Answer to Mr Jacobs Defense of the Churches and Ministry of England, Religious treatise 1 · Chapter 15

Answer to Mr Jacobs Defense of the Churches and Ministry of England · Religious treatise 1 · Chapter 15

p. 155Chap. 15. The Ninth Reaſon againſt Mr Iacobs Aſſumption aforeſaid.

Fr. Iohnſon. THey which do otherwiſe teach, and condiſcend not to the wholſome words of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, and to the doctrine which is according to godlines, all ſuch by the rule of the Apoſtle are to be ſeparated frō, and therefore cannot in that caſe by the word of God be deemed true Chriſtians, 1 Tim. 6.3.4.5.

But ſuch is the caſe of all the Miniſters and people of the Church of England, in their miniſtery, worſhip, and Church conſtitution: As appeareth both by the ſeverall points of their falſe doctrine**Points of falſe doctrine. els where noted, and by the proofes““Pag. 61. 63. 135. &c. here before alledged out of their owne Canons, Articles, Iniunctions, &c.

p. 156Therefore all the Miniſters and people of the Church of England, in their Miniſtery, worſhip, and Church conſtitution, are by the rule of the Apoſtle to be ſeparated from, neither can in that caſe by the word of God be deemed true Chriſtians.

H. Iacob his 1. Reply to the 9. Reaſon. THis your laſt Reaſon is: Separate from them that teach otherwiſe then the truth. 1 Tim. 6.3.4.5. We holding thoſe Articles, do teach diverſe things in the Hierarchy &c. that be otherwiſe then is truth. Therefore we must be ſeparated from, and conſequently we are no true Christians.

This is a fallacy alſo, Separate from ſuch, Ergo ſeparate wholy. See my 1. and 2. Reply afore to the third Exception, alſo the Aunſwer to the two laſt Reaſons of all, the 7. and 8. We graunt therefore, ſo farr forth as we hold otherwiſe then trueth, ſo farr ſeparate from vsus, but not any farther at all: not wholy, or abſolutly. And ſo the Apoſtle here meaneth. Wherefore briefly: Becauſe you prove vsus not wholy to deny the trueth, nor fundamentally, nor obstinatly, perverſly, and deſperatly any part thereof, like thoſe Iewes Act. 19.9. whom Paul ſeparated from, which he did not from all other Ievves, Act. 13.14. & 16.3. & 21.23.24.26. & 3.1. Therefore you ought not vvholy to ſeparate from vsus, Neither to condemne vsus vvholy as aboliſhed from Chriſt, no more then Maiſter Cranmer & Ridley were vvith their Congregations in King Edwards tyme. And thus our Aſſumption in the beginning, ſtandeth firme, The doctrine in the booke of Articles, is ſufficient to make a true Christian.

CōcluſionThe contrary vvhereof, is ſuch a Paradox, as hath not ben heard of till this day: All reformed Churches in Europe doe and have alvvayes held othervviſe. Themſelves††M. Barrow Mr. Penry. Mr. Iohnſon heretofore have acknovvledged and profeſſed it. The holy Martyrs that lived in King Edvvards dayes, and dyed in Queene Maries dayes, muſt be othervviſe cut of from Chriſt, vvho vvere true Chriſtians by vertue of this doctrine and the practiſe thereof, or verily not at all. But now it is vvonder, vvhat extreame paſſion hath driven them to this denyall. Surely they ſee that it conuinceth flatly (as indeed it doth,) their peremptory ſeparation: And therefore, rather then they vvould ſeem to have erred in ſo mayne a poinct: vve cannot but thinke that meere deſperatnes, hath driven them to it. Nevertheleſſe, all this vve leave to the Lord, vvith the iudgement thereof, vvho hath the hearts of all men in his hand: not only to ſearch the ſecrets; but alſo to turne and diſpoſe them, even as it pleaſeth him.

Fr. Iohnſon his Aunſvver to Mr Iacobs 1. Reply to the 9. Reaſon. TO this Reaſon you anſwer, It is a fallacy, Separate from ſuch: Ergo ſeparate vvholy. But how ſhew you any fallacy therein? You bid vsus ſee your Replyes to the third Exception, and tvvo laſt Reaſons of all. Well we have ſeen them, and finde nothing there but againſt your ſelf, as hath ben ſhewed. So this Reaſon and the reſt ſtand ſtill vnanſwered, and ſtrong againſt you.

p. 157And that we may not doubt, but your ſelf alſo ſee it, howſoever you ſeem to plead the contrary before, therefore now you graunt it (and ſo yeeld the cauſe) both in expreſſe words, and by not defending the points of falſe doctrine, wherewith you were charged, neyther your Canons, Articles, Iniunctions, &c.

In expreſſe words, when you ſay, you graunt, that ſo farr foorth as you hold othervviſe then trueth, ſo far vve may and ought to ſeparate from you. Loe here what the evidence of the truth (againſt which you have ſtrugled ſo long) hath now at length drawen from you. The trueth is mighty, and prevaileth.

But you adde, that vve muſt not ſeparate from you any further, then as before: not wholy or abſolutly: and ſo (ſay you) the Apoſtle “ here meaneth. 1 Tim. 6.3.…1 Tim 6:3Firſt of all, let vsus know what your ſelf meane hereby. If you meane that we muſt not for your other defection forſake the trueths which you hold, I aunſwer that we doe it not, and this your ſelf know well ynough. And in this ſence your meaning comes nothing neare the Apoſtles. You ſay your ſelves, you have ſeparated from the Papiſts: yet you neither can nor will ſay, that you have forſaken the truthes which the Papiſts hold: As, that there is a God; that there be three perſons in the Godhead; that Ieſus Chriſt is the Saviour of the world; that God made heaven and earth; that there ſhalbe a reſurrection of the iuſt and vniuſt &c.

But if you meane, that becauſe of the truthes which you profeſſe, therefore we ſhould not ſeparate from you: then firſt you contradict your ſelf, having graunted that we muſt ſeparate from you, ſo farr foorth as you hold otherwiſe then trueth. Secondlie, you condemne your owne practiſe in your ſeparation from the Papiſts, notwithſtanding the truthes they profeſſe. Thirdlie, in this ſence alſo your meaning comes nothing neare the Apoſtles meaning. Thus therefore is evident, both that there is no fallacy in the Reaſon, but that it is playne and forceable againſt you: And that you have directlie in expreſſe words given vsus the cauſe,See the particulars before, Pag. 63 &c. and acknowledged our ſeparation to be lawfull from your * Miniſtery, worſhip, Aſſemblies, &c. becauſe in theſe you hold otherwiſe then truth.

And as in expreſſe words you yeeld it, ſo in deed you ſhew it, in that you leave without all defēce (as vnlawfull and to be ſeparated from) your Miniſtery, worſhip, Church-governement, Doctrine, Canons, Articles, Iniunctions, &c. mentioned both here, and more particularlie in the Firſt and Second Reaſons before: which thing we wiſh the Reader well to obſerve. And becauſe we are fallen againe into mention of your falſe doctrine, to the end that the Reader may yet more ſee the deceitfulnes of your dealing and inſufficiencie of all your anſwers: therefore it ſhall not be yrkeſome to ſet downe here, ſome ſuch poincts of falſe doctrine as heretofore have ben obiected againſt you. They are as followeth:

1. That though the open notorious obſtinate offenders be partakers of the Sacraments, yet neyther the Sacramentes, Falſe doctrine in the Church of England, and in the defenders thereof.nor the people that ioine with them, are defiled therby. Which doctrine is contrary to the trueth of p. 158God in theſe Scriptures, 1 Cor. 10.17. Hag. 2.14.15. 1 Cor. 5.6. & 10.28. 2 Cor. 6.14.15.16.17.18. Gal. 5.9. Mat. 18.8.9.15.16.17.18.19. Exod. 12.43. Levit. 15.4.5.6.7.31. & 11.24. & 13.45.46. & 19.7. Num. 5.2.3. & 19.21.22. Ioſua. 7.11.12. &c. Ezra. 6.21.22. Ier. 3.1.

2. That the planting or reforming of Chriſts Church muſt tarrie for the Civill Magiſtrate, and may not otherwiſe be brought in by the word and ſpirit of God in the teſtimony of his ſervantes, except they have authoritie from earthlie Princes. Which doctrine is againſt the Kinglie power of Chriſt, and theſe ſcriptures. Mat. 28.18.20. Actes 3.23. 1 Cor. 1.27. Pſal. 2.6.9.10.12. Eſa. 9.6.7. Zach. 4.6. & 6.12.13. Dan. 2.44. & 7.27. & 9.25. Mich. 5.7. 1 Cor. 14.27. with 1 Theſ. 4.8. Phil. 2.6.12. 1 Tim. 6.13.14.15. Rev. 1.5. & 12.11. & 14.12. & 17.14. & 19.16. & 20.4.

3. That the true viſible Church of Chriſt is not a ſeparated company of righteous men and women, from the Idolaters and open wicked of the world, but may conſiſt of all ſortes of people, good and bad. Which doctrine is cō trary to the paterne of Chriſts Church, throughout all the ſcriptures, Gen. 4.26. vvith 6.2. Exod. 4.22.23. Levit. 10.10. & 20.24.25.26. Pſal. 24.3.4. Ezra. 6.21. 2. Chron. 11.13.16. Nehem. 10.28. Eze. 22.26. with 44.23. Zeph. 3.4. Mat. 3.10.12. Act. 2.40.41.42. & 19.9. Rom. 12.1.8. 2 Cor. 6.17.18. 1 Pet. 2.9.10. Rev. 14.9.12. & 18.4. & 21.27. and 22.14.15. &c.

4. To mainteine this error of their confuſed order and mixture of all ſortes of perſons togeather, they pervert the Parable of the tares, Mat. 13.24. teaching that all are the Church, and that they may be retained and communicated withall, in the Church. Which doctrine is againſt the trueth of the ſcriptures, yea againſt our Saviours owne interpretation in the 38. verſe, who teacheth, that by the field is meant the world, in which his Church is militant here on earth. And as therein there is the good ſeed, the righteous, the Children of the Kingdome; ſo there are alſo tares, hypocrites, the children of the wicked: who as they are often eſpied in this life by the righteous ſervauntes of God, and being diſcovered are here caſt out of the Church in the Name and by the power of Ieſus Chriſt; ſo ſhall they in that great day be perfectlie ſevered from the godly by the Angels: howſoever here in the meane tyme making profeſſion of the truth and having a ſhow of godlines, they be ſuffred to grow together with the good ſeed, and be with the vpright of heart reputed mēbers of the Church on earth. Note alſo, that the Church becauſe it is the Temple, Houſe, & kingdome of God on earth, wherein he dwelleth by his ſpirit and ruleth by the ſcepter of his word, as alſo the gate of heaven through which he bringeth vsus into his kingdome of glory after this life, is therefore by Chriſt in this place called the Kingdome of heaven, though yet it be here in the field of this world. Mat. 13.19.24.37.38.41.43.52. compared with Gen. 28.17. 1 Cor. 3.16.17. 2 Cor. 6.16.17.18. Epheſ. 2.21.22. Mat. 8.12. & 16.18.19.28. & 21.43. & 22.12.13.14. & 25.1. &c. Luk. 8.1. & 11.20. & 13.18. & 17.20.…1. Ioh 1.49.51. Act. 1.3. 1 Tim. 3.15. & 5.24.25. & 6.3.5. & 2. Tim. p. 1592.20.21. & 3.5. And further, if Chriſts meaning were that men ſhould here ſtill deare and partake with the knowen wicked and prophane, notwithſtanding that their eſtate, then by this it would follow that there ſhould neyther be vſe of Excōmunication in the Church, nor puniſhment of malefactors in the Common-wealth. Which could not but be the deſtruction of both: And is directlie contrary to the doctrine of Chriſt and his Apoſtles, in other Scriptures: As namelie, in Mat. 18.17.18. and 26.52. Rom. 13.4. 1 Cor. 5. chap. 1 Tim. 1.20. Finally, this their doctrine aforſaid, is againſt the expreſſe cōmaundement of God, the heavenly order of Chriſt in his Church, and the continuall practiſe of the Prophets Apoſtles and faithfull in all ages: For which ſee theſe Scriptures, Gen. 17.14. and 19.12-16. Lev. 18.29.30. and 20.22-26. Numb. 16.23-26. Ezra. 6.21. & 9.14. Eſa. 8.12.18 and .44.5. & 52.11. Ier. 15.19. Ezeh. 22.26 zach. 2.7. & 8.21. 22.23. Mal. 3.16.17.18. Mat. 18.8.9.15.16.17.18. Act 2.40.41.47. and 5.28.29. and 17.4.7.34. and 19.9. Rom. 16.17. 1 Cor. 1.26.27. and 5.4-7. 2 Cor. 6.17. 1 Tim. 6.3.4.5. 2 Ioh. verſ. 6.10 11. Iud. verſ. 3.21.22.23. Rev. 2. & 3. chap. & 14.9.12. & 17.14. & 18.4. & 20.4.

5. That the people may tolerate & ioine with open iniquitie in the Church, vntill by the Magiſtrate it be redreſſed. Which doctrine is contrarie to theſe Scriptures, 2 Cor. 10.4.5. Mat. 28.20. Act. 2.40. & 3.23. & 4.19. & 9.26. & 19.9. 1 Tim. 5.22. Deu. 5.32. & 12.32.

6. That the gifts of interpretation and application of the Scriptures are a ſufficient and lawfull calling to the Miniſtery, &c Which doctrine is both falſe and Anabaptiſticall, contrarie to the Scriptures, Heb. 5.4. Rom. 12.6.7.8. Levit. 22.25. Ezech. 44.8.9. &c Numb. 1.51. & 3.10.38. & 16.40. & 18.2.3.4. Act. 1.20.26. & 13.2.3. & 14.23.

7. That the Church may yeeld obedience vntounto other Lawes, Canons, traditions, officers and offices, then God hath preſcribed in his Covenant. Which doctrine is contrarie to Gen. 49.10. Mat. 6.24. Iohn. 10.4.5. Rev. 14.4. & 22.18.19. Heb. 3.1. &c.

8. That the Church may read other mens words vponupon a book, and offer them vp to God as their owne prayers and ſacrifices in the publique Aſſemblies. Which doctrine is contrarie to the ſcriptures, Eſay. 29.13.14. Rom. 8.26. 1 Cor. 14.15. Mat. 6.6.9. & 15.9. Mar. 7.7. Exod. 30.9. with Pſal. 141.2. Rev. 5.8. & 8.3.4. Iud. verſ. 20. Epheſ. 4.7.8. & 6.18. 1 Pet. 2.5.

9. That it is lawfull to ioine with the Miniſtery of dumb and Idoll Prieſts, and to receive the Sacraments at their handes. Which doctrine is contrary to Mat. 15.14. & 7.15. & 24.24.25. Eſa. 56.10. Iohn. 10.1.5. Num. 16.5.9.24.26.39.40. &c. 1 Tim. 3.2. & 6.5. 2 Iohn. verſ. 6.11.

10. That it is lawfull for a Miniſter of Chriſt, to ceaſſe preaching, and forſake his flock, at the Commaundement of the Lord Biſhops. Which doctrine is contrarie to 1 Cor. 9 16. Eſay. 62.1.6.7. Ier. 48.10. Zach. 11.17. Iohn, 10.11.12.13. Act. 4.18.19.20. & 5.29. Amos 7.12.13.14.15. 2 Tim. 4.2.

11. That the Church of Chriſt hath not alwayes power to binde and looſe, p. 160to receive in, and to caſt out by the Keyes of his Kingdome. Which doctrine is contrarie to Mat. 18.17.18. Pſal. 149.9. 1 Cor. 5.4.5.12. Num. 5.2.3.

12. That it is lawfull for the people of God to heare notorious falſe Prophetes in their Miniſtery. Which doctrine is contrarie to Deut. 18.15. Mat. 17.5. & 7.15. 2 Iohn. verſ. 10 11. 1 Cor. 10.18. Gal. 1.8.9. Rev. 14.9.10.11. & 18.4. Iohn 10.5.

13. That it is the Church and houſe of God, the body and kingdome of Chriſt, where he reigneth not by his own Ordinances & Officers, but the higheſt Eccleſiaſticall authoritie is in the handes of ſtrange Lordes & Antichriſtian Prelates: who alſo gouerne by Romiſh Cannons, and not according to the lawes of Chriſts Teſtament. Which doctrine and practiſe is condemned by Luke 19.14.27. Iohn. 15.14. Rom. 6.16. Luke. 22.25 26. 1 Pet. 5.3. 2 Theſ. 2.3.4.8. Iohn. 3.35.36. Rev. 9.3. & 14.9.10.11. & 19.14.15.19.

14. That there may be a preſcript Leiturgy and ſet forme of ſervice in the Church, framed by man. Which doctrine is contrarie to Deut. 5.8. Eſa. 29.13.14. Mat. 15.9. Mar. 7.6.7. Gal. 3.15. Iohn. 4.24. Rom. 8.26.27. Epheſ. 4.7.8. Col. 2.23.

15. That an Antichriſtian Prelate, notwithſtanding his dignitie (as it is called) ſpirituall, may be a Civill Magiſtrate, and obeyed of the people as their lawfull governour. Which doctrine is contrarie to Rom. 13.1. &c. Mat. 20.25.26. Mar. 10.42.43. Luke. 22.25.26. Rev. 14.9.10.11. and 17.14.16.18.

16. That men may giuegive the titles of Chriſt Ieſus to theſe ſonnes of men, his mortall enemies, to call them their Archbiſhops, Lordbiſhops, Fathers, Lords &c. Which doctrine is contrarie to 1 Pet. 5.3.4. with 2.25. Mat. 23.8.9.10. Eſa. 42.8. and 48.11. Prov. 17.15. and 24.24. Eſay 5.20. 2 Cor. 6.14.17.

17. That it is lawfull for a Miniſter of Chriſt to be mainteyned in his miniſtery, by Iewiſh and Popiſh tythes, Chriſomes, offerings &c. Which doctrine is contrarie to Heb. 7.12. 1 Cor. 9.13.14. 1 Theſ. 5.12.13. Pro. 27.26.27. Phil. 4.10.18. Rom. 15.27. Gal. 6.6.

Theſe are the points of falſe doctrine mentioned * before in the proof of this Reaſon.Pag. 155. Which you have left altogeather vnanſwered: as alſo your Canons, Articles, Iniunctions, &c. And thus are you driven againe and againe (whether you will or not) to yeeld the cauſe.

That which you adde in the next place, of your not wholy denying the trueth, nor fundamentally, nor obſtinatly, perverſly, and deſperatly any part thereof, is anſwered before in the ſecond Exception, and ſixt and ſeaventh Reaſons.

Where you ſay, you are not herein like thoſe Iewes (Act. 19.9.) whom Paul ſeparated from, which he did not from all other Iewes, Act. 13.14. and 16.3. and 21.23.24.26. and 3.1. you ſay nothing to any purpoſe. For what though you be not in all reſpects like thoſe Iewes? Are you not therefore to be ſeparated from? So in deed you would conclude. But then tell vsus, if Corah, Dathan, Abiram, the Apoſtate Iewes vnderunder Ieroboā, the corinthian infidels, Papiſts, &c. might not alledge ſome particular exceptiō, p. 161wherein they were not like to thoſe Iewes, Act. 19. Might not therefore ſeparation be made from theſe? The Scripture teacheth otherwiſe, Num. 16.25.26. 2 Chron. 11.14. 2 Cor. 6.17. Rev. 18.4.

Secondlie, conſider the caſe here ſpoken of (Act. 19.9.) and compare it with your eſtate and practiſe, and ſee if there be not now as great and iuſt cauſe to ſeparate from you, as was then from them. The words are theſe, When ſome were hardned, and diſobeyed, ſpeaking evill of that way before the multitude, Paul departing from them, ſeparated the diſciples. Act. 19.9. Compare now your caſe with theirs, and aunſwer for your ſelves. Are not you hardened againſt the truth? Let your writings againſt it, your impriſonning, baniſhing, and killing for it give evidence. Do you not alſo diſobey it? Let your conſtitution and practiſe be witneſſe. And do you not ſpeake evill of the way of God before the multitude? Let the Sermons of your Miniſters beare record, your books alſo and yll ſpeaches of your Prelates, Iudges, people, &c. Therefore (by that Scripture) you are to be ſeparated from. Wherevnto may be added in this caſe that which Peter ſaith, Act. 2. Save your ſelves from this froward generation.

Thirdly where you obiect, That Paule did not ſeparate from all the other Iewes, as he did from theſe, Act. 19. and ſhew it by Act. 13.14. & 16.3. & 21.23.24.26. & 3.1. I anſwer, that the Apoſtles had good and iuſt cauſe ſo to do. For firſt the Iewes were the people of God, ſeparated from the world, and ſet in the true way and order of God. Rom. 9.4. Levit. 20.22.24.26. Luk. 16.8. &c. Secondlie, Chriſt commaunded the Apoſtles, when he ſent them to preach his Goſpell throughout the world, that they ſhould firſt preach it to the Iewes. Luke 24.47. Act. 1.8. & 13.46. Thirdlie, the Iewes miniſtery and ceremonies being the ordinances of God him ſelf, and given in writing by Moſes the man of God, were therefore now (when they ſhould ceaſe) to be buried with honor. Act. 15.21. and 21.30.21.22.23.24.25. Heb. 8.5.13. and 9.1. &c. Theſe things conſidered, we ſee the Apoſtles had iuſt cauſe ſo to do, as they did in thoſe places mētioned.

But what is this to the aſſemblies of England, which never yet were ſeparated from the world nor ſet in the way and order of Chriſt, but ſtand in the““Rev. 13.16.17. & 18.2. 2 The. 2.3.4.8Rev 13:16Rev 13:17Rev 18:2 confuſion and defection of Antichriſt; whoſe Miniſtery and worſhip were never the ordinances of God, but taken out of**Rev. 17.2.4 & 18.3. & 9.3. &c.Rev 17:2Rev 17:4Rev 18:3Rev 9:3 the whores cup of Babylon; for which God never gave Commaundement to go vntounto them, but to depart from them, as being daughters of the great Babylon, that mother of whoredomes and abominations of the earth. Rev. 18.4. with 17.5.

Adde herevnto, that even from thoſe Iewes (notwithſtanding the reaſons aforeſaid) when they put from themſelues the truth and would not receive it, the Apoſtles departed and ſeparated themſelves, yea and ſhook of the duſt of their feet againſt them, teaching others to do ſo likewiſe, Act. 13.46.51. and 18.6. and 28.25.26.27, 28. and 19.8.9.

To that of Maiſter Cranmer, Ridley, &c. is anſwered before.

p. 162And hitherto of your generall Aſſumption: which was this, That the whole doctrine as it is profeſſed and publiquely practiſed by law in England, is ſufficient to make a particular man a true Chriſtian. Which by the Exceptions and Reaſons aforeſaid, is proved to be vntrue.

Touching the Cōcluſion.Now let the godly Reader (trying all things by the word of truth) iudge, whether we or you hold Paradoxes.

In that which you ſpeak of the reformed Churches, you are deceived, if you think they allow your preſent eſtate and Church conſtitutiō. Both their publique profeſſion and practiſe witneſſe the contrarie:In the anſwer to Mr T.C. Mr A.H. &c. as is declared at large in ‡ other treatiſes, which yet remaine vnanſwered.

Where you ſay, we our ſelves heretofore have acknowledged and profeſſed it, (viz your generall Aſſumption to be true) you are againe deceived. We have alway teſtified the contrarie, both by our profeſſion and practiſe, and were and are therefore caſt into priſon, appointed to exile, and to death: beſides many other iniuries and grieuances inflicted vponupon vsus for this verie cauſe. We have in deed acknowledged and do acknowledge, that you profeſſe divers excellent truths, but that the whole doctrine, as it is publiquely profeſſed & practized by law in England, doth make you in that eſtate true Chriſtians, never any of vsus (that I know of) did once acknowledge. Therefore till you ſhew the contrarie, I muſt needs think you do falſelie burthen vsus all, and ſpeciallie ſuch of vsus, as you have mentioned here in particular.

To that of the Martyrs in Queene Maries dayes is anſwered already. Yet for more evidence of the truth, I will annexe ſome particular ſpeaches and teſtimonies of the Martyrs themſelves, both then, and in former tymes.

Maiſter Bradford, (ſpeaking of the dayes before Queen Marie) ſaid.‡‡Act. & monum. In the conference vvith Archb. Heath. The tyme was, when the Pope was out of England, but not all popery. And moreover,**In his firſt ſpeach vvith D. Harpsfild. That the ſcripture knoweth not any difference between Biſhops and Miniſters, which men call Prieſts. And that the Scripture ſpeaking of Biſhops, cannot be vnderſtood of Biſhops that miniſter not, but lord it.

Maiſter Hooper held,Hooper on the eight cō mandment. That a Biſhop ſhould be Biſhop but of one Citie: and that till the Magiſtrates bring them to this poinct, it ſhalbe as poſſible to heare a Biſhop wade godly and ſimply through the Scripture in caſe of Religion, as to drive a camell through the eye of a needle. And againe he ſaith, The primitiue Church had not ſuch Biſhops as be now a dayes. And againe, What blindneſſe (ſaith he) is there befell in the world, that cannot ſee this palpable yll, that our mother the holy Church had at the beginning ſuch Biſhops, as did preach many godly Sermons in leſſe tyme then our Biſhops horſes bee a brideling.

Iohn Bale (an exile for the teſtimonie of Ieſu) writing vponupon the Revelation affirmeth,The Image of both churches: vponupon Rev. 13.1. & 17.3.Rev 13:1Rev 17:3 That the names of Blaſphemy written vponupon the Beaſts head (Rev. 13. and 17.) are none other then the proud glittering tytles, wherewith they garniſh their vſurped authority, to make it ſeeme glorious to the world, having within them conteined the great myſtery of iniquitie. What p. 163…her els (ſaith he) is Pope, Cardinal, Metropolitā, Primate, Archbiſhop, Dioceſan, Archdeacon, Officiall, Chauncelour, Commiſſarie, Deane, Prebend, Parſon, Vicar, and ſuch like, but very names of blaſphemy? For offices they are not appoincted by the holy Ghoſt, nor yet once mētioned in the ſcriptures. This Iohn Bale held and publiſhed. Then which, what can be more full and evident againſt you?

And writing vponupon the 14. of the Revelation, he hath theſe words: To receive the beaſtes marke in their forheads and hands, Ibid. vponupon Rev. 14.9.Rev 14:9is both to agree to ſuch decrees, traditions, lawes, conſtitutions, actes, and proclamations, as they vnderunder thoſe titles have made onelyonly for their owne covetouſnes and pompe, and neither for the glory of God, nor yet for the right maintenance of the Chriſtian common wealth: And alſo to be ſworne to the ſame, to ſubſcribe to it, to give counſel or ayde to it, to mainteine it by learning, to miniſter in it, to execute vnderunder it, to accuſe, puniſh, and put to death for it, or to thinke it lawfull and godly, with ſuch like.

And “ afterward vponupon the 16. of the Revelation,Ibid. vponupon Rev. 16.12.Rev 16:12 expounding the drying vp of the waters of Euphrates to be this, That the welthy Popes poſſeſſiōs and pleaſurs of the Clergy (their falſe feates once known) are and ſhalbe cleerly taken away from them: He ſaith thus, In England by the ♣♣Marke by this, of vvhat time & eſtate he ſpeaketh, even of ſuch vvhen the Goſpell vvas preched, the Monaſteries ſuppreſſed, &c.Goſpell preaching have many of theſe waters bene dried vp in the ſuppreſſion of the monaſteries, prioryes, couents, and Friers houſes, yet are not all things brought vntounto Chriſts cleare inſtitution. A ſyncere Chriſtian order cannot yet be ſeene there. And a great cauſe why. For all is not yet dried vp there. The Biſhops reigne ſtill in aſmuch vaine glorious pompe, & with as many Heathniſh obſervations, as ever they did, as cruelly harted and as bloody mynded are they yet, as ever they were afore. No miſchief vnſought to hold in the waters. Marke how Wincheſter, Durham, Yorke, London, and Lincolne worke (let vsus alſo adde Canterburie) with ſuch other pleaſant diſpoſed Euphratines. But be of good confort, and pray in the meane tyme. For the holy Ghoſt promiſeth heer, that they ſhall wither away with all that the heavēly Father hath not plāted. All which generatiō will the Lords breath cōſume &c.

And (to ſpeake alſo of others in former tymes) Iohn Wickleff held,††Actes and Mon. 5. edit. pag. 414. b. That Archbiſhops, Biſhops, Archdeacons, Officialls, Deanes, Canons, &c. be diſciples of Antichriſt.

William Swinderby ſaid,**Ibid. pag. 431. b. that what Pope, Cardinal, Biſhop, Prelate, or Prieſt, in manner of living, or teaching, or Lavves making, contrary to Chriſts living & his Lavves, or any other ground, put in ruling of the Church of chriſt, but by Chriſt and his Lavves, is very Antichriſt, adverſarie to Ieſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles.

Sir Iohn Oldcaſtle (Lord Cobham) witneſſed,′′Ibid. …ag. 518. a. & b. that the Biſhops, Prieſts, Prelates, and Monkes, are the body of that great Antichriſt: And that the poſſeſſions and Lordſhips of the Clergy, are the venime of Iudas ſhed into the Church.

Iohn Claidon (burnt in Smithfield) profeſſed,‡‡Ibid. pag. 588. b. that the Archbiſhops, and Biſhops, ſpeaking indifferently, are the ſeats of the beaſt Antichriſt, p. 164when he ſitteth in them and reigneth above other people in the darke Caves of errors and hereſies. And that the Biſhops licence for a man to preach the vvord of God, is the true character of the beaſt, that is Antichriſt.

Finally**In his treatiſes called▪ The obedience of a Chriſtian man, &. The practiſe of prel. William Tindall and““In his Preface before his Antitheſis betvveen Chriſt & the pope. Iohn Frith publiſhed, That Archbiſhops, Lordb. Archdeacons, Deanes, Officials, Parſons, Vicars, and the reſt of that ſort, are the diſciples of Antichriſt, yea very Antichriſts themſelves.

Theſe are the ſpeaches and teſtimonies of the Martyrs in former ages, wherevnto divers other ſuch like might be added. But theſe may ſuffice for the matter in hand. Now compare therewith, the publique profeſſion and practiſe of England (even as it is by law at this day) and ſee whether your owne proofes be not ſo many witneſſes againſt your ſelves.

But if it were ſo, that the reformed Churches, vve our ſelves, and the Martyrs of former tyme, gave allowance of your preſent eſtate and Church cō ſtitution, what would this help you, when as the vvord of God condemneth you, as we have ſhewed in the Reaſons aforſaid and defence thereof. Wherevnto (if you will ſtill iuſtifie your eſtate) we require direct anſwer from point to point, and that from the Scriptures, which only can ſtabliſh the conſcience.

Furthermore, that the truth it ſelf and your eſtate may better appeare what it is, as alſo that you may not turne away or obſcure the truth by your ſhiftes and evaſions, as your manner is: I will here propound a few queſtions concerning the points now in controverſie, deſiring your plaine and ſyncere anſwer therevnto, by the word of God, as you will anſwer to him at that day. The queſtions are theſe.

Seven queſtions conteining the vvhole controverſy betvveen vsus: yet vnanſvvered.1. Whether the Lord Ieſus Chriſt have by his laſt teſtament given vntounto and ſet in his Church ſufficient ordinary Offices, with their Callings, Workes, and Maintenance, for the adminiſtration of his holy things, and for the ſufficient ordinary inſtruction, guidance, and ſervice of his Church to the end of the world, or no?

2. Whether the Offices of Paſtors, Teachers, Elders, Deacons, and Helpers, be thoſe offices appoincted by Chriſt in his Teſtament, as aforeſaid. Or whether the preſent eccleſiaſticall Offices of Archbiſhops, Lordbiſhops, Suffragans, Deanes, Prebendaries, Cannons, Petticanons, Prieſts, Deacons, Archdeacons, Doctors of divinitie, Batchelers of divinitie, Chaplens or Houſeprieſts, Commiſſaries, Officialls, Proctors, Apparitors, Parſons, Vicars, Curates, Vagrant or Mercenarie preachers, Churchwardens, Side men, Clerkes, Sextons, and the reſt now had in the Cathedrall and pariſhionall aſſemblies, be thoſe Offices appoincted by Chriſt in his Teſtament as is aforſaid, or no?

3. Whether the Calling and entrance into theſe Eccleſiaſticall offices aforeſaid, their Adminiſtration, and Maintenance, now had and retained in England, be the manner of calling, adminiſtration & maintenance which Chriſt hath appoincted for the offices of his Church above named, or no?

p. 1654. Whether every true viſible Church of Chriſt be not a company of people called and ſeparated out from the world and the falſe worſhip and wayes thereof by the word of God, and ioined togeather in fellowſhip of the Goſpell, by voluntary profeſſion of the faith and obedience of Chriſt? And whether the Eccleſiaſticall Aſſemblies of this Land be ſuch, or no?

5. Whether the Sacraments (being ſeales of righteouſnes which is by faith) may be adminiſtred to anie other but to the faithfull and their ſeed, or in anie other miniſtery and manner then is appoincted by Ieſus Chriſt the Apoſtle and high Prieſt of our profeſſion? And whether they be not otherwiſe adminiſtred in the Cathedrall and pariſhionall Aſſemblies of England at this day?

6. Whether the Book of Common prayer with the Feaſtes, Faſts, Holy dayes, ſtinted prayers, and Leiturgy preſcribed therein, and vſed in theſe Aſſemblies, be the true worſpip of God commaunded in his word, or the deviſe and invention of man, for Gods worſhip and ſervice.

7. Whether all people and Churches (without exception) be not bound in Religion, only to receive and ſubmit vntounto that Miniſtery, Worſhip, & order, which Chriſt as Lord and King hath given and appoincted to his Church? Or whether any may receive and ioine vntounto another deviſed by man, for the ſervice of God? And conſequentlie, whether they which ioine to the preſent eccleſiaſticall Miniſtery, worſhip, and order of the Cathedrall and pariſhionall Aſſemblies, can be aſſured by the word of God that they ioine to the former ordeined by Chriſt, and not to the latter deviſed vy man, even the man of ſinne, for the worſhip and ſervice of God?

VntoUnto theſe queſtions and the particulers thereof, for the cauſes aforeſaid, we deſire your direct anſwer, with proofes of your anſwers from the ſcriptures. According to which word if you ſpeak not (as I ſaid before, ſo I ſay againe)Eſa. 8.20.Isa 8:20 it is becauſe there is no light in you.

And now to conclude, where you would in the end of your writing (being not able to anſwer our Reaſons) faſten vpō vsus ſome ſtrange paſſion, yea meere deſperatnes, for ſeparating from you, and anſwering of you as we have done: we refer it to the godly and diſcreet Reader to iudge by that which hath ben ſaid on both parts, whether it bee not your ſelves that are taken with the ſtrange paſſion you ſpeake of, and driven therevnto by meer deſperatnes: when for to mainteyne your owne eſtate; you will hauehave the ſcriptures to fall and exalt the Church and Magiſtrate above Chriſt himſelf, even fleſh and blood above God bleſſed for ever. Your practiſe whereof ſee before, Pag. 28. 91. 100. 105. 135. &c.

But for this & all your vnrighteous dealing againſt the truth & people of God, we leaue you to the Lord, who ſearcheth the heart and tryeth the raynes, to giuegive eueryevery man according to his wayes, according to the fruite of his workes: That is, to them that by cōtinuance in weldoing ſeek glorie & honor and immortalitie, eternall life; But vntounto them that are contentious, and diſobey the trueth & obey vnrighteouſnes, indignation & wrath. Ier. 17.10. with Rom. 2.6.7.8.

p. 166H. IACOB his 2. Reply to the 9. Reaſon. IN this your defence of the laſt Reaſon, you miſlike that I ſay it is a fallacy: and you ſay I ſhew none. Marke what I ſay, EueryEvery one of your Reaſons, I ſay every one, is a very proper fallacy, and an artificiall parte of Sophiſterie, as by my ſeuerall anſwers to them may appeare. Your Firſt Reaſon is called in the ſcholes Fallacia ab eo quod est ſecundum quid ad ſimpliciter prouing a thing to be ſimply, by that which is but after a ſort. The Second is the very ſame. The Third Fallacia equiuocationis, A fallacie of Ambiguity. The Fourth is the very ſame. The Fift is petitio principij, a begging of the queſtion. The Sixth the very ſame fallacie that was in the Firſt and Second Reaſons. The Seauenth, Eight, and Ninth, hauehave all the Fallacy of Equiuocation, and if you will, the ſame with that, in your Firſt, Second and Sixt Reaſons, alſo.

Further, where you ſay, that here I graunt you the cauſe, it is very abſurd. The Apoſtle 1 Tim. 6.3.4.5. ſaying, ſeparate from ſuch, hath a two fould ſence, Either ſuch as teach otherwiſe then the trueth fundamentally, and then ſeparate wholly: Or not fundamentally, but erring only in poincts leſſe then the foundation: and theiſe diuerſely alſo, Either preſumptuouſly, obstinately, and of a deſperate conſcience: and then if that appeare, ſeparate from ſuch wholy: Or els, erring in ſimplicitie & of ouerſight, and former preiudice, from ſuch, ſeparate nor wholly, but only from the very error or errors, in no wiſe from their Chriſtian communion and ſocietie, ſeeing theiſe are true Chriſtians.

Seing therefore our corruptions of the Praelacy and Ceremonies, be of theſe latter ſort: which thing hetherto, you hauehave not nor cannot ouerthrowe, (& withall you muſt vtterly ouerthrowe Maſt. Cranmer & the reſt of the Martirs their Chriſtianitie like wiſe): Therefore wee in England, by the grace of God, are ſtill true Chriſtians: & you ought ſo to acknowledge vsus, as you will anſwer vntounto God: All which you may doe, & yet touch no parte of our Eccleſiaſticall corruptions at all to giuegive allowance vntounto them: And in all this, there is no contradiction with my ſelfe, it is but your diſtempered conceipt, that ſeemeth contrarie. Nither is our abſolute departure from the Papiſts, hereby anie whit impeached. Wee hauehave iuſtlie forſaken them cleane, becauſe by their very profeſſiō and doctrine, wee canot eſteeme them true Chriſtians, neither in caſe of ſaluatiō, while they ſo remaine, but indeed very Antichriſts, as the ſcripture proueth. Which thing alſo if you ſay of vsus, you ſay falſlie: it is our preſent queſtion, and you doe not proue it, nor euer can doe.

As for your 17. poincts of falſe doctrine, which you moſt falſly lay to our chardge, what hauehave I to doe with them? I liſt not to meddle at this prſent, but with that which wee hauehave in hand…, namely to iuſtifie, that our publike booke of Articles of Religion (ſo farre forth as that it erreth not fundamentally,) conteyneth ſufficient to make a true Chriſtian:As it doth not. Againſt the which, hetherto you hauehave brought nothing worth the hearing, as we hauehave ſeene.

After you would proue vsus to be like thoſe Iewes Act. 19.9. whom Paul ſeparated from: But without all good reaſon. They were not ſo many but they were eaſily certified of the truth that Paul preached: but how infinitly many moe are there in this land, that know nothing of this controuerſie. 2. Secondly Paul was better able p. 167to conuince them by the ſcriptures, and did more effectually, and apparantly, then you doe (or can) our whole Realme. 3. Thirdly how many learned are there in this lande, that have many probable & ſeeming reaſons, & alleadge them, & publiſh them for the Praelacy againſt you: & are vnanſwered. And yet will you ſay they are conuicted, & thoſe infinite others depēding on them? I ſay cōuicted aſwell as thoſe Iewes? What if theſe ſpeake euill of that which you hold for truth, but they hold to be errors & ſchiſme? Are they all yea all the land therefore aboliſhed from Chriſt? Might not all this at leaſt, be ſayd of the whole eſtate of the Iewes in Chriſtes time, and after aſwell, yet they ceaſed not to bee Churches? why then are you ſo partiall againſt vsus?

Laſtly, you would ſhew Reaſons why the Apostles wholy ſeparated not from the Iewes Synagogues after Christ, Act. 13.14. &c. Which you will in no wiſe hauehave to ſerue vsus. But alas for all your Exceptions againſt vsus, you hauehave neuer a reaſon but one, and that is petitio principij, That wee were neuer ſeparated from the world, nor ſet in the way & order of Christ, but in the confuſion and defection of Antichrist, whoſe Ministerie, &c. were neuer the ordinances of God, &c. This is but crauing the whole queſtion. And I hauehave refuted theſe quarells in a ſhort writing (hereafter following) about the compariſon of the Miniſterie with Mariage, which yet you hauehave no leyſure, to anſwer, this whole three yeares togeather, and vpwarde.

And further you doe not ſhew any vtter and apſolute ſeparation from the whole Church of the Iewes a great while after Chriſt: but the contrarie is ſeene Act. 21.23.24.26. though from ſome one or two ſynagogues they ſeparated after full experience of their obſtinate & malitious reſiſtance of the truth, which we deny not.

Touching the Concluſion. In the cōcluſion of my former Reply, to proue your vtter ſeparation from vsus a Paradox: Firſt, I alledged all the reformed Churches: For who knoweth not but they all hold Cōmuniō with vsus as Churches of God? yet you dare either deny this or vtterly peruert it. You tell vsus of your Anſwers to Maister Cartwright & Mr. Hilderſam that are vnanſwered. If they be like to this your anſwer here, verely they doe wiſeſt in yeelding ſilence to ſuch friuolous & wandring wordes.

Secondly I alleadged your ſelues to hauehave acknoledged heretofore, That our publique doctrine allowed, would & did make many of vsus true Chriſtians. You too ſhamefully deny it. And ſay you are for witneſſing against it, impriſoned, baniſhed, &c. Whereto I anſwer, that if for theſe things you are troubled, I know none can pittie you. And becauſe you ſay, none of you euer acknowledged it, I will therefore repeat your owne words.

Mr. BARROW (in his laſt anſwer in writing to Mr Gifford, intituled, A fevv obſeruations to the reader of Mr. Giff. laſt Reply: Sect. 4.) ſaith thus:

The next calumniations whereby Mr Gifford indeuoreth to bring vsus into hatred with the whole Lande, is, That we condemne all the perſons both men and women of England, which are not of our minde, and pluck them vp as tares: wherein me thinkes he doeth vsus open wrong, if not against his owne conſcience, yet againſt our expreſſe writngs every where, &c. Have we not commended the faith of the Engliſh Martyr, and … thouſand, notwithſtanding the falſe offices and g… p. 168corruptions in the worſhip they exerciſed, not doubting but the mercy of God, through their ſyncere …aith to Ieſus Christ extended and ſuper abounded above all their ſinnes ſeene and vnſeene. And what now ſhould let, that we ſhould not have the ſame hope, where the ſame pretious faith in ſyncerity and ſimplicity is found? So that they neither neglect to ſearch out the truth, nor deſpiſe the truth when they ſee it, &c.

Aftervvard in the ſame Section. The faithfull ſervants of Christ (denying the whole constitution and government of this Church of England) may iustly deny the people whilest they remaine in that constitution to be members of a true constituted Church, yet hereby not condemne them with any ſuch peremptory ſentence as Maister Gifford ſuggesteth,Nota, from Chriſt. to cut them of from Gods election, or from Chriſt.

Mr PENRIE (in his confeſſion of faith publiſhed in writing a litle before his death,) ſaith thus.

The trueth of doctrine touching the holy Trinitie, touching the Natures and Offices of Christe, Iuſtifying faith, Sacramentes, Eternall life, and the reſt, eſtabliſhed by her Maieſties Lawes, and profeſſed by her ſelfe, their Honors, and ſuch as hauehave knowledge in the Aſſemblies of this land: I acknowledge from my heart to be ſuch, as if I mainteined not the vnitie, and held not the communion of the ſame doctrine with them in theſe poincts, I could not poſſibly be ſaved: For out of the communion of the true profeſſion, which her Maiestie hath eſtabliſhed in theſe and the like truthes, there is no hope of ſaluation l…ft: But ioyne notwithſtonding with the publique worſhip in the aſſemblies of this Land, I dare not, for the former cauſes.

I doe moreouer willingly confeſſe, That many, both of the Teachers, & alſo of the Profeſſors within theſe Pariſh aſſemblees, hauehave ſo embraced this truth of doctrine, eſtabliſhed and profeſſed in this Land, as the Lord of his infinite goodnes, hath graunted them the fauour, to ſhew outwardly many tokens, whereby (in regard of the Lordes election) I profeſſe before men and Angels, that I iudge them to be mēbers of that body whereof the ſonne of God Chriſt Ieſus is the head. OnelyOnly herein the Lord be mercifull vntounto them, (as to my ſelf in regard of my ſinnes:) That they are not vnderunder that outward forme of gouernement that Chriſt hath left, &c.

And in his examination before Master Fanſhaw, lately publiſhed by your ſelves in print, he confeſſeth the Churches of England to be the true Churches of Chriſt.

And what ſay you, Maiſter Iohnſon? Have you not affirmed this thing your ſelf, to me, and to Maiſter Philips, namely towching your owne ſelfe, when you were of vsus, That then you doubted not, but you were a true regenerate Chriſtian. By vertue of what doctrine? By extraordinarie reuelation? Nay, but by our publique doctrine of our Church, when you ſtoode and continued a publique Miniſter of the ſame. If you beleued ſo of your ſelfe, (and that truely) vvhat letteth but you may beleeue the like of many Thouſands novve?

Further vvhere you ſay, my applying of the Martyrs, is anſwered before, Let the Reader iudge. You ſhevv here, that ſome of them miſliked the Hyerarchie. But it maketh ſtronger againſt you, ſeeing for all that, they themſelves refuſed not to communicate, and partake vvith them, as true Chriſtians: as Hooper, Bale, Bradford &c.

After vvhere you ſay: though the reformed Churches, your ſelves, and the Martyrs, had thought otherwiſe then you now do, yet all this is no ſo und proof against you. Yes in deed, that novv you hold a Paradoxe, thoſe vvitneſſes are ſufficient for that: vvhere vntounto may be added, the vvhole Churches iudgment and practize, vvith p. 169all the auncient learned Fathers theſe 1300. or 1400. yeares, Chryſoſtome, Epiphanius, Nazianzen. Hierom. Auſten. Ambroſe, &c. They all have thought, that vnderunder the Prelacie, and humane ceremonies, men may be true Chriſtians. Then theſe witneſſes are ſufficient, that your denyall hereof, is a ſtrange & vnuſuall opinion, that is, a Paradox.

Finally to trie vsus, you propound a many of questions. But I leave all this ſuperfluous ſtuffe to your ſelf to be pondered. Firſt let vsus cleare this preſent queſtion, and your Reaſons hereabout: Till then, we have no leaſure to medle further. The Lord of his mercy open your eyes to ſee your extremitie, whereby you do greatly hinder, not helpe the truth, Not a Fir… for victorie but a lover of truth.which you would ſeem to ſuffer for. That you may indeed ſhew your ſelf as becometh a Chriſtian Paſtor, not impoſſible to erre, but no lover of error, * foreign, not regarding your owne, but the prayſe of Chriſt in all things. AMEN.

Fr. Iohnſon his Aunſwer to Mr. Iacobs 2. Reply to the 9. Reaſon. AS if your bare word were proof ynough, ſtill you ſay, but never prove, that this Reaſon is a fallacy. Yea and all the Reaſons before in your ſchoole-learning are likewiſe. But the beſt is, you are not the greateſt Clerk the ſchooles have knowen. Every of the Reaſons is proved before to be true, direct, ſound, and ſtrong againſt you. And in all your Replyes againſt them, what els have you done but played the Sophiſter, and that notablie? Apply therefore to your ſelf what you ſpeake here. And of all theſe things, now let the Reader iudge.

It ſeemeth verie abſurd vntounto you that I ſay, you do here graunt vsus the cauſe. But what if the abſurditie be found in your ſelf? Marke then firſt your owne words before,Pag. 156. ‡ We graunt (ſay you) ſo far forth as we hold otherwiſe then truth, ſo far ſeparate from vsus. Now you hold otherwiſe then the truth, in all the particulars † before rehearſed towching your Prelacy, Prieſthood, Sacraments, Book of common prayer, Pag. 63. &c.confuſion of people, &c. Thus far therefore you graunt we may and ought, to ſeparate from you. And further we do not at all. For there is not anie truth you hold, which we alſo hold not with you. So then in expreſſe words you yeeld vsus the cauſe. And yet further you yeeld it againe, in that you do not defend by the Scripture your Hierarchy, worſhip, doctrines, Canons, Articles, Iniunctions &c. received and ioined vntounto by all in your Church. How abſurd then and vngodlie is your denyall of ſo manifeſt a truth? And how diſtempered is your brayne, that can not perceive ſo plaine a contradiction with your ſelf?

Your two fould ſence of the Apoſtles words, is a ſilly fiction of your owne head, without anie ground or proof at all. If you will have vsus think otherwiſe, bring warrant for the particulars of your diſtinction from the book of God. But I pittie you, Mr Iacob. For I ſee you are brought to a low ebbe. Who knowes not that this is the very laſt refuge of all ennemyes of the truth, when they are preſſed with evidence p. 170of Scripture ſo as they can not avoid it, then to faine diſtinctions and to caſt about for the ſence, as if that were hard and obſcure which in deed is moſt plaine and eaſy? Look in Bellarmine, Bilſon, Whitgift, Bridges, and whoſoever els have written againſt the truth, if their dealing be not ſuch. This then doth not aunſwer the Argument, but proveth it rather to be vnaunſwerable.

Tim. 6.5.As for the words, The Apoſtle ſaying, from ſuch ſeparate thy ſelf, if now you would know, from whom, Himſelf telleth it as plaine as may be, If any man teach otherwiſe and conſent not to the wholſome words of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt and to the doctrine which is according to godlines &c. from ſuch ſeparate thy ſelf. verſ. 3.But ſuch is your caſe in particular: As hath ben proved, in your Prelacy and the other abominations of Antichriſt, yet taught and mainteyned among you. Therefore are we bound by this rule of the Apoſtle, to ſeparate our ſelves from you. Els ſhould we aunſwer it to God at that day.

Of your continuall vayne diſtinctions of fundamentally, wholy, preſumptuouſly, ſimply, &c. ynough is ſaid alreadie in the handling of the for mer Reaſons. As alſo of Mr Cranmer and the reſt of the Martyrs: Whom here you ſet before vsus againe, as coleworts, not twiſe but ten tymes ſodden. Leave this vſage of them Mr Iacob, for they have left you long ſynce. See before, Pag. 40.41.

Next, you tell vsus we may ioyne with you, and yet towch no part of your eccleſiaſticall corruptions at all, to give allowance vntounto them. Prove this, and you ſay ſomewhat. But I doubt we ſhall find you as ſlow in proving, as you are raſh in ſpeaking. Mind but theſe particulars following, which I will name for example. Can we receive your Prieſthood from the Prelates, or execute it vnderunder them? Can we ioyne to your Service book, or anie part of your worſhip and Miniſtery? Can we receive the word or Sacraments from your Miniſters in that conſtitution? Can we remaine members of your confuſed Aſſemblyes? Can we ſtand ſubiect to your Prelates, and their Courts, Canons, cenſures &c. Can we (I ſay) do theſe, or anie of them, and yet towch no part of your eccleſiaſticall corruptions at all, to give allowance vntounto them? In your next Reply (Mr Iacob) declare vsus this riddle, if you can. And in the meane tyme, I will attribute it to your diſtempered conceit, that you do thus every foot forget and contradict your ſelf, and yet diſcerne it not.

But what will you ſay too, if ſuch as ioyne with you in anie part of your worſhip (ſuppoſe it be the beſt) become thereby partakers of your whole worſhip and conſtitution, even of the worſt things that are among you therein? To make it plaine and certaine vntounto you, mynd theſe proofs. In Iſraell,††1 Cor. 10.18.1 Cor 10:18 they that did eate of the ſacrifices (as ““2 Sam. 1.4.52 Sam 1:42 Sam 1:5the people might) were thereby partakers of the whole Iewiſh religion, yea even of the altar: VntoUnto which yet they might not come at all, but the Prieſt onelie. Lev. 1. chap. &c. Numb. 18.7. Luc. 1.9.10. In Corinth, the Chriſtians that abhorred Idols and Idolatry, yet when after the ſacrifices p. 171were offred,**1 Cor. 10.14-22. & 8.4.10.1 Cor 10:14–221 Cor 8:41 Cor 8:10 they ſate but in the Idol Temples to eat of the meats that had ben ſacrificed (which in††1 Cor. 10.25.26.27.1 Cor 10:251 Cor 10:261 Cor 10:27 other places they might have done) became thereby partakers of the whole Idolatrous wprſhip: though they were not preſent at it, but (as they thought) abhorred it. In like maner, they which connnunicate in anie part of your worſhip, become thereby partakers and guiltie of the whole: though it may be, neither you nor they ſo think. So falſe it is (which here you give out) that we may ioine with ſome of your worſhip and Miniſtery, and yet towch no part of your Eccleſiaſticall corruptions at all, to give them allowance.

For the Papiſts (to omit that you aunſwer not what I obiected) you ſee and graunt readily that they are no true Chriſtians but very Antichriſts &c. Yet for your ſelves, though your Hierarchy, Leitourgy, confuſion of people, falſe doctrines &c. be meerlie Popiſh and Antichriſtian, you will not ſee and acknowledge it. Take heed leaſt when you ſee, yet you wink with your eyes, and though you vnderſtand, yet you harden your heart; becauſe you will not be converted and healed. Eſa. 6.9.10. Act. 28.26.27.

For the queſtion between vsus, let the Reader iudge how I have proved it, and how you have quitted your ſelf and your Churches.

Where you ſay, the points of falſe doctrine in your Church are moſt falſly laid to your charge, all may ſee here againe you have an hard forehead to deny anie thing, and yet are ſo ſottiſh you can prove nothing. But you ſay you liſt not meddle with them at this preſent. I eaſily beleev you. They are ſo pregnant againſt you, as it is no marvell if you have no liſt to do it. Otherwiſe you ſhew liſt ynough to medle with anie thing that you think may cary any ſhow againſt vsus.

But you muſt mynd, the point is not, what you liſt, but what you ought to meddle withall. You have taken vponupon you the defence of your Churches in the eſtate wherein now they ſtand. Therefore muſt you aunſwer aſwell for the falſe doctrines, as for the true, mainteined in your Church. Els would the Papiſts iuſtify their caſe againſt you well ynough.

For this cauſe then muſt you aunſwer aſwell for your Book of cōmon prayer and other your books of Articles, Canons, Iniunctions &c. as for that book of Articles which was publiſhed in the yeare 1562. For they conteine the doctrine and conſtitution of your Church aſwell as the other, if not alſo more. They are publiklie authoriſed among you aſwell as the other, whether you reſpect the Prelates and Clergy in the Conuocation houſe, or the whole body of the Land in the Parliament. They are generallie receyved profeſſed and practiſed of all the people in every Pariſh and Cathedrall Church throughout the Land, aſwell as the other: Yea and more too, your ſelves being witneſſes. One of your owne Prophets,Mr Giff. Di. of the strife of the Church. Pag. 100. writing of your eſtate ſaith, There be thouſands which be men and women growen, that if a man aſke them how they ſhall be ſaved, they cannot tell. Neither can your felf deny this to be true. How do they then know and profeſſe the faith of your book of Articles? Or will you ſay, they are as p. 172ignorant of your Service-book and of your Prelates other Articles, Iniunctions, Courts &c. vntounto which they ioyne and ſubmit dayly?

Either therefore you muſt meddle with the falſe doctrines and other publik books of your Church, aſwell as with that book of Articles whereof you ſpeak: or els you meddle not at all with the queſtion between vsus, neither defend your Churches eſtate. The queſtion between vsus is, Whether the truths you profeſſe together with the falſe doctrines and abominations of Antichriſt retained among you, do make you true Churches and I true Chriſtiās in that eſtate. If you keep not to this point, you may make as faire a plea for the Church of Rome and all other Hereticks, whileſt you meddle not with their errors and falſe doctrines, but looke onelyonly at the truths they profeſſe. Mynd but the Papiſts profeſſion concerning Chriſt, and his full and ſufficient ſatiſfaction for all our ſinnes, whereof I ſpake before, Pag. 47. And conſider now with your ſelf, how well and ſoundlie you have defended your Churches eſtate.

How your doctrine and conſtitution erreth fundamentally, I have declared before, Pag. 22. 114. 147.

But now though you have no liſt to meddle with your Churches doctrine, yet let vsus ſee in your next Reply, if your liſt will be to deale with your owne. Your owne (I ſay) which I had from your ſelf, and take to be private to your ſelf. I had it from you, in a Conference which paſſed “ between you and me,April. 3. 1597 in the preſence of divers that can witneſſe it. Yet for more certainty and better remembrance, I deſired and obteined of you to write it downe your ſelf. So you gave it me then vnderunder your hand, in writing, which I have with me yet to ſhew. Thus it is, word for word: A power borrowed from Antichriſt to excommunicate, may externally be committed vntounto a people & vſed by them who have power to excommunitate from Chriſt. Henry Iacob.

When you had thus ſet it downe, I deſired your proof of it from the Scriptures. But none could be had: I could not obteine that at your hands. Therevpon I tooke the paper, and wrote vnderneath your aſſertion, thus: This is againſt the Scriptures, 1 Cor. 5.4.5. compared with 2 Cor. 6.14.15.16.17. Ezech. 43.8. Mat. 18.17.18.19.20. & 1 King. 18.21. Fran: Iohnſon.

It is a good while Mr Iacob, ſynce this paſſed between vsus: and like, that you have had leyſure ynough to conſider of it all this tyme. Therefore in your next, I hope you will have ſome liſt to meddle with this doctrine of your owne, though you have none at all for your Churches.

Yet for the doctrines of your Church alſo (becauſe I am fallen into the mention of them againe) let me put you in mynd of two things mo.

Mat. 13.24. &c.Matt 13:24The firſt is towching the parable of the tares (ſpoken of before, Pa. 158.) of which, becauſe it is ſtraungelie and daylie perverted among you for the maintenance of your confuſed and wicked eſtate, therefore will I here p. 173in particular adde a word or two more, beſides that which I annexed before, for the further explication of this point, and conuiction of your error. As firſt, that you do conſider with your ſelves, if with this parable agree not alſo the Apoſtles doctrine, where he calleth the Church the houſe of God, and ſaith that in this houſe are not onelie veſſels of gold and ſilver, but alſo of wood and earth; and that as ſome of them be for honor, ſo ſome be alſo to diſhonor, from which therefore if anie purge himſelf, he ſhalbe a veſſel vntounto honor, ſanctifyed and meet for the Lord, and prepared to every good work. 1 Tim 3.15. & 5.24.25. & 6.3.4.5. & 2 Tim. 2.16.17.18.19.20.21. & 3.5. Next, that howſoever the parable be vnderſtood by anie, whether of (1) the generall eſtate of the Church, from the beginning of the world to the end thereof, how Sathan alway hath his tares, his wicked ones (ſometymes more open, ſometymes more ſecret) even as God alway hath his righteous children and ſervants, vntill the day of that finall and everlaſting ſeparacion (Mat. 13.35.40.): (2) Or the particular eſtate of the Church, in the tyme of Antichriſts apoſtaſy, wrought by Sathan, vntill the diſcovery and full abolition thereof (2 Theſ. 2.3.-14.): (3) Or the Churches continuall being and cōverſing in the world, with the children of the wicked: Which they muſt needs do, or els they muſt go out of the world (as the Apoſtle affirmeth, 1 Cor. 5.9.10.). Howſoever (I ſay) the parable be vnderſtood, whether of theſe or any the like, yet doth it no way make for the receiving or reteining of the knowen wicked (whoſoever they be) in the body of the Church: The ſcope of the parable, by theſe interpretations alſo leading to no ſuch thing: but onelie to comfort and inſtruct the godlie how to carry themſelves, with patience and wiſdome, in ſuch eſtate of things in the world.

And the Apoſtle (whoſe doctrine doubtles is not contrarie to Chriſts) teacheth expreſſely, in that place to the Corinthians and the other mentioned before, both that the Church is a diſtinct body ſeparated from the world, not partaking in their evill wayes; and that if anie of the Church will not ſo walk, but commit iniquity, and repent not, that then they be ſo far from being ſuffred to grow or remaine any longer in the Church, as they be forthwith caſt out of it, and delivered vntounto Sathan, the Prince of the world and children of diſobedience, even the Enemy that ſoweth the tares here ſpoken of. And thus alſo was the Apoſtles practiſe. For both which, that is, both his doctrine and practiſe herein, ſee theſe Scriptures, 1 Cor. 5. chap. & 2 Cor. 2.6-11. & 6.14.-17. Act. 19.9. Ro. 16.17. Epheſ. 2.1.2. Gal. 5.12. 2 Theſ. 3.6.14. 1 Tim. 1.20. & 6.3.4.5. & 2 Tim. 2.16-21. & 3.5. & 4.14.15. Tit. 3.10. Heb. 10.38.39. To conclude then, albeit that ſuch having crept into the Church, do both before and after their excommunication, as do alſo the other of the world who never received the faith, offend and trouble the Church and children of the kingdome, yea and do often flouriſh alſo in outward proſperitie in the world: yet the godly notwithſtanding muſt learne neither to fret at them, nor to faint in themſelues, but alway to walk faithfullie in the truth, and p. 174to waite patientlie on the Lord, looking for the great harveſt of the world. At which tyme God will for ever free his people from them all, both caſting the wicked into a furnace of vnquenchable fyer, and making the righteous to ſhine as the ſunne in the kingdome of their Father. Mat. 13.37-43. compared with ver. 47-50. Rev. 2.20.-26. & 7.14-17. & 10.7. & 11.15-19. & 14.14-20. & 17-22. chap. and with the other Scriptures noted before, Pag. 158. 159. 173.

The ſecond is, that beſides the falſe doctrines mentioned before (Pag. 157. 158. 159. 160.) your Church hath alſo manie mo. Some whereof I have noted in * another Treatiſe,A treatiſe of the Minist. of Engl. pag. 10. 11. 12. 13. to which I refer you for them. So as if your liſt and leyſure will ſerve in your next Reply, you may let vsus have your defence of them alſo. Or els provide (Mr Iacob) that you chaunge the Title of your book, and call it not anie longer, A DEFENCE OF THE CHVRCHES AND MINISTERY OF ENGLAND.

Now to proceed, there followeth next the compariſon between you and the Iewes from whom Paul ſeparated,Act. 19.9.Acts 19:9 Act. 19. To which you can not replie a word to anie one thing I aunſwered. Onelie you bring ſome new exceptions, but not anie of them all worth a ruſh. You might aſwell except, that Paul was an Apoſtle and a Iew, we not; that the people he dealt withall, were in Aſia, you in Europe; they at Epheſus, you at London &c. Such pretences, as they are verie common among you, ſo are they moſt abſurd and frivolous, not worthy the hearing or anie refutation at all. Onelie note, that the very Papiſts themſelves may likewiſe alledge againſt anie that witnes the truth vntounto them: (yea and do they not dailie thus pretend as you do?) viz, that they be infinitely many mo, then Paul had there to do withall; 2. That Paul was better able to convince them &c. then any ſuch are the whole Popiſh Church; 3. That there be many learned among them, which have many probable and ſeeming reaſons &c.

Where you ſay, there be ſome of you that have publiſhed ſome reaſons for the Prelacy againſt vsus, and are vnanſwered, it is moſt falſe. Name but one Reaſon (if you can) to which we have not given aunſwer, to the ſtopping of all your mouths. But in deed (Mr Iacob) you and your fellowes have let the * the Prelates and their proctours inſult over you,Bancroft. Bilſon. Sutcliff. &c. with book vponupon book, and yet aunſwer not a word. You that ere while cryed out ſo earneſtlie againſt dumbe dogs, are now become dumbe your ſelves, not moving the tounge againſt anie that writeth for the Hierarchy and leitourgy of Antichriſt retained among you. But (to leave this to your ſelves to be better mynded hereafter) tell me now, if it were anie thing to the purpoſe, though that you ſay here were true? By your owne confeſſion, the Reaſons which are publiſhed againſt vsus are but probable and ſeeming, not true and vndoubted. And this alſo ſeeming ſo but to you, not to vsus. What matter then, though they were never aunſwered by vsus?

Where you aſke, What if theſe ſpeak evill of that which we hold for truth, but they hold to be errors & ſchiſme? We aſke againe, Do not the Papiſts p. 175alſo ſay ſo vntounto you? Yea and did not the Iewes (think you) ſay ſo vntounto Paul? Why then are you ſo partiall againſt vsus? But for vsus it ſkils not, what you or they think of our cauſe, vnles you ſpeak according to the Law and teſtimony of God: which is far from you.

Let the Reader alſo note here, the maner of your ſpeach. You ſay, that which we hold for truth, they hold to be errors & ſchiſme. They (ſay you) as ſpeaking of others, not of your ſelf. You belike do not ſo hold it, as they do, but are perſwaded it is truth, and not error. Why then do you not obey and practiſe it? Why are you become our ennemy for bearing witnes vntounto it? Why are you ſo partiall againſt vsus in it?

Towching the eſtate of the Iewes Church, I ſhewed three reaſons why the Apoſtles neither did nor might wholy ſeparate from them at firſt. Againſt which you are not able to open your mouth.Pag. 161. Petitio principii (whereof you ſpeak) is the ſumme of all your Replies. Shew otherwiſe, if you can. Do you not everie where beg, and no where prove, that you are ſeparated from the world, ſet in the way of Chriſt, free from the defection of Antichriſt &c. So your ſelf are guiltie of that wherewith you charge me falſlie, all that you ſay being nothing els but to beg the queſtion and deny the Concluſion. As for your ſhort writing about the cō pariſō of your Miniſtery with Mariage, I did anſwer it * above three yeares ſince. But you have not yet replied againe, neither (I think) will in haſt.In the yeare 1596. When you firſt acquainted me with the purpoſe of publiſhing theſe things you know (beſides other things then ſpoken of) I did in particular deſier you to publiſh that aunſwer of myne with the reſt. Therefore you have done me the greater wrong, both in leaving it vnprinted, and much more in giving out that I have not aunſwered you theſe whole three yeares together and vpward. But I perceive, you will have your book ſutable one part with another, and therefore you will end as you ‡ began, that is,Pag. 5. with lies and vntruths.

Of that which you annexe of the Iewes Church, in Chriſts tyme and after, and of ſeparation from them and communion with them, I have alreadie ſpoken ſufficientlie. Pag. 161. Neither can you with anie Reaſon denie or ſtand againſt anie thing I have there ſaid: as I noted before. Tell vsus yet I pray you, when and how that full experience of obſtinate and malitious reſiſtance of the truth (whereof you ſpeak) may be had and diſcerned in anie, either Miniſters or people. For your ſelves, you cannot deny, but this is your caſe, that you reſiſt and refuſe the truth, many times and ſundrie wayes, witneſſed vntounto you; that you rayle and ſpeake evill both of it and of vsus that profeſſe it; that you perſiſt in the errors and defection of Antichriſt; that you bereave vsus of our lives, libertie, goods, countrie &c. And all theſe, becauſe we will not runne with you to the ſame exceſſe of impietie. Now ſeing this is the caſe (as your ſelf, I think, will not denie) of your Prelates and manie other of your Prieſts and people, and ſeing all the reſt of you ſtand with them in one bodie and eſtate of a Church, cleaving vntounto them in the ſame way, worſhip, Miniſterie p. 174duplicate page p. 175duplicate page p. 176&c. therefore even in this behalfe can we not poſſiblie ſeparate from ſome of you, but we muſt needs do it from all. And for your reſiſtance, whether it be ſuch as you ſpeak of, or not, we leave to the Lord, who knoweth the hearts and wayes of all men. It ſufficeth vsus (as it did the Apoſtles, and muſt do the ſervants of God in all ages) that the Reaſons of ſeparation include and belong vntounto you all, even all your Churches, Miniſters, and people, in that eſtate: As I hauehave declared before throughout this Treatiſe.

Towching the concluſion. Therefore vntill you prove the contrarie (which will never be, mark what I ſay) the Paradox ſtill remaineth vponupon you and your Church.

Towching the reformed Churches, ſome of * your ſelves (men of far better iudgement and learning then Mr Iacob) have confeſſed and publiſhed,In the first Admonition to the Parl. that you have all the beſt reformed Churches throughout Chriſtendome againſt you: And further, that you have an Antichriſtian Hierarchy and Popiſh ordering of Miniſters, ſtraunge from the word of God and the vſe of all well reformed Churches in the world. Yet you (like blind Bayard) ſticke not boldlie to ſay to the contrarie, that all men know they hold communion with you as Churches of God. Firſt then reconcile your ſelf (Mr Iacob) with your fellow Reformiſts at home: And then your Churches Hierarchy and conſtitution, with the Miniſterie and conſtitution of the reformed Churches abroad.

And remember here, that the Miniſtery of thoſe Churches is not eſteemed ſufficient by yours: As the Prieſthood of Rome is. (The proof of both which, you may ſee in the anſwer to Mr A.H. Pag. 96.) With whether of theſe then (I pray you) do you hold communion? Or do you not in deed halt, as newters, between both? Mynd further, that Mr Beza (whoſe iudgement, you know, is worthilie reverenced and approved in all the reformed Churches) ſpeaking but of fower or five of your corruptions, affirmeth that in the Antichriſtian Church there is nothing more intolerable, Bez. Epist. 8.yea that (your caſe being ſo) it is not a corrupcion of Chriſtianitie, but in deed a manifeſt defection from Chriſt. His owne words I noted before, Pag. 73. Now when themſelves do thus witnes and write of your eſtate, how ſhould anie think that they hold communion with you, as the Churches of God, vnles you could prove they do alſo hold it the Church of God, which ſtandeth in manifeſt defection from Chriſt?

I know in deed that you have long deceived them, by the Apology, which you publiſhed for your ſelves againſt the Papiſts. In which you concealed from them all your corruptions and abominations. By meanes whereof, not hauing knowledge of the truth of your eſtate, they have therevpon for a tyme thought much better of it, then it doth deſerve or will beare: As even ſome among them alreadie, vponupon better information ſynce, have acknowledged. But of this matter, and of your dealing therein, Reaſon. 6 I have written alreadie † in the anſwer to Mr T. C. And therefore for theſe things I do ſtill refer you, as I did.

p. 177The Anſwer to Mr Hild. (ſuch as it is) now is publiſhed. And ſo may the anſwer to Mr Cartw. be in tyme: ſpeciallie ſeing you do thus provoke therevnto. In the meane tyme, divers copies thereof are abroad in mens hands. In which, as alſo in the ‡ other Treatiſe,A …reviſ…o …f the Minist. of Engl. Pag 67. 68. 69. I have noted in ſundrie particulars, the teſtimonie of the reformed Churches, againſt your preſent eſtate. You (Mr Iacob) may account of theſe or anie other our writings, as you pleaſe. Your toungue is no ſclaunder. Yet till we be anſwered, and that ſoundlie from the word of God, all men of conſcience will ſee and mynd how you bring nothing at all in defence of your Churches and Miniſterie, but frivolous and wandring words.

Next followeth our owne acknowledgement to be diſcuſſed. For towching that bloody mind and ſpeach of yours when you ſay, if we be troubled for witneſſing againſt your Church eſtate, none can pitty our impriſonnement, baniſhement &c. I leave you and it vntounto God,aaSee the like before, Pag. 112. who ſeeth and will iudge. Onelie let the Reader note here “ againe, that not the Prelates alone, but you alſo (the forward preachers and profeſſors) have wittinglie and willinglie your hand in our blood.

Mr Barrow is the firſt you name: Whom together with Mr Greenwood you††At Ty…um by London, in the yeare 1593. Apr. 6. killed in time of Parliament: that the ages preſent and to come may know, it was done with knowledge of the whole Land. In all his ſpeach there is not one word, that the members of your Church are true Chriſtians in that eſtate. He teſtifyed vntounto death and ſealed with his blood, that you do all ſtand in Antichriſtian eſtate. I think your ſelf will not be ſo ſhameles, as to deny it. Now in his ſpeach here alledged by your ſelf, marke fower things, which all do ſhew it is againſt you.

1. That ſpeaking of the Martyrs falſe offices and corruptions, he deemeth them ſaved notwithſtanding, through the mercy of God which ſuperabounded above their ſinnes &c. By which is evident that he thought them vnderunder the wrath of God in reſpect of their falſe offices & corruptions, had not the mercy of God ſuperabounded above thoſe their ſinnes. For mercy (you know) preſuppoſeth miſery, and ſuperaboundance thereof a great meaſure of ſinne.

2. He intimateth as if he thought that theſe their ſinnes were vnſeen of them: as doubtles they were of manie of them, yea and of all of them as towching that meaſure of knowledge which God hath ſynce by his word revealed therein.

3. He declareth that he was far from cutting of all among you (as Mr Gifford ſuggeſted) from Gods election or from Chriſt. Where marke that he ſpeaketh of Gods election (vnderunder which we alſo truſt that manie of you are) not of your preſent outward eſtate.In his Diſco. of the falſe Church Ref. of Mr Giff. Conferen. &c In reſpect whereof here he ſaith, the ſervants of Chriſt may iuſtlie deny you in that conſtitution to be members of a true conſtituted Church. A caſe very wofull and miſerable. Yet adde herevnto, that which ‡ els where often he teſtifyed, that your Miniſtery, worſhip, eſtate, are Antichriſtian &c. For which cauſe he could not ioine with you in ſuch eſtate, but ſeparated from you, and witneſſed p. 178this againſt you vntounto death, himſelf ſo ſignifying at the very tyme and place of his execution. So far was he from iudging you to be in that eſtate true Chriſtians. To make the caſe yet more plaine, know that we dare not condēne them of the Church of Rome with any ſuch peremptorie ſentence as Mr Giffard accuſeth vsus, to cutt them all from Gods election or from Chriſt. Doth it therefore follow, that in the conſtitution of there Church, we iudge them true Chriſtians? Nothing leſſe. Yet thus you ſhame not to reaſon.

4. He aſketh, what now ſhould let, that we ſhould not have the ſame hope (as of the Martyrs) where the ſame pretious faith in ſyncerity and ſimplicitie is found? So as they neyther neglect to ſearch out the truth, nor deſpiſe the truth when they ſee it &c. We alſo aſke and ſay the ſame. But now if you ſay, this is your caſe, both we and your owne works deny it. For proof whereof ſee the differences between you and the Martyrs before ſpecifyed. Pag. 40. 41.

At Thomas a Waterings by London, 1593. May 29Mr Penry (whom you ♣ martyred alſo the ſame yeare) his ſpeach followeth. In which likewiſe note fower things, not one of them for you, as towching the queſtion in hand.

1. The true doctrines eſtabliſhed by Law and profeſſed by her Maieſty, their Honours, and ſuch as have knowledge in your aſſemblies, he acknowledgeth to be ſuch, as if he did not mainteyne and hold them likewiſe, he could not poſſibly be ſaved. We alſo are like mynded. And to put you out of all doubt, we tell you further, that if we did not hold and mainteine the true doctrines profeſſed in the Church of Rome, towching the onelyonly true God, the holy Trinity, the Mediator Chriſt, the Reſurrection, Life eternall &c. we could not poſſibly look to be ſaved. Yet do we not therefore approve their Aſſemblies to be true Churches, or the members thereof true Chriſtians in their eſtate.

2. He ſeparated from your Church as remaining in Antichriſtian cō ſtitution, and profeſſeth here that he durſt not ioine with the publik worſhip of your Aſſemblies. The cauſes thereof he mentioneth in the ſame confeſſion, which you conceale. Of which ſee further in his aunſwer to Mr Fanſhaw hereafter following.

3. He confeſſeth that manie of the Teachers and profeſſors in your aſſemblies, have ſo embraced the truth of doctrine eſtabliſhed and profeſſed in the Land, as the Lord hath given them to ſhew outwardly many tokens, whereby (in regard of the Lords election) he iudged them members of that body whereof Chriſt is the head: and prayed God herein to be mercifull to them (as to himſelf in regard of all his ſinnes) that they are not vnderunder that outward forme of governement which Chriſt hath left in the Church. Now marke here, 1. that this is no other thing, then as we alway did and ſtill do profeſſe likewiſe. Of which ſee before, Pag. 7. 41. 2. That he ſpeaketh but of ſome, not of all the members of your Church. Whereas your Aſſumption and Concluſion are of your whole publik Aſſemblies, and ſo of every member of your Church, as towching their outward ſtā ding p. 179therein. 3. That the perſwaſion he had of ſuch among you was (as himſelf noteth) in regard of the Lords election, not of their eſtate in your Churches conſtitution. For towching this (which is the queſtion between vsus) here he prayed God to be mercifull to them, as to him ſelf in reſpect of all his ſinnes. Now I ſuppoſe you will not denie but his ſinnes (as alſo the ſinnes of all Gods people) deſerve in their owne nature the curſe of God, if they were not forgiven in Chriſt. So that by praying thus, he acknowledged the eſtate of all (even of the beſt among you) to be ſuch, as for this verie cauſe you are everie one ſubiect to Gods wrath, becauſe you are not vnderunder that outward forme of Governement which Chriſt hath left in the Church. Conſider withall that even for Papiſts we may pray thus, that the Lord would be mercifull to them in this, that they are not vnderunder that outward forme of governement which Chriſt hath left in his Church: and yet not hereby iuſtify them to be a true Church in their eſtate, but rather the quite contrarie. For Chriſt his Church (whereſoever and among whomſoever it be) is vnderunder Chriſt his governement, not vnderunder Antichriſts. Neither have anie people, promiſe of ſalvation, in ſuch eſtate. 4. By all this it appeareth, that he ſpake of them, as iudging them to be members of the inviſible and Catholick Church, which conteyneth all Gods elect, not onelie among you, but among the Lutherans, Anabaptiſts, Papiſts, and all other people whatſoever. Now what is this to the poinct of the queſtion controverted, which is not of men as they belong to the Catholick inviſible Church, but as they ſtand members of ſome particular viſible Aſſemblies in this or that conſtitution?

4. His ſpeach in examination before Mr Fanſhaw, why do you not ſet it downe in his owne words, as you did the other before? Belike you ſee your ſelf, it is againſt you, howſoever you would pretend otherwiſe. That all may know it, thus it was. Mr Fanſhaw aſked him this queſtiō, Do the Martyrs teach you, that there is no Church in England? Mr Penry anſwered, If you meane by a Church (as the moſt do) that publik profeſſiō wherby men do profeſſe ſalvation to be had by the death and righteouſnes of Ieſus Chriſt, I am free from denying any Church of Chriſt to be in this Land. For I know the doctrine of the holy Trinity, the natures and offices of the Lord Ieſus, free iuſtification by him, both the Sacraments &c. publiſhed by her Maieſtyes authority and commaunded by her Lawes, to be the Lords bleſſed and vndoubted truths, without the knowledge and profeſſion whereof no ſalvation is to be had. Theſe are his words. By which you may ſee he ſaith no other thing here, then what he ſpake in his Confeſſion before obiected. So as the anſwer given for it, may ſerve for this alſo. Or if that pleaſe you not, you may mynd it thus, If he had ben demaunded by Mr Fanſhaw whether there were no Church of Chriſt in Rome: and had anſwered thus, If you meane by a Church, that publick profeſſion whereby men do profeſſe Chriſt Ieſus, by nature to be truly both God and man, that one eternall Prieſt and Redeemer which by his ſacrifice and death vponupon the croſſe hath reconciled vsus to God, and payed his blood as a full and ſufficient raunſome p. 180for all our ſinnes &c. as the Papiſts do publikly profeſſe: Rhem. Annot. on 1 Tim. 2.5.1 Tim 2:5then am I free from denying any Church of Chriſt to be in Rome. If (I ſay) to this queſtion he had thus aunſwered, would you have concluded vponupon his words, that he acknowledged the Church of Rome to be the true Church of Chriſt, or the members thereof to be true Chriſtians, in their conſtitution? Or do you ſee for the Church of Rome, but not for your owne, that ſuch concluſion can not be preſſed out of his words?

But yet further, for the more clearing of this matter, let vsus marke what Mr Fanſhaw next aſked, and he aunſwered, towching the eſtate of your Church and his ſeparation from it. VponUpon his former aunſwer Mr Fanſhaw ſaid thus vntounto him, Seing you acknowledge that her Maieſty hath eſtabliſhed the truth in ſo many waighty points, ſeing ſhe hath commaunded the true Sacraments to be adminiſtred, what miſlike you in our Church, and why will you not be partaker of theſe truths and Sacraments with vsus?

Mr Penry anſwered, I miſlike 1. the falſe eccleſiaſticall offices; 2. the maner of calling vntounto the offices; 3. a great part of the works wherein theſe falſe offices are imployed; 4. the maintenance or livings whereby they are maynteined in their offices. All which I will be bound to prove (by the Lords help) to be derived, not from Ieſus Chriſt, but from the kingdome of Antichriſt his great enemy. And therefore foraſmuch as I can not be partaker of the former holy things of God, but I muſt be ſubiect vntounto the power of Antichriſt in theſe officers, and knowen by thoſe marks whereby his ſubiects are noted, therefore I am enforced & bound to ſeek the comfort of the word and Sacraments where I may have them without the ſubmitting of my ſelf vntounto any eccleſiaſticall power in Religion, ſave onelyonly vntounto that which is derived from Chriſt Ieſus the Lord, in whom all fulnes of power dwelleth (Col. 1.19.) and from whom all thoſe muſt derive their power and office, vntounto whom the Saincts of God are to ſubmit their conſciences to be wrought vponupon in Religion. Againe, ſeing the aforenamed 4. enormityes of this Church, are marks which properly belong vntounto the Kingdome of the Beaſt, that is, the Romane Antichriſt, we dare not have any communion and fellowſhip with them, nor be knowen by them, leaſt we ſhovld be partakers of thoſe moſt fearfull & moſt dreadfull iudgements, which are denounced by the Spirit of God, againſt all thoſe that have communion with any of the irreligious inventions of the Beaſt. Rev. 14.9.10. Theſe are the things, together with the want of Chriſts true order, which I eſpecially miſlike, and the ſpeciall cauſes why I dare not ioyne with the Aſſemblyes of this Land &c.

Thus was his aunſwer. In which you may ſee, how he profeſſeth your Church offices and eſtate to be ſuch as he dare not ioine therewith, both becauſe they are not derived from CHRiſt IEſus the LOrd of his Church, and for that they belong to the kingdome and body of Antichriſt, and are marks of that Beaſt againſt which and all that partake therewith God hath denounced moſt fearfull iudgements in his word. VntoUnto theſe moſt playne declarations of his mynd, I might adde many mo out of his letters and other writings. But what needeth it, whenas the laying p. 181downe of his life in teſtimony againſt the Antichriſtian eſtate of your Church, is and will be alway as a thouſand witneſſes againſt you, whatſoever you pretend otherwiſe.

And now (Mr Iacob) let me vponupon this occaſion aſke you this queſtion, whether you think Mr Barrow, Mr Greenwood, Mr Penry, &c. dyed Martyrs and witneſſes of the truth againſt your Antichriſtian eſtate; or whether you account them evill doers, iuſtlie deſerving to be put to death. The thing is a publik actiō, and cōcerneth the publik ſtate of your Church which you would ſeem to defend. Therefore is it needfull that you declare your mynd fullie and plainlie therein: which yet I think you will be loth to do. You love ſo to walke in darkenes: and yet would ſeem to defend your Church, when in deed you do nothing leſſe.

Next you alledge myne owne acknowledgement to Mr Philips and your ſelf for the approbation of your eſtate. Of which, being alſo obiected before, I have ſpoken already, Pag. 41. To it therefore I refer you.

Yet before I end this point, I will note here three things more, for the Reader to obſerve. The firſt is, towching Mr Barrow, Mr Penry, and my ſelf, that ſeing you ſpare not to wreſt our words, whoſe meaning all men know and our owne practiſe proclaymeth, we can not therefore look for any other at your hands but that you will much more pervert the Scriptures and word of God, about the meaning whereof men make ſo manie doubts and controverſyes from tyme to tyme.

The ſecond is, towching your owne words in theſe Replyes: That whereas in the Concluſion of your firſt Reply (Pag. 156.) you ſayd, we our ſelves acknowledged your Aſſumption to be true: now in the Concluſion of your ſecond Reply (Pag. 167.) you chaunge your owne words, and ſay, we acknowledged your publik doctrine would and did make many of you true Chriſtians. By which you cleare vsus, and contradict your ſelf. For if your Aſſumption were true, then not onelie many, but all and every member of your Church, ſhould thereby be deemed true Chriſtians, as towching their outward eſtate: even all your Prelates, Prieſts, Dumbe dogs, Non-reſidents, Thieves, Coniurers. &c. Which you may ſpeak with ſhame ynough. Sure I am, none of vsus did ever acknowledge it, and I truſt never ſhall.

The third is concerning ſome things ſpoken to me, in the preſence of others, at one tyme by Mr Philips (whom here you name) and at another tyme by your ſelf. Of Mr Philips, when once he had ſpeach with me about our cauſe, I aſked, If her Maieſty ſhould permit, both that way wherein the Prelates and you now are, and the way wherein we are, to be free for all men to walke in eyther of them as they ſhould be perſwaded, In which of the two then he would walke himſelf, as being perſwaded it was the truth of God: Wherevnto he aunſwered, that then he thought he ſhould walke in the way wherein we are.

Of your ſelf alſo among other things once I aſked this, Whether you were ſo mynded for the Miniſtery which Chriſt hath appointed in his Church, p. 182as you thought you ought and would dy for it, God aſſiſting you: To which you anſwered, Yea. Therevpon preſentlie I aſked agayne, Whether you were ſo mynded for the Miniſtery of the CHurch of ENgland, as you thought you ought & would alſo dy for it: To which you anſwered, No.

If now (Mr Iacob) I would preſſe concluſions out of Mr Philips words and your owne, as you do out of myne and others: might I not gather from your ſelves (far better then you do or can anie thing from vsus) that in your conſciences you ſee your Churches eſtate and Miniſtery to be vnlawfull, and none of Chriſts at all? But I ſpare you.

The Martyrs (whom next you alledge) I ſhewed to be againſt you by their owne teſtimony. VntoUnto this you anſwer, That it maketh ſtronger againſt vsus, ſeing although they miſliked the Hierarchy, yet they themſelves refuſed not to communicate and partake with them then as true Chriſtians; as Hooper, Bale, Bradford, &c. But are you in deed ſo ſimple, as not to perceyve that this is of no moment at all? What if the Papiſts ſhould ſo anſwer, when we bring againſt them the teſtimonie of the auncient Martyrs, towching the Maſſe, the Hierarchy, Auricular confeſſion, and other corruptions of that Church? Or are you ignorant that**See before, Pag. 44.45. Iohn Hus, Iohn wickleffe, William Swinderby and manie other of the Martyrs in elder tyme did in theſe things communicate with the Popiſh Church vntounto their dying day? If this aunſwer then be frivolous for them in ſuch caſe, how ſhould it not be likewiſe in yours? Beſides that you may by this reaſō perſwade aſwell to communicate with the Popiſh Church in their Maſſe and Miniſtery, as with yours in your worſhip and Hierarchy.

But further, by this aunſwer you yeeld, that the Martyrs ſpake and wrote againſt your Church eſtate. Which being ſo, whether do you or we (I pray you) the better? You in following the error of their practiſe? Or we in receyving the truth of their teſtimonie? And then if all that you ſay be graunted, is it ought but this, that you have the weaknes and ſinne of their practiſe, for a cloke of your ſtanding in evill: whereas we have the truth and ſoundnes of their iudgement, for our walking in that which is good? Now let others iudge, which of vsus follow them beſt, and have the beſt intereſt in them. And let it alſo be mynded, that they then comming newlie out of the darknes of Poperie, and being exerciſed alſo with other points of that religion, neither did nor could ſo conſider of this matter, as ſynce their tyme in this clearer light it hath in our dayes ben diſcuſſed.

Laſtlie, if you will have this anſwer of yours go for currant, then will I by like reaſon prove, that you may alſo ſubmit to the Popes authority, and receive all the corruptions of the Romiſh Church. And albeit that which I have alreadie ſaid of the auncient Martyrs before, be ſufficient for proof hereof, yet will I ſhew it you further, thus: The Proteſtants (you know) do vſually alledg againſt the Popes Antichriſtian authority and other corruptions of that Church, the ſayings of Bernard, Beda, &c. Suppoſe now the Papiſts ſhould anſwer as you do here, This maketh p. 183ſtronger againſt you, ſeing for all that, yet they themſelues refuſed not to yeeld to the Popes ſupremacy, and to partake with this Church, as being Chriſts, &c. What would you reply againe? Either you muſt ſay (as the truth is) that this anſwer is wandring and frivolous: or els you muſt needs confeſſe, that by this reaſon of yours you may alſo receive the Pope and all that popery which is alreadie caſt out of England, and communicate therewith. Which I pray God be not the iſſue of this your pleading for and partaking with the remnants of Antichriſt yet held in your Church.

To that where I demaunded, If it were ſo that the reformed Churches, we our ſelves, and the Martyrs of former tyme, had given allowance of your preſent eſtate and Church-conſtitution, what would this help you, when as the word of God condemneth you &c. You aunſwer, that thoſe witneſſes are ſufficient for this, that we hold a Paradox. So the teſtimony of Man (if you had it) is of more force with you, then the warrant of Gods word. And whatſoever the Scripture ſaith, yet to you it is a Paradox, if it be gainſaid by the reformed Churches &c. Bluſh for ſhame Mr Iacob, and fear any more to publiſh ſuch godles aſſertions and ſhameles Paradoxes.

All your clipping and perverting of my words will not help you. Neyther your new ſupply of the whole Churches iudgement & practiſe, with all the auncient learned Fathers, theſe 1300 or 1400 yeares, Chriſoſtome, Epiphanius, Nazianzen, Hierom, Auſten, Ambroſe &c. As if they had knowen and practiſed the Antichriſtian abominations now had in your Church. But when you bring proof of this your laviſh ſpeach, it will then be tyme ynough to aunſwer it. In the meane tyme heare what Mr Tindall that faithfull Martyr ſayd (ſpeaking of the Prelates and Prieſts in his age, for their ſo alledging the Fathers as you do). As for the holy Doctors (ſaith he) as Auguſtine, Hierome, Cyprian, Chryſoſtomus and Bede, will they not heare. If they wrote any thing negligently (as they were men) that draw they cleane contrary to their meaning, and thereof triumphe they. Thoſe Doctors knew of none authority that one Biſhop ſhould have above another, neyther thought or once dreamed that ever any ſuch ſhould be.

This is Mr Tindall his ſpeach and obſervation. Which you may mynd. I note it now for this, that you may ſee how your Forefathers alledged the Doctors, and how it ſtands you vponupon, well to mynd what proof is brought from them, whether it be for this point (which here he nameth) or for anie other corruptions of Antichriſt retayned among you. Some of which I have rehearſed * before in particular,Pag. 63. &c. for which I will expect your proof from ſuch antiquity as you ſpeak of, ad Kalendas Graecas, in deed never. And yet I know that both 1400 yeares ſynce, and before alſo, they began to declyne very much. But Antichriſt notwithſtanding came not of a long tyme after, to that height and impiety, wherein now he is to be ſeen and felt both in your Church, and in your mother of Rome.

Note alſo, that when all is ſaid that can be in this matter, it is but a Popiſh ſhift to fly from the Scriptures to the Fathers; and an impious Paradox to exalt their ſayings (who are knowen to have erred in manie p. 184things) above the word of God, which alone is the rule of truth, and can not lye at all.

Finally you ſay, that to try you I propound a many of queſtions. Yet they are but ſeven in all. In deed I think it doth and will try both you and your fellow Prieſts to aunſwer them. Such ſuperfluous ſtuffe they are. And have you not read too,Iob. 32.3.Job 32:3 how ‡ Iobs frends condemned him, and yet could fynd no anſwer? Apply it to your ſelves and your dealing with vsus. But you ſay you would firſt have vsus cleare this preſent queſtion and our reaſons thereabout. Well: beſides that is already done, the deciding of theſe few queſtions will fully and plainly do it. Let others iudge if it would not. And mynd you then what you have anſwered. To ſhut vp all, you tell vsus aforehand you have no leyſure to meddle further. Very like ſo. You have leyſure ynough, to write book after book, to no purpoſe: yet you have not ſo much as to aunſwer a few ſhort queſtions, which may end all the controverſie between vsus. He that can not ſee how you would ſhift of the matter, and yet labour to withold the truth in vnrighteouſnes, what doth he ſee? The Lord open your eyes (Mr Iacob) that your ſelf may ſee and mynd it. As for others that be ſeduced by you and the reſt of your Prophets teaching lyes, let them in tyme (afore it be to late) apply vntounto you and themſelves in ſuch eſtate, that which is written, The leaders of the people cauſe them to erre, and they that are led by them are devoured. Eſa. 9.16. Therefore alſo let them all, even whoſoever feare God and will be aſſured of his mercy, give no reſt to their ſoules, vntill with the Prophet they can ſay in truth of heart, and ſhew it forth in their practiſe, My portion O Lord, I have ſaid, to keep thy words. I have conſidered my wayes, & turned my feet into thy teſtimonyes. I made haſt, & delayed not, to keep thy commaundements. I have refrayned my feet from every evill way, that I might keep thy word. Pſal. 119.57.59.60.101.

Let him that readeth, conſider.

AN ANSWER TO MAISTER H. IACOB HIS TREATISE Concerning the PRIESTES of the Church of England, Made by the PRAELATES, Accepted and ioyned vntounto by the people. Which he termeth A PASTORALL CALLING,

By Francis Iohnſon an exile for the testimony of IESVS.

Put your ſelves in aray again…t Babel round about; all ye that bend the bow, ſhooe as her; ſpare no arrowes: for ſhe hath ſinned against the Lord.

Ier. 50.14.

They ſhall not take of thee a stone for a corner, nor a stone for foundation: but thou ſhals be a perpetuall deſolation, ſaith the Lord.

Ier. 51.26.

1600.