The Unreasonableness of the Separation Made Apparent 2, Part 2
The second sort of Reasons taken, as is pretended, forth of our own writers.
The first reason taken from the 12. Arguments.
Fr. Iohnson.
All will worship is sinne.
To heare or communicate with the present ministerie of the Church-assemblys of England in Church service, in manner and forme prescribed, is a will worship.
There fore to heare or communicate with that ministrie is sinne.
VV. Bradshaw
This Syllogisme is Sophisticall, consisting plainlie of foure terms, Except, he make his conclusion this; therefore to heare or communicate with that ministerie in manner and forme prescribed, is a sin. For the third argument being will worship; all the other termes they being no parts there of, must be in the conclusion, if so be the Syllogisme be true, as every Sophoming boy in the universitie knoweth: and therefore he must either exclude them out of the Assumption, or include them in the conclusion, which he cannot doe; it being his intent by these arguments to proove …t a sin, to communicate therewith, not onelyonly in manner and forme prescribed, but any other way. And therefore he Sophistically, or rather in ignorant and witles simplicity, concludes a generall from a speciall, thus.
It is will-worship to communicate with our ministery in manner and forme prescribed,
Therefore it is a sin to communicate therewith, whether in manner and forme prescribed, or any other way.
Whereas a childe may know this; that an action done in some manner and forme prescribed may be a will-worship and a sin, which done otherwise may be true worship. A man may therefore (if need be) grant both his premisses & denie his conclusion. Neither will it help him; that the Author of the twelve Arguments concluded against the Ceremonys, in the same forme of words, that he doth here against the ministerie: it being plaine by the scope of his whole disputation, that though he doe not expresse these words in manner and forme prescribed in the conclusion; that yet he understandeth them: it being not his purpose to dispute absolutely against all use of them, but against the use of them in that manner and forme that they are prescribed.
But whatsoever his conclusion is, the assumption is false, yea though it should be granted, that in our ministerie there is some will-worship performed. Yet let us see how he prooves the assumption.
Fr. Iohnson.
All parts of divine worship and service imposed onelyonly by the will and pleasure of man upon the communicants in divine service, & that of necessity to be done, is will-worship.
But to heare and communicate with the present ministerie of the Church-assemblys of England, in Church service, in manner and forme prescribed, are such parts of divine worship as is aforesaid. Ergo,
To heare and communicate with the present ministerie of the Church-assemblys of England, in manner and forme prescribed, is a will-worship.
VV. Bradshaw
The proposition is taken forth of the twelve arguments, and there fore needs no answere. The Assumption is false; but he prooveth it thus.
Fr. Iohnson.
1. Man imposeth this ministery upon man, and God in his word hath not appointed these offices and callings: neither required any to communicate with them in Church service in manner and forme prescribed.
2. The people stand bound to heare and communicate with them upon pain of suspension, deprivation, &c. and God must have no solemne worship in England, except it be with communion to the same. Ergo,
To heare and communicate with the present ministery, &c. is a part of divine worship imposed as aforesaid.
VV. Bradshaw
The first part of the antecedent is false, & is not prooved by any ground taken from the twelve arguments. For not man onelyonly, but God allso, hath imposed this ministery: and hath appointed, for the substance thereof, the offices and callings of the ministers of our Church-assemblys: & hath required us to communicate with them in Chnrch-service, in that forme & manner, which the Law in the true meaning thereof, prescribes; and which many at the least doe practise.
Neither doth the consequent follow upon the second part of the antecedent; for though humane Lawe under never so greate punishments, should binde us to never so great corruptions in Gods service; yet so long as we doe not actually communicate in those corruptions, but onelyonly in the true parts of Gods worship, our communicating is never the worse for the said Laws of men, but rather the better. Neither doe we herein stand more bound, then Maister Iohnson and his people doe, when they are in theire Dominions. So that it makes as much against communicating with their ministery, as ours. Though therefore (as the author of the 12. arguments hath indeavoured to proove,) the ceremonys in controversie should be held to be a will-worship; and therefore a sin to use them in Gods worship; yet it followeth not by the same argument, that it is a sin to communicate with the ministery of our Church-assemblys, no though it should use the said ceremonys; much lesse where and when it useth them not, as in some places, or at some times, it doth not, neither is it by Law required so to doe.
Here Mr. Can forbearing to vindicate his brother Iohnsons Logick, which this his whole discourse throughout sheweth him never to have had much acquaintance with, or to justify either of the axiomes denied, in which the proofe of his assumption wholly consists, doth after his olde wont.
1. Renew his former cavill concerning the Law mentioned by Maister Bradshaw, what Law he meanes; and what the true intent and meaning of that Law is; as if who were true ministers, could not be known without it; (which is a silly and senseles inference) For answere whereunto we shall require him to the place where the question was first mooved, or the cavill rather first made: withall adding, that, if Maister Bradshaw had a good cause in hand, he would have referred his readers to the Prophets, Christ and his Apostles, & not used such carnall and idle talke. Belike he would have Maister Bradshaw doe as his brother Maister Iohnson alledge Scripture for matter of fact, to shew what our ministers doe, or are, or what the government they live under requires of them, or intendeth they should be and doe, and so both abuse Scriptures, and make himselfe ridiculous, as his brother Iohnson therein hath done.
2. He telleth us, he can not beleeve Maister Bradshaw in that (which commeth in on the by, ex abundante; for the answere takes away Maister Iohnsons argument without it) that it is Lawfull to communicate in that worship where the ceremonys are used; And hereupon breaketh out in his wonted manner, like the sheering of Swine, with much cry, and litle wooll; charging this inconsiderate man (as he pleaseth to stile him) with rashnes and folly, that durst without any reason more than boldenesse, justify that that his brethren have by many sound arguments, manifested to be evill and unlawfull: and accordingly serveth us in a long Messe, not very savourie, out of a nameles author, (no country-man of ours what ever he be; his language bewrayeth him,) who taking for granted, that kneeling used in communicating of the Lords table is idolatrous: & that those that joine in communion with such as so doe, though themselves sit, doe communicate with them, when they are committing the very act of idolatry, doth thence inferre the unlawfullnesse thereof: and with this Authors discours, and his own descant there upon to raise the bulk of his booke, he filleth 3. whole pages.
But neither is it materiall what Maister Can believeth in this case, nor what his nameles author saith, till he bring better proofe for what he speaketh; since that we are neither tied to subscribe, either to the beliefe of the one, or to the sentence of the other.
The second Reason taken from the twelve Arguments.
Fr. Iohnson.
It is a sin against God, for Christians to partake with the ministery of such, as accounting themselves to be servants of Iesus Christ, yet doe in the execution of their ministerie give speciall honour to Antichrist and his officers.
But the ministery of the Church of England is such. Ergo,
It is a sinne for Christians to partake therewith.
VV. Bradshaw
First I deny the proposition: the true and best ministers of Iesus Christ, that ever were or shall be, since the Apostles, may in theire ignorance or weaknesse doe some act in theire ministery, that may bring some speciall honour to Antichrist, and yet Christians may Lawfully, and without sinne, partake with such in their ministery. It being not necessary, that whosoever partaketh with a ministerie, should partake also with the accidentall corruptions thereof.
He tels us, like a bolde and blinde baiard; that the proposition is manifest and cleare to any, that have an eye of reason, and any light of divinitie shining in it; And yet it hath not so much as any colour of trueth; but in the eyes of such owles and bats as himselfe is. The proposition in the twelve arguments, unto which he would equall and paralell his, is this: It is a sin against God, for him that is by way of excellency a servant of Iesus Christ, (without a precise and direct warrant from him, at any time, especially in the solemne worship of God) to give speciall honour to Antichrist and his members: What? must it needes follow from this; that it is a sin to partake any manner of way, with such a ones ministery, as shall in any measure commit such a sin? must the joyning with them in any other parts of their ministery, needs be a communicating with them in this sin? he bidds us see for this 2. Cor. 6.14, 17. Rev. 18.4. But what is this to the 12. arguments, from whence he saith this reason is taken? and to what end should we see those places? except he had first made us to see, that our ministers in their ministery are infidels and Belials; that their ministery for the substance thereof is unrighteousnes and darknesse; that the God we serve in our ministery is an idole; that our assemblys are Babylon: and all this because some thing happily is done by our ministers, which (and yet contrary to their intent) is some honour to Antichrist. For except all this be granted unto him, these texts are of no force to confirme the proposition.
The Assumption is as false as the proposition. Neither doth it follow from the assumption of that argument of the 12. from which he would ground it. For though it should be granted; that to use the ceremonys in controversy in manner and fcrme prescribed, were to give speciall honour to Antichrist, and his officers; yet it doth not follow, that the ministers of our Church-assemblys are such, that in the execution of theire ministery give speciall honour to Antichrist, and his officers. For some of our ministers, from whome he separateth, doe not in the execution of their ministery use the said Ceremonys at any time: neither doe any of our ministers at all times in the execution thereof, use them, neither are required so to doe.
The Assumption notwithstanding he proceedeth to proove thus.
Fr. Iohnson.
Such a conformity to Antichrist and his officers, as is not onelyonly besides the word of God, but in a speciall manner derogatory to all Reformed Churches, that have departed from the Synagogue of Rome, is a speciall honour to Antichrist and his officers.
But the execution of the ministery of the Church of England is such. Ergo,
The execution of that ministery in manner aforesaid, is to give speciall honour to Antichrist and his officers.
VV. Bradshaw
The proposition is word for word in a manner taken out of the 12. arguments, and therefore for this controversy not to be stood upon, whether it be true or false.
The assumption is false, and hath no ground at all from the 12. arguments. For though it should be granted; that to use the Ceremonys in controversy in divine worship, is such a conformity to Antichrist and his members, as is specifyed in the proposition: yet no man, except he have some crack in his braine, can from thence inferre, that the execution of our ministery, is such a conformity; especially then when in the execution thereof they doe not use the said Ceremonys; whice none doe at all times, and some doe never.
He proceeds to proove the assumption not by any ground taken from the 12. Arguments, but by some of the fragments of his own former reasonlesse Reasons: and therefore the maine issue of the argument, lying not upon any thing in the said arguments; this second reason of his can not be said to be taked from the 12. Arguments. And therefore they are no wise guilty of his schisme, nor doe any ways here in this place patronize the same.
The third Reason taken out of the twelve Arguments, the London ministers Exceptions, and the Abridgment, &c.
Fr. Iohnson.
If such be the State of the ministery of the Church-assemblys of England, as they are bound in their ministration unto such things, as the using of them in Church service, in manner and forme prescribed, is a will-worship; a giving of speciall honour to Antichrist and his members, a performing of honours more than civill, even religious, onelyonly to a humane power; a warranting of the like use of Iewish, Turkish, Paganish or Popish observations, a doeing of Schismaticall actions; an having of Spirituall communion with Papists, in the mysterys of theire idolatry and superstition; a mingling of prophane things with divine, an using of unlawfull things in divine worship; an administring of Sacraments that are not of divine institution; a solemne acknowledging of speciall homage to the spirituall usurped authority of Lo…d-Bishops; an using of humane Traditions in Gods worship, as necessary to salvation; an apparent meanes of damning of many Soules; an observing of a Liturgy, which in the whole matter & forme thereof is too like unto the Masse-booke, &c. then it is not Lawfull to communicate with the ministers in their ministery.
But such is the estate of the ministery of the Church-assemblys of England.
Therefore it is not Lawfull to communicate with them therein.
VV. Bradshaw
Maister Iohnson thinks surely, that in this argument he hath out of our owne writings for ever disgraced our ministery, but whether here or in the arguments following he deale faithfully with our writers, I know not, his bad dealing in this kinde, we …ave discovered in part before, and doth most evidently appeare in one particular following, wherein he most shamefully and loudly, as a man void of all common honesty and grace, maketh the ministers of Lyncolne to affirme, that the Prelat…s are revealed to be great Antichrists, and theire ministery and constitution to be great troublers of the Church in this day, and that it can not but be very sinfull and hurtfull to retain or communicate with them. The Devill himselfe would have beene ashamed in this open manner to have tolde such a lie: and therefore he is to be trusted no further then he is seene, and here in his loudnesse is the more to be suspected, that where he rehearseth manie harsh, bitter and unsavoury speeches against our ministery and worship, as written by some of our selves, that retaine communion with the ministery and worship of our Church-assemblys; he doth not quote the particular places, but onelyonly referrs us to the Autors in generall, as though we had nothing else to doe, but to reade over whole bookes to finde out his allegations; or that we must take them upon his word to be faithfully reported: but let us suppose, that our men have so written; yet there is no consequence in the proposition. For what if our ministers were bound to say Masse, to sing Mattens, to worship the Virgin Mary, to acknowledge the Popes Supremacy, &c. yet it might be Lawfull to communicate with our ministers in theire ministry; except that in the execution of their ministery they submitted unto that which they were bound unto: it being one thing to be bound, and an other thing to fulfill the bond. He might contrarily with as much wit and understanding have reasoned thus: If this be the estate of the ministerie of the Church assemblys of Rome, that they are bound in their administration to the renouncing of Antichrist, and all his idolatry, offices & will-worship, to conforme onelyonly in their ministery to the Gospell of Iesus Christ, and to such ordinances, as are agreeable to the same; then it is Lawfull to communicate with them in their ministery and worship. Maister Iohnson would quickly discerne the inconsequence of this proposition. And why? because in the execution of theire ministery, they fulfill not this bond: and yet he cannot deny, but that they are by a stronger bond, even a divine bond, bound unto this, than our ministers to the contrary.
The consequent he saith is prooved by the ministers of Lincolne-shire, abridgement, pag. 17. but to passe by his depraving of them before touched, no such matter can be concluded from the words which he here citeth; yea though …e had dealt faithfully in the citation of them. For though it should be granted, that some act of spirituall fornication should be done in our ministery; that we are to separate from idolaters & Antichristians, and to be as unlike them as may be, in theire religious observations; though God doe beare a detestation to idolatry, & all the inticements thereof, as unto spirituall whoredome: though we ought to be ashamed of the monuments of idolatry, and cast them away with detestation; though we should be in some danger by them to be corrupted in religion, by conforming unto idolaters in theire ministery and worship; though keeping communion with such ministers should be a speciall meanes to harden them in theire sins; though the Prelates were revealed to be great Antichrists; though the godly learned have constantly taught, that Christians are bound to forsake and cast of the ministration; ceremonys and religious customes of Paganes, Iews, Antichristian idolaters and hereticks, and carefully to shun all conformity with them therein; yet it doth not there upon follow, that if the ministers of our Church-assemblys be bound as aforesaid, that then it is not Lawfull to communicate with them in theire ministerie.
Maister Iohnson therefore must be put to this pains, to proove his consequent.
For further proofe of the former consequent, he brings six reasons more out of his own olde and fusty horne of store, which proove the consequent just à baculo ad angulum: to which it shall be needles to give answere, they being proofes cleane besides the purpose of these reasons; which is to justify theire schisme by grounds taken from our own writings.
The consequent then of the proposition being evidently false, the assumptiō, though it should have never so much ground from our own writings, will stand him in no steede.
The fourth Reason taken out of the Admonitions to the Parlament.
Fr. Iohnson.
If the offices of Arch-Bishops, Arch-Deacons, Lord-Bishops, Suffraganes, Parsons, Vicars, &c. be Antichristian and contrary to the Scriptures, then the people of God may not communicate with them in their ministery.
But the first is true.
Ergo the latter also.
VV. Bradshaw
The consequent is false, and he goeth not about to proove it, by any thing taken out of our own writings, but by a stale proofe that hath been answered before: and therefore it requires no answere. OnelyOnly thus much of free bounty: That the offices of Arch-Bishops, &c. quatenus tales, are not of the essence of the ministery of our Church-assemblys, but meere accidents.
The assumption therefore will stand him in no steede, whether it be true or false; & therefore I leave it to their maintainance, from whome he saith he borroweth it.
The fifth Reason taken out of the offer of conference.
Fr. Iohnson.
If the propositions propounded to be maintained, in the Offer of conference be true, then is it not Lawfull to heare or have any spirituall communion with the present ministery of the Church-assemblys of England,
But those propositions are true. Ergo,
It is not Lawfull to have any spirituall communion with the same.
VV. Bradshaw
The consequence is false, and doth not follow from the said propositions.
1. Though it should be granted, that all matters meerely ecclesiasticall, Lawfully imposed upon any Church, are such, as may be concluded necessarily from the written word of God: yet in a true constituted Church, some matters meerely ecclesiasticall may be imposed through humane frailty, that cannot be so concluded.
2. Though all humane ordinances used onelyonly or specially in Gods worship, whereunto they are not necessary of themselves, were simply unlawfull; yet is not every such humane ordinance of that nature, that it maketh the Church and ministery where it is used, to be a false Church and ministery much lesse those Churches and ministery wherein it is not used, but enjoyned onelyonly.
3. Though it were generally granted of all, that every true visible Church of Christ is such a spirituall body politick as is specially instituted by Christ, or his Apostles, in the new testament: yet it will not thence follow, that those Churches and ministers are not to be communicated withall, that have any thing in or appertaining to the constitution thereof not instituted by Christ; or that such Churches are not true visible Churches.
4. Though every true visible Church of Christ, or ordinary assembly of the faithfull, hath by Christs ordinance, power in it selfe immediately under Christ, to elect and ordain, deprive and depose theire ministers, and to execute all other Ecclesiastica…l censures: yet will it not follow from thence, that all they are false Churches, & not to be communicated withall, that doe not, or by the Laws of man are not suffered to use that power; neither is it sure the meaning of them who offer the conference, to maintain that they are no true visible Churches of Christ, that cannot use that power, but are therein subject to others: for one may by Christs ordinance have a power to doe that, which yet, in regard of man, he hath no power to doe.
5. Though the Pastor of a particular congregation should be yeelded to be the highest ordinary Ecclesiasticall officer in any true constituted visible Church of Christ; yet can it not thence be concluded, that those Pastors are false Pastors, who are outwardly by mans Laws subjected to a superior ecclesiasticall officer. The father ordinarily is the highest officer in the family; yet if the Magistrate subject the father in some matters appertaining to the family to an other, though therein, it may be, he may doe the father some wrong; yet doth not the father thereby become a false father, or the family a false family. Admit then that this prerogative is due to Pastors, to have no spirituall officers superior unto them; yet is it not so essentiall unto them, that without the actuall use and possession of it, he cannot be a true Pastor. And yet take a true visible Church in that sense, which the officers of the conference doe, viz. for a particular ordinary assembly or congregation, and then in our own Churches, the Pastor is the highest; there being no ecclesiasticall officer in any such Churches above him.
6. Grant this, that it is the office of every true Pastor, to teach and governe spiritually one congregation immediately under Christ: can it from hence be concluded, that they are no true Pastors, which governe more congregations then one; or which are subject, in some outward things, to some others besides Christ?
7. Admit, that the offices of Provinciall and D…ocessan Bishops were contrary to the word of God: must it needs there upon follow, that those ministers and Churches, which are under them by the Laws of man, are false? such especially who obey them onelyonly in things which they judge honest and Lawfull, & who under this subjection doe no more, than they would doe, if they were not subject at all, unto Bishops?
A man must therefore bring a better head and witt with him then Maister Iohnsons, that by the propositions of the offer of conference (how harsh soever they may seeme to be) can conclude it unlawfull to joine and communicate with our Church-assemblys.
For the proofe of his consequent, he brings nothing out of our own writ ings but onelyonly to give his Reader thereby a vomit, some of his own Cole-wortes, not twise, but twise twenty times sodden, to which we give him leave to looke an answere from some as idle-headed as himselfe.
Maister Can having lien still a long time, as one fast a sleeps, nor regarding either his brothers Iohnsons credite, very shrewdly appeached, or his sory Reasons so shattered, that it would require a very skilfull Surgian indeed, either throughly to salve the one, or make any limme almost of the other stand upright; yea dispairing, it may seeme, of any good cure likely to be done upon either; yet now beginneth againe to rouse up himselfe, and set up his bristles, as if he meant to d…e something. And
1. To Maister Bradshaw answeres to the severall propositions he subjoyneth some one or other, such as they are, frivolous and impertinent exceptions.
To the first, That though it should be granted, that in a true constituded Church, some matters meerely Ecclesiasticall may be imposed through humane frailty: yet this helpeth theire cause nothing at all, in regard that a false worship an Antichristian hierarchy, an unlawfull ministery there from, is imposed upon, and hy the people slavishly submitted unto.
But 1, how is all this prooved; unles Maister Cans word shamefully ever and anone begging the main points in controversy, goe for good?
2. How doth this any way confirme Maister Iohnsons consequence, which is this, or else none, from this first proposition; All matters meerely Ecclesiasticall Lawfully imposed upon any Church, are such as may be concluded from the written word of God. Ergo, it is not Lawfull to have any spirituall communion with the present ministery of the Church-assemblys of England.
For neither is Maister Cans rablement any part of this Antecedent, nor doth the proposition, though granted, inferre; that wheresoever ought swarving from that rule is imposed, there enfueth presently a nullity of a true Church.
To the 2. That though every humane ordinance be not of that nature, as to make the Church and ministery false, where it is used: yet some are, and such are in their parish assemblys, as by theire owne principles (saith he) we have shewed.
But what is this again, (to passe by his naked assertion of our parish-assemblies, and his concealed principles of I know not whome, of as much weight with us, as his own word) what is this, I say, to proove Mr. Is. cōsequence? All such humane ordinances are unlawfull. Ergo the Churches where any such are used are no Churches, or the Churches where they are onelyonly enjoyned, and not used.
To the 3. Though it were generally granted of all, that those Churches and ministerys are to be communicated with, that hav… some thing in or appertaining to the constitution thereof, not instituted by Christ; yet it will not thence follow that we may with such, as in their constitution were wholly false, but such are theirs.
You see still Maister Cans word must goe for an Oracle: which if it may doe, all the controversy will be soone at an end.
To the 4. Grant this, that all are not false Churches, which doe not, or by the Law of man are not suffered to use their power.
If you grant it, then your brother Iohnsons consequence is unsound. Yea but saith Maister Can, your congregations doe altogether this power; & stand under that which was taken every part from the Devill & Antichrist, if some of yours speake true themselves.
Yea, but good Maister Can, if any so say, what ever they be, be pleased to tell them, that we believe neither you nor them, nor are bound so to doe; till better proofe be brought then either your brother Iohnson or you here bring.
To the 5. admit, that those may be true pastors, who are outwardly by mans Laws subjected to superiour ecclesiasticall officers. Though for this, in the margine he saith, he shall expect to see some proofe; whereas he ought rather, if the assertion be unsound, to have disprooved it. And yet is it not true of al pastors of any Separatists living in this land? as I presume there be, are, or have been such.
But if it be admitted, Maister Iohnsons consequence is rejected as inconsequent; who from this would inferre, that our Churches are no true Churches, because the pastor ought to be the highest officer in the Church: the vanity of which inference Maister Bradshaw by strong reasons, (though this shameles beast say, he never useth any one reason to confirme any one thing that he saith) hath evidently discovered; but he deigneth not to take notice of it. Yea, but yet, saith he, it can not hence be concluded, that theire ministers are true; seeing neither theire offices, callings, administrations, &c. are agreeable to the word of God. Yet it can not hence, &c. Whence meaneth the man, think we? because a true pastor may yet by mans Laws be outwardly subjected to some superior ecclesiasticall officer? who goeth about, or is so void of sense as to conclude in this manner: A true Pastor is the principall officer in his parish, (for that is the proposition that Maister Iohnson here propoundeth.) Ergo, The ministers of the Parish-Churches in England are true ministers? Or on this wise. True Pastors may yet outwardly be subjected by mans Laws to a superiour Ecclesiasticall power. Ergo, The ministers of the Church-assemblys in England are true ministers? But these are frames of Maister Cans own contriving; who wanting better worke, it seemeth, or having nothing to doe, rather then he will be idle, & yet he were better be idle and doe nothing, then be so idely employd, busieth himselfe about knitting of knotts, (but very loose ones, you see) that he may shew his skill at fast and loose in unknitting of them againe.
To the 7. (for the sixt happily escaped his hand) that if the offices of provinciall and diocesan Bishops be contrary to the Scripture, then necessarily that ministery, which is derived from it, (what it? from the Scripture, think we? for there is nothing else to referre this it to. But belike he forgat himselfe, as he oft doth, and would say, them:) must needs be so also, and that the Papists from the writings of the conformist have drawn this conclusion. And I hope then it must needs be Authentick.
But this is one of Maister Iohnsons Colewortes Maister Bradshaw spe…ks of, oft served in before, and hath been sufficiently piscussed in his proper place, in answere to the second Reason of the first sort.
The sixt Reason taken out of divers treatises.
Fr. Iohnson.
If these Assertions be true, that that Church calling for which the Scripture gives no expres warrant, is meerely usurped, and utterly unlawfull; that as it is not Lawfull to bring in any strange doctrine, so it is not Lawfull to teach the true doctrine under the name of any other function then is instituted by God, &c.
But the aforesaid Assertions are true. Therefore
It is unlawfull to have communion with that ministery.
VV. Bradshaw.
This argument, being a collection out of our writers, doth not differ from the former, as himselfe granteth: and therefore needes no further answere.
The consequent is false, and he prooves it not by any of our own writers, as he ought to doe: but still brings us proofes of his owne musty aumbry.
The Assumption therefore, borowed out of our own writers, will doe him no pleasure.
The seventh Reason taken out of the tenth of the 12. Arguments.
Fr. Iohnson.
It is a sin against Christ, the sole head of the Church, to have spirituall communion with those ministers, which in theire ministration of divine things doe either by word or deed solemnly professe and yeeld a spirituall homage to an usurped spirituall autority in the Church.
But so doe the ministers of the Church-assemblys of England.
Ergo, It is a sinne to have communion with the same.
VV. Bradshaw
The proposition is false, and hath no ground from that proposition in the 12. Arguments, unto which he would match, and forth of which he would draw it. The proposition there is this:
It is a sin against Christ the sole head of the Church, for any one of his ministers, especially in the administration of divine things, either by words or signes solemnly to professe and acknowledge, a spirituall homage, to an usurped spirituall autority in the Church. Can he conclude his proposition from this? doth it hence follow, that because our ministers in their ministery, if they conforme, doe in some measure, in infirmity or ignorance, commit some such sin; that therefore it is a sin to communicate with them in other divine things, wherein they doe not commit the same sin?
Hee tells us, that the proposition may not be gainsayd, and why doth he tell us so? because the Author of the twelve Arguments saith; his proposition may not be denied. As though there were just the same Reason for the one as there is for the other. But why may not the proposition? Because all spirituall power usurped over the Churches of God, is an Antichristian authority; and to communicate with those ministers, which professe spirituall homage to Antichrist; which must needes be a sin against Christ, the head of the Church. A deepe and learned reason! It can be no sin against Christ to communicate with them, which in some action professe spirituall homage to Antichrist; except in their communion they also professe the same homage, which like an ignorant disputant, he maketh no mention of. As though to joine with one that doth evill, in that which is good, is allways to joine with him in the evill; as though to joine with a glutton in eating necessary food, were to joine with him in his gluttony, or to joyn with a blasphemer in the act of his blaspheming in rescuing an innocent out o… the hands of robbers, were to communicate with him in his blasphemy. But herein he propounds onelyonly to play the Ape, imitating the Author of the 12. arguments, who saith, his proposition may not be gainsaid; because all spirituall power usurped over the Churches of God, is an Antichristian autority; and to professe spirituall homage there unto, is to professe spirituall homage unto Antichrist, which must needes be a sin. But what? is there no more reason in that reason, then in his? if this be a good argument to proove that proposition for which it is brought; must his argument needes be as good to proove his proposition? what, because it is a sin to professe speciall homage unto Antichrist, must it needes be a sin also to communicate with them, who doe professe some homage unto Antichrist? what? to communicate with them in other matters?
The Assumption is false as the proposition; and hath no ground from the 12. Arguments. For though it were granted; that to use the controverted Ceremonys in manner and forme prescribed, were even in the solemne worship of Christ by solemne signes to acknowledge a Spirituall homage to a sp rituall usurped Autority of Arch-Bishops and Bishops; yet doth it not there from follow, that our ministers in the administration of divine things, doe the same. For none of our ministers doe always in the administration of divine things professe any such h mage; and some doe never professe it; and those who professe it, when they doe professe it, propound and intend no such matter.
He prooves the Assumption thus.
They preach the word, and administer the Sacraments by vertue of theire calling received from the Arch-Bishops & Bishops, &c.
The vanity whereof hath beene sufficiently shewed allready; hee therein begging one of the stale reasons, and not borowing any thing from the 12. arguments.
That which followeth, whereby he would proove, that the authority of L. Arch-Bishops and Bishops is usurped; which he makes the second part of his assumption; is alltogether idle, and to no purpose, and done onelyonly of malice to the Author of the 12. Arguments. For otherwise had he herein intended the convincing of the said Author, and of them which are of his minde, (which is the onelyonly use of his latter sort of Reasons, and which can serve for no other use, it had been sufficient to have produced his assertion without his proofes. For) that had been enough to declare the Authors conceit.
He concludes, crowing as if he were some Cock of the game, that had picked out the eyes, and broken the neck, of all that have been set against him. And thus, saith he, the cause is yeelded by themselves. And is it not (think we) finely yeelded? is it not a field stoutly wonne? is it any marveile, that hee makes such outcries against the whole Christian world, that will not follow such a leader?
But I leave him to his vain conceits of his own cause; trusting that any sober and judicious Christian will be able to discerne therein his fond and ignorant vanity. And whereas in the Answere of his Reasons, I have omitted to answere to many particular passages; All things considered, I shall not need to aske him pardon: I should rather have cause to expect thanks, if I had to deale with a reasonable and good natured adve…sary.
Here Maister Can weary of his worke, and willing to end his reply, but not weary of his wicked woont of lend and palpable lying, having repeated some of Mr. Bradshaws concluding words, and returning him them again; to display and traduce Mr. Bradshaws manner of answering, canteth on this wise.
The proposition, saith he, (Maister Bradshaw he meaneth) is false; the assumption is false: But for proofe, a man may finde as soone a needle in a botle of hay, as any for the things he boldely denies.
But to this froath and falsehood, I answere,
1. Suppose all were true that Maister Can here saith; though it may be, he scarce knoweth what he saith, when he requireth Maister Bradshaw to proove the things that he denies. For is any man bound to proove the things that himselfe denies? or is there any, I lay not reason for it, but sen…e in it, to require any man so to doe? Mr. Bradshaw might as well require Maister Can to proove our Churches to be true Churches, and our ministers true ministers; for those be the things, to use his own words, that he boldly denies.
But we will suppose his meaning to be, if he knew at least what he meant; that Maister Bradshaw hath brought no proofe, that is rendered no reason of his deniall. It was not needfull he should. It is sufficient for the answerer, as for the defendant, to deny, and require proofe of the adverse party, the accuser or plaintiffe, who…e part it is to make what he saith good. Let us make our case Maister Cans a while. Suppose one writing a Libell against Maister Can should thus argue in it Syllogistically.
No bastard ought to be a minister of the Gospell.
But Ma…ster Can is a bastard▪ was not begotten in Lawfull mariage, but his mother had him by an other man then her …usband.
Ergo, Maister Can ought not to be a minister of the Gospell.
Or Enthymematically thus:
Maister Can had bastards by divers women, when he was sometime in England, hath inticed women to folly, that have repaired to him for conference in private hath caried these things so closely that they could not hitherto be discovered, hath related to some, what others have spo…en in great secrecy.
And is therefore a Negromancer, and workes by the Devill.
Put case now Maister Can were to answere hereunto; would he not speake as he saith Maister Bradshaw speakes, if he were at least to answere Logically, according to the rules, and in tearms of Art, (which yet seldome he doth:) The proposition is false; the assumption is false, the antecedent is false: the consequence is false; all is false, every jot of it. Or could any man justly blame Maister Can for so doeing? telling him, that he denyeth things boldly, but bringeth no proofe for the things he denied? or would Maister Can himselfe, thinke we, acknowledge any equity in it; for his adversary to require of him, to disproove the things charged upon him, to proove all that is said by him to be false? and yet just such is Maister Cans dealing with us. He saith, the Church of England our mother, is no true Spouse of Christ, but an harlot; our ministers are idolaters, that is, spirituall adulterers: our people all bastards, begotten out of Lawfull wedlo…k: our government Antichristian: our discipline devillish: our worship flat idolatry; with many other the like outcrys against us. And when we deny there things, he either biddeth us proove the contrarie; or telleth us onelyonly at the best, that some say so.
2. I answere, That though this were sufficient for Maister Bradshaw to answere by bare deniall of those things, that Maister Iohnson objecteth, and Maister Cans part were, if he will reply, to take away such his answere, by confirming and making good Maister Iohnsons assertions; yet in answere to this very argument now in hand, as also very frequently elswhere, he rendreth reason of his deniall, both of proposition and assumption: which being a trueth so evident and obvious to every ones eye, that doth but reade over Maister Bradshaws answere here; had Maister Can had either any shame in his forehead, or wit in his head-piece, he would never have adventured in so shamefull, or shameles rather, a manner, to vent so evident an untrueth, against his owne eyesight and the open view of all men, and thereby to crase & crack, yea to wrack, not his conscience onelyonly, but his credite too.
But this is not either the firstly Maister Can hath here tolde, nor the first time that he tolde this lye. For we have had it more than once before: and as they say of some addicted to that vice, that they tell some lyes sometimes so often to others, that at length they come to believe them themselves; so it may be it is befalln Maister Can in this case, that he hath tolde his Reader this untrue tale so oft, that his own eyes now can hardly persuade him, though it be never so evidently false, not to yeeld credit thereunto. Or it may be it is with Maister Can, as some say of the Estrich, that when she hath hidden her head in a bush, she thincketh no body can see her. He is one peradventure of those, of whome the Greeke historian saith, that when they winke themselves, they thinke others see not them. Sure either he hoped, that his Readers wanting Maister Bradshaws booke, being not every where to be had, to see his words, would beleeve him upon his word; ot else, that his confident and constant avowing of it, would beare men down, and make them not believe theire owne eyes; and his wilfull wincking cause them not to see what they saw. I say no more for the present, but God amend him, and give him grace to see his sin.
Howbeit, that we may see, that the man hath yet some metall leaft in him, as well for matter of replying as lying; (though for this latter he is much better of the twain) be maketh way hereunto, by telling us, that moreover the points in controversy, which are of greatest weight and moment, he either puts quite of by a fine trick, they need no answere, (but of this Maister Can gives no instance, & it may well goe with the rest to make his fardell of fittons the fuller) or else answereth to them besides the matter.
Now for an instance of this latter, as having forgot to discover it when time was, and yet saying …ow the very same in effect he said then, save that he leaves out the Divell & Antichrist, here, (the usuall flowers of his raving rhetorick,) and it was but the very next page before that he said it; but mildoubting belike his Readers short memory, and loath that, what but even now he sayd, and would now say over again, should be lost, he fetcheth us a jump backward to the fourth proposit…on of the fift Reason of the second sort: there, saith he, the proposition being, that every true visible Church hath power, &c. his reply (you must remember Maister Can speakes it, with whom to answere is to reply) out is, that All are no f…lse Churches, that doe not us… this power, &c. And thus having taken Maister Bradshaw tardy, (as he supposeth) he followeth him hard at the heels, and layeth on loade, to be even with him for alltogether at parting; for this is the last bl…w he reacheth at his whole answere. And is not this, saith he thinke we wittily answered? we say, from theire principles, that a true Church can not be without power; but theire Churches are wholly without it. For answere he tells us, a true Church may wa…t the use of it. VVe say so too But doth it follow, because a man in a sound hath not the use, for the time, of that life which is in him therefore one may be quite without life, and yet not dead? To this effect he reasoneth or else, as Paul said of some, he understood not what he said, nor whereof he affirmed, but spake evill of the things which he knew not.
Thus silly soule, or sot rather, he thinketh he hath hit Mr. Bradshaw home, and paid him to the purpose, for attempting in this manner to reply, (as he speakes) on his brother Johnson.
And surely were this his last charge on Maister Bradshaw true, that he spake evill of t…ings he knew not, yet were not Maister Bradshaw so bad as Maister Can that speaketh evi…l (if lyes and untruths be evill) so oft and so notoriously against his own conscience of those things, that seeing evident before his eyes, he knoweth to be otherwise.
But for the thing it selfe, Maister Bradshaws answere is sufficient, yea compleate. For
1. To Maister Johnsons maine hypotheticall proposition, consisting of 7. severall single propositions taken out of the offer, & making up its antecedent, he answereth directly by denying the consequence in generall.
2. He proceedeth in particular to render reasons, (which yet Maister Can most falsely affirmeth that he never doth) distinctly, of his former deniall of the consequence in generall, in regard of the severall single propositions or axiomes there…n contained. And to the same, as it taketh in this fourth proposition or single axiome, and so maketh up a syllogisme thus conceived:
If every true visible Church of Christ, or ordinary assembly of the faithfull, hath by Christs ordinance power in it selfe, immediately under Chr st, to elect and ordain, deprive and depose theire ministers, & to execute all other ecclesiasticall offices; then it is not Lawfull to heare or have any spirituall communion, with the present ministery of the Church assemblys of England.
But every …ue vi…b…e Church hath such power, &c. Ergo. he subjoyneth this reason, why he denieth the consequence of the proposition, so made up; because that, allbeit eve…y true Church had such power, as is here mentioned by the ordinance of Christ; yet it would not foll w that our Churches either not using, or restrained by humane Laws f…om the exercise of such power (which were all at most that could be prooved) were the efore no true Churches
And this was a full and sufficient answere to Maister Iohnsons argument, as it is there framed. For that every true Church hath such power Maister Iohnson prooves ndeed by the …ayings of such & such; but that our Churches have it not, he prooveth not at all, Being propounded in Maister Cans forme as now it is, a man might well demurre on both parts of it. For as for the proposition, setting mens sayings aside, Maister Can I suppose, will hardly be able to produce any one direct place of Scripture, where such an absolute power is given by Christ to every particular Church-assembly, as is here related; or to produce out of Scripture any one evident example of the exercise of the same. And for the Assumption, which he, silly man, thinking cock sure, never once lookes after: supposing such a power by Christs ordinance conferred, upon every particular Church-assembly, he w…ll never be able to proove, that our particular Church-assemblys have it not, to wit, by Christs ordinance; unles he will, after his brother Iohnsons wise manner, run round in a circle, and proove that therefore they have it not, because they are no true Churches. For all that he will be able to produce, is but matter of sact, to wit, that either they use it not, or are by humane Laws restrained from the use of it. And as soundly by the same reason he may proove, that Paul had no such power, as the other Apostles had, or was not therefore a true Apostle, because he used it not. 1. Cor. 9.4, 5, 6, 15. Or, that those whome the Jewish governers excommunicated, for the profession of Christ Joh. 9.22, 34. had not power by Gods Law of accesse to Gods house, and to the assemblys of his servants.
Thus at length after a tedious winding and turning and making forward and backward, as the blast of Maister Cans breath hath blown with us, we are arrived at the end of his roving reply.
Hence forward he hath taken on him the office of an answerer, wherein how he hath acquit himselfe, the sequele will shew.