Animadversion to Cliftons Advertisement, Part 3 · Point 6
The 6. point of difference: in the letter.
WE had learned aConfess. art. 38.that al particular congregations are by al means convenient to have the counsel and help one of another, in al needful affaires of the Church, as mēbers of one body in the common faith: yet here when differences had arisen about our common faith, and could not amongst our selves be cō posed, they would not desire nor consent to have desired, the help of our sister Church at Leyden, although it were instantly urged by many members that their assistance should be had.
With this they joyn the 9. out of the printed copy, to the effect of the former.
Against this they except, 1. that though for some reasons they absteyned from desiring it, or sending for them, or giving their consent so to doo: yet they were content to permitt it: which was not a denying of the practise of it, as the printed copy objecteth &c 1 Cor. 7.6. Deut. 24.1. I answer; the scriptures on which we grounded that article, being Act. 15. chap. 1. Cor. 14.33.36. shew an other manner of dutie, then a permission. For when dissention had arisen in the church of Antioch, they bAct. 15.2.ordeyned that some should goe up to Ierusalem, unto the Apostles & Elders about the question. And the messengers were cvers. 3.sent forth of the Church, and dvers. 4.were received by the Church at Ierusalem, & the Apostles and Elders, who ever. 25.came togither with one accord, & after discussing and agreement, wrote to the Church of Antioch, what had fvers. 28. &c.seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to them. And Paul sheweth a reason of such mutual entercourse, when he sayth, Came the word of God out from you eyther came it unto yow onelyonly? 1 Cor. 14.36. Wherfore seing the word of God, was come unto the Church of Leyden, as unto us; and considering the practise that was in the APOSTOLIKE Churches heretofore, and our profession to walk according; it is but a sory answer to say they would permitt of it, if others did it; as Moses aDeut. 24.1.permitted the bill of divorse, for bMat. 19.8.the hardnes of mens harts; and as Paul spake a thing c1 Cor. 7.6.by permission, not by commandement. For we think those Apostolical practises, Act. 15. to be in sted of commandements unto us, Philip. 3.17. And our Confession noteth it as a dutie, even by al means convenient. By this al may see, how weak a defense they make, for their proceedings.
Their reasons folow; 1. that the other Church & we were in peace togither: & if by this occasiō the peace should be brokē, they should not say, they sēt for thē. I answer, this exceptiō wil lye against al Churches in the world that are at peace: and might have been objected by the contentious at Antiochia; Act. 15. and wil be colour to cut off al use of that practise, and of our former profession. 2. That the Church of Leyden was in the same error with us who desired their help. I answer; this also might the troublers of the Church in Antioch, have objected as colourably against the Church of Ierusalem, Act. 15. & it is a barr to cut of al help from other Churches. Yea if any heresie be raysed by the officers in a Church, contrary to their former faith: they may thus except against al Churches, unless they wil fal into the same errors with them.
3 Thirdly they allege former experience with others. I answer, we never had experiēce of the like: M. Smyth in deed leaving the truth, and broaching his heresie against the translated scripture, would needs publish it in our Church. It is one thing to raise up a new error, as did he: an other thing to mainteyn the ancient faith, as did the Church of Leyden with us. So that which they fourthly allege, is but a pretence that al wil make, be their errors never so new; & they that urged circumcision Act. 15. could plead the anciēt practise in Israel, farr better then these our opposites can doo for the power of their Eldership.
4 Their next exception about a letter written by some to that church, a copy wherof was desired, but not granted &c. is an occasion taken by that accident. But they know, that before that letter was written, they signified their unwillingnes to intreat their help: and now were glad, that they had gotten a show to hold them off. 2. For the Letter mentioned, I did think it was meet they should have sent it, and so I wish they had: though they shewed reasons of their not doing it for the present, but have since that time sent thē a copy.
5. They next object, my own subscribing of those letters to Leyden &c & ask whether I denyed the practise of that article &c. I answer; first I had sundry times signified in publick my mind, that their help should be desired in the end, if we could not agree, but we would first use al means among our selves: & so I never was of their mind, who refused absolutely to desire their help; & this they wel know. Secondly, I subscribed those Letters, because I thought it meet that a copy of the foresayd letter should have been sent, as before I signified. Thirdly for the last letter (which to my remembrance I consented to,) they know I refused to subscribe it, til some words which implied an absolute denyal of requesting their help, were put out and changed. Fourthly, when no means among our selves could end the strife, they know, how I both intreated them to consent they might be sent for: & when they would not, my self went and obteyned their cōming. In deed I was loth to trouble them without urgent cause; & with my brethren now opposite, I sought to nourish peace, & it may be more then I should; which now they thus return upon me: and I therfore shal bear, and make use of it for hereafter.
6. Of their reasoning with them when they came from Leyden, it is not to the point in hand. Yet how unwilling they were even to admit of it, all present then did see: and the Elders of the church of Leyden, as occasion is can testifie. But I forbear to insist upon particulars: which are not so profitable for the readers.
7. Finally they ask why we did not desire the counsel and help of the Dutch & French churches? I answer, first these our opposites with us, had before dealt with them against their errors in this and other points, so farr as we could, and ended with them. What reason had we now to call for them to defend that errour which our whole church had condemned? Secondly, they could not discuss the cōtroversie in our English tongue, to the understanding of our Congregation novv troubled: no nor of al our Elders. Thirdly, these that thus object, did not (to my remembrāce) desire any such thing: if they had, I should not for my part have refused so absolutely as did they. But thus have they turned every stone, to see if they could find any colour, for vvithstanding the help of the Church of Leyden: vvith vvhat vveight and equitie, let the prudent judge.