Short Treatise Against the Donatists of England, Brownist position 6 – Brownist position 3
The ſecond tranſgreſsion.
The Brow. 2 THat the prophane multitudes without exception of any one perſon, &c.
The ſecond fault is, that all the prophane multitudes, without exception of any one perſon, are admitted and retained in the boſome of the Church. Manye Churches in England want godly Paſtours, and there all are admitted. It may be, he that admitteth is the worſt in the company. But there be many greater and ſmaller congregations, where the Paſtour doth keepe backe ſome for ignorance, &c.
Heere you confeſſe, that very many Churches in England want godly Paſtours, and that there all are admitted, and that he that admitteth them is the worſte of the company. Thus you make the moſt Chuches in England in a very bad eſtate, and ſo farre foorth you affirme your article. But yet you know ſome Churches, &c.
I did confeſſe, and doo ſtill with gréefe, that in very manyeG. G. aſſemblies in England, all are admitted to the Table of the Lord, which offer themſelues, euen the moſt prophane and groſſe ſinners. I ſhewed alſo, the reaſon of this gréeuous offence, namely that the miniſters which ſhould repell ſuch open offenders, are many times the worſt, or at leaſt negligent in that behalfe. And moreouer, that the Church of England dooth neither approoue ſuch admiſſion of prophane men to the Sacrament, nor yet ſuffer it in practiſe wholy. For touching practiſe, there be many congregations in the land, where ſundrie for ignorance, and open wickedneſſe, are by the miniſters kept backe, and not ſuffered to communicate, vntill they ſhew repentance. And for not approouing ſuch admiſſion, I ſaid, the booke of Common prayer dooth preſcribe and commaund the repelling of notorious wicked offendours: and alſo that ſome are excommunicated iuſtly, & not admitted to publike praier. This was the firſt part of mine anſwer: wherein I prooue your accuſation falſe. The other is, that the godly are not polluted by the companye of the wicked, which are ſuffered to communicate with them in Gods worſhip, and the thing not in their power to redreſſe. And for example I alledged the Church of the Iewes. By which I prooue, that if your accuſation were true, yet it deſtroyeth not the Church. Now let vsus examine how you ouerthrowe this by your replye. Yée aſke whether there were no more prophane in the pariſh beſides thoſe twenty or thirty which are repelled? And whether thoſe other prophane were not admitted? I anſwer, If there were, yet the repelling of twenty or thirty in a flock, dooth ſhew that you accuſe falſely, when yée ſay, all the prophane, without exception of any one perſon, are reteined in the body and boſome of our Church: But to prooue your article at once, as yée ſay, by a more direct courſe, yée bring an argument. And yée demand if I know anye in all the realme of England vnbaptized. Is not Baptiſme (ſay you) a Sacrament belonging to the Church, by which all the faithfull and their ſéed doo enter into it? Wherevpon yée argue thus? All being baptized, it followeth that all are receiued into the body of your Church. Now being once receiued in, they can no way be caſt out but by excommunication. And it is manifeſt, that the Parſon and all his pariſh, hath not the powre which Chriſt hath left vntounto his Church, to excommunicate any offender, be he neuer ſo obſtinate or notorious, &c. This being the onelyonly reaſon by which ye ſtand to prooue the truth of your accuſation, I muſt beſtow the more paines about it. Thus it muſt be ſet in forme. Where all are receiued in by Baptiſme, and no power to caſt foorth any by excommunication, there all the prophane multitudes are without exception of any one perſon, receiued into, & reteined in the boſome and body of the Church: But in the Church of England all are receiued in by Baptiſme, and there is no power to caſt foorth any by excommunication: Therefore in England, all the prophane multitudes, without exception of any one perſon, are receiued into, and reteined in the boſome and body of the Church. In your propoſition there are to be excepted ſuch as are repelled from the Sacrament, who are in ſome ſort, for the time, remooued out of the boſome of the Church. And alſo ſuch Papiſts, Heretikes, and Sciſmatikes, as depart out of themſelues. It is further alſo to be conſidered in it, that all the baptized, continuing outwardly obedient, they cannot be iuſtly called the prophane multitudes. Your preſumption, in which ye charge the Church of England with a principall tranſgreſſion, for receiuing in all by Baptiſme, and hauing no power to caſt foorth any by Excommunication, is with foule error and falſehood.
Touching the Baptiſme of Infants, this appeareth to be your iudgement, that the children of prophane men which remayne in the Church, and profeſſe the faith of Chriſt, belong not to the couenant, and therefore ought not to be Baptiſed. No doubt the Church doth offend, when open notorious ſinners are not Excommunicate, and brought to repentance, or at the leaſt to ſuch a ſhewe of repentance, as that men can not further iudge them but as Brethren. It is alſo an offence, where ſuch not being caſt foorth, their children are receyued vntounto Baptiſme, and that without care to ſée them brought vp and inſtructed in the Chriſtian Religion, and to leade a Godly life agréeable to the ſame. But to ſay, that the children of prophane men, taking prophane men as you doo, which profeſſe Chriſtianitie, and remayne in the Church, are not to be Baptiſed, is a very wicked iniurie to Gods people, and contrarie to the manifeſt doctrine of the holie Scriptures, and can not without Hereſie be mayntayned.
Firſt, touching prophane people, it is certayne that all Heathen Heretikes, all Sciſmatikes, open contemners of the holie Religion, and all obſtinate wicked men whiche deſpiſe the cenſure of the Church, that hath paſſed vppon them, may be called prophane. But you Browniſts go further, and condemne them all as Infidels and prophane, which profeſſe the faith of Chriſt, becauſe notwithſtanding they doo it in ſome weakenes and infirmities: which is a wicked preſumption, and intruſion into Gods ſeate, and in which (as I hauehave ſhewed before) yée breake the rule of diſcipline giuen by our Sauiour Chriſt, by which, no brother, that is, none which profeſſeth the true faith, is for his ſinnes and impenitencie to be iudged as heathen, vntill he hauehave deſpiſed the admonition of the Church, and ſo be caſt foorth. You take vppon yée to plucke vp all the Darnell: yée are commaunded the contrarie▪ leaſt yée plucke vp the Wheate Math. 13. You dare, and that in moſt ſauage and deſperate manner, rend and teare vp the weake plants: yée doo it vntounto whole aſſemblyes, in which there be many that vnfaynedly ſorrow and mourne for their ſinnes, and ſtudie to pleaſe God: all that feare the Lord, may tremble at this your intollerable wickednes. But now to procéede. Ye will not allowe the children of prophane men the Sacrament of Baptiſme. And what is your reaſon? they bée not the ſéede of the faithfull. In déede in this yée ſay true, that none are in theyr infancie to be admitted to this Sacrament, but the ſéede of the faithfull: but when yée take it that the children whoſe next parents are hypocrites, or wicked and prophane perſons, which yet remayne in the Church, and profeſſe Chriſt, be not the ſéede of the faithfull at all, and in any reſpect, and ſo within the couenant, and to be baptized, yée are farre wide: for let it be that their next parents before hauehave béene hypocrites and vnfaithfull, yet may they bée the ſéede of the faithfull: for their intereſt in Gods couenant doth (as béeing the ſeede of the faithfull) not depend vppon theyr next parents, but vppon the auncient Chriſtians theyr fore-fathers: for when he ſayth, I will be thy God, and the God of thy ſeede, the promiſe is made to a thouſand generations, Exod. 20. It is ſayd, that Leuy payd Tithes vntounto Melchiſedech becauſe he was in the loynes of Abraham, when he met Melchiſedech, and gaue Tythes, Hebrewes 7. ver. 9. 10. Abraham begat Iſaake, Iſaake begat Iaakob, and Iaakob begate Leuie, and yet of Leuie it is ſayd, that he was in the loynes of Abraham: yea, it muſt néedes be confeſſed, that all the whole Nation of the Iewes were in the loynes of Abraham. Our Sauiour Chriſt according to the fleſhe, was in the loynes of Abraham. For this cauſe, Saint Peter calleth all the Iewes the children of the Prophets, and of the couenant Acts. 3. ver. 25. So doth S. Paule Rom. 9. and in that reſpect, they be all called holie, Rom. 11. If the firſt fruites be holie, ſo is the lumpe: if the roote be holie, ſo are the boughes. Abraham, Iſaak, and Iaakob, are the firſt fruites, and the roote: all the Iſraelites the lumpe, and the boughes: but were they all faithfull, no nor yet the greater part? for Eſayas cryeth, that if the number of the children of Iſraell were as the ſand of the ſea, yet but a remnant ſhould be ſaued, Eſay. 10. How often doth the Lorde complayne eueryevery where of the greeuous infidelitie and rebellion in the greateſt part of that Nation? Why then are they called holie, and the holie people, being many of them reprobates? Is it not becauſe they be Abrahams ſeede, and were in the Church by outward profeſſion, adding this withall, that the elect of God, euen the right holie ſeede, were in theyr loynes: for Gods choſen did not ſpring only from the ſanctifyed, but alſo from other, who touching the outward profeſſion, and touching the holy ſeede which was in theyr loynes, were eſteemed as members in the Church, and were all of them, euen the whole nation, called the holy people. It is not diſalowed, that in the times of idolatrie openly maintained, their children were circumciſed. Nay further, the Lord calleth the children of thoſe wicked idolaters, his children, Thou haſt (ſayth he by Ezechiel) taken thy ſonnes and thy daughters which thou broughteſt foorth vntounto me, and ſacrificed vntounto them, to be conſumed. Thou haſt ſlayne my ſonnes, and giuen them, by cauſing them to paſſe through to them, Ezech. 16. ver. 21. Theſe Idolaters did offer their children to Deuils, euen to the Idols of Canaan, and ſhead innocent bloud, euen the bloud of their ſonnes and daughters, when they cauſed them to paſſe through the fire, Pſal. 106. If the promiſe to Abraham and his ſéede had not béen ſo effectual, as that the holy choſen ſéede was in the loyns of theſe Idolaters, how could they be ſaid to bring foorth Sonnes & Daughters to the Lord? How could it be ſayd, thou haſt ſlayn my ſonnes? or how could they rightly hauehave béen circumciſed? If ye ſay, theſe Idolaters ſhould not hauehave remained in the Church, but if not by the Ciuill power put to death, yet by the cenſure of the Church caſt foorth. Yea, but there was ſo generall a declining, that neyther of theſe was performed: and ſo they remayned ſtyll in the Church, and brought foorth children vntounto God, euen ſuch as the couenant made with Abraham did belong vntounto, they were in his loines, they were his ſéede, and not cut off by the wickednes of theyr next parents. If yée obiect that the Iewes nowe at this day are the ſeede of Abraham, and by that reaſon ſhould be ſtill the viſible Church▪ I aunſwere, that although there be Gods elect among them, whome eyther he taketh away in their infancie, or elſe calleth them to knowe Chriſt when they come to mans eſtate: yet the Iewes can not now be called the viſible Church, nor the Church, in as much as they hauehave reiected hym in whome the Couenant was ratifyed, euen the Lord Ieſus Chriſt, and therefore he ſayde vntounto them, the Vineyard ſhall be taken from thoſe Huſbandmen, and let foorth vntounto other. And then expounding himſelfe, he ſayth, the Kingdome of God ſhall be taken from yee, and giuen to a nation, that will bring foorth the fruite thereof. The Vineyard was not taken from thoſe naughtie Huſbandmen that killed the ſeruants of the Lord of the Vineyard which came for fruites, euen the Prophets, vntill they had killed the ſonne and heire himſelfe. Now the naturall braunches are broken off, and the wilde oliues, euen the Gentiles, are graffed in, Rom. 11. They are nowe the children of Abraham, and heyres of the promiſe, as it is ſayd, I hauehave made thée a father of many Nations. And in thy ſéede all Nations of the earth ſhall be bleſſed. Our fore-fathers, many of them declyned in the Apoſtaſie, and worſhipped Idols: but as the Idolatrous Iewes, ſo they remayned ſtill in the Church, and brought foorth children to God, that is, ſuch as were within the Couenant, to be accounted the holie ſéede, and ſo of right were to hauehave the ſeale of the couenant ſet vponupon them, euen Baptiſme. We can not ſay therefore that the Couenant was diſanulled, and that the Churche vtterlie fayled, no not euen in the moſt horrible confuſion of popery, but Antichriſt did ſit in the temple of God, 2. Theſ. 2 Thoſe idolaters were in the Church, and the heirs of promiſe in their loines, for we and all the Churches are ſprung out of them, ſealed with the ſigne of the Couenant, as of right belonging vntounto vsus from our holye aunceſtors. But you Browniſts as Catabaptiſts, denie that we hauehave the ſigne of the Couenant: for yee ſay we hauehave no Sacraments. If we bee not within the Couenant from our anceſtours, what are you? who hath béene ſent from God to call yée vntounto a Couenant, which yée were not within before? Who hath giuen yée the ſigne of the Couenant? or hauehave yee receiued a couenant without a ſigne? How will you indure this terrible voice of Almightie God: yée hauehave rooted vppe and caſt foorth my ſonnes and my daughters? For if it were ſaid to idolators, yée hauehave ſlaine my ſonnes? how much more vntounto you, which in a moſt proud furie, with intollerable boldneſſe and crueltie, roote vp and caſt foorth the infants of whole aſſemblies, which hauehave renounced idolatry, and profeſſe the Goſpell, becauſe yée doo account them prophane? Let it be, they are many of them nothing ſuch as they ought to be, but ſinners, and ſuch as ſhould by the Cenſures of the Church bee brought into better order, yet profeſſing Chriſt, and remaining in the Church, their infants are not by their vngodlineſſe caſt foorth of the Couenant. I conclude therefore, that the Church of England, or at the leaſt many of the teachers and guides doo offend, in not executing the diſcipline vponupon vngodly men, to bring them to repentance▪ but in receiuing their children to be baptized, they doo not offend, ſo they ſée them taught in the faith, and to liue a godlye life, as our Church hath eſtabliſhed, yea in refuſing them the infants ſhould receiue great iniurie.
But to make this matter yet more cléere, the queſtion is to be anſwered, whether the Church of Rome be the Church of Chriſt. For the Browniſts doo hold, that our aunceſtors were not the Church of Chriſt in the time of poperie, and that we now are confuſed multitudes, not rightlye entered into couenant with God, to become a Church, ſéeing wee were not of Gods true Church before, neither orderly entered into couenant. Indéed if we were not within the couenant before from our aunceſtors, nor entered orderly to become a Church, the matter would ſéeme ſtrong againſt vsus. Let it therefore be examined. I know this is the vſuall ſpéech of the learnedeſt Deuines, the church of God is in the Papacie, but the Papacie is not the church. And it may be, the ſenſe will differ little or nothing, but I take it a fitter ſpéech to ſaye, the Papacie is in the church, then to ſay, the church is in the papacie. For Antichriſt dooth ſit in the Temple of God: his lawes, his worſhip, and all his abhominations, were brought into the church. All the men which receiued his marke, and worſhipped him, were in the church, yea euen the whole Apoſtaſie was in the churche. The church was before, and that commeth after, and entreth into or ariſeth in it. Then to the queſtion, if by the church of Rome we vnderſtand the Pope, his lawes, his worſhip which hath béene deuiſed by himſelfe, his adherents, and all that worſhip him or receiue his Marke. I anſwer, that this is that which may properly be called the church of Rome, which is, the papacie, the apoſtaſie, and ſeduced to damnation, and not the church of Chriſt, otherwiſe then thus, that the Pope, the Cardinals, and all that worſhip the Beaſt, be falſe Chriſtians by profeſſion, bred in the Church, and continuing in it, their ſéede not excluded from the couenant. But if by the Church of Rome, we vnderſtand all thoſe companies of people, ouer whome the tyrannie of the Pope hath heeretofore extended it ſelfe, or dooth at this day: or thoſe things which were giuen by Chriſt, which remaine in the ſame. I ſay, this is not the church of Rome, but the Church of God. Firſt, if we reſpect the holye doctrine of God, in all thoſe points which were and are kept ſound among them, and the holye Sacrament of Baptiſme. Then ſecondly, if we conſider the kingdoms and people themſelues, all did not fall from Chriſt, but many held the foundation, the moſt of them lying ſcattered and hid in the deſolations and ruines. Thirdly, if we regard that the infants not only of theſe faithfull, but euen of the wicked Apoſtates which worſhipped the beaſt, were ſtill within the couenant as the holy ſéed: we ſhall ſee that the papacie was, and is, in the Church, which is the Temple of God, and not the ſynagog of Rome. The Church of Rome then is not the true Church of God: but the Church of Rome is the Apoſtaſie in the church. Let vsus come then more particularly. The church of England in the time of poperie was a member of the vniuerſall church, and had not the being of a church of Chriſt from Rome, nor tooke not her beginning of being a Church, by ſeperating hir ſelfe from that Romiſh ſynagog: but hauing her ſpirites reuiued, and her eyes opened by the light of the heauenly word, did caſt foorth that tyrannie of Antichriſt, with his abhominable idolatrie, hereſies, and falſe worſhip: and ſought to bring all her children vntounto the right faith, and true ſeruice of God: And ſo is a purer and more faithfull church then before. Idolatrie was openly ſet vp in the church of Iſrael, at ſundrye times. It did not, as I hauehave ſhewed, diſanull the couenant of God with them, nor debarre their children from the holy ſigne of circumciſion, but all the Iewes are called the children of the couenant. Then let the Browniſt ſhew ſome reaſon, why it ſhould bee otherwiſe in this caſe with our churches, then it was with the church of Iſrael.
Thus much for the one part of your aſſumption, wherein ye blame the church of England, for receiuing in all by baptiſme. Now touching the other part of it, in which ye affirme that there is no power to caſt foorth any by excommunication, yée ſpeake very falſely. For the church of England hath ſome power to excommunicate. But you reaſon thus: the perſon and all his pariſh hath not the power to excommunicate anye one offendor, therefore the church of England hath not powre to excommunicate. Is it poſſible, if a man would ſtudy to reaſon abſurdlie, that he ſhould excell yée? Will yee argue thus: eueryevery ſeuerall part by it ſelfe hath not power to excommunicate: therefore the whole together hath not the power? It is not méete indéed, that the Parſon and his pariſh ſhould hauehave the power to excommunicate, vnleſſe it bee ſuch a Pariſh as hath the Conſiſtorie of Paſtors, Teachers, and Gouernours. It ſéemeth yée hauehave great ſkill in the diſcipline of Chriſt.
The ſeuerall flockes about Geneua without the Citie hauehave eueryevery one a Paſtor, and two Elders: but yet they hauehave not the power to excommunicate, but that is referred to the Conſiſiorie which is within the Citie, Maiſter Beza, Epiſt. 20. Will yée ſay thoſe ſeuerall flockes cannot be the Churches of Chriſt, vnleſſe their paſtors and they together hauehave power to excommunicate? They are members of that church which hath power to excommunicate. But yée will ſay, that the excommunication of the Commiſſarie is no excommunication, and therfore our pariſhes be no members of a church, which hath power to excommunicate.
The like yée will ſay of the excommunication by the Biſhop himſelfe, and by the Archdeacon. I aunſwer, that if it ſhould bée graunted ye, that their excommunication dooth not binde in heauen, yet it is of force to remooue, and dooth remooue from the ſocietye of our aſſemblies, which prooueth your accuſation falſe, becauſe we reaſon about this outward remoouing. But what if the Biſhop, together with ſundry other Miniſters of the Goſpell, doo excommunicate duely an obſtinate wicked man, is he not excommunicate before God? If there be an heretike conuinced, and found obſtinate, and the Biſhops and Miniſters of the Church of England aſſembled, or ſome competent number of them, as in the conuocation, or ſuch ſynod do duely excommunicate him, is it no excommunication? Will yée reaſon after this ſort, that becauſe eueryevery Miniſter with his flocke ſeuerally, hath not the power to excommunicate, therefore the Miniſters of the Church of England are vtterly without this power? You confeſſe that it is the Church of Chriſt which hath this power, though it fault much by negligence in executing the ſame. I would all Browniſts could conſider, what it is to excommunicate, or to cut, not onelyonly particular perſons, but whole aſſemblies from Chriſt, it would abate their horrible preſumption.
Then for the ſuſpenſion from the Sacrament, by which the vnworthy, either for ignorance, or open wicked life, are ſeperated from the néere fellowſhip of the Church, I ſaid yée might demaund by what right the miniſter dooth it? Yée ſay, that indéede would be knowne, adding moreouer, that if it be in the nature of Excommunication, it were no ſmall preſumption in the Miniſter to arrogate ſuch abſolute authoritie to himſelfe. I hold it ſomewhat in the nature of Excommunication, in ſuch, as hauehave béene before admitted, but yet not to be compared as any thing néere ſo great as Excommunication: and neuertheleſſe, I déeme it no preſumption for the Miniſter, to repell the vnworthy from the Sacrament. He is to take héede to himſelfe, that he giuegive not holie things to dogs. He is to beware of that which may giuegive publike offence, and bring the holie myſteries into contempt. It is in déede no ſmall matter to debarre from the Sacrament. The Miniſter therefore may eaſily offende in this caſe diuers wayes: as namely, if he be carried with euill will for priuate reſpects toward any, and ſo aggrauate their offences, and make that heynous which is not: or if he doo not make the matter apparant ſo much as he can, that the flocke may ſée there is iuſt cauſe to repell them, and no iniurie offered, the crimes for which they are remoued being notorious.
Now becauſe I ſayd, the booke of common Prayer doth warrant this, héere yée ſet vp your briſtles, and firſt it may not be let paſſe, but noted, that euen the beſt of our Churches ſtand vnderunder this Idoll by our owne confeſſion. This is a ſpeciall note, and well marked. Why, did ye not knowe that we vſe the booke in publike prayer, and adminiſtration of Sacraments? Then yee aſke if the booke be Chriſts newe Teſtament, that we muſt fetch our warrant and direction from that Idoll? I might aſke you a queſtion, whether ye be in your wits? for doo we diſpute héere, whether a Miniſter is warranted in conſcience before God to repell any from the Sacrament? I thought that you Browniſts whiche take vppon yee to iudge, and vtterly to abandon and caſt foorth whole aſſemblyes which profeſſe the Goſpell, and which are eſtéemed of the godly Churches as Siſters, had made no doubt, but that by Gods word the Miniſter is warranted to repell a notorious wicked man from the Sacrament. But I ſuppoſed yee would obiect, that by the eſtabliſhed order and gouernment of our Church, all power to keepe the Sacraments from wicked prophanation, is taken away from the Miniſters, and for this I alleadged the booke. Let the Reader now iudge, how fitlie yee clap your wings and crowe, ſaying: In déede it is a fit Porteſſe for ſuch Prieſts, and the ſuſpenſion ye vaunt of, a fit toole for ſuch workemen, euen the inſtruments of that fooliſh Shepheard. If the iudgement of God (you ſay) were not vppon our right eye, we might ſée how our Lords the Byſhops doo dreſſe vsus, and perceyue how this weapon that they allowe vsus, wanteth both edge and poynt &c.
You ſpeake, as if the Byſhops did take vppon them, and we ſubmitte our ſelues vntounto them, as Lords ouer our faith and conſciences, and as though we were at theyr allotting, when as in déede they bée but miniſters to ſée thoſe orders kept which bée alreadie eſtabliſhed, and hauehave not authoritie to take from any Miniſter that power which the booke doth giuegive him: much leſſe can one word of maiſter Commiſſaries mouth heale the greateſt wound (as you ſay) we can make with it. Yee ſay, not one in the Pariſh ſetteth a flye by it. Yee ſpeake ſo confidentlie, and with ſuch ſhewe of honeſtie, that I ſhould beléeue yee in theſe things, if I had not for ſundrie yeares tryed and ſéene your words falſe by experience. I ſayd, ſuch as be iuſtly Excommunicate, as ſome are, be not admitted to the publike prayer. Héere yee bid ſée how God inſnareth me in mine owne words, and how hard a bad cauſe is to defend. What is the ſnare which I am héere caught in? Forſooth I doo héere openly iuſtifie Excommunication by the Commiſſarie, becauſe we hauehave no other power or meanes, and our Church wardens doo ſtand ſworne to that Court. But how ſhall I get out of your ſnare? I muſt be fayne to breake it, if it be not looſe of it ſelfe. What if when I ſay ſome are Excommunicate iuſtly, I hauehave reſpect, not to thoſe which Excommunicate, but to the deſert of them that be Excommunicated. Againe, it is vntrue that ye ſay, our Church hath no power, but the Commiſſaries Court (as I hauehave alreadie ſhewed.) Touching your next ſpéech, wherein yee charge vsus, that we thincke to heale, or at the leaſt, to couer enormities with theſe two drie withered figge leaues, the one, that we can not remedie the matter, the other, that priuate men are not to reforme: the aunſwere ſhall be more fitte, when wée come to ſhewe what priuate men may doo.
Now let vsus come to the other part of mine Anſwer which denyed the conſequence, though your accuſation were true, which is this: Wicked prophane men are receyued in, and retayned in the boſome and bodie of their Church, therefore the Couenant is diſanulled with them, and they are no longer Gods people, but a falſe Antichriſtian ſynagog. To diſprooue this, I did alleadge, that there were but a fewe true worſhippers that frequented the Temple among multitudes of prophane and vngodly men. To which ye reply, that comparing our Church to the Temple of God, and ſtill begging the queſtion, I frame my Arguments as though our people were faithfull, and our prayers holie. I pray yee what is the queſtion which I begge? This ſay you, is the queſtion, whether the aſſemblyes in England be the true Church of God? and then yee woulde beare the Reader in hand, that I reaſon in ſuch ſort as I would firſt hauehave this graunted, that it is a true Church of faithfull people, and holie worſhip. You ſhould hauehave done well to hauehave ſhewed how I frame my Arguments from the Queſtion graunted. But the truth is, yee can ſhewe no colour héere of any ſuch thing.
Nowe may I charge you, and that iuſtly, which I wyll alſo make apparant to all which will not ſhut theyr eyes, that in ſtead of anſwering, yee doo not onelyonly cauill, but moſt ſottiſhly with a blinde ſhift. For our queſtion heere is this, the Church of England doth receyue in and retayne in her boſome the prophane multitude, therfore the Church of England is not the true Church. To diſproue this, I reaſon thus, the Church of Iſrael retayned the multitude of wicked ones in her boſome, for there were but fewe true worſhippers frequented the Temple among multitudes of prophane vngodly men. Therefore this fault doth not deſtroy the béeing of a true Church, neyther is the worſhip and prayers of the faithfull polluted by the company of the wicked which worſhip together with them, eſpecially when they can not remedie the matter. To ouerthrowe this Argument, you muſt of neceſſitie prooue one of theſe two things, eyther that the Church of Iſraell did not retayne the prophane multitude in her boſome, and ſo the good and the bad worſhipped together: or elſe that they were not Gods Church when this was ſuffered, but all that came ſo together fell from God. You ſhift from this, and ſpeake of Idolatrous times, in which it is moſt certayne that the godly did not mixe themſelues with the wicked in idolatrous worſhip. We doo not argue whether the godly did ioyne with the wicked in idolatrous worſhip, for it is moſt cléere they might not, nor did not. But whether the wicked were ſuffered, and did ioyne with the godly in the true worſhip? and whether they were polluted by communicating with them, and that ſo gréeuouſly, as to diſanull the Couenant? let the Scriptures be iudge in both theſe. If I ſhould ſtand to recite all the teſtimonies, and all the complaints which are made by the Prophets againſt the multitudes of wicked which worſhipped together with the godly at ſundrie times, it would be long, ſome fewe may ſuffice in a matter ſo euident. He that readeth the bookes of Moyſes touching the ſtate of the Church for the ſpace of fortie yeares in the wilderneſſe, what ſhall he finde in the moſt but multitudes of prophane rebels, againſt whome, the Lord ſware, that they ſhould not ſée his reſt, whoſe carcaſſes alſo he ouerthrewe in the deſert, and yet they were not caſt out of the aſſemblie, nor ſeparated from the reſt ſo long as they liued, nor their ſeede reiected? If yee will ſee an epitome of their rebellions for that ſpace, and for the time of the Iudges, looke vppon the 106. Pſalme.
Afterward, when the Kings of Iuda raigned euen vntill the captiuitie, what gréeuous complaints are made againſt them? A great part which came to worſhip in the Temple, were as Sodom and Gomorrah, Ieſay. 1. & 3. Being the Lords Vineyard, they brought foorth ſtinking grapes. Ieſa. 5. Hauing committed thefts, adulteries, periuries, and other abhominable ſinnes, they came together with the godly to worſhip in the Temple, in ſo much that the Lord demaundeth, if they tooke his houſe to be a Denne of théeues, Ierem. 7. The Préeſts themſelues were not frée from this horrible pollution, for it is written, they are all dumbe Dogges that cannot barke, they louelove to ſléepe, they are gréedy, and giuen to Wine, Ieſay. 56. The Prophets propheſie lies, the Préeſts exerciſe dominion by their hand, the people louelove to hauehave it ſo. Ierem. 5. ver. 31. The Préeſts conſpire together, they are like a roring Lion, they deuide the pray, they doo violence to the law, prophane the holy things, and put not difference betwéene the holy and prophane. Ezech. 22.
What horrible things are theſe, by which the wrath of the Lord was kindled? But were they not ſtill the daughter of Sion? Reade for this the Lamentations of Ieremie. After they were returned from the captiuitie, the print of the rod being yet in their ſkrinne, they were not fréed from ſuch pollution▪ for Malachi accuſeth both Préeſts and people, and that heinouſly. They mixed themſelues by Mariage with the Heathen, and prophaned the Sabbaoth by kéeping market vponupon it. Eſra. 9. Nehe. 13. From the time that God raiſed them vp no mo Prophets, vntill the comming of our Sauiour Chriſt, their ſtate grew woorſe and worſe, not onelyonly by Sects, but alſo, that the Préeſts prophaned the Temple, Iohn. 2. Math. 21. The Teachers which ſat in Moyſes chaire, did expound the law corruptly in ſundry points, they mixed their leuen, they were hypocrites, blinde guides, couetous, and ambitious. Matth. 5. and 15. and 16. and. 23. Theſe reſiſted Chriſt, and would excommunicate thoſe that ſhould confeſſe him. Iohn. 9. And yet the godly did not onelyonly worſhip together with them in the Temple, but alſo our Sauiour dooth will they ſhould heare them teach. Math. 23. If they had béene polluted by worſhipping together with them, he would hauehave commaunded to ſeparate themſelues. This were enough to ſhew the groſſe hereſie of the Browniſts in this point: but yet I will adde ſomewhat of the Churches founded by the Apoſtles. In the Church of Corinth, Saint Paul reprooueth many things. There were factions and ſchiſmes among them. The Preachers did ſet foorth the Goſpell with humane wiſdome. The Paſtors and Gouernours did not execute the diſcipline, but ſuffered the inceſtuous perſon. They ſtraue one with an other in the law before Heathen Iudges. They feaſted in the idol Temples, at the feaſts which were kept in honor of the idols, and ſo were partakers of the cup of Deuils. They prophaned the holye Supper of the Lorde, they abuſed ſpirituall gifts. There were among them which denied the reſurrection of the dead.
A Browniſt will héere replye, that this Church did repent being reprehended by Saint Paul, as he witneſſeth of them, 2. Cor. 7. I aunſwer that they were Gods true Church before they repented, 1. Cor. 1. and alſo that they did not all ſhew repentance, as that ſecond Epiſtle which he wrote vntounto them dooth declare, and eſpecially, theſe wordes: I feare, leaſt when I come, I ſhall not finde yee ſuch as I would, and I ſhall bee found ſuch as you would not: leaſt there bee ſtrife, emulations, wrath, contentions, backbitings, whiſperings, rumors, tumults: leaſt when I come againe, my God abaſe me among yee, and I ſhall bewaile many of thoſe which hauehave ſinned before, and not repented for their vncleaneſſe, fornication, and wantonneſſe which they hauehave committed, 2. Corin. 12▪ verſ. 20. 21.
The ſeauen Churches of Aſia, Reuel. 1. were not in eueryevery reſpect commended: for in ſome of them the Nicholaitans were ſuffered, and they that taught the doctrine of Balaam, and a wicked woman, which made her ſelfe a Prophetiſſe, was ſuffered to teach and to ſeduce the ſeruants of God. One Church neither hote nor colde. Another had but a fewe in it which had not polluted themſelues, Reuel. 2. and 3. Yet are theſe named the Churches. I conclude therefore, that the not ſeperating of ſome wicked ones out of the Churche, although it be euill, yet is not ſuch an euill as deſtroyeth the Church, and that the godly are not polluted by the wicked, which come together with them vntounto the publike exerciſes of the holy religion.
Thus hauehave I prooued your article, or your accuſation, partly hereticall, and partly falſe. I hauehave alſo made manifeſt, that if yée did accuſe rightly, yet the conſequence is to be diſalowed as hereticall, in as much as we ſée, that very often it hath come to paſſe, that heapes of vngodly men hauehave worſhipped together with the godly, and they not polluted by them. It may be ſome will thinke hardly that I account it hereticall, that the Browniſt concludeth after this ſorte, they hauehave open ſinners, and men prophane in life, which doo worſhip together with them, as members of their Church, therefore the couenant is diſanulled with them all. I will therefore prooue that I hauehave ſaid by ſtrong arguments: the firſt ſhall be this. Whoſoeuer maintaineth, that where any groſſe ſinnes breake forth and appeare, there is not any true faith in the parties which offend, he doth contrary to the expreſſe word of God, maintaine flat hereſie: for we are taught eueryevery where, that regeneration which conſiſteth in putting of the old man, and putting on the new, is by degrées wrought in Gods elect. Whervpon the holy Ghoſt compareth the ſpirituall birth with the naturall. A man is borne a poore weake babe, not able to go alone, or yet to ſtand vpright: hee is nouriſhed and fed with milke, and ſo in continuance, dooth growe vp by degrées vntounto mans eſtate. We are borne againe, not of mortall but of immortall ſeed, euen the word of God which indureth foreuer, 1. Pet. 1. wherefore he willeth, that laying aſide all maliciouſnes, deceipt, hypocriſie, and ſuch like, we couet the ſincere milke of the word, that we may grow thereby, 1. Pet. 2. ver. 1. & 2. The regenerate are in many places exhorted to put off, and to mortifie euill and vncleane luſts, & to forſake their wicked ſins, Rom. 12. Epheſ. 4. Coloſ. 3. Iam. 1. And if in many things we ſinne all, Iam. 4. Yea euē ſuch as are grown vp in Chriſt to mans eſtate. How many, ſhall we then ſuppoſe, are the falles of poore new borne Babes? if Dauid, Solomon, Samſon, and many other, repleniſhed with great grace, did fall gréeuouſly, how ſhall we looke that other ſhall be frée? Let the Church of Corinth be for an example in this point, euen the teachers and people together, vntounto whom S. Paul writeth thus: I could not ſpeake vntounto yee brethren, as vntounto ſpirituall men, but as vntounto carnall men, as vntounto babes in Chriſt. I gaue yee milke to drinke and not meate, for yee could not beare it, neither can yee now: for yee are yet carnall: for when as there are among yee emulation, contention, and diſcords, are yee not carnall and walke as men? when one ſaith, I am of Paul, an other I am of Apollo, are yee not carnall? 1. Cor. 3. ver. 1. 2. 3. 4. Is not the matter as cléere as the Sunne, that he calleth them carnal, burthened with the fleſh, and in that reſpect prophane, as their open ſinnes did declare, and yet babes in Chriſt, regenerate through faith, and the déere children of God? It is ſaid of our Sauiour, Hee will not breake the bruſed reed, nor quench the ſmoaking Flax Math. 12. ver. 20. Saint Paul following the ſteps of his Maiſter, in care, in louelove, in merciemercy, and compaſſion, toward the poore weake babes in Chriſt, behaued himſelfe in the Churches, as a nurſſe vntounto hir little infants. 1. Theſſ. 2. ver. 8. But the fierce Browniſts doo maintaine contrary to this manifeſt doctrine of the Scriptures: that where corrupt manners breake foorth in thoſe that profeſſe the Goſpell, they be not onelyonly vtterly voide of faith which offend, but alſo, that all they which worſhip together with them, though neuer ſo much gréeued at their ſinnes, are fallen from the couenant moſt cruelly by this meanes, thruſting downe all the weake, and caſting foorth all poore babes. I may ſay the ſtrong together with them: therefore the Browniſts doo maintaine hereſye. EueryEvery faithfull man is to follow the example of bleſſed Paul, in that which he dooth teſtifie of himſelfe, how he forgat the things which were behinde, and preſſed forward toward the things which were before, euen towards perfection, Phil. 3. ver. 14. But yet it followeth in the ſame place, neuertheleſſe, in that vntounto which we are come, let vsus procéed by one rule, to be like affected. Shall the ſtrong, when all are to take the iourney together, runne away, and leaue the babes and the féeble behinde them? nay, rather let them leade them by the hand, carie them in theyr armes, and vponupon their ſhoulders. Let the Browniſts alone, who, as if they were ayrie ſpirits, diſburthened of all lumpe of the fleſh, mount vp aloft, and leaue poore heauie loden ſinners crawling vppon the earth. The other argument by which I prooue them to maintaine Hereſie in this their ſecond accuſation, is this, Whoſoeuer maketh the ſtableneſſe of Gods couenant towards his people, and with his Church, to depend vppon the works of men, he mayntayneth flat Hereſie: for albeit the words of the Couenant be theſe, I will be your God, and you ſhall be my people, which implyeth a true ſanctification required to glorifie God, and to be thankfull, yet the Couenant is wholly and altogether of merciemercy, yea euen of the riches of his frée grace, who hath promiſed and ſworne vntounto vsus to declare the ſtableneſſe of his counſell, that we might hauehave ſtrong conſolation, Hebrewes 6. verſ. 17. We are ſaued by grace, and not by works, Tit. 3. As the Couenant was made vntounto Dauid in ſome particular, ſo was it to Abraham and his ſéede in generall. Then thus it is written: I will make him my firſt borne, higher then the Kings of the earth. I will keepe my mercy for him for euer, and my couenant with him ſhall be ſtable. I will ſet his ſeed for euer, and his throne as the daies of heauen. If his children ſhall forſake my lawe, and not walke in my iudgements. If they ſhall prophane my Statutes, and not obſerue my commaundements: I will viſite their defection with the rod, & their iniquitie with plagues. But I will not diſanull my mercy towards him, nor falſifie my faith. I wil not prophane my couenāt, nor alter the thing which is gone out of my lips. I hauehave once ſworne by my holines, I wil not lie vntounto Dauid, Pſal. 89. v. 28. If the couenant made with Abraham and his ſéede, did not ſtand after the ſame ſort ſtabliſhed vppon the frée promiſe of grace, and vppon the oath of God, how could it be ſaid after all the defections and rebellions of the Churche of Iſraell reckoned vp, and after hée had chaſtiſed them, that hée remembred his couenant with them, and he repented through the multitude of his compaſſions, if it be ſayd, they repented, and ſo returned agayne into couenant with him, and obteyned merciemercy. I anſwere, they repent not but by his merciemercy and grace which he beſtowed vponupon them, becauſe they were within his couenant. Now the Browniſts in affirming that by open groſſe ſinne committed by any, if they remayne ſtill in the Church, the couenant is not only diſanulled to them, but vntounto all that doo communicate with them, and ſo make the ſtableneſſe of Gods couenant, not to depend vponupon merciemercy and frée grace promiſed and bound with an oth, but vppon our works, yea, and in a more tickle eſtate, euen vppon the woorkes of other whome we muſt iudge. Therefore the Browniſts mayntayne verie wicked hereſie, when they crye out, that thoſe aſſemblyes where any open ſinners are not caſt foorth, they be no longer the true Church of God, but the Couenant is diſanulled with them all that doo ioyne together in that ſocietie. I might héere make an ende touching this ſecond principall tranſgreſſion, but that there bée certayne particular reaſons, by which they ſtand to mayntayne theyr opinion. Firſt, to this effect many doo ſpeake. If there be wicked men ſuffered to come to the Table of the Lord, the Miniſter and Eccleſiaſticall Gouernours doo commit ſo grieuous a ſinne, that they can not but be vtterly voyde of the true feare of God. Then, he which is a wicked man, can not be a Miniſter of Chriſt, and béeing no Miniſter of Chriſt, there is no Sacrament of Chriſt deliuered, how then ſhall a man communicate with that aſſemblie? I hauehave ſhewed before, that there be great ſinnes and great neglect of dutie oftentimes where there is the true faith in weakeneſſe, and ſo they ſinne damnablie, which take vppon them to iudge them no Chriſtians. The faithfull in Corinth were blinded in theyr owne faults, and verie ſecurely did the Paſtors and Gouernours ſuffer the inceſtuous perſon to continue among them. And whereas they ſay, that if the Miniſter be vngodly, he can be no Miniſter of Chriſt, it is falſe: for the man touching his owne perſon may be a reprobate, and yet touching his miniſterie, a Miniſter of Chriſt. Iudas was a Miniſter of Chriſt, and baptized, Iohn. 4. ver. 2. they were as truly and effectually baptized by him, as by Peter, and yet in himſelfe a Deuill, Iohn. 6. verſ. 70. The two Sonnes of Ely were horrible wicked men, 1. Sam. 2. ver. 12. 22. and yet they are called not only Prieſts, but Prieſts of the Lord, 1. Sam. 1. verſ. 3. Ely himſelfe did offend, and was ſharply puniſhed, that being not only their Father, but alſo high Prieſt and Iudge, he did not put them from the dignitie of the Office, but did honour them with the ſame, not regarding Gods honour, 1. Sam. 2. verſ. 29. The Scribes and Phariſies who were not all of the Sonnes of Leuy, for Saint Paule was a Phariſie, and the Sonne of a Phariſie, but yet of the Tribe of Beniamin, were Miniſters of the Church, for Chriſt ſayth, They ſate in Moyſes Chayre, and willed men to heare them, notwithſtanding, they were blinde guides, hypocrites, prowde, couetous, ambitious, and verie reprobates, Matth. 23. Then, next they alleadge, that a little leauen doth leauen the whole lumpe, 1. Cor. 5. Therefore where one open notorious Sinner is admitted to be a member of the Church, all are leauened and polluted, all doo fall from God. I aunſwere, that Saint Paule rebuketh the Corinthes, that they were puffed vp, and did glorie when they ſhould hauehave ſorrowed: for as many as had the power of the Diſcipline in theyr hands, and did neglect, were partakers of his ſinne, and not only they, but of priuate members, all that did not mourne and lament to ſée ſuch a foule matter wincked at. As the Lord himſelfe doth cléere all thoſe which mourned for the abhominations of Ieruſalem, Ezechiel. 9. ſo were they frée and not leauened, which did mourne at Corinth for ſuch abuſes. Moreouer, it is verie falſe to ſay, that whole Church was leauened, or polluted with the ſinne of that wicked man, therefore they were not the Church of God. For béeing giltie not only in that fault, but in many other, hée giueth them the honour of Gods Church, writing to the Church of God which is at Corinth, 1. Corinth. 1. Then are obiected the words and commaundement of the Lord by Saint Paule: If any that is called a brother be a fornicator, or couetouſe, or an Idolater, or a rayler, or a drunckard, or an extortioner, with ſuch ſee that yee eate not, 1. Cor. 5. Some hold, that this commaundement is giuen only againſt the eating with an open ſinner at the Lords Table, ſéeing we may eate common bread with ſuch as be verie wicked. Others doo argue thus: If it be not lawfull to eate common bread with a wicked man, how much more vnlawfull ſhall it be to eate with him that holie bread of the Lords Table? as the Anabaptiſts lighting vponupon theſe words of our Sauiour Chriſt, but I ſay vntounto ye, Sweare not at all, Matth. 5. do gather, that it is vtterlie vnlawfull in any reſpect or at any time to take an oath, and erre, in not conſidering the circumſtances whereby the words vttered in generall, are to be reſtrayned vntounto the particular abuſe, and raſh ſwearing. Euen ſo the Browniſts, taking the words as they ſtand, and not waying the circumſtances, doo mayntayne abſurdities. They drawe theyr Argument of compariſon from things in which the ſinne or pollution is not: for the ſinne is not in the eating of the common bread, neyther in eating the bread of the Lord with the wicked, but in circumſtances. For I may eate bread with open ſinners, and offend thereby, and I may eate bread with notorious wicked men, and not offend therein, yea, I may grieuouſly ſinne, in refuſing to eate with them. I will expreſſe how. If there be open groſſe offenders, and my familiaritie with them, or my eating with them, can not be, but I ſhall eyther be partaker of their ſinne, or countenance and harden them in the ſame, I offend, if I doo not ſhunne their companie. If any brother in the Church be conuict of foule ſinne, found obſtinate▪ and ſo Excommunicate▪ eueryevery member of the Church euen by the commaundement of God, is to hauehave no fellowſhip with him, that he may be aſhamed, 2. Theſ. 3. v. 14. But yet we are willed in the ſame place, not to account him as an enimie, but to admoniſh him as a Brother. For if men ſhould now in familiaritie, receiue him to their table, or go to his table, it would harden him in his obſtinacie, and bring the cenſure and power of the Church into contempt. This is that S. Paul dealeth about. The wife of this man, his children, and ſeruants may eate with him, or anye other, where it cannot be eſchewed, for then it dooth not countenance him. Now if I be in a ſhip vponupon the ſea, among a company of vild wicked men, or in a priſon, or in an armie, and can hauehave no meate, vnleſſe I eate with them, if I refuſe, I famiſh my ſelfe to death, and ſo offend gréeuouſlie. We ſée then it is not the very eating with them that dooth defile, but the circumſtances. Euen ſo is it at the Lordes table, where wicked men be admitted. For ſuch as doo admit them, hauing power to repell, do offend in eating there with them, becauſe they countenance them in their ſinne. But nowe a priuate member which is gréeued at this, and dooth what lyeth in him to hauehave it redreſſed, dooth not offend, nor is not polluted by eating with them. But as he, that among the wicked in the ſhip, in the priſon, or in the Campe, doth offend in refuſing his bodely ſuſtenance: ſo ſhall he, if he refuſe that heauenly foode of his ſoule, for all the wicked cannot corrupt the ſame vntounto him.
This man hath no fellowſhip with the vnfrutefull works of darkeneſſe. This man dooth obey the Commaundement, come out from among them, ſeparate your ſelues, and touch no vncleane thing, &c. For he toucheth not their ſinne, but the holy things of God: for the ſeperation from the wicked, cannot be alwaies in body. Where there is idolatrie practiſed, and the faith and true worſhip ouerthrowne, we muſt depart both in minde and bodye: but from wicked men in the Church, we cannot depart in bodye, vnleſſe we will alſo depart from Chriſt.
If it were otherwiſe, how ſhould the faithfull, without pollution, worſhip as they did in the Temple, among ſo many prophane men? and how ſhould thoſe few at Sardi, Reuel. 3 hauehave kept their garments vnpolluted, among that heape of vngodly men? Now let the reader iudge, whether I hauehave in a frantike manner, as you accuſe me, blaſphemed the name of Chriſt, by comparing yée vntounto Anabaptiſts, and Donatiſts, in this your condemning and forſaking the Church for the euil men which be in it. I would to God both you and others could conſider that which is written of King Saul, when as the holy Ghoſt ſaith, he was zealous for the Children of Iſrael and Iuda, 2 Samuel. 21. and would roote out the Gybeonites. Did not the Lorde declare by the thrée yeares famine, and by cauſing ſome of the houſe of Saul to be hanged, how curſſed his cruell zeale was, which yet hee had ſome colour of from the lawe, which willed them to roote out the Heathen? The cruell zeale of Browniſts, which ſéemeth to bee for the Church, is more without excuſe, when they will néedes roote vp the naturall plants, as now they may be called, yea euen the whole aſſemblies, both old and yoong.
The third accuſation.
The Brow. FOr that they hauehave a falſe Antichriſtian Miniſterie impoſed vponupon them, &c.
The third fault is an Antichriſtian miniſterie impoſed andG. G. maintained. Héere is no reaſon rendred, why it is a falſe and Antichriſtian miniſtery which is impoſed. If yée be Prophets raiſed vp of God, then wee muſt beléeue that which you ſay: but they did not lie in any matter, but eueryevery man may ſée that you hauehave in the former article lyed, wee may not therefore giuegive, &c.