AN ANIMADVERSION TO Mr RICHARD CLYFTONS' Advertisement. Who under pretence of answering Chr. Lawns book, hath published an other man's private Letter, with Mr Francis johnsons answer thereto. Which letter is here justified; the answer thereto refuted: and the true causes of the lamentable breach that hath lately fallen out in the English exiled Church at Amsterdam, manifested, By HENRY AINSWORTH. Imprinted at Amsterdam, by Giles Thorp. Ano. Di. 1613. The Preface, to the Christian reader. OF all sorrows that do befall the people of God, there are none so grievous as intestine troubles, which Satan raiseth among themselves. With these, above others, we have been often afflicted, the Lord so chastening our sins, humbling us, and exercising our faith and patience: whiles many among us, at sundry times, have turned aside from the way of truth, and holy commandment which God gave unto them. And not contented to stray themselves alone; they have sought by all means to draw others after them: if they follow not, they make war against them. What challenges & provocations we have had by others, the world hath seen heretofore by works published: what now is further come upon us, they may see in part, though not as we have felt. Our adverse brethren, (although themselves have not answered the things formerly published against their present errors, yet) have not ceased to urge us with boastful speeches, private letters, and public treatises, to come into this field: and whiles we were otherwise employed, they have much insulted against us; and now, rather than we should be quiet, they take our private letters & print them: so restless is error in itself, so troublesome unto others. And whereas Ch. Lawn and others, first declined to these our Opposites faction, and afterwards fell from evil to worse, and have set out a lewd pamphlet, to the disgrace of the truth and of sundry men's persons: Mr Clyfton (who hath printed my letter with M. johnsons answer,) entitleth his treatise, An Advertisement concerning Ch. Lawns book: but taking occasion by Articles therein printed, the most that he advertiseth, is against me. It was my desire and purpose to have left controversies, & have exercised myself in more quiet and comfortable meditations: but it pleaseth not God as yet, to grant my request therein. My prayer therefore is, that his gracious spirit may guide me in this conflict for his truth, and gird me with strength unto this battle. A few things I will here briefly note, touching our present controversy. 1. The power of Christ which he left with his Church, hath been continually assailed by Satan and his instruments. Diotrephes * 3. joh. 9.10. began the love of pre-eminence, in the Apostles time: Bishops have prosecuted the same, in all ages sithence: but the high Priest of Rome did get the victory, and wears the triple crown. Two pillars there are, which do most underprop the tower of Antichrist: 1. a proportion drawn from the government in Israel, 2. and a pretended privilege from Peter's keys. Pope Innocent the 3. from Deut. 17.8.12. bolstreth his canon law, † C. aper venerabilem. Extrav. qui sunt sil. legit. for exercising his jurisdiction over all causes & persons, proportionable to the high court and Synedrion of Israel. Pighius “ Hierarc. l. 4. c. 3. & l. 2. c. 3. writing for his Lord's hierarchy, and Dorman (our countryman) his disciple, labouring * T. Dorm. Proof of certain articles, denied by M. jewel. fol. 7. to prove the same, plead from the jews state, how God provided to take away schisms that might arise, by appointing a place and judge to flee unto in all such doubts, Deut 17. and would have us think that God hath provided as well for his church now, which hath no less need than they. And because they had the same God, the same Christ, the same faith, the same covenant etc., that we, & the law contained * Heb. 10. a shadow of the good things to come, they think their proofs impregnable, concluding from the high Priests court in Israel, to their high Prelate's consistory in Christendom. Bellarmine and other popish writers (as this treatise after † pag. 15.16 etc. manifesteth,) allege the like arguments. Our opposites now, do plead against us, from the very same grounds: “ Treat. on Mat. 18, 17. Advertisement, pag. 32— 35. etc. wresting a proportion from the Princes of Israel to the Ministers of the gospel, & telling us we may not be strangers from the polity of Israel, whereof see after in this treatise pag. 13.14. etc. neither of them observing, how the Angel foretold that Christ should destroy the City and the Sanctuary of the jews, Dan. 9, 26. and so abolish Moses polity, & bring an other into his house, wherein he should be found as faithful as Moses, Heb. 3, 2, 5, 6. And he hath forbidden his ministers to exorcize princelike authority, or dominion over his heritage; Mat. 20, 25, 26 1. Pet. 5, 1.3. 2. The Papists seek shifts & distinctions, to turn away the reasons that disprove their errors. Bellarmine being pressed, with judgements used heretofore in the Churches, would ease himself thus. “ Bell. de Concil. et eccles. l. 1. c. 16. There is a double judgement (saith he) public and private. Public, is that which is uttered by a public judge with authority, so as others are bound to rest in that judgement. Private, is the sentence which every one chooseth as true, but it bindeth no man. Public judgement in the cause of faith, is never given to the people, but private judgement sometimes is given them etc. In like manner these our opposites, who themselves heretofore reasoned well for the churches judging of sinners from 1. Cor. 5.4— 12. do now seek to solute their own arguments, with the same distinction. There is also * Mr john's. treat. on Mat. 18.17. p. 21. (say they) a public judgement and a private, etc. The public judgement cometh out from the Lord and from his ministers, for him and the church or common wealth, whose public officers they are. The private judgement is to every particular person, touching their discerning, assenting or dissenting to or from the things spoken etc., as every one is persuaded. If this their judgement agree with the public, it is already signified by the officers, and so is the same with the public. If some disagree, it is the dissent of such particular persons judgement from the public, of what sex or condition soever they be, that so are diversely minded, & is to be regarded as there shallbe cause. Alleging for this private judgement, 1 Cor. 6.2.3. Act. 26.10. with 22.20. & 21.25. with 15.6.22. & 16.4. with 1. Cor. 5.12.13. 1. Cor. 10.15. & 11.13. Now although these men quote scriptures, which the Cardinal doth not: yet are the places but for a show; they yield no sound proof of the question. For none of them do manifest, that in the Churches judging of sinners, Paul intended the Elders only should have a public judgement, and all the people beside, but a private: nay the contrary doth appear, by the whole argument of that chapter: to omit things which may be pressed against their distinction, from Act. 15.22.25.28. and other places. As, when he mentioneth sorrowing, 1. Cor. 5.2. he meant not that the Elders sorrow should be public, and the people's private. When he willeth that the wicked man, by the power of Christ should be delivered to Satan, and cast out from among them, verse 4.5.13. he did not purpose that the Elders should deliver and cast him out publicly, & the people privately▪ all being gathered together for that business. When he would have them purge out the old leven, that they might keep the passover with unleavened bread; verse 7.8, he meant not that the Ministers should purge the leaven, and keep the feast publicly, & the church privately: neither did the type of the Passover in Israel, teach them such a thing. No nor the judging of malefactors in Israel: for when the Magistrates gave sentence of death, and the people stoned wicked persons at the gates of the cities: the ruler's fact was not then public, and the people's private; the scripture teacheth us not thus to distinguish, nor reason itself: but that the execution was a part of the public judgement. The Apostle writeth in 1. Cor. 5. to all the Church, blaming their neglect of the Censure, even as in 1. Cor. 11. he writeth to all, reproving their abuse in the Lord's supper. Wherefore, if men will, they may misapply this distinction to all church actions, as to Sacraments, prayers, election of officers, and the like, making them public in the Elders, and private in the church or people: and so, as the Papists do also in other cases, give all lay men but a private spirit (as * Kellisons' Survey, 1. book. 3. chapt. they use to speak,) and the ministers only a public. We find not that Christian people are more excluded from being public members of the body, and actors with their ministers in the Kingdom of Christ, than they are in the priesthood and prophesy. And we know no reason, why the Pastor himself, if he consent not with the Church in casting out such an incestuous person, may not be said to have a private judgement, as well as an other man. But by such popish distinctions, the clergy were severed from the laity, and so the people by degrees, turned out of al. And what now do these our Opposites allow the people, if they see their Elders to corrupt judgement, & therefore do dissent from them; they make it but the dissent of particular persons judgement from the public, of what sex or condition soever they be, (the Christian Magistrate, when he is a member of the Church, not excepted, touching ecclesiastical proceedings,) and it is to be regarded (they say) as there shallbe cause: they mean, I trow, as the Elders themselves shall see cause. And so if a church have 3. or 4. officers, and they corrupted with heresy or other vice, the whole congregation of people, of what condition soever any persons be, can pass no public ecclesiastical judgement upon them, by this doctrine: as for their private judgement or censure, the Elders themselves will regard it as there shallbe cause. If this be not a Prelacy which the Elders would usurp, I know not what is. But of these things, see after in this Treatise, pag. 22, 23. 3. Come we to reproaches & disgrace of the truth and way of God; and we shall see among the Papists, how they disdain that the people should meddle in matters of religion and judging of controversies. They complain of them for their ignorance, unrulynes, disobedience unto government: they say * Dorman, Proof of articles, denied by Mr jewel. fol. 11. the Protestants reason as Chore Dathan and Abyram did, Num. 16. when they rebelled against Moses & Aaron the Ministers of God; saying that there needeth here in the Church no head to govern it, because Christ is always with it. And did not those wicked men (saith the Papist) in their rebellion against Moses & Aron, use the same reason, when they told them to their face, let it suffice you that all the multitude is holy, & they have God present with them. And why then take you upon yourselves, the rule over the people of our Lord? As who would say, having no need of any other ruler, God being with them etc. The very same reproaches do our Opposites now, cast upon us, advancing the Elders, disgracing the people, † See after in this treatise, p. 37.39. by intimating their simplicity & error; charging us as oppugners of government; and abusing against us the example of Corah Dathan and Abiram, (as we have often heard with grief,) telling us, we go upon their grounds, and the like. For which we wish they may find repentance and mercy with the Lord, lest he turn the evil upon their own heads, as Moses then did upon the Levites. For unto them “ Num. 16.9.10. it seemed a small thing that the God of Israel had separated them from the multitude of Israel, to take them near unto himself, to do the service of the Tabernacle, & to stand before the Congregation, and to minister unto them, but they sought the office of the Priest also: so these our opposers are not content with their office, to be * Rom. 1.1. separated unto the gospel of God, to stand and minister before and unto the Congregation, but will needs be the Congregation itself, and take more authority than is given them from † joh. 3.27. heaven: whereof see after in this book, pag. 17.21.22.23. etc. 4. What enmity and persecution the Papists have raised against the withstanders of their heresies, I need not speak: all nations have felt of their cruelty. Neither would I here mention our opposite brethren's hard measure to us, but that themselves have printed, and seek to defend it, & cease not still to prosecute their purposes against us. Although themselves have lately professed, practised, & publicly maintained the truths, which now they oppugn and persecute: and bringing innovation into the Church, would needs obtrude their errors upon our consciences, either in judgement or in practice, or in both. Yea breaking the peace which themselves had devised, agreed unto and confirmed; because their brethren would not agree to the undoing of themselves and their families, for the satisfying of their wills, as is after manifested in this treatise, pag. 123, etc. If the Lord should reward them according to their works herein towards us, their account will be heavy: but my prayer shallbe against their evils. 5. Whereas many Treatises have been written in defence of the truths we maintain: these our Opposers answer them not; neither yet are they silent, nor will give rest unto others, but urge and provoke more writing stil. For the Church's power now in controversy, our Apology * pag. 62.63. bringeth nine reasons: these have answered only one of them, which is the sixth, drawn from Mat. 18.17. all the other they let stand. And yet what clamours have we heard, because their exceptions against that one, are not by us refuted! So in our other articles of differences, the scriptures and reasons set down in our Apology and other books, they pass by without answer. If they can make any colourable exception, they spare it not: otherwise, for want of argument, they fall to ask of questions, seeking if they can to ensnare us. Of which things the reader may see after in this book, pag. 45, etc. & 51. etc. & 59, etc. & 23, etc. The reasons pressed by our common adversaries, Mr Some, Mr Giffard, Mr Bernard and others, touching the baptism and church of Rome, & other like matters, these men now take up against us. The answers published by Mr. Barrow, and Mr Robinson, they pass by, as if they knew them not: yea their own former answers and writings, they take not away; and yet (which is most strange,) they ceass not to press us with the same things. I might well have stayed my pen upon these considerations, at least until our Opposers had given themselves further answer, and manifested what of their former profession they will still abide by: but their importunacy will not suffer me to be silent. Wherefore, (humbly craving the Lord's assistance,) for the defence of the faith once given to the Saints, & for my brethren's good (if it may be,) who are thus fallen into error and evil, I have written this answer to their ADVERTISEMENT, (so far as it concerneth me,) labouring by the word of God, to reduce them again into the right way. Their straying from it, is a reproach to the world, a scandal to the weak, dangerous to their own souls, and to me most dolorous, and my soul shall weep in secret for them, remembering our former amity & concord in the truth. And I shall yet labour for their good, both by prayer unto God, and by the utmost of my poor endeavours otherwise, so long and so far as I may. The principal things handled in this treatise. THe Occasion of publishing this controversy, and the state thereof. pag. 1. etc. Articles agreed of by the English Church at Frankford in Q. Mary's days; touching the Church's power, contrary to our Opposites errors. pag. 8.9. A defence of the Letter which Mr. johnson hath answered and published. pag. 10. etc. The first point of difference, about the power of the Church and Eldership. pag. 12. etc. The 2. of the Church's power to receive in and cast out members, when it hath no Elders. pag. 45. etc. The 3. of the Church's power for election and deposition of their ministers. pag. 51. etc. The 4. of executing a ministry without lawful caling. pag. 59 etc. The fifth of the Baptism in the Church of Antichrist. pag. 67. etc. Of the Church of Rome, and whither it be still God's true Church. pag. 76. etc. Mr. junius his judgement of the Church of Rome, tried. pag. 68 etc. The 6. of using the help of other Churches, in hard controversies. pag. 107. An answer to the 7. articles objected by Mr. johnson to us; pag. 110. etc. Mr. Robinson's answer to Mr. johnsons exceptions against his book. pag. 111. etc. Of the conditions of peace by us desired, by our opposites refused, pag. 123. Of the Agreement by our opposites propounded, made and ratified; and by them again broken.— pag. 127. etc. The Testimony of the Elders of the Church at Leyden, touching the foresaid agreement, and breaking thereof. pag. 123. etc. An Animadversion to Mr Richard Clyftons' Advertisement. Of the occasion of publishing this controversy▪ and of the state thereof. AS they that styrr up wars and strife, “ judge, 11.13. etc. impute the cause unto others, which lieth on themselves: so these our opposers, which will needs bid us battle, yet begin it as occasioned by us thereunto. They object 1. our private letters, and 2. printed Articles, as reasons moving them to print against us. But how weighty motives these are on their part; let the discreet reader judge, by these our answers. 1. I wrote no such letters to any, till they had printed their first book, and so possessed the world with the strife. 2. Mine were private, to friends & brethren; theirs public, even to enemies also. 3. They did it of their own proper will and motion; I was provoked sundry ways, by letters from abroad, and friends at home. For example, one writeth to me thus: Because it is doubted by some, not only whither [M Jo.] his practice with you, be answerable to his writing: but also whither in his writing there be not a discoherence, he being so intricate that many cannot apprehend his meaning: my earnest desire is, and the desire of many others among us, that you would afford us this favour, to signify to us by your letter, the certainty etc. Another writeth to my friend thus, we not knowing well to send a letter unto M. A. thought good to write unto you to entreat him to write unto us concerning the differences that be amongst you etc. Those that come over of M. J. his side, say they hold no more concerning the Eldership, then M. A. hath written against M. Smyth: others say to the contrary; we do therefore entreat M. A. to certify us of the truth etc. Upon these and the like motives there and here by some that went over to their friends, I have written as I was necessarily occasioned privately, of the differences between us; making account my letters would come to our opposites hand, as is fallen out: for which I am not sorry, save so far as hereby they occasion their own evils to be further manifested, which I had rather (if so it pleased God) they were hid and buried by repentance. 4. Themselves have done the like, and even this Advertiser well knows, who wrote to a friend in Engl. persuading against us that saying of the Apostle, receive him not to house neither bid him God speed: 2. Joh. 10. which letter (if we would have sought occasion as they have,) we might ere this have printed, with the answer. By this all may see, how partial these men are, which advertise the world of our writing coversly; when themselves (if it be a fault) are guilty of the same. 2. Touching the printed Articles, so often spoken of in their Advertisement; as we had no hand in, or knowledge of the publishing of them: so must we now show the reason, of giving them out, as we did, being even against our wills forced thereunto, by the frowardness of these our Opposers. 1. First, for the Scornful that printed those articles, they † Lawns book. pag. 78. 82. bear the world in hand, as if the Congregation whereof I am, and myself had sued others at the law, for the meeting house: whereas the contrary was publicly agreed in our Church, that we would rather bear the wrong, than trouble the Magistrate with our controversy: neither have we ever commenced such a suit. 2. But whereas two of our brethren and a widow, were chief owners of the building, they sought first in private friendly manner to come to agreement with their opposite brethren, but could not; then they desired to put it to the arbitrement of indifferent citizens, but the other party refused: whereupon our brethren signified to us, that they must seek help of the Magistrate, for the estate of some of them was such as they could not bear the loss and damage. And asked us, if the churches right were called in question▪ (for our adversaries plea was the church the church,) what should be answered before the magistrate? We, with signification as before, that we would rather suffer wrong, then sue at law; yet could not hinder them of seeking for their particular right: & if in so doing the churches right were called in question, that then some certain appointed, should answer for the same. 3. Those our brethren (before they went to the judges,) entreated the help of the Burgemasters, the chief of the City: who laboured by persuasion with our Opposites, to put the matter to the arbitrement of good men chosen by both sides, but they still peremptorily refused. 4. When it was brought before the judges, they also at first both persuaded unto, and nominated two indifferent men to hear the case: but when our opposers came before them, they refused to stand to their arbitrement. The judges the second time appointed them, with a mulct or forfeit upon those that refused their arbitrement: but our adverse party, persisted in their refusal as before: and urged sentence of the Magistrates, and pleaded that they which build on another man's ground, are by law to lose their building; which plea they made, because the assurance of the ground was made in the name of one man only, (now among them,) whose name was used but in trust, for any other might have had the same as well as he, as was proved before the Magistrate by sufficient witness. Now unto these Arbiters appointed, did our brethren willingly refer the cause, and to them (enquiring of the differences) were those Articles exhibited: which it seemeth those Libelers, or their Scribe, by some means that we know not of, procured a copy of, and so printed them. What cause now have these our opposers, to find such fault with our giving out those articles, which we were constrained by themselves to do, unless we should have suffered the truth to have been trodden down? They rather have cause to acknowledge their own stiff & refractory carriage, who would not yield to any good counsel given them, by our brethren, by Arbiters, or by Magistrates; till law forced them thereunto: and so have occasioned many ways, our common adversaries to rejoice. 3. But we have not (saith the † pag. 17. Advertisement) as we ought, handled and justified the causes for which we separated; which were annexed at the end of the Treatise on Mat. 18.17. but have gone about also to possess the world with other matters. So † pag. 31. after they urge again this point, that we leave the Treatise unanswered, which was purposely written upon that occasion and argument. I answer. 1. We handled and justified the causes for which we separated, by word of mouth in much disputing, before we left them: and this for them was as we ought, and sufficient, according to the Apostles practise, Act. 1●. 8.9. And now we are by their importunacy, called to handle and justify them before the world in writing: which whither we do as we ought, the sequel shall show, to the judicious reader. 2. It is not we, but they which have gone about to possess the world with other matters: for the things we charge them with, themselves in effect acknowledge; and as well as they can do defend them. But their declaration against us in the Treat. on Mat. 18. is defective; and the 7. points they article † Advertis. p. 27. etc. now against us, are superfluous; and injuriously wrested against us, as our answers to them shall manifest. The controversy in deed began upon the exposition of Mat. 18.17. but so as we have heard in times past Anabaptists begin controversy upon Mat. 28.19. who have reasoned both from that and all other scriptures, against the baptizing of infants: so these opposites from Mat 18.17. and all other scriptures that we could bring, reasoned against the power of the people in judging sin & sinners. We formerly * Apol, p. 65. professing the Church there to be Elders and people jointly: they now striving that it is not so, but the Elders only, we knew it must be either the name or the power of the church, that they would have. And we never thought them so vain, as to make such a styrr for a name or title: we held therefore to the power which Christ hath given to his church for judging of them that are within, 1. Cor. 5.4.12.13. Of this when we pressed them, they first gave this answer, that the Elders had the rightful power to excommunicate though without and against the consent of all the people, but not the able power: even as David had rightful power to put joab to death, but was not able, because others were too hard for him: 2. Sam. 3.39. To which we answered; in matters of this life, which are external, men may be hindered by outward force: but in the spiritual administration of the Church not so: God's word (by which they administer) is not in bonds, 2 Tim. 2.9. But if one man only have the power from Christ, he may use it, † jer. 1.9.10 against all the world. So upon better consideration, a week after, they affirmed the Elders to have both rightful power, and able power, to excommunicate, though without and against the consent of all the people. And thus was full power put in the Elders hands: & of the people they said, their power and right was as in Israel, and in the primitive churches. But being asked what that was? answer was made, it was to be inquired. So the poor people are left to seek their right where they can find it: the Elders have enough, they have found that they sought for. As Paul to dissuade the Corinthians from their error in denying the resurrection, showed them the dangerous consequences of the same, as ‘† 1 Cor. 15 13, 14. etc. that if there be no resurrection of the dead, than Christ is not risen, than the Apostles preaching was vain, than the Church's faith was also vain, etc. so I held it my duty to show the people the consequences of the former error, which though at first it may seem small, yet is it as a strong fort in the mouth of a country, which if the enemy win, the whole land is soon lost. For if all the power of receiving in and casting out, were given to the Elders: then our Church which was first gathered and constituted, did receive in and cast out members without Elders, was not planted by the power of Christ; neither had they authority to set up Elders if they could not again upon desert depose them, and if they had not power to judge their brethren, much less could they judge their Elders. And here came in the gathering of the church by virtue of popish baptism, and of receiving the ministry from Rome, as well as the baptism, and the like, which our opposites were and must necessarily be driven unto, for defence of their error. And as for the first gathering of this church, they said an error in the doing, overthroweth not the action: for Isaak erred in blessing jaakob in stead of Esau, yet the action did stand. To which we answered, that it was done by a person who had power from God to give the blessing, and the action was also confirmed by the evidence of God's spirit afterward: but this people (upon our opposites doctrine) had no authority from God, to do as they did, neither could they show any confirmation of the work by God, if our former grounds fail us. The sentence given in the end by the Elders that leaned to the Pastor's error, was, not that discourse they speak of at the end of the Treatise on Mat. 18. (for that was privately penned afterward by the Pastor himself,) but a brief and yet large approbation of the things which the Pastor had showed, to be the truth; and a promise that by the grace of God they would so practise. Upon which sentence giving, we on the contrary approved our former profession published, and showed sundry reasons (which hereafter shallbe set down) why we could not yield to their new vowed practice. And because they always sought to extenuate the controversy, as if it were but a strife about words, or about the meaning of Mat. 18.17. We purposely prevented it, signifying expressly, before we parted, that we would bear with them in their understanding of Mat. 18.17. so as they would yield the point in controversy, (which was about the Church's power,) from other scriptures, showing it also by an other case, that if we had to deal upon John. 1. with an Arian that denies the godhead of Christ, if he would plainly and sincerely yield to the truth of that doctrine, though he thought it not proved by john. 1, (where yet it is evidently proved,) we would bear with him therein. And this we still offer unfeighnedly to these our opposite brethren, let them yet directly and plainly renounce the error itself touching the power of the church now engrossed into the Elders hands, and the other errors that necessarily flow from the same: and we will bear with their judgement concerning Mat. 18.17. though we think of it otherwise that do they. Moreover seeing we offered much more, (which concerneth not only Mat. 18.17. but all other scriptures,) that we would notwithstanding our difference of judgement, have continued together, if our former practice might have been retained; and themselves in their Advertisement * pag. 73. can not deny this: how do they then bear the world in hand, that the breach among us was for the understanding of Math. 18.17? Touching their Treatise on Mat. 18.17. the causes why I have not answered it are. 1. When others heretofore (as namely Mr. Smyth) wrote against the truth which they formerly professed: we all thought best not to answer, till the second and third time we were exceedingly provoked: for we considered how the common adversary would rejoice at our intestine troubles. The same I minded here▪ and these men should (if they were not partial) have done the like. 2. I had experience, in former dealing with M. Smyth, of his unstayednes, that would not stand to the things which himself had written: I mind the like in these Opposites, who are not settled for the constitution of their Church and ministery, upon any ground that I know of, unless it be popish succession. Their former writings about the Church and ministry, and their present estate, will not stand together. Seeing those books are unanswered by others, they should answer them (if they can) themselves; and show us by God's word what is allowable, what disallowable in them. Till they do this, who would willingly deal with them? 3. There are 9 reasons in that our “ pag. 62.63. Apology to confirm the power of the Church now in question: the foresaid Treatise dealeth but against one of them, leaving the rest there, and whatsoever is written of that argument in other our books, unanswered: what reason have they to call so upon others to write, when so much is already written? If they yield us the cause, upon the other reasons, we will not strive about the meaning of one scripture, as before we showed. 4. The meaning of Mat. 18.17. is handled by Mr. Robinson against Mr Bernard (whose book, our opposites so much respected,) and the false gloss upon that text, sufficiently refuted: why do not these men answer the things there written, but call still for more; as if all men must leave other studies, to follow them in their hunting for pre-eminence. 5. I have had intelligence of Mr. Robinson's further purpose to answer in particular that their treatise, as occasion shallbe given. And in deed, I for the love and respect that I have always had to these now opposite brethren; have desired their conviction rather by others then by myself; who are both better able to perform it, and are likely to be more regarded than I, and to do it with less public scandal to the world: who desire nothing more, then to see us, that were so nearly joined, to sharpen our pens one against another. Thus have I been stayed hitherto, though now as the things in that Treatise are repeated in this their Advertisement, I shall discover also the insufficiency of their reasons there alleged. Now as the Advertiser * pag. 18.19 showeth by examples of troubles in church's heretofore, that the godly wise should not be offended at these dissensions: accordingly do I desire all sincere hearted for to walk. And further that he himself with others, would look into the 3. particulars that he allegeth. 1. For the troubles in Corinth, the Apostle composeth by showing the Church their place in Christ above their ministers, 1. Cor. 3.21.22.23. which might also if it were well observed, end the strife that is now among us. 2. The contention about Easter, as it was evil in itself, being about men's traditions: so was it as ill carried. For they learned not to redress things as Paul before taught, 1. Cor. 3. but contrariweise as Hierom after telleth “ Comment in Tit. 1.5. us▪ by setting up one Elder about others, that the seeds of schisms might be taken away. Which human wisdom furthering the mystery of Antichrist so far prevailed, that about this their Easter strife, Victor Bishop of Rome, determined to have excommunicated the East churches, and had done it, but † Euseb. l▪ 5. c. 26. that Irenaeus blamed him and stayed it. Thus ambition having wrung the power first out of the whole Church's hands into the Elders only, and then out of the Elders hands jointly, into ones alone: began to work factions and styrrs in the churches, worse than ever before. 3. The troubles which they speak of, in the English church at Frankford in Q. mary's days, is even a picture of our present calamities, and worthy of perpetual remembrance. For there when M. Horn the pastor with his fellow Elders usurped authority above the church; they were well withstood by the body of the congregation, among whom were sundry men of wisdom and learning. And to appease that strife, by the Magistrates counsel they agreed upon articles, which directly overthrew the errors so stood for by these our opposers. For thus the printed Discourse of the troubles of that church saith. * Discourse of troub. at Frankford. p. 11●. etc. The Discipline reform and confirmed by the authority of the church and magistrate. Art. 38. The ministers and seniors severally and jointly, shall have no authority to make any manner of decrees, or ordinances to bind the congregation or any member thereof: but shall execute such ordinances and decrees as shallbe made by the congregation and to them delivered. 44. The ministers and seniors elect, have authority as the principal members of the congregation, to govern the said congregation according to God's word, and the discipline of the church: and also to call together and assemble the said congregation for causes and at times, as shall to them seem expedient. Provided always, that if any dissension shall happen between the ministers and seniors, or the more part of them, and the body of the congregation, or the more part of it: and that the said ministers and seniors in such controversy, being desired thereto, will not assemble the congregation; that then the congregation may of itself come together, and consult and determine as concerning the said controversy or controversies, and the said assembly to be a lawful congregation, and that which they, or the more part of them so assembling, shall judge or decree, the same to be a lawful decree and ordinance, of sufficient force to bind the whole congregation, and every member of the same. 46. Item in case some do depart [out of the said congregation] that yet not withstanding, those which still remain, (if they be the greater part) to be a lawful congregation: and that which they or the more part of them shall decree, to be a lawful decree, of force to bind the whole body, ministers, seniors, deacons, and every other member or members thereof without exception. 53. If any of the congregation be offensive etc. to any of the brethren, so that the offence be private, he is first brotherly to admonish him alone. If that do not prevail, to call one or 2. witnesses. If that also do not prevail, then to declare it to the ministers and Elders, to whom the Congregation hath given authority to take order in such cases, according to the discipline of the Church. 54. There be 3. degrees of ecclesiastical discipline: first, that the offender acknowledge his fault, and show himself penitent before the ministers and seniors. The 2. that if he will not so do, as well his original crime, as also his contempt of the ministers etc. be openly declared by one of the ministers, before the whole congregation etc. The 3. that if he remain still obstinate before the whole congregation, after a time to him by the whole congregation limited to repent in, he then shallbe openly denounced excommunicate: which excommunication, seeing it is the uttermost penalty of ecclesiastical power, shall not therefore be executed until the matter be heard by the whole Church, or such as it shall specially appoint there unto. 62. If all the ministers and seniors [which have authority to hear and determine etc.] be suspected, or found parties, or if any appeal be made from them: that then such appeal be made to the body of the congregation, the ministers, seniors, and parties excepted: and that the body of the congregation may appoint so many of the congregation to hear & determine the said matter or matters, as it shall seem good to the Congregation. 65. That the Ministers and Seniors, and every of them, be subject to ecclesiastical discipline, and correction, as other private members of the Church be. 67. If any controversy be upon the doubtful meaning of any word or words in the discipline; that first it be referred to the ministers & seniors. And if they cannot agree thereupon, than the thing to be brought and referred to the whole congregation. These and the like things were agreed of by that church, to suppress the exorbitant power which the ministers then challenged: whereby the reader may see, 1. what the learned and most conscionable of the church of England held heretofore: which if they had continued in, would have freed them of all antichristian prelacy, the bane of so many churches. 2. That this opinion of the church's power above the Elders, is not new, or first professed by us, as some do reproach us. 3. And that these Advertisers, which now oppose against us, if they had looked upon the examples which themselves allege, might have seen their errors resisted by others, against which the Lord hath now called us also to witness. He vouchsafe to be with us in this business; and guide my heart and hand, to defend his truth. Of the Letter by M. johnson answered and published, and by H. Ainsworth now defended. Wherein the Articles of difference between both parties, are set down and discussed. THree things are to be treated of. 1. The points wherein they are gone from their former profession. 2. The points wherein they now charge us to differ from our former profession. 3. The conditions of peace, which they refused. For an entrance into this controversy, M. johnson gives 5. observations. * Advertis. p. 25. First, that we left them upon two particular matters, (concerning the Church's government▪ and the exposition of Mat. 18, 17.) & do not directly keep to them as we ought, nor answer the things printed. I answer: this their beginning is ambiguous and fraudulent. The church's government, is sometime taken largely; sometime strictly: sometime it is spoken of Christ, upon whose shoulders the † Isa. 9.6. government is; and hereof there was no controversy. Sometime it is spoken of the ministerial “ 1. Tim. 5.17. 1. Cor. 12.28. ruling and governing the church by Elders: neither of this do we make any question; but hold (as ‘† Confes. art. 19 heretofore) that Christ governeth his church outwardly by their ministration. Sometime men use it generally for the whole outward polity, power, and (as many call it) discipline of the Church: and about this in part our controversy was. But I will manifest the fraud. We in our published writings, distinguish the government, and the power: acknowledging * Confess. art. 17.19.26. government to be by the officers; but “ Conf. art. 22.23.24. Apol. p 46.47.60.62. power in the whole body of the Church. And for this point of power, are 9 reasons set down, whereof one is drawn from Christ's speech, Mat. 18.17. tell the Church. Apol. pag. 62.63. Between these two is the matter so conveyed, as while we plead for the churches right and power, we are said to oppugn government: and when we yield the Elders to govern, they thereby would enclose the whole power in their hands; as in the further handling of these things shall appear. But if a church have one minister only, he is to teach and govern them by the word of God: yet is not any one man a Church, neither hath the power of a Church. Yea this distinction is in one particular, by themselves acknowledged, in the same book: † Advertis. p. 46. it is (they say) undeniable, that to give voices in election is not a part of government, or a duty peculiar to the governors of the church, but an interest, power, right and liberty, that the saints and people out of office have. Very well said; whereupon we infer also, that to give voices in ‘† Act. 15.7.12.22.23.25 1. Cor. 5. 1● 13. deciding of controversies, and judging of sinners, is not a part of government, but a power and right that the saints out of office have. The Elders are to teach direct and govern the church in election of officers; they are to do the like in judging & excommunicating wicked persons, and in all other public affairs. Of the exposition of Mat. 18.17. and why their Treatise was not particularly answered, I have spoken before: & the special things therein, are in this treatise repeated, and so shallbe here answered. 2. Their second observation I like well, & yield unto; that men may change and redress, according to God's word, things that are amyss: but withal, I would have them, 1. plainly to acknowledge wherein they erred, and what they establish for truth; and 2. to take away by God's word, the reasons whereupon they builded before. Which whither these our opposers have done as they ought; I leave it for the discreet reader to judge by their writings, compared with those which were published heretofore to the contrary. 3. The third, for the church's government by the officers, is that which we always have and still do yield to, as even now I showed. As for our former practice altered, and as he saith, by me acknowledged: touching the order and manner of the practice in one particular, I grant it; but for the power of the Church, whereof we treat, I deny it. There never was such a practice in my days, as whereby the Elders should be esteemed the Church, and to have the power of the same. 4. The 4. observation is that our exceptions are such as the Anabaptists would object in much like manner. Yet doth he not show this so to be: and I know, for their successive ministery, they are nearer the Anabaptists than we: & both for it and other points, they build upon the very grounds of popery, as after shallbe manifested. But what do we except? is it not from our former Articles, and apology confirmed by scriptures, from which these are departed: in penning also whereof these that thus write, had a principal hand? So they do hereby not only join with our common “ D. Some. M. Giss. M. Bern. adversaries, who intwite us with Anabaptistry: but impute weakness to their own former writings and cause, wherein more strength of truth hath appeared then ever they shallbe able to pull down, howsoever they may assail it. The 5. observation is a mist cast before the reader's eyes, a collection of 7. things wherein they would make men believe, we are gone from that we held heretofore. The error whereof I will show hereafter when (as order requireth,) I have examined the answers that they make for themselves, to these our Articles, which now next follow. The first point of difference: in the Letter. 1. Whereas we had learned and professed, that * Confess. art. 24. Apol. p. 62.63. Christ hath given the power to receive in or to cut off any member, to the whole body together of every Congregation, and not to any one, or more members sequestered from the whole: now we have been lately taught, that the Church which Christ sendeth to, for the redress of sins Mat. 18.17. is not to be understood of the whole body of the Congregation, but of the Church of Elders. And it being granted of all, that with the Church is the power, the Elders being the Church, have the power, and so not the whole body of the congregation together. And in the copy which Lawn printed. The 24. Article [of the Confession of our faith,] (confirmed in our Apology, pag. 60.62.63.) professeth that the power to receive in, or to cut off any member, is given to the whole body together of every Christian Congregation, Mat. 18.17. etc. These have pleaded for the Eldership to be the Church, Mat. 18. and to have both rightful power and able power to excommunicate, though without & against the consent of the body of the Congregation. The scriptures to confirm our former doctrine and practice, are in our Confession, Psal. 122.3. Act. 2.47. Rom. 16.2. Mat. 18.17. 1. Cor. 5.4. 2. Cor. 2.6.7.8. Levit. 20.4.5. & 24. 14. Num. 5▪ 2.3 Deut. 13.9. The reasons in our Apology are nine, the first referring to proofs of former positions, the other 8, confirmed by sundry arguments doctrines & practices gathered from the Prophetical and Apostolical scriptures. For answer hereunto, their Advertisement telleth us many things. First of their Treatise published on Mat. 18.17. touching which, I also have spoken before. Neither is this point of the Church's power therein plainly handled, but closely carried: neither is there any thing at all said, to take away the other 8. reasons, in our Apology. Let the reader compare the writings, and judge. There be also things formerly written both by others and by themselves, touching this of Mat. 18. and things lately published against M. Bernard about it: to these they give no answer at all, yet call they upon us to write more. 2. Secondly they carp at this phrase, the Church of Elders; and would have it the Congregation or Assemble of Elders: saying that so men might sooner perceive the vanity of our error. And that I myself elsewhere show the word is sometime used for an Assembly of Elders. I answer; 1. If they will raze the word Church, out of the Bible, as unfit, they may do so in Mat. 18. and in this controversy: or else they must give us leave, to keep wont known words, which help men to discern the truth of matters. 2. Neither show they any one scripture for the phrase they would have, the Congregation of Elders: neither did I ever show or could see the word Church so to mean in all the new Testament: but in the old (which now is changed,) I have observed it in some few places. 3. But be it Church or Congregation, I will not much contend: yet I know their eyes will dazzle that look hereby to discern in our doctrine either vanity or error. Albeit I confess these our opposites, have the Papists on their side; for so Card▪ Bellarmine † De Verbo Dei, lib. 3. c. 5. expoundeth this Tell the Church, that is the Prelate, or the Congregation of Prelates; & * De author. eccles. contra Whitaker. l. 1. c. 1▪ S. 5. Stapleton interpreteth the Church, Mat. 18. to be the Ministers. 3. Thirdly, they observe that the scriptures of the old testament are quoted for our 24. Article, as directly carrying us for this matter to the Church of Jsrael; which now we would not be brought unto. etc. I answer; the first is true, for the scriptures cited do show that the people were interessed in those public actions with their magistrates: and therefore there is no reason that now there ministers should claim the whole power to themselves. The latter is untrue; for we did consider and decide the matter between us, by the scriptures of the old Testament, compared with the new, and so are still ready to do. But always with observing the differences between the state of the church then & now; which are many, as the Apostles do teach us. Heb. 8. & 9 & 10. chapters. Gal. 4.1.2.3. etc. Heb. 12. 1●.— 28. 4. Their last observation hath two branches: the 1. that the power of receiving in & cutting off in Jsrael, was to be performed according to order; and not to weaken but to 'stablish they Elders authority. This we willingly grant: neither ever doubted of. But we observe withal, a deceit which they couch under this name Elders: which usually in the old Testament, is given to Magistrates▪ which are also called in respect of their authority Lords, Princes, Judges, yea and Gods, 1. Sam. 23.12. Num. 21.18. & 22.7.8. Deut. 19.17.18. Exod. 21.6. Psal. 8 2. and by the Apostles they are called ●owers (or authorities) and Glories, (or Dignities,) Tit. 3.1. 2. Pet. 2.10. But the name Elders, now in the Church of Christ is given to the Ministers, 1. Pet. 5.1. who are forbidden to exercise authority, or to be as Lords over God's heritage, or to be called by such stately titles, Mat. 20.25.26. 1. Pet. 5.1. Luk. 22.25.26. They streyn therefore too far, which will proportion the authority and power of the Elders that should stand and minister to the Church (as † Num. 16.9. 2. Chro. 35.3. did the Priests and Levites:) with the authority of the Elders the Magistrates, that * jer. 26.10. late and judged in the gates. 2. The second branch of their observation is, that we must not be strangers from the policy of Jsrael; Ephe. 2.12. etc. I answer, by polity, they mean not, I hope, the inward faith which Israel had: but the outward order of administering in that Church: otherwise they reason neither properly nor to the question in hand. Yea in this very place the Apostle distinguisheth the polity, from the covenants of promise. And so I deny that we are bound now to keep the polity of Israel; neither doth the Apostle mean any such thing. For he putteth the Ephesians in mind of their estate being paynims, when they were * Eph. 2.11.12. uncircumcised, without Christ, without Israel's polity, without covenants of promise, without hope, without God. But now in Christ they were united & brought near; but whereunto, to circumcision? nay, he saith elsewhere, “ Gal. 5.2. if they were circumcised Christ should profit them nothing? or, to the ordinances of worship in the Temple? nay, for he saith † Heb. 13.10. we have an altar, whereof they have no authority to eat, which serve in the tabernacle. Or were they now to go up, as * Psal. 122.4 5. did the Tribes to the earthly jerusalem, where thrones of judgement were set, thrones for the house of David? nothing so, for Christ was ‘† Dan. 9.24 26. Luk. 19.41.44. to destroy both City & Sanctuary; so to force the jews to an end of their polity. But now the Ephesians were come ؛؛ Ephe. 2.18 unto the Father, by one Spirit, and unto Christ, who † verse 15. abrogated through his flesh the hatred, that is, the law of commandments, which stood in ordinances; and was * Heb. 3.2. faithful, as Moses, in all his house: and to be citizens with ‘† Eph. 2.19 the Saints and household of God; which are built, not upon Moses polity that is done away, but upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, that is the † 1. Cor. 3.10. etc. doctrine which they taught of Christ and of the ordinances of his Testament, which is * Heb. 12.27.28. a kingdom that cannot be shaken, as was the commonwealth of Israel according to the flesh. Look therefore what polity the Apostles have taught and taken from the Law; or Moses & the Prophets foretold should continue under the Gospel, so much will we reteyn, the rest we leave to jews & jewishly affected. And these are the things which they have answered to the first objection in the Letter: which whither they have proved the Elders now under the Gospel to be the Church which is to judge of sin and sinners, and to have power as the Church, in their own hands; let all indifferent men judge: as also what cause they had to conclude that we oppose against Jsrael, Moses and the Prophets, and to cry out against us as they do, that such is our error, and so great is our transgression and iniquity. But because of the printed copy, they set upon us afresh, with many observations, and questions, and by matters, with longsomnes enough: whereas a few sound arguments, would much better have cleared the controversy, and contented the reader. They † Advertis. p. 32.33. observe 1. that the scriptures of the old Testament are quoted in our Article, as well as of the new. 2. That Mat. 18. is to agree with the other scriptures cited. 3. That it must be understood with proportion to the manner in Jsrael. 4. That therefore their understanding is according to the ancient faith; and not ours, who would make them strangers from Jsrael, and would persuade them that Christ's doctrine in Mat. 18.17. is a new rule etc. I answer; these are in effect the things we heard before, and which in my answers I have partly granted, partly refuted. 1. The proportion they speak of, is a disproportion concluding from Magistrate's authority in the Commonwealth▪ to Ministers in the Church; which is against Christ's doctrine Mat. 20.25.26. And if they will not learn it of Christ, they may learn it of Cato, an alien from the common wealth both of Israel and of Christ, who yet said to such * Plutarch. in Cat. It becomes you to be mindful of your condition, that you are not Magistrates but Ministers. 2. It is a main pillar of Popery, to proportion the Church now, in the outward polity to Israel. The Rhemists would have the † Rhem. annot. on Mat 23.2. the see of Rome, in the new law, to be answerable to the chair of Moses. Cardinal Bellarmine “ De Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 1. maketh his first argument for the Pope's judging of controversies, from the Priest & Judge that was appointed in the Law, Deut. 17. And as Moses sat as Prince of the Church, and gave answer to all doubts arising about the Law of God, Exod. 18. so by proportion † Bellar. de verb. Dei, l. 3. c. 4. he will have now in the papacy. And in deed, for show, the papists proportion to have one supreme court above all, to end weighty causes and appeals; more resembleth Israel, then doth these men's Eldership in every particular Church. 3. It is an argument that others (except papists) have disclaimed. D. Bilson, (whose learning and goodwill hath holpen the prelacy as much as any man's, and whose understanding of Mat. 18.17. these our opposites in some points do now follow,) he ؛; Perpet. goverm. ch. 4. confesseth that to reason from the Magistrate to the minister, from the sword to the word, from the law to the Gospel etc. the leap is so great, that cartropes will not tie the conclusion to the premises. ‘† Prolect. de Rom. Pont. Con. 4. Q. 8. c. 2. ● 2. D. whitaker's, {punctel}; Animadv, ad contr. 1. l. 3. c. 4. et ad. cont. 3. l. 1, c. 2. D. junius, and others, refuting the Papists, disallow the reasons drawn from the law, and magistracy of Israel; which these our opposers make their chiefest bulwark. M. Cartwright answering D. Whitgift, saith * T. C. 2. Repl. p. 614 the argument is not good from civil government to ecclesiastical. When Bellarmine “ De Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 9 allegeth the civil Monarchies to justify the ecclesiastical: junius answereth, the ؛; Animad. in Bellar. ibid. example is altogether unlike, of temporal empire and spiritual ministry: between these, there is not, neither aught, neither can a proportion or comparison be rightly made. 4. It is an argument that is yet hid, and by our opposites themselves unmanifested how the proportion they speak of, shall be shaped. For in Israel there were Magistrates in the cities, & Priests and Levits, in the Tabernacle, and Ministers in the Synagogues. Let them show us who now are proportionable to the Magistrates, who to the Priests; and who to the Ministers in the synagogues. The Magistrates also were of sundry sorts, as * josh. 23.2. Elders, Heads, Judges, & Officers. The Judges again differing both in number and power. In † Deut. 16.18. all the cities throughout the tribes, were Judges, (which the Iew●doctors call the ‘† talmud Babylon. tract. Sanhedrin, c. 1. lesser Sanhedrin or Session, and say it consisted of 23. judges,) and ‘* Deut. 16.18. Officers which “ Maimon. in Sanhedrin, c. 1. they say were weaponed, and executed the judges sentences. In the chief City Deut. 17.8 9.2. Chron. 19.8. jerusalem were also judges and Priests, for the weightiest and hard causes: this Talm. ibidem. they called the great Sanhedrin, or Session, and it had Num. 11. ●4. etc. 71. judges, of whom first Moses was chief, and sucsessively, one called Maimon, ibidem. Nasi the Prince, next whom they place Ibiden. A●beth di●●, the Father of the judgement hall, besides other officers as two Scribes to write the causes of the condemned & the absolved: ‘† Maimon. Sanhedrin. chapt. 15. Sh●lc●●h ●●th din, the Messenger (or Angel) of the Court, even as there was also in other cases Shelia●h ●sibbur, the Messenger or Angel of the Church or Congregation, in the synagogues: whereunto it may be thought that in Rev. 2.1. etc. hath allusion. Again they make an other court ‘*’ Talmud Sanhedr. c. 1. of three, for lesser strifes and money matters▪ called dries m●●monoth: the lower Synedrion of 23. judged matters of life and death di●●i nephashoth: & the high Senate of 71. judged weightiest matters of state, of wars, of a Tribe, of a False prophet, of appeals brought etc. Also among the Priests and Levits, there were * 1. Chron. 23. & 24. &. 25. & 26. chapt. diverse orders and functions, some chief, some inferior, some ministering in the sanctuary by course, some overseers and judges, some Musicians, some Treasurer's, some Porters etc. In the synagogues there were ‘† Act. 15.21. always lecturers and preachers of the law and prophets, in every city, and in jerusalem itself were * Act. 24.12. many synagogues, besides the Temple there. Now they that would proportion their power with Israel, showld show whither they mean all these forespoken, or but some. They should tell us to whom the Pastor is proportionable, to whom the Teacher, to whom the ruling Elders. And seeing they will have that rule in Mat. 18. to be as it was in Israel, they should tell us to which of those Synedrions, or Priests, or Rulers, Christ sendeth. Whiles these things are not cleared, but we are told generally of a proportion with Israel, we are led as in the clouds; and know not into what errors we may fall. 5. They refer us in the beginning of their Treatise on Mat. 18.17. to a place in Mat. 5.22.23 etc.▪ where Christ (they say) teacheth the offending brother how to carry himself, as in Mat. 18.15. etc. he doth the brother offended: & that in both places Christ showeth to whom the offender may be brought, viz, to the Church or Congregation Mat. 18.17. to the Synedrion or sitting of Elders, Mat. 5.22. which must be either all one with the other, or else how should his hearers then understand him, or these things than be observed, or these two places be reconciled? I answer; Christ might far better be understood then, than our opposites may now: his words are clear, but not to the purpose that they cite them. Christ there speaketh not of men judging on earth, but of Gods judging in heaven. For men had not power to condemn to * Mat. 5.22. hell fire, there spoken of: neither could they by Moses law, condemn a man to death for unadvised anger, as Christ there God would do: neither was every man, that called his brother Raka, to be brought to the Synedrion at jerusalem, the lesser courts in the cities, could hear and end such matters. The jew Doctors say, † Talmud Bab. tract. Sanhedrin. c. 1. that such as bring an evil same on their neighbours, were to be judged, by the Court of 3. or by that of the 23. but for the high Synedrion, both they and Moses “ Exod. 18.22. Deut. 17.8.9. law show it was for the more weighty and difficult cases. Our saviour in Mat. 5. interprets the law otherwise then did the scribes. They said, ‘† verse 21. whosoever killeth shallbe culpable of judgement, that is, he should ‘* Exod. 21.12. die by God's law: and further than outward actual murder they went not. But Christ showeth 3. kinds of killing otherwise then with the hand: the least whereof, even * Mat. 5.22. unadvised anger, should be punished with death by God; and as it did increase and show itself in evil speeches, so should their punishment be increased in hell: which he setteth down by allusion to the sundry civil judgements in Israel. And so he proceedeth to teach men the true keeping of the law, by love and reconciliation; without which they should be cast into a verse 25. the prison of hell: how ever such sins were not punishable by men. But in Mat. 18. Christ speakketh of judgements b Mat. 18.17.18. on earth, in this life; and that not of the civil punishments by the Magistrate's sword; but of c verse 18. binding and losing by the word of God, to be performed by d verse 17. the Church, that is, (as Paul e 1. Cor. 5.4.5.12. showeth) the ecclesiastical assembly gathered in Christ's name. Wherefore the church in Mat. 18▪ 17. is not the Synedrion in Mat. 5.22. as these would have it. Or if it be, then is it meant of the Magistrates, and not of the church ministers, unto whom these would now draw it. For, were * Luk. 4.20. the Ministers and preachers of the law in the synagogues; judges in the synedrion? Sheliach Isibbur, Angelus ecclesiae, the messenger of the Congregation, was he the chief of the synedrion, as the Pastor (who they say is Angelus ecclesiae) is now chief in the Eldership? If Christ must needs speak to the understanding of the jew, and order his Church like their common wealth; there must be more than one court or Synedrion; and he could not give that to f Mat. 18.20. 2. or 3. gathered any where in his name, which belonged to the Senate of the Realm. 6. So whereas they say we would persuade them Christ's doctrine in Mat. 18.17. is a new rule which Jsrael had not: I think it willbe good for them to yield unto this persuasion. For the Elders in Israel, to whom they g In their Treat. on Mat. 18. refer us, by Psal. 82. Josh. ●0. 4.5.6 Num. 35, 12.24.25. 29. Deut. 19.11.12.16.17. and other like places, being Magistrates, that had power of life and death; if Christ sendeth unto such, the Ministers of the Church, I hope will not intrude into their places. Wherefore either let them acknowledge the * Heb. 8.8. new Testament, to have new rules and ordinances: and that the kingdom being changed aswell as the priesthood, there must needs be † Heb. 7.12. a change of the law thereof also: or else, let them leave it to the Magistrate, unto whom it belongeth. Next this, they give us “ Advert. pag. 33. a distinction between the sentence of excommunication, and between the execution thereof. As in Jsrael, the Elders, & Priests, had a rightful power to give out the sentence of death & of leprosy according to the law, without ask the people's consent, yea though it should have been without and against it; Deut. 1.16. & 17.8.12. & 24.8. with 2. Chron. 26.16.20. Levit. 13. etc. and then it was for the people to perform the execution accordingly: so the Elders now may by office give out the sentence of excommunication according to the law of God, & the people should accordingly put it in execution, by avoiding the excommunicate persons till they repent. I answer; this comparison is faulty many ways. First, it speaketh only of a rightful power, whereas the thing they should answer to, is both rightful and able power, as themselves once distinguished: or let them say, whether the Church that Christ sendeth to for redress of sin, hath not able power to excommunicate. 2. Secondly it matcheth the power of the Ministers in spiritual things, with the power of the Magistrates in civil things: which what is it, but to make the one Lords spiritual, as the other are Lords temporal; according to the Popish hierarchy? 3. Thirdly it misseth in the proportion of the Priests judging leprosy; for God's law in Lev. 13.2. is, that the suspected person should be brought to Aaron the Priest or to one of his sons the Priests; and the * verse 3.6 etc. Priest should look, and pronounce him unclean, or clean, as he discerned it. The proportion hereto now, is one Bishop or Minister, rather than a Church of Ministers: for if one Priest might judge then, why may not one Minister judge now? Do not the Papists, which † Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 5. c. 8. allege this very example, and apply it to one Priest: make a fitter proportion, than they that deny this power unto one, and yet apply it unto many? 4. Fourthly, thus far I grant this proportion, that as every Priest than might according to the law, declare what was leprosy: so every Minister now, may and aught by the law to declare what is sin and heresy; and this though it be without and against the consent of the Church & of all the world. Ezek. 3.17,— 21.2 Tim. 4..1.2. Tit. 1.9. But as then, not the priest only, but the * Num. 5.2. children of Israel, put every leper out of the host: so now, not the minister only, but the children of Christ, the church, are to ‘* 1. Cor. 5.12.13. put the wicked out from among them, as the Apostle showeth. 5. Fiftly, if the Elders the Magistrates, might (as these men say) give sentence of death against a man, though without and against the people's consent; & than it was for the people to perform the execution: then that people, I say, were in great subjection and servitude to their Elders, that must execute that man, to whose death they consented not: and to shape the Minister's power now accordingly, is to make them Lords, and the Church their subjects and servants: yea the Pope himself never had men in greater slavery. I know, when God's law condemned a man, if it were showed by all or any one of the judges, or Priests, or Prophets, yea or Israelites; the people should in order have executed him: but oft times the heads of the people a Mich. 3.11. judged for rewards, the Princes b Zeph. 3.3 4. Isa. 1.23. as Lions, the judges as Wolves devoured them, the Priests polluted the sanctuary, and wrested the law. And then the people of the land, c Levit. 20.2.4. whose duty also it was to look to open wickedness, were neither to follow d Exod. 23.2.7. the many nor mighty in evil. And that the judges had power to put any man to death, whom the people judged innocent, I find not, but would see it proved. I find how in Naboths' case (though it were a wicked fact,) there was e 1 King. 21. 12·13. a solemn fast and assembly of the people with the governors: how in jeremy's case, he was accused f jer. 26.11.12.16. to the Princes and people, made his defence to princes and people, and was acquitted by princes and people. When g 1. Sam. 14.39.44.45. King Saul swore that jonathan should die; the people swore the contrary, & saved him from death: when the high priests & scribes would have killed Christ, they feared the people, Luk. 20.19. & 22.2. and the people as well as the rulers, were called before Pilate about Christ's death, Luk. 23.13. and by their voices prevailed, Mat. 27.20.22.25.26. Luk 23.23. So that to prove the Ministers sole power now, for to cut off a man from the Church, by the Magistrate's power then to cut off a man from Israel, neither is the proportion just, if it were so, neither yet is it manifested that so it was in Israel. 6. Sixtly, the proportion which they here make, is so misshapen; that I marvel wise men would ever bring it forth to the view of the world. For they make the avoiding of the excommunicated person by the people, to be the executing of the sentence of excommunication; whereas this censure is properly executed by him that in the name of Christ and with consent of the Church, delivereth the wicked man to Satan, as the Apostle willeth, 1. Cor. 5. which being done, the man is certainly excommunicated, whither the people avoid his company or not. And if they otherwise here understand the word execution; they do but deceive the reader with an equivocation. This their other example of the sentence of death, and the execution thereof, will plainly manifest. For Pilate ‘†’ Luk. 23.24. gave sentence of death upon Christ; the ‘*’ joh. 19.23.34. souldjers that killed him with nails and spear, they executed the sentence of death, as we commonly speak and understand. Then “ vers. 38.— 43. joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, embalmed him with myrrh, wound him in a sheet, and laid him in grave: shall we say that these two now were the executioners of Christ; because they carried themselves towards him as towards a dead man? Or if any refrained from touching a dead man that had been hanged, least by him they ‘* Num. 19.11. should be polluted: did they here by execute him? No more do they properly execute the sentence of excommunication, which avoid the company of one excommunicated. 7. But because all the weight of their wrested proportion from Israel, is couched herein: let us look upon it a little more. In their Treatise on Mat. 18. there † pag. 19 they say: in Jsrael, such as would not hearken to the Priests and Judges, were to die by the hands of the people, Deut. 17. Again they say, * ibid. p. 20. delivering to Satan, in 1. Cor. 5. is in stead of death in Jsrael. Levit. 20.11. By this, one would think, that the people now should deliver a wicked man to Satan, when the Elders have judged him worthy: otherwise, how stands the proportion? But they mean nothing less: for a little after, they “ ibid. p. 26 tell us, in the Church's excommunication, there is the giving of a sentence judiciary, which pertaineth to government and authority; there is also in particular, a delivering to Satan, by the power of our Lord Jesus Christ etc. which likewise implieth authority; & that it is proportionably answerable to the taking away by death etc., that it is a special use of the keys given by Christ to the Apostles; that the force hereof is such, as thereby a man is not only cast out of that particular Church whereof he was a member, but is cut off & excluded from all churches upon earth: as on the contrary by baptism, we are entered into communion with all Churches of Christ in the world. By these things compared together, we may observ: 1. that the church elders may by their sole authority give judiciary sentence, that a man shallbe excommunicated: answerable to the Magistrates in Israel, that gave sentence a man should be put to death. 2. That the Elders may also by authority in particular deliver a man to Satan by the power of Christ; which is proportionably answerable to the taking away by death: which in Israel, themselves grant, was to be done by the hands of the people. Thus do the Elders now challenge by proportion in the Church, that which belonged both to Magistrates and people in the common wealth. But because they fear the † Act. 5.26. people, they shape them this deceitful proportion, that their avoiding the excommunicate person, is the executing (or putting in execution, as they ambiguously speak) of the sentence: answerable to the people's stoning of a malefactor in Israel; how fitly, let all that have understanding judge. For whether the people avoid him or not, the man is judged and delivered to Satan, and so cut off from the church: as on the contrary, when one is baptized by the minister, whether the people keep company with him or not, he is made a member of the church: and as a man beheaded in Israel, was surely dead, whether the people refrained from touching him or no. 2. Again they give no more to the people of that Church whereof he is a member, then to the people of all other churches, that are bound to avoid the excommunicated person, as well as they. 3. Yea they give hereby their people no more power, than the Pope doth to his marked servants; for he also will have the people avoid such as he doth excommunicate: and if this be the boasted right and liberty of the people, they had as much in the greatest bondage of popery, as now when they are carried thus blindfold by propertions. But they tell the people, † Advert. pag. 34. that if any can except against the Elders proceedings they shallbe heard. I answer, First before whom and unto whom, shall any man except against the Elders: is it not before and unto the Elders themselves? And is it meet that they should be judges in their own cases? In Israel when any complained of wrong in the Synagogues or Cities, there was an * Deut. 17.8 9 2. Chron. 19.8.10. higher Court to control unruly Elders, and to help the oppressed. But now 2. or 3. Elders in a Church, bearing themselves upon their forged authority from Mat. 18.17.20. may be lawless; and who shall let them in their proceedings? Secondly, how should the people except, when by these men's doctrine, they are not bound to be present at the hearing and deciding of the controversy: will it not be a just blame upon them, if they except against a matter, which they have not heard discussed? Thirdly, when the party accused shall except against the Elders proceedings, (as commonly he will do, for if he acknowledged himself to have sinned, he should not need to be excommunicated:) may the people now require to hear the case debated between the Elders and him? nay, they plead in their Treatise on Math. 18. saying, * pag. 16. But where hath the Lord appointed a rule of further proceeding, beyond that of the Elders & governors, for hearing the brethren's causes, and judging between a man and his brother? etc. And again, the Elders also are the Church's officers, etc. so as when they have heard, examined, admonished, and judged according to the word of God, it is to be esteemed as done by the Lord and the Church etc. Thus let the man except what he will, the judgment is at an end, the Lo: hath done it, the Church hath done it, because the Elders have done it: and it must be presupposed, that they have done it according to the word of God, though the man except never so much: and though the scriptures foreshow of judges that were † Zeph. 3.3. wolves not sparing the flock, and latter days abundantly confirm the same. And thus when a Naboth is condemned by wicked Elders, if any except on his behalf, they will * Isa. 2●. 2●. take him in a snare that reproveth in the gate: perhaps he shall hear it said, by what authority do you speak? &, are you one of the Church spoken of in the 1●. of Matthew? for the Elders have power to deal with him also that shall except, and can easily bring him within the compass of a contentious person, or an oppugner of government, and cast him likeweise out of the Church; that a man sometime were as good take a Lion by the paw, as except against the Elders proceedings. Next follow their many questions; and other matters imputed unto us: wherein we observe how when arguments fail them for their own cause, they seek to darken the truth, by casting clouds before the reader's eyes. 1. First they ask, whither in Jsrael the Lord abridged the people of their right and liberty etc. I answer, No: but these men that by wrested proportions, give the ministers of the church, the power that Magistrates, Priests and people had in Israel; do abridge the people of their right, as before is manifested. And for the further clearing of it, seeing there were divers governors in Israel, as the ‘*’ Num. 18. Priests and Levites in the Temple; the † Luk. 4.20 ministers in the synagogues; the ‘†’ Deut. 16 1●. Elders or Magistrates at the gates of the cities, and these also diverse and of unequal power, as before ‘*’ pag. 16. is showed: I ask of them again, whither now the Eldership of every church, be proportionable in power and government, unto all those governors: and if not unto all, unto which of them? 2. Secondly they ask, whither the people have any more right and authority in the church's government now, than the people of Jsrael had in those days. I answer, they should not seek to entangle by ambiguity of terms. First, we give not to the people government, as before ‘†’ pag. 10. I have showed, but a right and power to ‘*’ Mat. 28.20. observe and do all the commandments of Christ, touching his prophetical priestly and kingly office, by the Elders teaching guiding and governing of them in the Lord. 2. The govermt in Israel was divers, by Magistrates in the gate, by Priests in the sanctuary, by ministers in the synagogues. To the Magistracy, all Christians are to be subject “ Rom. 13.1. now, as they were then: for it is an ‘†’ 1. pet. 2.13. human ordinance, tending to civil peace, and concerneth all men whither within the church or without, indifferently. The external priesthood of Israel, is accomplished in Christ and now abolished, Heb. 7. yet in David's Kingdom, and Levies priesthood, there was * jer. 33.21.22. a figure also of the kingdom and priesthood that ‘*’ Rev. 1.6. Christ bestoweth on the saints. Who have as much more power and liberty in the Gospel now, than the jews had; as the heir when he is of years, hath more than in his childhood; Gall 4.1.2.3. yet always in order, and with submission to the ministerial government of their ‘*’ Heb. 13.17. Leaders. And I ask of these again, whither the Christian Magistrates now, are not to have their voices with the ministers of the church whereof they are, in the admonishing & censuring of sinners ecclesiastically, and in other public questions and controversies of religion. 3. Thirdly they ask, Whether the people of Jsrael were not Kings and Priests etc. as well as the Christian people are now, Exod. 19.5. Psal. 149.1. etc. with 1. Pet. 2.9.10. Rev. 1.6. I answer, first as touching the communication of their external kingdom and priesthood, it is evident, that the Israelites were not so the natural seed of David & of Levi, as Christians now are the spiritual seed of them in Christ, Jer. 33, 22. Secondly, for communication with the spiritual kingdom and priesthood of Christ by them shadowed, the Israelites were Kings and Priests as well as we, but with differences. For Israel's state and ours, are not simply opposed, yet do they differ in manner & degree. They were Kings and Priests as they were Christians, and partakers of the Anointing, and that is, as they were under the new Testament. But they were † Heb. 8.8.9. etc. not so under it as we are: neither are we so under the old Testament as were they. They were heirs of the heavenly things, but as children, and so (as Paul * Gal. 4.2, 3. saith) under tutors and governors, & in servitude under the rudiments of the world, until the time appointed of the Father, that is until Christ's coming. The scriptures which they quote, do confirm this. For the promise in Exodus 19.5.6. is legal, if they kept God's covenant; as in another place “ Levit. 18.5. if they did his statutes, they should live by them, which Paul a Gal. 3.12. showeth to be a speech of the law, not of the gospel. Now that condition, Israel b Heb. 8 9 kept not, neither c Rome 8.3 could: therefore not the law, but Christ hath made us Kings and Priests, Rev. 1.5.6. and until Christ came, Israel was kept under the law, as under a d Gal. 3.23 24. schoolmaster, & had an external priesthood, which could give them no e Heb. 7.11.19. perfection, and therefore is abolished, and our state much bettered, as is showed at large, Heb. 12.18, 19, 20.21, 22. etc. as the prophets also foretold, Jsa. 61, 5, 6. Jer. 33, 15.— 22. Mal. 3.3.4. & of this estate under the gospel, is the 149. psalm a prophesy, (though in their measure they then also fulfilled it,) and the place of Peter confirmeth it. Whereunto we may add the testimony of the jews Rabbis touching their estate, under that schoolmaster of the law. † Maimon. in Treat. of the discipline of the law; ch. 3. With three crowns (say they) was Jsrael crowned: with the the crown of the law, and the crown of the priesthood, and the crown of the kingdom. The crown of the priesthood was bestowed upon Aaron and his seed, Num. 25.13. The crown of the kingdom, was bestowed on David and his seed, Ps. 89.36. The crown of the law, lo it is appointed established and confirmed unto all Jsrael, as it is written, Moses commanded us a law, the inheritance of the congregation of Ja●kob. In that they all had the law to use so freely, & were so restrained from the kingdom & priesthood; it argueth their childhood: yet might they see by faith their inheritance in those types: how all Christians should by participation of Christ's * joh. 2.27. anointing, be that seed of David and of Levi, promised Jer. 33.22. Rev. 5.9.10. & 20, 6. And here I also ask of our opposers, whither the Ministers of the Gospel, be Kings and Priests now, by their office of ministry in the Church. 4. Fourthly they ask, whether the Church's power be not a ministerial power only. I answer, the power itself is * 1. Cor. 5.4 5. Christ's; and so royal or kingly: but all that the Church doth, is only to administer that power, under Christ. And I ask of them again, whether they think the Elders have the whole power, which Christ hath given to his Church. 5. Fiftly they ask, whether the Elders power be not ministerial, under the Lord, in and for the Church. etc. I answer, an ambiguous question cannot be answered till it be cleared. First this word power is large, and they must show how they limit it: for by comparing this question with the former, they seem to put all the Church's power into the ministers hand; which I deny. They have also misshapen the proportion of their power from the Magistrates of Israel, as before we have heard; contrary to Christ's commandment, Mat. 20, 25, 26. 1. Pet. 5.3. Secondly the word ministerial is also diversely used: in a special sense, the Officers only are called “ 1. Cor. 4.1. Ministers; in a general sense the whole Church are † Isa. 61.6. 1. Pet. 4.10 11. 1. Cor. 14, 31. Act. 13.2. Ministers, and do administer and dispose the manifold graces of God: & the word Cohen, Priest, given to all saints, doth properly signify a Minister. Thirdly for the Elders function, I grant it to be ministerial under the Lord, in and for the Church; but also unto, yea and under the Church secondarily, as the * joh. 3.29. 1. Cor. 3.22 23. spouse of Christ, in that sense that Paul speaketh, the spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets, 1. Cor. 14, 32. And I ask of them again, whether the Ministers of the Christian “ so called, jam. 2.2. synagogues now, have any more authority, than had the Ministers in the jews synagogues, or then they to whom it was said, Serve the Lord your God, & his people Jsrael. 2. Chron. 35, 3. Ezek. 44.11. But here (before they have our answer) they conclude, that therefore there is no weight in our objections about the Elders power, as if it were not the churches etc. I answer, first they conclude not the question set down in the article, but because it was too heavy, they leave it and turn to other matters. Secondly they conclude with an equivocation in this word power, which is not in the same sense to be applied to the Elders, as it is to the body of the Church. Thirdly the Jesuits do in this wise conclude also for the Pope. For the power & government which they dispute for, is not “ Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 5. absolute, but such (they say) as may be in ministers and stewards, 1. Cor. 4, 1. And that the power which the Pope and prelate's execute, should be the Church's power, it is the thing that they † ibid. c. 6. would have. So whereas our opposites tell us of the Elders power that in deed it is the Churches; the papists also tell us the same: but the more is their sin that deprive the Church of it, by engrossing it into their own hands alone; thus did the Pope clime by steps unto his primacy. And it is (say they) to be ministered by the Officers: but not (say I) by them only; therein is the deceit. The whole Church is a * Exo. 19.6. 1. Pet. 2.9. kingdom of Priests, that is of ministers: who are to be † Heb. 13.17. guided and governed by their Officers, (called also “ Colos. 4.17. ministers in more special manner,) for the holy and orderly practice of the power. And thus the Prophets foretold the state of the Christian Church, saying, ؛ † Isa. 61.5.6 strangers shall stand and feed your sheep, and the sons of strangers shallbe your plowmen and dressers of your vines; but ye shallbe named the Priests of the Lord, & men shall say unto you, The Ministers of our God. Where the Officers of the Church are compared to pastors & husbandmen, (as the new testament also † Eph. 4.11. 1. Cor. 3.9. confirmeth,) which should be of the converted Gentiles: and the Church itself, is the Lords * 1. Pet. 2.9. Rev. 20.6. priesthood, and his Ministers. Sixtly they ask, whither we in the Church's government, as the Anabaptists in the sacraments would not make them aliens from the common wealth of Jsrael, etc. I answer, this was in their fourth observation before, and ‘* p. 14.15. there is by me answered, I trust without absurdity, or ungodliness, errors or evils, all which they here insinuate against us, for to fill up their measure. But here again the reason deceiveth the reader, for in stead of commonwealth or polity, they bring in one body, one Lord, one faith of theirs and ours: etc. Ephe. 2. etc. All this we grant: but the outward polity & government, we deny to be the same, it being changed by Christ both for City & Sanctuary, Dan. 9.26. There was always one Lord & faith of the Church: but not always one polity. The kingdom and priesthood were first executed by one person, as in a Gen. 14.18. Melchisedek: afterward these functions were divided, & Kings might b 2 Chron. 26.18. not do the Priests work. Also the civil government in Israel was c Deut. 17.14. 1. Sam. 8. changeable, sometime without a King, sometime with one: yea sometime by heathen Kings, as Nebuchadnezar, Cyrus, etc., to whom the Israelites were bound d jer. 27.6.8.12. to be subject, but not so in their sacraments: that there is no just consequence to be drawn from the one of these to the other. We rather may ask of our opposites, whether they as the e Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 1. Papists would not draw us from the testament of Christ, (who was f Heb. 3.2. faithful as Moses in all his house,) to the jewish polity now abolished. And let them tell us whether there may be now Archbishops, over other Bishops and Ministers, as in Israel there were Archpreists * Num. 3.6.32 Nehem. 12 7.12. over other Priests and Levites; or a superior court † 2. Chron. 10.8.10. to hear the appeals from particular synagogues & cities now, as was then: and whether the ministers of the Church, now, may be captains of politic armies, as ‘* 1. Chro. 27.5.1. Kin. 2.34.35. Benajah son of jehojada the chief Priest, was general of the field in joabs room? Such orders have been heretofore in Israel. Seventhly they ask, why we speak not of ourselves, what we pleaded to be the church spoken of Mat. 18, 17. etc. I answer, because our plea is already set forth in sundry books, as the ‘† Pag. 242.243. Discovery, the “ p. 75.— 81. Recitation of M. Gifford, the ‘* p. 60.— 64 Apology, ؛* p. 61.74. the Treatise of the ministery against M. Hildersh the ؛† p. 55.56. Answer to White etc. And I ask of them again, why they answer not the things already published in so many treatises, but fish for more matter by subtle questions, as if men had nothing else to do, but answer all things that they write and demand: and to let them range at will, without orderly answering as is meet. They say, some of us taught it to be the whole church, alleging to that end Num. 15.33. & 27.2. and 35.12.. I answer, first, we taught then no otherweise then as themselves taught heretofore with us. Secondly we alleged many other scriptures and reasons both * Ruth. 4.9.11. Ps. 149.6.— 9 jer. 26.11.12.16. Mat. 18.18.— 20. & 28.20. Act. 15.22.23.30. & 11.2. etc. & 21.18.— 22.1 Cor. 5 4— 13. Rev. 2.7.11 29. from the Prophets and Apostles, though it please them to omit those, and cull out these against which they think they have more colour to contend. For hereupon they thus argue, 1 If this rule be found in the book of Numbers etc. then it is not a new rule first given in Mat. 18.17. I answer, they wrong us, and would deceive the reader: we alleged not those scriptures to prove the rule to be the same then and now; but to give light unto the question, by showing what was the people's right then, under the law, and under the Magistrate: which may be more, but can not be less now under the gospel, where the church ministry, hath not † Math. 20.25.26. 1. Pet. 5.3. the power of Magistracy over God's heritage. The Apostle applieth many things from Aaron's priesthood ‘* Heb. 5.4. & 9.6.7. & 13.11.12. to Christ: yet he maketh Christ's priesthood not to be after Aaron's order ‘† Heb. 7. 1●.12. ●5. but Melchisedeks': should men now thus carp at his allegations? Then they say, those scriptures speak of civil government, which we except about the Elders, but they suppose we will not give to the people civil authority. I answer, first themselves grant that the people have as much right and power now as they had in Israel: but we deny, & they can never prove that the ministers now have as much authority over the people, as had the Princes of Israel: so our reasoning is good, though theirs be nought. Secondly for civil authority as we never challenged it: so neither should it be objected to them, but that they will have it to be no new rule. Then say we, it must be left to the Magistrate, and ministers may not intrude into their place. And seeing they thus urge it, let them, if they please, clear themselves, whither they think not that the Elders of the church, may have civil authority also, as had the Elders in Israel. Thirdly they say, that by these and the like scriptures it is certain, sinners in Jsrael were brought before the congregation of Elders. I answer, if they mean Elders only, (as they must if they reason to the matter in hand,) I deny it: and there is no weight in their proof. For, it is also certain that Paul imposed hands on Timothee, 2. Tim. 1.6. but elsewhere it appeareth, others also imposed hands as well as he. 1. Tim. 4.14. So, the Apostles and Elders came together about a controversy, Act. 15.6. but the whole Church came together also, verse 22.23. Titus was left to ordain Elders, Tit. 1.5. but was he to do it, himself alone? The keys were promised to Peter, Mat. 16.19. but were they meant to him only? In Rev. 2.1. john wrote to the Angel (or Messenger) of the church: but by Rev. 1.11. & 2.7. it is plain the whole church was intended. So in Israel, the law saith in a case of marriage, let her go up to the gate to the Elders: Deut. 25.7.8.9. but the practice of this showeth, that the people were also interested with the Elders, Ruth. 4.2.7.9.11. In Exod. 5.1. Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh, but by Exod. 3.18. we may gather that the Elders of Israel went with them also. So in the place cited Num. 15.33. they brought him to Moses and to Aaron, and to all the Congregation; the people are here meant with the Magistrates, for God then said, † vers. 35. let all the congregation stone him; and * vers. 36. all the Congregation brought him without the host and stoned him. Now by M. johnsons own grant, they whom the judges condemned, did die †’ Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 19 by the hands of the people: who is it then that cannot see, the Congregation here to mean both Elders and people? So in the other place, Num. 27.2. when they stood before Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and before the Princes, and all the Congregation, this distribution of the persons, together with the place, the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation; may show that the Elders only were not meant: beside in the same chapter, josua being there ordained over the Congregation etc. it cannot with any colour be gathered, that the Elders only were the congregation, Num. 27.16.17.19.20. etc. Wherefore when one scripture mentioneth the Elders, Jos. 20.4. and an other the Congregation Num 32.12. Jos. 20.6. we should not restreyn it to the lesser, but let the scripture have the largest sense, unless apparent reason do urge a restraint, which is not here, but the contrary. For if they were to die by the hands of the people, conscience required the people, to hear their cause tried also, seeing the law charged every one, † Exod. 23.7 thou shalt not slay the innocent and the righteous: and it was not safe for them to trust their judges, which so often and so many ways corrupted judgement * Isa. 1.23. 1. Sam. 8.3. Zeph. 3.3. as all the prophets do complain. It is therefore an evil argument to say, in Israel by one scripture men were sent to the Elders, & by an other to the Congregation, therefore it was the congregation of Elders, and not of the people also. For by such wrested reasons, one might prove that the Elders only were bound to keep the passover, because in one place it is said, speak to all the Congregation of Israel, that every man take to him a Lamb, Exod. 12, 3. and in an other place it is said, Moses called all the Elders of Israel, saying choose out & take for every of your howsholds a Lamb; Exod. 12, 21. therefore it was meant of the Congregation of Elders, and so the other people were not bound to this service. Again, it was commanded, Exod. 19, 3, 5. tell the children of Jsrael, if ye will hear my voice and keep my covenant, ye shallbe my chief treasure etc. afterwards it is said, Moses called † Exod. 19.7. for the Elders of the people, and proposed unto them all these things: shall we now conclude, therefore the covenant was made with the Elders only? Who seeth not the weakness of such consequents: and that it is usual in scripture, to name but the principal of a company, and yet to include others with them? Notwithstanding between Israel and us, there were two main differences, the one, that Church ministers now, have not such ecclesiastical authority over the people, as is proportionable to the Magistrates authority then: for this is forbidden, Mat. 20, 25. where Christ saith, the rulers of the nations have domination over them, and they that are great exercise authority over them: but it shall not be so among you. And 1. Pet. 5.2, 3. Feed the flock of God etc. not as having domination over (his) heritage. The other is, that they were a national Church, & the Magistrates in the gates of jerusalem, the Priests in the Temple, being for the whole Realm; it could not be that all the people should be present at the daily judgements of the Magistrates, or sacrifices of the Priests. And therefore it was not required so of them; as now it is of us, who are but particular Churches, to be present at all public administration of Christ's kingdom and priesthood. Yea even in their most solemn assemblies, they could not do, as we are bound to do. For they did eat the passover * Luk. 22.10 11.12. etc. in their private houses, because all the thousands of Israel could not eat it in one room: but we are bound to eat the passover now (I mean the Lords supper) in † 1. Cor. 11 20. etc. the public Church, and not otherwhere. Whereas therefore they next except, that the people were 600. thousand men, and would we have them to think that they came together to hear examine and judge the cases of sin etc. I answer, no: neither all the Elders. For I have before showed, there were diverse officers, for several causes. And Boaz took but * Ruth. 4.2. ten of the Elders of Bethlehem to hear his cause. The Elders also did meet by themselves as there was occasion: and so are † Act. 21.18 they to do now. Secondly for this exception of so many thousands in the wilderness, that could not come to hear and judge: they should mind how the same lieth against the execution. When God said of the blasphemer, * Levit. 14.14. let all the Congregation stone him: will they say six hundred thousand men came together to do it? yet themselves grant this was to be done by the people. It was as easy for them to come to hear his cause tried, as to come and stone him: and care of equity taught them to do the first, as well as the last, as before is showed. Next they except against our expounding the Kingdom of Heaven, Mat. 18.1. etc. to be the church under the gospel, since Christ: this they say is not sound, because the same phrase is spoken of the church of the Jews, Mat. 22.2. etc. I answer; this their reason is unsufficient, for I could so except against the exposition almost of any scripture, by showing a divers use and meaning of the words. When th'Apostle proveth Christ's excellency above the Angels, because † Heb. 1.4.5 of his name, the Son of God: the jews might allege, that the Angels are also called * job. 1.6. & 2.1. Sons of God, yea holy † Deut. 14.1. men have the like title: but were this a sufficient answer? Well, I will not st●ive with them, about the phrase (although in some places they may see the Kingdom of Heaven opposed to the state of the jews church, as Mat. 11.11) but as the prophets tell us of * Isa. 65 17 & 66.22. 2. Cor. 5.17. new heavens under the Gospel, so will I distinguish and call the jewish church the old heaven, (as that which is † Heb. 12.26.27. shaken and removed,) and the Christian church the new heaven; of which the Gospel usually speaketh, as Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand, Mat. 3.2. & 4.17. Now when the disciples asked jesus, †’ Mat. 18, 2. who is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven? there might be reason of their demand touching the Christian church then to be planted: but to ask such a thing about the jewish church; I see little reason. They knew already the state of it, and who was chief therein. Secondly Christ's answer leadeth us hereto: for there being great expectation of that Kingdom, and an erroneous persuasion that it should be a glorious worldly state, Christ tells them the contrary, that it was for the † vers. 3, 4. converted and humble souls to enter into: that many scandals and offences should arise herein, both from ؛* v. 7. the world, and from men's corruption ‘.’ v. 8. in themselves, and from * v. 15. etc. their brethren. Against all which he armeth his disciples, and teacheth the orderly way to redress them. And that his rules should not be despised, he assureth them that their censures executed on earth, shallbe ratified ‘{inverted †}’ v. 18. in heaven: the ground whereof is his *’ v. 20. name wherein they should be gathered together, and his presence in the mids of them. And this phrase of Christ's name, leadeth us also evidently unto the church under the gospel: for it meaneth the clear manifestation of Christ with the power and profession of him, as Act. 2, 38. & 3, 16 & 4, 12, 17. 2 Tim. 2, 19 In respect whereof, Christ said to his disciples, hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name, Joh. 16, 24. These rules therefore, do most properly serve for the Church since Christ's coming: & therefore he sendeth not his disciples to the jews synedrions, much less to the heathen magistrates, for redress of the sins that should arise in his kingdom. But our opposites do except, what is here taught that the Jews should not observe as well as we? should not they be humble, harmless, etc. I answer, that which the gospel teacheth touching faith, repentance, humility etc., the jews were also bound unto; though these and the like things are otherwise opened and urged now under the gospel, Rom. 16.25.26. but there was to be an other form and order of the Christian church, than of the jewish: and in that respect, Moses polity must give place. Ye▪ they proceed and infer, that the offender if he repent not should be brought to the Congregation of Elders. This I deny in their understanding, who make this to be one with the Synedrion or Council of Magistrates, in Mat. 5.22. (which place I have also treated of * p. 17.18. before,) and I affirm it to be the Christian Church or Congregation of faithful people, the spouse and bride of Christ, with whom his † 1. Cor. 5. power is left to judge all sinners within the same; their Elders guiding and governing them in their judgements. For the outward form of the jewish Church was abolished * Dan. 9, 26. Isa. 65, 17. Heb. 8. & 9 & 10. chap. by Christ; the common wealth of Israel dissolved, and given up to the Romans, whose Caesar † joh. 19.15 they preferred before Christ. The Temple ‘.’ Mat. 24.2 ruinated, the ministery “ Eph. 4.11 1. Cor. 12. also changed, and the ordinances, though in many things proportionable with Israel: but for Minister's authority over his people, to govern them Magistrate like, it is forbidden Mat. 20.25, 26. Luk. 22, 25. 1. Pet. 5, 3. 1. Cor. 3, 22, 23. and for any church of Elders, the whole new Testament knoweth it not; nor any such practice as these would bring in: but that the same church which * 1. Cor. 11.20.— 33. came together to the word and sacraments, came also together † 1. Cor. 5.4.— 13. to judge and cast out obstinate sinners, and were ‘* vers. 1.2. all blamed for the neglect of this duty, as for any other. And for deciding controversies, the Apostles, Elders, and brethren did “ Act. 15.23 25. come together with one accord. And such order continued in Churches some years after the Apostles, for Tertullian relateth the manner of Christian assemblies in his time, †’ Tertull. in Apologet. how they came together into a congregation, for to pray unto God, and for to rehearse the divine scriptures, and with holy words to nourish faith, styrr up hope, and fasten confidence. How there also were exhortations, reproofs and divine censures; and judgement given with great deliberation: the approved Seniors being precedents in the assemblies. And Cyprian Bishop of Carthage a Cypr. l. 3. epist. 14. showeth how with him men's causes were handled not only before the Elders but b apud plebem universan. the whole multitude: without whose consent also, c ibid. epist 10. nothing was done. Next followeth their exception about women and children; ask if they should in a controversy be the greater part, whither then they be the church spoken of? Also, whither in the congregation and presence of the Elders, the women and children have authority by virtue of that rule Mat. 18.17. to examine, rebuke, admonish their husbands, parents etc. for, they that are of the church there spoken of, may examine etc. I answer; first they omit what heretofore we answered them, when they fished about this matter: namely that the whole church of men women & children are to be present at ecclesiastical judgements, as at all other public administrations of the church, where whatsoever is performed, is done † Act. 6.4. by prayer and the ministration of the word, that all may receive instruction by the word there ministered, and as is written * Deut. 13.11. & 17.13. all Israel may hear and fear and do no more any such wickedness. But no other to have voices or suffrages in excommunications etc. then they that have voices in election or deposition of officers. And they know well, it was never our judgement or practice, that in Elections women or children should give their voices, the ‘.’ 1. Cor. 14.34. Apostle and nature itself requiring woman to be silent in the church: they also themselves have thus professed and practised with us many years. Secondly they have seen Mr. Robinson's answer ‘؛’ justisic. p. 204.205.206. to M. Bernard (cavilling likewise about women and children,) to the same effect. Yet will they take no notice of his answer, or of ours; nor make any reply, but thus trouble the world, and us in special, to answer again and again whatsoever they please to demand. For after in pag. 43. of their book, they are twice up again with these questions of women and children, as if we had nought else to do, but to answer and answer their tautologies. Thirdly seeing they thus deal, to make the truth seem odious, and to set the more colour upon their prelacy, imitating the papists and popish affected, they shall have the like things demanded of them, not by us, but by others. Themselves as yet allow popular election of officers, because they say † Adver●. p. 46. to give voices in election is not a part of government, but a power right and liberty that the saints and people out of office have and should use. Now those of the prelate's faction which deny this power of the people, say thus unto them; * D. Cousins, answ. to the abstract. p. 99▪ 100 By this reckoning men women and children (for all the faithful be interested) shall have voices in election of their ministers; if any dissent, all must be dashed. It had been very requisite that our author for the appointing of these Democratical elections the better unto us, should with proof out of scripture for every particular have showed whether women or children of some reasonable discretion, should have voices in election of their Minister? whether he should be chosen by all, by the greater part, or by the better part? whether the wife's voice should be accounted several, or but one with her husband, or whether she might dissent from her husband, or the father from the son? etc. They that compare these two writers, may see how they wrote by one spirit, and almost with one pen. Yet because in this point of popular election they do differ: we leave it for our opposites to answer these demands to the Prelates; and than if need be, they shall hear further of us, touching popular excommunication. Fourthly, if some would thus cavil against Moses law, which requireth * Deut. 13 9 10. the hands of all the people to stone a wicked man; and ask, whether women also and children must be present & cast stones: he might have as good colour for his question as have these, if not better. For these say, † Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 19 in Jsrael, such as would not hearken to the Priests & judges, were to die by the hands of the people: and the proportion that they cast for the people now, is “ Advertis. pag. 34. that they shall put the sentence in execution, by avoiding the excommunicated persons. Now, I think, they will have women yea and children also, to avoid excommunicated persons; so then by proportion, women & children in Israel must cast stones at malefactors. Yea this may be further urged against them, by reason of a pregnant note which they give in their * pag. 8.9. Treatise on Mat. 18 that that is such a church, as where women may speak & are to be heard in their cases and pleas as well as men, but, it is not permitted to women to speak in the Churches of the saints, etc. where either they aequivocate with this word speak, using it in diverse senses, (a common † Aristot. in reprehends. Sophist. practice of such as would deceive,) or they must permit women to have voices and suffrages as well as men, in all their churches of Elders: and so, by their proportion, women were to cast stones in Israel. For if women are to do execution now, why not then also? 5. Now whereas they intimate to the reader, as if we would have all men examine, rebuke, admonish in the presence of the Elders; they do but labour the disgrace of the holy order in the church: where the Minister as the mouth of the congregation, propoundeth examineth and carrieth matters: and then the people if there be defect or default, may speak in due order, but if in matter or manner they transgress, they are to bear their rebuke. All things in the public judgements of the church being carried holily, peaceably and by the government of the Elders, even as in elections of officers, in prophesy, or any other thing wherein men have liberty for to speak. And when the Ministers carry things well, we commonly find it as in Act. 15.12. that all the multitude keepeth silence: otherwise strife (and sometime disorder) doth often arise, by the evil dealing of the Elders. 6. It is also to be observed how these our opposites will require by their proportion from Israel, children to stone their parents, wives their husbands, and servants their masters, by avoiding their communion: yet will they not have them to be of that church which is to hear, examine & judge of the causes why their parents, etc. should be stoned and excommunicated; not bound to be present at the trial of their case? Did ever any common wealth in the world require such execution at the hands of wives children and servants; and yet teach them so little to honour and regard their parents, as not to think themselves bound to hear their case tried, but upon the Elders report, to stone their own fathers, husbands, masters, which do take it on their death that they are innocent? Against 1. Cor. 12.21.— 26. which was by some alleged, they except, 1. that the Apostles purpose is not to speak of cases and pleas about sin, and of the manner of dealing therein: but of the diversity of gifts and functions, given for the help and service of all, to the building up of the body of Christ. I answer; 1. the Apostle speaketh generally of the * vers. 4▪ 5.6. diversities of gifts, ministries, and operations in the church, as they are given to to “ vers. 7. every man to profit with all; and nameth in particular the * vers. 8 etc. gifts, operations and ministries, and among the rest the † vers. 28. governors or governments: and there is no church action, which the Apostle purposeth not in that his dispute to comprehend: their first exception therefore is not true. 2. Neither doth it agree with itself: for if he speak (as they confess) of the diversity of gifts and functions given for the help and service of all, to the building up of the body of Christ: then can he not but speak of cases and pleas about sin: seeing they are to be judged by the gifts and functions * 1. Cor. 5.7 12. of the church; they are for the help and service of a jam. 3.2. all; they help to b Gal. 6.1. Ephe. 4.12.— 16. build up the body of Christ. Unless they would have us think, that the Elders prelacy which they strive for, is none of those gifts or functions, nor for the help and service of all, nor for the building up of Christ's body but of antichrist's: this we will grant them to be true. 2. Secondly they except, the Apostle showeth it by the similitude of the natural body and faculties; and applieth it to the feeblest members, even the youngest children newly baptized, vers. 13▪ ●22. to whom he appointeth not the cases of sin to be brought to judgement and censure, as we hereupon would infer. I answer; in thus speaking they injury us, and the truth itself. Would we infer, that the judgement of sin should be brought to infants newly baptized; because we say, not the Elders only but the church is to judge, as † Cor. 5.12 Paul teacheth? And would th'Apostle also infer (think they) that infants should rebuke and judge unbelievers, because he saith, * 1. Cor. 14.23.24. when the whole church is come together in one, if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, he is rebuked of all, & is judged of al. And did josua also mean, that the youngest children newly circumcised threw stones at Achan, because he saith, ;؛; jos. 7.25. all Jsrael stoned him? we had not thought wise men would ever have made such inferences. And what weight is in their reasoning from infants? that if other besides Elders may judge sinners, than infants: if not infants, than no other but Elders. Might not men thus elude all Paul's arguments? As when he saith † 1. Cor. 12.7. the manifestation of the spirit is given to every one to profit withal; they to conclude, therefore the youngest children newly baptized can manifest the spirit to the profit of others. We have been “ verse 13. all made to drink into one spirit: therefore infants also were partakers of the Lords supper. ‘† vers. 26. If one member be had in honour, all the members rejoice with it: therefore even the sucking babes▪ for they also are members. But did not these men think to find babes of us, that they have given such an answer to our allegations? 3. Thirdly they except that this similitude, might likewise be applied to Jsrael: which we grant. Also we acknowledge that it may not either then or now pervert God's ordinance about the Elders hearing etc. They say, the governors are set in the Church for that use: I answer, not the governors only: this is that which they should prove. They are to govern the Church in all actions, but not to do them alone. Also they say, all members have not fit gifts for examining of persons, deciding of questions etc. I answer, that is true, for infants (as they excepted,) have not. But that only the Elders have fit gifts for such purposes, is untrue: the ‘* Act. 25.22.— 25. scripture, and daily experience tells us the contrary: yea some other members may have fitter gifts than the Elders. And they themselves that now are officers, had they not gifts fit to examine judge decide etc. before they were choose into office: or did their election give them gifts, which had none fit before? 4. Fourthly, they will have this scripture direct against us; in that it showeth how some have a more chief place then others, as the head and eyes & hands in the body. This is not against us at all, for we grant so much. But they say we little regard it, who in cases of controversy will look where the greatest number of people is, (though they may be of the most simple) and will have them to be the church, and to have the power etc. as if the multitude should still be followed, and that there were no difference of gifts, of office, or other respect at all to be had. I answer, 1. they keep their wont, in abusing us before the world: we look not in any case to the greatest number, either of people or Elders: but in all cases we look to God's law and testimony as we are † Isa. 8.20. commanded; which when it is showed by whom soever, all aught to yield unto. We know neither the multitude, * Exod. 23.2 neither yet the mighty or Rabbis are still to be followed; there are differences of gifts and offices in the church, yet no man's gift or office (no not though he were ؛;؛ Gal. 1.8. an Angel from heaven,) may carry us from the written word, by which the Godly people tried even the Apostles doctrine, ‘†’ Act. 17.11. and were commended. Although therefore the Church hath that liberty which all societies (that have none to exercise dominion or authority over them) have, namely that the greater number overswayeth the lesser, when all accord not: yet the faithful are not so to look unto or follow the greater number, as to decline from the least of God's commandments. This we may see in the 12. tribes of Israel, where the greater number, even ten of the tribes fell to false worship, and they carried away with them, not only the tribute of a 2 King. 3.4. Isa. 16.1. 2. Sam. 8.2. two hundred thousand lambs and rams, which were due yearly from Moab to the Kings of judah, & were wrongfully challenged and taken by the Kings of Samaria: but carried away also the title of the Church, being usually even by all the Prophets b jer. 3.8. Ilos. 4.15. 1. King. 12.19. & 15.9.16.17. etc. 2 Chron. 10 16, 17. etc. named Jsrael, whereas judah and Benjamin were Israel as well as Ephraim and the rest, yea in deed they were the only Israel of God, as the scripture c Ps. 7▪ 3.1. & 125.5. Gal. 6.16. Rom. 9.4.6. counteth Israel. Yet did not the faithful respect this greater number, but left † 2. Chron. 11.16. them with their title, and usurpation, and went to the lesser part which was the better. 2. But is it not strange that these our opposites will object these things to us; when in some things they do the same, and in their new established hierarchy much worse? For in their popular election of officers (which they still allow, if it may continue,) must not the greater number of voices carry the thing? And yet there is no action of the church, that needeth more wisdom, government or circumspection then this. And therefore many precepts are left for the careful and holy performance of it, 1. Tim. 3. & 5. Tit. 1. And will not the Papists now cast the reproaches on their own faces, as they that would have the multitude still followed, as if there were no difference of gifts etc. 3. And touching their hierarchy the Eldership they will not I think deny, but the greater number of voices among them must prevail. Now that being so, a Church having a Pastor, and a Teacher that are learned, and 3. or 4. ruling Elders, which are as unlearned as the other of the people, taken of trades men and the like: these 3. or 4. Rulers (whose power they have proportioned with the Princes of Israel,) shall by their number of voices carry matters, though it be against Pastor, Teacher, and 500 brethren. Yea these may excommunicate or depose the Pastor and Teacher, and cast out of the brethren: but none can excommunicate them, or depose them jointly from their offices. The utmost that we can find these men to allow * In their Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 25. the Church in these exigents, is when they have done all they can, to separate from them: and this power any man hath in the church of Rome. But I hope every one that ●avoureth the things of God aright, will abhor such an unruly prelacy. For if these Elders prove such as Paul foretold of, † Act. 20. 2● 30. grievous wolves not sparing the flock, but speaking perverse things to draw disciples after them; & as the Church hath had woeful experience of, now so many hundred years: what havoc & misery will not they bring upon God's people? And if we add unto this their other opinion of God's covenant to continue with a Church, though they fall into so many horrible sins, idolatries & blasphemies as the Romish synagogue hath done, which now they plead for to be still the true church of Christ: what will not a presumpuous Eldership do, and yet bear out themselves with this that they are the true church, and all that leave them (for what cause soever) are schismatics. 4. Let the reader also observe their manner of pleading, when they speak of the Elders proceedings, they annex, according to the Law of God: but speaking of the people, they annex, † p. 28.40. though in error, and though never so erroneously carried, and though they be of the most simple: as if they would persuade men, that the Elders usually through their wisdom and godliness walked aright, and the people through simplicity and error went astray. Whereas if either the scriptures be searched, or human histories, or the present state of churches be looked upon, we shall see the greatest errors, heresies, schisms and evils to have both arisen and been continued by the Elders, priests and learned Rabbins in all ages: even Christ himself found no greater enemies than the † Mat-26. 3 4. & 27.1. etc. high priests, scribes and rulers of the people, which turned to his reproach then, (whereof his church now is made partaker,) so that they said, doth any of the Rulers or of the Pharisees believe in him? but this people which kn●w not the Law, are cursed. John. 7.48.49. 5. Neither (if it were true) doth their supposition that the Elders will judge according to the law, bear out their supremacy, which Christ † Mat. 20.25 26. hath forbidden. For (besides that one man may judge according to law,) both the princes of * 2. Chron. 19.5.6. Israel, and the princes of ؛؛; Plato de repub. l. 4. & 5. other nations, were bound to the laws prescribed: yet may not the ministers now by proportion have princelike authority, 1. Pet. 5.3. The philosopher could say ‘† Aristot. 3. Pol. c. 11. They that bid the Law bear rule, do bid God to bear rule by his own voice: but they that bid man bear rule (meaning without law) do bid a beast to bear rule. 6. Here also they do violence to the Apostles similitude of a body, and say, ؛; p. 41. when a part of the body is hurt, the hand is not used nor sought unto to see withal, nor the foot to hear, neither doth the head take them to consult and determine what to do, but when the head itself hath considered and determined, than it useth the help of the hand or foot etc. as there is need and occasion. I answer, 1. first much abuse may be offered to all parables, by wresting them beyond their general scope, as is here to this. For by this manner of reasoning the Elders as the head, have all the wit, and the people as the hands and feet, have none at al. The Elders as the eyes, see all things: but the people see no more than the ears. For if the people have some understanding and insight into matters as well as the Elders, why should they not be used also in consulting and determining public things which concern al. Unless the Elders now have such abundance of wisdom, as they can afford enough to all, and need supply from none. But the scripture tells the contrary, saying, who is sufficient for these things? 2. Cor. 2.16. And what meant the Apostles and Elders of jerusalem, to have all the people with them at their consolation & determination of a controversy, Act. 15.2.— 22, 23. And why did th'Apostles being the eyes, speak to the multitude, (which it seemeth saw no more than do the hands and feet,) to look out men of wisdom, for office among them? Act. 6.2.3. But what if there be of the people that see more than all their Elders, being illuminated as was David * Psal. 119.99.100. by God's precepts: & what if the Elders be blind guides as a Mat. 15.14 Christ caleth some, & without understanding, b Isa. 56.11 as the prophet complaineth? Then men must leave the blind Eldership, and go to the prudent brethren, and they must consult and determine, yea without the Elders, if these men say true. Do not these things manifest how they have wrested the similitude? 2. Secondly, it is direct against the Apostles meaning: who because of dissensions in the church of Corinth, showeth c 1. Cor. 12 by that similitude of a body, that the chiefest members have need of the inferior, and the head d verse 21. cannot say to the feet I have no need of you: but now the Elders can say to the people, we need not your help to judge and determine questions and controversies, this gift and duty is ours; neither are you bound to be present to hear and decide public causes; but when we have judged, you shall execute our judgements. And if the people again should say to the Elders when they are about choice of officers, we need not your help, or counsel: you are not bound to be present when we do this business; the feet have no more need of the eyes to go, than the eyes have of the feet to see. Were not this to make a division in the body, † verse 25. which th'Apostle there condemneth. 3. Moreover, it is vain to think that any officer or brother in the Church should so be one special member of the body, as that he cannot be an other. The Prophets in Israel were * 1. San. 9.9. Seers, and so in stead of eyes in the head: but when they “ Lan. 2.14. looked out vain things, then as the Lord saith, the Prophet that taught lies, was the tail▪ Jsa. 9.15. The Elders, by directing the church in the right way, are as eyes to the body; by administering the sacraments and censures, they are as hands; when they are sent on the Church's message, they are as feet; when they reprove sins, they are as the mouth, when they are reproved for their sins, they should be as ears; and so other Christians in their places and employments. And as God hath bestowed his graces upon any, so is he to be regarded of all, without respect of person: neither should the Elders be minded like Achitophel “ 2. Sam. 17. and take it ill, if at any time their counsel be not followed. A man may see that in the Church, which Solomon saw in the besieged city, a Eccles. 9.13 14. etc. a poor wise man, that delivered the city by his wisdom: though both he and his wisdom were despised. A b 2. Sam. 20 16. etc. woman in Abel when it was in danger to be spoiled, c verse 22. persuaded all the people with her wisdom to cut off Shebaes' head; and so preserved the city. Was she in this action, a part of the foot, or of the heart and head in that body, may we think? 4. Finally, this their reasoning is one with the jesuits, that exclude the people from church affairs. The Church (saith d De sacrament▪ in gen. l. 1. c. 25. Bellarmine) bindeth and looseth, but by their Prelates, not by whomsoever: even as the body speaketh, but by the tongue, not by the hand. Thus doth the Cardinal answer M. Luther's argument, and thus do these men answer ours. 6. Yet have they not said enough, but they will make it e pag. 41. Antichristian servitude, to have the people bound to come to the public ecclesiastical judgements; unless perhaps when the Elders call them together to execute their sentence, for than I trow they are bound to come. And is not this again to divide the body, when the head must be present, and the shoulders with the other parts and members may be absent? The Apostle writing to the Church of Corinth, how to do when † 1. Cor. 11.18.33. they came together for the Lords supper, writeth also to them how * 1. Cor. 5.4 5. when they were gathered together, they should deliver the wicked unto Satan. We find no difference, but they were bound to come to the one as to the other. And if they answer, they are bound to assemble for to excommunicate him, but not to hear him by the word convinced in the trial of his cause; they may as well teach the people they are bound to come to eat the bread and wine in the Lord's supper, but not bound to hear the word teaching and preparing them here unto. We do so understand God's law, that when it commandeth us any thing, it doth also command us to use all means for the right and holy performance of it: and all will be little enough. The people therefore that were bound to stone an idolater in Israel, were bound by that law ؛’ Exod. 23.7. thou shalt not slay the innocent, to look that he were duly convicted of the crime: and now by this law, ‘† 1. Tim. 5.22. be not partaker of other men's sins, keep thyself pure, every soul that is bound to cast out a man condemned for heresy or other sin, is also bound to see him convicted, lest * 3. joh. 9. 1●. Diotrephes cause to cast out faithful brethren. He that stands out to excommunication, will commonly plead his cause to be just; and complain that the Elders have perverted judgement: with what comfort of heart can the people now excommunicate him, if they have not heard the proceedings against him, and yet must execute the Elders sentence upon him? Let wise men judge whither this be not spiritual tyranny which the Elders would bring upon the consciences of the Church. But they allege further, the Elders are to have maintenance for the doing of it and of the other duties etc. I answer, let them then excommunicate alone, as well as try the case alone: seeing they have maintenance for both, and let the people be bound to come to neither: no nor to the pastors ministering of the word and sacraments (if this reason be good,) because he is more worthy maintenance than the ruling Elders, as th'Apostle showeth. But then, they say, * 1. Tim. 5.17.18. men must leave their trades, women their families, children their schools, servants their work, and come to hear and judge cases that fall out between brother & brother. I answer, 1. First they restreyn things too much, when they say between brother & brother: for what if it be a public case of heresy or idolatry, as that mentioned Deut. 13, 12, 13, 14. etc. will they say women children and servants were then, or are now bound to leave their callings, & come together to try out the matter? 2. Secondly many controversies between neighbours, are for civil things of this life: such are * Luk. 12.14 not church matters, nor there to be heard, but by † Rom. 13. Magistrates, or “ 1. Cor. 6.4.5. arbiters chosen. 3. Thirdly for doubtful cases ecclesiastical, people are to inquire the law ‘* Mal. 2.7. at the Priests mouth, and to ask counsel of their Elders severally or jointly, who are to have their ‘† Act. 21.18. meetings apart for such and other like ends: so many things may be composed without trouble of the Church. 4. Fourthly, when apparent sinners so convicted by witnesses, are to be judged by the Church: there is no time more fit than the sabbath day; wherein all men are * Exo. 20.10 bound to leave their own works, & tend to the Lords, of which sort this is. Or if that day suffice not, they may take any other for them convenient: for unto public affairs the Church is to be assembled, 1. Cor. 5.4. Act. 14.27. & 15.4, 30. & 21.18.— 22. Against this I know, they except saying, ‘†’ Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 17. who can show such an ordinance of God? find we such a course used in Jsrael on the Sabbath days? Did they not meet on the Sabbath, in the temple and synagogues for God's worship etc. and the Elders sit in the gates on the week days to hear controversies etc. I answer; for this later point they bring not any one scripture to confirm it: yet will I not strive there about, for I think it is true▪ Sure I am, the jews canon laws so declare; * R. jos. Karo, in Choshen ●amishpat, tract. de Iudi●. ch. 5. It is not lawful (they say) to judge on the Sabbath, or on a festival day: yea further, that † Maimony Tract. Sanhedrin, ch. ●1. matters of life and death may not be judged on the evening of the Sabbath, or on the evening of a festival day, least [the accused] be found guilty, and it be impossible to kill him on the morrow. I account civil controversies, of things pertaining to this life (as 1. Cor. 6 4. Paul caleth them,) to be of our own works, which by the law, “ Exod. 20. ●. are to be done in the six days: and therefore think it not lawful for Magistrates to keep courts or Assizes, to judge and execute malefactors on the Sabbath. And this, among other things, showeth a main difference between the Eldership of the Church, and the Magistracy of Israel. But for ecclesiastical works by priests or people, they were to be done on the sabbaths, as a joh. 7.23. circumcision, b Num. 28.9. with Levit. 1. killing, slaying, cutting and burning of sacrifices, which was very laborious work, and even a c Mat. 12.5 breach of the sabbath in outward show, but that the different nature of the action made it blameless. Now the church judgements are the Lords works, not ours, and therefore fittest to be done on the Lord's day: they belong to Christ's kingly office, and therefore are holy, as the works of his prophetical and priestly office. These our opposites themselves d Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 26. compare the casting out by excommunication, with the contrary receiving in by baptism. All churches baptize on the Sabbath, and also excommunicate on the Sabbath: why should not the cause be heard, as well as the judgement executed on that day? We find, ecclesiastical controversies were disputed on the Sabbath days in Israel, as the Apostles practice showeth, Act. 13.44.45.46. & 17.2.3. & 18.4. It was lawful on the Sabbath to e Luk. 13.15.16. heal the body: and is it unlawful to heal f Psal. 41.4 the soul? It was lawful to save a g Mat. 12.11.12. sheep from dying in a ditch: and is it not lawful to h jam. 5.20 save a soul from death, and cover a multitude of sins? Seeing therefore the Sabbath is to be sanctified by the word of God, and prayer: and all that the church ministers are to do, belongeth unto these, as th'Apostles teach us, Act. 6.4. we think it is too Pharisee like to carp at church judgements on the Sabbath: and then servants (which are i 1. Cor. 7. 2●. the Lords freemen) and all other, resting from their own works, may attend to the Lords, without such inconveniences as these would cast in their way. And hitherto of the first point in controversy. The second point of difference: in the Letter. 2. WE had learned, that every true Church of Christ, hath this power to cast out obstinate sinners from amongst them, Treat. of the Minist. of Engl. p. 62. Apol. p. 63. & this not only when it hath officers, but also when it wanteth them: but now we were taught, that a people without officers have not power to cast out obstinate sinners. Which doctrine amongst other evils, overthroweth the constitution of the Church that so taught; for it was gathered and constituted by Christians without officers, receiving in the repentant, and casting out the disobedient, whereas by this opinion, they had power from Christ to do neither; for they that cannot cast out, cannot receive in, one power is for both. With this they join out of the printed copy. 6. The 33. article [in our Confession] which our Apology also confirmeth, pag. 45. professeth that people being come forth of the Antichristian estate etc. are willingly to join together in Christian communion and orderly covenant, and to unite themselves into peculiar and visible congregations etc. These have pleaded, that all are bound to communion by virtue of their baptism received in the Church of Rome, or other Antichristian assemblies. These things are confirmed by Mat. 18.17.— 20. with 28.20. 1. Cor. 5.4.5. and 12.27. & 1.2. Rom. 12.5. Heb. 12.22.28. Mat. 5.14. Phil. 1.1.5 Act. 2.41.42.47. & 17.4. The latter is also confirmed with sundry scriptures and reasons expressed in our foresaid Apology. Against this their former profession, these men now thus write. 1. Where find we in the scriptures, Advertis. p 45. Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 23. that God hath thus laid upon the people without officers to excommunicate? where is the precept for it? which be the examples of it? or what are the grounds requiring & bearing it out? I answer, 1. First as their manner is, they would put others to prove, that which by others and themselves * Discov. p. 46.242, 243 Treat. of the Minist. p. 62.63.64 hath been proved and approved; and is not as yet by them or any taken away. It is easy for any to dispute and trouble men after this manner. 2. Secondly in that place of their Treatise on Mat. 18. they quote Mat. 2●. 20. as alleged for a ground: yet they give not any answer to that scripture, but still call upon us to answer their questions, & write more. Whereas Christ there encommendeth to his disciples of all nations to the world's end the observing of all things whatsoever he commanded th'Apostles. And excommunication was one of those things commanded, Mat. 18. 1. Cor. 5. Therefore to be observed by a Christian people though they want officers, unless these men can show some prohibition. Christ requireth to observe all things; these men say, nay, not excommunication: it lieth now, on them to show where Christ or his Apostles have excepted excommunication. But from that place, and by the very same reasons, do the Anabaptists deny baptism of Children, caling for scripture, example, precept, & ground to warrant it, as these do now in this case. 3. Thirdly, besides all things heretofore written, they have a ground in the article itself, which they neither do nor can take away; which is the power that the church always hath to receive in members: and therefore consequently to cast them out again if they deserve it. Which ground if they deny, they in effect deny that there can be any church without Elders, contrary to the express scripture Act. 14.23. 1. Cor. 12.28. Tit. 1.5. Yea or that there can be any visible Christians without Elders: for how can they be Christians without † joh. 15.1.2.3.4. union with Christ? And if men cannot be united with his members and body, because there wanteth Elders, how should they be united with him the head? 4. They have it proved a point of false doctrine by Mr johnson himself, to teach that the Church of Christ hath not always power to receive in and to cast out by the keys of the kingdom. Answer to M. jakob, pag. 159.160. 2. They secondly allege sundry examples & grounds that it hath been done by the Lord himself and by his officers, etc. This we never doubted of, but a Church having officers may excommunicate. Though yet the proof for the Elders willbe excepted against by the Prelates and such like. For, th'examples of Abraham, of Paul, of Titus, of Timothee, and of the Priest judging a leper, make rather in show for one Bishop, then for a Church of Elders: and so are alleged by Papists, for the Prelacy. The other scriptures do none of them show the Elders power to excommunicate, but to watch, take heed, reprove, admonish etc., all which the Prelates grant to their inferior Priests: whom yet they will not suffer to excommunicate, with out the Bishop or his Official, as these will not the Church, without an Eldership. The examples of excommunicating by the Rulers of Israel, I will turn against them thus: If the Magistrates and people of Israel might not only punish civilly with death, but also execute a spiritual censure of excommunication upon the consciences of evil doers, though they had wanted ministers of the Temple, and synagogues: then a Christian magistrate and people may do so now, though they want ministers ecclesiastical. And if the Church may excommunicate having a magistrate, it may also do it wanting one: seeing the power of spiritual censure dependeth * Io●. 18.36 not upon the civil magistracy, as the state of the Churches in the Apostles days showeth. 3, Thirdly they will have us to consider how a people can challenge the ministration of excommunication, more than of the sacraments etc. This we have considered, and find that if the reason be good, the ruling Elders may not excommunicate, any more than minister the sacraments: which whither they hold or no, let them tell us in their next. For they know well, the Prelate's object these things against the ruling Elders, as themselves do now against the people. 4. Fourthly they say, * In Treat. Mat. 18. p. 24. they cannot find in scripture but when the church is called the body of Christ, or compared to a body, house, city or kingdom: it is spoken either of particular Churches having officers, or of the catholic church, in respect of Christ the head etc. I answer, it appeareth then plainly, they have lost that which they had found; and let them take heed least for not † 1. Tim. 6.20. keeping it, God deprive them of finding it any more. But I will help them, if it may be by their own writing, where this same author saith, a Treat. of the minist. against M. Hilders. p. 63.64. A company of faithful people, (though considered a part by themselves, they be private men, yet) being gathered together in the name of Christ, and joined together in fellowship of his gospel, they are a b 1. Cor. 12 27. Rom. 12.5. Heb. 12 22.28. Mat. 5.14. & 18 17.20. 1. Co 1.2. & 5.4. Phil. 1.1.5. Act. 2.41.42.47. & 17 4. public body, a church, a city, a kingdom, and that of Jesus Christ, who is present among them to guide bless and confirm what they do on earth in his name, and by his power. So that like as in a city the citizens considered a part, are commonly private members, yet jointly together are the corporation and public body of that town: so is it also in the church of Christ, whither it consist of more or of fewer, yea though they be but 2. or 3. so as they be joined together in the communion of the gospel, and gathered together in the name of Jesus Christ▪ as before is said. These things they have acknowledged: though now it seemeth they have forgot them, or (which is worse,) do dissemble them. Unto these I will add th'Apostles testimony, concerning a house; d 1. Pet. 2.6. Christ, is the chief corner stone: c Mat. 18.19.20. and Christians that come unto him, as lively stones are made a spiritual house, an holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices. Men come unto Christ by “ verse 7. joh. 6.35. belief, and are joined unto him and one to another by mutual a jer. 50.5. & 32.40. & 31 33.34. Act. 2.47. & 5.13. covenant. The ministers of Christ are as b 1. Cor. 3.9, 10. etc. builders of this house, by preaching the gospel, laying first the foundation Christ, then upon him Christian people, God's building. But if (as often cometh to pass,) the c Psal. 118.22, 23. Mat. 21.42. builders do refuse, yet the Lord without them putteth Christ for head of the corner, and causeth the faithful to d 1. Pet. 2.4.7. come unto him, and maketh them his † verse ●. spiritual house to dwell in them, whose house they continue to be, not by having officers always among them, but by Heb. 3.6. holding fast their confidence and rejoicing of hope unto the end. Wherefore these men that can find no house of God without Elders, must prove that men can not come unto, no● continue in Christ, unless it be by ecclesiastical officers, (which they shall never be able to manifest:) or all may see, how they are beguiled with error, that they can not find things so apparent, and heretofore acknowledged by themselves. There opinion is injurious not only to Christians, but to Christ himself; whiles they will not grant him being the corner stone, the head, the king; and the faithful, the living stones his members and subjects, to make a house, body or kingdom; if the Elders want or refuse: though he as is written, * Rev. 2.1. walketh among his Churches and † Mat. 28.20 is with them all days to the world's end. 5. Fiftly they say, our controversy was about a Church established with officers: & things concerning people without officers, are left to further consideration. I answer, true it is, they sought always to hide their errors, and to put off things which pressed them, to further consideration, and the Elders having got the Church's power into their hands, they listed not to scan the people's right. But we were necessarily drawn to controvert this point two ways: first because their error did eat out the very constitution of the Church whereof they were, as shall after be manifested. Secondly because it was by themselves acknowledged that whatsoever power the people have before; is not to be taken away by their officers; this therefore was an argument that manifested the evil which lurketh in their new doctrine. And who can sound discuss any question, if they look not to the foundation; as Christ said to the Pharisees, f Mat. 19.8. from the beginning it was not so. 6. Finally, whereas we showed how their doctrine overthroweth the constitution of their Church; as being without power from Christ, they say, First it were worth the knowing by whom the first man or two men of this church were received in, and by what power. I answer, it is true they say; and pray them therefore to show by what power their church began, if they would have men acknowledge it for true, and planted by the power of Christ otherwise they must renounce their estate, and begin a new. As for ours, it is showed in our published writings, which if they can, let them disprove; as, in Treat. of the ministery, against M. Hildersh. p. 73.74. Apology, p. 44.45.46.47. 2. Secondly they say, by our baptism, as also by accord in the truth, we are bound to communion in any thing lawful, as God giveth occasion and opportunity. I answer; 1. they here turn from the question: we speak of constitution of a particular church, they tell us of communion by baptism and accord in the truth; which extendeth to all churches in the world, and to Saints that are not gathered and constituted into any particular church. We speak of a church with power to receive in and cast out, though it have no officers: they touch not this point, unless they closely grant us the question, to the overthrow of their opinion. For if they yield such power and practise, to be a lawful thing in the communion of all such as are baptized, or do accord in the truth; they refute themselves: if not, all men may see how they seek to divert from the matter in hand. 2. Secondly by their baptism, they mean not only the true baptism in Christ's church, but the false baptism in Antichrists, as the article expresseth, and after we are to scan: which if it be according to the scriptures which they cite, the a Eph. 4.4.5. 1. Cor. 10.1.2. & 12, 13. one baptism, that by one spirit baptizeth all into one body; then are they returned into the commmunion and body of antichrist's synagogue, (if the church of Rome be it,) & are bound to communicate even with Friars and Jesuits in any thing lawful as God giveth occasion, and that is, I suppose, to hear them when they preach nothing but the truth, or to pray with them, when they in spirit pray to God in Christ etc. I would be loath to wrong them, their own * Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 26. words lead me to this, if I gather amyss let them pardon me, & show their meaning plainly: for, † joh. 3, 21. he that doth truth, cometh to the light. 3. Thirdly, without baptism there may be a Church entered into covenant with God & one with an other: as all Israel “ Deut. 29.10,— ●3. passed into the covenant renewed by Moses; when ‘† jos. 5.4.5 all the men under 40. years old, were uncirsed: besides all the women. 3. They thirdly say, it is plain and undeniable that to choose or give voices in election, is not a part of government etc. but an interest power, right and liberty, that the Saints out of office have and should use etc. I answer, 1. First this is plain and undeniable, so long as it pleaseth them not to deny it: but if they change their mind in this point to morrow, as they have done in the former about the people's power to excommunicate, than we shall hear, as we did before, where find we in the scriptures that God hath thus laid on the people without officers to make election? where is the precept for it? which be the examples of it? etc. They tell us it is plain; but not one scripture is brought to show it: yet is it needful, seeing they know the Papists and other Prelates deny such elections without officers. The Prelates will show them sundry examples, where it was done by the counsel, direction and government of officers, as Act. 1.15.21, 22. & 6.2, 3. & 14, 23, 1. Tim. 3, 1.— 14.15 Tit. 1.5. but not one place where a people without officers attempted such a work. Wherefore we wish our opposites not to deal so slenderly, as to tell men it is plain and undeniable, & so to leave it: for we make no doubt, but the sound proof of this point, will disproov their former error. 2. Secondly, we have upon their bare word, that to give voices in election of officers is no part of government: we pray them in their next to show, whether then to give voices for deposition of unworthy officers, be a part of government; as also how they prove that to give voices for the reciving in, and putting out of members in the Church, is a part of government, more than the other. 3. Thirdly the reader may observe their covert carriage of this point, whiles they speak but of giving voices in election: but what say they about giving power of administration to the ministers: who must do that? or how had these men that, but by the people? And if the people have power in the name of Christ, to say to the elected Pastor, Take thou authority to preach the word etc. or in any other terms to give him pastoral office which had none before; I hope they will not deny but if that Pastor afterward proov a * Act. 20.29 Wolf, the same people may put him out of all his pastoral office: and if they have that power, why also may they not put him quite out of the fold and Church by the power of Christ, that is, excommunicate him? And if it be not lawful for a people to give authority of ministery unto a man: how then do these administer, which renounced some of them their former office and priesthood given by the Prelates, and as private men received a nue caling and ordination: others from private estate, were constituted Elders by the people. Is this ministery now from heaven, or from men? 4. Lastly they say, seeing their doctrine overthroweth not the constitution of the Church of Jsrael, nor of the primitive Churches, it cannot therefore overthrow the constitution of their church, or of any that is accordingly built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets etc. I answer, this in deed is the surest argument of all: save that it is a fair begging of the question. For the thing they should prove, is, that their constitution is according to Israel, or Apostolic. For, if Israel or the primitive Churches before they had officers, did or might receive in and cast out members, and if the people might set up, and depose officers by power from God: then are these men's errors overthrown. If not, but that the thing is unlawful for any then or now so to do, then is the constitution of their Church overthrown, as that which did grow up to such estate without power † joh. 3.27. Heb. 5.4. from heaven, and they are to let it fall, and be ‘* Mat. 15.13. rooted up, and come to a better (if they can find it) according to the scriptures. Whether therefore our exception, or their defence be more vain & frivolous, (as they speak) let the prudent judge. The 3. point of difference: in the Letter. 1. WE had learned, Confess. art. 23. & 3● Apolog. p. 46, 47. that every Christian congregation hath power and commandment to elect and ordain their own ministery, according to the rules of God's word: and upon such default in life doctrine or administration, as by the rule of the word depriveth them of the ministery, by due order to depose them from the ministery they exercised, yea if the case so require, orderly to cut them of by excommunication. But now it is by some maintained, that the Congregation can neither put into office, nor put out of office unless they have officers to do both: and can neither for heresy or other wickedness excommunicate or depose their Eldership. With this they join the first out of the printed copy: which is as the former. These things are confirmed in our Articles, by Act. 6.3.5.6. & 14.23. & 15.2.3.22.23. 2. Cor. 8.19. 1. Tim. 3.10. & 4.14. & 5.22. Num. 8.9.10. 1. Cor. 16.3. Tit. 1.5. etc. Eph. 4.11.12. 1. Cor. 12.7.8.14.15.28. Levit. 8. ch. Rom. 16.17. Phil. 3.2. 1. Tim. 6.3.5. Ezek. 44.12.13. Mat. 18.16. And in our Apology by 7. reasons deduced from the Scriptures. Advertis. p. 47. Hereunto they say 1. That the church may excommunicate an officer as well as any other member. I answer, they yet touch not the point; We speak of the church's ministery or Eldership in general; they tell us of one in particular: who because there are other ministers, he may be censured by them. burr if a church have only one minister, and he prove a wolf: they can neither put him out of office, nor excommunicate him, by their doctrine. 2. Secondly they say, if all the officers jointly transgress and so persist: then the church which did choose them, may also depose and refuse them from being their officers any longer, and may separate themselves from them. But that the people may excommunicate all their officers, they desire to see it showed from the word. I answer, though they can not deny the Article, yet they seek covertly to carry the reader aside. The article speaketh of choosing and ordaining, and so putting into office: they answer only of choosing: the other they pass by. But let them show ever any church, where men were chosen, and not also ordained and put into office: or that God committed the beginning of such a work to any people, and not the ending also. And why will they sever the things God hath joined? In the law; the church had authority † Deut. 16.18. to make them (that is as the Greek version showeth constitute or ordain, which word Paul useth Tit. 1.5.) Judges and officers in all their cities: and not to elect them only. 2. The article speaketh of deposing from ministry and putting out of office: they answer only of deposing and refusing from being their officers any longer: That is to say, as men that have left the church of Rome, have deposed the Pope: for in separating from him, he is their officer no longer. But is he not, trow we, a Pope still▪ And shall not an Eldership, when the people have done all this that they speak of, reteyn a ministry still? The separation which they tell us of, is thus opened by their own comment, * Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 25. that it implieth the power we have over ourselves, whereas excommunication implieth power and authority over others. Thus they allow not the body of the Church power and authority over their heretical Eldership, (though it be but 2. or 3. wicked men,) to cast them out of the Church in Christ's name and power, or to depose them from office, but from being their officers. Even thus they themselves h●ve deposed all the Bishops of England long ago. But whether this be not to aequivocate with the word depose, let wise men judge: for a little after they ask † Advertis. p. ●8. whether it can be showed by any scripture, that any did ordain or depose officers, but Governors. Now whereas our 〈◊〉 & Apology is confirmed by many scriptures & reasons deduced from them, they answer them not, as is meet they should, seeing they will abrogate their former profession, and bring in a new: neither do they (as they then * Apol. p. 48. wrote must be done) show some other manner of entrance [into the ministery] ordained by Christ; but thus they labour to confute themselves. 1. The particuculars of the 23. Article of our Confession being found true in the churches of Jsrael, and of the Gentlies' since Christ: the exception made hereabout can not be of weight against this or any other Church established according to the word of God, as those were, but must be also against those Churches withal. What to make of this their answer, as yet I cannot tell: my slenderness comprehendeth not the depth of it. That the particulars of that 23. article, were found true in the Churches of God; I doubt not of it: that is the thing we stand for. That exception should be made by us hereabout, against this or any Church, established according to the word of God as these were: is far from our thought. What is it then that they have said: but an ostentation of the name of Jsrael, their main colourable argument, which yet is against them, not for them at all, as our Confession and Apology showeth. In Israel the * Num. 8.9.10. whole Congregation was assembled at the ordination of their ministers, and the children of Israel imposed hands upon them. This rule we follow: but these our opposites will not allow churches (unless they have ministers before,) to do thus: they will rather have their ministery from the great Antichrist of Rome, (as after shallbe manifested,) for which they have no show in the scriptures. For did Israel ever take Egyptian or Babylonian priests to minister in their sanctuary? or did the primitive churches ever take any Bishop of the † 1. joh. 2.18.19. Antichrists that were in there time, & set them by virtue of their Antichristian ordination over the flock of Christ? why then do these men so often tell us of Jsrael and the primitive churches, unless they think their very names would make us afraid? But they except against Num. 8.9.10. saying, by the children of Jsrael etc. are the Elders of Jsrael often meant. I answer, 1. First this being granted, it disprooveth not our argument; for it may be often so used elsewhere, and yet not here. When we reason from Heb. 1.8. O God thy throne is for ever, to prove Christ's Godhead: the Arians object, that Princes and Magistrates are often called Gods, Psal. 82. Exod. 21.6. but is that a sufficient answer? 2. Secondly that which these say, is here true, but not the whole truth. 〈◊〉 Elders, are meant as principals, but not they to be all the congregation: which I thus manifest. The Levites now to be ordained Ministers, were taken in stead of all the firstborn of Israel, and not in stead of the firstborn of the Elders only: Num. 3.40.41. The Levits were now to be offered before the Lord, as a shake offering of the children of Israel, Num. 8.11. being freely given as a gift of theirs unto the Lord, to do the service of the Tabernacle of the congregation, Num. 18.6. & 8.16. All offerings were by those that offered them, to be presented at the door of the Tabernacle, with imposition of hands, Levit. 1. verse. 2.3.4. etc. For as much therefore as these Levites were offered by all the Congregation (and not the Elders or officers only,) in stead of their own firstborn: it is evident that not the Officers only, but the other people also are here meant, Num. 8.10. the rather also for that before verse. 9 and after verse 11. others besides Elders are intended. 2. Secondly they object, how should so many hundred thousand of Jsrael, either at once hear, or do the things there spoken of? I answer, as well as they heard and did other public affairs in the Tabernacle: unless they think, that all the people never heard or did any thing there. When the whole Congregation of Israel sinned, all the Congregation was to bring a sacrifice, Num. 15.24, 25, 26. will they ask how so many 100000. could do it? By this reason, nothing at all should ever be done in Israel by the multitude, either for word, prayers, sacrifices etc. And so by their proportion of the Church now, let the people be exempted from word, prayers, sacraments, as well as from ordination of officers, and censuring of sinners: and let the Eldership be all in al. 3. Thirdly they except, if it be said some did it for the rest: first, who were those some, but the Elders! secondly, under whom did they it, but under the Lord, who set them over the people to minister and govern in his stead? I answer, first the multitude & not the Elders only were assembled. Secondly the multitude and not the Elders only, gave these Levits to the Lord: both these are before proved. Thirdly for the order and manner of giving, Moses governed the action, to him it was said, * Num. 8.7.9. thou shalt sprinkle water, thou shalt bring them before the Lord etc. and then † vers. 10. the children of Jsrael imposed ●ands: this I understand, not of every particular man, but of some of the chief for the rest: as the Elders, heads of tribes, chief fathers of families etc. as when † Num. 15.24.25. a● the multitude brought an oblation for their sin, the Elders put their hands on the head of the sacrifice, Lev. 4.14.15. Accordingly have we practised in our ordination of officers (as these our opposites well know,) some of the chief of the Church, the ancientest, and fathers of families, imposed hands in name of the rest. Now to their second question I answer, they did it under the Lord, and for the other people. But this will not satisfy them, for they say they were over the people to minister and govern in God's stead, Exod. 20.12. Num. 11.16.— 30. Deut. 1.9.— 18. & 16.18. & 17.12. & 19.12, 17. etc., I answer, admit that all they which imposed hands were governors, (though that cannot be proved, neither doth honour thy father & mother Exod. 20, 12. I am sure, show any such thing:) yet they did not this thing as a work peculiar to their office of government, neither do any of the scriptures alleged, show so much, but the contrary may be manifested. For if they did it as governors, then was it either as governors ecclesiastical and ministers in the sanctuary: but so were not they, for Aaron and his sons had peculiarly that charge, Levit. 8. Or they did it as governors civil, & Magistrates of the common wealth. Which if it be affirmed, than first, Christian Magistrates now (which have civil authority equal with the Magistrates of Israel;) may ordain and impose hands on church ministers: and so men need not run to Rome to borrow a Ministry from Antichrist, as many now do fancy. Secondly if civil Magistrates may impose hands on Ministers: it will follow, that the Church wanting Magistrates, may also by the Fathers of families, or other fittest members impose hands. For it is not properly a work tied to the magistrates office: 1. because then the churches in the Apostles times wanting Magistrates, could not have had Ministers: but they † Act. 14. Tit. 1. had, and yet never intruded into the Magistrate's office. 2. Because the Magistrate's sword and office is not subordinate to Christ as he is mediator and head of the Church, (for so there should be no lawful magistrates but Christians & members of the church:) but Magistrates have their office next under ‘* Rom. 13.1. God, to be ‘† job. 12.24. heads of the Common weals (whether they be members of the church “ Act. 25.11 or not,) as Christ hath his office under God to be *’ Eph. 1.22 head of the Church: and these two governments are so distinct, as they neither may be confounded, neither do one take in hand the work peculiarly belonging to another. Christ professed his * joh. 18.36 kingdom not to be of this world, neither meddled 〈◊〉 with the † Mat. 26.52 outward sword, nor “ Luk. 12.14. civil controversies: neither on the other side, might the Kings of Israel meddle with the Priests work, *’ 2 Chron. 26.16, 18. to burn incense, or the like. 3. Because the works of the civil Magistrates office in Israel, might be performed by heathens when they ruled over that nation: as appointing of officers, judging of controversies, punishment of malefactors etc. So Nebuchadnezar the Babylonian lawfully a jer. 27.6..8.12. (as concerning God,) reigned over the jews, and did b jer. 40.5. set over them a governor, and put some of them to death c jer. 29.22 23. for adultery & other evils. And the jews were bound to obey him and his substitutes, and to d jer. 29.7. pray for his common wealth. But to the Babylonian Priests they might not be subject. Neither do I think that our opposites will say, Nebuchadnezar and his Princes might give office of ministery, or impose hands on the Levites in the sanctuary. Wherefore I conclude that the chief fathers of Israel imposed hands on the Levites, not because of their office of magistracy (if they had such an office,) as if it could not else have been performed: but because they were the principallest members of the Church, & therefore by order to do it before all other, and in the name of all other, which for the multitude of them could not perform it: which order all churches now are * 1. Cor. 14.40. bound to keep for ever. And this which I have said, the words of the text in their natural sense do confirm, † Num. 8.10. the sons of Jsrael shall put their hands upon the Levites: showing that they did it not by title of Magistracy, but as Israelites. So also in the other case, when the Elders imposed hands on the sin offering, Levit. 4, 14, 15. it was not a work peculiar to the ecclesiastical Elders: for afterward †† Chron. 29, 23. King Hezekiah with the Congregation laid their hands upon the sacrifices. Which thing also he did not by peculiar right of his kingly office, but as he was principal of the Church of Israel; for when they had no King, the Church might do it, by the next chief members; & an unbelieving King reigning over them might not do it. Also if any people returning from captivity, had wanted Magistrates; they were not deprived thereby of offering sacrifice for their public sin. For if every private man might impose hands on his own sacrifice, as Levit. 1.3.4. how can we think that the whole company sinning, the chief fathers might not have imposed hands, according to that rule, Lev. 4.15. Yea the word Elders doth not always (though often) mean Magistrates or ministers by office, but * Exod. 10.9. & 17.5. Lev. 19.32. Ezr. 3, 12. joel. 2.16.28. Prov. 20 29. 1. King. 12.6.8. sometime ancient in years. The other things which they allege, about the variety of phrase, as they do not disprove the thing forespoken: so make they nothing for them. They say such as are called Elders, Lev. 9.1. are called children of Jsrael, Lev. 9, 3. this is true: for who ever doubted but the Elders were sons of Jsrael as well as the other people. But if they bring it to prove the Elders or Officers only to be there intended, I deny it: the whole chapter after manifesteth the public church to be meant. For when Aaron had offered his own † vers. 8. synoffring, and * verse 12. burnt-offring; then offered he the “ verse 15, 16.18. people's synoffring, and their burnt-offring, and their peace offerings: and after lifted up his hands to the people and † vers. 22. etc. blessed them. This was one of the most public assemblies, and who would ever dream that the Elders only were here expiated by sacrifice, and blessed of the Priest? they might even as well say, the Elders only did keep and eat the passover; comparing Exod. 12.3. with Exod. 12.21. where one verse saith all the congregation, and an other, all the Elders. The next exception of the Septuagints translating the sons of Jsrael in Greek the Eldership: is not of weight, though the translators should have minded as do their Commenters. But they purposed not hereby to exclude the people, any more than in 1. Sam 8.4. they would exclude the Elders: where when the original text saith, the Elders of Jsrael came to Samuel, they translate it in Greek, the men of Jsrael. So the Elders of Jabesh, 1. Sam. 11, 3. the Greek caleth the men of Jabesh. Of like weight are their observations about the word Church or Congregation, which being but once † Pro. 26, 26 turned in Greek the synedrion, they * In Treat. Mat. 18. p. 7. score it up, as making for their Eldership: but though it be once, twice and thrice turned ‡ 2 Chr. 30.24. & 31.18 Exod. 12, 6. jer. 31, 8. Ezek. 17.17 & 23.46, laos, plethos, ochlos, that is, the people, and multitude; they can let them places pass, and say never a word. Moreover touching this place in hand, Num. 8, 10. the Greek version as well as the Hebrew itself saith, the children of Jsrael, shall impose their hands upon the Levites: so that their exception here standeth them in no stead. Finally they observe the clauses in the article, according to the rules in God's word, and by due order etc. which as they bind them to show by scriptures, that the people not being in office may choose their officers, as is proved there & in Apol. p. 46.47. so they bind us to show like rules practise or warrant of ordination, deposition and excommunication. I answer; first if a man would except as they do, he might ask them how they prove that people without officers may by due order choose any into office: for in the scriptures which they stand upon, all things were done by the counsel, ordering and government of the officers, even the election itself, Act. 6.2.3. & 1.15.— 22. & 14.23. etc. Secondly their new devise of having their ordination successively from Rome, is neither according to the rules in God's word, nor by due order, nor by any example in Israel; no though Rome were as true a church as they now plead her to be. For that the ministers of one particular church should ordain officers for an other church, is more unorderly then when every church ordaineth them in itself: the Apostles and Evangelists had their offices in all churches, so have not Pastors. Magistrates are limited within their own precincts: and the Mayor or Bailive of one corporation, hath no jurisdiction in another. So should all ministers be bounded within their own charges, and not challenge catholic authority in all churches, as doth the † 2. Thes. 2 8. lawless usurping man of sin, Antichrist. Thirdly, the scriptures and reasons in our Articles and Apology, serve also for the ordination and deposition of ministers; though it please these men to pass them over in silence, because they are too heavy for them to lift. In our Apology pag. 43. there are 6. arguments, and in pag. 47. six other arguments confirmed by scriptures, as the reader may see: till our opposites answer them, we think it needless to set down more. Fourthly, we hold it necessary that all church actions be orderly carried, either by the officers if there be any, or by the Magistrates as in Israel, or by the Fathers of families, or the most excellent in gifts requested thereunto by the congregation: this we firmly maintain, against all popular confusion and disorder whatsoever. And M. johnson himself hath expressly defended this truth heretofore against M. jaakob, * pag. 210. that where people first come to the order of Christ, imposition of hands is to be done by the fittest among them, being thereunto appointed by the rest of the church, alleging Num. 8.10. though now he useth for defence of his contrary error, the Jesuits answers. For even so doth Bellarmine turn away the reasons of the protestants, saying, † De Rom. Pont. l. 1. ●. 6. the people did never ordain nor create ministers, nor give them any power, but only named and designed them. Act. 1. & 6. The 4. point of difference: in the Letter. 4. WE had learned that none may execute a ministry but such as are rightly called by the Church whereof they stand Ministers, Confess. art. 21. unto such offices and in such manner as God hath prescribed in his word. But now these will execute a ministery, which have not rightly been called by the Church whereof they stand ministers, according to their own account and doctrine: which hold (as before) that a people without officers have no warrant from God, to make or depose Ministers. With this they join, out of the printed copy. 3. The 29. article (of our Confession, as also our Apology pag. 51.52.) professeth that the hierarchy of Archbishops, Lord bishops, Priests etc. are a strange and Antichristian ministery and officers, not instituted in Christ's Testament, nor placed in or over his church. These have placed over them, one that was made Priest by a Lord bishop's ordination, so as because of it, they did not ordain or impose hands on him, when at the same time they ordained and imposed hands on others, whom together with him they set over the Church. 5. The 32. article (whereto our Apology agreeth pag. 52.53.54.) testifieth that all such as have received any of those false offices (of Lord bishops Priests &c.) are to give over and leave them: and so hath it been practised here before by all such Priests as came to our faith and Church. Now one is Minister over them, ordained Priest by the Prelates, as is before said. The Confirmation of these points in our Apology (besides the scriptures quoted in our Confession,) is of the one by 8. of the other by 12. reasons deduced from many scriptures. Hereunto they make these answers. First, that this point is of like nature with the 2. & 3. here before, where therefore see the answers. And there also let the reader see our replies. But they would blind their reader with show of answer, where none is. For the first point was of every Church's power to cast out obstinate sinners: the second of their power to elect and ordain officers. Now what are these to justify any unlawful ministery, either set up by a people without the power of Christ, or received by the tradition of Antichrist? It had been their part, seeing they deny their former grounds, to have showed us some better by the scripture: which how they have done either there or here, let their writings being viewed manifest. Secondly, they say if we would here imply a particular matter concerning one of their Ministers, about imposition of hands, that is a point also left to further consideration, etc. I answer, no, we mean others of them that were Ministers before, and such as have had (some of them,) imposition of hands twice: and this they could not but see plainly to be our intent in that 4. article: though they wink and will not see it, and are mute, and will not defend it, but wind away to other things not there intended. Let them therefore in their next, bring a plain defence of their ministery, which by their new doctrine is overthrown: and use no more such tergiversation. Unto the other thing objected in the 3. & 5. articles by Lawn printed: First they signify that their testimony against the antichristian hierarchy treated of in the Confession, is not by them reversed or weakened any way etc. I answer, these are but words: in deed and truth, the contrary will appear. For as heretofore they a Apol. p. 108.109.110.111.112. proved antichrist's baptism to be not a true but a false sacrament; but now they plead for it b Advertis. p. 54.55. to be the one true baptism of Christ: so having heretofore witnessed against the whole Antichristian c Confess. art. 29.30. & in many treatises. hierarchy of prelate's Priests etc. their offices, entrance and administration: they now compare the popish ordination with the baptism. Also they bring to warrant this, the Priests and Levites which were called of God; as after is to be seen: and yet they would be thought, not to reverse their testimony. Secondly they tell us how they were cumbered with the Anabaptists, and occasioned to think of their ministery; as 1▪ That imposition of hands is of God, and not an invention of antichrist's etc. I answer, thus also they shallbe occasioned to think of the Pope's excommunication, for that is God's ordinance as well as their sacrament of orders: and of the Romish Mass or supper, for that is God's ordinance also; though by them abused to idolatry. Yea thus the jews that d 1. Macc. 1.12.16. f●l to paganism, mought take occasion to think of the heathen's sacrifices, for they also were God's ordinances in their first institution, as well as antichrist's sacraments. But as for the Anabaptists, themselves long since so refuted them, without this their new plea: that there needed no fear of their strength at al. Finally, the imposition of hands by an Antichristian prelate, upon that ministery which is not of Christ but of antichrist's apostasy, I deny that such imposition of hands is of God: and that such the whole ministery of Rome is, is proved at large by many scriptures, in M. johnsons Reasons and Arguments against spiritual communion with the M●nist pag. 17.18. etc., ●. Their second observation is, that baptism and imposition of hands, are joined together among the principles, Heb. 6, 2. I answer, so are baptism & the Lords supper (now of Antichristians called the Mass) joined in 1. Cor. 10.2.3. & 12.13. that if this reason be good, their next thoughts must be, about the lawfulness of the Mass. 3. Thirdly they allege that imposition of hands is in Rome still given to the office of ministery, and in the name of the Lord. I answer, so also the Pope's bulls of excommunication go forth from the office of Ministry, and in the name of the Lord: but so all mischief began, and gave occasion to the proverb, in nomine Domini incipit omne malum. But let us take a view, how imposition of hands is used now in Rome, as they say in the name of the Lord. Ordination of ministers there * Bellarm. l. de sacr. ordinis. c. 2. is a sacrament, the outward sign or rite whereof, is imposition of hands: the thing signified, is the promise of grace. They have seven † Ibid. c. 5. orders, Priests, (or Sacrificers,) Deacons, Subdeacons', A●oluthes, Exorcists, Readers and Ostiaries (or keepers of the door.) They are made Priests, when by the Bishop, (who a Ibid. c. 11 & 9 only can give this order) it is said, b Bellarm. ibid. Pontifical. lib. de ordinat. presbyt. receive power to offer sacrifice unto God, and to celebrate Masses, both for the living and for the dead, in the name of the Lord. The Bishop saith with all, receive the holy Ghost: the Priests are also shaved on their crowns, and anointed with oil on their hands; that by that unction, and the Bishops bless † sing those hands may be consecrated and sanctified of God. A stole of innocency is put upon the Priest, and he promiseth to the Bishop and his successors, reverence, and obedience; and the Bishop gives him again the blessing of God the Fa † there, & the † Son and the holy † Ghost that he may be blessed in his priestly order, and may offer placable hosts (or sacrifices) to God for the sins of the people. This ordination hath a c Bellarm. ibid. c. 10. double effect, 1. a perpetual spiritual power; in sign whereof a character (or mark indelible) is imprinted on them; and 2. grace making them acceptable, whereby they are enabled to execute their office. So this Bishoply ordination d Ibid. c. 5. conferreth grace; and if any shall say, that the holy Ghost is not given hereby, let him (saith the Council of Trent e Sess. 23. can. 4. ) be accursed. This is that holy ordination (or rather, that abominable Idol, and f Rev. 13, 16 mark of the beast,) so commended unto us by these men, as done in the name of the Lord. And as for the Office of ministery, to which they say now it is given. M. johnson himself ha●h g Treat. of the Minist. p. 98.— 105. set down heretofore 33. reasons and differences proving by many scriptures, that the popish priests office, is not the Christian Pastors office. Yea he affirmed the h Answer to M. jakob in pref. sec. 6. hierarchy of Antichrist, to be the most detestable anarchy of Satan that ever was: and what now will imposition of sacrilegious hands in the name of the Lord, do good unto such a detestable ministry? 4. Fourthly they say, they find not precept, example or ground in scripture, binding them to the repetition of [that ordination.] I answer, it is very true; no scripture bindeth men to repeat or do again such abominations. And we pray them show us where is there precept, example or ground to keep the priesthood and indelible character of Antichrist? But be it as they say; what then will become of their own Ministry, for some of them have both received, & given unto others, reordination: are they not in as evil case (by their own grounds) as the Anabaptists with their rebaptisation? They unjustly insinuate Anabaptistry against us very often: but themselves are in like actual transgression with the Anabaptists (if their doctrine be true), and yet manifest not their repentance, nor tell us by virtue of which ordination, they do now administer. 5. Fiftly they say, the Priests and Levites in Jsrael, being cleansed of their uncleanness, retained still their places, and their children after them, did minister without a new anointing or new imposition of hands etc. I answer, then belike the Romish priests must keep their Antichristian priesthood still; for so the Priests in Israel did theirs. otherwise if they must have a new office; how can they do it by their old ordination? Even in Rome itself, when a Priest is promoted to a Bishop's office, he is new a Pontific. de conscer. elect. in episc. anointed, both hands & head; the holy Ghost again given him, the pastoral staff, the ring, the Gospel is also given him, to go preach to the people committed to him etc. and he hath a new imposition of hands besides that he had before. 2. If the Priests children b Heb. 5, 4. called of God, did in Israel minister without imposition of hands upon them at all, as they suppose: yet this will make nothing for antichrist's hierarchy, called of the c Rev. 16.13, 14. Devil, with greasing, shaving, & imposing of hands, to sacrifice blasphemously for the quick and dead; that they should now minister by virtue of this office and calling in the Church of Christ. Neither might Baal's Priests or d 2. King. ●3. 5. Zeph. 1, 4. Chemarims, administer in God's temple. Their reason therefore from the Lords own ministery, is altogether unfit; the heathenish Flamens or Druids, are fitter matches for Belials clergy. And this M. johnson himself acknowledged, when he wrote against M. Hilderdersh. thus, g Treat. of the Minist. p. 89. If Jupiter's Priest, Act. 14.13. or if Mahumets' Priests now in Turkey, should by the laws of their nations be enjoined, and thereupon should execute the ministery of God's word, sacraments and censures: would it follow therefore that such Priests had the substance of the Pastor's office? And why then should this priesthood of Antichrist have more privilege than those, seeing the word of God hath laid this duty no more upon it then upon the other, but hath left them all, with their followers and adherents under the curse. Psal. 119, 21, 128. Rev. 9, 3. & 14.9, 10, 11. Thus he then wrote, but now we find an other manner of plea. 6. Sixtly they say, That they find in scripture some officers admitted with it, some without it. This I find not. They allege Act. 13.1.2.3. where Paul and Barnabas had it. It is true: yea Paul had imposition of hands twice, Act. 9.17. & 13.3. but where is the scripture that saith some had it not? They say, we read not that the other Apostles had. what then? doth this proov they had it not? So we may also conclude the other Apostles were never baptized, for we read not that they were. We read not (say the Anabaptists) that children were baptized in the Apostles days: will these men now conclude, therefore they were not baptized. But do not they know, that arguments thus drawn negatively from scripture, are generally blamed for insufficient? 7. Seventhly they say, that some churches hold it not of necessity to be had etc. I answer: that is nothing to such as hold it, and have Elders to do it. But they diminish the state of the question; for when the Apostle speaketh of Jmposition of hands Heb. 6.2. doth he mean the outward ceremony only, or the doctrine of the ministery, caling, & ordination signified by the sign? I hope the reformed churches deny no principle of religion, such as that is. So in this case spoken of, were it only the outward sign, I would not contend. But they compare the baptism of Rome and the ministery of Rome together: no new baptizing into the church, therefore no new ordaining unto the ministery: but as all come out of the Apostasy baptized Christians, so some do come ordained ministers. Wherefore if these be alike, they bring with them in their account, the substance of a true * 1. Cor. 1● 5.28. office and of a true † Heb. 5, ●. caling. otherwise if a new office and caling be given them, I assure myself they that say receive the Teacher's office etc. may impose hands: even as they that say: I baptize thee into the name of the Father etc., may put on water. Now these men's testimony heretofore hath been strong a Apol. p. 46, 47— 54. Reasons & arg. against spiritual communion with the Minist. of England, the whole book. against the Office or ministery itself, with the caling, administration etc. And now let them show by the word, that a new caling into a new office which men had not before, may be by the ordination or imposition of hands given by Antichrist unto a false office with a false calling. 8. Thus (say they) we show our keeping of communion with all other churches etc. I answer, this reason is good, if communion be kept in the b 1. joh. 1.6.7. light not in darkness: let God's word therefore try the case. Yet let these men say, whither they know not, that the ministers made in these reformed churches, are not admitted in Engl. without a new ordination by the Prelates. And that all Scholars admitted into Geneva, must expressly c Ex Calvini opusc. Form. conf. cui se adstring. etc. detest the Popish hierarchy so called, as a Devilish confusion: which hierarchy consisteth of Bishops, Priests and Ministers, and they that say it is not by divine ordination are by the Council of d Sess. 23. can. 6. Trent, accursed. Is not here good communion? Yea let me further tell them, how the learned and better sort in England, have disclaimed communion with that Romish clergy. D. Fulk, in the Answ. of a true Christian to a counterfeit catholic, saith, e Answer to art. 13. Although all godly men wish more severity of discipline to be used, in receiving them that come out of heresies to serve in the Church, then is commonly practised in England: yet you are highly deceived if you think we esteem your offices of Bishops, Priests, Deacons, any better than the state of lay men, but far worse: for we judge them to be nothing else but Antichristianitie, heresy and blasphemy. And therefore we receive none of them to minister in our church, except they forswear your religion: and so their admission is not an allowing of your ordering, but a new caling unto the ministery. Thus wrote M. Fulk: but now these our opposites, to show how they would keep communion with Rome, allow of their ordering, as of their baptizing, which they plead to be true baptism, as after shall appear. Yet let them show us whither all the hierarchy of Antichrist, as Popes, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops, Friars, Monks, jesuits, Seminaries, Priests, Parsons, Vicars, with the rest of that crew, be all of them to be admitted true Ministers into a Christian church, by virtue of the Imposition of hands, had in that kingdom of the Beast: and if not all, which of them must be reordeyned, and which not. Themselves have acknowledged f Answ. to M. jakob. p. 122. that the Ministers of Antichrist, are the spirits of Divils', Rev. 16, 13.14. let them now if they can, manifest them to be the Ministers of Christ. 9 We thought best (say they) to stay and consider further etc. if we find it ought to be done, we can do it at any time, etc. Then (say I) they should have stayed the practice of admitting such a teacher to administer, till they had been resolved whither his office and ordination had been of God or no. But first they let him administer, than they inquire of the lawfulness: the Godly heretofore did not so in a case of doubt, but stayed the administration of some priests, till they had assurance from God. Ezr. 2.62.63. 10. The church (say they) did choose him into office, and we by prayer commended him to God for his grace and assistance in the ministration thereof. Which we did without imposition of hands at that time; as both ourselves had before done, at our first growing into order: and as the French and Dutch churches also did etc. I answer, things are darkly set down: by saying first the church did, then, and we; they occasion us to ask what church they mean, their own particular, or some other. If their own, whether they chose him to an office that had none before: or chose him from a false office to a true: or chose him being already a true officer, to be theirs, as they admit the members of an other Church to be a member of theirs by prayer. If the last were not, how stands their comparison between baptism & ordination? If they did so: then they abuse the reader with the example of their own ordination before. For they had renounced their former ministery as false; and received a new, by the election and ordination of the people (though at the first without that sign spoken of,) who gave them a ministery which they never had. The outward sign at that time was not used, only because there were not Elders before: now there were Elders which imposed hands at the same time on others. It is a known fallacy, to pretend that for a cause which is not the cause. Moreover let them say whither thei● Teachers former election were not as holy as his ordination: and why then they rep●te one and not an other? 11. Observe (say they) how these and their partakers can hold that the people having no office may excommunicate, and some of them that they may also minister the sacraments: and yet can except against such as are in office, if they do but make question of a ceremony etc. I answer; the first we hold but as themselves heretofore did: & upon what ground they have left it, is before discussed. The second as touching us, (so far as I know) is a slander, a mere untruth. I know not one among us, that holdeth men without office, may minister the sacraments. The third, if it be as they say a question but of a ceremony, and not of the very substance of the ministery, to be retained as their baptism, I will profess to cease striving thereabout, (though I think they ere in it,) yea and repent that I have striven so far. But if it be in deed more than a ceremony, as I suppose the things forespoken will manifest; let these men take heed how they so dissemble, for * Isa. 29. 1● Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord. Of the Anabaptists objections we have spoken before. And now let him that readeth, consider, what weight there is in their later thoughts, compared with their former judgements confirmed by so many reasons, as the public writings show. Let him also note, how for this later point which they count but a ceremony, they say many things as we have heard: but for the former, their own ministery, which is a matter of substance and most nearly concerns them, they say nothing, but turn aside as if they saw it not. And for this also, let the reader observe Mr johnsons own words, in answer to Mr Hildershan, † Treat. of the Minist. p. 122. who can bring a * job. 14.4. clean thing out of filthiness? Is it possible that a lawful ordination, should be had from the ministers & Apostasy of Antichrist? Mat. 7.16. 2. Cor. 6, 14, 15, 16. with 2. Thes. 2.3. And if he be loath to stand to his former assertions: let him yet show what comfort or assurance any can have of the ordination in the Papacy, that it is from “ joh. 3.27. heaven; considering the Priests have their authority from the Bishops, the Bishops from the Pope: the Popes (as their own writers & Chroniclers do record,) have been divided by schisms, 2, or 3, a Bell. de Rom. pont. l. 4. c. 14. Popes at once, one cursing and condemning another, and among the successors, one repealing b Platina in Steph. 2. Rom. & Th●od. 2. the acts of an other. And among the rest, one she c Platinain joh. 8. Pope joan an harlot. And among many schisms one (which was the 22.) dured d joh. Ma●ij de schism. & Concil. c. 13. forty years, wherein the Antipopes so rend their Babel-church into factions, that the chiefest and learnedest of the clergy, could not discern which of them was the true successor of Peter, (as they use to speak) but some clavae to one Pope, some to another. Had these no● power from Christ to make ministers in his church? or are not they strangely carried, that had rather derive their ministery by uncertain succession from such beasts▪ then from the Lords true Church and people? And may we think that when God bring the jews again to the faith (as he hath e Rome, 11. promised,) that they will go to antichrist's throne for to erect a ministery for them? These and the like things considered, may show what soundness is in their doctrine and practice, that fetch their ordination from Rome, as they do their baptism. Finally let me admonish the reader, that The man of sin, who boasteth himself to be f Sext. decr l. 5. tit. 9 c. 5 in glossa. the Bishop of the whole world, as also to have the g Ibid. l. 3. tit. 16. c. unico, in gl. Princedom (or soveraygntie) of all the world; and may not only order and degrade priests, but set up and depose Princes, so exalting himself above h 2. Thes. 2.4. all that is called God; is for thus doing, to be accounted a traitor against Christ and all Princes of the world. And as the days have been when he challenged both church and crown of England (as in i Matth. Parisiens'. in vita johan▪ regis. King john's time,) to have the Prince his vassal, as well as the Priests his subjects: so is his will to do always and in all places. But this being tyranny and usurpation in him both over church and common wealth, he hath always had as good authority to make a Lord Mayor in London, as to make a Bishop there, and to create a Prince as well as a Priest or prelate: the one is injurious to the State, the other to the Church. And for men to hold or derive the priesthood or ministery from that Usurper, hath no more warrant that I know of, then if one would hold or derive a magistracy from him; for as God hath given every common wealth power next under himself, to call & set up Magistrates, according to the laws of Realms; so Christ hath given every church power next under himself, to call and constitute ministers according to his word: and not to derive their spiritual functions from his professed Adversary, whom he hath promised to * 2. Thes. 2.8. consume with the spirit of his mouth, & to abolish with the brightness of his coming. The 5. point of difference: in the Letter. 1. We had learned that it was gross error, and notorious absurdity, Apolog. p. 113. either to hold the Popish Church to be a true Church, having a true ministery and true sacraments, or else that men men must admit of rebaptising. But now we have heard, that the baptism of the Popish church is true baptism (by which we are bound to communion,) or else that men must be rebaptized: and that the church of Rome is the Church of God, because Antichrist should sit in the Temple of God. With this they join the 4. & 8. out of the printed copy. 4. The 31. Article of our Confession, (and also our Apology, p. 109.) professeth that such ecclesiastical assemblies as remain so in confusion and bondage under that Antichristian ministery, courts, canons, &c. cannot be esteemed true visible churches etc. These now plead, not only for them, but for Rome itself, to be the true church of God. 8. The 8. is as the 5. before expressed. These things are confirmed by sundry scriptures and reasons in the places quoted, as the reader may there see. Against these their former testimonies they now “ Advertis. p. 54. thus dispute. 1: It is true baptism: as the circumcision in Jsraels' Apostasy was true circumcision. I answer, these are their own assertions: but we would hear, Thus saith the Lord. True circumcision was the seal of the righteteousnes of faith: Rom. 4.11. Israel in their Apostasy were fallen from the faith, Hos. 11, 12. they were without the true God, & without priest to teach, and without law, 2. Chron. 15.3. and how then could they have the true circumcision, the seal of the righteousness of faith, and forgiunes of their sins, in that sinful estate? 2. The matching of Popish baptism and Israel's circumcision, though in this they agree that they are both false sacraments & lying signs: yet is baptism ten times more defiled in Rome, than circumcision was in Israel. Let us take a view thereof, as it is at the best, and now refined by the Jesuits. When any man comes to be baptized in Popery, after some questions praemised, 1. a Bellarm. de sac bap. l. 1. c. ●5. He hath the sign of the Cross made on his forehead and breast; which holy sign among other good properties, hath power to drive away b Bellarm. de imag. l. 2. c. 29. devil's, 2. Then followeth c Bell. de bapt. l. 1. c. 2●. Exorcism that is, adjuration of the devils to go from the man that is to be baptized. 3. After that comes d Bell. ibid. Exsufflation or blowing of the devils away, & an afflation of the good spirit in their stead. 4. Next followeth the tasting of salt, which is unto them in stead of the Eucharist. 5. Then the touching of the nostrils and ears with spittle, and saying Ephata, that is, be opened. 6. After that the priest gives him imposition of hands, and his blessing. 7. And then he is anointed with blessed oil on his breast and shoulders. Bellarmin. ibid. c. 26. 8. When he is thus sanctified, a name is given unto him. 9 He must have Godfathers or Godmothers, to instruct him in time to come. 10. Then follows consecration of the water, 11. And a dipping three times into the water, in the name of the Father of the Son & of the holy Ghost. 12. After comes * Bellarm. ibid. c. 27. the kiss of peace, in sign that the brother is baptized. 13. And an Unction of the Chrism, on the crown of his head. 14. Then is a wax candle lighted given him, for a sign of faith and grace received, & that he is translated out of darkness into light. 15. And a white garment is put upon him, which he weareth for a certain time. These pageants are played in Babel's language, an unknown tongue: & this baptism ex opere operato, by the work wrought (for here is a great deal more done than Christ ever would,) doth ‘* Bellar. de de effect. sacr. l. 2. c. 3 confer grace, and in very deed f Bell. de bapt. l. 1. c. 13. taketh away all sins, so as they are not only not imputed, but there is not any thing that can be imputed for a blame unto him. And if any shall say, that grace is not conferred by the work done, the Fathers of the Council of Trent have decreed, g Concil. Trident. ses. 7. de sacr. in Gen. can. 8. Let him be accursed. And although this baptism be of itself so gracious, yet any graceless person may baptize in time of need, be it man or † Bell. de bapt. l. 2. c. 7. & l. 1. c. 25. woman, be it Christian, Jew, Turk or Pagan: baptism hath his effect, & conferreth popish grace, and washeth away synns notwithstanding. This is the baptism about which we contend: now let us proceed with our opposites arguments. If ● be not a true baptism ( h Advert. p. 54. say they) it is a false: and false baptism is not God's baptism. etc. A true baptism we are bound to have, when we have the means, wherefore they that hold it not to be true baptism, must be rebaptized. I answer, we doubt not but it is a false baptism, and a lying sign, wherewith Antichrist deceiveth his subjects, under a show of Christianity: 1. because it is not possible for any work of a mere man (much less of a sacrilegious priest) to give grace, or to take away sins, for this is peculiar to i joh. 1.17. Heb. 10, 10, 14. 1. joh. 1.7. Christ God and man, and to his most precious blood, which only cleanseth us from all sin. 2. because true baptism being a sign of the k Act. 22.16 Rom. 4, 11. & 6, 3, 4. 1. Cor. 12, 13. washing away of sins, and a seal of the righteousness of faith, of our engraffing into Christ, his death, burial & resurrection: it cannot be that Antichrist the man of sin, and his worshippers, which are by the sentence of God devote unto l 2 Thes. 2, 4— 12. Rev. 14, 9, 10. damnation, should have from God such a sign and seal; but they falsely usurp the same, as many other things to their just judgement. Yet need not men that discern and forsake those lies and impostures, to have any new washing: because the Idolaters heretofore m 2 Chro. 30, 1. etc. Ezr. 6, 21, repenting & forsaking their false synagogues and lying signs in them usurped, needed not a new outward cutting or circumcising, as is showed at large in our former writings, Discovery, p. 116.— 120. Apology p. 110.— 113. For though the degree of sin in Rome be greater by far then that of Apostate Israel, (as elsewhere a Arrow against Idol. c. 5. is also manifested:) yet seeing they then were fallen b 2. Chro. 15.3. from God and from his church, and so were c jer. 3.8. divorced from the Lord, and were d Hos. 2.2. not his wife, but e Hos. 13.1 dead in their sins: the ordinances of God which they in show retained, could not be unto them the signs and seals of forgiunes of sins, and of life eternal, and therefore were in their use of them, false and deceitful; as were also the ordinances of God retained in other nations, as f Numb. 23, 1. Pompon. Laetus de sacerdo. Tibull. l. 1. Eleg. 10. & l. 2. eleg. 1. 2. Homer. Odyss. 3. & Iliad. 1. Virgil. Aen. 2. Caesar. bell. Gall. l. 6. Altars, Sacrifices, Priests, tithes, first-fruits, incense, meat offerings, drink offerings, feasts, baptisms or washings, anoynting, excommunications, prayers, vows, & many the like, whereof all histories do bear record, that the Gentiles did reteyn them. 2. They proceed secondly and say, If the baptism had in the church of Rome be not true baptism, than it is not the Lords baptism: and then they which have no other but it, should get the Lords baptism, afore they come to the Lords table, to eat the Lords supper etc. I answer, this reason is the same in effect with the former, and there answered, as also long ago objected by the enemies of the truth, and refuted by a Discov. p. 116. etc. M. Barrow. We have gotten the Lords baptism by coming to the Lord in true faith and repentance, who b Mat. 3.11 1. Cor. 12.13. 1. Pet. 3, 21. baptizeth us with the wholly Ghost and with fire. As for the outward washing which we had, it need not be repeated; as before is showed: and we may as lawfully eat the Lords supper without a new washing, as the Idolatrous Israelites turning to the Lord, might eat the passover with out a new cutting or circumcising. 2. Chron. 30.1.5.11.18.19.20.21.25. Ezra. 6.21. So whereas they charge us with profaning the Lords table, it is turned upon their own heads: for they have these many years professed the Romish baptism to be not a true but a c Apol p. 110— 113. false Sacrament, whiles yet without a new washing they did partake of the Lords supper. If this be to pollute and profane it, as now they press us, why do they not first repent themselves of such profanation; why call they not in, their former writings, and refute them? 3. Again (they dispute) there is but one baptism, Eph. 4.5. Baptism in the church of Rome, either is that one baptism or is not it. If it be that one: then is it true baptism: if not, than they which have no other but it, have not that one baptism, and therefore must get it etc. I answer, 1. This again is the same argument with the former, and before answered. 2. This ground from Eph. 4.5. was that which d Epist. l. 1 epist. 12. Cyprian builded on, who taught rebaptising of such as had been baptized by heretics: whose arguments seeing our Adversaries thus urge, we pray them tell us, whither they be of Cyprians mind for rebaptising; and if they be, wherein they differ in that point from Anabaptists? If they be not, than it seemeth they hold that all such as are baptized by heretics, Antichrists, excommunicates, schismatics, and other like, have that one true baptism of God, Eph. 4.5. and so have the seal from God of forgiveness of sins, and are one body with themselves. And if not, than they reason but for fashion sake, to trouble us and the world with questions. 4. Furthermore (they argue) such baptism is either a seal of God's covenant or not. If it be, then sure it is true baptism. If not, then 1. they which have no other baptism, must with the Anabaptists get another, that they may be assured they have the seal of God's covenant etc. 2. then that there neither have been nor shall be in Babylon any of God's people etc. Rev. 18.4. 3. then, baptism now had in Apostate churches is not answerable to the circumcision had in the Apostasy of Jsrael: for that was true circumcision etc. I answer, they may by a little varying of words make an 100 such reasons, alone and the same; all begging the question, and proving nothing. What one scripture or reason from thence, is here brought to prove antichrist's baptism, true baptism? Let any man define by the word, true Christian baptism, & then compare therewith the blasphemous Christening before set out from Bellarmine, and he shall see what accord is between them. And whereas the burden of these men's song, is, we must else baptize again: this is no proof at all; for (besides that which is before answered,) what if it be our error that we baptize not again? where be then all their proofs, are they not vanished into smoke? Verily I should much rather incline to Cyprians error (though I am far from it) for a new washing: then approve the sacrilegious washing used by that man of sin with most high dishonour to the blood of Christ, to be that one true Christian baptism; the seal of God's covenant. For that of Rev. 18.4. because God caleth his people out of Babylon, therefore Babylon's baptism is true baptism, is without all colour of reason. As if one should argue thus, God by jeremy called his people out of Babylon, jer. 51, 45. therefore Babylon's sacrifices, and sacraments, were true. Who would not rather conclude hereby the contrary: God caleth his people out of her, therefore she with all her counfeyt service, sacraments & apish imitation of God's holy things, are detestable and cursed. Again, a people may be Gods, though unbaptized: as the uncircumcised Israelites were God's people, Deut. 29.10,— 13. with Josh. 5, 4, 5. The 3. point of Israel's circumcision to be true, is but barely by them affirmed, without proof; and is before disproved. And if they shall continue thus to say all things, and prove nothing: I will never trouble myself more to answer their discourses. 5. Finally (they reason) if baptism in Rome be not true baptism, than (as we also said) it is an idol; bearing show and image of that which it is not in truth. And jdols are things of nought &c. and so baptism in Rome, is a thing of nought; and to be esteemed as nothing in the world, as filth, or dung etc. I answer, idols are of two sorts; some merely devised by men, as jeroboams † 1. King. 12 28. calves: some perverted by men from holy signs to Idols, as * 2 King. 18 4. the brazen Serpent. Both these kinds are in popish baptism. For their crosses, exorcisms, greasings etc. are Idols of the first sort, worse than jeroboams bullocks: their washing with water in nomine patris etc. is of the second sort, that is, God's ordinance turned into an Idol as was the brazen Serpent. Thus is there a mixture in antichrist's Christening, of both sorts of abominations. Therefore have we renounced that Romish baptism, as an impure idol in their abuse, standing up in the place of Christ and his precious blood, which it is not; pretending to give grace, and wash away sins, which it doth not; but it is a lie “ Isa. 44, 20 in the right hand of all that so receive it: and the saying of the Apostle is verified in it, an idol is nothing in the world. 1 Cor. 8.4. Yet, I hope, they think not that the Apostle is contrary to the Prophet, who saith their idols are silver and gold, the work of men's hands, Psal. 115.4. an idol then for the matter and workmanship is something, but for the relation unto God, or divine grace, it is nothing: and thus th'Apostle meaneth as his next words show, * 1. Cor. 8. ●. there is no other God but one. So Popish baptism, as touching the material thing is somewhat, the salt, the water, the oil, are God creatures: the outward action is the work of the hands of an idolatrous Priest; and this work remaineth as did the work of the Idolaters circumcising in Israel: but as touching the relation, (which is the main thing in a sacrament,) that it should seal up unto them the forgiunes of sins, and (as they blasphemously say) quite take away sins, and confer grace; so it is a vain idol and nothing: for neither do the true Sacraments in Christ's church work any such effect to Gods own people: and as for that Antichristian synagogue, it is not appointed to salvation, but to condemnation by the just sentence of God. Rev. 17.11. & 18.8.20.21. 2. Thes. 2.11.12. Therefore it will not help them to say, that baptism in itself considered, is Christ's ordinance: for the brazen a Num. 21.8.9. Serpent was in itself God's ordinance at first, and a sacramental sign of their redemption by b joh. 3.14 15. Christ, yet they that burned incense to it, made it an Idol, and therefore as c 2. King, 18, 4. Nehushtan, (a piece of brass,) it was destroyed. Yea this is acknowledged of the popish baptism, by the most learned and conscionable of our own Land. M. Perkins saith, and proveth it, d Warning against Idolat. p. 33. The Church of Rome transformeth the sacraments to Jdols, by teaching that they confer grace ex opere operato, by the work done etc. To this effect (saith he) the e Missal. reformat. de benedict. fontis. Priest is appointed to pray, that the nature of waters might conceive the virtue of sanctification: that God would make the water fruitful by the secret admixtion of his godhead, that having conceived sanctification, a new creature may spring out of the immaculate womb of the divine fountain, that it may be living water etc. Yea further he showeth that f Ibid. p. 18— 20. God himself, & Christ, being worshipped in, at, or before an image, is presently transformed into an idol. But what need I insist upon other men; even Mr johnson himself, hath pleaded g Answ. to Mr jakob. p. 120. the Prelates and Priests (which administer baptism) to be Jdol shepherds, the h Apol. pa. 112.113. sacraments to be not true but false; and citeth against them their own testimonies to prove that i Treat. of the Minist. p. 15. Christ himself is made an idol among them. Yet lo how he now inveigheth against us, for saying that the baptism in antichrist's synagogue is an Idol. But now as Satan hath begun to persuade antichrist's christening to be Christ's true baptism, (although the scripture plainly saith, k 2 Cor. 6. 15· what concord hath Christ with Belial?) so he will not cease there, but justify the cursed Mass, by like reason, to be the blessed Supper of our Lord. For it is the same church that enjoyeth these 2. sacram ts, the same priests minister them, both in the same Babylonish unknown language, both of them having Christ's institution abused by the man of sin: and as water is in their baptism, so bread and wine is in their mass: as in baptism they use the m from Mat. 28.19. name of the Father the Son & the holy Ghost, so in the Mass, they use n from Mat. 26.26. Take eat this is my body etc. Now why should one of these sacraments be true, and not an other? All that are not antichrist's bondmen, detest his Mass as a monstrous idol: let them that list, honour his baptism. Again, excommunication is God's ordinance as well as baptism: and these our opposites say, a Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 26. that by it a man is cut off from communion with all churches of Christ upon earth, having his sins also bound in heaven; as on the contrary by baptism we are entered into communion with all churches of Christ in the world. This Excommunication the church of Rome useth as well as baptism, and hath power from Christ to do it, as well as to baptize: whereupon it will follow, if we be bound to communion with them that they baptize, we are also bound to avoid the communion of them that they excommunicate. Now for as much as these our Opposites themselves (besides all other) that have separated from the church and doctrines of Rome, have many curses and Anathemaes laid upon them by the council of Trent and Pope's Bulls: what are they the better for being baptized in their infancy, now that they are excommunicated in their man's age. They told us d Advert. p. 46. before, (and said, we have not yet learned it as we should,) that by our baptism we are bound to communion: and now let them also teach us, whither by their excommunication, we are not bound to shun their communion. Or if they will not answer us, let them answer the Papists, who b Harding. confut. of the Apol. part. 2. c. 5. plead that their Apostate priests being divided and cut of from the church, and excommunicate, may not lawfully minister the sacraments. And whereas M. jewel complained, we have been cast out by these men●, being cursed of them (as they use to say) with b●l book and candle: Harding answereth; c Ibidem part. 5. c. 15. To be excommunicate, ye have deserved etc. neither were ye by excommunication put from us, till ye had by contumacy severed yourselves from the Church, and showed yourselves desperate and incorrigible. And what will they say to the Synedrion, the representative church of England, whose d Constit. & can. eccles. 1603. excommunications ipso facto, if they be of the Lord, do forbid all Christians to communicate with these men, that thus plead for antichrist's baptism: yea they will tell M. johnson in his own words, that it e Treat. of the minist. of Engl. p. 17. is a fearful sin, (their Church being a true Church) to contemn their excommunication. If they answer, their excommunications are unjust, therefore they are of no weight: this will not salve the sore. For 1. all excommunicated, will say they are cast out unjustly: shall their own sayings be accepted? if not, than neither these men's; till their particular causes be cleared. In the mean time, men will more regard the church, then him that is cast out of the Church: and according both to a Mat. 18.17. Christ's doctrine, & the doctrine of the Church b Artic. of religion, 33 of England, he should be esteemed an heathen and publican. 2. Again many have been cast out for contemptuous refusing to come unto the Bishops synedrion, & they have left those Bishops, Ministers, Consistories & Churches, as being all false and Antichristian, unto c M. john's. his Treat. of the Minist. of Eng. p. 60, 62. whom no church duty of admonition etc. did belong. And now that these men have changed their mind, and count it a true Church and ministery, (though with corruptions): how will they be able to bear out such as are excommunicated, for so great contempt and error? 3. Thirdly, as Antichristians do excommunicate such as they should not: so do they baptize such as they ought not, even open impenitent Idolaters and their seed, the d Mat, 3.7. generation of Vipers which john Baptist would refuse. Yea Mr johnson himself hath said of a better estate than Rome's, that f Treat. of the Minist. p. 91. God's covenant is sacrilegiously violated, whiles it is said to the open wicked (in delivering them the seals of God's covenant) Thou art righteous. Therefore if the Pope's excommunicatorie bulls, are but bubbles because they are unjustly executed: his baptism also will be found but a fiction, & no true seal of salvation to such as receive it of him. Finally touching circumcision, I think it cannot be manifested that any peoples fallen from God and his Church, using it colourably for a religious action, (as all Antichristians and heretics do baptism at this day,) did or were bound to cut their foreskin the second time, if they came unto the truth of God: as for example, the Colchians, Egyptians and Aethiopians, whom g Herodot. in Euterpe. histories mention to be circumcised; or the Samaritans, whom Mr johnson h In Answ. to Mr jakob. p. 68 acknowledgeth to have still used circumcision. Hereunto we may add out of the jewish records, how they hold, that l Maimonie, tract. de circumcis. c. 2. All have leave to circumcise, yea though it be an uncircumcised person, or a servant, or a woman, or a child, circumcising in the place where there is no man. But an heathen may not circumcise at all: yet if he do circumcise, there is no need to return & circumcise the second time. If this rule stand, we shall not need to repeat our outward washing in baptism, though given us by Antichrist, or any other aliens from the church & covenant of promise. Of the Church of Rome. The Church of Rome being acknowledged by all that fear God, to be the throne of Antichrist, & Mr johnson himself having professed, a In answ. to M. jakob. pref. sect. 6. that the hierachie and Church-constitution of Antichrist, is the most detestable anarchy of Satan that ever was: yet imitating now M. Gifford, M. Bernard▪ and other professed enemies of the truth, he pleads for that Church after this manner. b Advert. p. 58, 59 The Apostle expressly teacheth, that Antichrist should sit in the Temple of God, 2. Thes. 2, 4.▪ And by the Temple understanding the Church of God, it will follow that Antichrist should sit in the Church of God, and is there to be sought and found, and not among Jews, Turks, Pagans etc. neither that Antichrist takes away wholly the church of God, and every truth and ordinance of the Lord etc. I answer, truth & error are closely couched together in this their plea: for the discerning whereof, we are to consider, first how Antichrists church is described in God's word; secondly what the state of the church of Rome is at this day. The Antichristian synagogue is by the holy Ghost called a c Rev. 13, 11. Beast, which signifieth a d Dan. 7.23 kingdom: it is named also a e Rev. 11.8 great city, which noteth the largeness of that polity and kingdom. It cometh up f Rev. 13.11. out of the earth, as being of this world, (which Christ's kingdom that g Rev. 21, 2 cometh down from heaven is not:) and therefore is called h 2 Thes. 2.3. a man of sin, and a i Rev. 17, 1. great whore: whose head is k Rev. 9.11 Abaddon or Apollyon, the destroyer of others, and himself the son l 2 Thes. 2.3 of perdition; and they that follow him, are the children of m verse 12. damnation. This wicked generation warreth n Rev. 17.14.6. & 13 7. against the Lamb Christ, and against the saints; o verse 6. blasphemeth Gods name & tabernacle and them that dwell in heaven, ●hat is the true Church, whose p Phil. 3, 20 conversation is heavenly. Yet do they all this mischief under show of Christian religion: & therefore this beast hath horns q Rev. 13, 11. like the Lamb Christ, this whore is r Reu-17. 4. arrayed with purple & scarlet, guilded with gold, precious stones and pearls; as if she were the s Psal. 45, 9 13. Ezek. 16 10.— 13. Song. ●, 5. Queen and spouse of Christ: she hath t Prov. 7.14. peace offerings & Vows, as if she were devowt in u psal. 66.13. God's service: w Prov. 9.16, 17. bread and waters, as ready to refresh the weary sowls. Her doctrines x Prov. 5.3 1. Tim. 4.2. sweet & amiable lye● spoken in hypocrisy: but yet confirmed with y 2. Thes. 2.9. Rev. 13, 13.14. signs and miracles, as if they came from heaven: her power and efficacy great, z Prov. 7.21.26. Rev. 17, 2. & 18, 23. prevailing over the many and the mighty, the Kings & Princes of world, deceiving all nations with her enchantments, and if it were possible, * Mat. 24, 24. Gods very elect: her continuance and outward prosperity † Rev. 13, 5. & 1●. 7. & 20, 2, 4. long: her end “ Rev. 18.19.21. & 19.20.21. 2. Thes. 2.8. miserable, consumed with the spirit of the Lords mouth, and abolished with the brightness of his coming: and for her destruction the ‘* Rev. 18.20. & 19.1.2. heavens shall rejoice and sing praises to God. Now for to find the accomplishment of these things, we are directed by the now Romish religion, to a Catholic or Universal church, one part whereof lives on earth, an other under the earth, and a third part in heaven. 1. On earth, is the whole multitude of such as are named Christians through the world, united as a catholic body under one visible head the Pope, who with his 2 horns n Rev. 13.11. like the Lamb, pretendeth to be Christ's Vicar in the Kingdom & priesthood; and is professed of his vassals, o Bellarm. pref. in ll. de summo Pont. to be that tri●d precious corner stone, that sure foundation in Zion, Jsa. 28.16. and it is p Extra. come. l. 1. de major. & obed. c. unam sanctam. declared, defined and pronounced, that it is of necessity to salvation, for all men to be subject unto him. Under this Captain are three bands of soldiers, q Bell. pref. in ll. de membr. eccles. milit. the first clergy men, as Bishops, Priests, Deacons, Subdeacons' and the rest of those shavelings; the second Lay men, as Kings, Pinces', Nobles,, Citizens, and Commons of all sorts and vocations; the third sort is both of the Clergy and Laity, called Monks or Regulars. 2. Under the earth, or in Purgatory fire, are the souls (they say) of all such r Bellarm. de purge. l. 2 c. 1. as die with venial sins, whose pains are to be holpen by prayers, and masses, said for them by such as are alive on earth. 3. In heaven, are the sowls of men departed in the popish faith, and delivered from purgatory: some of which, the Pope s Bell. de Sanct. beat. l. 1. c. 7.8. etc. canonizeth for Saints, whom the people on earth are religiously to honour and pray unto, as their mediators with God. This church on earth, † Idem d● eccles. m●lit. l. 3. c. 14. cannot ere in things which it commandeth men to believe o● do, whither they be expressed in scripture or not: therefore men must t Test. Rhen. in 1. Tim. 3 s. 9 believe in her, and trust her in all things; for the truth of the faith as touching us, relieth upon her u Bell. ibid. authority: and she hath power w Bell. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 14. to make laws which do bind and constreyn men's consciences. These things premissed, I come to our Opposites arguments. Their first reason from 2. Thes. 2.4. is unperfectly alleged, for the text there saith of the man of sin, that he doth sit as God in the Temple of God: whereupon their conclusion must be, that Antichrist sitteth as God in the church of God. And if they can prove that he is the true God, I will yield that his temple is the true temple, & his Church the true church. otherwise, if he be but an Idol and not God: his Temple church and body, will prove but an Idol like himself, and his blasphemy is worse than theirs y Rev. 2, 9 & 3, 9 which said they were Jew's and were not, but did lie, and were the synagogue of Satan. Secondly, they take it for granted, that by the Temple is meant the church: and so go on in obscurity. Whereas the Temple did primarily figure out Christ, Joh. 2.19.21. and in the heavenly jerusalem, (the true church), there was no other temple seen, but the Lord God almighty and the Lamb (Christ) which are the Temple of it, Rev. 21.22. If in this sense we understand that speech of Paul z 2. Thes. 2.4. touching Antichrist, then must we translate the words, (as a Augustin. de civet. Dei. l. 20. c. 19 some ancient Doctors have done) eye tun Naon, for the Temple, or, as if he himself were the Temple: and so in deed Antichrist taketh upon him the person and office of Christ, (under pretence of his Vicarship,) b 2 Thes. 2, 4. showing himself that he is God, proclaiming himself to be the c Bellar. de Pont. l. 2. c. 31. brydegroom of the Church, which is the office of d joh. 3, 21. Christ, yea taking a title above him, for whereas Christ is called Pontifex magnus, the e Heb. 4, 14 Great high Priest: the Pope is usually entitled Pontifex maximus the Greatest high-preist; and reason there is for it, because f Steph. Patracens. in orat. in Concil. Lateran. sub Leon. 10. in the Pope there is power above all powers, as well of heaven as of earth, as in a public Council it was spoken of this Beast. Now that these things should be true of the man of sin, otherwise then by lies spoken in hypocrisy, none of grace, I know, will affirm. Secondarily the Temple figured the Church, but first the catholic or universal church Eph. 2, 21. then every particular church by proportion, 1 Cor. 3, 16, 17. Which of these two, our opposites do intend, they show not. If they mean a particular church; it will not agree with the prophecies of Antichrist, whose City or church is so great, as g Rev. 11, 8.9. peoples, kindreds, tongues & nations, do dwell in the streets thereof. Neither is that answerable to the Temple in Israel, which was not for one synagogue, but for h Deut. 16.16. the whole nation of the jews, and for the i 1. King. 8, 41.42, joh. 12, 20. Act. 8, 27. Gentiles that came to the faith, through the world. If they mean the catholic or universal church, (which indeed Antichrist claimeth for his Temple,) than we are to be taught of them, how that whorish company that k Rev. 13, 4 worship the Beast and Dragon; can possibly be the true catholic church and spouse of Christ, otherwise then by counterfeysance and lying ostentation, even as the Devil himself is an l 2. Cor. 11.14. Angel of light. And the very word Temple, leadeth us to understand antichrist's church to be but a counterfeit. For what was the Temple or Tabernacle in Israel? Not the Church or congregation of God's people properly, for they were the m 1. King. 8, 30.33, 35 etc. worshippers of God in the Temple: but it was a sacramental sign of Gods dwelling with his people, as it is written, n Exo. 25, 8. they shall make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them. So Solomon built the Temple that God might o 2 Chron. 6, 2. dwell therein:: and for the times under the gospel, God promised, p Ezek. 37, 26, 27. I will set my sanctuary among them for ever, & my Tabernacle shallbe with them, & I willbe their God, & they shallbe my people: and the fulfilling hereof is set down Rev. 21, 3. behold the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shallbe his people. So in Revelat. 11.1. the Temple is distinguished from them that worship therein, which is the people. The Temple then, was an outward sign of God's presence with his people, and of his inward dwelling in their hearts by ‘p Eph. 3.17. & 2.22. 1. Cor. 3.16 faith and by his Spirit unto their salvation: so antichrist's Temple is an outward show of his presence with that seduced people, in whose hearts q Rev. 13.4 14. & 16, 14. 1. Tim. 4.1. 2 Thes. 2.10.11.12. he dwelleth by Popish faith and by his Spirit of error carrying them to damnation. But as Antichrist shall not professedly deny the true God or Christ, though in deed and truth r 2 Thes. 2.4. he falsely showeth himself that he is God: so shall he not professedly deny the Temple or church of God, but falsely vaunt his adulterous synagogue to be the same. God's true temple and tabernacle is in mount Zion, in s Rev. 14.1.17. heaven, where God sitteth t Rev. 16.17. & 7.15. on a throne and dwelleth among his people; where is the u Rev. 11.19. Isa. 29.6 ark of his covenant, and from thence lightnings, voices, thunderings, earthquake and hail, come forth against the Antichristians his enemies, and w Rev. 16.1 2.10. vials of his wrath powered out upon the throne of the beast, and on the men that have his mark. On the contrary, the Beast, which is the kingdom of Antichrist, ascendeth from beneath x Rev. 17, 8 out of the bottomless pit, and y Rev. 13, 6 blasphemeth this heavenly tabernacle, and sitteth z Rev. 16.19. in Babylon upon the a Rev. 13, 2. Dragon's throne, and b Rev. 19.19. fighteth against the Lamb, and against the Saints, c Rev. 11.2 treading under foot the holy City, and d Dan. 8.11 casting down the place of Christ's sanctuary. When th'Apostle therefore telleth us, that Antichrist sitteth as God in the Temple of God, it is to be understood first of their invading and destroying of God's church and people, as the heathens of old e Psal. 79. Dan. 8.11.13. & 11.36. jer. 52, 12.13. etc. Lam. 2, 7, 9· dealt with jerusalem & dwellers therein; secondly of their own vain f Ezek. 28.2.6. Isa. 14.13.14. 2. Thes. 2.9.10. Rev 13.11.14. & 17.4. 2. Cor. 11.13.14.15. ostentation, whiles they will have it called the Christian catholic church, and the Pope the head of the same. The next point that Antichrist is to be sought there, and not among the Jews Turks & Pagans; is a fallacy from an insufficient division; for all out of the true Church are not Jews, or Turks, or Pagans, there is a fourth to make up the mess, even popish Antichristians, and among these is the Man of sin to be found, though with a visar on his face, and a sheepskin on his back. In the true Church he hath sometimes been found ranging as a wolf, but not reigning as a God, which in his own Temple he doth: where he is acknowledged g Clement. in proaem. in glossa. c. In Concil. Lateran. sess. 4. sub Leon. 10. Our Lord God the Pope, and ʰ Thou art an other God on earth; and i Extravag. in joh. 22. To believe that our Lord God the Pope might not decree as he hath decreed, it were a matter of heresy; and, l Paulus Aemyl. lib. 7. O thou that takest away the sins of the world, have mercy upon us; with other like intolerable blasphemies. Thirdly they say, Antichrist takes not away wholly the church of God, and every truth and ordinance of the Lord. I answer, neither did the Devil take away wholly every truth and ordinance of God from among the heathens: but they retained many rites of Gods worship received from their fathers, k Cum inter, in glo●. as before f p. 70. is noted. Yet in very deed, so much as in them lay, and us stood with the safety of their deceitful kingdom, the Devil of old, and Antichrist his son of late, have sought wholly to take away the church & truth of God; and to put lies in the place. But God hath nourished the woman (his church) in the wilderness, from the presence of the Serpent, Rev. 12.14. And for further answer hereof, let us hear what M. johnson himself wrote heretofore against M. jakob, k Answer to M. jak. p. 137. I would know of you (saith he) who are so deep a clerk, how antichrist's church and religion should justly be accounted a mystery of iniquity, and truly be said to speak lies in hypocrisy, also privily to bring in damnable heresies, and to have a show of Godliness, if they did so absolutely and wholly depart from the faith, and not only from some points thereof etc. Fourthly they allege Rev. 18.4. Go out of her my people etc. which words (they say) imply the covenant of God continued among them. I answer, these very words are taken from Jer. 51.45. My people, go out of the mids of her: where by my people, the Church of Babylon is not meant, but the Israelites, God's a jer. 50, 6. lost sheep scattered there upon the mountains and hills, whom b jer. 50.17 first the King of Ashur had devoured, & lastly Nebuchadnezar King of Babel had broken their bones, having c jer. 52, 13.14. burned jerusalem and the Temple with fire, broken down the city walls, d vers. 9 etc. imprisoned their King in Babylon, captived the Princes & people, and carried the e vers. 17. etc. vessels of the Lords house into Babylon: so that now Israel was without Temple, without kingdom, without polity or common wealth of their own; (only the Lord himself was f Ezek. 11, 16. a Sanctuary or Temple to the faithful there dispersed,) and their holy vessels were carried into the Temple and treasury g Dan. 1.1.2. of Nebuchadnezars' God. And these Israelites figuring Gods h Rom. 11.4.5.7. elect, are called out of Babylon, which God would utterly i jer. 51.25, 26, 37, 62. destroy & make desolate for ever. And thus from antichrist's church, which is k Rev. 18, 2. & 11, 8. Babylon, Egypt, & Sodom, are Gods elect called out: a most evident proof that she is none of God's church, (what soever she pretendeth,) any more than the idolatrous heathens, whom she matcheth in filthiness of whoredoms, and multitude of abominations. God's covenant of grace is not therefore with her at all, for she is appointed l 2 Thes. 2.8 12. Rev. 18.8.— 21. to damnation: but the elect that obey God's voice caling them out of her, them he will receive into covenant, m 2. Cor. 6.17.18. he will be a Father unto them, and they shall be his sons and daughters; as he hath promised. Fiftly they add, And so Jsrael is often called the Lords people, in the time of their Apostasy: 2. King. 9.6. & 13.23. 2. Chron. 30.6.— 9 & c·s I answer; they prove not the Question: for first the Antichristian church is n Rev. 16, 19 & 18, 2. Babylon, and out of o vers. 4. her, that is Babylon, are God's people called. Now to prove her God's church, they flee to Israel: whereas the p Rev. 11, 2.9.18. Gentiles were her true types as q Defence against Mr Smyth, p. 14, 15. elsewhere I have manifested; though all the wickedness & hypocrisy of Apostate Israel, is also found in this Romish Babel. 2. Neither yet is their argument for Israel good: to say they are called the Lords people, therefore they are his true church; I deny the consequent. For things are named in scripture sometime as they have been before, though they be not so still: as r 1. San. 30, 5 Abigail is called the wife of Nabal, though he were then dead, and she married to David; s Mat. 1.6. Solomon was begotten of Vriahs' wife, whereas she was then David's: so jesus was t Mat. 26, 6. in the house of Simon the Leper, so named because he had been a leper. Thus Israel were called God's people, for that he had been their u Hos. 2.7. first husband though in their apostasy they were w Hos. 1.9. & 2.2. not his people, nor his wife. Secondly they were so called, in respect of their profession, that they would be so esteemed and named; though in deed they were x 2. Chro. 15.3. without the true God. As y Mic. 2.7.8 o thou that art named the house of Jaakob etc. but he that was yesterday my people, is risen up for an enemy. Thirdly they were called God's people in respect of their calling again unto him and his covenant afterward, though for the present they were none of his: as z Hos. 2, 18 19 In that day, I will marry thee (Israel) unto me for ever, a vers. 20. I will even marry thee unto me in faith, and thou shalt know the Lord: and † vers. 23. I will have pity on her that was not pitied, and will say to them which were not my people, thou art my people, and they shall say, thou art my God. And thus the Gentiles were called Christ's sheep, because they should after be brought into his fold, Joh. 10, 16. & God had much people in Corinth a heathenish city, Act. 18.10. 1. Cor. 12, 2. and the jews to this day are God's people & beloved, not for their present state which is cursed, but for the promise that they shall hereafter be graffed again into Christ. Rom. 11, 11, 20.23, 25, 26. & 9.4. with Jsa. 59, 20, 21. Ezek. 34, 23.— 30. Hos. 3, 5. As for this false church and state of Israel (which b Hos. 11, 12. compassed the Lord with lies and with deceit,) it also may show us how to understand that Temple of God forespoken of, wherein Antichrist should sit as God. For was there any true Temple any where but in jerusalem? yet when Israel forgot his maker, he c Hos. 8.14 builded Temples. These howsoever they pretended d 1. King. 12.28. the God that brought them out of Egypt, yet were in deed built for the worship of e 2 Chron. 11.15. Divils', to whom they sacrificed, and f Deut. 32. 1●. 2 Chr. 13.8.9. not to God. Therefore the Lord by names distinguisheth these two churches, caling Samaria g Ezek. 23.4. Aholah, that is, Her own Tabernacle, & jerusalem Aholibah, that is, My-tabernacle in her: but if God's tabernacle had been also in Samaria; the difference had not been such. The Idol temples then which jeroboam and his successors builded, were none of God's temples, otherwise then by lying pretences: much less than was h jer. 51.44. Bells temple in Babylon, God's temple: and if the figure were not his, neither can the figured thing be his, I mean this spiritual Babylon, the i Rev. 17.5. mother of whores, the k Rev. 18.2. habitation of Divils'. For as Christ surmounteth in grace and holiness, all types & figures that went before of him: so Antichrist surpasseth in wickedness, all the types and figures of him. Therefore the holy Ghost contenteth not himself with one name, but caleth antichrist's church, l Rev. 16.19 Babylon, and m Rev. 11.8 Sodom, & Egypt, and where our Lord was crucified, meaning heathenish Rome, by whose policy Christ was killed, when he was delivered to n Mat. 27.2 Pilate the Roman deputy, and to the o Mat. 20.19. Gentiles (the Roman p Mat. 27, 27.— 35. souldjers) to be mocked scourged & crucified. So that look what idolatry, fornication, persecution and wickedness hath been read of among those heathen peoples, the same may be proved upon the synagogue of Antichrist, (though mixed with profession of the name of Christ, the more easily to deceive:) as whensoever any will bring them to be compared, shall soon be manifested. 6. But they proceed, and plead, that this clause partake not in her sins, Rev. 18, 4. showeth what we are to leave and renounce, namely their sins, and not whatsoever is had or retained by them. I answer, first the text saith Go out of her: meaning this whore, this Babylon, that is, this Church: and so from the q Rev. 17.4 golden cup in her hand, as well as from the filthy potion that is in it; & from the Beasts counterfeit r Rev. 13, 11 2. Lambs horns, as well as from his Lion's mouth and Bears paws. We may not in the truest Church in the world s 1. Tim. 5.22. partake with their sins: yet is not every true Church that sinneth, Babylon. Secondly, she being in this forlorn estate, she is but a lump of sin, t 2. Thes. 2.3. a man of sin, a child of perdition: the u Rev. 13, 11 Beast is not one person, but the whole w Dan. 7.23 kingdom: & M. johnson himself hath acknowledged more than once, x Treat. of the Minist. against. M. Hilders. p. 7. Apolog. p. 109. that the man of sin, is the false Church (& religion) of Antichrist, compared to the body of a man, and consisting of all the parts together. Now to the defiled and unbelieving, y Tit. 1.15. nothing is pure; their z Prov. 15.8. sacrifices are abominable, their prayers are turned a Ps. 109, 7. to sin. We acknowledge therefore no good or holy thing in antichrist's synagogue, as touching her use of it. Thirdly we renounce not any good thing, because that harlot doth challenge & abuse it: but we practise Gods ordinances as he hath commanded, condemning utterly the profanation of them by Antichrist. 7. They further allege, that the Church of Rome was at the first set in the way of God: since which time she is fallen into great apostasy as Jsrael did: in which estate she hath kept sundry truths and ordinances of God, as Israel also did. Which causeth a twofold consideration of her estate, 1. in respect of the ordinances of God still retained among them, 2. and of the mixture of their own abominations. In regard of the one to acknowledge the truth and church of God there; in regard of the other to observe their apostasy, and confusion against Antichrist: and for this mixture, to separate from them, and to practise every ordinance of God, which was and is in that church: leaving only their corruptions lest we fall into Anabaptistry and other evils. I answer, they do but roll the first stone, saying the same things; comparing antichrist's church with Israel, whereas the holy Ghost compareth it with the b Revel. 11.2.8. & 17.5. gentiles, even the most vile, the Sodomites, Egyptians, Babylonians, and heathen Romans, as before I have showed. In all which nations, there were many truths & ordinances of God retained & abused; which truths made them no true Church, unless we will say, all the world was Gods true Church. But I will follow their particulars. The Church of Rome (they say) was at first set in the way of God: I answer, there was c Rom. 1.7. at Rome such a Church in Paul's time; but the Romish Church now, is a Beast since that time sprung out of d Rev. 17.8.18. the bottomless pit; a Catholic monster, dispersed (as they feign) through earth, heaven, and purgatory, as before e Pag. 77. I showed: such a Church Paul never saw, but by the spirit of prophesy f 2 Thes. 2. foretold of it. That Church than was g Rom. 1.7. & 12.1. Saints, & worshipped God: this Church now is an h Rev. 18.2 habitation of Divils', and i Rev. 9.20. worshippeth Divils'. Since that time (say they) she is fallen into Apostasy. True, say I, even soon after Paul's time, for then the k 2. Thes. 2.7. mystery of iniquity did work, and l 1 joh. 2.18.19. many Antichrists were gone out, whiles the Apostles lived. For which their Apostasy (like Israel's) when they would not repent, (as Christ m Rev. 2.5.16. threatened some that were new fallen into such sins,) the candlestick (the Church) was removed, the Church of Rome as Paul n Rom. 11.20— 22. forewarned, for unbelief was cut off among others: and for a punishment of their Apostasy, God delivered the East Churches into the hands of Mahomet, and the West Churches into the hands of that false-horned o Rev. 13.11. beast Antichrist: even as Israel and judah of old, for their like sins, were p 2 King. 17 & 25. cha. delivered into the hands of the Assyrians and Babylonians. And this Paul prophesied, that there should be q 2 Thes. 2.3. a departing from the faith, before that Man of sin should be disclosed: and because they received not the r ver. 10. etc. love of the truth that they might be saved, therefore God would send upon them that Adversary, with Satan's power and strong delusion to believe lies, that they might be damned. Thus Mahomet & Antichrist, were Gods 2 plagues, to bring not only the death of body, but of soul, upon them that loved not the truth, but departed from it. For when the † Rev. 8, 8. great mountain (which is the kingdom of “ jer. 51, 25 Babylon, antichrist's monarchy,) burning with the fire of ambition and strife, was cast into the sea, that is, among * Rev. 17.15 Isa. 17, 12. peoples and nations: then the living creatures that were in the third part of the sea so corrupted and bloody, died: & “ Rev. 20, 4 4, 5. lived not again for a thousand years, as did the godly which worshipped not the beast. Although therefore we may truly call the state of Mahometisme and Antichristianisme, apostasy: yet we are taught of God, to understand such apostasy as was among the heathens, in Sodom, Egypt and Babylon; and so Rome is called, not only figuratively, (as sometimes the jews are called a Isa. 1.10. people of Gomorrah, but b Rev. 11.8 spiritually, that is in deed and effectually: for the spirit and life (so to speak) of all their abominations, are in her most powerful and apparent. So their comparison with Israel, falleth too short in measure: though Israel also when they forsook God and his Church, and builded new c Hos. 8.14. Temples were not Gods true Temple or Church, as before is proved. Their consideration in respect of God's ordinances to acknowledge the church of God there: is a speculation of their own, not of God. For the stealing & abusing Gods ordinances & mixing them with their own inventions, maketh not a people God's people or Ch:, any more than a true man's money in a thiefs purse, maketh the thief an honest man. If it were so, than the heathens when they sacrificed d Horat. l. 2 Satyr. 3. swine, were to be condemned▪ but when they sacrificed e Num. 23.1. bullocks and sheep, were to be approved as God's Church, for they kept f Gen. 8.20. Levit. 1. God's ordinance aswell as Rome with their sacrifice of the Mass. When they worshipped idols, they were to be condemned; but when they worshipped g Act. 17.23. the true God in their ignorant manner, they were to be justified as his people: so when they kept the feasts h Sopho●l. Electr. Tibull. l. 1. cleg. 3. of new moons, they were to be praised as God's Church, for it was an ordinance i Num. 28, 11 of his: but when they kept their Bacchanalia, to be disclaimed for heretics. And what will this come unto at the last; but to justify the Devil as he is a creature of God, and transformed into an k 2 Cor. 11.14. Angel of light; but to condemn him as he is a black Devil, and Apostate from his original. Their fear lest they should fall into Anabaptistry, is before defrayed: but as some mariners to avoid Charybdis have fallen into Scylla, so these to shun the shelves of Anabaptistry, have run their ship upon the rocks of Popery. 8. Their next double consideration, is about the covenant of God made with his people. For often, the people on their part break the covenant when the Lord doth not so on his part; but still counts them his people, calls them to repentance, follows them sometime with judgment, sometime with mercy, Lev. 26, 15— 45. Ezek. 16, 59,— 62. Jud. 2.1— 20. Thus in Jsrael they fell to idolatry & transgressed the covenant on their part, Exo. 32. Jud. 2. & 3. with Ps. 78.56.58. 1. Sam. 7.3, 4. 1 King. 12, 28, 33. & 14.22, 23, 24. with 2. Chron. 12. & 13. & 1. King. 19, 10. Hos. 6.7. & 8, 1. yet the Lord breaks it not on his part, but spareth and destroyeth not, nor presently gives them a bill of divorce, but in his mercy as a loving husband calls them to repentance, sendeth Prophets, calls them still his people, helps them and casts them not off. Adjoining also punishments, both for avenging the quarrel of his covenant, and procuring their conversion. Exo. 33, & 34. etc. Lev. 26, 14, 15— 25— 42, 44, 45. Jud. 2, 1, etc. Ps. 78. 1. Kin. 13, & 16. & 18. 2. King. 5, 8, 15, 17. Jer. 51.5. Ezek. 16, 59.60 etc. Hoseas, Amos etc. In these two diverse respects, Jsrael considered in themselves and their idolatrous estate are said to be without God, without Priest, without law: to forsake and break the covenant, not to be the Lords wife but an harlot etc. having children of whoredoms, and that the Lord is not with Jsrael, or with any of Ephraim, 2. Chron. 15.3. 1. King. 12, 28.33. & 15, 34. & 16, 13, 26, 31, 33. & 19, 14. Hos. 2, 1,— 5. & 5, 3, 4. & 8, 1. & 9, 1. with Psal. 106, 29.39. Ezek. 16. and 23, ch. 2 Chron. 25, 7. But again in respect of the Lord and his covenant into which they were received, & which he breaks not on his part, he calls them to repentance, is called their God, and they the people of the Lord, and their children born to the Lord, and Jsrael not to have been a widow forsaken of God, but the Lord pitied them, & respected them for his covenant with Abraham, and would not cast them off as yet. And thus Jsrael continued long, respected of the Lord notwithstanding her apostasy, Jud. 2, 1. 1. King. 18.36. 2 King. 9, 6. Hos. 4, 6, 12. & 5.4. & 7.10. & 8, 2. & 9, 1. & 14, 1, 2. Amos 7, 15, with Psal. 89, 30.— 34. Eze. 16.20.60. Jer. 51, 5. 2. King. 13, 23. Yet in these times, the Prophets taught the people to plead with their mother, & separate themselves. etc. Hos. 2, 1— 5. & 4, 12, 14, 15. Amos 4.4, 5. & 5.4.5. All these are written for our learning, & to be applied to the the church's estate in Apostasy since Christ, Rom. 15, 4. 1. Cor. 10.11. I answer, these things are very obscurely and confusedly by them set down: so that the error is couched in darkness. 1. They show not how the covenant between God and men stood: 2. there is an equivocation in this word breaking of the covenants, which they clear not: thirdly they shuffle together the estates of Israel when they were one body, & when they were rend in two, 4. so also the churches in Apostasy since Christ, they distinguish not, from the kingdom of Antichrist: but confound Zion (when she sinneth,) with Babylon. 1. The covenant between God and men, was always conditional; by the law, if they a Rom. 10.5. did his commandments, they should live by them; and if they b Gal. 3, 10. continued not in all things written in the book of the law to do them, they were cursed. By the gospel, c joh. 3.36. he that believeth in the son [of God] hath everlasting life, and he that obeyeth not the son shall not see life, but the wrath of God, abideth on him. And all the figurative covenants that Israel had, were also conditional, d Levit. 26, Deut. 28. blessings promised to the obedient, and curses to the transgressors. 2. The breaking of the covenant on man's part, is always e Levit. 26, 15. by sin: in which sense it cannot be said that God ever breaketh covenant at any time. But in an other sense by punishing, and putting from him the rebellious people, in just judgement; we may say God f Zach. 11, 10. Psal. 89.39. breaketh or disannulleth the covenant. Whensoever a people by sin forsaketh God, and refuseth his word caling them to repentance: they cannot have themselves, neither can other men have concerning them any assurance of their salvation, or that they abide in the covenant of his grace. For whosoever abideth in him (as saith g 1. joh. 3, 6. the scripture) he sinneth not: whosoever sinneth, hath not seen him, neither known him. Be it h Deut. 29, 18, 19, 20. man or woman, or family or tribe, which turn their heart from the Lord, to serve other Gods, though they bless themselves in their hearts, saying we shall have peace etc. the Lord will not be merciful unto them. As for God's patience, who presently punisheth not, but sometime forbeareth long; and inviteth them to repentance: this doth not assure any that they are under his covenant of grace, unless by repentance and faith they turn unto the Lord. The long suffering of God i Pet. 3, 20. Gen. 6. abode in the days of Noah, 120. years, whiles he preached to the old world which perished in the flood: so his bountifulness to many other peoples should have led them to repentance, k Rom. 2, 4, 5. when they after their hardness and impenitent hearts, heaped unto themselves wrath against the day of wrath. And the judgements upon Gods professant people, come often times more speedily, then upon the open infidels. Let us look upon the typical estate of Israel, our l 1. Cor. 10 6, 11. ensamples: It was a m Exod. 6, 4.5.— 8. covenant between God and them, that he would give them the land of Canaan, a figure n Heb. 4.1.2.3. etc. of the heavenly inheritance: and he led them through the wilderness, to the borders of the country, and said, o Deut. 1, 20, 21. Lo the land is before you, go up and possess it: but they p ver. 28, 26 32. were afraid and would not go up, through their unbelief. Then the Lord presently q vers. 34.35. was wroth and swore, that not one of those transgressers should see that good land; yea though they after were sorry, r verse 41. and offered themselves to go up, yet the Lord s ver. 42, 44. forbade them, slew some of them by the sword, and t Deut. 2, 1, etc. Heb. 3 17.— 19 turned all the rest back to wander and perish in the wilderness▪ Again, it was a condition of the u Exod. 34, 10, 11. covenant on God's part, that he would cast out the Amorites, Canaanites &c. from before the Israelites; and on their parts, w verse 12, etc. that they should make no compact with the inhabitants of the land etc. But when they broke with him, and rooted not out the people, but agreed with them x judg. 1.27.28.30.32, 33. for tribute; the Lord also presently broke with them, saying, y judg. 2.1.2.3. I said I will never break my covenant with you etc. but ye have not obeyed my voice, wherefore I say also, I will not cast them out before you; and again because z verse 20, 21. this people hath transgressed my covenant, therefore will I no more cast out before them any of the nations; and so they were left as a josh. 23, 13. a whip on their sides, and thorns in their eyes. The like may be seen by comparing all other particulars, and those threatings in Levit. 26.15.16. etc. with their histories in the books of the Judges and Kings of Israel: according to that saying of God to Moses, b Deut. 31.16, 17. they will forsake me etc. and I will forsake them. And as for that which is cited from Levit. 26.45. it was a promise of the Gospel, upon their unfeigned c verse 39, 40. repentance; and pertaineth to the jews also at this day, as Paul showeth us Rom. 11. for this rule is general, d Pro. 28, 13. he that confesseth and forsaketh his sins, shall have mercy. Although therefore God useth sometime more forbearance of evil men than at other time, and often giveth e Rev. 2, 21 space to repent: yet if they repent not, they shall assuredly f Luk. 13.3.5. Rom. 2..4, 5. Rev. 2.5. perish, and their boasting of the covenant shall g Mat. 7, 22 23. not save them. 3. Touching their application of things to Israel, not putting difference between their state when it was one, and when it was rend asunder: therein also they fail. Whiles Israel were one, they continued God's Church: for though they often sinned, yet by his word & afflictions he soon brought them to repentance, as is noted, Judg. 2.4, 5. and 3.8, 9.15. and 4.1.2, 3. etc. But when after many other sins, ten tribes fell from the Lord, and rend themselves from the Kingdom of David, and priesthood of Levi, both which were sacramental types a jer. 33.21 22. of Christ and his Church; when they left the other testimonies of God's presence, the Temple and Altar at Zion, where God had said he would b Psal. 132.13.14. dwell for ever; and builded them new c Hos. 8.14 11. Temples and Altars to sin, forgetting their maker; when they set up Calves and d 2 Chron. 11.15. Devil's to worship God by; then presently e 1 King. 13.1. etc. God sent his Prophet to them with a denunciation of judgement, which being done, he was to avoid them as heathens & Publicans; f ver. 8.9. not eating or drinking in the city: which because he did (though drawn in by the lie of another Prophet,) the Lord g ver. 26. slew him with a Lion. And all that feared God, h 2 Chron. 11.13.16. both Priests & people, left the country and went to judah: and the rest were still i Hos. 4.15.17. called upon by the Prophets to forsake them, as not being God's k Hos. 2.2. wife, that is, his Church: and their estate showed to be l 2 Chron. 15.3. without the true God, and without Priest, and without law: and they were unto God m Amos 9.7. as the Aethiopians. Now whereas our Opposites allege, God did not presently cast them off; it is true, in respect of caling them to repentance, and of their dwelling in the land, or, as the scripture saith, n 2 King. 14.27. of putting out the name of Jsrael from under heaven: for his covenant was to punish them o Lev. 26.16.18.21.24.28.33 by degrees, & at last if they repented not, to scatter them among the heathens, till their p ver. 41.39.40. uncircumcised hearts should be humbled, and they rued their former sin; and then would he q ver. 42.45. remember his first covenant, & so receive them again to grace in Christ. And as for not casting them presently out of the land, the Lord dealt with them, as he had before dealt with the heathen Canaanites which were spared therein for a time, because their wickedness was not yet full, Gen. 15.16. If this patience towards them, will not prove them a true Church; no more will Gods like patience towards apostate Israel. And how they in their impenitent estate, r 2 King. 17 13.14. etc. hardening their necks daily more & more, could be said to be the true Church of God, (though they compassed s Hos. 11.12. him with lies,) and in the covenant of his grace unto salvation; I leave for them to judge that are wise in heart. As for these men's double respects, they are not all of them sincere. They would have it said in respect of the Israelites, (and not of the Lord) that they were without God, without Priest, without law, none of his wife, having children of whoredoms, and the Lord is not with Jsrael etc. & again in respect of the Lord (and not of themselves) that he is called their God, and they his people, and their children borne to him, and Israel not to have been a widow forsaken etc. I answer, whatsoever was sin, was wholly their own, and whatsoever was grace, was wholly Gods: & this is true in the best Churches in the world. But whatsoever was a reproof and punishment for their sin, respected both God's justice, and their demerit: and whatsoever acceptation of grace was in them, respected both God's mercy in Christ, and their a Rom. 3.30. faith. If therefore they were in any sense a true Church at that time actually, it must needs be by mutual reference to the covenant on both parts, God offering, they b Rom. 5.17. taking his grace offered; through his holy Spirit working in them: otherwise it is a mere fiction in religion, to make difference where none is. Now let them show that they accepted the grace of God, caling them to repentance: we show the contrary by the Lords own testimony, who for their unbelief and stubborn disobedience c 2 King. 17.13.14.— 22.23. did put them out of his sight in wrath. And if men accept not the grace of God: his caling upon them to repent, makes them no more his Church, than the heathens d Act. 14.15. & 17.30. unto whom he doth the like. Again, it is not sound to say that in respect of themselves only, it was spoken by the Prophet e 2 Chron. 25.7. the Lord is not with Israel, with any of the children of Aephraim. For he there dissuadeth Amaziah from having the army of Israel to help him: his reason is, the Lord is not with Jsrael: this most directly respecteth the Lord and his f Hos. 5.6. withdrawing of his presence from that people. Even as Moses said, g Num. 14.42. Got not up [to war] for the Lord is not among you: did not the event show (when they h vers. 44.45. fled before their enemies) that is was meant in respect of God's presence and help now withdrawn from them? Also when it is said in other scriptures i judg. 2.18. the Lord was with the judge: and k Psal. 118.6. the Lord is with me, I will not fear: and l Mat. 28.20. I am with you all days, & many the like: who ever would dream that these things could be spoken in respect of the men only, and not of God and Christ? Finally the Prophet's speech to the jews, m 2 Chron. 15.2. the Lord is with you, while you be with him, but if ye forsake him, he will forsake you, doth evince manifestly, that it is an evil gloss, when the text saith the Lord is not with Israel, to turn it by respects, as if nothing were meant but Israel is not with the Lord. So in the other speech n 2 Chron. 15.3. Israel hath been without the true God; the words following o vers. 4. but had he turned to the Lord God of Israel; and sought him, he would have been found of them; these manifest, that it was in respect of Gods forsaking them also, and not only of their forsaking him. No better (if it be not worse) is their citing of Hos. 2.2. she is not my wife, that this respected Israel in themselves: be it so, but what followeth? † Hos. 2, 2. neither am I her husband: and if the former branch respected Israel, than this respecteth the Lord, especially seeing he testified by jeremy, * jer. 3, 8. I cast her away, and gave her a bill of divorcement: unless they will say this also was not spoken in respect of the Lord. They do not well therefore to cite one branch of the text, and conceal an other, deceiving the reader. How and in what sense God called them his people, I have showed “ p. 81, 82. before: their former state, their present pretence to be the Lords, and the future mercy that they should and yet shall receive, might well and did occasion such speeches: but in deed and truth it was as God said to them † Hos. 1, 9 you are not my people, therefore will not I be yours. And as for God remembering his covenant, it is true even to this day, for they are * Rom. 11.28. beloved for their father's sakes, and shall again have the benefit of their first “ verse 26, 27. Levit. 26, 45. covenant, and so may still becaled Gods people, as the Prophets foretelling their return, do ‘† Deut. 32, 43. Isa. 49.13. entitle them: yet I hope our opposites will not hereupon conclude, that the jews now (whiles they continue unrepentant) are Gods true visible church. That of Jsrael and Judah being no widow, Jer. 51.5. is a prophesy of their return out of Babylon, and restoring of their common wealth, as the whole argument there manifesteth. They should repent and seek the Lord ‘* jer. 50.4, 5. with tears, and renew the covenant on their part, and God ‘؛ verse 20. would forgive them all their sins. This therefore is not spoken in respect of God only, but of them also turning by repentance to the Lord in their affliction, and the Lord turning to them; as the first performance of this prophesy showeth, Nehem. 9.1.2.— 32.— 38. Moreover, it proveth not that Israel was always before, God's wife or Church; for it is plain to the contrary, Hos. 2.2. and she was divorced, jer. 3, 8. & dead in sin, Hos. 13.1. but now was to be fulfilled in such as returned, that which was prophesied, on Israel's part, † Hos. 2, 7. I will go and return to my first husband; and on God's part, * verse 20. I will marry the unto me in faith. Their applying of these things to our times, is not in all points aright. For though in this, antichrist's synagogue and Israel's do agree, that neither be God's true Church: yet the perfect type of Rome, as God describeth it, is * Rev. 17, 18 Babylon: and we should not be wiser then God. And if they cannot prove Babylon then to be God's church, which was not more deep in sin than now Antichrist is, and which city had † Psal. 87, 4 promise and * 1. Pet. 5, 13 performance of mercy in Christ at the end: they shall never prove this synagogue of Satan to be Gods true Church, which hath no promise of recovery or mercy, but ‘† Num. 24 24. Rev. 14 9, 10. & 18 8.21. & 19, 20, 21. 2. Th' 2.8.12. prophecies and threatenings of assured destruction. They proceed further to a double regard of apostate Churches, in comparison with other peoples; as Jsrael compared with the Philistims etc., is called and counted God's people, having the only true God for their God: 2 King. 5, 8.15.17. & 9, 6. but being compared with Judah, is an harlot and not God's wife. Hos. 2.2.5. & 4.15. etc. So the church of Rome in apostasy, compared with jews, Turks & Pagans, aught to be counted Christians, and the Temple of God, the Church of God brought to the faith of Christ, 2 Thes. 2.4. with Ezek. 43, 7, 8. Zach. 6, 12, 13. Eph. 2, 11.— 13, 19, 21. 2. Cor. 6, 16. Rev. 11.19. but again commpared with the ancient church of Rome, & such as now are faithful churches, she is to be esteemed the great whore, believing & speaking lies in hypocrisy etc., Rev. 17.1.5. 1. Tim. 4, 1, 2, 3. 2 Thes. 2, 3, 10, 12. And thus in a double consideration, it may be said of Rome in one respect, there is a true Church there, and in an other respect there is a false church there. I answer; first to the double regard of Israel; if they mean that only in respect of judah, and not also of God, Israel was called none of God's wife; it is untrue, and before by me disproved. If they mean, that not only in respect of God, but of judah also, Israel was an harlot, and not God's wife, it is true, and maketh so much the more against their estate, but nothing at all, (no not in show) for it. And how judah respected Israel, (besides all former testimonies of the Prophets alleged,) their continual wars both with word and sword do manifest, as when after a’ 2. Chron. 13, 4, 5.— 12 reproof of their falling from God, they killed b verse 17.18. five hundred thousand chosen men of Israel at one battle: besides their continual combats after, excepting some few Kings which made amity with them, for which they were reproved: as the Prophet said to K. jehoshaphat for joining with the King of Israel against the Aramites, c 2 Chron. 19, 2. wouldst thou help the wicked, and love them that hate the Lord? therefore for this thing, wrath from the Lord is upon thee. But had the Israelites been their brethren in the faith, and covenant of Christ, judah had d 1. joh. 3, 10, 11, 12. sinned greatly in so destroying them. And how the jews afterward also esteemed of their faith and godliness, their Rabbins testimonies in the Talmud showeth, where they say of the ten tribes, a Talmud Babyl. in Sanhedrin, c. 11. Aein lahem chelek leolam haba: that is, they have no part in the world to come, in life eternal; and that the Lord did put them from upon their land in this world, and will send them into an other land in the world to come. Did they now (may we think) esteem them within the holy covenant, and to have true circumcision, b Rom. 4, 11. the seal of the righteousness which is by faith? As for comparison with the Philistims and other heathens, it is true they were called the people of the Lord; because they never renounced their God in name and professedly: but pretended the contrary. Yet seeing they did but compass the Lord with † Hos. 11.12 lies and deceit: this their vain profession did nought avail them, with God or his Saints. And so at this day, the jews professing the God of Israel, and praying to him, & reading his law and prophets daily in their synagogues, may be called God's people in comparison of pagans which know not God or his scriptures at all: but worship the Sun and Moon, and some of them the Devil, by open profession. Yet none I think will say, that the jews now being without Christ, are actually in the covenant of grace. Again, the Turks that profess a Alcoran, azoar. 2, 3. etc. One immutable, living, true, most wise & high God; and do acknowledge Christ b Azoar. 67 to be sent of God with his gospel, and call him c Azo. 31. Ruchella, that is the Breath (or Spirit) of God: these men in comparison of Julian the Apostata, and other like wretches, and Atheists, may be called the people of God, and Christians: though in deed, they be far from being either. Secondly for their double regard of the Church of Rome, I say as before of Israel, that in comparison with Turks and paynim, they may be called Christians, but are in deed false Christians, such as in name and show pretend to be Christ's; but are Antichrists & worship e Rev. 13, 3, 4. the Dragon, and the Beast, and him that f 2 Thes. 2, 4. fitteth as God in the Temple of God; so to them the scripture may be applied, g Rev. 2, 9 & 3, 9 they say they are h jews Christians and are not, but do lie, and are the synagogue of Satan: and if this will help them, let them make the most of it. It is sufficient for the matter in hand, if in respect of Christ and his covenant, and in comparison with Christ's true Churches, that synagogue be condemned, as the i Rev. 17.1. great whore, the beast that k Rev. 17.8 & 19, 20. came up from, and shall again go down into the bottomless pit. vertheless (but that comparisons are odious) it might easily be proved, that though antichrist's Church pretend to be Christ's, & so in name is better than Turks and Pagans: yet in deed, those miscreants are in some things to be justified, in comparison of them. For jews and Turks, are not so gross as to worship g Offic. B. Mariae. ref. the Queen of heaven, and Images of Wood and of stone, as h Bellarm. de imagine. l. 2. c. 21- do the Antichristians. The jews are not so vain as to pray to Abraham and the Prophets, though they be in deed saints in heaven: whereas the popish Church prayeth daily a Offic. B. Mariae. in Litan. to S. Nicolas, S. Martin, S. Sylvester. S. Benedict, S. Dommik, S. Antony, and all other their own canonised and deified Saints, of whom they know not but many may be Divils' in hell. And Bp. Bale observeth, that b Engl. Votaries; first book. Pref. they have done as their old predecessors the idolatrous priests did by the ancient Romans, they have set us up a sort of lecherous Gods to be worshipped in our temples, to be our advocates, and to help us in our needs. Yea the heathens would marvel (as Tully c De nat. Deor. l. 3. telleth us) that any should be so mad, as to believe that that thing which he eateth is his God: yet Antichristians believe that they eat their God and maker, when they eat their blasphemous Sacrament of the altar, which before they eat, they d Concil. Trident. sess. 13. c. 5. worship with divine honour. At Canterbury e D. Fulk. answ. to a counterf. catholic. art. 6. were kept the clouts that Thomas Becket did occupy to wipe of his sweat and to blow his nose on: which were kissed as holy relics, and thought to be wholesome for sick folks. Was there ever, may we think, more foolish idolatry, among any paynim? Wherefore they are in many respects worse than the very heathens: and it is true which a learned man f Ant. Sadeel resp. ad profess. fid. Mon. Buld. art. ult. hath said, that their Church is like their Transubstantiation, accidents without the true and proper subject. Their allegation of 2 Thes. 2.4. that the Man of sin should sit as God in the Temple of God, is before answered; and is but the misunderstanding of a phrase, that if they would contend, they might as well prove, the Devil which appeared to the Witch of Endor, was Samuel; because the scripture phrase saith that Samuel said to Saul etc. 1 Sam. 28 14.15 etc. Neither is Ezek. 43.7.8. fitly joined with 2 Thes. 2. they should set the type from Bells Temple in Babylon, where g Dan. 1.2. the vessels of Gods true Temple were holden captive: or from the Samaritans Temple h joseph. Antiq. jud. l. 11. c. 8. builded by Sanballat on mount Garizim, whither the Apostate and wicked jews used to flee. And whereas they cite Zach. 6-12. 13. it is direct against them, for it showeth not that the Branch (Christ) should build the Temple of the Lord, and then leave it for the man of sin to be worshipped there as God; but that Christ himself should also a Zach. 6▪ 13. carry the glory, and sit and rule upon his throne, and be a Priest upon it; and this we see accomplished in the Christian Church warring against the Beast: for b Rev. 11.19, & 15, 5.8. & 16, 1, 2 10. out of the true temple, and from God's throne there, do come plagues upon the Beasts throne, and upon all his worshippers; and God continueth still in c Rev. 7, 15.17. & 14, 1, 2, 3, 4. his temple, which the beast d Rev. 13, 6 blasphemeth. And of this temple speaketh Paul in Eph. 2, 11. where the true God dwelleth by his spirit, verse 12. So 2 Cor. 6, 16. confirmeth this, saying; what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? but these would make agreement, which will have the e 2. Thes. 2. Adversary f Zach. 11.17. the idol shepherd, there to sit, where also he is worshipped as God. And in the words next before, what concord hath Christ with Belial? 2 Cor. 6, 15. by Belial, we may understand Satan or his eldest son Antichrist, the Hebrew word being taking from 2. Sam. 23.6. where Belial, the company of wicked ones is opposed to David's house, the father and type of Christ: & Sibylla prophesying of Antichrist g Oracul. Sibyl. l. 3. calleth him Belial, (in the Greek termination Belias). Now that which Paul doth most vehemently deny, these would affirm, in making such concord, that where Belial sitteth as God, and is so worshipped; there Christ also sitteth & blesseth him and his worshippers, with the one true baptism, sealing up unto them the forgiveness of sins, and life eternal. For so we have heard it pleaded, that the baptism which the Antichristians have and use in Rome, is the true, the one baptism spoken of Eph. 4, 5. How fitly may we put Mr johnson here, in mind of his h Treat. of the Minist. p. 25. own words cited from a Commenter on Dan. 11.34.35. of the wily whelps that seek how to agree Belial with Christ, Jdols and the true worship in spirit; thrusting the Pope and Christ both together into one poke. Whereas they end their diverse respects, with a true church there, and a false Church there: they conclude not the question, but closely turn it away. They should prove her, that is the whore, to be Christ's true spouse and Church; if so they could. For, there there may be a true Church, though she be none of it: even as God had jer. 51, 45. his people in Babylon, and there he was a * Ezek. 11, 16. Sanctuary or Temple unto them: but the Babylonians were not the men: neither was Bells temple, the Lords. But it may be they mean herself, by there: for presently they prove it “ Advert. p. 64. as Paul said of one and the same woman, she is dead & alive in diverse respects, 1. Tim. 5, 6. A fit comparison: for Paul meaneth that she was alive in this natural life, but dead as touching spiritual life in God: and this is very true in antichrist's synagogue: for a Rev. 18.7 she liveth in pleasure, and saith in heart, I sit being a Queen etc. but as touching life with God, she is b Rev. 20.5 dead, and appointed to c 2 Thes. 2.12. damnation. We acknowledge therefore with them, that things are often in the scriptures spoken in diverse respects, without observing whereof, men shall ere infinitely: but it is evil for men to make other respects than God maketh; the scriptures may easily be misapplied; as a little after, they bring us the respect of Abraham unrighteous in himself, but righteous by faith, Rom. 4.3.5. I hope they will not apply this to that son of perdition, in 2 Thes. 2. for that were a most wicked comparison. Yet thus they have shuffled together many scriptures (whereby the simple may be deceived,) for to show things diversely spoken, which none doubteth off: but how sound they have proved antichrist's Church to be Christ's, let the judicious Reader give setence. And let all that fear God mind, whither such doctrines will not beat the path for all licentiousness. For although the scripture saith, d 1. joh. 3.8 & 5.18. he that committeth sin is of the Devil: and, we know that whosoever is borne of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God, keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not: notwithstanding, men may be as profane as Esau, as filthy in life as Sodom, as idolatrous and sinful as the Egyptians and Babylonians, and yet if they will but call themselves Christians, and be outwardly baptized, they may be blamed in words, and separated from by men: but yet justified as God's true Church, they and their seed in his covenant of grace, & sealed with baptism, which is to remission of sins: and what need they care for more? Who will fear his estate, or amend his life, for the doctrine of such men, as pull down with the left hand, & build up with the right? Is not this rather to e Ezek. 13.22. strengthen the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wickedness, by promising him life? Moreover this acknowledging all that profess Christ and are baptized, to be true Churches having the true baptism of God: will necessarily draw unto a general communion with all such societies, where men think actually no evil is committed, as may fall out often in the sermons of Friars, jesuits, and other false Prophets; for with true visible Churches and members of Christ, who may not communicate, so it be not in evil? And thus Christians may come to that vanity & confusion which was among the heathens, of whom an ancient Doctor a August. de ver. rel. c. 1. noteth, that though they had infinite and contrary opinions about the Gods and their religion: yet all of them kept communion together in their Temples and sacrifices. Whereas Mr. joh. b Advert. p. 65. referreth us to his first writings, in answer to M. jacob, pag. 7. & 13. and 47. as having then written somewhat tending this way, which now he pleads for: the Reader may see (by comparing them) how far they differ. There, touching England, c Pag. 7. he distinguisheth between their Church estate, in respect whereof he is persuaded they cannot be judged true Christians, and the personal estate of some considered apart from their Church constitution, that they may well be thought in regard of God's election to be heirs of salvation, and in that respect true Christians: so in pag. 13. & 47. touching the Church of Rome, and some Gods elect in it. Although in pag. 146 he is persuaded, whosoever lives & dies a Papist and member of that Church of Antichrist, in the knowledge, profession, and maintenance of that religion in the parts thereof, can not of us be esteemed to live and die in the estate of salvation. Now what is that to his present plea, for the Church & baptism of Rome, but rather the contrary. And for us, we never disputed with any touching Gods elect, which we leave unto himself who only d 2 Tim. 2.19. knoweth those that are his. We deny not but there may be of the elect in all false Churches: even as Satan hath his reprobates in the true Churches. I hold it presumption for any to limit God, by how small means, or measure of faith and knowledge he will save a man. Who dares deny but God had many elect among the heathens, after he had separated Israel from them? Yea God expressly said, when he made Israel his peculiar people, that yet e Exod. 19.5. all the earth was his, which are the words of the covenant f Ezek. 16.8. generally. Wherefore we leave Gods secret counsels to himself as g Deut. 29.29. he willeth us; and do consider only the visible state of Churches, by the rules of God's Law and promises. Finally in that very book which he mentioneth, how sharply h In the preface, sect. 7. doth M. john's. inveigh against his opposers, and against M. Hooker (that pleaded for the Church of Rome because of some truths there retained;) & saith, that what by the Prelates and their Proctors on the one hand, and the Pharisaical daubing reformists on the other, all may justly fear, lest the end of that Church willbe to look back not only in part, but even wholly to the Romish Egypt and Sodom, and to wollow again in the same mire, from which they would seem all this time to have been washed. When the Prelates and Reformists shall see what the same man now writeth himself, for that Romish Egypt: what will they say, but that even he also is come to daub with them for company; and fear a further fall. Of their judgement of the Church of Rome: translated out of M. junius. To countenance their cause the more, they set it out with the name and judgement of a learned man, now deceased. Against whom themselves wrote a Letters between M. jun. & the exil. English Ch. at Amsterdam anno 1602. heretofore; when they would have been loath to stand to his judgement. But what will not men do, for help in time of need? The thing borrowed from him is in deed his own judgement, rather than proof of argument: I shall therefore the more briefly touch it, yet not meddling with the author (who I hope is at rest in the Lord) but with these his translators. b Advert. pag. 100 The Church of Rome (whereof they treat) is properly (they say) the company which is at Rome, as Paul wrote Rom. 1. abusively, it is all the Churches on earth cleaving to it and the doctrine & constitution thereof. They treat of the first, but would have men by proportion understand the same of the later. I answer; A Church there was at Rome in Paul's time, c Rom. 1 7.8. beloved of God, called Saints, whose faith was published through the whole world. A Church (or piece rather of a Church) there is at Rome now, d 2 Thes. 2.4.8.11.12. loathed of God, called e Rev. 18. ●. 3. & 16.14. Divils': whose whoredoms & abominations are famous through all the earth. In deed and truth there is a great City spiritually called Sodom, & Egypt and Babylon, Rev. 11.8. & 16.19. dispersed over the world under the name of a Christian catholic Church, whose chief place & throne is f Rev. 17.18. Rome. As for the congregation of Saints that was there in Paul's time, it is gone long since, and the g 2 Thes. 2. Man of sin with his worshippers, come in the place. Between these two, there is no just proportion: for what concord hath Christ with Belial? 2 Cor. 6.15. The Church of Rome considered as a subject, (they say) hath 2. parts, Pastors and the flock of Christ, for which Church th'Apostle of old gave thanks to God, Rom. 1, 8. Neither do we deny this subject to be at Rome even at this day, because we trust there is God caling, persons called, & the caling itself yet in her, which together in one, giveth being to a Church. I answer, First, I deny that God is there caling as in his Church, but the man of sin sits there as God, calling all to worship him, and his calling is by the working of Satan, and in all deceivableness of unrighteousness among them that perish: and the persons called, are deluded to believe lies. 2 Thes. 2.9, 10, 11. All these together, give being to antichrist's church, but not to Christ's. And we are sure God caleth out of her, such as shall be saved, Rev. 18, 4. Their p Rev. 9, 1, 2 3. etc. star (or Bishop) is long since fallen from heaven: and in stead of Peter's keys, he received the key of the bottomless pit, which he opened, and brought up a smoke of heresies, and darkened all truth and means thereof, and sent abroad his clergy the Locusts to sting and poison men's souls: by calling them from God, to † Rev. 9, 20 worship Divils': And these things Mr junius himself, hath q In annot on Rev. 9 applied to the popish hierarchy. Touching the papacy, (say they) or papal hierarchy called ecclesiastical, we say not that it is the church properly so called, but an accident growing to the church, and which covertly worketh against the life and health of the church. For the papacy is an order, human and nought; the church is an assembly divine, etc. And after they say, r pag. 105. The papacy is in the church as the order of apostasy in the house of God 2 Thes. 2. the man of sin sitteth in the temple of God, with his whole order or rank of Apostates: and the Temple of God consisteth not in that order and number of Apostates, which is a thing most strange and furthest off. And again, the papacy is a poison in the Church, which must needs be vomited out if it willbe preserved, or else the Church will be extinguished by it, if it suffer that poison to prevayl and possess all the veins of the body. I answer, true it is, and I agree with them, that the rank of Apostates, is far from being God's temple: whereupon I assume, the whole popish church, priests and people are a rank of apostates; because they worship s Rev. 13, 4. & 14, 9, 10. the Beast, who showeth himself there for God, where the Pope is acknowledged to be t Concil. Lateran. Sess. 6. the Lion of the tribe of judah, the root of David, the Saviour and deliverer: they worship Divils' and Idols of silver and gold, Rev. 9.20. and their belief is in lies 2 Thes. 2.11, 12. therefore the whole popish Church being a rank of Apostates, is a Temple of Antichrist, but not of Christ. Secondly, (to take that which they grant,) the papal Hierarchy ecclesiastical, if it be no part of the body of the Church, but an accident, a poison, a gangrene, an ulcer eating the body: what shall we think of all the actions of that ecclesiastical hierarchy, their ministration of sacraments, their making of ministers, and the whole Church administration, by that rank of Apostates, they cannot possibly be the actions of the body, of the Church, neither of Christ. Can a scab or gangrene perform any action of a natural body or member? And now what is become of their true baptism, and ordination of Ministers before pleaded for? these will be but as the operation of the poison or fretting of the gangrene, for they that did them, being the popish ecclesiastical hierarchy, were no parts of the Church, but accidents, as the gangrene or pocks upon the whore's body, which consume life and grace, but give none at al. Thirdly, seeing the popish ecclesiastical hierarchy, (which a Concil. Trid. sess. 23. can. 6. consisteth of Bishops, Priests & Ministers,) are the poison and botches in the body of the Church, and no parts of the same: how doth God call in that Church, as before they reasoned? For his ministery is not among them; as for his word, the people have it not so much as to read; and the service of their Gods, is in a tongue that they understand not: what now is the means of their caling? Fourthly, compare this with their former plea for the Eldership and ministery, when they could b Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 24. not find the Church to be called the body of Christ, house, city, or Kingdom, unless it had officers etc. Now for Rome they will have it the body of Christ, house & Temple of God, ministering true baptism, etc. and yet the ecclesiastical hierarchy are no parts or members, but scabs on the body. But the truth is, these Egyptian boils, the hierarchy, are the chiefest parts of the body of that Antichrist: which in some respect may be likened to the Image that Nebuchadnezar saw, Dan. 2.31. etc. The Pope with his triple crown, who is proclaimed for a c Lib. Benedicti de Benedictis, printed at Bononia an. 1608. Vice-God, the invincible Monarch of the Christian common wealth, and vehement conserver d Pontificiae omnipotentiae. of the popish omnipotency: he is the ●ead of Gold. The Cardinals and prelates are next him as breast & arms of silver; the other belly-god Clergy, is the strong brazen paunch, and the Lay people, are as the legs and feet of iron and clay, which carry and bear up the bulk: and the e Rev. 16.13.14. 2 Thes. 2.9. unclean Spirit of Satan giveth life and effectual operation to this Beast. For to be a member of this their body and Church, the papists themselves f Bellar. de eccles. l. 3. c. 2. profess that there is not any inward virtue required: so then there is no need of the spirit of God, to join these limbs of the Beast together. But they proceed and say, that g Advert. pag. 106. On God's behalf it is altogether a Church, wheresoever there is found a company called of God with his caling by the spirit and the holy scripture, and the ministry of persons ordained for holy things and divine actions. And a little after, h pag. 108. After this manner do we esteem of the Church in which the papacy is, God caleth her with his caling by his spirit and word, and public record of that holy marriage, the scripture, & the ministery and things & holy actions, which before we have briefly reckoned up. I answer; if men's eyes did not dazzle with looking on * Rev. 17, 4. the beauty of the harlot, I marvel how they could so esteem of that Church, which hath for her hierarchy (as even now they confessed) a rank of Apostates, no members but ulcers of the body. And are they now with another breath, become an holy ministery of God? Most strange it is that men should publish their own esteeming, without any word of God to warrant them. But let us bring them to the trial. They say, God caleth her by his spirit and word: but Paul saith, God shall send them strong delusion that they should believe lies, 2 Thes. 2.11. and this we see verified, by the manifold heresies, idolatries, blasphemies wherewith the whole body of that Church is poisoned. They say God caleth her with his spirit: the Apostle saith, strong is the Lord God which will condemn her, Rev. 18, 8. and with the spirit of his mouth, he will consume that lawless one, 2. Thes. 2, 8. And whereas they call the scripture, the public record of that holy marriage between God & her: the scripture shows no such marriage, but doth defy her as an a Rev. 17.1 harlot: where is the record that Christ was ever married to the b Rev. 17, 8 Beast that came up from the bottomless pit? If her having the book of holy scripture in an unknown tongue, wickedly abused to maintain her whoredoms and abominations, & subjected to the interpretation of her c so called, Entrav. in joan. 22, c. cum inter in glossa. Lord God the Pope, be a record of that holy marriage; the jews which have Moses and the Prophet's red and expounded in their mother tongue, have better records; and so they, and all heretical assemblies in the world, among whom the Bible is, must be judged Gods true Churches. Let us add hereunto the testimony of men, and touching our own county. D. Fulk answereth the Papists thus, † Answer to a counterfeit catholic. art. 21. you taught the people nothing else but to pronounce and that full ylfavouredly like popingeyes, certain Latin words which they understood no more than stocks or stones. So that the people had no instruction from you, no not of the name of God in many places, but that they received by uncertain talk of their parents, as it were from hand to hand. For how many thousand parishes are here in England, that within e these things be printed anno 1577. these 60. years would declare that they never heard sermon in their life. As for that they heard of their service, they learned as much of it, as of the ringing of their bells, which was a sound without understanding. These things being so, what caling had the poor seduced people more than among the heathens. * pag. 107. We will make the matter plain (say they) by a similitude from jer. 3. A wife being filthy with adulteries, if her husband will pardon her, and consent to receive her, she abideth still his wife etc. So a church overflowing with adulteries etc. I answer, God (if it were granted that he is the husband of this whore,) hath promised her no pardon, but delivered her to Satan, to be seduced, deluded, damned 2 Thes. 2.9, 11, 12. Secondly I deny that this harlot was ever Christ's spouse, otherwise then all the world was, by our first parents Adam and Noah. For this is not she unto whom Paul wrote Rom. 1. but an other of whom he prophesied, 2 Thes. 2. She succeed in the same place, as the night succeed the day. The Church in Paul's time, came from heaven, Rev. 21.2. and is long since gone to God: this came up from the bottomless pit; Rev. 17, 8. and thither she must return. She is of an other religion, the daughter of a strange God. But they allege, touching the election (as is said of the Jews, Rom. 11.28.) she is beloved for her father's sakes. I answer, first then this proveth rather the jews at this day a church; for still they are loved for their father's sakes: and shallbe called again, as th'Apostle there showeth. Secondly, if the jews are beloved for their good father's sakes: then Rome may well be hated for her evil father's sakes. For who were her fathers, but the Gentiles, Sodomites and Egyptians; Rev. 11, 2, 8, 18. not the * Rom. 1. saints in Rome; for she is not of their faith and sanctity. But you will say, she is the natural posterity of them. Nay, there is not so much as likelihood thereof, much less any certainty. For besides the bloody persecutions in those times, that did cut off the godly; there were after that, many changes of the Roman state, & great commotions, that heavens departed away as a scrol when it is rolled, every mountain & i'll were moved out of their places, Kings, captains and all sorts of men fled and hid themselves; Rev. 6, 14, 15, so great were the troubles of those times. And for particulars, Alaricus with his Goths above a thousand years ago, did † Hierony. in epist. ad Princip. de obit. Marcel. take, spoil and burn Rome, in the year of Christ 414. After that again within 44. years, Gensericus with his Vandals * Blond● l. 6 decad. 1. took and spoiled it, and Rome for a time remained without any inhabitant. A few years after, †’ Chron. Carion. l. 3. did Odoacer with an other company, invade Italy and conquer Rome, put the Emperor to flight, made himself King, and did much spoil. Then Theodoricus and the Ostrogothes took it; and after him again Bellisarius with his army, wann it: But above all, Totilas King of the Goths, in the year of our Lord, 546. after all the former invasions, a Blond● l. 6. decad. 1. did overthrow Rome quite, cast down the walls, burn the houses, and made it so desolate, that there remained in it neither man nor woman. These turmoils in Rome, within the space of a few years, being observed, and the possessing of that land by those foreigners the Goths, who b Sabellic● En. 8. l. 5. mixed themselves with the people, and degenerated into the name of Jtalians, and other plagues afterwards c Blond l. 2. d. 2. Fascic. temp. f. 66. by the Saracens that killed innumerable sowls in Rome & Italy: these & the like may teach us, how impossible it is to show that the present church of Rome, is so much as the natural posterity of the Saints in Paul's time: though if they were, yet would it help them no more in this estate, than the Ismaelites & Aedomites which were the natural seed of Abraham. And Adonisedek with his Amorites and jebusites in jerusalem, (Josh 10, 1. etc.,) may as well be justified to be Gods true Church, because of Melchisedek King & Priest of God, who with his faithful company dwelled there 5. or 6. hundred years before: Gen. 14, 18. etc. as the popish Beast with his Jesuits and marked slaves at this day, may be pleaded for, because of the godly that lived in Rome 15, or 16. hundred years agone. And thus their reasons from Israel, are also impertinent to this estate: they might well serve for the times wherein john lived, when the true d Rev. 2, & 3. chapters Churches were many of them apostate: but the Egyptians and Babylonians are shadows of our Antichristians, among whom their heathenish abominations are spiritually accomplished. Rev. 11. ●. But they plead still, e Advert. p. 108. In that the Church of Rome hath all the divine things in the scriptures, it is of God & a Church: in that it hath them all corrupt, that is of itself, and it is a corrupt Church. The Church is not taken away by corruption, unless it be total etc. I answer still they take for granted, that which they should prove; and which I have before again and again disproved. It is not properly the old Church of Rome corrupted; but a new church arisen out of the bottomless pit, carrying the show and titles of the old. It is not the woman f Rev. 12, 14 fled into the wilderness: but an other woman g Rev. 17.1 18. or city, reigning over the Kings of the earth. The Lamb Christ is not there, as on mount Zion with his 144. thousand, having his father's name written on their foreheads: Rev. 14, 1. but the Wolf Antichrist with his h Mat. 7, 15. Rev. 13, 11. sheep's skin & lambs horns, is there with his army of Canaanites as a Rev. 16.16. judg. 5.19. on mount Maggedon. At first those Gentiles invaded the courts of God's temple, and trod down the holy city, Rev. 11.2. as the Babylonians of old dealt with God's sanctuary: Ps. 79.1. etc. jer. 51.1.3. etc. Lam. 1.10. If that army of infidels were Gods true Church: so is the synagogue of Antichristians. And the heathens in their altars, temples, sacrifices etc. had the divine things of God among them, as well, if not better, then hath the man of sin and his worshippers, in their sacrifice of the Mass, and other manifold idolatries. The duty of those that are in the popish Church and see their corruptions, is (they b Pag. 111. say) such as of those children that dwell with their adulterous mother: that is, to abhor her sin, with speech and sign to call her back from evil, & abstain themselves from it, and in all things cleav to their father, & betake themselves into his closet etc. I answer, thus it appeareth, that these our opposites are returned to acknowledge the whore of Rome to be their mother: whom they feign to be as woman which c Advert. pag. 105. lieth in a deadly sort swollen with waters of the dropsy, or with poison, which d Pag. 106. had long ago given up the ghost, if God by the imposition of his grace etc. had not nourished and kept her warm. Now to leave their mother thus on her sick bed, as they have done e M. john's. Treat. of the Minist. pag. 60-62. (disclaiming all Christian duty unto her which is due to a true Church in corruption,) is but the part of unnatural children. Whiles God doth nourish & keep her warm, will they quite abandon her? let them return and cherish her also, and all her members, and see if there be any baulm to heal her wounds, and to comfort her. As for us, we have been taught of God, that in respect of him she is dead long ago in her sins; (Rev. 20.5. with Ephes. 2.1.) having been the f Rev. 20.4. & 13.4. marked whore & worshipper of the Beast, from which death she is not risen to live & reign with Christ. Although to this world, she liveth and reigneth in pleasure, till at one day death otherwise also come upon her, & she be burnt with fire, Rev. 18.7.8. And then shall we be so far from mourning at her funeral, as we shall rejoice g Rev. 18.20. with the heavenly multitude, and sing Hallelujah, when God hath given h Gen. 19.28. Sodoms' judgement on her, and we see her smoke rise up for evermore, Rev. 19, 1.2.3. Finally, to back M. junius judgement, they i Advert. Pag. 113. cite Amandus Polanus, & Bart. Keckerman, who said that Antichrist shall sit in the temple of God, not Jewish but Christian, etc. and as a rotten apple is an apple but corrupt; so that Church is corrupt etc. I answer, they may I confess cite divers men, that were mistaken, in judging of that rotten church, which will help these our opposites nothing, who have seen and acknowledged better, & now go back. Bernard was a learned man in his time, and is counted a Saint, and he plainly reproved many Romish abominations, and said, b Bern. Ep. 125. the beast in the Revelation, which hath a mouth speaking blasphemies, occupieth Peter's chair: yet himself doted overmuch upon the beauty of that harlot, when he wrote thus at an other time to her Leman the Pope, c Bernard, de Consid. l. 2. Thou art the great sacrificer, the chief Priest, thou art Prince of Bishops, heir of th'Apostles; thou art in primacy Abel, in government Noah, in patriarchship Abraham, in order Melchisedek, in dignity Aaron, in authority Moses, in judgship Samuel, in power Peter, in anointing Christ. It is not therefore to be marveled at, though wise & godly men be mistaken; for in many things we sin all. Jam. 3, 2. But I have showed how the scriptures do judge of this d Rev. 18, 23. sorceress; and could also allege many learned men's judgements; but I will go no further than our own country. Mr Cartwright speaking of the baptizing of children saith, e 1. Reply to D. Whitgift, p. 137. If both (parents) be Papists, or condemned heretics etc. their children cannot be received [to baptism] because they are not in the covenant etc. And again, f 2. Reply p. 146. If the corruption be such as destroyeth the foundations, as in the Arians which overthrow the person of Christ, as in the Papists which overthrow the office of Christ, they being no Church, aught to have no privilege of the church. Mr Perkins, writeth thus, g Perk. Expos. of the Creed: tit. Church. As for th'Assemblies of Papists, understanding companies of men holding the Pope for their head, and believing the doctrine of the council of Trent; in name they are called Churches, but in deed they are no true or sound members of the catholic church; for both in their doctrine, & in their worship of God, they raze the very foundation of religion. And again; h Ibid. It is no more a church in deed, than the carkes● of a dead man, that weareth a living man's garment, is a living man, though he look never so like him. And again; he hath a treatise and Assertion, that A reprobate may in truth be made partaker of all that is contained in the religion of the church of Rome, and a Papist by his religion cannot go beyond a reprobate: and bringeth 4. arguments for proof hereof, and endeth with this corollary, that A man being endued with no more grace than that which he may obtain by the religion of the Church of Rome, is still in the state of damnation. D. Fulk, answering the counterfeit Catholic saith a Answer to art. 11. It is evident that the true Church decayed immediately after the Apostles times: and telleth the Papist b Answer to a●t. 20. you cry the Catholic Church, the Catholic Church, when you have nothing in deed, but the Synagogue of Satan. Again c Ibid. answer to ar. 29. The Church of Antichrist is founded upon 7 hills, Rev. 17. upon the traditions, dreams, fantasies and devises of men etc. Therefore (saith he) in no wise may she be called the city of God, but Babylon the mother of fornication, Sodom, & Egypt, where our Lord is daily crucified in his members. D. Willet answering Bellarmin saith d Synopsis Papismi. Contr. 2. of the Ch. q. 5. part. 2. We deny utterly that they are a true visible Church of Christ, but an Antichristian Church, and an assembly of Heretics, & enemies to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Again he saith e Ibid. Contr. 4. q. 10. 2. Thes. 2. he shall sit in the temple of God, that is, the visible Church, that which sometime was the true visible Church, as the Church of Rome, and after should be so tak●n, reputed and challenged, as it is at this day by the Papists etc. He shall sit in the Temple of God, that is, take upon him the name & title of the Church, and yet an adversary unto it. And again, f Ibid. par. 9 The Turk is out of the Church, and so in truth is the Pope, but yet he challengeth to him and his, the name of the Church. M. Bale g Image of both churches; in the pref. compareth the Pope and Turk together, thus, So glorious are the pretences of Romish Pope & Mahomet, that they seem unto them which regard not these warnings, the very Angels of light, and their Churches most holy congregations, being very devils, with the very dregs of darkness. The Pope in his Church hath ceremonies without number, none end is there of their babbling prayers, their portases, beads, temples, altars, songs, hours, bells, images, organs, ornaments, jewels. lights, oiling, shave &c. that a man would think they were proctors of paradise. On the other side Mahomet in his Church is plenteous also in holy observations, they wash themselves oft, frequent their temples, pray 5. times in the day, they reverently incline, they lie prostrate on the ground, they fervently call to God, Dan. 7. O●colampad. in Daniel. they abstain from wine, they abhor idols etc. But unto what end this holiness leadeth, the sequel declareth. Daniel maketh these two but one, because they are both of one wicked spirit etc. The Pope maketh his boast, that he is the High Priest, he is of equal power with Peter, he cannot ere, he is head and spouse of the Church etc. Mahomet braggeth also that he is that great Prophet, the promised Messias, the Apostle of both testaments etc. He is well contented that Christ be an holy Prophet, and a most worthy creature, yea the word of God, the soul of God, and the spirit of God, conceived of the Holy Ghost, but he will in no case grant him to be the Son of God, nor that he died here for man's redemption. Both these two maintainers of mischief allow Moses law, the Psalter, the Prophets, and the Gospel, yea they commend them, advance them, sing them, read them, honour them etc. yet will they have their own filthy laws preferred above them, the Pope his execrable decrees, and Mahomet his wicked Alkoran: else will they murder men without measure. Thus though they outwardly appear very virtuous, yet are they the malignant Ministers of Satan, denying the Lord which hath redeemed them. By these may we measure their inferior Merchants, having their livery & mark. I might allege many more, especially of the Martyrs in England, which died in this testimony against that false whore; but it is enough that God's word doth condemn her, as before is manifested. The 6. point of difference: in the letter. WE had learned a Confess. art. 38. that all particular congregations are by all means convenient to have the counsel and help one of another, in all needful affairs of the Church, as members of one body in the common faith: yet here when differences had arisen about our common faith, and could not amongst ourselves be composed, they would not desire nor consent to have desired, the help of our sister Church at Leyden, although it were instantly urged by many members that their assistance should be had. With this they join the 9 out of the printed copy, to the effect of the former. Against this they except, 1. that though for some reasons they abstained from desiring it, or sending for them, or giving their consent so to do: yet they were content to permit it: which was not a denying of the practice of it, as the printed copy objecteth etc. 1 Cor. 7.6. Deut. 24.1. I answer; the scriptures on which we grounded that article, being Act. 15. chap. 1. Cor. 14.33.36. show an other manner of duty, than a permission. For when dissension had arisen in the church of Antioch, they b Act. 15.2. ordained that some should go up to jerusalem, unto the Apostles & Elders about the question. And the messengers were c vers. 3. sent forth of the Church, and d vers. 4. were received by the Church at jerusalem, & the Apostles and Elders, who e ver. 25. came together with one accord, & after discussing and agreement, wrote to the Church of Antioch, what had f vers. 28. etc. seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to them. And Paul showeth a reason of such mutual intercourse, when he saith, Came the word of God out from you either came it unto you only? 1 Cor. 14.36. Wherefore seeing the word of God, was come unto the Church of Leyden, as unto us; and considering the practice that was in the APOSTOLIC Churches heretofore, and our profession to walk according; it is but a sorry answer to say they would permit of it, if others did it; as Moses a Deut. 24.1. permitted the bill of divorce, for b Mat. 19.8. the hardness of men's hearts; and as Paul spoke a thing c 1 Cor. 7.6. by permission, not by commandment. For we think those Apostolical practices, Act. 15. to be in stead of commandments unto us, Philip. 3.17. And our Confession noteth it as a duty, even by all means convenient. By this all may see, how weak a defence they make, for their proceedings. Their reasons follow; 1. that the other Church & we were in peace together: & if by this occasion the peace should be broken, they should not say, they sent for them. I answer, this exception will lie against all Churches in the world that are at peace: and might have been objected by the contentious at Antiochia; Act. 15. and will be colour to cut off all use of that practice, and of our former profession. 2. That the Church of Leyden was in the same error with us who desired their help. I answer; this also might the troublers of the Church in Antioch, have objected as colourably against the Church of jerusalem, Act. 15. & it is a bar to cut of all help from other Churches. Yea if any heresy be raised by the officers in a Church, contrary to their former faith: they may thus except against all Churches, unless they will fall into the same errors with them. 3 Thirdly they allege former experience with others. I answer, we never had experience of the like: M. Smyth in deed leaving the truth, and broaching his heresy against the translated scripture, would needs publish it in our Church. It is one thing to raise up a new error, as did he: an other thing to maintain the ancient faith, as did the Church of Leyden with us. So that which they fourthly allege, is but a pretence that all will make, be their errors never so new; & they that urged circumcision Act. 15. could plead the ancient practice in Israel, far better than these our opposites can do for the power of their Eldership. 4 Their next exception about a letter written by some to that church, a copy whereof was desired, but not granted etc. is an occasion taken by that accident. But they know, that before that letter was written, they signified their unwillingness to entreat their help: and now were glad, that they had gotten a show to hold them off. 2. For the Letter mentioned, I did think it was meet they should have sent it, and so I wish they had: though they showed reasons of their not doing it for the present, but have since that time sent them a copy. 5. They next object, my own subscribing of those letters to Leyden etc. & ask whether I denied the practice of that article etc. I answer; first I had sundry times signified in public my mind, that their help should be desired in the end, if we could not agree, but we would first use all means among ourselves: & so I never was of their mind, who refused absolutely to desire their help; & this they well know. Secondly, I subscribed those Letters, because I thought it meet that a copy of the foresaid letter should have been sent, as before I signified. Thirdly for the last letter (which to my remembrance I consented to,) they know I refused to subscribe it, till some words which implied an absolute denial of requesting their help, were put out and changed. Fourthly, when no means among ourselves could end the strife, they know, how I both entreated them to consent they might be sent for: & when they would not, myself went and obtained their coming. In deed I was loath to trouble them without urgent cause; & with my brethren now opposite, I sought to nourish peace, & it may be more than I should; which now they thus return upon me: and I therefore shall bear, and make use of it for hereafter. 6. Of their reasoning with them when they came from Leyden, it is not to the point in hand. Yet how unwilling they were even to admit of it, all present than did see: and the Elders of the church of Leyden, as occasion is can testify. But I forbear to insist upon particulars: which are not so profitable for the readers. 7. Finally they ask why we did not desire the counsel and help of the Dutch & French churches? I answer, first these our opposites with us, had before dealt with them against their errors in this and other points, so far as we could, and ended with them. What reason had we now to call for them to defend that error which our whole church had condemned? Secondly, they could not discuss the controversy in our English tongue, to the understanding of our Congregation now troubled: no nor of all our Elders. Thirdly, these that thus object, did not (to my remembrance) desire any such thing: if they had, I should not for my part have refused so absolutely as did they. But thus have they turned every stone, to see if they could find any colour, for withstanding the help of the Church of Leyden: with what weight and equity, let the prudent judge. Of the 7. articles which they object unto us; as contrary to our former profession. They a Advertis. p. 27. pretend more sound and better observations that they could send and spread out against us. Let us bring them to the trial. Confess. art. 10.17.19.20. Counterp. p. 175● 176. Defense against Mr Smyth. p. 126.127.128. and in other Treatises. 1. Whereas (say they) we had learned and professed, that Christ was the only King and Lord of his Church, and had left unto it among men but a ministerial government, and that all the multitude of the members the saints, aught to obey & submit to the Eldership in every Church: Now we have lately been taught, * In their dispute against us: & in Mr Rob. justif. p. 217.225. etc. that the people as Kings have power one over an other: and that the saints being Kings are superior to their officers, because the order of Kings is the highest order or estate in the Church, and so an order superior unto, and above the order of the officers or Eldership. Also that the church may in relation to the officers, being servants therein, be called a Lord etc. I answer; first our former profession touching Christ the only King and Lord, we hold it firm in all points as before; and never had so much as a thought to reason against it. Secondly for the ministerial government of the Church by the Officers, we never disputed against it: but do still acknowledge the whole Church and every member is to submit unto their ministration in the Lord. Our controversy was about the Church's power, as we have b pag. 10. before manifested. Thirdly, for the people being Kings, we neither taught nor do teach otherwise then as we always c Confess. art 17. professed; namely that they are a d 1. Pet. 2, 9 royal priesthood, made by Christ unto God, both e Rev. 5, 10. Kings and Priests, and that reign on the earth: not one over an other, as they speak, but one with another, in the fellowship of the faith of Christ. That f Refut. of Giffard. p. 75. every Christian is a g Rev. 1, 6. Psal. 149. King and Priest unto God, to spy out, censure, and cut down sin as it ariseth, with that two edged sword that proceedeth out of Christ's mouth. These things heretofore both we and they professed: which now they would injuriously turn to be against Christ the only King, and against the ministerial government of his officers: such collections, as we think our common adversaries (that make conscience of their words▪) would be ashamed for to make. Touching Mr. Robinson's book which they allege, I have desired himself to answer, which he was willing to do, and hath written as followeth. Mr Robinson's answer. Because Mr johnson hath in his “ pag. 27. Answer touching the division expressly taxed my book against M. Bernard, I think it meet to insert a brief answer to his exceptions, as followeth. He there writeth thus. Whereas we had learned, and professed that Christ was the only King, and Lord of his Church, and had left unto it among men, but a ministerial government, and that all the multitude of the members, the saints ought to obey, and submit to the Eldership in every Church: Now we have lately been taught, that the people as Kings have power one over another: and that the saints being Kings are superior to their officers, because the order of Kings is the highest order in the Church etc. Also that the Church may in relation to the officers being servants therein, be called a Lord, etc. And for this he quoteth my book, p. 217 225. adding that I advance the people one above another as Kings, entitle them with kingly and lordly power in the outward policy and affairs of the church, by which as the Prelates on the one hand, so the people on the other hand become idols. Acknowledging the former and latter part of that he saith we have formerly professed, I except against the middle clause of the sentence, in sundry respects. First, in that he draws the question, which is about the power of Christ in the Church (common to all) to the government and guydance of the Church in the use of this power, which is peculiar to the officers: which may also more clearly appear to him that reads the places he quotes in the margin, wherein he concludeth (though more covertly) a double untruth: the one, that, because the government of the Officers is only ministerial and not Kingly, therefore there is no Kingly power left unto the Church, or communicated with the Saints for the suppressing of sin: the other that, because the Officers are the only governors of the Church, and so by us acknowledged, therefore they only have the power of Christ. And thus he would closely wrap up the Church's power, in the officers government, and not be seen in it. For the clearing then of the difference between government, and power; it must be considered, that by government may either be understood the whol●●●●●ensation of Christ's Kingly office, whither inward, or outward, whither by himself or up others: and so this power, we speak of, is comprehended under it as a part thereof. Or it is taken more strictly for the guidance, and ordering of the Church in her Public affairs, and the administration, and execution of them: and so it appertaineth to the Officers and is clean another thing then the power in question. For the proving of this difference. The Apostle Paul writeth to the whole Church of Corinth to excommunicate the incestuous man, * 1. Cor. 5.4.5. by the power of the Lord jesus Christ. This Power he would have the whole Church to use; but yet would not have the whole Church to become governors, nor to take upon them government, but the officers only: by which it appeareth that government, and power, are diverse things. I do further add, what if the whole Eldership should be charged by 2. or 3. witnesses, with heresy, blasphemy, or the like crime, and complaint thereof be made to the Church? Mr. johnson in this his † p. 47. Answer confesseth that the Church (he would be asked whither women and children or no,) may depose all her officers jointly, persisting in transgression, though in the same place he mince the matter too small, in saying they may depose, or refuse them, & separate from them, and again, refuse them. Whereas to depose, and to separate from, or refuse, are very diverse, For 1. to separate from the Eldership requires no power, but liberty, and therefore may be done by one man, or woman, upon just occasion: so cannot deposition be, upon any occasion, but by the Church: for which deposition of all the officers of the kingdom of Christ, the church; a man would think the power of Christ were needful, and that by it such a judgement should pass out. Besides, the Church in deposing her officers, doth not separate herself from them, (to speak properly) but them from her. Well, to take the least liberty he will give the people. If they may separate from all their officers persisting in transgression, than they must receive the complaint of sin, which is orderly brought, and by sufficient witnesses, against them, and must examine, and judge the matter. Now if it argue power to receive a complaint of sin against one brother, and to examine, and judge it, and so to censure him by excommunication, if there be cause; doth it not also argue power to receav a complaint of sin against all the officers, to examine, and judge it, and so to censure them, as their is cause, by deposition? But what now shall the Elders do accounting themselves innocent, and wrougfully accused, whilst the Church thus examineth things, and judgeth of them? Shall they surcease their government, and fail the Church in so great a ●eed? and would M. johnson so practise? or are they not now to do a special work of their government, not only in preserving order, but in directing, instructing, and guiding the Church by the wood of God in her whole proceedings. By which it appeareth, that judging of sin, and power to suppress it, is one thing, and government for the right use, and ordering of the same, another thing. The officers which are judged do govern, and the bod● of the Church which judgeth them, is governed by them. We may yet further see this difference even in the Lordly governments of this world, and that both in Peace and War. In the civil government of our own land, (than the which none in the world in the right use of it is more excellent,) when a malefactor comes to be arraigned at the Assizes, or Sessions, he is to be tried by his country, (a competent company, where all cannot possibly pass upon him) which they call the jury, whose power and sentence is of such force, as that the Lord Chief justice himself, and all the Bench with him cannot proceed against it, either for the quitting or condemning of the person: and yet the Bench governeth the whole action, and the jury is by them, according to law, to be governed. I wish the Elders with whom we have to do, would allow the body of the church the like liberty, at their Sitting, as they call it, that is, at their spiritual Sessions: or rather that they would better consider, that they are as Ministers to * Num. 16, 9 2. 2 Chron. 35, 3.2. Co. 4, 5. stand, and serve, and not as Lords to sit, and judge. Lastly when an army is sent against the Kings and their own enemies, the government is in the Captains, and Officers, but so is not all the power for fight with, and subduing of their, and their king's enemies. Neither is all the power of the church, which is an army with banners, in the officers alone, for the the subduing of Christ's, and their enemies, sin, and Satan, though the government be. Thus may the difference plainly be seen betwixt power, and government: in the opening of which I have been the longer, See for this, justif. of separation pag. 134 135. because 1. I think it a main ground of our controversy. 2. Our opposites do much insult over us, as speaking contradictions, when we yield the officers all the government, and yet deny them all the power.) 3. The weaker sort are much misled, and carried away through want of discerning this difference. I proceed to a second thing, and affirm, that Christ hath not left to the church among men only a ministerial power (which he confusedly calleth government) as he saith. He hath left the word of God, and gospel in the church, which is lively, and mighty in operation, Heb. 4 12. 2. Cor. 10.4, 5. piercing even to the dividing asunder of the soul, and spirit etc. ruling, and reigning in, and over the very hearts, and lives of men; binding their consciences: and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ. I know men can only minister this power, whither in doctrine, or discipline, as they speak. But it is one thing to say the power is only ministerial, and another thing, that men can only minister it. For men may be the ministers only of that power, which is kingly, and Lordly in itself, and so over men, as this is. So the saints can only minister their kingly power by participation of Christ's anointing, as one special grace they have received: of which more hereafter. Now in laying down the things, wherewith he chargeth me, he altars my words, misinterprets my meaning, and conceals that which I have written, and he read, in my book, for the explaining of the same. And first he saith I have taught that the people are as Kings one over another; that I advance them one over another, as Kings, and above their governors entitling them with Kingly, & Lordly power, (that is government, as he explains himself) in the outward policy of the Church. I do not in these places, or any other, advance the people one over another, much less over their officers, in the outward policy of the Church, that is (as he explains his meaning) in the government of it. I do every where profess the Officers the governors, and the people the governed by them. Neither do I any where affirm, that the people are Kings, or as kings one over another, as he chargeth me. I say in one place, that the saints are not Kings for themselves alone, pag 226. but for their brethren also, as they are not Priests only for themselves, but for their brethren. And in another place, p. 133. that every one of the faithful is a King, not only to himself, but to every other member, as he is a Priest, and a Prophet etc. Here is a King one for another, and one to another, but not one over another, (much less over the officers) for government, in the external policy of the Church. The plain and simple truth than is; whatsoever men either mistake of ignorance, or suggest of an evil mind, that we do not call the saints Kings in respect of outward order, and government, as though they were to order, and govern the Church in her public affairs, which is the work of the Officers: but as they are partakers of Christ's kingly anointing, by his spirit, common to the head, and the members, and so Kings by participation, and endowed with kingly power, for the conquering and subduing of the power of sin, and Satan, not only in themselves, but in their brethren also, by the sword of the spirit, the word of God, which they are to minister unto them, as all other graces in their order. And this meaning being held, it may safely be taught that they are over one another, that is, to watch one over another, and so as kings to conquer their spiritual enemies one in another mutually. But I will rather insist upon mine own words, for, or to one another, as being most fit to show that communion of the saints in this grace, as in the rest; which he also in all equity should have done. And thus I will prove this royal communion of the saints. And for them that make themselves merry herewith, job. 21, 3. let them suffer me to speak, and when I have spoken, let them mock on. And first it must be observed that the place and scriptures which M. johnson notes in our Confession to prove Christ the only King of his Church, prove him as well, (and that truly) to be the only Priest & Prophet of his Church. And if notwithstanding his sole prophecy, and priesthood peculiar to him, as the head, the saints may be Prophets and Priests as members, by communication, they may also be Kings by communication notwithstanding his peculiar imperial power. And so the scriptures testify that he hath made us kings, and priests unto God even his Father, and so our Father. Rev. 1.6 & 5.10. But it willbe answered, that Christ hath made us Kings to resist, subdue, and conquer our spiritual enemies, Sin, Satan, this world, and our worldly lusts, by * Eph. 6, 11, 17. the sword of the spirit, the word of God, and the work of the spirit, in and by the same. I grant it, and thereupon conclude, that since God's people are also by the same weapons, and means to resist and subdue the power of sin in their brethren, II. they are also kings in the same respect, unto them. The saints are † Act. 11, 26 Rom. 14.4, 5. 1. Cor. 12, 27. Christians: and that for, and in respect one of another, III. as members under Christ, one of another: and therefore Kings. For to be a Christian for another, is nothing else but by participation of Christ's anointing, to be a Priest, Prophet, and King for another. Ad unto this, that whatsoever grace any member of the body hath received, it is for the use, and edification of the rest, and so in order to be administered by him as a good disposer of the grace of God. 1. Pet. 4.10 And must this royal grace then, which the saints have received, find no time nor place for the dispensation of it, unto others? When a brother comes to subdue, FOUR and ma●e conquest of some spiritual enemy, or sin, appearing in his brother, either privately, or publicly, in his place and order he doth this as a fellow member, and Christian, and so by one of his three states, and endowments, of priest, prophet, or king (for he hath no office, wherein he administereth:) but by neither of the two former, therefore by the latter, and as a king, and so made by Christ. Lastly, the people are by M. johnsons own grant, V. to choose their officers, as also upon just occasion to depose them. And this, as the former, they do not as Priests, or Prophets, and therefore by their kingly endowment from, and under Christ. And thus much to prove the saints in their communion (as Priests to offer up the prayers one of another, and Prophets to instruct one another, so also) partakers of the kingly dignity of Christ, as his members, for the suppressing, and conquering of sin appearing, one in another, in that order which Christ hath left. And where do I in all this, as is imputed to me, advance the people, as others do the Prelates, and make them Idols? Do I give them power to prescribe and appoint other forms of God's worship, offices of Ministry, canons, ceremonies, or holy days, than Christ hath prescribed, and appointed? to bind the conscience by urging subscription ex animo, to their own inventions, or to loose conscience by dispensations to sin, as of pluralities, non residencies, and the like? or that one man should set up, and pull down ministers and excommunicate, and absolve both ministers, and people by his sole authority? If another man should thus have charged Mr johnson when he maintained the same liberty of the brethren (if nor greater) which I now do, though it may be not under the same terms, he would have pronounced it blasphemy in him. B passing by his terms of provocation, and reproach, I come to another exception: which is, that I make the order of saints superior unto the order of officers; to wit, in itself, as I there explain my meaning▪ and not in respect of government, as he traduceth me. I know that he which guideth, ordereth, and directeth another, is in that his art, and work, superior unto him that is so guided, ordered, and directed. So is the Pilot in guiding the ship, superior, and above all the passengers in it, though the King, and his Council: so is the Physician in ordering the king's body; as is also the meanest guide in leading, and directing him, and his army Royal in unknown places. So are the officers superior to the Church in their art, justific. p. ●18, 219. or work of government▪ which is the opening and applying of the scriptures to the use, and direction of the Church: but as this is done by them, in an order of service, and not of Lordship, so I judge, and call them inferior. And so in my book, I make them equal in their persons, as saints: superior in the word they minister, and in the place of God: not so in their order of servants, wherein they minister, but inferior. pag. 217. My reasons there brought to prove mine affirmation, because he here meddleth not with, I also forbear in this place to confirm; only a few words of one of them, upon which the next, and last exception dependeth. Which is, that the order of Church-officers is inferior to the order of the saints, because their order is an order of † 2. Chron. 35.3. Num. 16.9. Eze. 44.11. 2 Cor. 4, 5. service, and servants unto the saints the Church. I know Kings may be said to serve their people, and so to become their servants, but this is only in respect of their love towards them, and care for them; but not in respect of their order, which is a Lordship, and Kingship, by which they reign over their people, as their servants, and subjects. The like may be said of Christ himself, as that he served his disciples, and became as a servant, etc. And for that it must be considered, that as in the things wherein he did thus serve, and become as a servant, he did in his love make himself inferior to his disciples, and preferred them before himself: as in * Math. 20, 28. giving his life a ransom for many: in being † Luk. 22, 27 as he that serveth at the table whereat his disciples sat, (in which respect he expressly teacheth them to be greater than himself:) and in washing their feet as they sat at supper; so was not his order an ord of service in itself, but of headship, joh. 13, 4, 5. and kingship: which if our Ch: ●officers could prove their order to be, we would then acknowledge it in deed superior to the order of saints. But their order being merely an order of servants, me thinks common sense should serve to judge the same inferior to the order of the Church, whose servants under Christ they are. I add in my book, pag. 225. that, the officers being by their order, servants, the Church may in that relation be called a Lord: not for the governing of them, in the outward policy, and affairs in the church, as he injuriously collects: but as they are for the Church's use, and service; which he conceals: though I expressly so note in the same place; as also that the same Church-servants are church-governors: the gogernment of the Church being a mere service. And for the thing If the officers be to be called servants to the Church, what is the Church to be called to the officers? A servant is a relative, and must have a correlative: and I would know by what name he would call it, if not by the name of Lord, Master, Mistress, or the like. And if he deny this, he takes away from men the use of common reason, and understanding. Let the servants know, yea though stewards, as are the Church-officers, add so betrusted with the government in a special manner, that the wife of their Lord, and Master, is a degree above them, and so to be acknowledged by them: lest they not only wrong her, but provoke him to wrath. Lastly, because he imputes new doctrine to me, I will note down the doctrine of some few others, both more ancient, and more worthy of respect then myself. Musculus in his Commentaries upon 1. Cor. 3, 22, 23, 24. Let no man glory in men, for all are yours etc. saith thus. Is it not absurd that the † Major in minore. greater (to wit the Church) should glory in the less, (to wit the officers) the * Dominus. Lord or master in the servant? And in this sense (saith he further) the perverseness of the false Apostles is noted, who when they were servants of the Church, did make of a ‡ Domina. Mistress, or dame, a servant, and of servants, Lords. And again the foolishness of the Church is taxed, who when they were Domini. Lords of their Ministers, gloried in their servants. Bullinger upon the same place, vers. 21. saith thus. So great is the dignity of them that believe, that God hath subjected all things unto them. It is therefore great folly if the † Dominus. Lord of things subject himself to the things etc. Pareus professor of Heidelberg in his Commentaries, upon the same scripture, reproving the churches glorying in Paul, C●phas, etc. and quoting 2 Cor. 4.5. we preach not ourselves, but Christ jesus the Lord, and ourselves your servants, for jesus sake, saith thus. * Non convenit Dominum gloriari in servo suo. etc. It is not meet that the Lord should glory in his servant: we are your servants, Therefore etc. All these, and many more, call the Church expressly a Lord, in the very same relation with me: and yet I suppose, never man challenged them for making an Idol of it, or setting up a Lordly government: neither would Mr. johnson me, had he not been immoderately jealous for the officers dignity. john Robinson. The 2 Article objected. Confess. art. 24. We professed heretofore, that Christ gave the power of receiving in & cutting off, to the whole body together of every Christian congregation, & not to any one or more members sequestered from the whole etc. Now we have been taught that in cases of question and controversy, the greater part of the people are the Church; though all the Elders and other brethren be against them, etc. and so have the power to receive in & cut off etc. I answer, there is no contradiction in these things; we hold still in all points according to the article alleged: neither ever taught we the people only to be the Church sequestered from their officers; but the officers governing, and the people governed, to be the Church which hath the power, to use in holy order. But if these officers fall into heresy or wickedness themselves, or to abet wickedness in others, and will not be reclaimed by any holy means the Church can use, then may they by the Church which chose them, be deposed, as unworthy of their places, yea and excommunicated, and so all other impenitent sinners. and this by the voices of the most of the congregation, if all consent not; aswell as members or officers are received in by the voices of the most, if some do dissent: for there is one power for them both. And these our opposites must either manifest, that if one or 2 officers or members do dissent in a controversy, there is a sequestration of them from the whole, and the Church than hath not the power of Christ to receav in and cut off: or else all may see, that this is a colourable accusation of theirs, & no contradiction of ours. For if the consent of all & every one, be not necessarily to be had, they dissenting through their ignorance, frowardness, or the like: them the most voices must prevail. But how far their new doctrine (that the Elders are the Church,) is, both from our former profession and from equity, I have before showed. The 3 Article. * Counterp. pag. 177. We wrote heretofore, that the Elders have the reins of government committed to them: now we are taught that the government of the church is not Aristocratical, yea the people as Kings have the power etc. I answer; we differ not from our former profession, but they deceive the reader, by turning government into power, which we in our public profession heretofore distinguished, and so do still: giving the government of the whole Church, and all the actions of it, unto the officers: the power to the whole body; and so to the officers with the people, as jointly Kings and Priests: of which things we have spoken before. We never held the Church to be a mere aristocraty, as they speak, intending that the cratos or power should be in the hands of a few: neither shall these men ever prove it. And in the book which they cite, † Counterp. pag. 177. in the very same place (though they dissemble it,) we show the Church (not the Elders only) to have Christ's * 1. Cor. 5.4 12, 13. power to judge all within the same; and that the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are committed to the whole Church, as the Protestants have heretofore testified against the Papists. That these men do but feign contradiction, and would blind the reader, by confounding the Church's power and government, as one. The 4. article. We professed heretofore, that no sacraments should be ministered, Confess. art. 34, etc. until the Pastors or Teachers were choose & ordained into their office: now it is held by some, that seeing all the holy things of God are the churches, & people without officers are a church, therefore they may without officers have the use of the sacraments and all the holy things of God, and consequently may receive in by baptism, confirm by the Lord's supper, cast out by excommunication etc. And in this writing sent unto you, it may be observed, how they infer that people without officers may cast out, and therefore may receive in, there being one power for both. I answer; they wrong us, and abuse their readers. 1. There is not to my knowledge (as before I * pag. 66. testified) any one man among us, that held or holdeth that people without officers may have the use of the sacraments; but we all continue in the same profession that we made before. 2. It is fraud, and abuse of the reader, and injury to me, when they first speak of receiving in by baptism, and then allege from my letter, that the people without officers may receive in: as if they would bear the world in hand, I therefore hold, they may baptize. Whereas first the scripture showeth that persons uncircumcised (and consequently unbaptized), may pass into the Church-covenant of the Lord, Deut. 29.10.11.12.13. compared with Jos. 5.2.5. Secondly the children of the faithful, are born members of the Church, and are in the covenant before they are baptized. Thirdly a man excommunicated, may be received into the Church, yet not by baptizing of him. And 4. we heretofore in our Confession when we † Confess. art. 34. denied the sacraments in a Church without officers, yet * Conf. art. 24. Apol. p. 45.62. professed they had then power to receive in members. Wherein now are we contrary to our former faith? Do not these things rather show, how they seek to make strife, where none is. The 5. article Confess. art. 21. etc. We had learned, that none may usurp or execute a ministery, but such as are rightly called by the Church whereof they stand ministers, unto such offices, and in such manner as God hath prescribed in his word: now it is held by some that people out of office may execute all the works & duties of the ministery, for baptism, Lord's supper, censures etc. And these men in their second exception here write, there is one power for receiving in and casting out, and that people without officers may do both, as is observed before. I answer; their fraud and wrongful dealing is also observed before; and here to make their sin the more remarkable, they proclaim it the second time. Of ministering the sacraments, and of receiving in and casting out of members, and against usurping or executing a ministery without due caling, we hold as always heretofore: they repeat the same things, but to their own further blame; for our professed enemies, do not ordinarily more wrest our words. The 6. article Confess. art. 1.10.17.18. etc. throughout. 6. We learned and used heretofore to apply to our estate and use, the things that the scriptures teach concerning the governors and people in Israel. Now we are excepted and opposed against, if we do so, with these exceptions and the like, that they had civil authority and government, which the church hath not; that they could not in Israel forgive one an others sin, as we can now: that the people now have more power than in Israel, because now we follow Christ into heaven, whereas the people might not follow the high Priest into the most holy place etc. I answer; the right applying of our estate to Israel, we always have and still do approve: but these men's wrested proportions, and making the Church in Mat. 18. to be the same with the jews Synedrion or Sessions of civil Magistrates, we do reprove, and so have done in our more ancient writings, Refut. of M. Giff. pag. 76. etc. so that no new thing is done by us. 2. That private men forgave not sins in Israel, so absolutely touching the Church order or polity, as Christians do now, is evident by the Law, which bound the offender not only unto repentance and faith * Act. 15, 9, 11. in Christ, as also to † Lev. 5.5. confess his sin and satisfy his “ Lev. 6, 5. neighbour offended; but withal to bring a trespass offering to the Priest, (the minister of the Church,) that so the Priest making an atonement for him before the Lord, it should be forgiven him, Levit. 6.2.5.6.7. Now under the Gospel, the Law is, if thy brother trespass against thee rebuke him, and if he repent forgive him: Luk. 17.3. neither is such a man bound to go to a minister that he may pray for, or forgive him; as the Papists by proportion * Bellar. de Poenit. l. 2. c. 3. do gather. 3. That th'Apostle also showeth a difference of our Church estate from the jews polity, Heb. 9.7.8.9. etc. & 10.19.20. compared with Gal. 4.1.2.3. etc., is manifest: neither can our opposites deny it; only they cast stumbling blocks in the reader's way: saying thus, 1. what if any other would say, that Elders and Kings now should have more power than they had in Jsrael, because they now follow Christ into Heaven etc. To omit their ill framing of the reason, for their most advantage, I answer, they that would so say, should show their ignorance, or a worse humour, Because Christ's Kingdom is not † joh. 18, 36 of this world, neither meddled he with Magistrate's power, but left it * Rom. 13.1 etc. as it was, authorized of God his Father, and not subordinate to his Mediatorship; as “ pag. 55. before is showed: and therefore Magistracy hath neither more nor less by him now, then in Israel and former ages. But his Church, and so the Magistrates therein as they are Christians, are advanced to a further degree of grace, than they were in, under the rudiments of the Law, Gal. 4.3.4. etc. 2. The Second block is a marginal note, that yet the people were typically carried in by the high Priest, in the precious stones on his shoulders and breast, as the most holy place itself was a type of Heaven. I answer, this is true, and confirmeth that which I said: for if into the earthly sanctuary the people could not freely enter, in their own persons, at any time, but figuratively, although they had so much as by faith in Christ did save them: then is our estate now, as touching the outward Church order and polity, better than theirs, which are not restrained from any place whither the ministers of the Gospel may themselves enter, but we are a Rev. 20, 6. the Priests of God and of Christ, and b Heb. 10, 19 may be bold to enter into the holy place, into the type whereof only c Lev. 16, 2.17. Luk. 1.10 the high Priest under the Law might enter sometimes and the people not at all personally. And in every place we may offer incense unto the name of God, and a pure oblation, Mal. 1.11. and are freed from those legal prohibitions, d Col. 2.20 21. touch not, taste not, handle not, and other worldly rudiments under which Israel in their child's estate were in bondage, Gal 4.3. Therefore the Apostle, which showeth their estate and ours to be one in substance concerning faith in Christ unto salvation, H●b. 11. showeth also great differences between their condition and ours touching the clear manifestation of God's grace, and the outward polity of the Church; Heb. 9 & 10. & 12. Gal. 4. Finally these things we never intended or extended to any further rights or liberties of the people now, than we find evidently taught us by the doctrine and practice e Mat. 18, 17— 20. & 28.20. Act. 11, 2— 18. & 15, 22— 28. & 21, 18— 22. 1. Cor. 5, 1.— 13. Rev. 2, 29. & 5, 10. of th'Apostles: that if in any thing we miss (as easily we may,) in the application of those legal types, yet the doctrine confirmed by other plain scriptures, remaineth sound and good. And such differences between Israel and us, we also have put, in our more ancient writings: Discover. pag. 40. & 60. Their last note is in effect one with the first: showing how Christ and th'Apostles reasoned well, from the civil state of Israel, which we grant. Yet I hope they will not deny, but it is possible for other men to reason amyss, and to make ill proportions from the common wealth of Israel, as do the f S●● before, pag. 16. Papists, and as before is manifested that these our opposites have done. The 7. article Plea for infants p. 166 167. 1●8. Treat. against Anabaptists p. 16. etc. Apol. p. 108. etc. Answ. to Mr jak. p 17. & ●●. 7. We held that the baptism of Rome, was as true baptism, as circumcision in the Apostasy of Israel was true circumcision, and needed not to be renounced and repeated: Now we were taught that the baptism aforesaid is an Idol; and we know all Idols etc., are to be renounced and rejected, Isa. 30.22. and an Idol is nothing in the world, 1. Cor. 8.4. so than such baptism is nothing. I answer; our former profession and writing hath been, that circumcision in the Apostasy of Israel, a Dis●ov. pag. 116. could be no true sacrament, no true seal of the covenant of God's favour unto them: also that baptism delivered in the false church is no true seal of God's covenant, or true sacrament. Mr. johnson himself hath defended this very same, that b Apol. p. 109. etc. in that estate of their Apostasy it could not be a true Sacrament, and so for the baptism in Rome; not a true but a false sacrament. So the contrariety must be thus, heretofore we held it to be a false sacrament, but now we were taught it is an Jdol. Between these I hope all men of judgement, which know what an Jdol meaneth, will think there is no contradiction. But is not this good conveyance, for them to say; as true baptism, as circumcision in the Apostasy of Jsrael was true circumcision: whereas we professed of that baptism (as also of that circumcision) that it could not be a true sacrament unto them, but a false? Will not the judicious reader see, that they cast a mist before men's eyes, to disgrace the truth which themselves formerly professed? As for the consequences, I have before c pag. 69. etc. answered them; and showed how though the Idol be put away, there need no repeating again of the outward washing: and have proved that Antichrist hath turned the Lord's baptism into an Idol, as the jews did the brazen serpent, d 2. King. 18, 4. by burning incense to it: and that the most conscionable in our own nation have so professed, and the University of Cambridge printed, e M. Perk. Warning against Idol. p. 23. that the church of Rome transformeth the sacraments (yea even Christ, and God himself) into Jdols. But these our opposites are gone from the truth and from themselves herein, into the tents of our common adversaries, M. Gifford and others, who would have concluded hereupon a new outward washing: but were refuted * Refut. of Giff. p. 65, etc. by Mr Barrow. And Mr johnson once professed that f Answ. to M. jakob. in pref. p. 1 he thought he should never have seen any more absurd writing then M. Giffards'; though now he reasoneth like him. He also told the Oxford Doctors, that g Apolog. p. 113. to hold the popish church to be a true church, having a true ministery and true sacraments, or else that they are unbaptized, and must admit of the Anabaptists rebaptisation, are nought else, but gross errors and notorious absurdities. Yet lo how he now presseth us with the same things: and passeth over our reasons rendered heretofore, without answering them as is meet. Of the conditions of peace, by our Opposites refused, and broken. HItherto we have heard the particulars wherein they are gone from their former profession; & again the articles which they have insinuated against us. Now followeth, the peace which notwithstanding the former things, we desired to reteyn with them. The first. 1. Before our parting, we offered, that notwithstanding our differences of judgement, we would continue together, if our former practice might be retained: but this was refused. Their answer hereto is. Which is, as if they should say, they would have continued with us, if we would have continued in error and evil, so found and acknowledged by us: suffering the ordinance of God, touching the Eldership to be trodden under foot; the Elders to be despised and abused by the people, and the whole Church to be continually subject to contentions and scandals. Our reply. Here first observe, how they can not deny, but thus we offered them: and yet they would bear the world in hand, we left them for their understanding and exposition of Mat. 18, 17. They might have kept their understanding both of that, and other scriptures, if the Church's practice had not been altered. Secondly, how do their people yet bear themselves & others in hand, that their practice is not changed; but all things continue with them in that respect as before. Either their Elders dissemble with them, or they with others; according to the Philosopher's doctrine, that, in such changes, * Aristot. polit. l. 5. c. 9 it behoveth men to feighn and counterfeit the contrary. Thirdly, the answer is evil & injurious to the truth & people of God: for his ordinance touching the Eldership is not trodden under foot, the Elders despised, etc. by the holy order of the Church judging sinners as the Apostle † 1. Cor. 5. teacheth, and governed in all actions, by “ 1. Tim. 5. 17. Heb. 13 17. the officers, which was our former practice. These are but contumelies, such as Papists and lovers of Prelacy, have laid upon the saints heretofore: and upon such pretences have excluded the people from choosing their ministers, * D. Bilson, perpet. governm. ch. 15. for avoiding such tumults and uproars, as the primitive Church (they say) was afflicted with. Fourthly what if some persons have miscarried themselves, as can not be denied: have not some of the Elders also done the like? And shall the Church, because of the abuses, tyrannies, heresies which their Elders have in all ages brought in: refuse to have any more Elders? no more may the Elders refuse to have the people to hear and judge causes of public sin with them, because of the disorder and unrulynes of some; whom the people have been as willing to reprove and censure as the Elders themselves. As for the Church subject continually to contentions and scandals etc. it is most true by the Elders means: for (to let pass what we have seen among ourselves,) let all histories be looked, & it will appear the Church hath never more abounded with contentions and scandals, than when all power was in the Ministers hands, and the people excluded. Yea even in the Elders most solemn assemblies and Councils; as Gr. Nazianzen in his time complained, being himself an Elder or Bishop. * Nazianz. epist. 42. ad Procop. I am minded (saith he) to shun all assemblies of Bishops, because I never saw a good event in any Council, that did not rather increase then diminish our evils. Their contention & ambition, passeth my speech. Secondly, they speak of their offer to bear with us in our difference of judgement, if we would be content to walk peaceably with the Church in that our difference: but this was refused. I answer; they might also (if they had pleased) have showed the reasons of our refusal, which more than once we gave them: as, 1. Because we are willed to observe all things whatsoever Christ commanded his disciples, Math. 28.20. and therefore his ordinances must not be left in practice, and holden in judgement only. 2. Because touching the ministery it is said, a man can receive nothing except it be given him from heaven, joh. 3, 27. now to the Ministers it is given to * Act. 20.28 Rom. 12.7.8. 1. Pet. 5. feed guide and govern the Church, but not themselves to be the Church, and to challenge the power of the same in things pertaining to the kingdom of Christ. 3. Because touching the people it is said Stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage, Gal. 5.1. but this was a part of the people's Christian liberty, recovered out of Antichristian bondage, viz. to judge sinners that are within, 1. Cor. 5. and to decide public causes with their ministers, Act. 15.23.— 28. as parts of the same Church and body, 1. Cor. 12.27.28. therefore to be held fast, not only in judgement but in practice. 4. Because such giving place to the usurpation of the ministers, was the mean of antichrist's beginning and climbing to his pre-eminence; which had the people resisted at first, and practised the Gospel in the order set by Christ, he could not so have prevailed. And now also we should look, that Antichrist being expelled, do not again set in his foot. 5. Because if we holding otherwise in judgement, should let the true practice of the Gospel go; posterity after us, being brought into bondage, might justly blame and curse us, that would not stand for the right of the people, in that which we acknowledged to be their due. These things considered, we desired them then, and still do, to show us how we could let go our ancient practice, until our judgement were by the word of God changed. The 2. thing by us offered. 2. We desired, that then we might have a peaceable parting; and to be two distinct congregations, each practising as they were persuaded, yet nourishing brotherly love and unity. This also they would not agree to, unless we would leave this city. Their answer is; A peaceable parting we grant they desired in word, but in deed stayed not with us, but departed whiles we were considering whither it could lawfully be effected or not. etc. Our reply. We desired it in word and deed instantly: alleging the parting of Paul and Barnabas, Act. 15.39. the doctrine of the Apostle, Phil. 3.15.16. the practice of Abram and Lot (though in a civil case) parting to avoid strife, Gen. 13.8.9. the avoiding of public reproach in the world etc. But whatsoever we could say, persuaded them not, but they withstood us. We stayed long, and had we followed their delays, we might have tarried to this day, and have had no other answer at their hands. How long have they been considering about their Teacher's ordination, and still it dependeth. We are not ignorant of their pretences, to put off the thing they like not, with a consideration. But in deed we had their refusals often, before we parted. Which was much in them that had changed their former profession, and innovated the practice, that they should so refuse. Had we been the men that had made such innovation, and they continued as before: we had surely been excommunicated long ere that time of our departing. Of our business with the Church of Leyden, it fell out after; and is now to be spoken of, in the third place. The third thing. 3. We procured, though without their consent, the help of the English church at Leyden, who laboured our peace: a way of peace by these themselves propounded, and by the Church of Leyden and us agreed to, these after reversed, and stood not unto, unless we would go dwell out of this city. And although in the treaty of the agreement, it was testified by the Elders of that Church, that unless it were to the apparent undoing of us and of our families, we should not be dismissed again to dwell here: yet because we would not absolutely promise to leave this city, they would not stand to the agreement which themselves had made. Their answers, & our replies. Here they seek to wind out themselves from blame, by sundry pretexts, and long narrations. I will briefly touch the principal, being sorry to weary the reader with our strifes. 1. First for the thing by them propounded, (of men's going from the one Church and Pastor to the other) & by us agreed unto; it was not because we desired or liked such a course: but earnestly desiring peace upon any tolerable conditions, & seeing for the present no unlawful thing in it, we assented; though the thing would have been much to our detriment. For all of us must have made a journey to Leyden and back again, with charge and trouble, it being then midwinter: and such as could have had means of livelihood there, must there have remained; which perhaps would have been the one half of us, and so our congregation had been greatly diminished, which was one main thing that our adverse brethren plotted, as the events did manifest. The Church at Leyden also, as we, must have suffered continually their & our members, to go when they would, into the practice of those errors with our opposite brethren: a thing which we will carefully take heed of, how ever we yield to the like again. 2. That the officers of the Church of Leyden did at the first conceive that we all must remain with them: we cannot say. Sure we are, we did not so conceive; but M. johnson so propounded it, as we all even by his words understood it otherweise, and himself being after pressed, could not deny it. 3. That the thing was agreed of, and the second time by them absolutely concluded, & that three were sent with the message after the brethren of Leyden to signify it, as they write: is true, and past denial. 4. That after they made new motion of an other course, is true also; but they omit the public breaking of the former agreement: when they signifying that forasmuch as they perceived our purpose was to return and live again in this city, they did plainly reverse it. 5. The motion which they made of a double practice, as it was disliked by the Church of Leyden (as they signify:) so we also showed like reason of our dislike, it being both unlawful for us to practise sin as it were with the right hand, and righteousness with the left; & no likelihood of our peace, but of grief and daily dissensions. 6. Touching the motion made by the Church of Leyden, for coming first to the Elders as Church governors &c. and for admonition being carried according to the alteration practised and agreed upon; whereupon these our opposites now observe against us, for not yielding thereto, how greatly we oppugned the ordinance of God touching the Elders hearing and judging of causes etc. this rightly weighed, will show how greatly we are by them abused. For first, it was such a course as neither the Church at Leyden would bind themselves to walk in, neither did these our opposites, or we, think it to be according to the order of God. Secondly they tell us not, (wherefore we desire them in their next to tell us,) whither themselves would sincerely have practised these things according to the true intendment of the Church of Leyden that motioned them. Thirdly, for the carriage of admonition spoken of; it was found out, and by M. johnson himself publicly acknowledged that the controversy between us, was therein closely implied and yielded unto them, when upon despising the admonition of the Elders, the parties were to be excommunicated. This being thus manifested, with what conscience could we yield to practise error privily brought in under hand: and deny to practise the same thing publicly professed? Would not all men, and even they themselves have blamed us for such dissimulation? Fourthly for coming to the Elders first as governors, we did then and do now yield it the brethren's duty, in doubts so to come for counsel & advise: but for to bind all men in most manifest sins which the Church should judge, to come first to the Elders only, and so to lay it on the brethren as for not doing it, they should be excommunicated; and yet both sides acknowledge it is not the order of God: we told them this would be to deal worse than the Pharisees, when none of us walked in that which we professed to be the right way, but leaving that, would 'stablish our own traditions and cast out men for not observing them. These weighty reasons they overpass, and bear the world in hand how greatly we oppugned God's ordinance touching the Elders: when we but oppugned the Elders traditions, lest they should be advanced above the ordinance of God. Next follow their reasons why they would not stand to their former agreement with us, nor have spiritual fellowship (as they write) with us in such estate & walking. 1. Because they could not find warrant for it in the word of God. I answer, if they acknowledge no warrant found for our peaceable parting here, nor dismissing to an other Church: what remained, but either we must yield to their errors, which for the reasons foreshowed we might not; or else part from them as we did; the causes of the division being in them, both by broaching error, and refusing peace. 2. Their second reason is, because we refused (as they say,) disobeyed and spoke evil of the truth and way of God. I answer; first this is to take that for granted, which is the question between us. Secondly if this reason be good, and the truth be with us, (as we doubt not of it:) than they grant us that we had just cause to leave spiritual fellowship with them, which departed from, and spoke evil of, and persecuted the truth and way of God, wherein themselves once walked with us. Howbeit, if we would have lived at Leyden, all had been peace: is it more lawful, trow we, to speak evil of, and disobey the truth there, then at Amsterdam? 3. Their third reason is, because we refused to continue communion with them, though we might be suffered to walk in peace with protestation in our difference of judgement. I answer, this having been first offered by us to them, and they refusing it, as before they grant; it cometh upon their own heads, if any weight be in it. Secondly, we have showed sundry reasons from scripture, why we might not so walk: & have never yet heard from them, any like reasons to warrant us, to protest against a sinful practice, and yet to practise it daily. If our own hearts and mouths condemn us, * 1 joh. 3.20. God is greater. 4. Their 4. reason is, because some of us professed we would not deal in causes by way of protestation, neither when we were with them nor from them. I answer; first the different mind of some few, is not of weight to break the agreement with us al. Secondly, this might have fallen out also occasionally, if we had lived at Leyden; where they would have had peace with us. So it is our living in this city, that was in deed the only true cause why they stood not to their agreement, the other are but pretences. 5. Their 5. reason is, because we went not from one Church & Pastor to another, so to live and remain, but purposed when we had joined unto them, presently to return and live here in this town apart from them. I answer; this was in deed that which troubled them; they could not endure us in the same city by them. Yet they cannot deny but it was promised, we all should live and remain there, unless it were to the apparent undoing of us and our families. And were not these loving brethren, that had rather we and our families should be undoon, than they would want of their wills▪ For what reason (much less necessity) can they show why we must go from one church and pastor to an other, and may not continue in the place and state wherein God had called us, with as many officers already among ourselves, as the Church of Leyden had; and one a Teacher of the word. They tell us afterward, * Advert. p. 87. that the very naming of going to another Church & Pastor, carrieth weight of reason with it: belike because he is a Pastor that saith it: for word of God show they none, that binds men to go to another Church where there is a Pastor and no Teacher; but forbids them to remain in their own communion and church, where there is a Teacher and no Pastor. Especially when without the apparent undoing of men & their families, they can not remove their habitation. 6. Their 6. reason is, because by such walking of ours, great reproach would come upon us all, with much dishonur to God etc. I answer, it † Luk. 17.1 can not be avoided but offences will come, but woe unto them by whom they come. Yet greater reproach (as we always feared) is come by their refusing peace with us, (unless it were upon unlawful & unreasonable conditions,) then would have been by our peaceable parting, which we often and instantly desired. 7. Their last reason is, because they thought there should always be somewhat in such cases used, as whereby the Lord might work upon our consciences, to consider our estate, and to repent and yield to the truth and way of God which we had refused & oppugned. I answer, first this manifesteth their minds to be far from peace with us, whatsoever they pretended; unless we would yield to their innovation and prelacy. Secondly this reason, if it be good, serveth aswell for them that should live at Leyden, as at Amsterdam: unless they would permit us there to oppugn the truth and way of God, as they entitle their errors. Thirdly, this evil being found in themselves, that they do not only refuse & oppugn the truth offered; but forsake, speak evil of, and persecute the truth and way of God which they had long embraced & walked in: the judgement which they give upon us, is most just upon their own heads; by the sentence “ Mat. 7, 2, 12. of our Saviour. And we could do no less with these our merciless brethren, that would nourish no peace with us, unless either we made shipwreck of a good conscience, or would consent to the undoing of our estates and families; but leave them as we did, by the Apostles warrant, for causing division and offences, contrary to the doctrine which we had learned Rom. 16.17. If their new doctrines be good, I shall acknowledge we have greatly sinned: but if they be the high way to Antichristian promotion, and a bereaving of the Church of her right & power, as we are verily persuaded, and do trust we have so proved it; then have they given sentence against themselves, and except they repent, their condemnation shallbe just. Notwithstanding all their former reasons, they after allege, that they reversed not their agreement concerning such as would go and live with the Church at Leyden, but only about such as purposed to return and live here etc. I answer, by this all may judge whither the fear of God, or fleshly policy did more prevayl in them. For such of us as would have lived at Leyden, they pretend they could find warrant for it in God's word, but show none: they would let them there, refuse & speak evil of their pretended way of God, without leaving any thing to work upon their consciences, etc. and yet have peace with them as Christian brethren. Only at Amsterdam these things might not be suffered. The Pope himself permitteth jews which never received his religion, to live in the same city with him, where he is Prince: but these our adverse brethren, would not endure that we, (though we never received their innovations,) should live in one city with them, where they were but strangers. What should we have found, if they had been Princes of the State? Secondly, they plainly reversed the agreement, as before was showed, & when some of our brethren desired their testimonial, for to go to Leyden, they refused to give it. And we could not tell before we came thither & tried, whether there would be means found for our living there or no. But strange and unheard of cruelty was in these men, that would bind us there to remain, though we and our families should be undoon; & being but strangers themselves in this city with us, would take upon them so imperiously to banish us the town, which the Lords of the city never offered. I wish they may find more mercy with the Lord at the day of Christ, than they have showed unto us. And whereas they object, that when we left them, we went not to Leyden, to join ourselves to that Church according to the agreement etc. I answer, there never was such agreement, that of ourselves we should go, but that by them we should be dismissed, and this they refused to do, yea and publicly reversed the covenant that themselves had devised and twice confirmed: beside, that we of our own mind did never desire, but only for peace sake consented to that agreement, as before I showed. Neither was it ever agreed, that such only as would remain there, should go: but it was general for us al. But these their carriages show, what dominion such Elders would exercise over God's heritage; and how impossible it was for us to have peace with them, that would thus turn and wind, say and unsay, agree of a thing to day, and break it to morrow. Our souls were wearied, with their turnings of devises. Finally for our not remaining with them, till there was an answer of their Letter from Leyden, I answer, we tarried with them a good while after their foresaid letter, whereas we might upon their breaking of their own solemn agreement, added to all their former evils, justly have forsaken them. Neither could the Church of Leyden (as it seemeth) tell what to advise us, and therefore gave no answer to their Letters, or to ours: and because they would have no hand in the breach between us, thought better to be silent; seeing unto what extremity things were brought. And the agreement between the Churches being disannulled, articles of war and discord being proclaimed to us, and written of to them; delays only sought to work our dissipation: we know no word of God, that bindeth us to suffer ourselves to come into such bondage, with men that daily in their public doctrines and prayers, inveighed against the truth they formerly professed, wounded the consciences of the brethren, and sought all occasions to draw men from the right way and practice of the Gospel. What should we do, but shake off the dust of our f●et against such authors of errors, and peace breakers? Albeit in these our great troubles and strayts, we doubt not but many things through our ignorance and frailty might be done amyss; for which we have, and do always humbly ask mercy of God, that even our secret sins may be forgiven us. And touching the Church of Leyden, whose help they refused to desire, or consent to hav● desired, though now for their advantage (as they think) they speak of them, and have printed some of the passages between them: I have desired their Elders testimony upon this occasion, that the ages present and to come, may have true information of these matters; which is as followeth. The testimony of the Elders of the Church at Leyden. THough we much rather desired to have been mediators of the peace of our brethren, than witnesses of their strife: yet may we not, because that which we desired, could not not be effected by us, with draw from that, which both may, and aught by us to be done. We therefore being desired thereunto by Mr. Ainsworth, and occasioned by that which both Mr johnson and he have written, and taking the evils which have befallen others, as matter both of humbling, and warning to ourselves, do signify, what we know, and have found in our dealings thereabout. And first, Our special ●alling to intermeddle in this uncomfortable business, was a letter sent unto us by some 30. of the brethren there. In which, mentioning in the beginning of it, their long, and grievous controversy, they signified how they had oft desired of the Church to request our help therein, and that the Elders would no way aporove thereof: but would only permit our coming, either of ourselves, or at their request. Wherein they also certified us, how some of them had charged the exposition of these words Tell the Church, Mat. 18, 17. Tell the Elders, with some other particulars thereupon depending, to be error: and so were to prove their charge: and therefore earnestly requested us to help in that great business, that the truth might be maintained, and not by their weakness injuried, and the innocent condemned: and that we would help the Lord against the mighty etc. And the reason why they thus earnestly requested our help was, because M. Ainsworth was so sparing in opposing of Mr johnsons new doctrine (though always misliking it) as they scarce knew how he was minded in the things: so loath was he to come to any professed, and public opposition with him, whom he rather hoped to pacify by moderation, then by opposition to stop in his intended course. Besides he was careful not to give any encouragement to the too violent oppositions of some brethren, though minded as they were, in the things themselves. This their letter, and earnest request in it notwithstanding, we went not, but wrote to the Church and showed them what the substance of the letter was; desiring by them to be informed how things stood with them: and signifying withal, our unwillingness to interpose, but upon a dew, and necessary calling; and that also as much as might be, under the conditions of best hope of good issue. They, as before, denied to approve of our coming, and would only permit it, and that under the terms of jealousy, and advantage, as appears by that which themselves have published: and did oft, and earnestly require of us a copy of the letter before mentioned, with the names of the persons subscribed unto it. Which though we judged, and still do, an hard, and extreme imposition in itself, considering they themselves had permitted them to send unto us, and knew from us whereabout they wrote, and had not laid it upon them to show them their letter before they sent it; yet had we given way to their desires herein, had it not been for one phrase in the end of the letter, which being borrowed from Deborahs' speech against Sisera, judg. 5, 23. and applied as it was, might give offence, and minister occasion of further strife, which phrase also we reproved in the writers of the letter, and they acknowledged amiss; professing notwithstanding they had no evil meaning in it, but only a desire to provoke us the more effectually to supply their inability against those with whom they had to deal. Now for our withholding the copy of the letter (though since that time, for their importunity we sent it them) as also for our purpose of coming unto them, and the ends thereof, we will here insert what we wrote unto them in two several letters thereabout, For the former thus. If the letter whereof you desire a copy, might further your common peace, or procure good to any, we should easily answer your desire: but if, on the contrary, there were the least evil in it, we should hold it our duties to deal with the parties offending, ourselves, and not to discover their sin. And loath would we be either to minister matter of further scanning amongst you, or that any register of unkindness should come unto you from our hands. And the fear of this was in truth the only cause, why we refused to send this letter, as they required. Wherein if we failed, (as we see no cause so to think) yet was it the error of our love, and great desire of their peace. About our coming we thus wrote. Our purpose therefore is, according to the request of the brethren which have moved us, and our duty; to send, or come unto you; not to oppose any person, or to maintain any charge of error, but by all other brotherly means to help forward your holy peace (if so the Lords will be:) which how precious it is unto us, we hope to manifest to the consciences of all men: than which we know nothing in this world we have more cause to endeavour, both with God, and yourselves. Of which our coming we pray you to accept, and to appoint us some such time, as seems to you most convenient. Wherealso we shall satisfy you to the utmost, both touching the letter, and other particulars in all equity, yea so far as we can without apparent sin. These things notwithstanding, they would not approve, but only permit of our coming, as men use to permit of that which is evil, and which in deed they could not hinder. And so we came unto them: first of ourselves, and afterwards at the request of M. Ainsworth, and them with him, being sent by the Church, whereof we are: and so infor●m● ourselves upon them for the delivering of the Church's message, did reprove what we judged evil in them, and that we confess with some vehemency. And in that regard it was, that (upon the motion made by Mr. johnson for the free dismission of such members with them, unto us, as could not there walk with peace of conscience,, there lying no other cause against them; which should also be mutually performed on our part) we signified (as he writeth) that we little thought they had been so inclinable to peace; & that if we had so thought, we would have carried ourselves otherweise towards them, than we did. And good cause had we so to speak. For neither is the same carriage to be used towards men, prosecuting their purposes and persuasions, with all violence and extremity; and towards them, which manifest Christian moderation in the same: neither had we before, or have we since found the like peaceable inclination in them, to that which they then manifested. Which how great grief it hath been unto us, and how it hath even wounded our very hearts, he only knoweth, which seeth the sorrows of the hearts of his servants, and putteth their tears in his bottle. But to pass by these things, and to proceed. The motion made by Mr johnson for a peaceable dismission, was by the Church there received with general assent; unto which the Church also at Leyden condescended: and so sent back the Officers for the further ratification of it, and for some other purposes tending to the establishing of peace amongst them. Whereupon it was also the second time by them confirmed: always in deed with submission to the word of God, as was meet: and that if either they, or we minded otherwise, we should so signify. Which notwithstanding they did not: but reversed the agreement of themselves, without acquainting us with the change of their mind or reasons thereof. Afterwards indeed, they gave us knowledge of their purpose, as appears in their former letter by themselves published, desiring the continuance of our consideration about it, as if the thing which was fully agreed upon, as is aforesaid, and that oftener than once had been only in consideration: and in their second letter (as also appeareth) they gave us certain Reasons of their dislike. Unto which reasons of theirs we gave no answer (as they both write) before their parting. And the causes were. 1. For that they continued not long together after they came to our hands. 2. We had upon occasion of the motion made for a double practice, propounded another course (both more fit, and warrantable, as we thought, than that) for the bringing of things first to the Elders, as appears in our letter. Unto which course though we do not bind our brethren, yet may we safely say (so far as we remember) that there never came complaint of sin to the Church, since we were officers, but we took knowledge of it before: either by mutual consent on both sides, or at least by the party accused: with whose christian modesty, and wisdom we think it well sorteth, that being condemned by two, or three brethren, he should not trouble the Church, or hazard a public rebuke upon himself; without counseling with them who are set over him, and who either are, or should be best able to advise him. Thirdly, and which was the chief cause, we were without all hope of doing good, when they once misliked the motion, which made it. Whilst they liked it, we had hope, though it were with hard measure to the other, and so did further it, to the utmost of our power: but when they laid it down, we knew all our labour would be lost in endeavouring their second listing of it. Lastly where Mr johnson affirmeth, that at the first treating of the matter, we conceived that those by them dismissed should remain at Leyden with us, notwithstanding their want of means of living, it may well be as he saith, though we well remember it not. And therein all men may see, how we were even overcaryed with a vehement desire of peace with them, and amongst themselves, and how far we were from being partial towards them with whom we agreed in the things in controversy. Yea the truth is, we were boldest with them, both because we would prevent all jealousy in the other, and preserve in them all the interest we could for the common peace: and also because we were well assured of Mr Ainsworths' great moderation, upon whom the rest did much depend. But howsoever we conceived at the first, it is certain that both they, and we conceived otherwise in the agreement. And therefore when one amongst them made exception, I. O. that we should not dismiss them back, which came unto us, to live a distinct congregation in the same city with them, it was presently answered both by Mr johnson, and Mr Studley, that that concerned not them, but that they would leave it unto us: though that appeared afterwards to be the only thing for which they broke off their purpose, and promise. And here the work of God's providence is to be observed, that they who would have no peace with their brethren abiding in the same city with them, are about to leave it themselves, and to settle their abode else where. Which thing, that it might well come to pass in short time, they were by us put in mind of before hand, if God gave them not again to reunite, which by a peaceable parting, might have been furthered. Which how much better had it been they had admitted of, (all things considered) then, through extreme straightness in themselves (not to meddle with the main cause) thus to have made their brethren their adversaries, and themselves, yea and us all, a byword to the whole world? john Robinson. William Brewster. This is the record of our brethren of Leyden, touching our troubles. Whereas our opposites object unto us, that we refused to try if by writing among ourselves, we could have come to better accord etc. I answer, first we had by a twelve months dispute tried if we could have come to accord; but were further off in the end, then at the beginning Secondly things were brought to that pass, that the practice of their errors was established; the truth in public doctrines inveighed against; the opposers of their errors, compared to Korah Dathan and Abiram; the Lords supper of a long time not administered among us; occasions sought against sundry persons to cast them out of the Church; peace by us offered, by them refused; peace by themselves propounded and confirmed, and by them again broken; open war proclaimed against us, as against men that refused disobeyed and spoke evil of the way and truth of God etc. was this an estate for us to continue in together, and go to writing, which would prove we knew not how many months or years work? For lo to a letter of mine of 3. pages, they have given an answer of 70. and if they continue thus to multiply, what volumes shall we have in the end: and when shall we have an end? It is rather to be feared that we suffered things to depend too long: for when the Apostles found Christians liberty to be endangered, and bondage to be brought upon them, though privily, they gave not place by subjection for an hour, that the truth of the Gospel might continue with them, Gal. 2.4.5. Thirdly it was a way which they always misliked: and in our former troubles, when heretofore M. Smyth and others, having debated their causes in conference, proffered writings: then M. johnson himself, with the rest, withstood and refused that course. But now, that which they blamed in others, they commend in themselves: so partial are they in all things. When they like of a thing, it must be good: when they mislike, it must be evil. We wish they would show more sincerity. And now, as we desire the Christian reader, not to be offended at the truth, because of our infirmities who cannot walk in it as we ought; nor to stumble for the troubles and dissensions which Satan raiseth among God's people: so we desire these our opposite brethren, to return into the right way, from which they are estrayed, and putting away all love of pre-eminence, and of their own aberrations, to receive again the love of the truth, and of brotherly concord: that the name of God, be no more evil spoken of by the wicked, and that the hearts which are wounded by these dissensions, may be healed and refreshed. The Lord look upon the afflictions of Zion, wipe away her tears, forgive her iniquities, take away her reproach; restore her joy, and comfort her, according to the days that she hath seen evil. Amen. Finis. Faults escaped in the printing. Pag. 6. line 11. for that, read, than. pag. 46. two lines before the end, for uncirsed, read, uncircumcised. pag. 70. line 23. for wholly, read, holy. pag. 112. line 42. for wood, read, word.