Defense of the Churches and Ministry of England, Reason 6
Maiſter IOHNSONS VI. Reaſon againſt the former Aſſumption: with Maiſter IACOBS Replies to the ſame. REASON VI.
THe Samaritans (thoſe counterfett children of Abraham, Jſaack and Iacob) did publiquelie profeſſe that most excellent doctrine of the Meſſias to come: (the trueth of which doctrine howe powerful it was to ſaluation, the Scriptures testifie): yet doeth our Sauiour Chriſt repute them falſe worſhippers of God, becauſe their worſhip was a mixt worſhip, framed after the inventions of men, and traditions of their Forefathers: Therefore ſayth Chriſt vntounto them: Yee worſhip that which ye knowe not, we worſhip that which we knowe, for ſaluation is of the Iewes. By which wordes of Chriſt it plainely appeareth, that (although at that time, ſome profeſſed ſuch truthes which otherwiſe were auaylable vntounto ſaluatiō) yet none that were falſe worſhippers of God, could truely challendge vntounto them ſelues in ſuch estate, the benefite of thoſe truthes, but they onelyonly which were the true Church and people of God, to whom the Oracles of God were committed, and to whom the Couenantes and ſeruice of God did appertayne, ſuch as were at that tyme, (not the Samaritans) but the Jewes, and they whiche helde the faith of the Iewes: wherevppon (not the Samaritanes) but the Iewes, were then by Christ accounted the true worſhippers of GOD, and heires of ſaluation, John 4.22. compared with verſe 20.25, 29. and with 2. King. 17, 24.
In the like manner, the people of theſe Eccleſiasticall aſſemblies, ſtanding ſubiect to a counterfett Ministerie and worſhip of God, (being alſo commingled togeather of all ſortes of people:) Though they profeſſe ſome truthes which otherwiſe are auailable to ſaluation, yet can not in ſuch estate by the word of God, he deemed true Christians or true Churches: Neither can, ſo ſtanding, challendge vntounto them ſelues the benefit of thoſe true doctrines which they profeſſe, becauſe God hath not made his promiſe vntounto anie falſe Church or worſhippers of him: neither committed vntounto anie ſuch his holy things, to witt, his word, prayer, Sacramentes, Cenſures, &c. But he hath made his promiſe, & committed theſe things only to his true Church and people, which worſhip him aright, and yeeld obedidience to his Gospell, keeping whatſoeuer he hath commaunded them: Wherevpon it followeth, that ſuch people onelyonly are true Christians, and true churches of Christ, to whom the promiſes & holy things apperteyne, and not to the people and Eccleſiasticall aſſemblies of England, neither anie ſuch, abiding in falſe worſhip or falſe constitution of a church, as is aforeſaide.
H. JOCOB his 1. Reply to the 6. Reaſon.
THis your 6. Reaſon is, The Samaritans (beleeuing that Meſſias ſhould come, Iohn. 4.25.) were as neare ſaluation as we of England are. But they were falſe worſhippers for all that. Ergo, ſo are we, for all our holy doctrines beleeued according to that Booke of Articles.
I deny the Propoſition. The Samaritans, might knowe by hearſay and beleeue, the Meſſias ſhould come, and Baalam did know it, Nom. 24.17. and the Deuils doe now know and beleue, Iam. 2.17. Yet none of theſe beleeued [in] him. It followeth not therefore, that they were as nigh ſaluation as wee of England. In a worde, there is a Reaſon manifeſt. Theſe Samaritans ioyned Heatheniſh Idols with the God of Iſrael. 2. Ki. 17. which wholy deſtroyed the trueth in them, though they did reteyne ſome memoriall amongſt them of Meſſias to come. Wherfore here take the Second Anſwer to the Firſt Reaſon before.*Pag. 25. But I will help them with an Obiection, ſurely one fitter then all theſe.
Obiection: The Iſralites vnderunder Ieroboam at Dan and Bethell ſerued not Pagan Idols, but the true God after their own deuiſes, which yet reſembled the ordinances of Ieruſalem 2. King. 12.32. Amos. 4.4. Howbeit they were falſe worſhippers, only for their falſe Miniſtery and outward falſe worſhip, for all that they beleeued in the God of Ieruſalem otherwiſe rightly.
Ergo, ſo are wee of England only for our falſe Miniſterie and outward worſhip.
Anſwere. To this wee aunſwere alſo, what additions of deuices, and how groſſe Idolatrie they held, it appeareth not: But ſurely it ſeemeth farre groſſer, and filthier then the worſt is with vsus: But yet this appeareth cleerelie, that the conſcience of eueryevery of them, euen of the ſimplieſt, muſt needes be conuicted, that Ieruſalem was the only place, and Arons line the only Prieſts (†My meaning was the Leuits were not of Aarons line, but ye Prieſts only. & Leuits.) Therfore they could not be indeed true worſhippers, nor within the couenant, nor neere to ſaluation, when they all openly rebelled, and forſooke them deſperatly, whom the Lord had ſo expreſly choſen. Now our aſſemblies throughout England hauehave not their conſciences ſo conuicted in the Hyerarchie and Ceremonies. Ergo, wee may be in the coueuant, which they were not, for all our corruptions.
F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 6. Reaſon.
THis our 6. Reaſon, he neither propounded as we did, nor aunſwereth directlie, and ſoundlie vntounto anie part of it. But that the nakednes of his anſwere, and light of the trueth may better appeare, we will propound the Reaſon more ſhortlie in a Sillogiſme, thus.
The people and aſſemblies, whoſe Eccleſiasticall constitution is ſuch as to them in that estate the Couenantes, holy things, and ſeruice of God doe not apperteyne, they can not in ſuch constitution by the worde of God be deemed true Christians or true Churches, whatſoeuer truthe they profeſſe beſides.
But ſuch is the Eccleſiasticall constitution of the people and aſſemblies of Englande, as vntounto them in that estate the Couenauntes, holy things, & ſeruice of God doe not apperteyne.
Therefore the people and Aſſemblies of England, can not in that conſtitution, by the word of God, be deemed true Christians, or true Churches, whatſoeuer truthes they profeſſe beſides.
The Propoſition none will denie,
The Aſſumption is proued thus.
The people and Aſſemblies whoſe Eccleſiasticall conſtitution is ſuch, as they worſhip God after a falſe manner, neuer appointed by him ſelf, nor approued in his word: their constitution is ſuch, as vntounto them in that eſtate, the couenaunts, holy things, and ſeruice of God doe not apperteyne.
But ſuch is the Eccleſiaſticall conſtitution of the people and Aſſemblies of England, as they worſhip God after a falſe manner, neuer appointed by him ſelfe, nor approued in his word.
Therefore the Eccleſiasticall conſtitution of the people and Aſſemblies of Englande, is ſuch as vntounto them in that eſtate, the Couenaunts, holie things, and ſeruice of God, doe not apperteyne.
The Propoſition was proued by the example of the Samaritans, and Chriſtes ſpeach and ſentence of them in ſuch eſtate, Ioh. 4. and 2 King. 17 Whervnto he anſwereth nothing to anie purpoſe, ſaue that, what he ſaith, is againſt him ſelfe. For where he graunteth That the Samaritans, and Balaam knewe and beleeued the Meſſias ſhould come, yea and that the Deuills knowe and beleeue there is a God, and that Ieſus is the Chriſt, the holy one of God. Who ſeeth not, that moſt excellent truthes may be acknowledged, and yet they which ſo profeſſe, be not therefore in their eſtate true Chriſtians or true Churches, to whom the Couenauntes, holie things and ſeruice of God apperteyne? Where next he ſaith, The Samaritans beleeued not in the Meſſias, it will be heard for him to prooue it, ſeeing he taketh beleefe in Christ ſo, as it is had in the spirituall Babylon and her daughters, and ſeeing alſo the Samaritans profeſſed and beleened, not onelyonly that the Meſſiah ſhould come, but euen he which is called Christ, & that when he came, he would declare vntounto them all things. Jn ſo much as when Jeſus was come, & had spoken but to a woman of Samaria, the ſcripture witneſſeth, that manie of the Samaritans of that citie beleeued in him for the ſaying of the woman, which testified, he hath tolde me all thinges that euer I did, Ioan 4.25, 26, 29, 30, 39. Thirdly, where he ſaith, The Samaritans ioyned Heatheniſh Idolls with the God of Iſraell, which wholy deſtroyed the trueth in them which they held. By this againe it is euident, euen in his owne confeſſion, Both that ſuch things may be ioyned with the doctrines of trueth, as in that estate, they which profeſſe thoſe truthes, can not be iudged true Christians, or true churches, to whom the promiſes and holy things of God doe belong: And that therefore alſo, the *See further for the anſwer of this in Pag. 4.Propoſition of his principall and maine Argument first propounded, is not generall, but of neceſſitie admitteth limitations: So as then his maine defence falleth to the ground, as alreadie we hauehave noted both in the beginning of this writing, in the anſwere to that Propoſition afore ſaide: and againe in the defence of our Fourth Reaſon a little before. Moreouer, in that he ſayeth, the Samaritans ioyned Heatheniſh Idols with the God of Iſraell. (2. King. 17.) If he meane, that they worſhipped the Idols them ſelues,2. King. 17. ſacrificing to them, and accompting them to be Gods as well as the God of Iſraell, and ſo brake the First commaundement, as before he affirmed in his anſwere to our First Reaſon: then we take it, that here againe hee is deceyued, as there we hauehave ſhewed. The ſcripture ſaieth, Pag. 30.they worſhipped & ſacrifized to the Lord God of Iſraell. So as their ſinne was againſt the Second commaundement, in that worſhipping the true God, they did it in, and by thoſe Images, as alſo by other deuices of their owne, and traditions of their predeceſſours. That this was their estate and ſinne, beſides that it appeareth in that chapter alleadged, it is alſo most plainlie ſett downe, first by them ſelues, in that booke of Ezra,Ezra. 4.1, 2. where they ſpeake vntounto the Iewes of the captiuitie that builded the Temple, ſaying:
We will buylde with you, for wee ſeeke the Lord your God as ye doe, and we hauehave ſacrificed vntounto him ſince the tyme of Eſar Haddon King of Aſſhur, which brought vsus vp hither. Then alſo betweene Christ and the woman of Samaria, Joh. 4. where it is manifest, that the “Ioh. 4.20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 29, 30.contention betweene the Iewes and the Samaritans, was not whether onelyonly the true God was to be worſhipped, but both of them agreeing in that, whether the ſolemne place of his worſhip was in Ieruſalem, or in the mount of Samaria, &c. Lastlie, by this mans owne confeſſion, when he ſayth in this place, Pag 49.that the Iſraelites vnderunder Ieroboam at Dan and B… thel, ſerued not Pagan Idolls, but the true God after their owne deuices. For the ſcripture testifieth, “2. King. 17.28, 32, 33.that the Samaritans worſhipped the ſame God, and after the ſame maner that the Nations did which were caried from thence. Nowe the nations that were carryed from thence, were the tenns Tribes that fel away from Iudah to Ieroboam: which likewiſe feared *1. King. 12.27, 28, 29, 30, 31. wt 2. King. 17.32, 33, 40, 41.the Lord & ſerued their Jmages, that is, God in and by their Images as nowe alſo the Samaritans did that were come in their ſteede. Hetherto of his anſwere, which may ſeeme to concerne the Propoſition of the latter Sillogiſme.
The Aſſumption was ſhewed by this, that theſe aſſemblies being commingled togeather of all ſortes of people, they hauehave alſo for the worſhip of God among them, a counterfett Ministerie and ſeruice, deuiſed by mans which he rightlie vnderstandeth, as we alſo doe, of their Hierarchie, and other abominations (before rehearſed) which deceiptfully heare againe he would ſmother vp vnderunder the name of ceremonies. Touching which flight of his, ſufficient is ſaid before in the handling of our First Reaſon. But what nowe ſaith he here, concerning the Aſſumption or proofe of it? Doeth he denie it? No. What then doeth he ſay for their counterfet Hierarchie, worſhip, &c. Surely nothing but this, That their Aſſemblies in England hauehave not their conſciences conuicted in theſe, as the people vnderunder Ieroboam, could not but hauehave their conſciences conuicted then, touching their worſhip and Prieſthood. But first, if this were ſo: is this anie iuſt defence of their Ministerie, worſhip, or estate, that they yet ſee them not to be vnlawfull, as it could not be, but they vnderunder Ieroboam ſaw theirs to be? If this were a ſufficient reaſon, might not the groſſest Papist plead likewiſe for their Miniſterie, worſhip, and eſtate, as alſo the Vſurers, extortioners, and perſecutors, for them ſelues and their wickednes? By this reaſon, God ſhould not hauehave ſent Lyons among the Samaritans, becauſe “2. King. 17.26.yet, they knewe not the maner of worſhipping the God of Jſraell, neither had their conſciences conuicted therein. But Christ hath taught vsus otherwiſe, *Luk. 12.48.that euen that ſeruaunt, which knoweth not his Maiſters will, and yet committeth things worthy of ſtripes, ſhalbe beaten, though with fewer stripes, then he that knoweth and doeth it not. And euen of thoſe Jſraelites aforeſaide the Lord him ſelfe testifieth “Hoſ. 4.6.that they were deſtroyed for lacke of knowledge. So then neither can this peoples ignoraunce (which he pleadeth) be a ſufficient defence for their estate. Or if it could, yet it ſeemeth they of Iſraell aforeſaid, might aſwell hauehave alleadged for them ſelues, ſeeing the Lorde witneſſeth of them “Hoſ. 4.1.that there was no knowledge of God in the lande. And thus the obiectiō alſo here brought by him ſelfe, remayneth ſtill vnaunſwered. Nowe where hee ſayeth, that Aarons Line were the only Prieſts and Leuites, hee is alſo miſtaken herein, In deede Aarons Line onelyonly were the Priestes, but the Leuites were generallie of the Tribe of Leuie, though not of Aarons lyne. But to let this paſſe: We would knowe of him a ſufficient reaſon, why the true worſhip and ministerie appointed by Chriſt in his Testament, ſhould not be aſwell knowne vntounto them in theſe dayes, as in the defection of Iſraell? He ſayth They could not but knowe, that Ieruſalem was the only place, and Aarons lyne the onelyonly Prieſtes. HaueHave not theſe the ſcripture aſmuch as the other had? Or hath not Chriſt *Heb. 3.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.the Sonne, bene as faithfull in the houſe of God, and as plainly ſet downe his will for his true worſhip and Miniſterie in the time of the Gospell, as Moſes the ſeruant was and did for the time of the Law? Yea and hauehave not “Witnes the publike Treatiſes, Sermons, Admonitions, Complaintes, Supplications, & Demonſtrations, to the Parliamēt, beſides ye bandes and ſufferings of many in this behalf.theſe by the word bene made manifeſt to the conſciences of men in theſe dayes? And euen to the high Court of Parliament, repreſenting the whole body of the Land as the other were to the Iſraelites in the time of their defection? Finally, doeth not this Land ſtand in as open rebellion against, and forſaking of the true Miniſterie, worſhip, and order, appoincted by Chriſt to his church nowe, as the other did then, (if not more open and greeuous) not onelyonly for the cauſes aforeſaide, but becauſe alſo they hauehave “Witnes the Pōtifical, Portuis, Canons & Conſtitution of the Popiſh, & their aſſemblies, cōpared togeather.receyued and ſtill reteyne a falſe ministerie, worſhip, and confuſion of the man of ſinne, that ſonne of perdition, and capitall enimie of the Lord Ieſus Christ? And yet moreouer, least they ſhould lacke anie thing of the other, and not eueryevery way farre exceed them, doe alſo *Witnes their Actions, Statutes, &c.perſecute vntounto bandes, exile, & death, ſuch as beare witnes to the trueth of Christ, against their abominations aforeſaide. By this then it appeareth, that the aduerſarie heere, neither hath iustified their estate in respect of the Apostate Iſraelites, nor anſwered the obiection which him ſelfe framed against their preſent conſtitution: which therfore we will here ſet downe as he propounded it.
The Obiection was this.
The Iſraelises vnderunder Jeroboam at Dan and Bethell ſerued not Pagan Idols, but the true God after their owne deuiſes, which yet reſembled the ordinances at Ieruſalem. 1. King. 12.32. Amos 4.4. How be it they were falſe worſhippers, only for their falſe miniſtery, & outward falſe worſhip, for all that they beleeued in the God of Ieruſalem rightly. Therefore ſo theſe of England, onelyonly for their falſe Miniſterie and outward worſhip.
This is his owne Obiection and Reaſon, vntounto which hee hath giuen no ſufficient aunſwere, as before hath bene ſhewed. So that it ſtill remayneth vponupon himſelfe as a teſtimonie againſt their preſent eſtate. This we neither did, nor needed to propound, as a ſeuerall Reaſon, amongſt thoſe which we ſet down, becauſe it is of like nature with thoſe wee mentioned amongeſt ours in the Second and Sixt Reaſons before alleadged.
H. JACOB his 2. Reply to the 6. Reaſon.
IN this your defence of your 6. Reaſon you ſay, That the Propoſition of your laſt ſillogiſme, (They that worſhip God after a falſe manner, pag. 50.are are no true Chriſtans) is proued by the example of the Samaritans, and that I anſwer nothing againſt it.
Firſt I ſay, there you ſophiſticate againe. And it ſeemeth you can doe nothing elſe in argumentation. For your Propoſition is Aequiuocall and ambiguous. If you meane they that worſhip God after a falſe manner, that is totally, or els Fundamentally. Then I cleerely graunt it, and that the Samaritans doe proue the ſame, ſeeing they erred Fundamentally. But your Aſſumption touching vsus, is then vtterly falſe. You bring not a ſillable or one letter, to proue either of theſe Two againſt vsus, in all your writing, neither can you, but bare begging of the controuerſie which is infinite ofte. If you meane in your Propoſition, They that ſerue God after a falſe maner, that is, in part, not Wholly nor Fundamentally, As namely in the Hyerarchy and externall ceremonies as Cranmer, &c. Then I ſay and avouch confidentlie in the preſence of God, that ſuch may be true Chriſtians, though vnperfect in many things. Yea infinite, ſuch hauehave bene, are, and may bee hereafter, true Chriſtians. The contrarie whereof, is no leſſe then horrible blaſphemie againſt God and his Saincts, wherfore your Propoſition, is ſhewed to be againe ſophiſticall, as alſo thoſe were in your Third Exception, and Firſt and Second Reaſons.
Secondly where you ſay, the Samaritans proue it, and I ſay nothing againſt it. Marke you. Firſt I ſaid, the Samaritans might knowe by hearſay, and yet not faithfully beleeue [in] the Meſſias. You cannot bee ignorant, that there is a great difference betweene an obſcure rumor, which ſome of them might receiue from their neighbour Iewes, and yet not hauehave it conſtantly beleeued, and held publiquely among them, as their comon faith. If thus the Samaritans beleeued the comming of Meſsiah, they are in no cōpariſon with vsus, we holde our moſt holy faith and doctrine by the worde profeſſedly, as the publique ordinance of our Churchs ſheweth. But furder let it be howſoeuer they held the comming of Meſsiah, yet I anſwered, The Samaritans ioyned Heatheniſh Idols with the God of Iſraell which wholly deſtroyed the trueth in them. And this is the very truth indeed, howſoeuer you will not yeld it. For you ſay, that they broke not the Firſt commaundement, they worſhipped not the Jdols them ſelues, nor ſacrifiſed to thē, &c. This is proued apparantly falſe in the Text 2. Kings. 17.29, 30, 31.2. King. 17. Enery nation made their Gods and put them in the houſes of the high places which the Samaritans had made, eueryevery nation in their Citties wherein they dwelt. For the men of Babel made Succoth-Benoth, and the men of Cuth made Nergall, and the men of Hamath made Aſhima. And the Auims made Nibhaz and Tartak, and the Sepharuims burnt their children in the fyer to Adramelch & Anammelech the Gods of Sepharuim: Therfore they worſhipped the Idols of the Heathen, and ſacrifiſed to them, and accoumpted them to be Gods aſwell as the God of Iſraell. And ſo broke the Firſt commandement, and therefore they touch not vsus in this queſtion, As the like I hauehave truely and well derlared before,“pag. 34. againſt your Firſt Reaſon.… pag. 51. Your proofes, that the Samaritans brake not the Firste commandment are nothing. (1) That of Ezra. 4.1.2. that they ſought the Lord as the Jewes did, &c, was their conterfet hypocriſie and falſe brag, yea their diueliſh conſpiracie againſt the worſhip of the Iewes God. Doe you beleeue their wordes here in this place, that they are true indeed? I graunt as I noted before out of 2. Kings 17. they had a mixed worſhip, ſome thing of the Iewes God, but very much and (as by that Chapter ſeemeth) moſt of the Heathens Gods. 2. Secondly,Pag. 51. where you ſay out of Iohn. 4. That it is manifeſt, there was no contention betweene the Jewes and the Samaritans, whether *A bolde aſſertion.only the true God was to be worſhipped. There appeareth no word of any ſuch thing, Our Sauiour indeed noteth verſ. 21. One difference betwene them, that was, but about the place of worſhipping on occaſion of the womans wordes: But that there was no difference betwene them in the obſeruing of the Firſt Commandement, he ſaith not. The contrarie you ſaw before proued in 2. King. 17.30.31.3. Thirdly you vrge my cōfeſſion, That the Iſralites vnderunder Ieroboam ſerued not Pagan Jdols but the true God after their owne deuices. And you would proue it too, by 2, King. 17.28, 32, 33. Seeing the Samaritans worſhipped after the manner of the nations that dwelt there before they came, who were the Tenne tribes that Ieroboam drew away. I aunſwere, Firſt it is great ſhame, that you make this my confeſſion, when I expreſly bring it in, as your Obiection, whervnto I ſet mine anſwer,Pag. 49. that the Idolatry vnderunder Ieroboam ſeemeth farre groſſer and filthier then the worſt is with vsus, which I make manifeſt by the ſcripture, not only 1. King. 12.21. where Ieroboam erected viſible Idols, and very filthy ones, euen calues and brute beaſtes: which if they were but to worſhip God by, yet who would compare our Eccleſiaſticall orders to them, which*Viz. the generall ſtate. we profeſſe are but indifferent thinges, for order and comelineſſe only. Further I alleadged 2. Chro. 11.15. Where Ieroboam is ſaid to appoinct Prieſtes, for the high places, for Deuils, and for the Calues that he made. So I confeſſe little to your aduantage. Secondly, if the Samaritans worſhipped (as they did indeed) like the Tenne tribes before them, then you are cleane gone. For though Ieroboā at the Firſt had not ioyned in ye Heatheniſh Idolatry. Yet Ahab did 1. King. 16.32, 33. and his Sonne Ahaziah had further Baalzebub the God of Ekron. Yea the Iſralites, as they of Ieruſalem afterwardes, were Idolaters much a like 2. King. 17.19. But wee read of the Iewes vnderunder Ahas 2 Chr. 28.23. and Manaſſes and Amon. 2 King. 21. and 23.4, 5, 10, 11.12, 13. That they vſed the very Pagans Idolatrie. Yea it is expreſſed, 2. King. 17.8, 11, 16, 17. That theſe Tenne Tribes vſed the very ſame. Therefore the Samaritans doing as theſe Iſralites did,Pag. 54. held ſuch groſſe idolatry as could by no meanes ſtand with the true ſeruing of God. Finally as before is noted 2. King. 17.29, 30, 31. doeth expreſſe this groſſe Heatheniſh idolatrie of the Samaritans. Surely it appeareth more groſſe and worſe then the Iſralites before them. And therefore you are greatly deceiued both here & in the defence of your Firſt Reaſon before:Pag. 30. where you expreſlie mainteine theſe Samaritans to holde no Heatheniſh Jdolatrie, but onelyonly to cleaue to the God of Jſraell in an outwarde deuiſed corrupt worſhip. They acknowledged him, I graunt, but him only I denie, as hath ben proued.
Further you affirme in your defence of your Firſt Reaſon,Pag. 30. That they profeſſed the written lawe to be the rule, both for their inward beliefe, and outward manner of worſhip. Where you would proue it For that the Apostate Iſraelites did ſo of whom Ezeck. speaketh. Zeck. 43.8.Firſt this followeth not, becauſe the Heatheniſh Samaritans were further from ſinceritie, then the naturall Iſraelites commonly. Secondly, Iſraell it ſelfe in this wretched Apoſtaſie, helde not the written law for their rule, ſeeing profeſſedlie they left this rule, and did conſtantlie worſhip Calues, and ſacrifized at Dan and Bethel. Thirdly, Ezekiell ſheweth, euen there, cap. 43.7.8. they kept not this rule, but departed therefrom, and that as appeareth profeſſedly, and conſtantly. Which moſt of all is ſeene in Ahab, Ahaziah, Ahas,Pag. 34. 55. Manaſſes, and Amon, as is before noted. Wherfore in theſe your ſayings Maiſter Iohnſon, you are intollerably too blame and foully deceaued. As for example, They profeſſed that which they did in 2. Kinges. 17.29, 30, 31. was that after the rule of the written Lawe?
Next you oppugne me, for that I alleadged our Aſſemblies throughout England,Pag. 52. hauehave not their conſciences conuicted in the Hyerarchy and ceremonies, you ſay "if this were ſo, is it any iuſt defence of your miniſtery, worſhip, eſtate, &c. I tell you it is a iuſt defence for our miniſterie worſhip, and eſtate to be as touching the ſubstance and foundation of Chriſtianitie, ſound and acceptable to God. Refute it if you can. I knowe it is no iuſt defence of our whole Miniſtery, eſtate, & manner of worſhip, which I neuer intended, much leſſe profeſſed to iuſtifie.
Where you would ſnatch at an advauntage about Aarons line, my meaning was, that they of Aaron were only for Prieſts, & their bretheren of Leui, only for Leuites.
But you paſſe this, and you ſet your ſelf in earneſt, to proue vsus all conuicted in conſcience aboute our Hyerarchie and ceremonies. So that here you auouch openly, that third generall poinct which I obſerued in my very beginning aboue,pag. 3. for the which you hauehave this Reaſon. HaueHave not wee the ſcriptures as much as the Apoſtate Iſralites had? Or did not Chriſt as fully and plainly ſett downe our miniſterie and worſhip in the Goſpell, as Moſes in the Law? I aunſwere, this is true, as touching the word it ſelfe. In the Goſpell we are taught as plainly and as fully for the word it ſelfe, as the Iewes were in Moſes: But it is not yet ſo playne for our vnderſtanding and vſe. Why? Becauſe wee hauehave had a diſcontinuance of the“The Paſtors of ye Churches ſince, hauehave had many corruptions mixed in their callings, they hauehave not bene pure and ſimple euer ſince: or at leaſt wee cannot proue it otherwiſe, by any recordes now extant. ſimple offices of Paſtours, Teachers and Elders for the ſpace of a Thouſand Three hundreth, or a Thouſand Four hundreth Yeares, and a continuance of the Prelacie all this while hetherto. Alſo, for that many auncient, and late learned, and Godly Chriſtians, hauehave beleued it, at leaſt cōuenient, if not neceſſary in the Church. And they hauehave expounded the Scriptures ſo, that they carry no ſmall ambiguity in this matter, in infinite Thouſands iudgement. Thus it hath pleaſed God in his prouidence, to ſuffer this miſtaking amongeſt Chriſtians, thus longe, and thus vniuerſally. Whereby it commeth to paſſe, that infinite Thouſand conſciences are not eaſely conuicted, though they bee miſtaken in this caſe. With the Iewes it was not ſo in this matter that we talke of. As Moſes and the Prophets were moſt plain, that Ieruſalem muſt be the onlie place of ſolemne worſhip, Arons line the onelyonly Prieſts, no Calues, nor any viſible kinde of Image or meanes to worſhip God in: So alſo they conſtantly and perpetually practized that courſe, euen from Moſes till the Apoſtacie of Ieroboam. When any ſqared from this courſe, theſe were not onelyonly rebuked expreſlie by Gods voyce in his Prophets, from time to time: but alſo the obſtinate, were moſt fearfully ſmitten with Gods miraculous hand from heauen. So that for any to offend in theſe poinctes as Ieroboam did, It could not poſſible bee but in preſumptuous rebellion, with a high hand againſt God, and with a conuicted & ſeared conſcience. Which I ſay cannot with any ſhew of ſence, be ſaid of many Thouſand Chriſtians in this caſe touching the Praelacie, &c.
Further you vrge * theſe Reaſons That this cauſe hath bene made manifest to the conſciences of men, Pag. 53.yea to the Parliament of late times. You ſay well to the conſciences of men: but not to the conſciences of all men, or the moſt men throughout the land. Yea or to the moſt of them that know and feare God, according to the religion now mainteyned, This is the very queſtion. If you meane ſo, that all mens conſciences are conuicted in this matter, All men ſurely will either pitty your ſimplicitie, or laugh at your folly. I pray you Maiſter Iohnſon, conſider your ſelfe, you were a true Chriſtian, longe before you fell into this ſeparation. Yea moreouer you were learned, yea you knew and acknowledged theſe very corruptions a great while, and yet condemned vsus not, Nay you condemned the ſeparation earneſtly. I pray you is it not poſſible that numbers, who ſee not ſo farre as you did then, ſhould ſtill condemne your ſeparation, and yet be true Chriſtians, as you acknowledge that your ſelfe then was? meipſo teſte.
That which you ad "of perſecuting vntounto bandes, exile and death to proue our vtter aboliſhing from Chriſt generally: It is a toy.Pag. ibid. Firſt if you were meerely innocent, yet this could not make vsus worſe then the Iewes in Chriſtes time: who for all that they perſecuted, yet were they not wholly falne from God. Secondly you ſuffer indeed more thē you need, if that you would but acknowledge the grace of God with vsus ſo farre as it is. It is therefore not Chriſtes Croſſe in that regard, but your owne that you beare.
Finally let it bee noted, if here in this your 6. Reaſon you bee not directly contrary to your ſelf, as I hauehave obſerued in your 2. Reaſon:Maiſter Iohnſon his contrarietie proued betwene his 2. Reaſon and his 6. Reaſon. Pag. 39. For you ſay here, Pag. 48. That not the Samaritans, but the Jewes, were then by Chriſt counted the true worſhippers of God, & heires of ſaluation, Ioh. 4.22. But in your Second Reaſon, Pag. 35. you ſay: They that teach for doctrine mens precepts, as there Chriſt ſaith the Iewes then did, thoſe in particuler are no true Christians, nor their aſſemblies true Churches. Math. 15.9.Therfore you inferre, (or elſe you pretend it) that thoſe perticuler Iewes were not then true worſhippers, nor their aſſemblies true Churchest which is a flat contradiction, Or elſe what is. But if you ſay you meane not this of the Iewes, then you abuſe the ſcripture and vsus, turning it cleane from them, whom in your Reaſon you ſpeake of, and whom Chriſt therein expreſly meaneth.