confesse that our publike practise is agreable to our profession in that booke Nay saith he but proue you your assemblies to be such and if you can proue them where and what are your proofs if you do not you are confuted A worthy confutacion sure very Clercklike As if my Tenaunt should deny me rent for my house land yea and go to law with me for the fee simple which he hath holden in ferme of me these 40. yeares and I haue hetherto quietlie enioyed from my Auncestours time out of minde Now he suing me at law for that which I thus possesse faith proue your right to this land which you haue if you can what and where be your proofes let me see them Or els I your Tenaunt will haue it This were goodly dealing were it not and very lawfull Euen so doe you asking proofes of vs for that which we possesse and haue possessed before you made any question about it nay you your selues held parte of this possession of vs and with vs till yesterday when you began first to lay claime in this sorte to the whole Now your reason is let vs proue it to be ours where be our proofs Or els you will not acknowledge vs any longer see I pray you your owne equity If this suffice not to make you desist I leaue it to the Iudges to giue sentence Secondly note further Our Article saith A Church is where the word is preached Sacraments ministred according to all things that of necessitie are requisite Where we plainly insinuate that many errors may be added truthes wanting in a visible Church but nothing which is absolutely necessary Now what doth our practize in Preaching or Sacraments want that is absolutely necessarie without which there cannot be any true preaching or Sacraments at all shew it vs because we see it not our selues I assure you vntill then your first reason hath no reason in it F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 1. Excep HOw fit or vnfit the said discription of a visible Church mentioned in the 19. Article of the said book is we neither did nor doe examine Onely because this is their owne profession and wee see their practise is contrary vnto it we did therfore from hence take our first exception requiring of them to shew their assemblies to be such or els to know that their own discription is a witnes against themselues Now in their reply haue they according to the particulers of that description iustified their Church-assemblies nothing lesse Let this therefore be first obserued But what then haue they donne Surely this First pretending as if they repeated our exception and their owne discription they leaue out diuers perticulers of speciall moment there expressed as first where the visible Church is discribed to bee a congregation of faithfull men they leaue out these wordes of faithfull men belike knowing that their Congregations which are holds of all foule spirits and cages of euery vncleane and hatefull bird Reuel 18.2 cannot therefore iustly bee accoumpted congregations of faithfull men Secondly where the description speaketh that the Sacraments be duely ministered they leaue out the word duely because it crosseth their womens Baptisme priuate Communion receiuing of the most prophane and their seede c. Lastly where in the description it is reqaired both for preaching the pure word and due administration of the Sacraments that they be donne according to Christes ordinance they leaue out altogither these words according to Christes ordinance belike because this clause quite ouerthroweth both their Antichristian Prelacy from which all the inferior Ministers amongst them receiue power and authoritie to preach and minister the Sacramentes and their Priesthood and Deaconery wherein they all administer and their stinted imposed prayers exhortations crosses on the forehead questiones to the infantes vse of the same wordes in English in ministering the Lords supper which the papists vsed and still vse in Latine not reteyning the words of Christs institution and such like Now thus hauing left out such perticulers as were of spetiall moment against them they next demaund wherein their practize is contrary to their profession and discription of a visible Church in what things that of necessitie are requisite We aunswere in all the particulers of that description aforesaid For firste their Church-assemblies are not congregations of faithfull men but a confusion of all manner of people though neuer so wicked and prophane The “ D. Whithg last booke pag. 176. and 178. Prelates and Formalistes affirme that their Church is full of Atheistes Papistes Idolaters Drunkards Whoremōgers such like The †Sermon on Rom. 12. pag. 65. and 66. Demonstratiō in the preface forward Preachers likewise auerre that in their church are swarmes of Atheists Idolators Papistes erronious hereticall sectaries Witches Charmers Sorcerers Murtherers Theeues Adulterers Lyers c. Finally that a mā may be any thing amongst thē sauing a sound Christian. These things being so as both their estate and writings beare witnesse let themselues iudge whether their Assemblies can be accounted Congregations of faithfull men or no which is the first poinct of the description aforesaid Secondly in the same description is required That the pure worde of God be preached according to Christes ordinance But amongst them are allowed besides the word of God the Apocripha bookes and in stead of preaching the worde the reading of Homilies as may appeare in that booke of Articles alleadged by themselues Yet who knoweth not that in those bookes are diuers vntruthes errors contradictions blasphemies and such like So farre are they from being the pure word of God or agreeing therewith Moreouer when and where the worde is preached among them it is done by vertue of a false office and calling neuer appointed by Christ. And the Ministers that preach it doe in their constitution stand alwayes subiect to be silenced suspended excommunicated and degraded by the Prelates and Ordinaries to whom when they are made Priestes they promise and when they enter vpon a benefice they sweare Canonicall obedience Neither are they suffered any further to preach the word and trueth of God then agreeth with the Articles Iniunctions aduerticements and caueats in that behalfe prouided If any preach the worde of God anie further they are subiect to be silenced banished put to death That these things accord with the ordinance of Christ or with their owne description of a visible Church we suppose themselues will not for shame affirme it Lastlie in their description it is required That the Sacramentes bee duely ministred according to the ordinance of Christ in all things that of necessitie are requisite to the same Nowe by the ordinance of Christ in the administration of the Sacramentes there are necessarilie required 1. A lawfull Minister 2. A lawfull people And thirdly A lawfull administration according to the Testament of Christ In all which their practize is conerarie to the ordinance of Christ and their
vnto them Nay were they not therefore wholy to be separated from and left to the iudgement of God Num. 16. which ouertooke them and all that ioyned vnto them Yet was their error onely in matters of order and outward gouernement of the Church This may suffize to conuince the aduersaries vntrue assertions in this place To that of Maister Cranmer and Ridley c. is answered before For conclusion therefore this we adde concerning this poinct That all such assemblies and people as holde professe and practise as doth the Church of England these abominations following They can not by the word of God be esteemed in such estate trulie to holde Christ their Prophet Priest and King Towit The confusion of all sortes of people though neuer so wicked and their seed in the body of the Church The offices and callings of other Archb. and Lordb. then Iesus Christ also of Archdeacons Chancellors Commissaries Officials Priestes halfe Priestes Parsons Vicars Vagrant and Mercinarie Preachers c. The entrance into the Ministerie by an other way and by other Lord then Iesus Christ The executing of it vnder those strange Lords leauing it at their pleasure The preaching of the word administration of the Sacramentes and gouerning of the Church by vertue of the offices and callings afore said according to the Popish Canons and constitutions The power of Excommunication in the Prelates alone and their Officialls The confounding of Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall offices and authoritie in the Ministers of the Church The forbidding of Mariage at certen seasons The imposing and vsing of stinted deuised Liturgies The English Portuis taken out of the Popes latine word for worde saue that a fewe of the grosest thinges are left out yet keeping the same frame and order of Collectes Psalmes Lessons Pater nosters Pistles Gospels Versicles Respondes c. Appointing holy dayes to all Sainctes and Angels to the Virgin Marie Iohn Baptist Marke Luke and twelue Apostles seuerallie togeather with Fastes on the Eaues and on Ember dayes Fridayes Satterdayes Lent Prescribing the Ministers to pray ouer the dead ouer the Corne and Grasse at some seasons of the yeere and ouer Women at their Courching or purification Ioyninge them also to marie with the Ring which they make a sacramentall signe And to Baptise likewise with the signe of the Crosse with Godfathers and Godmothers with questions demanded of the infant that can not speake nor vnderstande Giuing power to Women to baptise And ordeyning that the other Sacrament of the Lords Supper be celebrated kneeling as when they receyue their maker and with change of the wordes of Christes institution taking in steed of them the wordes of the Popes Masse booke translated into English c. Finallie the vpholding of these and all such amongst them onely by carnall weapons of imprisonment death confiscation of goods banishment and such like The assemblies I say and people which holde professe and practize as doeth this Church of Englande the abominations afore said concerning the outward order and gouernement of the Church what soeuer truethes they holde besides yet can they not by the word of God be deemed truely to hold the Lord Iesus their Prophet Priest and King in such constitution of a church Neither therefore can they in this estate by the word of God be accounted true Christians nor the true constituted churches of Christ this is the question betweene vs and our aduersaries 7. Lastlie let the godlie and indifferent Reader iudge whether it will not followe vppon this answere in this place First that the a Contrarie to 1. Tim. 3.15 2. Tim. 3.16 Deut. 12.32 1. Corin. 4.6 Reu. 22.18 19 Scriptures are not sufficient for the building vp and guidance of the Church here on earth Secondlie that the b Contrarie to the 2. Tim. 3.17 with 1. Tim. 3.15 Pro. 2.1.9 Psal 119.105.13 men of God can not by the Scriptures be made absolute and fullie furnished to euery good worke Thidlie that c Contrarie to Col. 2.3 Heb. 3.1 2 3. Esay 32.22 Ephe. 4.11.12.13 1. Cor. 11. and 12. and 14. Rom. 12.3 4 5 6 7 8. Mat. 28.20.1 Tim. 6.13 14. Christ him selfe in whom the treasures of wisedome and knowledge are hid yet was so foolishe carelesse and vnfaithfull as hauing an house and kingdome which is his Church he hath not in his word appointed vnto it anie offices lawes and orders for the due gouerning and ordering thereof Finallie That the d Contrarie to the 2. Cor. 6.14 15 16. Psal 94.20 119.21.113.128 Reu. 9.1 2 3 and 14.9 10 11. Hierarchie Worship Sacramentes Traditions Canons and whatsoeuer constitutions of Antichrist concerning the outward orders and gouernement of the church being appointed by the Church and Magistrate are to be accounted Christes owne ordinances O shameles impietie Doubtles this is that same strange passion and meere desperatnes wherewith afterwarde vniustlie they charge vs which we will not prosecute as it deserueth but exhort them onely to take heede least that woe come vppon them whiche is written Woe vnto them that speake good of euill and euill of good which put darknes for light and light for darknes that put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter Woe vnto them that are wise in their owne eyes and prudent in their owne sight Esa 5.20.21 H. IACOB his 2. Reply to the 2. Except IN this your defence of your secōd Exception it pitieth me to see your extreame folly which is the more miserable because it appeareth to be not of weaknes but of wilfulnes You would know of vs if we hold Christ to be our Prophet Priest and King and if we professe to obey him in his own ordinances and in no other I answered we doe constantly prosesse so and as we professe so wee practise But to make our profession practize in this poinct more manifest I noted how our stare meaneth Christ to be our Prophet Priest and King and how hee is to be obeyed viz. That the written word ought of necessitie to shew vs our inward and meare spirituall beleif obedience As for the outward Church order our state holdeth that it is arbitrary to bee appoincted and abrogated againe at the liking of the Church and Magistrate And that the worde no where forbiddeth this libertie Where note in this explication two thinges First it is foule wrong to our Churches and to my wordes to say as you doe That they meane no outward orders at all be matters of faith or constant in the Scriptures Nay it was neuer doubted but to preach to pray to administer Sacraments c. though externall yet are perpetuall things and necessarie and vnchangable by the Scriptures My expresse wordes and our Churches meaning is That any reasonable kinde of Church gouernement and rites and orders are arbitrary and changeable no matters of faith nor written in the Scriptures And yet still Christ to be our only and absolute King Prophet neuerthelesse Whosoeuer doth
directlie of the breach of the Second Commaundment ioyning togeather in the worship of the true God their inueÌ„tions with Gods ordinances I say it is most manifest that he speaketh not of the breach of the Second Commandement onely but also of the first wherein men haue their inuentions also The Prophet sheweth vers 4. and 7. That God returned to his Temple againe whence he was departed for the abominable idolatries that had ben there committed before to shew that he would restore lerusalem and the Temple and worship of God againet He meaneth this literally of the returning of the Iewes after Babilons captiuitie and of the reedifying of the Temple and the appointing againe of Gods holy worship there Also spirituallie he may meane the erecting of the Christian Church wheÌ„ they should not fal to such impieties as the Iewes had done nowe in that time before for the which he had departed away from them Nowe if we aske what were those Idolatours in Ierusalem and in the Temple before Ezekiels time for the whiche the Lord forsooke them it is manifest in Ahas in Manasses and Amon and in the Kings after Iosiah That the Iewes idolatrie was verie Heathenish not onely against the Second but against the First Commandement also in ioyning the Heathen gods with the true God of Izraell in their Diuine seruice and worship Therefore this place of Ezekiell is as I say Not of the breach of the Second commandment onely simplie as our church corruptions are but ioinctlie touching the breach of the First also The verie same is that your Third scripture pag. 30. 2 Kings 17 33 34 40 41 of the Samaritans Idolatrie â— King 17. wherein because you are large I will deferr to explaine it till your Sixt Reason following where is a proper place for it 4 Lastlie in pag. 31. you agrauate the breach of the Second Commandment as being spirituall whordome c. But I would haue you to know Things may be mismatched too cruelly as well as too gentlie There is a sinne both wayes when things are not called by their proper and right names Is it true in some sence euery breach of the Second Commandement is spirituall whordome as euery wanton word euery light gesture and countenance euery immodest thought in a Woman is Adulterie yet who so shall angerlie and continuallie so call a woman whore harlot or baude that but thinketh or looketh or speaketh too vainly shall doe her great wronge and inâ—â—â—â—e the iust daunger of lawe Neither can shee nor ought shee in such case be diuorced as an Adulteresse ought And thus it appeareth 〈◊〉 still that you sinne again stabe Third Commaundment in misapplying of scriptures In the ende in pag. 31. where you saye To the proofe of your Assumption I answere neuer a worde which most of all required answere This I tell you that it is your fancie and not my meaning heere to answere to your Proposition First and then to your Assumption to say nothing Nay if you had not dreamed you might easilie haue perceyued that all my first wordes viz. where I say your speech here is vnproper c. are bent directly against your Assumption and the proofe thereof although at this time I expressed not those termes Secondly I shewe that your scriptures applyed to proue the Proposition are altogither vnfitt and intollerably abused if you meane them in that sence as your Assumption must be meant that is to say as they touch vs. This a verie childe might haue seene Maister Iohnson So that your marginall scoffe at my sound and schollerlike dealing doeth light on your self and bewrayeth eyther your deepe skill or your ouerflowing charitic As for the rest That I should iustifie our corruptions it is no part of my minde neither belongs it to our present cause so to doe Maister IOHNSONS II. Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON II. THat which appointeth and ratifieth the worshipping of God in vaine That cannot make either true Christians or true Churches But the doctrine publikely professed and practized by law in England appointeth and ratifieth the worshiping of God in vaine Therefore c. Of the trueth of the Proposition none can doubt And the Assumption is thus proued That which appointeth and ratifieth the worshiping of God by the precepts of man That appoincteth and ratifieth the worshiping of God in vaine This Christ affirmeth out of Esay the Prophet Mat. 15.9 compared with Esay 29.13 But the doctrine publiquely professed practized by law in England appoincteth and ratifieth the worshipping of God by the precepts of man This appeareth by the 35. and 36. Article of the booke alleaged And by their booke of CoÌ„mon prayer their Fastes Feastes Holy dayes c which are executed by their Popish Courts and Officers All which are authorized by Law in England Therefore the doctrine publiquely professed and practized by lawe in England appointeth and ratifieth the worshiping of God in vaine And consequently cannot make a particuler man a true Christian nor the assemblies so gathered together true Churches H. JACOB his 1. Replie to the 2. Reason THis your Second Reason is This booke and others appoincteth and ratifieth the worshiping of God in vaine Ergo c. 1. This also hath answere in the third ExceptioÌ„ Pag 22. 2 Also noâ—e I pray you this Scripture Mat. 15. is verified of such as were theÌ„ of the true visible †Marke his open contrarietie with him self graunting this in Reas 6. Church with whom Christ and his Apostles both in Christes time and after his death did sometimes ioyne and comunicate This therefore maketh for vs and against you most notably F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 2. Reason OVr Second Reason is as you see now what proposition doth he deny Truely none at all What defence bringeth he of their booke of coÌ„mon prayers and the particulers therein Of their Prelacie other Ministerie receiued from them according to their booke and Pontificall Of their Canons and Excommunications c. Surely none What then doth he answere Forsooth he referred vs to his anuswer before in the last exception Whether also we referre the Reader with this note that there he shall finde nothing either for aunswer of anie proposition of this argument or for defence of their false worship Praelacie Ministerie and Church gouernement called into question Is not this then a worthie and Clerck like answere And haue not these men thinke you good proofe for their present estate and Church constitution Which thus leaue it altogeather without defence euen when it most needeth and as it were beg geth their help and succor if they could affoard it anie But now hauing no aunswer to any parte of our argument yet hee bids vs note that this Scripture Mat. 15. here alleaged is verified of such as were then of the true visible Church with whom Christ himself and his Apostles both in Christs time and after his death
3 3 11. c. and 17 1 2 3 4 5. and 14.8 9 10 11. the spirituall Babilon notwithstanding any truthes she holdeth yet is so vnsanctifyed and abominable as shee is become a cage of all vncleane and hatefull birdes and that all her children and Marchants that will not departe out of her shall receyue of her plagues and damnation and drinke of the wine of Gods wrath yea of the pure wyne which is powred into the cup of his wrath and be tormented in fire and brimstone before the holy Angells and before the Lamb for euermore Loe here their fearfull estate which this man will needes accompt holy and acceptable before God H. JACOB his 2. Reply to the 5. Reason IN this your defence of your Fifth Reason you mislike that J call it an absurd comparison Where you affirme that the golden vesses of the Jewes were as available to sanctifie the Babilonians as the truthes of the Gospell which wee hold are to sanctifie vs. In deed your owne wordes be holden and receiued in the spirituall Babilon By which termes you meane vs of England I trow But marke sir Is not this grosse sophistery againe Is not this childish vanitie open beggerie and crauing of that which is the whole question that is That our Churches are spirituall Babilon and as deepely infected in Babilonish impietie as those old Caldeans If they were so infected I graunt in deed your Reason would follow But seeing it is the question And seeing we professe our selues true Christians by those truthes of the Gospell which we hold and as by Gods grace we are indeed Say I not well that this is an absurd Comparison Yes Maister Iohnson it is a most * To match those outward vessells of no sanctity of them selues with our inward doctrins of saluation impious absurd sencelesse comparison void of common reason And it inwrappeth Maister Cranmer Maister Ridley c. within the same Iniurions Yea irreligious consequence likewise All that you haue of allusions and alluding betwene the Tipicall and spirituall Babilon are meere delusions and vaine cauils Proue vs first to be spirituall Babilon Or els you fight with your shadow So that still I say those Scriptures quoted of Dan. 5. c. As also all the rest here packed togeather in your Margen they are miserably and desperately abused according as I rightly referred you to my censure to your First Reason which for all your wordes you haue not refuted The very same I say of your other Two scriptures towards the end Pro. 9.17 c. Reu. 18.1 c. As for Ezek. 43.8 I answered it before †Pag. 34. in your First Reason Maister IOHNSONS VI. Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON VI. THe Samaritans those counterfett children of Abraham Jsaack and Iacob did publiquelie professe that most excellent doctrine of the Messias to come the trueth of which doctrine howe powerful it was to saluation the Scriptures testifie yet doeth our Sauiour Christ repute them false worshippers of God because their worship was a mixt worship framed after the inventions of men and traditions of their Forefathers Therefore sayth Christ vnto them Yee worship that which ye knowe not we worship that which we knowe for saluation is of the Iewes By which wordes of Christ it plainely appeareth that although at that time some professed such truthes which otherwise were auaylable vnto saluatiō yet none that were false worshippers of God could truely challendge vnto them selues in such estate the benefite of those truthes but they onely which were the true Church and people of God to whom the Oracles of God were committed and to whom the Couenantes and seruice of God did appertayne such as were at that tyme not the Samaritans but the Jewes and they whiche helde the faith of the Iewes wherevppon not the Samaritanes but the Iewes were then by Christ accounted the true worshippers of GOD and heires of saluation John 4.22 compared with verse 20.25 29. and with 2. King 17 24. In the like manner the people of these Ecclesiasticall assemblies standing subiect to a counterfett Ministerie and worship of God being also commingled togeather of all sortes of people Though they professe some truthes which otherwise are auailable to saluation yet can not in such estate by the word of God he deemed true Christians or true Churches Neither can so standing challendge vnto them selues the benefit of those true doctrines which they professe because God hath not made his promise vnto anie false Church or worshippers of him neither committed vnto anie such his holy things to witt his word prayer Sacramentes Censures c. But he hath made his promise committed these things only to his true Church and people which worship him aright and yeeld obedidience to his Gospell keeping whatsoeuer he hath commaunded them Wherevpon it followeth that such people onely are true Christians and true churches of Christ to whom the promises holy things apperteyne and not to the people and Ecclesiasticall assemblies of England neither anie such abiding in false worship or false constitution of a church as is aforesaide H. JOCOB his 1. Reply to the 6. Reason THis your 6. Reason is The Samaritans beleeuing that Messias should come Iohn 4.25 were as neare saluation as we of England are But they were false worshippers for all that Ergo so are we for all our holy doctrines beleeued according to that Booke of Articles I deny the Proposition The Samaritans might knowe by hearsay and beleeue the Messias should come and Baalam did know it Nom. 24.17 and the Deuils doe now know and beleue Iam. 2.17 Yet none of these beleeued in him It followeth not therefore that they were as nigh saluation as wee of England In a worde there is a Reason manifest These Samaritans ioyned Heathenish Idols with the God of Israel 2. Ki. 17. which wholy destroyed the trueth in them though they did reteyne some memoriall amongst them of Messias to come Wherfore here take the Second Answer to the First Reason before * Pag. 25. But I will help them with an Obiection surely one fitter then all these Obiection The Isralites vnder Ieroboam at Dan and Bethell serued not Pagan Idols but the true God after their own deuises which yet resembled the ordinances of Ierusalem 2. King 12.32 Amos. 4.4 Howbeit they were false worshippers only for their false Ministery and outward false worship for all that they beleeued in the God of Ierusalem otherwise rightly Ergo so are wee of England only for our false Ministerie and outward worship Answere To this wee aunswere also what additions of deuices and how grosse Idolatrie they held it appeareth not But surely it seemeth farre grosser and filthier then the worst is with vs But yet this appeareth cleerelie that the conscience of euery of them euen of the simpliest must needes be conuicted that Ierusalem was the only place and Arons line the
only Priests †My meaning was the Leuits were not of Aarons line but the Priests only Leuits Therfore they could not be indeed true worshippers nor within the couenant nor neere to saluation when they all openly rebelled and forsooke them desperatly whom the Lord had so expresly chosen Now our assemblies throughout England haue not their consciences so conuicted in the Hyerarchie and Ceremonies Ergo wee may be in the coueuant which they were not for all our corruptions F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 6. Reason THis our 6. Reason he neither propounded as we did nor aunswereth directlie and soundlie vnto anie part of it But that the nakednes of his answere and light of the trueth may better appeare we will propound the Reason more shortlie in a Sillogisme thus The people and assemblies whose Ecclesiasticall constitution is such as to them in that estate the Couenantes holy things and seruice of God doe not apperteyne they can not in such constitution by the worde of God be deemed true Christians or true Churches whatsoeuer truthe they professe besides But such is the Ecclesiasticall constitution of the people and assemblies of Englande as vnto them in that estate the Couenauntes holy things seruice of God doe not apperteyne Therefore the people and Assemblies of England can not in that constitution by the word of God be deemed true Christians or true Churches whatsoeuer truthes they professe besides The Proposition none will denie The Assumption is proued thus The people and Assemblies whose Ecclesiasticall constitution is such as they worship God after a false manner neuer appointed by him self nor approued in his word their constitution is such as vnto them in that estate the couenaunts holy things and seruice of God doe not apperteyne But such is the Ecclesiasticall constitution of the people and Assemblies of England as they worship God after a false manner neuer appointed by him selfe nor approued in his word Therefore the Ecclesiasticall constitution of the people and Assemblies of Englande is such as vnto them in that estate the Couenaunts holie things and seruice of God doe not apperteyne The Proposition was proued by the example of the Samaritans and Christes speach and sentence of them in such estate Ioh. 4. and 2 King 17 Whervnto he answereth nothing to anie purpose saue that what he saith is against him selfe For where he graunteth That the Samaritans and Balaam knewe and beleeued the Messias should come yea and that the Deuills knowe and beleeue there is a God and that Iesus is the Christ the holy one of God Who seeth not that most excellent truthes may be acknowledged and yet they which so professe be not therefore in their estate true Christians or true Churches to whom the Couenauntes holie things and seruice of God apperteyne Where next he saith The Samaritans beleeued not in the Messias it will be heard for him to prooue it seeing he taketh beleefe in Christ so as it is had in the spirituall Babylon and her daughters and seeing also the Samaritans professed and beleened not onely that the Messiah should come but euen he which is called Christ that when he came he would declare vnto them all things Jn so much as when Jesus was come had spoken but to a woman of Samaria the scripture witnesseth that manie of the Samaritans of that citie beleeued in him for the saying of the woman which testified he hath tolde me all thinges that euer I did Ioan 4.25 26 29 30 39. Thirdly where he saith The Samaritans ioyned Heathenish Idolls with the God of Israell which wholy destroyed the trueth in them which they held By this againe it is euident euen in his owne confession Both that such things may be ioyned with the doctrines of trueth as in that estate they which professe those truthes can not be iudged true Christians or true churches to whom the promises and holy things of God doe belong And that therefore also the * See further for the answer of this in Pag. 4. Proposition of his principall and maine Argument first propounded is not generall but of necessitie admitteth limitations So as then his maine defence falleth to the ground as alreadie we haue noted both in the beginning of this writing in the answere to that Proposition afore saide and againe in the defence of our Fourth Reason a little before Moreouer in that he sayeth the Samaritans ioyned Heathenish Idols with the God of Israell 2. King 17. If he meane that they worshipped the Idols them selues 2. King 17. sacrificing to them and accompting them to be Gods as well as the God of Israell and so brake the First commaundement as before he affirmed in his answere to our First Reason then we take it that here againe hee is deceyued as there we haue shewed The scripture saieth Pag. 30. they worshipped sacrifized to the Lord God of Israell So as their sinne was against the Second commaundement in that worshipping the true God they did it in and by those Images as also by other deuices of their owne and traditions of their predecessours That this was their estate and sinne besides that it appeareth in that chapter alleadged it is also most plainlie sett downe first by them selues in that booke of Ezra Ezra 4.1 2. where they speake vnto the Iewes of the captiuitie that builded the Temple saying We will buylde with you for wee seeke the Lord your God as ye doe and we haue sacrificed vnto him since the tyme of Esar Haddon King of Asshur which brought vs vp hither Then also betweene Christ and the woman of Samaria Joh. 4. where it is manifest that the “ Ioh. 4.20 21 22 23 24 25 29 30. contention betweene the Iewes and the Samaritans was not whether onely the true God was to be worshipped but both of them agreeing in that whether the solemne place of his worship was in Ierusalem or in the mount of Samaria c. Lastlie by this mans owne confession when he sayth in this place Pag 49. that the Israelites vnder Ieroboam at Dan and Bâ—thel serued not Pagan Idolls but the true God after their owne deuices For the scripture testifieth “ 2. King 17.28 32 33. that the Samaritans worshipped the same God and after the same maner that the Nations did which were caried from thence Nowe the nations that were carryed from thence were the tenns Tribes that fel away from Iudah to Ieroboam which likewise feared * 1. King 12.27 28 29 30 31. with 2. King 17.32 33 40 41. the Lord serued their Jmages that is God in and by their Images as nowe also the Samaritans did that were come in their steede Hetherto of his answere which may seeme to concerne the Proposition of the latter Sillogisme The Assumption was shewed by this that these assemblies being commingled togeather of all sortes of people they haue also for the worship of God among them a counterfett
A DEFENCE OF THE CHVRCHES AND MINISTERY OF ENGLANDE Written in two Treatises against the Reasons and Obiections of Maister FRANCIS IOHNSON and others of the separation commonly called BROWNISTS Published especially for the benefitt of those in these partes of the lowe Countries MIDDELBVRGH By Richard Schilders Printer to the States of Zealand 1599. THE PVBLISHER TO THE CHRISTIAN READER ABout Three Yeeres since Maister Iacob hauing some speach with certen of the separation before mentioned concerning their peremptory vtter separation frō the Churches of England was requested by them briefly to sétt down in wryting his Reason for defence of the said Churches And they would either yeild vnto his proofes or procure an answer vnto the same Wherevpon the Argument following this Preface was set downe in wryting by Maister Iacob which the said parties did send to Maister Fr. Iohnson being then prisoner in the Clinke in Southwark who made an answer vnto the same conteyning 3. Exceptions and 9. Reasons in denyall of the Assumption Wherevnto Maister Iacob Replyed Afterward Maister Iohnson defended his said Exceptions and Reasons And finally Maister Iacob Replyed againe As by the particulars themselues appeareth Now hauing weighed and considered with my selfe the great ignorance and errors wherewith those of the separation aforesaid are and haue bene lately carried awaye namely to affirme That all that stande members of the Churches of Englande are no true Christians nor in state of saluation And such like most vngodly sentences which would grieue any Christian soule once to thinke on much more to publish to the view of the world And weighing likewise withall the greate weakenes of manie Christians among vs who through want of experience or due consideration of things as they are may easelie by their delusions be drawne away into those errors with them I haue therefore Aswell in hope of reclaiming of the said parties from their said extremities which now I iudge the most of them for want of meanes see not As also for the staying of others from running into the same grieuous excesse with them now published this discourse to the view of the world which hath line buryed in the hands of some few Many being desirous of it who by reason of the largnes in wryting out of the same could not obteyne it Wherevnto I am so much the rather induced For that the Reasons herein by Maister Iacob alleadged haue by Gods blessing reclaymed many from their former errors and satisfied others who haue bene doubtfull and subiect to fall into the same In the examining of which Discourse I shall desire the Reader to obserue a few notes for his better proffiting in the same 1. And First among the rest to note this as a token of the strange and obstinate dealing of Maister Iohnson and others of them viz. That heretofore vntill such time as the Argument hereafter mentioned was framed aganst them they neuer denyed That the doctrine and profession of the Churches of England was sufficient to make those that beleeued and obeyed them to be true Christians and in state of saluation But alwayes held professed and acknowledged the contrarie As by the publike confessions of themselues namely Maister Barrow Maister Penry and Maister Iohnson himselfe in this discourse mentioned in Pag. 81. appeareth But nowe they seing That if they should acknowledge the said Doctrines and profession to be sufficient to saluation That then this conclusion would of necessitie follow that those that hold and practize thē are a true * Which yet Maister Penry confessed see Pag. 82. Church And so their own former iudgements should be crossed Rather I say then they would be drawne to that They nowe stick not to deny their owne confessions which they thinke to be the saifest way for them and like vnnaturall children so vehemently hate contemne and dispise their mother who bare them nourished and brought them vp from whose brests they sucked that sweete milke of the meanes of euerlasting life and saluation if euer they had any tast of it at all Beeing notwithstanding not abashed nowe in a desperate manner in the hardnes of their heart to affirne * Which appeareth generally by denying the Assumption of Ma. Iacobs particularly in these pages 13. 62. 63. 64. That none by the doctrine of the Churches of England can be a true Christian or saued But that they all worship God in vaine Are abolished from Christ Are Babilonians Idolaters departers from the faith worse then Infidels And such like most vnchristian sentences making them all one with the Church of Rome c. Which impious affirmations would cause any Christian heart to lament and bleed for grief Whose vnchristian sentences and false and deceiptfull Reasons the very naming whereof were sufficient to refute them are most plainly taken awaye and cleane ouerthrowne by these brief Replies of Maister Iacob vnto euery of them vnto which I referre yow Onely this I adde with all which I would desire might be noted That if they continew in their former confessions That the doctrines and profession of the Churches of England are sufficient to saluation As they ought it being the very truth Then are they all in a most grieuous schisme in so peremptorily condempning and separating from such true Christians and Churches And if they deny it as they haue begonne to doe Then doe they runne headlong into an intollerable sinne and extremitie without all warrant of Gods word And besides giue iust occasion to be called fearfull * Which name they vniustly giue to those that iustly for this their extremity forsake their fellowship Apostates in so wholy falling and that aduisedly for aduantage sake as it seemeth plainely to appeare from so notable a truth which before they imbraced and acknowledged 2 Secondly I would desier the Reader not to be carried away with the multitude of corruptions from the Question or matter in hand viz. Whether the good doctrines of the Churches of England are sufficient to saluation in them that in simplicitie of heart beleeue and imbrace them notwithstanding the multitude of errors and corruptions which Maister Iohnson repeateth to the contrarie But to haue an especiall regard vnto the same Which is the maine poinct that hath and doeth altogeather deceiue them viz. To haue an eye to the corruptions in the Ministerie worship and gouernement of the Churches of England But neuer to looke vnto the nature and force of them whether simply of their owne nature they ouerthrow faith and Christianitie or whether they be held of obstinacy and a conuicted conscience or not Therefore I pray you marke and examine the errors which they reckon vp and I desire the same also of them for whose good especially I published this Treatise And after due consideration see if those errors are simplie of that nature which before we haue noted If they be not as Maister Iohnson nor all the men in the world shall euer be able to proue they are Then doe
he departed from them and separated the discipels c. Act. 19.9 Therefore come out from among them and separate your selues saith the the Lorde and touch no vncleane thing and I will receiue you 2. Cor. 6.17 And I heard another voice from heauen saying goe out of her my people c. Reu. 18.4 These are the very mayne grounds on which their separation is builded which being duly weighed with the scope of the text you shall very easely finde that not one amongest them all will hold in proportion with this time nor beare the separation they gather froÌ„ them First because either they concerne such times and states as the people that liued in thâ—â—â— were professors of or subiect vnto open grosse Infidelitie either Heathen or AntichristiaÌ„ Idolatry not in some particuler customes outward ordinaÌ„ces but in the whole body and power of Heathen Antichristian religion such as could not possibly stand with true faith and religion at all Which can not be said of these times present standings without open vntruth 2 Or els because if they be not of that sort they affoard no such absolute separation at all but only froÌ„ wilful rebellious obstinate disobeyers euill speakers and from apparant grosse corruptions but not from the whole publike body of those Assemblies nor from the lawfull and good things vsed in such times and standings as haue not wholy swarued from the faith though there were diuers grieuous faults both in doctrine and practize suffered among them As by the example of the Iewish Churches in the times of the Prophets especially of Christ him selfe may plainly appeare The Euangelistes make mention in diuers places That they worshipped God in vaine teaching for doctrine mens preceptes They made their proselites the Children of Hell Two fold more then they were before They made the commaundements of God of none effect by their traditions Such as beleeued in Christ they excommunicated c. Yet were they a true Church notwithstanding these and many other grieuous enormities with whom Christ himself and his Apostles had communion and fellowship sometime in those good things that were among them And so might they with the Churches of England without iustifying or allowing these things which they see to be euill All which things doe more fully appeare in the conference it selfe as it followeth hereafter But vnto the examples of these Churches me thinkes I heare already that common answer and last refuge of theirs which is this Obiection Those Churches say they were in a true outward constitution And therfore were the true Churches of Christ notwithstanding those grosse errors which they held in other poincts of doctrine and practize But contrariwise say they the Churches of England haue a false outward constitution and therefore they are no true Churches of Christ notwithstanding their truthes of doctrine c. Answer So the outward constitution is the maine poinct on which they wholy depend and for which they wholy condempne the Churches of England from being true Christians in state of saluation Which I doubt not plainly to take away 1 And first concerning the constitution of the Iewish Churches If we should examine the same we should finde that it was as greatly altered and corrupted as is the constitution of the Churches of England Two high Priests hauing by simony crept in at once which was vnlawfull and contrarie to Gods ordinance notwithstanding their gloses in their other “ 9 Reasons writinges to allow them to be lawfull by * 2. Chron. 24.2.3 Zadok and Ahimelech and by “ 2. King 25.18 Seruiah the chief Prieste Zephaniah the Second which make against themselues For there was neuer but one high Priest as they confesse * Answere to Maister Hild. Pag. 50. Ergo not two as here were the rest were indeed inferior to him And yet amongst those there was a chiefty also who were called sometimes Second Priestes or Priestes of the Second order 2. King 23.4 and sometimes chief Priests Mat. 27.1 These scriptures being compared with those in the margin by them cited doe make it more plaine Now if the chief offices were so corrupted and altered through couetousnes as the Histories make mention It is not likely that the inferior offices did remaine sound but were asmuch or more altered The Priests generally being such couetous wicked persons their offices beeing very gainefull and besides they liuing vnder the authoritie of the Heathenish Romans who ruled ouer them All these things considered it is very likely that the offices outward constitution on which they so much depend were wholy altered from the right institution and therefore would make nothing for theÌ„ As for their allegation of Mat. 23.1 Where they say Christ testifieth that they had true offices by saying they satt in Moses chaire It will not help them any whit at all For Moses was no Priest as they were but a Magistrate and therefore Moses chaire must be vnderstood of some what else themselues * Maist. Barrow and Mai. Greenwood in diuers Letters and Treatises haue vnderstood it heretofore of Moses doctrine 2. Secondly to let their constitution passe which yet as I haue said would be found as badde or worse then ours wee will examine their corruptions in doctrine Wherein I would know of theÌ„ which are the greater sinnes of these two sorts viz. 1. A false and corrupt outward constitution 2. Or false and corrupt doctrines I thinke they will say the corrupt and false doctrines are the greater as they are indeed For that they doe wound fester and corrupt the very conscience and doe deceiue the hearers thereof Whereas the errors in the constitution of a Church especially in some circumstances as the errors with vs are and those of no small controuersie in matters also not fundamentall are nothing nere so hurtfull by howe much the Tithing of Mint Annis and Commin are of lesser force then the other weightier matters of the law Now from hence I Reason thus If the greater sinnes namely in doctrine doe not simply ouerthrow a companie of Christians from being a true Church Then much lesse will the lesser sinnes namely in the outward constitution c. But the false doctrines which are the greater sinnes themselues confesse by the example of the said Churches doe not Therefore neither will the lesser For the better explayning of this poinct I would pray them resolue me of this question What if a company of Arians Anabaptistes or Papistes shoud bee gathered and established in a true outward constitution and still reteyne their fundamentall errors before “ pag. 4. named Whether should their outward constitution make them a true Church yea 〈◊〉 no I thinke they will say no. Thus I hope then it appeareth That the outward constitution whether falty or true availeth nothing to the ouerthrowing or making of a true Church vnlesse other doctrines of the foundation either false or true doe concurre
therewith And thus their Obiection of the Iewish constitution is I trust fully answered So that still their peremptory separation and condempning of the Churches of England for some outward corruptions temayneth still a grieuous sinne vpon their heades for which without harty repentance they shall one day answer before God which will be too heauie a burthen for them to beare Lastly concerning our corruptions As we cannot iustifie them to be no corruptions but must needes acknowledge that there are many yet remaining in our land which were left by that man of sinne are as thornes vnto our sides Iudg. 2.3 which we hope God will in time abolish So dare we not runne into your extremities to condempne our Churches for such corruptions but waight the appoincted time of God for the redresse thereof Yet in the meane time so longe as those most excellent truthes and doctrines of saluation for which God make vs thankfull are still reteyned and held as soundly as by any Church vpon the face of the earth the other errors not simply ouerthrowing the same beeing not held of obstinacy and being also for the most parte of great controuersie and disputation amonge the learned So long I say communion in things lawfull is to be kept with them as before is noted in the example of other Churches Otherwise it will come to passe by reason of the * Mat. 25.13 to 23. diuersitie in opinions and iudgmentes which by the corruption of our nature we remaine in in this tabernacle as hath “ Leu. 4. Psal 19.12 bene in all ages and * 1 Cor. 13.9 12. shal be so long as this life of imperfection indureth that no communion can euer bee had with any Church liuing no nor any one Christian with another Which to affirme were most absurd and vngodly These obseruations beeing considered I doubt not but the Lorde will adde a blessing to this worke That such as are simple hearted and haue exceeded in eagernesse of zeale may see their extremitie in so rashly and vnaduisedly separating from and condempning the Churches of England sometimes their Nurses and Mothers as before is noted Whereby God may haue the glory and themselues the comforte euen the saluation of their soules through Christ D. B. AN ARGVMENT PROVING THAT the Churches of England are the true Churches of God VVHatsoeuer is sufficient to make a particuler man a true Christian and in state of saluation That is sufficient to make a companie so gathered togeather to bee a true Church BVt the whole doctrine as it is publiquelie * Booke of Articles published Anno 1562. professed and practized by law in England is sufficient to make a particuler man a true Christian and in state of saluation * See further for these words in Pag. 3. and our publique Assemblies are therein gathered togeather THerefore it is sufficient to make the publique Assemblies true Churches H. IACOB Against the Assumption of the said Argument Mr Iohnson made 3. Exceptions and 9. Reasons which hereafter follow in order Together with Mr Iacobs Replies vnto the same But before we come to the examination of the saide Assumption let vs see first what he saith against the Proposition Fr. IOHNSON TO omitt the Proposition vntill it better appeare by their defence of the Assumption how to take and vnderstand it we will for the present only shewe the weakenes of the Assumption and this also the rather because they seeme wholy to depend vpon it H. IACOB THe answerer omitteth the Proposition for in deed it is most certen But he denyeth the Assumption which yet is as certen also That the doctrine in our booke of Articles is sufficient to make a true Christian Fr. IOHNSON In our former answere to this argument we omitted the proposition not because of the certentie of it euery way as the Replier dreameth but vntill we might see by his defence of the †The Assumption is examined and maintained Pag. 4. assumption how to take it as thē we noted Nowe therefore hauing seene in his reply the vnlearned vngodly and vnconscionable pretences by which he would seeme to defende the Assumption when in deed he doth nothing else but cast a miste before the eyes of the simple we giue him to vnderstand that the whole argument is lame and faultie in euery parte thereof The Proposition is not absolutelie true as it appeareth he vnderstandeth it by his defence of the Assumption The Assumption is not only false as we proued in our former answer but also lacketh a foote whereon it should goe if it were perfect and entier For whereas in the Proposition mention is made not only of the making of a true Christian but also of a companie so gathered together he should in the Assumption if he would haue had it sound and perfect not onely haue assumed that the doctrine c. is sufficient to make a true Christian but haue added also that their assemblies be cōpanies so gathered togither Which being not done both the Assumption wanteth one of the feete and the conclusion inserreth more then was in the premisses and so the whole silogisme is faultie and disfigured Thus might we without any further answer returne this argument to the first framers of it to be better fashioned Yet in hope that they may bee brought through the blessing of God to receiue the loue of the trueth that they may be saued and with their giftes no more to plead for and deck the whore of Babilon to help forward the building beautifying of Sion we will more particularly lay open to them the weaknes of this his reply And first whereas he affirmeth that the Proposition is most certen yet in his defence of the Assumption he declareth that he so taketh it as whatsoeuer amongst them be iointly togeather held and ioyned with that which otherwise might make a ture Christian or a true Church yet notwithstanding they are so to be reputed as if there were no such additions or commixtures we answere that in this sence the Proposition neither is nor can be absolutely true as it ought to be if they would haue their argument good For who knoweth not that such “ Gal. 5.2.4 things may bee ioined with Christ as abolish from Christ. And againe †2. Cor. 6.14 25. that Christ and Antichrist can not accord togither Either therefore the Proposition is not generall but admitteth limitations and then is not the Argument good Or if it bee generall without any limitation so as whatsoeuer be added too or cōmingled with that which otherwise might make a true Christian or a true Church yet it hindreth nothing at all Thē is it not absolutely true in such vnderstanding as may appeare by the former exceptions diuers other that might be alleadged Next touching the Assumption besides that it is lame as before is shewed it is also vntrue as in our former answer appeareth Some balme in deed this man
and thus we practise and wee are perswaded no Scripture to be against all this but rather for it I speake now concerning our Ministers and Congregations generally that is our publike Church state If yow say but there are diuers amongest vs that thinke otherwise I answere But this is the generall estate both of our Ministers and Churches howsoeuer one or two amongest hundreths or thousands may thinke otherwise shew the contrary if you can And our Churches they certenly must bee deemed after their generall estate and constitution not as one or two men thinke If you say this generall opinion and practize is an error Therefore they obey not Christs ordinances in truth herein though they thinke they doe I answere let it be so it is now * An error though not foundamētall the error of their iudgment as it was in Maister Cranmer Ridley c. Not pregnaunt rebellion and disobedience to Christe not a conuicted or seared conscience so that their other “ 1. Cor. 3.12 15. truthes of the foundation are not frustrat nor Christ made to none effect in thē And this is all our questiō Whether they remaine Christians still for all these faultes yea or no. F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 2. Excep COncerning our Second Exception it was propounded by way of demaund requiring that they would shewe vs if they held Jesus Christ to be the Prophet Priest King of his Church to be obeyed in his own ordinances onely and in no other howe then their practize agreeth with this profession One would haue thought that here it had bene good and needfull if they could to haue cleared this poinct by the Scriptures and the Testament of Christ and from thence to haue manifested that their Ministerie worship ministration gouernement c. which are called in questiō are no other then the Lord Iesus Christ that Prophet Priest and King of his Church hath in his Testament giuen and appointed therevnto And haue they not done this Surely no. What then doe they say First they tell vs That touching this poinct their profession and practize nowe is so as before time it was with M. Cranmer Ridley Latimer and their Cogregations But what of this Can the persons or age of thes whom he nameth nay can anie person or ages preiudice the trueth Were not they subiect to error at all or must their errors binde vs Did not Iohn Hus that worthy champion of Christ and others also of the Martyrs in former times say and heare Masse euen to their dying day not seeing the abomin ations thereof And did not diuers of thē acknowledge some the Popes calling and Supremacie some 7. Sacramentes some Purgatorie some Auricular confession and such like greeuous errours c And yet notwithstanding dyed most constantly for the truethes which they sawe and testified some for one and some for another as God manifested the trueth vnto them As may be seene at large in their seueral Histories in the Actes and Monumentes whether wee referre the Reader But may we nowe so professe and practize in these things as they did Or if we should were their ignorance and errours a sufficient defence for vs yet thus would this man beare vs in hande But moreouer let him tell vs if Maister Latimer and others did not forsake the Prelacie and functions they had before-time receyued And Maister Ridley at his death repent that he had bene so earnest for the remnantes of Poperie in his time retayned Besides also who knoweth not that when Maister Cranmer Ridley Latimer c. dyed Martyrs for the trueth of Christ they neither had them selues nor ioyned in spirituall communion with such as had the Prelacie and Manisterie nowe pleaded for And not that onely but were also members of that persecuted church in Queene Maries dayes which was separated from the rest of the Lande as from the world and ioyned in couenaunt by voluntarie profession to obey the trueth of Christ and to witnes against the abominations of Antichrist As they also did euen vnto death in the trueth which they sawe though otherwise being but as it were in the twylight of the Gospell they had their wantes and errors Yet who is so blinde or besotted as not to see that their errours may not bee our rules neither can be our warrant but rather that we ought after their example faithfully to stand in and for what so euer trueth God reuealeth vnto vs by his word And that otherwise those holy Martyrs should rise in iudgement against all such as either withhould the trueth in vnrighteousnesse or in any respect refuse to walke therein Finally seeing GOD hath giuen vs his worde to be the light of our feete and rule of our liues and religion What meane these men to lead vs from it to the aberrations of any men whatsoeuer Should not all people enquire at God or would they haue vs goe from the liuing to the dead From God and his worde to men and their errours Doubtlesse this is that whervnto they would bring vs and whereby they mislead their followers as will yet further appeare by that which followeth For what say they next Secondly they tell vs and they wishe it to bee noted as wee also doe That Christes ordinances be of two sortes either written or vnwritten the first necessarie the second arbitrary the first touching doctrine that is touching faith and the inward opinion onely these say they are written the second touching outward orders in the Church and all outward gōuernement and ceremonies These they say are not written but arbitrary at the appointment of the Church and Magistrate Thus they say they hold and practise and thinke no Scripture is against it In answere whereof First we aske what scripture they haue for this Secondly we alleadge against it the scriptures “ 1 Tim. 3.10 15. 5. chap. 6.13.14 Tit. 1.5 c. Act. 1.3 2.40 c. 6. cap 14.23 15. cap. and 19.9 20.7.17.28 Rō 12.6.7.8 Ephe 4 11.12 1 Thes 5.12.13.14 Phil. 1.1.5 Heb. 3.1.2.3 13.17 Iam. 5.14 1 Pet. 5.1.2.3 1 Cor. 4.17 5. cap. 9. cap 11. cap. 12. cap. 14. cap. and 16.1.2 Gal. 6 1.6.2 Thes 3.6.12.14.15 Mat. 18 15.16 17. 28.18.19.20 quoted in the margent wherevnto manie other might be added Thirdlie let it be obserued that them selues here graunt and can not denie but all the outwarde gouernement and ceremonies of their Church are inuented and arbitrary at the pleasure of man and not written in the worde of God Wherevpon it followeth that they are none of Christes and therefore not to be ioyned vnto in the worship of God as afterwards more fully will appeare Fourthlie see howe neare they are driuen that are glad to runne backe into the Papistes tentes where yet they knowe there is no succour Before they pleaded possession time out of minde nowe they tell vs of ordinances vnwritten c. are not these meere
popish shiftes euen the olde worne argumentes of antiquitie and vnwritten verities so often and so much stoode vppon by the Papistes Alas that these men should plead to be true Christians and yee thus openly take parte with Antichrist What shall we say to these things Surely God is iust and will verifie his word where he saieth That they which receyue not the loue of the trueth that they may bee saued hee will sende them stronge delusions to beleeue lyes that they may bee damned Fiftly note howe he maketh the ordinances touching outwarde gouernement and ceremonies to be no matters of faith neither writtē at all Surelie this is strange diuinitie It is an ordinance not onely concerning the inward but also the outward gouernment of the Church that Christ is Lord and King thereof It is therefore no matter of faith It cōcerneth the outward gouernment whether the Pope be vnder Christ head of the church or no Doeth it not therefore concerne faith Publique prayer preaching of the Word and hearing of it preached administration and receyuing of the Sacraments are matters concerning the outward gouernement and orders of the Church doe they not therefore touch faith Admonition and exhortation concerne also the outwarde gouernement of the Church doe they not therefore concerne faith Finally by this diuinitie the Sacraments of Baptisme and of the Lordes supper being ceremonies shal be no matters of faith at all amongst them But here they stay not but adde moreouer That the outward orders gouernement and ceremonies of the Church bee arbitrarie at the appointment of the Church and Magistrate and not certen nor written in the booke of God Whervpon it followeth that it is not certen nor taught in the scriptures but arbitrarie at the Churches Magistrates pleasure Whether Christ or the Pope of Rome or of Cāterburie be head and Archbishop of the Church of God Whether Jewes onely of the tribe of Leui may nowe minister the holy things of God in his Church Whether Christ haue giuen any giftes and set any offices in his Church for the Ministerie and guidance thereof Whether prayer must bee in a knowne or vnknowne tounge Whether the teaching and ruling Elders be to be had and honored Whether the church may excommunicate Whether the Popes or any other Prelates excommunication be to be regarded Whether there be two or three or seauen Sacramentes Whether the Passeouer Circumcision and other ceremonies and sacrifices of the Lawe be now to be vsed Whether the Heathenishe sacrifices and worship be to bee ioyned withall Whether creame oyle salt spitle crossing and coniuring be to be vsed in Baptisme Whether the bread onely and not the cup is to bee giuen to the lay people as they call them Whether holy water holy ashes holy palmes and such like be of the holy things of the church Whether the Iewish and Popish vestimentes fastes and holy dayes are to be obserued and a thousande such like which are all of them concerning the outward orders gouernement and ceremonies of the Church By these mens Diuinitie these and infinite such like are vnwritten and vncerten but left onely to the pleasure of the Church and Magistrate Moreouer if it please them the Princes and ciuill Magistrates may them selues be the publike ministers of the worde Sacraments and censures of the Church any that will may without a calling take vpon him to bee a publique officer in the church Women may baptise or administer the Lords supper The Jewishe Romish or Heathenish priesthood may be retayned Auricular confession may be vsed The Keyes of the kingdome of heauen may bee appropriated to the Pope of Rome or the Prelate of Canterburie or any other whom soeuer The Prelates and their Officials excommunications do binde in heauen The Apochriphall bookes and Decretall epistles are canonicall scriptures The Papes Portuis and the English booke of prayer taken out of it are the true and lawfull worship of God The Prelates and Priestes are the true and lawfull Ministers of God Orders pennaunce extreame vnction matrimonie c. are the Sacramentes of the Church Cap Surplis Cope Tippit Rotchet c. are ornamentes of the Ministerie Finally all ragges and trumperies of the Romish religion are good and lawfull if it please the Church and Magistrate For why They concerne the outward gouernement orders and ceremonies of the church And touching them say these men Christ hath not left any ordinances written certen or perpetuall but left them at the arbitrarie appointment of the Church and Magistrate Is not this straunge Diuinitie Yet they stay not there neither but as men that haue bent their tongues like bowes for lyes they feare not to adde moreouer that when the Church and Magistrate appointeth anie ordinances whether these or any other touching the outward gouernement ceremonies of the Church we are to account them to be Christes owne ordinances who hath left this libertie to the Church for to vse O shameles mouth O vnchristian hart Can any Papist or Atheist say more or can any desire a more euident proof then this that these men and assemblies thus holding professing and practizing as here them selues affirme can not in this estate by the word of God be deemed med true Christians and Churches Sixtly obserue howe yet moreouer they seeke shiftes would colour the matter pretending That the things which concerne outward gouernement and ceremonies are not of the foundation simply But this will helpe them no more then the other For first we aske are they of the foundation at all though not simply If they be then seeing they are not written not certen nor perpetuall as heere is affirmed it will followe that neither the whole foundation is written certen or perpetuall neither the Apostles were faithfuull and skilsull maister builders in the laying thereof If they be not then why is this worde simplie added as if they graunted that they were of the foundation though not simplie as they speake Secondlie wee aske whether the outwarde gouernement and ceremonies ordeyned by Christ for his church vnder the Gospell be not of the foundation asmuch as the outward gouernement and ceremonies appointed by Moses for the Church vnder the law Or if they be whether they are not as faithfully sett downe by Christ as the other were by Moses and as carefully to be obserued by vs as the other were by the Jewes Heb. 3.2.3 or rather much more inasmuch as Christ the Son is worthy more glorie and honour then Moses the seruant Thirdlie we aske what foundamentall poinctes Moses and Aaron with the rest of the Iewes ioyning with them helde that Corah Dathan Abiram and their companions held not Differing from them and erring only touching the Priesthood and Ministerie which concerned the outward orders gouernement of the Church was therefore Corah Dathan Abiram and their companies in that estate the true Jsraell of God Or were not the other truthes they helde by this meanes frustrate and of none effect
he sayth We sinned against the Third commaundement in the application of the scriptures aforesaid That is their owne common custome and lamentable sinne to breake the Third commaundement in taking the name of God in vaine not onely by falsifying and peruerting the scriptures but also by their Ministration of the Word Sacramentes and Gouernment of the Church by vertue of such offices and callings as Christ neuer appointed in his worde therevnto but were first deuised and still are reteyned by Antichrist that sonne of perdition Hitherto of his answere concerning the proofe of our Proposition To the proofe of our Assumption he “ Marke this his sounde and Scholerlike dâ—alinge in this place and afterwards answereth not a worde which yet most of all required answere if he would in deede soundlie defende their estate as he pretendeth That their profession and practise ioyneth Christ Antichrist togeather we shewed in pag. 28 c. by their Articles Canons Iniunctions Aduertisements c. published at sundry times by their present Ministerie Worship and Church-gouernement according therevnto If this be not so why bringes he not warraunt for these particulers from the Testament of Christ and so take away the proofe of our Asumption Jf this be so as by his silence he graunteth and wee are sure he cannot shew the contrarie by the Scriptures then our Assumption standeth firme and consequently in this constitution they cannot be accounted true Christians nor their Assemblies so gathered true constituted Churches H. JACOB his 2. Reply vnto the 1. Reason 1 IN this your defence of your first Reason you would first of all fasten on me a contradiction for gráunting that our Church corruptions are from Antichrist which against your Second Exception J said wee holde to be Christs owne viz. Because we hold Christ hath giuen his Church that libertie to deuise them Alas it pittieth mee to see your simplicitie or it greueth me for your malice who could not see that there I spake in the person of our whole Church and state See Pag. 12. 18. 19. and shewed what they held And here I speake as I thought my selfe This is a silly contradiction 2. Then you say Pag. 25. I dazell the peoples eyes in saying some outward orders and ceremoines are from Antichrist as if they were but a few and of small moment Therefore you are content to recken them vp full tediously God knoweth euen 91. in number numero Deus impare gaudet And what of all these will you saye therefore That whosoeuer holdeth these cannot holde Christ vnto saluation And so Mr. Cranmer and the rest of the Martirs were damned But if not Then I saye againe These some these 91. are too few and too slight and of too small momeÌ„t of them selues and of their owne nature to abolishe vs from Christ This ought you to haue proued which you neuer doe but still your speech is most false and not vnproper onely that wee ioyne Christ and Antichrist togeather As in the maimed maÌ„ before * Pag. 25. noted there is not life death ioyned togeather but liuing things and dead things are and yet the man aliue and a true man 3. Then “ 2 cor 14. c Eze. 43.8 â— King 17.33 34 40 41. you will iustify your applying the scriptures which I said were mismatched were meant against the Idolatry of the First commandment not against the Idolatry of the Second only and meerelie as our Church orders in question are Therefore these scriptures cannot inferre any abolishing from Christ by simple holding of the corruptions in our Church which they doe proue by the simple holding of those Heathenish Idolatries whereof they speake To this you reply in Foure points 1 Jf these places bee meant of Heathenish Idolatry which could neuer stand with Gods truth togeather Yet they forbid all other corruptions against the Second commaundement also That I neuer denyed to be true after a sort These places indeed doe forbid the breach of the Second coÌ„maundement but not principally directly and of purpose nor in that measure or fulnes But their immediat purpose is against the Heathenish Idolatry breaking the First commaundement So that they forbid the breach of the Second commaundemeÌ„t consequently and proportionatly but not in that full manner as they doe the First They forbid the First so as that they shew there is no communion with God whilst men ioyne in such Idolaty they simply forbid the Second but deny not al communion with God to whom soeuer erreth therein 2 To your SecoÌ„d Reply I say make much of it for my parte I neuer thought other but our church corruptions are against the Second commaundement your second scripture here applied is of Saul I. Sam. 1â— a presumptuous and wilfull offendour if you make our whole Churches so your sinne is the greater 3 Thirdlie if you meane anie of Antichristes Idolatrie and false worship and namelie this in question the outward corrupt orders and ceremonies onely and no more doeth abolish vs from Christ and that this can not stande togeather with true faith like as the Pagans idolatrie against the First commaundement can not Then I denie it vtterlie you haue no proofe in the world for it And this inwrappeth Master Cranmer Ridley c. in the same course Your excuse here pag. 29. That Cranmer Ridley c. forsooke all the corruptions they sawe This belongeth to manie Thousands in England nowe no lesse then to them yea surelie there are infinite that knowe not so much of the corruptions as those learned men did which yet are not ignoraunt of redemption by Christ c. Yea your selfe Maister Iohnson though a man of learning yea knowing our corruptions and misliking them a long time before you forsooke vs yet I thinke you stood not abolished from Christ all that while I pray bee so good to poore men as you may yea to vs nowe also aswell as to your selfe and them in those times Where you say pag. 29. That since that time we are conuicted by the scriptures If you meane some fewe that here and there you could pick out and doe sinne still speake to them threaten them throwe out your damnatorie sentence against them But smite not all whosoeuer comes neare you Beware howe you iudge least you be iudged The heart belongeth to God therefore censure not euerie mans conscience too hastilie 4 Fourthlie you would prooue in your Third Exception before noted pag. 29. That both the breach of the First commaundement and of the Second also is forbidden I haue tolde you before pag. 32 33. howe it is true and howe not Nothing at all to serue your turne That which you say pag. 30. touching your first scripture 2. Cor. 6.14 2 Cor. 6.14 c. in that sence and maner as I suide is true and not otherwise That which of your Second scripture Ezek. 43.8 pag. ibid. you say Ezek. 43. â— Who seeth not but it speaketh
present Gouernours and then doubtlesse it was lawe And though Zachary Elizabeth Symeon Anna Mary Ioseph Christ and his Apostles did not actuallie ioyne in these corruptions yet they were generall no doubt and by lawe neuer the lesse and a number of the Iewes simply vsed them yet fell not from God as †The Sixe waterpots of the Iewishe purifyings Iohn 2.6 Therefore your Replies here are most vaine and false Lastlie in pag. 37. you will not confesse your contrarietie that is to saye betweene this your Second Reason and certen wordes in your Sixt Reason But the greater is your sinne to doe euill and defende it too Here in this Reason pag. 35. you would haue this scripture Mat. 15. to be meant against such vaine worshippers that they become heereby no true Church Or els what doe you vrge it against vs But in your Sixt Reason following you say That the Iewes euen nowe when these words were applyed to them were the true worshippers of God Are not these contrarie I pray you then reconcile them Maister IOHNSONS III. Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON III. IF the whole doctrine as it is publiquely professed and practized by law in Englande be not sufficient to make a Galatian a true Christian that should with all submit vnto Circumcision Then much lesse is it able to make him a true Christian that togeather with it submitteth vnto a false Ministerie Worship and Gouernement of the Church deuised by man euen the man of sinne But the first is true Therefore also the latter The consequence of the Proposition is good because Circumcision was once the holy ordinance and appointment of God himselfe to his Church and people whereas the Ministerie worship and gouernement aforesaid neuer was so but is mans deuice in religion euen Antichrist that capitall enemie of Iesus Christ. The Assumption is proued Gal. 5.2.3.4 where the Apostle speaketh of them that helde not onely such truethes of the Gospell as are in that booke of Articles but more then those Yet if they should with all submitt vnto circumcision he sayth they were abolished from Christ Christ would prosit them nothing H. IACOB his I. Reply to the 3. Reason THis your Third Reason is from the more to the lesse negatiuelie to this effect A Galatian vsing Circumcision is a likelier Christian then one of our English holding the Hierarchy and other traditions But A Galatian is a false Christian Ergo An English professor is much more We answer We denie the Assumption Galatians were then true Christians and their Assemblies true Churches Gal. 1.2 Therefore this Reason is nought If he obiect The Apostle saith such are abolished from Christ That is in deed some amongst them as helde Moses ceremonies necessarie absolutelie to saluation as Act. 15.1 And that †Gal. 5.3.4.5 Rom. 10.3.4 iustification was by the morall workes of the law Nowe the Churches of Galatia generallie were not such but held the sauing faith sound doubtles though manie amongest them were tainted with that infection by reason of some mischeuous teachers that were crept in and too well interteyned among them Howbeit with the Church Communion was kept And therefore so with vs you ought to deale If you say we are worse Christians then those grofest Galatians It is vtterlie false proue it if you can and it must drawe in Maister Cranmer c. with vs also If you say there are manie amongst vs as bad or worse then those worst Galatians you may say it but proue it you cannot Also if it were so yet this disagraceth it destroyeth not the Church like as hath bin said of the Galatians F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 3. Reason TO this our Third Reason His First answer is That he denyeth the Assumption which is asmuch in plaine termes as if he had giuen the holy Ghost the lye who by the Apostle Paule affirmeth it Gal. 5.2 3 4. As in the proofe of the Assumption we shewed before But for the more euidence of the trueth we will set downe the proofe of the Assumption in a Sillogisme thus If a Galatian submitt to Circumcision though he hold all the truthes of the Gospell professed in England withall yet be notwithstandinge abolished from Christ and falne from grace Then is he not in this estate a true Christian. But the former is true as the Apostle testifieth Gal. 5.2 3 4. Therefore also the latter Next he answereth That the Galatians were then true Christians and their Assemblies Churches Gal. 1.3 Therefore sayeth he this reason is nought But he may not thus runne away with the matter and deceyue himselfe and his simple fauourers The question is not whether anie Galatians were true Christians or any of their Assemblies true churches For who euer doubted of that But this is the question Whether a Galatian holding all the truethes of the Gospell nowe professed in Englande and withall submit to Circumcision were in that estate a true christian Or putting the case that there were whole Assemblies consisting of such Whether those assemblies then in that case were by Gods worde to be deemed the true churches of Christ. The Apostle testifieth and saith no This man saith yea Nowe whether of these two we shall beleeue let all men iudge But what is it then that the Apostle termeth the assemblies of the Galatians true churches Gal. 1.2 This man sheweth the reason him selfe the light of the trueth is so cleare and manifest There were but some of the Galatians sayth he that were infected with this error of Circumcision True in deed say we of such onely is the suppositiō made in the case afore said But the churches of Galatia sayth he generally were not such but held the sauing faith sound which also is most true they being set in the way and order of Christ Iesus and therefore though there sprang vp some heretikes and schismatikes amongest them which is the “ 1 Cor. 11.19 Actes 20.30 lott and triall of the true churches of God in all ages yet was there not cause to breake the Communion with those assemblies but to proceed with them in the faith and order of Christ and to * Gal. 5.12 1 Cor. 5.7 11 13. cutt off and cast out such troublesome leauen from amongst thē Now this being duely weighed it is nothing for but altogeather against the hauing of communion with the assemblies of this Lande which are not set in the way and order of Iesus Christ as were those churches of Galatia but in the Apostasie and confusion of Antichrist as hath ben at large declared before in the defence of the former Reasons where also that of Maister Cranmer Ridley c. is answered H. IACOB his II. Reply to the 3. Reason TO this your Defence of your Third Reason I answer First it is too impudent a cauillation That you charge me to giue the H. Ghost the lye in denying your Assumption I meant
not your Assumption but that which I had made briefer conteyning the effect of yours This was the Assumption denyed by me But a Galatian is a false christian As he that hath but halfe an eye may see Secondly to cease needles strife I deny therefore your Proposition Though a Galatian * that is So holding it as the worst did or els this is a sophisticall Equi uocation holding circumcision cannot bee a true Christian yet an English Christian holding the Hyerarchie c. may The Reason of this denyall I gaue you then but that you would not see it Namelie because such Galatians held Iustification by the works and ceremonies of the Law Gal. 5.3.4.5 Rom. 10.3.4 Act. 15.1 Like the Papistes who by their ceremoniall and morall workes doe hold the same and so doe erre Fundamentally But our Churches and state hold not the Hyerarchie so but only as an indifferent thing in it selfe This blasphemous opinion of Circumcision maketh it infinitelie worse though once it was ordeined of God then our indifferent opinion of the Hyerarchie though in deed it were neuer but nought Thirdlie and lastlie you haue no where cleared Maister Cranmer Ridley Latimer the rest of those holy Martirs from being abolished from Christ if the Hyerarchie be simply worse then Circumcision so hold as those Galatians did hold Gal. 5.2 3 4 5. Maister IOHNSONS IIII. Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON IIII. THe doctrines of faith conteyned in that Booke alleadged would not make him a true Christian who holding them should also still executs or ioyne vnto the Ministerie of Mahomet that open Antichrist and enemie of Jesus Christ 2. Cor. 6.14 c. Therefore neither can they make him a true Christian that holding them yet doth still execute or ioyne vnto the Ministerie and worship of the man of sinne the couert Antichrist and enemie of Iesus Christ. H. IACOB his 1. Reply to the 4. Reason THis your 4. Reason is Mahomets Ministerie and Antichristes Ministerie are both bad alike But the good doctrines of our booke of Articles cannot saue a man that ioyneth also to Mahomets Ministerie Ergo the good doctrines of that booke cannot saue a man that ioyneth also to Antichristes Ministerie which thing we in England doe I deny neither the Proposition nor Assumption And yet the Argument is too bad It is a fallacie of Equiuocation as wee call it Wee must therefore distinguish Mahomets Ministerie and Antichrists Ministerie haue a doubtfull meaning If you meane the whole function and exercise of publique worship performed in Mahomets or Antichristes assemblies that is in the Turkish or Popish Churches The I graunt your whole argument is * Both are nought alike as touching abolishing vs from Christ true But that we doe so in England which comes in the conclusion Or that any Christian amongst vs thinketh so That I vtterlie deny And thus indeed that Scripture alleadged 2. Cor. 6.14 is rightly vnderstood But if you meane by Ministerie the outward manner of calling to the Ministerie som outward ceremonies vsed by Mahomet or the Pope Then I flatly and absolutely deny your Assumption and your Scripture is answered before in the First Reason For I affirme and it is manifest That such errors being ioyned with the good doctrines of that our Booke doe not destroy faith and true Christianitie As before was shewed in the Second Exception F. JOHNSON his Defence of his 4. Reason HEre the light of the trueth doeth so dazell the Answerers eyes as he freelie confesseth he can not denie any whit of our Reason And yet forsooth the Argument is too bad But why so There is hee sayth an equiuocation in it and therefore he will distinguish But First wee tell him there is no equiuocation at all in the words but they are al plain to him that hath a single eye and will vnderstand the trueth Therefore his distinction heere is idle friuolous Yet see also betweene what things he doeth distinguish Forsooth betwene the whole function and exercise of publique worship perfourmed in the Turkish or Popish Assemblies and betwene the outward maner of calling to their Ministery and the outward ceremonies vsed amongest them An absurd distinction touching the matter in hande For first who knoweth not that these latter are of the very same nature with the former Are not their outward callings and ceremonies false Anticristian accursed before God aswell as the rest of their worship and seruice Or hath God in his worde giuen any commaundement more for these then for the other Secondly who seeth not that the argument here is not of whatsoeuer thing is vsed among the Turkes and Papistes but of the Ministerie and worship which they haue deuised and executed As in particular of the publique offices of Ministerie retey ned among them of their maner of calling and entrance into them of their administration of them of their stinted imposed Liturgie their ecclesiasticall gouernement cannons proceedings c. All which in the church of England are taken out of * Reu. 17.4 5 2. Thes 2.3 4 7 8 9 10 11 12. that golden cuppe of abominations whereby Antichrist That man of sinne hath made the Nations of the earth to be drunken as may appeare by cōparing their Pontificalls Canons and constitutions togeather If this man will needes be otherwise minded then let him proue the particulars aforesaide by the Testament of Jesus Christ. Furthermore also marke here that he graunteth the doctrine of faith conteyned in their booke of Articles cannot make him a true Christian that holdinge them doth withall receiue and ioyne vnto the publike worship perfourmed in the Turkish or Popish Assemblies This he saith he graunteth as most true Wherevpon it followeth euen by his owne confession First that such thingh then may be ioyned with the doctrines of faith receiued among them as they in such estate cannot be deemed true Christians or true Churches Neither the truthes which they holde be auaylable to them Secondlie that therefore the Proposition of his First and mayne Argument is not generall but admitteth limitation so his greatest defence is of no weight as before is shewed in the beginning in our answere to that Proposition Thirdlie that his answere to our Seconde Exception before alleadged is of no force howsoeuer heere and euery where he referre vs to it For which also we referre the Reader to that which is saide in that place in defence of the Exception aforesaid As also for the allegation of 2 Cor. 6.14 vnto that which is said concerning it in defence of our First Reason before alleadged H. IACOB his 2. Reply to the 4. Reason IN this your defence of your 4. Reason you renewe your Sophistrie And that which is worse you wil not be tolde of it Is it because of the goodnes of your Reason that I denie no Proposition Nay it is for the badnes of it because all is nought all
deceiptfull and sophisticall Therefore I must distinguish euen so still as I did before and my distinction is good cleerelie discouering all your fraude What say you against it First you say Are not their outward callings and ceremonies false Antichristian and accursed aswell as the rest of their worship seruice Aswell Forsooth I trow not that is not as much Their inwarde impietie and false faith against Christ the onely all-sufficient Sauiour is farre more accursed and diuelish then their bare outward orders separated from the rest of their faith But whosoeuer ioyneth simply and indifferently either to Thukish or Popish Assemblies doeth ioyne with their whole and worst abominations which haue no communion or coherence with Christ in deede Neither can we also if we ioyne therein The case is not like when we reteyne and vse some of their outwarde orders in our Assemblies And here you note that I graunt Some thinge may be ioyned vnto our Christian faith in England which would vtterly destroy it Most true And here I note your most vncristian and false dealing with me in affirming otherwise of me As I haue expressed in the beginning about the taking of my First maine Proposition there Which see further in pag. 4. Lastlie my reference to the answere of your First Reason is a fit and full Refutation of you here Neither is your Defence any thing against it as there appeareth Also this your Reason includeth Maister Cranmer Ridley c. to be no true Christians neither as hath bene often alleadged Maister IOHNSONS V. Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON V. AS the golden vessels taken out of the Lords house and had vsed in Babilon of the Caldeans did not therefore make the Babilonians true Iewes touching the faith Nor their banquets wherin they vsed them to be anie of the Lords Feastes spoken of Leuit. 23. but they still remayned Babilonish people and banquets notwithstanding So the truthes of the Gospell vessels as it were of the Lords house holden and receyued in the spirituall Babilon whereof that other was a type doe not make the people so standing to be true Christians Neither their Ministery and constitution to be Christes appoincted in his Testament But they still remaine the people Ministery and constitution of Babilon notwithstanding See the proofes hereof in Dan. 5.1 2 3 4. compared with Prou. 9.17 18. and Reuel 17.4 5. and 18.4 with 14.8 9 10.11 H. JACOB his 1. Replie to the 5. Reason Your Reason is this THe materiall vessells of Ierusalem were of the like power and vertue to sanctifie the Heathen Babilonians As the holy christian doctrines in that Booke are to sanctifie vs that holde togeather with them some Popish ceremonies and orders as indifferent things But those vessells were not sufficient to sanctifie those Babilonians Ergo Neither these truthes of the Gospell can sanctifie vs. An absurd comparison The Proposition is most false and so the scriptures quoted Dau. 5.1 2 3 4. compared with Pro. 9.17 18. Rom. 17.4 5. and 18.4 with 14.8 9 10 11. are as idely and vainely applied See the Answere to the allegations in the First Reason before F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 5. Reason THis he sayth is an absurd comparison So belike if his graue iudgment might goe for good payment the manifold allusions which in describing the spirituall Babilon the Spirit of God “ Reu. 17.18 and 15. compared with Iere. 50.51 Cap. Isay 13. 14. and 21. 47. maketh to-the materiall Babilō of the Caldeans were to bee accompted absurd allusions and comparisons As also the often alluding and likening togeather the * Isa 66.20.21 Zach. 14.20.21 1 Cor. 5.7.8 and 10.2 3 4. Col. 2.1.12 He. 13.15 16.1 Pet. 3.20.21 Reu. 15.3 and 21.20 c. holy things of the Lawe with the holy thinges of the Gospell and the “ 2. Tim. 3.8.9.1 Cor. 10.6 c. Heb. 12 16.17 Iude vers 11. Reu. 2.14.20 and 20.8 9. transgressions then with the transgressions now which are so often vsed in the Scripture Are in his account absurd allusions and similitudes Secondlie he sayth the Proposition is most false Which we answer is most true and most plainely taught and declared in the fift of Daniels prophesie vers 1 2 3 4. and Leuit. 23. as we alleadged before when we first propounded the reason Wherevnto we yet haue receyued no aunswere So soundly he defendeth his cause Thirdly he saith The scriptures quoted Dan. 5.1 2 3 4. compared with Pro. 9.17 18. Reuel 17.4 5 18 4. and 14 8 9 10 11. are idely and vainely applyed But howe shewes he this to be so as he saith Verie profondlie I warrant you For he bids vs see the answere to the allegations in the First Reason And this is all the proofe he bringes Well wee haue seene his answere to the allegations there and finde First that those scriptures here alleadged are not so much as once mencioned there Secondlie that his answere to the allegations there set downe is most friuoulous and of no weight but against him selfe as there we haue declared Lastlie in his propounding of our Reason otherwise then we had done which in deede is a thing verie ordinarie though nothing commendable in them it seemeth that being not able to answer anie parte of our Reason as we had set it downe yet he thought to helpe him self by this exception that the Materiall vessells of Ierusalem were not of the like power and vertue to sanctifie the Heathen Babilonians as the true doctrines receyued among the spirituall Babilonians are to sanctifie them But hee shall finde if he will consider and compare togeather the Scriptures heere alleadged that the golden vessells being holy to the Lorde and taken out of his Temple did asmuch sanctifie the Caldean Babilonians and their Feastes As the holy doctrines vessels as it were of the Lordes Temple had among the spirituall Babilonians doe sanctifie them and their constitution That is neither of their Estates and Assemblies are sanctified thereby at all For saith not the Lorde “ Eze. 43.8 That the setting of mens postes and thresholds howe much more of Babilons enormities by his Postes Thresholdes that is by his truthes and ordinances is so farre from sanctifying as it defileth his holy Name yea is abomination in his fight and setteth a wall betweene him and them that doe it Saith not the scripture also †Prou. 9.17 18. 20.17 that the true doctrines in the false church are amonge them as stollen waters and hid bread which though they be sweete pleasaunt yet there also is the mouth filled with grauell and the guestes of those feastes and assemblies are so farre frō being sanctified by those truthes in that estate as they are before God euen dead men and in the deapth of hell To conclude this poinct hath not an Angell from heauen proclaimed it with a loude voice that “ Reu. 18 1 2
hearsay and yet not faithfully beleeue in the Messias You cannot bee ignorant that there is a great difference betweene an obscure rumor which some of them might receiue from their neighbour Iewes and yet not haue it constantly beleeued and held publiquely among them as their comon faith If thus the Samaritans beleeued the comming of Messiah they are in no coÌ„parison with vs we holde our most holy faith and doctrine by the worde professedly as the publique ordinance of our Churchs sheweth But furder let it be howsoeuer they held the comming of Messiah yet I answered The Samaritans ioyned Heathenish Idols with the God of Israell which wholly destroyed the trueth in them And this is the very truth indeed howsoeuer you will not yeld it For you say that they broke not the First commaundement they worshipped not the Jdols them selues nor sacrifised to theÌ„ c. This is proued apparantly false in the Text 2. Kings 17.29 30 31. 2. King 17. Enery nation made their Gods and put them in the houses of the high places which the Samaritans had made euery nation in their Citties wherein they dwelt For the men of Babel made Succoth-Benoth and the men of Cuth made Nergall and the men of Hamath made Ashima And the Auims made Nibhaz and Tartak and the Sepharuims burnt their children in the fyer to Adramelch Anammelech the Gods of Sepharuim Therfore they worshipped the Idols of the Heathen and sacrifised to them and accoumpted them to be Gods aswell as the God of Israell And so broke the First commandement and therefore they touch not vs in this question As the like I haue truely and well derlared before “ pag. 34. against your First Reason â—â— pag. 51. Your proofes that the Samaritans brake not the Firste commandment are nothing 1 That of Ezra 4.1.2 that they sought the Lord as the Jewes did c was their conterfet hypocrisie and false brag yea their diuelish conspiracie against the worship of the Iewes God Doe you beleeue their wordes here in this place that they are true indeed I graunt as I noted before out of 2. Kings 17. they had a mixed worship some thing of the Iewes God but very much and as by that Chapter seemeth most of the Heathens Gods 2. Secondly Pag. 51. where you say out of Iohn 4. That it is manifest there was no contention betweene the Jewes and the Samaritans whether * A bolde assertion only the true God was to be worshipped There appeareth no word of any such thing Our Sauiour indeed noteth vers 21. One difference betwene them that was but about the place of worshipping on occasion of the womans wordes But that there was no difference betwene them in the obseruing of the First Commandement he saith not The contrarie you saw before proued in 2. King 17.30.31.3 Thirdly you vrge my coÌ„fession That the Isralites vnder Ieroboam serued not Pagan Jdols but the true God after their owne deuices And you would proue it too by 2 King 17.28 32 33. Seeing the Samaritans worshipped after the manner of the nations that dwelt there before they came who were the Tenne tribes that Ieroboam drew away I aunswere First it is great shame that you make this my confession when I expresly bring it in as your Obiection whervnto I set mine answer Pag. 49. that the Idolatry vnder Ieroboam seemeth farre grosser and filthier then the worst is with vs which I make manifest by the scripture not only 1. King 12.21 where Ieroboam erected visible Idols and very filthy ones euen calues and brute beastes which if they were but to worship God by yet who would compare our Ecclesiasticall orders to them which * Viz. the generall state we professe are but indifferent thinges for order and comelinesse only Further I alleadged 2. Chro. 11.15 Where Ieroboam is said to appoinct Priestes for the high places for Deuils and for the Calues that he made So I confesse little to your aduantage Secondly if the Samaritans worshipped as they did indeed like the Tenne tribes before them then you are cleane gone For though IeroboaÌ„ at the First had not ioyned in the Heathenish Idolatry Yet Ahab did 1. King 16.32 33. and his Sonne Ahaziah had further Baalzebub the God of Ekron Yea the Isralites as they of Ierusalem afterwardes were Idolaters much a like 2. King 17.19 But wee read of the Iewes vnder Ahas 2 Chr. 28.23 and Manasses and Amon. 2 King 21. and 23.4 5 10 11.12 13. That they vsed the very Pagans Idolatrie Yea it is expressed 2. King 17.8 11 16 17. That these Tenne Tribes vsed the very same Therefore the Samaritans doing as these Isralites did Pag. 54. held such grosse idolatry as could by no meanes stand with the true seruing of God Finally as before is noted 2. King 17.29 30 31. doeth expresse this grosse Heathenish idolatrie of the Samaritans Surely it appeareth more grosse and worse then the Isralites before them And therefore you are greatly deceiued both here in the defence of your First Reason before Pag. 30. where you expreslie mainteine these Samaritans to holde no Heathenish Jdolatrie but onely to cleaue to the God of Jsraell in an outwarde deuised corrupt worship They acknowledged him I graunt but him only I denie as hath ben proued Further you affirme in your defence of your First Reason Pag. 30. That they professed the written lawe to be the rule both for their inward beliefe and outward manner of worship Where you would proue it For that the Apostate Israelites did so of whom Ezeck speaketh Zeck 43.8 First this followeth not because the Heathenish Samaritans were further from sinceritie then the naturall Israelites commonly Secondly Israell it selfe in this wretched Apostasie helde not the written law for their rule seeing professedlie they left this rule and did constantlie worship Calues and sacrifized at Dan and Bethel Thirdly Ezekiell sheweth euen there cap. 43.7.8 they kept not this rule but departed therefrom and that as appeareth professedly and constantly Which most of all is seene in Ahab Ahaziah Ahas Pag. 34. 55. Manasses and Amon as is before noted Wherfore in these your sayings Maister Iohnson you are intollerably too blame and foully deceaued As for example They professed that which they did in 2. Kinges 17.29 30 31. was that after the rule of the written Lawe Next you oppugne me for that I alleadged our Assemblies throughout England Pag. 52. haue not their consciences conuicted in the Hyerarchy and ceremonies you say if this were so is it any iust defence of your ministery worship estate c. I tell you it is a iust defence for our ministerie worship and estate to be as touching the substance and foundation of Christianitie sound and acceptable to God Refute it if you can I knowe it is no iust defence of our whole Ministery estate manner of worship which I neuer intended much lesse professed to
papistes religion which make them in their estate to be departers frō the faith and consequentlie false christians and false Churches If there be as he can not denie it then of what weight is his answer to defende the present constitution of these people and assemblies for whom he pleadeth seeing there are diuers other thinges besides these that doe and may cause that they may not be deemed true Christiās or true Churches in that estate Many a Seruetus Sabellius Arius the Anabaptistes c. heretikes heretofore haue and at this day doe reiect these three aforesaid are they therfore in their estate to be accounted true Christians or true Churches So then his manner of reasoning heere for their defence is as if the Adulterers to iustifie their course of life should alleadge thus We are noe 1. Blaspemers 2. no Persecutors 3. No Murtherers as such and such are therefore we departe not from the way of life but our estate and course of life is good and such as may be continued in But the scripture teacheth otherwise sayinge b Iam. 2.10.11 Whosoeuer shall keepe the whole Lawe and yet fayleth in one poincte is guiltie of all For he that sayed Thou shalt not commit adulterie saied also Thou shalt not kill Nowe though thou doest no adultery yet if thou killest thou art a transgressour of the Lawe and contrariwise So that what soeuer sinnes the Adulterer be farre from yet as c Pro. 6.32 Salomon saith Hee that committeth adulterie with a woman fayleth in heart and destroyeth his owne soule The same is the case of all spirituall Adulterers likewise who what so euer sinnes they be farre from yet in the worship of God runne a d Num. 15.39 whoring after their owne inuentions e Pro. 5.20 embracing the bosomes of strange women f Reuel 17.4 drinking of their cup of fornications Thirdly let him shewe vs sufficient warrant frō the scriptures why setting these three aside the other popish Hyerarchie and abominations receyued amongst them can not bee iudged to make them in such estate departers from the faith and therfore false Christians and false Churches whatsoeuer truthes they should hold beside If he cannot as who seeth not that it can not be donne then by this also it appeareth that his answer◠here is of no force for defence of their estate but against it as we haue declared before g Num. 16.12 c. Corah Dathan Abyram and their partakers were farre from the Abominations of the Heathen they helde also al the poinctes of faith that Moses and Aaron held differing onely from them and departing only from the faith in a matter concerning the Priesthood whereof also they h verse the. 3. shewed their reasons why they were so perswaded yet will he not denie we suppose but that they departed from the faith and were in this estate neither to be accounted true Israelits nor their assemblies true Churches with which communion might be kept If he should the scripture it selfe would witnesse against him herein Numb 16.26 Nowe compare case with case and tyme with tyme and the estate of these people and Assemblies of England wil bee found farre more grieuous as we haue already shewed both in the defence of our Second Exception before and in i In the answer to Master Hildersam and in the 9. Reasons concerning not hearing the Ministers of these assembties other Treatises to which yet we haue receiued no answer To conclude this poinct if their Abominations in England were farre fewer then they are yet so longe as they reteyne that poysonfull leauen of their Hyerarchie and worship wee must tell them as the Scripture saith and experience teacheth That “ 2. Kings 4.39.40 a litle poyson bringeth death vnto the whole pot of pottage A * 1. Cor. 5.6 litle leauen leaueneth the whole lump And a “ Eccle. 10.1 few dead flyes cause the oynctment of the Apothecarie to stinke and putrifie Although indeed their abominations are not a few but swarme in aboundance amongst them some whereof wee haue rehearsed before in the defence of our First Reason where the Reader may take a view of them Now in the next place fearing belike that the euidence of the scripture we alleadged could not by these shiftes of his be auoyded but that still the reason deducted from thence stood strong against them as we haue shewed it doeth therefore he would haue vs now passe by them and not apply this scripture to them Nota. or their mother Church of Rome but vnderstand it of Martion the heretike and Tatianus of whom he saith that they absolutelie condemning mariage and certen meates might indeed euen therin wholie fall from the faith somewhat like to Baalam Iudas and those Apostate Israelites lately spoken of namely for hauing their consciences conuicted and seared with an whote iron And thus sayth he are they in no comparison with them of England Well But first if his former answer were of any weight it might be asked why then the followers of Martion and Tatianus might not likewise haue defended them thus said that their departure from the faith was but in some poincts not wholy from all Secondly we answer that if this scripture was verified as he graunteth in Martion and Tatianus for their condemning of mariage and meates then we must needes also thinke it verified in the Romishe whoore and her apostate children whiche are falne into the verie sinnes that are heere mentioned Teh Apostle mentioneth Martion and Tatianus no more then he doeth the whoorish Babilon and the children of her Fornication but comprehendeth heere all such who so euer they be as shall fall into this Apostasie Nowe moreouer if the “ 1. Tim. 4.1 2 3. wordes of this scripture be duely weighed either other scriptures or the estate of the Romish Harlott and her children compared therewith it wil be founde as liuely to describe these as either Martion or any other that euer were in the world First when the Apostle sayeth that this shal be in the latter tymes who seeth not that it doeth most directly poinct at the Romish whoore though we doubt not but Martion also and Tatianus which liued twelue hundreth yeares since or thereabouts may also be comprehended therein Secondly when it is saide they shall departe from the faith thereby signifying that once they held the faith howe plaine is this of the Romish harlot which in the “ Rom. 1.7 Apostles time was the beloued spouse of God and since is falne into Apostacy and become the Mother of whoredomes and abominations of the earth as the * 2. Thes 2.3 and Reu. 17.1 2 3 4 5. scriptures in other places witnesseth Thirdly whē it is said they shall giue heede to spirits of errour and doctrines of Deuils how fitly agreeth this to the Romish Babilon which as the scripture els “ Reu. 18.2 where testifieth is become the habitation of Deuils
in the mouthes of his weakest seruantes except they haue authoritie from earthlie Princes Which doctrine is against the Kinglie power of Christ and these scriptures Mat 28.18 Actes 3.23 1 Cor. 1. 27. Psal 2.6 9 10 12. Esai 9.6 7. Zach. 4.6 and 6.12.23 Dan. 2.44 and 7.27 and 9.25 Mich. 5.7 Mat. 28.20 1 Cor. 14.27 with 1 Thes 4.8 Phil. 2.6 12. 1 Tim. 6.13 14.15 Rene. 1.5 and 14.12 and 17.14 19 16. and 20.4 3 That the true visible Church of Christ is not a separated companie of righteouse men and women from the Jdolaters and open wicked of the world but may consist of all sortes of people good bad Which doctrine is contrarie to the paterne of Christs Church throughout all the scriptures Gen. 4.26 with 6.2 Exod. 4.22 23. Leuit. 10.10 and 20.24 25 26 Psal 24.3 4. Ezra 6.21 2 Chron. 11.13 16. Nehem. 10.28 Eze. 22.26 with 44.23 Zeph. 3.4 Mat. 3.10 12. Act. 2.40 41 42. and 19.9 Rom. 12.1 8. 2 Cor. 6.17 18. 1 Pet. 2.9 10. Reu. 14.9 12. and 18.4 and 21.27 and 22.14 15. c. 4 That they may mainteyne this error of their confused order and mixture of all sortes of persons togeather they peruert the Parable of the tares Mat. 13.24 teaching that all are the Church Which doctrine is against the trueth of the scriptures yea against our Sauiours owne interpretation in the 38. verse who teacheth that by the field is meant not the Church but the world in which his Church is milatāt And as therin there is the good seede the righteous the Children of the Kingdome So there are also tares hipocrites the childrē of the wicked who as they are often espied in this life by the righteous seruauntes of God so shall they in that great day be perfectlie seuered from the godly by the Angels of God verse 38.43 This their doctrine also is against the heauenlie orders mentioned Matt. 18.8 9 15 16 17. 1 Corint 1.26.29 Actes 2.40.41 47. and 5.26 27 28. and 19 9. and 5.4 7. 2 Cor. 6.17 18. Leuit. 18.29 1 Tim. 6.5 2 Iohn verse 6.11 Reuel 2. and 3. and 14.9.12 and 18.4 and 20.4 5 That the people may tollerate and ioyne with open iniquitie in the Church vntill by the Magistrate it be redressed which doctrine is contrary to these riptures 2 Cor. 10.4 5. Mat. 28.21 Acts. 2.40 3.23 and 4.19 and 9.26 and 19.9 1 Tim. 5.22 Deu. 5.32 6 That the guiftes of interpretation and application of the Scriptures are a sufficient and lawfull calling to the ministerie c. Which doctrine is both false and Anabaptisticall contrarie to the scriptures Heb. 5.4 Rom 12.6 7 8. Leuit. 22.25 Ezek. 44.8 9 c. Num. 1.51 and 3.10 38 and 16.40 and 18.2 3 4. Act. 1.20.26 and 14.23 and 13.2.3 7 That the Church may yeelde obedience vnto other lawes cannons and traditions officers and offices then God hath prescribed in his Conenant Which doctrine is contrarie to Gen. 49.10 Mal. 6.24 Iohn 10 4 5. Ren. 14.4 and 22 18 19. Heb. 3 1 c 8 That the Church may read other mens wordes vppon a booke and offer them vp to God as their owne prayers and sacrifices in the publique Assemblies Which doctrine is contrarie to the scriptures Esai 29.13 14. Rom. 8.26 1 Cor. 14.15 Mat. 6.6.9 and 15.9 Mar. 7.7 Ephe. 4.7 8. 1 Pet. 2.5 9 That it is lawfull to ioyne with the Ministerie of dumb and Jdoll Priests and to receiue the Sacramentes at their handes Which doctrine is contrarie to Mal. 15.14 and 7.19 and 24.24 25. Iohn 10.1.5 Num. 16 5 9 24 26 39 40 c. 1 Tim 6.5.2 Iohn verse 6.11 10 That it is lawfull for a Minister of Christ to cease preaching forsake his flock at the Commaundement of a Lord Bishop Which doctrine is contrarie to 1 Cor. 9.16 Esay 62.4 6 7. Ier. 48.10 Zach. 11.17 Iohn 10.11 12 13. Actes 4.18 19 20 and 5.29 Amos 7.12 13 14 15. 2 Tim. 4.2 11 That the Church of Christ hath not alwayes power to binde and loose to receiue in and to cast out by the Keyes of the Kingdome Which doctrine is contrarie to Mat. 18.17 18. Psal 149.9 1 Cor. 5.4 5.12 Num. 5 2 3. 12 That it is lawfull for the people of God to heare notorious false prophetes in their Ministerie Which doctrine is contrarie to Deut. 18.15 Mat. 17.5 and 7.15.2 John verse 10.11 1 Cor. 10.18 Gala. 1 8 9. Reuel 14 9 10 11. and 18.4 John 10.96 13 That it is the Church and house of God the body and kingdome of Christ where he reigneth not by his own Ordinances Officers but the highest Ecclesiasticall authoritie is in the handes of strange Lordes and Antichristian Prelates who also gouerne by Romishe Cannons and not according to the lawes of Christes Testament Which doctrine and practise is condemned by Luke 19.14 27. Iohn 15.14 Rom. 6.16 Luke 22.25 26. 1 Pet. 3.2 Thes 2 3.4 Iohn 3.35.36 Reuel 9.3 and 14.9.10.11 and 19.14.15 14 That there may be a prescript Leiturgie and sett fourme of seruice in the Church framed by man which doctrine is contrarie to Deut. 5.8 Esai 29.13 14. Mat. 15.9 and 7.6.7 Gal. 3.15 Iohn 4.24 Rom. 8.26.27 Ephe. 4.7.8 15 That an Antichristian Prelate notwithstanding his dignitie as it is called spirituall may be a Ciuill Magistrate and obeyed of the people as their lawfull gouernour Which doctrine is contrarie to Rom. 13.1 c. Mat. 20.25 26. Mar. 10.42 43. Luke 22.25 26. Reuel 14.9 10 11. and 17.18 16 That men may giue the titles of Christ Jesus vnto these sonnes of men and his mortall enemies to call them their Arch and Lord Bishops Reuerend Fathers c. Which doctrine is contrarie to Mat. 23 8 9 10. Esai 42.8 and 48.11 Pro. 17.15 and 24.24 Esai 5.20 2 Cor. 6.14.17 17 That it is lawfull for a Minister of Christ to be mainteyned in his ministerie by the goods of wicked and vnbeleeuers by Iewish and Popishe tythes and offeringes Which doctrine is contrarie to Prou. 27.26 27. 1 Cor. 9.13 14. Phil. 4.10.18 Gal. 6.6 Rom. 15.27 Heb. 7.12 These are the 17 poinctes which were mentioned before in the proofe of this reason which the aduersarie hath left altogeather vnanswered as he hath done also their owne Cannons Articles and Iniunctions which are to be seene in their printed bookes And thus is he driuen againe againe whether he will or not to yeeld vs the cause That which he addeth in the next place of their not wholy denying the trueth nor fundamentally nor obstinately peruerslie and desperatlie any parte thereof is answered before in the defence of our second Exception and of our sixt and seauenth Reasons Nowe when he next saith That they are not herein like those Iewes Act. 19.9 whom Paule separated from which he did not from all other Iewes Actes 13.14 and 16 3 and 21 23 24 26. and 3.1 Firste wee aske What if they be not in all respectes like vnto those
Christ be not a company of people called and separated out from the world by the worde of God and ioyned togeather in fellowship of the Gospell by voluntary profession of the faith and obedince of Christ And whether the present ecclesiasticall assemblies of this Land be such or no. 5 Whether the Sacraments beeing seales of the righteousnes which is by faith may be deliuered to any other then to the faithfull and their seed or in any other ministery and manner then is appoincted by Iesus Christ the Apostle and high Priest of our profession And whether they bee not otherwise administred in the Cathedrall and parishionall assemblies of England at this day 6 Whether their booke of Common prayer with the Feastes Fasts and Holy dayes stinted prayers and Leiturgy prescribed therein and vsed in these assemblies be the true worship of God commaunded in his word or the deuise or inuention of man for Gods worship and seruice 7 Whether all people and Churches without exception bee not bound in Religion only to receiue and submit vnto that ministerie worship and order which Christ as Lord and King hath giuen and appoyncted to his Church Or whether in Religion any may receiue or ioyne vnto another ministery worship and order deuised by man for the seruice of God And consequently whether they which ioyne to the present ecclesiasticall ministerie worship and order of these cathedrall and parishionall assemblies can bee assured by the word of God that they ioyne vnto the former appoincted by Christ and not to the latter deuised by man euen the man of sinne for the worship and seruice of God Vnto these questions and the particulers thereof for the causes aforesaid we desire their direct answer with proofes of their answers from the scriptures according to which word if they speake not as wee said before so we say againe with the “ Esa 8.20 Prophet Esay It is because there is no light in them And now to conclude whereas this man being not able to answer our Reasons as hath bene declared yet would in the ende of his writting fasten vpon vs some strange passion yea and meere desperatnes for separating from them and answering of them as we haue done We leaue it the godly and discrete Reader to iudge by that which hath bene said on both parts whether it bee not themselues which are taken with a strange passion and driuen there unto by meere desperatnes when as to mainteyne their estate they will haue the scriptures to fall as hath bene * See the answer to our second Exceptiō and 7. Reason c. seene in their answeres before yea and exalt the Church and Magistrate aboue Christ himselfe euen flesh and blood aboue God blessed for euer But for this and oll their vnrighteous dealing against the truth and people of God we leaue them to the Lord who searcheth the hearts tryeth the raynes euen to giue euery man according to his wayes and according to the frute of his workes That is to them that by continuance in weldoing seeke glorie and honor and immortalitie eternall life But vnto them that are contentious and disobey the trueth and obey vnrighteousnes indignation and wrath Jer. 17.10 with Rom. 2.6 7 8. H. IACOB his 2. Reply to the 9. Reason IN this your defence of the last Reason you mislike that I say it is a fallacy and you say I shew none Marke what I say Euery one of your Reasons I say euery one is a very proper fallacy and an artificiall parte of Sophisterie as by my seuerall answers to them may appeare Your First Reason is called in the scholes Fallacia ab co quod est secandum quid ad simpliciter prouing a thing to be simply by that which is but after a sort The Second is the very same The Thirde Fallacia aequinocationis A fallacie of Ambiguity The Fourth is the very same The Fift is petitio principij a begging of the question The Sixth the very same fallacie that was in the First and Second Reasons The Seauenth Eight and Ninth haue all the Fallacy of Equiuocation and if you will the same with that in your First Second and Sixt Reasons also Further where you say that here I graunt you the cause it is very absurd The Apostle 1 Tim. 6.3 4 5. saying separate frō such hath a two fould sence Either such as teach otherwise then the trueth fundamentally and then separate wholly Or not fundamentally but erring only in poincts lesse then the foundation and theise diuersely also Either presumptuously obstinately and of a desparate conscience and then if that apeate separate from such wholly Or els erring in simplicitie and of ouersight and former preiudice from such separate not wholly but only from the very error or errors in no wise from their Christian communion and societie seeing theise are true Christians Seing therefore our corruptions of the Praelacie and Ceremonies be of these latter sort which thing hetherto you haue not nor cannot ouerthrowe and withall you must vtterly ouerthrowe Maist Cranmer and the rest of the Martirs their Christianitie likewise Therefore wee in England by the grace of God are still true Christians and you ought so to acknowledge vs as you will answer vnto God All which you may doe and yet touch no parte of our Ecclesiasticall corruptions at all to giue allowance vnto them And in all this there is no contradiction with my selfe it is but your distempered conceipt that seemeth contrarie Neither is our absolute departure from the Papists hereby anie whit impeached Wee haue iustlie forsaken them cleane because by their very profession doctrine wee cannot esteeme them true Christians neither in case of saluation while they so remaine but indeed very Antichristes as the scripture proueth Which thing also if you say of vs you say falslie it is our present question and you doe not proue it nor euer can doe As for your 17. poincts of false doctrine which you most falsly lay to our chardge what haue I to doe with them I list not to meddle at this prsent but with that which wee haue in hand namely to iustifie that our publike booke of Articles of Religion so farre forth as that it erreth not fundamentally As it doth not conteyneth sufficient to make a true Christian Against the which hetherto you haue brought nothing worth the hearing as we haue seene After you would proue vs to be like those Iewes Act. 19.9 whom Paul separated from But without all good reason They were not so many but they were casely certified of the truth that Paul preached but how infinitly many moe are there in this land that know nothing of this controuersie 2. Secondly Paul was better able to conuince them by the scriptures and did more effectually and apparantly then you doe or can our whole Realme 3. Thirdly how many learned are there in this lande that haue many probable and seeming reasons and alleadge them publish
them for the Praelacie against you and are vnanswered And yet will you say they are cōuicted and those infinite others depending on them I say conuicted aswell as those Iewes What if these speake euill of that which you hold for truth but they hold to be errors and schisme Are they all yea all the Land therefore abolished from Christ Might not all this at least be said of the whole estate of the Iewes in Christes time and after aswell yet they ceased not to bee Churches why then are you so partiall against vs Lastly you would shew Reasons why the Apostles wholy separated not from the Iewes Synagogues after Christ Act. 13.14 c. Which you will in no wise haue to serue vs. But alas for all your Exceptions against vs you haue neuer a reason but one and that is petitio principij That wee were neuer separated from the world nor set in the way order of Christ but in the confusion and defection of Antichrist whose Ministerie c. were neuer the ordinances of God c. This is but crauing the whole question And I haue refuted these quarelles in a short writing hereafter following about the comparison of the Ministerie with Mariage which yet you haue no leysure to answer this whole three yeares togeather and vpwarde And further you doe not shew any vtter and absolitte separation from the whole Church of the Iewes a great while after Christ but the contrarie is seene Act. 21.23 24 26. though from some one or two synagogues they separated after full experience of ther obstinate and malitious resistance of the truth which we deny not Touching the Conclusion IN the conclusion of my former Replie to proue your vtter separation from vs a Paradox First I alleadged all the reformed Churches For who knoweth not but they all hold Communion with vs as Churches of God yet you dare either deny this or vtterlie peruert it Yow tell vs of your Answers to Maister Cartwright and Maister Hildersham that are vnanswered If they by like to this your answer here verely they doe wisest in yeelding silence to such friuolus and wandring wordes Secondly I alleadged your selues to haue acknowledged heretofore That our publique doctrine allowed would and did make many of vs true Christians You too shamefully deny it And say you are for witnessing against it imprisoned banished c. Whereto I answere that if for these things you are troubled I know none can pittie you And because you say none of you euer acknowledged it I will therefore repeat your owne wordes Mr. BARROW in his last answer in writing to Mr. Gifford intituled A few obseruations to the reader of Mr. Giff last Reply Sect. 4. saith thus The next calumniations whereby Mr Gifford indeuoreth to bring vs into hatred with the whole Lande is That we condemne all the persons both men and women of England which are not of our minde and pluck them vp as tares wherein me thinkes he doeth vs open wrong if not against his owne cōscience yet against our expresse writings euery where c. Haue we not commended the faith of the Englishe Martirs deemed them saued notwithstanding the false offices and great corruptions in the worship they exercised not doubting but the mercy of God through their syncere faith to Iesus Christ extended and superabonnded aboue all their sinnes seene and vnseene And what nowe should let that we should not haue the same hope where the same pretious faith in synceritie simplicitie is found So that they neither neglect to search out the trueth nor despise the trueth when they see it c. Afterwards in the same Section The faithfull seruants of Christ denying the whole constitution and gouernment of this Church of England may iustlie deny the people whilest they remayne in that constitution to bee members of a true constituted Church yet hereby not condemne them with any such peremptory sentence as Maister Gifford suggesteth to cut them of from Gods election Nota. From Christ or from Christ Mr. PENRIE in his confession of faith published in writing a litle before his death saith thus The trueth of doctrine touching the holy Trinitie touching the Natures and Offices of Christe Justifying faith Sacramentes Eternall life and the rest established by her Maisties Lawes and professed by her selfe their Honors and such as haue knowledge in the Assemblies of this lande J acknowledge from my heart to be such as if J mainteyned not the vnitie and helde not the communion of the same doctrine with them in these poinctes J could not possibly be saued For out of the Communion of the true profession which her Maiestie hath established in these and the like truthes there is no hope of saluation left But ioyne notwithding with the publique worship in the assemblies of this Land I dare not for the former causes J doe moreouer willingly confesse That many both of the Teachers also of the Professors within these Parish assemblies haue so embraced this trueth of doctrine established and professed in this Land as the Lord of his infinite goodnes hath graūted thē the fauour to shew outwardly many tokens whereby in regard of the Lordes election I professe before men and Angells that I iudge them to be members of that body whereof the Sonne of God Christ Iesus is the head Onely herein the Lord be mercifull vnto them as to my self in regard of my sinnes That they are not vnder that outward forme of gouernement that Christ hath left c. And in his examination before Maister Fanshaw lately published by your selues in print he confesseth the Churches of England to be the true Churches of Christ. And what say you Maister Iohnson Haue you not affirmed this thing your selfe to me and to Maister Philips namely touching your owne selfe when you were of vs That then you doubted not but you were a true regenerate Christian. By vertue of what doctrine By extraordinarie reuelation Nay but by our publique doctrine of our Church when you stoode and continued a publique Minister of the same If you beleued so of your selfe and that truely what letteth but you may beleeue the like of many Thousands nowe Further where you say my applying of the Martirs is answered before Let the Reader iudge You shewe here that some of them misliked the Hyerarchie But it maketh stronger against you seeing for all that they them selues refused not to communicate and partake with them then as true Christians as Hoper Bale Bradford c. After where you say though the reformed Churches your selues and the Martirs haue thought otherwise then you nowe doe yet all this is no sound proofe against you Yes in deed that nowe you holde a Paradox those witnesses are sufficient for that wherevnto may be added the whole Churches iudgement and practize with all the auncient learned Fathers these 1300. or 1400. yeres Chrisostom Epiphanius Naziāzen Hyerom Austen Ambrose c. They all haue thought that vnder the
light of conscience nature togeather wherewith a liuely sauing faith cannot possibly stand Now the Papists in this do departe from the faith also but that is only in some sorte or in parte because they forbid these things not absolutly but vnto some sometimes They that departe thus from the faith may bee true Christians notwithstanding yea they are certenly if they be no worse in any thing els albeit you deny it here most fondly without all sence To which end you most vnlearnedly and vngodly apply those scriptures Scriptures abused A litle leauen leueneth the lump A few dead flyes make the oyntment to stincke and a little poyson bringeth death Will you haue no tainte of euell in a Christian but it quencheth the life of God in vs needes Is it not possible your selues might hold some such errors and yet remayne true Christians notwithstanding Then if Papists were no worse but in those errors only they might be true Christians notwithstanding But Martion and Tatianus doe wholy departe from the faith not but that they beleued some truthes but in that they “ The same did Corah Da than and Abyram likewise See before in answer to the 2. Exception the a Reply presumptuously quenched the instinct of nature conscience as I haue said Here then it appeareth how wicked a sclaunder it is that you say I runne into the Papistes tents and fight with their weapons doe iump with the Remists annotations on 1. Tim. 4.1 2 3. Iudge now by this that I haue said whether I doe or no. And note that I saye that they be either Apostates or departers from the faith not onely who fall totally as you sclaunder me that I saye but also who fall fundamentally that is eyther the first way or second as I haue afore saide And so doe these grosse Heretikes whom you mention 1 Arius Seruetus Papistes c. 2. Martion Tatianus Iudas Corah Balaam the Apostate Israelites c. Thus then your questions and demaundes about the Papistes and their errors I passe by as more vayne then pertinent Onely note withall if this reason of yours were good it maketh Maister Cranmer Ridley c. to be departers from the faith no true Christians Maister IOHNSONS VIII Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON VIII IF the Apostle accoumpted them denyers of the faith and worse then infidels and consequently no true Christians who though they held other truthes of the Gospell yet prouide not for their household Then what will he accoumpt of them who though they professe some truthes of the Gospell yet are not true worshippers of God but execute or submit vnto a false ministerie worship and gouernment ecclesiasticall Which to be th' estate of the Ministerie and people of these assemblies appeareth as aforesaid But the first is true 1 Tim. 5.8 Therefore c. H. IACOB his 1. Reply to the 8. Reason THis your Eight Reason is thus much viz. Like as it is for a professor not to prouide for his houshold so is it to hold the Hierarchy c. But that is to deny the faith and to bee worse then an infidel Ergo so are we in England Those very answers to the last Reason doe fully and flatly satisfie this also Either against the Assumption namely that it is not meant simply of denying the faith nor * I meane Fundamentally as in the last Reason before I haue shewed wholy but in this poinct only Or els the propositiō as being meant of such as neglect their families against the light of their consciences and the manifest instinct of nature F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 8. Reason FOr answere of our said Eight Reason he referreth vs to those answers of his to the last Reason which he saith doth fully and flatly ' satisfie this also for the proposition and Assumption But this which he saith we haue in the defence of that Reason declared to be altogeather vntrue Therefore yet we haue receiued no answere either to that Reason or this That thus it standeth we referre the Reader for it vnto that which is said in defence of that Reason aforesaid wishing the Reader moreouer to obserue both there and here in his answer to the Reason following that the power of the truth so preuaileth against them as they cannot but graunt that they departe from and deny the faith in their ministerie worship and gouernement ecclesiasticall as appeareth in their Canons booke of Common prayer Articles Iniunctions persecutions c. All which beeing mentioned vnto them as proofes thereof in these seuerall reasons when now they should defend these particulers if they would maintaine their standing behold they are as mute as a fish therein and not that onely but in their aunswer to the next Reason following graunt vnto vs that in these things we may and ought to separate from them Which is directly to yeeld vs the cause Thus soundly they answer vs and dispute for themselues H. JACOB his 2. Reply to the 8. Reason TO this your Eight Reason and defence thereof I aunswer as before If you take the Apostle to meane such neglecters of their houshold as deny the faith not Fundamentally nor against the instinct of nature but only against conuenient Christian prouidence and no otherwise Then I deny your Assumption If the Apostle meane of such as neglect their families against the light of confcience natures instinct then I deny the Proposition This I say because the Apostle may very well meane both these but in a diuerse measure and proportion of sinne but then this concerneth not vs Euen so as I haue said to your former Reason Note also if this were a true Reason it maketh Maister Cranmer c. denyers of the faith and no true Christians also For maintenance where of you haue here not one poore word at all Touching that you say we cannot deny but graunt that wee departe from and deny the faith in our Ministerie I haue told you how in my answer to your 7. Reason Also see my Replies to your 2. Exception Maister IOHNSONS IX Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON IX THey which teach othewise and consent not to the wholsome wordes of our Lord Iesus Christ and to the doctrine which is according to godlines are by the rule of the Apostle to be separated from and therefore cannot in that case by the word of God be deemed true Christians 1. Tim. 6.3.4 5. But that so it is with the ministers and people of these assembles in regarde of their ministerie worship and Church constitution appeareth by the Seauentene poincts of false doctrine c. which are already set down and by the proofes before alleadged out of their own cannons Articles Iniunctions c. Therefore the Ministers and people of these assemblies in regard of their ministerie worship and Church constitution are by the rule of the
Apostle to be separated from neither can in that case by the word of God be deemed true Christians H. IACOB his 1. Reply to the 9. Reason THis your last Reason is Separat frō thē that teach otherwise then the truth 1 Tim. 6 3 4 5. We holding those Articles doe teach diuerse thinges in the Hyerarchie c. that be otherwise then is truth Therefore we must be separated from and consequently we are no true Christians This is a falacy also Separate from such Ergo separate wholy See my 1. and 2. Reply afore to the third Exception also the Answer to the two last Reasons of all the 7. and 8. We graunt therefore so farr forth as we hold otherwise then trueth so farr separate from vs but not any farther at all not wholly or absolutly And so the Apostle heere meaneth Wherefore briefly Because you proue vs not wholy to deny the trueth nor fundamentally nor obstinatly peruersly and desperatly any parte thereof like those Iewes Act. 19.8 whom Paul separated from which he did not from all other Iewes Act. 13.14 and 16.3 and 21.23 24 26. and 3.1 Therefore you ought not wholy to separate from vs Neither to condemne vs wholy as abolished from Christ no more then Maister Cranmer and Ridley were with their Congregations in King Edwards time And thus our Assumption in the beginning standeth firme The doctrine in the booke of Articles is sufficient to make a true Christian The contrarie whereof is such a Paradox Conclusion as hath not bene heard of till this day All reformed Churches in Europe doe and haue alwayes held otherwise Themselues * Mai. Barrow Mai. Penry Mai. Iohnson heretofore haue acknowledged and professed it The holy Martirs that liued in King Edwardes dayes and died in Queene Maries dayes must bee otherwise cut of from Christ who were true Christians by vertue of this doctrine and the practice thereof or verily not at all But now it is wonder what extreame passion hath driuen them to this deniall Surely they see that it conuinceth flatly as indeed it doth their peremptorie separation And therefore rather then they would seeme to haue erred in so mayne poinct wee cannot but thinke that meere desperatnes hath driuen them to it Neuerthelesse all this we leaue to the Lorde with the iudgment thereof who hath the hearts of all men in his hand not only to search the seacrets but also to turne and dispose them euen as it pleaseth him F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 9. Reason VNto our Nineth Reason aforesaide he answereth That it is a Fallacy separate from such Ergo separate wholy But howe shewes he any fallacie to be in our Reason Hee bids vs see his answere aboue to our third Exception also his answeres to the two last Reasons of all Well we haue seene them and finde nothing there but against him self as there hath bene shewed So this Reason then as the rest also still standes vnanswered and stronge against them And that we may not doubt but him selfe also seeth it to be so how soeuer he seemeth to pleade to the contrarie before therefore nowe he graunteth it and so yeeldes vs the cause both in expresse wordes and by not defending the 17. poinctes of false doctrine wherewith they were charged neither their owne Cannons Articles Iniunctions c. alleadged against them In expresse wordes whē he sayth they graunt that so farr foorth as they holde otherwise then trueth so farre we may and ought to separat from them Loe here what the euidence of the trueth against which they haue struggeled so longe hath now at length drawne from them The trueth is mighty and preuayleth But he addeth that we must not separate from them any further then as before not wholy or absoluteiy and so saieth he the Apostle “ 1. Tim. 3.3 here meaneth Well but let vs here knowe what this mā him self meaneth hereby If he meane that we must not for their other defectiō forsake the truthes which they holde We answere that we doe it not as him selfe knoweth and in this sence also his meaning should come nothing neare the Apostles meaning Themselues say they haue separated from the Papists yet he neither ean nor will say that they haue forsaken the “ As that ther is a God that there is three persons in the Godhead that Iesus Christ is the Sauiour of the worlde that God made heauen and earth that there shal be a resurrection of the iust and vniust truthes which the papistes held notwithstanding that they haue made separation from them But if he meane that because of the truthes which they professe therefore we should not separate from them then First he contradicteth him selfe hauing graunted that we must separate from them so far foorth as they hold otherwise then trueth Secondly he condemneth their owne practze in their separation from the Papistes notwithstanding the truthes they professe Thirdly in this sence also his meaning should come nothing neare the Apostles meaning Thus therefore it is euident both that there is no fallacie in our reason but that it is plaine and forceable against them And moreouer that he hath directly in expresse wordes yeelded vs the cause and acknowledged our separation from their assemblies ministerie worship c. And as he doeth this in expresse wordes so also he sheweth it in deed in that he leaueth without all defence as vnlawfull and to be separated from their Ministerie Worship and Gouuernement Ecclesiasticall the 17. poincts of false doctrine obiected against them and their Canons Articles Iniunctions c. mentioned both here and more particularly in the First and Second Reasons going before Which thing we wish the Reader well to obserue And because we are fallen againe into mention of the 17. poinctes of false doctrine to the end that the Reader may yet more see the deceitfulnes of his dealing and insufficiencie of all his answeres heere and before therefore it shall not bee yrke some to sett downe here before the Readers those 17. poinctes of false doctrine aforesaide specially seeing they are but short They are these as followeth Poinctes of false doctrine deliuered and spread abroad by the Writings Sermons and practise of the forward Preachers of the Parish assemblies of England with answeres to the same 1 That though the open notorious obstinate offenders be partakers of the Sacramentes yet neither the Sacramentes nor the people that ioyne with them are defiled thereby Which doctrine is contrarie to the trueth of God in these scriptures 1 Cor. 10 17. Hag. 2.14 15. 1 Cor. 5.6 and 10.28 2 Cor. 6.15 18. Gal. 5.9 Mat. 18.8 9 15 16 17 18 19. Exod. 12.43 Leuit. 15.4 5 6 7 31. and 11.24 and 23 45 46. and 19.17 Num. 5.2 3. and 19.21 22. Iosua 11.12 Ezra 6.21.22 Ier. 3.1 2 That the planting or reforming of Christes Church must tarrie for the Ciuill magistrate and may not otherwise be brought in by the word spirite of God