Answer to Mr Jacobs Defense of the Churches and Ministry of England, Religious treatise 2

Answer to Mr Jacobs Defense of the Churches and Ministry of England · Religious treatise 2

p. 186Mr IACOB his Argument, by which he would prove the Priests made by Prelates, to be the Pastors ordeined by Christ: Taken frō a compariſon of Mariage, Which he falſely faith is gathered out of our owne confeſſions. Together with the Anſwer to it, & to his Reply thereabout.

CHAP. 1. The Argument of his Compariſon (as it is now propounded) is this:

AS a couple of ignorant people not contracting, but meaning to marry, & yet thinking that vnleſſe a Prieſt marry them, their mariage is nothing, whereas in deed their publique accepting each of other maketh the mariage: Now being married, (though““As themſelves bold. vnlavvfully) by a Priest, yet their mariage is true & lawfull notwithſtanding.

EVen ſo, a Chriſtian people, meaning to have a ſufficient man to their Paſtor, yet thinking, that vnleſſe a Prelate doe make him, he is no Paſtor at all, neither can be theirs. Notwithſtanding, he being made a Paſtor, (though ““As they alſo do acknowledge.vnlawfully) by the Prelate; yet, by rheir mutuall accepting and ioyning together, he is now verely a Paſtor, yea their Paſtor, true and lawfull.

H. IACOB.

Fran. Iohnſon his Aunſwer. THe Reader is to know that Mr Iacob did at firſt propound this cō pariſon far otherwiſe. Which ſynce being aunſwered, ſo as he could not defend it againe, he hath now chaunged and propounded it with ſome other termes then before: trying belike if he can any way help himſelf, or his cauſe. Now although both his firſt and laſt be alike in this, that neither of them are of any moment, yet becauſe the former aunſwer here following was made vntounto the cōpariſō as it was firſt propounded (which Mr Iacob concealeth) and to the end the Reader may ſee what chaunge he hath made therein: I will here alſo ſet it downe, as himſelf did propound it at the firſt. Which was thus:

As a couple of ignorant perſons that are contracted together, do think that vnles the Prieſt marry them, Mr H. Iacob his Compariſon, as it was first propō ded & aunſwered.their mariage is nothing (whereas in truth the contract maketh the marriage): yet being married (though vnlawfully) by a Prieſt, their marringe is notwithſtanding lawfull:

So the ignorant people that have made choyſe of a Miniſter, do think vnles the Biſhop make him a Miniſter, he is no Miniſter (whereas in deed their choiſe made him a Miniſter): yet being made Miniſter (though vnlawfully) by a Biſhop, his Miniſtery is notwithſtanding lawfull.

p. 187Thus did Mr Iacob at firſt make his compariſon. In which and the change thereof, let the Reader obſerve and Mr Iacob anſwer theſe things following.

1. That before in the Propoſition or firſt part of the compariſon, he ſpake of perſons contracted together; now of perſons not contracted.

2. That in the Reddition or latter part, he ſpake of ignorant people; now of Chriſtians: Before of ignorant people that had made choiſe of a Miniſter; now of Chriſtiā people intēding to chooſe or meaning to have a Paſtor.

3. That he ſpake before of any man generallie for a Miniſter; now particularlie of a ſufficient man for a Paſtor. Then of a ſuppoſed lawfull Miniſtery received afore the Prelates do vnlawfully make them; now of this vnlawfull one received afore the other. Then of the peoples choyſe firſt had, now of their mutuall accepting and ioining together afterward.

4. That thus chaunging the termes of the Compariſon, his aunſwer therefore to the ‡ Reaſons firſt brought againſt it,**The Reaſōs were 7. hereafter ſet down. is even in this reſpect indirect and inſufficient: beſides that it is otherwiſe moſt weak and friuolous. Of which more hereafter.

5. Where now he ſpeaketh of ſufficient men for Paſtors, ſet him tell vsus plainlie what he thinketh of their Dumbe Miniſters, and of the reſt among them othewiſe vnmeet and inſufficient: viz, Whether the Dumbe Miniſters and Formaliſts, have not the ſame calling of the Prelates, that the other have.

6. Whether they have not like, and many of them greater acceptance of the people, then thoſe he ſpeaketh of have.

7. Whether they therefore being thus ordeined of the Prelates and accepted of the people, are by the word of God true and lawfull Paſtors, to whoſe guyding men may commit their ſoules, and ioine to their publik Miniſtery.

8. Whether their Churches (as they ſtand) have power to chooſe to themſelves their Miniſters, ſo as being choſen by them they are by the Lawes of their Church their lawfull Miniſters.

9. How it is poſſible, that any ſhould hold mariage by a Prieſt vnlawfull, and yet think that vnles they be ſo married, their mariage is nothing? And againe, to hold the Prelates making of Miniſters to be vnlawfull, and yet to think that vnles the Prelates do ſo make them, they are no Paſtors at all, neither can be theirs? What ſtraunge contradictions be here? Is it poſſible, that theſe things can ſtand together? Or can they ever be reconciled, vnleſſe Mr Iacob think their people be ſo mad, as to hold that no lawfull Mariage or Miniſterie can be had, but by vnlawfull meanes? And conſequently, that whoſoever will marry or become Miniſters, muſt needs ſinne againſt God: Yea ſo, as they know and hold it before they do it: and therefore alſo ſinne againſt their owne conſcience.Pag. 186. For thus much do “ his Marginall notes, ſayd togeather with the wordes of his Compariſon, neceſſarilie import. And what a diveliſh doctrine alſo is this? 1 Tim. 4.1.2.3.

p. 18810. Whether the Offices and functions of the Prelates he ſpeaketh of, be not amōg them (as the Apoſtle fortold) exalted above and oppoſed againſt the holy things and offices of the Lord Ieſus. Yea, Whether thoſe very words of the Apoſtle,2 Theſ. 2.4.2 Thess 2:4 thus deſcribing the Man of ſinne [foreign, that is, ſet againſt & life vp above all that is called God or ““Or, appertaining to diuine vvorſhip. As the ſame word is vſed, Act. 17.23.Acts 17:23holy] do not moſt directly as it were with the finger point out that Antichriſtian Prelacy. And here (to ſpeake of it by the way) let the Reader mynd how wonderfully God hath diſpoſed, that they ſhould by themſelves (in their Statutes, ſpeaches, writings) be called by this name and title of [Prelates] which is the very Engliſh of the Greek word vſed by the Apoſtle when he deſcribeth Antichriſt: The word is, foreign, that is, exalted above; lifted vp; ſet before; or (as we vſually ſpeak) Prelate. 2. Theſ. 2.4.

11. How it can be then that Paſtors ſhould be made by the Prelates, as here he taketh for graunted. Men ſurelie do not gather grapes of thornes, nor figs of thiſtles. Neither hath the throne of iniquitie (which forgeth wrong for a Law) fellowſhip with the Lord. And whatſoever be pretē ded to the contrary, certaine it is that Chriſt and Antichriſt cannot accord together. Mat. 7.16. Pſal. 94.20. 2 Cor. 6.14.15.

To the end therefore that the Reader may better perceive Mr Iacobs corrupt dealing, it will not be amiſſe, brieflie to note here (out of their owne Pontificall and practiſe) how the Miniſters he ſpeaketh of are made by the Prelates.

1. Firſt, they are made Deacons or half Prieſts, whoſe duty is to read the book of Common prayer and Homilyes, to miniſter Baptiſme, to aſſiſt the Prieſt at divine ſervice, and (if he have the Prelates licence) to preach withall.

2. Then after a yeares ſervice in that Deaconſhip (or ſuch tyme as pleaſeth the Ordinary) comming to be made full Prieſts, they are preſē ted to the Lordbiſhop or his Suffragane, by an Archdeacō or his deputy, ſaying,Note this Point of blaſphemy. For now Christ alone hath the Ministery of Priesthood, & that foreign, that is, ſuch as can not paſſe frō him vntounto another. Heb. 7.23.24.Heb 7:23Heb 7:24 Reverend father in God, I preſent theſe perſons preſent to be admitted to the Order of Prieſthood.

3 The Prelate then ſaith to ſuch as be there (be they his Serving mē or any other that happen to come that way), Good people theſe be they whom we purpoſe God willing, to receive this day vntounto the holy Office of Prieſthood &c.

4. None of them ſhewing anie impediment to the contrary, the Clerks and people preſent ſay or ſing the Letany &c. And the Prelate readeth over a number of Collects and ſtinted prayers taken out of the Popes pō tificall: with an exhortation, an Epiſtle and Goſpell, wherein they abuſe and pervert the Scripture.

5. The Prelate demaundeth of them thus, Do you think in your heart that you be truly called according to the will of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, and the order of this Church of Englād, to the * Miniſtery of Prieſthood? And the partyes to be ordeined then aunſwer, every one for himſelf, I think it.

p. 1896. After other queſtions and aunſwers about the ſufficiency of the Scriptures &c. (wherein they condemne themſelves) the Prelate aſketh, if they will reverently obey their Ordinary and other chief Miniſters of the Church (that is, the Lordbiſhop of the Dioces where they live, the Archbiſhop, Archdeacon, Chauncelor, Commiſſary and the reſt of that Antichriſtian Hierarchy). They make aunſwer againe, every one of them ſaying, I will ſo do the Lord being my helper.

7. Then the Biſhop readeth a prayer for them, that they may have ſtrength and power to performe the ſame: and deſireth the congregation, ſecretly in their prayers to make humble ſupplications to God for the foreſaid things. For the which prayers, there is a certayne ſpace kept in ſilence. (Note this myſtery).

8. After a while, the Prelate prayeth againe in ſuch wiſe as is ſet downe vntounto him in the book: being not able belike otherwiſe to cōceive any prayer himſelf.

9. When this is done, the Prelate with the Prieſts preſent lay their hands ſeverallie vponupon the head of every one that receiveth orders: the receivers humblie kneeling vponupon their knees, and the Prelate ſaying vntounto them,**Note here againe blaſphemy. Receyve the holy Ghoſt: whoſe ſinnes thou doeſt forgive, they are forgiven; and whoſe ſinnes thou doeſt retaine, they are retained &c.

10. Then is ſung the Creed, and they go to the communion: they that received orders, being appointed to tary and receive the communion with the Biſhop the ſame day, and remaining in the††Well fare all good tokens. ſame place, where the hands were laid vponupon them, &c. So teſtifying that they are of the ſame faith and body with the Prelates, who are knowen to be notable perſecuters of the truth, and very Antichriſts themſelves.

11. Now being thus made Prieſts (and yet I omit many like things that might be noted out of their Book and practiſe, for it were endles to recount all) they pay for their letters of orders. Which they muſt alſo have in a readines at all tymes, to ſhew (whenſoever there ſhall be occaſion) for better aſſurance that they have received the Beaſts mark. And if now they be to enter vponupon a benefice, or whenſoever that day cometh (for which they are now prepared to day afore to morrow) then there is yet further required, that they have the preſentation of the Patrone (who perhaps is a Papiſt, or an Atheiſt, or a child, or the like) and the inſtitution of the Lord-biſhop, who without queſtion is an Antichriſt.Epheſ. 4.5. 1 Cor. 12.…5. with 1 Pet. 2.25. & 5.3.4Eph 4:51 Cor 12:51 Pet 2:251 Pet 5:31 Pet 5:4 The true Church hath but * one Lordbiſhop, the Lord Ieſus Chriſt. All other Lordbiſhops are Antichriſts.

12. Laſtly being thus ordered, preſented, inſtituted, and having ſworne Canonicall obedience to the Prelates: now whether the people will or not, they are and muſt be their Prieſts and have charge of their ſoules. And both themſelves, their Miniſtery, and people remaine ſubiect to the Prelates and to their Antichriſtian courts, power, juriſdiction &c.

This is the caſe of all the Prieſts, even of them that have the moſt and beſt acceptance of the people whereof he ſpeaketh. And would any now p. 190have thought, that the Prelates making, and the peoples accepting of Prieſts, being ſuch, Mr Iacob would be ſo ſenceleſſe as to perſwade that theſe are true and lawfull Paſtors? Might he not aſwell tell vsus, that a cleane thing may be brought out of filthines, yea that Chriſt may be made to agree with Antichriſt? Which both Scripture and experiēce teacheth can never be. Iob. 14.4. 2 Cor. 6.15. Eyther therefore let him make the tree good,Mat. 12.33.Matt 12:33 and his fruit good; or els make the tree evill, and his fruit evill. If the Prelates and their functions be Antichriſtian and were never but nought, then ſuch muſt needs be the Miniſtery derived and received from them. But ſo it is with the Prelates, even himſelf being witnes, who both yeelded it**Pag. 92. before: And here agayne in playne termes confeſſeth, that the calling received from them is vnlawfull.

By this it is too evident that the light of the truth ſhineth in his cōſciēce, howſoever he ſtrive againſt it. Therefore will I not now further vrge it, hoping that himſelf in tyme will better mynd it. In the meane tyme, let the Reader note it: And withall, that this calling by the Prelates (which he yeeldeth to be vnlawfull) is the onelyonly calling which by Law is ratifyed and allowed in that Church. And doth not Mr Iacob then (whiles he ſaith, notwithſtanding, they are true and lawfull Paſtors) ſpeak riddles, and contradict himſelf?

Theſe things being obſerved, and Mr Iacob deſired to reſolve them in his next: I will now proceed to ſhew the weaknes and inſufficiency of his preſent pretended Defence. Where for more evidence of the truth. I will firſt ſet downe the Reaſons heretofore alledged againſt his Cōpariſō, and then aunſwer his cavils now brought againſt them.

Chap 2. The firſt Reaſon againſt Mr Iacobs Compariſon, as it was firſt propounded.

Fran. Iohnſon. INfidels, Idolaters, prophane and godles perſons, may marry togeather, with conſent and choiſe of each other, notwithſtanding their prophanenes: And their marriage is therein lawfull.

But it ſtandeth not ſo with choiſe of Miniſters in the Church. For prophane godles perſons (ſuch as theſe Aſſemblies conſiſt of, being never rightlie gathered togeather according to Gods ordinance, remaining in ſubiection and bondage to their falſe Antichriſtian Offices and Courts, conſiſting of all ſorts of people &c.) are not capable of chuſing and ioyning to a true Miniſter in this eſtate, as Infidels and ſuch like may marry in their eſtate.

Therefore the compariſon holdeth not, neyther is ſuch choiſe of a Miniſter by ſuch people lawfull.

p. 191H. Iacob his Reply. THe ſtrength of this Reaſon ſtandeth in theſe laſt words: But theſe Aſſemblies conſist of ſuch people, 1. prophane & godles perſons. 2. neuer rightly gathered together according to Gods ordinance. 3. remayning in ſubiection and bondage to their falſe and Antichristian officers & courts: Ergo, &c. Theſe three accuſations availe nothing at all.

The firſt Accuſation is from our queſtion,Accuſatiō. 1. for we ſpeake of a Christian people, but you of aſſemblies conſiſting of prophane and godles perſons. If you ſay, our aſſemblies all & wholy are ſuch: That is falſe. If you ſay, ſome are: Of them we ſpeake not. If you ſay in all & every one of our aſſemblies there are ſome, yea many open prophane and godles perſons. 1. It is too bold a ſaying, and without knowledge to ſpeak ſo of all. 2. If it were true, yet it were falſe to ſay, our aſſemblies conſiſt of ſuch, or to thinke that whole companies of Chriſtians by ſuch commixtures are made vnholy; prophane, and godles: which is contrary to theſe ſcriptures. Mat. 23.2.3. Luke 2.21.22. & 1.6. Act. 21.23.26. 1 Sam. 2.17. & cap. 1. verſ. 3.9. Rev. 2.20.21. & 3.1.4. 1 Cor. 3.3. Gal. 3.1.2. & 4.11.16. & 5.4.9.

The ſecond Accuſation [that our aſſemblies were neuer rightly gathered togeather at the first according to Gods ordinance.] I deny it:Accuſatiō. 2 eſpecially towching many famous Congregations in the Land, where the GOSpell was not vnknowen before the Queenes commaundement came to vrge them to receive this doctrine. And if the maner of receiving it then, in thoſe hard and doubtfull tymes and hazardous beginnings, were not ſo perfect nor ſo exact, as ſhould hauehave ben, yet we may ſee by the example of““2 Chro. 30.17.18 19.20.2 Chr 30:172 Chr 30:18 Hezechias, and**2 Chr. 33.15.16.17.2 Chr 33:152 Chr 33:162 Chr 33:17 Manaſſes, and††Zepha. 1.4.5. & 3.1. Ier. 3.6. &c. & 4.1. &c. & 5.1. &c.Jer 3:6 Ioſias reformations, That God imputeth it not to ſuch godly and zealous reſtorers, the pillers and ground of the trueth in thoſe dayes.

If you ſay, the vntaught people then ſuddenly receiving the Goſpell by cō mandement, not by hearing, could not beleeve at the firſt, though they profeſſed, and therefore at the firſt were no true Chriſtians nor Churches? I aunſwer. 1. Though many received the Goſpell for the commandements ſake, yet who can ſay, That now they all generally wanted all knowledge, and all faith? The word then having ben in many places taught, very many bookes ſcattered, much conference, daily conſultations and diſputations vſed, and the blood of the Martyrs having preached ſo loud, and ſo lately before. 2. It was not ſo ſudden. There was””From Nouember the 17. till Midſomer following. more then halfe a yeare, for the people to heare, learne and conſider, before the commandement came. So that it can not be counted meer force and compulſion, that at the beginning of our Queenes reigne, brought vsus to the truth. 3. I would know, You condemne not (I hope) all reformation commanded and compelled by the Magiſtrate. 2 Chron. 34.32.33. & 33.16. & 15.13.. Seeing therefore, the aſſemblies thus openly, and aduiſedly, ſubmitted to the proclaimed truth, who ſeeth not, but they cōfeſſed therein their former errors, and profeſſed their preſent faith, and vndertooke a new life from that which before they led, though happely not ſo formallie, nor ſo perfectlie as were to have ben wiſhed.

But they received all togeather, Papiſts, Atheistes, ignorant men, and all diſſolute livers, Obiection. into one communion and fellowſhip.

p. 192Indeed all, who after this aduizement and notice taken, ſubmitted to and receyved this doctrine, Anſwer. theſe were all receyued in. And therefore no open profeſſed Papiſtes, Athiſtes nor other Heretikes. As for ignorant men, it is not poſſible but many will ſcape among the reſt, in ſo great & ſo generall reformation of a publike ſtate. And ſo queſtionles it was in Hezechias, Manaſſes, & Ioſias reformation. 2. Chron. which we noted before. The notorious, diſſolute, & wicked, ſome were reclaimed, all vndertook another profeſſion, and a new appearance of Chriſtianitie. And no doubt the like is to be thought of theſe, as before I obſerued touching the ignorant men. Now all this was done, not intollerablie doubtleſſe▪ though I graunt weakly and corruptly, & very like euen to your owne receiuing in to your Church at this time: nay more tollerable and more lawfull then yours: who to furniſh onelyonly one congregation, have received many**This particular Mr Iacob hath not printed: but it was in his written copy which I aunſwered. bankrupts, knowen bad men, and very ignorant: yea and ſtill retaine men full of contention, and bitter ſtrife. 1 Cor. 3..3. In a word this I anſwer:

That which diſanulleth not a Church gathered and ſettled, That diſanulleth it not in the gathering and beginning.

But ſuch mixtures do not diſanull a Church gathered and ſettled, as appeareth above in the ſcriptures quoted againſt the Firſt Accuſation, Mat. 23. Luke 2 &c.

Therefore ſuch mixtures did not diſanull our Churches then in their beginning.

The Third Accuſation is, [Our Aſſemblies remayne in obedience to the falſe Antichristian Officers, Accuſatiō. 3.&c.] Let this be our generall ſinne: yet there is diverſitie of ſinnes. All are not of like deteſtation before God, not of like conſequence againſt vsus. I ſay not that any ſinnes are veniall: but I ſay, all ſinnes by their nature are mortall, yet do they not all alike aboliſh vsus from Chriſt, nor deprive vsus of the glory of God. Now this ſinne of outward Church orders is not of the moſt heynous, nor extreameſt diſobedience. There are ſinnes againſt the††1 Cor. 15 2.3.4. Rom. 1.25. 1 Cor. 3.10 11.12.13.14.1 Cor 15:21 Cor 15:31 Cor 15:4Rom 1:251 Cor 3:10 foundation, and there are ſinnes that ſtande with the foundation: ibid. wherein men living and dying ignorantly without particular repentance, may be ſaved. Such were the ſinnes of the Iewiſh Church and eſtate in Chriſts tyme, and after, as””Beza in Acts 15.20.Acts 15:20 ſome thinke, even till their Temple and Citie were deſtroyed, though they did perſonally hate and perſecute Chriſt. Such alſo was the ſinne of the auncient declyning Biſhops, Cyprian, Epiphanius, Augustine, Chriſostome, Leo of Rome, &c. No leſſe was in ours of late Cranmer, Ridly, Hooper &c. in King Edwards dayes: and no greater is now in ours preſently, eſpecially towching our Churches, & Miniſters too, generally. If you ſay, we are all convicted now, and ſinne againſt our owne conſciences, as they did not in thoſe tymes: It is vtterly falſe, and a palpable vntruth. Whoſoever knoweth any thing in our Church eſtate generally, muſt needs ſee it, that this poinct towching the Hyerarchy, is not acknowledged even of ignorance in a thouſand to one: many holding (and not of the ſimpleſt) this preſent governement to be th'only true and right kinde: but all men almoſt, to be indifferent, and lawfull: very few indeed, and ſcarce to be found, that ſee it to be meerly nought, or as you terme it, wicked & intolerable. p. 193And in king Edwards tyme, whoſoever conſidereth, ſhall finde,H. I…. that the godly learned Proteſtans then, were not vtterly ignorant of this point of reformation, and yet ſinned not againſt their conſcience in bearing with the tymes, neither were aboliſhed from Chriſt. And ſurelie towching the Iewes, they were all generally more convicted then, that Ieſus vvas the Chriſt, then vve are now that the Prelacy is of Antichriſt: & yet they remayned a Church ſtill, becauſe generally indeed, they vvere not plainly conuicted. Thus then this our ſinne is**see the 2. ſortes of fundamentall ſinnes, in the 2. Reply to your y… …eaſon before. Pag. 142, Fr. Io. See the aunſwer thereto in the ſame treatiſe, Pag 144.147. no way fundamentall, it deſtroyeth not faith & Chriſtianity in our vvhole aſſemblies: Therefore they remaine Chriſtian people ſtill, as I affirmed: not all godles & prophane, as you vncharitably ſpeak.

O beware of raſh & haſty iudging, even of one brother, Rom. 14.3.4.13. how much more of ſuch anb ſo many whole aſſemblies profeſſing Chriſt in England? Woe be vntounto him which curſeth where God curſeth not. Num. 23.8. As alſo indeed that bleſſeth, where God bleſſeth not. We deſire you not to bleſſe vsus in our evill, but we vvarne you, not to curſe vsus in our good: vvhichwhich indeed turneth vsus not to any furtherance, but to a great hinderance and ſtumbling block, ſtopping vsus from that ſyncerity vvhichwhich els vve ſhould dravve nearer vntounto. Bleſſed is he that iudgeth vviſely (that is vvithout affection and partialitie) even of him that is deſpiſed. Better it is and more Chriſtianlike, even to offend in too much compaſſion and patience (eſpecially tovvardes ſo many hundreth thouſands, by vvhom vve knovv nought ſaue good in this poinct) then to offend in too much rigor, and ſeverity, and vniuſt anger. Mat. 5.22. Hovvbeit this vvere not indeed to offend, as hath ben above ſhevved. And briefly in twoo vvords, thus I conclude it farther, that,

That faith and religion taught in the booke of Articles publiſhed 1562. maketh the people that beleeve and obey the ſame, true Chriſtians: ſuch as ſo living & dying may be ſaved.

But our Church doeth ſo holde that faith.

Therefore they are true Chriſtians.

The Propoſition onelyonly is doubted. I had thought none ſo deſperate as to deny it: but lately I vnderſtand, you hauehave denyed it. Hovvbeit for anſvver, I referre you partly to that vvhichwhich here hath bene ſaid before, & eſpeciallie to that vvhichwhich is replyed to your Anſwer in the former Treatiſe: which being well weighed, I doubt not but all indifferent, & Chriſtian mindes will acknowledge, our publique Church aſſemblies in England to be true Chriſtians.

Fran. Iohnſon his Aunſvver. YOu have now ten tymes reproched me, and are not aſhamed. Whatſoever your ſelf or others do think of your Churches eſtate, God forbid that I ſhould eyther iuſtify it, or take away myne owne innocency in witneſſing the truth againſt it. Heare therefore, and I will aunſwer you once againe: I will open my mouth for the truth, againſt him that pleadeth for Baal.

The ſtrength of the Reaſon ſtandeth not (as you ignorantlie ſuppoſe) in the truth or falſhood of the particulars you mention: but in this, that p. 194it is not ſo vvith choyſe of Miniſters in the Church, as it is vvith choyſe of parties in mariage. For Infidels, Idolaters, godles perſons &c. may in that eſtate marry togeather: but they are not in that eſtate capable of chooſing and ioyning to a true Miniſter. And therefore your Compariſon doth not hold.

1Yet the particulars do all of them availe much againſt you, whatſoever you pretend to the contrary. The firſt is directlie to the queſtion. For although now (having ſeen my aunſwer) you ſpeak of Chriſtian people, yet your compariſon (which was given me to aunſwer) ſpake at firſt of ignorant perſons, and thoſe alſo ſuch as might marry togeather. Now you cannot deny but ignorant perſons (be they never ſo prophane and godles) may marry one with another. Yet have they not power in ſuch caſe to chuſe a Miniſter. It is your ſelf then that keep not the point, but chop and chaunge the termes of your Argument, as you think may beſt fit your turne.

And yet all this chaunging of your hew will avayle you nothing at all, vnles you could prove, 1. That your people in that Church-conſtitution are true Chriſtians: 2. That your Miniſters ſo made and received are true Paſtors. But neither of theſe can you do. For the firſt, let the Reader ſee the former treatiſe, where this point is purpoſelie handled. (And mynd here that your ſelf confeſſe, ſome of your Aſſemblies are all and wholy prophane godles perſons: Of which (you ſay) you ſpeak not: Yet tell vsus whether you think ſuch Aſſemblies be true Churches, ſuch people true Chriſtians, and their Miniſters (hauing like ordering of the Prelates and acceptance of the people) true Paſtors, or not.) For the latter, this is the treatiſe and place where you ſhould prove it, if you could. But behold, you do nothing leſſe.In the Compariſon, Pag 186. Nay even: here you yeeld, that your calling received from the Prelates is vnlawfull. Yet this is the onelie maner of calling that your Church conſtitution appointeth.

That which you ſpeak, of your Aſſemlies not being all and wholy profane and godles perſons, is nothing to the purpoſe. You might eaſilie have ſeen (if you had mynded the words of my Reaſon) that I ſayd expreſſelie, your Aſſemblies conſiſt of all ſorts of people, that is, ſome better, ſome worſe: Yet ſeing the beſt among you remaine in confuſion with the worſt, and all of you in bondage to Antichriſt: that even for this cauſe alſo you can not in that eſtate be deemed true Churches, having power to chuſe ſuch Officers as Chriſt hath appointed for his Church.

And where you ſay, whole companyes of Chriſtians are not by ſuch commixtures made vnholy, prophane, and godles, it is wholy from the queſtiō. The point is not,A treatiſe of the Ministery of Engl. in anſwer to M. A. H. whether the better ſort among you do by ſuch commixture become godles perſons, like the reſt; but whether your Aſſemblies in ſuch commixture can be deemed true conſtituted Churches of Chriſt. The Scriptures you alledge, are therefore miſalledged, and fit not your purpoſe at all. Yea they are direct againſt you, as I have … els where proved at large. Now note but theſe things brieflie.

p. 195In Mat. 23.2.3. Chriſt ſpeaketh of ſuch as ſate in Moſes chayre, that is, in the offices and functions which God by Moſes had ordeyned. Deut. 33.8.10. & Neh. 9.4. with Ioh. 1.19.24. Now what is this to your falſe Miniſterie, which God never appointed? The ſame is to be mynded in thoſe other Scriptures of 1 Sam. 1.3.9. & 2.17.

In Luk. 1.6. & 2.21.22. mention is made of Gods ordinances and offices then obſerued, after the Law of Moſes, vvithout reproof. Is not this then directlie againſt your Antichriſtian ordinances and offices, which are not according to the Law of God, but after the Apoſtaſy of Antichriſt: and therefore all the obſervers of them to be reproved?

In Act. 21.23.26. we read that the Legall ordinances were for a tyme permitted to the Iewes being zealous of the Law, and ſo obſerved of the Apoſtle, himſelf being alſo a Iew. Which was the honour of their buriall. But what proportion is there between thoſe ordinances of God, and the enormities of Antichriſt? Nay, if we may not now keep thoſe ceremonyes of Moſes, once Gods commaundements: how far ought we to be from keeping the abominations of Antichriſt, by God moſt ſtraitlie forbidden? Gal. 5.2. vvith Rev. 14.9.10. & 18.4.

In Rev. 2.20.21. & 3.1.4. 1 Cor. 3.3. Gal. 3.1.2. & 4.11.16. & 5.4.9. the Scripture ſpeaketh of true Churches and people ſet in the way and order of Chriſt. What is this to your Aſſemblies and people ſtanding in the apoſtaſy of Antichriſt?

But you will ſay, theſe Scriptures ſhew in theſe Churches ſome corrupt men, opinions, and actions. What then? 1. This was not the eſtate of thoſe Churches, but the perſonall aberratiōs of ſome therein. 2. Though true Churches planted in the order of Chriſt, be ſubiect to corruption: yet this doth not iuſtifie anie falſe Churches in Antichriſtian conſtitution. Though Iudah being the true Church of God had her enormities, yet Iſrael in apoſtaſy was no wife but an harlot. Hoſ. 2.2. & 4.15. vvith 2 Chrō. 15.17. If you mynd not this difference, you may plead for Rome at this day and all the falſe Churches in the world, as you do for your owne. 3. Although bad men vnderunder a ſhow of holines creep into the Church, till afterward in tyme they be deſcryed; yea although many hypocrites both enter and continew in the true Church: yet this nothing approveth the confuſion of ſuch Aſſemblies as are cages of every vncleane and hatefull bird even of knowen wicked perſons, Atheiſts, Perſecuters,Rev. 18.2.Rev 18:2 Whoremō gers, Drunkards, Vſurers, Idolaters &c. 4. When anie ſuch are eſpyed in the true Church, there is Chriſts power to caſt them out, if they repent not. Mat. 18.17. 1 Cor. 5.4.5.11.12.13. But ſuch being cōmon and notorious in your and the like Churches, yea and ſtill remaining vnrepentant, yet you have not the power of Chriſt to remove them: but all the eccleſiaſticall power and iuriſdiction among you is in the Prelates and their Officers, which is meerlie Antichriſtian. 5. Even in true Churches, when ſuch perſons and corruptions are not redreſſed or removed, they do in tyme leaven the whole lumpe, and Chriſt in iuſtice removeth his Candelſtick, p. 196and taketh his kingdome away from among them. See it in ſuch Churches as are ſpoken of in theſe Scriptures here noted by your ſelf. Mat. 21.42, 43. Rev. 2.5.16.22.23. 1 Cor. 5.6. Gal. 5.9. And if iudgement begin at the houſe of Chriſt, what ſhal be the end of the Synagogues of Antichriſt?

Theſe things I thought brieflie to note, partlie to ſhew that theſe Scriptures approve not your eſtate, partlie that the Reader may alway mynd to put difference between true Churches, and yours with all other falſe ones whatſoever. And let it be noted withall, how you ſeek out the verie Scribes and Phariſees with the corrupteſt tymes and people, by them to colour your vngodlie eſtate, if poſſiblie you could. Whereas the true feare of God would teach you to make choiſe of the Prophets and Apoſtles with the pureſt tymes and people, for examples, to walk in their ſteps.) But for the further handling of theſe things I refer you to other treatiſes, where they are more fullie ſpoken of.The anſwer to Mr A.H. &c. Now I will annexe (for more clearing of this queſtion) a brief deſcription of a true viſible Church, which hath power frō Chriſt to chuſe to it ſelf ſuch Officers as he hath ordeined in his word. Thus therefore I deſcribe it.

A true viſible Church of Chriſt, is * a company of faithfull people, † by the word of God called out & ſeparated from the world & the falſe wayes thereof, ′ gathered and ioyned together in fellowſhip of the Goſpell, “ by a voluntary profeſſion of the faith & obedience of Chriſt. * Mat. 18.17.20. Epheſ 1.1. Act. 1.15. Ezech. 36.38. † Ioh. 15.19. & 17.14.16. Lev. 20.26. Act. 2.39.40. & 19.9. Rom. 1.7. 2 Cor. 6.17. Rev. 18.4. “ Mat. 18.20. Phil. 1.5. Act. 1.15. & 2.41.47. & 17.4. Eſa. 60.4. “ Eſa. 44.5. 2 Cor. 9.13. Act. 2.41. Pſal. 110.3. Rom. 1.8. & 16.19.

This I take to be a true deſcription. If it be not, ſhew the errour by the Scriptures. If it be, compare herewith your Cathedrall and Pariſh Aſſemblies, and, if you can, prove them or anie of them (even the beſt among you) to be ſuch. And hitherto of the firſt of the particulars before mentioned.

2For the ſecond, it is needfull that you both name thoſe many famous cō gregations you ſpeak of, and that you ſhew how they were rightlie gathered and ioined together according to Gods ordinance. Otherwiſe who can know whereof you ſpeak, or what to think in particular cōcerning them?

If [by Congregations where the Goſpell was not vnknowen before the Queens cōmādement came to vrge them] you meane the perſecuted Churches that were in Q. Maryes tyme: this helpeth not your cauſe, but maketh againſt it directlie. For they were then ſeparated from the reſt of the Land; and voluntarily ſubmitted to the Goſpell of Chriſt: and enioyed th… true and lawfull offices of Paſtors, Elders, Deacons: neyther ſtood in ſubiection to the Antichriſtian Prelacy and other Clergy of the Land, but renounced and forſook it. None of all your Aſſemblies were ever ſuch, eyther at the beginning of her Maieſtyes raigne, or at anie tyme ſynce.

If you obiect, that even they of that perſecuted Church (when this Queen came) ſubmitted to the Prelacy and Clergy aforſaid: I deny it not. p. 197But note withall, that ſuch as did ſo, made thereby defection from the way of Chriſt, wherein they were before. And the reſt that would not ſo do, were eyther caſt into priſon, and ſo deteined vntounto death, or otherwiſe evill intreated: as both your priſons and ſo me yet alive are able to teſtify. Synce which tyme, your perſecution hath increaſed far more, even vntounto exile and death, vponupon ſuch as refuſe to joine to your Hierarchy, worſhip, and other abominations of Antichriſt, by your Law then eſtabliſhed.

How abſurd then is it to pretend for your eſtate, the reformations of Hezekiah, Manaſſeh, Ioſiah &c. Of which the Scripture teſtifyes, that God gave the people one heart to do the cōmaundement of the King, and of the Rulers, according to the word of the Lord. 2 Chron. 30.12. And who knoweth not, that theſe Kings did both aboliſh the falſe worſhip and Miniſtery which before tyme had ben in their Kingdomes, and did in ſtead thereof eſtabliſh that true worſhip and Miniſtery which God by Moſes had ordeined. 2 King. 18.6. & 23.25. 2 Chron. 29. & 30. & 31. & 33. & 34. & 35. chap. Beſides that thoſe Churches conſiſted of people ſeparated frō the world, and willinglie ſubmitting thēſelves to the Lord: as theſe Scriptures alſo do teſtify, 2 Chron. 15.8.9.12. & 30.11.12. 2 King. 23.2.3. with Exod. 19.5-8. Lev. 20.24.26. Howſoever then, being ſet in the way of God and walking therein, they had their blemiſhes and imperfections, yea and evill men ariſing among them (as the beſt Churches on earth are alway ſubiect to have): yet this is nothing eyther for ſuch cōmaundemēt of Rulers, as is not according to the word of God, or for your Churches eſtate, which from the beginning to this day neyther are ſeparated from the world, nor have the true Miniſtery and worſhip appointed by Chriſt, but ſtand both in confuſion with the moſt prophane, and in ſubiection to the Hierarchy and worſhip of the man of ſinne. Otherwiſe the ten Tribes of Iſraell might juſtify their defection, and the Romiſh Babylon her filthyeſt apoſtaſy by ſuch pretences.

For your people at the beginning of her Majeſtyes raigne, you alledge, 1. that they did not all generally want all knowledge and all faith. I do willinglie graunt it. But doth it therefore follow that your Aſſemblyes are true Churches, rightlie gathered according to the ordinance of Chriſt? Then by the ſame reaſon conclude the publik Aſſemblyes heretofore in Q. Maryes tyme, and now in Rome and the reſt of Italy, Spayne, Fraunce &c. to be true Churches right lie gathered: becauſe their people neyther did nor do all generally want all knowledge and all faith.

But your people had then had in many places the word taught, books ſcattered, much conference, daily conſultations and diſputations, and the blood of Martyrs preaching vntounto them aloud & lately before. All theſe being grā ted, yet they are ſo far from excuſing your ſinnes, as even therefore it is far the greater: inaſmuch as by this it ſhould ſeem you knew better, and yet neyther did it then, neyther do it yet vntounto this day. And ſo you are in the ſinne and vnderunder the judgement ſpoken of in theſe Scriptures, Iam. 4.17. Tit. 1.16. Ier. 6.16. Luk. 12.47.48. Let him that readeth mynd it well. And p. 196duplicate page p. 197duplicate page p. 198this too, that you ſpeak not of the whole Land and all your Churches, but onelyonly of ſome places and perſons, ſuch as had the books, conference, and diſputations you ſpeak of:Pag. 3.6. Whereas your * former defence ſpeaketh of your Churches, as they are eſtabliſhed by Law, and therefore of them all.

2. Next you alledge, that there was more then half a yeare (viz. “ from November to Midſomer) for the people to heare, learne, and conſider before the commandement came: ſo that it was not ſuddayne, neyther can be counted compulſion &c. But know you not Mr Iacob, 1. That it neyther was, neyther could poſſibly be as you pretend, that the people in that tyme throughout the Land ſhould be taught: Yet at Midſomer were all conſtrayned to receiv it, whether they did ſo beleev or not. 2. That this tyme was appointed, not for the peoples inſtruction, that ſo vponupon konwledge they might do what was enjoyned, but that in this tyme the Statute being knowen throughout the Land, they ſhould then do as was appointed howſoever they were perſwaded thereof in themſelves. This I prove, 1. Becauſe the Prieſts and people that would, were ſuffred by Law all that halfe yeares ſpace to ſay and heare Maſſe as before. Which I trow you will not ſay was to heare, learne, and conſider, as here you alledge. 2. Becauſe when Midſomer came, they were bound to receyv (and ſo did) what was publiſhed, for their faith, worſhip, Miniſtery &c. howſoever eyther themſelves were perſwaded, or the things impoſed did agree or diſagree with the word of God.

But now I would know what you will ſay to this, that all your former pleading was from your Articles agreed vponupon in the yeare 1562. and here you make your plea from your peoples eſtate in the yeare 1558. (for then began her Majeſtyes reygne: which I pray God long to continew and proſper.) If your profeſſiō of thoſe Articles made you now true Churches, which before you were not: how were your Aſſemblyes then rightly gathered ſo many yeares before, as here you pretend? Or if you were not true conſtituted Churches at that Midſomer you ſpeak of here, how could thoſe Articles effect it, being afterward agreed vponupon, not by your Churches,See the title of thoſe Art. but by your Prieſts, neyther by all of them, but onelie by your Archbiſhops and Biſhops and ſuch other of your Clergy as were with them in the Convocation holden at London in the yeare 1562. If to this laſt point you ſay, this agreement of your Prelates and Clergy was then publiſhed through the Land, and ſo you count it as the agreement and ordinance of your whole Church: then muſt you graunt withall, that the Antichriſtian Canons, Iniunctions, Articles, Advertiſſements &c. agreed vpō at the ſame and like Convocations, and likewiſe publiſhed, are alſo the agreement and ordinance of your whole Church. And ſo your Churches eſtate and profeſſion is to be conſidered, not by thoſe Articles onelie of 1562. but by the reſt likewiſe agreed vpō among you from tyme to tyme. Thus all your defence is found to be full of deceit and contradictiō every where. But it may be in your next wee ſhall know your mynd better.

In the meane tyme we anſwer what you deſier to know of vsus: viz, That p. 199we condemne not reformation commaunded & compelled by the Magiſtrate, but do vnfeynedlie deſier that God would put into the heart of her Maieſty and all other Princes, within their Dominions, to cōmaund and cō pell a reformation according to the word of the Lord: As it is expreſſely noted, that Hezekiah and other the good Kings of Iudah did. 2 Chron. 30.12. 2 King. 18.6. & 23.25. 2 Chron. 17.3.4.5.6.

We acknowledge with thanks to God and her Maieſty, that out of her Highnes Dominions there be alreadie aboliſhed manie of the abominations of the Romiſh Babylon. And we pray God, that foraſmuch as many of them be yet remayning in your worſhip, Hierarchy, confuſion, Canons, Licences, Diſpenſations, Rev. 14.9.10.11. Exod. 20.4.5.Rev 14:9Rev 14:10Rev 14:11Exod 20:4Exod 20:5Excommunications &c. with ♣ which no man may have ſpirituall communion vnderunder payne of eternall wrath: that if it be the will of God, her Highnes may be his inſtrument to ſuppreſſe and aboliſh theſe alſo, and to eſtabliſh the whole truth of God, according to his word. And further, that ſhe may take to her owne Civill vſes the Lordſhips and poſſeſſions of the Prelates and other Clergy, as God hath foretold and appointed ſhould be done with them (Rev. 17.16. & 19.17.18.) And as King Henry the eight (her Maieſtyes Father of famous memory) did with the Abbats, Monks, Fryers, Nunnes, and with their poſſeſſions and revennewes.

Which happy worke, by what Princes ſoever it be done (as certaynly will come to paſſe, for the Lord of hoſtes hath ſpoken it) it will greatlie redound to the glory of God, the honour of themſelves, the free paſſage of the Goſpell, the peace of the Church, and benefit of the whole Cōmon wealth. The Lord therefore haſten and accōpliſh it. Yea true and ſtrong is the Lord, who hath ſpoken, and will performe it. Rev. 17. & 18. & 19. chap.

This is our mynd (which you deſier to know) concerning reformatiō commaunded and compelled by the Magiſtrate. Where note withall, that it is the work of God onelie, to adde to his Church ſuch as he will ſave. And therefore that it is not in the power of Princes or anie Man whatſoever, to perſwade the conſcience and make members of the Church: but that this muſt be left to God alone, who onelie can do it. Act. 2.47. & 11.21. Gen. 9.27. 1 Cor. 12.13. & 14.24.25. Zach. 8.23. Ier. 32.38.39.40. Princes may and ought within their Dominions to aboliſh all falſe worſhip and all falſe Miniſteryes whatſoever; and to eſtabliſh the true worſhip and Miniſtery appointed by God in his word, commaunding and compelling their ſubiects to come vntounto and practiſe no other but this. Yet muſt they leave it vntounto God to perſwade the conſcience, and to adde to his Church from tyme to tyme ſuch as ſhalbe ſaved. But with you in theſe things, you know it is quite contrary.

Thus then neyther the examples of the aforeſayd Kings of Iudah are in your caſe fitlie alledged: neyther is it of anie waight, if all your people and Aſſemblies in the Land willinglie, openly, & adviſedly, ſubmitted to whatſoever was proclaymed at the beginning of her Highnes reygne: Vnles you could prove that Religion, worſhip, Miniſtery &c. then proclaymed and p. 200ſtill vſed, to be by God preſcribed in his word. Which ſtill you take for graunted, when it is the very thing which we denie and you ſhould proue, if poſſibly you could.

And what if here I ſhould put you in mynd, how you might more fitlie alledge for your caſe, the keeping of the Statutes of Omry, and the like, Micah, 6.16. But I will leave this for your next Reply. And then alſo tell vsus, what truth it is you ſpeak of, that was proclaymed at the beginning of her Maieſtyes raygne, whereof the people had ſuch aduizement & notice as you pretend, from November 17. to Midſomer following. For the book of Articles * heretofore ſo much preſſed by your ſelf,Pag. 3. &c was ſo far frō being proclaymed then, as it was not agreed vponupon till the yeare, 1562. Which was at leaſt fower or five yeares after the tyme you ſpeak of here.

Now to proceed, you tell vsus that no open profeſſed Papiſts, Atheiſts, nor other Hereticks were then receyved into your communion &c. But how can we beleev you, when D. Whitgift your Archprelate of Canterbury (a man of as great reckning and of more experience in your Church then Mr Iacob) tels vsus the cleane contrary, yea and prints it too (even then when he writeth in defence of your preſent eſtate) viz, ††Whitg. book, Pag. 176. & 178 639. 643.that now the Church is full of Papiſts, Atheiſts, Drunkerds, whoremongers &c. Even the Prelates themſelves (I perceive) do in ſome things deale more ſyncerelie then you Mr Iacob, and are nothing ſo ſhameles. Yet I know that ſome others of your coat which ſeek reformation, deale herein as plainelie as the Prelates, and far more faithfullie then you. For example, they confeſſe and publiſh that you have‡‡Sermon on Rom. 12.Rom 12 ſwarmes of Atheiſts, Idolaters, Papiſts, erroneous and hereticall Sectaryes, the Family of love, and ſuch like. Another ſpareth not to avouch more particularly,♣♣State of the Church of England between Diot. & Tert. &c. that ſome Doctors of the Arches be the ſame men they were in Queen Maryes tyme. Others (alſo ſpeaking of your Eccleſiaſticall courts) write thus,‡‡Ad…. to the Parliament. God deliver all Chriſtians out of this Antichriſtian tyranny where the Iudges, Advocates, and Proctors for the moſt part are Papiſts &c. Thus your owne men of all ſorts beare witnes againſt you.

But to let their teſtimony alone, who knoweth not that the whole Land being polluted with moſt Popiſh and wicked Idolatry in Q. Maryes dayes, they were all ſtraightway after (without repentance or the word preached going before) received into the body of your Church, and conſtreyned to become members thereof? Who with their ſeed vntounto this day do ſo remayne, and are commonlie called, the Church of England.

Neither will that clauſe of [open profeſſed] be anie ſtarting whole for you, as it may be you dreame. All know well ynough, it is no matter how open and profeſſed they be, ſo as they will be conformable to come to Church once a monethmonth, and heare your Divine ſervice book. Did Mr W. Smith (your great acquaintance) never tell you,Mr Wroth, Iustice. how ‡ one of the Cō miſſioners themſelves (when he was called before them) ſaid vntounto him, Come to Church, and be a Divell, if thou wilt?

That which you ſay of ignorant men received in a generall reformation, p. 201if you meane of ſome having far leſſe knowledge then others, being alſo vnable eyther well to expreſſe their owne mynd, or to defend the truth againſt an adverſary: I deny it not. Otherwiſe know, that all who are received members of the Church, being of yeares, are to be ſuch as in their meaſure (leſſe or more) have learned Chriſt, and do willinglie ſubmit to his Goſpell, having heard and knowen the grace of God therein. Epheſ. 4.7.20.21. 2 Cor. 9.13. Col. 1.5.6. Act. 2.41. & 17.3.4. Eſa. 44.5. Zac. 8.20.21.22.23.

And ſo queſtionles it was in the time of Hezechiah &c. For which, ſee theſe Scriptures, 2 Chron. 29.31. & 30.2.3.4.11.12.13. 2 King. 23.2.3. 2 Chron. 15.15. Beſides that the Iewes did long before Hezekiahs time vpō knowledge enter covenant with the Lord, to have him to be their God and they to be his people. Exod. 19.7.8. Deut. 29.10.11.12.13.

For the notorious, diſſolute, and wicked, you plead that ſome were reclaymed, all vndertook another profeſsiō and a new appearāce of Chriſtianity &c. Which how falſe it is, appeareth not onelyonly in the receyving and retayning in your Church the moſt profane of the Land and their ſeed, yea and conſtreyning all whoſoever in every Pariſh to be members thereof: but is confeſſed alſo by your ſelves on all hands, as I ſhewed * before,Pag. 16. 2… ▪ by teſtimony both of the Prelates and of the Reformiſts: who do both of them teſtefy that your Church ſwarmeth with Whoremongers, Drunkards, Lyars, Extortioners, Blaſphemers, Sorcerers, and other wicked perſons. Now ſay your ſelf, if theſe be not notorious, diſſolute, and wicked? Or if your Church abound not with ſuch, evē to this day? How were they then reclaymed &c. as you pretend? And how was your Church rightly gathered according to Gods ordinance? Are theſe fit ſtones for the Lords Temple, fit ſervants for the Lords houſe, fit members for the body of Chriſt? Whatſoever you think, ſuch eſtate is before God intolerable, and by his word vnwarrantable.. Learne it by theſe and the like Scriptures, 1. Pet. 2.5.9. 1. Timoth. 3.15. Zach. 14.21. Eſa. 35.8.9. 1. Cor. 12.27.

But you ſay, we have likewiſe received bankrupts, knowen bad men, ignorant, &c. 1. If it were ſo, would our ſinne juſtifie yours? 2. Neither in deed is it ſo, as you charge vsus. Knowen bad men we receive none at all. By bankrupts, if you meane ſuch as are not able to pay their debts, and do therefore think that they are not to be received or retained members of a true Church, you do therein too much bewray your ignorance. The Scripture teacheth that the true feare of God, and want of ability to pay a mans debts, may meet together in the ſame partie. 2. King. 4.1. Levit. 25.35. &c. And who knoweth not, that it is a triall wherewith God ſometymes exerciſeth his deareſt children? Iam. 2.5. with 2 King. 4.1. &c. Not to ſpeak how there gathered to David (who was a type of Chriſt in many things that befell him) all that were in diſtreſſe & debt and troubled in mynd &c. 1. Sam. 22.2. Yet notwithſtanding if any ſhall wilfully runne into debt, not caring what they borrow ſo they may get it,Rom. 13.8. with 2 King 4.7.Rom 13:82 Kgs 4:7 neither making conſcience to paie againe though they be able: ſuch do both break the commaundement of God, which ſayth vntounto all: † Owe nothing to p. 202any man, but to love one another: and are therefore by the Prophet accounted for wicked perſons, The wicked (ſaith he) borroweth and payeth not againe. Pſalm. 37.21. Now any that are knowen to be ſuch, we neither receive nor retaine. Yet you know, yourſelves, it is common among you. And what power hath your Church to redreſſe it, if you would?

Towching ignorant men, you have our mynd † before. And as we are mynded,Pag. 201. ſo do we practiſe: Remembring alway, that which is written of Chriſt our Lord, A bruiſed reed ſhall he not break, and ſmoking flax ſhall he not quench: &c. Eſa. 42.3. Math. 12.20.21.

Where you adde further, that we do ſtill retayne men full of contention and bitter ſtrife, it is alſo vntrue. For although with ſuch men we have ben exerciſed (as the Church on earth is alway ſubject to be, that they which are approved may be knowen): Yet neither is it any other thing then the Primitive Churches even in the tyme of the Apoſtles them ſelves did ſuſteine (as the‡‡i Cor. 3.3.1 Cor 3:3 Scripture here alledged by your ſelf, and**Act. 20.30. 1. Cor. 11.16.19. Gal. 5.12.15Acts 20:301 Cor 11:161 Cor 11:19Gal 5:12Gal 5:15 other the like do teſtifie): and when ſuch perſōs and dealing once be manifeſt, we caſt them out from among vsus and avoide them, according to the rules preſcribed in the word of God. Gal. 5.12. 1. Cor. 5.11.12. and 11.16. Rom. 16.17, Mat. 17.18. And yet, even then when they are hardned and pleaſe them ſelves in ſtrife and contentiō, they may both be received and reteined members of your Church, any of them that will come to your falſe worſhip, and ſo returne to their former vomit againe.

That which followeth in the laſt place, for the ſhutting vp of this matter (when you ſay, That which diſanulleth not a Church gathered &c.) is directly againſt your ſelf. For ſeing confuſion and commixture with the world and wicked thereof in one body of a Church, will diſanul and make voide a Church alredy gathered and ſetled: how much more ſhall it there, where a Church is but a gathering and beginning? (If we could imagine that to be a gathering of a Church, which leaveth it ſtill in confuſion with the world and bondage to Antichriſt.) Now that ſuch mixtures with the profane will diſanull Churches before gathered aright, you may ſee by that which is written, Gen. 6.2. &c. Ezech. 16. chap. and 22.26. and 44.6.7.8. And in the Churches that were at Rome, Epheſus, Corinth, &c. Rev. 13.16. and 17.1. and 18.1. and 18.2. being compared with Rom. 1.7.2. Cor. 6.14. &c. Thus all your aunſwer is in a word taken away.

But further, mynd here a contradiction with your ſelf. For now you graunt (which before you denyed) that your Church is commingled of all ſorts of people, having mixtures of profane and diſſolute, with the reſt that are better among you.

The Scriptures you quote, I have ſhewed ♣ before how you do pervert them. Pag. 195. And thus much of the ſecond particular.

3The third was, that you remaine in bondage to Antichriſtian Offices. Courts, &c. This you graunt to be your generall ſinne. Which is directlie to give the cauſe. For they which ſtand in bondage to Antichriſt cannot poſſibly in ſuch eſtate have alſo the power and libertie of Chriſt, eyther p. 203for choiſe of Officers, or for any other action to be performed by the power and in the Name of the Lord Ieſus.

Thus having given the cauſe, yet fearing belike to yeeld too much to the truth, you labour ſtill to leſſen and excuſe your ſinne, as much as you can. Now you alledge, that it is not of the moſt heynous nor extremeſt diſobedience. And thus may all ſinne be pleaded for, except the ſinne againſt the holy Ghoſt. Thus might Nadab and Abihu juſtifie their ſtraunge fier: Corach, Dathan, and Abiram, their vſurping of the Prieſts office: the Ten Tribes their deſertion: the Papiſts all their abominations: Hymena…s and Philetus all their impieties, and finally all Hereticks and lewd perſons their hereſies and bad dealing.

Next you tell vsus, of ſinnes that are againſt the foundation or not againſt it: of the Iewiſh Church, of the auncyent declining Biſhops, Cyprian &c. of King Edwards dayes, M. Cranmer, Ridley, Hooper, &c. of your Churches and Miniſters generally, that you are not all convicted &c. Theſe pretences are all aunſwered before in the former Treatiſe. Mynd now withall, that the ſinne of the later Biſhops ſynce the exaltation of Antichriſt, is far more grievous then was the ſinne of the other that were before that tyme: hath becauſe the Myſtery of that iniquitie is now more more fully diſcloſed which then was more hid and ſecret: and becauſe theſe later have ſeen before their eyes the miſchief that followed vpō that declining, which the other of former time neither did nor could.

Adde herevnto the great vnlikenes (when they are compared together) in their Offices, Entrance, Titles, prerogatives, Courts, Canons, Iuriſdiction, and other procedings. And tell me why you left out Cyprian in your printed Book, whō you named in your written copy? (for which cauſe I have now alſo noted his Name with the reſt.) Is it ſo, that you ſee alreadie how he is againſt you? Aſſure your ſelf Mr Iacob, that ſo will the reſt alſo be found, leſſe or more (I alway except the Prelates of Rome) whenſoever due triall and compariſon is made. Which I neither need nor purpoſe here to ſtand vponupon, ſeing theſe things are purpoſely hādled and alreadie publiſhed by others well knowen and approved alſo of your ſelves, as by Mr Beza againſt Saravia. T. C. his 1. and 2. Reply. The Demonſtration. &c. I omit alſo that yours are become perſecuters, whereas the other were perſecuted. Therefore your ſinne is far the greater.

And many other things I might alledge: but it ſufficeth vsus (and hereon we reſt) that your Prelacy, and other Miniſtery, Worſhip &c. are none of Chriſts ordinances appointed in his word. If you be other wiſe mynded, prove it by the book of God.Ioh. 17.17. Pſa. 119.105 Eſa. 8.20.John 17:17Ps 119:105Isa 8:20 You know that ” it alone is the word of truth, and ought to be vntounto all the lāterne of our feet. Hence forth therefore ſpeak according to that word: and ſeek not by the leſſe ſinnes of others, to hide and nouriſh your owne far greater. Otherwiſe remember and applie to your ſelves the judgement that is written, Exod. 20.5. Pſ. 129.21. Gal. 1.8.9. Rev. 14.9.10.11. and 22:18.19.

And note theſe things withall, 1. Firſt, That here you ſpeak of ſuch p. 204as live and dy in your errors ignorantly. Now what defence is this for your ſelf (Mr Iacob) and for all the reſt of your Church throughout the Land who do not onelie know theſe errors, but have alſo taught, profeſſed, and witneſſed againſt them heretofore? 2. Secondly, that here you are glad to vſe the ſame pretences (as ruſty weapons) againſt the truth, which were ſometymes vſed by D. Whitgift and the Papiſts for defence of the Prelacy, and found to be of no force at all. 3. Thirdly, that whatſoever you ſpeak here in excuſe of your conviction, may be likewiſe alledged by the Papiſts and other Hereticks for defence of them ſelves, viz, that they are not all cōvicted & ſinne againſt their cōſcience: alſo, that ſuch and ſuch points are not acknowledged even of ignorance in a thouſand to one among them; that many of them (and not of the ſimpleſt) hold their way to be the onelyonly true and right courſe: and almoſt all of them to be indifferent and lawfull: very few and ſcarce any that ſee it to be meerly wicked and intolerable. Yet theſe are the reaſons and armour of proof you bring for defence of your Hierarchie and Church-eſtate.

And what ſhould I ſpeak of your manifold contradictions, fearfull clauſes, notable vntruthes &c. Your cōtradictions, as when you graunt here,Pag. 28. 61 This is your generall ſinne, and yet ſaid before, you held theſe to be Chriſts ordinances. Your pretended excuſe, that you ſpeak ſome things in your owne perſon, ſome things in your Churches, I have ſhewed before to be vayne and againſt your ſelf. Pag. 55. 56. 72. Another contradiction, in that you profeſſe the auncyent Biſhops and yours have declyned (viz, from the truth and way of Chriſt, or els tell vsus in your next, from what?) and yet plead, as if your Church generally were eyther ignorant hereof, or held your preſent governement to be the onelyonly true and right kind, or at leaſt to be indifferent and lawfull &c. For how (I pray you) can theſe ſtand together? If you ſay, your ſelf know thus much, but as for any others that know it, they are very few and ſearſe to be found (theſe, I take it, are your owne words) this is but a vaine conceit of your ſelf, and ſuch as is ſtill accompanied with folly. There are no doubt a thouſand to you, who are but one, that know theſe things aſwell or better a great deale. Yea I know manie of your Church my ſelf, who have taught and writtē far more ſoundly and godly of them, then ever Mr Iacob did. And if theſe had all held their peace, yet your Book of common prayer (as groſſe as it is) knoweth thus much,‡‡In the Commination. that in the Primitive Church there was a godly diſclpline, which (it ſaith) is much to be wiſhed that it might be reſtored agayne. The particular there mentioned, I ſtand not vponupon. I note it onelie for this, that you may ſee even by that book, received among you generally, how your Church neither is ſo ignorant of the eſtate of things in former tymes, as you pretend, neither thinketh your preſent government to be the onelie true kind &c. Not to ſpeak of your ſo manie and ſo publik ſuites to the Parliament, to have it removed as being vnlawfull and Antichriſtian: Neither of the many books printed with Priviledge, avowching as much. A third contradiction (till you cleare it better) note in p. 205this alſo, that you acknowledge they in K. Edw. tyme were godly learned, and yet inſinuate withall, as if they were litle better then tyme-ſervers.

Your fearfull clauſes, importing partlie a yeelding of the cauſe, partly a ſeeking of ſtarting holes and excuſes for your ſinne: As when you ſay, 1. Let this be our generall ſinne, yet there is diverſity of ſinnes. 2. All ſinnes by their nature are mortall, yet do they not all alike aboliſh vsus from Chriſt. 3. This ſinne of outward Church-orders is not of the most heynous, nor extremeſt diſobedience. 4. There are ſinnes, wherein men living and dying ignorantly without particular repentance, may be ſaved. 5. No greater is now in our Biſhops preſently, eſpecially towching our Churches, and Miniſters too, generally. 6. If you ſay, we are all convicted now, it is falſe. 7. The godly learned Proteſtants in King Edwards tyme, were not vtterly ignorant of this poynt of reformation. 8. The Iewes were not generally plainely convicted. 9. Our Aſſemblyes are not all godles and profane: Our ſinne deſtroyeth not faith & Chriſtianity in our whole Aſſemblyes, &c. As if your ſelf thought it did in ſome.

Your notable vntruths alſo are many, as when you alledge Mr Beza vpō Act. 15.20. as if he ſpake of ſuch Iewes as did perſonally hate and perſecute Chriſt: where as he ſpeaketh expreſſely of ſuch as beleved in Chriſt, but were withall zealous of the Law, being not yet perſwaded of the aboliſhment thereof. Agayne, when from him you would teach, that they which did perſonally hate and perſecute Chriſt, yet were the true Church vntill the Temple and City were deſtroyed, yea and ſaved though they repented it not. Which is contrarie to theſe and many the like Scriptures, Act. 2.40.47. and 13.45.46.50.51. and 19.8.9. 1. Theſ. 2.14.15.16. Rev. 2.9. Another vntruth is, that you ſay the ſinne of your Biſhops now is no greater then of the auncyent declining Biſhops and them in K. Edwards tyme: Whereas many wayes it is incomparably greater, as I have ſhewed before. Pag. 40. 41. 129. 133. 148. 162. 175. 177. 183. 203. Another is, in that you ſay your ſinne is no way fundamental. The contrarie whereof ſee proved before, Pag. 22. 73. 114. 147. And another, when you charge me, as if I held all among you to be godles and profane: when I have alway thought and profeſſed otherwiſe. Yea even here I ſaid, your Church cōſiſteth of all ſorts, that is, both good and bad, better and worſe, ſome making cōſciēce of their wayes according to the knowledg they have, ſome not, &c. For which alſo ſee further before, Pag. 7. 20. 21. 41. 78. 103. 168. 178. Finallie, it is …either vntrue alſo when you ſay, this poynt towching the Hierarchy is not acknowledged in your Church even of ignorance in a thouſād to one: Or if it be true, it is a ſhame for you and all the Miniſters of your Church, who have not in this cleare light of the Goſpell, by the ſpace of fourty yeares together, made knowen vntounto the people ſo great a point of Antichriſtianity, as the Hierarchy is: Which is the verie ſinewes and ſtrength of the Popes Religion: As (I feare) wofull experience will teach you further, if yet you do not ſee and feel it ynough. But of this alſo I have ſpoken before, in the Preface: Section 6.

p. 206Lo here, the ornaments of your Reply and Defence of your eſtate. The very naming whereof, is ſufficient to ſhew your folly, and your Churches miſcrie. Yet leaſt you ſhould pleaſe your ſelf in this courſe, as alſo for the ſatiſfying of ſuch as deſier further handling of theſe things, I have ſpoken of them before more particularly. As namely, of ſinnes fundamentall, Pag. 22. 32. 44. 46. 51. 73. 114. 147. Of the Scriptures which here you alledge in the margent, Pag. 51. and in the Preface, Section 3. Of the Iewes Church, Pag. 84. 161. 195. 197. & in the Preface, Section 5. Of the auncient Biſhops, Pag. 129. 162. 183. 203. Of them in K. Edwards dayes Mr Cranmer &c. Pag. 8. 40. 41. 48. 49. 67. 77. 162. 182. Of your Churches eſtate and conviction, Pag. 3. 7. 16. 27. 33. 42. 43. 53. 60. 61. 63, 73. 78. 82. 94. 101. 103. 108. 120. 130. 131. 132. 135. 147. 155. 157. 171. 180. 188, 194. 196. 200. &c.

Your caution againſt raſh & haſty iudging of any, is very good and needfull. We do together with you exhort all to beware of ſuch dealing: and to take heed they † iudge righteous iudgement, as Chriſt hath commaūded. And therefore that they be careful to ſearch out and help forward the iudgment, Ioh. 7.24.John 7:24given by the Apoſtles and Prophets, on the Whore of Babylon and all her Daughters. Rev. 18.20.21. and 17.1.5.6.7. with Ier. 51.61-64.

Neither let any think that this is to curſe where God bleſſeth, or to lay an hindrance and ſtumbling block before any: but that it is in deed to reward Babylon as ſhe hath rewarded vsus, and to beare witnes to the truth and ſyncerity of the Goſpell,Rev. 18.6. & 14.6.7.8 2 Theſ. 2.8.Rev 18:6Rev 14:6Rev 14:7Rev 14:82 Thess 2:8 that it may the more be brought to light, and received of the elect, to eternall life. To ſuch, we know, Chriſt with all his ordinances is precious: but in deed to them which be diſobedient, he is a ſtone to ſtumble at and a rock of offence, even to them which ſtumble at the word, being diſobedient, to the which thing they were alſo ordeined. 1 Pet. 2.7.8. Take heed therefore you bleſſe not your ſelves in your diſobedience of anie truth of Chriſt, promiſing your ſelves peace, though you walk according to the ſtubbernes of your owne hearts: ſo adding drunkenes vntounto thirſt. For ſuch bleſſing God hath threatned to curſe, Deut. 29.19.20. Zach. 11.5.6. Malach. 2.2.

For our ſelves, we judge not any man. It is the word of God that iudgeth, which ſhall alſo judge in the laſt day. Ioh. 12.48. By it therefore let every man trie and examine his wayes (of what place or calling ſoever he be) firſt for the worſhip he performeth vntounto God, and then for all the other actions of his life: that he may ſo pleaſe God in this life, as he may in the next be partaker of the glorie that ſhalbe revealed. Neither let anie be daunted with the reproches and afflictiōs which accompanie the truth and witneſſes thereof. Even Chriſt himſelf the Prince of our ſalvation was conſecrate through afflictions: and he hath promiſed, if we ſuffer with him, we ſhall alſo raigne with him. Heb. 2.10. Rev. 2.10. Rom. 8.17.18. 2 Tim. 2.12. Therefore alſo we ſay with the Prophet (as you do here) and wiſh it might ſound in the eares of all men as a trumpet, Bleſſed is he that iudgeth wiſely of the poore, even of him that is deſpiſed &c. Pſal. 41.1.

p. 207To conclude, your one word (whereof you told vsus a litle before) is now become two words: and all litle ynough. For if your reaſon be good, all me your ſelf, if a man might not (after your example) in two words conclude the Papiſts alſo to be true Chriſtians, thus:

That faith and religion taught in the Creeds commonly attributed to the Apoſtles, the Nicene Councell, Athanaſius, &c. maketh the people that beleev and obey the ſame, true Chriſtians: ſuch as ſo living and dying may be ſaved.

But the Popiſh Church doth ſo hold that faith:

Therefore they are true Chriſtians, &c.

If your reaſon be good, what will you ſay to this? If you ſay, they profeſſe in word, but do in deed both in their Church-conſtitutiō and practiſe denie it: ſuch alſo is your caſe. Beſides that the queſtion is not, whether anie among you may be ſaved by the truth you hold: (For we doubt not but evē in the Popiſh Church God ſaveth his, by the truth there held.) But the queſtion is, whether you (or they) can in your eſtate and Church-conſtitution be deemed by the word of God true Chriſtians or true Churches: ſuch as none may ſeparate from your worſhip and Miniſtery eſtabliſhed among you.

And here I can tell you, that even ſome of your ſelves have acknowledged and openly avowched your Churches caſe to be ſuch,Demonſtration, in the Preface. as “ a man may be any thing among you but a ſound Chriſtian. Yet I ſuppoſe you will not ſay they were deſperate for ſaying ſo. And if I be not deceived, your ſelf alſo have ben like mynded with them heretofore. Sure I am, you had need cleare theſe things very well: and in anie caſe take heed you become not deſperate therein. Neither two nor three of your words will help the matter. It is the word of God that muſt decide it between vsus.

Whatſoever you have replyed in the former Treatiſe, I have there anſwered. And now I leave it to all indifferent and Chriſtian mynds to acknowledge your publik Church aſſeblyes for ſuch Chriſtians, as in that eſtate they are found to be by the word of God. If by it either you or anie other can prove them to be true ones, I have done. If not, then I wiſh you and all others to yeeld to the truth, and no longer to ſtrive againſt it. Hitherto of the firſt Exception, againſt your Compariſon.

Chap. 3. The Second Reaſon or Exception againſt Mr Iacobs Compariſon.

Fran. Iohnſon. THe Prieſt doth not celebrate or pronounce any marriage without the married firſt giuegive their conſent.

But the Prelate make miniſters without and before the peoples cōſent.

Therefore the Compariſon holdeth not.

p. 208H. Iacob his Reply. FIrſt it is very vaine to make this any matter, viz, the peoples conſenting either before or after the Prelats ordeyning. For whether before or after, it is in nature and value all one: They in their ignorance having reſpect only to the Prelats act. And if it were ſo, that the Prieſt ſhould ſometymes marie a couple, the Maide being meerly enforced, and denying conſent, yet not ſtriving nor reſiſting: and a while after ſhall willingly agree & like: Out of queſtion there is now true wedlock betweene them. Even ſo the caſe is betwixt the Church and the Miniſter. 2. But what will you except here againſt thoſe Paſtors amongſt vsus, that were firſt choſen by the people, they firſt profeſſing their conſent, and are after inſtituted, and inducted by the Prelat. Many are thus called amongſt vsus: and the moſt have the peoples conſent even together at their firſt inducting: at leaſt wiſe they have ſoone after, by the peoples ſubmitting & mainteyning them even preſently. 3. Laſtly in a word, where you ſay the Prelats make Ministers without & before the peoples conſent: Beza in Act. 14.23. Fenner against Bridges Pag. 148.Acts 14:23We" affirme, that they make not the Paſtor at all indeed and in truth; but onelyonly ſuppoſedly. It is the Churches conſent that maketh him truly, whether before or after the Biſhop, that ſkilleth not. If any thinke Impoſition of hands to be ſimplie neceſſarie to the being of a Miniſter: that is alſo an error, and can not be proved.

Fr. Io. his Aunſwer. BEcauſe I ſee you need it (Mr Iacob) I will deale very liberallie with you. I graunt, that your peoples conſenting (whether before or after the Prelates ordeining) is in nature and valew all one &c. that is, of no valew or force at all: Whether you reſpect the Law of God, which knoweth no ſuch jugling of people and Prelates: or the Law of your owne Church, which appoynteth no ſuch election by the people at all. And thus too it is a very vayne thing for you to make this any matter, viz, our peoples conſenting eyther before or after the Prelates ordeyning.

Yet remember that your Cōpariſon (which I anſwered) ſpake of people that had made choyſe of a Miniſter before he came for ordination to the Prelate. Therefore it was and is ynough againſt the Compariſon, to ſhew that the Prieſts can not celebrate mariage before the partyes conſent ech to other: Whereas the Prelates make Miniſters both before and without the peoples conſent, yea and without their knowledge commonly. It is vayne then in you to count ſuch exception vayne.

I mynd alſo how deceitfully you paſſe by that clauſe [without the peoples conſent.] Therefore to diſcover your fraud, and to ſee what better anſwer you can give in your next, I will propound the Reaſon alſo thus: The Prieſt doth not celebrate any mariage without the maryed firſt give their conſent.

But the Prelates make Miniſters without the peoples conſent. Therefore the Compariſon holdeth not.

Your caſe [of a Mayde being meerly enforced and denying conſent, yet not ſtriving nor reſiſting] is meerly abſurd and ridiculous. Can it poſſibly p. 209be, that one ſhould both be meerlie enforced, denying conſent, and yet not ſtrive nor reſiſt? As ſoone may you make Fier and Water agree together, as theſe two. For, to be enforced, yea meerlie enforced, muſt needs imply a ſtriving or reſiſting againſt it. Els what needed there, or how ſhould there be ſaid, to be anie forcing?

But you ſay, if afterward ſhe agree, there is true wedlock. True in deed if they both agree. But then it is not by reaſon of anie thing done before (which was ſinfull altogether) but by vertue of the preſent mutuall willing conſent: they having liberty and power to marrie together according to Gods ordinance. But with your people and Aſſemblyes it is far otherwiſe: ſeing you have not liberty or power in your eſtate to call a Miniſter according to the ordinance of Chriſt. Which I have proved both in the firſt Reaſon before, and in the reſt hereafter following.

2. To your demaund about Miniſters firſt choſen by the people afore they are inſtituted by the Prelates: I aunſwer, that if your people had power in your eſtate to chuſe a Miniſter (which they have not) yet the receiving of inſtitution and induction by the Prelates afterward (being never ordeined by God) were at leaſt to ſet your threſholds by Gods threſholds that is, your inventions by Gods ordinances. Which were in very deed to commit abomination againſt the Lord, and to defile his holy Name, and you in ſo doing become ſo far from having him preſent with you, as even by this meanes you ſet a wall between him and your ſelves. Ezech. 43.8. And not ſo onelyonly, but do alſo rebell againſt the Lord, and turne away from him, in receiving an other Miniſtery for the adminiſtration of his holy things, thē he by his word hath ordeined in his Church. Ioſ. 22.29.

Let the Reader note here beſides, how you ſpeak onelie of the inſtitution and induction by the Prelates, and cloſely paſſe over the Prelates firſt ordeining of them Prieſts and Deacōs. Without which they are in your Church no Miniſters at all, neyther capable of anie benefice, though the people ſhould never ſo much make choyſe of any.

Where you ſay, moſt of your Miniſters have the peoples conſent at their firſt inducting, or at leaſt ſoone after by the peoples ſubmitting & mainteyning them even preſently: Firſt I aunſwer (as before) that your peoples conſent in your eſtate is of no moment. Secondly, if this reaſon of yours be good, then your dumbe Prieſts, Non-reſidents, and moſt Popiſh Miniſters in the worſt tymes and places, are to be accounted true Paſtors, aſwell as the beſt among you: becauſe vponupon their inductiō the people ſubmit to their Miniſtery and mainteyne them even preſently. For who knowes not, that when once a Prieſt is preſented by the Patrone and inducted by the Prelate to a benefice, your people do and muſt joyne to his Miniſtery, and for his maintenance give him their tithes, &c. will they, nill they.

Adde herevnto, that even the maintenance belonging to your Miniſtery is ſuch, as was never ordeyned by Chriſt: and therefore neither to be received by the Miniſters, nor given by the people. Which I prove thus: 1. Your Miniſtrrs are mainteyned by Tithes, which is Iewiſh, and p. 210ceaſed with “ the Levitical Prieſthood: Or if you will, Popiſh, derived from the Iewes:Heb. 7.12.Heb 7:12 which comes all to one end. 2. Your maintenance is ſuch, as by it all maner Miniſteryes once received in the Land might be mainteyned, were they never ſo Popiſh, or otherwiſe never ſo impious in anie reſpect. 3, You are bound ſo to mainteyne the Miniſters you have whatſoever they be: and that alſo, whether you will or not. 4. On the contrarie, the maner of maintenance now ordeined by Chriſt for his Miniſters, is ſuch,2 Cor. 9.14.2 Cor 9:14 as belongeth" but to them which preach the Goſpell, and muſt come from the people of love and duty in that behalf. 1. Theſ. 5.13. Gal. 6.6. Rom. 15.27. 1. Timoth. 5.17. 1 Cor. 9.7. &c.

3. Laſtly you ſay in a word (but a ſhrewd word) that the Prelates make not the Paſtors at all in deed and in truth, but onelyonly ſuppoſedly. And now in your printed book (for more certainty) you affirme it with conſent of others, whom you note in the margent. But for this point it needeth not. For we yeeld it moſt willingly. Yet note withall, that thus you do both give the cauſe, and condemne at once all your Miniſtery as vnlawfull, ſuch as may neither be received nor joyned vntounto. See it for plainenes ſake in a Syllogiſme, thus:Witnes your Articles, Canons, Iniunctions, Statutes, &c.

Your Law and Church admitteth no other Miniſtery as lawfull among you, but that which is receyved from the Prelates.

But this (ſay you) is none at all in deed and in truth.

Therefore all the Miniſtery admitted amōg you by your Law & Church is none at all in deed and in truth.

A very ſound defence of your Miniſterie: ſuch as all the Prelates and Prieſts in the Land may well thank you for, with cap in hand: At leaſt wiſe, if you could draw them to be thus mynded. And here let me put you in mynd, how once you wiſhed vsus to ſet downe nothing in anſwer vntounto you, but that which is the doctrine of our whole Church. If your ſelf have kept this rule, it is well. If not, how will you aunſwer it?

That which you have added concerning Impoſition of hands, I admit, with theſe cautions, 1. That it is not to be neglected where it may well be had. Hebr. 6.2. Act. 6.6. and 13.3. 2. That in Churches alreadie eſtabliſhed it be done by the Elderſhip: and where people firſt come into the order of Chriſt, by the fitteſt among them, being therevnto appointed by the reſt of the Church. 1 Tim. 4.14. Numb. 8.10. And thus much of the ſecond Exception.

Chap. 4. The third Exception againſt Mr Iacobs Compariſon.

Fran. Iohnſon. THe people can not chuſe their Miniſter, vnles the Prelate do either before, or after, make him a Miniſter.

But a couple may chuſe and take each other in marriage, whether the Prieſt will or no. Therefore the Compariſon holdeth not.

p. 211H. Iacob his Reply. 1 VVE deny your ſaying, the people can not chuſe. They can chuſe. They have power in Chriſt, as being Chriſtiās, though they know not their right therein. The ignorance of this ſimply, doth not cut vsus of from Chriſt, nor from this holy priviledge: no more thē the blind Papiſts have loſt their right & power of marrying together without a Prieſt, becauſe they are ignorāt of it.

2. Againe where you ſay, But a couple may chuſe each other whether the Prieſt will marry them or no: Marke, That we ſpeake of blind Papiſts, that thinke that the Prieſt is the whole abſolute and neceſſarie marriage maker. If you ſay, even ſuch have right and power to marry, though they be farre from knowing it, and farther from practizing; Then graunt the like in chuſing a Miniſter, to our Chriſtians: for ſo the Compariſon importeth, Els if you meane thoſe words of others that be men of knowledge, Then you fight with your ſhadow: you touch not our queſtion.

Fran. Iohnſon his Anſwer. YOu do ſtill take for graunted that which is denyed: viz, that your people have power in Chriſt to chuſe their Miniſters &c. I proved before that ſeing your people ſtand in Antichriſtiā ſervitude to the Prelates, their Canons, Courts, confuſion, &c. they have not in that eſtate (neither can have, whiles they ſo remaine) the liberty and power of Chriſt, either to chuſe them Miniſters, or to performe anie other action belonging to the Church of Chriſt. And further that they can not in that eſtate by the word of God be approved true Chriſtians. For which ſee the former Treatiſe.

In that you graunt the peoples choyſe to be an holy priviledge, you condemne both your Church which rejecteth it, and ſuch of your people as ſeem to vſe it, whereas in your eſtate they do nothing els but profane it. Why alſo do not ſuch of you as know theſe things, deliver everie man his ſoule from that ſlaverie wherein ye ſtand vnderunder the Prelates, that ſo you might enioy and practiſe the priviledges and holy things of God, as Chriſt hath given them to his Church?

2. To that you pretend of ſuch as be blynd and ignorant, thinking thereby to help your ſelf: I anſwer, that we ſpeak of your people, as now they ſtand in your Church-conſtitution. For ſo (you know) the queſtion is. Now whether they be ignorant, or whether they have knowledge, it ſkilleth not for the matter in hand. This we alledge, that none at all of your people or aſſemblyes have, in your eſtate, the liberty and power which Chriſt hath given to his Church: as the other hauehave for mariage. So we have towched the queſtion directly. But in deed the fault is Mr Iacob,Iren. adverſus Valem. lib. 1. cap. 1. that your Compariſon and Arguments hold together, like ropes of ſand: as “ Irenaeus ſaid of the Valentinians.

Let the Reader note withall. 1. How you match together, and put as in an eaven ballance, the blynd Papiſts and your Chriſtians. A worthy defence of your eſtate. 2. How here you pretend to ſpeak of ſuch as be ignorant, p. 212other where of Chriſtians having knowledge of Chriſt, feare of God, faith &c. Thus turning your ſelf into ſo manie ſhapes and colours, as a man can not tell where to have you, or what to make of you. Quo teneam vultus mutantem Protea nodo?

Chap 5. The fourth Reaſō or Exceptiō againſt Mr Iacobs Cōpariſon.

Fran. Iohnſon. IF anie that by the word of God are not capable of marrying togeather (as Brother and Siſter &c.) do notwithſtanding conſent to take each other for man and wife: yet are they not therefore lawfull man and wife.

So if a people and ſome man, that by the word of God can not chuſe & take each other as Paſtor and Church in their eſtate (ſuch as now is in this …a…d) do notwithſtanding conſent ſo to accept each other: yet are they not therefore lawfull Paſtor and Church.

H. Iacob his Reply. THis is wholy preſumed and from the Queſtion alſo: Like to the firſt Reaſon, and hath the ſame anſwer as is made to the firſt accuſation there. You reaſon againſt people not capable of a Paſtor; And we ſpeake of true Chriſtians which are alwayes capable. You do ill therfore in comparing this action to mariage betwene brother and ſiſter: who indeed can not marry.

Happely you may likelyer compare it to a couple that have lived both of them wantonly: Afterwards they marrie togeather, and this marriage it ſelfe they vſe not ſoberly, nor temperatly. Howbeit for all this, I profeſſe theſe two are truly man and wife notwithſtanding: Now even ſo our Churches and Miniſters, &c.

Fr. Ioh. his Anſwer. KNowing the queſtion Mr Iacob, you might well ſee (if you were not blynd) that this is directly vntounto it. And ſo in deed it is like the firſt Reaſon: that is, it ſheweth the folly of your Compariſon, and is ſuch as you can not aunſwer. True it is that we ſpeak of people not capable of a Paſtor: that is, of yours in your Church-conſtitution. And if you ſpeak (as you ſay you do) of true Chriſtians which are alwayes capable, then ſpeak you not of your people or Aſſemblyes in your eſtate. And ſo it is your ſelf that f…ht with your ſhadow, and towch not the queſtion, but ſtill preſume that which you ſhould prove: viz, that ſtanding in Antichriſtian bondage to the Prelates and their procedings, yet notwithſtanding you are by the word of God to be judged true Chriſtians, having the liberty and power given by Chriſt to his Church, whereof he is the head. Till you prove this, we muſt needs think that the comparing of your chuſing a Miniſter in your eſtate, to a brother and ſiſter or ſuch like that can not lawfully marry togeather &c. is good and pertinent.

p. 213Your owne comparing of it to a couple that have lived wantonly, and afterwards marry together, yet vſe not their mariage ſoberly &c. deſcryeth that your ſelf ſee the wicked and vnlawfull eſtate of your Miniſters and people, as now they ſtand, howſoever you labour to hide and excuſe it, as much as you can. And beſides, if you would deſcribe your eſtate, as it is in deed, you ſhould compare it to ſuch, as both had and do ſtill live wantonlie and wickedly in adultery and vncleannes: whom God will judge. Let all ſuch therefore among you as feare God, delay no longer, but with ſpeed forſake your adulterous wayes and turne vntounto the Lord: that by his grace you may be “ maryed to him in righteouſnes and judgement, in merciemercy and compaſſion,Hoſ. 2.19.2….Hos 2:19Hos 2:2 and not ſtill run a whoring after your owne inventions, and abominations of the man of ſinne, whom the Lord will deſtroy. Rev. 17.1-6. 2 Theſ. 2.3.4.8. Numb. 15.39.40. Ier. 4.18.

Chap. 6. The fift Exception againſt Mr Iacobs Compariſon.

Fran. Iohnſon. THe Prieſts joyning of the parties doth not make them Man and wife at all, but onelyonly the parties mutuall conſent.

But contrarily, in the preſent eccleſiaſticall conſtitutiō of England, the Prelats ordinatiō maketh the Miniſter, and not the peoples choyſe at all.

H. Iacob his Reply. THe ſecond Propoſition we here flatly deny. It is anſwered in our laſt words againſt the 2. Reaſon.

Fr. Ioh. his Anſwer. YOu have an hard forehead Mr Iacob, that can flatly deny ſo cleare a truth. But for proof thereof, beſides your Churches-conſtitution, I cite your books of Articles, Canōs, Iniunctiōs, Statutes: togeather with the conſent of your whole Church: and your book of ordering Prieſts and Deacons &c. All which are ſo many proofs of the ſecond Propoſition, and witneſſes of the truth, which you ſhame not to deny.

Is it not your Churches expreſſe Law, that no other be receyved for Miniſters, but ſuch as are made Prieſts or Deacons by the Prelates? Yea, that every one muſt to this end have his Letters of Orders vnderunder the Prelates hand and ſeale that ordeined him? Can anie among you (though he have the conſent of all your people) be Parſon, or Vicar, or (as you ſpeak) one of your Paſtors, not having the Prelates ordination and inſtitution? On the contrarie, having theſe of the Prelate, is it not ſufficient for him, though all your people ſtand againſt him? Yea, muſt not all the people (whether they will or not) receive and joyne vntounto his Miniſtery being by the Prelate ſo ordeined and inſtituted as aforeſaid? The truth hereof is ſo well knowen and yll practiſed through the whole land, as it is ſtraunge p. 214any man ſhould have the face to deny it. But what wil not Mr Iacob deny, when he knoweth not what to aunſwer, and yet hath not an heart to yeeld to the truth? It muſt needs be a weak and bad cauſe that can not otherwiſe be mainteined then by ſuch impudent denyals.

Your Aunſwer to the ſecond Reaſon before, is there taken away, and proved to be both againſt your ſelf and againſt the Law and conſtitution of your Church. Mynd it better next tyme.

Chap. 7. The Sixt Reaſon or Exception againſt Mr Iacobs Compariſon aforeſaid.

Fran. Iohnſon. IF a woman conſent to a man that is another womans huſband, they are not therefore Man and wife.

So if a people conſent to a falſe Miniſter, they are not therefore true Church and Miniſter.

H. Iacob his Reply. THis is anſwered as before in the Fourth Reaſon. It carrieth ſome likelyhood indeed, and ſome reaſon againſt Pluralities, but nothing any further.

Fr. Ioh. his Aunſwer. NEyther the fourth Reaſon, nor this, nor any other of them are yet anſwered, Let others judge. And now your ſelf are driven to confeſſe that, this hath both likelyhood and reaſon againſt your Pluralityes. Which is in deed to yeeld vntounto it. For tell me, if your Pluralitie-men have not (as well as the reſt among you) both the ſome calling by the Prelates, which your Church appointeth; and like acceptance of your people, who joyne vntounto them and mainteine them, as you alledged before: Pag. 208. The Reaſō then hath waight not onelyonly againſt your pluraliſts, but againſt all your other Miniſters too: ſeing they have all of them one and the ſame falſe Miniſtery, received from the Prelates, and executed vnderunder them,

VntoUnto which you may adde, that the Miniſtery of all among you is ſuch as Chriſt never ſet in his Church: whether you look at your Offices, from the hyeſt Prelate to the loweſt Prieſt: or at your Entrance, according to your Churches Canons and Book of ordinatiō; or at your Miniſtration, by your Book of common praier and other your Canons and Injunctions: or finally at your maintenance, by Tithes, Chriſmes, Offerings &c. When you have well mynded theſe things, you ſhall find this Argument reach a great deale further then to Pluralityes, even to all the Miniſters of your Church in your eſtate. Make a tryal: ſearch the Teſtament of Chriſt throughout, and if you can, ſhew it to be otherwiſe. If not, give glorie to God, and yeeld to the truth.

p. 215Chap. 8. The Seuenth Reaſon or Exception againſt Mr Iacobs Compariſon aforeſaid.

Fran. Iohnſon. AS when a man and woman have conſented each to other, if the man do afterwards give his body to another, and ſo commit adultery: Then is the marriage-knot broken.

So, if after a people have choſen a man to be their Miniſter, hee give himſelf to another and a falſe Miniſtery, and ſo commit ſpirituall whoredome: Then is the former knot alſo broken.

H. Iacob his Reply. THe taking of orders from a Prelate, after conſent given to a Miniſter by a people, is not like adultery in mariage: eſpecially where both Paſtor and people are ſimply ignorant of that error. Therefore that diſanulleth not, as adultery doth the wedlok. So this Reaſon is much like to the laſt before, and the anſwer not vnlike to that of the Fourth Reaſon likewiſe. For

That which at the Firſt maketh not vncapable: That ſame afterwards doeth not diſſolue.

But this error maketh not Chriſtians vncapable at the firſt: as thero is ſhewed, and in the Third chieflie:

Therefore neither can it diſſolue afterwards the Covenant betweene the Paſtor and the people.

Fr. Ioh. his Anſwer. YEs Mr Iacob, albeit your peoples conſent were the choyſe of a true Church, yet ſuch taking of the Prelates Orders were like adultery. How much more in your caſe, who have drunke ſo deep of the cup of Babels fornications? Yet you ſay, theſe two are not alike: but your ſaying you proue not at all. I do ſtill affirme there is likeliehood between them, and thus I prove it.

To receive the Miniſterie of Antichriſt, is to commit ſpirituall whoredome. (For Antichriſts Miniſterie is part of the Whores abominations, ſpoken of, Rev. 17.4.5.)

But the taking of Orders from a Prelate, is to receive the Miniſtery of Antichriſt. (Witnes your Book of ordination, Adm…. to the parliam.compared with the Popes Pontificall: Wherein (your ſelves confeſſe) he ſheweth himſelf to be Antichriſt moſt livelie. Witnes alſo the nature of your Orders and Prelacy, compared with the ordinance and Miniſtery of Chriſt.)

Therefore the taking of Orders from a Prelate, is to commit ſpirituall Whoredome.

Now that there is likelyhood and fit Compariſon between corporall and ſpirituall Whoredome, the Scripture doth every where teach, and your ſelf Mr. Iacob (I think) will not be ſo ſenceleſſe as to deny it. Even p. 216here you confeſſe that your taking of Orders from a Prelate, is an error.

Neither will the ignorance you pretend, help the matter. For although it cannot well be thought, that after ſo open and manifold declaration of the truth, as you have had, you ſhould ſtill be ignorant thereof: yet if it were ſo, your ignorance (you know) will not warrant your action, nor juſtifie your ſinne. Ignorance in deed cauſeth a ſinne to be leſſe, but not to be none at all. Suppoſe that two ignorant perſons, not knowing (or at leaſt pretending not to know) adultery to be vnlawfull, ſhould commit that folly togeather: Were their action therefore not to be deemed adulterie? Yet thus you reaſon. And your anſwer beſides importeth ſome yeelding to the ſimilitude, as towching them among you which know the truth. Let all ſuch therefore, eſpecially, weigh with them ſelves in what wofull eſtate they remaine wittinglie, even ſuch as is ſpiritual whoredome againſt the Lord.

So this Reaſon in deed is like to the laſt before, that is, direct and of waight againſt you: and your aunſwer vntounto it not vnlike to that of the Fourth Reaſon and the reſt, that is, meerlie frivolous and to no purpoſe at all. For this error as you call it (that is, your ſubjection to the Prelacy and abominations of Antichriſt yet remaining in your Church) maketh you in that eſtate evē at the firſt vncapable of chuſing a Paſtor: or of entring ſuch Covenant as you ſpeak of, or of performing anie other action, by the power and liberty which Chriſt hath given to his Church For what concord hath Chriſt with Antichriſt? Or how can the liberty of Chriſt and bondage of Antichriſt ſtand together,2 Cor. 6.15. 1 King. 18.21.2 Cor 6:151 Kgs 18:21 and the one not expell the other? Or will you alway halt between two opinions, and never make ſtreight ſteps vntounto your feet, to turne them into the teſtimonies of the Lord? Be not deceived: God is not mocked. Whatſoever a man ſoweth, that ſhall he reap. He that ſoweth to Antichriſt, ſhall with him reap corruption: but he that ſoweth to Chriſt, ſhall by him reap life everlaſting. 2. Theſ. 2.10.11.12. Rev. 14.9.10.11.12. Gal. 6.7.8. Ioh. 3.36. Heb. 5.9.

Chap. 9. Of the clauſe annexed at the end of Mr Iacobs printed book, which is thus:

H. Iacob. THis laſt Treatiſe, hath remayned in their hands, theſe three yeares & more, vnanſwered.

Fr. Iohnſon. THis is moſt falſe, Mr Iacob. For I did aunſwer it my ſelf, “ above three yeares ſynce.In the yeare 1596. And (being then cloſe priſoner) I ſent it away from me ſheet by ſheet (as I did at the ſame time my aunſwer alſo to the former Treatiſe) to be copied out and conveied vntounto you. Since which time, you have not given any Replie vntounto it againe. No, not vntounto this day. p. 217So it is your ſelf that have not anſwered me theſe three yeares and more. Mynd therfore how greatly you have abuſed both me and your Reader.

But perhaps you will ſay, my anſwer came not to your hands: For ſo by this clauſe of yours, it may ſeem to be. If it were ſo (as for myne owne part, I know not whether it did or no) yet of this I am ſure, that when you ſent me word theſe things were to be publiſhed,MonethMonth. 5.10. and 30.159 8. I wrote to you “ twice, deſiring (among other things) this in particular, that then you would with the reſt publiſh alſo my anſwer to this Reply of yours. So as by this you had knowledge (if not before) that it was anſwered. Yea you know moreouer, how I wrote vntounto you at the ſame tyme, that you had not replyed vntounto me agayne, ſynce I anſwered you: and that if you wanted any of my anſwers, or by any occaſion had them not perfect, I would help you to them, if you ſent me word &c. And theſe Letters of myne you received,In your Letters to me. Mon. 5.27 and 6.20. 1598. as your ſelf “ certifyed me: Which I have yet to ſhew vnderunder your owne hand. Yet you have not onelie left my Anſwer to your Treatiſe vnprinted, but you ſhame not beſides to affirme (contrary to your knowledge) that it hath remayned in our hands, theſe three yeares & more, vnanſwered.

Think now with your ſelf (Mr Iacob) what conſcience or honeſty there is in ſuch dealing. But it may be you had not ſo much care to deale well, as to have the parts of your book agree together alike. For as with vntruth and bad dealing you began, and proceded in it hitherto, ſo you do now alſo end it: Principio medium, medio ne diſcrepet imum.

Thus in deed all the parts of your book from beginning to ending are ſuteable one with another. Yet ſuch correſpondence in your Book, is ſmall commendation to your ſelf. Better dealing would better become you: ſave that ſeing you fight for Antichriſt his Churches and Miniſtery, it is no vnmeet thing that you vſe the weapons of Antichriſt: Which are chiefly two, falſehood and violence. Of the former whereof your book is full, from end to end, ſpeaking lyes through hypocriſy. And with the latter your Church (which you would defend) aboundeth, as your violent courſes againſt the truth will alway teſtify to your face, howſoever you ſhame not to plead evē for this alſo. For which ſee before, Pag. 112.133.134.

If you write agayne, be better adviſed.Rev. 14. & 18. chap. Pſal. 84. Ier. 50. and 51. Chap.Rev 14Ps 84Jer 50 Or rather learne to lay your hand on your mouth, and plead the cyuſe of Antichriſt no more. But follow the Lambe whitherſoever he goeth: And give your ſelf no reſt, vntill you appeare before God in Sion. Forſake Babel: Let Ieruſalem come vp on your heart, and help you to build the walles thereof, though it be in a ſtrait and troublous tyme. And this which I ſpeak vntounto you, by the word of God, I wiſh to be mynded of all, that feare God, and love the Lord Ieſus.

He that hath eares to heare, let him heare.

Math. 13.9.