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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Jewes are they not therefore to be separated from So in deed he would conclude in this place But then let him tell vs if Corah Dathan and Abiram the Apostate Jewes vnder Ieroboam the Corinthians Papistes c might not alleadge some particular exception wherein they were not like to those Iewes Act. 19. Might not therefore separatiō be made from these The scripture teacheth otherwise Numb 16.25 26. 2 Chrō 11.14 2 Cor. 6.17 Reu. 18.4 Secondly cōsider the place it selfe Act. 19.9 cōpare it with their estate practise in England see if there be not now as great and iust cause to separate from thē as frō the other Are not these now hardned against the trueth Let their writings against it their imprisonning banishing and killing for it giue euidence Doe they not disobey it Let their constitution and practize be witnesse Speake they not euill of the way of God before the multitude Let the Sermons of their Ministers in the pulpit the speaches of the Prelates in their Courtes beare record Therefore saith that “ Actes 19.9 Actes 2.40 Scripture Actes 19 they are to be departed and separated from Wherevnto also may be added in this case that which Peter saith Act. 2 Saue your selues from this froward generation Thidly were he obiecteth That Paule did not separate frō all the other Iewes as he did from these Acts 19. and sheweth it by Act. 13.14 and 16.3 21 23 24 26. 3.1 we answer that the Apostles had good and iust cause so to doe For first the Jewes * Rom. 9.4 Leuit. 20.22 24 26. Luk. 1.6.8 c. were the people of God separated from the world and set in the true waand order of God Secondly * Luke 24.47 Act. 1.8 and 13.46 Christ commaunded the Apostles when he sent them to preach his Gospell throughout the worlde that they should first preach it to the Iewes Thirdlie the Iewes ministerie ceremonies being the ordinances of God him selfe and giuen in writing by Moses the man of God “ Act. 15.21 and 21.30 21 22 23 24 25. Heb. 8.5 13. 9.1 c. were therefore nowe when they should cease to be buried with honor These things considered we see the Apostles had iust cause so to doe as they did in those places mentioned But what is this to the assemblies of England which neuer yet were separated from the world nor set in the way and order of Christ but stande in the * Reue. 13.16 17. and 18 2. 2 The. 2.3 4 8 confusion and defection of Antichrist whose ministerie also and worshippe were neuer the ordinances of God But * Reue. 17.2 4 and 18.3 and 9.3 c. taken out of the whores Cup of Babilon for which likewise God neuer gaue Comaundement to goe vnto them but to “ Reue. 18.4 with 17.9 1 Tim. 6 3 5. departe from them as being daughters of the greate Babilon that mother of whoredomes and abominations of the earth Againe euen from those Iewes notwithstanding the reasons aforesaid yet when they put from them the trueth and would not receyue it the Apostles departed and separated thē selues yea and shooke off the dust of their feete against them teaching others to doe so likewise Actes 13.46 51. and 18.6 28 25 26 27 28. and 20.40 and 19.8 9. To that of Maister Cranmer Ridley c is answered before And hetherto of their generall Assumption which was this That the whole doctrine as it is professed and publiquely practised by lawe in Englande is sufficient to make a particular man a true Christian Which wee haue shewed to be vntrue both by the Exceptions and Reasons aforesaid which still stande firme against them as is manifest by this our defence Touching the conclusion And now let the godly Reader trying all things by the word of trueth iudge whether we or they holde Paradoxes Touching that he saith of the reformed Churches he is deceyued if he thinke they allowe their present estate and church constitution Both their publique profession and practise witnesse the contrarie as wee haue declared at large in “ In the answers of Ma. Carthwrights reasons of Maist Hildersams letter c. other treatises which yet remayne vnanswered wherevnto we referre the Reader in this behalfe Where he sayth That we our selues heretofore haue acknowledged and professed it to wit their general Assumption aforesaid to be true he is also deceyued therein we haue alway * You maie speake it with shame enough testified the contrarie both by our profession and practise and were and are therefore cast into prison appoincted to exile and put to death besides many other iniuries grieuances inflicted vpon vs for this verie cause In deed we haue acknowledged and doe acknowledge that they professe diuers excellent truthes but that the whole doctrine as it is publiquelie professed and practized by law in England doeth make them in that estate true Christians neuer anie of vs that we know of did once acknowledge And therfore till he shew vs the contrarie we must needes thinke that he falsely burtheneth vs all and specially such of vs as he hath mentioned here in particular To that which he next addeth of the Martirs in Queene Maries dayes is answered already in the defence of our Seconde Exception and First Reason wherevnto may be added for more euidēce of the trueth the particular speaches testimonies of the holy Martirs them selues both then and in former tymes As of Maister Bradford who “ Actes monuments 2. vo in his conference with Peter Henth speaking of the dayes before Queene Marie saide The tyme was when the Pope was out of England but not all popery And moreouer “ In his firste speach with D. Harpsfielde Archdeacon That the scripture knoweth not any difference betweene Bishops and Ministers which men call Priestes And that the scripture speaking of Bishops can not be vnderstood of Bishops that minister not but lord it Also of Maister Hooper who held and “ Hooper on the eight commandment published that a Bishop should be Bishop but of one Citie and that till the Magistrates bring them to this poinct it shal be as possible to heare a Bishop wade godly and simply through the scripture in case of Religion as to driue a Cammell through the eye of a needle And agayne he sayth The primitiue Church had not such Bishops as be nowe a dayes And againe What blindnesse sayth he is there befell in the world that can not see this palpable yll that our Mother the holy Church had at the beginning such Bishops as did preach many godly Sermons in lesse time then our Bishops horses bee a brideling And John Bale an exile for the testimonie of Jesu writing vpon the Reuelation * Bale in his booke called The Image of both churches vpon Reu. 13.1 and 17.3 affirmeth moreouer That the names of Blasphemy written vpon the Beastes head Reuel 13. and
17. are none other then the proud glittering titles wherewith they garnish their vsurped authoritie to make it seeme glorious to the worlde hauing within them conteyned the great misterie of iniquitie What other els saith he also is Pope Cardinall Metropolitan Primate Archbishop Diocean Archdeacon Officiall Chauncelour Commissarie Deane Prebend Parsons Vicar and such like but very names of blasphemie For offices they are not appointed by the holy Ghost nor yet once mentioned in the scriptures This Iohn Bale held and published Then which what can be more full and euident against them And againe writing vpon the 14. chapter of the Reuelation In Image of both churches vpō Reu. 14.9 he hath these wordes To receyue the beastes marke in their foreheads hands is both to agree to such decrees traditions lawes constitutions actes and proclamations as they vnder those titles haue made onely for their own couetousnes and pompe and neither for the glorie of God nor yet for the right maintenance of the Christian cōmon wealth And also to be sworn to the same to subscribe to it to giue counsell or ayde to it to mainteyne it by learning to minister in it to execute vnder it to accuse punishe and put to death for it or to thinke it lawfull and godly with such like And “ Ibid. vpon Reuel 16.12 afterward vpon the 16. of the Reuelation expounding the drying vp of the waters of Euphrates to be this That the welthy Popes possessions and pleasurs of the Clergy their false feates once known are and shal be cleerly taken away from them He saith Moreouer In * Marke also by this of what time estate hee speaketh euen of such when the Gospell was preached the Monasteries suppressed England by the Gospell preaching haue many of these waters bene dried vp in the suppression of the monasteries prioryes couents and Friers houses yet are not all thinges brought vnto Christs cleare institution A cincere Christian-order cannot yet be seene there And a great cause why For all is not yet dried vp there The Bishops reigne still in asmuch vaine glorious pompe and with as many Heathenish obseruations as euer they did As cruelly harted and as bloody minded are they yet as euer they were afore No mischiefe vnsought to holde in the waters Marke howe “ He meaneth the Prelates of these Seas Winchester Durham Yorke London and Lyncolne worke let vs also now adde Canterburie with such other pleasantlie disposed Euphratynes But be of good comfort pray in the meane time For the holy Ghost promiseth heere that they shall wither away withall that the heauenly Father hath not planted All which generation will the Lords breth cōsume c. Likewise may be shewed by the testimonie of others in former tymes as of Iohn Wickliffe who * Actes Monumen 4. edi 1. vol. pa. 150. helde and affirmed That Archbishops Bishops Archdeacons Officialls Deanes Cannons were disciples of Antichrist In like manner of William Swinderby who * Ibid. pag. 36.8 b. said that what Pope Cardinal Bishop Prelate or Priest in manner of liuing or teachching or lawes making contrarie to Christs liuing his lawes or any other ground put in ruling of the Church of Christ but by Christ and his lawes is very Antichrist aduersarie to Iesus Christ and his Apostles Also Syr John old Castle Lord Cobham who “ Ibid. pag. 5621 b. 563. held affirmed that the Bishops Priestes Prelates and Monkes were the body of the great Antichrist And that the possessions and Lordships of the Clergy were the venime of Iudas shed into the Church Likewise Iohn * Ibid. pag. 639. b Cladon burnt in Smithfield held professed that the Archbishops Bishops speaking indifferently are the seates of the beast Antichrist when he sitteth in them and reigneth aboue other people in the darke Calues of errors and heresies Moreouer that the Bishops licence for a mā to preach the worde of God is the true character of the beast that is Antichrist Finally William “ In his treatises called the obedience of a christian man and the pracsise of Prelats Tindall and Iohn * In his Preface before his Antythesis betweene Christ and the Pope Frith held and publissed That Archb. Lordb. Archdeacons Deanes Officialls Parsons Vicars and the rest of that sort are the disciples of Antichrist yea very Antichristes themselues These are the speeches and testimonies of the holy Martirs in former ages whereunto diuerse other such like might bee added But these may suffice for the matter in hand And now compare with these thinges alleadged the publique profession practise of England euen as it is by law at this day and see whether their own proofes bee not so many witnisses against themselues But if it were so that the reformed Churches wee our selues and the Martirs of former time had geuen allowance of their present estate Church constitution what would this help thē when all the word of God condemneth thē as we haue shewed in our Reasons aforesaid defence therof Whereunto if they will still iustifie their estate wee require direct answer from poinct to poinct and that from the scriptures which only can stablish the conscince Now furthermore that the truth it selfe and their estate may better appeare what it is as also that they may not turne away or obscure the truth by their subtill shiftes and euasions as their manner is we will therefore propound vnto them a few questions concerning the poinctes now in controuersie in this land desiring their playne and sincere answers thereunto by the word of God as they will answer him in his great day The questions are these 1 Whether the Lord Iesus Christ haue by his last Testament geuen vnto and set in his Church sufficient ordinary 1. Offices with their 2. Callings 3. Workes and 4. Maintenance for the administration of his holy things and for the sufficient ordinary instruction guidance and seruice of his Church to the end of the world or no. 2 Whether the Offices of Pastors Teachers Elders Deacons and helpers be those offices appincted by Christ in his last Testament as aforesaid .. Or whether the present ecclesiasticall Offices of Archbishops Lordbishops Suffragans Deanes Prebendaries Cannons Petticannos Gospellers Pistlers Virgirers Queristers Organ-players Priests Deacons or halfe Priestes Archdeacons Doctors of diuinitie Batchelers of diuinity Chaplyns or House-priestes Commissaries Officialls Procters Apparitors Parsons Vicars Curates Vagrant or Mercinary preachers Church-wardens Sidemen Clerkes Sextons and the rest now had in these Cathedrall and parishionall assemblies be those offices appoincted by Christ in his last Testament as is aforesaid or no. 3 Whether the Callinges and entraunce into these Ecclesiasticall offices last aforesaid their Administration and Maintenance nowe had and receiued in England be the manner of calling administration maintenaunce which Christ hath appoincted for the offices of his church aboue named or no. 4 Whether euery true visible church of
before The notorious dissolute wicked some were reclaimed all vndertook another profession a new appearance of Christianitie And no doubt the like is to be thought of these as before I obserued touching the ignorant men Now all this was done not intollerablie doubtlesse though I graunt weakely corruptly And very like euen to your owne receiuing into your Church at this time nay more tollerable and more lawfull then yours who to furnish onely one congregation haue receiued many knowne bad men and very ignorant yea and still retaine men full of contention bitter strife 1 Cor. 3.3 In a word this I answer That which disanulleth not a Church gathered and settled That disanulleth it not in the gathering and beginning But such mixtures doe not disanull a Church gathered and setled as appeareth aboue in the scriptures quoted against the First AccusatioÌ„ Mat 23. Luke 2. c. Therfore such mixtures did not disanull our Churches then in their beginning Accusa ∣ tion 3 The Third Accusation is our Assemblies remayne in obedience to the false Antichristian officers c. Let this be our generall sinne yet there is diuersitie of sinnes All are not of like detestation before God nor of like coÌ„sequence against vs. I say not that any sinnes are veniall but I say All sinnes by their nature are mortal yet doe they not al alike abolish vs from Christ nor depriue vs of the glory of God Now this sinne of outward church orders is not of the most heynous nor extreamest disobedience There are sinnes against the * 1 Cor. 15.3 3. 4. RoÌ„ 4.25 1 Cor. 3.10 11 12 13 14. foundation and there are sinnes that stande with the foundation ibid. wherein men liuing and dying ignorantly without perticular repeÌ„tance may be saued Such were the sinnes of the Iewish church and estate in Christes time and after as “ Beza in Acts 15.20 some thinke euen till their Temple and Citie were destroyed though they did personally hate and persecute Christ Such also was the sinne of the auncient declyning Bishops Epiphanius Augustine Chrisostom Leo of Rome c. No lesse was in ours of late Cranmer Ridley Hooper c. in King Edward dayes and no greater is now in ours presently especially touching our Churches Ministers too generally If you say we are all conuicted nowe and sinne against our coÌ„scieÌ„ces as they did not in those times It is vtterly false a palpable vntrueth Whosoeuer knoweth any thing in our church estate generally must needs see it that this poinct touching the Hyerarchy is not acknowledged euen of ignoraÌ„ce in a thousand to one many holding not of the simplest this present gouernement to be th' only true right kinde but all men almost to be indifferent lawful very few indeed scarse to be found that see it to be meerly nought or as you terme it wicked intollerable And in King Edwards time whosoeuer considereth shall finde that the godly learned ProtestaÌ„ts then were not vtterly ignorant of this poinct of reformation and yet sinned not against their conscience in bearing with the times neither were abolished from Christ And surely touching the Iewes they were all generally more conuicted then that Iesus was the Christ then we are now that the Prelacie is of Antichrist yet they remayned a church stil because generally indeed they were not plainly conuicted Thus theÌ„ this our sinne is * See the 2. sortes of fundamental sinnes in the 2. Reply to your 7. Reason before pag. 48. no way fundamentall it destroyeth not faith Christianity in our whole assemblies Therfore they remaine Christian people still as I affirmed not all godles prophane as he vncharitably speaketh O beware of rash and hasty iudging euen of one brother Rom. 14.3 4 13. how much more of such so many whole assemblies professing Christ in EnglaÌ„d Woe be vnto him which curseth where God curseth not Num. 23.8 As also indeed that blesseth where God blesseth not We desire you not to blesse vs in our euil but we warne you not to curse vs in our good which indeed turneth vs not to any furtherance but to a great hinderance and stumbling block stopping vs froÌ„ that sinceritie which els we should dravve nearer vnto Blessed is he that iudgeth wisely that is without affection partialitie euen of him that is despised Better it is and more Christian like euen to offende in too much compassion and patience especially towardes so many hundreth thousands by whom we know nought saue good in this poinct then to offend in too much rigor and seueritie vniust anger Mat. 5. â—2 Howbeit this were not indeed to offend as hath bene aboue shewed And briefly in twoo words thus I conclude it farther that That faith religioÌ„ taught in the booke of Articles published 1562. maketh the people that beleeue and obey the same true Christians such as so liuing and dying may be saued But our Church doeth so holde that faith Therefore they are true Christians The Proposition onely is doubted I had thought none so desperate as to deny it but lately I vnderstand they haue denyed it Howbeit for answer I referre them partly to that which here hath bene said before and especiallie to that which is replied to their Answer in the former Treatise which being well weighed I doubt not but all indifferent and Christian mindes will acknowledge our publique church assemblies in England to be true Christians REASON II. F. Iohns SEcondly the Priest doth not celebrate or pronounce any marriage without the married first giue their consent But the Prelats make Ministers without before the peoples consent Therefore the comparison holdeth not H. Iacob FIrst it is very vaine to make this any matter viz. the peoples coÌ„senting either before or after the Prelats ordeyning For whether before or after it is in nature and value all one They in their ignoraÌ„ce hauing respect only to the Prelats act And if it were so that the Priest should sometymes marie a couple the Maide being meerly enforced and denying consent yet not striuing nor resisting and a while after shall willingly agree and like Out of question there is now true wedlock betweene them Euen so the case is betwixt the Church and the Minister 2. But what will they except here against those Pastors amoÌ„gst vs that were first chosen by the people they first professing their consent and are after instituted inducted by the Praelat Many are thus called amongst vs the most haue the peoples consent euen togeather at their first inducting at least wise they haue soone after by the peoples submitting mainteyning them euen presently 3. Lastly in a word where he saith the Praelats make Ministers without and before the peoples consent We “ Beza in Act 14.23 Fenner against Bridges Pag. 148. affirme that they make not the Pastor at all indeed and in truth but only supposedly It is the Churches consent that maketh him