A Christian Plea, Treatise 1 · Chapter 4 · Errors
Errors, evaſions, contradictions. &c.
1. That the Temple of God, ſpoken off by the Apoſtle, 2 Theſ. 2, 4. is no more Gods Temple,Animadv. p. 82. &c. then vvere Ieroboams Idoll temples in Iſraell, and Bels Temple in Babylon. Animadv. pag. 82. yet he told us but a litle before, that it was to be underſtood of Gods church and people, invaded and deſtroyed by Antichriſt, as the heathens of old dealt with Ieruſalem and the dvvellers therein. Ibid. pag. 80.
Pa. 83, & 84, &c.2. That he maketh not onelyonly Babylon, but the Beaſt himſelf, and the Church to be all one. Whereas the Scripture teacheth us again and again, to diſtinguish betvveen Babylon, and Gods people in it; betvveen Babylon, and Sion in it, &c. as I hauehave shevved here before, out of Jer. 51, 45. and Zach. 2, 7. compared vvith Rev. 18, 4. & betvveen the Beaſt that is the man of ſinne, and the church or Temple of God, vvhere he ſitteth and tyrannizeth, &c. 2 Theſ. 2, 3, 4. with Rev. 11, and 13 chapt.
Pag. 84 & 85, &c.3. That vvhereas I obſerved a tvvofold conſideration of the eſtate of the church of Rome, and of Iſraell heretofore: one in reſpect of the trueths and ordinances of God ſtill reteyned among them; another in respect of the mixture of their ovvn inventions & abominations vvithall: in regard of the one, to hold and acknovvledge the trueth and church of God there, *This cauſe he omits.againſt the Anabaptiſts; in regard of the other to conſider and obſerue their apoſtaſie and Babyloniſh confuſion, againſt Antichriſt, &c. he doth not onelyonly not yeeld unto it (vvhichwhich thing alone is to much ſtrengthning of the Anabaptiſts in their erroneous opinions and courſes) but he blameth and oppugneth the comparing of the church of Rome vvith Iſrael: ſaying, They doe but roll the firſt ſtone, ſaying the ſame things, comparing Antichriſts church vvith Iſraell, vvhereas the holy Ghoſt compareth it vvith *Rev. 11, 2, 8. & 17 5.the Gentiles, euen the moſt vile, the Sodomites, Egyptians, Babylonians, and heathen Romanes, Pag. 84. The like he hath againe in, pag. 85, and often in his treatiſe. Where marke, not onelyonly hovv he ſtrengthneth the Anabaptiſts hands, but uſeth alſo the Anabaptiſts language and anſvver. When M. Clyfton, to approue the reteyning of baptiſme received in the apoſtaſie of our forefathers, alledged the example of circumciſion received in the apoſtaſie of Iſraell: M. Smith then oppoſing, returned this anſvver,”M. Sm. charact. of the Beaſt. p. 48. that the apoſtaſie of Antichriſt is deeper then the apoſtaſie of Iſraell: for firſt (ſaith he) Antichriſtians are not called Iſraelites, but Babylonians, Egyptians, Sodomites, Gentiles, in the Revelatiō: whereby the holy ſpirit of vviſedome giveth us to conceiue, that he doeth account the apoſtaſie of Antichriſt equall to Paganiſme it ſelf, yea to the very vvorſt kind of Paganiſme. &c. Novv let the Reader compare theſe together: and then let him conſider vvhether M. Ainſvvorth doe not in deed plead the Anabaptiſts cauſe: and that alſo after their manner, and almoſt vvith their very vvords. As touching the point it ſelf, I hauehave‘Pag. 129 135. &c. already out of the Scriptures shewed, how the word Gentiles may here be underſtood, vvhichwhich I need not repeat. Yea M. Ainſw. himſelf shevveth*Anno… on Pſa. 59.6. & 54, 5 othervvhere (though now he forget it) that by this terme of the Heathens, David underſtandeth the Ievves, that were wicked and perſecuters, &c. Pſal. 59, 5. And the Prophets often compare‘Eſa. 1, 10 Jer. 23, 14. Ezech. 16, 3, 45, 46. &c. Hoſ. 12, 7. Amos 9, 7 the Jevves to them of Sodome and Gomorrah, to the Canaanites, Ethiopians, Philiſtines, Syrians, &c. Wil he therefore conclude hereupon, that they were not the Church and people of God? Not to ſpeak, how the Scripture alſo deſcribing the iniquitie of Antichriſt, & the eſtate of the Church of Rome, and other Chriſtian churches in apoſtaſie, hath reference often to the eſtate of Iudah and Iſraell: as I hauehave shewed more largely”Pag. 127. &c. here before. Which alone is ſufficient to convince both M. Ainſw. and M. Sm. anſwers, and the Anabaptiſts errors hereabout.
4. He grants, that in Pauls time, the church of Rome was ſet in the way of God, and ſoone after fell into apoſtaſie. Pag. 84.Pag. 84. & 85. And yet in the next page he ſaith the ordinances of God vvhichwhich are ſtill reteyned in that church, are ſtollen; as vvhen a thief ſteales a true mans money. Pag. 85. Wherein he contradicteth himſelf, & hardeneth the Anabaptiſts. And is (in ſome reſpect) as if he should ſay, whē an honeſt man having money in his purſe that is truely gotten, becommeth afterward a thief and ſtealeth ſome goods of other mens: the money which he had before and ſtill hath, is ſtollen money, becauſe the other goods are yll come by, which he getteth afterward by unlavvful meanes. Or rather thus, as if he should ſay, that vvhen an honeſt woman becommeth an harlot, now all the goods vvhichwhich lavvfully she had before & ſtill reteyneth, are ſtollen goods. Thus if he vvere the judge, she should be condemned not onelyonly of adulterie, but of theft. And note moreover, that when a thief repenteth, he may not keep but muſt reſtore againe all the goods he hath ſtollen. Accordingly then by his doctrine, if the church of Rome should repent (as Iudah often did) of her adulteries; and when any of that church novv doe repent, and forſake that apoſtaſie: they should not reteyn the baptiſme & other ordinances of God, vvhichwhich that church hath: but should preſently part with them, and no longer keepe them, ſeeing they are ſtollen goods. How could you ever be thankfull ynough to M. Ainſvv. (O ye Anabaptiſts) for thus pleading your cauſe, if your opinions were good, and his arguments and anſvvers ſound thereabout.
Pag. 85.5. The like errour and iniquitie he falleth into againe, vvhiles he matcheth baptiſme & the other ordinances of God reteyned in the church of Rome, with the feaſts, worſhip and ſacrifices of the heathen (”Epheſ. 2, 11, 12. who vvere without Chriſt, being aliens from the common vvealth of Iſraell, and ſtraungers from the covenants of promiſe, having no hope, and vvithout God in the world) yea matcheth theſe things moreover vvith the Divel himſelf, being tranſformed into an Angell of light. Pag. 85. What miſerable aſſertions are theſe, and merely Anabaptiſticall? Certaine it is, that the apoſtaſie of the church of Rome, and iniquitie of Antichriſt is extreemely ſinfull: yet alvvaies we should remember in caſes of apoſtaſie (as in Iſraell and Iudah) to put difference betvveen the ordinances of God that ſtill are reteyned in ſuch eſtate, and the inventions of men that are taken up of themſelues and mixed vvithall. Which this man not regarding, though it be shewed him: vvhiles he vvould shun the gulf of Poperie, runs his leak bark upon the rocks of Anabaptiſtrie.
P. 86 — 92.6. He maketh a large diſcourſe touching Iſrael: wherein he hath many truths: which vve alſo hold and urge. But yet notwithſtanding he hath alſo ſome ſleights, errors, & contradictions mixed withall: Whereof take theſe for inſtances: I. That ſetting down my vvords, he omitteth ſome ſpecial clauſes of waight: As namely, vvhen I ſpeak of‡Advert. p. 60, and 61. a double conſideration about the covenant of God made with his people: I declared it thus,*Theſe clauſes he omitteth, Animadv. pag. 86. one in respect of the Lord himſelf, on the one part; the other in respect of the people taken into covenant by him, on the other part. Deut. 26, 17, 18, 19. Iudg. 2, 1, 20. And again, that in theſe tvvo reſpects *Theſe clauſes he omitteth, Animadv. pag. 86.(ſometimes having reference to God, ſometimes to Iſraell) may there many things be obſerved to be spoken diverſly.
Pag. 87. &c.II. That he oppugneth this diverſitie of conſideration hereabout: whereof I hauehave ſpoken ſufficiently‘Pag. …6, 111, &c. here before: Which double conſideration, vvhether it be not neceſſarie to be obſerved, for the right underſtanding of the Scriptures, and the eſtate of Iſraell and other churches, let the vviſe of heart judge. As alſo, whether he doe not in ſome things ſpeak ſo about the covenant, as may eſtablish the righteouſnes of works in ſome reſpect. Alvvaies remembring, that the covenant of God, wherof vve ſpeak, is this, that the Lord ſaid to Abraham, I wil be a God unto thee, & to thy ſeed after thee. And again, I will be your God, and you ſhal be my people. Gen. 17, 7. & 22, 18. Hoſ. 2, 23. Zac. 13, 9. with Act. 2, 39. & 3, 25. Rom. 9, 25, 26. &c
III. That the typicall eſtate of Iſraell, is our enſamples. 1 Cor. 10, 6, 11. Which,Pag. 87. vvhen we obſerue or alledge, he ſetteth himſelf to oppoſe it, he will not admitte it, he excepts againſt it, &c. But for himſelf, he will uſe it, he will inſiſt upon it; no man more: as in all his vvritings may be ſeen. And if he may doe it, may not we alſo? Came the word of God out from him? or is it come to him onelyonly? 1 Cor. 14, 36.
IIII. That he pretendeth and pleadeth as if he vvould perſwade,Pag. 88. that God brake the covenant on his part vvith Iſrael, vvhen al the tribes were together, Pag. 88, &c. and yet aftervvard in the ſame page ſaith, that whiles Iſraell was one, they continued Gods Church. Pag. 88.
V. That he shuffles together the eſtates of Iſraell,Pa. 88, 89, 90, & 91. when they were one body, and when they vvere rent in tvvo: Alſo, whileſt Iſraell was in the land and preſence of the Lord; and when they vvere caſt out of his houſe and preſence. Which I hauehave shevved‘Pag. 70, 71, 78, 101 &c. here before: and vvhichwhich the Reader may here again obſerue, if he doe but note the Scriptures which now he citeth, and the caſes ſpoken off, and the times vvherein they fell out. As namely, the things ſpoken off, in Deut. 1, and 2. Exod. 34. Judg. 1. and 2.Animadv. p. 88. 89, 90, 91. Num, 14, &c. when they were al together. And 2 Chron. 11. and 15. and 25. and 1 King. 13. Hoſ. 4. and 5. and 8. and 11. Amo. 9, &c. when the ten tribes had left Iudah: as alſo whiles yet they vvere in the Land. And finally, 2 King. 17. with Hoſ. 1, 9. and 2 chap. Jer. 3, 8. &c. vvhichwhich ſpeak of the eſtate of Iſraell, when they vvere caſt out of the land, as out of the houſe and preſence of God, and had the bill of divorce giuen them, that is here ſpoken off, &c. Which places, times, and caſes, hovv he confoundeth, the Reader may obſerue; and hovv needfull it is to diſtinguish them, may appear by the things themſelues as I hauehave shevved more largely heretofore: pag. 70, 78, 101, &c. to vvhichwhich I refer the Reader.
Whereunto novv I annex this, that among other things,Pa. 82, & 91. the place in Hoſ. 1, 9. vvhichwhich he cited before, and here again, might hauehave taught him better to conſider hereof: both in reſpect of the ſeverall times of the birth of the children there ſpoken off, vvhereof that of Lo-ammi, not my people, vvas the laſt; & becauſe the Lord doth there expreſſely uſe a word of the future tenſe (I vvill not be †or, your God: or for you, &c.yours) shevving that their caſe should afterward come to be othervviſe, then novv it vvas as yet, vvhiles theſe types and prophecies vvere giuen them, and vvhiles as yet they vvere in the land. Of vvhichwhich alſo, ſee more here before, pag. 77, 78. &c.
VI. That he ſaith, if we cannot proue Babylon in Chaldea to be Gods church, Pag. 92.vvhen the Iewes vvere there captived, Ier. 50. and 51. we ſhall never proue the Temple of God ſpoken off 2 Theſ. 2, 4. to be Gods true church. For about this, is our queſtion and reaſoning: hovv ever he pleaſe ſtill to terme it, the Synagogue of Sathan, &c. Of vvhichwhich, ſee here before, pag. 124, 143, 144. &c. And this Babylon (he knoweth) vvas then meerely an heathenish City & people, whereas the Temple of God here ſpoken of, himſelf acknovvledgeth†Animad. p. 80. othervvhere to be underſtood of the church and people of God, anſwerable to Ieruſalem and the dwellers therein. Animad. p. 80.
7. That vvhere I ſpake*Advert. p. 62. of the vvord Church, being taken ſometimes more largely, ſometimes more ſtrictly: which about the queſtion (concerning the church of Rome) may likevviſe be obſerved: he omitteth”Animad. p. 92. this point, and doeth not ſo much as mention it: vvhether not willing to meddle with it, or not regarding it: vvhereas other both learned and godly men do obſerue and note it. Keckerman vvriting of the church, ſaith, The church is taken largely, or ſtrictly. The Church largely taken, is a company of men, that profeſſe Chriſt to be their King, Prieſt and Prophet. And touching the Church thus taken, there be theſe generall rules. I. The Church is of thoſe things, which hauehave one name, and divers ſignifications, or, where divers things are ſignified by one word: which cannot be comprehended in one eſſential and generall definition. 2. But the profeſſion of the doctrine of Chriſt & acknowledgment of his Propheticall Prieſtly and kingly office, generally and howſoever taken, is the forme of the church largely conſidered. 3. Thus therefore the Church being taken, conteyneth euen the reprobate and hypocrites, as members: to wit, ſo long as they proſeſſe Chriſt the Prophet, Prieſt and King any manner way. Keckerman. Syſtem. Theolog. l. 3. c. 6. p. 370.
8. Where I obſerved†Advert. p. 62, 63. a double regard, that may be had of apoſtate Churches in all ages, according as they are conſidered and ſpoken of, in compariſon with other people of divers ſorts. As namely, that Iſraell in apoſtaſie, being compared with the Syrians, Philiſtimes, Moabites, and other nations are called & ought to be accounted the people of God, who hauehave the onelyonly true God for their God, &c. 2 King. 5, 8, 15, 17. and 9, 6. &c. But being compared with Iudah, which ruled with God, & was faithful with the Saints, she is called an harlot, not the wife of God, but an whore, committing adulterie, & compaſſing God about with lyes & deceit, &c. Hoſ. 2, 2, 5. and 4, 15. and 5, 3, 4. and 9, 1. and 11, 12. &c. And in like manner, that the Church of Rome in apoſtaſie, being compared with the Iewes, Turks, and Pagans, they are and ought to be accomted Chriſtians, and the Temple of God. Where alſo is verified that which the Apoſtle ſpake of Antichriſts ſitting in the Temple of God, 2 Theſ. 2, 4. not the Temple of Ieruſalem, as ſome to turne away the truth, hauehave imagined) but the Temple of Chriſtians, the church of God, brought to the faith of Chriſt, and profeſſing to be Chriſtians: as may appeare by theſe Scriptures, and the like compared together. 2 Theſ. 2, 4. with Ezech. 43, 7, 8. Zach. 6, 12, 13. Eph. 2, 11 — 13, 19, 21. 2 Cor. 6, 16. Rev. 11, 19.*This clauſe he omitteth. and as it is alſo underſtood by all ſound writers both old and new. But againe, being compared with the auncient Church of Rome and other primitiue churches, in the Apoſtles times, and ſuch as now walk in their ſteps and in the good & old way, ruling with God, and abiding faithfull with his Saints: she is called and is to be eſteemed an harlot, the great who…e, the mother of the whoredomes and abominations of the earth, beleeving and ſpeaking lyes in hypocriſie, giving heed to ſeducing ſpirits, and having pleaſure in unrighteouſnes &c. Rev. 17. 1, 5. 1 Tim. 4, 1, 2, 3. 2 Theſ, 2, 3 — 10, 11, 12. And that thus there being in divers reſpects) a double conſideration had of the Church of Rome novv, as of Iſraell heretofore, it will appeare how in one reſpect it may be ſaid, there is the church of God or a true church there, and in another reſpect, there is an apoſtate or a falſe church there, as it is ſaid of the ſame woman, that she is dead and aliue, in divers reſpects, 1 Tim. 5, 6.*Theſe alſo he mentioneth not. And of the Iewes, that they ar enemies in one reſpect, & yet beloved in another, Rom. 11, 28. So Iohn Baptiſt is Elias, & is not Elias, in divers reſpects. Ioh. 1, 21. with Matt. 11, 7 — 14. & 17, 10— 13. Iudas is an apoſtle, & yet a divel. Mat. 10, 2, 4. with Ioh. 6, 70. The Iewes are the children of Abraham, & yet the children of the divel: Ioh. 8, 33, 34. As the Prophets alſo called the Iewes, the ſeed of the wicked, the ſeed of the adulterer, & a falſe ſeed, in one reſpect, when in other reſpects they acknowledge them to be the ſeed of Abraham, Iacob & Iſrael, & ſo a true ſeed & people of the Lord. Eſa 1, 4. & 5…, 3, 4. with 41, 8. & 45, 19. & 58, 1. Hoſ. 2, 1, 2. & 4, 15. Eſa. 63, 16, 17. & 64, 9. Ier. 31, 36, 37. Hoſ. 4, 6, 12. & 5, 4. & 14, 2, 3, 4. And endles it were to recount the many ſpeaches & ſeveral conſiderations of things thus ſpoken off in the Scriptures. Chriſt is without Father and without mother, Heb. 7, 3. and yet he hath Father and mother, Luk. 2, 48, 49. Ioh. 1, 18. and 2, 3. Chriſt was put to death in the flesh, but quickned in the ſpirit, 1 Pet. 3, 18. Abraham is unrighteous in him ſelf, but righteous by faith. Rom. 4.3.5. The Apoſtle Paul, and all the regenerate ſerue the law of God, and the law of ſinne: the one with the mynd, the other with the flesh. Rom. 7.25. Peter is a diſciple and an Apoſtle, yet in other reſpect is by Chriſt called Satan. Mat. 10, 2. and 16, 23. A leprous Iew is a true man and an Iſraelite, but a corrupt diſeaſed man, to be put and kept out of the hoſt of Iſraell, till he be cleane. Lev. 13. and 14. with 2 Chron. 26, 20, 21. Numb. 12, 10— 15. The Temple is the houſe of God, and yet is made a denne of thieues. Mat. 21, 13. The Emperours of Rome, of Babylon, & the other nations are kings and higher povvers ordeyned of God. Rom. 13, 1. with Rev. 17, 10. & Dan. 7, 17. yet are they alſo in other reſpects Beaſts, Lyons, Beares, Leopards, &c. Rev. 12, 3. and 13, 1, 2. with Dan 7, 3 — 6. So likewiſe the beaſt was, and is not, and yet is, Rev. 17, 8. And a number the like that may be obſerved in other places of the Scriptures compared together.
M. Ainſvv. comming to anſwer, and treat of this double regard aforeſaid,‘Animad. p. 92, 93, 94, 95, 96. ſetteth himſelf to except and oppoſe, vvhat he can: & finding the light of the truth herein to be ſo evident as it is, is driuen divers times to yeeld unto it: which yet he doeth in ſuch ſort, as euen then alſo he ceaſeth not to except and oppugne after his manner: as the Reader in his treatiſe may obſerue. Novv how needfull & profitable the conſideration of this double regard is, both about this and other queſtions in religion, I leaue to the judgment of ſuch as are of judgment and indifferency: and that it may the better be conſidered of, I hauehave here againe ſet it downe, as I did heretofore.
Whereunto I will novv (having this occaſion) annex this moreover, touching Iſrael, about the point in hand: That when Ionah was commanded by the Lord, to goe to Niniveh that great city, and cry againſt it: it is ſaid*Jon. 1, 3. he roſe up to flee unto Tarſhiſh, from the preſence of the Lord: that is (ſaith Piſcator) out of the land of Iſraell: where the Lord dvvelt with his people. Piſcat. in Ion, 1, 3. And that Ionah prophecied in Iſrael, among the tenne tribes, appeareth by 2 King. 14, 23, 24, 25, 26. and vvas himſelf of Gath Hepher, a towne of the tribe of Zebulun, 2 King. 14, 25. vvith Joſh. 19, 10, 13. Now by this may appeare, that Iſraell (being compared vvith other nations, as I noted before) had another conſideration & eſtate in the account of God and his Prophets, then thoſe nations had. Tarſhiſh, vvhither Ionah novv would flee, is out of the preſence of the Lord: as the phraſe is here uſed and underſtood. Iſraell, from whence Ionah fleeth, is in the preſence of the Lord. And ſo it is ſaid in the hiſtorie, the Lord was gracious unto Iſraell (ſpeaking of the ten tribes) and had compaſſion on them, and had reſpect unto them, becauſe of his covenant vvith Abraham, Iſaak, and Jacob, and would not deſtroy them, neyther caſt he them from his preſence as yet. 2 King. 13, 22, 23. As the ſame phraſe likevviſe is uſed touching Iudah, that through the anger of the Lord it came to paſse in Ieruſalem and Judah, untill he had caſt them out from his preſence, that Zedekiah rebelled againſt the king of Babilon. 2 King 24, 20. Jer. 15, 1. Whereupon Piſcator alſo compareth this phraſe vvith the like ſpeach in Moſes, where Cain ſaid unto the Lord, from thy face ſhall I be hid: (Schol. in Gen. 4, 14.) as M. Ainſw. himſelf doth, vvith thoſe words, And Cain went out from the preſence of the Lord. In his Annot. on Gen. 4, 16. The like may be obſerved in Amos his ſpeach to Amaziah, vvhere he calleth the land of Aſſyria a polluted land, in reſpect of Iſraell. Amos 7, 16, 17. And yet in other reſpect, the land and people of Iſraell, not onelyonly of the ten tribes, but of Iudah, & all the tribes of Iſraell together, is ſaid to be polluted and defiled. Pſal. 106, 38, 39. Jer. 2, 7. and 3, 2, 9. and 16, 18. Hoſ. 5, 3. and 6, 10. But of this and divers other things, that may hither be referred, I hauehave ſpoken here before more particularly. Pag. 61, 62. and 114, &c.
Novv before I proceed to other things, it will not be amiſſe to shew what ſome others hauehave obſerved about this matter, concerning a divers conſideration of the church: And namely, vvhat Keckerman (vvhoſe judgement I shewed here before) vvriteth further thereabout.
The church [ſaith he] largely taken is again conſidered, eyther diſtinctly with oppoſition to the heathen, or collectiuely in reſpect of Chriſtians among themſelues. The Chriſtian church, if it be loo…ed upon diſtinctly in oppoſition to the heathen, is the company of al thoſe, which profeſſe Chriſtian religion (or the name of Chriſt) in what maner ſoever, and ſeparate themſelues from the Turks and Pagans. And thus are all hereticks, ſchiſmaticks, and Arians, Papiſts, Anabaptiſts, and ſuch li…e, referred to the Chriſtian Church.
But in reſpect of Chriſtians diſtinguished among themſelues, the Church largely taken, is that which worshippeth Chriſt with a more pure or ſyncere profeſſion of doctrine and the Sacraments. And thus our Church gathered in France, England, Scotland, Low countreyes, County. Palatine of the Rhene, and other where, is called”That is, of right faith or ſound religion. the orthodoxe Church: and yet with a certaine large extenſion: becauſe not all who profeſſe our right or ſound religion, are elect, but there are alſo not a few reprobates and hypocrites vvithall. Therefore muſt we diſcerne and diſtinguish theſe degrees euen in this large ſignification of the Church: Namely, that it is eyther moſt large, or ſomewhat ſtricter: or finally the moſt ſtrict, of vvhichwhich we will now treat.
The Church taken ſtrictly and properly, is the company of thoſe men, whom God the Father hath from everlaſting choſen to eternall life, and in time effectually calleth them by his ſpirit, & gathereth them into the communion of his Sonne Ieſus Chriſt, as being the true Prophet, Prieſt, and king, or head: and together alſo into a mutuall union of faith and louelove among themſelues. Hitherto Keckerm. in his Syſtem. Theolog. l. 3. cap. 6. p. 372, 373. This I thought here to inſert, being ſuch as may be of good uſe, for the better conſideration of the Church, in divers reſpects. Novv I will proceed to note a few moe of this oppoſites evaſions, and errors, &c.
Animadv. p. 93.9. Where he ſaith, the Turks acknowledge one God, and Chriſt to be ſent of God with his Gospell, and to be the breath (or ſpirit) of God: what is this to the purpoſe, ſeing they doe not acknovvledge Ieſus to be the Chriſt, the Sonne of God made man, that dyed for our ſinnes, &c. as the church of Rome profeſſeth, and divers of that Church hauehave dyed in teſtimonie hereof, againſt the Turks and Moores, &c. To make it yet more plaine, doth he think that the Turks make ſuch profeſſion of Chriſt, vvhereby any of them are ſaved in their eſtate? And againe, doth he think that none of the Church of Rome are ſaved by the faith of Chriſt, which they hold and profeſſe in their eſtate? Not to ſpeak of the church of England, of vvhichwhich alſo, hovv theſe men eſteem, is not unknowen.
10. Likewiſe, vvhen he ſaith, The Turks and …agans are in ſome things to be juſtified, Pag. 94.in compariſon of the church of Rome: hovv frivolous is this, and not to the purpoſe, for the point in hand? Sayth not the Prophet, that Ieruſalem became ſo exceeding ſinful, as she juſtified Samaria, & Sodome, in reſpect of themſelues, and that they vvere more righteous then she? Ezech. 16, 46 — 52. Alſo, that the backſliding Iſraell juſtified her ſelf more then tretcherous Iudah. Ier. 3, 11. Yea Chriſt ſaith, it shall be more tollerable for Tyre and Sidon, & Sodome, in the day of judgment, then for Chorazin, Bethſaida, and Capernaum, where Chriſt lived, preached, & did miracles himſelf. Matt. 11.20— 24 Shall we therefore think, that Ieruſalem and Iudah, Chorazin, Bethſaida, & Capernaum, vvere not the cities, churches, and people of God? Yet ſuch reaſons and arguments this man bringeth us.
11. Erroneous alſo it is and Anabaptiſticall, that he ſaith,Ibid. The Temple of God, spoken off 2 Theſ. 2, 4. is no more the Church and Temple of God, then the Divel which appeared to the witch at Endor, vvas Samuel, 1 Sam. 28.14, 15, &c. Alſo where I compared Ezec. 43, 7, 8. with 2 Theſ. 2, 4. that this is not fit, but that the type ſhould be ſet frō Bels Temple in Babylon, where the veſſels of Gods true Temple were holden captiue (Dan. 1, 2.) or from the Samaritans Temple builded by Sanballat on mount Garizim, whither the apoſtate and wicked Jewes uſed to flee. Joſeph. Antiq. Jud l. 11, c. 8. For let him ſpeak, was the Divell Samuell in deed? was Bels Temple, or the Samaritans Temple, Gods Temple in deed? as himſelf ſaid erewhile, that the temple of God spoken off 2 Theſ. 2, 4. is to be underſtood of Gods church and people, anſwerable to Ieruſalem and the dwellers therein. Pag. 80. Beſides that he knovveth hovv Auguſtine ſaith (in the place here before cited by himſelf) that the Temple of any Idoll or Divell, the Apoſtle would not call the Temple of God. Auguſt. de civit Dei. l. 20. c. 19.
12. Where I alledged Zach. 6, 12, 13. Ephe. 2, 11 — 13, 19, 21. 2 Cor. 6, 16.Pag. 95. Rev. 11, 19. and compared them vvith 2 Theſ 2, 4. to shew, that by the Temple of God here, the Scripture underſtandeth not the Temple of Ieruſalem, but the Temple of Chriſtians, the Church of God: he turnes avvay from the point in queſtion, what he can, & diſcourſeth on things agreed upon by all. But to put him from his shifts, let him tell us plainly, when Paul ſaith, the Temple of God hath not agreement with idols, 2 Cor. 6, 16. if yet there be idols ſet in the Temple of God, (as was in the time of Manaſſeh, Antiochus, and others) whether now it ceaſe therefore to be the Temple of God, or not. The Scripture sheweth that it is the Temple of God notvvithſtanding, as I hauehave noted before out of the hiſtorie and Prophets. 2 King. 21, 7. Jer. 50, 28. Ezec. 8, 5, 10, 16. Dan. 11, 31, 38. This is the point, whereunto he should keep, if he vvould anſvver to the purpoſe.
13. And againe extreemely erroneous and Anabaptiſticall it is,Ibid. that he ſaith the Church of Rome hath not *Such is his opinion alſo touching the baptiſme of the church of Englād.the true baptiſme, the one baptiſme, ſpoken off, Epheſ. 4, 5. If this be true, what outward Baptiſme then hauehave theſe men themſelues? He ſaith, not a true one, not that one baptiſme spoken of Epheſ. 4, 5. And vvhat remayneth then, but that they muſt needs become Anabaptiſts, and get another outvvard baptiſme then that they hauehave, if they will vvalk conſcionably: and that in the meane time they profane the Lords table, and all the holy things of God uſurped among them? So eyther they muſt leaue their Anabaptiſtical opinions, or admit of Anabaptiſtical courſes. Let them chuſe, vvhichwhich they vvill. And if they vvill not become Anabaptiſts, let them tell us, whether (in divers reſpects) a double conſideration may not be had of the church of Rome as of Iſraell heretofore, yea and of Iudah alſo: ſo as in one respect it may be ſaid, there is the Church of God or a true Church there (to wit, as the Temple of God, and his people is there) and that in another reſpect, there is an apoſtate or a falſe Church there (namely, as Antichriſt ſitteth therein, with his apoſtaſie, oppoſitiō, exaltation aboue all that is called God, &c.) & whether moreover it be not good & needful in ſuch caſes to obſerue how the Scripture ſpeaketh diverſly of things in divers reſpects: vvhereof I gaue ſundrie inſtances. Againſt vvhichwhich though he vvould ſeem to except what he can, yet he doth directly yeeld unto it: and that ſo, as himſelf affirmeth here,†Pag. 96. that things are often in the Scriptures spoken in divers reſpects, without obſerving whereof, men ſhal erre infinitely. Which vvhether he hauehave not done, in his plea about the Baptiſme and Church of Rome, let himſelf conſider, and others judge.
14 Whereas for a concluſion, I inferred, that if the things aforeſaid & the like, about apoſtate churches, and the mixture of mans inventions with Gods ordinances in apoſtaſie, be diſtinctly and carefully regarded, they may be (through the mercy of God) ſome good meanes to ſtay people from Anabaptiſtrie and other yll courſes, by the conſideration of the things that are to be obſerved on the one hand: and to bring men more ſoundly to ſeparation from the apoſtaſie of Antichriſt, by the conſideration of the things to be obſerved on the other hand. (Advertiſ. pag. 65.) this he‘Pag. 92, & 97. paſſeth by: which both he and his followers had need to regard othervviſe, then hitherto they hauehave done, if they vvil walk ſoundly & ſyncerely in the truth, as they ought to doe.
15. And whereas I noted, that I had obſerved and written ſomewhat tending this vvay, long ſince: as may be ſeen in the Anſwer to M. Ja. p. 7. where I spake of a double conſideration of Chriſtians, in one reſpect, true, and in another falſe: &c. himſelf knoweth, that then both he and his followers could well like of this manner of ſpeach & diſtinction touching the ſame perſons in divers reſpects: vvhereas novv if like ſpeach be uſed in ſome other reſpect or occaſion, they can make no end of their outcries & evil dealing by word &”P. 76, to 97. beſides his letters &c. vvriting thereabout. If there were no other thing in them, but this their dealing, they might hereby conſider with themſelues, that ſomevvhat doubtles is amiſſe vvith them novv, othervviſe then heretofore. But they know, we are acquainted with other things beſides, concerning thē.
16. Moreover, vvhereas I noted, that in the book aforeſaid, I had alſo vvritten of ſalvation now had in the church of Rome (Pag. 13,Pag. 97. and 47.) which neceſſarily implyeth, the people of God, and his covenant to be there: becauſe that whoſoever are ſaved, they are the people of God, and under his covenant in Chriſt: he fynding no anſvver or cavill hereabout, ſaith now here, that they deny not, but there may be of the elect in all falſe Churches, euen as Sathan hath his reprobates in the true churches: And that he holds it preſumption for any to limit God, by how ſmal meanes or meaſure of faith and knowledge he will ſaue a man. Yet here before he hath often affirmed again and again, that the church of Rome hath not‘P. 70, 71, 72, 80, 81, 95, 96, &c the covenant of God; the covenant of grace; the people of God; the baptiſme of Chriſt; the ſigne and ſeale of forgiuenes of ſinnes and life eternall, &c. And hovv then should ſalvation be had in that church: ſeeing there is no ſalvation to any that are out of the covenant of grace; no ſalvation but to the people of God; no ſalvation without remiſſion of ſinnes. Doth he not novv then eyther contradict himſelf, or fall in deed into that preſumption, vvhichwhich he diſclaymeth in vvords? And mark vvithall, that though I ſpeak expreſly, of the Church of Rome, and of the people of God, & his covenant to be there: yet he doth not thus ſpeak or acknovvledge particularly of that church, but uſeth ſome generall words about the ſalvation of Gods elect: whether for an evaſion hereafter; or for that already he perceiveth, if he should ſo ſpeak, and acknovvledge it in particular concerning that Church, his contradiction vvould be more evident unto al; or for vvhat other cauſe, himſelf knoweth beſt, and time may manifeſt more.
17. Neither is this to be omitted,Pag. 97. that to hauehave the more colour & evaſion, he ſaith, God expreſsely ſaid, when he made Iſraell his peculiar people, that yet ”Exod. 19, 5.al the earth was his, which are the words (ſaith he) of the covenant *Ezech. 16 8.generally. And for this, he citeth Ezech. 16, 8. with Exod. 19, 5. But vvhat now is it that he meaneth hereby? If by the covenant, he meane the covenant of grace for ſalvation (whereof we treat) and think that all people of the world in all ages and places of the earth are under it; vvhat differeth this, from the opinion of the Anabaptiſts, and of the Arminians alſo, touching generall redemption? If he ſpeak not of the covenant of grace, vvhichwhich is for ſalvation; all may perceiue he ſpeaketh not to the point in hand.
18. And finally, how he uſeth or rather abuſeth the Scripture hereabout, vvho can not diſcerne? The Lord by the Prophet (in the place which he citeth) ſaith to Ieruſalem; when I paſsed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, the time was the time of louelove (that is, the time of mariage) and I ſpread my ſkirt over thee (taking thee to be my wife, under my protection) and I covered thy nakednes: yea, I ſware unto thee, and entred into a covenant vvith thee (to wit, the covenant of mariage) ſaith the Lord God, and thou becameſt myne, that is, my wife) Ezech. 16, 8. Thus alſo the Lord hath dealt vvith the church of Rome: Rom. 1, 7. as himſelf acknowledgeth divers times in this Treatiſe, Animad. p. 84. and 98. &c. But is this novv the caſe and eſtate of all the earth with the Lord? Are al in the world become the Lords wife, church, and people, in the covenant of mariage, &c. Or vvas all the earth ſo, and did the Lord ſo intend it, vvhen he ſaid to Iſraell, all the earth vvas his? Exod. 19, 5. Othervvhere the Lord ſaith, that*Deu. 10, 14. Pſal. 115, 16. the heauen, and the heauen of heauens is the Lords: and that‘Pſal. 50, 10, 11, 12. every beaſt of the foreſt is his, and the cattell upon a thouſand hils: that the vvild beaſts of the field are his: yea that the world is his, and the fulnes thereof. Shall vve therefore think, that the heauens, vvild beaſts, cattell, and vvhole vvorld, are the vvife and church of God, in the covenant of mariage with him, as Ezekiel ſpeaketh of the Ievves, in the place vvhichwhich here he alledgeth, and by vvhichwhich he vvould perſwade us, that theſe are the vvords of the covenant generally? But I vvill not follovv this any further: neyther the abuſe that he hath of other Scriptures every where: which vvere endles to proſecute in particular. OnelyOnly let him conſider with himſelf, how ſinfull a thing it is, thus to abuſe the vvord of God, and to take his name in vaine, as he doth throughout his treatiſe. For vvhichwhich he may aſſure himſelf, the Lord vvill not hold him guiltles, nor leaue him unpunished, if he doe thus perſiſt, and vvill not be reclaymed. Exo. 20, 7. Let him therefore not delay to think on his wayes, and to turne his feet into the teſtimonies of the Lord. Pſal. 119, 59, 60.
19. When as heretofore about this queſtion concerning the church of Rome, vve annexed ſomewhat out of the vvritings of M. Iunius againſt Bellarmine: vve expreſſely ſignified,‡M. Clift. Advertiſ. p. 20, 21. that vve did it, not as relying upon the judgment of men in cauſes of religion, but becauſe we knevv, that many who are caried with a prejudice againſt us, would ſtay themſelues the more, when they ſhould ſee what M Iunius hath written of this argument. Yet as if no ſuch thing at all had ben ſignified by us,”Animad. p. 98. this oppoſite doth not onelyonly paſſe by it, but pretend as if herein we did or vvould ſtand to his judgment. And this alſo he maketh the more ſtraunge, becauſe ſometimes ſome letters of difference hauehave paſſed betvveen M. Iunius and us in ſome other things. As if vve could not differ from him in ſome things, and yet like or ſpeak of his judgment in ſome other. This man himſelf differeth from him in ſundry things: doth he not therefore like, or may he not ſpeak, of his judgment in any thing? But vvhat vvill he not pretend or except againſt, to hauehave ſome shevv of help for himſelf in ſuch time of need? And although it be certaine, that in caſes of Religion, vve should not rely on the judgment of man, but on the vvord of God alone (as we noted before) yet ſeeing that we knowe but in part, and the Word of God is common to all his people, and is not come to any perſon or people alone, therefore should we not lightly deſpiſe or reject the judgment of others, and thoſe alſo godly & learned, but with reverence and humilitie regard them: ſpecially when they ſet themſelues not onelyonly to shevv their judgment, but to bring proof of argument, and that alſo frō the word of God, as M. Iun. doth about the matter in hand.
20. Novv therefore that the Reader may ſee hovv M. Ainſvv. ſetteth himſelf herein not againſt us alone, but againſt any other whomſoever, and vvhatſoever they alledge hereabout; and ſpecially, that he may better conſider, what M. Iunius himſelf hath written of this matter; and how very many things therein of ſpecial vvaight and uſe M. Ainſw. hath omitted, which are good and needfull to be obſerved: I hauehave thought it not amiſſe here again to ſet dovvn M. Iunius his ovvn words. Which alone wil much help the Reader better to diſcerne the evaſions, errours, abuſe of Scripture, and other evill dealing, into vvhichwhich M Ainſvv. runneth on ſtill more and more. Beſides that the Reader may by this meanes be better informed and directed, hovv to diſcerne and judge of the opinions and differences that are at this day hereabout, among whomſoever, vvhether Proteſtants, or Anabaptiſts, or any other.