The Unreasonableness of the Separation Made Apparent, Answer 1

The Unreasonableness of the Separation Made Apparent · Answer 1

THE MAINE CONcluſion of M^r. Johnſons Reaſons, as it is propounded by himſelf, is this, That it is not lawfull to heare or hauehave any ſpiritual communion wit the preſent Miniſtery of the Church, Aſſemblies of Englande.

WHich hee laboureth to proue. 1. By Reaſons (as hee fancieth) drawne from Scripture, and other Teſtimonies.

2. By Argumentes collected from the writeinges of them, whom hee ſtileth (in diſdaine) forward Preachers. And this hee performeth as far as the remainders of his logick skill will giuegive him leaue, in moode and figure. But the figure for the moſte part is of his owne ſhapeing, ſuch as neuer came forth of any logick Schooles: yet feing the truth hee oppoſeth receaueth noe diſadvantage therby. I can (for my owne parte) be content that his Syllogiſmes ſtil retaine thoſe formes and figures, that hee hath put vponupon them, and ſpare the labour of Tranſlating them into nue. And ſo without any further expence of wordes, I come to the Examination of the firſt ſort of Reaſons.

THE FIRST SORTE OF Reaſons from the Scriptures and other Teſtimonies Examined.

The firſt Reaſon Examined.

All are bound in the worſhip of God to heare and communicate onelyonly with that ministery which Christ hath giuen, and ſet in his Church for that worke.

But the preſent Ministery of the Church Aſſemblies of England, is not that which Christ hath giuen, and ſet in his Church for the worke of his Ministery.

Therfore it is not lawfull for any in the worſhip of God to heare or communicate with the preſent Ministery of the Church Aſſemblies of England.

Anſwere.

Not to contend about the Propoſition. I deny the Aſſumption: and affirme, That the preſent Miniſtery of our Church Aſſemblies (how ſoever it may in ſome particuler parts of the execution, happely be defectiue in ſome places) is, (for the ſubſtance thereof) that very ſame Miniſtery which Chriſt hath ſet in his Church for the worke of his miniſtery whether it bee the miniſtery of thoſe which hee calleth the forward Preachers, or of thoſe which being qualified according to the true intēt of the lawe, do ſubſcribe, and conforme according to the laws of the State.

Fr. Ihon.

The Ministery which Christ hath giuen, and ſet in his Church, is, of Apostles, Prophets, Euangelists, Pastors, and Teachers ſpoken of Eph. 4.11.12.

But the preſent Ministery of the Church of England is none of theſe ſpoken of Eph. 4.11.12.

Therefore it is not the Miniſtery which Christ hath giuen and ſet in his Church.

Anſwere.

The preſent Miniſtery of the Church of England (1. of the Church Aſſemblies of England) is the Miniſtery of Paſtors and Teachers.

Fr. Iohn.

The preſent Miniſtery of the Church of England is of Prelates, Priestes and Deacons.

But nether Prelates, Prieſtes, nor Deacons of that Church, are Pastors or Teachers ſpoken of Eph. 4.11.12.

Therefore it is none of thoſe ſpoken of Eph. 4.11.12.

Anſwere.

I denye both Prepoſition and Aſſumption. For 1. Though our Preletes, doe ſometimes voluntarily and occaſionnally performe the ſame worke and ſeruice in ſome of our Church Aſſemblies, which our ordinary Miniſters doe, yet their Prelaticall or Epiſcopall office or Miniſtery is not the proper Miniſtery of any of our Church Aſſemblies. But (in the intent of our lawes) their propre Miniſtery conſiſts in overſeeing the Miniſters and Miniſtery of our Church Aſſemblies.

2. Though ſometimes our Miniſters be called PRIESTS and DEACONS yet the MINISTERY vnderunder thoſe names aſſigned vntounto them, and which they exerciſe is not the proper and eſſentiall Miniſtery of either Prieſtes or Deacons; but of Paſtors and Teachers: Soe that they are onelyonly in aequivocation, and name, or Metaphorically Prieſtes and Deacons: But really Paſtors and Teachers, and therfore ſuch Prieſts and Deacons, may bee, and indeede and truth are ſuch Paſtors and Teachers as are ſpoken of Eph. 4.11.12.

Fr. Iohn.

The Prepoſition is manifest.

1. The Law of that Church admitteth not any other Miniſtery, but that of their Prelacie Priesthoode and Deaconry, receaued amongst them ſelues or from the Papistes.

2. Their Conſtitution is ſuch as all the Miniſters of that Church must bee Priests or Deacons, and theiſe alſo either in a Superior degree as the Prelates, Arch. Biſhops Suffraganes &c. or in an inferior, as Parſons, Vicars, Stipendaries, Chaplins.

Anſwere.

1. It is not neceſſary that the Miniſtery of a contrey or nation ſhould be alwaies ſuch as the law eſtabliſheth or admitteth: The Miniſtery (at leaſt in ſome places) may be good though the law in generall ſhould admit and eſtabliſhe ſuch a one as is bad: as on the contrarye ſide, the miniſtery may at ſome times, and in ſome caſes be bad, though the laws admit, & eſtabliſh neuer ſoe good; for the Gouernors of Churches and common wealths who hauehave the diſpenſation of lawes, may in their Chriſtian wiſedome, and moderation permitt a miniſtery in ſundrie reſpects different from that which the laws require; yea and our owne Gouernors in fact hauehave permitted the miniſtery of ſome, who neuer receiued ordination, either from Papiſts or themſelues. And hee cannot be ignorant but that ſome by connivencie are yet ſuffred in ſome points of their miniſtery to ſwerue from ſome obſervances which the lawes require. The Argument therefore will not follow, from the qualitie of the miniſtery, except hee can proue that our Miniſtery is in all our Aſſemblies, in all reſpects aimſwerable to our lawes.

2. The Preeſthood which the law admitteth is not called Sacerdotius but Presbyteratus, and the Prieſts are not called Sacerdotes or ſacrificers but Presbyters, (as ſufficiently appeares by our orders in Latin.) Therefore the Law doth not intende any true and proper Prieſthood but onelyonly boroweth the name to expreſſe an office of another kinde.

3. To bee Perſons, Vicars, Stipendaries, Chaplins, &c. is not to hauehave a diuers kind of Prieſthood or deaconry, or Miniſtery (as hee fooliſhly conceiteth:) onelyonly varietie of Tytles is giuen to the ſame kind of Miniſtery, in diuers perſons, in reſpect only of a diuers kinde of maintenaunce or dependance, for Parſons are ſuch as hauehave all tythes in kinde; Vicars ſuch as hauehave only the ſmaller Tyths, the other being impropriated by the Magiſtrate for other purpoſes; Stipendaries are ſuch as are maintained by the voluntary Contribution of their Churches or by ſome ſuch like meanes. Chaplins are ſuch as depend vponupon great men; The Miniſtery of all which (If they duly execute the ſame) is one and the ſame, even that (and noe other for ſubſtance) which is proper to true Paſtors and Teachers.

Fr. Iohn.

The Aſsumption is prooued by their 7. Arguments following.The. 1 Arg.

The Paſtors and Teachers ſpoken of Eph. 4.11. hauehave their offices, callings, adminiſtration and mainetenaunce ordained by Chriſt in his Teſtamente, Eph. 4.8.11.12. and Rom. 12.7.8. Act. 14.23. and 20.17.28. Heb. 5.4. Col. 4.17, 1. Theſ. 5, 12.13.14, 1. Pet. 5.1.2.3. Reu. 2. and 3. and 22.18, 1. Cor. 14.1. and 5.4. and 9.14. and 11.23. and 12.28. Gal. 6.6.

But the Prelates, Prieſts & Deacons of the Church of England, hauehave not their offices, Callings, Miniſtration and Maintenaunce ordained by Chriſt in his Testament.

Ergo. They are not Paſtors and Teachers ſpoken of Eph. 4.11.

The Aſſumption appeareth by their Conſtitution and practice, in as much as their offices of Prelacie, Prieſthood, and Deaconry, their calling, and entraunce, according to their Pontificall, Their choyſe of their people, whoe ſtand themſelues vnderunder Antichriſt, and vnſeperated from the worlde, and are noe true viſible Churches of Chriſte. Their Ministration by their owne, and other Popiſh Canons, Artes Iniunctions, and booke of Common prayer, their maintenaunce by Tyths, Lordſhips &c. were neuer ordained by Chriſt for his Miniſtery, but diriued from Antichriſt and his Apoſtaſye, as hath bene proued by vsus in diuers treatiſes.

Anſwere.

1. The Propoſition is not true, except hee vnderſtand by offices, Callings, and adminiſtration, the Subſtantial, or Eſſentiall parts therof. Otherwiſe thoſe very Paſtors and Teachers ther ſpoken of, may hauehave diuers acceſſary parts of their offices callings and adminiſtration not ordayned by Chriſt in the newe Teſtament. Nether is it true, Yf by maintenaunce hee meane any ſpeciall kind of maintenaunce. It is to be graunted in generall. That Miniſters, are to hauehave ſufficient maintenaunce, and the texts a ledged for that proues noe more, and therfore that which they proue, is nothing to the purpoſe; As little to the purpoſe are the other Texts, for it will not follow from any force in them, but that there may bee ſundry accidents cleauing as parts to the offices, calling, and maintenaunce of true Paſtors, and Teachers, which Chriſt neuer ordained.

2. Concerning the Aſſumption. 1. whether Prelates hauehave their office, calling &c. ordained by Chriſt is beſids the preſent queſtion. Except M. Iohnſon can proue that they are ordinary Miniſters of our Church Aſſemblies; which I am ſure hee cannot. 2 Soe many of our Miniſters (whoe in the booke of ordination are called Prieſts and Deacons) as in all points concerning the ſubſtaunce of their Miniſtery, are qualified according to the intent of the lawes, hauehave their offices, callings, adminiſtration and maintenaunce for the ſubſtaunce therof, ordained by Chriſt: And yet I deny not, but ther may be ſome accidentall defects, or Superfluityes in and a bout them all; yet ſuch as doe or cannot be proued to deſtroy the nature and ſubſtance of any of them.

3. All that is brought to proue the Aſſumption is falce, and as much if not more controuerſal then the Aſſumption it ſelfe. For 1. hee can neuer proue, that either the practis of all our Miniſters, is in all things according to that Conſtitution, or their conſtitution according to their practis, or either of them anſwerable to the ſtrict termes of the law in all points. 2. Hee can neuer proue, that either in their conſtitution, or practis, or by the law they are in proper ſpeech, either Prieſts or Deacons; only hee preſumes them to be ſuch, becauſe through ſome libertie of ſpeech vſed in the lawes, they are termed ſuch. Though it ſhould bee graunted that our people ſtand vnderunder, ſome kinde of obſervances, and offices which in their owne nature, and firſt originall, are in ſome kinde Antichriſtian; Yet they are of ſuch a nature, that divers worthy Martyrs of Ieſus Chriſt, that hauehave with ſtood Antichriſt vntounto blood, hauehave ſtood vnderunder as much as wee. And therfore ſuch a manner of ſtanding vnderunder Antichriſt, cannot be ſaid to overthrowe though it may ſomwhat ſtaine the Miniſtery of Chriſte. But howſoeuer, hee herein ſhamefully begs the queſtion, in the naked affirming, without any prooffe, That all in this kingdome are vnderunder Antichriſt.

4. Though (for avoyding further controuerſie) that ſhould be graunted him, that ſome parts of our miniſtratiō by the Canons, &c. was neuer ordayned by Chriſt. Yet at the leaſt the maine principall, and Eſſentiall parts therof performed according to the Canons and booke a foreſaid, are ordayned by Chriſt; yea by M. Iohnſon himſelf. Nether hath hee proued or euer can proue, That that part of our miniſtration, by our Canons, and booke a foreſaid, which Chriſt hath not ordayned (If any ſuch bee) is of that nature and qualitie, that it neceſſaryly deſtroyeth or maketh a nullity of the other parts of their Miniſtery, which vſe them.

5. Though Tythes and Lordſhippes and manners in perticulers, bee not ordayned by Chriſt for the maintenaunce of Miniſters, yet they are as much ordayned as any other particuler, or ſpeciall kind of maintenaunce, It is the will of Chriſt that the Miniſters of the Goſpell ſhould liue of the Goſpell. i. ſhould bee manietanied for their Miniſtery ſake by them to whome they preach the Goſpell. But in what particuler manner that maintaynaunce ſhould bee rayſed, hee hath noe wher defined and therfore left it to the diſcretion of Chriſtian Magiſtrates or Churches.

6. Wheras for the proofes of theis maine pointes, hee referreth vsus to the generall Tytles of certaine Treatiſes formerly publiſhed, hee might as well ſend vsus (as they ſay) to ſeeke a needle in a bottle of hay, and why doth hee not in all other points of this booke, as well as in the is, ſend vsus to the ſaide Treatiſes? ſeeing hee ſaith nothing throughout this in effect, that hee hath not all ready ſaide in ſome one or other of his former bookes.

Fr. Ioh. pag. 8.

The Miniſtery of Paſtors and Teachers ſpoken of Eph. 4.11. The 2. Arg.is the ordinary and perpetuall Miniſtery giuen by Christ to his Church, and ſuch as the Princes of the Earth nether may nor ever ſhall bee able to aboliſhe, ſeing Chriſt hath appoynted it to continue to the end of the worlde.

But the Prelacie Preeſthood, and Deaconrye of the Church of England is not the ordinarije and perpetuall Miniſtery giuen by Chriſt to his Church, but ſuch as the Princes of the Earth may and ought to aboliſh out of their Dominions. Rev. 17, 16 1. Tim. 2.2. Rom. 13, 4. with 1. Kin. 23.3. deu. 12.2. Pſa. 72.1.

Therfore the Preeſthood Prelacie and deaconrye of the Church of England is not the Ministery of Paſtors and Teachers ſpoken of Eph. 4.11.

Anſwere.

Idenye the Aſſumption. Vnderſtanding by Prelacie Preeſthood and deaconrye, The ordinary Miniſtery of our Church Aſſemblies againſt which hee propounds to himſelf to Diſpute; And aunſwer. That it is the ordinary and perpetuall Miniſtery, giuen by Chriſt to his Church, and ſuch as the Princes of the Earth are bounde by Gods Lawes to maintaine and protect by their Authoritie; And if their bee any corruption in and aboute the ſame, which they ought to aboliſh that yet they are accidentiall and perſonall; and not ſoe Eſſentiall as that they doe Diſtroy the Miniſtery.

The places of Scripture anexed to the Aſſumptiō for the proofe therof, are all abuſed and profaned for not on of them doth any way ſoe much as colourablye proue either of the Clauſes in the Aſſumption, but only they proue in generall, That the Idolatry and Idolatrious Miniſtery of Antechriſt is to be aboliſhed: Soe that the man in his ſymplicitie, takes it as graunted; That our Miniſterye is ſuch an Idolatrious Miniſtery; which is the maine matter in Controuerſy, and in effect the generall queſtion of his whole booke.

Fr. Iohn. pag: 9.

The Office of Paſtors and Teachers ordayned by Chriſt in his Teſtament, The. 3. Arg.are ſuch as did or could ſtand, with the offices of the Apoſtels, Prophetes and Euangeliſts.

But the offices of the Prelates, Prieſts or deacons of the Church of England, are not ſuch as did, or could ſtand, with or vnderunder the offices of Apostles, Prophets and Euangeliſts: which if any deny, let him ſhew the Countrary, by the Scriptures; Light hath no fellowſhip with darknes; nor Chriſt with Antichriſt. And ſuppoſe the Apoſtles were a liue in their Perſons, and were in England, It were worth the knowing, whether they and the ordinances giuen by them, ſhould giuegive place to the Prelates, and their Canons, and whether they ſhould be ſuffred to preach, &c. without ſubſcribing, and conforming. Their Canons vrge all vponupon paine of Excommunication ipſo facto.

Therfore they are not the Paſtors, and Teachers ordained by Chriſt in his nue Teſtament.

Anſwere.

1. What a ſhameleſſe man is this to affirme, That our Miniſtery nether did nor could ſtand with the offices of the Apoſtles &c. and for proofe therof bid vsus, If we deny it ſhew the contrary by Scriptures. Doth not the burden of prouing by the very lawe of Common Reaſon ly vponupon the accuſer? If I ſhould in like manner reproch his Miniſtery, & ſay it is a Miniſtery that ſtandeth vponupon Sorcery, witch croft and Coniuration and for proofe therof bid him, If hee deny it ſhew the countrary by Scripture, were I not worthy at leaſt to bee laughed out of the Scholes. This is a ſufficient juſtification of our Miniſtery; that ſuch Malitions aduerſaries therof, whoe woulde ſeeme ſoe expert in the Scriptures; are no better able by Scripture to proue their vnchriſtian accuſation.

2. It is true, that light hath noe followſhip with darknes, nor Chriſt with Antichriſt. Yet ther is no light in men in this life, but it is mingled with ſome darkneſſe; and the beſt Chriſtians that are, or euer hauehave bene ſince the Apoſtles times, may be infected with ſome points of Antichriſtianiſme. Many of the late Martyrs ſince the revealing of Antichriſt, were worthy lights, and renoumed Chriſtians, and yet the light of many of them, was mingled with more darkneſſe, and their Chriſtianitie with more Antichriſtianiſme, then can be founde in our Miniſtery.

3. Our Biſhops hauehave as good reaſon, to make the like ſuppoſition againſt him, and as much worthy the inquirie that were, if the Apoſtles, &c. were a liue now in their owne Perſons where hee liueth, and ſhould profeſſe the Church Aſſemblies in Englande to be true Churches, and their Miniſtery in generall to be a lawfull Miniſtery, and their worſhip for ſubſtaunce to bee a true worſhip, whether M. Iohnſon and his Church would ſuffer them to be ſoe much as priuate members, of their Society, much more to preach, &c.

4. Though our Biſhops ſhould herein be ſoe impious as to advance in ſuch a manner, their owne Authority, and ordinances aboue the Apoſtles. Yet what is that to proue that the Preeſthoode and Deaconry of the Miniſters of our Church Aſſemblies, (who many of them in theis pointes are meere patients, and eſteeme of theis things as burdens) cannot ſtand with the offices of Apoſtles, &c. doth M. Iohnſon think that none of our Miniſters in England would ſuffer the Apoſtles to preach in their Cures, without wearing a Surplice, If they might hauehave their owne wils, or ſhould this any whit derogate from their Miniſtery, that the Biſhops therin would not ſuffer them to hauehave their will.

5. It is beſids the preſent queſtion, and a needleſſe thing to ſpend time in juſtifying the Canons herein: If the Biſhops therin hauehave gonne too far, it may ſeeme to bee the fault of the Parſons, rather then of the Prelacie it ſelfe, and therfore to make and vrge ſuch Canons, and Traditions as are a fore ſaide doth not proue, but that for all that, the Prelacie & in of it ſelfe, might ſtand well enough with the offices of the Apoſtles &c. for thoſe offices may of themſelues, (If their bee noe other impediment) ſtand well one with an other, which in the actions therof doe not (but by accident only) one overthrowe or oppugne the other.

Fr. Iohn. pag. 9.10.

The offices of true Paſtors, The 4. Arg.and Teachers are by the ordinaunce of Chriſt ſet in the Church, and imployd in the Miniſtery of the word, Sacraments & Church Gouerment, ſoe as they may not, with their Eccleſiaſticall functions receaue Cyvill offices, and callings, nor take vponupon them princely Titles and dignities. Eph. 4.11, 1. Pet. 5.1. Rom. 12.2.4. Luk. 12.14. and 22.25. 1. Cor. 12.5.8. 1. Tim. 4.13.15.16. 2. Tim. 2.4.

But the officies of Prelates, Prieſts, and Deacons of the Church of England, are not ſoe, but by their owne Conſtitution we ſet in the Church, and imployd in the Miniſtery ſoe as they may alſo receaue Cyvill offices and Callings, as to be Iuſtices of Peace, &c.

Therfore they are not true Paſtors and Teachers.

Anſwere.

Ther are 4. Termes in this Syllogiſme, The groſſe Sophiſterye wherof may appeare by the Explanation therof in others wordes.

True Paſtors & Teachers may not (viz. by Gods lawe) take vponupon them Cyvill offices.

The Miniſters of England may (viz. by Mans lawe) take vponupon them Cyvill offices.

Therfore they are not true Paſtors and Teachers.

This is the effect of his Argument, & who is ſo blind, but hee may ſee the fallacie therof. And it is as though we ſhould reaſon in the like manner againſt their owne Miniſtery, thus,

True Paſtors & Teachers may not bee Drunckards, Anabaptiſts, Familiſts.

The Miniſters of the Seperation at Amſterdam may be Drunckards, Anabaptiſts, Familiſts.

Therfore they are not true Paſtors and Teachers.

This Aſſumption is as true as the former, for the ſame kinde of Authoritie that permits our Miniſters to bee Cyvill Magiſtrats, doth permit them to bee Drunckards &c. The goverment vnderunder which they liue, permitteth the one to more, then our ſtate doeth the other.

But I anſwer more particulerly.

1. That by the ſame lawe, that our Miniſters may take vponupon them Cyvill Magiſtracie; Any true Paſtors, and Teachers, may take vponupon them, the ſame Authority, and by the ſame lawe that true Paſtors and Teachers, may not take Cyvill Authoritye vponupon them our Miniſters may not take the ſame vponupon them.

2. All our Miniſters may not (noe by the lawes of our State) take vponupon them Cyvill Authority; But ſuch only as are called ſpecially therto, by the fauours, & grace of the Cyvill Magiſtrate, not as they are Prelats, Prieſts or Deacons, or by vertue of thoſe functions; but in reſpect of other qualifications. Nether are the forced by any law to adjoyne any ſuch Authoritie to their Miniſtery, but permitted only. But what if by the lawes of men, Miniſters might be Murtherers, Adulterers, Theeus, &c. ſhould theis lawes chaunge the nature of their Miniſtery? what? of their Miniſtery that denye vntounto themſelues that lycence; would it not rather the more juſtify their Miniſtery; when in Conſcience of Gods law, they ſhall for beare that which fleſh, and blood and humaine laws would permit vntounto them.

3. Suppoſe not onelyonly that it is vnlawfull for any true Paſtors, and Teachers, to bee Cyvill Magiſtrats, but that alſo by our lawes, all our Miniſters, were forced therunto, and that by vertue of their Miniſtery, will it thence follow, that for this cauſe, they are not true Paſtors and Teachers; May not true Paſtors and Teachers, in their weackneſſe, ignorance, and infirmities (the laws of the State requiring the ſame) admitt of ſome kind of office or Authoritie, for bidden them; but they muſt needs ther vponupon ceaſe to bee true Paſtors, & Teachers? doth the admitting of every vnlawfull thing chaunge the nature of the Miniſtery, and make it either noe Miniſtery, or a Miniſtery of an other kinde.

Fr. Iohn.

The Miniſtery of Chriſtian Paſtors, and Teachers, The. 5. Arg.ſtandeth by the word, and ordinance of Chriſt, ſo as all Churches vnderunder Heaven, are bound to receaue, and ſubmit thervnto.

But the Prelacie, Preeſthood and Deaconry of the Ghurch of England ſtaundeth only by the Authoritie and Law of man, ſoe as other Churches els wher, nether are nor neede to bee ſubjecte thervnto; which euen themſelues of all ſorts hauehave acknowledged; for which ſee Whitgifts defence in the Preface. The Anſwer to the Abſtraucte pag. 58. The Admonition to the Parlement; The defence of the Godly Miniſters the demonſtration.

Therfore it is not the Miniſtery of Chriſtian Paſtors and Teachers.

Anſwere.

I deny the Aſſumption. The Miniſtery of our Church Aſſemblies of England, whether of Prelates, Prieſts or Deacons, or by what other names ſoeuer they be called, for the ſubſtance therof, ſtandeth by the word, and ordinance of Chriſt, and not onelyonly by the Authority and law of man: And all other true Churches, are and ought to be ſubject, to the ſame kinde of Miniſtery, and to noe other, that ſhall in any Eſſentiall point of Miniſtery differ from ours.

If any Perticuler Parſons amongſt vsus, hauehave bene ſoe vnaduiſed to graunt the Aſſumption, let them anſwer for themſelues; Hee hath noe more reaſon to binde vsus to their opinions, then wee to binde him vntounto whatſoeuer his predeceſſours Browne, Barrowe, and Greenwood hauehave held before him. Concerning ſome of the particulers, Doctor Whitgifts words are theis, The ſubſtance, and nature of Gouerment muſt indeed by taken out of the word of God, and conſiſteth in theis parts. That the word be truely taught, the Sacraments rightly adminiſtred, virtue furthered, vice repreſsed, and the Church kept in quietneſſe and order: The offices of the Church, wherby this Gouerment is wrought bee not namely, and particulerly expreſsed in the Scripture, but in ſome points left to the diſcretion, and libertie of the Church, to be diſpoſed according to the State of times, Places, and perſons. The Author of the Anſwer to the Abſtract in the place aledged ſaith, That it cannot be proued that any ſet and exacte particuler forme of diſcipline is recomended vntounto vsus in the word of God. Now are either of theis to affirme, That the Miniſtery of our Church Aſsemblies ſtaundeth only by the lawes and Authoritie of Man? Hath M. Iohnſon any ſhame left in his face that thus ſhamefully abuſeth the names of learned, and reuerent men, ſoe directly contrary to their words and meaning. Is ther not cauſe to ſuſpect that the other Authors, are in like manner abuſed, and that for the better hideing of his fraude, hee forbeareth to quote any particuler places; Being therfore convinced of depravation, in the places particularly quoted, wee may preſume, that if the other places had bene more pertinent, hee would hauehave giuen vsus ſome particuler directions alſo for the finding of them; And the rather, for that hee cannot be ignorant, that thoſe whom ſpecially hee fighteth againſt in theis Argumēts, doe rely vponupon the judgement of the Authours following, more then of the former.

Fr. Iohn.

The offices of Paſtors, The 6. Arg.and Teachers, which Chriſt hath appointed, are ſuch as they which hauehave them muſt bee members of a true viſible Church, and bound to one perticuler Congregation for the Miniſtery and Gouerment therof.

But the Offices of the Prelats, Prieſts, and Deacons of the Church of Englande, are ſuch as they which hauehave them, need not bee, neither in their State can bee members of a true viſible Church, but of a fals, neither are bound to one perticuler Congregation for the Miniſtery and Gouerment therof, but the Prelates are our whoele Prouinces, and Dioceſſes & other inferior Prieſts, may hauehave in that State pluralitie of benefices and Eccleſiall Cures &c. which none can deny.

Therfore they are not the Paſtors & Teachers that Chriſt hath appointed.

Anſwere.

Though ſome parts of the Propoſition bee diſputable; Yet becauſe other beſids the Seperation doe hould the whol for truth. I will leaue it in medio.

The Aſſumption is falce; eſpecially if it bee vnderſtoode (as it ought to bee) of the offices of ſuch Prelats, Prieſts, and Deacons as are Miniſters of our Church Aſſemblies. For moſt of thoſe which hauehave ſuch offices are, and are bound to be members of true viſible Churches; And cannot in their Eſtate (they being in all points anſwerable to the lawes) be members of a falce Church; They are all (ſuch excepted as hauehave ſpeciall diſpenſations) bound to one particuler Congregation, and may not by law, hauehave more Cures then one; but admitting of a ſeconde, the firſt is voyd; Yea the Prelats thēſelues; though in regard of their Prelaticall office, they are Gouernors of whole Prouinces, & dioceſſes, yet it is poſſible for them (not withſtanding) to be members (in their Eſtate) of a true viſible Church, and bee bound (as are the Prelats of Scotland) to one particuler congregation for the ſpeciall Miniſtery and Gouerment therof. And though the other Miniſters may hauehave in that eſtate pluralitie of benefices, and Cures, yet it doth not follow, that therfore they are ſuch, as in their eſtate cannot be members of a true viſible Church; excepte they hauehave thē indeede, yea & though they ſhould be pluraliſts indeede, yet (for ought hee hath proued to the contrary) they may bee membres of true viſible Churches, and may each bee bound to one particuler Congregation, for the Miniſtery and Gouerment therof.

But what man, except hee were halfe frantick, wold reaſon, thus, Our Miniſters may bee Pluraliſts therfore they neither are nor can be true Paſtors and Teachers; Is not this rather one of the honors then blemiſhes of our Miniſters; That they may be pluraliſts, and yet are not. If by our lawes their owne Aſſemblies were eſtabliſhed If by the ſame lawes their Paſtors and Teachers, might bee non reſidents or pluraliſts, or worſe, would they think hemſelus euer the worſe for this? would they not rather thinke themſelus the better that they are not ſoe bad, as by mans lawe they might bee.

Fr. Iohn.

The Offices Condition and Gouerment of Paſtors and Teachers, The 7. Arg.are ſuch as noe way impaire the Authority and Supremacy of the Syvill Magiſtrate.

But the offices, Condition and Gouerment of Prelates, Prieſts & Deacons, are ſuch as doe many waies impaire the Authoritie Supremacie and dignity of Kings, and all other Magiſtrats both in Civill, and Eccleſiaſticall Cauſes. For the Prelates will hauehave their preſence, voice, and Authority, to be at Parlaments, for enacting of lawes and Statuts for the Common wealth. They are Rulers of whol Prouinces, and dioceſses in the Eccleſiaſticall cauſes therof.

In Civill State, and dignity, ſome of them are aboue all, and all of them, aboue ſome of the Nobles, Iuſtices, and other Magiſtrats of the Lande. Themſelues their Courts and officers handle and determine ſundry Civill Cauſes, and affaires, appertaining to the Magiſtracie; They inflict Civill Mults, and puniſhments; In their forbidden times they giuegive licence to Mary. The beneficed Prieſts ſweare Canonicall obeidience to the Prelats. All the Prieſts and Deacons are exempt from the Magiſtrats Iuriſdiction in diuers things appertaining vntounto them, and anſwerable onelyonly or cheifly to the Prelats and their officers.

Therfore they are not the onelyonly Paſtors and Teachers ſpoken of Eph. 4.11.

Anſwere.

The Aſſumption is falce, nether doe the inſtances proue the ſame. 1. The Prelats claime their voices in Parlament not as diuine ordinaunces appartaining to their Prelateſhip, but as an honor annexed to the ſame by the Civill Magiſtrate.

2. Their Authority in Cauſes Eccleſiaſticall ouer Prouinces, &c. is either ſuch as the Civill Magiſtrate himſelfe may execute, and adminiſter in his owne perſon if hee pleaſe; or ſuch as is not for them, as they are Magiſtrats, to execute. The firſt ſort they adminiſter only, by vertue of the Magiſtrats owne Commiſſion, and therin they cannot impair either his dignity, or Supremacie much leſſe in the other part of their Authoritie, which belongeth not to the Magiſtrats themſelues to execute eſpecially when they vſe it not nether, without their conſent, lycence, and approbation.

3. That all are aboue ſome, and ſome aboue all of the Nobles, and Iuſtices, &c. is a free and voluntary honour graunted vntounto them by the Civill Magiſtrate, and held in tenure from him, and not claimed (as I thinke) as belonging to their Epiſcopall function, by diuine right.

4. Their Courts determine noe other Civill cauſes, then the Civill Magiſtrate, and his lawes do permit, or if they doe the falt is in the Parſons, and not in the Prelatſhip; further they inflict Civill puniſhments, giuegive lycences, exacte Oathes, &c. by Authority from the Magiſtrat whoſe ſubſiſtutes therin they are. And therfore the Prelates neither in theis, nor in any of the former inſtances can bee ſaide to impaire the dignity, Authoritie, or Supremacie of the Civill Magiſtrate, when herein they doe all things, in and by the protection of his Authoritie, much leſſe can other inferior Miniſters who hauehave noe dealing in the aforeſaid matters. Laſtly if all our Miniſters be exempt from the Magiſtrats Iuriſdiction, in ſome things appertaining vntounto them (but wherin I knowe not) this very exemptiō it ſelfe, is an act of the Magiſtrats Iuriſdiction & depends, onelyonly vponupon his pleaſure! & how can it thē, any waies impair the ſame. & hytherto hee hath dealt by Syllogiſmes ſuch as they are, now for a concluſion of this firſt Argument, hee ſhoots at rouers as followeth.

Fr. Iohn.

To this end diuers other reaſons might be aledged, for example If they ſay that Arch Biſhops hauehave the Paſtors, then they hauehave but two. If Lord Biſhops, then but 26. and what office then hauehave the Arch Biſhops amongſt them. If the other Prieſtes, then what office hauehave the Arch Biſhops: and Biſhops ſeing God hath or dayned noe higher ordinary Eccleſiaſticall office, as ſome of them-ſelus acknowledg. If they ſay the deacons hauehave the Paſtors office, the ſame abſurdity followeth as in the former beſids that the works of the deacons office are oppoſed to the worke of the Miniſtery. Act. 6.2. with. Eph. 4.11. Rom. 12.8. If they ſhould ſay they hauehave the Teachers office, it would be known, which of their officiers hauehave it amongſt them, and to whom they are adioyned for the worke of Miniſtery, as Teachers are to Paſtors, and what office the reſt hauehave whom the accompt not to hauehave the Teachers office & whether the Teacher ſpoken of Eph. 4.11. muſt firſt bee deacons; and then Prieſtes and permit obeydeince to the Prelates; and that alſo is to their ordinaires, and be ſylenced and depoſed at thtir pleaſure.

Anſwere.

Here hee thinkes hee hath knitt ſuch Gardian knotts as cannot be vntide, without a ſword or a bill; but the Simplicitie of the man here in is to bee laughed at, for 1. though ſome ſhould ſay, that either our Arch Biſhops: or Biſhops hauehave the Paſtors office, yet ther in they doe not exclude the other Miniſters, from that which is the ſubſtance, and effect of that office, though they ſhould from the name; No nor frō the name neither, but ſhould therin onelyonly make degres of paſtours, viz. of Arch Biſhops. over Biſhops and their Dioceſſes of Biſhops over Miniſters and their Churches, and of Miniſters ouer their owne Congregations; Leaving vntounto them (not with ſtāding the Superioritie of the other Paſtors) that maine and Subſtantial office of the Paſtor which is enough to define and denominate a Paſtor. And therfore they may make ſuch Paſtors, as are over whole Prouinces but two, & ſuch as are over whole dioceſſes but, 26. and yet hold alſo without any abſurditie, that their are alſo as many Paſtors beſyds, as ther are Miniſters of a particuler Congregation. And though it ſhould be graunted that herein they were deceaued in making Provinciall and dioceſme Paſtors; yet the ſorteing of vnproper Paſtors; with true or the ſubiecting of true Paſtors vntounto other ſorts of Paſtors, doth not neceſſarily make the true Paſtors fals, ſoe long as vnderunder them they performe, the name, and ſubſtantiall duties of true Paſtors; which all the Miniſters of our Church Aſſemblies doe, or by the lawes ought to doe.

2. If any hould that the Miniſters of perticular Congregations, onelyonly are Paſtors, thē they may without any abſurdity hould that they Arch Biſhops, and Biſhops, are generall Cōmiſſioners vnderunder the King to ſee that the Paſtors doe their duties, and in that regard, may alſo Metaphorically, and in another ſence bee called Paſtors, as Princes themſelves are ſoe called, in good and approued Authors; and what abſurdity can follow vponupon this? Or what if they which hould the Miniſters of perticular Congregations to bee Paſtors, could not tell what to make of the office of Arch Biſhops and Biſhops, whats that to the purpoſe? are not our Miniſters, and Teachers therfore Paſtors, becauſe they which ſhall hould them to bee ſoe, cannot tell what to make of the Calling of Arch Biſhops and Biſhops?

3. Though this ſhould bee yelded vntounto him that all Paſtors are equall, and that the Paſtors of perticular Congregations, are the higheſt ordinary Eccleſiaſticall officers; yet ſhould this make nothing to the confirming of his conceit, That our Miniſters are not therfore true Paſtors and Teachers, becauſe then Arch Biſhops and Biſhops ſhould be excluded; for this doth not exclude them from being Commiſſioners, and Viſitors in cauſes eccleſiaſticall vnderunder the King over the Paſtors, and Churches, of ſuch and ſuch Prouinces and Dioceſſes, which is to giuegive thē their principall honour, & due. 4. Concerning the Teachers office (not to contende needleſly, with him about the nature and quality therof but to ſuppoſe a Teacher in that ſence which hee meaneth) This may reaſonably bee held; That ſome of our Miniſters, (whether Prieſts or Deacons ſo called, or whether Parſons, Vicars, Curats or Stipendaries) are Paſtors and ſome Teachers, That ſo many of them as hauehave and vſe the gift, not onelyonly of doctrine and inſtruction, but of Exhortation, are Paſtors, That thoſe which wanting the power of Exhortation, and yet hauehave & vſe the gift of inſtruction and doctrine are ſuch Teachers, as hee meaneth. And therfore herein alſo if it ſhould bee yealded vntounto him, That it were fit that every Congregation ſhould hauehave both theis offices; and that the Teacher ſhould be the Paſtors Aſſiſtant, yet it doth not follow, but that in want of ſufficient men, for both theis offices in every Congregation, ſome may inioy one, and ſome an other. For if the Churches of their owne way, and conſtitution, may bee without both Paſtors & Teachers, and that for a long time, till men may be choſen vntounto that office? Why may not a Church much more in the like neceſſity retaine a Paſtor without a Teacher, or a Teacher without a Paſtor, Can hee proue by any colour out of Gods word, That one cannot bee called vntounto, or execute the office of a Paſtor vntill hee hauehave a Teacher to aſſiſt him, or that hee cannot execute the office of a Doctor, except hee do it as an actuall aſſiſtant of ſome Paſtor? If not, then is this a moſt frivolous demaunde, when hee askes to whome our Teachers are adioynd for the worke of their Miniſtery: nether doe the places hee quoteth viz. Eph. 4.11. Rō. 12.7. proue any ſuch matter. 5. As idle and impertinent is that demande which followeth whether the Teachers ſpoken of Eph. 4.11. muſt firſt bee Deacons, & then Prieſts, & promiſe obeidience to Prelats, & be ſilenced and depoſed at their pleaſures. For what if noe ſuch matters bee required of Teachers by Paul, either in that or any other place, doth it thervpon follow, that their ſubmiſſion to ſuch things, makes them noe Teachers! may not Magiſtrats, & others alſo require, ſome things of Teachers, not required by the Apoſtles, but they muſt needs thervpon, become no Teachers? But what repugnauncie is their in theis matters, to the office of a Teacher? To be a Deacon in the intent of our lawes what is it, but (as himſelfe out of our booke of ordination hath in effect publiſhed it) To read the Seriptures, Pag. 31.& to pray in the Church to Catechiſe the Iōger ſort, to baptize & to preach if the Biſhop ſhal think him ſitt. what is it to bee a Prieſt, or Presbyter in our law? hath not himſelf alſo taught vsus? viz. Pag. 32.To hauehave authoritie to Preach the word, and to Miniſter the holy Sacramentes in the Congregation, wher hee ſhalbe appointed, what obeidience doe they (promiſe to Prelates in the intent of the lawe? but onelyonly in things that they ſhal judge honeſt, and lawfull, and not repugnaunt to the word of God; what is it to bee ſylenced and depoſed, but to forbear to Miniſter publiquly (as themſelues doe alſo forbeare) vponupon the Magiſtrats pleaſure: for the Biſhops pleaſure ſoe far as they proceede according to the lawes, is the Magiſtrats pleaſure, otherwiſe it is but a perſonall fault. And wherein Imarvaile doe any of theſe acts, ſo oppugne the office of a Teacher, that they cannot ſtand together! wher doth Paul forbid any of theis acts vntounto the Teacher? or if hee ſhould, doth eueryevery Act forbidden to a Teacher, make him noe Teahcer?

Fr. Iohn. pag. 14.

Wheras ſome alledge that the people were to hear the Scribs and Phareſees ſitting in Moſes Chayre it is to bee noted, that they were Leuits and Prieſts and therfore had the true offices appointed by Moſes. This therfore is nothing for a fals Miniſtery, ſuch as theirs is proued to bee. further to bee a Pharefye was not to hauehave a new kinde of Miniſtery, but to bee of a ſpeciall Sect amongſt the Iewes that pretended more ſtrict obſervances of the law, and might bee of any Tribe. Laſtly though the were corrupt, yet did the hould, that very true Miniſter muſt bee from heauen: and this hauehave the forward Preachers acknowledged, as T. C. pag. 83.

Anſwere.

Here abſurdly, and Childiſhly hee goeth about to anſwer ſuch an objection, as noe body ever made againſt any thing contained in the former Argument. This Argument onelyonly is vſed in generall to ſhewe, that ſome corruptions in Miniſters and Churches are not of that nature, that men ſhould therfore ſeperate from all Spirituall Communion with them, And wher hee ſaith, that this is nothing for any fals Miniſtery neuer ordained of the Lord, ſuch as ours is proued to bee: Noe man ever brought it to proue any ſuch matter; But onelyonly to proue that ſuch corruptions as are in our Miniſtery, ought noe more to hinder, communion with our Miniſters, then the corruptions in the Miniſtery of the Scribes and Phareſees, did hinder the communion, with their Miniſtery, and that the corruptions in our Miniſtery doe noe more argue our Miniſters to bee fals Miniſters, then their corruptions, did argue them to bee fals Miniſters: Nether hath hee brought any Argument to proue our Miniſters fals Miniſters, but either ſuch corruptions, as the Scribes and Phareſees were guilty of, in as high if not a higher degree, or in reſpect of their names, in that they are called Prieſts and Deacons; So that if the Scribes & Phareſees were true Miniſters, not with ſtanding their names, and other corruptions, our Miniſters cannot bee fals, in regard of the like names and corruptions: furthermore if to be expounders of the Law, bee ſufficient to argue their Miniſtery to bee a true Miniſtery, nothwithſtanding their names of Scribes and Phareſees, with other vile & groſſe corruptions; why may not the Preaching of the word, and adminiſtration of the Sacraments bee ſufficient to argue, our Miniſters to bee true Paſtors, and Teachers, notwithſtāding that in the mouth of the law, they are ſometimes called Prieſts and Deacons. For otherwiſe in the mouths of men; euen of the Biſhops themſelues they are not ſo called; except ſometimes by Metaphoricall alluſions to the Leviticall Preeſthood; But they are vſually ſo called onelyonly by profane Atheiſts, or ignorant people, with whom in this point, the Seperation goeth hand in hand.

2. To bee a Phareſie was not onelyonly (as hee minceth the matter) to be of a ſpeciall Sect amongſt the Iewes, that pretended more ſtrict obſeruances of the law then others. But alſo (which as it is to be feared with a fraudulent minde hee concealeth) to joine mainy humaine Traditions, and will-worſhips to the worſhip and ſeruice of God (wherby they are ſaide by Chriſt himſelfe, in vaine to worſhip God, and to make the commaundements of God of none effect;) making more accompt of; and vrging with more ſeverity the ſaid Traditions, then Gods owne laws; And in like manner, wee affirme, That to bee a Prieſt and Deacon, in the intent of our law (whatſoeuer the words may ring to the contrary in ſome mens eares) is (at the worſt) to bee ſuch a kinde of paſtor and Teacher, as is content, over and beſids thoſe duties of the Miniſtery which Chriſt requires of them to yeald conformity alſo to humaine Traditions, of noe worſe nature and quality in themſelues, then thoſe which the Phareſies vſed in or about Gods ſeruice, wherin to ſuppoſe that they ſin, yet cannot this their ſin be ſo repugnant to the Miniſtery of Chriſt as that of the Scribes and Phareſies, which they are forced to acknowledge to be a true Miniſtery, In that they were the vrgers of Traditions, wheras our Miniſters (for the moſt part) onelyonly yeald vntounto them, either in obeidience and louelove; or feare of the Magiſtrat that commaundes them. Laſtly wheras hee argues them true Miniſters by this, that though they were very corrupt, yet the did ſtill hould that eueryevery Miniſtery muſt bee from Heaven, and not of men. It deſerues rather to bee laughed at, then anſwered. For may not yea doe the falſeſt Miniſtery that are or ever hauehave bene, hould ſo much, at leaſt in ſuch a ſence and meaning as the Phareſies might hould it. And can hee name any amongſt vsus, that houlds not as much?

THE SECOND REASON. EXAMINED.

Fr. Ihon.

NOne may heare or hauehave any Spiritually communion with the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie.

Such is the Miniſtery of the Church Aſsemblies of Englande.

Ergo,

None may heare hauehave any Spirituall communion with the ſame.

Anſwere.

I graunt the Propoſition; taking the words in the plaine and common ſence viz. vnderſtanding by the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtacie. The adminiſtration and diſpenſation of the things of Antichriſt; otherwiſe to communicate ſpiritually with any Miniſters what ſoeuer onelyonly in the holy things of Chriſt, is not to communicate with the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtacy, no though the Miniſters be Miniſters therof. Nether do the 5. Reaſons following whereby hee needleſly proues his prepoſition, proue it vnlawfull to heare or hauehave any ſpirituall communion with the Miniſters of Antichriſt, then, when they Miniſter the things of Chriſt.

For the profe of the Aſſumption hee makes a terrible muſter if no leſſe then 7. Arguments. But let vsus pull vp our Spirets, and ſee what is in them, one by one.

Fr. Iohn.

The Miniſtery of Deacons and Prieſts ordained by the Prelats thervnto is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy.The 1. Arg.

The Miniſtery of the Church Aſsemblies of Englande, is ſuch a Miniſtery.

Ergo,

It is of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie.

Anſwere.

Hee brought this very Argument to proue the firſt Reaſon and now hee brings it againe for a profe of his ſecond Reaſon: And is not this a learned kind of reaſoning? when hee will make a ſhew of multitudes of Reaſons againſt vsus, and yet all of them come to one iſſue and lie vponupon one ground, and depend vponupon one profe; ſo that the overthrowe of one, is the overthrowe of all: But his childiſh vanitie herein wee ſhall better perceaue in that which followeth.

Both the Propoſition and Aſſumption are fals; For 1. It is not neceſſary, that the Miniſtery of Prieſts, and Deacons, though ordained by Antichriſt himſelfe, ſhould be the Miniſtery of his Apoſtacy; But not withſtanding his ordination, their Miniſtery may be the Miniſtery of Ieſus Chriſt; As was the Miniſtery of Luther, Huſſe, Wickliffe and others.

2. The Miniſtery of ſuch manner of Prieſts and Deacons, as the Prelats ordaine, (or by the lawes ought to ordaine) is the true Miniſtery of Ieſus Chriſt, and for the ſubſtance therof, directly contrary to the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy.

3. The Miniſtery of our Church Aſſemblies, is not (as I hauehave ſhewed before) the Miniſtery of Prieſts and Deacons properly ſo taken, but of Paſtors and Teachers.

The Propoſition hee proueth as followeth by two Arguments.

Fr. Iohn.

The Miniſtery of Deacons and Prieſts which accompts it ſelfe to bee Chriſts, and yet was not ſet by Chriſt in his Church, for the worke of his Miniſtery, is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy.

Such is the Miniſtery of Deacons and Prieſts, ordained by the Prelats therevnto.

Ergo,

It is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy.

Anſwere.

This Argument is it which hee bringeth for the firſt Reaſon of all; and here hee brings it to proue that which before was brought to proue it. For hee proues, That our Miniſtery is not ſet by Chriſt in his Church, by this becauſe it is the Miniſtery of Prieſts and Deacons, and ſo by conſequent of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie. Here hee proues, That the Miniſtery of Prieſts and Deacons is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie, Becauſe it is a Miniſtery, that was not ſet by Chriſt in his Church; This doth hee moſt groſly runne round in a circle, as if I ſhould proue that his Miniſtery is vnlawfull, becauſe hee is a Schiſmatick, and that hee is a Schiſmatick, becauſe his Miniſtery is vnlawful. The 2. Reaſon wherby he proues his Propoſition followeth.

Fr. Iohn.

2. If the Prelates of the Church of England hauehave ſuch offices, and Gouerment as be ſpeciall parts of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie, then the Miniſtery ordained by them thervnto muſt needs bee the Miniſtery of that Apoſtaſie.

But the Prelats of the Church of England hauehave ſuch offices and gouerment, as bee ſpeciall parts of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy.

Therfore the Miniſtery ordained by them is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie.

The conſequent is manifeſt, becauſe the fruit muſt needs bee as the tree is. Mat. 7.16. and who can bring a clean thing out of filthineſse. Iob 14.4.

The Aſsumption is proued.

1. Whoſoever (beſids Chriſt) hauehave ſuch offices and Gouerment, wherby the claime to bee ſpirituall Lords, the hauehave the offices, and Gouerment which are ſpeciall parts of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy, and are indeed very Antichriſts themſelues.

But ſuch are the Prelats of the Church of Englande.

Therfore the hauehave ſuch offices and Gouerments, as are ſpeciall purts of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy.

The Propoſition is proued by thoſe places of Scripture which teach that there is but one ſpirituall Lord, the Lord Ieſus.

The Aſsumption is proued by the lawes, and Statutes of the land, wherin they are called Lords Spirituall, and in their Canons they take vponupon them to preſcribe their owne ordinaunces to the Ghurch for the worſhip of God, and binde the ſpiret and couſcience to the acknowledgement, and approbation therof, and to giuegive the holy Ghoſt.

2. The offices and Gouerment of ſuch Biſhops, as are ouer Dioceſan, and Prouinciall Churches, and exerciſe Eccleſiaſticall juriſdiction ouer all the Miniſters and people therin, are ſpeciall parts of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie.

But ſuch are the Prelates of the Church of Englande.

Ergo,

They hauehave ſuch offices and gouerment as bee ſpecially parts of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie.

Anſwere.

1. I deny the cōſequent of the Propoſition of the 1. Sillogiſme. The officers & gouernors of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy, may & hauehave ordained ſome things that are Chriſtian, Nether doth the ſaying of Chriſt or Iob proue the conſequent; for though it ſhould be graunted vntounto him, that the gouernors of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy hauehave ordained this Miniſtery; yet doth it not follow that it is therfore a propre & meere fruit of Antichriſt, but may be an dentall effect, as are many other things which hee ordaineth agreable to Chriſts owne ordinaunces, ſo that hee muſt proue that our Miniſtery ordained by the Pope or Biſhops, doth as properly flowe from the nature of their office and gouerment, as figs from a fig tree, or grapes from a vine, or filthy water from a foule fountaine; The contrary wherof is in this caſe moſt euident. For leaue the bare names and tytles, and conſider our Miniſtery in all the eſſentiall parts, and offices therof, and it is a poſſible, either for a Presbythery, or for any perticuler Church, ſuch in conſtitution as their owne, to ordaine the like Miniſtery in all points and reſpects, with all the defects and faults therof.

2. Concerning the firſt profe of the Aſſumption, The Propoſition may bee denied; It being one thing to bee, and another to make claine to bee, for eueryevery one is not that which hee claimeth to bee, The Inſtances alledged to proue the Aſſumption, either are fals or proue it not. The lawes may giuegive their titles, to men which they doe not claime. Neither doe either their Canons or practis ſhew that they preſcribe their owne ordinances for worſhip or propound to binde mens conſciences to the acknowledgement of any ſuch matter. The profeſſe the contrary, and vrge their owne ordinaunces onelyonly vnderunder the name of things indifferent, Though therfore in error of iudgement, they may, and happily doe commande ſuch ordinances of their owne, as are diuine worſhip, and in ſuch a manner as it bindeth conſcience (which M. Iohnſons owne Church in many caſes may doe, except they think themſelues priviledged from error) yet they proteſting againſt any ſuch power and authority, they cannot be ſaide therin to arrogate the office of Spirituall Lords, in that ſence at leaſt, in which Chriſt is ſaid to bee the only Spirituall Lord. And though in their ordination of Miniſters, they vſe as a ceremoniall ſpeech to ſay, Receaue the holy Ghoſt; and therin peraduenture offer ſome force vntounto the Scripture vntounto which the allude; yet they diſclaime al actuall power and authority of giuing the perſon or gifts of the holy Ghoſt vntounto men.

It ſhall bee needleſſe in this controverſie, to ſpend time in the defence of the calling of Biſhops any further then the neceſſity of the argument requires, OnelyOnly for the further clearing of the truth in the differences of them of the Seperation not only from the Biſhops, but from the other ſort of Miniſters alſo, which doe not approue of their callings, I offer theis pointes vntounto them to conſider of adviſedly.

1. Whether the Supreame Magiſtrate hauehave not power to ouer ſee, and Gouerne all the ſeverall Churches with in his dominions, yea whether hee bee not bound ſo to doe?

2. Whether for his further helpe and aſſiſtance herein hee may not make choiſe of graue learned and reuerent men to aſſiſt him in the ſame gouerment.

3. Whether by vertue of his power theis perſons thus called to aſſiſt the Supreame Magiſtrate, may not lawfully try the gifts of all the ſeverall Miniſters with in his dominions, and giuegive publique approbation of the worthy, & inhibit thoſe which they finde vnworthy, frō the execution of their Miniſtery, & whether they may not viſit the ſeverall Miniſters and Churches, conuent them before them, examine them, how they hauehave behaued themſelues in their places, and puniſh the blame worthy.

4. Whether for the more eaſy and orderly Gouerment of the ſaid Churches, ſo far forth as appertaineth to him, hee may not devide his kingdom (as ours is) into Provinces aſſigning over each of them vnderunder himſelf ſome ſpeciall Magiſtrat for learning and experience to overſee, and gouerne all the perticuler Churches there, and whether hee may not ſubdevide thoſe Provinces into Dioceſſes, aſſigning alſo to them, other more inferior officers, vnderunder him, and his provinciall officers, to over ſee the ſeverall Churches with in ſuch, and ſuch a precincte?

5. Whether it doe deſtroy the nature of a Miniſteriall or a perticular true viſible Church, that many of them ſhould appertaine vntounto one Provinciall or Dioceſame gouerment, though in that reſpect they ſhould bee held and reputed, but for one Provinciall, or Dioceſame Church?

6. Whether Antichriſt hauing vſurped the Kings Supremacy, and taken into his hands this authority and corrupted the ſame, hath made it now vnlawfull for the Magiſtrate to execute the ſame in manner and forme a fore ſaide; or whether the Iuriſdiction a fore ſaide doe not directly and properly belonge to the Civill Magiſtrate, and not to Antichriſt. But by vſurpation; And whether his vſurpation of this office can make it a part of his Apoſtaſie in thoſe places where it is reſtored againe to the Supreame Magiſtrate.

7. Whether the Supreame Magiſtrate recerving this his right from Antichriſt, and together with it happily taking alſo to himſelfe ſome thing alſo that belonges to the Kingdom of Antichriſt: & executing the ſame either in his owne perſon or by others, together with his owne lawfull right, whether (I ſay) this doe deſtroy his owne lawfull right? and whether the ſubiect is ever the leſſe bounde to ſubject themſelues vntounto the ſame right, either in his owne perſon, or his ſubſtitute.

Hither to hee hath indevoured to proue the Propoſition of the firſt Argument, wherby hee would confirme, the Aſſumption of his 2. reaſon, and now hee ſets vponupon the profe of the Aſſumption. Namely, That the preſent Miniſtery of the Church Aſsemblies of Englande, is the Miniſtery of Deacons, and Prieſts ordained by the Prelats ther vntounto. This hee ſaith is proued by the Canons conſtitutions & obſeruation of our Church; And this hee confirmeth firſt by a longe, tedious and idle reherſall of the forme of ordination of our Miniſters, beſtowing coſt to print, in a manner our whole booke of ordination.

2. By certaine of the late Canons preſſing ſubſcription, conformity, and an acknowledgement of the lawfulnes of the calling of Biſhops, and of their ordination.

3. By certaine ſharpe ſpeeches of ſome Martyrs and of ſome others of our owne Nation againſt the Arch-Biſhops, Biſhohs, & other of the cleargy of their times. In the relation of which pointes hee ſpends ſome 5 leaves; wherin ſtill hee runs in a circle begging one of his arguments to proue an other, So that one of his Arguments are as good as all, and all no better then one; This may ſuffice for anſwere. 1. That if all particulars mentioned in the booke of ordination ſhould bee ſtrictly, and preciſely practized (as alwayes they are not) yet ther is not one clauſe in the whole forme of ordination by him cited, that doth neceſſarily argue them, which are ſo ordained, to bee true and proper Prieſts, and Deacons; But if ther were and if alſo the Miniſters ordained, were anointed with oile, if their crownes were ſhawen, and they had power giuen to offer the abhominable Idole of the Maſſe, yet this is not ſufficient to argue, that their Miniſtery is the Miniſtery of Prieſts, &c. except in their Miniſtery they ſhould execute the ſame. If their owne Church ſhould ordaine one to the Miniſtery of a Paſtor, and ſhould in their ordination require him only to preach the worde ſincerely, and to adminiſter the Sacraments according to Chriſts inſtitution, and yet in his practis and execution, hee ſhould do nothing, but ſing Maſſe and Mattens, and they ſhould accept of this Miniſtery, and no other, at his hands; would any that is in his wits, ſay that this mans Miniſtery, is the Miniſtery of a Paſtor: becauſe hee was in formality of words & ceremonies ordained to that office, how much leſſe can any ſay that our Miniſtery is the Miniſtery of Prieſts, when they doe not only execute any ſuch office, but the clean contrary; and when in their ordination not ſo much as any parte of a Prieſts office (properly ſo taken) is aſſigned vntounto them, but only the name; and not ſo much as their name in their orders written in Latin, which are to interpret the meaning of the Engliſh worde.

2. Though the Miniſters ſhould doe all things required, by the canons, and ſhould bee every way anſwerable vntounto them, And though the Teſtimonies of our Martyrs and others were yealded to bee true, yet muſt hee ſtreiue hard, that can from either or both, argue that our Miniſters, are indeede Prieſts, except in a Metaphoricall, and borrowed ſpeech.

The other Arguments wherby hee proueth the maine Aſſumption of the 2. Reaſon viz. That the Miniſtery of the Church Aſsemblies of England, is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy, followe.

Fr. Iohn.

The Miniſtery of the Prelacie profeſsing it ſelfe to bee Chriſts, The 2. Arg.and yet ſtanding in ſuch an eſtate as it doth not obey Ieſus Chriſt in his ordinance of Miniſtery, worſhip and gouerment of the Church, as their Prophet, Prieſt and King, is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy.

Such is the preſent Miniſtery of the Church Aſsemblies of Englande.

Ergo,

It is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy.

Anſwere.

To the Propoſition I anſwer, That not onelyonly the Miniſtery of the Prelates, but of a Presbytery, or any Church whatſoever that ſtands in ſuch an eſtate, is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtacie; And not onelyonly the Miniſtery of the Prelats, but any other Miniſtery els vponupon earth, may ſtand in ſuch an eſtate, as that it may in diuers, and ſundry Perticulers of (ignorance or infirmity) diſobey Chriſt in his owne ordinances of Miniſtery, worſhip, and gouerment of the Church, and in that reſpect, and ſo far forth bee the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy, & yet bee alſo the Miniſtery of Ieſus Chriſt. Hee proues the Propoſition by 19. places of Scripture; to as much purpoſe, as if by as many Teſtimonies, hee ſhould proue that it is day lighte at high noone; Except hee meane, That that is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie, doth not in eueryevery perticuler obey Chriſt in his owne ordinances of Miniſtery. But which his 19. proofes hauehave no more force to proue it, then to proue that their is a man in the moone, as any may ſee that hath nothing els to doe, but to examine them.

2. I deny the Aſſumption; The Miniſtery of our Church Aſſemblies, though it bee ordained by the Prelats, and bee ſubject vntounto them, yet it is not their Miniſtery, but the Miniſtery of Ieſus Chriſt; They preaching his worde, & adminiſtring his Sacraments; And it doth (if it bee anſwerable to the law:) obey Chriſt in all the maine eſſentiall parts of his owne ordinaunce of Miniſtery, &c. And in all other points (for ought hee can proue to the contrary) as far as the Lord hath revailed the truth vntounto them which exerciſe the ſame.

But (ſaith hee) the Aſsumption is evident by that which hath bene ſaid in the 1. Reaſon and their Conſtitution it ſelfe ſhewes it, in that they are ſo farre from obeing Chriſt in his ordinances of Miniſtery &c. as that they execute the Miniſtery and gouerment of an other Arch Biſschop, L. Biſhop then Chriſt of an Arch-Deacon, Parſon, Vicar, &c. as alſo in their reading; prayers out of a booke, and obſerving other humaine inventions, and in their Church Gouerment according to Canons, Courts, &c. which were neuer appointed by Chriſt. To omit that here againe, hee begs his firſt reaſon to proue his ſeconde, If the Aſſumntion hauehave noe better evidence, the evidence is fals, as I hauehave made it evident, in the Anſwer to the firſt reaſon? Nether hath hee there or els where (in any of thoſe other of their wrightings which hee ſends vsus vntounto pag. 40.) proued that our Miniſters do not obey Chriſt, in his ordinance of Miniſtery, worſhip, and Gouerment, yea though it ſhould be graunted that they execute the Miniſtery, and Gouerment of other Arch Biſhops, and L. Biſhops beſids Chriſt. And though they ſhould bee Arch Deacons, Parſons, Vicars, reading ſtinted prayers, &c. For all this may bee donne yea and they may ſinne ſome way in doing all this, and yet they may obey Chriſt in all the maine eſſentiall and ſubſtantiall pointes of his Miniſtery worſhip and Gouerment.

Fr. Iohn.

The Miniſtery of Chriſtians which is oppoſed againſt and exalted aboue the holy things, Miniſtery & ordinances of Chriſt, The 3. Arg.is the Miniſtery of Autichriſts Apoſtaſie, 2. Theſ. 2.3.4. with 1. Ioh. &c.

Such is the Miniſtery of their Church Aſsemblies.

Ergo,

It is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie.

The Aſsumption is euident, 1. Aman may peaceably receaue or adminiſter, their holy things in their manner, by vertue of their Deacoury or Prieſthoode, receaued from their Prelats.

But if any doe adminiſter or receaue the holy things of God by the offices of Paſtors, and Teachers entred into and executed according to the Teſtament of Chriſt, they are reviled and perſecuted.

2. Their Prelacie, Prieſthoode, and Deaconry is the very meanes of thruſting away and keeping out of the Church the Miniſtery and order which Chriſt hath appointed, which ſome of themſelues hereto fore hauehave acknowledged, and written.

Anſwere.

1. The Miniſtery of our Church Aſſemblies being anſwerable to the lawes, is not a Miniſtery exalted in any thing, aboue the Miniſtery of Chriſt, but the very ſame in nature and qualitie, though in ſome accidents it may differ. In which difference, if ther bee any ſinne, it is of ignorance, or infirmitie in the Miniſters; which may in as high or a higher degree befall vntounto the beſt Miniſters that ever were ſince the Apoſtles times.

2. The holy things which they adminiſter are the holy things of Ieſus Chriſt, and not of their owne, & by vertue of that Prieſthoode and Deaconry which they hauehave receaued they may not adminiſter any other holy things but what Chriſt Ieſus requireth. The other things which they adminiſter are iudged by them which adminiſter them; onelyonly things indifferent and matters of order, wherein if they which vſe them be deceaved, it is but ſuch an error as worthy Martyrs of Ieſus Chriſt hauehave bene ſubject vntounto, and not ſufficient to make their Miniſtery an Antichriſtian Miniſtery.

3. The Prelats doe not perſecute any true Paſtors and Teachers, ſo much for Miniſtering any of the holy things of Chriſt, as for refuſing to conforme to ſome ſpeciall ordinances of their owne, which they doe not hould to bee holy things, but matters of order, & which by reaſons they hauehave indevoured to proue to bee ſo: wherein the practis of Prelats is noe more extreame, then their owne, who cenſure as farr as they can, in all extremity, all them whoe doe not in al points, conforme and agree to their owne orders, ceremonies and Church policie.

4. It can never bee proued, that the admittance of this Miniſtery, is a hindrance of a better, but rather it is a meanes to keepe out a wors, and away in time to bring in a better, if a better bee to be brought in, for by yealding to ſome things that may be bettered & is ſo wiſhed and indeavored, a dore is opened to Miniſter many holy things, which otherwiſe ſhould bee ſhut. And if it bee as lawfull, for vsus to conjecture, as for him, Their general Schiſme and rent from this Miniſtery, hath bene one maine and principall meanes to vphoulde it as it is.

Fr. Iohn.

The Miniſtery which is ſuch as in the nature and condition therof it pertaineth not to any body or eſtate either civill or eccleſiaſticall but only to the body or kingdome of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie.The 4. Arg.

Such is the Miniſtery of their Church Aſsemblies.

Ergo,

It is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie.

The Aſsumption is clear, in as much as their Prelacie, Prieſthood, and Deaconry; is ſuch that the Civill State may bee perfect without, them and the Church of Chriſt may bee compleat without them, onelyonly the body, and Kingdome of the Romiſh Antichriſt, cannot bee full and furniſhed in all the offices therof without them.

Anſwere.

For Anſwere to the Aſſumption,

1. Concerning the Prelacie (though it bee not any Miniſtery of any of our Church Aſſemblies, and therfore Idly vrged, in this and all the other Arguments) this may bee ſaide; 1. That the principall, and moſt honorable parts therof is onelyonly vſurped by Antichriſt, and doth not appertaine to him, but to the Iuriſdiction of the Supreame Magiſtrats, and States.

2. That the State of a Chriſtian common wealth cannot bee perfect, without ſome generall viſitors, and overſeers of Churches. 3. That though a perticuler Church or congregation may bee compleat without them, yet for the neceſſary vnion, and agreement of the ſeverall Churches in Chriſtian Provinces, and Kingdoms, it is fit and agreable to reaſon, and noe wayes repugnant to Gods word, that vnderunder the Supreame Magiſtrate ther ſhould bee, other Governors to protect, and incorrage thoſe Miniſters, and Churches which doe their dutie, and to puniſh thoſe which ſhall offende. Wherin if either through warrant of humaine lawes, or ſome perſonall corruption, they ſhall in ſome things paſſe their bounds, they doe no more then any other officers either Civill or Eccleſiaſticall, through frailtie, & infirmitie may doe. 4. That the kingdome of Antichriſt cannot be furniſhed, in all the offices therof without the Authority of Civill Magiſtrats, and therfore this ſeemes to make as much againſt the calling of civill Magiſtrats as Biſhops.

2. Concerning the Miniſtery of our Prieſts and Deacons, ſuch as it is, or by lawe ought to be in our Church Aſſemblies, the Church of Chriſt cannot bee compleat without it; yea it is noe Church without it. Nether can the kingdome of Antichriſt ſtand before it, Nether will hee ever proue the contrary.

Fr. Iohn.

The Miniſtery which is ſuch as the body of Antichriſt the man of ſinne, The 5. Arg.cannot without it be compleat in all the members and canonicall functions therof is the Miniſtery of Autichriſts Apoſtaſie.

Such is the Miniſtery of the Church Aſsemblies of Englande.

It is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie.

The Aſsumption is proued by the Canons, Pontificall, and eſtate of the Romiſh Antichriſt.

Anſwere.

This Argument is but the taile of the former, & therfore needs noe further Anſwer, it being cut of in the anſwer to the former. The Canons Pontificall, & State. of the Romiſh Antichriſt doe manifeſt the countrary, which hauehave and doe curſe and perſecute with ſworde and fier, ſuch a Miniſtery as is the Miniſtery of our Church Aſſemblies: if it bee in all points to the intent of the law.

Fr. Iohn.

The Miniſtery of Deacons, Prieſts, and Prelates which accounts it ſelfe to be Chriſts, and yet indeed is ſuch, as the Kings and Rulers of the Earth may and ought to ſuppreſse, and roote out of their dominions, is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie.

Such is their Miniſtery.

Therefore it is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy.

The Aſsumption is proued in the former reaſon and in other Treatiſes, and by ſome of themſelues in their Suites to Parlament, and if the Prelats and their conforming cleargy, deny it they are by their owne Canons excōmunicated ipſo facto.

Anſwere.

This ſixt Argument is borrowed from the firſt Reaſon wher it is brought to proue that our Miniſtery is not the Miniſtery of Paſtors and Teachers, as here it is brought againe to proue, that it is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy; Thus then hee reaſoneth, the King may and ought to ſuppreſſe this Miniſtery, Therfore it is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſy. But how doth hee proue, That the King ought to ſuppreſſe this Miniſtery? Hee refers vsus for the proofe therof eſpecially to the former Reaſon, how doth hee proue it ther? Thus. It is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie. Therfore the king ought to ſuppreſſe it. Is not this learned ſtuffe?

Concerning his other Treatiſes, which hee ſo often ſends vsus vntounto, as if they were in every ſtreete and market place of the lande, wee hauehave not ſo much idle time to ſeeke after them: and wee preſume wee ſhall find noe better ſtuffe in them then in this; If any amongſt vsus hauehave put vp any ſuch ſuit to the Parlament, for the Abolliſhing of our Miniſtery in generall, let them anſwer for themſelues; But the Prelats may well laugh at his ſimplicity, and ſeelineſſe of wit, that thinks to fright them with ſuch a bug-beare as this, in making them beleeue that they are by their owne Canons excommunicated ipſo facto, if they deny that the King may, and ought to aboliſh our Miniſtery.

Fr. Iohn.

If it bee ſuch as ſhall bee aboliſhed by the Lord throughout the power, and light of his Goſpell, The 7. Arg.then is it the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie.

The firſt is true.

Therfore the latter is true alſo.

Anſwere.

The ſame anſwer will ſerue to this Argument, that was giuen to the former; For the Aſſumption is fals, The light of the Goſpell ſhall more, and more, confirme eſtabliſh, and perfect it, and remoue all the defects and blemiſhes in it, his profe is as ridiculous, and ſophiſticall, as is the former; for hee proues it by the ſame queſtion, that here it is brought to proue, for ſo in effect proceeds his diſputation.

That which ſhall bee aboliſhed is Antichriſtian.

Our Miniſtery ſhall bee aboliſhed.

Ergo, It is Antichriſtian.

But how doth hee for our learning proue that our Miniſtery ſhall bee aboliſhed, very learnedly and profoundly thus.

That which is Antichriſtian ſhall be aboliſhed.

Our Miniſtery is Antichriſtian.

Therfore it ſhall be aboliſhed.

For this is the effect of that idle diſcourſe of 2. or 3. leaues, viz. pag. 46.-51. tending to proue, That Antichriſt, and all his offices ſhall be aboliſhed.

THE THIRD REASON. EXAMINED.

WHat ſoever Miniſtery is ſuch none can heare or hauehave any ſpirituall communion with it, but in ſo doing hee ſhall worſhip the Image of the beaſt, and receaue his Marke, in his forehead or hand. That Miniſtery may none heare, or hauehave any ſpirituall communion with all.

But the preſent Miniſtery of the Church Aſsemblies of England, is ſuch as none can heare or hauehave any ſpirituall Communion therwith but in ſo doing hee ſhall worſhip the Beaſts image, and receaue his marke in his forehead or hand.

Ergo,

None may heare or hauehave any Spirituall communion therwith.

Anſwere.

This Reaſon for the effect and ſubſtance therof differeth not from the ſeconde, for what is it (by his owne interpretation) to worſhip the beaſts image, but to ſubiect himſelfe to the Miniſtery, and worſhip of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie, and how is it poſſible for him to proue this but by runing to the former Reaſons, for their help therin.

For the profe of the Aſſumption hee ſets vsus downe a tedious and impertinent diſcours of ſome ſix leaues of paper, teaching what is meant by the beaſt & his Image, and by receaving the marke in the forehead or hand, The ſome and effect wherof is this,

That by Beaſt wee are to vnderſtand the Romaine Dominion and Antichriſts hierarchie, withall the offices, lawes, Pag. 51.—63.and authority appertaining thervnto, That by worſhipping the Beaſts Image may bee vnderſtoode the yealding of ſpirituall ſubiection to that Antichriſtian kingdome in the lawes offices and Iuriſdiction therof, That by receaving the marke in the forehead or hand, is publiquely to profeſse and obſerue them not being a ſhamed of the beaſts wayes. And this doe all they who ſubmitte to the goverm̄et of Prelats, Prieſts, Parſons, Vicars, booke worſhip, &c. Not to contende about this interpretation, but to ſuppoſe it true, ther is nothing in ſubſtance here brought to confirme the 3. Reaſon, but that which is in the 2. Reaſon, viz. that therfore wee worſhip the beaſt, in communicating with our Miniſtery, Becauſe it is the Miniſtery of Antichriſts Apoſtaſie. And therfore it needs noe other Anſwer, then what hath bene giuen already. Only thus much further, That for men ſo far forth to ſubmit to the Gouerment of ſuch Prelats, &c. as our lawes doe require, is not to yealde ſpirituall ſubjection to the Kingdom of Antichriſte, nor without ſhame to profeſſe the Beaſts wayes. For they may not withſtanding that bee ſubject to Chriſt and his lawes, and to fight againſt the beaſt. Yea though it ſhould be graunted, that ther, in ſundry perticulers they yeald to ſome things, in their vſe Antichriſtian and vnlawfull; which the beſt reformed Churches and Miniſters, ſometimes of ignorance or infirmity may doe; and yet remaine the Churches and Miniſtery of Chriſt.

THE FOVRTH REASON. EXAMINED.

NOne may heare or joine in any Spirituall Communion with that Miniſtery which deriveth not their power and function of Miniſtery from Chriſt, which is the head for the edification of his Church, which is his body.

Such is the Miniſtery of the Church Aſsemblies of England.

Therfore none may heare or joyne in Spirituall Communion therwith.

Anſwere.

This reaſon is the ſame with the firſt; for it is all one, To be derived from Chriſt, &, To be ſet by Chriſt in his Church, The other words which here hee addeth, Doth noe more vary the force of the Argument, then a new garment put vponupon the ſame witneſſe would make him a nue and different witneſſe from himſelfe.

In the profe of the Aſſumption hee daubes 6. pages, bringing therin, nothing but his ould brokery, the ſubſtance wherof is as followeth.

1. Pag. 64.—70.That our Miniſters hauehave not theſe offices which Chriſt hath giuen to his Church for the worke of his Miniſtery.

2. That it is the Miniſtery of Deacons and Prieſts made by the Prelats.

3. That they were left in England by the Pope, and are ſtill in the Kingdome of Antichriſt wher they firſt roſe, and theefore is deviliſh, and by conſequent the more gifts and truth the Miniſters bring with them, the more the vphould the Miniſtery of iniquitie, and intiſse vntounto their ſtolne waters and hid bread.

4. That our Church aſsemblies are not true viſible Churches of Chriſt vnſeperated from the worlde not joyned together in Communion of the Goſpell by voluntary Profeſsion of the faith and ſubmiſsion to the Gouerment of Chriſt, but ſtanding in bondage vntounto Antichriſt.

The very rehearſall of which reaſons is anſwer ſufficient, he being notable to proue, any of theis aſſertions, but either by the Aſſumption it ſelfe, that they are brought to proue or one by another circularly; Contrarily I affirme.

1. That ther is no ordinary Miniſteriall office that Chriſt hath giuen vntounto his Church, for the worke of his Miniſtery, but our Miniſters either hauehave or by our lawes ought to hauehave the ſame.

2. That it is a Miniſtery as oppoſite for the ſubſtaunce therof, to the Miniſtery of Popiſh, Prieſts, & Deacons, as light is oppoſit to darkneſſe.

3. That the Pope left not ſuch Prieſts, and Deacons as ours are, nor hath any ſuch in his Kingdome; But that our Prieſts and Deacons, hauehave bene vnderunder God and the Prince, the principall Perſons that hauehave driuen, the Pope and his Prieſts and Deacons, out of the Realme; That it is deviliſh for any to ſay that they are deviliſh except they can proue it by better reaſons. That they that hauehave the beſt gifts, doe not intice any to ſtolne waters, or hidden bread, or to vphould any Miſtery of iniquitie; Except the Goſpell of Ieſus Chriſt, and the true and onelyonly meanes of ſalvation; bee the Miſtery of iniquitie.

4. That our Church Aſſemblies being ſuch as by the lawes of the land they ought to bee; are ſo far forth ſeperated from the world, joyned together in the communion of the Goſpell, by the voluntary profeſſion of faith, &c. and freed from Antichriſt, as is ſufficient to make them true viſible Churches of Chriſt, notwithſtanding that many things may bee wanting, to the full and deſired perfection of them. And I doubt not but wee ſhall bee far more able at any time by reaſon out of Gods worde, to proue theis points, then ever M. Iohnſon will bee to proue the contrary. And yet it were eaſie to proue any thing, by ſuch a jugling Method of Reaſoning, as M. Iohnſon hath gotten; For hee can proue you the 1. Reaſon by the 2, the 2. by the 1. The 3. by the 1. and 2, the 1. and 2. by the 3. The 4. by the 1.2. & 3. and every of them by the 4. and all 4. by that queſtion which here they are brought to proue.

THE FIFT REASON. EXAMINED.

Fr. Iohn.

NOne may heare or hauehave any Spirituall communion with thoſe Miniſters, which Miniſter the holy things of God, and worke vponupon the Conſciences of men, by vertue of a fals Spirituall calling.

Such are the Miniſters of the Church Aſsemblies of Englande.

Ergo,

None may heare or hauehave any Spirituall communion with them.

Anſwere.

This Argument which here hee brings againſt our Miniſtery, is the very ſame with the 2. For by a fals Spirituall calling, hee meanes a calling proceeding from the Apoſtaſie of Antichriſt.

The Prepoſition for brevitie ſake hee proues by fiue and thirtie places of Scripture: And yet who ſoeuer ſhall pleas to take the paines to examine them, ſhall finde, that nether ſeverally nor joyntly, they proue the ſame.

The Aſſumption wheron the whole weight of the controverſie, leaneth, hee proueth onelyonly by the firſt Argument, wherby hee proued the Aſſumption of the 2. Reaſon viz. Becauſe they doe it by vertue of their Miniſtery receaved of their Prelats, from their Spirituall Authority, which is vſurped and Antichriſtian; And this is all this witneſſe hath to ſay; and all the anſwer it needeth; OnelyOnly hee wandreth into certaine objections, and queries, grounded vponupon ſome ſuppoſed defences of ſome of our Miniſters; VntoUnto which I will (though I neede not) giuegive a breif anſwer from point to point.

Obj. Some ſay they preach not by vertue of their Miniſtery taken from the Prelats, but by vertue of ſome other calling and Authority.

Anſ. I knowe none hauing receaued ordination from the Prelats, that neede deny that they preach partly by vertue of the Miniſtery which they hauehave taken from them; Noe though they hould the calling of Prelates vnlawfull: For what is the Miniſtery which they hauehave taken from them, for the ſubſtance therof. But (after a triall of their gifts) a libertie, and leaue graunted vntounto them to preach the worde of God, and adminiſter the Sacraments, in ſuch Congregations as they ſhall bee called vntounto.

Obj. Why will ſuch ſeeme to renounce that calling, receaued of the Prelats, and yet blame vsus for doing the like.

Anſ. They may acknowledge a further calling, then that of the Prelats, and yet not therin renounce the calling receaved from the Prelates, but rather ratifie the ſame; For the Prelats being learned divines, and having approued of their gifts, and by words, and letters Teſtimoniall giuen, libertie to execute the Miniſtery of the Goſpell; they doe not therby thruſt them into a Miniſtery, but they leaue them to bee further called or choſen, either by the people, or thoſe Patrons, vntounto whoſe fidelitie the people hauehave committed this charge: And therfore this acknowledging of a further calling, maketh nothing to the juſtification of the proude & ignorant ſchiſm of this Perſons.

Obj. If they preach by virtue of another calling how then ſtande they Miniſters of that Church wher noe other is alowed, and how impoſe they themſelues vponupon any of their Pariſhe Aſsemblies, ſeing the lawes of the land allow onelyonly the Prelacie, Prieſthood, and Deaconry a foreſaide,

Anſ. Though this ſhould be graunted (which hee in his ignorāt ſimplicitie doth ſuppoſe) that ſome amongſt vsus, hauing bene ordained by the Prelates did exerciſe our Miniſtery, by virtue of another calling, and though the law of the land, alow noe other, yet (eſpecially ſo long as they are permitted to execute their Miniſtery by thoſe in Authority, though it bee by virtue of another calling) they are to bee reputed Miniſters of that Church, that hath vſe of their Miniſtery.

Obj. How alſo herein can they avoide to bee both intruders and hipocrits, intruders in taking vponupon themſelues a publique office in that Church againſt the publique lawes and conſtitutions therof, hipocrits, becauſe they pretend in ſhew one thing to the Prince, and State, and yet performe another indeede.

Anſ. All theis inferences are vponupon a fals ſuppoſition; yet if there were any ſuch Perſons, they could noe more therin bee ſaid to bee intruders, and hipocrits then they of the Seperation are; For though the publique lawes ſhould bee againſt any other calling, yet ſo long as they take an office by a good calling, they cannot bee ſaid to intrude themſelues. Nether doe any ſuch amongſt vsus (if ther bee any ſuch) pretend in ſhew any more then they doe indeed performe, for ſo far forth as any differ in iudgement from the publique lawes, of the State, they are ready to profeſſe it, being called thervnto, and they practis onelyonly that, which they iudge lawfull, being as ready, as any of the ſeperatiō to ſuffer, rather then practis approue, or aſſent vntounto any thing, which they judge vnlawfull, and vnwarrantable.

Obj. But ſuppoſe they had ſome other lawfull calling yet they alſo retaining this vnlawfull calling of the Prelats this were but to halt betweene two opinions, and to ſet their threſhould by Gods threſhoulds and their poſts by Gods poſts.

Anſ. How can ſuch bee ſaid to retaine the vnlawfull calling of the Prelats, which proteſt againſt the ſame, & profeſſe that they preach not by that, but by another calling? But if ther bee any ſuch, that exerciſe their Miniſtery by another calling beſids that of the Prelats, they therin refuſe; obeidience, and conformitie to what ſoever in the Prelats calling they judge vnlawfull, and ſo doe not joyne an vnlawfull and a lawfull calling together, but reject the corruptions, retaine the good, and ſupplie the defect with another calling; and this is the worſte that can bee made of it; But this is not to joyne mans Treſhoulds to Gods, &c. but clean contrary, to ſeperate them, as much as may bee; And how can they bee ſaide to halt betweene two opinions, when ſo far onelyonly as the truth (in their iudgement and opinion) is eſtabliſhed by publique lawes they imbrace it, acknowledging their ſubjection to the ſame lawes, and contrarily, wher they judge that the law ſwerves from the truth, they take another courſe, But ſtill hee begs this, (which is the maine controverſie) that our Miniſters hauehave receaued an vnlawfull calling from the Prelates.

In the next place hee labors to proue by reaſons that howſoever ſome pretend another calling, yet it is evident, that the execute all the duties of their Miniſteries, by virtue of their calling taken from their Prelats; But what of that; This will ſtand him in noe ſteed, vnleſſe it bee given him of almes. That every Miniſtery executed by virtue of a calling taken from the Prelats, is an vnlawfull and an Antichriſtian Miniſterie; For proue it hee cannot, And if wee ſhould, except this alſo bee given him, That our Miniſtery is executed ONLY by virtue of a calling taken from the Prelats; and not by any other power, or virtue beſids, taken either from God or man. But let vsus ſee his reaſons.

1. They cannot ſtand publique Miniſters except they receaue of the Prelats the Prieſthood and Deaconry a foreſaid.

2. They are excommunicated ipſo facto, if they affirme that they whoe are made Biſhops, Deacons, and Prieſts, are not lawfully made, vntill thie hauehave ſome other calling.

3. The people hauehave not the liberty of the Churches of Chriſt nor power in this their eſtate to choſe and ſubmit vntounto the true and lawfull Miniſtery appointed by Chriſt.

4. Without and againſt the peoples conſent, they are by the Prelats a lone ſilenced, depriued, and degraded from exerciſiing any Miniſtery in thoſe Aſsemblies.

Theis reaſons doe not proue, That they exerciſe their miniſtery ONLY by virtue of a calling receaved frō the Prelats, and therfore whether true or fals are nothing to the purpoſe, and vnworthy any further Anſwer.

After this hee fetcheth another Rode out, and laboureth to proue, that our Miniſters ought not to ſuffer themſelues to bee ſilenced, and depoſed from their publique Miniſtery, no not by lawfull Magiſtrats, which is not onelyonly fals and ſeditious; as ſhall appeare afterwarde, but idle and impertinent, to the preſent controverſie, for if it were true that Miniſters ought not to doe in this caſe, as ours doe; yet this doth not argue, any corruption in the calling of their Miniſtery, but a weackneſſe onelyonly in the Perſons that execute it, in yealding further from their owne right, then they neede to doe; But let vsus conſider the perticulers, that hee objecteth againſt our Miniſters in this reſpect.

Obj. The Apoſtles being true Miniſters of Chriſt would not at the commandement of lawfull Magiſtrats, leaue to preach, much leſse ſhould true Miniſters, at the appointement of vſurping Prelats. Nether did the Apoſtles make, their imediate calling from God the ground of their refuſall, but this, That they ought to obey God rather then man, which is a duty required of all Miniſters and Chriſtians.

Anſ. 1. Wher hee diſtinguiſheth between ſilencing, & depriving, by Prelats and lawfull Magiſtrats, it is in our caſe, wher the Prelats doe it by Authority, and commiſſion from lawfull Magiſtrats; a diſtinction without a difference. 2. Though the Apoſtles did not aſſigne, their imidiate calling from God, as the ground of their refuſall, in ſo many letters, and ſillables, yet that which they doe aſſigne, is by implication, and in effect the ſame with it; for it is as much as if they had ſaid; God himſelfe hath impoſed this calling vponupon vsus, and not man; & therfore except wee ſhould rather obey man, then God, wee may not forbeare, this office, which hee hath impoſed vponupon vsus. For oppoſing the obeidience of God to the obeidience of man, hee therin pleads a calling from God; and not from man: otherwiſe if they had receaved a calling from man, there had bene incongruitie in the anſwer, conſidering that in common ſence and reaſon, they ought ſo far forth to obey men, forbidding them to exerciſe a calling, as they exerciſe the ſame by virtue of that calling els by this reaſon, A Miniſter ſhould not ceas to preach, vponupon the commandemēt of the Church, that hath choſen him, but ſhould be bound to giuegive them alſo the ſame anſwer which they Apoſtles gaue, which were abſurd. So that by this groſſe conceit of M. Iohnſons, their ſhould bee no power, in any ſort of men whomſoever, to depoſe a Miniſter from his Miniſtery, but that notwithſtāding any comandement: of Church or State the Miniſter is to continue in his Miniſtery. But for the further anſwer of this his ignorant conceit plainly tending to ſedition, wee are to know; That though the Apoſtles, Prophets, and Euangeliſts, preached publiquely where they were not hindred by open violence, And did not, nor might not leaue their Miniſtery vponupon any humain Authoritie and commandement whatſoever; becauſe they did not enter into or exerciſe the ſame, vponupon the will, and pleaſure of any man whatſoever; yet they never erected and planted publique Churches and Miniſteries in the face of the Magiſtrate, whether they would or noe, or in diſpite of them. But ſuch in reſpect of the eye of the Magiſtrat, were as private and inviſible as might bee: Neither were ſome of the Apoſtles onelyonly forbidden, ſo as others ſhould bee ſuffered to preach the ſame Ghoſpel in their places: but the vtter aboliſhing of Chriſtian Religion was manifeſtly intended in the ſilencing of them. But our Churches wherof wee are Miniſters, are noe private & ſecreat Aſſemblies, ſuch as hide themſelues from the face of a perſecuting Magiſtrat, and State. But are publique profeſſing their worſhip, & doing their religion in the face of the Magiſtrate and State, yea and by his contenance, authoritie and protection; And wee are ſet over thoſe Churches, not onelyonly by a calling of our people, but alſo by the authoritie of the Magiſtrate who hath an armed power to hinder any ſuch publique Action: who is willing alſo to permitte and maintaine other true Miniſters of the Goſpel in thoſe places where hee forbiddeth ſome. If therfore after our publique calling, to Miniſter to ſuch a knowne and publique Church, but by the Magiſtrat alſo, The Magiſtrate ſhall hauehave matter againſt vsus, (whether juſt or injuſt it skilleth not) and ſhall in that regard forbid vsus to Miniſter to our Church. I ſee not by what warrant in Gods word, wee ſhould thinke our ſelues bounde not withſtanding to exerciſe our Miniſtery ſtill; Except wee ſhould thinke ſuch a law of Miniſtery to ly vponupon vsus, that wee ſhould judge our ſelues bound, to run vponupon the ſword point of the Magiſtrate or to oppoſe ſword to ſworde. It being not the vſe of the higher powers, in ſuch caſes nakedly to forbid, but to ſet a ſword to the breaſt, therby to force them, which ſhall refuſe. And ſuppoſe the Magiſtrate ſhould doe it injuſtly, and againſt the will of the Church, and ſhould therin ſinne; yet doth not the Church, in that regard ceas to bee a Church, nor ought ſhee therin to reſiſt the will of the Magiſtrate; Nether doth ſhee ſtand bound in regard of her affection to her Miniſter (how great and deſerved ſoever) to deprive her ſelfe of the protection of the Magiſtrat, by leauing her publique ſtanding to follow her Miniſtery in private and the darke; refuſing the benefit of all other publique Miniſtery, which with the leaue and liking of the Magiſtrate ſhee may injoy; Nether doe I knowe what warrant any ordinarie Miniſter hath by Gods worde in ſuch a Caſe ſo to draw any ſuch Church or people to his private Miniſtery, that therby they ſhould hazzard their outward ſtate and quiet in the Common wealth wher they liue, when in ſome competent Meaſure they may publiquely, with the grace and fauours of the Magiſtrat, inioy the ordinarie meanes of their Salvation, by another, (and except hee hauehave a calling to Miniſter to ſome other Church) to bee content to live as a private member, till it ſhould pleaſe God to reconcile the Magiſtrate vntounto him, and ſo call him againe to his owne Church, laboring in meane while, privately vponupon perticuler occaſions offred, to ſtrengthen and cofirme, in the wayes of God thoſe people that are deprived of his publique labours, and I take it to bee the dutie, of the people in ſuch a caſe, if they will approue themſelues, faithfull Chriſtians, and good Subjects, ſo to ſubmit to the Miniſtery of another, as that by prayer and all other good dutifull and loyall meanes, they may doe their beſt indevour to obtaine him of whom againſt their will, they hauehave bene deprived and ſtill to affect and louelove him as their Paſtor. Now if the people doe thus, then is that Miniſter called to bee ſilent not onelyonly by the Magiſtrate, but by them alſo, though with much greife.

Obj. It is the dutie of all Miniſters, and Chriſtians as will as Apoſtles, to obey God, and not man, when man forbiddeth that which God commandeth, or commandeth that which God forbiddeth.

Anſ. True, but God noe wher that I can find, commaundeth either a Miniſter to Miniſter publiquely in a publique Church maintained by the Magiſtrate, againſt the will, and in deſpite of the Magiſtrate, noe more then againſt the will and in deſpite of the Church it ſelfe.

Obj. Vriah at the commaundement of the King made an Alter after the faſhion of that of Damaſcus but therin ſinned, though hee offred theron ſuch burnt-offrings as God had appointed; much leſse may the Miniſtery vnderunder the Goſpell, bee framed after any nue manner deviſed by man leaſt of all after Antichriſt, though in that Miniſtery many doctrines of the Goſpell bee taught, and ſuch Sacraments adminiſtred as God hath ordained.

Anſ. This Example of Vriah the Prieſt is altogether impertinent, vntounto that which goeth before. It being one thing vponupon the commaundement of the Magiſtrate to forbeare the publique exerciſe of a true Miniſtery, another thing vponupon his commaundement to frame a nue Miniſtery after a nue manner devized by man or Antichriſt.

After this hee runs out of his way againe to ſatisfie an objection, that hee had propounded and indevoured (as far as his learning would giuegive him leaue) to anſwer before; And which doth nothing at all depend vponupon any thing that goeth before in this Argument, wherin hee reſembles ſome wanton Curs, that takes delight to turne round about to catch their owne tailes; But let vsus ſee what it is hee ſaith.

Obj. Here againe concerning ſuch as plead that they teach the truth, and many excellent points of Doctrine. It is to bee obſerved, that yet none may therfore heare their Miniſtery vnderunder Coler of learning the truth becauſe in yealding to receaue and heare it from Antichriſts Miniſtery, They defile the Temple of God, and become the Subjects of Antichriſt, pag. 75.

Anſ. Wher hee againe, taketh it as matter that muſt whether wee will or noe, bee graunted vntounto him, That our Miniſtery is Antichriſts Miniſtery, which needs noe other anſwer then before, yet thus much further. 1. That noe Miniſtery whatſoever (ſo far forth as it teacheth the truth of Chriſt eſpecially a truth oppoſite to the doctrine of Antichriſt) is the Miniſtery of Antichriſt; And thoſe which ſhall ſubmit and ſubject themſelues vntounto any Miniſtery whatſoever, onelyonly ſo far forth as they Miniſter and teach ſuch truth, cannot therin bee ſaid to defile the Temple of God, or to bee Subjects of Antichriſt, but bee obedient to Ieſus Chriſt.

2. Our Miniſtery in divers Congregations of the land at the leaſt, Teach not onelyonly many excellent points of doctrin. But ſo much doctrine as is ſufficient to the Salvation of him that beleeueth the ſame; even all the maine fundamentall points of Salvation clearly ſet downe in Gods word; yea and for ought any can proue to the countrary. All other leſſe neceſſary points, ſo far forth, as God hath revealed, and convinced their conſciences of the truth of them.

3. Thoſe amongſt vsus who make conſcience of hearing our Miniſtery, doe not heare them vnderunder a Colour of learning the truth, but onelyonly to this very end, and purpoſe, that they might learne the truth, and therin the true way of ſerving and worſhipping God according to his owne will.

Obj. And not to ſpeake of the many errors & falſhoods which they alſo teach, it is no nue thing that the Miniſters of Antichriſt, ſhould in diuers things teach and bring the truth with them, for when Sathan cannot by falſhood vtter his wares, ordinaunces, Miniſtery worſhip, hee will bee glad to vtter the ſame by teaching the truth. pag. 75.76.

Anſ. 1. Our Errors whether for weight or member, or qualitie, are not ſuch, ſo great, ſo many, but they may be fall vntounto true Chriſtians, whether Miniſters or people, yea (as M. Iohnſon well knoweth) many of the Martyrs of Ieſus Chriſt, hauehave liued and died, in more and greater Errors of the ſame kinde, and therfore well may hee paſſe by this point. This is but a peece of his ſimple thetoricke, careleſly to ſeeme to paſſe by that which hee cannot proue. For how many Errors, can hee name or number, that hee is able to juſtify to be taught in the Miniſtery of our Church Aſſemblies? what one truth of Religion can hee name, that is not or hath not bene (when juſt occaſion hath bene offred) taught by ſome of our Miniſters? I am not ignorant that in his treatiſes againſt M. A. H. and M. H. I. hee muſtreth a whole troup of pretended Errors, but ſuppoſe them to bee ſo many deſtinct Errors, how doth hee proue they are taught in our Miniſtery or that they are required by law to bee taught? Ther is indeed a Conformitie and Subſcription required to ſome of them, and a Canon that requires that the late Canons bee reade in Churches ſome times in the yeare, as alſo that the booke of Articles bee read at the firſt entrance vponupon an Eccleſiaſtical Church, with a teſtification of aſſent vntounto it: But is this Miniſterially to teach the Errors contained in the ſaid bookes? May not a man in the weackneſſe of his judgement, and in infirmitie at his firſt entrance into a calling, conforme and ſubſcribe vntounto ſome things, not ſo warantable, and true, and yet not teach them for truths; yea may hee not, for all that teach doctrin in it ſelfe directly countrary to thoſe vntruths, yea and yet ſatisfie alſo the minde of the law, which being humaine, and therfore not alwaies perfect, may commaunde that very truth to bee taught, which being thorowly followed, will deſtroy ſome vntruths, which the ſame law alſo requires? Further it is one thing to reade the Canons to the people, therby to declare vntounto them what is required at their hands, by their Governors, another thing to teach, and juſtifie the Errors countained in them, and to teſtifie an aſſent vntounto ſome Errors, is not Miniſterially to inſtruct the people in thoſe Errors.

2. Though it bee noe nue thing that the Miniſters of Antichriſt, ſhould in divers things bring the truth with them; Yet this is a nue thing and never hard of before, That the Miniſters of Antichriſt, ſhould teach the wholl truth of Chriſt Ieſus for the ſubſtāce therof. That they ſhould oppoſe directly and zealouſly againſt the maine, and foundamentall doctrins of Antichriſt; That they ſhould profeſſe him to bee Antichriſt, and that man of ſinne, and to the ſheeding of their blood, ſhould exerciſe their Miniſtery againſt Antichriſt and his kingdome, proteſting againſt him and his Service, were it not nue ſtraunge that a man ſhould bee counted a true Subject vntounto a Prince, then when hee doth openly proteſt againſt him. Counting him a vſurping Tirant, and imploying all the wit power and ſtrength hee hath againſt him? ſuch ſubjects of Antichriſt are our Miniſters, or by the lawes ſuch they ought to bee. Could hee bee ſaid to bee a Miniſter of Chriſt, that yealding to ſome externall kites, and profeſſing ſome doctrines of Chriſtian faith, doth not withſtanding, directly, openly and profeſſedly, renounce Chriſt and his Seruice, and profeſſe himſelfe to bee an enemie to him, and his Kingdome, If it hould not in the one, it is not both a nue and ſtrang thing that it ſhould hould in the other.

3. M. Iohnſon out of his knowledge muſt teach vsus; how Sathan can be ſaid, by teaching the truth to vtter his owne Miniſtery, or worſhip, or how a Sathanicall Miniſtery can be vttered when in and by the Miniſtery, nothing but the truth of Chriſt is adminiſtred; what is the Miniſtery of Sathan but the Miniſtery of Error? how can the Miniſtery of Error bee vttered by teaching the Truth? or how can a Miniſtery be ſaid to be vttered, by a truth, when it is the Miniſtery it ſelfe that vttereth the truth, Surely noe more then a Marchandize can bee ſaid to bee vttered by ſelling of wares, and were it not a wonder, if a man ſhould vtter his bad Marchandice, by ſelling good & ſound wares? Sathan and Antichriſt indeed together with ſome truths, ſeeke to vtter much falſhoode, which otherwiſe (they knowe) would not be receaued: And many of our Miniſters are content to yeald to ſome things which they judge not ſo counvenient (if it did otherwiſe ſome good to the State) to the end they may vtter the truth. But that like Antichriſt and Sathan our Miniſters ſhould propound this vntounto themſelues, to teach ſome truths to this end that they might, therby vtter falſhood and lies, fals Miniſteries & worſhips is a Malitious imputation, and can never bee juſtified.

Obj. Beza ſaith, Though Antichriſt teach the truth (which ſometimes hee doth) to the end hee may more eaſily ſeduce to beleeue his lies, yet wee are to ſtoppe our eares againſt him, leaſt vnderunder his pretence, wee bee deceaved by him. pag. 76.

Anſ. Well, but it is yet to proue, That our Miniſters are Antichriſts, and that they teach the truth to any ſuch wicked intent; the contrary is manifeſt, when many of them in regard of the times, are countent, to yealde to ſome colourable vntruths, that they might therby purchaſe libertie vntounto themſelues, to aduance the truth of Chriſt, They yeald to ſome things in appearance Antichriſtian, that they might with more libertie fight againſt Antichriſt.

Obj. Who knoweth not that Antichriſt and his Miniſters are hipocriticall frends to Chriſt vnderunder the name of Chriſt fighting againſt him.

Anſ. But who knoweth not that our Miniſters, if they bee ſuch as our lawes require them to bee, are ſworn enemies to Antichriſt, and in the name of Chriſt, and vnderunder ſome of Antichriſts owne Rites doe fight againſt him and reſiſt him vntounto blood; And who knoweth not, that many of them hauehave died for Chriſt at the foot of Antichriſt.

THE SIXT ARGVMENT.

IF the preſent Miniſtery of the Church of Englande bee a ſtrange Miniſtery, then is it not lawfull in the worſhip of God, to heare it, or hauehave any Spirituall communion therwith.

But ſuch is the Miniſtery of the Church Aſsemblies of England.

Therfore it is not lawfull in the worſhip of God to heare it, or hauehave any Spirituall Communion therwith.

The Aſsumption is manifeſt, for a ſtrange Miniſtery is that which is not by the law ordained, and giuen for that worke, as themſelues here to fore hauehave publiſhed, and as is proued in the firſt Reaſon.

Anſwere.

This Reaſon differreth not in ſubſtance from divers of the former, for what is it to bee a ſtrang Miniſtery, but to be a Miniſtery that is not ſet by Chriſt in his Church which is his 1. Reaſon. But to bee a Miniſtery which deriveth not the power and function from Chriſt, which is his 4. Reaſon. But to bee a Miniſtery that worketh vponupon mens conſciences by virtue of a fals Spirituall calling which is his 5. Reaſon. Might hee not with as greate facility out of this method of reaſoning hauehave brought forth 7000. Reaſons as theis ſeaven. But how doth hee proue the Aſſumption of his reaſon? by ſending vsus back againe (as you may ſee) to the firſt Reaſon. So that all the reaſon of this Reaſon is borrowed from the 1. Reaſon and is anſwered all ready in the Anſwer therof.

But before hee paſſeth to the next reaſon, hee runs out after the wonted faſhion, into an idle diſcours, nothing at all appertaining to the Argument in hand, bringing in ſome idle obſervations vponupon the Story of Corah, Dathan, and Abiram, & alſo of Naaman, falſly Miſapplied vntounto our Church Aſſemblies & Miniſtery. For hee taking it as graunted, or as a thing that could not be denied him, That our Miniſtery is Antichriſtian, & that our worſhip is Idolatry, hee makes our Miniſters, & people even the beſt of them wors then Corah, Dathan, & Abiram and them which were of their conſpiracy, and our Aſſemblies and worſhip as bad as the Temple of Rimmon, and the idolatry therin performed. And wher hee brings the example of Naaman, as brought by ſome of vsus to juſtifie our joining with our Church Aſſemblies I perſuade my ſelfe he doth againſt the knowledge and light of his owne conſcience bely vsus; & that ther cannot be one of vsus brought forth, that ever made this plea; we hould it as vnlawful (as themſelues) outwardly & but in appearance to joyne with Idolators, in their Idolatry: & wee ſee noe warrant why for every perticuler Act, that in a large ſence is Idolatrous, adjoined to Gods true worſhip, wee ſhould forbeare our preſence, at the true worſhip it ſelfe. Or that our preſence, for the true worſhips ſake alone, ſhould in reſpect of ſome point of falſe worſhip thervnto a nexed bee (as hee ſpeaketh) the ſubmitting our bodies to a ſtrang worſhip. Eſpecially when wee are not perticuler Actors in it, but onelyonly preſent, behoulding it with greife, and ſuffering it in others for the true worſhip ſake vntounto which it is adjoined, If this ſhould bee held vnlawfull; then can noe man preſent himſelf with a good conſcience, at any publique worſhip of God wherſoever. Becauſe (except it ſhould be ſtinted and preſcribed, which M. Iohnſon holds to bee a fals worſhip) hee can hauehave noe aſſeurance, but that ſome errors in matter or forme will bee committed; yea if hee bee a man of vnderſtanding, and learning, hee may preſume in a māner, that in the publique worſhip, ſome error or other in matter or forme, greater or leſſer will bee committed, before which he muſt preſent himſelfe. But what? were the Iewiſh Sinagoges in Chriſts time free from all parts of fals worſhip? the Scripture witneſſeth the contrary. Did they when Chriſt came into them, for beare their Aſſemblies? The Scripture confirmes the contrary, was Chriſt preſence then (as heere he ſaith our preſence is) a very bowing downe vntounto them? was hee alſo therin an vnconſcionable diſsembler. Did hee therin imbrace the boſome of Strangers? breake his couenant, goe a whoreing with the inventions of man. For (ſuch fiere as this hee ſpits at vsus) if not, why ſhould it bee ſuch a ſin in vsus? who hauehave not ſuch eyes to pearce into the impiety of mans traditions, as our Saviour had.

THE SEAVENTH Reaſon. EXAMINED.

Fr. Iohn.

IF the preſent Miniſtery of the Church of Englande bee not from Heaven, but of men, then is it not lawfull in the worſhip of God to heare or hauehave any Spirituall Communion therwith.

Such is the Miniſtery of the Church Aſsemblies of Englande. Ergo, It is not lawfull in the worſhip of God to hauehave any Spirituall communion therwith.

The Aſsumption is evident, becauſe God hath not appointed the Miniſtery of the Church Aſsemblies, but man, as appeares by their booke or ordination, And if they will ſay the contrary, let themſhew their callings out of the word of God.

Anſwere.

This Reaſon is the very ſame with the 4.5. and 6. and hath noe ground, or profe but from them: And therfore is Anſwered alſo in the Anſwer of them. And this may bee ſufficient to ſhew, that our Miniſtery is from Heaven, when ſo malitious, and excerciſed an Adverſary whoſe whole Religion ſeemes to lie in oppoſing to our Miniſtery, can ſay noe more againſt it.