first Section The place of Daniel mentioned in the beginning of this Section is Dan. 3.16 O Nebuchadnezzar wee are not careful to answere thee in this matter 17. Behold our God whome wee serve is able to deliver vs froÌ„ the hote fiery fornace he will deliver vs out of thyne hand o King 18. But if not be it knowne to thee o King that we wil not serve thy Gods nor worship the golden jmage which thou hast set vp This place of Scripture Mr. Berâ—aâ—â— handled oft tymes in several places in so much as every man conceaved that he would have been a ring leader to reformation For the circumstances being considered that this Scripture was handled when the King vrged Subscription conformity throughout the whole land when divers of the forwardest preachers were silenced himself then endaungered to leese his vicâ—â—ridg that then he should thus p each was enough to have brought him within the compasse of petty-rebellion in stirring vp the myndes of the people against the Kings proceedings besides the shew of the text might aford that he compared the King to Nebuchadnezzar Subscription to the Kings commaundement of worshipping the golden jmage Refusal of Subscription to the Refusal of worshipping the golden jmage the parts of Subscription to the golden jmage the Ministers refusing Subscription to the three persons that refused to worship the golden image their
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
vnderstanding but therein the L. hath shewed mercy vnto me which mercy I desire also for you but what is this to excuse your slaundering rayling scoffing inconstancy Apostacy conformity subscription blasphemy the rest which you have plentifully discovered to al the world Shew me how when after the acknowledgment of the truth I fell back as you have done many tymes that I ever yeelded to the Prelates conformity or Subscription after I once withstood it amōg the rest of your follyes ther is one vntruth that I did kneele downe praise God for Satisfaction after doubting Not so I remayned doubting alwayes till I saw the truth after I once doubted but during the tyme of my doubting which was 9. Months at the least I did many actions arguing doubting but that I ever sel back from any truth I saw I praise God I can with a good conscience deny it you are never able to prove that against me but the L. wil cut out the tong that speaketh lyes The second Section These oppositions of yours you have written in a lettre which came of late to my sight which are thus in your lettre Touching your oppinions in these things shall I never be perswaded that you doe well in 1 In Seperating from all the Reformed Churches 2. In holding that one sinne of one man publiquely obstinately stood in not reformed by a true constituded Church doth so pollute it that none may commicate with it in the holy things of God til the partie offending be by the Church put out after lawful conviction 3. In maintayning that it s not lawful to heare any ministers amongst vs whatsoever thy be nor to joyne in prayer with such as feare God among vs. 4. In holding that Princes have no more to doe in Ecclesiastical causes thē one of you in a particular congregation 5. That the powre of binding losing is given to the whole multitude not to the principal members therof 6. That the word truly preached Sacraments rightly administred are no infallible tokens of a true Church 7. That a minister may be made without Elders ordinarily I meane for extraordinary courses are not now to be vsed for ought I see 8. That such as are not in your way are to be accounted without after the Apostles meaning 1. Cor. 5.12 9. That those which are not of a true constituted Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdom 10. That an erroneous constitution of a Church is a real Idol 11. That only Saints as Mr. Smith defineth them by 4 proporties are the matter only of a visible Church 12. That every of our assemblies are false Churches al our ministers false ministers our worship a false worship 13. That a company truly fearing God if any open wicked joyne with them are not capable to chose them a minister over them 14. That baptisme is not administred among vs simply into the faith of Christ but into the faith of the Bbs. or Church of England 15. That ministers ought only to live of voluntary contribution not of stipends or any set mayntenance 16. That our Churches ought to be rased downe not to be imployed to the worship of God Al which I do verely beleeve to be crrors I see not which way men can joyne to you to swallow vp al these as truths into which you doe runne in avoyding our corruptions that with such deep condemnation of vs as is greatly in your behalf to be lamented but I am tedious c. _____ R. B. This is your writing word for word wherein you have taxed mee by name in one particular indeed in most of them it shal be my part therfor to cleer these matters for your information that if it be the wil of God you may see the truth walk in it which I vnfeynedly desire of the Lord or els that you may no longer seduce others from the truth your corrupt walking being once discovered vnto the simple my intent therfor is not to take these points in that order which you have placed them in but to assume thē in the natural order wherin things vsually among Schollers are discoursed Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the Second Section I desire heer to advertise the reader that these 16. points which Mr. Bern. accounteth error are againe in his book intituled the Seperatifts Schisme rehearsed refined augmēted changed as it pleaseth the forger into another order shape nomber which it shal not be impertinent heer to propound for evidence sake that the Reader comparing these 16. points with those 22. For so they are in nomber may discerne the agreement difference so more fully be informed of the whole cause The particulars are these following as they are expressed in divers pages of his booke as pag. 78 the title of them is this The Errors of the Seperatists the matter of their Schisme 1. They hold that the constitution of our Church is a false constitution pag. 78. 2. They hold our constitution a real Idol so vs idolaters pag. 79. 3. That such as are not of a particular constituted Church to wit such a one as theirs is are no subjects of Ch. Kingdom pag. 80.81 4. That all not in their way are without do apply against vs 1. Cor. 5.12 Eph. 2.12 pag. 82. 5. That only Saynts that is a people forsaking al knowne sinne of which they may be convinced doing al the knowne wil of God in creasing abiding ever therein are the only matter of a visible Church pag 83. 6. That the powre of Christ that is authority to preach to administer the Sacramēts to exercise the censures of the Church belongeth to the whole Church yea to every one of them not to the principal members thereof pag. 48. 7. That the sinne of one man publiquely obstinately stood in being not reformed not the offender cast out doth so pollute the whole congregation that none may cōmunicate with the same in any of the holy things of God though it be a Church rightly constituted til the partie be excommunicated pag. 102.103 8. That every of our assemblies are false Churches pag. 109. 9. Al our Ministers say they are false Ministers pag. 128. 10. Our worship say they is a false worship pag. 146. Divers other opinions they hold which I will also set downe they be these pag. 150.151 1. That our congregations as they stand are all every of them vncapable before God to chose them Ministers though they desire the meanes of salvtion pag. 151. 2. That God in our best assemblies is worshipped after a false manner pag. 151. 3. That baptisme is not administred into the faith of Ch. simply but into the sayth of Bishops or Church of England pag. 152. 4. That our saith repentance is a false faith false repentance pag. 152. 5. That our Ministers converting men to God heere do it not as Pastors but as Teachers pag
although a false constitution be a sinne yet it is not Idolatry you must manifest it to me to be a sin of another commaundemeÌ„t if you plead that otherwise I stil hold it to be a sinne of the Second commaundement viz to worship God in a constitution of an humane invention even as it was in the Church of Ieroboams in vention as it is in a popish parish assembly as it is in the English assemblies now further to prove vnto you that a false constitution of a Church is an Idol I use these places 2. Cor. 6.16 VVhat agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols The faithful who have made a covenant with God are heer cailed the temple of God thervnto are Idols opposed signifying that an assembly of men who are vnfaithfull though some faithful meÌ„ be among them who are commaunded to come out to be Seperated endevoring to worship God after ther fashion are an Idol therfor if the temple of Ierusalem now stood the Iewes assembled to worship God ther after the fashioÌ„ of the Old Testament that assemblie was an Idol So are the assemblies of Turkes Idols So are the assemblies of Papists Idols as Abbayes Monasteries c. Such are al churches framed of a false matter or having a false covenant 1. Ioh. 5.21 Babes keep your selves from jmages Zach. 11.17 The Apostle who wrote the Revelation forseing through the Spirit of prophecy the abhominable Idolatryes of Antichrist which would grow vp in the Church giveth the Churches a caution especially to take heed of those Antichristian Idolatryes now the Idolatryes of Antichrist are not heathenish paganish but of another nature viz not false Gods but meanes invented by men to worship the true God in or by Hence I gather thus VVhatsoever meanes is devised out of a mans brayne vsed as a meanes to honour God in or by is an Idol A devised constitution of a Church is of that nature Ergo an Idol For further amplification whereof consider that as a false minister wherof afterward is an Idol minister Zach. 11.17 So a Church of a false constitution is a false Church that is an Idol Chuch as it was vnlawful yea flat Idolatry for a Priest of Ieroboams devising to offer Sacrifice to the L. So is it also Idolatry to offer vp service to God in a Church of a false constitution Col. 2.23 Mat. 15.9 Wil-worship vayne-worship is forbidden in these two places namely such worship as is offered to God after the wil precept of man whose wisdome is enmity to God But a false constitution of a Church is after the will precept of man even invented devised go it is forbidden but wil worship vayne worship is a transgression of the second commaundement go it is idolatry so that false Church wherin or wherby it is offered vp to God an Idol These things are manifest to him that wil not blindfold himself I pray you consider of the particulars by mee alledged if you find a truth in them embrace the truth lead on your people with you to the truth if not let vs heer from you an answer that we may see our errors wee wil can reforme so cannot you so long as you stand as you doe ther is no way to reforme but to Seperate as we have done already Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the third Section I published a litle Methode not long since intituled Principles inferences concerning the visible Church in the tenth page of the book I write thus visible Churches constituted according to the devise of men are Real Idols Mr. Bern. in the beginning of his third Section chargeth vs to hold That an erroneous constitution of a Church is a real Idol in his book intituled the Seperatists Schisme pag. 79 hath these wordes They hould our constitution a real Idol so vs idolaters pag. 152. of the same book he writeth thus that our Church viz the Church of England standeth in an adultrous estate accounting this as an error that wee defend Mr. Ainsw in the answer to Mr. Bern. pag. 172. faith that a false constitution of a church set vp in stead of a true what is it better then a very Idol Heer let vs consider the difference agrement betwixt Mr. Ains me he saith a very Idol I say a real Idol I cal a false constitution a real Idol For that in existence being it is an Idol Mr. Ainsw calleth a falsely constituted Church a very Idol bicause it is indeed truly an Idol heer is litle difference except it be in wordes but for the further cleering of my position viz that a falsely constituted Church is a real Idol two things must be discovered 1. what an Idol is 2. what Real is For the first vnderstand that most properly an Idol is contrary to an ordinance apoinred by God in matter of Religion So the Apostle willeth the brethren to keep themselves from jmages or Idols 1. Ioh. 5.21 the Lord himself in the Second Commaundement forbiddeth vnder the phrases of making worshipping jmages al inventions of men in matter of Religion Exod. 20.4.5 Now matter of religion especially subsisteth in Religious worship or religious government For the Saynts are made Kings Preists vnto God as Kings they excercise a regiment as Preists they performe their Sacrifices Revel 1.6 1. Co. 6 1-9.1 Pet. 2.5 therein they performe homage to the Lord submit their consciences to be wrought vppon seing the conscience must bow only to the Lord not to man otherwise then in the Lord therfor in matter of Religion the conscience is not to yeeld to any thing devised by man but must alwayes have the Lord for the leader Governor therein hence then it foloweth that whosoever substituteth any devise of man any thing taught by the precept of man Mat. 15.9 Esay 29.13 any will worship or any ordinance of the world in matter of Religion setteth vp that which is contrary to the Lords ordinance contrary to the Lords wil contrary to the Lords wisdome I would fayne learne whither this be not an Idol or jmage So that Idols are of two sorts 1. A false God 2 A false meanes to honor or submit or doe homage to the true God in or by as a false or devised tyme place person instrumeÌ„t action if theâ—be any thing of the like consideration therfor a false or devised tyme may be caled an Idol day as 1 King 12.33 the month which Ieroboam appointed for the worship of his Calves is called the month which he had forged of his owne hart that is an Idol moneth so by consequent the 15 days of that moneth an Idol day So in the old Testament the place where God was to be worshipped was the Tabernacle or Temple Deut. 12 5-8 therfor the high places in iudah also DaÌ„ Bethel in Israel were Idol places bicause
they were places forged out of the harts of them that first appointed them such were al the places dedicated by the hethen to worship their Gods in which therfor were commaunded to â—he rased downe Deu 12.2.3 so likewise a shepheard or minister framed according to the devise of man is called a foolish or Idol Shepheard Zach. 11.17 Such were Ieroboams Preistst 1. King 12.31 the false Apostles 2. Cor 11 13-15 who are therefor called the ministers of Sathan In like maner Gideons Ephod judg 8.27 Michaes Ephod Teraphinâ— molten jmage Iudg. 17.4.5 The brasen Serpent 2. King â—8 4 being instruments of idolatry might justly have been called Idol instruments so forth for actions Thus we see the first point what an Idol is by consequent that Idols are infinite in nomber that they are not only 47. as Mr. Bern. fayth Marlorat reckeneth them againe that Mr. Bern. question is answered which he maketh pag. 152. What Idol worship wee Saith Mr. Bern I answer that Mr. Bern. doth both worship an Idol worshippeth in or by Idols The Idol which he worshippeth is a false Christ who is neither a King to him seing he submitreth not to his kingdome ordinances thereof nor a Preist seing he yeeldeth not to his true Ministerie nor a Prophet seing he receaveth not the Holy doctryne which he teacheth but yeeldeth to a Kingdom Preishood Prophecy erected established according the doctryne commaundements of men as shal be sufficiently cleered heare after hath been oâ—t tymes already done The Idols wherein wherby he worshippeth is 1. his owne false Church 2. his owne false standing as a meber of the false church 3. his owne false Ministery 4. his owne false parish Church or Idol Temple 5. his service book 6. his Lords the Prelates their courts ministers wherin wherto he submitteth Generally look how many Prelates Preists Deacons Parishes Temples Service books Surplices Crosses Holy dayes Courts Ecclesiastical Officers in these Courts ther are in the Land So many Idols there are that wee may say as Esay said in his tyme of Iudah Esay 2.8 their land is ful of Idols so this question of yours Mr. Bern. is answered Now the second point to be manifested is VVhat is Real I opposed Real to mentall as may be seen Princip Inferenc pag. 9. 10. Mental or intellictual is that which hath his being in the mynd or vnderstanding as the frame of the English Churches conceaved in the mynd I called a mental Idol Real is that which hath an existence being out of the mynd conceipt as the Parish Church of worksop whereof Mr Bern. is vicar is a real Idol having existence being not only in the mynd conceipt but also in deed truth Now Real is eyther Natural or Moral or Artificial or Political Natural as a man Moral as vertue Artificial as a howse Political as a Cittie or common wealth whereas I called a falsely constituted Church a real Idol I intended it a real Politique Idol For so a Church is a politie Cittie or common wealth Revel 11.2 18.2 VVherefore as the true Church is the Holy Cittie the new Ierusalem that commeth downe from God out of heaven Revel 21.2 Even that true Politie common wealth of Israel Eph. 2.12 So the false Church is Babylon Egipt Sodom that Cittie Politie common wealth or Sinagogue of Sathan so a Political Real Idol therfor the English assemblies being proved to be false Churches are real Idols Let vs in the next place consider what Mr. Bern. saith to these things First he saith the Scripture never taketh an Idol in this sense I have both in this Section of my lettre also in this Parallele shewed him already that an Idol is so taken in the Scripture but for further evidence I use this argument That which is contrary to a true Church is an Idol A falsely constituted Church is contrary to a truly constituted Church Ergo A falsely constituted Church is an Idol The Major is true by natural reason as also by the consideration of the nature of contraries For as light is contrary to darknes vertue to vice white to black fire to water So is true contrary to false a true Church to a false Church The major is the Apostles owne argument 2. Cor. 6.16 his wordes are what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols whence I reason thus That which is contrary to the Temple of God is an Idol That which is contrary to the true Church is contrary to the Temple of God For the true Church is the Temple of God Ergo That which is contrary to the true Church is an Idol Herevppon it followeth that seing the Apostle opposeth an Idol to the temple of God as he opposeth light to darknes Christ to Belial seing the Temple of God is the true Church therfor an Idol in that place is a false Church now Mr. Bern with al your learning avoyde this place I wil yeeld you this particular Further A false Christ is an Idol A false Church is a false Christ Ergo a false Church is an Idol The Major is vndeniable The Minor is proved two wayes First by the contrary thus A true Church is true Christ as may be collected from these two places 1. Cor. 12.12 Gal. 3 16. Therfor a false Church is a false Christ Secondly it may be proved by Christs owne wordes Mat. 24.24 ther shal arise false Christs false Prophets that is to say false churches false Ministers which professe teach doctrynes of the Lord Iesus falsely both of his person offices as the Arrians the Lutherane vbiquitists the Papists the Anabaptists c. Thus you see wee have proved vnto you now this second tyme that a falsely constituted Church is a real Idol But bicause you cannot soundly answer therfor blasphemously you scoffe at the doctryne of the constitution of the true Church wee doe constantly bouldly defend that out of a Church truly constituted when a man can may joyne therto no ordinance of God can be accepted neyther preaching nor praying nor Sacraments nor any other religious action what the Lord accepteth in secreat that we dispute not but what the word of God teacheth vnto vs to be acceptable that wee speak of And tel me Mr. Bernard can ther be a true ministery a true baptisme a true faith true prayer true preaching or administring the L. supper true excommunication in the church that is falsely constituted did the L. accept of the Sacraments Sacrifices of the Church of Israel constituted by Ieroboam that author of Idolatry doth not the Lord say vnto that people in that false Church Lo Ammi Lo Ruhamah No People No Pitie Hosea 1.6.9 is not the Lord as severe now against a Church falsely constituted in the New Testament as he was against the false Church of the ten tribes in the old Testament or do you
he is a member of Christs visible Kingdome yet cannot shew vnto me his fayth by his workes I say vnto him as Iames saith VVhat avayleth it him o thou vaine man shal thy sayth save the thy sayth is dead he that shal plead with the Lord in the day of his judgment that he hath prophesyed in Christs name by his name cast out Devils wrought many great workes given his body to be burned in the fire given al his goodes to the poore hath spoken with the tongs of men aungels wanting true inward love faith the Lord wil say vnto him depart thou worker of iniquity I know the not al this outward shew was hypocrisy thou art but as sounding brasse a tinckling Cymbal Therfor as the Apostle saith glorifie God with your body and Spirit for they are Gods 1. Cor. 6.20 he that is only an invisible member of Christs kingdome is but half a subject of Christs Kingdome at the vtmost though it be the better half he that is only a visible member of Christs Church he is vnto vs truly fully a subject of Christs Kingdome though vnto the Lord he is but half so the worse half so as good as nothing Let the Lord judg in secret what he pleaseth in mercy but wee must judg in visible that which we see visiblie therfor to conclude this Parallele I say he that pleadeth himself to be a true subject of Christs Kingdome by his invisible fayth yet standing in confusion with the world in the false Church worship ministery Government let him be what he may be vnto the Lord to me he is eyther an Antichristian or Famelist he that wanting true faith only in secreat knowne to the Lord is yet a meÌ„ber of a true Church though I must needes say vnto him thou art holy faithful Elect yet the Lord wil cal him an Hypocrite a worker of iniquity in the day when he will bring vnto light every secreat thing whither good or evil Therfor my position standeth firme notwithstanding al your cavils that he that is not of a true constituted Church is no subject of Christs Kingdome The fisth Section In the next place followeth your eighth position which you account error viz. That such as are not in your way are to be accounted whithout after the Apostles meaning 1. Cor. 5.12 I take it to be most evidently true vppon the former groundes that seing the true visible Church is Christs sheepfold his Kingdome his howse his household or family his Temple or Tabernacle his body That therfor al those that are not within this sheepfold this Kingdome howse family Temple body are without For they are either within or without but they are not within go they are without Now for the Apostles meaning in that place of the 1. Cor. 5.12 I do also take it to be manifest that he aymeth not only at the grosse Idolaters in paganisme but at al manner of vnbeleevers that is both Iewes Gentils that did not embrace the saith now these persons were of 4. sorts 1. persecuting pagans 2. civil pagans 3. persecuting Iewes 4. the Iewes that were Zealous vnreprovable in the law of Moses as was Paul yet refused Christ Such as the Apopstle speaketh of Rom. 10. 1.2.3 VVho have the Zeale of God but not according to knowledg who sought to establish their owne righteousnes did not submit to the righteousnes of God al these 4. sorts of persons were then without the true visible Church of the Apostolique institution which is called the Kingdome of God Now whereas you say wee doe account al without that are not of our way I answer two things First that all the members of every true Church in the world wee doe account within Secondly that al the members of false Churches wee doe indeed account without therefore we doe account your particular Church at worksop to be without For it is not the true constituted Church of Christ therfor it is a false Church therfor without according as the holy Ghost testifieth the court that is without the Temple cast out Apoc. 11.2 Now you know that in the old Testament al sorts of people good bad came into the vtter court but now in the new Testament Iohn by vision was commaunded to cast that vtter court out not to measure it bicause it is given to the Gentils who shal tread the Holy Cittie vnder foot now only the true visible Church which is the Temple of God 2. Cor. 6.16 consisteth of a holy people which must come out from the vnrighteous vnbeleevers that are Belial even without the yoke of the L. ordinances must be a Seperated people And must have no followship nor agreement with vnrighteousnes not touch any vncleane thing such a people the L. promiseth to receave to be his owne people no other I avouch therfor that seing you parish Church wherof you are parish preist consisteth of a confused rowt even such a people as came into the vtter court in the old Testament that therfor by the commaundement of the Lord your parish church must be cast out not measured therfor it is without so are all such assemblies as yours is what say you Mr. Bern. now either justifie your Church or forsake it Let vs heer what answer you make to this matter for I gesse it toucheth your freehold very neerly but I proceed Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the fifth Section In the beginning of this Section Mr. Bern. imputeth to vs to hold that such as are not of our way are to be accounted without after the Apostles meaning 1. Cor. 5.12 In the book called the Sep. Schisme pag. 12. Mr. Bern. saith This is one â—â—ror of ours that all not in our way are without And that wee do apply against them 1. Cor. 5.12 Eph. 2.12 Mr. Ainsw confutatioâ— of Mr. Bern. pag. 173. saith we hold that al not in the way of Christ are without In the midst of this fifth Section I expounding what wee hold saying thus All the members of true Churches wee account within all the members of false Churches without al that are of Christs visible Church which is his Sheepfold Kingdom Family Temple Body are within al that are not within this true visible Church are without Hereby it appeareth that in this particular ther is no difference betwixt Mr. Ainsw me indeed truth Mr. Bern. I do wonderfully mervayl at your boldnesse that you dare so contrary to all truth contrary to my expresse wordes in this Section thus impute vnto vs I say and so al of vs say That the members of the true Churches whatsoever are within therefor not only our particular Churches that Seperate from the English assemblies but all other true Churches that seperate from the false wayes of Antichrist walk in the true faith of Christ are within
al false Churches the members of them are without Ther is one only faith truth Eph. 4.5 as in the Old Testament so in the New the true church ministerie worship government is but of one kind al the Churches or assemblies of the Edomites Ammonites Moabites Ishmaelites Israelites Samaritanes the rest were false churches hada false ministery false worship false government only the Iewes had the true Church Ministerie VVorship Government with them So in the New Testament al Churches or assemblies of men whatsoever professing Christ as Abbayes Monasteries Nunries Colleges Cathedrals Seminaries Rectories Parishes c. not Seperated from the Antichristians worldlings are false Churches so without only the Seperated Churches are the true Churches are within you should have answered this Section of my lettre Mr. Bern. before you had printed your book if you had dealt ingeniously plainly but seing you caÌ„not answer for I take it so bicause you doe not answer for your book declared that ther is no wil wanting let vs see what you object your objections are three First the two places of Scripture 1. Cor. 5.12 Eph. 2.12 you say are ment of such as never made so much as an outward profession of Christ Iesus at al your argument is this No Scriptures directed against pagans can truly be applyed against Antichristians These places are directed against pagans vic Eph. 2.12 1. Cor. 5.12 Ergo these places cannot be truly applyed against Antichristians I deny your Major Mr. Bern. you have not proved it at al Let the reader judg whither your speeches be oracles that they must be believed bicause you vtter them but herin your fraud and evil conscience or palpable ignorance appeareth that you leave out your Major which you should have confirmed propound only your minor For that these places are vnderstood of Pagans I deny not but that they are only to be vnderstood of pagâ—â—â— that they â—â—nnot be vnderstood of Antichristians I deny 〈◊〉 I prove the â—â—ntrary evidently to your conscience the conscience of al men after this manner That which the L. hath taught vs to doe we may lawfully doe But the Lord hath taught vs to apply against Antichristians places of Scripture directed against pagans Ergo places of Scripture directed against pagaÌ„s may by vs be applyed against Antichristians The Major is evident The minor is proved by the consideration of these Scriptures â—evel 11. â— 18.2.7.21 where the holy ghost applyeth against the Antichristians matters Scriptures spoken literally of Sodom Egipt Babylon which were all pagans Agâ—â—â—â— If Antichristians be in condition eyther equal to or worse then pagans theÌ„ by proportion Scriptures directed against pagans may be applyed against Antichristians But Antichristians in the Lords account are in a condition equall you worse then pagans For so Christ saith Mat. 11.22 that it shal be easier for Tyrus Sidon the Sodomites then for Chorazin Bethsaida Capernaum Ezech. 16 44-52 Iudah Sodom Samaria are sisters in sinne punishment Iudah hath justified Sodom Therfor Scriptures directed against pagans may be applyed by proportion eyther of equality or superiority against Antichristians Now for your further instruction in this point Mr. Bern. consider that in the new Testament the phrases speeches titles priviledges benefites of the Church of the Iewes considered as the true Church are ordinarily applyed to the visible Church of Christ in the new Testament contrariwise the phrases speeches titles priviledges judgments pronounced agaist the Gentils in the old Testament are customabley applyed against the false Churches Antichristians in the new Testament Hence it is that the true visible Church of the new Testament is called the holy Cittie Temple Tabernacle the new Ierusalem the like the false Church is called the Gentils Egipt Sodom Babylon c. the reason whereof is bicause that the Church of the Iewes was a type of the Churches of the new Tastament so the assemblies of the Gentils were types of the false Churches of Antichrist as you may see through the whole book of the revelation in divers particulars which point if you had eyther vnderstood or attended you could not thus frivolously have objected to vs this one particular that speeches vnderstood of pagans may not be applyed against Antichristians I pray you what vse do you make of the prophesies of the old Testament against Nineveh Babylon Elam Madai the rest VVhat vse can you make of the judgments threatned inflicted vppon the GeÌ„tils if not this that Christ the Apostles make Mat. 11.22.24 12.41.42 2. Pet. 2 5-7.15 Iude. 7.11 Heer I know you will say that you are not Antichristians so though these places may be applyed against Antichristians yet not against you that particular wee will see afterward in his proper place in the meane tyme thus much we have gayned that places af Scripture directed against pagans may as wel be applyed against Antichristians as places of Scriptrue spoken to the true Church of the Iewes may be applyed to the true Church of the new Testament Secondly you object that wee cannot prove laying aside the forgeâ—â—s of our owne braynes that this scripture phrase without may be applied vnto you as to a people without VVell wee wil lay aside our owne devices so let vs trye what wee can doe Arg. 1. Churches that are in condition equal or worse then assemblies of pagans are without Revel 11.2 Antichristian Churches are in condition equal or worse then assemblies of pagans Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 2. False Churches are without Antichristian Churches are false Churches Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 3. Dogs Enchanters VVhoremongers Murtherers Idolaters they that love or make lyes are without Revel 22.15 Antichristian Churches are assemblies of such persons Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 4. The habitation of Devils the hould of al foule Spirits cages of every vncleane hateful byrd are without Antichristian Churches or Babylon are such Reuel 18.2 Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 5. The vtter court which must not be measured by the goldeÌ„ reed but which is given to the Gentils that persecute the Holy Cittie is without Antichristian Churches are that vtter court Revel 11.1.2 Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Againe 6. The Serpent his seed or aungels are without Revel 12.9.10 Gen. 3.15 Antichristian Churches are the Serpent his seed aungels Ergo Antichristian Churches are without Now Mr. Bern. I have proved by playne Scripture that Antichristian assemblies are without I know you wil not denye it but you wil plead that your Churches are not Antichristian assemblies therfor you account that one of our errors pag. 109. viz our 8. error as you summe theÌ„ that position therfor viz your Churches are false Churches shal be proved vnto you fully in the Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the 10.
section of this lettre whither I referre the reader desiring him for his information satisfaction in that particular to read that Section before he proceed any further in reading lest it should be thought that I deceave shift of thys mayne point which is indeed the cheef most principal of our cause Seperation The third thing that you object is that God Almightie hath witnessed that you are his people by giving you his word Sacraments by effectual conversion by his strange miraculous delivering you these things Mr. Ainsworth hath answered most fully hath stopt your mouth for ever that you shal never be able to mutter any more in this matter therfor I wil spare my paynes Neverthelesse I advertise you of one thing that we do acknowledg that the Lord hath his peâ—ple among you whome he calleth to come out from among you to be Seperated to touch none of your vncleames 2. Cor. 6.17 Saying vnto the faithfull that are among you Goe out of Babylon my people that ye be not partaker of her sinnes that ye receave not of her plagues Revel 18.4 that they may be the better perswaded to come out from you to be Seperated the Lord threatneth a woe a fearfull woe to them that worship the beast or his jmage or that receave his mark in their forehead or right hand Revel 14.9 al this the Lord performeth by our testimony Yet neverthelesse we say that your assemblies Ecclesiastical are false Churches that they are Babylon Epipt Sodom where Lot the Lords people are kept captives by reason of the presence of Gods people with you therfor it is that you have those many deliveraÌ„ces which you have even as the Lord gave Paul the lives of al that Sayled with him in the Ship Act. 27.24 whereas you plead you have the word Sacraments conversion I say it is but as the theef hath the true mans purse as the false Church of Ieroboam had as the Samaritanes the Edomitts Moabites Ammonites Ishmaelites had circumcision the Sacrifices by vsurpation which by continuance of tyme were at the last worne out among them even so you see Mr. Bern. that Gods people the sincerest preaching by the forwardest among you the conscionable practise of the truth by the best professors the reformation which the reformists so long have sought is almost expired out of date in the Land The Prelates Subscription Conformity Declining to Popery a Linsy wolsey Religion prevayleth in the Land you your selfe among the rest have lost or forsaken your sincerity are become a Tymeserver a Newter a Temporizer then what els but an Hypocrite except the Lord be mercifull vnto his people among you it is likely to come to passe among you as among the Samaritanes Edomites Moabites Ammonites Ishmaelites that the Holy things of God which by violence vsurpation you have invaded wil be eyther overwhelmed with Egiptian darknes or vtterly banished out of the nation I would fayne know whither even at this present ther be not a thousand parishes in the Land wher ther is no more true profession of Christ then among the Antichristian Papists Finaly to conclude this Parallele whereas you object that wee like it that you call vs brethren but we wil not so account you nor admonish you as brethren I answer that we like it to be counted brethren by you nor for that wee are so vnto you but for that here by wee would judg you out of your owne mouths that whereas you account vs Brownists Schismaticks Heretiques Traytors c. you may hereby perceave your wicked slaunders that thus intitle vs yet account vs your Brethren For otherwise as we detest your Church ministery worship Government as Antichristian So also wee have in abhomination your brotherhood which is Antichristian also wee abjure to be brethren to your Lords the Prelates to your vice Lords the Archdeacons Chancellors Comistaries Officials of their Courts to the damned crew so termed in the Land to your Church Papists to the adulterers Thâ—eves Murtherers VVitches Conjurers Vsurers Atheists Swaggerers Dronkards Blasphemers infinite sorts of sinners impenitent in your Churches yea take the forwardest preachâ—rs professors of the nation wee vtterly dislike their brotherhood visiblie standing members of the assemblies visiblie joyned in communion with the forenamed Antichristians abhominable persons in one the same body nay wee goe further we reject the fraternity of those that deny themselves to be ordinary members of your Churches yeâ— are so extraordinarily that refuse communion with you continually yet reserve liberty to heare communicate occasionally For seing they hereby are made one with 〈◊〉 â—ntichristian body wicked members ther of being vnseperated from them we cannot acknowledg our selves thâ—â—r brethreâ— lâ—â—â— we joyne light darâ—â—es Christ Belial the Temple of God Idols together wherefore neither are we your brethren nor you our brethren visibly neither do wee delight so to be called in these respects but only as you have heard that we may be wel reported of by them that are â—ithout that we may heapeÌ„ coales of fire vppon your head wheÌ„ you acknowledg vs brethren yet slaunder vs so shamefully this shal suffice as concâ—â—ing this Section The fixth Section Your â—leventh position followeth to be considered of which is this That only Saynts as Mr. Smyth defineth them by 4. properties are the matter oâ—ly of a visible Church This you hould error I hold it the most certayne truth of Gods word as these Scriptures doe evidently prove Rom. 6 4.5.8.11-22 1. Pet. 3.11 2. Pet. 3.18 1. Iohn 2.19 Apocal. 3.5 compared with Roman 1.7 Eph. 1.1.4 Revel 11.2 22.14.15 18.2 compared with Deut. 14.2.3.11.2 Cor. 6.16 compared with 1. King 5.12 The 4. properties wherby I describe saynts are these though you mention them not iâ— this your note 1. To forsake all knowne sinne 2. to doe all the will of God knowne 3. to grow in grace 4. to continue to the end For the further cleering of this point consider that al the members of the true visible Church of the Apostolique institution are persons who are to be accounted holy faithful elect now if they be elect I hope they wil continue faithful to the end but you wil happily object that many fal away by Apostacy true then they are fit to be entertayned in your churches as some of ours have been of them I say as the Apostle Iohn saith if they had been of vs they would have continued with vs Therfor they were none of vs For although they were in the outward communion yet they were not of the true visible Church but were only Hipocrites as superfluous excrescences in the body no natural true parts of the body For as in the matural body an eie of glasse is not indeed a true part of the body
bewray therein great ignorance of the true nature constitution of the Church of the Old Testament as also of the ministery worship government thereof which were al typical ceremonial Know you therfor Mr. Bern that ther is as much difference betwixt the Old Testâ—ment with the ordinances thereof the new Testament with the ordinances therof as ther is betwixt the signe the thing signified betwixt the ceremony the substâ—ncâ— the type the tâ—uth the shadow the body Lâ—â—eral Spiritual the lettre the Spirit For in these the like Phrases doth it please the Holy Spirit in the Scriptures tâ— discover vnto vs the differences of these two Testaments the ordinances thereoff you cannot plead bicause in the Old Testament there were Sacrificing Preists therfor tâ—eâ— mâ—st bâ— such in the New Testament neyther can you plead for that they had one high Pâ—eâ—â—t in the Old Testament therfor ther must be one Pope or Patriarch over the â—huâ—ch â—n the Nâ—w Testament To reason thus were to bring in Iudaisme to disanull the blood of Christ Therfor if you wil reason aright as you ought to doe you must â—rame your reason from the Type to the Truth after this manner This was a Type figure â—hadow ceremony signe literal ordinance in the old Testament therefor we must not have that type figure shadow ceremony signe literal ordinance in the new Testament but we must have the thing typed figured shadowed out signified thereby as for example In the old Testament they had a visible Tabernacle Temple Cittie wee must have a visible Church which is indeed the true Tabernacle Heb. 8.2 3 2-6 The true Temple 2 Corinth 6.15 the Holy Cittie Revel 21.2.3 In the Old Testament the materiall Temple was made of material stones in the New Testament the visible Church is made of living Spiritual stones 1. Pet. 2.5 in the old Testament the people that offered sacrifice were a holy people literally Deut. 14.2.3 in the new Testament the people that worship God must be holy indeed spiritualy 1. Pet. 2.5.9 the same may be said or the sacrifices sacrificers or Preists of al other ordinances of the old testameÌ„t hence it foloweth by a necessary consequence that the constitution of the church of the old testament was a ceremonial constitution the worship of the old testament a ceremonial worship the ministery a typical ministery the government a typical government the people a typical people the land or country a ceremonial country so forth of the rest by proportion This being propounded confirmed thus as the vndoubted truth of God discovereth the vanity of your reason I say vnto you that David Iehosaphat the rest of the Godly in the old testament though they did suffer known sin in the land yet were the true matter of the typical Church being typicaly or ceremonialy cleane For to the constitution of the typical Church ther was not required true holynes but ceremonial cleanenes although it was signified vnto them of the old testament necessarily required of them for their aceptation befor God that they should be truly holy sanctified for never was any accepted before God without true inward holines yet it was not necessarily required of them to the constitution of their Church for to make them true matter or members of that typical Church or to fit them to that typical coÌ„munion which was the proper coÌ„munion of that typical Church of that typical service Hence it is that as in the old testament a Saint was a typical Saint so an hipocrite was a typicall hipocrite a wicked man was a typical wicked man therfor excommunication was typical Nomb. 5 2-4 12.14 Hence also it foloweth that lawfully they might have typical communion in typical worship that were typicaly cleane or saynts typicaly though they were wicked indeed For their real wickednes did not polute their ceremonial or typical Church worship communion although it did polute their owne consciences workes Their ceremonial vncleanes did polute their ceremonial communion Their moral vncleanes did not so If their communion had been moral Spiritual then their moral vncleanes had defiled their coÌ„munioÌ„ but their coÌ„munion being only ceremonial typical their polution was only of that kind therfor you shal never find that in the old testament the L. chardgeth theÌ„ for coÌ„munion in their typical service with wicked men howsoever the wicked men theÌ„selves are sharpely reproved for their wickednes Besides the nature of their worship being wel weighed doth instruct vs thus much For their worship was reconciliation repentance to acceptation but our worship is of another nature viz Sacrifices of praise thanksgiving after repentance reconciliation acceptation For they did worship to repentance we do worship from repentance therfor they might did worship therby to reconcile theÌ„selves to God we being reconciled to God accepted in Christ do proceed to offer vnto the L. the calves of our lips the best grace we have with vs men first declare their repentance then we receave them into our communion to worship with vs with them first men were receaved into typicall communion then they were trayned vp to repentance faith in Christ by the typical sacrifices of that typical communion Their worship began outwardly in the lettre proceded inwardly to the Spirit so did their coÌ„stitution ministery al our worship beginneth inwardly in the Spirit proceedeth outwardly to the lettre Therfor our constitution ministery worship government is contrary to theirs therfor Mr. Bern. if you had knowne or observed this you would not have objected these things of the old Testament for the joyning with suffering of open knowne sinne in the new Testament the communion thereof For how can these things agree except you wil make the New Testament the Old Testament abolish Christ set vp Iudaisme againe But I would fayne know how you can prove that these holy meÌ„ did suffer opeÌ„ known sinne or suffering it were not defiled therby defiled I say not in their communion which was typical but in their consent which was Spiritual But this point I must thus leave wayting for your answer For I avouch that either the sinnes which they suffered were not knowne or if they were knowne they were defiled by them so not repenting of them al their worship was defiled to themselves but yet being ceremonially cleane their communion in ceremonial worship was not vncleane vnto others if you doe object vnto me that their Spiritual communion was polluted vnto others I answer that their moral or Spiritual communion was invisible so could not pollute others ther visible communion was typical ceremonial that only polluted others For such as was ther communion such was ther pollution Ther communion visible being typical did only polute typicaly our communion visible being moral or Spiritual doth pollute
vs moraly Spiritually Now I doe confesse vnto you that by ther typical Church ministery worship government Spiritual things were signified both for them for vs For them the morality or Spiritual signification was double viz 1. that the Lord required that they should be that indeed which was typed vnto them els they could not be accepted 2. That in them they ought to see as in a glasse the glorious condition of the Church ministerie worship government of the new Testament which were shadowed out by those ceremonies For vs the moral or Spiritual signification is that except we be correspondent in our constitution ministerie worship Government to those types of the old Testament our constitution ministerie worship government is either jewish or paganish therfor Antichristian Herevppon thus may I reason against you most soundly therin you Mr. Bern. shal have your mouth so stopped as that you shal never be able to reply or once to mutter against the truth any more except you have a cauterized conscience viz. If in the Old Testament ther visible typical communion was typically polluted by typical ceremonial vncleannes vncleansed Then in the New Testament our Spiritual visible communion is really poluted by moral vncleanenes vncleansed that is sinne vnrepented of But in the old Testament ther visible typical coÌ„munion was typicaly poluted by the typical ceremonial vncleanes vncleansed Therfor in the new testament our visible Spiritual coÌ„munion is realy poluted by moral vncleanes vncleansed that is sinne vnrepented of The major cannot be denyed for it is a just analogie proportion from the type to the truth from the shadow to the substance The minor is evidently confirmed by these places of Scripture compared together Nomb. 19.13.20 Hag. 2.14 Act. 21.28.29 Againe If in the old Testament the persons ceremonialy vncleane during the tyme of their vncleanes we excluded from the tabernacle or the host of Israel then in the new Testament persons morally vncleane by impenitency during the tyme of ther impenitency must be excluded from the communion and fellowship of the true visible Church But in the old Testament persons ceremonialy vncleane during the tyme of their vncleanes were excluded from the tabernacle or host of Israel as may be seen Nomb. 5 2-4 12.14.15 2. Chron. 26.21 Terfor in the New Testament persons morally vncleane by impenitency during the tyme of ther impenitency must be excluded from the communion of the true visible Church But I shal have better occasion hereafter namely in the 8. Section to manifest this particular whither I referre the reader Breeflie I answer concerning David his suffering of loabs murther The Kings of Iudah suffering the brasen Serpent to be worshipped the high places Moses giving the bill of divoice that eyther they knew them not to be sinne or if they knew theÌ„ that they were polluted therwith by consent but yet ther typical communion was not defiled ther by if they were ceremonialy cleane they therfor being typicaly Saynts were true matter of the typical Church for the Church of Corinth the Churches of Asia I answere that they were not impenitent in sinne so were Saynts For know you that not sinne but impenitency in sinne maketh meÌ„ a false matter of a church making saynts no saynts Now how can you prove that either the Corinthians or the Churches of Asia were impenitent after once twise admonition I think it passeth your skil to prove that therfor I think this second objection of yours to be idle of no value Your third objection reason is that the places of Scripture which we bring declare what men ought to be not what men are you say we cannot conclude from the places of Scripture we bring that bicause men are commaunded so to be therfor if they be not so they are none of Gods people To this objection reason I answer that hereby you confesse that the L. requireth that al the members of the visible Church should be Saynts whence I also conclude that seing they ought so to be therfor if they be not so they are otherwise then they ought to be so by consequent if the Church be framed of those that are not Saynts it is framed of another matter then the Scripture appointeth I would know if that be not a false matter Moreover I avouch flatly contradictory vnto you that if men be not as God commaundeth they are none of his people but you are to know that true repentance is the true tryal of a Saynt or of one of Gods people impenitency is an evident declaration that the partie therwith affected is none of Gods people Therfor you must observe the difference betwixt the commaundements Legal Evangelical The commaundements legal require absolute obedience in the highest degres therof The gospell requireth true vnfeyned repentance in the best degre we can aford I would not have you think that wee imagine men should beframed in obedience absolutely according to the exactnes of the low For wee are not vnder the law no wee only hold that men must in vnfeyned desire endevour yeld obedience to the law repent of al that wherin they are defective this is the obedience of the gospel which is acceptable for wee are vnder grace wherfor Mr. Bern. if you doe conceave that we intend the most perfect obedience of the law as a proper adjunct or formall difference of a Saynt you are very grosse in your apprehension if you conceave that we entend that men should be absolutely according to the gospel in faith repentance or els to be none of Gods people then your conceipt is true fit but your objection is frivolous ridiculous For then men either are so or none of Gods people this doth our places of Scripture which we quote prove for any thing you yet have manifested to the contrary when wee see you manifest otherwise you shal receave answer in the meane tyme you have discovered your self to be but a wrangler Your fourth objection reason is for that Saints in Scripture are not so called 1. eyther for soundnes of knowledg 2. or internal pure affection 3. or holy practise of their duty alwayes But 1. For their outward calling to Christianity 2. For their profession of faith 3. inâ—espect of their baptisme 4. in regard of the better part 5. or in respect of the visible signes of Gods favour 6. Gods good pleasure I answer you thus you deny three things affirme six I doe poremptorily deny your three negatives I constantly affirme that sound knowledg pure affections continual obedience are most pregnant and couvertible properties off true Sanctification Soundnes of knowledg is a proper note of life Eternall Iohn 17.3 Heb. 8.11 so a true note of Sanctification Tit. 1.16 that which you bring of Christs Disciples being ignorant of many things which we acknowledg is
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
not truly as I have expounded vnto you before in respect whereof also the Lord is said to see no iniquity in Iacob nor transgression in Israel Nomb. 23 21-seing that people at that present was typically Holy so typically without imputation of iniquity in respect of their typical communion And for the Parable Mat. 13. of the wheate tares I doe constantly avouch that though you al divines with you doe expound it of open wicked impenitent persons Saints supposed in communion together yet the parable is wrested from the true purpose of Christ who doth not intend to teach that for then he should teach contrary to himself who by the parable of the Leaven declareth that one wicked persone defileth the whole lump Mat. 13.33 compared with 1. Cor. 5.6 Exod. 12.18 And wheâ—eas in the conclusion of this point pag. 88. you would prove that bicause the auncient Church of the Seperation have as you say wicked men among them therfor the parable Mat. 13. is truly expounded in that sense of a mixture of good bad I say for that point as the parents of the blind man said they are auncient enough lett them answer for themselves And thus have I ended this parallele with you Mr. Bern. concerning Mr. Ainsworth who renounceth this Holy truth of the Lords which I have thus clered I say hereby he renounceth the saith in this particular renounceth the Apostles testimony who saith they went out from vs they were not of vs for had they been of vs they would have continued with vs 1. Ioh. 2.19 The seaventh Section Now followeth you fifth position which you also perswade your selfe to be an error and which being wel expounded I account the vndoubted truth viz. 5. That the powre of binding losing is given to the whole multitude not to the principal members therof These are your wordes I hold maintayne out of the word that a coÌ„pany of faithful people Seperated from al vncleanenes joyned together by a covenant of the L. are a true Church yea though they be but two or three So Adam Hevah were a Church so Lot his wife his daughters were a Church So Noah his family in the Ark were a church So the twelve men at Ephesus were a Church Act. 19.7 So in Q. Maries dayes the Martyrs seperated were a church if but two or thre of them lived together That this is a truth I prove vnto you thus 2. Cor. 6 16-18 with whome God maketh his covenant to be ther God whome he receaveth to be his people they are a Temple that is a Church vnto him vs 16. But two or three faithful people comming forth from the vnbeleevers being Seperated touching no vneleane thing are Gods people God with them maketh his covenant they are his sonnes daughters he is their Father vs 16.17.18 Therfor two or three faithful people are the Temple and Church of God The Premisses are evidently delivered in the Scripture therfor the conclusion foloweth necessarily Mat. 18.20 wher two or thre are gathered together into my name ther am I in the mids of them In the mids of whomsoever Christ doth dwel walk they are a true Church of Christ Even his Temple Tabernacle habitation as these Scriptures teach being compared together Mat. 28.20 2. Cor. 6.16 Levit 26.11.12 But among two or three gathered together by love into the name of Christ by faith Christ is present to dwel walk Mat. 18.20 2. Cor. 6.16 compared together Therefor two or three faithful people are the Temple Church of God I could alledg other Scriptures but two or three witnesses are sufficient Remember for this point that the covenant made with Adam Abaham Isaac Iacob al the faithful is made with any faithful people in the world as if two or three faithful people should aise vp in the dominions of the Turk or Pope or Iewes or Pagans joyne together to walk in the faith the Lord maketh his covenant with them he is their God they are his people they are his Temple he walketh ther he is their Father they are his sonnes daughters Christ is their King they are his Kingdome even a Kingdome of Preists c therfor whersoever in the Scripture the covenant is made with any it is to be vnderstood as made with Abrahams childreÌ„ according to the faith therfor with two or three faithful people any were in the world This being premised as the ground of our whole cause we having departed from al the profane of the Land having seperated touching no vncleane thing 2. cor 6 17 We are Gods people his temple his Church he dwelleth walketh among vs he hath given to vs made with vs his covenant Heb. 8.10 although we were but â—ew in nomber yet the Lord chose vs to be his Wee being now the Church of God wee have the powre of the L. Iesus Christ given vnto vs For we have himself out owne by title possessioÌ„ vse that by vertue of the covenaÌ„t God made with vs for so God is our God our Father only in Chr. through him al the promises of God in Christ are yea Amen Christ therfor is ours Christ he is our King our Preist we are his Kingdome we have his powre that this is so I prove vnto you by these Scriptures Marc. 13.34 Christ ascending vp into Heaven for that is his going into a farre country as may be perceaved by Luk. 19.12 with Mat. 28.18 Eph. 4.8 gave authority to his servants leaving his howse that is his Church according to his bodily presence now what authority is this that Christ gave vnto his servaÌ„ts that is evident by other places of scriptures 1. Cor. 5. the powre of our Lord Iesus Christ which the Corinths had that is the powre of admonition excommunication the powre of binding losing a powre to administer Christs Kingdome al the ordinances therof Mat. 16.19 The powre of binding losing is given to Peter Ioh. 20.23 The powre of binding losing is given to al the Apostles Marc. 13.34 The powre of Christ it given to his Servants 1. Cor. 5.4 The powre of Christ is in the hands of the Corinths Now let vs make collections gather instructions out of these places the truth wil most evidently appeare The Pope saith out of the 16. of Mathew that the powre of binding losing is giveÌ„ to Peter his successors the popes of Rome that al the Bbs. Preists in the world the whole Church vniversal receaveth binding losing from him Nay say the English Prelates out of the 20. of Iohn Christ gave the powre of binding losing to al the Apostles their successors the Lord Bbs. of EnglaÌ„d that al the Preists people in the Land receave binding losing from them in their severall
dioceses Nay say the Presbyterians of England out of Mat. 18.17 The powre of binding losing is given to the Edership the poeple they are bound or losed by the Presbytery For by the Church they vnderstand the Presbytery Nay say we the powre of binding losing is given to the body of the Church even to two or thre faithful people joyned together in covenant this we prove evidently in this manner Vnto whome the covenant is given vnto them the powre of binding losing is given The covenant is given to the body of the Church that is to two or three faithful ones For God is their God they are his people Therfor the powre of binding losing is given to them Againe Vnto whom Christ is given for King vnto thē the powre of Christ the King is given as being his deputies lieftenants But Christ is given for King vnto the body of the Church even to two or three faithful people who are his Kingdome howse cittie Therfor vnto them is given his powre that is his powre to bind lose Finally Vnto whome the covenant Christ is given vnto them al the promises are given for al the promises are conteyned in the covenant in Christ as these places prove 2. Cor. 1.20 Psal 133.3 Act. 2.39 Gal. 3.14.15.16 the powre of binding losing is one of the promises is a part parcel of the covenant Mat. 16.19 Ioh. 20.23 Mat. 18 15-20 But the covenāt Christ al the promises are givē to the body of the church even to two or three faithful ones Therfor the powre of binding losing is given to them also But ther are certayne objections which must be answered in nomber three Ob. 1. One is that Christ speaketh only to Peter to his Apostles giveth the powre only to them therfor Mat. 16.19 Iohn 20.23 Mat. 18.17 For answer thus much The place Mat. 16. although it be directed to Peter personally yet it is intended vnto all the Disciples of Christ For vnto them is the powre given that have the saith and made the confession ther mentioned But the faith confession of faith is of al the Disciples spoken by Peter in behalf of them al therfor the powre is by promise given to al The place Ioh. 20.23 importeth plainly that Mary Magdalene divers other of the Disciples were present when Christ spake vnto them for they were assembled together in a howse the dore being shut it was the L. day not the Apostles only but the rest of the Disciples were assēbled in al likely-hood for the Sanctification of the L. day yea further Thomas was absent so the promise of binding losing could not be made to him at that present afterward it was not made to him so by consequent that one of the Ap. had not the powre givē him by ther reason which plead it to be given to the Apost only The place Mat. 18.17 doth not prove that this powre was given to the Presbyterie for that place importeth that it was given to the Church now the Eldership is not the Church but a part of the Church it must be proved that the word Church doth signifie the Eldership or els this place wil help nothing as I am sure cannot be showed out of the word besides the circumstances of the place teach that Christ intēdeth the powre of binding losing to be given to every brother for so he saith if thy brother sin lett him be vnto the take two or three witnesses where two or three c. I am in the midst of them Finally It cannot be denyed but admonition aperteyneth to every brother why should not excommunication For their is powre to bind lose in two or thre witnesses toward a brother why not powre to bind lose in the body of the Church if the whole Church be but two or three or some smal nomber Now for the vtter over throwing of this conceipt of the powre given to the Presbyterie only consider that the twelve were not yet Apostles only they were nominated to be Apostles they were invested in their office at the descending of the Holy Ghost on the day fo Pentecost which I prove vnto you evidently Eph. 4.8.11 when Christ ascended he gave gifts vnto men viz the gifts of Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastors Teachers For Christ receaved his Kingdom when he ascended Luk. 19.12 For Christ obteyned a Kingdome by his death he receaved his Kingdome when he went into that fane country Christ by his sufferings entred into his glory So that Christs Kingdome in regard of the outward regiment ordinances thereof beganne at the day of Pentecost when the Apostles were endued with powre from on high Luk. 24.49 Act 1.8 it shal end at the day of judgment 1. Cor. 15.24.25 Seing therfor that they were not yet Apostles but only Disciples the powre given to them was given to them as Disciples not as Apostles therfor all Christs Disciples may justly in al ages challendg that powre of binding losing For a conclusion therfor in a word the commaundement of binding and losing is given to every brother go the promise powre of binding losing is givē to them also as the forsaid places do evince as the charter of a corporatiō is frō the King al the offices have powre from the corporation so the Church hath powre frō Christ the Eldership from the church as the body hath powre from the head the parts of the body have their powre from the body So the church which is Christs body hath powre from Christ the Eldership a part of the body hath powre from the body Ob. 2. A second objection is this that if the powre of binding losing be givē to the body of the Church then powre of preaching administring the seales of the covenant truth we confesse it the church being a corporation committeth powre to administer to such officers as Christ hath apointed to his church viz to the Elders or Bishops stil reserving powre to correct her officers by the same powre of binding losing in admonition excommunication the benefit wherof doth as wel perteyne to the Elders as other of the brethren except it be said the Elders are to be exempted from censures so to want those meanes of Salvation which the brethren have which is a pitiful condition alamentable priviledg Ob. 3. A third ebjection is that the benefit of binding losing of the word seales of the covenant is given to the church al the members but not the powre of thē wherto thus much may be answered viz that the Church viz two or thre faithful ones have as is said the covenant Christ the promises not only in vse but in title possession the faithful have as good powre title or interest
to the covenant Christ the promises as a freholder hath to his lands possessions Esa 9.6 Vnto vs a sonne is given the chruch is the spouse of Christ so hath powre to Christ the covenant promises the Church is the body of Christ the body hath a real possession title powre to the head all the helps therof For the faithful are flesh bones of Christ Eph. 5.30 these things are manifest to them that wil vnderstand if any man be ignorant let him be ignorant But it may be Mr. Bern. you wil say that powre to bind lose are no properties of the Church but only priviledges For shame say not so Surely this plea argueth that either you got litle Logick in the vniversity or that you have forgot it or if you remeÌ„ber it you either carelesly neglect it or wilfully pervert the vse of it to seduce your followers I pray you tel me in good sooth what difference is there betwixt a priviledg a propertie Is not a priviledge according to the notation of the word privata lex a private law wherin one person or state is interessed The King hath certaine previledges or prerogatives as to pardon condemned persons to dispence with his law a negative voice in parliament c. I would faigne know of you whither these be not properties such as the Kings Queenes of the nation only have title to no other but consider wel with your self what relation ther is betwixt a priviledg the person that is interressed in the priviledg Is it not the relation of the subject the adjunct A priviledg therfor is an adjunct to the priviledged person Now al adjuncts are either proper or common adjuncts but a priviledge is not a common adjunct as I am sure you wil confesse or els you want reason therfor it is a proper adjunct It it be a proper adjunct it is a propertie so your distinction is senselesse vnscholler like you may aswel say that pepper is hot in working cold in operation as to say that the true Church may be without her priviledges but not without her properties Therfor I doe heer before the L. attach you as a deceaver of the people in teaching thus contrary to al learning true vse of reason that the powre of the Lord Iesus Christ given to the church one part whereof consisteth in binding losing is only a priviledg not a propertie of the true Church that the true Church may want it It is as impossible for the true Church to want Christs powre as for a man to want reason Mr. Ber. answer now or els yeeld to the truth you cannot for shame denie the one of them Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the seaventh Section In this Section I write prove that the powre of binding losing is given to the whole multitude not to the principal members therof Mr. Bern. in his book intituled the Sep. Schisme pa. 88. calleth it the A.B.C. of Brownisme to hold That the powre of Christ that is authority to Preach to administer the Sacraments to exercise the censures of the Church belongeth to the whole Church yea to every one of them not the principal members therof Mr. Ains answering Mr. Ber pa. 174. Saith that Mr. Ber. may put this opinion if he please in the Criss-crosse-rew of Bernardisme he himself being the first that ever he heard to vtter such a position afterward pa. 175. 176. 177. 178. Expoundeth what that auncient Church whereof of he is teacher holdeth concerning it Wel Let vs handle these things largely to ful satisfaction herein I professe befor the Lord befor the whole world that if I do not prove evidently my assertion that the powre of binding losing is given to the whole multitude not to the principall members therof I wil acknowledg the Churches of England yea the Churches of Rome yea the Greek Churches also to have a true ministery to be true churches of Christ For if the ministerie the holy things with the ministerie come by succession from the Apostles handes through the churches of Rome the Grecians that ther are no ministers but such as are made by theÌ„ froÌ„ theÌ„ successively our whole cause of Seperation lyeth in the dust we must disclaime our Schisme which we have made our heresies which we hold but if it be proved that the true ministerie commeth not by succession from the churches of Rome or the Grecians that the holy things are not given to the ministery by sucessioÌ„ but are giveÌ„ first to the body of the church the faithful yea though they be but two or three that both the ministerie and all the powre that the ministerie hath doth â—â—ow from the Fountayne Christ Iesus through the body of the Church 〈◊〉 the Presbytery then is your Church ministerie false so are the Churches of the East West much more then we those Churches only which raise vp their Ministerie from the Election aprobation ordination of a faithful people are the true Church of Christ having the true Ministerie of Christ you with the rest of Gods people in Babylon must seperate joyne together walk in the Lords ordinances as we other true Churches doe or els woe be vnto you from the Lord Therfor in this particular I would supplicate the Kings Majestie my Soveragne Lord on earth the Lords of the Parliament The Gentlemen that susteyne the person of the commons in the nether howse al the learned men of the Land to confider to search out this point For it being throughly cleered may breed peace infinite good to the whole nation whereas it being suppressed choked darkened neglected draweth with it al the contentions and controversies amongst them that professe Christ in the whole earth For my part Mr. Ber. I wil endevour according to my poore hability to discover what I have conceaved and doe vndoubtedly beleeve from the Scriptures and doe make the beginning of my inquisition after this manner which I desire the gentle reader to weigh consider of with his best attention Christs visible church which is his Kingdom hath in it a spiritual powre and jurisdiction by the confession of al that professe Iesus Christ which powre is of two sortes 1. The powre of Christ himself who is the Lord King of his Church Mat. 28.18 and he is the Fountaine of powre being the head of the Church which is his body Eph. 1.22.23 For as the head is the Fountaine of life sense motion powre to the whole body as the Mr. of the howse is the original of al oeconomical powre So is Christ the original of al spiritual life sense motion powre to the Church which is his body family This is evident in regard of this powre which is inherent in Christ the church which
care chardg being cast vppon the Elders from the brethren they may wholly neglect the matter the Church grow corrupt through the Elders partiality negligence or other sinister respect for confusion it is not intended as you grossely imagine that al should speake but that al should consent For as in prayer one speaketh al the Church consent So in publique admonition excommunication one speaketh at once the rest consent if any man have any thing to say he may speake the first hold his peace as in Prophecy so in admonition by proportion 1. Cor. 14.30 yet the Lords oâ—der not be violated if pride therevppon contentions do arise it is through the corruption of men not through the ordinance of God may ther not much more pride grow in the Elders think you when they are absolute Lords as it were over the people wil not that breed much more contention And to contend for the truth is good and warrantable yea contentions must be in the true church but woe be to those by whome they come Secondly you say the whole Church cannot speake joyntly nor severally one by one except weomen children speak I deny it the whole Church may speake joyntly as in prayer prophesying 1. Cor. 11.4 So also in admonition excommunication by some persons deputed therto either Elders if ther be any or other if ther be no Elders for the speaking of weomen in the Church I say it needeth not for they so al the brethren may speake by silence or if any dissent they may speak either woman or youth yet the rule of the Apostle not violated who forbiddeth weomen to lead the action of worship in prayer or prophesy or praising God or any action of Government in the presence of men but he doth not forbid a woman to speake when she is called therto in matter of Government neither doth the Apostle intend to forbid weomen to pray or prophesy in the presence of weomen only as somtyme the occasion may be ministred if the church consist only of weomen that this is so you shal perceave by comparing these places 1. Cor. 14.34 1. Tim. 2.12 considering the reasons of the Apostles prohibition but let vs see the force of your argument If tel it to the Church be tel it to the body of the Church then every member of the Church must speake in rebuking the partie But every member must not speak in rebuking the partie that is promoted to the Church for sinne Therfor tel it to the Church is not tel it to the body of the Church so it must needes be tel it to the Elders I deny your consequent for al may heare take notice give consent speake if they se just cause orderly yet it followeth not that al are bound to speake vocaly one by one For silence is a sufficient testification of consent Further I say your minor is weake For every one is bound to speak that seeth just cause or els he shall ther by strangle his conscience and quench the Spirit and suffer sinne which he cannot do without sinne Lastly Christ crosseth not himself in giving powre to two or thre For he may give powre to two or three if ther be no more yet to twenty an hundreth a thousand if ther be so many but you Mr. Bern raise vp false expositions wrack the text to support heresies therby making the Scriptures a leaden rule to frame to your crooked conceipts a nose of waxe to be wrung which way your perverse apprehensions incline Your sixth reason that tel the Church is tel the Governors is this that els the Corinthians offended who were al commaunded to deale with the incestuous Corinth yet some only did so Paul should sinne who vppon the advertisement of Cloes howse did not wayt for the churches consent but himself alone determined the matter wils them to exente his senteÌ„cein the open congregation I answer al the Corinths did deale with the incestuous person though many spake the rest giving consent to their speeches therfor ther can no more sinne lye vppon theÌ„ for not rebuking by voice then ther lyeth sinne vppon the whole Church for not lifting vp their voice to speake in prayer prophesy being al commaunded so to do besides all might speake for many somtyme signifieth al as I have already shewed but this is but idle stuffe which you object Furthermore Paul was an Apostle having powre infalibility to plant direct reforme Churches wil you froÌ„ hence fetch a rule for the perpetual government of the Church it followeth not Paul did thus go one Prelate may do thus nay by your owne exposition ther must nedes be two or thre Prelates but what did Paul did he performe the whole decree of excommunication I deny it vtterly but the Apostles meaning is that he for his part gave his voice advise commaundemeÌ„t as having receâ—ved grace to be faithful that the incestuous person should be excommunicate note it wel Mr. Ber. Paul doth bid the Elders as you say excommunicate him caÌ„ these things agre I beleeve your wit was wandering when you wrote these things for you avouched out of the 2. Cor. 2.6 that many Elders did excoÌ„municate the incestuous person now you say that Paul at the information of Cloes Family like a Lord Bb. decrees the sentence of excommunication in his court coÌ„maundeth them to pronounce it you gave this powre of late to the Elders now you take it froÌ„ the Elders give it to Paul make the Elders only his deputyes but I wil shew you the reason of this your oversight contradiction you had by you in your study when you penned your book the writings of the Reformists the writings of the Prelates being in wrath choler enraged against vs of the SeperatioÌ„ you thought to make Herod Pilate frends against Christ have gathered both the Prelates Reformists objections against vs put theÌ„ downe in your book without judgment so through the weaknes of your vnderstanding not discerning the reasons of the Reformists Prelates to contradict bicause they fitted you against vs you not regarding the truth but the victory have fallen into this grosse contradiction which your learning can never salve only your repentance confession can cure it Your last reason that tel the Church is tel the Elders is this for that al reformed churches judg so wel yet you said even now that tel the Church is tel the Apostle Paul the Lord Bb. by consequent his successors are you in your right mynd Mr. Ber. that stumble thus but you see what it is to resist the truth But what if al the reformed Churches say so is it so if the Scripture say contrary it is not so the Churches must be reformed yet further according to the Scriptures
were not Apostles they Elected Deacons Act 6 Now Election is the very essence of a true Minister The Church admonisheth an Elder Col. 4.17 deposeth false Apostles Reve. 2.2 preacheth prayeth worshippeth wanting Elders Act. 13.22.23 whereas you say that Ministers only make Ministers I answer it is the ground of Succession which I have formerly overthrowne I say that the body of the Church hath in it al ministerial powre immediately from Christ your slender stuffe hath prevailed nothing against this truths of the Lords the vniversity may make a Doctor a Bachelor a Maister yet â—t not any such thing but a compound body having a charter from the King for that puâ—pose a corporation may make a Major Sherifes yet the corporation is not a Major or a Sheriffe So the Church may make Ministers yet the Church it self is not properly an Elder or Deacon or VVidow but a body politique having powre to produce such workes by verue of the charter which Christ hath given vnto it And thus Mr. Ber. I have done with you for this point but Mr. Ains steppeth vp with a new kind of Antichristianisme never heard of before he teacheth vs if we wil beleve him that Christs ruling powre is in the Eldership that the Pope Prelates are not Antichrists for taking into their hands the powre of the multitude but the powre of Christ Heer in the first place we must remember that the powre of Christ which we speak of is a ministerial delegated powre given to man that the question is who is the first subiect of this ministerial powre who receave it immediately from Christ I say the body of the Church is the first subject of it I say that whatsoever the Eldership hath it hath from Christ through the body of the Church by the Churches disposition this if you deny Mr. Ains which I think you do not I say you are therein departed from the faith The body of the Church having al her powre from Christ retaineth keepeth it intire to it self doth not so delegate it to any officers as that she leeseth it is deprived of it neither doth she delegate any powre to her officers but that which she formerly receaved from Christ her head husband Lord For Christ giveth not a double ministerial powre one immediately to the body of the Church which she hath keepeth another mediately to the Eldership by the Churches disposition which the church hath not at al but is only a conduit pipe to conveigh it to the Eldership if you hold such a matter declare it vnto vs out of the word of God we wil receave it when we see it in the meane tyme we hold that whatsoever the Elders have they have it from the Church by delegation that the Church hath it in ther owne hands receaved it from Christ by vertue of the covenant God maketh with it in Christ giving Christ for King Preist Prophet to the Church therfor the Church hath from Christ the head al powre al the members officers of the Church have al their powre from the body which they hold vse in the body not Seperated from the body The Elders as it were the hands are conjoyned to the Church as to the body The body of the Church is conjoyned to Christ the head The body hath no powre devided from the head the hands have no powre divided from the body So a company of men have no powre Seperated from Christ an Eldership hath no powre Seperated from the Church but as all powre floweth from the head to the body then to the haÌ„ds through the body which is first in the body before it come to the hands So al powre Ecclesiastical or ministeriall is derived from Christ to the Church then through the Church to the Elders which is first in the Church before it come to the Elders And as when the hands are cut of the body stil retaineth the powre intire though it waÌ„t hands the powre of the hands is sâ—â—â— in the body So when the Eldership is deposed the Church stil retaineth the powre of the Eldership though it want an Eldership as the hands can do nothing contrary vnto the liking of the whole body but the actions of the hands are by consent of the body So the Eldership can do nothing contrary to the liking of the Church but the actions of the Elders must be by consent of the Church as those hands are worthy to be cut of that rebel against the body wrong it or endaunger it So are these Elders worthy to be cut of from the Church that rebel against the Church wrong it or endaunger it This is the faith which I hold Mr. Ains if you hold any other faith it is not the faith of Christ but let vs see what your book wil aford vs. First you say Christs ruling powre which the papists say is in the pope we say not is in the body of the congregation the multitude but in Christ himself that the Pope is Antichrist not for taking into his hands the powre of the multitude but of Christ to rule governe the Church as head of the same confutat of Mr. Bern. pag. 175. You know Mr. Ains that the Pope doth not assume that powre which Christ as King hath in his owne hands reserved to himself but the pope claymeth to be a ministeriall head vnder Christ having a Ministerial powre given vnto him by succession from Peter although it cannot be denyed but that he doth many actions which are proper works of Christs powre Monarchical proper to himself yet that is but the misinterpretation of his ministerial headship not vnderstaÌ„ding how far that ministerial headship which he challengeth extendeth it is not his proper clayme to Christs office therfore properly the Pope is not Antichrist for challendging Christs Kingly powre proper to himself but for assuming Christs Ministerial powre delegated to his Church although I do not deny but the Pope enlargeth the delegated powre further then Christ hath prescribed in his word So that the Pope is Antichrist in two respects 1. For clayming that powre which Christ hath given to the body of the Church 2. For extending that ministerial powre beyond the compasse which Christ hath limited in the word Secondly you say Christs ruling powre which the Protestants say is in the Bbs. the Prelates we do not say is in the multitude but in Christ himself that the Bbs. are very Antichrists for assuming Spiritual jurisdiction aperteyning to Christ alone confut of Mr. Bern. pag. 175. Heer also you cannot be ignorant Mr. Ains that the Prelates do not challendg that Monarchical powre which is properly inherent in Christs person but renounce it vtterly as confidently as you do but they only challendg that Ministerial powre which Christ as they say hath delegated
to the Apostles their Successors the L.Bbs. neither can you with any good conscience say that they clayme Christs Kingly powre but only they are Antichrists as the Pope is for two causes 1. For clayming that powre Ministeriall which Christ hath given to the body of the Church 2. For enlarging that ministerial powre beyond that compasse which Christ in his word hath determined Thirdly you say Neither that ruling powre of Christ which the Puritanes say is in the presbytery do we say is in the multitude For we acknowledg Christ to have ordeyned a presbytery or Eldership that in every Church for to teach rule them by his owne word lawes vnto whome al the multitude the members the Saints ought to obey submit themselves as the Scriptures teach confut of Mr. Bern. pag. 176. VVee say Christs ruling powre is originally fundamentally in the body of the Church the multitude we acknowledg further that the Elders receave by delegation powre from the body of the Church which powre ministerial in the hands of the Elders is not so large as that which is in the body but it is rather a leading powre then a ruling powre neither are the Elders in al the new testament to my knowledg called Rulers archontes but overseers leaders Elders prohistamenoi wherby the holy Ghost would teach that their powre is not to rule but to leade direct I do therefore vtterly disclaime this your error Mr. Ains as one part of Antichristianisme in your Church but you had need expound it wel for the satisfaction of the brethren of the Seperation least you here in destroy your constitution before you be aware VVhat we hold concerning the Presbytery I have delivered partly in that which before I have written in answer to Mr. Bern. partly in that which I lately published concerning the differences of the Churches of the Seperation in the second part the first Section Chap. 5. 6. wherfor if you hold that Lordly vsurped Antichristian powre of your Eldership to be that ruling powre which the word of God warranteth it shal be your part to justifie it to rebuke al that gainst and it for herein wee vtterly disclayme your judgment practise we maintaine that the powre of the Eldership is a leading directing overseeing powre ministery or service both in the Kingdom Preisthood of the Church that the negative voice the last definitive determining sentence is in the body of the Church wherto the Eldership is bound to yeeld that the Church may do any lawful act without the Elders but the Elders can do nothing without the approbation of the body or contrary to the body The eighth Section In the next place followeth your second position which is this in your copie In holding that one sinne of one man publiquely obstinately stood in 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 lawful conviction you say is error I say it is the most comfortable holy truth wee hold in our walking one with another in communion of Gods ordinances This truth ariseth from the former ground that al the members of the Church have powre to the censures of admonition excommunication to bind lose For observe I pray you that every brother is bound to admonish his brother for a fault he observeth in him if he reforme not he must take one or two witnesses admonish him if he reforme not yet he must bring the matter before the Church suppose the Church consist of 12. persons as at Ephesus Act. 19.7 The matter being before the Church the eleven deale with the twelvth discover his sin convince it to his conscience he refuseth to â—eer them but despiseth the admonitions I say if they retaine him stil in communion they consent to his sinne For as the civill Magistrate in pardoning willfull murther consenteth to it bicause the murtherer should die Even so the Church suffering the vnrepentaunt persone among them consent to his sinne and are polluted with it and consent to all the profanation and violation of the Holy things committed by that vnrepentaÌ„t person For God hath commaunded the church to watch over their brethren if they do not they hate their brother in suffering sinne to rest vppon him God hath commaunded that no vncleane person should medle with the Holy things if they doe they profane polute the Holy things offering violence to the Lords ordinances But it may be you wil say that by this meanes we assume to our selves a kind of perfection puritie in that we wil have no sinners among vs I answer that you must distinguish betwixt our persons our communion we confesse our persons severally every one of vs to be subject to sinne that we doe sinne dayly bicause of our sinning nature the Lord hath appointed the ordinances of the visible Church as helps meanes to subdue this sinning nature of ours especially these ordinances of admonition excommunication which are to be vsed administred vppon al by al as occasion is offered Now this is the perfection puritie of our communion that we suffer no vnrepented sinne no vnrepentant sinner among vs but either we cast out the sinne by repentance or the sinner vnrepentant by excommunication that our coÌ„munion may be pure holy the church without spot or wrinckle that we may be a new lump dayly vnleavened the leaven being purged out of vs continually oh Mr. Ber. if you knew but the comfort powre of the L. ordinances of admonition excommunication as we do blessed be our good God in some measure that growth reformation which is in some of vs thereby you would be so wonderfully ravished with the powre of Gods ordinances that you would acknowledg the Church to be terrible as an armie with banners yet amyable lovely comely beauteful in so much as Christ himself saith that the love of the church is faire that she woundeth his hart with one of her eyes in regard of the beautyful holy communion which is dayly maintayned in her by vertue of the censures but your confused assemblies al the members of them not only omit but reject yea oppose al these holy ordinances which Christ hath given to his Church therby you proclaime to all the world that you are of Belial that is without the yoke of Christs ordinances you cast away from you these cordes bandes wherwith wee are bound one to another knit faster faster vnto Christ our head therfor you living thus without the yoke out of the Lords Holy order having broken these bandes cast the cordes froÌ„ you mingling your selves vnto joyning with al manner of profane persons that violate al Gods ordinances how can we have any
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
the people therfor were necessarily bound over vnto them otherwise they could not find the Lord his truth which was only at Ierusalem in the New Testament the Church Ministery VVorship Government are so constituted by the Lord as that in them ther is no Succession nor alligation of tyme place person c. But when the Church is become false by impenitency the faithful may Seperate cary the truth with them if but two or three Mr. Bern. the L open your eyes the eyes of al his people in England to see this blessed truth of the Lord then the cause of Separation wil be evident vnto your consciences in the meane tyme you cannot but be ignorant A south reason whereby you would prove that to joyne to the Holy things in the communion of obstinate impenitent persons is no sinne is for that the Scripture teacheth the contrary as you say two wayes 1. by acquitying the Godly from the transgression of others 2. by declaring it to be a sinne to leave the Holy things of God for the wickednesse of others this you say cutteth deepely I answer you Mr. Ber. that we do not feele this cut at al for the iron is blunt you had need put to more strength your reason hath in it no cutting quality at all For I doe acknowledg that the Godly if they consent not to nor approve not the sinne of others are by the Lords sentence acquit from the transgression but I would learne of you if the Holy Ghost in the Scripture doth not account the principal the accessary in the lame condition though not in the same degree of sinne what say you to the sinne of Achan the sinne of the men of Gibean concerning the Levites concubine The feare of the Israelites in respect of the Altar built in the border of the Land of Canaan by Iorden These places are evident that consent to sinne polluteth the person consenting the places by you quoted do not prove any thing contrary to this assertion of ours but rather they prove this vndoubted truth of the Lords the place Ezech. 33.9 proveth that as the watchman that dischargeth his duty is acquit so if he discharg not his duty he shal be accessary to the sinne partaker of the punishment as may be seen vs. 6. the place Ezech. 18.14.17.20 doth declare two things that if the child follow not the sinne of the parents he shal be guiltlesse if he partake in ther sinnes he shal be partaker of the. punishment the place Ezech. 14.18.20 sheweth that Noah Daniel Iob shal deliver their owne soules by their righteousnes but al those that are polluted with other mens sinnes shal partake of their plagues Revel 18.4 So that you see these places of the old testament quoted by you do not only not help you but vtterly overthrow your conceipt The places of the new Testament alledged by you also make as litle for you Tit. 1.15 teacheth that al thing are pure to the pure yet the intent of the place is not to shew that sinne is pure to any man although I may lawfully vse the Holy things of God being my self cleane yet being partaker of another mans sinne by consent I polute al the holy things to my self have no title to vse them so the Apostle saith presently to the impure is nothing pure the place Revel 3.4 teacheth that so many of the Church at Sardi as defiled not their garments by consenting to the polution of the rest of that Church but that stood out against their corruptions to the vtmost shal be innocent the other place Revel 2 22-24 sheweth the same thing but for these two places I say you must prove Mr. Ber. that your assemblies are true churches as these were againe you must prove also that these persons neglected their duty of admonishing standing forth against the Church that the church was convinced by them yet did joyne with them in communion of Holy things For otherwise we say we are not to Seperate till wee have done our vtmost endevour neither are we poluted til then your last place is Gal. 5.10 wher the Apostle teacheth that he that troubleth the Galatians shal beare his condemnation whosoever he be yet the Apostle telleth them vs. 9. that a litle leaven leaveneth the whole lump that is to say if you consent to this false doctrine of joyning circumcision to Christ the person that perswadeth you shal beare his burthen whosoever he be yet you also shal be punished receaving the false doctrine but I hope otherwise of you this is the meaning of the Apostle Secondly you say the Scripture teacheth it to be a sinne for to leave the holy things of God for the wickednes of other for this purposes you alledg 1. Sam. 2.24.17 wher you say the wordes are plaine cannot be avoyded by another exposition of the word gnabarwell although the word doth as properly signifie to passe vppon or to passe by as to trespasse that it is so expounded by Pagnin yet I will not plead it at this tyme sith it needeth not Therfor take the place according to your construction that the Sonnes of Ely by their sinnes caused the people to sinne by abhorring the L. offering through occasion of ther wickednes I answer thus in the old Testament no man was to forsake the Sacrifices for other mēs sinnes if they were ceremonialy cleane therfor that the people did abhorre these ordinances of God vppon the wickednes of Elyes Sonnes was ther transgression the L. taught no such thing in the old Testament in the typical communion therof but now in the new Testament we having the truth that was then signified by the old Testament the ordinances therof it followeth necessarily thus that as in the old Testament the communion therof which were typical persons typicaly cleane might not have communion typical with persons typically vncleane without polution ceremonial So in the new Testament the cōmunion therof which is the truth persons moraly cleane may not have Spiritual communiō with persons moraly vncleane without polution moral which is sinne so you are answered according to your exposition of the place yet I deny it to be necessary to expound the place so as you doe Your fifth reason proving it lawful for the Saints to hold communion in the holy things though persons obstinate in sinne be present is For that in the word we have liberty given to come to partake in the holy things if wee look to our selves to reforme our owne wayes mat 5.23.24 1. Cor. 11.28 the Corinths did partake in the holy things with them that were once twise admonished 2. Cor. 12.21 go so may we do I answer The place of Christ Mat. 5.23.24 teacheth that a mā must first reconcile him self to his brother before he offer his gift truth but it must be for al the sinnes he
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
false Churches Ergo. The worship offered vnto the L. in those Ecclesiasticall assemblies is a false worship The ground of this argument is this that al the Ecclesiastical actions performed by a false Church are stayned with the false constitution of the church For God wil not have every communion of men worship him but he wil be worshipped by such a company of people as he hath described in his new Testament as in the old Testament no man or company of men might worship or be accepted visibly but such as were circumcized Gen. 17.14 Exod. 12.48 Deut. 23 1-4 Act. 21.28 2. King 17 25-28 Ioh. 4.22 So in the new Testament no man or communion of men visiblie can be accepted of the L. but such as are described in the new Testament viz. men Seperated from al the abhominations of Antichrist 2. Cor. 6.17 gathered into the name of Christ Iesus Mat. 18.20 being made Disciples have receaved baptisme whereby they are counited into Christ Mat. 28.19 If any communion of men otherwise constituted viz men not Seperated not gathered together not gathered into Christs name not made Disciples not baptized truely with the baptisme of the new Testament if any such company of men do worship God ther worship is not accepted of God but as the L. sent Lyons among the Samaritanes for persuming to worship him in the land of Israel they being an vncircumcized coÌ„pany 2. King 17.24.25 as the L. punished the vagabond Iewes exorcists by the violence of an evil Spirit for naming the L. Iesus being an vnbeleeving vnbaptized company Act. 19 13-17 even so wil the L. be avenged on al them that joyning together to worship God have not Seperated themselves or calling vppon the name of the Lord do not depart froÌ„ iniquity 2. Cor. 6.17 2. Tim. 2.19 neither wil it serve to say that the worship is true bicause it is true conceaved prayer or true preaching or thanksgiving For true worship must be defined not only in the matter but cheefly in the forme For otherwise among the Antichristian papists Heretiques ther is true conceaved prayer preaching thaÌ„ks giving els in the old Testament ther was true Sacrificing among the Babylonians wheÌ„ they Sacrificed an oxe to the God of Israel Dan. 6.25.26 whereas it was manifested that no Sacrifice could be accepted that was offered with straunge fire Levit. 10.1.2 there for the Sacrifices of the Babylonians must needes be abhominable though the matter was true bicause the forme which cheefly consisted in the fire was false So though the matter of the worship of the new Testament be true viz conceaved prayer preaching praising God yet bicause it proceedeth not from the true fire which is alwayes living vppon the Altar Levit. 6 9-13 at Ierusalem that is in the true Church and Temâ—â—e of God bicause it is not inflamed by the true Spirit of Christ the true visible annoynting which is only in the true body the true Church Ephes 4.4 For there is one body and one Spirit Therefore the worship is not true worship visibly what it may be inuisibly I dispute not nor doe not censure at all but leave to the Lord and to every conscience The Second Argument The worship that is offered vp vnto the L. by a false Ministerie is a false worship ceÌ„ not visibly be judged true or accepted The worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is offered vp by a false ministery as hath been proved already Ergo the worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is a false worship cannot visibly be judged true or accepted The ground of this Argument is the same with the former wherefore as in the old Testament the worship that was performed in Israel by the Preists of Ieroboams devising which were not of the Linage genealogie of Aaron was a false worship could not be accepted visibly or be judged as accepted judging by the rules of the word 1. King 12 31-33 and as the inceÌ„se which Azariah the King of Iudah would have offered could not be accepted or so judged bicause it was not offered by the true Preists the Sonnes of Aaron 2. Chron. 26 16-22 and the King was punished with Leprosy for his presumption So al the worship which is offered vp vnto the Lord by a false ministery is visibly to be judged abhominable bicause Christ only offered vp to his Father the worship of the worshippers which his new Testament hath described no other Rev. 8.3.4 coÌ„pared with Revel 5 8-10 11.1 stil let it be remembred that I dispute not nor censure not the invisible things of the Lord. The third Argument Iewish that is literal stinted imposed book-worship is false worship The worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is Iewish that is literal stinted imposed boom-worship Ergo the worship of the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England is a false worship The ground of this argument is the Analogie and proportion which ther is betwixt the type and the truth the shadow and the substance the lettre and the Spirit the Old Testament with the ordinances therof the new Testament with the ordinances there of For seing the old Testament was a type of the new therfor the Church ministery worship government of the old Testament were types of the Church ministery worship government of the new Testament therfor the worship of the old testameÌ„t being lyteral beginning in the lettre as was carnal circumcision Rom. 2.29 did type forth the worship of the new Testament to beginne in the Spirit Ioh. 4.23.24 For the Lettre was a type of the Spirit Col. 2.17 Seing therfor that Reading the Law was a typical ordinance of the old Testament therfor literal stinted manifesting the letter book-worship it followeth that it is now abolished by Christ the thing signified by the literal Reading is now to be retayned in the new testament which is vttering matter out of the hart called the manifestation of the Spirit the demonstration of the Spirit the ministring of the Spirit the like by which phrases of Speech the Holy Ghost would teach vs that seing we are fet at liberty from the bondage of the law which was a Schoolmr to leade to Christ we are not therfor againe to be intangled with the yoke of bondage in any thing no not in this matter of stinted literal book worship which is flat ludaismâ— but we being placed in the liberty of the Spirit are to vse our gifts in Gods worship as the spirit giveth vtterance as we see the Apostles practised vppon the day of Pentecost when the promise of the Spirit was fulfilled vppon them as we see the Church of Counth practised 1. Cor. 14.15.16.26 12 7-â—1 He that desireth to know further of this particular of book-worship let him read the book lately published intituled The differences of the Churches of the Seperation wher this point is largely discussed which if it be the truth
body of Christ and Antichrist the members of the one body and of the other be made one Brasse Iron Silver Gold cannot possibly be mingled with clay or earth No more can the members of the true Church and the members of the false Church but in al the parts of Spirituall communion as prayer prophecy praysing God the Sacraments the persons that partake in them are commingled make one body 1. Cor. 5.9.11.2 Thes 3.14 1. Cor. 10.15.17 2. Cor. 6 14-18 Therfor whosoever shal mingle with false ministers or members of false Churches therin offer as shameful indignity to Christ as it is to take the members of Christ make them the members of an harlot 1. Cor. 6.15 And heer Mr. Bern. pag. 153-156 indevoureth to prove it 1. Lawfull to heare their Ministers 2. to be vnlawfull to heare vs 3. to be lawfull to pray with them that are Faithful among them For the first you say who ever heard that to heare the word should be a sinne yes I have heard it in these places of Scripture Deut. 13.3 Math. 7.15 1. Timoth. 6 3-5 2 3.5-6 againe you say you have converted by the word go you may bee heard I deny that ever you converted men visibly to the Faith of the New Testament I regard not what you doe invisibly for I cannot see it nor know it what say you to them that convert in popery shal they be heard or doe you think they convert none invisibly Visibly I am assured they convert not the like I say of you Further you plead that the Scripture commaundeth to heare the word pronounceth them blessed that heare it and maketh it a marke of Gods Child so to doe I grant it if it be preached in the Lords true ordinance els men are forbidden to heare it pronounced accursed that heare it and are marked for the Servants of Antichrist for so doeing Revellat 14 9-11 Moreover you say Christ forbiddeth not to heare the Scribes and Pharisees true for they were members of the true Church of the Old Testament and their communion Typical was not polluted by Typicall vncleannes for ought that is mentioned to my knowledg but you say Paull rejoyced that Christ was preached though of contention with a purpose to encrease his afflictions Well Paull rejoyced not that false Ministers in false Churches preached Christ or that Christians heard them so doe neyther doth Paull speak of visible sinnes but of invisible affections which he by the Spiritt discerned to bee in the Teachers even as Peter discerned Ananias and Sapphyras dissembling And what is this to your purpose who are both false Ministers in false Churches Antichristian convinced Heretiques except you can and doe make answer which when you have done then c. For the Second you say wee are not to bee heard bicause as Brownists wee speake our owne fantasies visions of our owne harts and are obstinate Wel Mr. Bern. I say no more for this point but this that every Godly mynded man give sentence whither you or wee have the truth the tyme wil come when secret things will come to light your selves doe approve al that wee professe in substance except the Seperation the Lord judg betwixt you vs you say againe that wee convert none but are our selves converted by you I say al that come from you to vs are by vs converted to the truth from your errors false wayes you doe not convert one man visibly to the faith Besides I demaund when you Seperated from Rome who converted you from Rome Finally wee condemne no man among you only wee declare what you are visibly in the account of the Scriptures by reason of your false Church standing they that see the truth to be the truth yeeld not to it woe be vnto them take heed you be not of them who have seen it to be the truth have confessed it so to be yet write your bookes against it if it be so woe be vnto you from the Lord I say from the Lord except you repent you shal grow worse and worse as for them that sinne through ignorance their is a Sacrifice for their sinnes Lett willfull scorners looke to them selves For the third you say that if wee hold you the children of God wee may pray with you For so Christ hath taught vs to say our Father Well I deny not but those among you that apertayne to the Lords Election have God for their Father but I say they are in visible vnknowne to vs certainly particularly therefore wee cannot have visible communion with them For whatsoever is not of faith is sinne I may have visible communion with one that is a reprobate in the Lords account as Peter had with Iudas I may not have visible communion with one that is Elect in the Lords invisible Electiō bicause he is not visibly faithful to me as namely with thousands of you in the assemblies bicause I cannot possibly know them certainly particularly The twelfth Section The next particular of yours is the thirteenth in nomber viz. 13. That a company truly fearing God if any open wicked joyne with them are not capable to choose them a minister over them which is a truth though you hold it error I manifest it in this manner First you cannot approve to vs certainly that you truly feare God Secondly you cannot convince that they who suffer wicked men in communiō with them truly doe feare God bicause they live in confusion with the wicked from whome they ought to be Seperated that therfor in that confusion estate they have no title to choose them a minister Thirdly let it be graunted for disputation sake that some fearing God doe consent with open wicked in chosing a minister I say that Minister so chosen by the good bad is no true Minister For that mixt people are not the true Church Seing the holy Ghost testifyeth 2. Cor. 6.17 that God wil receave only those that are seperated to be his people that seing those supposed faithful have the Spirit of God the open wicked have the Spirit of Satan they cannot possible combine together except you wil say that the holy Spiritt and sathan can combine seing then those contrary persons cannot conjoyne how can they in common choose them a minister or if they doe how is he a true Minister seing they that choose him are not a true Church I pray you Mr. Ber. in your answer dissolve vs this knot if you can that we way receave instruction Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the twelfth Section Mr. Ber. Sep. Schisme pag. 151. Saith that this is one of our errors to hold That our congregations as they stand are all every of them vncapable before God to chuse thē Ministers though they desire the meanes of Salvation In the beginning of this Section I say that a company truly fearing God if any open wicked joyne with
powre to collect distribute the Churches Treasury to minister for the body meÌ„bers of the Church in other general services helpful to the body outward part this is evident enough if you wil not be blind wilfully For as in matter of mariage this is the very forme of mariage I take the formy wife I take the for my husband So in the matter of office this is the very forme therof we take the for our Pastor I take you for my flock so forth of the rest now ordination is nothing but the publishing of the officers election with prayer made for him admonition given to him to be faithful The Church doth the former which is al in all even the very forme the latter is but the lesser an accident without which the officer may be a true officer declare the contrarie to this if you can if not yeeld to the truth Ob. But you wil say the word mentioneth an Eldership which must ordeine Paul commandeth Titus to ordeyne Elders Tit. 1.5 1. Tim. 4.14 Ans. 1. The place of Timothie compared with 2. Timoth 1.6 yeeldeth this sence that Timothie by â—he exercise of prophecy wherein he was trayned by the imposition of the Apostles handes whereby the extraordinary gifts of tongs prophecy were then vsually conferred had an excellent grace so the word is in the originall conferred vppon him But let it be granted that Timothie had a ministerie conferred vnto him surely it must needes be the office of an Evangelist what is that to an ordinary Elders office Paull only the Apostles could create Evangelists Further let it be yeelded you that Timothie was made a Bishop of Ephesus by the Eldership of Ephesus the Eldership in that action did nothing but that which the Church appointed them to for the effecting wherof they had powre authority from the Church who is the Fountaine of al the powre that any officer hath Ans. 2. To the place of Titus I thus answer that Titus ther is not commaunded to ordeyne ministers but to constitute Elders For the word is not to ordeyne or to lay on hands but to constitute if you vnderstand the Greek tongue you wil acknowledg that I say to be true now to constitute an Elder signifieth Election approbation ordinatioÌ„ not ordination only as the objection importeth but you know or els you are a sworne slave to the Prelates that the Church hath powre to Elect approve her Elders yet Titus is heer commaunded to doe it whence wee must needes conclude that Titus only should teach direct the Churches in constituting of her Elders according to the Apostolique institution which what it was Titus being an Evangelist wel acquainted with the Apostles course could wel tel this must needes be the sence of this place except you have any thing to say against it which we pray you let vs heer if ther be any thing you seeme in this point to distingnish the calling of Elders as if ther were two manners or formes of calling Elders ordinary extraordinary I know no such thing therfore I leave that till I see it expounded Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the thirteenth Section Al this thirteenth Section hath for the subject matter of it the ordination or making of ministers the question of it is this viz whither a company of faithful people gathered into the name of Christ by the voluntary covenant of the new Testament have not powre of themselves to create their owne Pastors Deacons Although that which hath been spoken concerning the seaventh Section may fully sufficiently satisfie al this doubt yet I thought meet to add certaine argumeÌ„ts of plaine evidence for the further declaration hereof that al scruples shifts may be taken away The first Argument They which have powre to enter into to assume the New Testament have also powre to assume al the ordinances of the new Testament so by necessary consequent the ministery Two or three faithful people have powre to enter into to assume the new Testament of Christ Ergo two or thre faithful people have powre to assume al the ordinances of the new Testament therfor the ministery The Minor only is doubtful which may thus be confirmed Gal. 3 14-16 wher the Apostle saith plainly that the promises were made to Abraham his seed viz to the Faithful vs. 16. that the blessing of Abraham came vppon the beleeving gentils vs. 14. that these promises blessing is the covenant or new Testament vs. 15. wherevppon it followeth that seing the Faithful have the blessing the promises the new Testament therfor they have the powre of enjoying the ministery For the ministery is one part or ordinance of the new Testament The second Argument They that have Christ with Christ all things els they that have al things aperteyning to life Godlines they that have the promise of this life of the life to come have the powre to assume the ministery for that is a part of Godlines But the Faithful be they but two or thre have with Christ al things els Rom. 8.32 have the promise of life Godlines 2. Pet. 1.3 have the promise of this life of the life to come 1. Timoth. 4.8 Ergo The Faythfull though but two or three have powre to assume the Ministery The third Argument They who have powre to examine elect their Officers have also powre to pray for them to commaund them to minister which is ordination But the Scripture teacheth plainly that the Faithfull have powre to Elect and choose their owne Officers as Deacons Act. 6. one to bee an Apostle Act. 1.26 Elders Act. 14. also to approve them Act. 6.3 1. Timoth. 3.10 and you confesse no lesse your self Ergo the Scripture teacheth plainly you by consequent grant indeed though you deny in wordes that the Faithful have powre to pray for ther officers Elect to commaund them to administer that is ordination The Fourth Argument They that have powre to make a Church have powre to make a minister or ministers For they that can doe the greater can do the lesse Two or thre Faithful people have powre to make a Church Ergo two or thre Faithful people have powre to make ministers The reason of this argument is for that the Church is the body of Christ the Spowse of Christ the ministery is but one part of the body one Servant of the Spowse one of the ornaments of the Church The Minor is plaine For two or three Faithful people have Christ Iesus have the promises have the holy things of David which are Faithful have the blessing of Abraham being Abrahams seed furthermore the Apostle Heb. 8 10-12 expounding what the new Testament is teacheth that they that have the Lawes of the Lord put in their mindes written in their harts are the people of God have God
for their God so are the Church of the new Testament Mr. Bern. this point is cleerer then can be denyed al the world can never be able to overthrow it the vnderstanding feeling whereof I do â—artily wish vnto your soule to al the vpright harted of the Land The Fifth Argument They that are the true matter of the Church of the new Testament shall be invested with the true forme of the new Testament they that have true matter forme have the true property which ariseth from the vnion of matter forme that is Christs ministerial powre to assume al the meanes of their edification to Salvation so by consequent the ministery Two or thre Faithful people are the true matter of the true Church of the new Testament therfor have the true forme or covenant of the new Testament induced vppon them so being a Church subsisting of true matter forme have the true property arising from the vnion of the matter forme viz the powre of our L. Iesus Christ to assume vse al the meanes of their edification to salvation so by consequent have powre to assume the ministery Ergo two or thre Faithful people being a true Church may create that is Elect approve ordeyne their owne officers And this may suffice for the proof of this point The Fourtenth Section And so I passe to another point which is you Fourtenth viz. 14. That baptisme is not administred among vs simply into the Faith of Christ but into the faith of the Bbs. or the Church of England This point you say is also erroneous let vs consider of it I pray you seriously I would know into what Faith they are baptized if not into the Faith of the church of England they are members of the Church of England they professe the Faith of the Church of England are they not then baptized into that Faith of the Church wherof they stand as members of which Faith they make profession are they baptized into one Faith and do they professe another Faith or do you think that the Faith of Christ the Faith of the Church of Engeland are not one me thinkes Mr. Bern. you lay a fowle imputation vppon your Church in holding that the Faith of the Church of England is not the faith of Christ that baptisme is not administred into the Faith of the Church of England respectively but into the faith of Christ simply I dare say your Lords the Prelates wil coÌ„ you litle thank for this geare but let vs consider of your Faiths The Prelates Church of England have one Faith wherto they Subscribe The Puritanes their Faction have an other Faith for they wil not Subscribe to the Prelates Faith Christ wee of the Seperation have a third Faith for we wil Subscribe neither to the Bbs. Faith nor the Puritanes Faith but to the Faith of Christ indefinitely comprehended in the Holy Scriptures Heer now are thre Faiths thre Churches so thre baptismes But the time Faith is one the true Church is one the true baptisme one Therfor you we have not both the true Faith Church baptisme but we approve vnto you our Faith church baptisme to be true therfor your Faith Church baptisme is false so certainly it is For whosoever have stinted their covenant limited their repentance abridged their Faith have a false Faith Covenant Repentance but you in your assemblies have your Covenant Faith repentance at the wil of the Prelates you dare not covenant and practise al that you know but walk in violating of the whole Kingdom of Christ are mingled among al the refuse of the Land in your Church worship communion of holy things therfor your Repentance Faith Covenant is false your church false your Ministerie false your worship false your baptisme false the Lords Supper false al false heer give me leave to advertise you to look to your selves that know the wil of God doe not nor dare not practise as you know I wish you consider your own doctryne that whosoever liveth in any open knowne sinne hath no grace but you live in open known sinnes For you know you should reforme many things which you doe not nor cannot seing you want the Censures how then can you perswade vs that your repentance is true that your faith is true you plead you have a true ministery bicause you conuert soules you convert soules a pace do you not when you convert them to your falfe repentance false Faith false Church false Ministery false VVorship false Government is this the conversion wherby you would prove your ministery not only to live in your false repentance covenant Faith Church vnder your false Ministery Government but to reject oppose the truth that with such slaunderous lying courses as we heare of you you must affoard vs better evidences of your Faith repentance of your true ministerie or els we hold them al false Consider what I say Mr. Bern. the Lord give you vnderstanding in al things Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the Fourteenth Section Against this Section of my Lettre Mr. Ber. taketh exception in two particulars pa. 252. of the Sep. Schisme accounting them both errors 1. that baptisme is not administred into the Faith of Christ simply but into the Faith of Bbs. or Church of England so say I 2. That our Faith and repentance is a false Fayth and a false repentance so say I of their visible Fayth not speaking of things secreat Mr. Ainsw confutat of Mr. Bern. pag. 159. accounteth both those imputations of Mr. Bern. vncharitable collections and caluminations Seing Mr. Ainsw doth renounce them I wil therefore vndertake the defence of them vnto whom they aperteyne and heer I wish the Reader to observe whither it lay not vppon mee justly to answer Mr. Beâ—n whose whole book in the essential parts of it was directed against this lettre of myne as may evidently be perceaved as in the whole tenor of it so especially in these two particulars against which he excepteth in this Section Now for the first let vs consider the intendment of the baptizer How the Ministers of the Church of England intend their baptisme How the law of the Land intendeth baptisme how the Service-book intendeth directeth baptisme how the parents Susceptors or Suretyes do demaund baptisme consent to baptisme administred vppon the conceaving of these particulars the baptisme must be censured now if al these intend definitely that Faith which is by law established in the Land that the partie is baptized into that Faith which they intend it wil follow necessarily that baptisme is administred not simply indefinitely into the Faith of Christ but particularly definitely into that Faith which the Bbs. the Church of England do teach professe For which consideration an argument may be framed thus Into that
may not the Prelates reason against the Puritane thus or the papists against the Protestants wherfor although I wil not scoffe at this argument yet I pity your simplicity in it but I alter your argument and frame another after this manner against you Antiquity is the truth The Seperation is true antiquity go the truth the reason of this Argument is for that we approve the Doctryne and practise of seperation from the beginning out of the writings of the Holy Apostles and on the contrary I reason thus against your Protestancy Novelty is not the truth The ministery worship government of the protestant churches of England are Novelty go Not the truth that al these things are novelty I prove bicause they are not of the primitive Apostolique institution as I have sufficiently proved in the former Treatise Thus much for your first Likelyhood The second Likelyhood against the Sep. is thus framed They that in some things agree with auncient Heretiques Schismatiques are Heretiques Schismatiques their opinions heresy Schisme The Sep in some things agre with auncient Heretiques Schismatiques Ergo they are Heretiq Schismatiq their opinions heresy Schisme I answer by this arg I can prove you Mr. Bern. to bee an Heretique and Schismatique except you will renounce the Deity and Trinity the fall of Adam redemption by Christ c. For I can prove that Heretiques yea most vild Heretiques have held these opinions with you if my argument be not good against you neither is yours good against vs besides you should counting vs to agree with auncient Heretiques Schismatiques have proved two things 1. that they were indeed in truth Heretiques and Schismatiques for holding the points that wee hold 2. you should have set downe the particulars wherin we agree with them but you have done neither of them therefore fayle in your proof and so let this Likelyhood also passe as a matter not worth taking vp The third Likelyhood against the Sep. is framed thus That is not the truth the Teachers professors wherof somtyme do give straung expositions therby do wrest the Scriptures The Teachers professors of the Seperation doe straungely expound wrest the Scriptures somtyme Ergo the Seperation is not the truth I answer First do you expound no Scripture straungely to the Papists do not they instantly defend against you al that you shamefully wrest those two places of Scripture Mat. 16.18 vppon this rock wil I wil build my church 1. Cor. 11.24 this is my body yea a hundreth more besides if therfor the argument be good for you against vs it is good for the Papists against you but the argument is naught For may not a company of men have the truth somtyme through ignorance misinterpret so pervert the Scripture it may be so vndoubtedly except you wil say that men professing the truth have in them as the Pope saith he hath in Scrinio pectoris the infaâ—ibility of expounding Scriptures as the Apostles Prophets had in writing Scripture except you wil say that men have the perfect ful knowledg of the Scripture but secondly what are the Scriptures wee do straungely expound wrest I require you Mr. Bern before the Lord to produce the places of Scripture that I do wrest pervert eyther I wil acknowledg my sinne or els justifie them to be truly expounded in the meane tyme the reader may se that this is but simple stuffe the Papists can take it vp every whit agaâ—nst you The 4. Likelyhood against the Sep. is framed thus They that are not approved by the Reformed Churches have not the truth The Sep. is not approved by the Reformed Churches Ergo The Seperation is not the truth I answer That seing the Seperation have published the confession of their Faith wher in they have by name desired the approbation of the vniversities of the Reformed Churches either by writing or silence the said Christian vniversities have not disalowed that their confession though long since published their silence is therfor in al equity to be accounted their consent Mr. Iunius his silence what is it els to be esteemed but consent but suppose that al the men vppon earth should disalow the Seperation if the Reformed Churches of Corinth Rome Thessalonica Galatia the scaven Churches of Assa the Mother Church of Ierusalem planted by Christ Iohn Baptist the Apostles all of them being of one the same primitive Apostolique constitutioÌ„ if I say the Seperation have the allowance approbation of these Apostolique Churches it shal be sufficient for them therein they shal rest contented by my consent In the meane season you for get that your Church is vtterly disalowed by the reformed Churches in regard of your prelacy which is one of the cheef abhominations among you in many other particular which I shal not need to relate but remember for a conclusion for this point The stone which the builders refused is become the cheef corner stone I appeale vnto your consciences if you do not think the Churches of the Seperation better then your owne then tel me how you can stay in a worse knowing a better The 5. Likelyhood against Sep may be framed thus Whatsoever Mr. Whittakers Mr. Perkins Mr. Bredwel Mr. Willat Mr. Allison Mr. Cartwright Mr. Iames Mr. Rogers Mr. H. Smyth saith of the Seperation is true These forsaid learned men say the Sep. is not the truth Ergo The Seperation is not the truth I make another argument like vnto this which shal be your answer VVhatsoever Herod Pontius Palate Annas Cayphas the learned Scribes Pharisees Tertullus the Oratour and all the Lerned men of the Church of the Iewes say is true that is true These persons al of them with one consent say that Christian Religion is Heresy and schisme as you may see in the History of the Gospel acts Ergo Christan Religion is Heresy schisme If this argument be faulty then is yours faulty much more but I wil reason thus for the Seperation against you whatsoever Christ the Apostles the Holy Scripture 〈◊〉 the Primitive Apostolique Churches collected of the Iewes Gentils do allow or disalow is to be allowed or disallowed The seperation is allowed the Church ministery worship GovernmeÌ„t of the English assemblies is disallowed by these forsaid persons Ergo The sep is to be allowed you are to be disalowed The minor of this argument is proved in this book which I present to every honest hart of the Land to be measured by the golden reed But mee thinks Mr. Bern. should blush at his Logick The 6. Likelyhood against Seperation may be framed thus They have not the truth that are judged of the Lord. The seperation is judged of the Lord. Ergo The Seperation hath not the truth againe They have the truth that are prospered by God in their course The English
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
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
seales of the covenant 9. If the faithfull either doe not Seperate themselves from the wicked or not Seperate the vnbeleevers from them if they still mingle with them they forfeite the covenant they consent to all the sinne of the vnbeleevers to all their prophanation of the Holy things seing God hath given them power to reforme themselves and to keepe all wicked persons from among their communion by the censures of admonition and excommunication Apoc. 18. 4 Eph. 5.7.11 1. Cor. 5.6 Mat. 13.33 1. Cor. 12.17.22 Levit. 17.19 Mat. 22.39 Mat. 18.15.17 10. If Kings and States forbid the faithfull to vse any of these helps and meanes which God hath given and commaunded them to vse they are to lose their lives rather then to forbeare bicause they are bound to obey God rather then men Act. 4.19 Deut. 12.32 11. If Princes and States commaund the Church and faithfull to entertaine any other ordinances then these before rehearsed they are not to obey but rather to leese their lives 1. Tim. 6.13.14 Mat. 16.24.25 Apoc. 22.18.19 Mr. S. these are the very grounds and principles of our cause which is the Lords truth there are divers other particulars which I thincke not fitt to relate vnto you They may be after discovered vnto you vppon occasion Now I come to answere your reasons for your Church and ministerie First you say you have a true church your reason is for that you have the word truly preached and the Sacraments duely administred I confesse that wheresoever these thinges are found there is a true Church but I denie the word to bee truly Preached and the Sacraments duely administred in any parish Church of England which I manitest vnto you after this manner 1. First the people pertakinge in the seales of the covenante in prayer and in the communion of Holy thinges are not a people Seperated from all the vnbeleevers open sinners of the Land but stand still in conlusion with them submittinge to all the false Government of the Prelates c. Such a people so standinge have no title to the covenant to Christ to the promises see the first ground supra 2. Secondly this people so mingled with the wicked of the Land cannot be a true Church seinge it is impossible for them to be conjoyned combyned together into one bodie as the true Church is For as two disparate seeds viz of an horse and an asse doe not produce either an Horse or an Asse but a mule Genes 36.24 So of the two contrarie seeds of the VVoman and of the Serpent Genes 3.15 can not proceede a true Church but some thing of another nature viz a false Church VVherefore in the false Church cannot the word be truly preached the Sacraments duely administred 3. Thirdly there is one only true forme of a visible Church Ephes 4.4 One bodie which bodie is called Christ 1. Corinth 12.12 Galat. 3.16 This one body hath one Spirit Ephes 4.4 This one body guided by this one Spirit hath one Lord. Ephes 4.5 VVhich Lord is Christ the onely Lawgiver It hath also one faith which is the faith expressed in the writings of the Apostles it hath also one Baptisme whereby men are admitted into this faith submitted vnto this Lord baptized into this Spirit incorporated into this bodie and so have one God and Father one hope of life everlastinge to whome the promises and covenant is given Now in the assemblies of England there are divers Faythes one off the Puritanes so miscalled another of the Prelates a third of the Papistes that come to Churche a fourth of the ignorant persons go they cannot be one they denye themselves to be of the same body with Papists Atheists Prelates witches conjurers theves murtherers blasphemers drunckerds vsurers c. Therfor they are not the true body of Christ the true Church of God therfore all the holy things are profaned when they are ther administred how then can they be said as you plead to be truly administred in the assemblies of England 4. Add herevnto that the most forward Preachers Professors of the Land do not practize according to that which they know the Lord requireth to be practised viz in admitting of al to the Holy things good bad in neglecting the censures vtterly in setching the Ministers calling from the prelates whome they hold Antichristiā in submitting to their Ecclesiastical jurisdiction which is vnlawful therby yealding their consciences to other Lawgivers then Christ For their cannōs Christs lawes are contrary how can we say that they that thus doe sinning against their consciences in this manner are Seperated from al sinne touch no vncleane thing so how can they be said in that constitution the true Church so how can the word be said truly preached the Sacraments duely administred in that estate Thus Mr. S. you see your Church is proved not to be true your signes of a true church therfore not to be found in your assemblies Your second point foloweth viz that your ministerie is a true ministerie I pray you how can ther be a true miuisterie where is a false Church doth not the true ministerie arise out of the true Church can there be a true ministerie a false Church I know not how these things can stand together But let vs heare your arguments to prove your true ministerie First you say ther is a true ministerie bicause men are converted thereby I answere conversion is no signe of a true ministerie For Prophets Preists Apostles Evangelists ordinary Prophets Pastors private men private women have converted Iohn 4.39 Phillip 1.14.15 1. Cor. 14.24.31 Act. 9.1 11.19.21 Ergo conversion apertaineth not only to ministers nither is it a proper effect or adjunct of a true ministerie Secondly let your argument be framed after a true forme it wil be this whosoever converteth soules is a true Pastor The ministers of the church of England convert soules go they are true Pastors I make another argument whosoever converteth soules is an Apostle 1. Cor. 9.2 The ministers of England convert soules go they are Apostles The like arguments may be made to prove the ministers of England Priests extraordinary Prophets evangelistes yea Christ himselfe Mat. 11.5 Ierm 23.22 Malach. 4.6 Act. 8.12 Now Mr. S. judge whither your Argument be good to prove a true ministerie yea or nay Thirdly I would know whither you thinke that the Ministers of the Romish Church are true Ministers yea or nay but it is manifest Apoc. 18 4. that Gods people are in Rome how came they thyther ther they are converted how was Luther Husse Ierom of Prage the waldenses converted how were they converted in King Henrie the 8. tyme answere this if you can I pray you Fourthly it is not the worke of the Officers of the Church to convert soules but to sede edifie them being convertedia Pastor doth not make shepe but fedeth guideth tendeth his shepe the members of the true Church are al
wil I adventure further to prove before any witnesses vppon the hazard of my life if I may have audience do not you now as you have once done in your Letter to Mr. H. take it granted that nether he nor his leaders as you speak can answere your arguments you see it is otherwise I pray you doe not oppose against this truth in your pulpits till you have throughly scanned all thinges til you have had further passages with mee about it I did thinke that I ought to doe many things against this way but it pleased the Lord at the length to reveale his truth vnto me for the which I blesse my God for ever I know if you once interest your selfe in opposition against the cause publiquely it will be very hard for you afterwards to deny your doinges to pul downe that which you have built Therefore be advised raise vp your hart to enter into the cause be not afrayd of it deny al even wife children life also els you are not capable of this truth I pray you commend mee to Mr. B. and to your selfe most kindly The Lord of his mercy vouchsafe to enlighten you with the evident brightnes of his truth and the Lord open your hart to entertayne it in love and the Lord guide your feete into the way of peace so in all kindnes I take leave of you bidding you most hartely farewell FINIS A Lettre written to certaine brethren in S. By Iohn Smyth Mercie and peace be multiplied vnto you RethteÌ„ I am excedingly rejoyced in my soule hearing of the grace of God bestowed B vppon you althongh you are but few in nomber yet considering that the Kingdome of heaven is as a graine of mustard seed smal in the beginning I do not doubt but you may in tyme grow vp to a muâ—titude and be as it weere a great tâ—ee full of Fruitful branches which I vnfeignedlie desire brethren in your behalf at the Lords handes I have receaved your lettre long since I had seÌ„t you answer ere this if I had had a coÌ„venient messenger but now having fit opportunity offered I doe willingly of duty to you my brethren to the L. Iesus his truth make answer to your motion whereas Mr. K. is a man famous in the Churches of England for learning sincerity being now growen aged in them both it might therfor be thought boldnes in mee to deale with him yet being provoked therevnto by you by himself by my place which I susteyne in the Church of Christ I durst not refuse but choose rather to incure the vndeserved suspitioÌ„ of arrogaÌ„cie if any man dare so deem it by manifesting the truth then the deserved reproach of the denyal of the truth which is committed when the tâ—uth is not defended vppon due calling thervnto First therfor I doe professe before al men that the truth wee professe is maniâ—ested already sufficiently to all that wil but open there eyes in the writings of those worthy witnesses of Iesus Christ who have gone before vs in the Testimonie of this truth wee hold out to the world therfor I shal by this my writing only doe that which is already done therfor this my labor might wâ—l have been spared Secondly neverthelesse bicause things may be further explaned manifested by several gifts I thought it not amisse to shew myne opinion also The rather being called thervnto by your selves as also by Mr. K. breefly therefore to come to the matter the two points to be proved are these First that such matters as aâ—e excepted against in the Church of England are contrary to the word of God Seâ—ondly That they are in such sort opposite therevnto as thereby it is become no Church meet for any good Christian to Remaine in and to communicate with These two points shal be manifestly proved by these Scriptures following 1. First your Church is not of the Apostolique constitution but framed according to the invention of man which is proved thus Deut. 14.2 compared with 1. Pet. 2.9 Roman 1.7 1. The Churches of the Apostolique constitution consisted of Saints only The Churches of England consist not of Saints only Therfor the Churches of England are not of the Apostolique constitution therfor are framed according to the invention of man The major is proved by the former Scriptures for Moses calleth the Iewes an Holy people ceremonially typing that the people of the new Testament should be truely holy as Peter doth expound it and Paull exemplifie it to the Romanes and in all his Epistles The minor is manifest for all sorts of persons Atheists Papists adulterers theeves c. who not are compelled to be are members of the English Churches Ergo. 2. Againe from that Church which is not of the Apostolique constitution but of mans invention al the faithful must make Seperation 2 Chron. 13 5.-13 30 5-12 compared with Revel 14.9.10 18.4.5 The Churches of England are not of the Apostolique constitution but of mans invention Therfor the faithful must make Seperation from the Churches of England The major is proved thus as Ezechiah perswadeth the Israelites to Seperate from the Church of Ieroboams invention to joyne to the true Church of Iudah which was of Moses constitution so Iohn by vision is commaunded to pronounce a woe to them that give homage to Antichrists ordinances and to perswade all the faithfull to Seperate from Babylon which is by interpretation a confusion Now all mens inventions are Antichristian seing that as Christ Antichrist are opposite so are Christian Antichristians if ther for the constitution of the Churches of England be not of Christs that is of the Apostolique primitive frame it is of man of Antichrist so woe be to them that doe not Seperate from it 2. Secondly your ministerie is not of the Apostolique primitive institution but framed according to mans invention which is proved thus Heb. 5.4.5 Levit. 8. compared with Esay 66.20.21 Act. â— 3 -6. Act. 14.23 1. The true ministerie of the Apostolique institution was by election approbation ordination of that particular holy people wherto they did administer The ministery of the assemblies of England is not so but after the invention of man Therfor the ministerie of the assemblies is not the true ministere of the Apostolique institution but devised by man The major is proved by the former scriptures for as that only was the true preisthood which Moses by the coÌ„maundemeÌ„t of the L. apointed in the old testameÌ„t therfor that of Ieroboams was false 1. King 12.31 2. Chron. 13.9 So it the new Testament that is only the true ministerie which is of the Apostolique institution viz by election ordination approbation of that faithful holy people wherto they administer The minor is evident For the ministerie of England viz the Prelacie Preisthood Deaconry like thre vncleane Spirits proceed out of the month of the