syn and impure by nature even as we by baptising our selves doe the like By offring sacrifices for syns they acknowledged themselves actual transgressors of the law and the killing of beasts argued themselves were vvorthy of death Novv it vvas not possible for the blood of buls and goats to take avvay synns and the lavv taught them so much therfore it vvas a schoolmaster to lead them to Christ that they mought be made righteous by faith This handwriting vvhich stood thus in decrees against the Ievves and vvhich rose up as an adversarie and contrary unto them Christ blotted or vviped out by his death on the crosse vvhere he spoiled also the principalities and powers the Divils vvhich vvere readie to plead against Israel urge this hādvvriting these ordinances vvhich they practised against them if they used them not vvith fayth in Christ but vvith expectation of justice by works of the law Now this word handwriting figuratively used and applied to the legal ordinances M. Smyth taketh properly for the written law and prophets as if Christ had blotted out them and taken them from his Church even as he took circumcision altars sacrifices c. which how far it is from truth I leave unto every conscience 〈◊〉 judge But were it as he thinketh the writtten word of God yet must it then be limited so farr forth onely as men do abuse it and learn not Christ by it for to such onely it is a handwriting contrary to them and so is at this day But this is not the proper use or end of the law or scripture in it self for it preacheth to men the word of fayth and righteousnes therby in Christ as wel as righteousnes by works of the law and the gospel hath witnesse of the law and prophets and they testifie of Christ are a sure word unto Christians Wherefore it were woe vvith us if these vvere blotted out and taken avvay as ceremonies and shadovves abolished the reading vvhereof both publik and private is a continual light and comfort to our harts and confirmation of our holy fayth And to substitute mens harts vvhich are by testimonie of the prophet deceitful and wicked above al things in sted of the holy bible vvhose vvords are al true and faithful is a miserable exchang for eyther men must be as vvere the prophets moved and caried by the holy ghost and so all their vvords taken for heavenly oracles or else vve shal be fed vvith chaffe in sted of vvheat and drink deadly poyson in sted of vvholesome liquor The serpent is subtile more then any beast of the field he savv this ground of making the scriptures of God ceremonies and abolished by Christ vvould be distasted of many yea of any that feareth God therefore he laboureth to svveeten this vvormvvood vvith an after receipt vvhich yet is so tempered as it may serve to help forward his purpose in taking the book of God out of the church M. Smyth in the next place granteth that the holy scriptures are the fountain of al truth the ground and foundation of our fayth that by them al doctrines and every spirit is to be iudged that they are to be read in the church and to be interpreted neverthelesse not reteyned as helps before the eye in tyme of spiritual worship There is no such battel as when a man is at warr with himself it is a special judgment wher with God smiteth his enemies Would any man think that such bitter sweet waters could come out of one fountain as have flowed here Standeth this eyther with religion or with reason that that which as an adversary is blotted out nayled to Christs crosse abolished as being ceremonial and a worldly rudiment should yet be the fountayne of all truth the ground of faith c. If these will stand togither what wil not Then also may circumcision altars sacrifices and other Iewish services although they were shadowes and abolished by Christ yet be reteyned and used of Christians with a little qualification and distinction of worship properly so called and this will like the Iewes very well But we that have learned Christ cannot brook such contrary potions For if the book writing reading of it be Iewish shadowes ended and abolished by Christ and the hart and speaking out of it be the shadowed thing the heavenly truth figured by and substituted for the other we would keep the substance leave the ceremony for such as follow shadowes But if the book of God the written scriptures be the fountaine of all truth and foundation of our faith as it is in deed and we so esteem it then can we not but detest that former plot as a groundwork of Satan that hung vp the scriptures as our enemy vpon the crosse so blotting them out as a cancelled bond and abolishing them for ever Wherefore the reading and expounding of the scriptures continueth now as of old in Israel where the lavv and prophets were read in the synagogues every sabbath for to teach inform Gods people in his vvayes so read vve them still for like end and vse and shall by Gods grace maugre Satans slights so do vnto the end And as for the snare the distinction I mean of spiritual worship properly so called Which vvas set to take the simple it is broken before and the adversary himself if any man be is caught vvith the same Yet ceaseth he not but proceedeth vvith reasons that the originall scriptures are not given as helpes before the ey in worship But the foundations being already overthrovvn vve shall vvith lesse difficultie and more brevitie discover and do away the errors His reasons are Because Christ used the book to fulfil all righteousnes Mat. 3. 15. having by the use of the book fulfilled the law of reading he shut the book in the synagogue to signifie that the ceremonie of book worship or the Ministerie of the letter was now expired and finished Luk. 4. 20. Ioh. 19. 30. First here is the law of reading brought to an end according to that first ground of ceremonies contrary to the second grant that the scriptures are to be read in the Church and to be interpreted which reading and interpreting if it be not Gods worship and service it is the worship of the Divil Thus M. Sm. wavereth as a reed shaken with the wind Secondly in the other side of the leaf M. Sm forgetting himself as a drunken man sayth all the worship that was appointed by Moses for the Preists was limitted to the holy place whether the people were not admitted and therefore reading was of an other nature performed in the utter court or synagogue or elsewhere eyther by the Levites or any other learned men quoting againe Luke 4. 16. and so no part of worship properly so called but onely a ceremonial ground or foundation of inward or outward spirituall worship
Greek letters words and phrases which had beene profaned by lying histories and lascivious poets unto all manner idolatry and wickednes Herevpon it followeth that the word of God in whatsoever letter or language it be written or spoken vnto vs is the word of God stil so to be reverenced and regarded and not to be basely and profanely counted among humane and apocryphal writings A comment or exposition of scripture as for example vpon this word Emmanuel sheweth the mans iudgement mind or understanding that commenteth telleth the reason of this name why it was given to Christ discourseth of his godhed of his manhood of the uniting of these two in one person of the end and use of these and many such like things This being done by ordinary men is properly an humane writing though it may be agreeable to the word of God shewing by letters as by signes what is the mind or understanding of such a man in this mysterie of Christs incarnation even as Paul sayth of his owne divine writing when ye read ye may know myne understanding in the mysterie of Christ. Ephes. 3. 4. Now God hath by his Prophets and Apostles written to his Church a short summ of his mind and will guiding and carying them and inspiring their writings with his good spirit that there should be nothing but words of truth faithfulnes equitie and perfection in them that men mought have a sure ground for their faith and actions throughout all generations And minding mans weaknes the holy Ghost hath omitted to write many things though otherweise in their nature very good penning such onely as were needful and profitable for our faith and salvation giving vs warning also to take heed of other things because there is no end of making many books and much reading is a wearynes to the flesh Ecclesiast 12. 12. But because in these scriptures somethings are hard to be vnderstood and all men know not how to use and apply Gods word unto their times estates actions c. therefore hath Christ given gifts unto men to open and apply the scriptures for the edification of the Church vnto the worlds end alwayes binding them both teachers and hearers to the foundation layd by the Prophets and Apostles whose writings are sufficient to make men wise unto salvation through the faith which is in Christ Iesns For this cause the holy scriptures are necessarie for al Churches to be read expounded unto the people as every nation differeth in language so to have the word spoken and written in their vulgar tongue which change of the tongue or letter changeth not the nature of the word spoken or written but it is stil divine and heavenly Onely because in this changing or translating imperfections wants errors may fal in therfore the first writings as the Prophets Apostles penned them are to be made the absolute canon rule touchstone whereby al translations are to be tried by which being tried found faithful it is the same word of God in what language or letter soever differeth as much frō humane cōmentaries or expositions as heaven dooth from earth But Mr. Sm. avoucheth mens written sermons or cōments upon the scripture the scripture it self written in English to be equally humane in respect of the work equally divine in respect of the matter they handle Of this his bold and false assertion he maketh no proof at al it is a speculation of his own hart Two carnal reasons he setteth down which are these To translate the originals into any mother tongue is as wel and asmuch the worke of a mans wit and learning as to analyse the scriptures rhetorically or logically to collect doctrines and uses theologically to give expositions and interpretations of places doubtful Where first if M. S. mean the action of translating simply without reference to the mater and thing translated he doth but dally and seek to deceiv for writing printing translating are al alike humane actions but the things written printed translated are differēt some good some evil some of God some of men and of the divil The books of Moses written printed or translated are Gods law the book of Mahomet written printed or translated is the divils law the actions of writing printing translating are mere humane actions in all of these Now if because translating is an humane action therefore the thing translated must also be humane the work of mans wit and learning then also because writing and printing are humane actions therefore the bible written or printed in Hebreue Greek al languages must likewise be humane and the work of mens wit and learning and then there can be no divine scriptures but the very first copies which the Prophets Apostles wrote with their owne hands And if Satan could perswade this he would be glad Secondly if Mr. Sm. meaneth the thing translated as Moses law Davids psalmes or other like in English that these are as wel and as much the work of a mans wit and learning as an exposition of doubtful places in them or doctrines and uses collected from them he teacheth wicked error which al of judgment cōscience wil abhorr The holy scriptures faithfully expressed in English or any language is the work of Gods wisdome unserchable knowledge and cannot without injury to his majestie be said to be the work of mans wit learning though man have used his skil in writing or translating it according to the original copie given of God This plea of Mr. Sm. is like as if Ieroboam should have sayd the cherubims and the brazen bulls in Solomons temple are as wel and as much the work of mans wit skil as my golden calves if they may be admitted into the house and worship of God then why not these If M. Sm. should answer that the cherubims and bulls which Solomon made were commanded of God and from the divine pattern though humane art did make them but Ieroboams calves were from his own hart so answer I in this case the translation is from the divine pattern of Gods original book and commanded to be made and used but to write comments or homilies to read in the Church is frō a mans own hart and hath no commandement or warrant from God so to be used but are forbidden Eccles. 12. 12. Secondly he sayth The translator cannot conceive nor expresse in writing the whol mind of the holy spirit conteyned in the originals but onely some good part of it the expositor paraphrast commentator may expresse as much as the translator yea and in respect of some particulars as Hebraisms Grecismes and the like considerations much more If a translator cannot expresse the whol mind of the spirit in al the bible by his interpretation litteral or grammatical then much lesse can the expositor expresse the whol mind of the spirit in the bible by his exposition theological For it is a thowsand
him But eyther he must look for enthusiasmes or revelations from heaven vvhich some Anabaptists have dreamed of or els he faleth to profanenes or desperation And it is not M. Sm. distinction of worship properly so called that here vvil comfort the troubled sovvl for he must doe al especially his ecclesiastical religious actions of fayth and not his proper vvorship onely Yea the serpent wil build more on this rotten foundation and assault him also that hath skil in the tongues and trouble him saying though thou hast knowledge of Hebrue and Greek yet hovv canst thou tel vvhither this that thou readest be the pure vvord of God There be many Ievvish fables and humane traditions that have been vvritten in Hebrue and in Greek also and vvhither God spake or vvrote these things as novv thou readest them thou knovvest not and therfore canst not of faith make this book a ground of thy religion and vvorship And if thou vvilt credit M. Smyth loe he telleth thee that as Antichrist hath polluted al Gods ordinances so hath he violated the original scriptures Do not thou therfore build thy fayth upon the scriptures any longer but beleev that which M. Smyth and his like shal prophesie out of their harts for so he sayth holy men prophesied before Moses time and indeed so some prophesyed in Ezekiels time though they vvere blamed for it books are in the nature of pictures and images and therfore ceremonies and reading a book is ceremonial and reading Prophesies in the time of the law was a type of prophesying and reading the words of the law out of the book signified the lettering of the words of God out of the hart and Christ fulfilled the law of reading and shut the book in the synagogue to signifie that the ceremonie of book-worship or ministerie of the letter was now exspired and finished and now the worship of the new testament must proceed originally from the hart and spirit Wherfore lay aside the scriptures and hear what men shal prophesy out of their harts orif that like thee not exspect thou revelations and visions from heaven Thus M. Sm. as a snare on Mispah a net spred upon Tabor hath layd in his book such a groundwork against the script as fitteth the Divils purpose to intāgle mens sovvls although to deceive the birds withall he hath strewed some wheat at the mouth of the pit as that translations may be made the ground of our faith an instrument to trie doctrine by c. so breathing out of one mouth both hot and cold A translation made verbatim from the originals is absurd by reason of the difference of the dialects therfore unlawful seing it edifieth not 1 Cor. 14. 26. a translation paraphrastical or a paraphrast if it be lawful in time of worship to be read then why not a written sermon These are but blocks to make the blind stumble Gods word may be set over into English for the most part word for word without absurditie and where our language wilnot bear the strict proprietie of the original phrases we are warranted by the Apostles allegations of scriptures in an other tongue to use such words as the language wil affoard to expresse the other withall Though tongues differ one from another in proprietie of speeches yet God hath sanctified them all for instruments to convey his word and law unto us and this in writing as well as in speaking Dan. 2. 4. c. Act. 1. 4. 8. 9. 11. 15. 23. Rev. 1. 11. 19. Written sermons are the works of men Gods book set over into English though with some diversitie of phrase is Gods book and word stil for as hath been shewed it is not the letter or sound but the thing signified meant by them which properly is Gods word and which we are so to reverence But M. Sm. having granted that the translation may be read in the Church made a ground of our faith c. and now asking why a written sermon is not also lawful in Gods worship eyther alloweth humane writings to be read in the Church as wel as Gods writings translated which is a notable error or els he cavilleth against the truth contrary to his cōscience And in his reasoning dealeth like a false coyner who because the gold of the common wealth is not so fine perhaps as the gold of Ophir or Vphaz sayth to the merchant if such course metal may be taken for mony then why not brasse or copper A paraphrast commentarie or exposition upon a chapter which conteyneth more of the contents of the originals and the holy Ghosts meaning is vnlawful to be read in time of worship therefore a translation of a chapter which conteyneth lesse is unlawful also to be read in time of worship First by Mr. Sm. grownd layd in the beginning a paraphrase comment or any humane writing may be used in the administration of Christs kingdome in like sorte as the scriptures which is erroneous Secondly he addeth more to his error in teaching here that a cōmentary hath more of the contents of the holy Ghosts meaning then the text it self in English or othertrāslatiōs His cōclusiō therfore bringeth forth vanitie and his belly hath prepared deceit No cōmentary in the world made by an ordinarie man conteyneth the meaning of God so as the text it self in a faithful translation of the book or chapter dooth Thirdly Mr. Sm. confesseth that the matter of the translation agreable to the originals is inspired but not the writing or character If the thing written be inspired of God then is it canonical scripture 2. Tim. 3. 16. then not apocryphal nor an humane work as a commentarie then conteyneth it more of the contents of the originals then any mans exposition As for his exception of the writing or character it is but vanitie for the Apostles had the matter of their writings by inspiration frō God as for the writing or character that was not inspired but Gods word was written in such characters words phrases as the hethen Greeks philosophers and Poets had used long before Lev. 22. 22. Mal. 1. 8. 13. 14. Mat. 22. 37. Rō 12. 1. 2. Ps. 119. 45. 103. 1. God wil be served with the best we have But ther is no one translation the best we hav seing the Lord may in time of worship minister better to him that administreth if he understand the originals if he understand not the originals he hath it not at all for it is an other mans work and therefore no one translation written may be read in time of worship M. Sm. is like one of them that hunteth the sowles of Gods people setting reasons as hayes to intangle No one translation sayth he is the best we have seing the Lord may in time of worship minister a better as good a reason against reading the translated
us with synn for using our English Bibles in the worship of God he thought that the teachers should bring the originals the Hebrew and Greek and out of them translate by voice His principal reason against our translated scripture was this No Apocrypha writing but onely the Canonical scriptures are to be used in the Church in time of Gods worship Every written translation is an Apocrypha writing is not canonical scripture Therfore every written translation is unlawful in the Church in time of Gods worship Why he counted every translation apocrypha and what he meant therby appeareth by these words of his a written translation sayth he or interpretation is as wel as much an human writing as an homilie or prayer written read The like impietie he hath also printed in his book saying A translation being the work of a mens wit learning is as much and as truly an humane writing as the Apocrypha so commonly called writings are and seeing it hath not the allowance of holy men inspired but is of an hidden authoritie it may be iustly called Apocrypha c. And therfore not to be brought into the worship of God to be read That this point of the translation was the onely difference as it is known to al that then heard his publik protestatiō so his words in writing shew it Translations written sayth he are not refreyned in the case of scandal for we desired that they might be refreined for our sakes that we might keep communion it would not be yeilded So if we would have layd aside our translated Bibles communion they say should have been kept with us Now for the true differences on our part at that time and stil they are thus We agree with M. Smyth herein that Onely canonical scripture is to be used in Gods worship that no apocryphal writing is to be used in Gods worship But we disagree deney that every written translation is an Apocryphal writing affirming that the Scriptures in English and other languages rightly translated out of the Originals are Canonical so to be read in the Church in the worship of God After much time spent about this controversie he manifested other differences touching the ministerie and treasurie and soon after published this book of Differences wherin having his latter thoughts as he thought better then his former he retracted a former book of Principles c and al other his writings so farr forth as they were overthwarted by this his last book He also acknowledged the ancient brethren of the separation as he calleth us are to be honoured that they have reduced the Church to the true primitive and Apostolik constitution which consisteth in these three things 1 The true matter which are Saincts onely 2 The true forme which is the uniting of them togither in the covenant 3 The true propertie which is a communion in al the holy things and the power of our Lord Iesus Christ for the mainteyning of that communion To this blessed work of the Lord wherin those ancient brethren have laboured I know not sayth he what may more be added I think rather there can nothing be added And was he now setled in his course nothing lesse for the strange womans pathes are moveable they cannot be known Soon after this God stroke him with blindnes that he could no longer find the door of the Church out of which he was gone by schisme and which he had assaulted with error Our entring in by the covenant of God with Abraham to the faithful and their seed hath been as a brazen wal whereagainst he hath runn himself to his utter ruine if God in mercie raise him not up And now as a man benummed in mynd he cryeth out against us contrary to his former fayth and confession Loe we protest against them sayth he to bee a false Church falsly constituted in the baptising of infants and their own unbaptised estate And agayn We protest against them that seeing their constitution is false therfore there is no one ordinance of the Lord true among them Thus wine sheweth it self in M. Smyth to be a mocker strong drink to be raging whiles he having drunk the wine of violence proclaymeth open warr against Gods everlasting covenant The defense of which grace being already in the hands of two worthy soldiers of Christ Mr Clifton whom he hath printed against and Mr Robinson whom he next threatneth I leave vnto them not doubting but God their strength will teach their hands to fight and their fingers to battel in so good a cause against this enemie But because he still vrgeth his former quarrels of the scriptures and Ministerie I purpose with Gods grace to set against him in these desiring the Lord my Rock to gird me with strength and to make my way entyre Touching the first namely the vse of translated scriptures in the worship of God M. Smyth thus summeth vp the difference in the forefront of his book 1. We hold saith he that the worship of the new testament properly so called is spirituall proceeding originally from the hart and that reading out of a book though a lawful ecclesiasticall action is no part of spiritual worship but rather the invention of the man of syn it being substituted for a part of spiritual worship 2. We hold that seing prophesying is a part of spirituall worship therefore in time of prophesying it is vnlawfull to have the book as a help before the eye 3. We hold that seing singing a Psalm is a part of spirituall worship therefore it is vnlawful to have the book before the ey in time of singing a Psalm Here first let the reader observe that the mayn and true difference which was between M. Smyth and us about the translation is not mentioned but is brought in after as by the way in hādling these matters and other points never controverted between vs are made heads of the differences In which doing M. Smyth hath graced the very portch of his building with imposture and frawd 2. In saying of himself and his brethrē We hold c. he giveth the reader to vnderstand vnlesse he meant to delude him that they whom he dealeth against hold the cōtrary wheras he neither dooth nor is able to produce any proof hereof against us neyther I dare say can he tel what we hold of these points Thus secondeth he his fraud with injurie and maketh these two as Iachin Boaz the pillars for to bewtifie the temple of his book Now because his whol battel against the translated Scriptures is cheefly out of this bulwark of spiritual worship wherin he hath intrenched himself and flyeth therto at al assayes when other shifts fayle him I wil begin with it as himself also dooth and come to Translations anon OF WORSHIP Wheras the word Worship is diversly used somtime more largely somtime more straightly by reason wherof
distinction be not true then M. Sm. is a deceiver properly so called who to make things serve his hereticall humour and hide his blasphemies against our reading of the holy scriptures in the Church hath digged thus deep to find a pit whereinto to fell the righteous though himself by Gods iudgement be fallen into the same And here by the way I will briefly note M. Smyths methode in contriving of his book for the advantage of his cause The three offices of Christ in prophesie preisthood and Kingdome he reduceth vnto two 1. kingdome and 2. preisthood comprehending prophesie vnder the preisthood as a branch of it Deut. 33. 10. Rev. 1. 6. with 1 Cor. 14. 31. Act. 2. 17. 18. Whereas by the same ground of Deut. 33. 10. he mought have made the kingdome also a branch of the preisthood for the Preists were to teach Iaakob Gods judgements and Israel his law as well in cases of controversie plea and strife which M. Smyth maketh actions of administring the Kingdome as in other doctrines of exhortation and comfort But I find in the scripture that Moses not Aaron the Preist is made a figure of Christ as a Prophet and Prophets there were many in Israel of other tribes then Levi seing then Moses the Prophets caried types of Christs prophesie Aaron and the Priests of his priesthood David and the kings of his kingdom I would not now confound the priesthood prophesie in Christ any otherwise then the priesthood and kingdome but keep a like distinction in them al as in Christ the head so in the Church his body Againe as in heavenly order the 1. manifestatiō of mans syn and miserie by the law of his justice happines by the gospel also the 2. work of mans redemption by sacrifice 3 the conservation of this grace wrought for the Church against al enemies are three distinct things one following another so Christ in his administratiō observed this order distinction first teaching the Church as a Prophet above three yeares then offring up himself as a Preist sacrifice to his father for his Church and lastly rising ascending into heaven to the right hand of God there to reign as king until al his enemies be made his footstool Now M. Smyth maketh prophesie one with the Priesthood because he would have these two to be Gods worship the kingdome he speaketh of first and excludeth al the actions of it from Gods worship Whereas the Gospell is called the word of the kingdome and Christ when he preached or prophesied is sayd to preach the kingdome of God and the doctrines which he taught were the secrets of the kingdom and the Apostles in their sermons preached expounded and testified the kingdom of God Wherefore they be deep waters which M. Sm. hath found that the actions of administring the kingdome should not be worship and yet the preaching of the gospell or prophesying shal be worship and that in the highest degree properly so called If he followed not fansy in these things rather then sound judgement let the prudent iudge Like vanity he sheweth in this that having made the scriptures to be the matter of our worship now he makethnot them to be the matter also of Gods worship in Israel but beasts incense oil fat c. and the form of our worship to be the spirit but the forme of theirs to appear in honey leven fyre salt What had not they the written word of God for a ground of their religious actions as well as we have the written word had not they the good spirit of God to instruct them as we have had they not praying prophesying singing c. by the spirit as we How is it then that this man maketh the matter and form of Gods worship in Israel to consist in such carnall things There is a depth of abomination herein which is the ground of his anabaptising heresie For wheras th'Apostle magnifieth the Iewish Church above the Gentiles in many respects this proud Gentile disgraceth them extremely saying that their Ministerie worship government was carnal that faith and repentance was not required to the matter that is the people of that Church but onely a carnall holynes with many such like vituperies which out of his carnal hart he uttereth against them But for their worship which we have in hand let him shew if he can what one thing we have which they had not before vs. He maketh the parts of our worship to be three praying prophesying singing all these they had and vttered them by the spirit as the scriptures every where manifest and though they had many carnal rites with these as sacrifices incense c. yet was not their worship carnal for we have also some carnall rites as washing with water in baptisme the eating of bread wine in the Lords supper have we therefore a carnall baptisme a carnall supper if not neyther had they a carnal worship though carnall rites were adjoyned unto their worship But as God whom they worshipped was a spirit so worshipped they him in spirit and with faith exspecting that promise which God made vnto them of salvation by Christ as Paul testifyed of the whol body of that Church that the twelve tribes instantly serving or worshiping day and night hoped to come vnto it shewing further that the gentiles are of the same or one joynt body with them fellow-heyres and partakers of the promise in Christ. M. S. having shewed as he thought the matter and form of the Iewes worship inferreth vpon it thus Hence it followeth sayth he that the worship that beginneth in the book or translation commeth not originally from the spirit but from the letter or ceremony and so is not properly of the new Testament but of the old 2 Cor. 3. 6. If this followeth upon the former description of their worship and ours I think it comes a great way behind that few wil be able to see it For did the matter of their worship the beasts incense oil c. proceed out of the book or did the form seen in fyre and salt come from the book any otherweise then our praying preaching and ministring of the sacraments dooth or must doe Did they look on a book when they kindled fyre on the altar or cast salt on the sacrifice if not how followeth this halting inference That the worship performed in reading the scriptures proceedeth originally from the spirit even from God whose spirit is in his word and who hath commanded it to be read and that such reading is not the ministerie of the letter spoken of 2 Cor. 3 6. shall through Gods grace anon be proved in handling the second point of the scriptures Here next followeth to be considered Mr Smythes allegories opening the worship of the new testament by the type in the old Their Church Ministery worship government
known before the Apostles time as Tullie testifyeth and the poets taxed the people for it And if they understood not Greek is it likely that Paul would have written his Epistle to the Romans in Greek as he did seeing he misliked speaking and consequently writing in an unknown tongue 1 Cor. 14. 6. 18. 19. M. Sm. having spent his strength though in vain to heap syn upon Israel for translating the bible procedeth unto arguments against reading translations in time of worship Where first I wil give the reader advertisement how contrary this enemie is to himself and then I wil come to his frawd against the truth Of the scriptures set over into other languages commonly caled translations he thus affirmeth A translation is as much and as truly an humane writing as the apocrypha so commonly caled writings are Againe he sayth Translations are not the pure word of God and so contrary to Eccles. 12. 10. Mat. 15 9. Agayn that translations of scripture and written sermons upon the scripture are equally humane in respect of the work equally divine in respect of the matter they handle These and the like blasphemous opinions he sought to infect our church withal for which he was resisted these laboured he by word and writing to confirm with sophistical reasons the pillars of al heresie Yet even in this same book he pulleth down this his former uncouth building it being the nature of error as the foolish woman to destroy her howse with her own hands For afterwards he writeth thus The translation agreable to the originals is a secondary scripture yet much inferiour to the originals So then it is not apocryphal unlesse he use a fallacie in this word scripture for we understand hereby as Christ himself did holy scripture inspired of God as 2 Tim. 3. 15. 16. It may be read sayth he in the church and sung in tunes Then say I it is not as the apocryphal so commonly called writings are for their very name signifying hidden teacheth that they are not to be read in the publik church Jt may sayth he be expounded in the church But so say I may not homilies be nor apocryphal writings And if M. S. in his synagogue doe read and expound such scriptures to his people he maketh thē with himself notorious idolaters Exod. 20. 4. 5. 2 Tim. 3. 16. 17. Eccle. 12. 10. The matter of it sayth he agreable to the originals is inspired to weet of God But the matter say I of the Apocryphal books as Iudith Tobie c. though exactly translated is not inspired vnlesse of the Divil for lyes and fables are in them both the translations I mean and the original Greek copies Jt may be made a ground of our faith sayth he and an instrument to try doctrine by Then is it say I not apocryphal but Canonical for it is made a canon that is a rule of our faith and walking But far be it that humane apocryphal writings should have such vse in the Church of God Wil M. Sm. ground his faith upon this that ther are seven holy Angels which present the prayers of the Saincts and that lying Raphael of the kinred of Azarias is one of them wil he ground his faith upon this that the smel of the hart and liver of a fish perfumed on the coles wil so drive away the Divil that he shal never come againe any more or wil he have his disciples to try their religion by such crooked instruments no marvell though they be led with him into the ditch when they try his doctrine by that which they professe to be as much and as truly an humane writing as the Apocrypha comonly so called writings are For it argueth that eyther they use the Bible but for a shew and colour seing they esteme so vily of it or else that they honour the base borne apocrypha as inspired of God Which is the very syn snare that they have sought to bring upon us Now let vs examine his arguments 1 Thes. 5. 21. Try all things keep that good thing But no man ignorant of the tongues can trie whither the translation be fit or good therfore no man ignorant of the tongues can strictly keep or read a translation in time of worship Here first M. Sm. striking at the translation mysseth that and hitteth onely the ignorant reader of it for if one have skil of the tongues know it to be truely translated this reason maketh nothing against his reading but for it So M. Sm. playes the sophister to argue against a holy thing because of the ignorances infirmities of some men He mought thus have cavilled against reading the law in Israel that no man blind of sight as was Ahijah the prophet could trie whither the original scriptures were truly written or not Secondly if he proceed further as he hath begun hereafter he may come with like reason thus Try al things keep the good thing but no man ignorant of the tongues can trie whither the interpretation of scriptures which the minister giveth in preaching the word or any text that he allegeth in his doctrine be fitt or good then mind what conclusion the Divil wil make hereupon in a simple mans conscience to draw him to doubt of and consequently to forsake and despise not onely al reading but also preaching of the word because he being ignorant of the tongues cannot judge or trie whither that which is read or taught be true according to the original scriptures And thus he falleth into the snare of Satan which Mr. Sm. here hath set in secret Thirdly this reason overthwarteth that which elsewhere the man granteth that the translation may be made the ground of our faith and an instrument to try doctrine by This being so how dooth Pauls counsel Trie al things c. make against translations Rom. 14 23. 1. Tim. 1. 4. 7. Heb. 11. 6. whatsoever cōmeth not from faith is syn but no man ignorant of the tongues can of faith use the translation seing he cannot examin it whither it be good or bad and so beleve or refuse it Therefore it is not of faith in him and so it is syn for him to use it before the eye in time of worship Like sophistrie and impietie is in this argument as in the former for it concludes not the thing unlawful in it selfe but onely in him that is ignorant of the tongues and his faith it seeks to shake For ther is no faith without Gods word and where to have this word he cannot tell If it be set over from the originals to his mother tongue in writing he cannot trie whither it be good or bad if the Minister translate or interpret it by voice the poor man is as much uncertain or more whither the teacher speak true or false Thus can he neyther read nor hear of sayth if M. Smyths engine once take
deceitful glosse contrary to the tenour of the text Two several works he acknowledgeth ruling and teaching yet two several men for these workes he wil not admit of But had he learned the Apostles word who is sufficient for these things he mought have seen a reason of the counsel of God in adding helps to the teachers of the word For if the Apostles those excellent master builders had need of supply for want of sufficiencie how much more need have wee weaklings It is Gods usual administration in his church for several works to appoint several persons so to Moses he committed the goverment political to Aaron the ecclesiastical To Moses he adjoyned 70. ancients of Israel besides the ordinarie inferiour governours to Aaron he gave for a gift the whole tribe of Levi. The Levites had also their special distributions some helping the Preists in sacrificing c. some tending to song and musik some warding the Tabernacle some looking to the treasures al joyntly the Ministers and teachers of the church Deut. 10 8. 33. 10. Christ also providing for the good of his church as he hath diversities of operations or effects to work in the same so hath he given diversities of gifts and these to diverse persons and also with diversities of ministeries or offices some to teach some to exhort some to distribute some to rvle that that gift which is dimm in one man may shine clear in an other and the church have the use and benefit of al. Now comes M. Sm. and he not being able to deney the diversities of works and operations required in the church yet dareth deney the diversities of offices and wil have one man in one limited office of the Pastor to do al that perteyneth to exhorting teaching and governing of the church though the scriptures doe so plainly distinguish And if men excelling in the gift of exhortation be chosen to attend unto that ministration or office of exhorting and others excelling in the gift of teaching others in governing be chosen to execute their gifts in the teachers and governours offices this he exclaymeth to be Antichristian for one office he thinks must doe al. To this end wresteth he these words of Paul The Elders that rule wel are worthy double honour specially they that labour in the word doctrine The specialtie sayth M. S. consisteth not in the works of ruling teaching but in the qualitie of the works viz wel ruling fupainll teaching I deney this violent construction and affirm the specially here added of Paul to respect a special distinct person in and for his work as may thus be manifested The Apostle treateth of honour and unto whom it belongeth Honour widowes sayth he which are widowes in deed Give double honour to the Elders that rule wel speciallie to them that labour in the word As honour double honour respecteth several persons in their several estates and imployments so double honour and special double honour respecteth several persons in and for their several works and imployments some ruling wel othersome labouring in the word Thus the scripture is plain But M. S. will have the specialtie to consist in the qualitie of the work viz wel ruling and painful teaching As if Paul would have double honour given to them that rule and teach but specially if they rule wel teach painfully But thus he neither speaketh nor meaneth For al rule is either wel or yll but ill rule deserves no honour therfore it were unmeet to appoint double honour in this respect where open rebuke rather is due and where losse and dammage followeth because the work must burn 1 Cor. 3. 14. 15. But take it as the Apostle speaks and intends widowes indeed are to have honour the wel ruling Elders are to have double honour thus it is meet and the meaning evident Now the specialtie cometh after wel ruling and respecteth an other work labouring in the word where the former word wel is again to be understood For false teachers laboured in the word to seduce and deceiv such were to have no special double honour but their mouths stopped and to be turned away from though they creep into howses though they use fair speech and flattering though they take such pains as they compasse sea and land to make one of their profession Again the word labouring makes not the specialtie as M. Smyth interpreteth it painful teaching for labour is a common dutie lying upon al church officers whose office is not in idlenes None can rule wel but with labour none can teach well but with labour and therefore PAVL useth this word of all the officers 1 Cor. 16. 16. So the specialty here is not for labour simply but for labour in the word doctrine which some Elders did differing from labour in government which othersome did as is evidēt both by this other scriptures as 1 Cor. 12. 28. thirdly teachers after that governours and Rom. 12. 7. 8. he that teacheth on teaching he that ruleth with diligence Thus several men were imployed in these several labours or works and in respect of the persons imployed is the word specially added and purposly put between rulers teachers as if the Apostle should say they that labour in ruling are worthy of double honor specially they that labour in teaching And that this is Pauls mind his plain words shew when he sayth they that rule and they that labour where this word they leadeth to diverse persons as in other scriptures they that have doon good and they that have doon evil they that weep and they that rejoyce and innumerable such speeches Agayn the word specially being put between them that rule and them that labour confirmeth this yet more for it increaseth the distinction as when Paul in the same Epistle sayth God is the saviour of al men specially of the faithful the word specially distinguisheth the faythful from other common men of the world who have not fayth in God and yet are saved or preserved by him that is the preserver of al his creatures and saveth man and beast So to Titus he sayth there are many deceivers of minds specially they of the circumcision where the word specially distinguisheth those of the circumcision from other deceivers and meaneth not the same but different persons And if here we take it not so for several persons where wel ruling is first set down and specially comes after for such as labour in the word and doctrine we overthrow the force and grace of Pauls gradation or stepping to his specialty And if he had meant as M. S. takes it for the qualitie of the works doon by the same persons it should be as otherwhere Paul writeth they that labour much or labour more then the rest but he speaks not so here M. S. expounding the place of the same persons to
aspes As where Mr. Sm. sayth that to the constitution of the typical Church meaning the church of Israel there was not required true holynes but ceremonial cleannes This is a false and blasphemous assertioÌ„ injurious to Gods holy majestie as making him to constitutea Church of hypocrites it is evidently overthrown by the covenants made between God and them Gen. 17. Exod. 19. 5. 6. 8. Exod. 20. and 21. c. and 24. 3. 4. 7. 8. Levit. 19. 2. with 1. pet 1. 15 16. Deut. 5. 1. 2. 3. and 26. 17. 18. 19. and 29. 10. 11. 12. 13. c. So when he sayth the Israelites did worship to repentance we doo worship from repentance therfore they might and did worship therby to reconcile themselves to God we being reconciled to God and accepted in Christ doe proceed to offer to the Lord the calves of our lips the best grace we have with us first men declare their repentance and then we receive them into our coÌ„munioÌ„ to worship with us with theÌ„ first men were received into typical coÌ„munioÌ„ and then they were trayned up to repentance and faith in Christ c. These the like distinctions Mr. Sm. hath fetched out of his own hart not from the word of God for although ther be differences many between them and us as touching outward rites and services ended abolished by Christ as the Epistle to the Ebrues sheweth yet as touching the substance of their religion worship constitution c. as touching repentance faith reconciliation to God c. ther was no such differences as Mr. Sm. feighneth They had the law to shew them their fyn and to bring them to Christ so have we Mat. 5. 17. Rom. 3 30. 31 and 7. 7. 12. 21. c. Iam. 2. 8. 9. 10. 11. We have the gospel to shew us our righteousnes by Christ without works of the law so had they Heb. 4. 2. Levit. 26 42 45. with Luk. 1. 54. 55 72. 73. Deut. 30. 1. 12. 13. 14. with Rom. 10. 5. 6. 8. Gen. 15. 6. Psal. 32. 1. 2. with Rom. 4. 6. c. 1 Cor. 10. 1. 2. 3. 4. Hebr. 11. Onely in the manner of administration the Law gospel ther be differences manifested Also when he sayth that the Iewes moral uncleannes did not pollute their ceremonial communion that their real wickednes did not pollute their ceremonial or typical CHURCH worship and communion but lawfully they might have typical communion in typical worship that were typically clean though they were wicked in deed these assertions manifest M. S. to be not onely a typical but a real seducer and deceiver of minds in deed who would make us beleeve that if a man in Israel had but touched his own wife lying in her child-bed or put aapart for her disease if he came to worship in â—â—e tabernacle and had not washed and clensed himself according to the law he polluted the Church and communion of the Saincts but though he had committed adulterie with his neighours wife and came into the tabernacle in his syn to worship without repentance yet he polluted not the Church but lawfully mought have communion in the word prayer sacrifices c. which unclean doctrine is evidently condemned by these and many other like scriptures Levit. 4. 2. 3. 13. 14. 22. 23. 27. 28. 35. Levit. 6. 2 7. Num. 15. 22. 23. 24. 27. 29. 30. 31. Levit. 19. 17. Levit. 18. 29. 30. Iosh. 22. 16. 17. 18. 20. But upon these and like rotten grounds M. S. hath now sought to build his towr of Anabaptisme which the breath of the Lord wil throw down upon his head Although therfore the cause which M. S. then had in hand was good and many good things are in that book yet the dead flyes have caused to stink and putrified the ointment of the apothecarie as in these so in other points which the wise must observe Leaving therefore those things I come to the matter which he maketh against me and in his foresayd book of Parallels pag. 67. hath thus inveighed But Mr Ains steppeth up with a new kind of Antichristianisme never heard of before and he teacheth us if we wil beleeve him that Christs ruling power is in the Eldership and that the Pope and Prelates ar not Antichrists for taking into their hands the power of the multitude but the power of Christ. Here first Mr S. maketh his owne collection to be my assertion I sayd not neyther would say thus absolutely Christs ruling power is in the Eldership my words are these Counterp pa. 176 We acknowledge Christ to have ordeyned a Presbyterie or Eldership and that in every Church for to teach and rule them by his owne word and lawes That which I wrote I plainely confirmed by scriptures in the margine which the reader may serch and judge of neyther hath this adversarie taken them away or sayd ought against them or yet set them downe in his book where he printed my words for his reader to take notice of That which I have written is further confirmed for the substance of it by Mr Sm. himself in the very same book of Parallels the last page but one where he hath set down this argument The goverment of the primitive Apostolik institution was by a college of Pastors or presbyterie The goverment of the English assemblies is by an antichristian Prelate and his officers Therfore The goverment of the English assemblies is not the primitivs Apostolik goverment The maior is evident c. Agayn in this very passage where he treateth of popular goverment he is driven into such straits as force him to say We dispute not whither the Elders must rule or not but we dispute who hav the negative voice c. and a little after yet we say the Elders are to lead and govern al persons and causes of the Church Who now wil not wonder at this mans malice to charge me with Antichristianisme for my writing and himself in the same book to write as he hath doon And were iâ— in deed Antichristianisme as he sayth which I have stepped up with yet he overlasheth with his tongue in calling it a new kind neverheard of before considering what he had heard before of M. Bernard if not of others as the opinion of those that he caleth Puritans But let us turn the edge of his own argument against himself thus The goverment of the primitive Apostolik institution was by a college of of pastors or presbyterie This M. S. himself defendeth But popular goverment by the multitude is not the goverment by a college of Pastors or presbyterie Therfore popular goverment by the multitude which yet M. Sm. would also plead for is not the goverment of the primitive Apostolik institution Agayn his argument helpeth me thus The goverment of the primitive apostolik institution is not Antichristianisme The goverment which J plead for in answer to M.
men to open and expound them to the understanding of al but this expounding is not reading Reading is first exactly to the letter exposition cometh after with such words as God putteth in the expositors hart as by Daniels practise we may learn Neyther are the words of the expositor comparable to the words of the writer these being divine are al as silver fined seven times no drosse mixed with them The other being humane I speak of ordinary men as we are and shewing the mans judgmēt that expoundeth them are mixed with humane infirmities mistakings and sometime deadly errors Wherfore reading of the Original scriptures wherof here we treat must be strictly literal as is in the book Translations are after to be spoken of and is here vainly inserted for Paul wrote in Greek which al in Colosse Laodicea Thessalonica and the whol country over used as their vulgar tongue that they needed none to translate for them Further M. S. answereth that the Apostle wrote upon particular occasions for particular ends and the commandment of reading was special in these respects to them c. yet acknowledgeth he at last an absolute necessity of reading onely he denyeth it to be a lawful help or part of spiritual worship c. As the Apostles so the prophets wrote upon particular occasions yet is there a general use for whatsoever is fore written is fore written for our learning as Paul himself teacheth Wherefore this cavil is frivolous An absolute necessitie of reading the scriptures now as they were read in Israel and in the Christian churches and to the same end is al that we hold and stand for Which how it is worship is before shewed The Apostle 1 Tim. 4. 13. 16. commanded Timothee and so al Elders to attend to reading wher reading is ioyned with exhortation and doctrine so importeth that it is to be understood of the ioyning of reading in the time of spiritual worship This obiection as the rest is made of M. Smyths own fashion and was never thus framed by us And here he excepteth that it is not spoken of the execution of his office but of preparing himself to the execution of it c. That reading in the publik church is necessary he is forced to acknowledge and in that we rest If he think this place is not meant of publik but of private reading he may keep his iudgment My self see no cause why it may not also be meant of the publik execution of his office for Paul departing from Ephesus besought Timothee to abide there and look unto the Church and after wrote this letter for his direction how to behave himself in Gods howse whiles he taried away and in it sayth til I come attend to reading to exhortation to doctrine where seing al these are publik ecclesiastical actions as M. Sm. himself granteth seing they are joyned thus togither with this limitatiō til J come what letteth but these al should be executed by him in publik Private reading for his own preparation was to be alwaies and not onely til Pauls coming And as for such preparation it is mentioned after in vers 15 and both again jointly vers 16. for the salvation of himself and others Let it be granted that the Apostles and Evangelists used no books being extraordinay men and having the extraordinary direction of the spirit for they needed no such helps of books as we doe yet wee being ordinarie men have need of books c. This last objection I reject as frivolous and falsly intimated to be ours The Apostles I am sure had no greater measure of the spirit then Christ yet he read publikly in the book and so did holy men of God before him publik reading is grāted yet necessary therfore we are to use it Though we have more need of the book then the Apostles our memories and judgements not being sanctified like theirs yet had they their infirmities and used books But it is Gods ordinance of reading that we stād for which how M S. hath sought to undermine and how he is snared in the work of his own hands is worthy to be noted with Higgajon Selah and meditated to the praise of God OF TRANSLATIONS THe first and onely controversie between M. Sm. and us being about the scriptures translated or overset into other tongues which he affirmed to be apocrypha and humane writings how ever he hath sought to excuse and hide his error yet hath he no wil to forsake it as appeareth by this that having spoken of writings 1. by men inspired of God as the prophets and Apostles and 2. by ordinarie men of al sorts he shuffleth the translations of the holy scriptures among these latter and affirmeth that * there is no better warrant to bring translations of scripture written into the church and to read them as parts or helps of worship then to bring in expositions resolutions paraphrasts and sermons upon the scripture seing al these are equally humane in respect of the work equal ly divine in respect of the matter they handle Very impious is this comparison which thus matcheth a mans comment or written sermon with Gods written word set over into an other tongue for it debaseth the majestie of Gods law and advanceth too high the basenes of men Translation is that in writing which interpretation is in speaking namely the expressing of an others mind but commenting or expounding is the expressing of ones own mind or understanding The scriptures first written in Hebrue and secondarily written in English do set forth one and the same word mind of God unto us though which different letters sownds as Emmanuel is interpreted and translated God with us Mat. 1 23. Messias is interpreted CHRJST in Greek ANOJNTED in English Iohn 1. 41. Here the Hebrue Greeke and English differ onely in outward letter sound the meaning substance or essential form being one in them al the word of God so caled by relation because the mind of God is made knowne hereby to the mind or understanding of man The different letter or character changeth not the nature of the thing for if it did then Emmanuel written by Matthew in Greek letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by Esaias in Hebrew letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should not be one and the same name of Christ and so the Apostle should be made a falser our gospel betrayed to faithlesse Iewes The different sound or pronūciation changeth not the nature of the thing for then Messias and Christ shoul not be one and the same and so the gospel and new testament and our faith were overthrown and more then Iewish superstition should prevail But God who hath sanctified by his spirit all sounds and languages to the ear hath also sanctified by the same spirit all letters and characters to the eye as th'Apostles practise sheweth writing with
runns on in error His cōceipt of mental reading as it hath no groūd frō Christ here nor any prophet or Apostle to be the ordinary way of reading or interpreting scripture so mind we it to be a far more vncertayn and erroneous course let the man make as many Querees after it as he will Having answered these few objections as we see he afterwards questioneth whither the hearers may have their translations or the originals to read or search in time of prophesie Which he deneyeth Of this point though it was not controverted between us yet I wil speak what I mind about it Not condemning it as dooth he nor iustifying it as it is abused by some but shewing the mean which I take to be best His first reason is that the Prophets and Apostles wrote books but never divided them into chapters or verses Henry Stephen first made the verses of the N. Testament whereupon he concludeth that the hearers could not serch their bookes in time of hearing I deney the consequence for in reading the law expounding it comparing words with that which went before and after the hearers mought serch and see though it were with more difficultie Secondly the Hebrue bibles that we have are all divided into chapters and verses as also into other sections noting where the lecture of the law began and ended and the lecture of the Prophets answerable to it Whither the first writers did this or the Church after them I wil not dispute but that thus they might doe I make no doubt For God hath left to the discretiō of the Church and Ministers what quantitie of scripture to read and teach of And this was the practise in th' Apostles dayes for it was not possible that every sabbathall the law and prophets should be read over the Hebrue letters and marginall notes are sufficient records of the antiquitie of them The Churches practise in the books of the Prophets sheweth us our libertie in the Apostles writings which cannot be read over at once And long before Henry Stephens time the Greek copies of the new Testament had chapters and sections though otherweise then we now have And Matthewes gospel parted into 68. chapters or titles and 355. sections was in a manner as easie for the readers to serch as it is now with us and so the rest His second reason is that th' Apostles in citing scriptures quote not chapter and verse but onely say it is written by Zacharie by Jeremie the scripture sayth c. This reason dependeth on the former and is there answered in part Further I observe the Apostles speak diversly sometime naming no book at all sometime naming the book as the Psalmes sometime a part of the book as the second psalme and how they particulated matters in their doctrine is not set down the summonely of things is recorded The argument therfore concluding thus it is not written that they quoted chapters therefore they did it not is not of force negatively But if if be true which Hilarie an ancient writer recordeth that the seventie Greek interpreters did number and order the Psalmes and we find that sometimes the Apostles quoted what Psalm in nōber they alleged it may warrant us such like use of humane labours for help of our memorie His third reason is of like nature that no mention is made of any hearer that had his book c. yet mought it be say I though it were not mentioned they used to dispute in their synagogues after the lecture was ended and that by the scriptures and the hearers serched the scriptures dayly for trial of doctrine Who now can say that the hearers had or used no books in the synagogues His 4. reason is that serching quotations hindreth attention for the mind and affections are distracted from hearing by seeking the places c. This I grant to be amysse in all that so use their books for diligent eare shoud be given to all that is spoken Howbeit this abuse may not abolish the lawful use for as by turning of leaves many hinder thēselves in time of hearing so many againe attentively hearkning and comparing things spoken with the matters before and after in the chapter are not hindred at all but greatly furthered by looking on their books And for this matter I rest with that rule given by th' Apostle for all things to be doon unto edification seemlily and with order 1 Cor. 14. 12. 40. His last reason is that manuscripts being few and very dear there being yet no printing found out all could not have or bring their bookes but there is onely one kind of true aad profitable hearing eyther all to have bookes and serch or none If God have left it to the wisdom and discretion of his people when and how to use the scriptures so it be not to confound actions or hinder their good I wil not bring their libertie into bondage nor prescribe a law where God hath given none Though written copies were dear yet were they many many had them not all for all now have not That such as have not books or cannot read should prejudice other that have can there is no reason It is not therefore for us to walk by example in this case but by general ground and equitie from Gods law who permitteth us free use of the scriptures for our edification according to which if men use them in private or publik they do well Thus am I at an end about the mayn cōtroversie of the scriptures which for the readers good I have beaten out and explaned shewing the true differences which he handled covertly for his best advantage Wherein the judicious may discern how Mr. Sm. hath been up and down wavering like a reed shaken of the wind sometimes seming to allow translations sometime bitterly writing against them that as easie it is to know the way of a serpent upon the rock as the way of a man with his mineon error A DEFENCE OF CHRISTS MINISTERIE in the church against the contradiction of M. Smyth VNto the former battel against the scriptures M. Sm. addeth strife about the ministerie affirming that the triformed presbyterie as he calleth it consisting of three kind of Elders viz. Pastors Teachers Rulers is none of Gods ordinance but mans devise and that lay elders so called are antichristian That other point being an idol of his own invention which he would have had worshiped in our church I have more largely dealt against this latter being a thing oft discussed heretofore and no new thing by him alleged I wil the more briefly answer M. Smyth a while before both agreed in judgment with us and wrote in defence of this ministerie which now he oppugneth but that his first fayth and labours he retracteth in this book and sithence is fallen into further error about the covenant between God and his people So by degrees he is come to undermine the
word the ministerie and the covenant of grace three mayn grounds of Christian religion to manifest himself one of those which privily should bring in damnable heresies even denying the Lord that hath bought them and bring upon themselves swift damnation Touching the Eldership his assertion is The presbyterie is uniform consisting of Officers of one sort Esa. 66. 28. compared with Exod. 28. 1. and Num. 11. 24. 25. 1 Tim. 3. 1 8. Act. 14. 23. Phil. 1. 1. Ier. 23. 1 4. Ezek. 34. 1 6. If this opposite would have avouched the contrarie he mought with farr more reason have alleged these scriptures For Isa. 66. 21. speaketh of Preists Levites which had charge of the sacrifices sanctuarie and Num. 11. 24. mentioneth the LXX elders of Israel joyned with Moses to ayd him in the government and which mought not meddle with the sacrifices And are these fit scriptures to prove Officers of one sort If he mean no other Uniformitie in the presbyterie then was between those Elders and the Preists he fighteth with his own shadow not with us who hold a more strict agreement in the Eldership of the church now then was in that Eldership and preisthood of the law where one tended to civil causes the other to ecclesiastical But I wil come to his reasons proving the Elders to be of one sort viz. al Pastors First in the old testament sayth he there was but one kind of Priests who had equal authority to administer al the holy things excepting the high Priest who typed forth Christ so proportionably in the new Testament there is but one sort of Elders who succede the Preists in the dispensation of holy things Esa. 66. 21. Behold here at first the falshood of this adversarie even now he quoted scriptures that spake of Preists Levites and other Elders al which were different and here he taketh one sort onely Preists to conclude about the Eldership of the church of Christ. But thus to reason from part of the figure to the whol thing figured is mere deceit Again he misseth in his proportion making al the Elders now to succeed the Preists then who had equal authoritie to administer al the holy things For the prophet speaketh both of Preists and Levites Isa 66 21. which had not equal authoritie in al the holy things as the law plainly sheweth Numb 16. 8. 9. 10. 40. and 18. 2. 3. If now al the Elders be of one sort equally administer al the holy things proportion is not kept with the Priests and Levites of the law as Esaias prophesied M. Sm. saw this inconvenience and therfore afterwards seeketh thus to shift it off The Deacons sayth he in the new testament are answerable to the Levites in the old as the Elders ar answerable to their Preists Esa. 66. 21. compared with 1 Chron. 26. 20. Here agayn he useth his former fallacie concluding from part of the Levites unto the whole And taking one peece of scripture he neglecteth many other vvhich make against him For as 1 Chron. 26. 20. shevveth that some Levites had charge of the treasures so 1 Chron. 23. 27. 28. c. and 25. 1 2. c. and 26. 1 2. c. Num. 18 other scriptures many shevv that othersome vvere assistants to the Preists in the service of the Lords hovvse in al businesses staÌ„ding every morning and evening to give thanks and to prayse the Lord and togither vvith the Preists did teach instruct the people according to the blessing which Moses pronounced upon the whole tribe Deut. 33. 9. 10. So that the Levites were Ministers also of the word prayer which is directly differing from the Deacons office in the Church now as appeareth Act. 6. 2. 3. 4. As in the old Testament there was the sanhedrim which consisted of 70. ancients for the administration of the kingdom which was a type of the visible Church all which elders in their first institution did prophesie and were of one kind under Moses so in the new testament under Christ Jesus which is the King of the Church ther is asuâ—â—drion or eldership consisting of ancients of one kind who administer for the good of the Church Rev. 4. 4. 5. 6. First here is the same fallacie that we had before concluding froÌ„ a part to the whol For in the former Esaias was cited for Preists and Levites to be figures of our Ministers and now the Ancients of Israel are alleged for figures also because these AncieÌ„ts were of one sort therefore all the Presbyterie figured both by Preists of Levi and by Ancients of other tribes must be all of one sort The conclusion is vanitie Rather the reason should be framed thus as the teaching Preists were of one sort and the governing Elders of an other so the teaching Ministers and the governing elders differ at this day Or taking those Elders politik to be figures of our Elders ecclesiastik as M. Sm. maketh them the true proportion is but this as governing elders then so governing elders now are all of one sort and this is that which we hold Neyther wil his other places Rev. 4. 4. and 5. 6. help him any better For he seemeth to understand by that vision the church and by the 24. elders about the throne all which were of one kind the eldership of the Church but he should with all have considered that besides those Elders there were 4. other winged creatures ful of eyes which incessantly praysed God and went before the Elders in this action of worship and these were of the number of the redeemed by Christ blood and of the Kings and Preists that reigned on earth and being as meet to signifie the Teachers of the Church as the 24. are to signifie the ruling elders wil rather shew a difference between the teachers and governours of the Church then that they should be of one sort How beit I rest not in his exposition of those Elders but that is another point Againe sayth he if Pastor Teacher Elder had been 3. offices formally differing the Apostle intending to teach the several officers of the church would have mentioned them 1 Tim. 3. but there he onely mentioneth Bishops and Deacons according as Philip. 1. 1. go Bishops are onely of one sort or kind How M. Sm. understandeth this phrase of formally differing I cannot tel his logik is not like every mans the speach being well taken I admit of and doe deney the consequence of his argument that if they differ formally they should have been mentioned 1 Tim. 3. for it is as if he should have sayd if Preists Levites differ formally Moses would so have mentioned them Deut. 33. 8 -10 Nay Moses having mentioned the difference other where thought it not needful to set it down here and so dooth th' Apostle It is a weak ground to conclude against a thing because it is not written