Anna c. He is not a Iewe which is one outward neither is that Circumcision which is outward in the flesh But he is a Iewe which is one within and the circumcision is of the hart whose praise is not of meÌ„ but of God Rom. 2 28 29. Now how God in the time of Poperie the publick Ministerie of the word being corrupted had his inuisible Church is thus declared There were a coÌ„pany of baptized Infants which were a great part of the Church but Note By this declaration it appeares tâ—at we doe not condemne our godly ancestours who liued in the time of Poperie the Church was neuer at any time without baptized children seeing that Baptisme euen vnder the raigne of Antichrist remained in the Church There were alwaies godly intelligeÌ„t meÌ„ which gaine-said the Pope sometimes openâ—y sometimes secretly See the booke intiâ—uled Catalâ—gus testium veritatis and those who gaine-said him had them which approâ—ed their iudgement although by reason of the tyrannie of the Bishops of Rome they durst not openly make profession thereof There were also many simple men whose harts were more pure thaÌ„ were the mouthes of their teachers The simpler sort had the chiefe fundamentall points of Christian Religion in the Lords praier the Creede and the ten Commaundements whereby they might bee instructed to a true faith a right inuocating of God and an holy life They heard the Passion of Christ read out of the stories of the Euangelists as also the rehearsing of the Gospels They might therfore out of the text neglecting the glosses of their Preachers learn those things which are necessarie to saluation They confirmed their faith by receauing the holy Supper of the Lord which though it was maimed of the one kinde the cup being quite taken froÌ„ them yet were not they in fault who were coÌ„strained to endure that tyrannie The Masse and other idolatrous seruice by the speciall prouidence of God were celebrated in the Latine tongue for which cause the Lay people were the lesse partakers of their idolatrie which vnderstoode not what was done They had Christ the foundation It is credible therefore that in their agonie the stubble that was built vpon the foundation was consumed but theÌ„selues saued as it were by the fire of tentation tribulation 1 Cor. 3. Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason 1 Yee are the light of the World a City that Note 〈◊〉 this 〈◊〉 our Aduersaries should proue that the church is onely visible but they proue nothing els but that the church is visible which is not questioned is set on an hill cannot be hid also no man lighteth a candle and putteth it vnder a bushell c. Mat. 5 14 15. therefore the Church is visible Ans 1. I graunt the whole reason if by the Church be meant the externall publick Ministerie 2 It is a fallacie from that which is spoken in some respect to the same taken absolutely for in that the Church is said to be visible that is true in some respect onely that is not in respect of the inward man but of the outward publick Ministerie 2 That the Church is visible and that the Church is inuisible be contradictories therefore if it be granted that the Church is visible the inuisible is ouerthrowne Ans Contradictions are not vnlesse they be spoken of the same things and in the same respect but that Church is called visible in one respect and inuisible in another for it is visible in respect of the externall companie of them that heare the Word and vse the Sacraments but it is inuisible in respect of the inward man and true faith which is knowne to God alone as before I said 3 Vnlesse the Church bee visible there will not bee an apparent and free accesse to the Church for any man which ought notwithstanding continually to be so Answer 1. There is an equiuocation in the worde Church First it is taken for the publick Ministerie of the Word and Sacraments and so I grant the whole reason Secondly it is taken for those which doe truly beleeue the Word and rightly vse the Sacraments and so the conclusion is to be denied 2 By that which hath beene saiâ— it appeareth that the Antecedent speaketh of the former the consequent of the later acceptioÌ„ of the Church and so there bee foure termes in the Syllogisme 4 Christ bids vs heare the Church Matthew 18. Which if it bee inuisible cannot bee found out Answer 1. I answere to this reason as to the former 2 Our Aduersaries haue more in the conclusion than in the premisses For thus much followeth that there is a certaine visible church or that in some meaning the church is visible but that there is onely a visible Church there is neuer a word in the place cited 5 The Fathers did oppose the authoritie of the visible Church against Heretikes therefore there must needes be a visible Church Ans 1. It is a fallacie supposing that for a cause which is not For they did not oppose the authority of the Church against the Heritikes for that it was either visible or inuisible but because at that time it preserued the sacred bookes and the sincere profession of the Doctrine 2 Neither did the Fathers seeke to represse the Heritikes by the onely authoritie of the Church but stroue against them with the authoritie of the Scripture Question 3. Whether the Church may erre Our Aduersaries denie it hoping that if it appeare as in truth it doth that the Church in ancient times was at Rome and if that the Church cannot erre that they shall easily without any adoe free themselues from all crime of falshoode by the bare name of the Church being free from all errour But we denie it for these reasons Because the promises of preseruing the purity of the Church are conditionall and not absolute as if yee continue in my word yee are verily my Disciples Ioh 8. 31. Because where the thing doth testifie the contrarie there no plea hath place But we haue examples ready at hand both in the olde and new Testament that the Church hath erred 1. The Church of the olde Testament aâ— concerning the publick Ministerie hath often erred as in the Wildernes when iâ— worshipped the Calfe in the time of the Iudges it oftentimes fell away from the true seruice of God The like happeneâ— vnder the gouernment of King Ahab iâ— the time of Ieremie and of Christs comming in the flesh 2. In the new Testament the Church erred 1 In the Church of Corinth many doubted of the Resurrection of the dead 2 The Galathians swarued from the Apostolick doctrine of Paul in the article of Iustification 3 The Church of Pergamus fauoured the Nicholaitans Reuelation 2 15. 3. At this day the Church of Rome doth erre in many things which hereafter shall be made to appeare as cleare as the noon day The particular members of the Church are not free from error as it is plaine that Peter
infallible as beeing receiued from heauen Heere therefore wee are to handle three questions 1 Whether the Church of Rome or our Church bee the true Church 2 Whether wee ought to grant that there is an invisible Church 3 Whether the Church can erre First of al in the entrance we must obserueâ— that there may many waies arise ambiguitiâ— in the word Church First it doth signifie indefinitely Ambiguitie in the word Church euery Church or congregation and is taken both in the good and bad paâ—â— for any kinde of assembly or congregation whence also the Scripture maketh mentioâ— of the malignant Church Secondly it is tâ—ken for the company of them which aâ— called by the outward ministerie of thâ— word and Sacraments wherein are gathâ—red both good and bad Matthew 13. Thirdlie it is taken for the inuisible Church or the company of them which vse the Ministerie of the Word and Sacraments to their saluation and are truely beleeuers which also may bee called the companie of the Elect. Fourthly it is taken foure maner of waies in respect of the foure fold outward face of the Church 1 For the most pure Church of the Apostles 2 for the Church of the Fathers wherein there was a more sincere state of doctrine than in after-ages yet it was not altogether voide of superstition 3 For the Church of Antichrist which is ouerflowne with horrible Idolatrie as with a kinde of deluge 4 For the reformed Church restored according to the conformitie of the Apostolick Church A fift signification the Papists haue made vs vnderstanding by the Church not a company of teachers learners but the Pope Cardinalls Bishoppes Monkes c. By obseruing of these distinctions we shall detect many stratagems of the Papists seeing they play continually with the ambiguitie or equiuocation of the word Church and in their arguments they bring sometimes fiue termes But now let vs come to the questions Question 1. Whether the Church of Rome which at this day blasphemes the Gospell of Christ curseth and persecuteth the professours thereof or ours be the true Church Wee denie that the Church of Rome is the true Church for these reasons Because they want the true notes and the true definition of the Church therefore neither haue they the definitum that is the Church 1. The Church heareth the voice of Christ Iohn 10 27 Which is reuealed in the Scripture which the Papists do not heare and that 1 in refusing it for their Iudge 2 in making decrees in many thinges against it 3 In giuing it but cold and slender commendation 2. Because they haue not the sincere ministration of the Sacraments and that 1 in forging new Sacraments 2 in defiling Baptisme with humane superstitions 3 in making Monasticall habite state equall to it 4 In changing the Lords supper into a sacrifice 5 And in the Câ—munion of lay people in maiming it of the one kinde that is by taking the cup froÌ„ the people they haue not therefore an vncorrupt Ministerie and consequently their Church may not be called a true Church Because they haue not so much as the notes which the Papists themselues require in the definition of a Church 1. Their Church hath not vnitie 1 Because they striue amongst theÌ„selues about manie things 2 They haue not vnitie by reason of the foure-fold face and condition of the Church before noted 2. Their church is not holy because they trust in their own holines which before god is not holines but as filthy clouts Isai 64 6. 3. It is not Catholick 1 Because they haue not the consent of the whole world for the Greeke Church hath alwaies dissented from them in diuers points 2 because they defend not the vniuersall true doctrine of all times therefore they neither agree with the Church of the Apostles nor yet with the Church of the Fathers 4. It is not Apostolick because they agree not with the Apostles doctrine seeing verie many of their thinges are not Apostolick but superstitions raked together and compiled of sundry Authors Take for example there of the Canon of the Masse and the mangling of the Lords Supper which was vnknowne for many ages and at length established by the Counsell of Constance Likewise Indulgences the feast of Corpus Christi other moe without number concerning which looke Polidor Virgil. lib. 4. cap. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 As also the whole 5 6 7 8 bookes But of such like superstitions of the Romaine Church that they be contrary to the Scripture shal hereafter bee spoken in their proper places sufficiently Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason thus 1 The Church of God hath had the name of the Church euer since the Apostles time therefore it is the true Church Answ 1. It followeth not It was long agoe Simil. This woman was long since a Maid therfore nowe she cannot be an harlot therefore now it is 2 There is no good argument from the bare name of a thing to the thing it selfe 3 Neither yet doe wee denie but that there doth at this day remaine some Church in the City of Rome to wit of such as bee yong children girles and simple men which simply believe in Christ their Saviour and trust nor in their owne merits Neither is it to be doubted but that there be some intelligent and wise men in Rome who with all their hearts derest the Popes impietie and tyrannie But all these are not that Roman Church with the authoririe wherof our Aduersaries do seeke to oppresse and beare vs downe 2 The Fathers themselves did account the Roman Church for the true Church Ans 1 Here be foure termes For in the Antecedent the worde Church is taken for that face or condition of the Church which was in the Fathers time in the consequent for that state wherin Antichrist doth raigne Now it followes not it was so twelue or thirteene hundred yeares ago or vpward therefore it is so now 3 The state of the Roman Church is most antient therefore the Roman Church by reason of his antiquity is the true Church Ans 1 We denie the Antecedent for the testimonies alleaged before out of Polidor Vergill 2 not simply that which is ancieÌ„t is to be received but that which is most ancient For the Devill is ancient but God is more ancient 3 Antiquity cannot make that good which in it selfe is bad 4 The Church of Rome is the Vniversall and Catholicke Church therefore it is the trve Church Ans Wee denie the Antecedent For if by the word Catholicke be meant that which agreeth with the Catholicke and so with the Apostles doctrine then the Antecedent is absolutely false But if the Church of Rome be called Catholicke by reason of the multitude of those that take parte and cleave to that side then the multitude of them that err is no iust defence for the error Otherwise in the time of Arrianisme the Apostolicke CHVRCH as beeing brought to a great paucitie shoulde
not have beene the true and Catholicke Church but the Arrians should have been the Catholick Church for that they far exceeded in nuÌ„ber the rest which were the true Christians In this sence therefore wee deny the consequence The Antecedent also is not true because as before I sayde the Church of Rome doth not consent with the Church of the Apostles nor yet with the Church of the Fathers And therefore they haue not that vniuersality of multitude whereof they boast 5 If the Church of Rome bee not the true Church then for some ages together Christ had beene without a spouse but Christ never was without a spouse Therefore c. An 1. From a speciall to a generall arguments are drawen only affirmatively It is no good consequence therefore the church of Rome consisting of Popes Cardinalls Bishops Priests and others of the same ranke who withstood the heauenly truth were not the spouse of Christ therefore Christ had no spouse 2. I deny the maior or first propositioÌ„ For there were also other Churches as the Greeke Church which alwaies gainsayd the Bishop of Rome and wherein Christ might haue his spouse The argument therefore proceedes from an insufficient enumeration or reckoning vp of the parts to the whole 3 In the visible erronious Church of Rome there was the spouse of CHRIST hidden to the eye of the World all glorious within Psal 45 13 or the inuisible companie of belieuers Ans so Christ neuerthelesse had his Spouse On the contrarie side that we haue the Church of God with vs we proue Because to us agreeth the definition of the church therefore the church which is the thing defined agreeth to vs also 1. For in our Church the vncorupt ministerie of the word and Sacraments dooth flourish for witnesse whereof wee haue the holy scripture nay our Aduersaries theÌ„selues who hither to coulde neuer shewe out the Scripture that there is any thing in our Ministerie doctrine or administration of the Sacramentes contrarie to Christ or his Apostles Therefore wee are the true Church Because our Church in respect both of the Word and Sacraments is comformable to the Church described in the writings of the New testament vnder the Apostles Contrariwise our Aduersaries do reason thus 1 The Protestants belieue not all thinges which the Church of Rome dooth Therefore they are not the true Church Ans 1. There is more in the Conclusion than in the premises For no more followeth thence than that we do not agree with the Church of Rome in all things which who will deny But wee may not for that cause be thought not to be the true Church 2 It is a begging of the question For whether they which gaine-say the Churh of Rome do gaine-say the true Church that is the thing in controversie 2 The Protestants Church dooth not agree with the Church of the Fathers in all thinges Therfore they are not the true Church of Christ Ans 1. This argument is too common and agrees to both sides For by the same reason it may be proved that the Papists are not the Church because their Church which they cannot deny hath much fallen away from the Church of the Fathers 2 the church of the Fathers is not the sampler of Churches but the Church of the Apostles to which it is sufficient that our Church is like 3 The Prodestants doctrine is new It is but few yeares agoe since it first sawe the light Therefore their Church is not the true Church Answ 1. This is a begging of the question For that same is the matter in controversie 2. Our doctrine is not new but renued 3. There are therefore foure termes in the Argument For in the Maior proposition the worde Newe is taken for that which is simply and altogether new in the Minor for the refined and renued ministerie of the Word reformed according to the rule of the most ancieÌ„t doctrine of the Prophets Christ and the Apostles 4 The Church ought to have vnitie but so hath not the Church of the Protestants for it is rent and devided into parts and schismes Ans 1 Heere be foure termes For in the Maior proposition by the word Church are meant those which in truth and deede are the Church in the minor those which are in the outward company of the Church or those which have mingled themselves amongst our Church when as in truth they be not of our opinioÌ„ And these sever themselues from the true Church of them who maintaine the truth and stirre vp Schismes Of such sort of men Saint Iohn saith They went out from vs but they were not of vs for if they had been of vs they would have continued with vs 1 Iohn 2 19 2 It is a fallacie taking that for a cause which is not a cause Because the Church is not the cause of tumults and schismes but Schismatickes are the cause therof Otherwise the Church of Corinth had not beene the true church seeing Paul writeth There must be heresies among you 1 Corinth 11 19. Question 2 Whether we must grant that there is an inuisible Church The Papists acknowledge onely a visible Church which same they tye to the Pope Cardinalls Bishops c. rather than to the hearers But wee in this visible companie of them that heare the Word and vse the Sacraments doe believe that there is an other companie inuisible to the eies of men not in respect of the members persons themselues but in respect of the inteÌ„t of their hart and their fayth which is only known vnto God And that for these reasons Because wee believe the holy Catholicke Church but faith is the ground and evideÌ„ce of things which are not seene Heb 11 1. Because those which are in the visible Church may a great part of them be hypocrites betweene such and the true beleeuers God alone doth discerne vnto vs the hearts of men are not knowne and the Church doth iudge of secret â—gings 1. Christ knowes his sheepe Ioh 10. 14 27 2 The foundation of God remaineth sure and hath this seale The Lord knoweth who are his Timo. 2. 19. Because we haue the thing it selfe the invisible Church deciphered by examples in the holy Scriptures 1 For a long time hath Israel beene without the true God and without priest to teach and without law but there Christ was not altogether deprived of his Spouse but though the ministerie were corrupted he had his invisible Church 2. Chron. 15. 3. 4. 2 I will leaue vnto me saith the Lord seven thousand men in Israel which haue not bowed the knee vnto Baal 1. Ki. 19. 18. But this company could not then be perceived with bodily eyes but was invisible and only knowne vnto God as is gathered out of verse 10 and 14. â— At the time of Christs comming into thâ— world when the publick Ministerie of the Word was corrupted God had his inuisible Church Marie Ioseph Zacharie Elizabeth the wise men that came froÌ„ the East Simeon
erred Galath 2 11 14. All admonitions and predictions of the changes of the Church of taking heede of 1 Iohn 2 18 c 1 cor 11 1â— Math 7. 15 Act â—0 28 29 c 2 Thessal â— 2. 15. false teachers of diligent keeping of sound doctrine c were friuolous superfluous if â—t were impossible that the church shold err And why aboue all other Churches the Church of Rome whereof we now treate â—hould haue this speciall priuiledge that it â—annot erre there is not one sillable or title in â—he holy Scriptures Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason thus 1 The Church is the pillar and ground of truth 1 Timothie 3. 15. Therefore it cannot erre and consequently the Church of Rome neuer did erre An. 1. There are heer foure terms because the Antecedent speakes of the true Church in which alone is Saluation to bee had and which is the keeper of the writings of the Prophets and Apostles but the consequent speaketh of the Church of Rome which is indeede the company and Church of Babilon 2 It is a fallacie from that which is spoken but in some respect onely to the same taken absolutely Because the Church is the pillar and ground of truth that is so long as it maintaineth the truth followes the direction of Gods word But and if it swarue aside from the word of God it can no longer be called the pillar of truth 2 Christ promised to the Church the Spirit of truth Iohn 14 16 17 Therefore the Church cannot erre Answer 1. This promise did principallie pertaine to the Apostles in whom it was most exactly fullfilled and secondarily to the Church which holdeth the doctrine of the Apostles such as the Church of Rome is not at this day 2 It followeth not the holy ghost was given to the Church therefore the Church shall retaine it forever Or the spirit was given to the Church therefore the Church dooth alwaies follow the direction and guiding of the Spirit For neither did Christ so promise his holy Spirit that needs it must abide with the Church howsoever the Church behaue it selfe and turne aside from the revealed Word of God For so the Church of the Galatians coulde never haue been seduced 3 Christ prayed for the Church Father sanctifie them with thy truth c Ioh 17 17. therefore it cannot err Ans 1 Here bee foure termes The Antecedent speakes of the companie of the Elect or the inuisible as is plaine by the whole text the consequent of the visible Church 2. It is a fallacie from that which is spoken but in some respect to the same taken absoly For Christ speakes so adding withall a condition Thy Word is truth Therefore this promise is tyed to the obseruance of that worde as to a certaine condition 4 My Spirit which is vpon thee and my words which I have put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor out of the mouth of thy seede from henceforth for euermore Isai 59 21. Ans 1 If this promise had beene made without condition then it would follow that God had not kept his promise For these words doe immediately goe before They shall feare the name of the Lord from the West and his glory from the rising of the sunne or the East but the Easterne Churches have had a most miserable downe-fall long agoe This promise therefore is condtionall as if God should say I will not forsake thee for ever if thou forsake not me It is therefore a fallacy from that which is spoken but in some respect to the same taken absolutely 2 This promise belongeth to the Church which obeieth the word of God vnto which God will never be wanting with his spirit 5 The Comforter shall abide with you for ever Ioh 14 16. therefore the Church of Rome cannot erre Ans 1 What agreement is there between the Apostles witnesses against whom no exception can be taken the present Church of Rome as now it is vnder the kingdome of the Pope which differeth so much from the Church which Paul taught at Rome as light dooth from darkenesse 2 There is no good consequence from that which is spoken indefinitely to the same spoken definitely or determinately but in the Antecedent the speech is indefinite in the consequent definite There be therfore in this reason foure termes 6 Christ sayth that hee will abide with his Church vntil the end of the World Mat 28 20. Therefore the Roman Church cannot erre Simil. The Husband promised that hee would bee faithfull to his wife all his life loÌ„g therefore she caâ—not become an adultere Ans 1 There is more in the conclusion than in the Premisses for it followeth not Christ remaineth with his Church therfore the Church can in nothing swarue from Christ 2 Besides the Argument is from that which is spoken indefinitely to the same taken definitely 3. And there bee foure termes For Christ speakes of the true Church wherewith the present Church of Rome to which our Aduersaries wrest this promise hath no agreement besides the bare and naked name onely 7 The gates of Hell shall not overcome the Church Mat 16 18. Ans 1 Heere bee foure termes In the Antecedent the Church is meant which is built vpon Christ his Word and SacrameÌ„ts but in the consequent such a Church is meant as is built vpon the Pope and Traditions of men 2 As long as the Church remaineth vpon this Rocke that is Christ it is inuincible but not so if it make defection from the Gospell of Christ CHAP 8. Of the Bishop of Rome THe Papists being driven from their holds which have now beene treated of doe flee to the authoritie of the Pope as to a sure sacred anchor For they imagine 1 that Christ appointed Peter as his Vicar in the Church 2. And gave vnto him both the dominioÌ„ over the whole Church and also the dominion of faith 3 that Peter was Bishop at Rome and gave the same authoritie of dominion to that sea or place 4 That the Bishops of Rome are his successours both in Power and Office And that therefore whatsoeuer proceedes out of their mouth of any point of Religion must needes be infallibly true and that all the faithfull or all Christians are bound to obey them From this rope platted of sand arise moreover these questions 1 Whether Christ have need of any such Vicar on earth 2 Whether Christ gave Peter authority power whereby he should beare rule over the rest of the Apostles and have the dominion of faith 3. Whether Peter were at Rome and did there constitute this order 4 Whether the Bishops of Rome be the successors of Peter the Apostle Question 1 Whether Christ have neede of any visible head or Vicar in his Church on Earth The Papists affirme and wee denie it for these reasons Christ had ill provided for his Church if he had ordained a man vniversall Vicar which might erre as beeing a man as
c. Now if our Aduersaries think he spoke these words of the choise and difference of meates why doe they not leaue the vse of meates in mens libertie and why do they not take away the difference betweene him that eateth and him that eateth not 3 Seeing Paul speaketh of a thing which hee leaueth in free choise and our Aduersaries of a thing not lefte at liberty this allegation of Paul is impertinent And there be 4. termes 3 It is good not to eate flesh Rom 14 21. Ans 1 Paul speaketh of the moderating of Christian liberty wherof there is no controuersie which seeing our Aduersaries doe wrest to the abrogating of Christian liberty there is more in the conclusion than in the premisses and there is committed the fallacy of taking that absolutely which is spoken but in part onely 2 If these words of Paul do binde vs to a choise of meates then it will follow that we must not drinke wine neither For Paul ioyneth these together It is not good to eate flesh nor to drinke wine Whence one of the two dooth follow that either these words are alleaged impertinently or that the Church of Rome doth erre in not forbidding the vse of wine The latter our Aduersaries do not grant Therefore needs they must grant the former 4 If meate offend my brother I will eate no flesh while the World standeth that I may not offend my brother 1 Cor 8 13. Ans 1 Paul doth not speake of the popish difference of meates wherein the vse of all flesh generally is forbidden but of things sacrificed to idolls Therefore it is nothing to the purpose 2 Euen this moderating of our liberty is it selfe a temporall precept as appeareth Acts. 15 29 the Popes prohibition then seeing it is perpetuall hath no affinity with this precept of Pauls And seeing there be two termes in this argument which have equiuocation in them there arise fiue terms 5 In the Olde Testament there was alwaies a difference made of some meates before and after the floode and in the time of the law Answ 1 These for the most part were shadows of things to come Therfore they be long not to vs in the new Testament 2 Then there was an expresse commandement of God which wee doe not onely want in the new Testament but wee haue also the contrary commandement of Paul Coloss 2 20. c. 6 Daniel fasted with choise of meates Dan 1 8 and 10 3. Answ 1 This was partly Dan 1 8. by the commandement Leu 11. partly of his owne free accord Dan 10. 3 and not of superstition but it was rather a fast of sobriety and temperance all which haue no affinity with the popish faste especially seeing Daniel abstained also from wine which the popish Prelates Priests and Monkes would be loth I warrant you to obserue 7 The choise and difference of meates hath ground in scripture Leuit 11 Deut 14. Answer 1 They were Leuiticall precepts abrogated by God Acts 10 15. By the Apostles Act 15 10 19 20 c. By Paul Coloss 2 16 17 20. c and Heb 13. 9. 2 And that Leuiticall difference of meates was not in this whether it were lawefull to eate flesh or fiâ—h but there was difference put betweene the cleane and vncleane liuing creatures Wherefore that Leviticall difference of meates is fondly wrested to the Popish difference and choise of meates and there be fiue termes in this argument 8 The Apostles did forbid to eate bloud or that which was strangled Act. 15. 29. Answ 1 It was a temporall commaundement for the moderating of Christian libertie vnto the edification of the weake but the Popish difference and choise of meates doth not moderate but abrogate Christian libertie neither is it for any weake ones sake but for obtaining of tyrannie in the Church 2 The Apostles did not forbid them flesh at all but bloud that which was strangled which many men at this day also by nature thinke abhominable to be eaten It is nothing therfore to the purpose 9 The Nazarites abstained from certaine meats and drinks Numb 6 3. Ans 1. The vowe of the Nazarites did belong to a certain abstinence for one set time but heerein it agreeâ—h not with the Popish choise and difference of meates 2. It was a Leviticall ceremonie which ought to cease among Christians 3 The law of Nazarites did forbid the vse of wine also which notwithstanding our Aduersaries doe retaine in their fast 10. The Rechabites abstained from wine Ier. 35. 6. 10. Answ 1. They did it not to merite the favour of God but they had receaued a commandement froÌ„ their Father that they might the more easily abstaine from drunkennes the vices which follow drunkennes Neither would their Father prescribe a law to others but to his sonnes It is then a fallacie taking that absolutely which is spoken but in part 2. We dispute of flesh and they answer of wine 11. It is not read that Christ did eate flesh but that he did eate bread and fish c. Answ 1 As if the Pascall Lambe had not beene flesh 2. We should not therefore haue an example to imitate if it were never so plaine that Christ did abstaine from flesh 3. But neither doe we reade that Christ did eate hearbs nuts spices nor that he dranke beere All these therefore shall be inhibited Christians if this argument follow 12. The earth was cursed by God Genes 3 17. but beasts live of the earth therefore there should be an inhibitioâ— that they be not eaten Ans 1 By this reason all flesh at all times should be forbidden 2 That curse is but in part namely that it should be barren and bring forth thornes and thistles 3 So should we not eate hearbs neither which spring immediatly out of the earth 13. Because flesh is most nourishing and bringeth forth the pricks of Concupiscence wee ought to abstaine from flesh at that time which is appointed for the taming of our flesh Answer 1. These are the precepts which haue a shewe of wisedome in will-worship Coloss 2 23 and wine should be forbidden rather than flesh as that which inflameth men to Inst and other vices as it is said Prou 23 31 32 c. 14. The Apostles fasted Acts. 13 2. 3 and 14. 23. And fasting is commended Matthew 6 16 Marke 9. 29. Ioâ—l 1. 14. Zachar. 7 5. and 8. 19. Ionah 3 5 7. Answer 1. That Christians should fast in their kinde in due sort and manner no man denieth but without the losse of Christian libertie those things then are brought for arguments which are out of coÌ„trouersie 2 But whiles the argument is from a true manner of fasting to the Popish hypocriticall manner of fasting there arise foure termes For the fasting of the Aposâ—les did not consist in the difference of meates but they that fasted in the old Testament abstained froÌ„ all meate and drinke a whole day vntill evening Such a fast the Popish Priests and